##VIDEO ID:https://videoplayer.telvue.com/player/994DtmGEsi0VDYK3jJI2BJ72GfgNIpU2/media/919075?autostart=false&showtabssearch=true&fullscreen=false## <v Speaker 1>Start tonight's meeting at 7 0 8</v> or thereabouts, the 4th of December, planning board. And couple of notes ahead. 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're on the phone, press star nine. Any individual wishing to speak during public speak or during public hearing, any a 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 participant menu. Hover your cursor over your entry. To click more and re-click on rename and type in your first and last name. No questions. I didn't expect any. First on the agenda, public speak. Any individual may raise an issue that is not included in the agenda and it will be taken under advisement by the board. There will be no opportunity to 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. Is there anyone here or <v Speaker 2>There was a Richard Foster raising his hand,</v> but his hand has been lowered and he's still in attendance. I don't know, <v Speaker 1>So we'll assume.</v> I think so. No public speak there first. Next on the agenda, approval not required. 71 to 89 Union Street. Amanda, can you just give us a, just a brief <v Speaker 2>Where we're Oh, sorry.</v> Oh yeah, lemme just promote Chris Cannon from Metro West Engineering. He's here. So while he's coming over, he's the engineer on the pro or land surveyor on the project. So what we are looking at here tonight is, this is 89 Union Street and it is actually the diminishing of a lot line between two parcels of land. It is the St. Benedict's property, but what they are doing is removing the lot line because they acquired the property to their north. So therefore that line lot line has been Zed out. You do have letters from the conservation commission and also the town engineer. <v Speaker 1>Okay. And that's what we have here. Yep.</v> Ready for signature? Yep. <v Speaker 2>And Chris is here. Who is the project</v> <v Speaker 1>To the engineers wanting to speak?</v> <v Speaker 3>No, if I'm just here for, if you have any questions,</v> I'm Christopher Cannon from Metros Engineering project engineer. <v Speaker 1>Alright, Christopher, I'll start with the board.</v> Andy, do you have any, well, what is it? Explain it please if you don't mind. Oh <v Speaker 3>Yeah.</v> So I'm here tonight representing the applicant, St. Benex Classical Academy, to present this a and r plan to merge the, the properties located at 71 Union Street and 89 Union Street. Both properties are owned by the school. The merge, the, the new merge parcel will have sufficient frontage and lot area. And basically if you're looking at the plan now, lot A is the St. Benedicts new Arsal basically. And that as, if you remember previously we came before you with site plan review under the Dover Amendment to build the new St. Benex school. And you could see the existing school location there to the right of the pond area and then to the left hand side for lot B. That used to be a single family house residential lot. That residential house has been torn down and it's currently vacant. That lot is nonconforming due to insufficient frontage and law area. So the school has purchased it and is looking to merge 71 and 89 Union Street together. <v Speaker 1>No questions for me. Okay, Terry,</v> <v Speaker 4>Thank you.</v> I know that there's a significant wetland between where the house used to be and where the, the school has been built and I'm trying to understand what the, if there are any implications in terms of development that could have an impact on the, on the wetlands. <v Speaker 3>Like any other further development within the wetlands</v> would require approval from the Native Conservation Commission. At this time, the school has been trying to wrap up its construction of the new school or future plans. I'm not a hundred percent sure what would be proposed in the future just because they're just finishing up. What has already been planned has already been planned. <v Speaker 4>Thank you. No, when they had come</v> before us originally with the overall concept for the the school, there were several phases. I think a couple have been telescoped into the original plan, but I think there were fairly ambitious plans for later development. Thank <v Speaker 3>You.</v> Yeah, that's correct. Yeah, probably a full development. There would be a couple extra buildings probably to the west and south, but at this time they're just finishing up phase, the first phase. <v Speaker 4>Okay, thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay, thank you Doug.</v> <v Speaker 5>Just a couple questions. What is the right of way?</v> The 14 foot wide and the 20 foot wide right of way? What does that benefit? Yep, <v Speaker 3>Yep.</v> So that basically if you are looking at the page between law A and lot B where the former property line is correct, there's a 20 foot wide right of way and then a 14 wide. That was previously done in the late 18 hundreds when these two parcels of land and the land to the south of us, those residential lots were all owned by one person at one time. And when 89 Union Street was basically sold off, there was a 14 foot right of way that was placed along the, the Western Lee boundary line for access. If there wasn't any other access between Union Street and the, the land south of us. Further along the lines, the 25 20 foot was to benefit lot B due to the existing driveway being within 89 Union Street. Oh, okay. Parcel. <v Speaker 5>Okay. Thank you. Yeah, just, I mean, not germane</v> to the plan but the building, I mean I don't know if anyone else feels the same way, but I think it's spectacular building. It looks really, really nice. It's gorgeous. Well done, you know, especially when it's lit up at night. Very well done. So, no, no other questions. <v Speaker 3>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 6>Just I guess a clarifying one just</v> to make sure I'm on the right page. So the lot that you've taken over that is just, that's not taken from any other lot. It's, it's a single lot itself that's just gonna become part of this property, right? <v Speaker 3>That's correct. We're not</v> <v Speaker 6>Dividing anything</v> and the right of way. Is that going to disappear? <v Speaker 3>No, that will, that will remain due to</v> the, the people to our south, the butters have the benefit of using that right away. So that will remain in place even though that it's not being used today. <v Speaker 6>Okay. And I don't know if you'll be able</v> to answer this one, but there's no set, well, I guess kind of a question I have is almost like why are you doing this and is it so that way? And I wasn't involved with any of the previous plans or planning out the site. Is it so that way your total square footage is bigger if you were to develop more of your parcel on the south side of the wetlands or are you likely to be developing on that side of the wetlands or, or do you <v Speaker 3>No, the former owners, the Winola farm</v> people, they actually own both properties. When they sold 89 Union Street, they basically still own 71 Union Street. And since that 71 Union Street is non-conforming due to insufficient lot area and frontage, you would basically need a variance from the zoning board of appeals and that would be a, a significant process. And so ultimately the owners of 71 sold it to the school. <v Speaker 6>Just the opportunity was there, I guess kind of,</v> <v Speaker 3>Yeah, it kind of is more naturalized now.</v> So it kind of meshes in pretty well with the wetlands area. <v Speaker 1>No,</v> <v Speaker 6>No more for me.</v> <v Speaker 1>Is there anyone in the audiences wanting to speak on this?</v> Okay. And is no one on, <v Speaker 2>We do have one hand.</v> <v Speaker 1>We do have one hand. Oh, Mary</v> <v Speaker 2>L yeah.</v> Oops, sorry. Running too many things. Oh, they just need to unmute. <v Speaker 7>Hi there. I just wanted to</v> make a quick comment. Excuse me. <v Speaker 1>Excuse me. Mary, would you please identify yourself?</v> <v Speaker 7>Yes. My name is Mary Avalos</v> and I live at 56th Union Street. Thank you. I just wanted to jump onto the comment that a member said about how beautiful the building looks lit up at night. And actually I am not alone in feeling that, I don't know whether it's because the electricity has just got turned on, but it's a blaze all night long. This is a quiet scenic road and you come down Ying Street and you come around the corner of the hospital and there's huge blazing lights up ahead. And I hope that that is just temporary while you're getting the building open. They said that because it, it, it's light pollution. This <v Speaker 5>Our plan, can we move</v> <v Speaker 7>In, in a wooded residential area?</v> And I know that the engineer probably doesn't have anything to do with the lighting came up, but I just wanted to make that point. It's not in this discussion. No, but thank you. Just that <v Speaker 4>It's not the first time it's been heard about. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 5>Alright, I'll make a motion</v> <v Speaker 1>Thank you</v> <v Speaker 5>To endorse the plan as approval, not required</v> as presented and <v Speaker 1>Any discussion, further discussion on it.</v> Second. Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Andy Terry? Aye. Peter? Yes. Final May? Yes. Oh, I don't on this. No site plan <v Speaker 5>Approvals, special permits only. Thank</v> <v Speaker 1>You.</v> Sorry, keep me on track there. Oh, any for clarification? Associate members on this type of project are not asked. We're not a participant in the voting. Alright then. Motion made and passed and there is a document here at any time tonight. Be ideal to sign, sign it at the end and it's <v Speaker 4>Right here. End of the meeting.</v> <v Speaker 1>They'll pick it up, up tomorrow</v> if you'll pass it down now. Okay. That would be good. Alright, next on the agenda. 2 16 2 18 South Maine. 79. <v Speaker 5>No, 79. Speed.</v> <v Speaker 1>Yep. Oh, I'm sorry.</v> I, I I went down 79. Speed. Yes sir, if you, <v Speaker 8>I'm Peter Harrans, I represent the applicant.</v> There are several members of the team here on Zoom as well. We have the architect, engineer and project manager. I believe the owner may be as well. Based on the comments from the board from the last meeting, we did submit some updated plans. Some of the changes to, to note would be that the grades were pulled back from the property. They added a silt fence for erosion control and added more erosion controls along the western property lines. The new plans also identified the location of the air conditioning units, which was a, which was a question at the last hearing. They're, they're on the roof now. Not visible from, from the street. Oh, thanks. Another change to the plans was a reduction in the amount of parking spaces and we took it down to, I believe 12 spaces now. And the applicant is willing to go back to, to the zoning board to have that sort of update approved if, if the town requires it. Any other questions on the updates? The engineers are here and the architects are happy to field or any other questions generally, Mr. Meyer had a question as to whether the applicant would be willing to repair sidewalks. <v Speaker 1>Why don't we just on the, I'll pull the board</v> for questions, but is there anything more that you'd like to present? <v Speaker 8>No, I mean the, the updated plans are, were submitted</v> and we located the air conditioning units was a, was one of the points from the last meeting as well as trying to increase some of the green space in the parking area, which they had done all which we've also now done. And so any other comments on the new plans we're, we're happy to hear. <v Speaker 1>Okay. Alright,</v> we will start again. Andy. <v Speaker 9>Well, he was about</v> to say something about sidewalks. What, what are your thoughts on the <v Speaker 8>Sidewalks?</v> You, you had asked whether they'd be willing to repair them out front as part of the construction and I was pretty sure he would be willing to, and we did confirm that he's more than happy to make those types of repairs as part of the overall construction of the building. Excuse me. <v Speaker 9>And that's shown on the plan.</v> Does, is there a dimension like how wide they will be? <v Speaker 8>I'm not sure they have that on the plans.</v> I think we show the sidewalks, but I i, as far as what they're willing to do as part of the construction property that's not there, the town sidewalks, they're willing to, to fix them or repair 'em as necessary. <v Speaker 9>Okay. I mean generally three foot on speed street is not</v> great 'cause people do walk north and south. So, you know, I think we do have some sidewalk standard widths, I think in the ballpark of five, five feet or pretty. Yeah, <v Speaker 6>You should do five feet.</v> 'cause anything less than that you then have to get passing zones. So it's better to just do five feet wide at <v Speaker 9>Least.</v> So it'd be great to have that shown somewhere. So I, everything you've mentioned so far seems responsive. I think the, the big one is this issue of parking being allowed in a ally zoned area and the need to go back to get that variance from the zoning board. And I appreciate that you're coming here and going back there. Sometimes we ping pong people back and forth and I don't really know a better way to do it. So that is kind of, and I think they just had a meeting recently, so you're probably looking at going back next month. <v Speaker 1>What</v> <v Speaker 8>We were going back</v> for is the reduction in the parking. I, we didn't get a determination from town council as far as the variances themselves. I believe Amanda spoke with the building commission or the building department and we passed it along. We did reduce the amount of parking. So I I I didn't know if that in and of itself would require the zoning board to look at this again. 'cause they had approved more a, a different plan essentially as it as it related to parking. <v Speaker 9>I'm, I, you know, when, when we get to Mr. Landry, I'm,</v> I'm all have some thoughts, but if, if that is something that has been discussed at the town board level between the building commissioner and the CED, you know, we should know that. So when, you know, I dunno if we wanna jump into that right now. That seemed to be the big issue. <v Speaker 5>The parking, the</v> <v Speaker 9>Parking, the allowance, the use of parking in in,</v> in the area where in which it's zoned. So yeah, <v Speaker 5>It's not allowed.</v> Right? It's not allowed. I'm confused on <v Speaker 9>What we're even</v> <v Speaker 5>Looking at.</v> Hold on. So, so it it's not allowed by zoning <v Speaker 10>And then you can't grant</v> <v Speaker 5>A variance</v> for We don't grant use variances here in, in the town. They're not allowed. Right. So you cannot use residential zone land for parking for commercial purposes. <v Speaker 9>This was raised</v> <v Speaker 5>Last, it was raised last, last time.</v> Last time. And I'll also point out that the fi whatever you wanna call this, the finding, which was granted, when was that? July 22nd. The decision when first condition on number nine, 9.1, it says the board's decision is subject to the following conditions. The new residential structure shall be constructed. So is this a residential structure? No, it's not. But why does this say that? <v Speaker 8>I didn't issue the</v> <v Speaker 2>Dec. It's a scribner's error.</v> <v Speaker 5>It's recorded.</v> <v Speaker 2>So we will, we will fix that.</v> <v Speaker 5>How will that get fixed?</v> <v Speaker 2>Going right down</v> to the town clerk and we as we've fixed other scribner's errors, <v Speaker 5>New hearing, new ZBA decision. What?</v> <v Speaker 2>No, it goes right to the town clerk.</v> It is a scribner's error. So therefore you just put the documentation of the town clerks and it gets recorded with the decision <v Speaker 5>And what is it supposed to say?</v> <v Speaker 2>It is supposed to say commercial structure.</v> <v Speaker 5>Okay. So</v> a section six finding, which I think this is what it is. It's not a variance. <v Speaker 8>We did get a</v> <v Speaker 5>Variance on what,</v> <v Speaker 8>On the, on the use</v> on the construction. We got a variance for <v Speaker 5>For setbacks and Yeah.</v> Other dimensional requirements. Yes. This is use. So, <v Speaker 9>But just, just</v> <v Speaker 5>To clarify, a section six finding is for</v> extension of existing non-conforming lots for mod modest kinds of extensions, modest kinds of, you know, modifications, not tearing down a building and putting up a two story headquarters building of a construction company. And then assuming you're gonna use commercial spaces in a residential zone, i it, it it no, simple as that. You have a lot of work to do either rezone the thing, go get a variance for parking, which you can't do, but you're not giving a Yes vote outta me on this project. <v Speaker 8>I I understand. I, the, the, the, just to clarify the,</v> the parking is a preexisting condition. There was, there's already, <v Speaker 5>So why didn't you cover that?</v> None, none of that Finding covers parking. Not one bit of it. There is nothing in there that says parking. <v Speaker 8>The application was made based on what?</v> The determination of the building department. <v Speaker 5>You're the attorney.</v> <v Speaker 8>I I'm not follow,</v> I mean I'm not following. We were issued the variances and the appeals periods lapsed. I I I'm, I'm <v Speaker 5>Pointing out to you that the parking issue</v> for an existing non-conforming is not covered by this decision. And it says it's for residential use. So what is your cure for those issues? <v Speaker 8>For the, the language in the decision?</v> <v Speaker 5>Yeah. Or what you're presenting this board.</v> <v Speaker 8>I'm not exactly sure how to approach it.</v> I mean we, we went through the zoning board. They issued the decision and I'm not trying to pit people against each other. But it sounds like the issue that you have is with the zoning board or with the building department as opposed to <v Speaker 5>I have an issue with the plan.</v> <v Speaker 8>I understand, I understand that and I understand that as,</v> as presented or however else you aren't in favor of it. I do understand that. But we are coming in under variances that were issued by the zoning board. Were <v Speaker 5>They I disagree. Is there</v> <v Speaker 8>Evidence of that? That they were issued</v> <v Speaker 4>That, that the, that variances for parking were issued?</v> <v Speaker 8>It wasn't a, it was a variance for the plan overall.</v> The commercial building requires parking, <v Speaker 5>So in the commercial zone,</v> <v Speaker 8>But that, that's what the overall variance,</v> <v Speaker 5>It doesn't say that Mr.</v> I'm sorry, your last name. Thank you. It doesn't say that. Go back and read the decision. Nothing in there addresses parking at all. <v Speaker 9>I'm curious why, you know, in the time that we've met,</v> I mean there was a zoning board meeting I think it was last night or a couple days ago. The, the point that, that Mr. Landry is making, which i I do agree with hasn't changed. I, I'd be cu I'd be curious why you did not choose to look into this further with the zoning. Well, <v Speaker 8>Well, because we did obtain these plans.</v> Well, a very of, not these exact ones that I have tonight. Prior plans with more parking were presented to the zoning board at three separate meetings as we went through it. <v Speaker 5>They're not the site plan review authority.</v> They're not, they're the zoning board of appeals. <v Speaker 8>But if the zoning board looks at the building</v> and says that building is a, a applicable to a section six finding and to a variance based on its location, the building that we're putting up needs to have parking. It happens to be located here. Ah, <v Speaker 4>But you're, you're, you're, the gap in, in your logic is</v> that it might allow the building, it does not allow parking in the residential zone next door or that's, that's, that's, that adjoins it. The zoning bylaw is very, is explicit about that. And it is not addressed in the zoning board decision. It's not addressed Is that I see it in any documents that have been shown to us or that exist for all I can tell, <v Speaker 8>I'm, I'm not exact, I think you guys are asking me this.</v> I present to the zoning board established that I didn't have adequate parking and it wasn't raised or, or they established that I didn't, or I mean, I can only submit what they asked for. <v Speaker 5>You are the attorney Yes.</v> Who represents the applicant Far beat from me to tell you what your job is. But I would scrub that bylaw. I would look at the situation on the site and I would ask comprehensively every single thing you wanted to have asked. But that's not what shows up in the decision. We have a residential use, which you're not proposing. You have parking in a commercial zone, which is not allowed. And you have a decision that does not address any of that residential <v Speaker 4>Zone.