thank you okay well welcome everybody to the Norton planning board's meeting of April the 23rd I would ask that anybody join remotely if you could please mute your mute your microphone while you're not speaking so as I mentioned this is the planning board's meeting of Tuesday April 23rd members of the public are welcome to participate in person and remotely in person we are at the Norton Public Library at 68 East Main Street join on Via zoom and use the zoom ID 638 9291 060 there's also a phone number to dial in directly if needed the meeting will also be available on Norton cable access channel 15 Channel 9 and viewable on the Norton media Center's YouTube channel after the meeting uh for future sessions please feel free to email questions for the board ahead of the meeting to br and carmichel town staff and they can be read into the record as needed uh in case you aren not able to attend in person or virtually so with that out of the way thank you very much everyone for joining us um I'll start off the meeting with um just a again in person welcome to Paul Dy who has rejoined Norton as our town player Paul great to have you back with us great to be back okay I know I think we speak for all of us when we are uh very very glad that you're here I'll say it again I'll probably continue to say it so see how you are in a year okay I'm very happy to be back um in terms of planning board business and policies we do have I think one item that we can address at the end of the meeting so I'll save that for now um we have we don't have any bills or warrants we do have two sets of minutes that were sent around for us to review and approve um I'll also hold those to the end unless anybody has any objection um so just to restate we have two items on our agenda this evening Beyond those items we have a continuation of a public hearing for zero Manfield Avenue then we have a discussion regarding a Citizens petition for town meeting regarding a lighting B LW uh for Norton um in terms of trying to do what we can to make sure that nobody's waiting here forever um my initial thought process in terms of how we would proceed would be to proceed with continuation of our discussion for zero Mansfield Avenue here everybody who would like to speak on that run through are any questions that we may have for the applicants any issues where we want to make sure that we're addressing any comments uh and then close the public hearing here the discussion about the C petition and then move forward with the decision for zero mans field it's a little bit back and forth the other option is to do everything for zero Mansfield first and do the lighting bylaw second um if anybody has a objection to bouncing back and forth a little bit just to make sure that we don't uh keep the citizens petition waiting let me know I know I went back and forth on it myself so I'm okay with it if everybody else is gives us a moment to dwell on a decision I guess okay with that out of the way um we'll proceed to a continuation of the public hearing for site plan review 20110 201103 and special per at 19928 and 19935 for zero manur Avenue and we have Mr Jovi here with us so thank you very much sir good to be here again um good to see Mr sey again um chairman members of the board Jack jaob 144 Bank Street attelboro representing the applicant um so want to make sure I understand what you just said about our procedure so so I have a brief update we also have have the updated landscaping and lighting plans that were filed I assume you will want Dan Campbell to present those uh then my question is when we finish that would you want to then take public input before we do a summation and after that public input we can sum and anybody in the public can sum who's opposed would that be the procedure generally yes um and the board has also been tracking a list of the waivers you're requested and different issues that could come up so we would run through those prior to closing the public hearing just make sure there's anything need clarification from you before we do so okay great so my brief update is that we filed the lighting plans and the Landscaping plans as you asked um and remove the legend that they would be further updated at the time of a building permit uh and in addition I'm pleased to report that last night the conservation commission voted unanimously to approve an order of conditions for both Parcels c and d and uh so uh with that um I think it's time for Dan to come up and perhaps if Paul or Brian can bring up the plan but we also do have it in hard copy um depending on how you want to proceed um third from the last page give us lighting and then landscape one before that is lighting perfect uh good evening Daniel Campbell level Design Group on behalf of the applicant um what we have to run through is the photometric plans for the site um basically there's uh zerox ration of of light and foot candles off the site with the exception of right along the frontage along Mansfield AV we have 0 1.02 which is a very small amount of light but um made sense with the sidewalk that we're proposing along the front of the site as well so it does go over the property line but it doesn't go over the sidewalk they are dark sky compliant LED fixtures U which are shown on the next page and the idea of the fixtures um they are more of a residential in nature they are um shorter fixtures along the buildings taller fixtures in the parking lot we are 16 ft in the parking lot um for the fixture height we are um between 8 and 10 ft along the buildings for the walkways um and we have no lighting behind the buildings that isn't from the building itself um because we have the wetlands and and everything else behind the structure um the very last last page is the updated Landscaping plant um and the Landscaping uh has been updated in a similar nature to what was originally submitted we have extensive Landscaping immediately in front of the buildings into the side of the buildings sort of on the approach we have Landscaping directly behind and around the basins but those are larger trees to compl the wooded area behind and then we've asked Mass highway to allow us in between the sidewalk and the site to uh plant again and some some larger deciduous trees um the idea being that they will will uh uh grow in that area they're behind where the existing electric lines are so we we feel like they should be able to survive those lines are also a little bit taller these are a little bit of a shorter deciduous tree so um we think that that those will be um work well with the site as a whole we did the same thing for lot D lot D's lighting plan uses the same fixture same style has approximately the same amount of light that comes off um the Landscaping plan looks similar but I'd be happy to go through it with you um it is um similarly we're planting in the front of the structure um we're planting around the uh central portion leaving the central portion large grass area for not only the detention Basin but as we explained before so there was a play area um someplace that people could set up for cornhole or barbecue or things of that nature so around the approach side in both directions on this building um there's Landscaping that wraps the edges we have a couple of larger trees that complement the slopes and then we planted along the frontage um to make it a more residential feel as we talked about so I think we answered the site related questions that we left with last time but I'm happy to answer any remaining AG site layout landscaping or lighting questions thank you um and just before I go to that I do see one person with their hand raised in the zoom meeting um I'm going to ask the applicant to go through their initial presentation and answer some questions and then I will go to public comment so I see you um and I'll recognize you in the near F in in a short while thank you um so from members of the board initial questions for Mr Campbell based on the Landscaping lighting plans or other site questions that he can answer for us at this point we had as a pending item the fire department's review of access and clearance both with and without snow storage but I don't see any resolution to that in terms of um Mr Jacobi was going to agree LG get um fire sign off prior to the this meeting okay so the paperwork was submitted um we have had no response to the plans as a whole because they're not in front of them for a building permit so I don't know um I can't make the fire department or anybody else respond back to us uh I can only submit the documentation which was done before we started the original meeting as well can I yes uh I did speak with deputy chief uh Robbins earlier today um he did I asked him the question about the access the fire access to the buildings and he did verbally say they didn't have issues with that uh we didn't talk about the snow issue removal issue but he was okay with the with the access thank you from what I recall Snow sword is going to be in the middle of correct is that snow storage is primarily in the middle and the very far end so if I can walk up to the screen yeah the center snow storage is primarily to the right of the dumpster here but that still leaves us 20 25 ft of lawn area between the landscaping and and where we're intending to pile it um at least on you know the small small storm events um and then we'll be pushing it to the ends of of the parking lot um there's four five spaces at the very end of Lot C for instance that uh assuming they're not being used would be used for snow storage if not it would be right adjacent to that which has grass areas and swailes for treatment and discharge those three on the left there correct thank you Bri additional sa question Laura do we have to show where the hookup for the electric vehicle is intended to be I know they're going to just what the the term is prewire or yeah so the the electric Department really depends they determine where is the best place for us to feed from okay um sometimes it's from the Transformer sometimes they want us to feed from the building okay but we will have the requisite pre-wired spaces according to the building code okay and you'll work on that once the construction started and you know where the electrical and all that's going to be right once we have permits then we can go to the electric department and we can ask those questions got it thank you not a mind I'm going to guessing the ones closest to the buildings probably they're probably going to be the ones closest to the edge of the dumpster pad in all honesty cuz that's where our Transformer is a question uh behind the proposed Recreation Area how what is the drop off uh the drop off varies across the back side of the site um if we can probably go to the grading utilities which will be the fifth sheet in the the overall plan set I believe yeah that'll work so as you can see across the back side of that it varies um the only drop off point is where we are with the wall right here and that height is around 6 to 7 ft um but the remainder of it is graded uh to some degree and it's a 3:1 slope so it's not in extensive it's not steep it's not RI wrapped it's grass as well um but the area in here is a fairly sizable area as you can see it's at least the depth of the building itself okay thank you and know previously you said that the that fence would be marked and there would be additional signage telling people these are wetlands don't go in there so the fancier terms than that conservation requires us to put up their placards the only condition that we garnered last night over and above that was they're also asking us to place a placard that says no dumping um basically so the landscapers don't throw clippings and stuff over the edge additional site related questions or additional questions as a whole for the applicant um prior to us going to public comment Allen I'm going to go to just uh ask you directly if you have anything at this point that you wanted to raise just want to know if the applicant wanted to address the affordable housing that we brought up last week any update any other comment anything um our position remains that the bylaw uh says what it says but I understand your position that you've been advised by Town Council and so I suspect that you will probably take the advice of your attorney uh and uh if you should issue this permit you probably will have a condition uh what we would do about that I can't say at this point um I I have to say that it was interesting from the first opinion to the second opinion how things changed um and frankly I thought she tied herself up into a pretzel to try and reach a conclusion but that was just my opinion and so uh I think that in the end um as she said to you in the first opinion you are the initial judge of what your bylaw means and we then have to deal with that thank you and I think PA do you remember do you remember this coming up before an applicant having a problem or us having a discussion on how that bylaw was interpreted no not during my time yeah I I expect that when we after we close the public hearing that it makes sense to pull the blo up on screen and we're all going to look at it and look at Town council's statements and we'll make a determination about it anything further from anybody prior to going to public comment here okay hearing none um I'm going to try try and go back and forth between anybody who's looking to speak in the zoom meeting and anybody here in person um I do see that there's somebody in the zoom meeting who's had their virtual hand raised for a while um so the name that I see in the zoom meeting is Jane um if you would like to unmute and just state your name and address for the record please um I'm looking forward to hearing your comments I do see was still muted um I can't see you on camera I'm not quite sure if that's um the mute button Playing Tricks on you but I will give