e e e e e e e e [Music]
[Music] a [Music]
good evening chadam welcome to the February 25 2025 meeting of the chadam select board please note this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly Hereafter for scheduled and On Demand viewing on any smartphone or
tablet device if anyone else is recording the meeting please notify the chair seeing none I will proceed pursuant to Governor Healey's 29 March 29 2023 sign of the acts of 2023 extending certain covid-19 measures
adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law General Law chapter 30A section 20 until March 31 2025 this meeting of the chadam select 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 the order a a reminder that persons who would like to listen to this
meeting while in progress may do so by calling the phone number 1 158 945 4410 conference ID 203 386 491 pound sign or join the meeting online via
Microsoft teams through the link in the posted agenda well this is a live broadcast and simal cast on chadam TV Xfinity channel 1072 despite our best efforts we may not be able to provide
realtime access we will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible uh my first order of business is to establish a quorum uh Ms Davis present Mr Mets present Mr Shell
is present Mr necastro present we have a pres uh we have a quorum our first first order of business is the minutes of February 18 2025 we'll take a motion we have a we have a motion do I
hear a second second thank you uh Corrections Mr Nast thank you Mr chairman I have just have a few on page four in the second line um this is a from the finance committee report I'd like to insert um um after the word
support the phrase consideration of a recommendation to support consideration of the sener for active living they didn't actually endorse it at that point um page five um the second full paragraph in the
second line that begins with the phrase that historically Capital items that had gone before the town meeting after the phrase town meeting I'd like to insert the phrase for free cash funding so town meeting for free cash
funding on page 13 there's a stray word um yes in the fifth full paragraph third line at the end of it has the word and I think that should be stricken warranty and
presentation is it you see it cavy did I miss something there I believe that was for town meeting pres presentation so I could amend it that way but I believe it was requested that SL presentation be included in both okay all right we'll leave it as it is
and then on page 14 um uh under item five paragraph that says directive fairely presented in the third line I think you can strike the word system the first time it appears so that it would read and and Reps to the the original
sewer collection system okay that's it uh I have a couple if anybody else I'll defer um uh my first one is on page
three um I want to um after the word in the uh uh in the first paragraph um next to the last line uh let me see here uh I item I'm sorry item four uh next to the last line
u in in the public comments section um I want to insert um after the word that um I want to insert the phrase the MSD superintendent had estimated that I
I made the point that it came from him not that that it was coming from me on page three also in the last line on the page uh I want to act add the word u i want to say recommendation to Target achieve and
maintain an annual certification of free cash page four um the last line um of the second full paragraph um I want to strike uh a
change to the character of the town I want to use the language that Mak basically basally was in the in their memo and so I would insert um after the word citing their belief that it will adversely impact the face
and shape of the community's public Gateway that was that was directly from their memo um I go then to page six um item 5 C in that first paragraph
um in the last line I would strike the words um town uh strike the words Town helping people with and insert um towns
fashioning a subsidy program for hardship cases involving and then continue with the connection costs uh I go to page nine um uh item five
e uh second paragraph um I would like to revise the first two well it's really one sentence but the the sentence that includes both sides of the semicolon to read as two
sentences um the FY 2026 general fund Debt Service is budgeted at 8,576 227 which is an increase of 99.74% over fiscal year 2025 the principal portion of that
amount is 6,821 63 and the interest portion is $1,624 64 with shortterm interest amounting to
$150,000 which includes bonds and issuance costs I I just think that there's no substantive change it just reads A little better that way um on page [Music]
17 um I wanted to revise the last sentence to read as follows um she suggested the select board might consider accepting the invitation acting as good
neighbors um and then also on page 17 in the third paragraph third line um which ends uh with two select board members uh I want to put a comma after
members uh and and say which Mr Shell endorsed um and that's all I have so with those amendments I assume the motion stands as does the second I will call the role Ms
Davis I uh Mr Mets Mr Shell says I uh and Mr necastro I thank you moving right along uh next we have public
announcements and agenda requests do we have any from the board any from the public uh Mr chair I think that Shan an was going to make a public announcement there she is
