##VIDEO ID:BGvT-56ZKvk## e e hey Jeff Michael can you hear me I can great thanks Steve Tom Mark hi Nathan is in the process of joining us it just says joining so Mark we missed you I you you you you you muted how's that there he is did you miss us as well yeah I said I thought about running but I'm not actually a town you know live in town so you could just buy your house and then You' be all set yeah well actually I can move into one of my seven units I suppose yeah it's just an excuse that you don't here I love I love the l i you know every time I show that parcel I think what am I doing you know it's a beautiful it's a absolutely beautiful piece you know and then I'll walk the person go oh I love this you know I'm like me too what am I doing yeah can't have you can't you know you can't live in well actually I just bought a house in Spain so I guess I can live in two places anyway wow nice yeah now we in Spain um it's on the coast of town called alante which is about 370,000 people it's got all the beautiful architecture and I about 20 minutes outside the main portion of the city so I'm not right in I'm realizing how much of a country boy I am when I buy a 10th floor Penthouse and I'm like 10 floors you know it's up there but the view is beautiful I haven't been there since I purchased it back in July so I'm G to take off in h January till March there's a lot of work involved trying to get ready to go on a trip like that though it's just amazing I still own some real estate as you know so it takes takes a little bit to get it done how's everybody else on the board doing good good evening everyone thanks for your patience and getting this started tonight I see we do have a quorum so I will uh call the this meeting on the shury planing board to order and uh I know that the meeting is being recorded I also uh designate Tom to sit in as a full member Tom Seer and uh we'll start out with uh public comment anyone want to make public comment how about a private C no can do Robert welcome thank you sir am late well it turns out uh I was late too so you didn't miss anything except uh public comment and uh nobody wanted to say anything except uh Steve wanted to make a private comment but I said well we can't do that inside jokes are allowed but not private comments right um um landowner education and guidance I don't think that we have anyone here for that as of now um all right so next on the agenda is going to be uh Mark uh Whitman with his special permit and uh so we have this question about the uh conservation restriction and Mark before you even uh get started I I'm curious as to whether anyone on the board has much of a so he's been working with the Conservation Commission he's reached out to me us over the inum and um so there's a condition in the special permit that says that he will submit to us for approval conservation restriction there's a similarly worded condition that states that you know no building permit will be issued unless there's a a conservation restriction that's signed by the I believe it's I don't know if that's Secretary of State and uh meets the you know meets the standards of uh Mass General law right um so what I my question is is do we really care much um you know what's going on with the restriction and we just want to kind of like see hey you know uh we we more or less want to essentially endorse that the he does have a proper conservation restriction that meets the um that signed by the uh appropriate authorities in the state and you know meets the statute or do we want to have a look at it before he goes to get that approved and then give our blessing at that point uh does anyone have you any idea about this I [Music] do no I I mean I think looking at I mean I'm generally speaking I don't have concerns I mean it seems like looking at the special permit um where hold on I just had it up here a minute ago where did it go that's anyway um it just do you have it can you share it Nathan the word um I I can share yeah do you uh I had it on my screen but I know I can't find it I was just gonna say something about it yeah um I can get it up in a second I'm just gonna take oh here I got it I got it hold on I think this I think this is the right one uh I've got I I actually actually I know I've got the uh I pulled it down from what was recorded so I hope that's uh you you got it all right so okay that's probably make it much smaller and then we can maybe get it all but it's I was going to just comment on this part uh that it would so the ca is conservation analysis and which I presume is the precursor to the conservation restriction um and just that it had the appropriate level of detail under consideration you know and locates the resources of concern is this is that sort of this is a question or is it well that's that's one of our findings and that's based on the uh report whatever document was submitted with along with all the stuff here they are sorry that's okay yeah so it's uh right here right go back up to number seven yeah and this is this is actually a a draft I believe so yeah I don't think it's changed very much but uh so I can look at mine before you stop sharing and I'll tell you if uh okay yeah um yeah so that that's about the same right the African sh within two years of issuance of this decision submit to the planning board for their consideration and approval a conservation restriction and compliance with mgl chapter 184 sections 33 through uh 31 through 33 for all and on the parcel outside of the building lot 14.3 plus or minus Acres [Music] and then number nine brings you to the to what was submitted yeah yeah I think my only comment sort of question is just If all we're just trying to figure out if it complies with you know mg 184 section 31- 33 which I would assume the concom is aware of since they do these things um so I I don't think there's much substance that we have to the ability to comment on just to make sure that it's actually doing what it's supposed to do um so that's sort of a question I don't know if you've talked to to Beth at all Nathan I haven't talked to Beth um well I guess you know so Mark why don't you talk to us a little bit and tell us where you're at in the process with the Conservation Commission and what you want from us tonight absolutely so uh my understanding and you have it perfectly on the screen here is that uh number nine brings us to The Next Step which is until such time as a forceed conservation restriction is approved by the secretary of the eoea the conservation area shall be subject to the draft conservation restriction document dat 815 2016 attached here to is exhibit B so that's um that's this big thing that big thing but you know it's like 15 pages long 20 pages long and it um is a document that was uh created by my engineers at the time and then submitted to the board and um obviously made a part a portion of this approval so it's I've got a few questions in here that I'd like to go through with you guys and again I think that what you just said is answering most of it is that and what I had what I had written to you folks um in one of the emails is that I think that the from what I'm getting from this the intent was to be able to make sure it meets the requ requirements of Master law 184 sections 31 through 33 and if it does then whoever the holder of the Restriction is is going to implement um I don't want to say have their will but they're going to discuss with me what they believe how this thing should should work where there are areas that have some flexibility um one that came up in our conversations between myself and the Conservation Commission was that um there's a couple different ways to go I could actually give the land to the Conservation Commission along with the restriction and then um the land is as I understand taking off the tax roles and um they pretty much are going to discuss or decide how it's going to be handled the other which is my choice is to keep the 14 acres plus the 4 acre building envelope in my ownership paying taxes on all 18 Acres instead of on just the four acres and and um anybody buying from me would have the same and then my interest in that case because of paying the taxes would be to keep the conservation area restricted to the um the dis the um the homeowner or the owner of the property making decisions as