</v> <v Speaker 5>Residential, excuse me, the other way around. Yes.</v> Thank you. So <v Speaker 1>It sounds as though there's a breakdown here in,</v> as I hear it, zoning board has, I think by the sounds of it aired, they've given you some kind of approval and I, I'm just, as my my opinion, they've looked at an overall plan, which is what you presented basically this with parking and the building. And for some reason they've approved the plan without breaking it down into some of its components. One component being there's parking being shown in a residential zone. That component by the sounds of it, of the overall approval that you got from the zoning board was not considered. And it is apparently, from what we're hearing here from people who understand these zoning quite well, there's something, there's a, there's a problem there. My suggestion would be somehow this did this go back to ZBA with, as Mr. Landry said, specific your review that identifies very specific components of an overall approval of this site and have them, the zoning board make a decision if they so desire, they so feel that clearly states parking is, if they wanna say it, parking is permitted, it's unlikely they're gonna say it. But I'm thinking that this is what what Amanda, I I I bow to you or I'm anxious to hear what you're, <v Speaker 2>I</v> <v Speaker 1>Guess I'm how we should approach this</v> <v Speaker 2>Absolutely dumbfounded.</v> The ZBA received a determination from the building commissioner to specifically look at the variance in the back because the parcel or the building was getting closer to the rear lot line. They obtained that variance. They obtained the section six, finding the parking is a preexisting, has nothing to do. They could basically not change it and still use it underneath this new building. It doesn't matter what the building is used for. It's an office which is allowed by Right. So the parking was not underneath the ZBA. The parking is under the planning board's review for site plan review as a preexisting use. So therefore we can send it back to the ZBA and you're gonna get the same result. The applicant can actually forget the parking, leave it as is, as no storm water, no landscaping, no modification, and still continue to move forward. The reason why they are here is because they're here for only site plan review. Not a special permit for use. Not a special permit for the parking. The parking is pre-existing if the construction use or the office of the construction is the problem. You can't look at that. It is an office building. You can condition it that they cannot park their construction vehicles in the residential, but you cannot say no to an office use because it is allowed by Right in the commercial zoning district. <v Speaker 1>The building</v> <v Speaker 2>Is, and that is</v> what the building commissioner made a determination. I've had conversations with legal counsel who has been away because they have worked excessive a number of hours and they will get a determination before the 18th. <v Speaker 1>Now something you, you just mentioned, you say that</v> it could be documented that there's not commercial equipment or something Correct. Parked in that lot. Now does that mean that there's, they can look at that lot and, and say what can and cannot be? How it can be used? That would <v Speaker 2>Be you as a planning board.</v> <v Speaker 5>I mean, anyway, you know,</v> I mean I hear you to use your word. I I'm dumbfounded too. How big is the existing building on that site? <v Speaker 4>The original, the house</v> <v Speaker 5>Building. The Bri al shop.</v> <v Speaker 4>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 11>One of the engineers may have that here.</v> See here guys, I believe <v Speaker 2>That it is 3,336 square feet, if that's the correct,</v> <v Speaker 12>That</v> <v Speaker 5>That sounds about right.</v> It's a little cape. Then the McKay architect's plan showing the new footprint of the building says 5,000 square feet, which takes up almost the entire half of that lot. <v Speaker 8>The, the lot coverage on it</v> is the proposed lot coverage will be 20%. <v Speaker 5>How big is the footprint of the new building actually?</v> How big is the footprint of the new building and square footage of the new building? <v Speaker 8>I believe it's about 5,000 square feet if, when the</v> engineers probably has footprint. The footprint, yes. And <v Speaker 5>So, so there's no way that house is even</v> close to 3000 square feet? Not if it's a cape. No. I mean, if you look at the plan and you toggle between the Field Resources Inc. Land survey plan of January 10th, which shows the existing conditions of the wood story, w wood stor wood framed house, and you go to the next plan, which is the McKay architect's plan. <v Speaker 8>It's, it's, you can,</v> <v Speaker 5>You cannot possibly tell</v> <v Speaker 13>Me, I'm sorry guys,</v> <v Speaker 5>That that is a,</v> <v Speaker 13>That is exactly,</v> <v Speaker 5>Excuse me, excuse</v> <v Speaker 1>Me. Excuse me. Who whomever</v> <v Speaker 5>Is, you cannot possibly tell me that that is</v> an appropriate expansion and use of the section six finding for an existing non-conforming. You're not, you're tearing down the existing house. You're not even, you're not even expanding the existing building. You're ripping it down and building a new one. <v Speaker 8>Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 5>That is not an appropriate Section six</v> <v Speaker 8>Use.</v> The section six is a use for, for tear downs pretty frequently. And, and so as part of the, the, as part of the table, I will say we do, we are increasing the footprint. There's no question about that. But yeah. <v Speaker 1>Can we add, add some in, have some input here from,</v> I guess it's Mr. McKay, is that who's <v Speaker 13>Trying to No, it's the surveyor.</v> It's Paul Boy Field resources I wanted to speak to. Yeah, this house is, is, is exactly the proposed is 3,400 square feet. 3,437 square feet. It's not 5,000. That's <v Speaker 5>What it says on the plan.</v> <v Speaker 13>No, it doesn't, it doesn't. On the plan it says</v> <v Speaker 5>20 K architect's plan says 5,000 square</v> feet. I'm looking at it right now. <v Speaker 13>Okay. Well the architect isn't the lance survey surveyor</v> and my, the architect's not talking about the footprint, the footprint of this building, the lot coverage is 20.7. That's 20.7% ti of 16. 6 0 6. The original, the original building was only, was considerably smaller. Yes. <v Speaker 8>I, if, if I missed, I,</v> this is getting a little contentious. I don't, I don't think it needs, but I <v Speaker 13>Just, I mean, just wanted</v> to correct numbers being said. I don't, I know <v Speaker 8>Paul, Paul, I understand. Thank</v> <v Speaker 13>You sir.</v> We've got that correction. <v Speaker 8>And, and, and so, so</v> to clarify on the section six portion, we do keep the lot coverage below the, the required both for the residential and for the commercial size. So I understand it is, it is certainly bigger, but the lot itself, if you're looking at the site plan, I think it, it's not misleading per se, but because we do show the two separate zones, it makes it look like it's a big how our big structure on a small little lot. And it's actually, you know, you have to take it as far as scale with the full lot. And we do keep it again underneath the, the requirement, which is part of the section six where we didn't expand that type of non-conformity. It's, it's conforming now. It'll continue to be conforming as far as lot coverage. Again, it, it certainly is getting bigger. We, I that that's not a, a secret or anything like that. It's just, it, it does fall within the, the zoning setbacks and bylaws. <v Speaker 6>So, did I miss it?</v> Did we ever actually say what the existing square footage of that building is <v Speaker 8>Existing?</v> Does anyone have the existing, <v Speaker 6>Seems like that's an</v> <v Speaker 8>Easy, it goes, it goes from 6.6%</v> of the coverage, which is much smaller. If you look at the pull <v Speaker 6>Out my calculator. No,</v> <v Speaker 8>But</v> <v Speaker 6>Is that, is that lot coverage</v> or is that building square footage? <v Speaker 8>They're, I look at them very similar.</v> I mean like you the square <v Speaker 6>Footage, but it's not, I mean, you know,</v> we have a one and a half stories. It's gonna be two full stories. It's, <v Speaker 8>It's, well it's</v> <v Speaker 13>Both of them are one story.</v> Both of 'em would essentially be two story buildings in the sense of it's mass. But the new building is a one story structure. So if you wanted to go by realtor numbers, you wouldn't double it just because it's tall. Internally, the old house, the existing business is 1096 square feet is its footprint. <v Speaker 6>Footprint, okay.</v> <v Speaker 13>So there, you know, those are the numbers.</v> Now, you know, whether <v Speaker 6>I These aren't abstract numbers.</v> No, no. For instance, the num amount of space you have, not just the law coverage that kinda ha plays into how many employees could potentially be fitting in one, which correlates to, you know, how much traffic's coming in and out. So these are the most basic numbers with a plan. Like I don't, you know, what's the existence? Square footage. <v Speaker 13>Square footage. One question with the, with the prior,</v> with the prior use as a, it had a thousand square feet on the first floor. Well, 1100 square feet on the first floor, plus two thirds of that on the second floor. So you had only 50% less, I'm gonna say business square footage currently than what we're proposing. Not 50% of the total. So like, so if you take the thousand, call it say another 700, you're talking about an 1800 square foot of workers who could be in there, right. As <v Speaker 6>Someone who lives in a cape.</v> I wish that was the case. <v Speaker 13>It's my first house was a cape.</v> My second story was 70% of my first war. I mean, this cape has a, you know, the full, the back is fully dormant. It's not, it's not a, you know, it's, I mean, you know what I mean. There's difference. <v Speaker 9>Put it on, on page five.</v> It says that this proposed one story wood frame is 3,360 square feet office. <v Speaker 6>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 9>And it looks like the existing is</v> just under 1100. <v Speaker 6>Okay, thanks. Just want to have the, the,</v> the facts and that's <v Speaker 8>Fine's fine.</v> Yeah, no, absolutely. And the intention of it obviously is it's for office. It, it's not intended to have a lot of traffic coming in and out. It's for <v Speaker 6>Yeah, no, I was just trying to get a point</v> where these are just the kind of the basic numbers that any decision is gonna be. Yep, absolutely. You know, <v Speaker 8>Absolutely.</v> <v Speaker 6>That's gonna be part of any</v> <v Speaker 4>Is it, is it the case, you know, we talk about this as a,</v> as preexisting non-conforming. I take preexisting non-conforming to mean that it was pre-existing, the implementation of the zoning bylaws in, in, in the town. And I guess I would ask if that's demonstrated in terms of the use of that side of the property that's residential for parking. Because it would seem that someone at an earlier time might have questioned the fact that there a, a parking field was being proposed in a residential zone. And I think a preexisting meaning not quite like antebellum, but I mean, it's just that it's, it's, it was there before zoning bylaws were there to manage it. And that just may be an kind of a, yeah, an optimistic look of how I think of it. But just because there are lots of examples that, that we can point to in town where things got paved that no one ever asked to pave. And so I don't nec I don't see anything demonstrated to show that at the time this became a parking lot. There was anything confirming that it had the right to do so. <v Speaker 5>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 1>All right.</v> I'm, excuse me, Mr. McKay. I <v Speaker 13>See a hand.</v> Yes. Tha thank <v Speaker 14>You.</v> You Michael McKay. I'm the project architect. There was a, a mention of this being a two story building. Can it, it's a one story with a basement. There's a storage basement. It is 3006 3,360 square feet. Gross square feet. This is a, a headquarters building. It's not a construction building. It's, it certainly has higher ceilings. It's 22 feet to the top of the main roof. And then there's some parapets that extend up, but it's 3003 60, not 5,000 on one floor. And it's not a two story building. The building the existing has a basement, has a first floor and two thirds of the cape. That's where the number was determined. So it's, that's, that's it. But <v Speaker 9>I'll, I'll just point out the, the existing building is</v> 25.8 feet tall. And the proposed building is 29.4 feet tall. And if you call it one story, that's fine, but it's, it's basically just under 30 feet. <v Speaker 14>I, I'm, I'm sharing the screen just to, that's to this,</v> this is a section that I was showing how the air conditioning condenses would be concealed by the parapet. A good portion of that is parapet. And then this, this one raised area, the main roof is at 22 foot six. And then there's a parapet area that raises up and it's decorative. There's no question, but this is the office area. This section shows it pretty clearly. This is another view through the section. So this, the main roof and then beyond it is that little tart. The decorative tart, yeah. This is the, you know, various views of, of, but the, the main roof portion is where my cursor is growing, growing across. And then this portion of it is raised up. Is the, is the turret, <v Speaker 4>Are the, are those the turrets that you're pointing out?</v> Kind of the, the same height as the mechanicals? <v Speaker 14>No, the mechanical, the main right where the top</v> of my fingers in the cursor, that's the roof. And then there's a parapet that we designed to conceal the, the condensers. So the, the para, this is a parapet. I'll go back to this section if I can. Now this is, this is the roof plan that parapet goes around. These two gray docker gray areas are just raised decorative areas there, higher ceiling areas. One is a conference room, one is an office area. This is a flat roof that's actually much lower than the, the 22 foot parapet. But this is, this gray line here is the top of parapet. That's what you're looking at as the main mass. The roof is about three feet below. <v Speaker 4>So, and think, and the reason I that I asked that was</v> because, you know, the town concedes that building rooftop, building mechanicals are not counted into, in, in, as part of building height. But it's not the issue that, that extends the building up isn't directly a result of the, the mechanicals. It goes well beyond that. <v Speaker 14>True, this decorative portion</v> that there's no question it extends up where it, it was, it was, it's a design feature. It's a design element in the, in the facade. And you know, we looked at it as being a, an anchor. It's a, you know, it's a modern turret. If we wanted to call it anything. It's, but the height at the roof from small <v Speaker 4>Cape to modern turret.</v> <v Speaker 14>Yeah. Excuse me. I</v> <v Speaker 4>Said from small cape to modern turret. It's,</v> <v Speaker 14>It's, I I mean there's no question.</v> This is not a small cape. I <v Speaker 4>Know,</v> <v Speaker 14>Right?</v> This is a, this is a new commercial building and a commercial area. <v Speaker 4>Well, wait, wait, a commercial area?</v> <v Speaker 14>Well, it's a commercial. It's right</v> around the corner. Is is, you <v Speaker 4>Know, and residential is as well,</v> <v Speaker 14>Right? That's true.</v> <v Speaker 4>I I know that area pretty well.</v> <v Speaker 14>I I, but it's not, you know, we're,</v> we're talking the main ridge. The height is 28 feet to the top of this parapet. It's, it's decorative, no question. And we prepared renderings, comp. And we also showed, now this is, this is a real life photographs stitched in our, our building. This is certainly, we did not design this to be a sixties colonial building. I it's designed as a modern building. But you know, in perspective this way, it, it may look like the existing building is taller, but just to be fair, we do a, it looks like now our building is taller. It's in, it's just the way the perspective works. You know, the, the, the visual, <v Speaker 1>Is that an actual building</v> that's there on the site? The, yeah, <v Speaker 4>Its the white, the white building's there. The white,</v> <v Speaker 14>That's the white building that's there. Yes.</v> <v Speaker 1>Small medical,</v> <v Speaker 4>Medical use is in there.</v> <v Speaker 1>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 8>And the neighborhood too.</v> There are newer office buildings that have, that have gone up as well. We do feel that the, the design fits with the other newer office buildings in the area. It, I don't think it stands out or it wouldn't stand out. <v Speaker 1>I, well, I know it was mentioned</v> that our last presentation that, as I say I at the time, I don't know who Leo was, but Leo's got a, a heck of a height. And that's, that's quite a space. And I, it's very subjective here as far as I'm concerned. But in trying to keep in scale to some degree to the surrounding area, the residential scale, I think that, that, well <v Speaker 8>We, we were trying to keep more to the, again,</v> this is a commercial that this portion of where the building is is a commercial zone. I understand it's two zones, but the other commercial buildings nearby across the street, behind in, in the intersection. <v Speaker 1>I, I think</v> <v Speaker 8>I understand it's a</v> <v Speaker 1>Static, we can get into talking about the, the design</v> and the how it fits or doesn't fit all day. I think if we go back, isn't there a, is there still a major question that I'll ask you, Doug, on the parking and the site and the zoning and the, how that all works? Yes. <v Speaker 5>If that's, I mean, I, I, you know,</v> <v Speaker 4>I would, there would have an opportunity</v> with a different layout to have. You probably could accommodate all of the parking on, or at least a good portion of what's proposed on the commercial side of the lot had they had it kind of been chosen to, and it be organized differently. <v Speaker 5>What section of the bylaw speaks to</v> commercial parking in a residential zone? In a <v Speaker 4>Residential zone?</v> Yeah. Just want this may take me a sec. Alright. <v Speaker 1>No tabs.</v> <v Speaker 4>No, no. My notes</v> <v Speaker 5>Hanging Chad's.</v> <v Speaker 1>Oh, great.</v> <v Speaker 4>Carry on while I look for it.</v> <v Speaker 5>Well, so</v> <v Speaker 13>Amanda, while, while they were,</v> while they were looking that up, just a quick question for you. Didn't you get an email from the building commission or the chief zoning officer of the town that the parking did not require? Didn't we do that between these meetings? I thought that was part of one of the things that we were, that we were respecting the board's request for us to chase this fact down. I mean, I wasn't that one of the emails that came through? <v Speaker 2>I believe so. I've gotta check my emails. Let me check</v> <v Speaker 4>Because</v> <v Speaker 13>I think we're good.</v> One of the things that, so I understand that this board has a question about whether or not that's, you know, appropriate, but once the chief zoning officer of the municipality says that it is the only way to challenge that or question that would be a ZBA decision. <v Speaker 8>I I I think we, we are gonna be waiting</v> for the town council determination. Either way I would, I would assume, I think the board would want to <v Speaker 1>See that.</v> I think town council was out way. <v Speaker 8>Yeah. Yeah. She, she, I, she, Amanda let me know tonight</v> that she, she had been away. So I'm, I'm happy to wait for her determination as well. <v Speaker 2>I did speak with her this, this afternoon.</v> She has been away, but she would be able to get you something by the 18th of December, which is your next scheduled meeting. <v Speaker 1>How does that fit?</v> <v Speaker 8>I, I assume</v> that when Amanda said I just, I we were, we came in to again show the updated plan, the, the air conditioning locations, which was a, a, a point of concern the last time some of the landscaping and, well, not the specific to parking, but less parking was something the, the board had suggested might be a better fit. So we wanna just show those to see if there was any other, <v Speaker 1>How was it determined?</v> I know there's a parapet, but how was it specifically determined that the units, rooftop units were not gonna be visible? I believe Yeah. In what, to what degree are they not visible? <v Speaker 8>I believe based on the location</v> and the coverage, the architect would be able to speak probably better to that than I could. <v Speaker 14>I can, I can speak, I can speak to that.