all right we will open the planning board meeting for Tuesday April 23rd 2024 this is being conducted in a hybrid manner pursuant to the general laws if anybody's recording that is fine you just need to let us know okay um we will be um recording this and putting it on our website after this meeting is completed uh 7 o' Town planners report thank you very much Mr chair uh finding board members I don't have a whole lot to reps on this particular cycle I was on vacation next week but I will share that U uh tangentially uh related note um through my storm water coordinator role I received a letter from Dan PS who own and operate the Shaker Farms Country Club uh over they detail in a letter here that they've seen I want to call it increases in frequency of we just say storm events that caused them to have to close portions of their course um so there the letter was an Outreach essentially related to uh some land clearing activity which we don't have Juris over because it is under it's planned under an approved um force cutting plan uh but as it relates to planning board work my responsibility then to look at we'll call it permanent facilities uh Upstream I think that's Cog book that passes through that um that we do have active stor water and make sure that they are we'll say at least functioning as intended let's put it that way uh but uh aside from that I don't have any uh the for the board except for in June there are two options for dates to meet with the select board uh regarding procedures and properties come out of the chapter 61 program um the two options are the 6th and the 10th 6 PM meetings so I'll take the board's preference now if you don't mind and respond to them with the best prer the 10th I cannot do the six I can do the sixth can do the 10th you can do the 10th can do the you can do then all can do it without me um if that's are you available both oh yeah I get back to you on that how many you need oh all of them always um ja are you going to be back no yeah I'm gonna be on both nights attemp it is I'll uh I'll respond with with the board's pres if I can is it is it um attending their meeting is that what the yes I believe this is going to be a discussion about we call it deg ree Bing or actually developing a formal policy but attending their regular meeting or is it a separate St if it falls on the the 10th is the Monday right so 6 p.m. that would be the if I can I will zoom in but I will not be here okay all right um those were all the items that I had just with bu there something else in your mind yeah I just want to I can't remember if you mentioned it last time and I can't remember if I forwarded it to you but we did get we did get a lettered back from the Attorney General's office on the open meeting on complaint fil by uh Jim Sullivan back in September of last year um no F yeah filed with the AGS in September written to us in June uh and they declined to review the complaint so that is put to B so I can't remember if I send it to you if I didn't I will and you can pass it around to the for sure thank you very they don't move too quickly down there do they no um so I'm assuming I didn't for to I may have seen it through other channels and regrettably by a little way there was no specific action but should have shared it with the board yes do that now and then all right thank you uh 705 public comment anybody have anything for the board tonight that is not on the agenda that they wish to bring to the board's attention yes um hoteling 45 C Road I wasn't able to attend the last meeting but I want to say thank you to the board for giving your stamp of approval to move the master plan forward thank you all right um any other public comments and okay all right uh 710 Public contined public hearing Oak Ridge Estates at Mor Mort Vining Road subdivision plan and storm water management per howdy I'm still Sal s Associates and uh earlier this afternoon I emailed you the responses designer stuff that you requested the modified uh drainage report and set of the plans here's a hard copy of the plans right on oh didn't see that dramatic effect thank you um so I realize you guys haven't had a chance to digest all that unless you're a speed readers no we have not um so is there I guess what would be the best way to present any of it tonight um in your mind it just you know what's there better than we do so right we have several pages of comments and responses okay that we did submit but you guys haven't had a chance to read it so I don't know if it makes sense for me to go through this or do you want to have a chance to digest it and go out it the next Mee um I would think when was our we have 7 7:30 um I think it's probably best to so it's on sort of get through we can read through it um and put it out there people can digest it um so that so that everybody you know who's attending whether online or in here can hear it um and I'm happy to take it and read through it too um sure sure you know um mind just giving you a little bit of that um to give me a chance to kind of digest it as well wi you volunteered who doesn't famous last words right um all right so this um is there anything else besides DPW and yourself fire uh this Stern which we can touch upon that as we go through right correct um okay anything else Board of Health uh didn't uh have any issue um I did not uh hear back yet from uh I'm sorry the Water Commission uh coordin with Randy Brandon that the presumption there's no impact to the water system out there so the presumption have any all right those are just formalities under there was a gentleman who asked about school buses but I thought we kind of resolve that I think so thank you um and then the fire comments were solely related to the sisters or were there others th far okay all right um obviously they all the boards committees and departments still need to look the new so um all right so let's start with the DPW comments um per the soil report submitted to the Board of Health the depth to groundwater is shallow throughout much of the subdivision subterrain shall be installed along all roadways where the depth of seasonal groundw is less than 42 in below grade to provide drainage for the road bed include a standard detail for subd drains we indicated that sub drains have been added to the road ra details so that seems to be resolved um on ver Lane near Station 2 plus 00 there is a large natural drainage channel that flows into the proposed roadway the grading on the north side of the road should be extended to capture flow from that drainage Channel and divert it into the culber proing near station one plus 20 uh you have indicated that a drainage channel has been added to prevent runoff and flowing into the roadway so like PR to be disolved um the drainage Crossings on barer lane at stations 1 plus 20 and 27 plus should be box culverts with flared end sections not multi-pipe drainage Crossings as currently shown the multipipe pipe Crossings will be more prone to fogging and backing up from falling debr uh it is your response is that it is our opinion that the multi-pipe crossings will be a better option than an open bottom culverts the north crossing must be shallow due to other pipes needing to go over the crossing as a result the height of the crossing is limited to 30 in at most if debris washes into the culber and get stock it will be much harder to get out than de breis in front of one of the pipes the southern Crossing consists of two 48 in pipes that are capable of passing a 100-year event flows to the crossing and the northern Crossing are intermittent flows out of up gradient Wetlands flows to the Dual 48 inch Crossing flow across a large Wetland Meadow and will not not likely be carrying large debris that could F numers so we'll see what the response is from BPW unless you have anything Engineers different opinions let them arm wrestle over that yep fair enough um for St Water Report indicates that the drainage system accounts for some surface water from private Lots including roofs driveways and Lawn areas however it is not clear if the drainage system was designed to account for flows from groundwater sources such as footing drains please confirm if not included in the calculation properties will not be permitted to discharge footing or similar drains into the storm water system note that some pumps are not the tie into the drainage system uh you indicated that uh the the storm water calculations do account for impervious surface roof areas driveways and Longs for all the building Lots [Music] um what about footing drains again there's difference between Terry and footing footing drains won't be connected to the storm water system I didn't see okay all right so that's not factored into the culation okay all right um I'll let ew comment that um five it does not appear that the design storms used to calculate Peak runoff rates meet the atlas 14 plus as required through the South storm water regulations anage analysis should be revised to meet the standard uh response is Peak runoff was calculated using Atlas 14 plus at 90% confidence intervals at average recurrence intervals calculations were recalculated using the same 90% confidence intervals but at 90% of the upper limit of the respective 90% confidence integral I will definitely let DPW sort that one out uh number six uh drainage easements shall remain open and accessible at all times no structures Gates plantings or other obst shall be permitted within easement include a detail of how the access um will be constructed I'm not sure what that word is there or meant to be there um access something um comments have been noted an easement cross-section has been added to the plan details so have to take a look at that seven drain man drain man holes should be installed in the middle of the a travel Lane outside of the wheel path and not the center of the road uh drain manholes have been shifted to the middle of the drive Lanes as requested uh eight on sheet 17 some of the proposed pipe sizes in Basin three or left blank um I'll let you guys figure that out you can find the issue with uh so sure that'll get figured out the open space detention basins and piping to the from the street to the Basin shall be maintained by the homeowners association the town will maintain the drainage pipes manholes and catch Basin within the roadway that is noted um the applicant is requesting a waiver per sidewalks on one side of bar Lane the applicant shall deposit funds for sidewalks not installed on one side of the road into the sidewalk revolving account DPW suggests that the cost for sidewalk not installed be set at $60 per foot that is noted 11 the applicant shall provide a thirdparty inspector to monitor construction and provide inspection reports to the town in accordance with Town BW section 315-1108 [Music] but we have a guy that stands ready all the time for it um all right 12 um all of the proposed trees to be planted along both sides of the street shall be planted as far away as possible from the front line BPW is concerned about the tree roots expanding and heing the both sidewalks uh indicate Tree locations are as specified in the zoning ordinance um well we'll let that we'll keep a note of that and figure that one out I don't remember there being such specificity in the zoning by loss but maybe I'm wrong I feel like it's say there there is specificity where where the trees are specified to be set into the property line I believe 10 feet or eight or 10 feet is that but that's not like a on the dot right I mean it's a well yeah no it does specify a distance and so on so that's how they were done all right um 13 that locations of utility conduits for electric cable and television should be included on plans responses that locations have been added to the plans 14 has the applicant consulted with the postmaster regarding mail delivery and whether mail will be delivered to each house or Buster mailbox will be provided in some recent subdivisions the postmaster has required clustered mailboxes if clustered mailboxes are required include the location on the plans uh respon is that two neighborhood distribution cluster units will be installed at the North and South entrances to beer Lane Pur South Post Office uh is that indicated on the plans as well fantastic 15 the cover letter indicates that park benches will be installed in the open space but the plans do not show details or locations where the benches will be located there will be three Park is installed and for bird houses within the open space area specific sites will be determined after construction of storm water one and the Wetland replication area all right we follow up on that uh 16 the applicant file a petition with the select board as Road Commissioners for the proposed Road names respon is this is in progress 17 the plans do not show or call out any Street signage the applicant is required to provide all signage necess for the subdivision such as street name signs stop signs Etc the signs shall meet mutcd standards indicated that signs have been added to the plans and layout notes specify that all signs must meet mutcd standards 18 in the cover letter the applicant request a waiver for Street lighting however the plans includeed detail for a street for a light pole installation the applicant should clarify their position on street lights per F law section 31512 B16 and 3 31512 d2c street lights should be installed at all intersections DPW does not recommend granting a waiver for street lights uh street lights have been added to all intersections the response sheet 22 concrete sidewalk pad detail materials and workmanship for sidewalk shall meet Mass do standards the app can consider using fiberglass reinforcement as opposed to wire mesh as shown also applicant shall apply a sealant to moisture evaporation and protect against salt damage that's noted 20 sheet 22 typical roadway section detail the proposed paveed Road width is not listed in the detail please clarify indicated the proposed Road width has been added to the detail 21 sheet 23 storm water catch Bas in detail the great shall be galvanized and rectangular catch Bas shall be CT style tops details have been modified to use CT style tops and Fin fin sheet 20 finally for DPW uh sheet 23 typical infiltration based in detail the acent should provide a list of species proposed to be planted in the rain Gardens all plants should be native you've indicated the plant types are listed on the layouts and planting plants so it seems like that's pretty well um to the point of agreement with ppw there's a few things to be worked out correct um so that seems pretty good all right planning comments um one per 31510 B copies of the submitt AR have been provided to a number of parties understanding that the division between consultant coordination and internal Municipal coordination is sometimes confused a copy of the plans will be circulated via planning to the remaining parties conservation and the Water Commission for their comment so we will await those um two per 31510 H please indicate the plan uh of securing the construction of subdivision infrastructure uh you indicate the project will be constructed in four phases with bonding for each separate phase um and you have indicated that on the plans or is that that's part of a waiver request no you mentioned at the last one I'm just trying to remember we mentioned it the last one to just put it on for discussion we have to put on the plan where these bases are going to be okay all right uh 3 per 315 12 A3 please provide a designer certificate to accompany the appication materials a certificate template is attached to this memorandum that's been provided for under 3151 12b 40 scale plans are required a variety of scales is provided within the application materials and the roadway plan profiles are provided at 40 scale plans with 10 times magnification for profiles I believe that the intent described in the regulation has been satisfied uh that is noted uh per 3152 B5 the width and grade of Mor gring Road is to be shown it is observed to have been graphically depicted on the plans that's noted six per 31512 V8 the plans are required to be drawn with a contour interval of two feet the submitted drawings