to who has access to it and the concom agreed that it made sense this is a the way this thing is written this draft is very restrictive I mean it says no new Walking path paths no um nothing I mean you really can you can walk where the walking paths are you can go out and look at Birds um but it's it's basically hands off on the conservation land um and I don't see a lot of flexibility in that in the U in the draft that was written I'd like to have a little flexibility in there to be able to have people be able to create additional paths and things of that fashion um but the Conservation Commission and I have met twice now and we had a walkabout also on the land and they made some good comments but the biggest one was that they were um interested in doing this they think as the Conservation Commission for the town of shoot spr it's sort of their obligation to be able to help land owners with this sort of thing in to be able to help land be uh restricted and conserved so they want to make sure that there there's some sort of renumeration so that that it's not coming out of the town's Pockets we talked about some sort of escro amount that I would put up and uh if they had to hire someone from outside the Conservation Commission to walk the boundaries once a year to make sure there hasn't been any encroachment that uh there was money there to pay for that at the same time um I suggested why shouldn't the Conservation Commission uh get paid as you know when you do a perk you pay the town for doing the perk when you do a lot of things you have to pay a fee to have them done so if the conservation commission's actually going to do the Walkabout once a year and check the boundaries and make sure nothing is being disturbed they should get a feed for doing that so I don't have a problem that coming out of that escrow amount that we're discussing the other that we um that they had asked for which I thought was something I should have thought of ahead of time is that um they want to have all the property boundary lines or excuse me boundary Corners um pinned and staked now all the boundary exterior boundary had been uh pinned years ago so I sent my surveyor out and he staked all the exterior boundary lines and we we put ribbons on each one of the stakes so they can be seen by the Conservation Commission anybody else that wants to see them and then um we also pinned the approved for plus or minus acre building envelope for lack of a better term um and put the pins and then Stakes at the pins so that you can see all the areas um of the boundary of that um building envelope and what that does for the Conservation Commission as they explain is that they can then see easily if the owner is encroaching the owner of of the building envelope has encroached into the conservation area or if a neighbor uh which I hadn't thought of uh is encroaching on the exterior um uh boundary of the conservation restriction area so I thought it was a good move I was very fortunate that I was able to get a surveyor out there in less than a week um I think I'm running out of favors but that was a good one and um he got the whole actually got 30 yellow jacket stings but he actually got it done so um it is all staked out and um ribbons are on the Stak so anyone wants to go over and take a look they can they can see where that building envelope is now uh that'll help with the sale of it as well lets people know where they can and can't uh build so we're moving along um I'm supplying them with what they ask for as quickly as I can and uh they are the first to bite you know I haven't had any success with the nonprofits I've gone towards so I think it makes sense to continue to move forward with the Conservation Commission they've asked they haven't asked for anything that I thought was outrageous I mean the they wanted $5,000 for the esro and I figure it's a you know it's a one hour Trek around even at 125 or 200 bucks an hour seemed five sounds a little high so we're going to work on that number um and that was just one member who had suggested the five grand because he had seen something for uh I think a a restriction down toward the Boston area so I think prices are a little higher there but we'll work through the numbers to make sure there's Nest grow and uh and make sure there's always money in that account to make sure they can do what they have to do over there so the only questions that I had and I think that you've already answered it that I'll work it out with the Conservation Commission as long as we're staying within that Mass General law um this um draft that was presented and approved by you guys uh will be what we'll use and then we'll if anywhere where there's um a point point on here that hasn't been very you know hasn't been um solidified the Conservation Commission I work it through and then once that's finish they sign the um the restriction and then I think it goes to the select board next or to you guys next and then the select board and then to the Secretary of State yeah I I think I was I was going to reshare this I'm just having a problem with it I think it comes to us um let just get this back on the screen and see if I think you oncom signature on it so that you can see that it's a yeah dumb deal there and then you guys have to give a blessing yeah so I think in seven the way I'm reading it every is that um it's your approval of the conservation restriction so I think you could probably move forward finalize it with them and then when it goes from the draft to the restriction we just approve it but I I don't I don't think it goes to the select board at all that's that's my read of that's my read of seven I don't know if anyone else has a different opinion or if it goes well that may be um you know the select board step could be uh legitimate and needed um and it's just outside the purview of this permit that's true in terms of you know just generally conservation restriction you know the select board may need to approve it because it's the town of shutesbury essenti you potentially uh acquiring land or at the very least acquiring a lean on land right so it's uh they may have a process in place where they do it did did the Conservation Commission talk about the select board needing to approve it Mark they didn't the engineers U draft document has a page in there for the select board signatures I didn't know if that was um an optional thing and they put it in to make sure if you needed it was there uh but there is one for the I know the secretary of state has to sign it or the Secretary of environment has to sign it it's in the permit so at least has to go there so my thought was it should go to wherever it's has to go to and then it should be presented to you guys fully done so that you're looking at it showing that these um entities have said it meets Mass General law so it's not on you to try and figure out whether that's the case or not and you're basically looking at going okay um they've signed off it meets Mass General law then it's our requirement to sign it and uh we are looking oh bless you we're just over a year since I received the final approval and uh I will be gone for three months so my hope is that I can work with the Conservation Commission to get um their I'd love to get their uh approval work out a document with them you know through this draft that they're happy with have them sign and then I can go through the next uh steps by zoom while I'm out of town and hopefully by the time I get back or soon after I return in March or early April um I can I can um have gone through the steps and hopefully it's in front of the Secretary of environment I'm told it takes months to get through the Secretary of environment and I don't have any connections at the town or at at the state level anymore so um it's not going to happen as fast as the surveyor so I'm I'm hoping I can figure out some way to maybe get one one of our local congressmen or Senators to help push it through at the state level but um yeah I haven't done any donations lately that's G to happen U but I think that's the plan see if I can get the Conservation Commission online in the next couple of three months before I take off um get them signed and then put it through the next process whether it has to go to select Bard number we'll figure that out and then um it'll go