</v> They're the condensers. Now these are not big air handlers. These are, these will have mechanical units in the basement and there'll be some in the ceiling. And these are small condensers. There's, okay, <v Speaker 1>I think you just,</v> <v Speaker 14>They're located</v> in the center of the roof. <v Speaker 1>The plan shows the size of the unit, the rooftop units</v> as those two squares rectangles in the middle of the roof than I, I quite confident that the parapet is going to greater block it from down in the street level. Not, <v Speaker 14>It's definitely, I mean, the section shows that,</v> that they'll be concealed. I mean that's, I don't know what, what, what more I could do to prove it to, other than, you know, an eye, somebody standing across the street, the elevation really shows the clearest way. You'll never see it in elevation. If somebody's up on a second story, they're going to be looking down. They still wouldn't see <v Speaker 1>It.</v> I, I, I am quite confident that most people would not understand the 2D, the elevation. And that the computer now has the capability to sit, stand someone out in the sidewalk at certain distance away, certain height, looking up and seeing what they would actually see. That capability exists. They've got a rendering on the board now that says you've got 3D capability. Nobody just, nobody rew that one. And therefore it can be shown, but I don't believe it's necessary. In this particular case, under most many circumstances, I would say yes, it is required to demonstrate whether they're visible or not. But it showing the plan of the scale of these units sitting there relative to the size of the roof with the parapet around it, you're not gonna see it from the ground. That's I'm confident, but that's not the major problem. That's not the problem right now. The rooftop, let's just say that based on the plan, unless you had a unit on the roof that was 20 feet high, you're not gonna see it. So I think the parking still sounds like it as though it's the, the paramount issue at the moment. I'm not sure, frankly, I'm not sure unless we just wait for the council. Town council's opinion is that that opinion is going to focus on the issue that we're talking about. It is, and that'll be, she'll have it by the 18th. Is the board satisfied that that <v Speaker 5>Will, what's the, what's the question being posed to her?</v> <v Speaker 1>That's,</v> <v Speaker 2>It's regarding, it's,</v> I had forwarded over your information requests regarding the, if the parking could be located there and then also just the overall site review. <v Speaker 1>The first part of that question.</v> That sounds like the issue right there is the parking allowed on that site. I <v Speaker 8>Think it would be more the adequacy of the variances as,</v> as it relates to the proposed use Correct. On the site plan. Correct. And so I guess my, I'm, I'm happy to wait till the 18th, obviously, and again, I just, if, if the board is satisfied or if the town council satisfies the board with a decision on it, are there, I mean the plan itself, apart from that, <v Speaker 1>Well, I would ask the board,</v> but I'm fairly confident that is the board's, if town council answers the question that is being posed, is that parking and would that, <v Speaker 5>We'll see what this says.</v> I mean, did you find that? I have not. Okay. Yeah. So, and you've gotta cure the residential use in that decision somehow. Scribner's error, whatever it is. But that's what it says. So <v Speaker 8>I, I think that</v> <v Speaker 2>I can take care of that tomorrow. And</v> <v Speaker 1>Are we, we have a move motion.</v> Just continue, continue that until the next, the 18, 18, 18 <v Speaker 5>18th.</v> <v Speaker 9>Well, I, I gotta say I,</v> I associate a scribner's error with a comma. Yeah, two ths when there should be one, the word residential and commercial being interchanged, unfortunately, you know, it's like allowed or not allowed and oh, we accidentally put in the word not, <v Speaker 2>This isn't scribner's error on my part.</v> I apologize. I made a mistake. I was doing 11 decisions while covering someone else. Can I just pause you? <v Speaker 9>No,</v> <v Speaker 2>But can I pause the application? The application?</v> No, the application clearly stated commercial. I messed up Amanda, <v Speaker 9>This is not at you. I'm just saying on</v> <v Speaker 2>It is I made a mistake.</v> <v Speaker 9>I I, you know, it doesn't make any difference</v> to me whether you did 11 decisions or one, you know, it, it just doesn't matter. The product, the piece of paper uses a word when another word should have been used. It's not, I mean, it might have been mistaken, but it's not like two ths or a comma. <v Speaker 1>Okay. I I think it's, it's clear</v> what we call it is almost irrelevant at the time. The mis it's a mistake. That word should have been something else. And I think we ought leave it like that. Otherwise we're pointing fingers and I It doesn't, that's what it sounds like. I'm <v Speaker 9>Not, no, I'm not sir.</v> Okay. I not, I'm not pointing any fingers. I'm saying that the decision that was recorded has an error in it and I don't know how comfortable I am that we just go down and just cross it out. Maybe the, maybe the zoning board, maybe they, maybe they reviewed this as a residential. No, <v Speaker 8>No.</v> We, we were, we had three meetings. I, we can go back to the minutes. I'm not saying, I mean we, we did present this to the same way the whole time as a commercial building in the commercial zone. The issue was residential and commercial zones. There was never any residential structure proposed. Well, let, <v Speaker 9>Let me just put my cards on the table.</v> Okay. Here, here's where I approach some of this. First of all, yes, I do live close by. That's not my main concern. I actually think it's a good looking building. And I, and I, and I and I and I, I was okay with it, although I don't really care too much what a building looks like to me it's all about conforming. But in this case, we're in one of these transitional zones where we have commercial heading into areas where people live residential areas. We we're sort of using up all of our space in this town and we, we, that surprise that citizens feel when they're like, oh geez, we've knocked on another, what's gonna go there? Oh, it's bigger. Oh my god. It's bigger, it's wider, it's taller. You know, it, it feels like it's kind of a, a a a, a march of construction and development upon the citizens of the town. This board here is like the one backstop to give it a good thorough review to make sure that it's appropriate to make sure that it's legal, to make sure that all the i's are dotted and the t's are crossed. If we just said yes to everything, boy it would, it would just overwhelm people. And there's a lot of construction going on in town right now. So I'm not apologizing for a second for being super thorough on this because this is like the last spot where you go from commercial to residential and people are gonna feel it, it feels like the commercial's kind of closing in. So I, I'm, I am prepared to go through the process and to make sure that we get it right. I think it's one of the best things that we do as a board is site plan review. And this is site plan review. So I'm, I'm, I'm comfortable kind of going through the process to make sure that we get it right. That's, that's where I'm coming from. <v Speaker 8>That's fine. And I just, I did just wanna clarify</v> that we did, we did not ever propose a residential structure there. I just wanted Amanda, <v Speaker 1>Is there any way that this script,</v> this can be posed to town council? Say <v Speaker 4>I'll pose it to town council.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay, thank you. So</v> that's gonna be specifically mentioned town council. I'm counting on the fact that town council is gonna give us an answer, but why don't we accept the motion that we're gonna continue if there is a motion to continue into the 18th and made and seconded. Did you find the reference by the <v Speaker 5>Way? Yes. Yes.</v> <v Speaker 1>Would that be helpful to know what that is?</v> <v Speaker 5>It's in section five D five DI</v> <v Speaker 1>Don't if that's six</v> obviously pertinent to what we're talking about. Yeah. What's the page number? <v Speaker 4>Six</v> <v Speaker 5>Five. Five</v> <v Speaker 4>D six In the old book.</v> It was page V 14 Roman numeral five 16. <v Speaker 5>Can we It's in the, the new is' in the,</v> I'm the human tab now it's page V, you know, five dash 14. <v Speaker 1>Okay. Thank you. Okay. This since</v> <v Speaker 4>Sections don't matter. I don't know them.</v> <v Speaker 1>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 5>What, so it says something that can be read</v> for the Yes, it says location of required parking spaces says you've gotta be on the same lot as the building on which the use which they serve. The special permit granting authority may grant a special permit to allow use of parking facilities. Not on the same lot provided that the special permit grounding authority determines the proper provision is made to ensure pedestrian traffic safety, yada yada. Except as here and after provided no land in a residential district shall be used for off street parking accessory to or to service a structure or use in a commercial industrial highway planned use or highway mixed use district. <v Speaker 1>Alright, so that's the key to the point</v> that you've made from the beginning. <v Speaker 5>Yeah, and I guess I would like if Caras is going</v> to opine on this, that you go to section two of that same section with the applicability Piece. Any building or structure or land use with its parking lot or facilities, if any, which was existing or lawfully begun or for which a permit was issued prior to March 26th, 1975, may continue its permitted operation or may be changed to a use within the same or lesser category of parking demand without having to conform to these off street parking loading requirements. However, any building or structure or land use which changes its operation to a category of greater parking demand as outlined in section five D three must comply with these offs. Street parking and loading requirements. <v Speaker 1>I am quite confident that Amanda has noted that</v> for Harris. <v Speaker 4>Yes, we've already reviewed that section as well. Great.</v> <v Speaker 1>Alright then with that on the record</v> again, is there a motion to continue? Do we need a motion to continue 18th? <v Speaker 4>We do. It's a public hearing. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 5>Yeah. Hearing.</v> <v Speaker 4>So yes, so moved</v> <v Speaker 5>Second.</v> <v Speaker 1>Need any further discussion? Andy? Terry? Aye.</v> Aye. Yeah, Doug? <v Speaker 12>Yes. Okay. You can vote 'cause it's a special permit.</v> <v Speaker 1>Would continue. Okay, good. Thank you.</v> And I'm just gonna ask you single time. Alright, thank you. Thank you, thank you. And those participants online. Thank you. And we'll look forward to you. <v Speaker 15>You're gonna see me in a second too, so I'll</v> <v Speaker 1>Just stay up here.</v> Oh, okay. I'm not saying goodbye then. Alright, we'll move on. 2 16, 2 18 South Main, <v Speaker 2>Just gimme a second.</v> I just have to promote a couple of the staff members or <v Speaker 12>Project team members.</v> <v Speaker 1>Amanda, is any Billy Worth word</v> that you can give us on this? <v Speaker 2>Yep. Who else on your,</v> sorry, who else on your team was, I think <v Speaker 15>Randy and Steve are on Randy and Steve Cosmos. Oh</v> <v Speaker 12>Yeah, I'm and Omar. Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 15>They're up there already.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yep. I'm not seeing Steve Cosmo.</v> I'm not sure if he's under something else, but Randy is coming over. Was there anyone else? Steve would come. Steve said Steve. Steve usually comes up under Steve Cosmo, so, okay, <v Speaker 12>Come on.</v> This is easy stuff. Okay. <v Speaker 1>Okay,</v> <v Speaker 2>So Steve,</v> we'll keep an eye out for him. So this is 2 16, 2 18 South Main Street. Since we met last in October, there has been a working group meeting of Andy and then also Alan was in attendance of that meeting reviewing what is known as now I think the paddle board, paddle pickle ball <v Speaker 1>Pickle, pickle ball, paddle.</v> <v Speaker 12>It was pickle ball,</v> <v Speaker 2>It evolved Bossy road.</v> It's evolved. And then after that meeting there was also a follow up meeting because of the amount of disturbance and everything like that, the town engineer and the conservation agent both met with the applicant to review that as well. In terms of stormwater, I'm not sure if Alan was able to attend that meeting or not, but there is a follow up letter within the packets. So I don't know if Andy or Alan wanna provide a overview, but do you want me to pull the plans up or does Omar, <v Speaker 15>Omar can or, or Palin?</v> It was easier <v Speaker 2>Just so you can see the, it has evolved.</v> It is also in your packets for tonight just so you can see it up close, if that helps and I can pull it up <v Speaker 1>If needed.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah, as far as the working, Andy, feel free to add in,</v> but I think we talked a lot about the, the width of the circulating roadway, the direction of the circulating roadway. I think that was pretty much most of the discussion we <v Speaker 15>Had.</v> So what we did, someone could pull up the planes. I can go over what almost getting there. Okay. <v Speaker 9>The other thing we did is we made a suggestion</v> that they just, you know, there's been option one, option two that, yeah, we advised them, just pick an option. Right. <v Speaker 15>So we're into the 26 unit option that we discussed.</v> We, one of the major things we discussed was the directions of the roadways. The alleyway goes front to back. Originally we had, actually, you can't see it on this plan, Omar, can you, I think scroll to the plan with the arrows on it? Yeah, that one. So the alleyway goes front to back. That didn't change, but the, the left kidney, if you will, is now going down towards the back, circulating around as a one way and the right kidney's coming around like it did. We switched basically the, the left kidney from one way in coming away from the houses to down towards the houses. We also changed the width of the roads. Originally they were, the kidney roads were 14, the inner alleyway was 20, they're all 18 now. That was what we discussed at the work <v Speaker 5>Group.</v> So then you narrowed the alleyway, <v Speaker 15>You narrowed the alleyway.</v> We widened the outside roads just for parking on the roads and Amazon trucks and things like that. We did move the sidewalk as well to the north side of the site versus the south side. I believe Glenn had brought that up last time. And we also, at Claire's suggestion, we ended the hiking path. You can't see it on this plane, but we ended it at that sidewalk, the end of the sidewalk. And we added a crosswalk from the opposite side sidewalk. So if you're coming up the sidewalk from South Main Street, you can cross over to the path and vice versa. You can go all the way around if you want. So those were all the major changes that we all discussed, shown <v Speaker 1>The computation</v> <v Speaker 15>And also the, we,</v> it was missing from the last plans, but the open space computation, we updated that. Since we've made so many changes, it's, it's almost 41% now of open space. So it's well above the 35% required. <v Speaker 1>Okay,</v> Doug, <v Speaker 5>Good Again, great progress</v> and thanks for continuing with the working group. The, the three visitor spaces as you come in or now you're gonna go all the way around to get there, right? It's gonna be tempting to kinda, I mean, maybe it doesn't matter, but it's gonna be tempted to come up that driveway and take the right in there. But that's a private matter, I guess. But what, how, how are those graded? Are those We have a grading plan. Okay. Can, is it retaining wall holding up? Oh, on the, on the right side? Yeah. On those three parking spaces. Exactly. Yes. <v Speaker 16>Retaining wall. Okay. Retain,</v> retaining wall there. So they're graded something. <v Speaker 5>Okay. Show me that. Zoom in on that please.</v> <v Speaker 1>Can we have an, the gentleman on the left? On the left.</v> An introduction. I didn't, <v Speaker 16>I'm sorry.</v> Edman prone. I'm the engineer of record here. <v Speaker 1>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 5>Whoever. Can you zoom in on those three?</v> Just don't wanna say the grading. Yeah. Okay. I don't see a retain wall. No, <v Speaker 6>There's no retained wall.</v> The retained wall looks like it ended, right? Yeah. Yeah. <v Speaker 16>Retained wall is there. Yes. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 5>So it's just gonna come off.</v> Oh, what's the backside, what's the backside of those spaces doing? Just grading off. <v Speaker 16>Grading off. Right. Now what we should</v> do is put a barrier there. <v Speaker 5>Yeah, yeah. 'cause it's going down.</v> Yeah. Yeah. If, <v Speaker 17>Good evening everyone.</v> If I may, I'm Omar. I'm with s Spring engineering. So the idea, it's that the town allows the, well, the engineering department allows for one to four slopes. So the concept behind this is this driveway would come up, it's sloping down towards the roadway for storm water management purposes. So it's not running off towards, you know, the landscape directly. But beyond that, we kind of have a reverse slope. We can look into adding potentially a barrier as opposed to having that one to four slope cut going, still going there. But that's the concept we have now. And yeah, we'd be happy to add a small retaining wall here <v Speaker 5>If Yeah. Required whatever.</v> <v Speaker 6>I mean, is there even curb or anything like that? I mean,</v> <v Speaker 16>Yeah. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 17>It, it would be burn the curb. Yeah. Yes.</v> <v Speaker 5>And how is that drained</v> <v Speaker 1>Down for</v> <v Speaker 17>The,</v> <v Speaker 1>For the, sorry, go ahead. The big</v> <v Speaker 5>Road. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 16>The pavement is, yeah, it's coming back towards the pave.</v> <v Speaker 5>Okay, got it. Mail. Random question.</v> How is mail handled on a facility like this? Big box at the, down at the bay? Probably at the base entrance. Yeah. Okay. Alright. <v Speaker 1>Can I just, well, it's fresh in my mind.</v> The, those three parking spaces we were just talking about, you say it's bermed around? Yes. That's just a six inch berm. Asphalt berm, asphalt berm. How's that for protection if somebody just were to, I mean, it could be driven over fairly easily. <v Speaker 15>Oh, I mean, would it be a</v> barrier at the back of the spaces? That's, that's what we were talking about. <v Speaker 1>Oh,</v> <v Speaker 5>Guardrail or so would be</v> <v Speaker 15>More for the storm water management.</v> But as far as like safety, that would be like a, a barrier at the enson. Oh, <v Speaker 5>Short guardrail or wooden guardrail, something like that.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay. Attractive.</v> <v Speaker 6>Actually. Sturdy. Sorry, I'll go sturdy.</v> How about on the sidewalk? Because we do have a bit of a really a slow, I'm looking more on the one way. Is there any type of barrier, guardrail, fence, anything like that on the outside of the driveway? And does there need to be, I guess this is a private, it's not a public road, but Yeah, <v Speaker 15>I mean it's not on there now,</v> but if it's something that would be, what's the slope there? It's the one and four. One to four. <v Speaker 6>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 5>Would you suggest that Alan?</v> <v Speaker 6>I'll just look into whether</v> or not, yeah, I can't remember off the top of my head. I think it's usually a two to one is not recoverable. Only if needed, I guess. You know, if that, if, yeah, I don't, I'll have to look it up basically to, because if it's, if it's not recoverable, you know, we don't want a card. Yeah, sure. It's ting down. But if it's graded out smooth enough that it's not needed, we don't, yeah. Not gonna put up for no reason. So it's a wonder four slope. <v Speaker 1>Alan, did you have any more anymore?</v> <v Speaker 6>No, not right now.</v> <v Speaker 1>Alright.</v> <v Speaker 6>Terry?</v> <v Speaker 4>I don't at this point.</v> <v Speaker 6>Andy, progress.</v> I, I'm pretty good. I'm pretty good with all this. Thank you. <v Speaker 4>Actually, just one thing and, and that's just confirming</v> that the calculation of open space does not include this kind of storm water management elements. <v Speaker 1>Just</v> <v Speaker 4>Wanting</v> <v Speaker 16>To, we learned that.</v> <v Speaker 15>Yeah. Yeah. You can see it's, it's voided</v> <v Speaker 4>At all.</v> We have to kind of keep things not getting away from us. Yeah. <v Speaker 5>Oh, okay. Thank</v> <v Speaker 6>You.</v> So one to four is the limit as far as being recoverable versus not helpful. So if you make it any steeper than that, then it will need some kind of barrier. <v Speaker 16>Yeah, let, let's take a look at it then ourselves.