##VIDEO ID:1m7LtfDePWI## want to disturb it or put something Ultra Modern for instance on top of a a building of that nature um if there's no questions I I'll I'll run through the comments real quick and then just just a quick question the so is that now the main entrance for visitors for all for security purposes yes that's a good question um I'll I'll tell you what we went over with the school district obviously the school district can comment on their own protocols um but the intent would be this entrance while school is let's say at arriv Ral in the morning mornings would be open for students coming in once arrival time is done let's say those first few minutes of the day that gets locked down and now this is a secure visitor entrance so anybody coming to the school that's a visitor after those arrival and dismissal hours would have to come through this entrance good so just to clarify that would be open full access in the morning or would they still have security there to ensure that only students are coming in so they the way that their protocols they dictated to us was that they would make sure students are only coming in I don't know if the door is going to be manned before that um but but it will be uh at least the camera and have entrances going into the building at that point after it's locked down during the day so they know who's coming into the building okay they do have an SRO I know station right here right now doing that same Duty so yes correct correct and that's on so what you're looking for is the ground floor level this is like half sunken into a basement over here first level they would come into the building and then go into to the main office and guidance would just flipflop in the interior so just the the formal comments on that application were um that the applicant should provide testimony regarding the intended purpose of the security so I think we've covered that and the Ada accessibility and then the site plan at this level again um we are going to have to uh comply with storm water management as everybody knows I have to just state that that when we go through that application we will comply with that and the accessible routes we're going to continue the accessible route from the parking lot that's located on the uh on the side of the building by the Board of Education Office any questions on that one I just want to Mar for the record then we will a a 28 thank you thank you so this is the the second application site upgrades at Somerville High School um and then exhibit A1 it's the site plan and the same date August 7th and then here M se3 thank you um so again this is part of the referendum submission process uh it's a schematic level doe drawing I understand Mr Cole had to kind of use his his every uh trick under the book to get comments on this one but it's a just schematic level we will come back if you need at that point we are required to undergo uh and and comply with storm water management um this what we're calling a full depth reconstruction and again should a referendum pass we can discuss whether that's leaving subbase and and and uh not having to go for the major development versus a million a millon overlay is not what we're intending to do here because the Department of Education deems something that's full depth eligible for State funding and that's more of the referendum process and I'll let the Board of Ed comment on that but we submitted this as a full depth for that purpose that the state will contribute up to 40% Debt Service a on a project of of this nature which is why you're seeing a full depth um what I'm pointing to here which is note number two this is the existing parking lot this is the staff lot across the street from the high school on and this is on Davenport across the street is the student lot and then adjacent to the building uh where the ramp comes out for the gym for those who are familiar with the site is a smaller parking lot for staff and then it wraps around with a roadway connecting out to Orchard um the student lot is roughly 109 spaces right now with no Ada spaces in it the staff lot is about 124 spaces two of which are wheelchair Ada spaces and then the School site actually has two Ada spaces and it's only 22 Lots um I can tell you what we have to do and again when we go through a final parking plan should referen and pass we would do a final parking PL and we're obligated to comply with the number of ADA spaces which we've already informed the sum of a Bo of Ed we have to do so they're aware of the impact in number of spaces uh not the final number but they aware the number is going to shift um for Ada and number of spaces so that was the first comment on the letter uh from Mr Cole the uh full depth again U the full depth again was marking about the major development um I don't know if there's any questions on that the uh storm water and the basins that are existing again when we uh do a full application at that point we are have we're going to be required to comply with storm water management as well as any soils Conservation District measures and we'll have to make that full submission to the soils District as well at that point and then the last comment was about parking lot lighting um the lighting is out of the scope of this project so the existing pole mounted lighting that's on the wooden utility poles would remain in place we not we're not increasing or decreasing we're not touching it it would stay as is right now any uh questions for those two so I I'll comment on that you know so we we did a public release of the referendum already at the board of education level at the at the last Board of Education meeting um what I can tell you is that the district is looking at different configurations of what a question would look like it's not finalized yet um what that means is this application may or may not happen with that building or not so I don't know I don't want to testify to that building yet obviously for for reasons tonight they're not here and I want the Board of Ed to be here for that one um the we have to take into account number of spaces obviously in any occupancy in the building um right now we're looking at all options for the configuration so I depends on what happens