on from there um so I think you're what you've said makes a lot of sense to me that uh I'll work out there's only like three items in there that um are there's any leniency whatsoever one way or the other so I'll work those out with the Conservation Commission and then uh once we get all the signatures come back to you folks and and uh present the the finished document that sounds reasonable right um you know it seems to me that uh you know it's obvious that uh you may uh encounter some pretty serious delays at the state level yeah so having this Clause of you know coming to us and you know we say yeah it's uh we approve it it's kind of like a intermediate step that just kind of says hey you know I've I've done what I need to do it's with the state you know we you know we've I've done everything I can to ensure that it's in compliance and you know we can kind of uh give a nod and um you know that be great right I think that's the idea yeah that sounds that sounds very fair and helpful because again you know I thought that this was something I would leave for the buyer you know the property because they could choose their own uh nonprofit or whoever they wanted to hold the restriction and then as I started dwelling delve into this thing I realized how complex it was and timec consuming so I don't have the engineers that I us use sve no longer have a a Massachusetts licensed engineer so I'm sort of on my own I've been trying to find somebody to pick this up for me and do it but um I'm getting through it you know it just takes a little extra time and I do have um a gentleman who was at s SP two of them uh who I've been able to talk to to be able to help me walk through this and now with the Conservation Commission almost on board I think we'll get there in time but like you said if we've got it all done concom signed off on it says they feel it meets mass light4 18431 and 33 or 31 through3 three then you guys can take a look at it say yes we're telling you we're on board you're all set you met your requirements and now let's just wait until the State Signs off on it that would be great and Mark I would just say you can't have total fun in Spain so you got to do a little work somehow I'm uh I feel a little embarrassed even bringing it up and I'm I'm a I'm a bluecollar kid from Greenfield that um a lot of people work a lot harder than I've worked or as hard as I've worked many have most haven't made the mistakes in life I've made but um you know I feel very fortunate I really do there's not a day that goes by that I don't think how lucky I am to be able to afford a nice house here and and have something um where I love being I've been there five times in four years now so uh yeah I got to work a little bit while I'm there I'll I'll suffer through it all right well you know eat some cheese and you know whatever other good stuff they have over there too I just think of like uh like arnous heaving way is always talking about eating cheese that might have gelato yeah all of it over there but every time I go I actually um I eat really well in other words you know things I enjoy like pastries and zelato and I lose 5 to 10 pounds because you're walking everywhere and this the I won't get into the food is not like it is here you know it's it doesn't have all the poisons that we have in a lot of our processed food they even with fats they only allow 2% um trans fat inside of anything that that you're purchasing so you can't get any more than 2% of the fat as trans fat you know they don't allow the dyes and the colors and all the rest of the stuff that can cause problems and I just uh yeah I feel healthier when I'm over there I might have something to do laying around in the sun you know on the ocean too so anyway I I will um if I have any questions prior to leaving uh I'll give you a holler but I think we're on on good ground now and uh next next stop I'll I'll send Conservation Commission a uh letter to see where where they want to go next and I will copy you guys if it's okay on the letter that's fine yeah you know we we look forward to uh seeing some uh some documents I look forward to supplying them great I appreciate your time yeah you have to mark you have to include a picture of your house too your new house in Spain oh I'll do a whole video for you right now but but uh you know maybe we'll uh you know if uh yeah depending on how quick everything goes maybe we'll see you uh on a zoom call from Spain or whatever you have to early in the morning it's like aead it'll be in the middle of the night that's not going to work yeah it's it's six hours difference yeah but that's all right but it's four bedrooms over there so it's family friendly help yourselves I'll keep that mind as a I'm sorry call you up call you up never happens didn't say that I'm here with my wife and kids yeah all right thanks Mark look look forward to hearing from you again and best of luck finalizing that with the concom and uh you know assuming that goes well then later on with the state so sounds great thanks again okay next on our agenda we have the minutes from 7824 um do I hear a motion to approve those minutes I'll move to approve proove the minutes of July 8th 2024 do I hear a second second thank you Jeff any discussion I know it's been a while just a quick um typo in my name I just remembered that in the attendance list it's siie not SEI but not a big deal either way well you know Michael's got to dish it out a little bit for all times that somebody didn't capitalize the uh D yeah spelling is a good thing for your last name yeah you can probably see where I mean if you look at it yeah Michael are you sure your name is spelled quickly on your Zoom window on my zoom window yeah okay it's the mail that's the issue okay um so I will uh I'll make that little tweak anything else from anyone all right um I'll call the rooll Raymond hi Weston hi wrestler hi sefor hi with an ie hi I'm okay most passes unanimously that's great I uh you know I got a couple other minutes like that where I said I'll make a couple tweaks and then uh I got to go back and find those too and currently we don't have a a new minute taker right yeah currently we don't I was uh yeah you know it seems like there's a few little changes going on in town but uh we may have a new land use before too long but share updates later on in the agenda so okay um all right so I'm just GNA leave that up all right um zoning act changes as they pertain to shutesbury zoning bylaw as you may have seen in a flurry of emails uh you know they they updated the zoning Act it's the uh affordable housing act I want to say the Affordable Care Act but it's the affordable housing act and uh you know it affects accessory uh dwelling units the main thing is is it says he can't have restrictions on uh owner occupancy I believe right uh there may be a few other tweaks uh Michael sent out some stuff um and uh I think he's he's done a little bit little bit more digging on this than I have um but it's uh why you why don't you go ahead Michael and uh you walk us through what you have so far so I haven't I haven't done any rewriting yet I most I what I told Nathan I want to do is just sort of share this with everybody and then if everyone's good I can do a draft for next meeting but um so as he said and you guys probably saw you know in the the law change and the the two things are what I'm I'm sharing here is the the Now official definition and so there's things in the law that we have to change but as an example um under number two it says in terms of the gross floor area um 900 feet um or half the gross area ours is currently 800 feet so that's an example where we would have to change it um and then one of the other ones it's very OB obious if scrolling down to this this next part um is that you can have restrictions on owner occupancy either in the principal dwelling or the accessible dwelling we have it that owner has to be in one of the two units so you know and then there's another part about parking which is down here um which I have to look at how we would word it um but right now we require a total of three presuming to two for the primary one for the accessory so you know there's there's some tweaks um so this is this is to share um what it is and then let me just quickly uh where' it go uh oh there it is okay hold on