you a stand here and ramble for a second to give you a chance um otherwise I will Circle back to you later in the meeting to see if you are able to rejoin okay I will come back to you Jane in a little short while um is there anybody here in person who would like to speak further yes please just come to the podium please Dedra brag on 19 Resort street I'm sorry I missed the last couple of meetings so I don't know if this has come up I think I had asked a couple months ago when I was here if they've done the traffic study um we still don't know with the traffic that's happening at the McDonald's that has not filled yet so I don't think a true traffic stud can even be done yet as well as the ones that are on Pine Street that are being built so I'd like to hear what that's going to be done because right now I am four or five houses off a reservoir and to get out in the morning and to come home it's past Mass gas so there's additional traffic that I think needs to be taken into consideration yes so the the applicant did I can the applicant did perform a traffic study and that's those are all driven by The Institute of traffic and engineers and all of their data and calculations about for a multif family property of this size it'll generate this many trips on average this many during the peak hours Etc all of the numbers that they ran they also included Pine Street the building McDonald's and some other developments that are in town so all of those even though that's not completed the numbers of that pending was already included in the study that they did for us good thank you uh and Mr chairman it was peer-reviewed by the peer-reviewer that the town hired who confirmed that our Figures were accurate and there was no adverse impact expected from the development thank you if I could just offer um there will be a uh condition to employ a Department of Transportation to optimize the traffic signals yes yes part of the part of the applicant's presentation is that that they did the traffic study and that they would be they would have recommendations for Mass do to refine the timing of the lights at the at Norton at 140 123 to potentially improve the level of service there and that's something that M dut is always W always happy to welcome in uh private people to do their work for them well was I said you meet again I'm John CH 25 res Street I apologize to my parents I just came from work um to the board thank you this is a fruitless job and aggravating um I want to go back a little bit this going to be a little bit of time consuming this lot St with 11 houses I believe it started with single family LS yes what happened to that the owner decided to change what they wanted to do did they have to come in front of the planning board for the houses I believe they came in front of the planning board to divide up the Lots M that's just a division of lot lines it's not like just say they instead of one big lot you have four little ones correct that's so that pass the planning board it went through the planning board I believe through anr Pro an approval not required process which basically the board looks at it from a do all these lots have Frontage do all these Lots meet the size requirements if yes then we are expected to endorse it okay um in fact if we don't take any action on it the state considers it approved without us doing thank you for that in because that's we're on a fact finding Mission because I'm trying to learn about this as we go on so good so we all agreed that houses were good there all we did was divide up the lot lines with nothing on it right but the assumption is unless I just misunderstood you nothing was taken further so it would be approved because of the breakup and stuff like that there would have been there wouldn't have been any challenge to it anything like that basically we wouldn't be having these meetings we wouldn't having these those would generally be as of right developments whether some of them would need conservation with Wetlands or who knows individual to each house that's being built there are a number of uses that they could do as of right okay um single family housing being one of them other ones could I think Village commercial yeah top of the it's a village commercial so number of as of right a school a church yep okay so that's where I'm going next with us so the were these the gentlemen that wanted the 11 houses or do we not um do you know are we allowed to answer I mean they all they proposed was different Lots okay they did not propose houses specifically okay all right so now we move forward into this apartment complex we spoke before I was on the zoom meeting what does the planning board have for latitude in planning now we discussed before you said you're not allowed to take the financial impact into this no there are elements of the financial impact that we're not allowed to consider which we've gone through in other in other sections okay so are you allowed to within the financial impact like that would include the school impact you're not allowed to look at that I'm asking I don't know I'm not trying to get you in trouble I'm trying to figure this out because I mean what my next I I hate to go through the laundry list there's of what we can or can't there's a number of things that we look at yeah ultimately they are in front of us for a discretionary special permit asking for us to give them relief from the town's bylaws according to what they've requested right what they've requested is multif family in this District they need a special permit we can say no for a number of reasons whether we think it's too too much density whether we think it's also too much traffic impact um the bylaws have a core set of conditions where one of the base basic ones is the detrimental impact the positive impacts outweigh the detrimental impacts or something like that kind of a balancing test for the board to weigh in their own judgment all right now at the end of this each member votes correct are they Guided by their belief and op opinion or they got Guided by legal lease rules and regulations like they have to say yes to let me Circle back discretionary special permit we are Guided by those conditions so one of those is being that balancing test of do the positive that way the negatives to law or to your opinion everybody has their different places a different amount of weight on every aspect of the project okay because what I want to understand is this town went through a huge study sat yeah I didn't mean to strike a nerve I just don't don't play poker they went through a Hu they went through a huge study to undertake and change 140 um I'm going to plead a little bit of ignorance I sat there and watched it go by and believed what everybody else wanted CU I didn't truly understand all as you get older you get wiser to it understand commercial Village some of the lots to set back some of them not so that so if the whole town voted for commercial Village along that way which was a town meeting to 3 400 people not trying to be exact I'm not trying to guide people with misinformation either but that was a pretty big meeting are any developers allowed to come and just fulfill the planning boards I use wishes very Loosely wishes regulations rules and then they get their permit if I if if an owner had if let say you want property in Norton you can do whatever you want in your property that's in as of right use MH if you want want to do something that you need to get a variance from the zba you go to the zba right if you don't need a variance you can do whatever you want right any owner can do any as of right use that they want on their property the applicant has proposed this they could have proposed different item this is what they proposed and this is what we look at which isn't according to what is there it's not an as of right use it's a special permit it's a a use that is permitted by special permit so if you want to propose this here it's going to have to go to the special permit process which means you go through all these hearings and to get the permit you need a super majority of the board which is 5 out of seven Tim could I address something yeah again to to go to like any property owner can choose whatever option is on the table within their zoning district and the town decided that within the village commercial District where this property particularly is multifamilies are sometimes allowed so the town decided that within that District sometimes as multiv it shouldn't be allowed by right so just I understand this and thank you in the commercial Village approval at that town meeting they allowed a special permit to build apartments in them well depending on which if we're talking about two different districts that might be getting mixed up here we have Village commercial that runs up and down 140 and 123 but in our Center which like 2 or 3 years ago we just passed Village Center core mhm which is basically like a sort of smaller hyper commercialized uh District mhm um is this is this lot in that zone or no no okay so that wouldn't apply to this so this is just in Village commercial itself um yeah and as Tim said any Allowed by right use yeah they don't have to come through us for a special permit they just got to get the the building approved um I fully understand for special approval means that within that District as a planning board we do have a little bit of leeway but we should not necessarily out right deny we don't have we some of those things should be in there the district might need a ratio maybe the village commercial should be 10% multi family or 20 or 40 That's not labeled but it's not supposed to be majority multif family but it should be a part of that District it's kind of what the suggestion is from the zoning District itself like there's no factories allowed so we wouldn't allow it it's no special permit option to put a factory there so like that's the difference in zoning we want to create a a village commercial neighborhood that doesn't allow multifamilies where just only single family homes and small shops we have to create a new District or change the district that exists right now to exclude multif family as a special permit change that SP into a no basically would be all right this I remember yeah cool yeah to answer your question yes Village commercial allows multif family by special permit and that's what we on thank you top of the show toop housing is What's Done by right as a f right yeah yeah all right okay so that makes a lot more sense so then that answers a bunch of the next questions and stuff like that so now let me ask you this final question what is the weight of the local people there versus the contractor zero some 50% 75% 100% I think that everybody weighs each public comment individually and how all of that factors into that that I'm to call it see so obviously we have 50 people lining up telling us that we think this is a terrible idea we've had a lot of people this for this project saying not sure I like this I'm worried about the traffic I'm worried about this we take all of that in we listen to what the applican has to say about them and we have to make a decision and you'll note the applicant can also make modifications to their plans as well in which case they did here they have I i' I've stated before I've stated again they're very afford accommodating they've they've listened to the people's complaints um made their moves um I don't understand from three buildings to two buildings but that was something you know whatever they had there they just withdrew that plan there um you know and Builders tend to do that but let me ask you a question remember when they built the buildings and the offices on B Street over there was anybody on the board then did anybody go to the town those meetings then they talked about oh what street you're talking about Street I apologize Le street street where the golf where the driving range used to be that weren't there supposed to be 220 Apartments built in that there was originally potentially going to be a 40b property right and the town chose to rezone that to Industrial to pursue what's a version of what's there now okay all right that makes some sense all of those each one of those properties has gone through the special perment process because they trigger it it for various reasons they're too big or they're different things that made them hit the special permit thresholds nothing about the schools though just the fact that they didn't want the load of people in that area so that's why they resed to Industrial um industrial is a higher generally a higher tax revenue for the town okay um well yeah there no there's no kids there's nobody living in it's just commercial basis business being done and 40 BS when the town is not above the state's affordable housing threshold percentages yeah um the permitting process essentially is is very streamlined in favor of the developer got job so if you're not at the threshold 40b can kind of if 40 if they can do mostly what they want but for be that I understand that I remember that convers ation and they were being very midle with the town wanted to do things so we didn't get strangled by the 40 question all right couple more questions I apologize for eating up your time is the town allowed to study the impacts now I don't know if it's positive or less so I say this with an open mind of what the values of the properties become when you build an apartment beside it are you allowed to look at those are you allowed to see what happens there or no we just I would say we generally think about it MH it is something that we've gone into this in detail with some other projects um but impact on property values in adjacent properties is something that we think about when we're looking at a project in terms you think about it but are we allowed to have a study on it is the board allowed to direct them to