##VIDEO ID:https://vimeo.com/1040237047## Everybody, it is seven o'clock and you're calling the, um, Tuesday December 17th on planning board meeting to order. As everybody knows, this is a hybrid meeting. Uh, so we have it on Zoom over here and we have it live in the, um, in the meeting room. And again, for everybody's purposes, it's because city elevators off first on the agenda, public participation on any matter, not subject to a public hearing for anybody who wants to talk about anything that's not subject to a public hearing. Next on the agenda review and approval of previous minutes, uh, we have two of them on November 19th and December 3rd. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes on 1119 and December 3rd. Second. Those in favor? Aye. Aye. Next, on the agenda, uh, we have no A and s correct. Okay. So we are off and running to public hearings. Um, so as I do every meeting, we, uh, read off a little Kate here. Um, next in the agenda is our public hearings. Today we have only, uh, only special permits or site plan approvals. After the applicants present, their proposal board members will begin asking their questions. We will then invite the public to ask questions of fact. We will have a separate time for the public to speak in favor of or speak against a motion when we recognize you. Um, please give your name and address and direct all questions and comments normally to the board. But I guess with this hybrid, it will just direct your questions out there. The purpose of our public hearings is to allow board members to collect evidence and testimony supporting or contradicting the published legal findings. We are required to make, uh, to approve or deny an application. We cannot act outside the bounds of the zoning ordinances, nor storm ordinance. Were also sought. Please understand, public hearings are not a community referendum, the town meeting. We ask you to keep comments civil and positive. Remember, you are all neighbors working to move Westfield forward. While you are free to express your opinion, ultimately and legally, the board can only deliberate on findings of fact, not on yours or personal opinions. Um, need a motion to amend, uh, the agenda looking on to allow, um, Michael qui to go first. Anybody wanna make that motion? I'll Make a motion to alter the agenda to three. Go first, first on the agenda. Second. All those in favor? I. A We have a letter from, um, Michael D Plea. Uh, he wants to, he is requesting withdrawal without prejudice. So, um, need, I need to hear a motion on these requests for withdrawal without prejudice? Make a motion. Will withdraw without prejudice will accept. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Next on the agenda is Steven Rosinski for a special permit person, ordinance section four point 20.2, lot size averaging and four point 20.42. Create a new single family building lock from and reduced side yard at 49 Roosevelt to have zoned residence. A. So good evening everybody. Thank you, Jay. Hold on one second. We have, um, we have enough. One, two? Yes. Mm-hmm. Okay. You have enough, right? Yeah. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Yeah. Five, five. Yeah. Not what? Six? No bill's not here. Bill's not your Ray. Yeah. And mowen. So it's Five. So you need five out of Five. You need five out of five. Okay. So, and, and, and that's why I wanted to stop you right away because, um, um, both Rich and, and Ray, Mr. Meeting. Okay. So you need all five? Um, okay. Okay. Um, Yeah, I'll give it a shot. Um, so I do everybody, Thank you. Thank you. Did you have a Copy? Sorry. That's okay. Thank you. Okay, excellent. So just to start, um, no. So what I want to talk about is just the handout that I gave you briefly, just why it's here. Um, Uh, what it is, is this is just gonna make life a little easier from handing back and forth between, um, looking at various sites and adjacent thoughts. Um, page two is going to be three, Um, Three houses that I'm gonna be referencing during this that are, that are in the, the vicinity. So I also wanna start by addressing, um, I sum this up to about four bullet points that were concerned, some things to be addressed by both the board as well as the, uh, uh, opposing numbers. So the first is that the, the house was too large height-wise. Um, the second being that the square footage was too large, especially in the second floor. Uh, the combined per, uh, because the height of the building was tall as well as more square footage was on the second floor. Um, the building looked larger than normal. Um, the third is, I'd like to address the overlooking into the neighbor's backyard, located at 45 Roosevelt Avenue. And fourth, um, was the style of house not fitting into the neighborhood. So with that being said, um, what I ended up doing essentially was just taking the, was taking a model home that's not terribly far away. Um, it's an abutter of an of, of an abutter, uh, at 36 posts avenue. So if you look at page two, it's the second one down. So what I basically did with this to come up with the footprint of this building is I just went on GIS looked at the dimensions and then fit the dimensions based off of, and made adjustments so that it would fit to the lot for, you know, what we're discussing today. Um, so the new house, just to compare where we were versus where we are now. The new house design is five foot six shorter than the previous house, so I, so I counted for that. The house is also much wider. So the previous house was 45 feet in width. This new one is 65 feet wide. Um, the reason I think this is important is because many of the other houses that are on a wider lot are approximately 60 to 70 feet in width, so it'll fit in better. Um, now the square footage was also reduced. So originally the plan was, uh, 2,180 square feet. I reduced this down to, um, 1,986 square feet. And, um, most of the square footage of the house got moved from the second floor to the first floor. So that's part of the reason why the building is wider. Um, and then also to, um, the issue with the house not fitting into the neighborhood. So again, I took an abutter from an abuts, um, house design, which was 36 po and just made revisions to it. Um, so therefore it is a relatively close house. Now what I'm looking to accomplish here today is to subdivide the lot. So the current lot is 200 feet, but I'm looking to, um, subdivide it could, uh, could you go to the next, uh, the previous page there, Lisa? Thank you. So 49 Roosevelt would, would have a 108 foot, uh, frontage and the new building's footprint. Um, you can see it on the plan as shown, um, would have a 92 foot frontage. Now, a couple of the, um, a couple of things that I do want to discuss are the, um, the special permit. So I'm looking to keep the, the house, the 15 foot, uh, minimum away from the neighbor's house at 65 Roosevelt. And also too that, um, on the opposing side, I'm looking to go for a 12 foot setback from the side. And when it comes to 49 Roosevelt Avenue, I'm looking for what is a 13 foot three setback to the face of the garage, or what would be a two foot five setback to the face of the roof overhang that's off to the side of the property. Um, it's attached to the garage that's basically just covering like a concrete pad. Um, now with that being said, um, I'll take any questions. So if I'm reading this right? Yes. So talking about 49 Roosevelt. Yes. She wanted to repeat the punch I 49 Currently? Yes. And then is this your current property or is this No, this is June split. So what I'm looking to do, where the dotted line is mm-hmm. That's where I'm looking to split it. And then there's gonna be a 92 foot parcel, or it says, I just put, uh, F 55 Roosevelt just as a placeholder number. So that's where it's gonna go. Oh Yes. Right here. Yeah. This, I'm not sure what this is. How much frontage do we need? The minimum frontage requirement was 64 feet based off the Averaging. Like 64? Yes. Garage station away from what would be 49 vols above. Yes. The reason I put the garage on that side is because, um, I wanted to use the roof of the garage to be able to hide the windows from the second floor so that it, um, the second floor could not look over into the neighbor's property. Objection. But anybody in the public have a question of fact. Um, yes. Please state your name, please state your name. Hi, my name's Marilyn Roski and I at 44 spelled that and I've been helping the abutter with this project because I've lived here for 48 years and I'm familiar with the neighborhood, uh, the property that he is referring to on 36th Oak Avenue. And I lived there before that house was even erected. There was a colonial that was, there was in such disrepair that they had to demolish that house and the builder came at it and built that house. Just the garrison. There was no garage, no breezeway, nothing. And that is a bigger lot than what he's proposing to build. That's bigger footprint of a house on, um, they were there, I don't know how many years, and then they eventually added on the breezeway and the two car garage. And their lot is big enough. I don't believe they even had to get a variance. Their lot is, if anybody goes up in our neighborhood, it's quite wide. And a parcel of it also comes back to Roosevelt Bath. So you can't really compare what he's proposing to put on that 92 foot frontage on our street to what is put on folks avenue. Um, as far as houses that are on our street with smaller frontage, the 50 by a hundred, those are HUD houses. Okay. That was done back. This is, this is, are you speaking me favor of Against this. Against it. Okay. This is for questions. Okay. Question, questions? Yes. So if you have a question, great. It's not, yeah, we'll asking, we'll give you time later because