okay um can you guys see this one okay yeah this this I put together I pulled from all the places in our zoning by where it references um accessible dwelling units so this part should be fine because you can still do a site plan review and currently we require site plan review by the zba um the dimensions are basically the same but there's a reference here about accessory Apartments um and then this really generally does not entertained but it it's uh 44-2 is basically where it talks about adus and what the way it is um written now is that all the conditions 1 through 10 have to be in compliance in order to get approved in town um so you have to have 45 square feet um it has to comply with um setbacks ETC number three is what we'd have to change because it talks about owner occupancy um curb Cuts I think are probably okay as long as we're compliant with the with the parking spaces number six it says you'll see it says three uh off street parking spaces and I just got to figure that out in terms of making sure that we're like we're talking about requiring one for the 8 year regardless of how many years in the pr AR I think we just have to change the language a little bit um this is the 800 square ft that now has to be at least 900 square ft and access is fine um and it can be in external places like Barnes and garages and stuff um so there's not that much Ashley Ashley's here um so there's not that any changes that have to get made I the one thing I'll say is that what the law says is as long as you're complying with the new changes you can have additional restrictions so as an example um in hours and if you ended up reading the conoy one that Jeff said you know there's a requirement that an accessory uh dwelling unit if it's a separate dwelling has to sort of fit into the architecture of the area and so like that's something that's not we can add it it's not the law doesn't say you can't do that we just have to be able to sort of comply with the other stuff so I'll answer questions as much as I know but I haven't dug in as much as I usually have because I what I wanted to do is say are you guys fine with me based on this working on a draft and sending it out before the next meeting and then we can sort of talk about if there are things we want to add or change because we can be more expansive than the law um like we can let's see how's this work instead of the 900 square feet minimum we could could make it it has to be 800 feet or keep it at 800 feet because then 900 feet would comply so we can be more generous than the law if we want to but there's decisions we could make but um wait don't we have it 00 the law is 900 yeah so it has to be he said minimum I think he meant maximum yeah anyway it's a bad example but basically the the idea is there's things that the law points out in terms of the size and the parking and the owner occupy that we definitely have to change some things for there's other things in there that we currently have that we can discuss if we want to keep them um so I think what I would do is write something up that's pretty straightforward you know make the changes keep what we have send it out and then we can have a discussion about um what we want to tweak Nathan had asked me um about the timing of this and so the law doesn't go in effect until February 2025 presumably we won't have annual town meeting till April or May and reading what Jeff Lacy had written to us which I shared he there's a webinar that he got he watched that we weren't able to watch um even if we haven't accepted the bylaw yet and updated our bylaw starting February 2025 we have to comply so it's not like we'll be out of compliance if someone says I want to do an Adu in March whatever the law is we have to do it's just that um when we get around to doing it we can then approve it and it'll be part of our bylaws so we won't be out we'll never be out of compliance it just won't be that our bylaws will be updated if that makes sense Le that's my understanding of it yeah so you know if uh if we don't obviously we're not going to be able to get this in for special town meeting in November um so as a result um we'll get this done for annual town meeting and there's going to be a period between February 2nd when this goes to effect and whenever we hopefully get the uh residents of shur to pass this in town meeting and if that H if we if we get applications at that time the zba will uh be obligated to um to wave portions of the shb bylaw that don't comply with state law if you have a question if you're GNA go off and um do a draft that comp where our zoning bylaws comply with this new state statute if what I would ask and anyone else is welcome to weigh in is to add add things that you think we might want to consider and just make them in red or a color so they're new you know they're new items that we can we'll be ready to discuss in the next meeting sure well let me ask you a question back um is the the easiest way would be just to make the changes so that we're in compliance and we keep the stuff that's there that's not out of compliance so that would be the straightforward stuff would it be helpful as I dig into this and look at what other towns have done if there's good ideas that we might want to consider should I either write them in and do the red notation or make footnotes or something I mean I think pointing out things that we might want to consider um but would you would you you prefer I I write them in and just highlight them or just sort of list them somewhere no I I well I'll I'll answer myself I think it's a little more streamlined if you just put them in now identify the ones that are new and as we read through it we can then discuss it which if we want to you know adopt some of those new ones or not cool other people thought on that I I I I go along with Steve and appreciate your doing what you do thank you yeah does anyone else have any ideas about what they would want to uh weak if we're in here anyway I mean this kind of aligns with what we've been talking about for the last on and off of the last year or so Steve raising your I have anything off the top of my head I I will say that uh several oh a few years ago maybe four or five years ago it came up in the planning board whether we wanted to change our minimum square footage for accessory housing from 800 to 1,000 feet and personally I was against that my first house in shutesbury was 750 fet and two Floors Plus a drylight stone foundation and we had myself my wife and a child and the business going out of that house um long way it's a long way of saying I think 900 if that's State Statute is fine I wouldn't suggest going beyond that above that um anyone else I I would say if people have ideas you know in the next couple of weeks just email me because I I I would agree with Nathan like when you've had this conversations about how to make housing more accessible I mean I think the change in the law is part of the bigger State effort of how do you create more housing for people um and so this is one way to do it and if there's you know there I mean what's interesting just as a footnote I think when I looked at this about two years ago when we started the you know the discussion about small houses and stuff there were under 50 maybe in the around 30 communities that allowed accessory dwelling units so this is a huge shift because all these communities that didn't allow them now have to and we were in the minority of communities where we already allowed them so we're doing tweaking where I think it's you know it's a dramatic thing but if there's things that we can tweak to make it easier for people um and I don't I don't know what they are yet but I I invite every anyone to email me if you have ideas yeah well the good thing is is that uh you know if we're not rushing to get this in for November then we're just like all right we'll deal with a little bit of a gap that we can uh take a little bit of time uh you know it's good it's good to be getting on this you know now in October as opposed to you know some of the stuff we've been kind of at this point in like you know February or something like that right so um I I wanted to make a brief comment um I actually talked to someone who has a small house in South Deerfield and I said well what are the rigs in South Deerfield she