make a study of it are we I mean that's what I'm asking like the challenge Bec how do you do a like to like I don't know I don't studies no but how do you do uh you get into uh hey we found the study well we won't like it it was in Maryland hey we found this study well the apartment building was bigger well I'm a simplon I mean you would think that you would find an apartment beside a house and see if it goes up or down now like the Redmill Village I'm assuming it raised them and that's not to be disrespectful these gentlemen of what they're presenting I mean cuz that that Village up behind Kelly's place is I guess I I've read before it's like in one of the top ones in the country or something like that like it's really it's reable it's very well I mean the apartment houses beside them great people you see them out there doing stuff like that so it's not like I'm against it but like you sit here as a whole you know I drive by there for the last 25 years um you look at the woods and I've looked at their Renditions and you know you sit there driving on the road you go is that going to be good or bad I mean trees are trees we've all looked at trees their their Renditions look nice but everything else that comes with it and stuff like that you know I don't know if that's right or wrong if that bears on your minds and stuff like that um I'll leave you the this Parting Shot the people on Reservoir Street the others that live around there I think we all have spoken loud and clear that we're against it not them the people of the apartments just for the whole principle of the project but are you aware that one resident already up and left because of this do you think it's wise that a elderly woman sold her cuz she was so distraught about it and from what I'm pretty sure about she was a lifelong resident of Norton I mean does that wear on your mind or anything like that at all it does okay we do hear things like that from time to time yeah I mean the house sold so the next person comes in but I feel bad for them when they wake up in four months because they're brand new and go what the heck is that you know what I mean and and we all know that's why I say thank you to you all cuz Steve got a question I got another com I I mean to reflect on that I I've lived in town my entire life and when I was a kid the end of Reservoir Street was a tunnel of trees yeah the residents there that don't want something built there weren't there when I was a kid either right and I used to play in those Bo yeah so yes I definitely reflect on that stuff Redmill Village used to be a a gravel pit where I rode my dirt bike the development the apartments next to it used to be my friend's house I used to hang out and have parties there well I'm guilty I'm not I'm guilty I I my house I moved in my first house in 93 um Jim and Priscilla Divine 20 31 resin Street great people so and uh oh look at they're building houses here so I mean I played and went in those woods I mean I get how progression in life go and stuff like that but it's you know as this is all gone and these gentlemen pass their way and 10 years down the road when you're all off the plan and board and you know you're much grayer because you had to deal with all this and stuff like that myself included I mean we I I made this thank you for your your service and stuff like that and listening to us and everything but um I I'll leave you be with that but thank you very much you a lot of questions if I can make one more before we get please the the the main part of this I I suppose is if we don't allow a multif family or whatever use is a special permit the applicant can then change their mind and build any other use that's within that District totally so I would recommend that any residents that feel like something shouldn't be in a district really take an in-depth look at at our table and figure out what else can be built within that and then apply for town meeting articles to change that I know what you're talking about that yeah because that goes back to when they created this whole list and stuff because this all this whole list came from we had nothing if I remember correctly right this whole list and this commercial Village and everything was created over the last few years The Village Center Corp was created yeah Village commercial has been around for a while okay all right but I know that and I again I'm learning on those things and stuff right that no worries all right cool thank you for your time appreciate itk um y I'll say um Jane in the zoom meeting if you'd like to speak um please just state your name and address for the record please hi Jad rendi 17 res street thank you very much thank you and enjoying technical difficulties over here no worries my first question is look looking at tonight's agenda and I am not trying to be argumentative it's just an information why is this conversation continuing if it's posted on our public agenda that the discussion is supposed to be three proposed buildings and I'm not quoting the entire agenda which I have pulled up in front of me for 24 unit apartment buildings yet I've already Eno a screen share which shares a 36 unit building why is a conversation allowed to continue because it's not on the agenda sure so this project was originally three different apartment buildings and in the course of it being a noticed public hearing the applicant has removed one of the buildings and adjusted some of the other dimensions um but the underlying permit numbers Etc are the same I understand that I believe but an agenda as I understand and I consulted with a few other people in town including the Town Clerk and I can name other people if you would like me to why is a conversation H happening about a 36 unit building which is not at all clear on this public agenda I would say I would restate my original statement that that this public hearing has been has been noticed has been discussed a number of times over the past several months um and has been continued as an open public hearing for members of the public to join and to raise comments um if you as a resident as an abutter if you would like to file an appeal based on this process you are certainly welcome to okay thank you because I've been attending most of them for over a year my second concern which I would like the board to it's probably already uh been said but I need to reiterate it and I understand that these were Woods here when we chose to buy that piece of land and have our home built all the homes that were built here the 10 I don't know who's counting what what view you see on Reservoir there's eight and two behind but the eight out in front none of them were built with thum pumps almost all of them at this point have some pumps and a serious water issue I do not have all my agenda meetings in front of me but two or three meetings ago as I understood it's up to the homeowner who now Pro that the water runoff which would damage my home at least more and then file a civil suit and I'd like the planning board to please consider that they're raising the property right now across from me which is level at least 10 ft higher and they're going to collect water closer to our home so I ask you to take that into consideration thank you um thank you for listening and thank you for your volunteer work thank you very much and I'd ask you to vote no on this project thank you thank you and if I could just ask you to lower your hand hand in the zoom meeting when the when Zoom decides to agree with you that'll save the AGD part of my brain from thinking you'd like to comment again and if you would like to comment again please feel afraid Miss Senor hello Cheryl Senor 169 Reservoir Street I've lived on Reservoir Street for over two decades walked it biked it um I have I'm familiar with the bylaws I've looked at the studies I've looked at the documents of the Town prepared this development is too dense for these Parcels it's too dense for this section of Route 140 it's t for the norn Grove it's already one of if not the most densely developed neighborhoods we have in nor we have the reservoir there it doesn't make sense and as far as the um village commercial goes a single apartment building would have met the intent of that two was not necessary um just because the zoning bylaw that you can find a way to let them get the most return investment out of it doesn't mean that's the way the town should go right you can get more M for property values but you're paying it out on the other end as well and I can't imagine that this isn't going to create not just more of a headache but more of the brunt of it is going to fall on on this particular neighbor there's no equity in that so there's a lot of things that should have gone into this sooner and I hope that if this passes the way it is that you will consider all these things when War development proposals come to you thank you I'll ask if there's any other people here who would like to comment one more question sure I'll ask you to state your name and address once again just in case we missed it first John CH 25 res Street can I have the gentleman uh either one of them to come up and explain the building plan in the beginning there supposed to be three buildings 10,000 ft 24 per we do math that's 400 ft per P right I lost the numbers there as you went through them quickly um I believe they did because what I'm looking at he said he was going I apologize he said he was going to talk about one two and three bedroom apartments in these buildings how do you get two and three bedom apartments and still keep the 24 which is now 60 we're going for 60 correct how do we get I'll ask them to just come up yeah perfect do we cuz do we have plans on that that we can look at yet or not there's not interior layout plans in terms of how much square foot per apartment the and just give an overview of the buildings and rough average sizes thank you for that the question I have you is how come they haven't produced an interior plane yet they got outside water sewer not required as this part of the process thank you appreciate it you want me to reintroduce myself to sure Daniel Campbell level Design Group for the applicant um Brian can we go to the layout sheet one sheet before that just to restate the overall dimensions and average expected size of the units I think we talked about them I think maybe at the last time we spoke to you but sure so when we first made a submission um what we had was the building footprint size not the total building square footage it is three stories it is below the height level of the zoning as required and we have one and two bedroom units and that's what is listed on this layout sheet as well um what we have on the right hand side is a 24 unit building it is the exact same size as the building we originally submitted what we have on the left hand side on Lot C is a 36 unit building which is one and a half times the size of the original building we submitted because of the number of units and that we dropped the last building on lot e um to make up some of the units that were lost to note on this plan as we've discussed in the past and one of the things that we put on the plan is distance to those houses own Reservoir and distance across a Wetlands which will never be touched um which was part of the presentation that we made to the Conservation Commission as well our closest building to the property line on Reservoir is I believe 283 ft not to the homes but to the property line on Reservoir so that's not even to the roadway that's not to the trees that are being cut that is building to property line which on Reservoir Street is probably the middle of the road on Reservoir Street there is still um quite a bit of wetlands between the property line and the edge of the street um especially in the area right behind the building for lot D um so though we don't have the interior layouts per se what we did do in the very first public hearing was we submitted pictures of the units the building is the exact same style that this developer has has constructed in another location and if I can add one other thing um it became fairly clear fairly quickly that both this board and the Conservation Commission had issues with the lot e development and so we asked you for permission to withdraw that to preserve that in its natural state uh and that was a um a concession that we made uh it did mean that we had to increase the size of one of the buildings because obviously no project gets builds andless it's economic um but uh we we heard you and we reacted and we heard the Conservation Commission and we reacted um and and left lot e is is left alone and so I just wanted to emphasize that can I ask you a question about that um will lot e be permanently left alone or do you have plans in the future to possibly develop it I can't say it would be permanently left alone but there are a lot of challenges to developing that and so I think if would be quite some time if ever I mean there are wetlands in close proximity there are neighbors across the way it's at that V it's um it's a challenged piece of land from a development point of view it's a very nice piece of land from a open space and uh treed area but it's certainly challenged for development when to drive through 27 chair and you never doubt the possible that house in the middle of the road uh yeah I I remember a place uh I think it was up in Sharon where they built the road right around the house that's the one that's the one and uh I always wondered uh what made those people decide that they wanted to stay there when the road was widen but but I don't know them and no answer yeah no answer but yes you're right you can never say never but again um it's a challenged piece of land from a development point of view thank you Tim if I could sorry steps in John sh yeah to say least John sh 25 res Street um thank you for that I apologize it's 10,000 