it wasn't on here, which you did answer my question on the 13th feet, three inches mm-hmm. On the, the line, because I did not receive the copy of the house until this afternoon. That's one of the question that you did answer. Um, I guess the other question I have, I don't know, is there a minimum be from the growth to where you put the property to the house? I don't know what that is. It's, it's based on the neighboring house. So we can match the, Okay. I just didn't know if there is a, 'cause I know my neighbor wanted to do something and they had to go for variance. Yeah, I mean, it looks like he's, this would be the un determining factor. Okay. I have no major what that one is, but okay. Yeah. According to this plan, it's about 18 feet. Anybody else with a question with that? Anybody in the zoom world have a question with that? Not now. Okay. I already answered it. So Yeah, we have any more questions there, John? I can't see. No question. No. Jane? No. Rich. Uh, you gotta add on my, okay. Uh, oh, I know what it was. The lot. I'm going to make an assumption here that north is up and south and down on this, this drawing. Uh, yes, that's right. Okay. This lot here on the south side, is there a building on that right now? No, it's vacant. That's a vacant lot? Yes. Okay. All right. So this one here, this 15 foot you've offset is from a vacant lot? No. No. So this is, um, well the, could you show a building show only here? That's the existing building. That's, uh, that's the existing and then this dash line right here. Oh, this is where you're putting it on? Yes. Oh, okay. You're putting it next to this one? That's correct, yes. Okay. Alright. Sorry about that. That's okay. I misunderstood. Yeah, that happens occasionally. Get lost. This, this one here. This, I don't know what this is. Okay. But here, so there's a dotted line here, this dash line? Yep. That's where it's gonna go, is here. They're drawing a different color. So can I ask a question? Um, you don't happen to know how far off the street 36 Bush Avenue do. It's one of the features I liked about that house. It seems to be set back with a lot of trees in, so it's not what, uh, uh, freezing up front or what's your thoughts on that? There wasn't really a plan for trees. There's one that's already in the front, but it's a small Japanese maple that would be remaining. Um, and then there are, um, it's like a pine tree. I don't know what species, but I was planning on having those removed because there're really close together. That's the way usually on these Intels you condition a shade tree on each lot like that. The Japanese maple, you would just completely take that out? Or can you Those are, those are nice trees, not just destroyed. Oh no, that's staying. Oh, okay. Oh no, that's not, that's not getting destroyed. Yeah, that's staying looking at removing. They're like the tall kind spruce. I'm not sure exactly what kind, but yeah, those would come out. Yep. Would you like to speak in favor of or against? We are taking comments. Are you speaking, um, in favor of or against? I would be speaking against it. You stand up your time? My time also? Yeah. She's the abutter, but she's on zoom, so we'll get there. Okay. Okay. We'll get to everybody. No getting old. Um, I know we're supposed to come with facts. As of this morning, I had nothing to go by. The drawings were not in the system. I don't know when they were finally presented, whether they were yesterday or the day before, but I had nothing to look at to go between what was presented at our last meeting in October night. You know, she had two months to get these in. So this morning I had, I sat down and I read what I put down opinion also. Okay. Good evening. After reviewing the minutes of the last meeting, I do have a few questions and statements. Mr. Brezinski stated he had trouble funding a smaller project. He would need to build a building of a certain size to be able to get a loan and have equity in it. Most homes being sold today do not have equity on them. Later. Mr. Rasinski stated he needed a larger home in order to accommodate his parents because they were getting older and also to have family gatherings. If my children were to build a home to accommodate my husband and I, the house would need to have a bedroom and a full bath on the first floor. The previous buildings that he submitted had not a bath. The house plan that Mr. Rasinski submitted had neither. Okay. Also, I have a smaller home, and that never stopped me having family gatherings later in the minutes, Mr. Rasinski stated he didn't have a problem with downsizing the house, but then note if the cost issue that come with building smaller houses, being that Mr. Bronski does this for a living, would he have thought of these facts before proposing to build Mr. Bowen stated on the planning board, I don't know which, thank you. Stated, he would like to see a home that looked like a Cape Cod in front with a large dormer in the back and that would fit in the neighborhood. Mr. Zinski's house that he lives in now is a cake. And what is stopping him from putting a dorm on that house to fit his needs? Mr. Walinski asked if the board would consider a Gamb stylist roof similar to a neighboring house on Foes Avenue Bowen. Ian said they would please keep in mind the size of a lock that house is built on. And also later they added a breezeway and a two car garage and had enough property without a variance. A gamble style house style house would not fit into the landscape of Roosevelt Avenue. I do realize that some of the plumbing board members are familiar with the neighborhood, and I feel it should be taken into consideration landscape of the neighborhood houses, which are ranches and takes that seem to have the correct setback between them. If you haven't been in our neighborhood, please take a ride down Prospect Street to Roosevelt Avenue to see the landscape and homes that are built here on Roosevelt Avenue. Most residents in this neighborhood are blue collar workers, veterans, families just starting out are retirees that could not afford to buy a house like Mr. Raki is proposing to bill. Also, looking at the markers from the survey, not only would you need to remove the carport, if you leave the required 15 foot feet between me, Between the property line, you would be encroaching on the garage. How can you build equity in a proposed house if you need to take into consideration money spent on survey costs, remo, removal of trees, removal of carport, removal of driveway, and possibly the garage. Maybe there was a reason the house was built on the property 78 years ago on the blueprint that it is. So another house couldn't be built on the property. One other bit of information to add is the previous owners that sold the house had watched a meeting that we had in October and called the Abutter the next day to apologize for selling the property. Mr. Goki, as I said, I'm against this and I don't know why some of you would be allowed to stick a house of that size on a lot 92 feet. Now we were at a hundred and he must have had the survey done and found out that he would have to move it farther in so he wouldn't have to take his garage down. Thank you. I appreciate it. And any anybody on the zoom in the zoom wanna, uh, speak? Yes. Can you hear me? Yes. My name is Bet Callahan. I live at 65 Roosevelt Avenue, and I just looked at the, uh, paperwork today and I don't believe that the, the square foot footage has gone down at a hundred feet, a hundred square feet. Is that correct? What was the first square footage footprint? Um, the square footage of, of lable space with the original house was 2,180 square feet. Okay. The new house is one 1,986 square feet. Okay, so it went down about 200, not even Right, Right. Correct. About about like 9%, But it's wider, correct? Yes, that's correct. Yes. The point of it being is to try and make the house have a smaller profile And a good question, um, that somebody posed earlier, I'm sorry, I can't see, I'm looking at a little tiny screen of everybody. Um, how far back can you go with that? How far can you put that house back on the property? Well, the problem is, is initially I had it with the regular setback. It was a 35, uh, foot setback, but I was told to move it closer so that it matched the front of other houses on the street. So that's not something that's in my control. And who, who did that come from That came from the building? I believe that was the planner's suggestion. I don't know who it was, but this was earlier on the last, sorry. Usually things we want them to match, uh, fit in with the, the cadence of the neighborhood. But it's a suggestion, not a mandate. It was my suggestion, yes. Okay. To the point, because I'm still concerned. I've still got two windows overlooking my backyard. I know that it's gonna be, it's a 15 foot easement, but, and then you're gonna have the garage, but they're right above the garage. Garage is in habitable space. That's a pull down attic space that's not habitable. Right. But I'm talking about the windows on the side of the gambrel. So on the side of the gambrel, if you look at the, um, left elevation, that's where they are. You see it in pink. It's being hidden by the roof. I've deliberately, purposefully made the roof steeper to hide. Right. But that's not gonna be facing my backyard. Right? It's gonna be the other. Oh, okay. I see. What's, I think I see it now. It's because the house is further back. So let's just say that the front of my house matches the front of your house. Yep. So, well, those windows would basically be looking over to the left if there wasn't a garage there. So I had the garage put on that side with a steeper slope roof to resolve that. Okay. So those two are actually gonna be on my side, but the sloped roof is going to be somewhat of a, a screen? Yes. For lack of a better term. Yes. Yeah. All right. I, I still, I still think it's a really big house to put in that small spot, but that's my, that's my opinion. And you asked me, and I'm, I'm just gonna let you know. Thank you. Anybody else wanna speak in favor of speak against? I just wanna say one thing, what that is saying. I'm sorry, stand up again. Hold on. Take me a little while. The previous house that he had, um, was 45 feet by 36. The house that he is proposing now is 65 feet long by 40 feet. I, I think that's big, but, and he has gone down eight feet on the frontage of the property. Did she speak in favor or against, against you? She was speaking, thank you. The one over here in the screen, she was speaking, I think her name is Betty Callaghan. Elizabeth. Correct. Ms. Callaghan, were you speaking in favor or against the project? Against, Thank you. Excuse me. And also, if you go to the previous minutes, there were what, 39 signatures that were against this project of the I went to all the house. I walk the neighborhood all the time with my dogs, so I helped that, um, get signatures. Thank you. So Can I just speak to that, but that was based off of the original plan. Um, that's not this. Mm-hmm. Are there signatures for this? Just asking. We didn't have anything to, to propose. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Okay. One at a time. And it is not a debate. I'll make sure we understand that this is not a ba debate. Okay. Um, if you wanna talk about it, that's fine. She, the abutter, you're the abutter. Um, please go. Um, Ms. Callaghan. Well, we didn't have a counter proposal until this morning, so I didn't even know if I wanted to, uh, if I was going to be against this or if I was gonna be okay with it. It's like I said in the beginning, if we were talking about a ranch or a, a cape that something that wasn't so ginormous, I wouldn't even be at the meeting. I just think the size and, and the, the complexion of the house is just, it's big for that neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. I, I'm sorry. Let's, um, let's consolidate our thoughts if we can. Yeah, like that said, we, I, we did not know what the Okay. Regarding proposal. I mean, if you want, I can go back out there as I'm walking my dogs and I can go back to all the people. If you want me to do that, I'll have, go with the list and I'll have 'em. Okay. I'll show 'em what's being proposed, but nothing was out there for us to review. Thank you. Can you, uh, can you talk about the survey and whether the would be taken the shed or the extra extra piece off the garage right on the ground? No, the Garage would remain, um, I'm willing to part ways with the overhang that's to the left of the garage. That's the X section. Um, yes. The cross. Cross, Yes. That's gonna go, Yes. That would just, it's basically like a carport, overhang, whatever you Call no, 13th and three. Okay. So the issue with the setback, obviously is the common line. Two lots. The controls. I think that last time we talked, that wasn't so much an issue because it's not affecting the abutter. The 15 foot on the abutter side is the standard requirement. So I mean, in theory, he could knock down the existing house and put a new house right here anyway, or build an addition outta the existing up to that 15 foot line. So it's not, um, not seeking relief for that, that distance When he is seeking relief for two Be common, that, but it's against himself so that it's Against himself right now. Yeah. Or anyone who buys it would know that. We do have a, um, Four copies. We do have a, a draft condition, um, special permit info, lot size averaging side yard reduction, subject property, 49 Roosevelt Avenue, the parent parcel. And I will lead the draft conditions. Uh, one, the lot to be created remaining lot and layout of the new dwelling shall be, um, in substantial conformance with the submitted proposed site plan sheet. 1.0 of plans for 55. Roosevelt have 12, 15, 24 prepared by Ross being LLC two, reduce side yard setbacks from the common side. Lot lines allowed as follows, a remaining lot. Nine, um, not less than 2.5 feet. B, proposed new house line, not less than 12 feet. Three. The new dwelling shall be constructed in substantial conformance with the submitted elevations sheet. A 2.1 of plans for 55 Roosevelt abs call 1524 prepared by Roths being LLC four compensate for the loss of green space. At least one shade tree, two min, two inch minimum caliber planting shall be installed and maintained on each lot along the front yard area. Existing retained mature trees or plants, uh, um, existing retained mature trees or trees planted in the adjoining, um, street right of way with city approval shall satisfy this conviction. Five. The rights granted by the special permit are twofold. A creation reduction of the lots for which this permit shall have been deemed to be substantially used on the recording of the lot. Plan at the registry of d Such plan shall describe the book page in which the special permit is recorded. BD dwelling construction, commencement of which shall be the subject of the three years time limit for action pursuant to the general conditions. And we have, have seen their, um, draft findings, we have other questions, comments that we're looking for out there. Um, I actually like what you did. Oh, thank you. Um, I'm gonna suggest, is there a possibility to reduce it? A small percentage to make it a little bit smaller? Like to get the setbacks, you get three feet off of one side. It's, it's a little difficult to accommodate having a, having a, an entryway between the garage and the, um, and the main house. Um, I mean, it is possible, but the thing is, is it's just, um, it's just better to have a side entrance to match the other houses. So for example, like 48 Roosevelt has it, It looks at me. No, I get, okay, I get that, But I'm like, it's like I'm still, I'm still losing square footage. I get it. I'm no architect. But if you put the door on the side here and squish this together, you got three feet. I'm, I'm just, is that practical? No, there's gonna be a bedroom there. So I think so There's a bedroom between the garage and the, the downstairs? No, It would be in the corner. So basically if you were to take this model, it would be in the corner Of the front. Honestly, that couldn't be the entrance. Yeah. To eliminate the breezeway. I mean, I would prefer not to. I would rather it look like the rest of the buildings. You're saying Mr. Bowen looking three feet. So the, the other alternative is to move the property line. I mean, that was what I had originally exposed was the property line being moved over. And I mean, it is invisible line. There's only x amount of space between that. So from a practical standpoint, does it matter where that line lands if the building s don't change something up? So if you moved it over, then instead of the 12 feet, It would be nine feet, no, 15 feet? It would be, no, I'm saying if you say moved it a foot, then you get 13. But then the other side, okay, You should the other way. Okay. So like I said, frankly it's a common line between the project. Can't see that as a solution. Again, I like what you did. Think it's a little bit too big. I would like to see it smaller, but you know, this is what we have to build on. This is what we have to build. Okay. So a lot of times on these dimensional special permits, at least the zoning board, I mean, you look at the neighborhood patterns as well. So, um, yeah, on this plan, there are several, several side line lines that are pretty close. So it's not inconsistent with the, the neighborhood, like directly across the street, for instance, they definitely don't have a 15 foot setback, um, at 50 Roosevelt. So if you stand like the, the pen is actually right in the road. So if you stand and look, it's relatively close. Um, in fact, a lot of the buildings on the street in general, especially like the, um, the veterans' houses don't conform to, to many different rules that like, I would be able to, when would they Build? That's the difference. So they're you willing in 2024, Right? About the quarter. Better still complete, but, but also to, to try and match something that's existing. I, I agree. But to try and match something that's existing to con while simultaneously having newer standards is difficult to accommodate both. Um, What's the square footage of unit building again? Uh, 1,986. What's The square footage of, uh, 29 Roosevelt? The home you have now? Uh, 40, uh, that's, uh, 1080. And what about The, and part of it's unfinished, so if it's finished, it'll be about, it'll be like, um, around 1300. Would, you know, would, would, would 36 foot sh would that be comparable to the height of what you're trying to build there? Um, oh, in terms of the new property? Yes sir. Yes. I don't know how high it is, truly like how high the foundation is, but yes, it's very close. I agree with Mr. Bowen a little more, a little tighter. I mean, I think go a long way, but that's what you want in front of us. I just like the, the screen porch side. I hear you. And, and it goes long, but then if you go further down a few houses, there's half a dozen, if not more, homes that don't even have garages. I mean, probably three, four lots away from all those HUD houses. Sure. So yeah, no, it, there's, it's a hodgepodge of different types of homes on that street. There's no question. Yeah, just, I, I think part, part of the problem is we don't want just sticking out like a so thumb and, and these people that have lived there for 40 something years don't either. So that's all. I again, appreciate everything you've done. As far as the changes, I drove the