exceed the standard at a 1 foot interval this section also requires that one Benchmark must be set per five acres the applicant should clarify if the aforementioned preliminary plan waiver request on this item will be applied to the current application that is noted and I think you are asking for that we did put that in our way yeah 7 for 315 12 B9 the zoning table shown on the plan should be amended to refer to a proper zoning section R40 and include the percentage and area of the propos open space to be included in the subdivision indicated that correction has been made 8 31512 b11 in the application a description of open space to include park benches is provided are there plans to show improvements to the open space to facilitate facilitate its use how many benches will be be provided and where will they be installed as indicated before there will be three park benches installed and four bird houses within the open space area specific sites will be determined after construction of storm water 1 and the Wetland replication area uh 9 315 12 b14 will there be any significant trees to be retained as described in the section within the proposed right away or within 10 ft of it uh you indicate that you will verify Tree locations if any um 10 per 315 12 B17 please amend the board signature block to includ lot numbers that provision has been made 11 uh per 315 12 B1 18 please add the general location of proposed buildings and driveway to the plans those have been added to the plans 12 for 3152 B20 the waiver request should include the purpose or reason for each request and you submitted that with the reasoning okay 13 for 315 12 B21 a minimum of three monitoring Wells are to be provided at the site and their location is to be shown on the plans we indicate that sufficient water table data has been collected via the two perk test performed for each of the 28 Lots monitoring well should not be needed I'll let um Mr Gard consider and respond to that um you have anything you want talk about now okay 14 um although most of the items under 315 12C can be inferred please provide a statement that describes compliance with items 1 through four in this section uh you indicate for one uh submitt of covenants deeded easements and restrictions applying to the area proposed to be subdivided you request to defer this requirement to appoint prior to issuance of building permits as we talked about last time two information um yeah so I don't have those right in front of me but you for number for C2 information has been submitted to to the South Board of Health and they return no comments C3 the amended storm water report is submitted here with and C4 the South Conservation Commission has issued a permit for the Wetland Crossing at the southerly entrance to ver Lane in the order of conditions is reported and the handon County registry of deeds at book 2494 s that's page 22 y um 15 per 315 D4 the center the streets must be sted with appropriate cut Bill markings you've requested a waiver on that per 16 per 3151 12f the subdivider must Define which method or combination of methods of Security will be provided for the construction installation of the required improvements again you indicate project will be constructed in four phases with bonding for separate uh fa for each separate phase is your request uh 17 the planning board should consider whether the parcel labeled storm water 3 situated adjacent to the Northerly curb cut constitutes a reserve strip under 3154 B3 um you indicated that this is not a reserve strip is part of storm water 3 so we can take a look at that uh 18 for 31516 the maximum grade of streets within 100 ft of an intersection is 2% I believe two of the Interior intersections fall outside of this requirement indicated that the two intersections have been adjusted to meet the 2% requirement 19 it is noted that the open proposed open space area Falls below the suggested Target of 10% of the total usable area 31518 L is consistent with the preliminary plan you see the rer request and then 20 315 26 shade trees subdivision plans indicate the installation of Red Maple and black to below Street trees at 40 foot spacing and at 2.5 in minimum caliber the waiver request should be updated to include with justification the proposed reduction in size from the required 4 in caliper and you've indicated the pseud waiver request all right so again it seems like for the most part those are decently uh there's a few things that still need to be correct and figured out and whatever else but it seems like in the comments you guys are pretty much on agreement on the majority of them um all right anything else you have for tonight that's okay anything from the board any questions comments okay uh any Town officials have any questions or comments if I could just make a quick comment um so absent from this dialogue right here is a little bit of coordination with uh the fire chief related to the sister sizing out there um how Le initiate the dialog the connection your team so that you can understand what volume he's looking for if it's going to require an eement error or something that goes beyond the wrer pl where he chooses those locations related to that discussion but not related to fire sists uh was thinking about the phasing of of the project you're starting at the more Yep the more challenging uh of the two Crossings um so that takes off a little pressure in terms you know thinking about what infrastructure elements are left over um but you may want to consider um we call the suitability of temporary um Co desect I know that you are intersecting uh are some of the phases Encompass the spur roads and maybe that's fully resoled by just mentioning here prob we have the opportunity thankk um any other T official comments okay uh any public comments or questions okay anything else on the board before we wrap it up all right what we may 7 s 15 uh you is you have everything in so it's just a question are we going to be good for May 7 for you and Randy to go through all that yes okay um all right so do I hear a motion to continue the public hearing for Oak Ridge Estates to 7:15 on May 7th Dave Spina so mov D singer second s we'll do a roll call vote Michael D i da I got singer I s i i okay 7:30 Contin public hearing 771 College Highway proposed retail Development Special permit site plan review and storm water management permits application set over here that set tripod I would put it just to the right of that television probably I think it'll allow the board to look at it it'll allow audience members to uh we'll also if John do you have he'll pull it up on Zoom as well so um oh thank you that I don't steal [Music] it I'm TR to do okay um just introduce yourself and then hop right into it sure than uh so my name is John Tom cheepy design engineer of Arc Associates I'm here tonight to discuss uh application for proposed retail building we located at 771 College Highway here in the town um believe this is the third hearing um there's been some changes over time based on Town review comments planning comments the from the public so I'm going to maybe try to just give a little recap of how we got to where we're at uh that maybe that would be helpful um so like I said uh the project is a proposed retail building to be located 771 College Highway uh just for reference this here is uh College Highway Route 10 to 202 um North is to the right on the plan uh this is Windfield Condominiums are over here nor um so the original site plan uh lay out of the site is is pretty close to what was originally proposed sort of a centrally located building uh it's about approximately 10,640 square feet uh we'll be parking sort of on the south side and on the east side uh of the site we have a storm water basin to the rear uh the parcel is zoned uh business restricted it happens to be sitting sort of in a pocket of residential um which um requires some additional uh Landscaping require along the perimeter um so the original site design um as I said was pretty similar it was was similar to this in the parking and building uh but the footprint of the the development itself was a little bit a little bit wider you know the storm water basin used to be sort of fit in back in the southwest corner of the property um and the the buffer plantings along the perimeter probably weren't ideal I guess I'll say So based on some input uh what we've gone back we've gone back to the drawing board sort of and um we've we've relocated the storm water basin we reduced the footprint of the development so it's it's tucked in behind the building here uh the project proponent has agreed to um establish a declaration of restriction which will establish sort of a approximately acre and a half um uh vegetated open space which which is indicated by sort of this darker green color along the perimeter here um it's about 30 feet wide on the South Side you know varies from 30 to probably 50 feet along the north and it's you know it's probably a good 100 feet wide uh along the Westerly edge of the property um again we we added some additional planties along the along the perimeter here um and uh I think that's where we probably left it um the last tearing we've had again some additional um uh I guess so the architecture you know the the book of the building has been has been a topic of discussion um and also parking uh I guess the the amount of parking um I do have a new uh Le John you have the we can discuss the te elements of the building um so this is what this is fresh off fresh off the press hot off the press um this would be sort of this would be the front facade of the building um it would be uh not not wood clabbered but it's a like Hardy Board product would be sort of like wood grain look like wood clabbered uh a brick waycott along the along the the lower portion of the building uh the roof would be shingle you know with the Gable end here and the copal at top um um so that would sort of front of the building would look like and then another thing we uh we looked at was uh reducing the amount of parking uh requesting a reduction in the in the amount of parking and sort of uh allowing for the addition of parking should be deemed necessary so what we've done is along the frontage here uh originally there was um a roow parking at the face of the building then a drive aisle and then parking that would face sort of onto the onto College Highway what we're proposing to do is sort of there's 14 parking spaces here we sort of Bank them as as it's as it's called um and this would originally be lawn area at the start of the development then you see if if there's still adequate parking and I guess it would remain you know lawn area so we we reduce the the you know the impact of the parking on the front on the front of the uh the site um I think that like I said I we we relocated the Basin closer to the building we have a we've also proposed a six foot stock a fence uh along this inner portion here so and a lot of this will just remain in its natural state and probably only be bow uh maybe a couple times a year um but you know allow it to sort of become more natural so um I think I hit all the points any more any questions um anybody on the board have anything what's the number that we went down exactly we went from how many parking to what total uh sure so we uh have the potential for 43 yeah um and then like I said we we have 14 spaces in the front here that you know so so the total of 29 okay with the potential for 14 additions my roundabout way of explaining I'm having a hard time getting into it my computer so how many um parking spots are now in the front of the building right along the front base 13 including how many handicap there are two what's that banked parking I guess it's just the term we're using that it's is they're available should should be deemed necessary you know if if we find that you know there's so much overflow or there there is an adequate parking there you know it is available to be constructed here so is it going to be dirt or is it going to be it would be lawn area just lawn area yeah so you just you just have the single Drive aisle with parking on one side if it was ever deemed necessary to have that that additional parking was required you know you could just expand the parking and you have parking on the other side of the drive would that trigger a hearing Mr G have tover it such a way I I would think so they wanted to add parking like that but there's a couple of different ways to look at this um bringing the parking down to 29 achieves certain I say Goals or suggestions that we've heard at previous meetings it does fall below we're going to call it the the permissible 80% threshold um that we have for a reduction just by itself so I think the philosophy is you provide these for future usage and they could be conditioned um with decision that that area be reserved frankly for construction of parking and I'm tring what mechanism over wording of a mechanism to say no you know the experience that we're having is U that there's a significant parking impact you need to execute the remainder of that plan um I can explore different methods um I'm not sure if it would under that scenario I don't think it would necessarily fly coming in for bothside plan modification but I think it depends on and what I want to double check is look at you know B ring and so on so forth that would be necessary for full buildout and make sure it's either provided or accommodated or something that so we'd have to reflect it on the plan now build it in with a condition and then it wouldn't arguably be needed for public hearing there may be on the flip side of that there may be advantages from a design level maybe from a screening Stamper what have you where you want to execute some improvement within that area if it was available I need we need to digest and weigh the the suggestion yeah okay I guess I just got to figure out how that plays out uh yeah okay um all right any um other board questions or comments could you provide some detail on the exterior lighting plan you have it uh I feel a little better I guess then I won't kill the computer it's always exciting when whole tripod go so usually this would be in color unfortunately did not print that way uh so obviously the this is rotated a bit so now actually on the plan North is up so obviously this is parking here um so you just wanted to know where like the light where the fixtures are and poles and so we would have two there are two along this Edge that face you know in uh we have one at at the entrance that faces you know the light this area and then we would have two um if if we were to Red if we were to eliminate these parking spaces they would get moved in so that they were along the drive aisle and then if the parking ever got expanded they'd have to be relocated out so there then there's two poles here facing in and then there will be you know wall packs on the building itself yeah so anything on the uh let me think North or west side there um well it would be on the left side the South Side you know for the parking and the deliveries are in this area there is a a a door at this corner so probably be but there's no there's no lighting nothing going in the general direction of the residences kind of get that yeah and you yeah um any well actually before I ask uh any others um just so folks here and I guess on zoom we're having some technical difficulties trying to pull this up and share it so um if we get it we'll get it but um for now uh it's certainly available at the planning board office if anybody needs to look at it um all right any other um board questions or comments Mike hello Mike I got my thank you I think it's just I wonder oh you know what y I wonder if it's a I wonder if it is just band band could be bandwidth could be power insufficient electricity flow either away that's fair it's good to have an I won't take it personal hello joh no all right go ahead dick I was wondering what is the um propos width of the West Side property line you know between a parking and a property line is this Dimension here I'm sorry I'm in Florida in the back the piece in the back on the west side yeah the width of what I'm sorry I'm sorry from front to