per floor thank you Dan so my question which kind of wasn't answered how many one bedrooms how many two bedrooms how many three bedrooms that has there one and two bedrooms and the rest of it has not been determined somebody said one two and three bedrooms at a meeting before just saying and they they I believe they actually is that right on that table it is right on the table that's all that's what I get for trying to don't feel bad I sit home I go blind looking at this thing that's why I apologize I've looked for this I scroll over to the yes so this is bottom two lines under parking requirements give you the total number of units I believe it's 36 and 24 but one bedom and two bedom and that's for both buildings combined both buildings combined so there's no three bedrooms no no three bedrooms okay thank you thank you okay and Jane I see that you've raised your hand again so I'll recognize you if you could just state your name and address once again please hi to be fair jundy 17 Reservoir Street sharing a computer with my husband so he's going to State his name so he didn't have to log in um hi this is Bill rundi 17 res Street um thank you for what you do I know it's a a pretty difficult job volunteering um in this town so again thank you um two points on this project the first one and I I think a woman who was further up the street kind of said that it doesn't really fit in to the area again and I said this at one of the very early meetings on this project this is a these are three story buildings plus a roof so you're essentially four stories high in what is essent entually a residential area 140 is residential except for I think there's one three story house everything else single family single level these things are going to be a monstrosity any way any way you want to cut it whether you're coming down 140 or whether you're looking through the woods in Reservoir Street you're not you're not going to miss them because are going to stick out so much essentially like the building behind McDonald's which which that one at least fits into a commercial L my my second point is if lot I think it's lot e is taken out of um the discussion at the moment why don't you consider donating that to the town so then it stays unbuildable that is certainly something the applicant could do they have not said that they will do that so um I will speaking for myself in terms of a process if the applicant doesn't do that then I assume that at some point it will be built so I keep that in my EXA in my calculations as a this could happen in the future exactly right now we're only ruling on what's in front of us um but understanding that lot e as it sits now and as the applicant is presented is still open for future development even if it is as the applicant stated a challenged piece of property to do so and again to fit into the neighborhood and area of the Town it doesn't need any more density than what is already an overdense proposal and that's probably for English so thank you thank you sir okay can I address the hype real quick yeah I I was just going to state that you've said it me meets the height requirements for the Zone correct and is it taller than the other buildings around yes maybe maybe not I mean a single family house is generally about 32 ft tall the zone is 35 ft tall and we're under that so it may be taller but it's not going to be it's certainly larger than single family house and it is it's not a we're not saying that you're over what the height is allowed for the zoning or within that requirement but it's a big it's a big structure that's not okay okay sure want um don't promise now 19 Street um with the state of the country as it is today you might be talking this later about your bylaws there's a lot of hotels that are not only in Taunton but in Mansfield that are no longer hotels okay I have a concern cuz a lot of the hotels at the end of Reservoir Street people are now walking from there because they don't that that's no longer half of it's not a hotel okay I want to make sure and this may be discussed in the bylaw that this apartment complex doesn't turn into one of those no longer hotels and houses of people that aren't looking necessarily for apartments but temporary housing so that may be something that you discussing lat the bylaws and I'd like to hear more about that sure I don't I don't mind addressing that yeah was I was just going to say it's been proposed as multif family rentals not hotels so we have a separate thing in our use table for hotels it it doesn't me that requ yeah and the hotels in Taunton had those same requirements and the Mayor found out the day of that it was no longer going to be used as a hotel right so that's what I just want to make sure that's not going to happen either okay I'll ramble for a few seconds here just to see if there are any additional public comments not seeing anybody jumping up in the room or anybody raising their virtual hand in the meeting um at that point I think um the next two pieces in my order of operations here were if um there was any additional summation you wanted to provide Mr jacobe and then we would potentially Laura if you could pull up the um the document that you been keeping about the items that we've discussed as we've gone along just to make sure if there's anything that we need to get further clarification from the applicant prior closing the public care so uh obviously I'm urging you to uh Grant the special permit uh to my client uh there have been a number of arguments that have been put forth by the abutters um uh by don't mean to uh denigrate their concerns uh there's always concerns um but I did want to go over a few of the items and respond to them uh the first one was that the claim was made that housing is not socially or economically desirable I would absolutely dispute that housing is probably behind uh uh water and food the most important thing to human being beings uh maybe clean air Falls in there somewhere in the top three or four as well uh but housing is socially desirable we do have a housing crisis in this Commonwealth uh and uh we need to create more housing um single family houses are enormously expensive I can't believe the price that they're getting for them now but my parents probably said the same thing at some point in the past as well uh by uh housing is socially desirable it is economically desirable in the sense that it brings people into town who then shop at the local merchants and restaurants uh who are available for a for the labor pool and so it is economically desirable uh the question has been raised uh about uh economic impacts uh and as the chairman has apply stated there are certain things that you just are not allowed by law to consider uh effect on schools uh the fire department other things of that nature uh early on there was a claim that there was a study somewhere but was never presented to you and so I think that you have to go by the evidence that's before you um and uh I think that uh the next point that was made was that they would rather see commercial development here which I found odd um I think in my experience commercial development um at least today very few Dry Goods retail the traditional retail just doesn't exist Amazon changed our lives forever and all of their uh competitors we have um now as I see with my clients um it's restaurants and medical uses that generally are or what comes into commercial development these days someone one of the development officers or one of my other clients said that tenants they get are where you actually have to go to the place rather than having the place deliver it to you so a gym a medical office a restaurant yes you go to the place those are the kinds of tenants uh in a minute I'm going to go over that table that talk about the other uses that could be done here mostly As a matter of right but I would suggest to you that the other kinds of uses that could be here would have increased traffic increased noise increased lighting and that this is relatively benign compared to all of those other uses uh the claim was made last meeting by a gentleman who's not here tonight but the Conservation Commission didn't like this um I don't know how he can speak for the Conservation Commission the only uh thing the conservation did was to unanimously pass the order of conditions uh the claim was also made that this is 10 times the allowed density um I'm not sure where that comes from it may be somebody looking at potentially putting up 11 single family houses as opposed to 60 Apartments interestingly when you passed your zoning changes a few years ago you eliminated the density requirements which um you might want to revisit someday um because typically most of the communities that I work in you say okay the first unit requires 10,000 square ft every unit after that 2500 or something and then you add it all up and then you see how many units you can get on the lot you eliminate it that uh so I would say to you that there is no argument that density is being violated there was a question about impact on the wetlands and that was peer reviewed uh and the Conservation Commission accepted the peer review as well as our Engineers work uh and they issue the order of conditions there was questions about the storm water again that was peer-reviewed accepted and accepted by the Conservation Commission and as we said earlier there were questions raised about traffic and the traffic was peer-reviewed and I think it's safe to say that the firm that did the study for us vaai is one of the two preeminent uh traffic uh engineering firms in the state the party you hired for the peer review phb is the is their main competitor and they would argue as to who's one and who's two uh but they are certainly no worse than one in onea in terms of their uh their expertise and so they peer reviewed it they found our methodology to be correct and that there would be no impacts they did s our people did suggest uh that we uh as the chairman stated um help the Commonwealth with some of their issues and that would certainly be a condition that we would uh expect uh that you would impose that we approach the Commonwealth and ask them to implement uh those traffic changes I can't guarantee that the Commonwealth will listen but I've never seen them not listen because there are tens of thousands of intersections in this Commonwealth and they just do not have the staff to uh go out and retime those at all much less periodically um the standards as I said are that it has to be socially and economically desirable I've covered that it has to satisfy an existing need um the town adopted a master plan this board as I understand it was a large part of that and you called for this type of housing in this district and the zoning was changed to allow it and so uh it does satisfy an existing need uh for those who are uh not able to buy single family houses uh uh because of the cost or because of things that change in their life sometimes people when they're younger if their relationship changes if their health changes if their job changes they want to be able to move on or not have to sell a piece of property so the rental uh apartments are uh F A need in the community uh would also suggest to you that there's not an insic ific factor in that we are extending the sewer line from the center of town all the way to this property um my understanding is that the Sewer Commission is very pleased with that because we are paying for something that they would like to do but don't have the funds currently uh as we pointed out no one will be required to hook up to it but my further understanding and it's memorialized in the bylaw is that when your septic system fails then you have to hook up and unless there is a manifest uh uh economic cost that is just beyond the pale and then you can apply for an abatement from that um but uh one of the uh things that I understand uh environmentally is that all septic systems fail sooner or later they are in the groundwater uh sewering uh is is more environmentally sound than than having septic systems uh so uh I can I did put in writing to you back in October it's been a long time we've been doing this uh and I did point out to you um that this District allows as a matter of right not not only single family homes but top of the shop housing which is apartments above uh commercial uh although there is no definition in your bylaw I think we all know what it means it's a if I could it's is any of the housing that's allowed in that type District if it's if single family homes are allowed you can put a single family home allowed there if dormitories are allowed you can put dormitories it's whatever type of residence is allowed with than that correct uh and you can have a tourist or room blooming house a bed and breakfast an educational facility a religious facility a private school a health or recreational Club a fraternal Lodge professional offices Bank retail stores medical dental offices Conference Centers Corporate Offices repair shops wholesale offices a bus terminal commercial parking lot restaurants Artisan manufacturing or indoor Recreation I would submit to you that all of those would have a far greater impact on our neighbors than uh this development as we pointed out to you the uh uh there is quite a distance across a wetland that absolutely will never be built on between us and the Neighbors on reservoir uh and so we believe that there will be no aurous impact on them so that was my long-winded way of saying that we submit to you that we have met the standards for the granting of this special permit and uh uh we hopefully look forward to a positive vote from your board thank you sir um and you feel free to sit down but I think uh before we close the public hearing I just wanted to make sure that the board took the opportunity to run through all of the items that we've been tracking over this