sh yescome thank you uh just a reminder that the town will be holding a public forum on the proposal to adopt Mass General Law chapter 90 section 17 C which would allow the town to reduce speed limits from 30 mph to 25 milph on
any roadway inside a so-called thickly settled business district that is not a state highway tomorrow evening Wednesday February 26th at 5:30 p.m. right there in the large meeting room with Town Office Annex remote partition participation is available for the Forum
and the link to join remotely is posted on the town's website on the main page under both the um news and update section and on the calendar the form will also be live streamed on xinity channel 1072 through the town's website and it
will be available on chadam TV's YouTube channel for viewing um I hope we have some good participation on this important article that will be under consideration for annual Town Meeting thank you thank you um anybody
else I don't see anybody okay moving right along um public comments on the business agenda do we have anybody I don't see anybody here in the room anybody online no I'm not seeing any I don't see
anybody either thank you thank you okay um and I'm reminded now that I neglected to review the the agenda um the remainder of the business agenda is uh first the the uh FY 2026 budget
review uh for purposes of transmitting the um 26 operating and capital budgets to the finance committee um next we have an annual town meeting articles review the first first of which is the um referring the
petition protective zoning bylaw uh to the planning board for a public hearing next we have a series of nine Community preservation act articles recommended by the um Community preservation um
committee uh and then finally uh not finally next we have uh presentation of test fits um at for development at 12 27 Old Harbor Road by util architecture and planning and then finally we have the
town manager's monthly report so with that I will invite um I think I'm going to invite m masel to the uh to the podium to present the uh 2026 budget review
welcome thank you Mr chair Carrie masol Finance director um I'll be going over the um update for the FY 2026 budget um so originally um the preliminary budget for
FY 2026 which was presented on January 21st 2025 was presented at 43,9 21,5 22 it is now refined and presented at 44,1
154,00 $28 um without education assessments that's an increase of 8 9% versus the 7.62% um the FY 2026 operating budget with
education assessments is now a total of 55 m959 395 a combined increase of 8.25% over 2025 and I'll just go over um these changes for
you so like I just stated the operating budget is presented at 44,1 54,2 without education for an increase of $232 I'm sorry $232,000 um and this is due to the
retirement assessment that we received um just recently in February is that an increase in the the retirement assessment itself or we we got something that we had nothing uh for before because we didn't have the assessment we didn't have the assessment
so it was just an estimate so yep we received the information and this is the assessment for this is an increase to the assessment um so this kind of goes over um what we have for FY 2024 actuals
what was voted for 2025 and the proposed budget for FY 2026 budget so we've gone from 35 m98 th000 to 4,812 to 44154 um there was one change to the
capital budget so it was initial proposed amount of 2.9 Million um there was an increase of $220,000 for the uh DPW replace of a 2005 dump truck um so the current
capital budget is at 3,162 650 we're actually using a article from uh last year that was approved for a rolloff truck in the amount of 300 and
I'll just say $61 somewhere around there um we're going to be using that as a funding source for this so our amount that we were using for free cash actually reduced because we're going to be using this instead so so we were using like
2.7 million of free cash but now we're using 2.5 so this kind of this actually goes over the slide so um we're going to be using to fund this $2.5 million of free cash we're going to use $770,000 from the Waterway Improvement funds 25,000
from the Cemetary lots of sales 130,000 for the peg excess fund and then um the prior year articles was $361,500 for a total amount of 3,162
650 so what's happening to the rolloff truck um so what happened to the rolloff truck was um they have two rolloff trucks and the one that they're using um
for I think it's sludge or something like that no longer needs to be used for that purpose anymore so they're going to be able to utilize that truck instead of buying a new truck so they're repurposing a rolloff truck that we purchased for the Wastewater Pollution Control uh facility that's no longer
needed there's a contract out and so we're actually saving money with a contracted service okay and what was what H how was the last year's how were we proposing to pay for the rolloff truck last year it was a raise in
appropriate okay thank you it's I have a question Mike yeah is sorry sharine go ahead that's okay um the rolloff truck um that is the is the um Wastewater still needing a rolloff
truck that is uh for Sledge or is it just that and that it's contracted within the new uh service provider or is it that we just don't need it at all Carrie we have Rob fa online if you want oh okay well if Rob wants to answer that
sorry yeah sure thanks so so the rolloff truck that's at the water pollution control facility will no longer be needed the new company that will haul the uh sludge cake will provide a dumpster and they pick up and do drop off service as well