</v> And obviously if we're any way tight, we could, I'm sure Anthony will have no issue putting up a barrier. <v Speaker 6>Okay. Again, we don't need to,</v> if it's not needed, but understood. If it's needed, we will. <v Speaker 5>One question the, the sidewalk on,</v> I'm looking at the grading plan. The sidewalk coming again around the corner by those three spaces. There's like a little extension of it. Yeah. Why is that there? Why is that extension coming down the driveway? What is that doing? <v Speaker 6>Is</v> <v Speaker 15>It a walk? You mean coming down to the path?</v> <v Speaker 6>Oh, that's the</v> <v Speaker 5>Path. Sorry.</v> <v Speaker 15>It leads to that path.</v> <v Speaker 5>Sorry. Yep. Thank you Anthony. Got it. So it's needed.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 5>Yep.</v> <v Speaker 1>All right.</v> I have, let's see. Andy, we could, nobody online any outstanding. <v Speaker 2>Just one of the only questions I have was just,</v> 'cause we've haven't seen this, was the two purple units that you're showing on the screen, the fronts are gonna be facing down the road, right? Like, so like it would be like an entrance. So like when you're driving up, you would see the front of those. Okay. And then there wouldn't be any proposed like six foot tall fence or anything going around that just 'cause then that would take away from the No. <v Speaker 15>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>Just wanna double check</v> <v Speaker 1>Relative to that.</v> Someone might come in after the fact and say headlights coming up, up that road, going right into those two units just might be something to consider that that could be a nuisance. If I read that correctly. Coming up. We're coming up the road to this, to the left. <v Speaker 5>'cause the circulation's gonna go</v> <v Speaker 1>Yeah, clockwise.</v> But as you, when you're on the road, the single the, anyway, something that can think of, think <v Speaker 4>Of that.</v> And that's something that's come up in past projects that the board's considered. We, we've usually been able to find some way of <v Speaker 1>Even a natural having</v> <v Speaker 4>Therapy, having screening.</v> Yeah. Yeah. That's put in place in the plan. <v Speaker 1>We just have that question come up. Yeah.</v> Stretching from one project to across west, east, central to some houses on the other side. Alright, <v Speaker 15>Well it came up here too and I addressing,</v> <v Speaker 4>Oh it did when former anthology was put in the Yeah,</v> the townhouses across the street had that concern. <v Speaker 5>Yeah. Can you talk about that</v> with the neighbor across the street? What, what conversations <v Speaker 15>You had?</v> Yeah, so Steve Cosmos and I met with, I believe her name was May. Yes. About 10 days after the last meeting, we walked the site with her. We went over potential options fencing. Steve proposed landscaping in front of the windows or between the two large trees she has there. So we told her we were open or whatever off whatever she thought was gonna be best <v Speaker 1>For her.</v> Oh, she watched, he's on her property and, <v Speaker 15>Right.</v> Yeah. Yeah. I actually haven't heard back on her decision, but we're willing to do whatever screening she would, would make her happy. So <v Speaker 4>Yeah, that's right. If there were two places,</v> <v Speaker 1>Certainly certainly taken a, yeah, A site that headlights</v> <v Speaker 4>Pointed there way</v> <v Speaker 1>Initially wouldn't look like much</v> of a site to put a complex like this on. Yeah. But interesting. Very interesting. <v Speaker 2>And Steve Cosmos is here. Oh, he just,</v> <v Speaker 4>Just the man to ask about screening.</v> <v Speaker 1>Just he want to, do you have a hand raised,</v> you wanna participate in any <v Speaker 2>No, that's a member of the public.</v> I think it's Ga Wessin Roberts. I would assume that's what the WR is for. But <v Speaker 4>I'm guessing,</v> <v Speaker 2>I don't wanna assume anything.</v> Does you wanna speak when, when you go to public speak? Sorry, go ahead. <v Speaker 12>I think we're ready. We've</v> <v Speaker 2>Board Did you have a question for Steve though</v> before we No, I <v Speaker 4>Don't think he or does Steve have anything</v> that he wants vo <v Speaker 12>No, I don't think</v> <v Speaker 2>So. You did on,</v> <v Speaker 18>You could put up the, the landscape plan if you like,</v> and we could just show, show a little bit of what's, what's going on there with the landscaping. Do you have that plan that you can put up for me? <v Speaker 12>I dunno if Omar has it.</v> <v Speaker 2>I apologize. I I do not have</v> <v Speaker 18>That. Oh, okay.</v> <v Speaker 12>You may. Just trying to pull it up right</v> <v Speaker 2>Now.</v> It was, my screen was just oversized for some reason. Bear with me because that was uploaded, right? <v Speaker 18>Yes, definitely there with the,</v> <v Speaker 2>With</v> <v Speaker 12>The</v> <v Speaker 2>October 30 meeting.</v> <v Speaker 12>Can Steve share it?</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah, if he has it.</v> It might be quicker, but, <v Speaker 18>Oh, okay.</v> Let's see. I'm sorry, I wasn't ready with that. I'll <v Speaker 2>Keep working to pull it up, but</v> <v Speaker 18>Let's see if I have it here.</v> Too many screens open here. Oh, <v Speaker 2>Was it up, was it uploaded back on the</v> 25th of October? Yes, <v Speaker 18>Probably. Oh yes, sounds</v> <v Speaker 2>About right.</v> Oh, okay. So we do have that. So I just go with option two. Yes. So that is in your packet. It's in one of the previous folders because the, <v Speaker 4>It's not the new BD</v> <v Speaker 2>OSRD set?</v> No, it was previously submitted for the October meeting. Ah, okay. So it would be, and this is the later one. Yeah. And that would be helpful if I actually shared the screen other than looking at it myself. Is this it, Steve? <v Speaker 18>There it is. If you can just enlarge that</v> and kind of scope in. I just want, well, I guess we could walk through it a bit. So essentially, you know, we have a very strong street tree component here going in. And then within those blocks it sort of breaks down into driveways on one side and then the patios on the other side. And so with the patios, I was trying to give them that privacy from the road or you know, from each other. Essentially. If you can go in a little bit closer, maybe you can see a little bit of that detail of the patios and the units. Oh, yep, There we go. Yeah, so on those two buildings at the entrance 19 and 20, you can see the seating spaces for those units are behind the, behind the houses. So they'll be screened by the house. The front entrance will, you know, essentially be what's visible when you pull in. So we can easily screen those with plantings in the fronts, just enough to diminish the light. The planting is, you know, there's a lot of trees here. We're trying to put back what we have taken. And so it's, you know, it's varying in different areas, whether it's slopes or, or flat areas. But there's a very strong street tree component. These are all native trees and, and hopefully it will do what we're trying to do, which is to separate the trail from the units and the units, essentially giving each one their own individually. And so these, the way I've arranged these blocks of trees is also to try to give some neighborhood identity to each area rather than just, you know, mixing it all up so that it would have a sense of here's this one middle section versus the outside section. So the scale and the, the texture of the plantings will also help give some identity to these areas and the, and the neighborhoods. So that, that's about it. If you have any other questions, <v Speaker 1>Just a small all going back</v> to the one you had just had 19 and 20, it clearly 20 has trees in front of it as you come up from the road come up, the main entry to this, and I don't see that at all in front of 19. It, it's just a, <v Speaker 18>Yeah, because</v> <v Speaker 1>We were talking 19</v> <v Speaker 18>Approach, 19 missed a tree.</v> So 19 will get a tree. Definitely missing tooth right there. <v Speaker 1>Yes. No credits necessary.</v> And these trees, yes, in plan, it's, it's, it's really nice. I'm thinking that in terms of the a the canopy of the tree, how much trunk is going to have is not gonna have any kind of a visual barrier to it, except maybe when it's just a little sapling. I mean, it's gonna grow and it, it's really, you won't be able to see the, the structure is as well when it's grown. But under it, in other words, do these trees come down pretty much? <v Speaker 18>What's the No, no.</v> The street trees are gonna be branching above six feet. So they do not screen anything. It's not the intention. So when you see the evergreens, that's the screening element or you know, shr massing would be a screening element, but no, these are all street trees. <v Speaker 1>Yeah. That, that's what's sometimes a little confusing</v> when you're looking at a 2D plan. Really looks like there's a lot of trees there when you're walking through it. Well, yes. Alright. Any, any other I <v Speaker 5>I have an unfair question.</v> <v Speaker 1>Beg</v> <v Speaker 5>Your pardon? I have an unfair question. Oh,</v> <v Speaker 1>I know we've all been doing that all night.</v> <v Speaker 5>W-W-G-G-S, what would Glen gla say?</v> <v Speaker 1>Oh, oh, about the</v> <v Speaker 5>Species?</v> Yeah. I mean, have you, I, Steve, I'm sure you know, aren't there <v Speaker 9>Any arbor because I think</v> <v Speaker 1>I know</v> <v Speaker 9>How he feels about that. That's the question.</v> <v Speaker 5>Are you comfortable that it passes</v> one of our missing members? <v Speaker 18>Absolutely. Absolutely. I I I That is the hurdle.</v> That is the only hurdle I have here. <v Speaker 1>I'm sure he'll be glad to hear it if</v> he's not already hearing it. <v Speaker 18>Well it's, it's just the truth. Oh, there</v> <v Speaker 6>You go.</v> So what, what kind of tree was the one in the middle, I guess <v Speaker 1>Middle of what,</v> <v Speaker 6>You know, the,</v> you said we were gonna kind of have the same, the same type of tree kind of in the inner circle and then we have a wax surrounding it. Can you just <v Speaker 18>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 6>Expand on that.</v> <v Speaker 18>So what I have</v> to do is see the planting plant to see what that, what that tree was. Does it, we see anything there designating it? <v Speaker 2>Oops. I think it was the, the 20 ccs, is that correct?</v> Is that the circle one you were talking about on the interior? <v Speaker 6>Yeah, the interior I think seemed</v> to be all one, but I just wasn't too <v Speaker 2>Sure for sure.</v> Is the American horn Beam Horn beam. <v Speaker 18>There you go. Horn beam. Someone</v> <v Speaker 1>Was just</v> <v Speaker 2>Talking with me about horn beams.</v> And then on the other side it does have quite a few of the pb, which is the paper birch. <v Speaker 19>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>But it has a nice mixture of different species.</v> <v Speaker 19>I mean, frankly I'll defer</v> to people actually know their trees a lot better than I do. But I don't see any AOR there. <v Speaker 18>You don't see any what?</v> <v Speaker 6>AOR variety.</v> <v Speaker 1>I think Steve,</v> <v Speaker 18>Oh no, there's no aor.</v> No, I promise that. No. Yeah, so I've, I've used all natives. That's pretty much the, the standard nowadays. <v Speaker 1>Alright,</v> <v Speaker 2>So you have</v> two members of the public. If whenever you're ready, <v Speaker 1>I'm sorry,</v> <v Speaker 2>There's two members of the public,</v> whenever you go to public comment, <v Speaker 1>We're at public comment.</v> Okay. <v Speaker 2>I believe that it's scale.</v> Weston Roberts, but I could be wrong. She's allowed to speak <v Speaker 5>On mute. Maybe if</v> <v Speaker 2>We, she needs to unmute</v> <v Speaker 1>Then if we don't know her complete name, we'll ask her</v> to, she'll tell you. Put it in. <v Speaker 5>She's</v> <v Speaker 1>On, because that's a tough</v> one to pronounce the way it is. We go ahead. <v Speaker 5>She can speak. Yeah, she's</v> <v Speaker 2>Unmuted. Yep, she's unmuted.</v> <v Speaker 9>Gail, do you have a comment for us?</v> <v Speaker 1>Alright, why don't we go</v> to the Gail down and <v Speaker 2>The next one that we have is Rick Dero.</v> Maybe I'm pronouncing that wrong. <v Speaker 1>That's, no, that looks that's right.</v> <v Speaker 2>That's fine. He's, he just needs</v> to unmute or they need to unmute. <v Speaker 9>Rick, if you could unmute. Do you have a comment for us?</v> <v Speaker 20>I think I did unmute, correct. There you are, you're on.</v> Okay, thank you. I'm just curious. I, I, I heard the width. Can get your name and address please? Oh yeah, sorry. Rick Devereux, 40 Sienna Lane Natick. Thank <v Speaker 1>You.</v> <v Speaker 20>Okay. I'm just curious, I heard the width of the</v> road down the middle, whether it's called an alley, was that 14 feet? What was that? 18. 1818 feet. Okay. So it looks like some of the driveways in there are two cars wide and some are one car wide. Is that a correct impression? <v Speaker 1>Yes. Based on the units. Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 15>Because it's the three unit building.</v> So some, there's two that are together on one. <v Speaker 9>Yes, that is correct, sir.</v> <v Speaker 20>Okay.</v> So I'm just wondering if you've thought through things like trash pickup, when that comes in and how that works when people frequently have visitors during the day or workers during the day or help aids or whatever it is. And they can't park in the, in the, in the, you know, the one parking space. Where is their parking for them and how are they not gonna be in the way of trash pickup in an, in an area that narrow? There are other, there are other issues with, you know, delivery trucks and things like that that come in and sit. It just seems, it seems very tight to me to, to have that many units and no overflow parking anywhere. <v Speaker 9>I could just speak for the working group.</v> We looked at the roadway width very carefully up to determining how wide, you know, UPS trucks are and FedEx trucks. And that's why we chose 18 feet, so that if those are parked on the curb, you still should have nine to 10 feet to get by. It is a tight site. They, we've been really, really careful with where the visitor parking has to be. And I think we've reached the point where we've got a pretty good compromise, but the folks that live there are gonna have to kind of get used to, you know, using the parking that's there and just managing that well. But I, I don't, I don't think we have any room for overflow parking, but I'd say this has probably been, we're at the end point of probably what, an eight month review on this. Yeah. So we have given some thought to it and I, I grant your point that it's tight, but I i, from my, from how I'm seeing it, I think it's workable. <v Speaker 8>And, and and I would also say too, there'll be a,</v> a document governing, like a homeowner's association type document where, you know, how effective on a day-to-day basis perhaps. But we can have penalties included in there for parking in certain spots on certain days when there know people are coming for trash or other sort of neighborly things. You can sort of try to mandate as you go. <v Speaker 1>Each unit has a garage, right? Yes. Alright.</v> So it's not dissimilar from where I am in some townhouses and trash is kept in the garage and rolled out and left on a certain day, a pickup day right to the edge of the driveway. And guests come to our place if they don't wanna park on the street, I'm in the garage from the park in their driveway. Now granted it's only one car, but <v Speaker 20>If I could just ask how much overflow park,</v> how many overflow parking spaces are there in the entire complex? <v Speaker 15>I should know this off the top of my head. Parking</v> <v Speaker 1>Requirements right there.</v> <v Speaker 15>10 10 visitor parking spots.</v> <v Speaker 20>10. 10. Okay. Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Thank</v> <v Speaker 8>You.</v> <v Speaker 1>Anyone else? Amanda?</v> <v Speaker 2>No, no, that person actually Gail removed her hand.</v> Lowered her hand. So we're good. Alright. Unless there's anyone in the public here. <v Speaker 1>Anyone in the public want? No I didn't.</v> <v Speaker 2>Absolutely. Actually they raised their hand again.</v> Gail Weston Roberts is able to speak at the unmute. <v Speaker 1>Gail, you're on. Hello?</v> <v Speaker 21>Can you hear me this time? Yes,</v> <v Speaker 1>Yes, yes.</v> <v Speaker 21>Ah, great. Sorry, I'm having technical difficulties</v> 'cause I have a new laptop and I've had to resort to my old one. And your address. I have a question about the retaining walls. Excuse me. <v Speaker 1>Gail</v> <v Speaker 9>Is your name and address? Your</v> <v Speaker 1>Address name.</v> <v Speaker 21>Oh, I'm so sorry. Gail Western Roberts 26 Western</v> Avenue Natick. <v Speaker 1>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 21>So I have a question about retaining walls.</v> A lot of this is because I have seen some growing number of projects in downtown Natick that are resorting to retaining walls. And because of what happened up at Walnut Hill with them having to cut down a row of wonderful trees because they had to repair the retaining wall, I have questions I did not used to have about the implications of building multiple retaining walls in residential areas. So I'm not claiming I know what the cons are as opposed to the pros. It's pretty clear what the pros are. It allows folks to build in areas where otherwise they wouldn't be allowed to build retaining soil and so on. But if you folks on the board at the very least could explain to me what the potential pitfalls are when long retaining walls are created in order to allow a development like this to be built. Thank you very much. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Anyone wanna address that?</v> <v Speaker 6>Well, I mean, they're gonna have an engineer</v> that's gonna be signing off on the retaining wall that's gonna show that it's structurally, <v Speaker 16>Structurally sound. Yeah. And</v> <v Speaker 15>Also,</v> <v Speaker 6>So you're not gonna plant trees too</v> close to it. Of course, <v Speaker 16>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>Have we,</v> <v Speaker 15>The original plan also had 27 foot retaining</v> walls and now the highest wall is 10 feet now. So we, that was a concern that built <v Speaker 6>And, and I can't remember, I think we asked</v> before if you knew the style of wall or how it was gonna look like. <v Speaker 15>We talked about that the, the, the,</v> <v Speaker 16>The, the, the broad block is what I'm envisioning here.</v> <v Speaker 6>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 16>Like a she concrete type one,</v> <v Speaker 1>Is that the one that's made to stack?</v> Yes, yes. And interlock. <v Speaker 16>Exactly.</v> <v Speaker 1>And does that allow for weeping</v> and Yes, it does. Yes. And is that straight or is it canid the high, I mean the real high ones <v Speaker 16>Yes.</v> Slightly stepped in as it goes up. Yes. <v Speaker 1>Yeah. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 16>That's what I'm envisioning.</v> It could be reinforced concrete. There, there are, there are various different options. But that's what I see walking here. <v Speaker 1>And that stands up pretty well to the floor.</v> Thaw, freeze, and thaw. Yes. <v Speaker 16>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 6>So if you ever look at the lows in Milford,</v> that's probably the worst example of a retaining wall I've ever seen where it, it's a huge retaining wall that just looks so horrible. Understood. So please don't do anything like that. I think it's ultimately, it's a block would've probably looked fine if it was a two foot tall wall. <v Speaker 15>It would've been down 1 35 towards Ashton where they,</v> they widened the road there. There's a massive <v Speaker 4>There Elliot at Elliot Street and 1 26. Yeah, it would</v> <v Speaker 15>Probably something like that. Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 4>You should, did you see the original renderings when it</v> was, when or when it was 30 feet tall or however tall <v Speaker 1>Be? I don't think so, but</v> <v Speaker 15>I mean, oh yeah, we, we brought, I talked about that</v> <v Speaker 4>And it was, I slightly terrifying.</v> And so, and this is what a third now? 10 most <v Speaker 15>Is the highest. So it's the</v> <v Speaker 5>Highest point come way, way down. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 4>Yeah. I think that was one of the most rational things.</v> <v Speaker 5>Did that help with your export as an export site? Right?</v> Yes. Yeah, <v Speaker 15>Unfortunately</v> <v Speaker 16>No, no.</v> <v Speaker 15>May have exacerbated</v> <v Speaker 5>Direct.</v> I'm just curious what, how, how much export is it? Just <v Speaker 15>60,000</v> <v Speaker 8>Spend it to make it Right.