process and make sure that if there is any clarification needed that we get it before we close yes correct cuz once we close we're closed exactly so if there are any questions that still exist we're certainly willing to answer them thank you so Laur I will let you drive since you have the um the document open here there's not much okay um so the um grade out ones have been resolved that we've discussed that I felt comfortable just marking off as we've discussed here we need to discuss the affordable housing um there are five previous storm water standards that according to the hely Whitten period VI March 14th that needed to be reviewed um how yeah however um concom has closed and issued a wetland permit in order conditions so I I'm assuming that um forly witness peer review of the last response from Level design um is satisfactory resolved so I'm going to Mark 6 through 10 as resolved um I just want to get the board's approval before I marked this as okay um with regards to the fire department's review of access and clearance both with and without snow storage um Paul had noted the deputy chief said it looked fine for Access and clearance a we comfortable that it's okay with snow storage as well okay yeah the applicants propose snow storage if we had any if we have any objections to what they propose we should raise them to the larger point of fire um if we feel that we want a condition for fire department officially improves signs off on access to the site as a conditional approval for the file then I don't see the after can have any questions how does the board feel about that as as you said Paul the fire chief didn't the deputy chief didn't necessarily didn't have objections to access to the site but if we I think I'm viewing this as making sure that we have it in writing that's how I'm viewing it okay so you would like to prefer to condition it I think that I think that the I see it as a no risk issue to condition agre other than the generation of electronic paper okay so I'm going to move that forward to conditions just as a reminder that is the last pending um concom status obviously since we have their order of conditions um at this time other than the scale of the plans I saw no requests for waivers in any of the site planner narratives so presuming we're moving forward without voting on anything for project conditions we have potentially affordable housing do we want to condition the stretch code compliance with the 20% electric vehicle ready is that something we need to do that's requ or is it required by the state okay I think I wasn't sure all right so we'll delete that there were two conditions that were re recommended by vanas in regards to um site distance analysis they recommended trimming and removal vegetation for site triangle um and then the sight distance analysis same thing um condition that no snow object or snow that exceed 2 and 1/2 ft should be placed within that site triangle um one we've already talked about employ the Department of Transportation to optimize the traffic signals to improve level of service at Route 140 and 123 is detailed in the mitigation section of the traffic analysis uh condition installation of 2700 ft of sewer from 123 the project site um what I didn't know is is do we or should we reference conservation special conditions issued within the Wetland permit I feel like every time we have something that crosses both boards we debate this whether we should reference it and I yeah there special conditions goes for like four pages yeah I have no issue including as reference okay I think that would be the cleanest way of going about it uh and the recently just added fire department review of access and clearage with snow storm sure did I miss anything did anybody see anything not usually um I don't know if this is can you just as we set up for potential discussion later can you just um put it in for a discussion confirming roles around multif family and versus hotel to see if there's any just to make sure that we look at those two two definitions and make sure that we're um yeah and has been in the news a lot recently so I haven't heard of any instances where they've been put into Apartments so I you never know what the state will come up with well and if the state decides whatever we put in here probably won't matter is that exactly yeah like it's going to be the solar bylaws all over again yeah yeah we're just going to do what the state tells us to do yeah we can cross that bridge when we get to it yeah um the two here that I see Mr Kobe at the podium um would be related to the site distances and making sure that nothing is in the way of those um I'm assuming that you would not have an objection to a condition for an operations and maintenance plan for the project which would include those two requirements from veness oh absolutely problem sorry AR they're not veness anymore and with regard to the short-term rentals we don't intend any short-term rentals I don't I don't remember in your bylaw definition but if you wanted to include a condition that there be no rentals of less than 30 days or something along those lines to stop it from being a hotel we're looking for much longer leases yes I don't think that was my concern I understand what your concern yes thank you so you know if you want to craft something that's it the r less than x number number of days like 30 um then we have no problem that I think the um the ab Butter's concern was in relation to the state's housing of um migrants that are coming into the US so it's a mess at the state and the federal level so I had just put that just to as we look at a property of this size with Apartments just to look at our own bylaws and see what supplies that's yeah I'm not sure that's something we can solve here tonight if we could solve it in one meeting in the town of Norton then uh we'll be famous tomorrow okay uh the one thing do have in here is a operation and maintenance plan we should probably condition that yeah and that would basically Encompass row 10 and 11 there yep among the operation maintenance plan would probably also o include all of the in practice it would include all of the Wetland stuff which is in our purview yep what our what's in our per the operation maintenance plan with these conditions is trim the trees so people can see on the driveways yep and don't store anything at the ex exits for members of the board I do see you up there um are there any other conditions as we've discussed this project that we want to put on this list for a discussion um and which we might need the applicant to weigh in on okay Mr Campell I see you at the PO I just wanted to mention that as part of the U VP review that is one of the reasons that we planted the larger trees along the front so that there was a maintenance requirement and there's no Shrubbery planted in there that you'll notice on the landscape plan so we did try and incorporate that in in our current design you never know what trees will be taken down and what things can get put in their place are you agree it turns me into a cic sometimes okay anything else that we wanted to address at this point or anything else that we want to ask the applicant prior to closing the public here one more if affordable housing is not going to be willfully achieved there is the option of granting the town land in Li of having affordable housing um would l e be that potential land that could be used the applicant would ultimately be able to to decide whether they meet it via actually providing affordable housing payment in L or any other method I don't so I think that would be my um I don't know how things add up and what is worth what to qualify that as a potential option sure um if the applicant wanted to consider that and bring that to the town as an option in those disc discussions they certainly could if it got to that point if you that's exactly what I was going to say obviously I can't make a commitment of one but it's an interesting idea and and one that can be explored so the affordable hous requirement says I think it says they meet the requirement or they provide something in equal to whatever equal to whatever however we would value different things is a whole level of math and Actuarial detail that uh I don't think we need to get into tonight and my brain will explode my question is if if we were to approve or deny something tonight how do we set forth the the idea of procuring land or setting that option on the table later on they know it's an option it's always an option for them we're if if we choose to however we address the affordable we are the condition would be whether or not we are conditioning that this project meets this town's affordable housing by law okay we say project must meet with meet the town's affordable housing by law regardless of solution just say they need to meet it okay however they choose to reach that end um they could as they've stated could choose to appeal that condition as well depending on how they how they have said they interpret our bylaw and how they want the process to play to go forward so if there are affordable units of the property all the better is there anything else that we would like to discuss with the applicant at this time otherwise I would potentially look for a motion to close the public he in absent any further comments so Mo we have a motion in a second sure if you'd like to come up and just give a um quick question John j25 as the board votes y am I allowed to ask them to elaborate on the Y the justification as to why they're voting or no let's see I think it'll generally be obvious in the discussions that we have after this public hearing is closed if it is if it is not um I am not going to I generally not going to all you to go up to the podium and say how why did you vote this way uh if you choose to have a discussion with somebody outside of this meeting everybody's a private CI no not more confrontational more quizzical that's why I'm asking like I don't know like it it it's like they just say yes or no and move on like is is the town allowed to understand the yes or no and I know you just said meet them one onone or is that like a a question that's out of bounds when we when we issue a decision one way or another we have to give a reason okay all right cool and we give that in writing in the decision you all have to write your answers no the as a whatever the deciding voted as as a individual ones would be fun long to read by hand court support okay so we had a motion and a second to close the public hearing um again after closing the public hearing we will not accept any additional comments from members of the public we will not address recognize any additional comments or submissions from the applicant themselves um so we have a motion and a second is there any further discussion on that motion or anything else that we want to sayi prior to its action okay I will now go through the rule for the vote again this is a vote to close the public hearing only it is not a vote on any decision therefore so Eric I will start with you yes Jim yes Steve yes Wayne yes Laura yes Alan yes and I will vote Yes so the public hearing is now closed we didn't hear who made the motions oh I did made the motion second motion yes sorry usually I restate so I'm off my game caught off guard someone jumped in at the last second no I'll just blame myself it's easier okay so the public hearing is closed as I had said before um I want to try and let us go into a little bit of discussion about the lighting bylaw and go into to that and then we could have a board only discussion about um what decision we are going to reach on this it on the Zero Mansfield Avenue agenda item and because of the elections we do need to close it out tonight so um no objection with that we'll move forward with the next item on our agenda which is a Citizens petition to discuss changes to Town's lighting bylaw um Laura do you want to stop sharing your screen just for a bit You Got U I know that thank you for waiting patiently sorry to uh give you an in-depth uh update on uh how the planning board operates wanted to share Al set thank you very much for allowing me to speak tonight about the actually I have two I have the Lighty bylaw and Camera bylaws sorry yes that's okay just want to make sure that they vote um my name is Peres Constantine you can call me Stella I live at 312a South wer Street I purchased um my home in 2010 with my fiance the Covenant acquir enjoyment in both tendency and real estate law states that the owner has the right to use their property under the Covenant of CME enjoyment the current bylaw lighting excludes single and family homes and I'm asking the town to include single and family homes on the current bylaws so I'm basically just asking to strike letter A under 175 20.2 right now lighting which is an accessory in use to one and two family residential dwellings it excludes that so I'm asking the town to strike letter a and then num reum accordingly um the reason I have put forth this petition is the last couple of years actually going up 3 years I've had neighbors flashing lights on my property I've had to put cheap paper blinds up to cover my windows I can't open my windows at night and it's it's very you know upsetting that I can't enjoy my home the way it was intended to so that's that I'm sorry I hate talking in front of people that's okay so understand the request certainly and I think that it's probably the single and two family homes are probably excluded from the simple reason of somebody has their driveway they have a motion sensor light on the outside of their driveways when they go outside to check the mailbox or put out their trash cans that they can see um and that they don't need to comply with necessarily the guidelines here um Brian does the warrant go down and show the rest of the bylaw well this is the only part that's being protected