said um they're really unclear and it seems to be fine as long as a neighbor doesn't complain if a neighbor complains we have to get rid of it and so far no one's complaining so it's it's much better for everybody involved to have clear rigs so um my friend actually the daughter of my friend doesn't have to live in a situation where she could be forced to move because of a a neighbor not wanting her there so thank you Michael sure I guess I'm just uh wondering without thinking about it too much whether this would be an opportunity to uh bring in a byw of with regard to tiny homes that someone might want to have an accessory dwelling unit that is in the nature of a tiny home which would be a lot more affordable whether or not this would be an opportunity to do that I so I think you know the way the accessory draw unit definition is which we already had but you know it can be part of an existing primary dwelling or it can be separate so the one thing that Jeff Lacy had wrote In His email to us as a suggestion was I I think the distance between the primary and a a separate accessory dwelling unit is 75 ft Jeff was suggesting you know making it like a 100 so one way to do that Robert is not necessarily to call out special tiny home but to sort of maybe expand the distance so that you know and that's something we can discuss in the group but like how far from the primary dwelling should an accessory dwelling unit be um without um it's still you know I mean and this is part of the compliance with the re the rest of the setbacks so if you're on two acres and say we allow 200 ft from the primary dwelling you know as long as it's in the setbacks it's not really encroaching on any neighbors because it's still within the setback so that might that might be more accommodating for people you know I I don't know the answer but I can think there's probably some of those things where because if you have a separate dwelling unit it's got to be a home unto itself like it has to have a bathroom it has to have kitchen all that kind of stuff um I'm not quite sure after looking at it you know last year the year before what differentiates a tiny home from an accessory dwelling unit except for probably the size um is my sense um but think you should look back at what you know you and I sort of did research on if there's something pops let me know okay yeah you know I think the you know the tiny housing is um you also going to have to you know it's an issue of conforming with uh the Board of Health regulations pertaining to septic and the well um I don't know what about a tiny house would fall out of Conformity with the existing bylaw of uh except uh I do believe don't we have uh some language in our current zoning bylaw that uh that pertains to um that you know if you're doing it like an existing uh building or something it has to be like a like an existing barn or something if it's a if it's a detached building it needs to be something that was existing or uh yeah there's stuff about trailers and mobile homes yeah that's the big thing it's pretty restrictive it's it's um yeah I mean I'm sure you guys know it like you can't can't occupy it for more than 14 days yeah that that is the big difference I think Ashley is right is that like you know a lot of tiny houses are built not on foundations they're intended to be mobile and so if you have wheels on something and it's not on a foundation then it becomes a mobile home and you know I mean one thing we could look at is what the definition of a mobile home is for shury what's the difference between a mobile home and a tiny home yeah well that's what I'm saying so if we Define a m home it could be different from a tiny home I I have no idea what how we would differentiate that um maybe we could allow one mobile home huh as long as it's mainlined into the uh septic system and uh properly wired and U you know what have you right or is that well I think it's worth the conversation my my hunch is that who you know way back because I think it just got adopted forward when we did we did the bylaws that there was a desire not to create um mobile home parks mobile home parks are one thing but you could limit it to one right so it's kind of like you you know I think generally people aren't going to want to like stick a mobile home on their property but it's uh the idea is you know if someone is uh you know retired on a fixed income and they want to be able to uh you know bring in some some Revenue they can set up their mobile home and rent it out or uh you know maybe if uh some people here have some some folks that are uh some their parents are aging uh somewhere and rather than sticking them in a a home somewhere they want to stick them in a trailer in their yard you know it's uh that's the idea there right you know it's a uh obviously you know I mean that can be uh you know that you know where you had one house before maybe you have uh you have one house and a mobile home and it's not someone's parents or someone's kids uh that they're bringing back to live close with them it's just a you know I don't know other people but it's uh I mean yeah it's if um if uh shutesbury approved um or adopted appendix Q which is the international cold for tiny homes um an accessory dwelling unit could be something that would be 400 square feet and would have special U requirements which would be modified from the general housing requirements uh and I believe Massachusetts has adopted appendix q and it's subject to each Town deciding whether or not they want to uh approve having tiny homes in there in in their municipality does appendix Q change regulations around septic um no the pendix Q mainly is focused on the different requirements as far as access as far as um ceiling height um okay bedroom dimensions that kind of thing yeah it's building code stuff if I'm not mistaken tiny homes do need to be on a foundation not on Wheels that's one of the differences I'm pretty sure no they could be either a lot of them when you look Steve a lot of them are actually on Wheels um so I think that would be up to us to say whether we want them on a foundation or Wheels like in our definition like that's something we could discuss um and I mean the other thing about tiny home is that it could be a primary or an accessory dwelling unit I mean I think based on our private conversation my gut is that having it be accessory makes it more affordable because if you're going to do all the cost of septic and water for a primary residence and you might as well have more square footage but as an accessory dwelling unit it seems like presumably there's a little bit lower costs because you're adding on well what what happens right now with with shutesbury zoning bylaws if somebody wants to build just a tiny home on a lot that is conform it conforms with the other zoning bylaws you know um they can do that as you know yeah we just don't say the words in the bylaws but there's nothing that prohibits it right correct yeah as as folks have said before they still have to conform with Title 5 you know board of health issues as far as septic and that you know no I think I think that's true and I'm not Rob Robert are you certain that there is actually any you know obligation or or need for a town to adopt uh attachment que for it to be in effect like I feel like the the state building code is just you you know I think I feel like it's uh applicable to our bylaw as amended right yeah and I don't know Robert I'm not I I remember you thinking that the state adopted it but I think you pointed out that they they got close but they didn't which I have to go back and look it's it was confusing yes yeah yeah yeah but it's a good guideline and it's it's an international the guidelines so I mean it is the starting point in terms of if we wanted to go there we could reference it and save us ourselves a lot of time and effort to say if if a tiny house is going to be allowed it has to comply with the specifications blah blah blah um yeah yeah we could do it independently of whatever the state did yeah yeah you could just explicitly call it out as an allowed use right say again have we circulated appendix Q amongst the planning board members I'll be pleased to send it out think it was a while ago you could just send it out again that'd be fine you okay so I'm I'm I'm gathering