[Music] [Music]
good evening my name is Art Sprew i'm chair of the planning board this is the planning uh town of Chanham planning board hybrid meeting April 14th 2025 at 4 pm please note this beanie is being recorded and will be available shortly
thereafter for scheduled and on demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device if anyone else is recording the meeting please notify the chair i don't see any notification pursuant to Governor
Healey's March 28 2025 signing of the chapter 2 of acts of 2025 extending certain COVID 19 measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law general laws chapter 30A section 20
until June 30 2027 this meeting of the Chattam Planning Board is being conducted in person and via remote participation every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings as provided for in the
order a reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling a phone number 508-9454410 conference ID 667-432257 pound or join the meeting online via Microsoft teams through the
link in the posted agenda while this is a live broadcast and simalcast on Chattam TV uh Exfinity channel 1072 despite our best efforts we may not be able to provide real-time access we will post a
record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible uh like to uh begin the meeting with a roll call vote um Warren Chain warren Chain present bob Worer bob Worchhatter present charlene Greenhall
Charlene Greenhild present frank Sharer Frank Sharer present uh Bob Dubis bob Dubis present and Katherine Halpern yes katherine Halpern present and Artsboro i'm present all right uh we'll begin tonight
with a approval not required for 48 Silven Way do I have an applicant who would like to present need to withdraw without prejudice as there was very big confusions on the
plan here because it shows a culde-sac on a plan that apparently doesn't exist correct um so my understanding is that we're going to have to come back in front of you with a definitive plan right and obviously we're probably going
to be asking for waiverss on that and I would like to see some guidance from the planning board or the town planner on that see what kind of waiverss that we're going to need um I know that we had supplied as much information as we could on this and I
know I was I was asking for to see if there was any kind of a covenant we couldn't find anything on it or release of covenant just seems kind of odd how how things happen but um just want to go on record that we
tried to do our best with this no they understand okay um with that said is there any direction you want to give me right now other than out the door i I think uh your suggestion of going before the uh uh uh
community development staff and getting some information about what you would need based on past experience of what we've dealt with some items like this before where it's just a a small subdivision with a lot split
like this with a culde-sac so that we're familiar with this and so is the staff and they can probably give you some history associated how we deal with it okay in that case Charlene did you have something uh no i was just going to move that we accept the withdrawal without
prejudice oh excuse me uh second second all right we'll do a roll call vote uh Warren Chain warren Chain approve uh Bob Wchf bob WH approve charlene Charlene Greenhouse approve frank Sheer rank sharer approve bob Dubis bob Dubis
approve uh Katherine Halpern katherine Halpern approve and Arts Brew I approve thank you very much thank you okay so uh site plan approval uh is the first one 200 meeting house road is that going to be continued so that one um
they have requested uh to be continued to the next meeting possibly um the planning board members did go out uh for a site visit last week um to get some additional information with regard to that so we
can move forward to the next item right i move that we continue that particular item to April 28th 28th right no earlier than do we know what day what time our meeting starts five o'clock
i don't have my calendar with me no early in 5:00 PM i'll second that okay we'll do a roll call vote warren Chain warren Chain approved uh Bob Warch bob Warter approve charlene Greenhal charlene Greenhild approved frank Sheer frank Sheer approve uh Bob Bob Dubis bob
Dubis approve and Katherine Halpern katherine Halpern approve and Artsboro I approve okay so uh next one is uh 878 8880 Main Street digan uh this is a
continuation from last meeting that is correct this is the continuation from the last meeting and we have the applicant here before us tonight we also have the um condo unit owner okay is this from the last meeting or two meetings ago because I wasn't here so it
had to be two meetings ago uh it could have been yes you're right okay i am going to abstain from the vote only because I was not here to participate in the first part of it but um I would like the opportunity to ask any questions if
I feel it's necessary okay thank you okay please go ahead introduce yourself hi I'm Caitlyn Diggin and um again um give us some background about your project and uh some of the
questions that we brought up last time and uh what you are how you're going to be addressing those tonight sure um so I guess one of our biggest issues was the parking um at this place because it is a condo association so there are three
owners um and you guys had mentioned um you know them coming together and seeing if they would wave um you know the rules I guess with the parking and unfortunately we could not come to an agreement on that um most of the people
were on board one wasn't um so I went a different route to try to fix this problem because I really want this so I was um able to get in touch with the people that are at Compass the general manager and the owner um and they have
allowed me to take some of their spaces um if necessary for my business which is really nice of them um and also there is public parking that's not too far so if it really came down to it I could always have my employees there and I'd be happy to carpool them or drop them off or
whatever we had to do um so basically the parking thing was really the the big issue for me um so I think that I have have that figured out for the most part okay um board members uh any questions
on this i'm going to start down at the other end uh Bob Dubis well I'm glad I'm glad to see that you got your two two or three spaces and this letter is exactly what we need so other than that I don't I don't remember any other problem other than the parking issue right so unless
you have anything else to tell us I think that we might be able to take a vote on it but unless Art would like to refresh us quickly on what we did okay so uh the big question that happened here is the space that you're taking over had
um so many parking spaces two I believe right and so there was an increase with this and I think from what I understand um you're proposing that your employees would be parking uh adjacent to this or be be busted over um that makes an awful
lot of sense and leave the remaining three spaces which are allocated to your use anyway for your customers uh that that is a a good resolution i don't recall any other points i hate to interrupt you but she only has two
places right four i have four spaces allotted to me and then I needed two two or three more oh I apologize yeah that's great that's great and it is just me right now so it's going to take a little time to fill those up but hopefully not i don't think you're going to have much trouble once
you get settled away that's going to be a busy place yeah I hope so uh okay frank uh you have any questions or comments no no questions um Charlene um smart to go to the neighbor and see if they would accommodate you um I was delighted to see that they did so they
were very nice yeah good um um if I could vote I would yeah okay the affirmative um Bob we're sure there no questions uh Warren chain uh the only thing I just have a question for clarity and that is do we need somehow to memorialize that this parking is going
to be available so we don't need a variance or an exception or anything in the I think the applicant has submitted a letter associated with this okay and that's part of the record okay no questions um the only thing I would say to you is on the plan maybe we need to
have as and I've talked about maybe having something changed on the on the the writing on the plan yeah the the plan is indicated um not quite what the parking criteria is so uh my my viewpoint is is they just need to uh
update and correct that portion of the plan if I might suggest instead of changing the plan yet again memorialize it in the decision letter that will get recorded and include the letter okay attached to
it i think that to me that's a lot cleaner okay i do yeah uh Katherine uh do you have any uh comments or questions um I do have a comment um first of all I want to say congratulations on uh getting the
other parking and that is also very good of the people at Compass to do that i agree with all the previous comments that we need to you know sort of formalize that agreement in our decision letter and in the information in your file so all of that's good the only
thing I am looking at is we have maybe it was from the last meeting the email from David Vch as um president of the condo association I believe saying it's
basically stating that as a as president and as an individual citizen he agrees with your plan but there is one uh owner in the condo association who does not agree Can we get a followup that says that the
arrangement that you've made with Compass satisfies all of the other condo owners and any of their concerns about parking i I do think we need to also formalize it that way spoke with him about it sorry um and he was when I told
him he was happy about that so yeah I I'm not I'm not sure sure we want to get involved with the condo association and the condo members um it might but we need to know that well but we need to know that the parking arrangements are
acceptable to the con to the condo association as a whole because that was the issue so if we could just I'm you know it's great that you spoke to them but I'm just wondering can we just get that statement in writing that you know that the parking arrangements are
satisfactory now because we have something in writing that says they're not so Charlene that's what I'm asking i'm not sure if it's so much that they're not it's just that one of the condo um owners didn't cooperate with with the uh the