neighborhood. Um, I don't live up there, but I drove the neighborhood for a good 15, 20 minutes. And it's like, it is like a lot of, uh, neighborhoods in Westwood with, uh, with a large number of streets. The houses, depending on the street could conform to the, the street layout itself. Um, you go over a street or two, the house can, might be a little bit bigger. Okay. Um, and you go over, there's some others that were built on new, um, vacant land that have bought right on, um, Montgomery Road. Okay. Again, those tended to be bigger as well. But this street, um, I, I again agree with John, me, three P goes a long way. It absolutely goes a long way. That, that little bit is, um, I like the house. Um, I think it's, it's, it's, it does fit the neighborhood, but it is would be, um, 10%, probably the biggest one in the neighborhood. And, um, I think just that new little bit of shrinkage. I, I'm three three here. Okay. I like it. I think it's, it's much better than the first plant, much better than the first plant. Um, but just that, this street alone, Roosevelt Avenue, this street alone looks for, um, just something what happen's, mom. Okay. Um, if you want us, we can go forward. If you want to consider this, you can ask for a continuance in the community. Um, Can I make a comment before you go forward? Absolutely. Sure. My opinion, three feet is a yard stick. And I don't think visually taking three feet off the house is going to make hardly any difference visually looking up the street. Just my opinion. I'm just thinking about standing in the road or driving by it Extreme. Well, uh, I'm sorry Joan. I have an opinion and I'm gonna say it. No, Great that, so it would be three feet by 65 feet? Correct. I'm talking about visually from the front of the house, three feet close. You're not gonna, you're not gonna be seeing the whole, um, three feet by six, five feet. You're just gonna, I'm talking about driving by visually from the street, looking at it. I play doubles advocate. Sure, sure. I, I I Would, would you be, would you be opposed to adding creepy feet? Personally, I don't think that's the question. I don't think that that makes the difference. So I have, I'm having another thought here. What if we, um, rather than touch the house that you want to build, uh, is, is it practical to take the garage down on the existing house and move your property line? So you've got 15 and 15? Um, I mean, I prefer not to remove the garage. Well, here actually I have a, well, I wanna propose a different, like, um, how far is it from a shed? How far is the offset from a shed from a property line? What's the requirement? It's, it depends on the height. Depends on the height of it, The height of the shed. So if it falls over, it lands on your Property in theory or less, but yeah. Um, I, I'll just say, so he first sh presented a plan that showed this 15 foot setback with the line kind of at or through the garage with, and then along or along into the driveway with an easement. So just to get the 15 feet. And I said, is it really, does that accomplish anything when you can just shift it back to 12 feet and have a nice clean locks without any ance between 'em? So that's how we ended up with the 12. I'll take credit or blame for that because the garage is realistically like a shed. Um, if you end up driving through the neighborhood, a lot of sheds are actually quite literally on the property line. So that's, that's my argument is if, I mean, I'm open to having the line moved three feet to the right and that lot, instead having 95 feet of frontage and this checks the box, remove the overhang on the left side of the building and treat it like a shed. Well, it's attached to the house, so you can't treat it like a shed. It's because between it, it's like an o it is just like an overhang. It's attached. So Oh, it's considered a, okay. But if that came down then I guess it would be detached. But then, I mean, it doesn't line up with the driveway. Right, because it, It would be odd. It would be, well it seems to me this is like a minor issue. Exactly where that line lies between the two properties. I think the bigger, well my opinion, the bigger issue is, you know, does it fit the averaging mathematics? Yes. Does the house fit into the neighborhood that's for you to decide? Um, I don't, I don't see that setback as kind of agree with Jane. I don't think that it wouldn't make any difference on the ground. So as proposed right now we have 12 feet on the new building. And how much on 49? Uh, 13.3 to the, yeah, to the garage wall and the overhang For the garage wall taken down the over, It's the overhang were to come down. Yes. Right. Mirrors I guess at distance to that. Mm-hmm. Yeah. We're all varying lock size as you've got down there. Not gonna lot difference. We got lock size all, all place down there and for houses and setbacks are all over the place too. Well, I mean it's, a lot of things don't comply. That's why it's like I'm, this actually will be the most compliant house in the area. I'm not trying to, I'm not trying to be disrespectful at all. Um, 44 is another one that complies, but many of them have like a shed right on the line. Or like 50 Roosevelt. There's definitely less than 15 feet. It's probably more like 10 feet at the most. Um, then you go to a lot of the veterans' houses, they don't comply in variety of reasons. Many of them have a double wide driveway. So they don't have at least 25% of um, they have more than 25% I should say of like impermeable space in front of the house. Um, and they have setback issues too. 'cause the houses are 24 feet wide and the lots are 50 so they have to violate one. Um, that's why I was hoping like a couple feet would not make a huge difference. But then it would just get me what I'm looking for too. I see some of the, uh, lots here. They have the acreage put in there. What is the acreage of the new lot? Why point that what quarter acre Actually don't know the acreage. It would be 92 by one 10, whatever that A less than Thank you. 1.23. Yes. Four. And I believe the neighborhood average of like 0.27. Two six. This is 0.23. Point two three. Yeah. Yeah. It says in the Draft decision what the, I think it was 0.17 the average. But, alright. Uh, any other questions, comments? We want close public hearing. Can I speak? Yeah. I that yes, I, I, sorry. Okay. Before the way the footprint was of the original drawing, now with the new drawing, he's increased the footprint which loses more green space of any lawn of anything that we see in the neighborhood. Um, he was referring to 50 Roosevelt Avenue. The first two homes that were built up there. 'cause that used to L Woods was 50 Roosevelt and 49. And those are the fir original homes that were built up there. So I'm sure back in those days there was no, you know, where you put this, where you put that and we're right now, because we have the HUD houses that were put in, people who have houses that are on the required footage and stuff because of that, now we're saying we can put things on smaller lots, squeeze 'em in, and the house that he is proposing, it might look something like Foosh Avenue, but it doesn't fit on Roosevelt that we don't have a house like that. We don't have a house that big and most of our houses on that street don't have garages. I don't have a breezeway. My garage is attached right. To my freaking house. You know, so I guess I can only say what I say. Thank you. So do we, would we want to condition, um, the taking down of the overhang on 49 brought it up? I'm sorry, part your plan, right? Yes. Yes. So yes, we should condition correct so that, That would change the condition from 2.5 feet to 13, 13 feet. Right. So let me ask, go ahead Jay. A question, since he's the owner of both properties, can't make a condition that says that that can stay right now, but if he sells the property, it has to come down. Is that reasonable? Or, Um, it could be tied to the Yeah. Be tied to the building permit for the new house. Probably It would be on the be on It easier. Right? It's easier and cleaner to take it down. Okay. Right. Yes. We get Ron adjust. So if you condition 13 feet that'll essentially require that removal without necessarily having to say it. Okay. Addition 13 feet. That's that's right. Right. 13.3. Yeah. Do I hear a motion to close the public hearing? I'll make a motion to question. Hold on James. Um, you've heard us all speak. Okay. So we're gonna close the public hearing. Um, so your last as well. I just wanna be fair about that. Okay. I appreciate that. But, um, I'm, I'm contented. Okay. I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Do I hear a motion on the special permit? I'll make a motion to approve 49 Roosevelt 55 49 Apparent part Nine. Yeah. Which, um, with, uh, conditions. Okay, second. All right. Start with John. Yes. Cheryl? Yes. Jane? Yes. Ernie? Yes. I have a sheet then. Um, okay, now I am a yes Cheryl. I got Cheryl. Mm-hmm. Okay, so we're not done. Um, congratulations on getting your special permit approved as the applicant only, you cannot utilize the rights granted any special permit without having that all conditions and requirements of the permit. You have additional steps which must be met before this approval becomes valid. A, for state law, you must wait 20 days after the day the planning board files the decision with the city clerk. This is a 20 day appeal period, allowing any agreed party to appeal our decision. B, after the appeal period, you must obtain city clerk signature on the decision and you must record the, uh, C You must record the special permit with the registry of DD. This will all be spelled out in the instruction sheet mailed with your decision and e most importantly, you must continue to comply with the terms and conditions of the special permit through the life of the permit. If you are not in compliance City State Code allow for various means of enforcement should your non-compliance rise to our level. We reserve the right to revoke your special permit. We appreciate, um, and welcome your willingness to do business in our good city and we hope that you'll be a good neighbor, um, with the rest of our neighborhood. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Next on the agenda, uh, continuation Jennifer Yana, uh, for special permit for zoning ordinance section four 20.33 for flag Lot at 2 2 2 Russellville Road Zone, rural Residential and Water River Resource Resource. Um, again, you have five of us. Okay. Um, to, because Ray is ineligible and rich is now sending the, okay. So, um, you have five of us. Um, and go. You know, so I just wanna make sure you understand you need all five of them. Steve from S Associates. Uh, the last time at the last meeting I had sacrificed on son, it was his first time ever being in front of a planning board. I was in Florida. He did alright. And, uh, yeah, how do you enjoy it? I, I appreciate the crucifixion of you and, uh, I told many other planning board after this is gonna be, but uh, not seriously. He did. Um, so just to refresh everybody, what we're looking to do is have a preexisting lot that has 19 acres and about 95 feet of road furniture. It's an, an older lot that was never been built on and we're trying to now have that lot designated as a flag lot so they can build a single family home. Um, we're not creating a flat, a new flag lot. There's an existing lot though. There's kind of a little differentiation there. At the last meeting, um, there were some questions raised by butter. And today at about two o'clock, I met with Rich and Pam. And on the phone I had the, the applicants here and we were discussing can I sleep behind you two, sir? We were discussing the plan and what we have is a driveway design with a house, which is what they were looking for except, uh, apparently I misunderstood one, one feature. And that is Rich and Rich's lot is right in here with abut. And they wanted to have a berm put up this way to redirect and diffuse some water that runs off going that, uh, out towards their lot. And so at our conversation this afternoon, the four of them all agreed that, uh, the applicant will put a berm up through here even though it's not on the plan, would make it part of the conditions. Um, the other part was Rich would like this driveway moved about 10 feet more that way. Notice. Yeah. Well that's just making sure everybody knew because, um, so what we have now is we had the house, we, the drainage, we had the road coming down with drainage swell on this side. We have two detention basins down at the bottom. They're actually, they don't look big, but they're oversized for the amount of water that's gonna come down. This will drain into that one. And there's a catch basin here that then ties into, uh, just off screen, I think is a, uh, catch basin and between, by reaches driveway. So this water will now come down, get into here, and then join into the rest of the, uh, storm system. Um, and, uh, like I said again this, we're just gonna slide this during construction. We're gonna take this whole thing, it slide it north about 10 feet. And I said parties are hearing agreed upon it, it on this afternoon at two o'clock. So if you have any questions, I'm here. I Any questions folks? So no one up is gonna actually affect the neighbors or right next to where the, um, roadway will be putting, correct? It's It's a driveway. The driveway, yeah. Uh, because I know there's a neighbor right next Up here. The house is up here further. This, uh, Rich's house is a little bit closer to line here. And that's part of the issue here is that because of the proximity of his house, we're trying to avoid having any, any of the runoff coming to him. And like I said, I didn't realize at the last meeting what Rich was talking about is that having a, a berm here to deflect water so it doesn't come down this way. And, and that's easy to do. That's not a, a, a, a major construction thing. So the applicant's willing to put in a, a, a berm through here to prevent water and redirect it this way, I guess redirect it this way so it comes down like this. So now of it's gonna run across the street? No, it comes down to these two detention basins right here. And then it gets captured into a catch basin. Then it goes from that catch basin into another catch basin by Rich's house. Yep. And then across the road into the, to the swamp. Okay. Oh, so it's gonna go into that swamp area across The street? Yeah, Exactly. Okay. Yep. And, and the applicant agrees to maintain that berm for the life of the permit because it's land and land shifts and moves and Right. I suppose that everybody maintains their property. Okay, So, well, I wanna make sure we're clear on that. If it's in the permit, it's Yeah. Enforceable required. That's It. Is forceable all enforce? No. Anybody wanna ask a question of fact? Anybody on, um, in the zoom world wanna ask a question of fact? I did want to ask a quick question about the catch bases. They, they shoot the water across the road to, to the oversight of the street? No, no. Again, the, the catch basin on the north or the de tension basin on the north feeds into the one on the south. There's a catch basin in the south and that one, and then it connects to a catch basin down here. Uh, yeah, right here. Sorry. Thanks Jane. Yeah. Oh, okay. Connects to that catch base in there and then from there it goes out And, and that's on the other side of the road. Okay. I'm sorry. I misunderstood. Yeah, no, it's okay. Thank you. Anybody you wanna speak in favor of or speak against? Uh, I was against this to begin with. Name. Uh, I was against this to begin with. Uh, and to be honest with you, I still am not happy with putting a house behind me. But with, as long as we condition the burn behind my property and the moving the driveway drainage, we can fish both of those items. I can find a way to get along with this, what they're trying to do. I understand what they're trying to do. Uh, and with those conditions put in there, I can accept that. Thank you. Anybody can't speak in favor of speaking against, I'll talk here. I'm Pam Loy and I'm next door. And I'm certainly glad to have neighbors. They've been wonderful to talk to. They've been very, uh, accommodating. We had a tree come down, they came across both of our properties and they were wonderful. They took care of it. So to me, I'm ready for some new neighbors. If I remember correctly, you mentioned something got boulders, if I remember correctly, you mentioned something about a rock, A lot of rocks. Four. Okay. And I Forgot to mention that. I apologize. The other thing is, there's four boulders that we will, they will remove. Uh, they're like in the front mm-hmm. Across there. Yeah. They were stopping all the, uh, four wheelers and whatnot when we had It. Yeah. Oh, oh, oh. They were just There. We Made sure they're there for, okay. Yeah. The stain. Yeah, I, that's it. Right. And I think between the berm and I like where the house is positioned and I don't think that the neighbor on that side will have a problem with that because they sit a little further over than that. And he has done a lot of landscaping, which, uh, is beautiful and, and takes care of a lot of that. So I'm for it. Okay. Thank you. Uh, we have a draft condition here. Special permits lag lot subject property. 2 2 2 russellville road. Um, draft special conditions. One, the lot development shall be in substantial conformance with the submitted grading and drainage plan as prepared by Costa Consulting Engineers 12 16 24, except a burn to divert runoff onto the rear of the abutter. Number 2, 2 0 shall be added. Um, b the driveway shall be shifted 10 feet minimum to the north. And do we have to condition removal on the molds? No. Okay. In case they in All, anything else wanna condition, want hear a motion to close public hearing, I'll make a motion to public hearing. Second. All those in favor? Aye. You need a motion on the special permit? I'll make a motion to grant. Special permit Russellville Road To John. Um, Bernie? Yes. John? Yes. Jane? Yes. Cheryl? Yes. And I am a yes. Okay. Thanks. I, you guys know, you guys know what you have to do with the, um, special permit. 20 days. You signed this before? Mm-hmm. Okay. Thank you very much. Congratulations. Thank you. You played the two. Wait, wait, sit down. Any video, the two one, we don't believe it unless we see video. Four. Video. Next on the agenda is You very welcome. Pioneer Valley. Room code, LLC for special permit site plan, stormwater permit, re zoning ordinance section three, do 1 36, 1 10 and 4 1 0. Direct warehouse exceeding hundred thousand square feet and Ampac Road. We do have a, um, a request for a continuance, uh, to the second week in January. Anybody not gonna be here second week in January? I will not be here the first, uh, that would be what, 14th or something? Seventh is the first. The should be 21st. 16th first you say second week or second meeting? Second meeting. 