back how much space how much depth is there from the building from the no catch Bas here to here oh grass only no grass or field okay that is well it's it's 200 feet from the building to the property line um I don't have a scale on me I'm this is probably in the neighborhood of 100 feet if that's what Yep this point to this point with about what how much is in the back as far as the vegetation and the back that's being planted what's being planted is 30t wide okay and then this would be like I said Essen be left natural but probably most you know like a field would be you know a couple times but about a 70 foot or so field area be yeah okay 70t there to to stock yep um any other board questions or comments nothing all right um uh public officials any questions or comments9 Roes during the previous uh meeting I voiced concerns about uh uh College Highway itself that uh by the petitioners uh own comments that it is a major archery through South wake and it is a two-lane road no soft shoulder and it is it isely travel since my first meeting I've been approached by citizens in their area stating that col like from access to College Highway coming out of sunic blad backs up in the morning just due to the volume of traffic North and South through the area so with increased stops and turns into the into the property it's just going to back things up particularly if you're heading north on F Highway and then back traffic waiting for access to turn into the into the store we could I also mentioned that the uh passing Lane for College Highway terminat somewhere around the south end of Tractor Supply and if you've ever been around rais Family Farm traffic picks up you know in this time of the year you know you see traffic backed up again on College Highway now I would assume pretty assured you say that the Dollar General's business plan is going to provide information as to how many trips or customers should be coming into the store on a daily basis in order for economic justification the Cy store so I would encourage Bo to review that because that's going to give you an indication of just how much backup is going to be occurred or tra increased traffic on the on this section Highway uh one of the other areas that was mentioned to me was the safety aspect of it and that's primarily uh going back to how much traffic is on the road and is there any risk for accidents or things of that nature I did speak with the South Police Department safety officer and pretty much got what I had expected because Massachusetts does the same thing as many other states you in order to show justification for things like putting in a blinking light or going from a yield sign to a stop sign or reducing traffic or putting installing a traffic light you have to have verifiable evidence so you have to have accidents in order to justify verifiable evidence to address the safety issue and so it's I would encourage the board to also take that into consideration uh and the other thing I did mention is that when it does because we uh when College Highway does get widened and I didn't get any information I couldn't get any information if it's on any State uh TI I I've always heard tip I think during the master plan development the term pep was used bet I'm not exactly sure but tip is the transportation Improvement plan kind a redundancy there but be assured that College Highway will be widened there's no question about it with volume of traic when it occurs well my crystal ball is about as clear as your guys you your Crystal and but when that does happen all the plantings that you see across the front are going to go away okay and now the store is going to be right on the road now for a retail guy you know that's great because they want to be on the road so people driving by they look oh pull in there that type of thing so uh if this development were to go in I would recommend I would suggest as a citizen that consideration be made for that buffer and the plantings to remain in place with let's just say the addition of a center passing Lane col Highway again to keep with screening you know that they have that they would provide for at this point U there is one other thing that we brought out is and that is that the store is going to provide produce they said it's got a a gap or a change uh I don't know what produce that means you know bags of potato chips crackers I don't know but produce maybe they have apples and oranges and things of this nature but one of the concerns that was was is that you know they're bears in the area and you go over track like I've done that bear tracks in the area when you're throwing food waste into dumpsters and things of that nature you know that's going to bring you know those kind of animals into the area I don't know if there's any uh justification for environmental impact from that perspective but it was my attention so I'm going to for your consideration to have that from the petitioner um I might have another comment but I think I'm pretty much given you the highlights of the concerns that I would have okay safety and that's that's the going to be the number one issue and backup of traffic Highway back up right well it backs up right now and Sun side and access and erress for the surrounding developments in particular thanks um any other public officials have any questions or comments just go make sure's no oh okay all right um so let me just read in a letter we received before I open up the public comments it's a letter from uh Mark and Mary madrew if I'm saying that correctly uh 29 Windfield Circle um we have been residents of South for the past 3 years following our retirement we moved from the city of Westfield in an attempt to live in a quieter more Serene Community where land preservation was actively a goal of the Town while Westfield was a good place to live much of the open land was stripped away with too many shops and too many crowded neighbor Ood is popping up everywhere our peace and quiet became a thing of the past which is why we considered Southwood and a few other communities for our retirement years we have attended previous planning board meetings and know that there is an application for a Dollar General Store proposing to be located at 771 College Highway which is adjacent to our property at windfields at the previous meeting we have also learned that the current Family Dollar Store was closing in the near future we are also aware of a parcel of land nestled between the Southwick post office and the Express Care car wash that is available and being advertised for development both of these locations seem ideal for a potential business to consider and more suited for a retail establishment find business locations amongst other businesses located only a mile or less from our community allowing a do Dollar General store to be popped between beautiful residential communities like the greens and windfields Fields intrusive and random very much out of character for our neighborhoods we would ask for your serious consideration of denying the current application applicant access to the land between our communities in order to m maintain the Integrity of two beautiful living communities encouraging them to reconsider available more appropriate locations for business thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration all right um Mr chair if I can just share a couple Department comments you can please okay for the record let's see uh fire chief Richard sanitz says John I spoke with LEC a few weeks ago and all of my previous concerns were slash are being addressed this time I will be looking for the permit drawings for the fire protection system and Final locations thank you Richard Sanel um and from tpw Mr Brown writes I have reviewed the additional information provided by RL do I have any additional questions or comments at this time pw's prior comments have been addressed Randy um any public comments at this point and start uh in the audience here sir this name and address first please three name add name and address please oh name nfield CLE able to visit three different dollar stores and I able to take pictures they all have a lot in common they have dirty floors they have trash room up and down the hallways in one of the stores Hamburg Frozen Hamburg fell out on the dirty floor that was picked up and put back inside the case you know and I just don't see why we need to have this store here where it is we got plenty of dollar General Stores if you want to look at talk about the the textured flat boards and imitation brick if you go to any one of the Dollar General stores they all have the same thing and it's to me it's inexpensive looking and I was very disappointed in the buildings himself I have the pictures that you need to have me submit them I'm more than willing to do so but I don't think we need to have this in our neighborhood thank you uh any other public comments um hoteling 45 clim Road has the board received an economic proposal as to what this uh development is going to generate for tax revenue I'm not aware of one okay and I'm also not I mean I guess the other part of it is I'm not aware if they're required to in any okay and the a second question and maybe you can answer this John how high is the stock fence going to be on those two qu uh is the the fense that's propos is 6 6 yeah sir I'm Mark M from 29 fur the letter my wife and I had submitted I have really just a question regarding um I don't know too many instances where I've seen a retail establishment such as this in a residential area um I'm guessing they must exist somewhere but most of the ones that I've seen are in a business related area the concern that I have would be has anyone done a study or an evaluation was to effect a retail establishment such as this which no disrespect but it's not a highend retail establishment does it have an effect on longterm on property values where it's going to be in the middle of two residential areas 5 10 years down the road we take a hit because of credential issues or just because it's a retail establishment in the middle of our residential Community I don't know if anybody has that type of information or if a study's ever been done but it might be nice to know is there an effect yeah and it's you know just so you know sort of traditionally that's not something that the planning board would undertake you know themselves uh it's usually something that um um you know either I guess depending on the situation proponents or opponents of the The Proposal will submit um you know something that'll show the impact on on real estate in the area um so it would sort of be on the um you the again the proponents of the I wasn't necessarily working for the planning board to do that y it's something maybe the planning board could ask with the people making the proposal can you show us is there an effecta on the prop just a question y um Terry 228 South Lumis um I you know I don't really feel like we need another retail but I wanted to give you a little bit of history and show you that the Zoning for the two residential areas that are there were in the middle of the business it was changed see they're they're surrounded by business they were and change they were originally all that was in for the development not saying that I want that I'm just trying to explain know it wasn't the zone that changed the business it's that the business was changed but it is what it is today it is what it is y Mary MW 29 field Circle would there be any consideration with this proposal because it is between going to be between two residential areas to restrict hours of deliveries early morning uh late evening whether there be any consideration by the town to restrict that to certain weekday more appropriate hours because it is between two hous yeah and that's typically something that's considered you know generally um and um I don't know forget if it was mentioned before I but I could be wrong I just don't have it on top of my head but it's certainly something that's that's a Not Unusual condition that we'll put into special permits if they are granted um to have some limitations on when uh deliveries are made given that they are using you know large trucks and creating some noise when they do um any other public comments Sor do things the gentleman referring to safety issues I think is something that's really critical in when I drive north and I driving into windi Circle there's a slight fature in the road that bends away well towards the ash house and then anyway it bends away from if I'm taking a left hand turn into Windfield serone it's quite dangerous very often because if you have a truck or something in front of you you cannot see if there's any of traffic approaching and I imagine that the same situation probably pertains to it's being just a few feet further south down the road and as the gentleman referred to it there's no shoulder so if you're making a leftand turn into that area you're at the Lim of cars behind you if you need to stop making sure that they see your your stop light your your reer brake lights up because you I'm very often in fear of getting red and I'm also very often in fear of making a TR until I that there's a clear line of traffic there because that road I don't think it's is really capable of handling the kind of traffic that you might see with a retail operation secondly I would like to I haven't heard anything addressing signage and I don't know if that's a separate hearing or whatever that you would have in terms of signage but I haven't seen anything in terms of signage that might be out on the road versus signage that may appear on the building itself and I wonder if that could be a through share to the uh to the so um just so you know there's a specific sign by law that they would have to comply with uh it's usually done subsequently um and they you know there'll be a condition in any special permit that gets granted that they need to comply with the sign by bylaw when they come before it and we'd have a we'd have a um another consideration of that application when it came before us to decide on the so that would be a separate issue that would be on the agenda agenda when that came time if that was granted um any other public comments in the room here Sir George Bassel 38 Windfield Circle um I just like to say again that uh I am against thege 7 cur1 College thank you thank you sir okay uh any other public comments in the room all right um any on Zoom either if you could use your hand rais function or if you're having trouble with it please unmute and hop in okay seeing none um anything else from the board all right um John anything else that you wanted to okay all right um so I think it's you know give us time to sort of digest this and put it on for the I think the next meeting and then try to probably wrap it up with the next one unless something significant needs to change but you know I just want to spend a little bit more time with these as like um the new changes and figure it out so in case there's anything that pops up for the next one but we can I think the plan would be to close it up at the next one and then turn deliberating on the issue so okay all right um why don't we put that on for uh 7:30 again on um May 7th do I hear he being so moved do I hear s second um we'll do aoll Michael I Dave I singer I I just cour and I okay thank you thank you nice yeah see if I can get some done yeah I mean that's I that's the other reason I wanted to people want to look at some of this stuff had the opportunity rather make sure um all right 7:45 in planning board time continued public hearing proposed amendments to chapter 85 section 28 nonconforming uses structures and blocks anything else they got tweaks on this stab that stab that if you will no right I think the intention was to digest and see where we in tonight to be fa work probably at the Finish or rather we're at a threshold I don't want finish as a now you're beating it to death exactly again yeah it's very violent I got a guy yeah I don't understand why I'm having we were we were cruising along here for like last year and now all of a sudden we having every technical problem Oh night um impressive I can't even open this can you just