I don't we can't get involved in the condo association if they like things or not i think simply by having the additional parking spaces available to them yeah which I understand is where the employees are going to park which is
perfect um that it's been satisfied and and I don't think the board really can go any further with the condo association folks that's beyond the purview of the board in my opinion okay so okay so now the way I could
understand it then is that there is no waiver we're not correct we're not creating a waiver so there's no impact there's no impact on the association anyway because you found another solution so that's all right so great so that's fine i'll go with that uh Bob
worship just a question for procedure i mean uh it's great that somebody else is letting him use two spaces but how do we know those two spaces aren't already allocated and required for the for the
compass um I mean in general we would just be playing uh Yeah good point uh let me let me interrupt a minute yeah have you have you ever gone by there no I'm just asking in in general there is plenty of empty spaces there this is
this is that's why I'm asking questions this is a way to make things better all around and this is not the first time we've ever done this we did this down uh the Cranberry in at a few times we've done it all over the place a few times as
long as she has this letter from the from the owners I think we're all set they they don't use all the spaces there okay because if they did they wouldn't give you permission to use them so I don't want to I don't want to dwell
on this subject i I don't want to give her any more aggravation than she's already done she's done her homework and let's just get on with it please okay um so I'm not quite sure how to word this
motion um a motion to approve the uh uh amended change of use for this uh application um Charlene why don't you help me out here do you want Okay yes i I will so I actually I can make the motion
yes um I I move that we approve the amended site plan for the property located at 87880 Main Street for the proposed hair salon as it meets the necessary requirements and criteria for approval
pursuant to the zoning bylaw protective zoning bylaw with the conditions as stated in the um uh the staff report these are standard conditions additionally that it is understood and shall be com become part of the decision
that the property located to the east which is now Compass Real Real Estate has allowed that two or three three three three spaces be allowed to be used for this use
do I do I second all right we'll do a roll call vote warren Shane warren chain approve worter shaft approve charlene Greenhall abstain okay thank you frank Sher Frank Sher approved bob Dubis Bob Dubis approves uh
Katherryn Halpern I approve and Art Sprew I approve thank you so much i better see all of you there thank you so we we will reach out once we have everything signed and just get you a copy of it so that it can be taken care
of okay thank you okay next is 18 George Ryder Road South unit A um I have someone from the applicant mr chairman you had me fooled for a while when I first opened this this uh
pardon did you i said Mr chairman yes what i know what you're gonna say yeah i couldn't find a place on George Rder Road to save my life I did figure it out it's there i figured it out too right all right uh if you
could introduce yourself and and introduce your your uh project here absolutely hello board my name is Dr christina Lee i am the owner of Uplift Physical Therapy and Wellness and my application is to change the use of um
unit A18 George Ryder Road South from retail to be used for my um solo provider physical therapy clinic that's it well that's pretty much it i haven't um proposed any changes to the
structure of the building to the parking to the layout so everything about the use of the building will be the same except there will be fewer people in and out because it'll just be me one-on-one with uh a patient for one hour at a time um and there are no other changes being
requested okay and if I understand Christine that the uh parking use is actually less than what was previously approved this is correct the the previous use was retail um so this is is fewer uh spots required
um this is within the historic business district so if you do do a sign we would have to have a sign application go to them um so it's a lesser use and we anticipate that you'll only need two of the spaces so the other spaces
will just be still there uh the I took a look at the previous site plan it's a well-developed site it's a a great design that's associated with dealing with all of the storm water issues and everything so there's there was really no no issues here that I saw but um
board members uh Warren do you have any comments or questions um no comments at all uh Bob worship no comments charlene just curiosity which retail uses going away so the clothing consignment store
that was in unit B left my unit was the at home again annex they moved into the clothing consignment and I took their space perfect i have no other Okay anything uh Frank Sher no questions uh Bob Dubis I got a lot of questions
no questions uh Katherine any questions comments no no questions but I just want to compliment you on setting up this business i think it's something that could be very helpful to a lot of people in Chadam thank you very much uh and
Arts I have no comments or questions so uh a vote to approve the site plan approval i I just have a question sure go ahead do we need to impose the conditions as shown on the you know as highlighted here do do we really need to impose those conditions because it's a
change of use and the site's not changing at all um you can suggest not to propose them i would suggest we don't include the conditions because there's nothing changing i mean except the use the only thing I would say would be
maybe the the signage one in the future but we now have that on record so I don't feel strongly about it oh that one I'll include right well so so those are your I mean those are mostly your standard ones i did take out the lighting one in the last one but Right you don't need to I mean these are your standard conditions that I was told to
leave in at the beginning but Okay you are the board and I will follow your direction okay based on that I would move that we approve the amended site plan uh to allow for the proposed physical therapy office use which meets the necessary requirements and criteria
for approval to the protective zoning bylaw with the condition that no signage is proposed as part of the application but the property does fall within the entire historic business district commission local designation review uh
area so any proposed signage or alteration to the exterior of the structure requires review and approval from the HBDC all right do I have a second second okay uh Warren Shane warren Shane approve uh Bob Worcher bob Worcha
approve charlene Greenhold charlene Greenhelge approve frank Sher rank Sher approve bob Dubis bob Dubis approves uh Katherine Halpern katherine Halpern approves and Arts Brew I approve thank you very much welcome thank you and I
will reach out once we get the paperwork signed and we'll let you know okay thank you all right moving right along here tonight uh 16 Quanset Road and this is to be
continued is that right this is another request to uh continue per the applicant um they will be coming in on Wednesday to meet with community development staff to go over their latest proposal that is a jam and jelly one okay do we know when
they want to continue it too um we do it to the next meeting just to air on the side i think we should just do it to the next meeting to air on the side of question um I would move that we allow for the continuence of the site plan approval amended change of use for 16 Squanset Road to um April 28th no
earlier than 5:00 p.m and do I have a second second all right uh let's do a roll call vote warren Warren Chain approve uh Bob Worch bob Worcher to approve uh Charlene Greenhall charlene Greenhelge approve frank Sher Frank Sher approve bob Dubis bob Dubis approve uh
Katherine Halpern katherine Halpern approved and Arts Brew I approve all right uh next is release from Covenant Evergreen Lane Drainage uh do I have someone from the
applicant to walk us through uh just to refer refresh the board's memory this was discussed at the September 23rd 2024 meeting oh um if you have notes from that time
you can refer to them good afternoon David Clark u engineer and it would it'd be helpful to just refresh uh the board's memory around a lot of things that happened in the audience of the owners uh Susan Shepard and Barry Payne uh so when we were here
in September um we were look uh discussing with the board how to move this uh panhandle lot uh to the point where they could sell it and uh get a building per the buyer could
get a building permit we got to speak up I will uh so the board uh asked that they they needed well stated they needed a plan showing what was out there for uh um kind of an asbuilt plan because
work was done out there um so so we prepared an asbuilt plan uh of the uh intersection with Route 28 the uh specifically the uh the entrance is
18 and a half ft wide uh so there's there's room for two cars to be at that entrance one coming in one going out um the rest of the roadway uh from the split the driveway split that goes to uh another private property uh that
fronts actually on Route 28 and then the Evergreen Lane that continues on the right side of the split um going up the hill uh there is a some drainage out there there is a gravel area it's covered with leaves and pine needles
right now um but it it appears to be uh sufficient to handle the runoff that that's uh coming off of Evergreen Lane um one of the issues we found uh in the approved
uh drawing from from when the panhandle was created that uh it showed uh roundings uh out at uh Route 28 uh that were in excess of the uh roadways
frontage in that the the rounding heading on the east side um heading into town extend ended beyond the property line and uh it was made clear from the property owner of that the property that actually has the frontage on Route 28
that they didn't want the road to extend beyond the extension of their property line on Route 28 um so we show the the existing roundings um there I had no issues with uh
maneuvering onto or or off of Route 28 i we feel that uh what is out there um for constructed roadways roadway is sufficient for the one additional house that will be