this is within the same exact existing footprint we're not looking to expand it correct correct for for this application correct so this is a concept plan on its own correct correct it stands on its own it's within the same that's important actually for the Department of Education when I said about the eligible projects when the State Department of Education deems a project eligible that means in this case with parking it's in the same footprint that's why we're adhering to that same footprint if we were to go outside of that footprint the expense would be borne by the district or the taxpayer in a case of a referendum but in this case and all the numbers and tax impact and things like that are not my pery to get into here tonight but they're I know but um yeah exactly so I'll just let the board about a comments on those the referendum will not be on this year's ballot so the referendum is scheduled for March of 2025 right now and we'll expect to have all these costs mentioning from the state sometime hopefully in November but it is ant but it is anticipated once I should say once if a referendum should pass those components of the referendum once the site plans are uh finalized you would come back yes if you the Board of Ed would come back for a full uh courtesy review yes correct so this satisfies the requirement for the Department of Education should you guys want that we will absolutely extend that cour you and and go through that process and that's what's been done in the past so I would I would uh I would think that they would come yeah I think we had yeah we had to do that before so absolutely yeah mayor at the conclusion of this a motion in a second for any comments orations to make back to the board we have anything else should open to the public all right I'm going to open up to the public first for comments okay hearing none we'll close public uh comments from the board for a recommendation or non- recommendation a recation motion to make a recation the returns after second we should do a roll call on this right is that the only recommendation anything else mayor Gallagher yes councilman V yes acting chair Warner yes acting Vice chair CA yes Mr Cleveland yes Mr addex yes Mr Aken yes thank you very much thank you thank you for your time okay we are G to move into um let's start with the fence ordinance Mike yes fence ordinance yes uh thank you uh Madam chairman chairwoman uh based on the meetings sorry you're okay based on the uh meeting we had in July I came up with conditional use standards to uh address the corner lot fence and subsequent to that car made some good comments about cleaning up the language and finetuning it uh basically you had two things one on the site triangle and at that meeting we had talked about raising at to 48 inch and I provided documentation that in my opinion it shouldn't be higher than 36 in because of the crown the road and being able to see and I proved some documentation from ashro and some other governing standards uh about that so on the site triangle the language goes from 50 ft each way from the intersection from the corner to 25 ft and I think uh I we had talked about 48 in I had recommended 36 in and I think Cara had reduced that down to 30 in uh so there is discussion on the height that you could see around it's the motorist Vehicles 42 in if you look at the reference documentation the idea so you could see a motorist coming down the street or pedestrians the pedestrians are typically higher than 4 2 in so that's not the issue but it's the car it's a sports car it's the average car um and then car had asked added one comment about uh landscaping and pruning and stuff in the RightWay to limitate to over8 feet and my comment back to her was well we have Street trees plantings they're typically branches are lower than 8 feet because they're not that they're going to have to grow so I'd rather not say that because the street trees there's no way of getting Street trees in my opinion to have branches over 8T it's just not I don't see that happening so uh we the bureau is very good with planting Street trees so I think we I don't want to see a conflict with the ordinance on Street trees but uh did I cover that one on the the corner lot yeah I think the the only two comments I had was um whether it should say um on Section 11 117 i1 uh we have language saying above no more than 30 inches in height above the center line of the street opposite opposite uh or adjacent to if we should add that additional language and the other thought I had was I find a lot of times with these Street intersections and we may actually even have them in our ordinance right now showing a little diagram helps yeah um just measure up any confusion um so that was that was that one comment and then the subsection two um I just said we have no fence or shrub um and I think I just added planting or other visual obstruction um so and I don't think that's a big deal but I defer to Mike and the board as soon what their thoughts are we can certainly clean up the language get with car's comments and come up with a clean version for the board for final review and then the board likes it it would be a recommendation to council to change the ordinance but we can certainly make our final copy y to include all all comments and get it back to the board for their sign off approval of this the last one the last line um what what that is saying is that the fees for this application would be no different than anybody anybody applying for a fence on their property other than the zoning permit yeah that's one that's one the conditional uses on the fences yeah uh this site triangle basically says you can't put these structures in that area there's no I guess Technic you could say it would be a zoning permit it would be a denial if you wanted to put a a structure within that 2525 but typically mayor this doesn't come up from a zoning permit application it's usually a uh a complaint issue they can't see and enforcement goes out there and says cut the shy down or eliminate the uh the obstacle or the obstruction so I don't see this as being a application for like a zoning officer to review the or lot fences now that's a different story that's what we're going to do next