pull it up the good news is I can't I have a version opening I can stop yeah thank you okay all right so so you want to just all you know what um just scroll down to the blue there this is just make they're starting under non-conforming laws yeah okay does anybody wish to aop don't worry about let me just put these together thank you I do have another car yeah you um Okay so what's the this is for residential use go back up a second sure yeah yeah I want you scroll down to that I mean at this point I mean I do I want to go through this and make sure it's right I do wonder how many actual pieces of I can't think of any person um maybe there is um so and I suppose there could be right because if something gets knocked down what on right um orang to keep going down what was this where did this come that one came from Helen the one that Marcus had Y and it was echoed amongst other that I looked at they while the protection is granted under state law they a point to make sure to lay it out here and also provide the order of what stuff needed to happen for that case um keep going down good all right um all right so that's I going to steal that thank you that's non-conforming loss which is so that I guess the only thing I wanted on this one is there's not the um did make more I thought just single time there's not the like right now we have section A is the prohibition and then it becomes right exeptions to the prohibition this is structured as there's no the prohibition doesn't exist right it's it's not there's not I mean it starts off with nothing in this chapter shall prevent the direction or placing of any structure building for residential use on a lot I guess how are we us all right so I guess chapter is being used as nothing in the byla I keep reading that as the section 28 but it would be in the nothing in the Bog should right this is fa mods do we need a section that basically says like it does now that oh no I guess we don't this is a lot it's a vacant lot this section A is vacant lot so right that's what it's addressing which isn't really explicitly addressed right now in the current B right no and and if it is it you're it's required to have been burnt down to have made it vacant right presum like presumably a vacant lot is not being used or right I mean that's a use sort structure so this is vacant if you want to do something on it you have to comply with the bylaws and the zoning requirements for that zone the year and so this would allow an exception to the zoning requirements whatever Zone that would it be whatever Zone as long as the area is [Music] Zone family is in an area for okay all right so okay all right so that you don't need the okay so that's I think that works so that's the lot which really wasn't addressed before but now we've addressed lot um you know it was mentioned in the title of the one before um now so then we keep going John to the which is structures and this has the language [Music] um actually from before I have a question yeah if I can yeah um and I know I raised it last time about um substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood or shall result in a more keeping with the character yep who's responsible for termining that us yeah or whoever you elected time and it just sounds so broad to me yeah and I think it's um well let's walk through this let's walk through this in order and we'll get to that because that's three right I mean it's fair I mean it's it's a it's standard language that we have in right in other sections um but the question I think is fair question is to whether in this one when you're expanding this whether that should be tightened in any degree um because you are expanding this so yeah um but let's just walk I just want to walk through it and make sure that we're doing it right hopefully it reads me quickly here um all right so that so the exceptions uh the proposed alteration is to a residential use building or structure Prov the uses so that extends it for three years for residential by right between three and 10 by permit or by finding I guess um all right and then that language goes in there so um I mean is your so let me let me ask you this do you see it definitely for this section versus a later I mean this one's talking about residential use right does it is it less concerning in this section to you than it is in the subsequent section or do you treat them I treat them the same but and basically because everybody has a different opinion of how that would look so how do you come to like an agreement on what's best for that area like that's that's very broad to me w so let me ask you this then I mean my answer my guess my in my head the answer to that is that's what we do right I mean that's just our job um but then the question I guess is what would be the alternative what do you think the alternative should be or could be to sort of discuss in in instead of that language I guess just how you weigh it like how do you weigh what is more or less detrimental to that area like what are the pros and cons and how do you fine-tune that when you're looking at something that comes before you um I mean we're we're ask right now what we we're doing is asking for the flexibility to have that discussion when it comes before us and the argument can be had between the board members if the application let's take a look 250 College Highway y do do you think in that situation having a multi-residential building continue in the usage that it had before is that any more or less detrimental to College Highway across the street from Two Churches next to other residential usage that also have accessory agricultural uses and next to an industrial area not too far down the road so in that case I would think most reasonable boards would come to the agreement that that is not more detrimental that that is in keeping with the spirit of that neighborhood and that would be a special permit we would agree to go forward if they came forth and wanted to make it a 20 unit Residential Building at 250 College Highway we would as a reasonal board say no that is not in keeping with it and therefore your application is denied and that's the trust that we're building this byaw in of ourselves but also any future board that we as residents elect not ourselves that makes sense um when you when you break it down like that it makes and that's the sort of Stu you can't write into a bylaw and say well in this instance we would say yes and you know we're looking to get away from that abely that's why there's five us does this um our powers combined go around and we B I think this have to be tweaked a little bit to this isn't the only finding right me you still [Music] um about Rel special considerations you can't so this thing reads so the 3 to 10 one right so the not less than three or three or less or I should probably say three years in right the next sentence says equal two are greater than 3 years so let's should say 3 years I believe right or no three years or less I'm sorry or less than three years I should said uh has not been abandon for years for more than oh no so has not been so um has not been abandoned or discontinued for three years or more because the next sentence talks about equal to or greater than years so I think that's is that right it's we can figure out whether we need TW that language to make it but I think that's right um so not conforming uses and residential not conforming structures and residential use so for the three to 10 maybe altered I mean um see the way this reads may be altered Upon A finding by the planning board that such continued residential use blah blah blah right so that's not the only finding we make to give a special permit we have to actually follow right I mean section n and in Grant the special permit so I think it has to be tweak to sort of say for structures and reses have been banded or discontinu for a period equal to a greater than three years but less than 10 years may be altered upon a special permit granted by the planning board uh which would include a finding at such continued use which is required which must include the finding that such you know blah blah blah so it's like and I'm just trying to see it that language is used a little bit but it's more about the detrimental um specific detrimental effects rather than sort of detrimental generally in the special permit section so that's sort of an additional that's like number 18 right so sorry yeah I just put a p after playing yeah that um this is probably not you know April 23rd at 8:30 something we should be doing but but fair enough um all right so um that is everybody okay with that all right so that deals with residential structures and the process for that um is there any is there any other I mean the thing about this now is that it basically gives full discretion to the planning board to allow whatever changes they want like consensus yeah yes yeah more concerned about the three years or less situations are we kind of given a got a small house on the lake no correct I mean it applies the V right it's not it's not just the or actually um yeah and you're right I mean the 3 to 10 actually at Le comes in front of us and we have say but then but there is no limit like they're already working outside the bounds of of setbacks and I mean it depends on the property right but they're already working outside of some are all at the bounds now you're giving them the opportunity to expand without putting any kind of percentage of expansion or keeping minimums or anything that's the only thing that this was the revolving door we ended at last meeting that you're going to look at and see whether what level we were going to continue to allow to be decided by the building inspector Who currently does this and acts as a preemptive by right granter before having to come to us um I guess my process was just um was whether sending the three years or less ones for um site plan on but then again I mean the problem becomes is that the way site plan review reads you have to find that the comp un you can't do that definition so um I mean do you just take that do you just take that first section and basically require submission of a site plan and a f and in a limited finding that uh the proposed structure operations not right so that's just submit us submit your plan to the planning board for notwithstanding 18537 which says the opposite submit your plan to those planning board so they can make a finding that it's not more V so that's takes care of the three years or less and then what years to 10 years you got to do the the special perment process and then also have that do that make sense that give some kind of more balance right I mean it gives some ability of the planning board to look at right I mean there may be properties that just it's it's not an issue if they expand a little bit me it's hard to set a certain percentage or certain whatever for whatever boundary that they may be not in compliance with but it always let the planning board look at it before they do it sweet how out of sorts it is what do you think if it will pass attorney general muster that's all we're shooting for um I've been thinking about this for months now so kind of I just think I mean you gota I get the residential I just you got to have some I mean you don't get to do whatever you want just because you have discontinu more than three years right I mean you got there's got to be some boundary you're going from zero till no changes to whatever changes want that seems like too much because you got to deal with neighbors and whatever else right I mean so I think the plan Bo should at least have eyes on because the neighbor aspect of it is going to have more residents with these types of properties right I mean you could have properties that are buting up to that foundary if they want to go closer to that foundary arguably under this they could just do it right so I think there has to be site plan here um all right John comma in which case the applicant shall submit a site plan for review I guess be right there but um go that after uh plan for review by the planning board [Music] um um for endorsement Upon A finding you got the language down six years man' something was bound to absorb uh that and then just take that language from the proposed structure or alterations yeah so now I you don't have to or you know what yeah take the whole thing I'm sorry take the whole thing find that yeah take the whole [Music] so is that work for folks yes if maybe POS okay all right so then we change to what happened to okay this old version no I just split out we did abc4 I gave a subsection to a talk about years or less that one p the goalie top Town Stu all right um so this is the rebuilding one which that just kicks it from 24 to 36 Jessica is that the biggest the only change I think and that does not apply just residential that applies to any that basically says you can rebuild on the okay get 36 mons okay perfect then um so I think this it should basically start with for um for proposed instead um instead of the four for or I guess for the yeah yeah and pluralize changes changes alter yeah extensions alterations [Music] not um not covered by section 1A is that what we want to just do is that make it easier I mean I was going to say not not for for non residential structures yeah yeah yeah or but then you also have to add in over 10 years right because that was the other part of a right so I was just going to say that doesn't it's not covered by 1 a yeah um probably Section 1 a Above So this oops [Music] um I need because I like I can describe that better awesome but if you do not give me that leave it in there leave it in there I just didn't know why if we arrive at a confus I hope is that there's some flexibility in the motion all right Council I do our work of course um not co uh the planning board so take out B um and I think it's basically the same thing as before right um you shall I grab that I don't want to leave just shall I yeah yeah grab that amended I think that's [Music] right yeah probably don't need the M off but we can see it excuse me I get um so after above yeah raise that but go after above um um after above comma okay and then I would write after the comma uh such changes extensions or alterations may be allowed by special extensions or alterations may be um Allowed by special Department granted by the planning board right is it not is it only residential use so just be Contin use yeah good I'm done that work all right so it basically applies the same thing from residential 3 to1 to all other stuff okay all right so let's go down to this got be that same it again see [Music] how all right you added an extraction on the bot what is that that last thing I I don't know what that oh no I know okay that's fine all anything else on that section on the um structures all right so now we've taken care of structures so now lastly uses um anyways um uses we have the same general language it may be continued not be changed or extended langage [Music] maybe okay so this changes the continuation of use to two years to three years okay and then let's just take that same language know just P it right now you still have um that I think it's where I am did that not get there yeah we're we're okay yeah you're fine just got to take out residential one um that's yeah maybe let's do the maybe alter okay got get going on this got get you a mouse thanks I appreci it pass the9 um so on go back up go back go back down yeah I think sorry all right continue to use provided that such use is not been okay so then nonconforming residential uses have yeah there you go and it just be maybe continue Al y okay that right I'll strike the I think you want to get rid and the residential output right I'm sorry the word residential just no you need res talking about but yes I think right about okay um yes okay and then and structure all right okay we good with that [Music] MH okay and then the next section is just the Sally um that's the other one with 36 months language under the existing B if you're correct has a 24 just ch 36 and then uh it talks about when we're talking about structures whe provide the building as we built and restore shall not be greater