out that that will be on the the vacant lot okay um I did review my notes and I I think we brought up a a couple of different issues um but I I think uh what might be
helpful to the board is if we do a site visit out there for this because if you take a look at the original improved plan and what is now um I think it's important to understand
what was approved as part of the subdivision and what the applicant is asking for now and I think it's important to see that Um so my suggestion is is because the applicant's not asking for any modification to to
this uh original subdivision plan so this does not comply with what was previously approved so I I think before we make you know too much of an assessment perhaps a site visit by the board members would be helpful
um we also need clarification of which plan was approved because the the both plan and profiles have the same date uh same revision date uh since there's no statement of conditions that was recorded
um we don't know which plan the planning board is following well we can do that at the same time too i don't recall that um maybe there was something about that raise but I don't recall any clarification required requested of the board but certainly but you're again
you're not asking for a modification you're not asking for any waiverss is that correct well that means you're saying whatever plan that was approved that you still plan on building it no we're not proposing to build anything um okay then
you have to ask for a modification then okay right because one of those plans is is approved and what you're what you're showing here is not in compliance with what was approved that's what I have in my notes
from the meeting on the 23rd and I thought that that was what you were going to come back with besides the plan existing condition of you're going to ask for a waiver or modification or whatnot to that plan okay all right Warren why don't you ask any
comments or questions um I would just like to defer to Bob Dubis who's actually done work on that site as to what he thinks with respect to uh the original approved plan and what is now being uh
proposed there's pointless in spending a whole lot of anybody's time trying to uh propose an amendment to a plan um if the amendment isn't necessary or um if it is necessary exactly what it needs to be so
I'd appreciate you know Bob's input but I don't have any questions okay um Charlene you want to go just simply I mean at this point they're asking for release of from the covenant that's all for that lot that's all they're asking for right so that's what we should be
acting on okay if in my opinion I mean I there are two lots still held under covenant 1B and one A if I'm well one B isn't subject to the well the the and also on the plan you you have lot 1A it
should be 1B not on the notes you've got it right David but um in amongst the trees on the plan it says lot 1A that's illegal access no this should be
lot 1B oh no 1b right they're switched i'm always right but that being said I'm kidding i'm kidding that being said what we're all we're doing is that Yeah and and if we feel that
um we can't act positively on that because the road isn't completed right then we need to vote no because the board only has 45 days per fif I forget how many days to act on or release a covenant okay under
subdivision control that's a good a good point i forgot about that i I don't I mean I think there's other things here but I don't want to get us stuck in the weeds when something else is before us okay all right uh Bob you have a I David is
this this the plan that you want us to to work off of yes how are they going to get water they're going to put a well in do you know that the the uh sewer plant the sewer plant flume
flows that in that direction yes okay i'm asking that because are you are you coming back oh not the sewer plant the dump both of them no there's no way the water treatment plant all right i'm not I I don't want to argue with you right now but but we're on the
other side of Cocoa Cole Creek you're going to come back with another plan or or a better plan than this it all depends on what the board wants that's why we're here because because the road as it is now is I won't vote for it it's it's not it's not structurally sound okay it was put in as a temporary uh
preventive because they couldn't get up and down the road the the whole road or just the front portion no the front portion is sta pretty stable but it's not legal it's not thick enough the under it needs to be redone it was a
temporary fix right okay the people that the people paid to have a temporary fix so that it kept washing out so we stopped that but I don't believe that it's structurally sound after all the equipment gets in there the other thing is I see sewers in here you they
planning on putting a sewer in no it just says future sewer well every subdivision that we've looked at if if they're going to do road work they put the sewer in well we're not going to put sewer in for one lot it It's going to It's going to take uh I would assume it's going to take two or
three lots well if we put it in it's our sewer so we wouldn't we wouldn't let anybody else tie in i I I I think I think that this needs a lot more work i'm sorry to say that and I believe Well we're here for direction Bob i I know well I'm trying to give you some
direction but that that if you're going to put it I don't think the road is is actually going to pass okay when we go out there and look at it I think that you'll find that it's not a proper road it was not that you want to You're making a subdivision out of it that was
already there okay but nobody was building on that lot they made the lot they want to sell the lot no we we've always had an once it comes to us as a subdivision you have to put a legal road in okay i don't think that's a requirement here
well that's you're turning it into a subdivision yeah it is we're not subdividing the road we're not modifying it already is a subdivision so what they did is they did a panhandle lot they split the lot they did a panhandle lot
on a way that's that was approved by the planning board well I'd like to see the road that they that was on there on the other where they did it make sure that that was from the information that we had from the FE uh September 23rd meeting
so who is going to put the sewer in there the town are they sometime in the future okay yep so I I just think that and I believe you should have a water man in there with a hydrant on top that's my it's
always been Can I ask for a clarification i don't mean to so the the subdivision plan that created lots one A and 1B that was separate from the rest of the because it was a panhandle lot correct
so whatever was constructed prior to that they're not responsible for in in my opinion if this is just a two lot subdivision off of Evergreen Lane right wrong or indifferent I don't think we
can require um you know the rest of Evergreen Lane to be improved when that wasn't part of the subdivision that this was approved under i think the portion from the um
from Route 28 to where the the frontage and access for lot 1A is is under the board's jurisdiction for this purpose if we can figure out which plan was actually approved for the
purposes of construction um and I right now I think that's the big you know wrench in the works here is not knowing which plan it is and if waivers are needed additional waivers are needed from that construction or
improvement um but I don't think we can require them to do the whole road if this was only a two lot subdivision except the two lots are up here no the two lots are here and here it was treated as a subdivision as a two
lot panhandle subdivision because although lot 1B has frontage on Evergreen Lane the access is going to be off a panhandle easement on lot 1A okay so
putting my old planner hat on the board can only request that portion of the subdivision that this was part of which seems to be the entrance from basically where kind of in the middle it says um
concrete bound found where it then angles a little bit now the house the lot goes all the way up to here to the top of the hill i understand that but there's more lots further down i'm not talking about those no no that not part of the subdivision
no that's a different subdivision well we have to say where this stops if they're at the top of the hill but if they're going to be accessing it from an easement and that was understood at the time of the definitive subdivision that see that's where we need more
information i don't know if it was that that's where I need more information i I think I think we should table this or for until we figure out Well we have to act on the on the on the request for
the release unless David wants to request a withdrawal of that request well it looks like it's not going to get acted on favorably so um we we I can send you a letter in the morning asking Actually you can do a verbal because we need to vote on it yeah we need to vote
on it yeah okay well I I I I think Part of what the issue is here this is this was a subdivision that was approved in 2004 in that plan David is right there's two different plans but in that plan they
still showed an improvement at the access to Main Street Route Route 28 that was never constructed it also showed an improvement that was supposed to be some drainage associated there that was never done either and that I have no problem with right yeah and and
and the part of the discussion that we had in September was we understand that you may not want to do this and the and some of the butters did not want to do this i thought that it was clear that there needed to be some modification or
waiver request in order to to actually allow the process to go through and to release it i I agree 100% with you M so that's where I was going that's where my notes took me and um certainly we could consider that because of what has
happened over the last 20 years and the condition is and it's all going to get ripped up anyway uh once the sewer gets put in there so uh or and or a water mane so I I just I just think that at this point I don't want to release a lot
until we resolve that issue i I'm with you 100% on that yeah that's my only and I and I think that it would be helpful if we went out there as a board members many of us that can get out there with the applicant and and walk through this issue and how you know what is it that