and that's where the conditional uses and Cara has comments on that too about the sheering it's a good T segue into the next topic if we want to discuss that now yeah might as well that's the one where we have Corner lots and the concern was that you're getting penalized twice on the corner lot being you have the frontage or the street address and you have the other Frontage which uh those property owners have a legitimate argument that there's not privacy because you're you're you're reduced to 4 foot fence with 60% opening on two sides of your property so the uh the idea on this was to make it a conditional use which does two things it allows the planning board to review things that normally the planning board can't review because one and two families or site plan exempt typically go to the board of adjustment so a conditional use would allow the board to uh review these applications and because of the nature and there is in car point is out in some of her comments one of them is like the good size facing out is subjective I agree it's subjective and to handle that I'm saying have the planning Board review it not the zoning officer so the concept was that the a orb would review these and make a recommendation similar to what they do right now in the Sid it would be a recommendation so the acronyms ARB is the Architectural Review Board right which is a subcommittee out of this body subcommittee out and there was discussion that the Sid members all had to live within the burrow right now that's the case but uh Bernie brought up that make that caveat so that caveat is in there and then there's some mechanics in the past the arbs makes a recommendation the planning board has to approve it because I don't in my my opinion the aaba can't approve it because they can't usurp The Authority in my opinion so that was the thought not Reinventing the wheel so you would have the A or B review this and make a recommendation this complies with the conditions of the conditional use or no it doesn't if it doesn't comply it would still go to the planning board to confirm that and then it would be a mechanism to go to the board of adjustment because it would be a D4 or D3 it's a conditional use variant D3 D3 if the board the planning board says it doesn't comply with the conditions of conditional use and then it has to go to the board of adjustment and what the mayor brought up okay what's the fees and all this the idea was that you would not be penalized for going to the board of adjustment you still have to do the noticing and all this but the idea was that you the $35 would be the zoning permit they or be would review it either say we think this complies and the planning board would then have the airb comments with with the application or the airb would say we don't think it complies the planning board would still see it and say yes this doesn't comply and then that applicant would have to go to the board of adjustment for the variance but there wouldn't be additional application fees is what the mayor came up it would be handled under the same fee structure to handle this in that nature so the fee will allow them to do all different Avenues without any extra cost it's an initial fee and that's it right and there's well there's a escrow and I I understand what the board's getting at there's always the issue of initial esro to review it but my experience been this is only a couple every four or five years so I'm willing to eat my review time to get to what the mayor wants the mayor wants and I understand this equal treatment equal treat treat but if it's going to go to the board of adjustment the penalty has always been the application fees the escrow the higher heightened everything so if you make the application fees blanket what's the other Missing Link would be my review fees or Cara's review fees and that's I can work with that with with both boards on this issue but uh yes so then you have the conditions which is the setbacks going back to what these conditional uses which Cara had comments on but before we get to that I just want to kind of discuss the procedural aspect of going ARB planning board and then planning board board of adjustment if necessary was it contemplated that there would this would be a noticed hearing before the planning board after the ARB recommendation because typically let's just say we weren't having let's say you had a typical conditional use we weren't talking about fences we just had a use that was deemed by your ordinance to be a conditional use the application if the applicant felt that it met all of its conditions would come to the planning board they would show you it met all the conditions it would still be a noticed hearing and then you would make that determination if you found it didn't same procedure as what Mike's recommend commending they'd have to go to the zoning board but that would be a noticed hearing so just try yeah I I don't I didn't perceive it as a noticed hearing I what I perceived it as the the it immediately goes to the ARB for review if the ARB says you know if they tickle it and make it work um and and the homeowner is is satisfied with that it appears as a line item on our agenda and we move forward because they've interpreted and then ultimately the planning board has interpreted that it's met the conditional use okay we can we can tighten that up a little bit to make that kind of again it's we need parody for homeowners who live on a corner versus homeowners who don't live on a corner who want to put up a fence and we can't treat them differently so I know we just discussed noticing but let's just say the ARB says it's not something that should be recommended and it comes here they should the a resident and applicant should have an opportunity to come speak before us well cor so it's not just a matter of it coming to us and they have to just wait in the background okay no it's an application that the the planning board's going to have to act either affirmative or negatively on this use regardless of what the ARB says in my opinion okay a orb approves it planning board could say I don't think this meets the conditions and then the planning board would make a ruling on vote on this if it was it doesn't meet the condition