21st. So be looking for continuous the 21st. May do Tomorrow. Continuous, continuous For January All those in favor, Right? I Don't know. That was, you guys agree with that? You guys agree with that? Sorry. Sorry about that. We have a continuance to the, uh, 21st for Yes. Okay. January. January 21st, not December. Okay. That concludes our, um, special permits and agenda is comments to the department of public utility materials way battery source utility. So I, I sent out a, I drafted a letter For per last meeting discussion. Um, comments are due in a couple days. So, or it's all right with the draft, otherwise you can amend it or I really hope, I think you hit all the high release. Mm-hmm. I agree with John. I agree. How do you feel? I attended a meeting last week of the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and one of their agenda items was this zoning change thing. And they had some speakers that were answering questions about the zoning change and why it was, why they were doing it, what was happening with it. And one of the things that came out loud and clear is it is what it is and live with it. With you talking about AD or the what? You talking about ADUs or the A DU on the battery. On the battery. That's, or in the battery. Yeah. I thought we were on ADUs. Okay. That's okay. So I don't know if you had a chance to read that article in the paper that Dan Ally did a super job. He did. I read you. And, uh, he, he brings up some really, really important points about PFOS and, you know, that catches stuff, catches on fire. That stuff goes up in the air. That's the last thing. This is something I wouldn't want in our backyard. There's no upside at all. I'm glad you said that, Jay. 'cause that's right out my mind. That's to put this, put this walk. If you get a fire up there, you can't put it out, but you'll end up putting 80 or 80 or a hundred thousand gallons of water on it just to contain it. So it doesn't take over some of the rest of it up, which is all that water's gonna go right into the aquifer, whatever. Then you watch off those units. Mary, I see Maryann is there, is there, is there PFAS and lithium batteries? Probably everything. I don't know. P has to repeat my, we'll see if she like up, Uh, incidentally, councilor Elli is putting a zoning petition to regulate these in our zoning. May not matter if they're overriding our local zoning, but it is on council's agenda. Well, the fact that I think it was the Westfield or, uh, west Springfield fire chief came out, or maybe it was Southwest to oppose this as well. Says so much Mainten Springfield. I'm awake. John. All. Yes. The comment was made that the batteries, they may not, uh, that the bat that there bat probably is PFAS in those batteries. But I, I'm not the expert on that either, but I am handing in comments. Well, if the board's all right with the draft letter, we can we'll submit that. Let submit it. Mm-hmm. All, all you, everybody agreed. Okay. Are are you going to read it? Wanna Read it? You read it? You just wanna hear my melodic voice, don't you, Maryanne? Absolutely. Donna Sharkie, uh, hearing Officer Mass, uh, department of Public Utilities one South Station, Boston, mass oh 2 1 1 0 by email only. Um, on new, um, read comments on Westfield E-S-S-L-L-C, battery Energy Storage Facility DP 24 51. Dear Ms. Sharkey, the Westfield Planning Board received and reviewed DPU Notice of filing, request for comments and public, um, comment, hearing, and other information regarding the above project. The Board takes seriously. The role its board takes seriously its role in ensuring Westfield's land use decisions are prudent and consistent with our master plan. And as opposed to this project and any zoning exemption for the following reasons. One, the site is on or abutting our water Resource protection district, especially adopted zoning overlay district that corresponds to the state's approved wellhead protection area on parent aquifer zone two. Especially given previous contamination issues. The board always scrutinizing any land development in this area that may threaten our and several other communities drinking water source the specific project's potential for to poison this water supply is an unacceptable risk. Two. Public safety is impacted by the threat of fire explosion and the inability to reasonably control or extinguish such a disaster. This threat is magnified by the state's, by the site's proximity to critical infrastructure like state and US Highway ten two oh two, a solar energy generator, a major regional food supply distribution facility in our municipal airport, including an air international guard base. Three, like most municipalities in the Commonwealth, Westfield, prides itself on its empowerment to make local decisions on matters of land use and zoning. Usurping our local control or any board approval process on a project of such mag, uh, significant impact and threat to is counter to this tradition. The city should be able to con, contemplate, manage, and mitigate projects like this. Utilizing the local zoning tools intended for such purpose for the project offers no upside or appreciable benefit to the city. Only risk. Thank you for considering the local concerns for the board. William Car's chair. Craig, writer Bill, Who, uh, could I ask who you were gonna send this to? Donna Sharkey. Hearing officer. That's S-H-A-R-K-E-Y. Okay. She's the hearing officer. Mass Department of Public Utilities. Yes. But I think you also have to send it to the D-E-D-P-U-E filing. There's, that's One of the, that's that's one of the emails. Maryanne Oh. And the attorney, uh, for Westfield Shepherd Mullin. Uh, we're c we have cc um, Shane early via email, uh, s early@shepherdmullin.com. Great. Yes. Anybody else that we need? You are all set. Thank you Maryanne. Maryanne, we appre Maryanne. We appreciate this. We really do. Okay. And we appreciate you sitting on all the way to, uh, to get to this point. Um, we think it's a very good letter. I do too. So thank you Maryanne. Really do appreciate it. You're welcome. I appreciate you. You welcome. Uh, next on our agenda, draft state 80. Well, um, what happens if, um, chairman Sharkey, Donna Sharkey decides to disregard everything we said and everything that city council's gonna say? I mean, all we can do is submit the comments. So what's our grounds after that though? Legal, I got the impression of the last meeting that it was kind of like, we don't have a Choice in this matter. Well, like I said, they're asking to override the local zoning. So You, you Yes, Maryanne. Oh, hello. Yeah, go ahead. Maryanne. Yes, You have a, somebody from the g and e and I think there's somebody else to the, the city attorney. Uh, our, our interveners. If you go to their website, you can see all the letters that people have posted are there. So if you send this in, this one will be up there on that website too. And then they have to have evidentiary hearings. That's why you have an intervener. And you can also be a limited participant. Anybody who wants to file for that would receive information that is discussed there and what the decisions are. So there are appeal processes and everything. That's why somebody becomes an intervener. And why it's good to have an attorney be present for those things because they can help guide the process. So it, it's, we don't know what's gonna happen. Let's think. Nice warm, fuzzy, positive thoughts. Thank you. Maryanne, can I ask you a question? Sure. Are you, are you planning on signing up for interveners and all of that as well? I mean, clearly you sat through our entire meeting for this one moment. Well, you have to go to the website and look at what their responsibilities are of interveners are limited participants. I may not want to be an intervener. That can be expensive. You, you do need a lawyer to help. Of course we have the city lawyer. I am thinking about the limited participant role. Thank you Maryanne, on behalf of the city. Thank you. You're welcome. You go ahead. Thank you. Next on the agenda, draft state a DU regulations and zoning petitions for a DU housing. Miscellaneous as loaded, well raised. Um, so interesting when we talked about this last time and we had all these wonderful ideas and Phil didn't want to see exterior steps and plan review that following Monday, the state decided to issue their regulation. Yes. And um, when I read, we had already submitted to city council and when I read through the regulations, I was okay again, well this isn't gonna fly. So, um, I requested city councils table table it, which they did. Um, and I think we need to update a few things. Basically we need to loose in any kind of regulations we had. Should have the two sets. Basically what, what I emailed earlier, I didn't keep one Passed on. Sorry about that. So we had originally We agreed. Yeah, Thank you so much Mr. Green. The next a green one, there's a, yeah, there's several three ones. So if, if you, if you recall this was the fryer one we talked about ad nauseam. Sorry. Um, but what came outta that meeting was some specific stuff about where is it exterior style, um, staircases. And when you read the new state regulations, basically you can't treat these any differently than in a regular single time in house. So I interpret it to mean you can't require site plan approval because we don't require site plan approval for, um, you can't have a reduced height. But you had talked about You can't have a reduced rate. It's gotta meet the same requirements as a single family out. So what, what's the definition of accessory? If an accessory is something that compliments the main piece isn't matching decor kind of within the balance. Yes. But so the only way you could regulate the architecture is if you regulate architecture of the, of a single family house. You can't have a more stringent requirement. Um, But we can require that it's conforming to a neighborhood. No, you can require that it meets the setbacks that a regular house meet. We can't even re we can't even require that it meets the same architectural structure as the primary house. We can't regulate the architecture unless you regulate the architecture for a single family home. So, and I don't think we wanna be doing, reviewing all those, Do we have any seeing restrictions of base to height? In other words, can you have a 10 by 10 building 30 feet high or is there some kind of Yes. Valid system. It's not anything. Nothing. So in other words, they could build a two story accessory building. Two and a half. It's 10 by 10 tree house. A tree house by 10. Yeah. But you could build your house that size if you want, But not over nine outta square feet Total. Yeah. Not over half the size of the maintenance. Right. I understand. But it doesn't, we have nothing to balance the height to base. So we also talked about driveways. 