Does it show the rest though just to show the requirements of the Z loading lighting bylaw I I have it up to High I don't know if there's more um there is more it's just projectives and standards yeah objectives and standards and it says lighting levels shall be appropriate for the intended use excessive levels of light glare and light trespass will not be permitted so basically that's what I'm asking the town to do because the light is trespassing over my property line into a wooded area that's towards the side of the house and I'm sure I'm not the only resident in town that's having an issue I know my neighbor has a great light on in their driveway that comes into one of the the whole what that which way is that facing north side of my house probably 60% of the evening yeah my neighbor does the same thing the motion sensor right across the street into my bedroom yeah my Liv room what's the source of the light if you don't mind me asking like is it there is it censored lights is it car light is it it's a sensor of light that um is pointed at our property so when an animal comes on our property the motional light will go on Tim earlier this evening I I rewrote that little section I just wanted to go to the what we have now so the whole thing yeah if you want to just just to so what I'm cognizant of is just going through this is the rest of the bot here and so we're saying that lighting should be appropriate for the intern intended use makes sense if we go down to B and it says the use of flood light should not be pres permitted except expus approval planning board will not include light levels which exceed recognized standards so if we just strike the exception the bylaw would be saying that anybody wants to put a flood light in their house needs to come before the board and get a permit for it am I reading I'm interpreting that correctly correct Paul so are you saying that um businesses have to come before the board with the light with li the applicant here presented a lighting plan for the development and it went through okay these are the lights that we're proposing they give off this much light in this cone so here's the map of the site and here's all the light um some of them aren't that detailed they say we're going to have downfacing they call them wall packs so a little those Square lights that you see on the side of commercial buildings that point down at the sidewalk and sometimes that's acceptable but so when somebody builds a one family home they have to present they don't have to present the lightings so if you strike this you're telling me that everybody has to to come before you and present the lighting laws if they want to put a SP in there so then how do just with point B that doesn't make sense to me that's if we strike the residential exemption that's what it says so basically residential homes have no so basic I can't as a homeowner I have no recourse with flashing lights from a from a neighbor so how do we based on this bylaw specifically okay so how do we fix that that is something that I'm CH challenged to find out I'm not sure I think I might have come up with a reasonable solution to it yeah why here I mean I don't know the laws this is what I was kind of told to do to come here to do the petition so I would like to kind of move forward with something to remedy this because I'm sure I'm not the only homeowner in the ofon that is having an issue sure and nobody should have to live like this have you had conversations with the neighbor uh yeah I don't even want to go there I I assume would have for all the effort to do this if you hadn't done that exactly I it's to the point where it's borderline harassment what we've been going through between lights and cameras on our property going on over 3 years maybe even before now so I going to I want to kind of try to remedy this the right way I mean I've had the police down my home numerous times and I'm too old for this C understood um Paul you Mr chairman if I could sure Alan I I just before we go any further I I just think this is a bad precedent um to be setting we're not here to set ause dur for Neighbors we set policy for the town we don't this just seems to I don't know I'm very much against this as osed and I this is more of a commercial bylaw has nothing to do with residential like I said we we you don't solve the SPs between neighbors seems and I'm not and I'm not asking you I'm talking it's okay this seems this seems out of I'm not going to say out of our priew but I don't believe this belongs in front of us and I'm strongly against this as it is proposed right now and in any form if there was a whole new residential lighting bylaw proposed that would be completely different thank you Alan and don't I know it's sometimes challenging talking in person and zoom I get it apologize no no wores but I'm not asking the board the planning board to remedy any disputes that I'm having I'm just trying to come up with some type of lighting laws that does not apply to single family homes right now sure and when I was talking to everybody in the town they suggested that I start here by striking that one line with the lighting laws so if this only applies to commercial I understand that so maybe there's another maybe we can come up with another bylaw it it applies to everybody as it is now but that exception for one and two family homes means that it doesn't apply to 90% of 95% of the residential okay properties in town it does apply to multifamilies like the one that we heard earlier which because they're bigger they need more lighting and it makes sense to to look at it and make sure they're not going to have a whole bunch of Lights it lights it up like d Stadium right um so I'm not sure Steve I apologize I haven't had the chance to go through in detail what you had sent around earlier it's mostly a rearrangement of what's there it's not anything vastly different um did you have that is this Steve's proposal upfall uh I believe it is okay so Steve if you can just walk through the the logic here and whether it's something that we act on this evening or think about in the future sure um so you've removed you've kept the you've removed the exemption and then what is the well I placed the exemption further down if you scroll down a little bit yeah where I found some of it is applicable only to commercial stuff and shouldn't be applied to single family homes but some of it could be applied to single family homes like a single family home shouldn't be Shining Light into another yard but the type of light or or the height of it might be allowed they shouldn't necessarily be like like a single family home could put flood lights if it's not shining into somebody's yard we already have the ruling there that says it can't shine into another person's yard you can't have .1 foot candle of Illumination in someone else's yard regardless of the type of light you use you're not permitted to do that so okay to meet that standard you're requireing if I want to put a flood light in the back of my house for me to get lighting measurements I I suppose if there was going to be a way that that does this that's that's that's the line where I have a trouble with this and that's why like I I put for emergency lighting like a flood light for emergency lighting should be L that's basically kind of what and then I exemp you going to differentiate between a whole another lighting system for their regular motion sense of Veris is emerg because it regulates it on there where the light can shine and how much how is the homeowner going to do that I mean well again let's take it to the extreme can I just go in my yard right now take a giant flood light and shine it at my neighbor's houses without any regulation like I can get a whole series of flood lights and shine it at everybody's houses so in theory yes you could you probably wouldn't have very happy neighbors so there so there there is a reasonable cause to to put something in there you you're not supposed to NE forbid somebody if somebody's on 5 Acres they can't put a flood light on their Barn that seems like they should but they shouldn't be able to shine it in somebody else's yard yeah so I'll take our area how are you in in Reservoir down in the Grove area where you have all sorts of non-conforming any kind of Spotlight is going on neighbors properties you don't have a typical acre lot how are you going to then enforce if it's a non-conforming lot they just built a house that literally has no yard if their bedroom light goes on that light's going to cast down into the neighbor's yard it seems like the type of thing that would give legal standing for it to it's just opening up worms that I don't think we are going to be able to govern and enforce and it's going to create a backlash of animosity amongst neighbors even more so than she's already got like I would like to think that if the neighbor knew that their light was flashing just trying to tilt it down so so that it covers their property and still be bright but common decency isn't necessarily going to be winning the day yeah I I I agree with this the idea that most people should be able to do almost anything they want with their own property almost anything until it interrupts the next property and by moving the residential lighting requirement down the exemption below not letting your light go on some somebody else's yard that's the standard if a neighbor can pull out a light measurement tool and check how how many lumens again just go down into the Grove and see what you're going to open up I understand I live there I have a light shining in my living room right now right now are you going to do that if I want to enforce against my neighbor if they're not willing to have an actual discussion then I would have legal precedent to do something right now we can't do anything and the neighbor can't do anything the resident can't do anything yes it would be nice if everybody got along it would be great to do it benevolently but some people are not that way and you need a ground to stand on again I can I live in the Grove I have my living room is lit up every single night I can't stop my neighbor from doing that okay um Steve just from a point of information was this were the additions that you put in under e there were they drawn from another town or is it just something you developed under E I didn't put any additions the only addition I put was C for emergency lighting but everything else is what's in our bylaw already I just took the the things that apply to the planning board and gave it its own section we okay gotcha okay but all that none of this is from another Town's bylaw this is ex what we had just slightly rearranged okay do let's see speaking for myself I appreciate the work that you put into this I'm not sure if I'm if I would be prepared to recommend this to to meeting tonight I'm more than happy to analyze it I don't have to recommend it tonight but I wanted to propose something to help out if I could also offer I could be wrong we should probably check with Town Council but because this is a citizen's petition it needs to go to town meeting as written we can't it right um yeah so and all and all that we're doing here is we are giving a all this board's position is be giving recommendation to town meeting okay and they will call the article on town meeting um if you choose to come up and present and say yes this is my petition I want to do this for X Y and Z reasons and I'll find a microphone and say the planning board voted on this and voted to endorse it or not to endorse it to town meeting um and then Tom meting can do whatever it wants Tom me doesn't all us to listen to us I get it so at that point would you Sugg put into motion what you suggested is that how this all works because this is all new to me I so anybody can amend anything on the floor of town meeting it is the wild west of local politics okay I don't think you can amend a petition a citizen's petition on the floor I don't think you can I think I think we've tried to edit people have tried to Motion in writing for those petitions oh sewer they seven and a half years yeah they've they've changed and that was a Citizens petition yeah so they've Chang yeah um so changes to what you've submitted in your petitioned article have to be done in writing to the moderator um somebody could submit this if they wanted to um speaking for myself as a board member I'm not sure I would feel comfortable recommending it without having looked at it compared it to other local towns um and I think kind of the discussion that I had about if we take that away then anybody wants to build a house that wants a spotlight on that driveway when in theory need to come to us for approval and that's a burden that I think is the challenge oh I yeah I don't want to make any more work for you believe me I'm not thinking about work for me I mean I want to keep busy I'm just kidding um what I don't it seems like it would be an overreach of government telling people what to do even if um yeah so get you in just a second I just want didn't know if I was able to join I saw you join in the corner of my the corner of my eye so I thought you had something that you wanted to say um so I think to Allen's point I would have a hard time endorsing this for town meeting okay as it's right is there anything that you wanted would want to add to that if you'd like know Miss Senor had a a thought in the comment no I just if we can come up with something you know that would be great and I I I don't I don't it's not about a neighbor dispute it's like I should be able to use my property and not have flashing lights from when it turns dark all the way to dusk all the way to Dawn facing my bedroom that's what I'm you know and I'm sure I'm not you know the only person dealing with this issue in the town of  so if there's some way we can you know if we can't change the existing