</v> <v Speaker 5>That's a lot. That's a lot. Yep.</v> Hopefully you can find a place for it, <v Speaker 16>But it will be good stuff.</v> That's, that's the problem. It is gonna be rocked. It's gonna be broken. Yeah. You know, it's not a silt or you know, or an ash or something like that. <v Speaker 1>Did Gail signed off?</v> <v Speaker 21>No, I'm still here.</v> <v Speaker 1>Oh, did you have anything further or is that</v> <v Speaker 21>Yes, I, I would like to, I I was not really picturing</v> so much the molasses tank bursting and blowing soil all over the surroundings. Instead, I'm a little more concerned about what happens when maintenance is required in the future and who pays for it. One of the things I've noticed in attending a lot of hearings is that residents are told that they're going to have to resort to a tort, otherwise known as paying for a lawyer to sue if there's something that the builders are responsible for down the road, which fails in some regard. And I, I am sure none of us really wants that to be happening to residents. So this is why I'm asking about it because it's an extensive wall and I didn't used to wonder about this, but now I do. Thank you very much. <v Speaker 1>If I'm not mistaken, generally speaking there's an HOA</v> that's gonna cover the cost of repair, normal maintenance, repair, repair reserve of anything that's on this entire, well within the O eight. If there's something that has been proven or can be proven to be negligence in some way, and I don't want, I'm not a lawyer and I don't wanna pretend to be one, but then that, that's a whole different issue. Probably <v Speaker 15>There is an omissions, don't even joke,</v> <v Speaker 1>That'll cover everything.</v> <v Speaker 8>No, no.</v> <v Speaker 1>That</v> <v Speaker 8>Be an hoa.</v> There'll be an H HOA for reserve <v Speaker 1>And they'll own it.</v> They're the ones who will have to <v Speaker 8>Know</v> <v Speaker 1>Litigation</v> that they take care of that That's right. That there's money set aside. People do it every month. The residents have within a certain bounds, the residents are, it, it's their property. <v Speaker 9>Right. It's not the town of Natick. It's not Right.</v> It's the, it's they own it. <v Speaker 6>And the plan is for this to always be</v> privately held roadway. They're not planning to turn it over to the town at any time. Right. We wouldn't <v Speaker 1>Unless they'd like it.</v> Probably. Mine is more than 18 feet and it's not accepted by the town. <v Speaker 16>The retaining wall is similar to the buildings it's going</v> to be built on under the same quality i i the building. So, you know, it's not like a landscaping component. It's a structure. Yeah. And, and it's gonna be designed as such <v Speaker 1>Now sew sewer lines are in there.</v> This is going to the town system. Yes. Alright. If I'm not mistaken. And the sewer line is under the street. The town is responsible for the sewer line. But if the, that, if that requires maintenance, the surface of the street is re is the cost of HOA homeowners? The HOA? Absolutely. Yes. Okay. Yep. <v Speaker 16>That's the same on any private residence. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 1>That's, yeah. Well that's, I'm quoting only</v> what I understand from where I live, so. Okay. <v Speaker 9>Is there anything else we need</v> from the applicants at this point? Are we, <v Speaker 1>I think we've, well is there, is there from board point</v> <v Speaker 5>Of view?</v> Not from my point of view. <v Speaker 1>Terry, any</v> <v Speaker 9>Motions?</v> <v Speaker 1>Sure.</v> <v Speaker 9>So it's a special permit,</v> open space residential development, special permit and site plan review and aquifer protection district. So I'll make a motion to approve the site plan as submitted. <v Speaker 5>Second.</v> <v Speaker 1>Is there any question about which site plan?</v> I see a couple of variations. Is there, is it dated? <v Speaker 5>Good point.</v> <v Speaker 15>Okay.</v> I believe it's dated that November 27th. <v Speaker 1>That's a set. All the drawings in that.</v> <v Speaker 9>Yes. Yeah. November 27th.</v> Yeah, I have one dated November 27th. 2024. Yes. Okay. So <v Speaker 1>That's the one.</v> That's what we're referring to in the motion. Yep. <v Speaker 5>Question for you and question probably</v> for Alan, 'cause he is here. When was this hearing opened? <v Speaker 15>October 30th.</v> <v Speaker 5>Did you,</v> have you sat on every hearing I for this? For this resubmitted application? Version two. Have you been here? <v Speaker 15>October 30th was the first</v> <v Speaker 5>One.</v> October 30th I believe he was. Were you here for that? Yes. Okay. I believe he was. Yeah. Okay. So <v Speaker 6>All the stuff in the spring was a previous,</v> <v Speaker 5>We've gone.</v> So you're able to vote on this. <v Speaker 1>I can ask you and you'll be able to tell me</v> that. You okay? Thank <v Speaker 5>Yeah, just wanna make sure.</v> <v Speaker 9>Thank you. Is it cluster, not a subdivision?</v> Do does, do you get to vote on the cluster? <v Speaker 5>Yes. Yes. Is this</v> <v Speaker 1>A special permit?</v> <v Speaker 5>Not, yes. Special permit.</v> <v Speaker 1>Not as</v> <v Speaker 5>Subdivision. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 9>I</v> <v Speaker 1>Just turned to them. Okay, so motion made second</v> <v Speaker 9>Just for the special permit.</v> I just for the site plan, we'll do the special permit next. <v Speaker 1>Alright. We do 'em</v> <v Speaker 9>All.</v> Okay. Motion to approve the site plan, which is dated 11 27 24. And motion to approve the special permit for open space residential development. And I guess we'll do the aquifer for protection next. <v Speaker 1>And that was, do we have a second on that? Second. Second.</v> Okay. Any discussion? No handy. <v Speaker 9>Aye.</v> <v Speaker 1>Terry Aye. Aye.</v> A Aye And aye Ali. <v Speaker 9>And then a motion to approve</v> the application for aquifer protection for the A PD. Second. <v Speaker 1>Second. No discussion, Alan.</v> Aye. Aye. Terry. Aye. <v Speaker 9>Aye.</v> <v Speaker 1>Aye.</v> <v Speaker 9>And I think we'll probably sometimes we will continue this</v> for to our next, while the decision gets drafted. And that way if we need to discuss anything, we can discuss it without having to reopen the public hearing. So I'll make a motion to continue to our next meeting, which is 18th, the 18th of December second. <v Speaker 1>And just</v> before where all of us that are voting are here and not there, then we don't have to, if I'm not mistaken, go <v Speaker 9>With the names.</v> Correct? You don't have to. No, we're <v Speaker 1>All here And just all in favor, correct?</v> Aye. Aye. All aye. Aye. <v Speaker 9>We'll close the public hearing the next time we meet.</v> Okay. But thank you for all your flexibility. Thank you guys. This has been, guys really appreciate it. I don't think we, collaborative effort, we didn't start here, but I, I think we're in a good spot. Thank you guys. Thank you guys so much. Forward to the fork. The fork in nights. Next. <v Speaker 1>Be good here, gentlemen. Thank you. Thanks. Okay.</v> The planning board. Oh, business. <v Speaker 22>Business. Thank</v> <v Speaker 9>You. Have a good night.</v> <v Speaker 4>This is the exciting</v> <v Speaker 9>Stuff. Thanks Anthony. Oh,</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 9>See you Nick. See you. Depends</v> <v Speaker 4>On your definition of excitement.</v> <v Speaker 1>Zero Magnolia request</v> for reduction in performance block. I'm sorry. No. <v Speaker 4>Oh no, I'm, I'm just excited about.</v> Very organized town meeting plan. <v Speaker 1>Oh, okay.</v> <v Speaker 22>My name is Carrie Wu</v> and I'm the owner of the zero Magnolia. I'm here to request for a revision of the bond amount based on what DPW has checked off and what has been completed. Original bond amount at 430,000 was set based on zero completion. So, you know, to expedite it, we put in a $430,000 cash bond to, to, to move forward. So like to get a revision of the bond amount based on the, the, the what bill from DPW has checked off. And then so they can, the bank can release part of the money on the work that's been completed. <v Speaker 1>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 5>So the 94 4 6 4 is what's left to be completed?</v> Correct. Okay. Correct. So we be reducing the amount you would to that total be <v Speaker 22>About from 430,000 to 90</v> <v Speaker 5>To 94 4 6 4.</v> <v Speaker 22>Okay. The 94</v> and change are includes the 20% overage. So <v Speaker 5>Yeah.</v> Okay. Sense. <v Speaker 9>Even so we typically round up, so I would,</v> I would support like a hundred thousand <v Speaker 5>Say that. That's fine.</v> <v Speaker 22>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 4>Or</v> <v Speaker 5>Motion to motion to reduce it. Yep.</v> To a hundred thousand. Yep. <v Speaker 9>Second.</v> <v Speaker 1>All those in favor? Aye.</v> <v Speaker 5>Aye. Aye. Aye.</v> <v Speaker 6>Okay. I waited this time.</v> <v Speaker 4>So did Iye.</v> <v Speaker 5>Good.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay. Yes.</v> <v Speaker 22>Okay. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 6>Between different classes of things</v> or some things that started before I was here. I'll just wait. Oh, <v Speaker 4>No, that's fine.</v> In a manner of speaking. Long, long before you were here? <v Speaker 5>Yeah. Oh zero. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 1>Oh, that one. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 4>Zero Magnolia. I have scars.</v> <v Speaker 9>He, the original guy was one of the all time characters.</v> He, he goes, he's in the hall of fame, the original guy. <v Speaker 4>I wanna say I think I was chair when all that was</v> <v Speaker 9>Happening.</v> Yeah, yeah, he was, he was precious. <v Speaker 4>Okay. It's a piece of work.</v> <v Speaker 1>2024 spring annual town meeting zoning articles.</v> <v Speaker 2>So I apologize, I should say 2025 spring.</v> So we're already having a week. So the four articles that I have sent to you via email on Monday and then also in the packets tonight. These are intended to be light lifts for the spring, more cleanup items. So I'd like to walk through 'em just because maybe we could actually get a recommendation to refer, ask the select board to refer it back for the purpose of open the public hearing to get these ones more off the planning board's plate early if possible. So with that being said, the first article I would like to discuss is the indoor recreation overlay district. So within the town of Natick you have a overlay district that allows for indoor recreation. It is up in the East Natick tech park. However, with all the work that you've been doing on the youth regulation schedule, you already now allow for indoor recreation in all of the industrial ones. So therefore the overlay is no longer needed. So we can actually delete noman numeral three L from the bylaw and I would just put reserve because now we have a 3M because of accessory dwelling units and then also delete the overlay district from the zoning map. That is one of the articles that it just, it seems like it's cleanup. There's not, when you look at three L, there's not anything that's like extra conditions or anything because you would already be doing elsewhere. Yeah, <v Speaker 4>It's it's a lot tidier. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>So that is one of them. Question on</v> <v Speaker 9>On your, on your spreadsheet, that's three A and three B.</v> <v Speaker 4>Yep.</v> <v Speaker 9>People pop,</v> <v Speaker 4>Wait no it's three L.</v> Well removing three L <v Speaker 9>Well look at the document that's in our,</v> <v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's A and B.</v> It's the yellow or <v Speaker 2>The, yeah.</v> So that's a separate document that I am working off of. So that is also part of another discussion that is right underneath this. So in that huge table that I had previously circulated, which we were looking at for 2025, spring and fall, that is what Andy just referenced. <v Speaker 5>What should I be looking at?</v> <v Speaker 2>You should be</v> <v Speaker 9>Paper. No, no, no.</v> <v Speaker 4>This is, this is printed, this is from our, we don't</v> <v Speaker 9>Use printed stuff anymore.</v> Like in in the spreadsheet in our Google. What <v Speaker 2>Should I be looking at?</v> Okay, so when you're in the Google drive in, you should look at zoning articles for recommendation. Okay, <v Speaker 4>That's, I just printed it. That's all I did.</v> <v Speaker 2>Okay. And there'll be four folders in there.</v> So the one we just went over is indoor recreation overlay district. The next one's <v Speaker 5>Question for you.</v> Yeah. On, so deleting the section three L and I know we've been moving everything into the use and <v Speaker 4>Reserving and</v> <v Speaker 5>Reserving and reserving, right?</v> But moving everything into the use table, there's a FAR requirement here. What happens with that Dimensional It would matter. I mean it <v Speaker 2>Honestly you would fall under, it would revert back</v> to the no numeral four B, which is our density city regulations. Because everything would be indoors, you would be enclosed, this was originally my understanding in research was for a indoor volleyball establishment in the East Natick tech park. But we wouldn't be adding that. And I wasn't trying to add any more footnotes to four b. <v Speaker 5>I appreciate that. Okay,</v> <v Speaker 2>So that is</v> that one which seems pretty straightforward just from my perspective. Alright, the next one I'd like to go to is section 3 26 height. So when you actually go this one, I have a question for Caris. However, what the document that you're looking at, and I can share it on my screen as well. It seems a lot more complicated than it really is. So somewhere back in 2005, the prior to that, this table that is shown in the light pink color used to live right underneath 3 26 point 12. However, in 2005 under a zoning article 3 26 13 and 3 26 14 were added. And whoever put the two new sections in actually separated this top language right here from the table. So therefore it doesn't correspond because we do have the colon. But when you look at the current zoning bylaw, there's no table that goes underneath it. And when you actually grow down to the bottom, and you can see I've gone back through the old bylaws as well, you can see 3 26 13, you've got the Coleman and then you have a table 'cause it says public way. So you, that makes sense. But then when you come down here, 3 26, 14, it's a period, but then all of a sudden you have this table underneath it nowhere. And so when I go back to the old bylaws, <v Speaker 5>That's where it should be.</v> <v Speaker 2>It's where it should be. The other thing is</v> it's a little crazy and I don't know if it's just the way I read it because this section's a little crazy, but 3 26, 12 it, it regional center mixed use development isn't the title. It's actually supposed to be like regional mixed use overlay district or regional mixed use. Like it doesn't call out the correct title. So therefore you could actually clean this up because structures in the highway overlay districts, which is all four of them, which you actually call out here are, you can just summarize it. However, if you aren't gonna make any amendments, this may be something that we can just do <v Speaker 4>Administratively.</v> Administratively. I mean it really is it's, it is kind of just cleaning up the, truly cleaning up the <v Speaker 2>Language.</v> It is but then it's just, the only thing is you can see in 3 26 13 it says regional center mixed use development and yeah, district. And it's supposed to be called regional center mixed use district <v Speaker 4>Overlay overlay</v> <v Speaker 2>District. So</v> <v Speaker 4>This was all the language that was put in</v> before most of our times I think, I don't know Andy, were you here? It was early. It was in the days when they were dealing with Modera. <v Speaker 5>Can you tag that to a, A town meeting</v> <v Speaker 4>Or no, sorry, not modera. The</v> <v Speaker 5>Mall. The corrected language.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah, well the corrected language, I can't,</v> we can bring it in forward. It's just like a housekeeping. <v Speaker 5>Yeah, that's what I'm saying. If that's, yeah,</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah.</v> Okay. So it was just trying to clean that up. <v Speaker 5>But can I, the numbering what,</v> <v Speaker 2>So I'd like to, can you do that?</v> We can do that. But not today for this town meeting. That whole section needs a good loving like, <v Speaker 5>Okay, so</v> <v Speaker 2>But it is on the list of the,</v> <v Speaker 5>That's the only section of the bylaw that is num like</v> <v Speaker 2>That one in section? Yes. One.</v> <v Speaker 4>And that was the, the, the planning board</v> of the day legend hazard thought that they would switch to the whole, the whole bylaw to this format and what happened other than the fact that it, you know, they were never heard from again. Okay. <v Speaker 2>So, okay. That is number two.</v> Number three, this one these. And also when you do look at the table that Andy was referencing, I do try to review Natick 2030 to show where these items are supported or why they no longer are needed. Body art. So this is an item that was brought forward at the, I believe springtown meeting of 2024 to expand body art to the DM zoning district, but also within the D body art definition to include microblading permanent makeup. And there was a couple others relative to that because that's all there, there was a discussion that why only the DM district and why not expanding it to the other commercial districts. We had discussed looking at it for a future town meeting of possibly expanding it. So in that effort, because we've had salons in the commercial two zoning district asking why they can't do it. But you can do it in the DM district. It's not an fair advantage. I remembered we had this conversation, so I wanted to bring it forward. I created two options for the planning board to review to consider. Option number one is amending the youth regulation schedule so that we just say body, our establishments are allowed in the commercial two zoning district by a special permit. That would be very clean, straightforward. But then we would also no longer need footnote number four because that specifically says that it's only in this little piece in the RC overlay or the regional corridor overlay district. Yep. And also in the dms we would no longer need that. That's option number one. Option number two is actually only amending the definitions and you wouldn't need to amend anything else. So what you would do is remove permanent cosmetics, permanent makeup, micro-pigmentation and microblading from the definition of body art. And then add those four items into the definition for personal service establishment. And personal service establishment is allowed in the C two and several other zoning districts. So it just depends on how far you want to expand it and what you wanna move forward with at this time. Both are options. <v Speaker 4>Option one seems so much simpler and</v> and less kind of less involved. <v Speaker 2>Yeah, it, I just didn't want to, well</v> <v Speaker 9>Here's, here's a little background.</v> I I, I happen to know a gentleman that owns a salon in town and he was, he's a real active guy in the community. Really good guy. You, I, you've talked to him I think Matt Trager. I, yeah. So he runs a business and he became aware that when town meeting took this action, un unintentionally, it literally sent the people who want these services to Framingham and, and to Wellesley where it's allowed, it's a real competitive disadvantage. So they are simply just trying to provide these services so that people stay in town. So from that standpoint, what I'm thinking is having, you know, having businesses like his say, okay, you can do it now, but now you have to come in for a special permit. It seems to me I would, that that can be cumbersome. I I think I'd rather change the definition. So allow them to operate as is. It's it apparent. I of course I don't know anything about these services, but apparently they are more and more common and it's just a pure competitive advantage. So the idea of the business owner now has to come in and get a special permit from the planning board that, you know, I I think I like the idea of changing the definition to allow it. 'cause it's, it's another thing that happens in the salons that they couldn't do. But now they can <v Speaker 2>And,</v> <v Speaker 9>And, and the, and the gentleman did offer</v> to come in and talk to us in like informal discussion or to help support. In fact, if I had known this is, this was gonna be tonight, I, I would've asked him to come. But he's very eager to come help explain it to us and it's just a pure competitive advantage kind of thing. So I, I'd like to try to lower the barrier permanent wise if, if possible, I think that might be a good idea. <v Speaker 2>And personal service establishment is allowed</v> by w right in the commercial two zoning district if that <v Speaker 9>But not in the dm?