'cause we didn't wanna let a bunch of driveways cut in and that we had as a regulation force proposed regulation for single family houses. So that we can do, because we're saying any single family house can have one driveway. But that would cover that one. That's one of the regulations that we could keep. Wait, so they would share the same driveway the house is on, not making an additional one, just sharing it. Yeah. So it kind of still looks a little more like a, it's a single family neighborhood that you're not getting these cut in houses. So, um, so the other thing, so the, the law says these are, these can go anywhere in a single family district. Now I took that to mean are rural residential and residence A, which are districts that don't allow two family. The state says no, a single family district is any district that allows a single family. But technically that's fourth Street. Pretty much The zoning then, right? Technically it's even downtown. So one of the proposals here is to eliminate single family houses as in allowed use in Court Street Broad Street Core district. And by doing so, we will remove those as single family districts, which means we can regulate accessory dwelling there. So those accessories can be put into these smaller areas downtown. If we do nothing, someone can put a tiny house somewhere downtown, as long as there's another dwelling on the property, somewhere on the property. Because it allowed, technically allows single family homes. So there's a lot of language in here to, to eliminate that piece, at least in the downtown. So we can, we can regulate them there. So what, what do we have to do to do that Jay? 'cause I like that Idea. It's in the draft. It's in the draft, yeah. Yeah. So Broad Street, port Street would no longer allow single family home. Not that they're a ton of 'em no longer allow single family homes, therefore they are not a single family district. Therefore accessory goals can be regulated or restricted. So we can at least do that. Um, so I know this is kind of hard to read about the ordinance in front of you, but again, split into two because some things require majority vote, some things require super majority, otherwise it would be one solid. Can I ask a question? Yeah. Um, we talked about last time somebody taking a mobile home and taking the wheels off. That's not allowed. However, people are now starting to make dwellings out of those storage containers. Is that allowed cities, you're doing it in cities. I mean a modular is allowed In a modular you may not have metal. Yeah, You could make your house out of metal. You could build a single family. So That Roku could have a condo complex in ACell. Well, no, no dwellings on that property. So it's not a single family district. So are those storage containers, could that be an a DU? Uh, I'm sure there are building code issues, but if you can meet the code issue and require a, a appropriate foundation and all that. Yeah, we don't regulate materials for single family homes. So we can't regulate materials for a DU. Don't scan it in here, but what we talked about as far as, it probably doesn't touch on it, the short term rental, long term rental stuff. Uh, yeah, I didn't it, I think the state was okay with That. You can restrict that. So that is in here under, that's, Yeah, we don't talk about it. Uh, section on, on, uh, on the red one, section f the top of the third page. Yes. Four that it doesn't say doesn't reference, but four dash 32 is the short term residential short term rental section. So, um, this would exclude no accessory dwelling unit, um, as allowed as a short term rental. So that's that section on the top. I know, but basically Forest service tube says you can, you can have a short term rental, but this would add but no detached accessory dwelling unit would be allowed to do that. So they can build another property on there for overnights and things to that nature to rent it. Airbnb VRBO? No, we're, we're prohibiting. Okay. Alright. Yeah. That, that would be our prohibition and we're allowed to do that. Yeah. That, that didn't change from the last one. The only thing that changed, basically we took out the stuff we closed about architecture. Um, I tightened up those single family districts and sorted the things into the two baskets of, of voting. So State, does the state, state supersede the city? Um, it, it will because it will say no zoning ordinance shall prohibit or reasonably regulate this. And if we're What, what if their regulations are unreasonable? Theirs? Yes. Well they have draft regulations right now. So they're not final. This is based on what it's proposed. So Personally I'd like to keep that architectural stuff there. Is there a way to say this is our thing and Well, I mean, that would be counter to the regulations Might be for me to start a fight. Did you see any lawsuits coming from cities and towns, like a class action that they're trying to impose us on? I doubt it. If anything, the lawsuits would be the other way around where They're su Us. Yeah. And the state has gonna say, you gotta, you can't do that. Well, let me see what, what we're talking About. So John, what I'm hearing you say is I wonder if there's other towns that would agree with that. And if there's enough, if there's enough towns that turn around and say, hey, um, you know, we don't want, we want architectural. Okay, then, then at least the people are voting and speaking. Right? So, you know, if, if Westfield says it, west Springfield says it, you know, um, ham says it, you know, Lynn Lee, all these people not found, at least you have some critical, Here is the regulations that they issue. For the purposes of this section, the following restrictions and regulations shall be considered unreasonable. One design standard. Any design standard that would not be applied to a single family dwelling. Um, which is applied to A A DU. So we can't treat them any differently. And, and if you think about it, I mean if you, you've got your house on your lot, you could build an addition right up to your setback. You want a big living room or whatever. The only difference here is that addition could be a separate building or attached and have another family in it. So I mean, if you're thinking about regulation from the, from the, uh, context of the use, really, really what a lot of this is couched in that you're trying to regulate the use. That's certainly not gonna fly. I think it's unreasonable to tell us. That's some reason. Honestly, being sincere. I Agree with you. Well that's, uh, make it up with the governor. She doesn't take my calls Then. You're not it down there honor. Sure. I can't get in it. Is they, they put these in the same categories as churches, religious uses. So protected use, not So I get the both protected use things, but let us, give us a little Well, I mean we've got a little Cru, Very little. Could you actually, because it might, nothing I worry about was in the last meeting. This could turn out to be look like dump yards everywhere. I mean, if they had such a wide opening, pretty much do what they want. You're taking a, a crayon and coloring wherever you want. And it just seems like this could really backfire against neighborhoods. Well, if there's No formality and it doesn't seem like there's formality in this and this is why I'm, I'm asking that question. It just, our hands seem to be tied. They are limited. I mean, unless you wanna adopt site plan review for every single family home, you can't really do it for, as I read it and as the draft stands now, the state's saying we're gonna have these finalized by February 2nd, which is the same date they, or the log goes into effect. Goes into effect. Yeah. So we can wait and see what they come up with. I suspect it'll be pretty crunch to what they put out there. Or we can try to get something on our books in time for that date. Um, like I said, city council has tabled this to allow us to either revise 'em as I showed you, um, withdraw it altogether and wait or do whatever else you want to dictate. If I just also heard you correctly, it would behoove us to get something on the books ahead of time And Absolutely. I think minimally. Because right now, right now we say you can put an accessory structure closer to the lot line. Right? So if we don't change that, um, they, we put them closer. Right now there's no limit on how many driveways you can have in zoning so they can cut in more driveways. So this is kind of at least the basic, uh, addresses things basically. Maybe you have to come back and look at it in the spring after regulations are finalized and after we, So let's play devil's advocate here for a second. What if we do put in there, um, the architecture has to be conforming with the, the primary house. All the state can do is clean around and say, no, you can't do that. But the rest of our ordinance has rip and if the state doesn't say anything, at least it's on there until somebody Well, they're already saying it though. They beat us to the punch. If, if ours became adopted before theirs, we would've had a shot. I think. Yeah, I think the ones Phil gave us last meeting were actually ones already on the books that those towns are gonna have the fixed. So I, I'm not being a squeaky