that maybe what I will do is take a First Step at the housing thing and then we can use that as a jumping off place to to think about if we want to weave in tiny houses or something like that where we could add it um it's it seems like this is the vehicle like rather than bringing forth tiny houses to town meeting we use the change in the law and say this is where I mean just like the state did this is not about accessory dwelling units it's about affordable housing so in a similar way we could do the same thing if we wanted I like that yeah now uh I don't think there's anything in the bylaw that says what are the parking requirements for a single family dwelling but I do suspect that that probably is in the building code I I don't know if it's in the building code because it's not the building I mean it is so in our accessory dwelling unit um language C has to have three but I don't know if that's just assuming the fact that you know you'd want to have two for a primary residence but it doesn't require I don't think that's required we can look housing options um compliance with health yeah any all dwellings shall comply with regulatory requirements two off street parking spaces for each ding minute okay what what section is that except is provided in the accessory dwelling unit uh section which says you have to have three it requires two per dwelling unit right so having at least three uh complies with state law so you don't have to touch that cool okay um however it may be um you're looking at 4.4 D4 yeah yeah so I don't think we have to change it at all I don't think it makes sense to you know like you know for example if a if a house has three off street parking units and they want to do an accessory dwelling unit I don't think it makes sense for us to say all right well we actually want four right because you know you can't require more than one additional parking space so that would you know technically comply with the state law but it's uh more restrictive than we currently have on the books right so that's not well the only thing I would the the one benefit I think to calling out that an accessory drilling unit has to have at least one is that you it's conceivable that just say there's a homeowner and they create an Adu and all of a sudden their kid moves home and they need three parking lots and and so they the homeowner has three and then there's nothing for the Adu like that won't work because the Adu is required to have one so it should say and maybe maybe I'm just imagining like the way it's written now I don't know if that's open to interpretation and it's not clear enough you know what I mean it might be fine just the way it is I think you're you're not you're not wrong I'm just trying to figure out like how someone could misinterpret it says at the end of the parking thing in section 8.2 that the approving board or building inspector may require additional off- street parking spaces if such spaces are deemed necessary for safe use of the property so it may require yeah approving board or building inspector Ashley where is that that you're read it uh I well I'm on page 30 uh section 82 parking oh okay I got it yeah except in the case of accessory apartments under subsection 4.2 okay Dash two e right so that's a broad uh thing on parking applicable to any use and you know it says the minimum is two for a a dwelling right so if you have a two family house you need four spaces if you have a two family house and you get Adu attached to it then it's five spaces right I don't know if we can do an Adu with a two family house on our zoning by um anyway I was uh yeah so that seems pretty straightforward uh seems like we're good there you know Michael you'll probably think about it more and have more suggestions but um so you know we can consider uh the whether or not we want to remove the owner occupany requirement for other multif family uh dwellings um one thing I would certainly uh like to see at the very least is I noticed you know Jeff sent an email I think it might have been just to Michael and I I don't know if the whole board got that but um in the in the Conway by lot there's a uh they have owner occupancy as well uh for some of their stuff some some requirements but they also have a clause that allows you to designate a family member is like a uh I forget what they like a standin owner or you know you know something like that so essentially like you know if uh you know your son or your brother or some any family member you know is living at the residence then you're meeting the owner occupancy requirement and and not you know falling short on it which I think is a very reasonable thing to have in there which I I could have swore that we had it in our bylaw but then I got a question on it um at some point from someone that was trying to do one and and they had gone and put their house into their son's name for other purposes and then now they want to do an accessory dwelling unit but they're you know they have this conundrum where their son is the owner they're not going to be living there right uh they had other issues aside from this from what I understand but it's uh I I think I think it would be a good thing to add do that's you understand why I'm asking Michael yeah I I think I'm just looking at um guys hold on one sec um so I was just looking at the the law and what it says is um additional restrictions may be imposed by municipality including but not limited to additional size restrictions and restrictions or prohibitions on short-term rental as defined by the law um and that no municipalities should unreasonably restrict the creation or rental of an accessory dwelling unit that is not a short-term rental so it seems to me like someone could argue that requiring sort of a responsible known party to be on site in one of the units goes against the intent of the law no I'm talking about not we can't do it accessory dwelling units but but I think uh on the on the current bylaw we probably have owner occupancy uh requirements for for multif family uh dwellings like two family suplexes things like that I'm not sure but would you so what you're saying is for non adus that are that are more than a than a single family loosening them so that it's not owner occupancy but it's known responsible party occupied well yeah you know it's uh for the purpose of this B the owner shall be defined as one or more individuals residing in the dwelling who hold the title and For Whom the dwelling is the primary residence for voting and tax purposes said owner May designate a legal relative as a life tenant who may occupy the house in the owner's stead certification by affidavit shall be provided by the owner uh so that's the you know the language that is in the the Conway bylaw on that right and so adding something like that for you know anything not covered by the Adu law that we have already if we have any any uh owner o owner occupancy requirements for multifam housing that's not Adu um I would I would like to add that in at the very least yeah I just did a search I didn't see it come up anywhere so okay but I'll look I I'll see uh yeah I would be surprised if we had it for adus but not for two families but you know that just maybe the way it is so yeah not uh I mean if we don't have it we could add it well the only thing it says here I just found it says for two family 12 this is what is this four- 44-3 two family multi- dwelling units so it says for two family dwellings where any of the dwelling units are rented or leased and owner must have their principal residence in the town of shutesbury so you don't have to be on the property but you have to be a shutesbury resident to lease out a multi- multi- drilling unit interesting oh and then it actually yeah uh it actually does have owner occupancy is is the same for the next point in that for multif family dwellings where any of the dwelling units are rented or leased at least one dwelling unit must be occupied by the owner of the property um the owner must own the entire lot um yeah and in the case of a condo uh yeah so there is that requirement so you're so we would change that a life whatever it was oh yeah either either the owner occupancy or or a a life tenant right yeah okay I'll check that out thank you welcome [Music] um and you know I think uh I would encourage everyone