we can do to you know help resolve it you know and I think there could be something that we could do to resolve it you almost need to see it though you know it's it's not your it's not flat I'll tell you it's it's like
it's a it's a bit of a challenge y I agree 100% with what okay you're saying but again we have a request for covenant release right so that's what we need to focus on now and and I agree that if um uh you know the applicants through their
engineer want us to do an on-site right for the purposes of a future modification or what have you then that would be appropriate in a in a separate matter all right is that is that agreeable to the board members who are interested in it okay all right so we'll
do that um I think that would be worthwhile oh Katherine go ahead yeah i just had a comment um I how to say this i think the only thing that's clear about this whole matter is that there's an abundance of confusion
and and I think we need to really clear it up and um Charlene this may be a somewhat different perspective than you're saying but I think to release a lot from the covenant we need to know that I'm not suggesting we release a lot
from covenant at all no I know okay i know let me just finish but I think to do that to take action on that we need to know that the requirements of the covenant covenant have been met and right now we don't even know what the covenant is so I think we need to
determine that we need to determine what uh the covenant for this subdivision is and then we need to determine whether or not that's been satisfied and I'm going to add this piece that it's come up in our consideration of subdivisions previously that to some
degree the board does have purview that is above and beyond um you could say the letter of the uh subdivision rules and rags in other words it is the board's responsibility and purview to be sure that everything regarding that
subdivision meets all safety requirements meets all requirements about um causing any difficulties for a butters etc and we we do need to look to public safety and to all those issues and we have a kind of how to say
expanded responsibility to do that um so we do need to examine the whole situation as well as determine what is the particular covenant for the particular subdivision has it or has it not been met and can we release this
particular lot so anyway those are my comments and uh for what it's worth I think a site visit would help us determine this also maybe more research into the records that we have on file um to just try to clarify exactly what the
situation is thanks ju just so you know the the two plans one was a much more extensive um improvement of the roadway all the way up past the uh second lot the one
that's up on the hill there is a a second plan and I think this is the one that um uh that David is asking us to clarify which only showed a couple hundred feet as u as it
approaches um route 28 so there needs to be a clarification of that in in any case one way or another we would have to make a decision about what it is that we want to resolve or agree to a modify or
whatever and then once that is addressed I think the lot release can you know we can take that on as a follow-up issue but right now we need to act on I I would say right all right and Right
so uh is that something you you're uh requesting to withdraw um yes and no um in that we want to keep moving forward with this and we don't want to have to come back in six weeks just to be at this same spot again um
so one of the problems in last September's meeting was the board didn't want to move forward until they saw something on paper yeah that's what we provided um
well what you've provided is not does not address what the approved plan has though that wasn't the purpose of the plan the purpose of the plan was to show you what's on the ground now and and then try to move forward with with um
either a modification or picking which approved plan you wanted to go with right um and and so it unfortunately we're we're right back where we were with in September in that sounds like the board has no information to move
forward um well just just to clarify the September was just a preliminary discussion it was not a formal request to do I know that right right but the board made it clear that they needed something on paper and that's what we provided so
well if you want us to vote on this we certainly can vote well well so you vote on it and now what what we have to formally request a modification of the subdivision in order to get you to go out to the site to take a look at it or
do we keep this thing open with a letter from me saying we waved the 45 days and uh at least we have the public process still open you guys can go out and take a look at the road and let us know what your feelings are and what direction we need to be going but that that's
acceptable can I make a Go ahead Katherine yeah I just want to make a comment we really need to take this off of you know this idea of see what we think see what it is we need to just really nail it down what was approved before and what
is it now and what do we need to have happen now in order to release the lot um because it's it's just we're just keeping it sort of amorphous we and whatever we need to do to to to clarify that information it might
mean David another meeting with you and community development department looking at at the historical documents and determine we um we just need to determine you know what was approved before what's there now and does it meet
the requirements of the previous covenant uh the previous subdivision we understand it doesn't meet the requirements of of either plan that was approved last time um Okay so so it's
clear that we're we're going to be going in the direction of a modification um and so I need input from the board as what modifications would be appropriate and I think an on-site's a great way to
start um but I I think the board needs to proceed with a with a with an open application because if if even if we filed a modification tomorrow we don't
know what we're filing for and and it's going to be six weeks before we can get you to go out there and take a look at it so like I said uh just for keeping the open meeting then keep the keeping
the meeting open I would ask that we continue and uh the request for the release um knowing that we're not going to get that ever until we resolve the modification issue but at
least we keep the public hearing process open and it gives a mechanism for the board to go out and take a look at it sooner than later is that something the board members are agreeable to do yeah i I want to know why it's going to take six weeks well I I don't think it
should i mean we can schedule this within the next week or or or two weeks before between now and the next week i'd rather not do it in the rain like you guys did that's true personally but uh we we did that at 200 Meeting House Road so there are two things then that we
need to do one is an agreement with David yeah for an extension of the time in which the board has to act on the covenant release right that's not to a date and time certain that's to like just say I don't know give you three
months extension just to keep something to keep it and and then that gets recorded with the town clerk once you submit that and the chair would need to sign that so that would be one thing and then just continuing this to a date and time certain with the understanding that
we're going to have on site right okay but you also need to have a modification eventually so I mean I know you know what the modification I think David is right he he needs some guidance on that only because 20 years has gone by so um
we have a plan right now of what it is the existing conditions if you visually see it I think you'll be able to come to some um compromise associated with this uh I can understand your applicant does not want to build what was proposed no
the neighbors don't yeah and the neighbors don't too yes so that tree canopy we we need to you know make a decision as board but you it's it's important to actually see this it's not level on a ground all nice and dandy that this a little bit more challenging
than your average road and I and I think if you see it okay so on the 28th um if if there's an on on-site between now and then right on the 28th if it's very much clear that a modification needs to be
submitted then you would ask for a a waiver from the covenant release and then move forward with the modification based on the on-site right so you're suggesting that we just continue this through the 28th if you
can get a I'm not going to be available for an on-site or um the 28th meeting unfortunately so what is what is the form are we signing a timeline extension form of it's a timeline extension right form or even a letter which a letter
from us a letter from them with a signature line for the chair to sign um so it would be f first uh an understanding that we are going to continue um the uh time in which the board has to
act on the release of covenant to say June 30th that would be part A of motion and then part uh B of the motion would be to continue this matter to April 28th with
the understanding that there will be an on-site before then right so that would be my motion okay any discussion do I have a second first of all second all right any discussion on this first before we No okay then um
let's stay a roll call vote uh Warren Chain warren chain approve uh Bob Wor bob Waffer approve charlene Greenhal charlene Greenhal to approve um Frank Sheer frank Sher approve bob Dubis bob Dubis approve uh Katherine Halpern katherine Halpern approve and Artsboro i
approve mr chairman yes i think after an on-site inspection we we can come to an agreement on a certain certain few items uh but I think we should have an on-site um we'll see and um are you going to be around at all in the next two weeks uh
Charlene no uh we're going to be away from the 22nd and coming back first okay maybe you could take at least take a u visual on this yourself you willing to you willing to meet me out there David one on one
i'd like to go with you i'd like to go in with you to throw in my two cents David if that's all right be three cents but I do I do I do want to see you progress i just have a few and and actually that'll be good that way somebody who will actually be able
to be here on the 28th right will convey convey your points yeah yeah so just so I'm clear you're going to the two of you are going to do the site visit alone with the engineer yes well yeah the other board members can go along with that if they want or separate that