in volume or area from the original nonform structure so I think that same logic is being brought over to the use consideration right I mean to for so I'm just trying to think of the scenario right that you have a non-conforming use that's the only thing that's non-conforming building it's not it's bur down you then want to rebuild building can you expand it make it bigger under but there's nothing non-conforming about the building oh I'm sorry so if it's just a non-conforming use right say you're a business in a residential area burns down you want to rebuild the building and continue that use what about the scenario where you then can just build it however big you want to as long as it complies with right then you're building the intensity impact of such nonconform use I guess intensity right that's where it would right so Walt's garage burs down he's can resume the use three years from now because it takes them that long to rebuild it okay so but here's the only thing on this one that we there has you have it you have the the condition that has to the finding that has to be made but we need to set up a process for to be made right is it is there let go back make sure the special Perman is mentioned in a I don't think it's mentioned above that so we have to add in some way to make that finding I guess maybe it's just site plan review like we did before if it's just rebuilding and continuing the use [Music] um um that right do that make sense your concern about it in the prior section is because it was already a structure that was outside the bounds and so you're worried about somebody rebuilding something too large for the area in this case we're talking about usage so if Walt's garage comes in to get a permit from the building inspector and says I'm just reestablishing my business that burned down 34 months ago the building inspector at that point can say okay here's a building permit to build another garage for that use but here's so in B right here right you have the condition that the intensity and impact of such non conforming use upon the neighborhood of suround property shall not be increased over the level of existence prior right there has to be a comes in and says I'm going to rebuild a massive car dealership in carvana Tower then the building inspector is going to say that's a change in use that's not reconing your use no so that's what I'm saying so it's I'm not talking about the decision I'm talking about the process so that's a finding that needs to be made to allow for that to happen who's making that finding the building inspector or us I think in under the threeyear period of time I would presume that they could do that but that who can do that the building inspector as it current as it currently stands that's what he does no but you're giving you're now giving [Music] him that's he does not ever in any scenario that I can think of make a decision about whether the intensity impact of abuse is being increased or not right he's not making that decision ever so that's something that you're now putting on him to make a decision about rather than having the board make that decision at that point wouldn't he be telling the building inspector that he'd be increasing the size of the building if that's the case well then that that would trigger him having to come back to us no because the building is not building is not non-conforming okay just a use it's just a use and why we use the example right Walt burns down um not that sorry M down you then want to put a car dealership in large car dealership in right as long as it fit within the bounds of that property and met the setbacks and the page and whatever else for that zone then he could just submit that to the building inspector for a permit and as long as the permit as long as the bilding color said it's not bilding would have to make that decision check that box and we would never see it so that's that's the only concern that I have is that you're not putting that decision which is traditionally a planning board decision in the hands of the bill inspector I'm just saying that in this instance when we're talking when right now in our current bylaw when we're talking about a building destroyed or damaged by catastrophe we already allow it without it coming before us this is an exent that we have built in we have right now if it stays within the same bookprint right which is fine okay but if you want to expand this isn't talking about this year right now we're not talking about bookprint right now we're talking about use so and in the past it was all muddled together correct no that's what I'm saying right and so because of that if you separate them out you got to consider the situation where because the language before combined use and structure and it said that if you wanted to rebuild within the same footprint you're fun it didn't say whe whether you had non-conforming use or whether you had non-conforming structure it said if it burns down and you want to if you fall into this chapter and it burns down and you want to rebuild in the same footprint you're fine right now we're separating those out and under structure we say same fine yeah and same use fine but that opens it up to building it however big you want I mean I guess why in this one if you we're not concerned about it being built however big you want if it's already in a I mean that's a completely new process then if you're trying about a new building it's not it's just going to the building aspect that's what I'm telling you all right but so that's what we do now it's not I mean if you want to add a site plan review goad no no I mean just use the example that you're saying right Walts burns down yeah there's a difference between Waltz being rebuilt as it is yeah and a giant car dealership going on that property and that strikes me as something that probably should come in front of the planning board if we want to continue the quote unquote Car Sales use you know at that property whether that change in intensity is appropriate right because that's a non-conforming use of that property right but so but we're not asking him to tell us whether it's appropriate or not he's saying whether there is a substantial change in use Walt is just rebuilding what Walt had before then it's not a change it's not a substantial change in use it's within the three-year period of time because of catastrophe okay if we're talking about a substantial change in use then it's on him to kick it to us I just to me that's a that's a finding that a building inspector sort of outside of the building inspector's General perect that that's a planning Bo decision in my mind and I would keep it with the planning Bo I don't mind having something that says um sorry it says um that has the same provision that b 1B has about the building is rebuilt or restore it should not be greater in volum or area than the original not than the original building structure if it says that and you want to just say you can rebuild it that's fine but I think there has to be a provision for something that comes to the planning board if they want to make it bigger but right there's a big difference between making it 10t bigger and 100t bigger I mean that's that's PR difference and it's just I'm not sure you put it on the building inspector to make that fall it all I mean it may be unbiased but I've also seen building inspectors Grant permits to put up electric signs where they don't so I'm not necessarily running out to give the building inspector the ab to check a box and say everything is fine so I I don't know maybe that's my own bias I'd rather come in front of a board that has to look at it and have five people to sort of cover that basis um so then is the a section here for rebuilding after catastrophy not needed because is we're talking no matter what change they do with the usage because it's a pre-existing nonconforming use we want to see it regardless if it's 10et or 100 feet because this was included in the previous bylaw and an encapsulation of all three issues of non-conformity no I that had an addressing for the case of the building and for it to be allowed within its original footprint we took away the original footprint portion of it we're now taking away its by right portion of it so it should just completely come out and every use alteration change whatever whether it's a change to the building or to its intensity of useage has to come for us in a special I just I I think you it is it is more um protect to draft this to say that if you want if it's Dam destroyed or damaged by fire um or whatever you can rebuild it just the way it was and that's not a problem right I think that's fine and continue to use the non-conforming use in the building that is the same as before that's fine you don't have to come to the planing board just go get your building permit rebuild but if you are going to do something outside of that I I don't necessarily want to leave it to the building insector to make draw that line as to where that expansion becomes intensity and impact you know blah blah blah I mean I just that to me is not I'd rather have the building inspector have solid lines of okay are you in the same footprint yep okay you can do that you're not in the same footprint okay go to the planning board and get even it's just a site plan review fine but again this section is not about footprint this is about use so in this section it's an it's an inappropriate line if we're not gonna though so so you're just copying and pasting everything that we have up top for this but changing the word structure to use yes no but here's tell me if I'm WR I'm happy to be right I'm going to assume that whil it has a Christ if there's a fire there I'm gonna be I'm gonna assume that that is a conforming structure yes right I'm G I'm just going to assume that's a conforming structure so the only thing non-conforming about that property right now is the use okay and the use right now is Car Sales repair whatever so um the if there is a fire and it burns down then right now under this Theory or right now they would have the ability to rebuild in the same footprint and continue that use under the existing B what they don't have the ability to do right now is make that footprint bigger and continue to send use and so what this would be doing is putting it on the building inspector to decide somewhat discretionary language about intensity and what have you which would basically build in some ability to make that building bigger when it gets rebuilt and continue the same use rather than having the strict line of it's not you can rebuild it in the same footprint but and continue the same non-conforming use but you if you're going to go beyond that what do we do my answer would be in the first section a special permit would be triggered because it's outside the original footprint is that now it's not a non-conforming structure but you're saying that in in an expand of use and structure like it's going to be triggered by the change in the structure like it's going to so what I'm talking about right now is use right no but right now under the bite if you have either a non-conforming structure or a non-confirming use yeah or both and that building burns down Y and you rebuild it all within the same only rebild it within the same foot correct right and so and at that point in time if somebody comes if Walt comes in and says I'm just going to rebuild it in the same place and doesn't tell the building inspector he's going to change his usage then he can do it right now we're we're saying if you are coming to us and saying you're going to also change the usage of a location that was previously destroyed and you want to change the usage this is the this is the process going forward for that right now I can come in and just say I'm rebuilding the structure are you doing the same use yeah sure this we're asking for a little bit more detail we just tell them not the building's going to move so easier what is restored at the same location same property yeah the same not the same okay Mike yeah I think we should keep it within the planning board if it goes to the building inspector and let's say there's some change but the building insector doesn't see it or just sort of holds a blind eye to it that's going to come back and bite us someday just say well so and so two years ago did the same thing and made the building bigger and building spctor said okay at least if we do it we can like it or don't like it and then give it to the building spctor make the decision I don't think we should give up the um the oversight of the of the situation I mean we can always pass it off to him well at least we get to look at it first if the building spor has it he may not pass it back to us to F tune it and I don't think he's going to want the extra responsibility right now TimeWise we asking I mean is the issue that okay the and building inspector or concerned his interpretation look intensity and impact just be clear to say as long as the use does not change from that of the prior whatever because that'd be pretty obvious you change or not and and take away this well yeah it's changed but it's less intense it's not as any more intense so I'm okay but it still doesn't want to change it still doesn't no because leaving that intensity and impact is sort of vaguely covering expansion of the structure does c address what you're saying you read down a little bit to see does that address what you're saying uh no uh no only because that's a separate okay except uh I don't think at least in my mind all right well I guess what do you want to do I mean tell me if I'm wrong but right now as I read this build inspector has to make a decision about whether the intensity and impact is increased right that's the way the reads right so since B is an exception that we make for it seemed like the intent of that inclusion of an exemption in our prior bylaw was meant to provide protection for the building the building itself burns down you're going to rebuild it within the same footprint you may do that you're allowed to do that okay this section we don't necessarily want to give that protection to use it because we don't trust our building inspector to make an appropriate determination whether or not the use is being changed or not therefore let's remove b c becomes B and we change it to changed extended altered or rebuilt only by a special permit granting when it comes to use non-conforming use keep the structure and use question separate for I just think we're thinking about these very different I just I I don't think we're on the same page we how we I'm thinking about I just they're two separate things in it they are two separate things they're set up be two separate things of this right so but what you but right now we're talking about massaging this exception it's no longer an exception if we want a special permit or to see a site plan every time a a building gets rebuilt when it has a non-conforming use aspect of it but that's what I'm saying so then this exception doesn't belong in this section it only belongs in the structure section I think you are conflating non-conforming uses in non-conforming structures into then both having it there are scenarios where you having non-conforming use but structure perfectly fine right and you're and but so I feel like you're conflating it because you're saying that we can say well they can come back and do the same use but if they but if they increase their building then they're intensifying the use okay okay but then that's a question of use not building and and and this exception is talking about a loss of the structure because of catastrophe not because all of a sudden they decided nobody was going to run a restaurant anymore this is specifically an exemption that initiated in our bylaw to protect a structure to be rebuilt within the same footprint this section is not talking about rebuilding a structure within the same footprint because it was pre-existing nonconforming now we're talking about a use that's fine and we can do the V diagram of where those inter but I mean the the intensity of use and enlarging the structure are pretty together on that V diagram right I mean one is