you know if if you have the time to to try and look at this and uh brainstorm a little bit and come up with any suggestions you can think of uh either get them to Michael or or bring them to the next meeting um you know both both with respect to you know the reading of the law it's more or less straightforward but it's always good to you know make sure we're uh doing a deep reading of it and not missing anything and then you know like uh like we said this is our opportunity to uh you know do what we can for you tiny houses affordability um because it's the it's the uh I want to say flavor of the month but that's not really the vibe I'm going for it's it's uh it goes hand inand with you know what the state is doing right so it's a window of opportunity it's the window of opportunity right you know this is the moment so that's that's what I'm trying to say thank you all right I think we'll uh move on um um so we're good with that I is there anyone else that wants to be more active and working on this okay well you got it Michael thank you as always and if you need any support um effort yeah yes it is um let me know all right so I've got uh zoning act changes as they pertains to oh wait no I'm sorry zba special permit for 640 W Road um so this is a uh you know just a all right um as you know we are have not been with a land use clerk um also I think uh I think as it happened that Carrie when she was our L us clerk uh may have been the one that had access to the zba email account at any rate you know the current chair of the zbaa did not have uh access to the account and they did not have it set up like ours where emails to the account were uh you know being forwarded to all the members automatically so you they got this application and nobody received it or you know like uh you know things were kind of going through the cracks a little bit uh so I think that because there are requirements for you know the plan were to have you know so many days to review um you know typically that just fires we say nothing they move on uh but since they're under a rush I'd like to just kind of uh I does do we want to just say no we don't have any uh further comment on it is there anyone that wants to look at it more than that do we discuss this previously I can't remember that was a different one that was a different one is this the one with the um person who's wanting to move back from Tennessee is that the one we're talking about that's an accessory dwell unit that was on on lever Road by the center of town um that was a uh a different situation I see you Tom but one moment the uh the building inspector issued a permit for a a building permit for an accessory dwelling unit uh that had not received site plan review and the billing inspector's office is supposed to know that sudsbury zoning byla says that accessory dwelling as a site plan review but it was someone that was recently hired and you know slept through the cracks up there so can I make a comment about this yeah great I'm actually I know this land um and I know Russ um my understanding was that uh he's a carpenter um that he built this house with um a certain clearance and then two years after he built changed it it it um from this is my memory from um from 15 feet to 25 fet forcing him to move the garage into his backyard basically so when he originally built the house he thought he was going to be able to put it I think 15 feet from the front and now because the law changed after two years after he built the house and cited it specifically for the garage the law changed forcing him to sight the garage um into his backyard so that's my understanding of the situation I've been to the house and it's in an isolated Road and um personally I don't I haven't been in contact with Russ for many many years but um personally I don't see an issue with um him doing this considering that um this was his plan before when he cided his house and I think he built his own house too anyway anyway that's my two cents okay and uh Tom um somehow Jeff read my mind because I was at the zba meeting and I know Russ a little bit he's a neighbor like six houses away and um I would just underscore what Jeff just said it's an issue of a 10- foot difference that didn't exist at the time of construction um added to an argument for allowing this is the fact that the immediate neighbor to the north cited their house on the north side of their property such that between that structure and where this garage would be would be a very large amount relatively speaking of just kind of Woodland um so the isolation factor that Jeff talked about is really true and doesn't seem as though it would change over the 10 feet we're talking about between the 25 and the 15 foot I think it would make his it would allow him to have a backyard and we're talking about a very isolated place on his street and um considering the circumstances I would um I would allow him to do this so we like to instead of saying uh no comment we can say you know we support uh approving it well that would be my preference but I you know speaking for myself that would be my preference yeah I think that would be great I think the zba would probably approve it either way yeah yeah well I mean that's the thing I mean really you know it's U from the reading I had yeah um I agree I think from what I read in the emails it seems like it's not a a very big deal to issue a special permit in the situation if it was upsetting or problematic it would be different for other parties but it doesn't seem that way and it doesn't seem like you know the the person is doing it out of any sort of disrespect for regulations that things just changed so you um you all feel we're not sitting a I I'm fine with it but I just want to make sure we're not setting inadvertently setting a precedent that um you know when somebody else comes along that doesn't have the same rationale um allows us to deny that if if we feel that it's inappropriate that is a good point no that is a Val concern right can you guys see this yeah and again I'm not at all against this I'm I'm in agreement with everybody it's just a future you know looking forward kind of uh question no no that's a good question I guess what I would say is if we as long as we um come up with a sound what we feel is a sound rationale for this so that if in the future a decision by the planning board is challenged we have a good you know we have a we can pull out our rationale well the safest way to go based on what Steve said is not to have an opinion and if Tom's correct it'll just go forward so presumably if we're not objecting we don't have we're not saying anything therefore we're not creating precedent right and that's fine it's zba who's setting the precedent really that's true okay so should we have a motion not to have an opinion I think the conversation I would ENT I would entertain a motion uh for the the board to uhh say that I'll I'll respond to John's email and say um you know the planning board does not have any uh any comment on on this application I think Robert should make that motion I I like Na's language and endorse it that's my motion okay Michael second can I add a quick discussion Point discussion yeah um I think the zba was looking more for uh why we wouldn't then why we would so I think this is a good satisfactory way of doing that okay yeah I I mean um I yeah I I think that the uh there's a requirement to you know send to the board you know the zba has to send it to us and give us so many time so many days to review it and you know at the very least we need to just say we're not you know we we reviewed it and we're not uh you know we have no comment um so that it's like an answer and you don't have to let that clock run out that's the minimum uh so that's kind of like the direction yeah um yes okay so uh any anyone else all I'll call the RO Bressler hi Weston Raymond hi POF I Seer I Mike DEA I and I'm an I most passes unanimously I'm GNA um [Music] [Music] okay all right all right that's off good thanks for bearing with me on that I like to just get that done all right community outreach uh I miss the deadline for uh well we missed the deadline to uh get get on the newsletter for fall so I was just going to mention that and uh you know I want to I want to send something out on account of the uh zoning changes