because I need to I need to post it if it if it's just Bob and I just for time constraints right and it doesn't need to be posted right yeah if you have another if you have an on-site with the rest of the board I'd be more than happy to be out there too okay i I would suggest
that we do that in two parts then just so we can get Charlene's input and then um Christine will reach out to you and schedule sometime between now and the 28th for a site visit for the rest of the board members so we can post it okay
right and may may I just ask David can you be at both site visits yes great thank you so much david I'll give you a call tomorrow sure because you don't have my number i I think the other thing um if
Christine can take the packet that we got from the September 28th meeting there was additional information in that packet that we didn't get in tonight's packet and that'll that'll I'm not sure it's going to clarify anything but it'll show you the two different plans that
were part of this uh and that might help me understand about what was originally proposed and maybe why there was an adjustment to the plan but I agree with David from the standpoint which is the final approved plan
that was um part of the the subdivision approval hi can I say one thing if you introduce yourself susan Shepard um and for the I guess we've owned this
land for about 12 years and we owned the house that was connected to it so we we bought the two pieces separately but within a year of each other um we whenever anyone has looked at this it was always our understanding that it
was the modified plan that had the less restrictive road size we were never told no one ever seemed to think that it was the first plan right why it was modified so quickly and how that happened I'm not sure i think maybe Jack Farrell knows
the answer to that but um uh I just wanted to you know we've been trying to get the history on this for about the past three years and trying to figure out exactly what needs to be done um but that was definitely our understanding that it was the less restrictive
um the you know the road size was the smaller one that they were talking about but yes okay we'd like to have this cleared up so I really appreciate you guys trying
out there i very much appreciate it yeah it's been it's been hard to get any answers or any agreement and um obviously Okay there actually is a motion on the floor no second yet either i I No there was a
second bob Duvvice did the second right yes yes i thought we voted no I apologize if we didn't uh then uh let's take let's take a roll call vote on this then uh Warren Chain Warren Chain I approve uh Bob Worcha bob Warch approve uh Charlene Greenhall charlene
Greenhouch approve uh Frank Sheer frank Sher approve abdubis bob Dubis approve and Katherine Halpern katherine Halpern approve and Arts I approve okay so we'll probably set up two site visits with you one with all the board me most of the
board members and uh the other one with Charlene and Bob separately okay thank you thank you all very much all right we have a few minutes before I think the next one is our public hearing so we have a few minutes
can we go back to the way just for a point of clarity i'm sorry um You you can't speak from the audience we have a few minutes so okay great i'll be quick i'm Toby Liry i represent the uh builder
uh builders at Silven Way and the which you guys heard before I got here i got stuck in some traffic so we were just going to ask for a point of clarity on the on the uh the plan of land that we have that we were under the impression we it was an a approval not required
that we were literally just getting a sign off for our subdivision and we have a plan of land that is signed by the planning board from uh 1988 and I'm not sure if you all have it
or not but I just wanted to uh ask you know why this plan wasn't wouldn't be acceptable to the board tonight with which shows the culde-sac right on it so Sure um I would like to speak to that actually so the planning board does have all of these plans these are the plans that I passed out to them later so that
last plan was for a different subdivision it was for um Twine Field which is further up in the middle of the plan there this other piece that was on there was just on there as the the the drawing itself um not part of the
application it was not part of the application at all it was not part of the subdivision um so we go back to the the plan before that in the package that the planning board members have speak to Nichson Circle and then they show the lot being the full lot the way it is as
we see it now and if we go back one more plan in the package that I have provided to the sub to the um surveyor we see the original plot of land um which basically is off of Svin Svin Way and there is no culde-sac there and that shows um the
small approximately a little over 30 ft of frontage on it so there is no the the um we have no record of any plan with the um the culde-sac and being recorded anywhere coming before the planning board it it appears as though it was
just something that somebody maybe was considering or somebody had gotten some misinformation or got ahead of themselves but the plan we we I'm sorry to interrupt um but my uh original surveyor on this project did do some research and it was on May 23rd 1988
that it was before the planning board and it was a it was a plan of land for all four lots on this plan and it was a definitive plan of land uh and again that was the date it was signed off by all the members of the planning board approved that night
recorded um at the registry of deeds and uh there was two subject lots that were subject to covenants that night and there were two subject lots that were not subject to covenants but this um so the four the four lots on that plan that
you're referring to again the planning board has that yes um do not include the lot with the the um the culde-sac that you're speaking of that I'm I'm I'm looking at it right now it's right here it's got their signatures it's got the date it's got the uh registry of deeds
stamp on it right but the but that culde-sac at the bottom corner is not was not part of this sub it was not part of this subdivision it's not in the in the application at all well I also have an opinion from the
person who did the original uh zoning work here and under the statute he has he's not a lawyer but he does have uh the ability to weigh in on it i could read you his commentary on this if if you would Well no I want to interrupt you right now because we're beyond the
point where you were just going to talk for a few minutes okay um the application was withdrawn um there has never been a submission to the planning board for this uh extension to the
roadway if there was there would have been a road built there's no road build at the culde-sac all right it's just driveways so there's no evidence that that was even completed so I think you need to go back and do your research on
that and maybe have a a subsequent meeting with the with the community development staff and go fair enough and this so this plan of land that was recorded and dated and signed by the building uh the planning board which shows the culdeac is is in that was for a different subdivision it has nothing
to do with your subdivision we will also tell you to look at the um protective zoning bylaw on page 51 uh which refers to lots created after January 1st 1987 and prior to January 1st
1994 um and that speaks to some of the things of this and it in particular it speaks to um having the roadway built within eight years of the of any subdivision so even if the subdivision that you have is correct and it is true and accurate then we're going
to refer to this and we're going to take you through that piece of it i I just wish we when we asked 30 days ago that we would have been given this information instead of 2:30 this afternoon because you know we had a lot of uh a lot riding on this this is been a long process to get here and so um you
know I have been in contact with the surveyor i did not give him this information initially it came up as the planning board chair and I were discussing it um I know that your surveyor was away last week um we've had a number of other issues with regard to it we think we can get to where you need
to be with a definitive subdivision so I would suggest if you reach out to the planning the planning office and community development we can go over it further fair enough and uh I would like to submit that uh that opinion letter as well so we'll send Oh by by all means
yeah at that time sure um c can I just I I happened to be the assistant town planner when this was done is your name on it no because I didn't get to sign anything back then um that being said have you found the old case file for
this so we we found something under the I'm sorry we found something under twine field um I only say that because in all in actuality it was not unusual for the lower culde-sac to have been created for
the purposes of creating frontage for what's known as lot 4 because they're showing that temporary turnaround um off a twine field so it was not unusual back in the day to have done a
plan like this whereas that culde-sac was created and it may have been waved for road construction because the access was actually going to be off of the new Twinfield Road so there was no access from this property though for that
that's that's part of the issue and there was no submission no no no i'm just talking it was just for the purposes of creating frontage only because lot four doesn't have adequate frontage well it might on the straightaway there but I'm just it I
mean it was good lord I was a lot younger then and I don't remember every plan that came before the board but um you know I don't know if there's anything in shown on the preliminary subdivision that shows that culde-sac you will look again and I just that's
fine only because when I saw the date I'm like oh he I worked here then so um I don't know if that and they probably did this for plan protection because there was a subdivision uh there was a zoning change that occurred so I guarantee this was done for plan
protection back in the day I don't know if that helps or not well part of the bylaw is the issue too that we found right within the bylaw so um I will have to reach out to you tomorrow if you want to give Annie in the back your information um I can I can move
forward in that direction too thank you thank you okay uh so now we can go to our public hearings these are continued from what date was it lost my agenda