bylaw because it's more for commercial I get that maybe if we can write something else for lighting I would be grateful for that too okay if you don't mind please thank you I'm sorry don't mean to be obnoxious um this really resonates with me so obviously I live in the Grove as well so I'm familiar with this kind of a thing and so so what happened to us is in the fall um a neighbor who lives probably we going to say about 800 ft diagonally behind us on the opposite side of a side screen we place the flood light with this giant LED it is so obnoxious and not only does it light up every room in my house once it comes on after dark the side street that I'm on on several of the light colored houses light up like Christmas trees it's crazy how much light how much illumination how far it carries CU for those houses it's probably even further so is it the fact that the type of light I you do have a line in there that talks about what's preferred is this something that that can be addressed as far as the a if it has to be an LED if you can't say you can't to an LED can a wattage or some kind of control be added to it it's something a general it's something that we could consider it's not something that we can right now as a board we can only endorse what Stella has presented we can endorse or not endorse it what happens at town meeting after that point it's not our board it's I understand that but it may you think that maybe it hasn't been looked at since the Advent of all this easy access of the number the number of bylaws that we have in our list that we would like to spend time on reviewing uh continues to grow probably every month um Norton does not have a sound bylaw Norton does not have has this lighting bylaw which doesn't address single and two family homes doesn't have a lot of things uh we are going currently going through a Zone and reification process um which is another thing in process um I'm not sure if the lighting bylaw I don't think we've hit that yet in our recodification review okay um if that is something that maybe we can flag for the attorney working on that process um it wouldn't be something that would be addressed at this town meeting upcoming but it would be something that would potentially be addressed at the subsequent town meeting when we're looking to get the town to approve the recodification and the sound byar is going to be evaluated at some point in time in the I know it's on my list I've talked about it I've talked about decb at ambient background levels far too many times well now that so many people are working at least part of the time from Home Again The Grove is the place to go and look and see it's insane the noise that what goes on just trash tracks the fact that we don't have it the sound doesn't collect it so this trash talks every day in the neighborhood it's it can be difficult but the lighting is something get just talking about last night how disturbing it is you can't go out your backyard it's like being underneath stage lights okay um you have additional comments or questions for the the petitioner as it relates to this article or do we want to Mo over the motion to endorse I sympathize with your plate I'm in the same boat but I couldn't endorse this to the town the way it's written I think it just would open up Pandora's Box okay yeah I say same as as written with just scratching off the residential it's it's too overwhelming okay anybody like to make a motion motion to endorse the citizens petition from Mrs Constantine so thank you Laura for the motion I'm going to say Steve for the second close again the motion is in the affirmative um I'll go through the RO Eric no Jim no Steve no Wayne No Laura no alen no and I will vote no as yet no as well um but obviously you can still present a town meeting for this article discuss it and town meeting can choose to act on and and just so I can understand everything correctly town meeting they'll be able to change it with me you can subit any changes that you would like to the moderator in in writing um if you'd like to ask the town moderator in advance what the what their requirements are they then consider whether they think the proposed changes is within the scope of the petition so basically is it would people are we still talking about the same thing or is you coming with a the extreme example would be the petition was to change the lighting bylaw but instead I'm going to amend it and add sound which would be completely different um so it's the moderator's discretion what's Within talking about the same thing so if you want choose to try to do that in writing you can do that then it's just a matter of getting time meting to understand what you're presenting okay so it's basically lighting law a lighting law it's the moderator's discretion as to what they see as part of the scope okay um so we have the lighting bylaw and you also had the camera bylaw yes um Paul I see you're popping up here is there something you wanted to say just to let everyone know that this item will be taken up by the select board this Thursday so but tomorrow I'll draft a memo reflecting the vote uh uh to the to the selectboard but it'll be Thursday uh starting at 7:00 at the Norton Housing Authority sen it's 6:58 just keep them no I'm just kidding maybe the zoom will get on time that's okay too zo okay and the the other bylaw that you had was a CA the other bylaw that I was um proposing is that one Just sh we we don't even need to vote on it because it's General bylaw it's not in our perview so I exed or not no you don't have presented okay if you'd like to you certainly can we a town board to listen to Residents but it's not something it's not a zoning bylaw so we don't give a recommendation on it okay I won't waste your time okay thank you so much thank you so much I appreciate it good luck thank you okay so that is out of the way um so going back to is every prepared to go back to our discussion on decision perero Mansfield Avenue okay um Laura if you don't mind pulling up the conditions again sure um and actually as I say that I think that um actually I'll do that for so looking at the conditions that we discussed earlier um are there any of these conditions outside of the affordable housing where we have any disagreement among the board about whether it is warranted whether we should have it um or whether having it or not having it if you think it's contentious and your decision on the application as a whole rests on it then just speak up in that respect if we think that all of these are straightforward and we're all in agreement and we don't need to talk about it it's not going to be the basis for the way I'm going to vote right exactly that's all I'm good with that yeah I'm good I'm okay so the key one I'm going to say is probably the affordable housing one so um let me just try and can let stop sharing yes I was going to pull up um I have it if you want to sh share sure why don't you put that up okay and we can read the as my lawyer friends like to say read within the four corners of the page this is what the bylaw says for affordable housing so let me see I think you're is the down a little is the gallery scrolling cover covering the point where it talks about the date which is let me scroll down so applicability so this is the piece that is the center of U yeah3 yeah can um can you just drag the people over to the left side of the screen so that we can all read that section doesn't need to be yeah so the division of land so the bylaw appli to the division of land held in single ownership as of this state or any time thereafter into six overall Lots whether so created at one time or blah blah blah so the applicant has stated that this bylaw says that it only applies to things that happened after this date or before this date before the date uh which is if you look at the plain language you could make that you could make that read on it um the piece of it the other piece of it is that I think we have this from find the I think that or anytime after is key that's that's not what they're looking he's looking at yeah we're looking at B Steve at B oh it's it's very short well that's just it so if you look at A and B I know you the Four Corners there all applicability and division by lamb says as of October 8th 203 anytime thereafter that makes sense right that's what you want to see B for some weird reason says inexistence of October 8th 2003 which reading B the one sentence that's there sounds like that day and before because it says in existence as of why it's written that way I have no idea but um in my opinion because I've looked at this a few times now trying to wrap my head around it um I believe Mr jacobe has the right interpretation okay and I will say that that statement and we do have a read from Town Council yep which says differently A and B Town Council did say and I'll just for whatever it is worth that it is generally up to the board to give its read of what it is actually saying um so we are supposed to get kind of quote unquote difference in that respect they also made a point to say though that they were worried about the cost of single family housing so if that's truly a driving force behind this then why not have affordable apartments cuz I've seen rent also that rent's also out of control so if that's indeed a concern why wouldn't that why would this be so contentious well that's I think what it is it's like bylaw written uh versus by written right interpreted one way or the other right it's you know did did go by the how it's written or how was supposed to be written like the interpretation um but in the spirit of it what the spirit yeah Spirit of the law versus How It Was Written and it's kind of yeah I mean I already said where I was going with it but I I you know I I can I don't know like said I don't like I don't understand why it was written that way personally I I can give context on that oh cool so um they were approved this bylaw was approved at the October 8th 2003 meeting oh so they just did it very literally and it was an amendment on the floor so here is the uh so that is the reason for the date okay so it is a we are in a linguistic uh challenge here it does seem counter to the point that we would put into the bylaw that we want to as of then but now for 21 years not apply affordable housing that that was that was the core of town council's argument is that the read it reading it in the other way made it nonsensical we have to kind of look to the L revert back to a which which I hate agree it's vague and leaves open for all sorts of interpretation and argument but the spirit again yes was designed to have more this is the Crux of this condition of whether this condition or not is this going to be a a situation where this again holds up someone's approval of it or not because it's it's not going to be the reason for my approval or disapproval that's not the Crux of my voting this is a massive precedent for everything else that comes forward this absolutely needs to be settled one way or another but it needs to be Rewritten we can't do that with this yes it definitely has to be Rewritten but we well no no we're not doing it tonight but we're doing it with but we have the we're going through the biology what I'm saying is is this going to be something that holds up someone's vote y or nay cuz if if people say no this isn't a decided reason then we can just say okay we don't need this I mean as part of our conditions and then adjust it later on to read the right way is what I'm saying just trying to shorten it up and make it more common sense I'm not sure if I'm not sure if it's the deciding vote deciding factor in a vote but I'll say from my perspective the afford from a highlevel perspective this type of development is exactly what an affordable bylaw is supposed to apply to yeah exactly I agree and and tell like reading between the four corners and I hate that logic is telling me not to so the the Town Council says it comes down to us at the end anyway Town Council has said has given us an opinion based on President as she sees it and said that it's ultimately our decision to interpret at the B A and that in theory the town is supposed to have some level of difference in how we interpret our own bylaws I would follow her lead then in my opinion I believe we should include this in a condition I believe whether it's written poorly or not in the spirit of the law we know it's supposed to apply it only makes sense that it applies and this is just another reason why modifying things at Tom meting just put it in the list of things that just gets messed up every time that is done okay this is one this is one condition where I would like us to have a vote on prior to making a vote on a decision um is there anything else anybody would like to add to this point prior to doing so my only other conern if this becomes an this become an appealable issue yes and then clearly an appealable because then if they go the nuclear op in appeal go to the courts and stuff like that I then Town Council will be arguing against their attorney in court yeah and the entire process will be delayed cool so so that's and the applicant said I think in one of our past sessions they would have they would in they disagree with this interpretation the one that we're talking about and they would consider whether or not they want it to appeal and look at the economics of that versus the economics of delay versus versus this is why I was saying to dipstick and see if this was the because if we do put it as a condition and then it gets voted down then that becomes the Crux of the where if it's not a condition and it gets voted down then it's no longer that's an appealable action correct they can choose to appeal whether we put this in right but I'm saying that part of it where we're hazy with the wording would be out of the mix so to speak because what I'm saying is like my my