but I I I guess it's uh it may make more sense to uh kind of I'll get something together for next month and we can review it and vote on because I I don't have anything ready yet and yeah obviously it's getting pretty late here and I know we're going to going to Executive session at the end here so um just Nathan just yeah so assuming we take the path that we talked about so some version of a chang of Adu maybe being more expansive you know we have to have a public hearing before town meeting but presumably there will be a Spring Town newsletter and so you can do it right up there because you know turn out for the public hearing will probably be minimal so in preparation to sort of educate people going to town meeting that would be a better time to do it anyway yeah if that works with the timing I would be good to wait all the way to uh to the spring I I gotta you know get with some somebody in town hall and figure out when the deadlines are you know this one kind of you know was after our last meeting they sent out an email hey the deadline is October 1st so I mean I could have just you know written something up and sent it in but it was like you know uh you know so we would need to be you know having a good idea of when they're going to send it out and have it ready you know the month before so that you know we don't get the hey you know the deadlines in a couple weeks but then we don't have a planning board meeting for a month you know so but yeah I I'll do that that's I think that's a good idea um if for some reason we need to have the hearing before that uh then we'll just use town anounce again um all right so updat from chair there was a few things I had let's see um I did uh go to town hall to engage in an interview for a uh land use clerk uh a couple week weeks back um I know that so this was with uh Mato penalo and uh you know that the interview more or less went well and uh I know he went to the select board the next day or or you know whatever the next select board meeting was now I was listening to it uh a little bit earlier but it uh I didn't hear if there was a vote or not um so I don't know if if that was finalized or not I'm talking about it because I know that it was uh considered by the select board an open meeting so it's not that Parts not a secret I just didn't quite get through I I don't know if they they were also talking about an administrative secretary and it seemed like maybe they were talking about the land use Clerk and then the administrative secretary and then like going to vote on both of them after all that discussion or something I I don't know um but I just kind of uh yeah I didn't get quite uh through the whole through the whole thing and find where the vote was they they kind of went on and on a little bit so we might have one we might have one we might have one as we know but uh and then um so I don't know if anyone has been to the uh you know looked at the uh select board agenda for tomorrow oh oh can I just add they did vote Mato in and they did and Abby Hernandez as a secretary uh and they did announce it at the last concom meeting I believe but yeah it's public and you just didn't catch the right moment in the video they did vote at that meeting I I I thought they must have like but you so I mean you know not that I can bear witness to it yeah no I I was just uh this was like in between when my workday ended and uh you know signing on here and I just needed to get outside for a little bit and I was trying to look at it real quick and I was like I just got to get outside and do something like I've been in the house all day but anyway I'm glad to hear that Tom thank you um so looking at the select for um I see one of the last times on the agenda says Town Administrator transition plans news to everyone yeah yeah so that's uh lot a lot of uh a lot of changes going on seems um I saw another uh select board meeting where they apparently they were interviewing a internal candidate for Highway superintendent yeah presumably Steve resigned but oh you don't oh yeah this has been announced the highway superintendent and did resign yeah yeah so anyway um there's some uh there's some change over in town hall or or in town more broley including the highway department um so that's uh that's big news [Music] um and then uh I've had a few well so you know I've been receiving inquiries from uh Steven puffer uh down on lever Road uh that's that should be all set but he was asking about you know his property and uh his Lots he got a special permit for a shared driveway back in 2003 and he got a an anr around the in 2003 that uh broke up his Lots they still meet zoning it's just there's a shared driveway that goes from one lot and provid access to the other Lots because they're on that big slope right so um and he and he got a letter from the building inspector uh saying that it's buildable but he he was still wanted to reach out to the planning board and talk to us or you know talk to someone and I just kind of looked at it and I talked to um John Thompson who's chair of the zba and uh you know we didn't see any issues so we told him that and uh he wanted to get that in writing and I told him no and that was because it's it's kind of like you know without having an application before us we're not really GNA as a board you know weigh in on something like that right make a determination unless it's unless we have an application um I think that's generally uh the best practice there may be some exceptions to that but um anyway um that was my take on it also uh we approved an anr I want to say was back in March on Lake Drive for a Randle Smith that was like right across the street from the Jones anr we did right um and apparently he's been going into town hall and asking for his myars his plans um which uh so I don't know I've looked around haven't been able to find those so I don't know if anyone is uh by chance seen them or has uh made themselves familiar with any of our records but just an FY well have you looked in the basement in the big meeting room I have yeah oh you know I don't know I um I'm still GNA call uh Carri on that I you know so we got that email you you all would have seen that and I've called him twice left messages on his machine and and then he hasn't got back to me so maybe he found it but that was uh so that's that's it um yeah that's all I've got uh no unanticipated business as far as I know so at this point I'm G to turn it over to Michael you guys are going to get some uh yeah I'll let I'll let Michael take it away for the last item on the agenda and I'm G to uh sign off here shortly yeah thank you do so good night everyone thank you thank you all your work until next time oh I'm sorry Michael yeah yeah I'm sorry I just remember one thing before we go uh next month is another one of these uh someone stuck a holiday on the second Monday of the month again um so I would like to schedule the meeting for the first Monday of the month again in November I'm happy to say that golf ended today so nice at least I don't have that problem next month we'll see what else comes up yeah so we're meeting on Election Day Eve oh boy let uh yeah gota gotta uh don't want to be after election day not um yeah so it's November 4th um sounds good okay cool all right I'm gonna uh probably just post that before too long all right now formally okay sounds cool he Nathan so I'm gonna move uh there we go the planning board enter to Executive session for reason number three to discuss strategy with respect to litigation if an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the government's litigation position litigation specific to complaint received from Kohl's regarding the shutesbury bylaw and pure Sky not to return to open session so um anyone want to second that second okay so we'll roll call in um and just confirming everyone's in a private place where no one else can hear okay so Steve hi Robert hi Tom hi Ashley Ashley had farther to go to the door and there we go I sorry I had to ban my son okay Jeff uh I'm not sure I I was out of the room for a minute uh but no one's around okay no you just have to say I so we can go into executive session I sorry okay we are in executive session so this is relatively short um excuse me do we stop recording for the executive session oh yes thank you I you know