wheel here, but what is to prevent somebody from meeting the minimal standards of the building department, cutting some windows into a storage container and throwing those in their yard look like. Well, what's to prevent someone from doing that as their main house? Right? You're, you're living in your main house. Someone's paying you pants. Well maybe you're gonna rent it out a Storage container, 15, 25 to to 40,000. You can buy continue, will do. Wonderful thing. They're Gonna be dropping. Uh, and and what I've heard is we make these changes which control a couple of small things, but they don't have to come before anybody to put this thing in. All you do is go to the planning board and get a permit and build it. And nobody has any oversight at all on this thing. Well, you don't have oversight over single family homes. So it's no different. Well, it's construction requirements. Well these, you know, all the code stuff We are just doing though with, with uh, Roosevelt Avenue trying to regulate the structure. Well that's a special permit. So that's not a by it wasn't law. If that law was big enough. He could have, he could Have put anything he wanted on it. It's just because the Because the law was Yeah. Gave you purview. Do, is there anywhere in this it says how big the lot's gotta be to put this thing up, Whatever your single family house requirement. So you can't require more land. So if you need 20,000 square feet for a house, you can put a house in your access unit on or On that 20,000 Square on that same set. There's no setback. There's setbacks. Far same setbacks for the house. That's for the house. So Those army barracks Is the right now not in Westfield, not those setbacks are less because we regulate accessory structures. That's one of the reasons to change it. But it would, it would be the same as the house. We adopt these. Can you explain the additional off street parking once you provide in accordance with the seven dash 10? My biggest fear is this like street like Mike Valley Drive, we have no sidewalks. Very tight street. Um, I mean it's when somebody parks on the, on the road, it's tight enough and I see these a popping into my neighborhood. And what do you have to provide as far as off street parking? Something like this. So it says you can't require more than one spot. Um, so we would need to adopt something to require any, okay. So if we did nothing, they wouldn't require it. So this includes the requirement of adding a spot. Except if you're in a half mile a bus station. That's, that's definition in there. They find a bus station not only as the bus station, but also any bus route. That's a flag stop. So Doesn't mean within half a mile from bus add another Space means you don't need to, you can't require any parking. You Can't require, okay. Yeah, We can require one space anywhere else. Um, which is what we're doing. Are other states doing this now? As far, I mean, I'm sure there are but we are, are anything in the northeast? There's a lot of California. Got rid of single family zoning. Okay. This that's basic kind of gets rid of it. Uh, uh, lightweight, I guess. Gotcha. Everybody. Sony is there. I it's probably in here. I don't remember reading it. The unit has to be behind the house because I have a huge front lawn and I have a very small backyard. But I dropped the front Yard. You can't put an accessory building in the front yard in the front. You can't do it now. Now. And that wouldn't change. So it need to be They out In line with Demanding small backyards. Do your neighbor aren out? Oh no. I know. I'm just saying at least they can't be in the front yard. Yeah. So tell your neighbor $25,000. They can put one of those units in there. I'm not telling 'em anything. They're in California. They're stacking of them. Put steps up. How many uh, rooms is that? Just one big, like a big old hall road. Yeah. Container. So I mean the things that were surprising me is how they define single family district and uh, the part about, you know, you can't do anything, can't do anything really different than you do for So, so again, we a draft. I assume they'll come close to fruition. Um, what does the board wanna do with what you've got pending before council now? Which was the old version? You wanna switch it out with these? I think we have to. I think we have to because the other ones aren't gonna fly. Why I think we need bother here. Why? Right. Bernie said why bother we're handcuffed. We need to get something on the books before, before February. It would be good. Yeah. If you don't sense on your report. That's, you know what I mean? We don't sense something. I'm sure we're not being only city Thinking we're not gonna do that. It doesn't work that way. Yeah, I mean it probably, maybe we'll have to revisit it once we see how these materialize and, and what we, maybe the regulations will change. Maybe I will come up with some good ideas. The thing about ization is not addressed in the regs. So that's still in here that you can't car 'em out and sell 'em out off separately. Let's see if that lies or not. So that's on the same d parcel part number. Well, yeah, I mean I am thinking, well why not just carve out that not the condo and then someone owns a main house, someone owns the back. It's basically subverting on subdivision regulation and all that. So we added that prohibition. Um, not counter to the regs, but the regs don't address, They wouldn't have any fronted on, well It'd be the same like a condo. It's, heres a lot common as the common deed, the lot. Then there's ownership, separate ownership. I don't know how that is can happen and still be called accessory. It's not owned by the same person. So that's in there only we discuss Business on the backyard. Right. And Then there are several other tweaks and that edits related to housing. That stuff come from the master plan stuff. It's not all ED stuff. This, this accessory building can be like, you can own the main building and I own an accessory building that's you have own, that's Unclear. But in our proposed reg, we would require a common owner common Ownership. Okay. Yes. Thank you. At least we got that. So, um, You get a motion from us? Yeah. Well Ms, I Mean council table till the January 16th I think. So we maybe have time to revisit again if we meet. No, if they table this till January 16th, how are they gonna get it done before February? We just need to have it advertised to be kind of lock us in. Okay. So as long as we get it noticed before February, it can kind of it would You go? It would basically be in effect. Okay. Um, as of now, there's no applications for January 7th. So You want us to put it on the table to Well, for now. So from what I Heard public, a public hearing for it. It'll come back to us for that. Yes. Um, but if we don't meet in January 7th we'll proceed with this with the council. If there's time we can review it again. I don't know what would change. All right. Hey guys, we're gonna look at this again on January 7th. Okay. Um, see if we meet then if we what? Like I said, there's no applications that came in. Okay. And you continue then Impact road. Yeah, we continue Road 21st. If we don't meet on, on the seventh, we'll let Jay run with this. Um, agreed. Okay. Yes. I'd like to continue anyway. She said Yeah we can. I really plan on it and you know there may somebody could come in tomorrow. Well, well he's retired. I'll be retired then he'll be good still. Hallway. Hallway. You can't find my pen. Where'd it go? I didn't think the retired guy stole my desk in the one my desk gets all up pen then at and I like not uh, any announcements, future agenda items, anything like that? Uhuh, You mentioned that, uh, cannabis Cafe fas I think, I think they issued ranks today. The new regulations came out today. So we can add that to us. January agenda. Oh, the cannabis for public. Great idea. One thing I'd like to mention coming. Yeah, the container place up on lock house Road. He was supposed to put a six foot burn in there with the breeze on it. That burn is about six inches, not six feet. You talking Mr. Rokus? Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. That verbal was supposed to be six feet tall. She was six feet tall, not six inches people that anything and then don't do work. He had an stop. Like my kids what it is. Do we just let, let them walk away and say have a Merry Christmas or do we do something about it? Call 'em in on a brighter note with the bushes in front of the, uh, electric family. Pretty good now. Yeah, I saw it. Oh yes. It Took a while to get home. But I Do you wanna do that lock up throw thing you wanna put on the next agenda? Can I, can I just say what I've heard about what's going on there is he's waiting to spring till pave and then he is going take care of everything. But if you planted bushes on top of the six inch Yeah. Burn. I don't think he'd plan on putting a six foot burn in like he's supposed to. I think we're gonna have to go after him in the spring anyways, so I think we should just wait. That's my opinion. Wait until he is done and then uh, We're not Done. Well then tell Tell'em what's S people And Johns what? Love it. Yeah, it's right now. You really can't hold. I'm, anyway, but we went till Springs. But Maryanne have the question. Been up for a bit. Got her hand up. Marianne, you got a question? No wonder I'm tired. My hunch has been up too long. Thank you for your participation. You're you're welcome. Enjoy. Thank You for keeping me company. Merry Christmas, Maryanne. Merry Christmas. Happy New Year. And all the others for you all too. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You do your a motion to adjourn. Motion. She adjourn. I'll second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Yes.