</v> <v Speaker 2>In in the dm. Oh it is in the dm.</v> So personal service establishment is allowed as of right in the dm, the C two and the center gateway and also the limited commercial zoning district. It is allowed by special permit in the PCD, the industrial one, industrial two and then, hm one small and large. But we have a two, which you can't exceed a certain percentage footprint. <v Speaker 4>This isn't that in option two. That's, but</v> <v Speaker 2>We are changing the use regulation schedule.</v> <v Speaker 4>I mean I, I have to say it's not clear as to why</v> it would be special. It would be as of right in half of the town and then special permit. 'cause that's what you're, <v Speaker 2>We just amended that.</v> Yeah, it was 'cause I think those were more the industrial districts. So they wouldn't typically have Okay. Those like hairdressers and stuff like that. Yeah. But in terms of the body art establishment printing costs, you could also just change both the DM and the C two to buy. Right. It's just a matter of body art includes, and I've nothing against tattoos at all. It's just, I don't know how people feel about that. Like it's, <v Speaker 5>I mean</v> <v Speaker 2>If you're, you're fine with it, you could allow</v> that by right in the DM and the C two as well. 'cause that also includes piercings other than ear lobes. 'cause that's by Right. So <v Speaker 5>I mean I guess I'm kind of tracking with Andy on this.</v> I'd like to hear from Matt. I guess his name is, you know, I mean I I have a hard time understanding what this board's interest is in a special permit for body art. <v Speaker 4>I mean, well it, it has this kind of a,</v> a morality thing about it that I think is a little weird. <v Speaker 5>Say it again, I'm sorry.</v> <v Speaker 4>It kind of this this morality</v> police that feels a little weird. <v Speaker 6>It wasn't too long ago we</v> couldn't even do it in Massachusetts. Right. <v Speaker 5>So yeah,</v> <v Speaker 9>I think we're sort of past that.</v> If you, I know I'm just saying as far as if you've been to a waterpark lately, I think it's safe to say we're past that. But the, what I'd be curious to know is are there any current salons that are not located in DM C two CG or lc? 'cause if, is there, is there a salon in the industrial park? 'cause I I, I just don't wanna create an unfair advantage. Like, you know, if you want this service done, you can go there. But that place has to apply for special perming has to, you know, jump through a bunch of hoops. So I, I just want to, you know, <v Speaker 2>We've had, in terms of salons, we've had people reach out</v> to us that are in the RG zoning district wanting to open a salon 'cause it's around the center gateway or not center gateway, sorry, downtown excuse. But we could do an analysis but this is why we wanted, I wanted to give you both options. <v Speaker 4>But RG is different in that it's a residential.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah this was more on the 1 35 strip.</v> So it was zone residential in the historic district. But yet, <v Speaker 9>Yeah, I'm thinking of these home occupations.</v> 'cause you know, the idea of going to somebody's back room to get your hair done is one thing. And I guess what we're doing is, you know, get your hair done, get a facial, get a little tattoo, get a micro blade. I mean these things all have to be regulated of course, you know, by Department of Health. But if you're located there and you can do that stuff and you're located there and you can't, I think we need to kind of make it even playing field. You know. <v Speaker 4>Is there anything that that board of health would have</v> to say about the services that would make any difference? Only I'm, that's what kind of a wildes <v Speaker 2>My understanding is, I'm not an expert on this,</v> but I've been learning quite a bit on it, is that it's treated the same way. Microblading and permanent makeup is treated the same way in terms of board of health regulations as a tattoo is because you are like going through the skin. Other than that, my understanding is that they just have to get the necessary permits through the board of health and regular license. License or inspections. So we, this was just an item 'cause I didn't want to have it drop off. And we've also had people ask us about it. So then the last one I would like to, well <v Speaker 9>It, it would just be helpful to know, like I'd be,</v> I'd be happy to say work on the definition side of it and boom, you have even things out for let's say 85% of the salons in our town. The, the next step might be if we hear back from people, Hey I have a home business RG and it's not allowed. You know, maybe it would really be good to know how many we're missing if we just go with the definitional change. If we're, if we're not missing any salons or any businesses, then that's easy. But if we're missing three then I don't know what to do. Maybe part two is to actually change, you know, it gets more complicated where you have an n to make it a YI mean that that becomes more of a town discussion. Yeah. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. I can do it like I can do like,</v> like a review and everything. But then it's also like if you had a school like because this is becoming more popular. If you had a school that wanted to go in the East Natick tech park to actually teach this, are you prohibiting people from doing that as well? So let me do a review, but we have two options. There's two paths forward. It's just, which is the option that works best for everybody. Okay. Again, tattooing is not the same as it was 20, 30 years ago. So might not have the same issues trying to get forward concerns I guess. Yes, concerns is a good word. <v Speaker 4>And what I, what I can't miss the opportunity</v> to say is I love that we are discussing this now and not in early January. I mean that we, this is coming on the table now and I really, really appreciate the fact that these conversations can be had not quite at leisure, but <v Speaker 9>Make sure a better product.</v> It makes it easier to explain. <v Speaker 4>And so, and this is actually a really good example of one</v> that, you know, if time allows, we should explore it here what other people have to say and look at what, <v Speaker 9>Would it be helpful to invite the this business owner in</v> to Yes hear maybe you can explain what these things are. It's like to hear it. Okay sure. You wanna handle that or you want me to? Yeah <v Speaker 2>I can.</v> I have an EI have an email from him and I was waiting to see what the conversation went to tonight so I can see if he wants to come in. If you want to put this to the 18th. <v Speaker 9>Yeah, maybe we can put it early in the night.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah, we don't have much on the 18th actually.</v> <v Speaker 9>We can just do body art.</v> <v Speaker 4>Oh</v> <v Speaker 9>It'll be body art night point.</v> Oh you mean the language. That's what you mean got no Doug, if you feel inspired you get a nice neck tattoo. You know, something classy though, you know. Nice. <v Speaker 2>The last one that I do have prepared in half,</v> I do not have the whole thing prepared because it depends on what way the board wants to go. So we always put together the use regulation schedule first and then we follow up with the definitions because we don't wanna create definitions if we're not moving forward with something. So in your packet also under the use regulation schedule, this is continuing the work that the planning board has been doing at the previous town meetings. We also get to delete some more footnotes on this. We are really getting there. This <v Speaker 4>Is the one that starts with professional medical offices.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah. So we have</v> I think five or six sections left. The last two sections after this are really specific to auto and also on like wireless and communications. Those two kind of clump together. So what I have prepared here based on our conversations prior to is use header eye, which is professional and medical office uses goal is the same, reduce the language and put definition language into the definition section 200, align the use categories with current uses. Also bring anything in to compliance with case law or amendments at the state level. And then also updates that we should be doing as best practices. So we have no, or sorry, use header i professional medical offices. We are proposing to update Jay research and development laboratory and technology uses. Oh and I apologize. We are also trying to reduce the small letters. So like in J where it has J one that was originally in the table of use but then we have J one A that was because when we took it from like limited commercial or something else, it did not fit perfectly in. So we're trying to eliminate those as well. K. Which is manufacturing and industrial uses. There's a lot of verbiage in that one. We can really cut those down. And then the last one is, I wasn't gonna tackle this now but m other uses because I fallout shelters. I'm not, haven't had one of those requests in ever. But it may be a thing. So it's just looking at those, it might be. So those are the four sections for the planning board to consider for the SPRINGTOWN meeting. Again there are, this does not include I was going to do body art or however we decide to do the other one as a separate thing. So that was not included in this, but we were also able to del to delete foot or EndNote, T, U, V and X and we would put reserve. Once we get all done with all of this, the reserves all go away it and we can renumber them. It's just, I don't wanna cause chaos and people being like, where's M and N and O and P? Yeah. 'cause you go all the way down to SW and Y is basically all we have left. So those are the four that I can confidently say that we're at the point of we do need review and we can put these to the 18th or if you feel confident where you wanna actually request the select board to refer it back for the purpose of the public hearing just so we can get the advertising. We can't open the public hearings until January, but I just wanted to put that on the table for the planning board. <v Speaker 4>I think we could do that with with the select board</v> because if what we see we're comfortable enough, we're in the heading in the right direction, then I had I happy, I'd be happy to move things forward. And I have, it's funny 'cause I was reading through it and it's like it, it felt like it had a facelift. You know, they were just getting, thank you. Getting rid of language that was either superfluous or repetitive. <v Speaker 2>So those are the four.</v> <v Speaker 5>So on the use schedule, other uses,</v> billboards ends across the board. So what, what, help me with that. <v Speaker 2>Yeah, so that one I was actually really trying</v> to understand because it just said signage, <v Speaker 5>Right?</v> Signs is here and after permitted and then it's <v Speaker 4>But doesn't the state come in where, where billboards,</v> <v Speaker 5>Yeah, I mean there's the mass, mass DOT has an office</v> of outdoor advertising and it's a permit process for what they call off-premise signs, which is a billboard you, you're advertising something not available on the site. Okay. Right. That's what they are. But, and I'm not suggesting we have billboards in the town, but you know, I along the mass turnpike <v Speaker 4>Is isn't</v> <v Speaker 5>Is there one you might be able</v> to have one you if you're a property owner <v Speaker 4>1 35</v> <v Speaker 5>That</v> <v Speaker 4>Just in framing that, just across the line.</v> <v Speaker 5>Oh there's an oil one.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 5>There is one on right by the gas tank. Aztec. Yeah. Cohen</v> <v Speaker 4>Oil's got a</v> <v Speaker 5>Billboard.</v> Yeah, those are, so those are, I wonder if those are under mass D jurisdiction, why would they be, <v Speaker 4>It's a state road,</v> <v Speaker 5>Right?</v> It's not necessarily a state <v Speaker 2>Road. I, I think that they're,</v> <v Speaker 5>You know, you could, I mean, in other words you could have</v> a billboard not on state highway, not near state highway, you know? Yeah. So I think, I think, you know, this is fine. I'm just like, well if, let's have a conversation about the, the mass turnpike. <v Speaker 2>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 5>Because there might be properties along the mass</v> turnpike that might want to take advantage and of a bill of an off-premise sign, but they would have to go through DOT Yeah. To get that approval. So that's, that's not, you know, <v Speaker 2>And I guess mine, when I was looking at this,</v> 'cause it was said signs as here and after permitted, right. I didn't really fully understand that because I thought if you were a commercial, you automatically went into no room set. 5K or five eight. The sign section. <v Speaker 5>Yeah. Why would you have a special permit?</v> <v Speaker 2>So why, like, I guess why do we even have a row for</v> that when it's like a I don't accessory thing. That's why I thought maybe they meant billboards. I <v Speaker 5>Don't know. I,</v> <v Speaker 2>So that's what I would,</v> <v Speaker 5>Yeah, I would.</v> And there's no definition or anything like that, just No. I'm sure we'd want to open that can of worms around. Yeah, around billboards. So if that's, and I hear you on the why the sign is in its own line. I would say get rid of M1. And <v Speaker 2>That's fine across the board.</v> <v Speaker 4>I mean, I, I had, I'd assumed</v> that the only thing it could have been for was instances in which off premises signage made sense. <v Speaker 5>Yeah. And those were what districts?</v> So the s the special permits were in PCD and AP for that use. <v Speaker 2>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 5>So</v> <v Speaker 4>Trying to think of what I Trying to think.</v> <v Speaker 2>So I can, I'll delete that and I'll update that.</v> The other thing, so if you go back out to the main Google share drive for tonight, if you would go into the folder that says 2025 zoning articles, open friends bylaws and map. This was also emailed out. It's a very large document and it may, it, it could feel overwhelming, but a lot of it is really housekeeping or work that we've already started to undertake. And so what I tried to do here, which one is it? I'm sorry. Oh, sorry. <v Speaker 5>1125. 2024.</v> <v Speaker 2>It says no in tonight's folder.</v> It's 2025 zoning articles, open bylaws in map. The <v Speaker 4>One in on the, got it on the right on the left side there</v> in various pastel. Got it. Yeah. <v Speaker 2>Yep. Exactly. So I tried</v> to capture everything that we've talked about or we've discussed and what's, why I wanted to send it out is to take a look at what we're actually trying to do. Because we are doing a lot and it's a lot easier when we know what we're doing spring and fall and like going forward. But then also it's helpful to know where is this coming from? So if I'm a member of the general public this, we're not just pulling this outta thin air. It's like, oh, Natick 2030 is actually recommending this, or we had another thing that was recommending it. So again, there's no, I didn't put these in priorities. It was really just writing down a list and whatever came to the list first. So the ones are everything to do with the use regulations schedule. So that's just trying to update that, breaking it down, moving it forward. So you'll know that there's all the sections that we have left. I did include body art establishments as one C because we had talked about that at the end of going through the whole use regulation schedule. And which is why I put it as spring of 2026. So the, the hope would be that we have gone through all of the sections of the use regulation schedule and in 2026 we do a final review to make sure everything is where it needs to be, reads what we want it to be. And all of the footnotes are clear, if you go to two, two is in like a blue color and it's really only two, it's the floodplain district. This one, I am saying fall of 2025. We have to update the floodplain because FEMA is updating the maps. There's some other things that we need to have to have it be in compliance with it. One of 'em being designating a point of contact for fema, which has to be called out in the bylaw, which is really weird, but they want it called out in the bylaw. We don't have that. It's a very easy thing. What I've done before is we designate the town manager and the town manager identifies a designee based on whoever's staffing at this point. So that ones I, I would say it fall of 2025. And I put the maps 'cause two to be determined. We don't know. The next one is the three A and B, which is what we just discussed, which was the indoor recreational overlay districts just deleting those items. It seemed like when I was putting that together, that that's a light lift. So it seemed like spring of 2025 was reasonable. Fours, fours are the intensity regulations, which is four B. It is continuing the work that we started also really looking at those footnotes to see where we can start deleting items. Also, if there is anything I, and I said the footnotes would be a spring and a fall because I think we would get a chunk done, but there may be ones where we're like, oh, we've gotta actually amend this section of the bylaw. So, <v Speaker 5>Okay, so you'll, if it's gonna be spring,</v> <v Speaker 2>Yep, you have those on the December 18th meeting.</v> Okay. Okay. I just wanted to get as much out to you as possible. And that is the goal is to get, as these things are finalized, to get 'em out continuing with the, that would be the fours, the fives. This one is a parking facility regulation. So off street parking, looking at that spring may not be realistic, but what we would do is actually start doing the work in the spring to bring an article forward in the fall. And I say that in the sense of we would maybe need a peer review since we don't have the books, except for if someone may have the books at this table regarding parking numbers. And we would wanna make sure that what we're doing is aligned. But also even though the book state something, the IT <v Speaker 5>Manual is talked</v> <v Speaker 2>About.</v> Yeah, yeah. We could actually decrease it. Because those are based on the IES Saturday between Thanksgiving and the Christmas season on a Saturday. <v Speaker 4>Yes. In a different time.</v> <v Speaker 2>A different time. But then it also,</v> it may not also break it down even further. Kind of like what we had talked about is a clothing store may have a different demand than a furniture store or vice like, so looking at it much more deep dive. So that's where, and no, <v Speaker 4>And it actually did that, the, the existing bylaw does</v> that with, specifically with furniture stores. But yeah, <v Speaker 2>But we would wanna make sure, but it's also, it,</v> it goes hand in hand with the use regulation schedule. Because the ultimate goal would be to make sure that all the uses that we've identified actually have a direct parking requirement. So there's no question it completely lines itself. <v Speaker 6>So before, when we get into that, so I'll, I can go</v> through the parking generation manual to at least, I mean, again, those are averages. It doesn't mean we're beholden to that. But that helps make sure we're not, not doing something that's wacky. You know? I mean sometimes, you know, towns you look at and you go, oh, for every unit or residential you need, you know, three parking spaces and when it was a really large development, that would be ridiculous. So I could take a look at that to make sure we're, <v Speaker 2>So, if you hear that reasonable.</v> And then on the flip side, if you've ever, and you all have, but when you look at no numeral five D, there is a lot of five in the bylaw, in the bylaw, sorry, there's a lot of language telling you how it should be laid out. But it's just like it keeps adding on and it's not, it seems like we could write it a lot more simply to be able to follow it a lot easier. So it'd be also looking at that also, if we're trying to encourage people to decrease the length, then we should just tell them to decrease the length rather than asking them to do special permit kind of thing. Like <v Speaker 5>That's like the, like the Abbey labs where we</v> <v Speaker 4>Have Oh, parking</v> <v Speaker 2>Spaces, parking spaces,</v> <v Speaker 5>We have the overhang and</v> <v Speaker 2>You know.</v> Yeah, but not the, that was, <v Speaker 4>Yeah, that was done to try to incentivize buffers.</v> <v Speaker 5>Open space and buffer. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>But it seems like since we are trying to encourage that,</v> why not just call it out to increase, increase the landscaping. But so that's what it's to look at that, the six, I just had that in there just to keep it in mind ongoing for inclusionary housing, just so it's there. And that's the same with seven, which is the accessory dwelling units. As things happen at the state level, we just wanna make sure that we're in compliance. So I just wanna keep that on there. Eight. What am I looking at here? Oh, this one. Oh, <v Speaker 4>The PCD.</v> <v Speaker 2>Well, yeah, so this one's a big project,</v> but what I was proposing in the spring is if you actually look at the zoning bylaw, this kind of was identified at the, with the accessory dwelling units. What are our single family zoning districts? We don't actually define which districts are our single family, which is our multifamily, like, so when you actually look at section noal, one of the bylaw, only certain zoning districts have intents. <v Speaker 4>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah. And other districts don't.</v> But my bigger question is, is if you go to section two of the zoning bylaw, it lists all the zoning districts and all the overlay districts. Why didn't we put the intents in two rather than one? Which is more of like the administrative section. It just seems like if you're gonna call out all the zoning districts, put that, put their, all their baggage with them. Yeah, exactly. So what I would like to do is just pick them up and put 'em in two. That was what I was proposing for the spring. But I would show that to you, but I didn't wanna overload. Then continuing on, there's other things that we would like to look at that just may need to be looked at. And which is the nines, which I apologize, the color is terrible on that. It's too much like the eight, I have it as TBD 'cause these are sections that are not as pressing, but we might wanna take a look at 'em, which is like flooding. We have a section about flooding. We also have signs and advertising devices. We might wanna look at that just to see if we need to update it or vice versa. Outdoor lighting. We might wanna look at that just to make sure, are we getting what we want? So it's just having those on there. But I also have those as to be determined. 'cause I don't know when, <v Speaker 4>And, and with, with signage, I'll just say that long,</v> long ago, Deb, Sarah still remembers I worked with Natick Center Associates on optimizing kind of signage for Natick Center. And long story short, never gotten enough traction. But I think that it still has a lot of value. The way, the way we measure our kind of allowable sign sizes is so random. If Newton has some excellent examples of how to put together, signed bylaws that if we ever get to doing something at that point, the bylaw, I would love to be I part <v Speaker 2>Of that.</v> And we can move things. These were just to get 'em down and when the next one is 10, oops, <v Speaker 9>Signs are getting worse.</v> The signs that we are not looking at or seeing that are going up have got websites on them. Tiny websites, tiny phone numbers. They're not legible, they're not safe. If you tried to read them, you could smash into the car in front of you. I realized it was sort of taken away from us as a first Amendment issue, which is, but still <v Speaker 4>We could say commercial signs should cannot be under like,</v> you know, two inches character size. Yeah. Something that <v Speaker 9>I've been taking pictures and I,</v> I'll put 'em together at some point, but signs are getting worse. They are getting, they are just getting harder to read and I think they're less safe. And it appears that anything that's submitted is just approved. And I know we used to spend hours on these things, but I think, you know, to good value. <v Speaker 2>Would you like to move that up in priority then?</v> 'cause I don't have a date, but we could push that up. We do have <v Speaker 4>Collective thing on, on how, how signage is regulated</v> and not with recognizing the importance of the first amendment, but, but just how to do it so that it looks coherent. So that it looks consistent. Yeah. <v Speaker 5>And, and there's an argument to be made to move</v> sign regulation out of the zoning bylaw itself and make, get a standalone signed bylaw, a general town bylaw. Some towns do that because then you're able to have enforcement amortization things that don't necessarily outside of the, the constraints of the zoning law. Having it in a general bylaw makes it more enforceable. Yes. And, and more immediately for enforceable. Good question. So I would a little research on that would be nice. Yeah. <v Speaker 1>We are talking downtown signage.</v> <v Speaker 2>Well,</v> <v Speaker 1>Or can we,</v> <v Speaker 2>You can talk downtown signage.</v> This one was just the section which included downtown, which included Route nine everywhere. But that may be exactly what you wanna do is pull it outta the zoning bylaw, put it as a general bylaw, and then you actually create standards for the different areas. Like if you're on route nine, this is what you do. If you're on like South Natick, like at the intersection of Pleasant and Union Union, you're this, like, these are all things that you can do. And if you're in, <v Speaker 5>You could do design standards, right?</v> Yeah. And, and again, having it in a zoning bylaw, you know, it there, there's grandfathering, there's all these things that yes. Come into play. And if it's something you want to see, you know, in terms of aesthetics and and enforcement, it's a, it's a lot easier outside of the zone bylaw. <v Speaker 4>It's like illumination.</v> <v Speaker 5>Anything, any</v> <v Speaker 4>Oh,</v> <v Speaker 5>Right.</v> <v Speaker 1>Anything. We're talking a lot about, you know,</v> you're talking about the text and the first amendment and so on in terms of the downtown, I think what we're somewhere, I don't know where it comes in the actual, the the cohesiveness of signs throughout. <v Speaker 5>Yeah. Design standards of</v> <v Speaker 1>Design standards.</v> And where, where is that? Because that's that I throw any text on it, as far as I'm concerned. Just if you got some cohesiveness to the entire location size. I mean that's what really makes you, when you go down to me, it makes going downtown, oh, this is a, there's there's one mind in that. Yep. In there <v Speaker 4>There's a, you have a rhythm that you, you</v> <v Speaker 1>Yeah.</v> It's something, it makes a hell of a lot of sense. I don't know that Newton Center has that or not. Well, <v Speaker 4>But I have to say their, their kind of little,</v> their standards book and so forth was, I was so jealous. It was, <v Speaker 5>But you think about conquered, you know, places</v> that have cohesiveness a rhythm to the design. It would be nice to have some kind of design standard. Maybe it's a, maybe it's a consultant that helps us figure that out. Well <v Speaker 4>The the other thing too Yeah.</v> Is that's, you know what you're talking about. That's a historic district. It's on, it's on the na it's on the national register and, and yet we don't necessarily police signage of it, of it. <v Speaker 2>With that in mind,</v> <v Speaker 9>We had a pretty</v> good pocket of standards. We, we had no telephone numbers. We, I mean we viewed them as site identifiers as opposed to advertising devices. Yeah. So we did not have websites, we did not have phone numbers. We had addresses that had to be a certain size and, and essentially no taglines. You know, all you can eat or, you know, chicken, Turkey and ham. I mean we're, yeah, we, we didn't have any taglines or descriptions. They were, they were logo name clear. I mean that's a pretty good place to start. That served us re we really, I felt as a board improved signage up and down route nine. We got some of the bigger ones down. I mean somebody might say you can't do that. You have to, you know, first amendment, I don't know. But as a package of standards, just identifying these things, not as advertising pieces, but as site locators. Yes. Figure out where you're going. That was a pretty good hook to hang your hat on. <v Speaker 2>So I'll bump that one up in priority.</v> And then the tens are about West Natick. We're moving forward. We'll have a further, is this the fate of the lc district? Yeah. I would like to break it up into multiple sections. We will be discussing this at greater <v Speaker 5>Length.</v> What's the intent of the sections? Tell me how that's gonna work. <v Speaker 2>So the different sections, I'm gonna stop sharing</v> and I'm gonna share with you the zoning map, which I think we kind of briefly discussed at one point. So the different sections is looking at the 1 35 corridor in terms of one topography, two, how the actual area is used or reads. And then three, what actually could that area lend to each other? So you have topography. So from the Framingham Natick municipal line, you have a increase in <v Speaker 5>Show that, can you share that?</v> <v Speaker 2>Yep. Hold on a second of what is that?</v> <v Speaker 23>Okay,</v> <v Speaker 2>So,</v> and lemme just put the aerial on just to help. <v Speaker 23>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>So what you'll see</v> is you actually can look at different sections. And so we wouldn't be going what they call form-based code, but we also wouldn't be doing the same zoning along 1 35 from the Framingham municipal line all the way to the dog park. Because there's a lot of different things that go into this. <v Speaker 5>So that's, that's what you mean by different,</v> <v Speaker 2>Breaking it up into sections.</v> <v Speaker 5>Got it. So there'll be different,</v> slightly different requirements heading. <v Speaker 2>Yep. Uses west to east Dimensionals. Okay.</v> Parkings, et cetera. Okay. So but <v Speaker 1>You are considering going east up to the dog</v> <v Speaker 2>Park? Yes.</v> <v Speaker 5>Yep. And we're And would be starting on the west. Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 2>We wouldn't be starting on the west.</v> We actually would. You would or would not? I would not. I would actually focus the attention on the commuter rail station. Yeah. <v Speaker 5>That's the west. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 2>Oh,</v> so there's a little bit more to the west. Yeah, <v Speaker 5>No, I mean that, yeah. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>So I would be looking</v> and proposing to look at the commercial building. I think that's 2 51, sorry, 2 73. I should know that by now. But here is the MBTA commuter lot. I would then also the was the former dive shop now is gonna be the daycare school. Yeah. The, and then the RCN, which is right behind. Then you have the one floor, I think there's the distributors and another use. And then you have another commercial building. Yeah. Wow. <v Speaker 19>Karate or</v> <v Speaker 2>TSU or TaeKwonDo or something.</v> And then you have these two buildings here. The reason why I would like to focus on this area is if you actually look across the street, this area here is all green, but it's all wetlands. So there actually would not be a possibility of development. So you could actually potentially have more density if you pull the buildings closer to the road, pull 'em away from the residence on the north side because you would not feel like you're in a cavern because you have the offset of the green space on the opposite side of the street. <v Speaker 5>Well I mean in doing that parcel next</v> to the parking lot. Yep. I mean it's no secret. That is a highly desirable parcel. Everyone in their grandmother is looking at it. Yep. Waiting for the sewing to be in place. Yeah. So <v Speaker 2>The other thing is, the name hasn't been decided,</v> but you would establish this as a central hub, like the central core, kinda like what we have the downtown mixed use. You have the central area of interest and then you disperse it out as you go. So that would be potentially coming forward first. And so when you, I said that we still were going west, so this would be a second phase. So from this commercial, the actual topography increases to about this area right here. And then you start to traverse down the hill right here. You have these, it's one these, right. These are all like two and three FAMs. But if you had any type of height here, it would extremely tower. Yeah. So you didn't wanna do that, even though you had that green space over here. This is a different type of green space. This is just woods not wetlands set. So, so who owns that? <v Speaker 5>What is that?</v> <v Speaker 2>This piece here, I believe is part</v> of the, yeah, it's part of like dedicated <v Speaker 4>Open space.</v> Is it for the PCD? <v Speaker 2>Yep.</v> <v Speaker 4>For native village.</v> <v Speaker 5>Ah. So it's permanent open space.</v> <v Speaker 4>That's my understanding. Yep.</v> It we, it was done in the seventies. So how careful the language was crafted may not, <v Speaker 2>You</v> <v Speaker 4>Know, may be up</v> to today's standards, but Yes. Yeah. <v Speaker 2>So you would wanna look from here this all the way to</v> what we call a junkyard. This is in Natick <v Speaker 1>What we call, what else would you call it?</v> <v Speaker 2>I don't know. I feel like terms</v> <v Speaker 4>Of metal.</v> <v Speaker 1>Metal. It's a junkyard somewhere pc, but took away</v> <v Speaker 5>The definition metal object depository. Right.</v> <v Speaker 2>So we have the junkyard,</v> we have a medical building right here. And then you have a Wendy's restaurant and on the opposite side you have some more two and three families. So it seemed like this read a little bit differently than this central court just because one the height, but also just the way it, and this may be separate from these. Right. That's why we wanna look at it. Then when you get into this area, so here is, I think this is Wells or homes, this street right here, you have the tire place, you have the Planet Fitness, which has a realtor. Realtor in there. And then you have office building. But on this side you have townhouse style development. This is a former dry cleaner, but I think it's now like a paint store. <v Speaker 1>You passed one commercial one just west of that.</v> That one right there. That's the King's I think. Oh, yep. Is that King's the auto detailing? <v Speaker 2>Yes, I believe so.</v> But these kind of read a little bit different because you have to be mindful that there is development on this side versus the other side. You're also getting away from the commuter rail station. And so we would be looking at that to maybe be a little bit different than what we were doing as a central suggesting <v Speaker 5>Coming across the street. Yep. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 2>Pull this down into this area as well.</v> So we've got Cohen's and we have Speedway. And then also one of the things that we would like to do in this area, 'cause this is partially town owned, is we have the high tension wires is determine to how we can connect this area, be a walking path or multi-use path using the high tension wires to the golden triangle. Something similar have, <v Speaker 4>Have they had any luck?</v> I know, 'cause we've talked about this at open space. Yeah. And do, do they ever have any luck in other communities getting the utility provider to agree to it? Because that's been a real stumbling block here. <v Speaker 2>Needham actually has it's Needham Dover area.</v> They actually have it right underneath the high tension wires. They have a a paved pathway. <v Speaker 4>Do you don't know 'cause Eversource has</v> not been the most forthcoming. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. So we are looking into that</v> and that is something that we would like to do because if you <v Speaker 5>Yeah, we were to connect, how</v> would you get over the tracks? <v Speaker 2>The tracks. That's what that we would've to figure it out.</v> But <v Speaker 6>Yeah.</v> Well also over, once you get immediately over the high tension wires kind of go over people's houses pretty much, right? Pretty much up until you get to close to Mill Street. <v Speaker 5>Yeah, there's the swath right there. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>So like, or I guess maybe not all the way to, so</v> <v Speaker 2>Something that we would have to look at,</v> and it may not be starting right here at 1 35. It may be getting onto Boin and then cut. We'd have to look at it. But come over around it. It is, <v Speaker 5>What's the bridge?</v> <v Speaker 2>The Boden Lane Bridge. Boden Lane Bridge is there.</v> And then you have the Mill Street bridge as well. So it may be on road off like these are things, but if you could do that, it gets you right into the golden triangle. And it'd be another asset just like the constituent constituent rail trail is. Yeah. <v Speaker 6>I mean there's already a path kind of up there. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>It would just be nice if it was more formalized. Oh</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah.</v> Well also getting from getting from Mill Street, Hartford Street. I mean right now you can kind of go down Porter Road. That's kind of my neck of the woods spot. Yeah. <v Speaker 2>And then it would be nice.</v> So then you have Mill Street right here and you have Speed Street right here. This kind of lens a, it reads differently as well. And the possibility of we've got water, water, water. What can we do? Because we know the CVS is kind of constrained. So how <v Speaker 5>Far are we from West Naic Station at that</v> <v Speaker 2>Point?</v> You're, you exceed the half mile. <v Speaker 5>It's more than half a mile. Yeah.</v> Where is the half a mile? Do do, where does that land? <v Speaker 2>The half mile? It, it's deceivingly not that far honestly,</v> just because of the widths. These are very wide parcels. They're not very deep parcels <v Speaker 4>And that, but that, that parcel,</v> that adjoins the DCR land, that used to be the car dealer across from Roche Brothers. <v Speaker 2>So Half Mile gets you to basically Cohen's give or take.</v> This is not Yeah. Accurate all that. It's about to co the edge of Cohen's and so <v Speaker 5>Mill Street ish. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>So and then by the park basically the Yeah.</v> Little cobbler shop there. <v Speaker 2>Yes, exactly. Okay. Yeah.</v> But we would want to take this as an opportunity to also just look at this whole area. And then also, this is another area. We've got great uses, but this is where the CVS is. There's the A veterinarians Dunking Donuts office, the Legion, and then the dog park is right here. So we'd want to take a look at that. With all of that being said, there is a land use component. The other thing we are looking at, we have funding for is how can we create this as a corridor for non vehicular. So something like what they did in Arsenal Street in Watertown, which is they put the multi-use path along Arsenal Street and it, it looked a little weird when they first did it because it was like only in front of one parcel. But then as the development has continued to go in, they've now got a multi-use path. <v Speaker 4>That's kind of how we put in sidewalks.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah. So it's like, can we do that?</v> And it is also, we've got a very large right of way. So these are all things that we're looking at. So we'll have more detail, but I, I would love to say this would be a 2025 thing. But I think West Natick is moving forward at a faster pace than the Golden triangle. Also the funding for the Golden triangle has extra time. So therefore we would do Golden Triangle as a 2026 starting conversations on like planning efforts in like after town meeting of the spring. Just so we can get all the dot. But we wouldn't bring anything for town meeting until at least 2026. Do <v Speaker 9>You foresee changing the SPGA in the lc?</v> <v Speaker 4>I think, I think getting rid of the lc</v> <v Speaker 9>Then.</v> Well it's currently a a zoning. It's A ZBA. Yeah, <v Speaker 2>It would actually,</v> <v Speaker 9>They, they own all that.</v> And I've always felt that we would do better. <v Speaker 4>And it's a, it's a district that was written</v> by a developer and it reads like a zoning district that was written by someone who wanted to milk it for all it was worth. Yeah. <v Speaker 9>What what, what district are we talking about? The lc</v> <v Speaker 4>Limited commercial.</v> <v Speaker 9>Yeah. Yeah. Which all which this is predominantly</v> the SPGA is the zoning board of appeals for site plan review. That's why you never see like when the Mexican restaurant goes in or when all those townhouses go, I mean we, <v Speaker 4>We, it actually had no sign bylaws.</v> <v Speaker 9>Yeah. Those are some of the worst signs in town.</v> <v Speaker 4>Well we, we ended up getting the language in</v> late. We would change it. <v Speaker 9>Yeah. But yeah, realize that I did not realize.</v> Yeah, it should definitely be a plan. <v Speaker 4>Absolutely. It's, we would change it.</v> <v Speaker 2>Nasty district. We would also probably get rid</v> of the limited commercial zoning district in itself. And we do have to be mindful that there is a tiny little speck of limited commercial on North Main Street, little up by the Mercedes dealer. So we would have to rezone that as well. But we have that in our minds. But yeah, the, the goal would be to actually change the SPGA because it makes sense. <v Speaker 4>'cause then you can actually plan. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>So,</v> <v Speaker 6>So you pointed out a bunch of small air, you know,</v> here, here, here, here. At some point, are we getting close to spot zoning? Like is this <v Speaker 2>No.</v> And the reason why I, I broke it down was those would be conversations. The board in the public process or in reviewing it you may decide, you know what, this actually is all the same. It was just more of looking at it in digestible parcels based on just the land use. Yeah. Not the what could and couldn't go there. So no, we wouldn't wanna do spot zoning, but we were not gonna focus on the PCD area either. Just because that's, <v Speaker 6>Well, what I'm wondering is like, is there a certain size</v> that has to be to avoid it being considered spot <v Speaker 5>Zoning?</v> Spot zoning is, it's what the, it's what the courts determine as spot zoning. And you can do as small zoning as you want. It's just be mindful of it. And if it's based on a planning process that we're doing. <v Speaker 6>So it's not that it has to be minimum of two lots or</v> <v Speaker 2>No, but we threes or whatever,</v> we wouldn't wanna just do one piece because it would, well I <v Speaker 6>Thought I just wondering what the limit is.</v> Know if there is a, a limit of <v Speaker 2>The goal is to also maintain assemblage.</v> So like you actually keep parcels larger. 'cause it, once they get broken up into teeny tinies, it's a lot harder to get them together. So yeah, if everyone has time just to review this and we'll find some feedback. We have to <v Speaker 9>Take this up presumably after MBTA west NAT station</v> <v Speaker 2>Of</v> <v Speaker 5>What? Take one up.</v> <v Speaker 9>Well this, this, this discussion I'm assuming will be</v> impacted by whatever changes are made because of the west Natick MBTA. Aren't we <v Speaker 2>Oh.</v> <v Speaker 9>Are still waiting for information from the state</v> on how to proceed with that. <v Speaker 2>So at town meeting of the fall,</v> we actually have all the compliance that we need. We're right now just waiting on like basically two pieces of information that to submit to the state. It's just we need the certified votes and then we submitted in. But I So <v Speaker 9>That, that won't have any impact on</v> any zoning in that area. <v Speaker 2>No, it would be independent.</v> You, you're more than welcome to use the MBTA zoning parameters. But it is not required because you, you get compliance do it down here. However, we, <v Speaker 4>We made a, a commitment, we, we've made a commitment</v> I think at town meeting that, that what happened. We don't, when West Natick wasn't included in the MBTA communities plan because we were waiting for the study that we, that you were going to see change we're not being mandated to. Which is very liberating 'cause it means that we can actually do it. Not because there's a gun at our head saying you need this land. <v Speaker 9>Well I was hoping maybe some</v> of the impact on downtown mixed use might be shifted and take advantage of what we have in West Natick and maybe pulled back some of the zoning changes. I was thinking that that might be part of it. <v Speaker 5>Amanda, the SO six A</v> inclusionary housing update. <v Speaker 2>Oh yeah.</v> <v Speaker 5>What, just</v> a little bit deeper on that if you would. Yeah, <v Speaker 2>I definitely will.</v> So there's a few things with that one. One is if there are any amendments to the MBTA communities, because there's conflict between master law chapter 40 a section three A and the guidelines one says no less than 10% and the other one says no more than 10% if that were ever amended. I want to, keeping my eye on that, right. Keeping my eye on inclusionary housing relative to accessory dwelling units. If there's anything with that. The other piece, <v Speaker 4>If that that prohibition against having affordable</v> housing in the ADUs. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. Which makes no sense looking at that.</v> But then it's also based on the conversation that we've kind of had and that you've brought up is, is 10 or 15% actually necessary if the developer can create affordable housing without such mandates. So it's looking at a lot of different things. So that's why I had that on there because inclusionary housing is not just a one size fits all. The other thing is the board and the town may want to actually delete the fee in lie just because you're not getting the units. Or maybe that's the option that you want to go with is more of fee in lieu. So it is, I wanted it on there because I don't think just because we've amended it, I Second <v Speaker 9>Second.</v> It looks like we're back on. Yep. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. <v Speaker 2>Great.</v> <v Speaker 9>We need to, we need to do the meeting</v> <v Speaker 2>Schedule.</v> The last thing I have that really is the 2025 plenty board meeting calendar review. Just because we need to know, even if it's just us scheduling the January once, <v Speaker 5>This one big mega meeting in July. Wanna do that?</v> <v Speaker 9>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 5>Three days. Sounds good. What do you think?</v> <v Speaker 9>It sounds like you're just all the business of the year,</v> <v Speaker 2>So it's, I don't know if anyone had any chance</v> to No, not take a look. <v Speaker 9>Conflicts with the select board. Is that, is</v> that just the best we can do? I mean I kind of hate for people who are interested in <v Speaker 2>That was my other, that was one of my questions</v> because technically they're conflicting with us. <v Speaker 9>Yeah, they were Monday nighters</v> <v Speaker 2>And well, but also</v> after one of the days, they actually missed a missed a Wednesday. So they all of a sudden started meeting on our Wednesdays. Yes. <v Speaker 4>They mistepped on us.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>So I took a look basically just see</v> how it matched up with my schedule. One thing I just noticed was the February one is during the February vacation. Not that I have any plans, but I don't know if we try to avoid vacation weeks or not. We also happen to have New Year's Eve. Yes. Wait, what are you looking at? You talking about the 2025 meeting? I think this one that you sent, <v Speaker 2>It's not, it's select boards.</v> <v Speaker 9>That could be if it was a PDF that was a select board.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah. Ignore what I just said.</v> <v Speaker 2>So I</v> <v Speaker 6>Was looking at</v> <v Speaker 5>The select board meeting</v> <v Speaker 9>They can meet</v> <v Speaker 2>On, oh, the one that I sent out was this one here.</v> Where is it? It's in the packet. <v Speaker 5>I know, I know. I saw it. I just can't find it.</v> <v Speaker 2>Okay. So it was proposing to meet</v> on the 15th. However, I don't know how everyone feels, but the school is closed on the, because of it being the lunar new year. So we can either on, that's on January 29th. We can either meet on the Tuesday, January 28th or Thursday, January 30th. <v Speaker 4>So is it that we don't meet on if,</v> if schools are closed, we don't. <v Speaker 2>Well if it's a religious holiday, like Yeah, I don't,</v> I know lunar New Year's very important but I don't know, I couldn't really find a lot of information about that. And I've never heard of us having it off before. No. So we could leave it. <v Speaker 9>Let's just stick with that. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>And then the next one was meeting on</v> February 12th and the 26th. 'cause we would avoid president's date, <v Speaker 5>Which is that week. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>Looking, wanted to avoid that.</v> <v Speaker 5>Yep.</v> <v Speaker 6>Should read the title better look.</v> <v Speaker 5>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>Meet on March 12th and the 26th.</v> And the 26th would be the meeting and reorganization. <v Speaker 5>Oh, when is the, when is the election?</v> The week before 25th. Oh, oh is it? Oh, the Tuesday before. Yeah. <v Speaker 4>Isn't it usually the, the election?</v> <v Speaker 5>Yeah. Yeah. Is that,</v> <v Speaker 6>I was curious what the reorganization</v> <v Speaker 4>Reorg is always the next day.</v> <v Speaker 2>So it may it Oh, the election's March 5th.</v> <v Speaker 4>No, March 20.</v> <v Speaker 5>The Tuesday? Yes.</v> I think it's, it's a Tuesday. It'll be a Tuesday my fifth. <v Speaker 2>Okay. I</v> <v Speaker 4>Believe.</v> <v Speaker 2>And then we can meet April 9th.</v> And so here's April 23rd is the week of school vacation. So I don't know if we wanna meet or if we I'd rather not. Or we don't meet. 'cause we would be in town meeting at that point. <v Speaker 5>I would rather not in town meeting.</v> I would rather not meet that week. <v Speaker 4>Yeah. 'cause we don't, yeah. 'cause we don't meet town.</v> Meeting doesn't meet during school vacation week. <v Speaker 2>Great. Then we have May 7th and May 21st.</v> The week of Memorial Day, June 4th and 18th. And we do have Juneteenth off. So that wouldn't affect it. The question comes down to is you've got three Wednesdays that you can meet in July. July, but you don't need to meet that many times in July. So I don't know if anybody wants, just wants to pick <v Speaker 5>One.</v> I would take the 16th out. That's my, that would be my vote. Okay. But others can weigh <v Speaker 6>In.</v> So July 4th is the, that's a Friday. Friday. So is that gonna be a very common vacation week? <v Speaker 2>'cause we would, you could meet this July 2nd,</v> the 16th or the 30th. <v Speaker 9>What's, what's July 16th? Why? Why is that one now?</v> Because I, I'm thinking there, there's boundary conflicts on July 2nd. I'm, <v Speaker 6>I have a feeling</v> <v Speaker 9>People might take</v> <v Speaker 5>That's, but that's the July 16th is the teeth</v> of July. And <v Speaker 4>But what I'll say is if we're trying to get things done</v> when the, for when the fall warrant closes in early August, it's, it's, I I mean it's good to get ahead of it. You'd rather have more time have the meet, have our meeting earlier so that we can address things that may still be outstanding for, for the fall. <v Speaker 5>So what don't, don't do the July 30th?</v> Is that what you're saying? Are we gonna do three in July? I guess that's the question. <v Speaker 4>You're only gonna do two.</v> Yeah, just I, yeah, I probably, you I keep the 30th because that's gonna really be the last meeting before the warrant closes. So if you get 16 and 30 gives you a chance <v Speaker 5>To wrap and not July 2nd.</v> Yeah. <v Speaker 4>But, and second with 4th of July week may not,</v> may be suboptimal anyway. Mm. <v Speaker 2>So which one do you want to</v> <v Speaker 9>I would say scratch July two.</v> But that, that's just my opinion. Yeah. Yeah. <v Speaker 6>It's mine two, but,</v> <v Speaker 4>And what, you know, if we have the other two, we can</v> cancel answer the meeting if there's not, if if, if we we're not, we don't, we're not obligated to meet if there is not a pressing business to deal with. And <v Speaker 2>Then there's two days in August,</v> which is the 13th and the 27th. I don't know if you want to just meet one day in August, which is what we did this year or <v Speaker 4>And we had done that traditionally.</v> Yeah. <v Speaker 2>Like if you're meeting July 30th,</v> you could actually just meet August 27th. Or we could meet, or you could actually just meet July 16th and then cancel the July 30th meeting and then meet August 13th and the 27th. <v Speaker 9>That seems fine.</v> <v Speaker 4>I think we might need the July 30th</v> more than we would need to. Kind of. <v Speaker 24>And you said the 16th is a holiday? The</v> <v Speaker 2>16th.</v> 16th. So it, it is a holiday kind of, it's called the three weeks, but it runs from July 13th through August 3rd. And it's the only restriction on it was no work on Shabbat. So my understanding is we could meet, <v Speaker 5>So we went, if I'm reading this right, we went the,</v> we met on July 31st. Yep. We didn't meet again until August 28th. <v Speaker 2>So you could do that same thing this year.</v> <v Speaker 4>Yeah. Yes. It depends on, again, I'm, I'm just trying</v> to think of trying to get things in shape for warrant for the warrants and do we need the extra meeting <v Speaker 6>Time?</v> Is it easier to cancel a meeting or Impossible to add a new one. So like <v Speaker 2>Easier to cancel because then everyone's kind of got it.</v> <v Speaker 4>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>Okay. Because</v> <v Speaker 4>Like, like</v> <v Speaker 6>We don't know right now</v> <v Speaker 4>Like, like our meeting on November 18th.</v> <v Speaker 6>Yeah. Like, you know, our, as it gets closer,</v> can we try to, Hey, let's try to push through like we kind of did a few weeks ago. Yeah. Try to push him around depending on schedule. <v Speaker 2>And then</v> <v Speaker 5>Why did we, why did we go ju June 5th,</v> not the 12th, ninth, the 19th. We, we and then we went the 25th, which was a Tuesday. This current <v Speaker 2>Year.</v> <v Speaker 5>Yeah. Why did we miss, like why was June sort of sporadic?</v> I, <v Speaker 2>There was one day, I think Andy, you had a commitment.</v> So we had to move the meeting to, <v Speaker 5>We did it on a Tuesday.</v> <v Speaker 2>A Tuesday. And I think</v> that there was, I don't <v Speaker 5>Remember.</v> Yeah. All right. Right. But yeah, I mean we can change things if we need to. <v Speaker 6>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 5>Okay. Just as long as</v> <v Speaker 4>It's enough advance. Oh, Juneteenth</v> <v Speaker 2>Juneteenth.</v> <v Speaker 4>That was why</v> <v Speaker 6>Third? It was</v> on a Wednesday this year. Yep. <v Speaker 5>Oh, maybe that's, oh yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>Everybody went to the beach that day. Everybody.</v> I stuck in the traffic trying to get to the beach myself. But <v Speaker 2>Then gotta go to New Beach.</v> Another would be, we can meet on the September 10th. But, and I do need some help with this one. So Rosh Hashanah occurs from September 22nd through September 24th. But it ends at sundown on the 24th. However, I don't know what sundown is in September. Oh, you can on the 24th <v Speaker 4>You can, you can find it</v> <v Speaker 5>Eight ish.</v> It's after seven o'clock. Okay. Quite sure. <v Speaker 4>Yeah. There are, there are, there are charts</v> that you can find online that, <v Speaker 2>So you can either meet on the 24th</v> or you can just move it to the 25th. The one that we do need to definitely move. And is the October 8th meeting <v Speaker 4>Ko osu?</v> <v Speaker 2>It is October 7th through the eighth.</v> And no work is permitted. So you can either meet on Monday, October 6th or October 9th. <v Speaker 4>The sixth is what day of the week?</v> <v Speaker 2>The sixth is a Monday and the ninth is a Thursday.</v> <v Speaker 4>Oh my God. Why</v> <v Speaker 2>Is it Thursday?</v> We just can't meet the seventh, which is Tuesday or the Wednesday. Okay. <v Speaker 4>No, no. I just have a regular second Monday meeting.</v> <v Speaker 2>But if we can continue like this</v> discussion till next week. But if, are we all okay with meeting on January 15th? I have a project that needs to be advertised. I, <v Speaker 5>What's the conflict?</v> <v Speaker 2>There's no conflict with January 15th. Oh, video.</v> I was just saying like I could update the this so we can vote it next time. But just so I can use the 15th for the advertising of that project. 'cause I expect it to come in by the end of this week. <v Speaker 23>Cool.</v> <v Speaker 2>And then also I can advertise the legal.</v> <v Speaker 9>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 6>The, I assume we won't have one on, what is</v> that? Christmas Eve we had it. <v Speaker 2>You know we usually avoid Christmas</v> <v Speaker 6>Eve.</v> Oh sorry. On Christmas they get that Christmas. Oh, <v Speaker 2>I just put the blue.</v> <v Speaker 6>Oh, you're just putting down there with the</v> <v Speaker 2>Holiday was like holidays that I was trying to avoid.</v> <v Speaker 9>I think they're gonna be on</v> Thursday next year, by the way. <v Speaker 2>At what? Christmas?</v> <v Speaker 9>Christmas and New Year's there.</v> It'd be rare to have 'em on the same day. Two years in a row. So they're Thursday. I actually <v Speaker 2>Think it oddly fell.</v> <v Speaker 9>They're both on Wednesday this year.</v> So next year they'll be both on Thursday <v Speaker 2>Is next year a a leap year?</v> No, they're, oh yeah. So actually I, you don't, you don't have the leap years in odd numbered years. Yep. If they have it on Thursday, this next year it is. So I gotta update that as well. <v Speaker 9>Okay. So let's just pick either that Monday</v> or Thursday in October and just vote this thing. Anybody have any preference for Monday? Do I, I'm sorry, what's that? Anybody care about Monday or Thursday <v Speaker 5>Of the October.</v> <v Speaker 9>October? Yeah. It could be Monday the</v> sixth or Thursday the ninth. <v Speaker 6>Can't say my schedule was really planned out</v> that far in advance for the most part. <v Speaker 9>Call it Thursday the ninth. Just for fun</v> <v Speaker 5>Weekend start on Thursdays.</v> How about Tuesday? Weekend <v Speaker 9>Starts on Thursday.</v> What are you? 18. It's matter with you. You're a grown man. I don't care. Fine. <v Speaker 5>Thursday the</v> <v Speaker 9>Ninth. Thursday the ninth. Okay.</v> So with that, I think we, <v Speaker 2>Do you want to</v> <v Speaker 9>Keep and we have to pick January?</v> <v Speaker 2>No, January was all set. Okay.</v> Did you want the only one was the September 24th? Did you wanna keep it on the 24th, which is a Wednesday? Or did you wanna move it to the Thursday the 25th? 'cause Rosh Hashanah ends at sundown on the 24th. Sorry, this is <v Speaker 5>September.</v> <v Speaker 2>September, September. Yes. Sorry,</v> <v Speaker 9>I don't know.</v> In September if we meet at seven, I mean, we can move back to seven 12 or, I don't know when sundown is, but I I think it's just good to keep it on the same night <v Speaker 2>So we could, yeah.</v> <v Speaker 9>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>It says according to Google it's 6:39 PM Okay.</v> Wednesday, September 24th, 2025. <v Speaker 9>There you go. So I move</v> <v Speaker 2>Natick, Massachusetts. Perfect.</v> <v Speaker 9>I move, we approve the draft meeting schedule as stated</v> with a meeting on Thursday, October 9th. <v Speaker 5>And what are we and what are we doing with the July?</v> <v Speaker 9>Oh, I don't</v> <v Speaker 2>Think you, I don't</v> <v Speaker 9>Think you, we didn't decide.</v> So we, we talked about scratching July 2nd. <v Speaker 5>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 9>And I guess</v> we talked about scratching July 16 as well, but you know, we could <v Speaker 5>Want make that a game time decision. Yeah. Okay.</v> <v Speaker 9>So why, why don't we just remove July 2nd</v> and pencil in Thursday, October 9th. And I think we can vote it <v Speaker 4>And I'd say rather than voting it,</v> why don't we wait till we have the final copy next week <v Speaker 2>For next meeting.</v> Not to throw a wrench into everything, but I'm going to, since we are already conflicting with select board later in the year, would it actually make sense to delete or not meet on June 18th, but keep June 4th and then meet on June 25th and then you could actually delete July 2nd and 16th and meet on the July 30th. <v Speaker 9>I think Terry's right. I printed it up and send it to us.</v> That's not a bad idea on that. It's probably, I can't quite keep it all in my head, but, <v Speaker 6>Sounds good.</v> So I'm pretty sure I, I have a feeling I'm gonna be on for, was vacation on the 25th does of June. What do we Yeah, well that's the week after the kids probably get out of school. I mean, I think my wife's already chomping on the bit. Yeah. She's ing on the bit to, <v Speaker 5>Well, assuming we have a associate member</v> <v Speaker 4>True.</v> <v Speaker 5>And someone else becomes a permanent member.</v> We'll have a, we'll have options. Okay. <v Speaker 4>A full, a full member. Not a,</v> <v Speaker 5>Not a, I mean a full member.</v> Excuse me. Yeah. <v Speaker 9>So we'll vote that next time, Holly? Yep.</v> <v Speaker 2>Except for, we'll, we'll meet on the January 15th.</v> <v Speaker 5>Yep. Okay. Motion to adjourn in the</v> <v Speaker 4>Shadow of inauguration.</v> <v Speaker 9>A second.</v> <v Speaker 24>What about meeting committees, board meeting,</v> committee assignment? <v Speaker 2>I got nothing. Nothing.</v> <v Speaker 4>Nothing to report.</v> <v Speaker 24>Fine. Motion to</v> <v Speaker 5>Adjourn?</v> Yes. Motion to adjourn. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. You, <v Speaker 2>What time do you have? I got 10 11.</v> <v Speaker 5>10 11.</v>