two weeks three weeks 19th of March was it the I'm sorry the 24th of March 24th of March okay and this first one is the petition for your stormwater
article is that is that correct uh yes good afternoon that Aldridge impact Chattam so my drive for this article is to align the bylaw to the purpose and intent of the bylaw its protection of natural resources if it's not abundantly clear
to everyone in the community I will state it clearly storm water runoff contains pollutants that degrade water quality at one point in time open up a a swale into the water body and everything was fine and then we started realizing
that that caused problems so the planning board seems to accept this premise but has concerns regarding property owners quote unquote getting what they want i'm not entirely sure what they want and what the planning board means by that they would get what they want by
abusing this bylaw to significantly alter land within conservancy districts so I would like to review the existing bylaw in various circumstances that do allow for cut fill and regrading utilities just a minute yes point of
order yes um I think when you came before us the last time we had suggested some word smithing i think that's where we're at correct um I don't I mean I think we all understand
what it is you're trying to do here and I don't think we need to go into that again i agree we we did go into it last but um if I remember right and unfortunately I didn't mark my copy but we talked about um excluding the word the wording
including excavation comma filling um comma and regrading um so that it would just said something along the line the construction maintenance and improvement necessary to
direct treat and infiltrate is is my memory on that if we're going to take out perhaps direct would be also important to take out um however we want just the storm water systems with the existing surfaces that we have i did
speak with the building commissioner on this and um he doesn't have the time to review this he can only review existing regulation he had a few violations and spring has sprung he has a lot of uh permits being
closed so we'll take out the language it should work if it doesn't we'll be back mhm so so it what the and this would have to be changed on town meeting floor in a motion by you so it would be the construction maintenance and
improvements and improvement to treat and infiltrate storm water runoff in accordance with all of the applicable regulations and guidance so so this is something I think would be uh appropriate we we're just talking about
this verbally i think we should have this in writing let's continue this to the 28th we can vote on it then because we'll have something that that is going to be presented at town meeting with the re with our recommendation our recommendation is based on this not not
what we have in front of us i would prefer to do it that way rather than just verbalize this because it's a bylaw change is that something that that would work for you then absolutely okay uh Mr chairman I move that we continue the
public hearing unless somebody else said something I apologize um for the uh petition zoning amendment um with regard to the conservation district to April 28th no earlier than 5:00 p.m and do I have a second second all right
let's do roll call vote warren Shane Warren Chain approve bob Worcher bob Worcher approve charlene Greenhall approve frank Sheer approve uh Bob Dwis bob Dwis approve uh Katherine Halpern katherine Halpern approve and Art Sprew
I approve okay uh next hearing is let me get my packet of information out here this is a petition article mechanical system we work mechanical
systems okay exterior mechanical system appliances yes for the record that Eldridge impact chatam this one there was a suggestion for additional wording and we are not going to provide that and I'll explain
why so I just want to start by reviewing how impact chatam came to be i consulted with Buck Upson he was on the conservation commission and the zoning board of appeals um he recognized my mindset was not to blindly overdevelop the town i'm not an advocate for clients
i abide greatly by 250 CMR the protection of the health welfare and safety i want responsible development so I'm not coming at this with a prodevelopment perspective i want something that's responsible
so for the exterior mechanical appliance systems bylaw or system appliances quite a mouthful um it was a member of the community that reached out to us asking if we had put this forward we sought out opinions from
legal council who's familiar with the local zoning bylaw and they helped wordsmith bylaw that we put before you that attorney has suggested that it would be far more prudent to review how the zoning board of appeals works rather
than create excessive language within this bylaw that would be redundant i will do my best so the board appeared satisfied with the changes to the setback keep these things out of the front yard setback uh the second floor units that
um that shouldn't be they should meet the setbacks as well so now the concern is putting this to a special permit rather than a variance request before the zoning board of appeals so starting with the costs um to
do it right it'll take a minimum of $5,000 to get to the zoning board of appeals between site plans legal fees applications notifications can you get it for less sure can you get it for more or more
difficult application will certainly be more than than 5,000 but this is not something that somebody's going to take on lightly that could be a deterrent for applicants who just want their appliance in the wrong
spot the protective bylaw starting on page 93 has the criteria so when somebody goes in for a special permit they have to prove the the suit suitability of the site for the proposed use the impact on the neighborhood
visual character noise and litter which is most important for this as these are noise generating items and compatibility of the proposed use with surrounding land uses special permits may be granted with
reasonable conditions safeguards or limitations and there has to be a finding that it's not detrimental to the neighborhood i have great faith in our zoning board of appeals to ensure that a butter's concerns are heard they are
notified and and it's very easy for somebody to write a letter back to say they don't like the location of a unit but more importantly to meet the criteria they would have to make sure that they're not negatively infect
impacting the abuter this was noted today in the past five years there have been 53 variance requests 24 have been approved it's pretty high considering the difficulty of obtaining
a variance i provided examples of several cases where a special permit made sense and with that I open it up to questions okay um Katherine I'm going to
start with you do you have any uh questions or comments of that on this petition article are you still there Katherine i Hold on yes I'm connected i had to get myself off mute okay
um so as I recall and forgive me I I think we wanted to add wording wasn't the issue about whether the units were raised or not raised and whether they were part of the footprint and um wasn't that our issue can you can you
refresh my memory that so there are three changes going about in this article and one of them elevated units are the current bylaw reads at ground level and okay if they're not at ground level they don't need to meet the setback and that seems because that only
projects the noise right the building footprint the bylaw was not drafted that way so these devices separate structures um we could certainly rewrite the bylaw Okay that is part of a building
footprint but we're working with what's already written okay yes all right and so basically you're just saying that the concerns that the planning board has you feel will be taken care of through the
special permit process with zoning board of appeals is that correct yes they will be okay um I don't think I have any questions if you'd like to go ahead okay um Warren do
you have any comments i don't have anything to add to those comments um Bob War nope no uh Charlene nothing nothing uh Frank no and Bob Dubis yeah bad didn't Didn't we already go through
this for the setbacks on on air conditioners and and uh other other We did noise making uh machines whatever they you want to call them out out things i thought we had it so that they
were to use the setback and then uh we had it that you put a fence around it and or plants something like that so what what exactly you just want to change from a variant to a special permit is that what your idea is
you weren't here before for the um for the initial so currently it's at grade units need to meet the setback the sideyard setback from all around or the front or rear setback no just the sideyard setback
so at grade units need to meet the sideyard setback so in a R40 it's 25 feet it needs to meet 25 feet from the street i have two examples in there a street view showing generator all right so front yard so exactly what what are you telling us then so we want to keep
units from being within the front yard setback so make them 40t in the 40,000 square foot zoning district keep them What if they don't have 40 feet then rather than a variance they can go for a special permit just what I said you want to change this to special permits yes
okay you're still keeping within within the law that we did uh god five years ago or something like that we came before us and we changed all of that when whenever we did I was on the board when we when we made it if it was loud that we would put we would put a fence
around it and or shrubbery around it to help absorb some of the noise and and uh I thought that went through if there was a complaint or something like that so and and I do agree with you that I think that a special permit would be would be
better than than uh uh a variance so that's the only I'm just making sure that's the only change you want to do there were the three changes the All right give me the other two 40 feet so it's at grade right that's fine has to meet the setback elevated it doesn't
have to meet the setback how far is elevated um the current interpretation is 8 ft if you can't reach it from ground level then it doesn't have to meet the setback and you don't think that the noise carries further at 8t than it does on ground level that's why we're getting rid of that because the noise would carry further when you're