then it would be going the applicant would have to go to the board of adjustment because it wouldn't make the conditions regardless of what the ARB said so the other other thing that I have a concern about is I just want to make sure that there is um we're on the same page as what the ARB has been doing um I know there's been some ARB reviews I haven't seen them here so we are relying on this as an A or B review and then we get that information absolutely I just want to make sure that that procedure is still being followed currently before we hang our hat on this new resol on this new ordinance my understanding is the ARB meets ad hoc as applications come in and there's one member of the board of adjustment that chimes in a member of the planning board and a member of the DSA they all chime in via email or they meet and make their recommendations and that's it's at hoc it's not it used to be back 10 years ago there was 11 11 no but after that it's supposed to be coming here for official and I have not seen that I know for a fact we've had I think two or three recently and they have not so we just want to make sure that that part of the procedure is getting buttoned up and that everything is still coming here so that we are not in violation of them trying to override the planning board's Authority and what I would what I would also suggest is that we amend the ARB because if we have planning board zoning board uh DSA we should have a resident as well it's supposed to have a and it does actually technically I'm sorry there is a resident on the uh board currently yeah the idea was the DSA member was a resident mayor that was the idea the that's why it said the DSA member had to be a resident it was in the language all right that's do that good and then you can see the conditions and Cara had some good comments on the conditions and if you want to go through them all i' like to clean it all up to get the language but it's the flexibility that we talked about about the setbacks and the height and question on that so having a DSA that's also resident aren't there doesn't that same person have kind of different looking through different lenses right a DSA has a different lens they look through than a resident that's not involved with DSA so it would make sense to put a fourth person on I know that creates two and two for that might be an issue with voting and making decisions but I would say you still need a resident I I have no problem bringing a resident on and I have no problem with two versus two because it ultimately has to come here and if it's split we still have to make a decision and I think we should look at the ARB regs because for some reason I'm remembering that since I've been here we did do an amendment to the ARB procedure I just don't off hand recall exactly what that was so let's take a look and let's make sure that any change we made before doesn't impact what we're trying to do here till EA's Point that's the chairwoman's point yeah so maybe we put that on the agenda how about we do it tonight perfect yes we have yes I think it definitely needs to get put on for yeah okay we'll look at that too and then if you if you look and Cara had some good comments that clean this up about I had language that side of the lot that's not the address Cara cleaned it up so you see the conditions on the different flexibility that the property owner has in in that other the other side of the corner lot front facing I would like to get with Cara and to meet with Cara and clean it all up uh but the board has the the idea the idea is exactly what we talked about in the last meeting uh it's basically allowing a lot of different ways Avenues of addressing the concern being privacy for not having two small fences on two sides of your property that's that was the concern so the board likes I'd like to clean up with Cara and get you a clean with all our comments done and then you can bleed all over it or tweak that you know I think we're on the right path I think we're doing it right well I mean I think um easier I think it's on a a path and then we're going to have to amend the fee schedule or to address this or Define it and we can certain once we have the language right I can we can go through and make sure we picked up everything like in the ARB on making sure that the fee scheduled the or reflects so if things change it's it's clear that this is the process as the mayor had said good and I definitely like uh Cara's idea of the visual I think that especially because this is meant for residents to be able to understand yeah I know we all understand it but we're the ones that have been looking at stuff like this for quite a bit so and I think Mike had found a couple um yeah good yep exactly yeah I think that'll be helpful they're generic enough just it's generic me comes from and it helps the ARB too yes it kind of helps everybody along we could have this all for the ninth for the next meeting do we think we could try yeah just I just don't want to delay too much longer before we get to the council yeah because it's got to come up to us and then we have to amend the ordinance so that takes time as well yeah we'll work on it we'll get you something we want to make sure you have enough time yeah also to take a look at it and we'll we'll look at what the agenda for the nth looks like to make sure and the approach overall if you look at land use ordinances the approach is to try to get conditional uses because that would empower the planning board more we have issues where the board doesn't have jurisdiction over certain things if the board wants jurisdiction the conditional use would allow the board more uh more flexibility and matters that right now like they don't you guys don't review that's I'm just tell that's the overall theme on how to address because I know that we have other ordinances coming up or things that the that the board wants to look at I'm just saying that my thinking is to try to approach some of these with conditional uses just throwing it out all right anything else anybody have anything else on that all right uh so that brings us to oh do we we don't need to do any action on that right because we're just reviewing and okay nope um so the next one is