I've come to what I'm going to make a decision on and it has nothing to do with the household the affordable housing act so if I'm going to vote in the negative I don't necessarily want that in there as a condition because then if it is a condition and it's voted down then that condition can be part of the appeal and like a this is a Mis interpretation of this only applies if it's approved okay then then it's but what if they appeal though they're appealing the the denial based on the what reasons that we include in the decision okay all right so then we're not going to deny it based on the condition that we've approved right because the condition is that before it moves forward they have to meet the that was my question is that if that's in there could that be part of the appeal process that's what all I was trying to get to if it's denied then it'll be based on what they wouldn't have ever met the condition any had a burden against this condition that's a way too of a legal answer that I wanted to give for a moment another legal legal thing if we were to say that it didn't apply are we setting up ourselves for any litigation with former developers that we required to do that um for the 20 something years I don't know how the appeals process would play out for things that are already in motion or have already been approved um no but we're setting yourselves up going forward yes no I think it has to be addressed go to town meeting we might not get this done by Fall town meeting it might not get past the fall town meeting then we can go all the way to spring or the next poll it does set precedent going forward absolutely and I other two senses personally I never take into account if we're going to get sued or not in any decision that we make in doing this I just think that is bad practice in my opinion yeah the applicant rais it themselves so I think it's fair to at least say this is what they said whether or not they do% I just don't take it into consideration of anything as what I'm considering I don't care if they Su us I don't care if they don't Su us like I just don't consider that in any of my decision thank you Paul you wanted to yeah just to add that um we also have to remind you know remember too is you know Butters can also appeal and they could appeal if you decided not to factor that in then they could appeal and say you should have so now we're in I think move forward with putting the recommendation that one of the you know terms being that it has to have the affordable housing to it is that an official motion yes second you have a motion in a second is there any further discussion on that motion about including a potential condition requiring the applicate meet the affordable housing bylaw does it to accept the condition into the rest of it understanding the motion is to include the condition in the decision if it is approved okay any further discussion on the motion okay hearing none I'll go through the rle here Eric yes Jim yes Steve yes Wayne yes Laura yes Allan yes and I will vote Yes as well so that is that condition is something that if approved the board would include as part of its as part of its decision um that's applicable to special permit right not the site plan um yes it's a special permit condition okay good yeah because it talks about the special permit granting Authority and all that other fun stuff okay the only other condition that that I think that we had questioned about was if we wanted to look at the commercial uses and the differentiation between like a hotel and multif family and whether we have the definitions even to talk about it which I'm going to guess that we probably don't but that's a whole other discussion with everything's so well written I find it hard to believe uh sorry sarcasm comes natural that as it should no I uh no it's um I know we looked at a lot of this when we were looking at the rooming house discussion in terms of the definition is rooming house versus tour and tourists are the same thing right I don't know what hotel was right so I think it's just generally that hotels tourist housing lodging is only allowed to stay for 2 weeks I think like 14 days yeah we also have a u like an Airbnb bylaw um which has its own set of regulations that people do need to come before the board for so that's not something that would necessarily imply um so if we have um a good I'm not seeing as I go through the bylaws here a good different delineation between multif family and kind of a hotel kind of the state has the definition really yeah the state defines lodging and hotels I'll just go through the definitions here just for fun there's nothing that's coming up for a definition of a hotel it's just whether or not it's permitted in the individual so Paul if you want just pull up what multif family dwelling says there because I see that you have it on screen so I'm cheating by cribbing off of your your screen there so again this is our definition of multif family dwelling a building such as an apartment house pay three or more dwelling units with independent cooking and sleeping facilities um we have a definition for family though but we don't necessarily say that so it needs to be used by a family and then the definition of the family would follow that yes but I don't think that that would necessarily um yeah the applicant stated they'd be open to saying that rental term should be longer than 30 days if we wanted to include that one we certainly can I don't think way of getting around it I don't think it really meets the I don't think it would necessarily do anything to deter the state from looking at it if they wanted to but I don't think there's anything that we can do would necessarily do that either I think the state's going to have to go working real hard to get to that point they're trying to limit and enforce the 9mon state you know what I mean I don't think they're looking to expand right now I think they're looking to restrict it okay so if there's nothing we're going to add for that condition we can cross it off um is there anything further that we wanted to discuss in terms of conditions or other factors related to this project prior to moving forward with the vote okay so would anybody like to make a motion I would say we would take take the special permits first and the site plans second potentially um motion to approve special permit number 19928 and special permit number 19935 with standard and special conditions as just discussed second did you do the site plan though or the special permits just special permits special the motion was for both special permits as a unit okay with conditions standard conditions and additional conditions as discussed yes and the second was Wayne is that correct y okay is there any further discussion on the motion the motion is to the affirmative okay hearing no additional discussion I will go through the role for a vote as a special permit this requires a five vote super majority Eric yes Jim no Steve no Wayne No Laura yes Alan yes and I will vote yes that is four to three against so the special permit is not granted take would you like take anybody like to take any additional action on the site plans themselves we ran into this the last time or whether we needed to we did did we move we did do site plan action on cond motion to approve site plan number 201 one0 and 201103 with standard and special conditions as discussed second thank you Laura for the motion and Eric for the second Paul were you going to say something there just when we're done with the vote we going to talk about the reasons yeah thank you okay so we have a motion and a second again to approve the site plan with conditions as discussed as well as standard conditions any further discussion on that motion okay Eric yes Jim no Steve no Wayne No Laura yes alen yes and I will vote Yes as well that is four to three of the same uh votes okay normally I know in other past sessions we've had the decision and we've come back and we've refined some of the wording around our reasons for the decision um as this is our final meeting before the election I do want to make sure that we have the that anybody who wants to has the opportunity to kind of stay any of the reasons that they'd like to share for the denial at this time we do not have to issue the decision at this point uh but anything that we would like to share in terms of reasons to include on this initial draft while we are in an open session I invite everybody to to say so I can share mine uh twofold mainly the ab butter impact and then two that the town wanted this developed as vill commercial and whereas if if they were to come in and build by right that's fine that's what the town voted on that was their motivation and desire this being by special permit and I see so many of Butters negatively impa impacted I didn't see the good out weighing the negative same I see the impact from the abutters as the number one reason we haven't had anybody stand up and recommend that we do this we've had more people recommend we don't do this and I'm an elected representative I got to represent the people that stand here and tell me what to do but overall is it generally not socially desirable okay any additional comments that we wanted to add at this point we will still have the opportunity to review the decision prior to filing with the clerk but just because of the timing as it relates to election I want to make sure that if there are any aspects of this denial that we want to discuss tonight that we have the opportunity to do so I've got something not specific to that conditions but I think we got to put down in the near future to have a discussion about standards for denying a site plan review um which are completely different than denying a special permit um I just think we need to review those in the near future thank you Alan anything further that we wanted to add at this point for the decision it is although with conservation's agreement on it uh I still think it's awfully close to the wetlands it's right up against the 25t marker which is going to cause an impact okay okay um so Paul and Brian we can work on the formatting decision and um I think it still makes sense to bring it back to the board in the next session even if we have some turnover before we file it okay especially given the amount of time that we put into it just to make sure that we have everything that we want in there right okay okay um other items on our agenda this evening we did have two sets of minutes that we share um did anybody have any specific comments edits updates to those that were shared um I will add if you do not feel comfortable voting on those minutes please say so I'm going to say I didn't even read them I didn't even see them um if you guys want to I didn't see them I check my email Conant I see them they were on the initial U email with the agenda um given that we have two two members who didn't feel that they read them I think maybe it makes sense just to put those up for our next session um and I saw that you finally get some help in putting some of those together the font changed so okay um in terms of additional planning board business and policies I do want to say that we do have an election coming up but we do have two members who um are not on the ballot to return with us so I just want to say thank you to Wayne and Allen we have certificates of appreciation for your service to the town Alan I've started a writing campaign in your honor Alan I'll send this to you in the email just kidding that's fine Jim I don't think you're the only one um but but but I will say I'm not going to leave you guys hanging I don't know anyone running if there's an open seat I'm going gladly take an appointment for a year and go that road you've got my vote vote for Allan Wayne I wouldn't torture you like that old okay so now that I've actually signed it there we go there we go failure on my part in that respect that I'll give you 50 cents you might get a coup of coffee somewhere for 50 that was a joke I will say we had a number of applicants who thanked us all for what we do here this evening I think it's great thank all of you for what you do uh we will be I will see everybody at town meeting I'll probably see you before uh our next meeting is May 7th 7th if you want to schedule anything after I know we're still waiting for elections but do we have applications that we need to notice we do yes okay so we have May the 7th and two weeks from that would be May the 1 correct that's not Memorial Day no the Monday after so I would s so I would suggest that the 21st would be our next meeting unless anybody has any conflicts or objections what was the DAT I'm sorry may we have May the 7th which is our next one and may the 21st will be the next one of we proposing yep and do we need to notice anything in June yet or no do we need to do another one schedule out I think we should schedule out in the end of June okay um um I know last year Tim wanted to wait for any members that's that's the only true that's what I'm trying to manage is if we if we have things we need to notice and we need to have dates then that's one thing if we what's what's our second meeting the 21st the 21st so we should be okay for that okay okay okay so we'll proceed with setting additional meeting agendas following the elections when we have at least one new member and we'll move forward with potential appointments after that fact unless uh we get a whole lot of rins for somebody okay might commit voter fraud just kidding just kid okay uh is there anything else that be wanted to discuss in tonight's Open Session motion to adjourn second I was going to say Wayne do you want to make the motion oh sorry ahead it I resend my motion move to a Jour second okay we have a motion and a second thank you Wayne and Jim during no further discussion Eric yes Jim yes Steve yes way that was good that was good okay luck