sort of a subset of the other then there may be other so so in that case then if the structure is changed it falls under the other section and will come before us anyways that's what that's where that's where I think you're missing it is because if you increase the intensity of the use by making the structure bigger as long as that structure was conforming you don't have to come in front of us under Section B in our new bylaw that we are currently writing correct then then I I've washed my hands of it because apparently I don't know what we're talking about anymore if it's changed so much that that's that that's how far off base I am and how far our brains are and we should have had this discussion prior to this meeting I don't want to vote on it tonight we're g to stop using walls um there we just and now we now we have staff coming up to stare at us it's and we're not going to come to a votable bylaw tonight we have to side of this and come and come to a better understanding so that you and my brain are are on better terms or I'll just abstain from it and you guys can go on it however you want within the next 30 minutes what board meeting you were coming to that all I have to say I can give you that answer I can give you that answer later so I mean you want to take this off the town meeting this sort of structural understanding should have been attained a month ago and we're not all on the same base and we're not on the same page and we're not going to get to that same page within a reasonable amount of time tonight and if we cannot do that and have it done in time for the meeting then I guess we can why do we all why do we have to all be on the same page you're right we don't we can vote on it person who wrote it and may has apparently an understanding of it that's different than everybody else then guys can do what you want go ahead dick edit it from home all right so let's here's what i' said in the for the for the purposes of getting this on the tumy I would suggest we'll leave it the way it is we can talk more about it as we go forward and make sure everybody's on the same page and adjust it as we need to At a next meeting if we need to um and just keep the building inspector I mean this is not a common scenario so this ever H if this happens in those period of time we can let the building expector know that this is an issue right that we're trying to figure out that would be my suggestion we'll leave it the way it is and the way it is right now the way 20 minutes ago right now right is that acceptable I we could reprint it out and let me read it in total sure because we've made so many editat to it tonight yeah that's fine all right um we have to tweet C if we keep going forward only because that same thing about um no no that's fine so that's fine the big moment where we get rid of the highlighted sure excuse me Mike in um section B John second line up you have the neighborhood and surrounding properties shall be not be sure I am there you go thank you all right you can UNH highlight that um and not apply to B and signs blah blah blah yeah the rest of the keep going downard signs okay same thing as before uh except for shall I go grab yeah I'll grab this one from before just pop it down into that and then I think we're that right think so okay and then what are you he for sorry but if anybody should know how it does yeah it's running out the scenario I think just to get to the meat of it which is to allow other places to sort of tweak some right [Music] um I I haven't really been completely ption you don't want people to be able to tweak easily because then you're GNA have even more problem and always believe that the word detail and the more specific you get in the bylaw you're giving people amount more options to find a loop Okay so why don't we close the hearing we can move on to the next here and then we will we will print this out in the meantime can run through it are you okay with that okay all right do I hear a motion to close this hearing da being so moved honorary um do I hear a second yes you did okay roll call vote Michael dhy i d i j singer I David Sutton I just and I okay so that is closed we will take up the vote on it after this 8 o00 in planning board time continued public hearing zone change petition for 2:33 South Rob got ate by a sh streets Mr is here all right um Rob do you hear music all right so um rob you unmuted there you are okay um what do we have here to add to this tonight you're asking me yes I'll be brief nothing you're just see as you didn't really start it last week yeah yeah what happened H it's uh is the season of public hearings I guess um so thank thank you for your time uh the record Rob L Marc Associates um we're we're requesting a zoning map Amendment um to be heard at town meeting uh we're requesting that the uh the subject parcel which is now split zon with R40 at the arguably East End of the property um with agricultural conservation on the U majority of the remaining Western portion of the property uh be reson so that it is contiguous and entire Le Zone R40 which will allow us to work on becoming um you know a little bit more compliant with the existing facility as well as the potential for expanding uh the facility to some extent obviously subject to the site plan and special permit applications for you know that type of thing so uh right now uh I would argue that a portion of the existing Campground uh for Sodom mountain is considered pre-existing non-conforming um and as you guys have just with the uh regulations associated with pre-existing non-conforming uses um you are aware that uh under the current regulations we're um if we were to seek relief to allow for the extension of a pre-existing non-conforming use or the expansion thereof cannot expand beyond the existing fo so with any luck you folks will also resolve the uh doing the hard work to uh figure that one out uh but at the same time this will allow us to um work with the planning board on you know renovation and potentially some expansion plans to the extent that you know at the time we come in you know something is palatable to the the planning board I know that um there were specific questions to and I think it's a very logical question um what is potentially also allowed in the R40 zoning District in general without getting into the details um you know single family homes are allowed um as you can imagine um you know parting with a a lucrative Campground is not um ideal um and you know switching to a residential single family use um not only is literally in my opinion impossible um from a financial and logistical and Geo geometric standpoint when it comes to this property um so I think um any fears related to any sort of potential for single family residential should be um met with the um the understanding of the the uh I guess logistical and also topographical constraints of the property where I I would not ever expect anything to that effect being done so uh again we're requesting the uh entire property D Zone we respectfully request the planing board um uh make a positive recommendation to select Intown meeting and I'm happy to answer any questions you have thank you um board questions or comments nothing okay anything you want to add um I for the sake of discussion I did reflect upon uh we call the purpose of the AC Zone um I think the the relevant elements that relate to oh shoot you're G Make Me Turn the Page to protect natural to prevent waste pollution and slope erosion AC is a district to protect natural drainage blood retention areas and natural water table prevent water pollution slow corrosion to continue to promote agricultural land and power so I feel like uh we'll call the relevant elements of that purpose statement to me would be we'll call it natural drainage and protection against soap or maybe something to prevent water pollution related to ro so all I want to do is reflect upon those items and the SP site specific factors uh that MRC mentioned about there being logistical and and topographic constraints that would generally continue to protect the property um and preserve those purposes oh um all right any else okay [Music] um public comments I would be me You' be the public area 228 Sou stre um the the concern that I have is the big picture so if you look at the zoning that entire mountain is preserved and I don't think there's anybody I'm going to say this because Ken left I don't think there's anybody in this room or very many people who haven't walked that entire stretch from Sodom Mountain up to Grandville Road ever but I and my husband have done it many times and there is a lot of Wildlife and a lot of wetlands and a lot of everything I am not close to the zone change because I know there's a lot there that needs to be fixed and I know the only way to fix it is to probably bring in more income I get that but what I don't really approve of and I know from being on planning board they all you always want to change the whole parcel but there's plenty of parcels including this one that are split I mean all along here there's you know residential I mean the guy that's here half of his property is I just to me the only reason they're doing the whole parcel is because it's easier than surveying and writing two Deets I would I would prefer they're not going to I mean it's 240 acres the Campground is basically this much of it right now so even if they expand it up in here to to make more money and whatever there's still if you look at the the big picture if maybe you if maybe you kept you know 150 or 100 acres across there I mean there are Fox duns deer runs bear places Bears can settle I mean there's a lot and I just I understand that the intent is not to go all the way up there and I know what Rob is saying it's going to be very difficult but if you have enough money you can do just about anything you want you know and and so I it concerns me because you know they it I don't see how they're going to get very I mean it's it's rough and there are some some trails that look like they could be br from when they put the pipeline in they're not maintained or anything like that but they do show where oh wait they took a big you know big truck whatever those trucks are called you know up here to to get rid of this um but you know that's a whole other issue is the Tennessee gas pipeline runs right through this property I don't know what that would you know do for them but I just my big thing is I mean if you look at this it just cuts a hole right completely through a zone that if you look on the rest of the this you know over here they protected that mountain our forefathers saw that you know you you protect some of that stuff so that things don't happen in it for a reason I mean there's so there's so much water up there wetlands and everything you know I mean there's when they go for their special permit or whatever it's going to be to expand there'll be other issues like the gentleman that was here right now he's right under where they're going to go and at least one of those houses one of them's been around since 17 or 1839 I don't remember it's got you know dirt you know Stone basement and everything and I'm sure it's wet you can't tell me they're going to be able to keep everything up there yes they're supposed to but I mean we're redoing the drainage in front of my house because there's so much water coming off that mountain there's areas where it's like a waterfall or whatever and but I understand the finances behind it you know the acans and the LEF Frances they struggled I get it um and they the new owner is amazing they've you know cleaned it up put in more infrastructure they're definitely headed in the right direction um I just don't feel like the entire property needs to be changed and then cutting this off with the potential if they went up in there you know you can never say it's never going to happen but you do that in all the wildlife that goes across that the top of that mountain is going to have to go through a campground not saying it wouldn't campgrounds aren't as bad as subdivisions but it's also are 40 so you could find a way and you could probably go up and I don't know who lives over here but you know you might be able to go up and over you know depending on the zoning there so I mean that's it's to me it's just writing another deed and just having it not be 240 acres getting cut through but maybe you know leave a hundred or leave whatever I don't I don't know I don't care but you know it I know it's more work and little tricky rob you know I've written Deeds like you know I get it well this Echoes another public comment Rob that you missed um from Mr Phelps at the last meeting were um taking he had a similar suggestion where you evaluate with your um your client with their buildout analysises and give us a limit of a cut here so that we can respect the AC Zone and keep it protected and as she says not just for water erosion but for environmental purposes and Wildlife corridors and the such and the like and I mean they they Mark in here proposed impact the proposed zone change to residential fential 40 is consistent with the zoning around the neighborhood okay it the the neighborhood is not and even these Lots along here are cut in half so they don't even you know they're all part of the AC Zone and then the next page says the proposed Z zone change will not impact the surrounding neighborhood well okay there's only the neighborhood that's down the waterfalls you know and I it it will affect them it definitely will changing the topography which I'm sure they will have to to be able to zigzag up and there but you know that's another subject that's the permitting that they have to come through and the drainage that they have to do and all that that this is only about the zone change and the only thing that I'm bothered by is there's really no reason to go all the way up to the line and completely allow allow it who knows and that's just that's you know my only that's really it's not huge and it probably won't get changed it'll probably be the whole piece and I'll be that one person that says no but you know it's it just doesn't seem necessary either because it's also a bump out like there's got to be a way to just you know not it's just another deed what paron his dick I'm in Florida hey um how far does that property go does it go past the Stevens and it go past the mor yeah no it um actually goes um you have it there I but yes there's already there's already Campground be behind the Stevens it that shows on my little diagram here okay the ones in the woods not the main part but you know the part that kind of like goes off I mean I don't know when was the last time here but there there's like you know little little wooded ones that aren't um can't take the big RVs and those are up the hill from the houses that you're talking about does it go as far does it go as far as an empty Warehouse um need the big one no there's another parcel in between there um there's a moral house right so after the mors house there's that little strip that goes in and then it's on the other side of the lake that's where the Boy Scouts were going to go in that's not part of this okay because there is a um empty Warehouse back there that um because used to use yeah we all know what's in there but nobody's doing anything about it that's not this property okay thank you can I can I uh speak to the chair yes cor thank you sir uh is it possible to share my screen sure Rob a second sir thank you sir all set right see are you guys looking at the boat I want to buy I'm just kid just um so yeah so just to um to talk about a little bit about what was just discussed so all good points raised by Raz um here we are with the Campground road that comes up right the frontages here off of South Lumis um I don't want to call this a plateau because it's not perfectly flat but the current Campground is right in this area extends probably to about here there's yeah there's some good pretty good Wetland here and then it splits and there's also some Wetland that comes down and their existing septic system is over here which is arguably you know in disrepair along with a lot of the other out buildings and whatnot so if I go