going to be the crosswalk um I am going to have mayor Gallagher give us a little bit more information on this because you saw this way before any of us saw it um yeah well apparently this has been floating around since 22 before uh before I came back um dot is looking to put in a signaled crosswalk uh on West End Avenue uh right right near the entrance exit of the Immaculate Conception School driveway so if you if you know that driveway right now the crosswalk let me back up a second there between Mida and Mountain there are no crosswalks that's an extremely long section to go without having a crosswalk especially with the school yeah and and uh seniors and you know it's it's it's a problem so um apparently dot has crafted a plan to put in a midblock crosswalk um which one already exists which is located directly directly between the two uh entrance and exit driveways of Immaculate Conception School which is not a great spot for it right between it so dot uh I think is getting ready to pull the trigger on on moving on this and installing uh a revised midblock crosswalk along with signalization uh button activated signalization so they had sent this a while back um it came across my desk again and uh then are looking for the council to pass a resolution in support of this um it's a state highway uh I think it's probably one of those that it's more of a courtesy review because it is a state highway and and they obviously have jurisdiction over the state highway they can do what they want but I give them credit for uh for for approaching us so um that's kind of the mix of it so if you take a look at what they have here it looks like they're moving the crosswalk a little bit West so it's West of the exit driveway which I think is a good thing it gets it out of that flow of of vehicular traffic um I did send this over to the mon Senor so he could have a look at it along with his uh his his staff I haven't heard back from them yet um but I thought it most appropriate for the uh uh this this body to have a crack at looking at it to make sure that it comply shouldn't I shouldn't say comply that it fits with what we think is a is is a a safe overall operation from our perspective because we're the we're the feet on the ground this is designed by engineers in an office so uh Mike anything to add to that if the the board likes this it if the board likes or agrees with endorsement on the dot crosswalks the only caveat I would say to see if the crosswalks can incorporate the the humps that uh the rescue the OEM fire guys have approved which is the small detail this is what's being done on residential streets when there's a traffic cing speed uh pump required that that's the detail that has been approved by the the board of Engineers yeah on a state highway I know they're going to have their own thing I know I know I it's a great thought I know it's pie in the sky but I'm sorry so the only thing that I see though is this is actually two different different locations yeah so the other location is between Division and Union Union and Main or Maple Maple I'm sorry yeah but I see I was looking at the top streets not the well whatever um existing that there yeah so they're looking to just improve that in sight visibility and signalization yeah yeah and the signage I think the signage is proposed yeah all those those green signs The Pedestrian signs I don't think they're uh you see they they're giving you warnings ahead I don't think that currently exists those warnings but is there an actual crosswalk there yes there is yes yes we have one we have one there okay it's right it by the alley that cuts back okay then yes that is it I believe correct the alley comes out it would have to be based on here yeah you're right and that's where this is right there they're adding signage and lighting is this like the yes speed tables yeah that's exactly it's called right yeah yeah right right so what what I well what I'm really looking for is the planning board to uh um just like a recommend make a recommendation to council that you agree with these improvements and then the council then can can draft a resolution of support to the dot referencing the planning board's approval as well so do we have a mo traffic traffic signal lights what's Happ can we trade them for traffic that's a different battle highly annoying that's a different battle I'll make a motion to make a recommendation to council um to write a letter of recommendation in support of the two new um Crossing improvements I'll second that mayor Gallagher yes councilman vro yes acting chair Warner yes acting Vice chair crasa yes Mr Cleveland yes Mr addex yes Mr Aken yes you got write that one yeah better late than never all right uh I have have no comments uh why don't I open uh open this up to the public for comments on anything come on up please state your name and address for the record yep I just have a real quick comment Rich O'Neal I got look up later 124 West Cliff Street thank you you talk about the uh arital review board you have two members of of the public citizens of town on that because be be on the board of jce be on the planning board you'll live in town so automatically takes care of that problem that's it thank you turn your mic on Larry thank you uh Rich what I was gonna ask you is it seems like the intent of having a public person would be somebody who's not official who's not a planning board member who's not already a board of adjustment member I know exactly what you're saying good we got plenty of people around town who just love to volunteer and do stuff for free what are you talking about come out meeting watch emails am I wrong no you're absolutely right we'll find it yeah okay anybody else from the public all right we'll close public session uh before we do end I just want to do thank Jenna today is her last day thank you for oh I'm in denial Den I was like wait a minute what happened no one wants you to leave particularly me yes but thank you for everything while you've been on the board good luck in your new Endeavors and we will miss you so thank you for everything thank you thank you Jenna all right I will take a motion to close out so moved I need a second second all in favor I I all opposed osed you know