meeting i just want to make it clear to me and and some of the people that might be watching uh okay and what's the other one so we have meeting the street setback right we have the elevated units need to meet all the setbacks and then instead of a variance it' be a special
permit in order to violate the setback perfect thank you that's good carrot clarification for the dummies like me yeah so um I'm going to have Christine read a few of the minutes from the uh previous meeting on this uh and might help clarify some of the other comments
that we had do you have those up available yeah so after um that had presented at the last meeting um Charlene had asked she said that she was in support but she was concerned with the wording um these again are draft um
minutes but this is this is kind of what we have then Frank had said he was in favor of using a special permit since the lot for the lots in these cases um are difficult to deal with and this allows for additional tools and review
katherine and Bob Wishfter um they were both concerned with the wording as well they wanted something more clear especially with circumstances um would have applicants seeking a special permit miss Miss uh Katherine
suggested the mechanicals be considered part of the building footprint mr eldridge said that the special permit items clarified the use in the table he added that he didn't believe that the mechanicals could be part of the building footprint as they could as they
could be five feet or more off the building and case law pushes them into the direction of he is proposing uh Mr mr wooder also had said about two fundamental issues with regard to sound and aesthetics um and then Mr uh first
said that he agreed with other planning board members that there needs to be some clearly defined criteria for planning board support so that's that's where you all left it you basically were looking for more information you were looking for better wording um again
these are draft what and you already have the wording in the bylaw with the criteria that exist okay so if there's no more comments or questions we can close this um public hearing and then we can decide how we
want to deal with the recommendation mr chairman I move that we close the public hearing second okay uh let's do a roll call vote warren Chain warren chain approve um Bob Worsher bob Worchafter approve um Charlene Charlene Greenhild approve
frank Sher Frank Sharer approve bob Dwis Bob Dubis approve uh Katherine Halpern um Mr chair I approve but I just wanted to ask did we need to get any public statements prior to closing the public
hearing that's a good point um maybe there are maybe there are none but just just in case you're still under discussion that's right uh I do not see any hands raised so great so then and there's nobody on the audience here
thank you for bringing that up uh no worries then I approve that we close the public hearing for deliberations and uh Arts Brew I approve okay so I would say next if there's any discussion about how uh you
would like to uh go forward with a recommendation or um alterations or um entertain comments from the board members on this during discussion any recommendation to town meeting should always be in the positive
that's correct and then the vote reflects right yep so any comments questions or do we want to go ahead and vote a positive recommendation on this u Bob Dubis I'm in favor of those three
changes uh I I think I'd rather have a special permit than a variant okay katherine um I agree um as as I if I can summarize it that I
think you haven't made any changes since we last met with you but you've clarified what you're doing here for the board is that is that correct um he can't really say anything right yeah because we closed the hearing right oh right because we closed the public
hearing sorry i'm sorry but I think that's that's uh what he has done in in my point of view too that he has clarified yeah I think that's correct for the board so you all had received um proposed bylaw amendment dated February
7th um and we received it on February 19th and it says just to refresh u mechanical system appliances um he took out all lowercase E he capitalized exterior um then he took out located at
ground level and then he added shell after shelby uh located to meet the applicable minimum minimum building uh structure st set setbacks and then he took out
setback the distance of the abuter setback to the property line as required for building buildings and structures in appendix to um schedule of demenual requirements and then the added except by special permit from the zoning board
of appeals so it will read just clearly now it says exterior mechanical system appliances including but not limited to air conditioners condensers generators and pumps shall be located to meet the
applicable minimum building/structure setbacks in appendix 2 schedule of dimensional requirements except by special permit from the zoning board of appeals
okay so um uh do I have a recommend Bob go ahead where does it say anything about the uh the um units that aren't on the ground i mean it is that just I I
still confused i mean I well I have a ve a clearer picture of what FAD wants and told us but I'm I'm going to say that most people reading this are not going to see that when they read yeah here here's what I think um
the previous one made it a focus on located at the ground level so all previously anything that was located at the ground level so it so anything elevated was uh not didn't come into
that purview so by eliminating that piece then it means anything that's there that I think and I think that did clarify that so I I do think that that is a clear item that work okay i missed that so
with that do we want to make a um a positive uh recommendation for the proposed uh bylaw for exterior mechanical system appliances mr chairman so moved to the town meeting so moved to the town meeting yep and
Warren Chain I second okay uh let's uh roll call vote warren Chain warren Chain approve uh Bob Worchfter bob Worchfter approve uh Charlene Greenhal charlene Greenhald approve frank Sher frank Sher approve uh Bob Dubis bob Dubis approve
uh Katherryn Halpern katherine Halpern approve and Arts Brew I approve thank you much so just so you all know a letter will be going to the um select board and then ultimately to um the town moderator to read
the that town meeting because the warrant has already closed it's closed so there'll be a separate letter and the recommendation will be made on town meeting floor thank you all right thank you all right so last item on the agenda
is the uh West Jam Neighborhood Center um uh the community development staff and I have been uh diligent work in a background um we've created um what would you call it a video of
Yes I would say it was a video um Art myself and Katherine um produced a five minute video with the help of uh Cadam TV and Mark here um that we're waiting on um the town administrator uh the town manager to approve um she is reviewing
it currently uh it answers frequently asked questions it's something similar to what was done for the ADU bylaw a few years ago this one's got some of the graphics in it um that uh were developed throughout the throughout the entire process so what
we're doing now is we've proposed um we initially had written a a script of frequently asked questions that was much longer so I think I believe you all got a draft in your package a couple of pages um uh and I wanted you all to is it is
you've got a four-page one right but there was seem to be some confusion okay so we were trying to decide whether or not we would be putting up a longer version on the website just to answer questions for people um we we when we were doing the video we decided that it
was too long to put together as a video so we combined a couple of things together as part of the video Q&A so there even though there's less questions the answers were sort of like melded in together to cover as many of the aspects of the Q&A
so the um Mark did a marvelous job of adding some of the visual images on this some have animations on them um I I was uh rather impressed with it because I didn't know where this was going to go uh I had so many takes on this so uh I
was happy he was able to resolve some of my my pieces i I appreciate his help on it um uh I think it's going to u uh help in communicate this especially when you're answering some of the questions with some visual images because we use a
lot of the visual images of what we have used and created over this time but then we thought that we should post the more lengthy Q&As's um on the website in case there was other questions that we didn't cover with that video
i was just confused because starting on the second page we have some redundancy from the first page yes yes so I was trying Exactly i was just trying to figure that out a little bit um I think you guys did a great job on this um I just have a couple minor so we
made some modifications the day of and they did not make it in this draft to you um but I would we saw the redundancy yeah i would like to um send it out to you all tomorrow so you can kind of take a look at it and give some additional things some of the questions are are simplified whether or not it costs money
and stuff like that but those are some of the questions that maybe some people will ask and some are much more involved right so I would like to send out another thing to you all um to review before we put it up on the website and then what will happen is um Shauner from the town manager's office will be um
putting out some social media things on this to promote the video and then also to promote the frequently asked questions when we get it settled so that's what kind of we just wanted to bring it all to your attention over the next couple of weeks i'll just give you my marked up oh perfect terrific yeah
thank you terrific does the video include some of the renderings that we've seen as things are going to look like so So it does it yeah we kind of we go through the process and um Mark has matched them up with uh you know from the the formbbased code very early on um
all the way through again we trying to keep the video fairly short but we're getting there once the town manager signs off on this and it's posted could you send a link to the board members so that they can take a look at it absolutely okay all right you anticipated my next comment
Mr chair yes Katherine yeah i just wanted to make a comment just um in response to Charlene i think everything will be more clear for the board when you see the video i think what you have before you in writing is two versions of