to zoning and I can actually figure this out bear with me um aha so you'll see from the agricultural conservation zoning that first of all this area the majority of the campground other than down by the road is zoned R40 um I'm sorry did I say that right the majority of the camper on ground is z agricultural conservation with a very small strip of R40 down the front so back to the discussion about um the extent of the zone so I can shut this off okay um with any luck you're looking at it without the zoning on it so there is a really significant grade change that start starts right about here this is the tow the slope of what I would call the mountain where the mountain really really starts so um the trick is going to be that the you know if there is an expansion we would expect that there would be a wildlife portal mean pain more on a um in a site planning and special permit approach pretty much between this uh tow slope um and arguably up to probably in this area so if you were to kind of think about the property in thirds the first third is already developed as a campground which is agricultural conservation um there is a fairly steep portion of the M the the hillside here that um arguably um would remain untouched wooded other than you know an access road or two to get up to what we're calling an upper Plateau here um there's definitely ample ways to make sure that wild wild corridors are are managed we can even you know as you look at the topography you can kind of see that this upper um flatter more desirable area um is really running kind of we call it north south along the ridge um so you know there's ways to make sure that Wildlife corridors multiple I would say multiple Wildlife corridors in one that's going to arguably be hundreds of linear feet if I can measure it here I will um so from the toe slope up to where I would expect any sort of uh expansion to be it's about, 1500 Lon feet um from those you know from those two green points so um so it's not a matter of like cutting off the Western portion of the property based on the actual topographical um you know sit situation can't really you know break the out break out the middle of agricultural conservation because we kind of when you so we fully intend to work with the planning board early on in the process for any sort of site planning um our next step uh you know was obviously you know to try to get this through town meeting um that requires 66% of the vote um you know and then in the meantime we're hoping to talk to the fire department there's a lot of you know there definitely I don't want you know there a lot of hair on it right so a lot stuff to figure out before we have what I would call a posable reasonable plan to bring before the planning board um so to the extent that we don't cut the canvas off in any particular location would be helpful to us because as you can see we have a number of topographical constraints that will already create significant Wildlife corridors running north south on the bridge um and then I I do think it would be slightly impacted by our access roads but you know we're talking about trying to keep those as minimal as possible and I'm hoping for it's probably going to be two just so that we have an alternate emergency access back down the hill um uh I think there was a question as to what's going on in Grandville on the other side right now the the zoning in Grandville would not allow uh for us to connect through the campground um for the purposes of actually access um there's a gentleman that owns the property that we've been contact brid and we potentially will try to connect if if it's palatable to him and it works if it works we would try to connect to them it's Mr um I think it's Armstrong I think it's the name Armstrong I believe um and he has a cell tower load up there in the back right at the top uh probably right about either or so so the idea would be um if we can for alternate access for fire vehicles or something like that we would certainly that but so yeah so I understand where you're coming from with regard to you know wanting to make sure that Wildlife corridors are um maintain but the reason we're going through a zone change is not just because it's a little bit uh more straightforward from a you know deed point of view It's really because we need the canvas in order to get up to the upper location where there would be viable potential campsites but I mean I you know and I get I mean it's it's not totally preventing a wildlife quarter but you're cutting through it one way or the other yeah with the road yep but again these are not unrestricted Wildlife corridors I mean you know you got Route 57 that runs through it you got a number of other St put land behind Stevens so I mean it would be you know it would be a matter of a deer or a fox running across a uh you know a campground one or likely two well I presume there's I mean it's not just a straight shot you're going up there I assume there's got to be a bunch of switchbacks and whatever else to get up it's gonna be really expensive make much money yeah and they might even walk up the road might be easier for them to get up the road too I emergency vehicles have to get up there I you know I'm sure when when it comes down to actually putting it in Rob's going to have plenty of stumbling blocks to to get through and you know it's but it is disruptive and it will affect the water table and the all that kind of stuff maybe it'll improve it maybe it'll slow it down so it's not running into everybody's yard down below but um you know and there's also a part of me it's like go ahead and then you know spend that money and don't ever get it back because you don't make much money as a campground but I do think think they need a little expansion you know to be able to make the changes that they need they do need a few more campsites but uh they're not going to fill all those sites there's not that much to do in Southwick but that's their business decision it's not you know you know mean you know it's not it's not a big deal I get it that you could change the whole thing and it and it probably won't affect much in the i in my opinion they'll they probably won't be able to get up there to do Camp campsites it's pretty um it's a pretty tough way to get there but Rob knows that I don't you know I don't know you know conservation is going to have a lot a lot to say but you know I I just wanted to bring it up because it's my one thing that's just it it just it sorry it's gonna make the map look funny no I'm just kidding I I mean I just I I I think I would probably guess that most if not everyone is okay with the camp improving it needs to be and becoming more economically viable um as business but it's just a matter of how to get there right I'm not I'm personally not necessarily sold on the zone change I just I think there's probably better ways to do it and if you're mean I almost wonder whether right I mean what we're playing around with with the non-conforming that will allow you to play around with the campground in the front and improve that area in the front and then but how many non-conforming things are you going to allow there's a lot there's a lot they need to do you know to get conforming to AC or to the uh commercial recreation that's where most of the restrictions are right yeah but I just I wonder whether and it depends on obviously the language we come up with with the nonconforming but I just I don't think that in this area as sort of isolated as it is for the most part where they're doing the campground that they you can really make a great argument that there's a huge impact by the improvements that they're suggesting up there right I mean I just don't think it's going to have no it's it's out of the way it's you know so but they have to meet meet health and safety I mean there's there's plenty of issues up there that need to be fixed um and but I don't think they're building buildings I mean they have one building up there you know that has an apartment and has a kitchen and stuff like that and they do events you can you know have a banket or whatever and they probably need new bathrooms and I heard a rumor that the and I don't know if it's true or not that the either the septic or the well have to be moved because they're too close together you know so I mean and those are expensive you know Renovations but I don't know how much expansion they would have to do to actually recoup that um but I do know that they you know have some money to dump into it so no but this is I mean this is sort of the prime example or one of the Prime examples as to why I wanted to look at the nonperforming use bylaw which is this has been around for God knows how long right it was Resort I wanted him to tell you about yeah but I mean it's been used as commercial recreation yeah forever forever and so at some point it becomes well you know why are we not allowing them to change things when it forever I want it to to survive I don't want it to not not make it I'm just wondering whether the front can be adjusted through different means through the non-conforming bylaw and back or the top whatever you want to call it the top can be potentially down the line a zone change that only deals with the specific area that you're looking at I'm not sure that putting a Access Road in between those two things necessarily needs to be through a residential Zone I mean I'm not sure that you wouldn't be able to put an Access Road between in an a C Zone to get between those two things I don't I don't know the answer well most of it is well I don't know but I mean I I think if you're accessing it from another if you're not accessing that from the other side if if what Rob said is if you're accessing that top part from the other side from the other side there's a lot of real big  um I I don't it's true anybody will do anything may not necessarily need to be in the R40 it may be able to be allowed in the AC Zone because it's just an emergency access R right it's not necessarily part yeah but if they want to build Campground up there well no I don't know I you know I mean I we could rethink it and hash it out you know till the end of time you know it um but to me because of that strip there I I mean I get it you you want to have another two 200 campsites that go ahead and fill them really like that's a big part of it um but you know to me really just need that you know that bottom part and get more they need to get more sites for sure and the commercial residential I mean the commercial recreation actually doesn't allow as many sites as they have up there there're supposed to be a certain distance apart whoever wrote that has never been camping because I've never been in a c campsite where they're 100 feet between them I agree with that you know I mean if you do redo the commercial don't worry we already have a red line from Rob on it it's already yeah yeah I I you know I just you know it's just protection of that that strip right there that he's talking about the high part yes it'll still you know get um Wildlife it's there's roads and things like that that are up there and I I just that are already there you know if I'm putting in the pipeline they're not roads that you can drive on um I don't know I just yeah if I if I can interrupt so yeah so you know a little bit of color commentary on on you know kind of you know their thought so you know I'm working with Sam from Sam from s builders um he you know he's been pretty clear you know when we initially what we had done was kind of a compliance audit so to speak you know there's there's a number of different regulatory um agencies that that that regulate Camp drivs regulated by the states regulated uh sometimes by Title 5 sometimes under the DP Wastewater regulations depending on the uh the total flows you have Public Water Supplies out here which are also you know stuff that you know R had alluded to um you know so you know public water yeah public yeah public water supply um there's no public there's no public water up there they're on a well it's a public water so to clarify the public water supply is any Supply that you know provides water to over 12 people and you know there's yeah yeah so they have a public water supply number there's two two Wells on site both which have public water supply numbers and they have an operator as you can imagine you know you don't want to give people bad water at a campground so um so they they are well so you know so there's a number of things that we looked at and essentially found that you know there's things that be upgraded and in you know there compliance issues to be General um that said you know there's costs associated with all of that and you know to One affect those changes and two potentially to you know keep the campground viable the the thought process was that you know it makes sense not only does it does it make sense to do to hopefully try to EXP a little bit to pay for those upgrades but also incorporate those upgrades into whatever their plans are because it doesn't make sense to you know do a public water supply or you know you know treatment septic systems for you know a certain number of units and it turns out you're going to you know try to do other things so it you know makes sense for them to do a comprehensive logical you know a straightforward approach to this um where we really logically think about everything there's a master plan that gets executed probably gets executed in phases um but allows them to also you know become lucrative so um so that's kind of the game plan it's really again it's only step one the control will absolutely be in the hands of the planning board with the um you know with the special permit our intent would be this it would be to um if we are you know get the zone change it would be um we would like to come in probably we start informally uh communicate with the planning board uh communicate with the fire department talk about Wildlife corridors talk about Wetland resource areas our next step would be to map the Wetland you know a whole bunch of other um you know mapping to provide really a better picture of what's out there um and the goal would be and their goal as a client has been made very clear to me is they would design with nature you know the idea is you know we would work on the land that we can obviously we have some constraints and we have some topographic issues but you know there's really two areas right there's the area that you see here you can kind of see the Contours and then there's this area up here so those are really the two viable areas um for a comfortable campsite it's beautiful up there uh product devid speak to that it's just you know super super attractive so a goal would be to try to provide something that's palatable exping board work to you guys on some of the details um if the pre-existing non-conformance section gets passed the town meeting hopefully um potentially we could take advantage of that as Mr G said but um to be as compliant as possible the thought was that the R40 zone change um made sense in the perfect world we'd have some of those text edits that we talked about so that it actually is designed by or written by somebody who's been camping before as R said um but you know I think our first step is R40 uh hopefully and then we would you know wouldn't be an overnight process we would certainly Look to You Know work with the planning board on a special permit and take the comments that R took it you know put you know put into place here and it really worked with you guys and including RZ and the other people in the neighborhood for sure so that would that's our goal so we would respectfully if you can see a way forward to make a positive recommendation that would be our goal I think we might be running out of time on you know we have another meeting we have I mean I guess and we'll wrap this up shortly my only last question would be I mean explain to me why that wouldn't be an attractive place to put a small residential development uh so first of all uh on the front part I mean I'm not let's disregard the back of it where it is sort of develop now say they weren't able to make that economically viable what why would you