essentially the same thing a short version which was made into the video and art is completely right um Mark added some graphics i think when you see the graphics and the video it really does make it very clear in a very short
compact video and then I think the second version is intended to be the same some of the same questions and answers as the first so it's intended to be redundant as I understand but it's a written version that goes into a little bit more detail of what's in the in the
video so I think that's that's the intention um that there's the short video and then a little more detail in the written version yeah so what what we were finding both Katherine and I when we were uh reading them reading them is one thing but when you speak them it
doesn't come out quite right and so I think we made about six edits while we're in production on this and it it turned out better because we spent the time to do that and again Mark was terrific about cutting and pasting all of our voiceovers
in so he has a text on the bottom with the question and and text on the bottom with the answer um and then the images are um um he's he he streams through quite a few different images associated
with this and then one of the other things over the next couple of weeks prior to town meeting will be the um whatever uh Art or whoever is going to present at town meeting on behalf of all of you um so we'll be bringing that script forward
too we wanted to have the long range um item on the next couple of agendas just to keep everybody aware and informed of things that we're doing um to get some outreach and get some wording out there so I I I plan on doing the presentation
but if there's other volunteers I'll be happy to have you step up well my question was going to be how are we going to incorporate all that nice graphics into your presentation so you I don't know whether we can just put the
the polished edited version as you're you get up and just push a button and let it all go or whether you're going to have to get more coordinated in having those graphics because it's going to be very important to have the graphics as part of your present i I think so i
think that um we are that's what we're actually starting to work on tomorrow um and we'll develop something a series of slides and um pinpoint what some of the highlights
are i mean the Q&A is part of that but there's other components of it that we wanted to speak to about how this this evolved um we'll see if we can get some information to uh the board for the next meeting so that we can share that would
be uh available for the town meeting uh that we present and maybe we can critique it then so that'll be part of what I'll work on with Christine over the next two weeks chairman is this going to be an option under consideration to actually play the video
at town meeting well that's what we we could ask about that and I know also that the town manager's office is um they she usually does some type of a question and answer um we don't have the details on what that is going to look like exactly it's not going to cover all of the items in the warrant but um Katie
is is uh researching that as well so maybe that will be played part of it at town meeting i don't know yeah i mean Mr yep katherine yeah yeah i had a comment Lauren if you're done
um from past town meetings um and I did happen to run into Jill and she said she's working on her on her video for the town warrant and um and I think we will get a positive reply from town manager's office on our little um
frequently asked questions um from previous town meetings i believe I mean please do check again but I believe it's possible to either play our short frequently asked questions video or even make a new video
that is the full presentation for town meeting on the article which includes graphics there's usually a screen available um or the there is usually a screen available you could do the speaking live with graphics on the
screen i think we have done that in the past so I think all of that should be available to you and uh at town meeting when I u talk with Katherine about this she's been exposed to this a little bit
more than I have um one of the challenges that she she mentioned when it comes to a bylaw like this there could be some comments that come up that may not be um connected in the right way
or or uh identified in the right way based on the way the bylaw is we may not have an opportunity to go up there and rebut any of that and that's part of the challenge at least that's what Katherine mentioned to me on her past experience when she was dealing with this we might
have our presentation that we'll do say whatever five minutes or so and there might be you know positive comments on it negative comments on it we may not have a chance or an opportunity to rebut any of those if if there's clear if it
clearly is inaccurate in comparison that we resolved that i mean we resolved an awful lot of things associated with this and I I think I appreciate it because it was it was straightforward for me to actually answer some of those during the select board meeting and the finance
committee meeting uh that was helpful but that's a back and forth and I'm not quite sure that we'll get that opportunity at town meeting so I I think the presentation may have to we may have to live with that as the only thing so we may have to cover as many bases as we
can well we we we could stand and get in line that's correct yes yep yep that's right that's right you remember Bob so you've done that before oh yeah okay
my um I think it's extremely important that we we have something we'll call it the video whatever it looks like that actually shows what this is going to look like yeah in 50 years uh because there going to be a lot of people that will never have seen those renderings right and won't have seen
them in the context of this is what the problem was this is our solution and this is what it's going to look like and do it at town meeting i think is important i am I am um amazed as good a word as any yeah that in this whole
process and all of the public hearings um the lack of input um for or against um uh of a zoning bylaw which is as significant a change as this one there there was some
initially but I think we vetted a lot of that out u I I thought the major step that we did on this is when we included when we addressed the residential piece piece on this and the affordable and obtainable that was never part of what
we started off four years ago that was a significant piece and I think that that is a critical piece for this to be successful and and so it it took us a while to actually get that to the point that we were all comfortable with it and we could feel positive when we actually
introduced this at town meeting as I say but I think those points have been adequately conveyed to the public and there have been multiple public input options and I'm amazed I I was even the other things that we get public input on
which is you know not holding back on criticisms or questions or objections and in this particular case um any comments that I've heard personally and certainly in our public meetings Yeah have all been favorable uh and really
every everything that has ever come up that has been negative has been essentially yeah um so I'm just amazed that for a zoning bylaw as momentous as this one the lack of of public
um opposition which is I'm I'm I'm almost frightened by the fact that there's lack of of opposition because I come from an experience just as a voter that if it's a zoning change the answer is no
i don't need to read the Bible i think you're mistaken Warren this is a very minor change i want to make sure everybody that's listening true understands it's a very minor change that we're asking and that's why we're getting very little
feedback just careful yeah the thing that turn I I just would I think it's very important that at the meeting that it's quite clear Yeah what it is the problem was what we proposed and this is this is what it's going to look like mhm
so you can see that it's a minor change okay so we have uh it's about a month for that but we have only one meeting unless we call for a special meeting so and we certainly couldn't do that if something comes up on the 28th and we
said that you know it would be nice if we could do a check-in on this first before May 10th so certainly we'll we'll consider that on the 28th but let's see what um Christine and I can put together on this we'll work hard for the next two weeks and see what we can produce and
then we'll go from there uh any other comments from anybody else we need to take Mr chair uh I think Rick Levit is Oh yes rick I see your uh hand up i uh please uh go right ahead
well thank you very much and I've been following your conversation i just want to e echo all of your your thoughts and and and particularly Warren's thought that we do need to show the town meeting voters what it's going to look like and
it is a minor change uh and and the the video it will be so important to have at town meeting my experience in going to town meetings and using videos to to uh advance my whatever I was saying has
been very effective in the past and I know this video would be effective as well that's all I needed to say well thanks for sticking with us on this Rick i appreciate it appreciate your input uh one last thing um there's an item that
will be in the U agenda and it's called correspondence it's not intended that we discuss this it's I think it's important that when we receive correspondence that we we share it with the board members if there's something that pe uh pops up there that you think is important that
we can uh we should put on in a future agenda that's fine but I thought it wouldn't be important because we could get 10 pieces of correspondence that are not related to our business but it's it may be worthwhile for us to actually read you'll see that in the future but
it's not intended that we be discussing them on a on a meeting by meeting basis all right okay uh with that I think uh we have a motion to adjourn mr chairman I move that we adjourn this exceptionally
good meeting i second it okay uh roll call uh Warren Warren chain approve borafter abort approve charlene Charlene Greenhouse approve frank Frank Sher approve Abdubis Abdubis approve uh Katherine Halpern Katherine Halpern approve and Art Spur I
approve and the time is 5:46 p.m [Music] [Music]