not why would that not be attractive for a small I don't think I don't first of all I don't think you can do it I think R probably and John the fact that you have to go more than 800 feet to get where you would be doing them and you don't have another way to get out isn't that part of the subdivision rules and rs you can only have a dead end that's a certain thing you need another way to get out there's only one way to get in and out of that place that's it right there and the grades you can see that the Campground road that I'm showing here in white um you know that is kind of switching you know the reason it's not going straight up the mountains because it it can't you have to come across the grade literally you'd be going almost straight up the hill right so there's multiple reasons why um a residential subdivision is in my opinion is and financially infeasible not to mention the value of the campground the campground that exists there certainly has value um you know if you talk to the guys from and other companies they'll they'll tell you that the cost of Roads has gone from about $450 to $500 Ling your foot up to about $1,000 Ling your foot in the last couple years so you know the act I don't I think the number of subdivision roads that you see being put in I think there's going to be really really skinny profits on a lot of these for a while um so it's not it's phys in my opinion it's not possible reason it's not impossible is because of this and the strip that goes out like it's not impossible but it would be negotiation and stuff like that with people that you know everybody bends for money I mean as as it would be an attractive place to have a house would be it would be a  to put septics in and Wells they'd all need septics in Wells right that be really you need there's ledge up on the hill and the certain yeah no it's it's much more conducive to a campground it's logical um and Campground has significant value as is so I think doesn't confute doesn't pencil out I mean I I just wanted to make a point that you know to consider and it honestly I know Rob they'll be able to find a way to to find a way up there and and everything but financially I don't know if anybody has that kind of money from the income that comes in from a campground because that's one of the reasons why there weren't any improvements because the family that had it before was you know breaking even they you know so correct and I I mean again I don't this isn't necessarily the market of the location but I mean there are plenty of houses that are built on these type of scenarios and ski resorts and whatever else right I mean you're going up to whatever height and building on ledge and blowing it up so and then see how that affects the AC Zone that's on either side you you open the potential and that's why I didn't want it to go all the way up the mountain because I mean my inclination is is for me personally and I'm not speaking to everybody here but my inclination is to to not change the zone and to allow you know find a way to sort of allow for the changes to the campground to make it you know better than it is now and allow for the ability to change it and maybe that's through the non-conforming bylaw but I just I'm not sure they need more sites I mean you know I get it but part of it is that you know the money only comes in certain times of the year they get the biggie they got the Motocross and Six Flags those are their draws you know there's not much more and I don't know if they know that yet they've only owned it for three years so Mike I don't know this an alternative Way Forward currently you don't have a a pre-existing non-conforming ordinance that allows for expansion beyond the footprint I've looked at the definition of footprint and trying to understand what the intent was of that bylaw but realistically if you know if we if we argued that the entire Campground was a footprint because it's all quotee unquote you know what's a campground you know you know argue that we could do it but I don't I don't know if that you know I don't if that hold water either but I don't see that there's a current Way Forward the the way forward in my opinion is the R40 is zing um and again I mean I'm I'm telling you on behalf of the owner that um this is you know this is a much more viable Campground with additional sites and I think Rob spoken for that so yeah no but I rob you may not have been here for it or or or you know um listening to it but we were just I mean that the there's going to be hopefully a non-conforming use bylaw change on the town meeting in a couple weeks um which will allow for greater expansion of non-conforming uses and structures um and so outside of the footprint as it is now do you guys have you know do you guys have time a little bit of time left to have another hearing on that and on on this potentially we do not do or don't we do not oh the warrant you didn't vote am I correct I thought I heard that you guys did not vote tonight on the pre-existing noncom we will we just have we closed the hearing we haven't voted yet I want I need to go to bed yeah pass my bedtime I go to bed between 9:30 and 10 10:9 R um so we will be hopefully voting on it tonight um okay that will be going there and I you know I mean I just well so let me can I ask a question on that real just brief so and I apologize I didn't hear all of it I was uh you know kind of came to party late but so um will that allow for the potential expansion of a pre-existing non-conform use beyond the footprint of the buildings and potentially within the property subject to special perit only them down first burn it down um yes okay so hey I that's the way forward in that structures yes so so so yes I mean if you want to hang around for a few minutes you can actually hear the actual bylaw but um uh I think but so what you're saying is I should shut up and let you guys move on well no I just I I think we unless anybody else has anything else I think we close this hearing and then you know we can vote on it um I'm just telling you my my reaction is I'm not inclined to necessarily change the zone at least at this point in time I think is it is it uh is it too much to ask to to not vote for a couple minutes so I can hear that and then if it's appropriate I could withdraw that without that uh zone change request without prejudice you can well so change need to continue it for five minutes and then close it I don't I don't think his says that withd no I don't think there's I don't think there's a need for I mean I don't well we'd have to withdraw from the you know but yeah so let me just let's just close the hearing unless the board has any other questions or comments okay um so uh do I hear a motion to close the hearing than do I hear second roll call vote Michael dity I I got singer I David and I Jessica th and I can I have a motion that R go night R thank you forred you know I have thank you for your help bedtime now that can I go to bed hey hey hey he letting people home to go to bed all right um You you're reupping your desire to be here to potentially o' at night remember uh yes you want to just throw it on the screen [Music] all right so I would just say let's take a run through this bring up any issues that you have um if you want to bring it up on the screen Rob uh if you want to uh um run through it you're welcome to run through it you can just tell John to sort of move ahead and we all have paper copy sitting right here so this is and you're the only one sitting here uh on this meeting so this is your meeting thanks so you can control how fast you go through this St I'm good yeah the first so we divided it up into Lots structures and uses so there's three separate sections yeah I don't think you need this part Lots is useless to you because that's y got it irrelevant that's just to mostly allow for a single family residents on vacant Lots which probably don't exist in this town but we haven't he added three years that's good yeah so that was one before right two one two I think it was one I think it was actually one one the two [Music] insert how about reest is there something in here about reestablishment of abuses uh not quite there yet this is just structures on gotcha okay I got you so far so that first part is sort of irrelevant right because that's residential and if there is an accidental fire up there you have this right here to uh play around with and then C is probably the one that is more applicable to you or your quient right into my mind there's some discretion there and that property is so sort of isolated in mind you know at least the way I think about it that the finding that it's not more detrimental to the neighborhood so result in a use or keeping with the character the cic properties that's not you have some leeway with the amount of distance between properties that in in the few properties that you have around that campsite so I think there's a little bit more leeway in that discretion for the campground in my personal opion got it so is this for uses and structures this is for structures we'll get to uses but this is for structures okay sorry I'm good yeah on page three letter C hold on for proposed changes extensions or alterations for the structur part could you add that to the use part that we were discussing before I think that's right I think that's did we do that no I'm sorry page three which uh letter c yeah we did did you add that to the yeah we did C in c1c take a look and tell me if that's I'm running around on you don't worry and this is the one I think R cares about right here c1c anyways un conforming uses that's the use the language is a little different from C from B1 c y to c1c to C1 c a little different and I think it got to the point that you were trying to make so am I correct in understanding that the bottom line is that the planning board will be the permit granting Authority for a special permit that can granted for either the extension of pre-existing non-conforming structure or pre-existing non-conforming in general oh it does need to be changed B1 c c yes Rob shall the finding so that would get to the point that you were making about if the structure were destroyed if they wanted to rebuild it any changes would Happ have to come before the planning board but this is use in um Rob in my mind Rob just so I mean the way I read this the way I'm thinking about it is that the campground would have the ability under this bylaw to come in and get a special permit from the planning board and have to show to the planning board that the change extension or alteration of both the structures and the use that they propose um um is equally or more to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming use or I guess that's slightly different in the structure one but basically the same not more detrimental to the neighborhood um Mike I agree with you I I I I I really agree with you that and frankly the r without the R40 being cleaned up I think this is actually a clear path forward not only based on your approach but in general because the are 40 you know doesn't really you know right now even a zone change to R40 doesn't really clean up this this almost cleans up all of the um the items and because it's pre-existing non-conforming it almost gives you the flexibility in the special permit to you know you know write your you know really control what happens I I would think so yeah right it deals with what is a unique problem in town right this commercial Rec that is in an agricultural Zone I mean that's some of a unique problem and so I just don't think that the zone change to me it's just too much I agree totally I yeah so we will we will we'll withdraw that request and I this would if with any luck this this gets to town meeting hopefully you guys work it out but yeah this is this is a great path forward and I think it cleans up a lot of situations that you have throughout town where um yeah all the ones you your discretion you have the ability to to allow stuff yeah um yeah no I mean that's why we did it it's because there's been a handful of things in the last couple years um that have come in front of us um nice work Jessica how are you feeling about this I'm okay with the way that it's currently printed out and then all right so let's go through the one thing that you mentioned because I want to make sure that that's right so the language I I was just thinking about the language and now I'm lost it um so B1 C and C1 C e1c it says for proposed changes extensions or alterations not covered by right so these are basically commercial Y Must Be may be allowed by special Department right granted by the planning board should you use that same language me C1 yes it needs to so C1 C needs to be tweaked because it just wasn't tweaked from before right the planning board may only Grant but shall not be prior to Grant which is fine I don't um but Al so change out exended or altered only by a special permit M grant grant soci permit um but may may allow for such changes Allowed by a special per brand to including the finding say that again Justin it just this needs to be added on to the special F criteria and not as a set Standalone finding for a special part right right which is what we did before so change are altered only by a special permit and that probably should capitalize right is special permit I'll walk and grab a bunch that's fine granted by the planning board the planning board may only Grant but shall not be required to Grant such a special permit um that must it um if it meets the special permit criteria and include G all right so yes plan board may only Grant but not beire to Grant such a special perit maybe change special permit finding must or such a any and and and any special permit granted must include a finding that is that right so that gives it to the planning board not the building inspector correct um that right in terms of replacement due to fire got that in the budget next year take away my excuse okay so is that are we good with this you just what I just said so if you go to see use the same language that [Music] was one right they building the same and if they want to change alter or extend it has to okay what do you have concerns about is that's CB is where I'm C hold on nonconforming uses c c1b c1b yeah CH that d1b we haven't touched right I'm just may hav't touch it but we haven't touched it no I was trying to remember why it's necessary there if we're covering it in the other section and not changing the size the building because the change of the building is covered by section c but at this point I it's I don't care to parse through it list I hear you yeah that's fine I we can I think we can talk about it at a later point I'm not sure that this is I I you have to understand I've been gaming these outcomes by myself or with John for months now yes and I've just I've done done I've done the work for Rob you're welcome let's vote on it and be done with it um no and we can still we can sort of put this aside and then come back to it and sort of think through tweaks to it right and I did I mean I don't want to let perfection in the way of good right I mean I think that let's get this changed and then kind of tweak if needed um all right so do I hear um a motion to um uh recommend the proposed bylaw change as WR as we just discussed with the allowance for John and Town Council to make modifications as necessary yeah Dave second a roll call vote Michael I da I David S i Jess I and then Rob you're I mean again it's it's not necessarily a special permit public hearing but you're withdrawing the request for a um bylaw change so zoning change thank you we'll we'll formally withdraw that tomorrow okay so we won't vote on that all right thanks guys have a good night good work everybody have a good night Rob take care okay all right so I'm happy to wrap this up there unless folks have we need to talk about Noble St tonight progress is planned weather has been challenging fantastic is movement good update planning board member and staff comments okay we will defer the minutes to next time do I hear a motion Mr I make a motion to close the meeting Dave being a second all in favor say I I all right oppos stay here by themselves