so we don't need to tax our resources and have that truck available for use thank you very much you're welcome thank you you're welcome um so those are well for the operating that was the only change was the retirement
assessment and then um the $22,000 for the uh dump truck um there was a couple other changes um which you won't be voting on these tonight but I figured I would go over them just just in case so um originally for
the Cape Cod technical Regional High School the assessment I estimated was $604,500 um their actual proposed budget came in at $ 587,589 for the Cape Cod Tech
assessment and then the monmore regional district assessment went up 86,5 79 from the original uh proposed which was 11,138 39 um their new proposed budget for FY
2026 is 11,217 $1,418 um and that's my last slide for all of the changes that have been made um okay questions okay do you want to vote on the
operating in the capital and vote to place them on the warrant or yeah I'm sorry just confirming so the the motion tonight would be to refer both the capital and operating budgets FY 26 to the finance committee so we're
not the the the memo suggests that we're also voting to place and recommend the the the uh the budgets right so there's there's four motions or four actions so so we're referring it but also voting okay thank you all right so I'll take a
motion on um the referral to start with Mr chairman I I move that the s board vote to transmit the proposed FY 2026 operating in capital budgets to the finance committee per the town of chattam by law General bylaw which
requires it to be submitted honor before March 1 2025 second second uh okay all those in favor Mr necastro I Mr Shell says I Mr uh matters I and Miss Davis hi next Mr
chairman I move that um the select board vote to place the FY 2026 operating budget article in the amount of 44,1 154,00 28 on the 2025 annual town meeting
warrant second second uh all those in favor Miss Davis Hi Mr Mets hi Mr Shell says I and Mr necastro I Mr chairman I vote to place the FY 2026 capital budget article
in the amount of 3,16 $2,650 on the 2025 annual town meeting warrant second uh all those in favor Miss Davis I Mr nicastro I Mr Shell says
I Mr Mets I Mr chairman I vote that the select board I move that the select board vote to recommend the following 2026 budgets to the 2025 annual town meeting warrant a the operating budget in the amount of 44,1 154
,28 and be the capital budget in the amount of $3,162 650 second all those in favor Miss Davis I uh Mr nicastro Mr Shell says I and M matters
I thank you thank you thank you next um we have a petitioned protective zoning bylaw um is Mr Eldred somewhere there you are welcome good
afternoon good afternoon good evening good afternoon good after evening I'm San alridge I'm with a group called impact chatam before you last week with a zoning bylaw petition article um I had a citizen of the Town
reach out to me regarding this one and it's a good bylaw that we have now but there's a reasonable percentage of properties that it really doesn't work with so the current bylaw is for
exterior mechanical Appliance systems or HVAC heat pumps generators and pool equipment first concern is that they are allowed to be elevated and and then violate the setback which only projects
the noise that the intention of the bylaw is to not cause a nuisance to neighbors we are asking to strike that there's a the current bylaw provides just the side yard setback all around and in many cases
that pushes these units to the front yard which it's not really the look we should be going for so we've asked to strike that in some cases when we've had issues with properties not being able to fit a unit
within the setback or somebody installing the the unit and not realizing that they had to meet the setback they've had to go for a variance with the zoning board of appeals variances are very difficult so we're asking to change that to allow for a
special permit that would enable all the neighbors to be notified and if there are any questions I'm happy to answer them the the the last word that we heard before you sort of broke up was no allow the neighbors to be notified was there anything of substance
after that it's your standard special permit procedure that okay you go to a public hearing neighbors would have a chance to comment questions from the board Dean thank you Mr chairman um that I
just I had two questions um are you saying that under the current bylaw if I have if if there's a 15 foot setback requirement and I have only 10 feet
between me my house and my neighbor I can't I cannot put the generator or whatever it is on the ground but I could put it on the side of my house is that the way you're you're reading the current BW technically yes is that the way it's
been that is how the Building Commissioner that's the way the Building Commissioner has applied it yes okay I haven't looked into it but it's surprising to me to hear that are you also saying that under the current bylaw
there is no relief via a special permit from this you're adding the phrase special perit correct yes it's only by variants that you can get relief from this okay and some of those have gone through fine and some of them have not
and this has not been heard before the planning board as yet this proposal no it has not okay is it your hope and expectation that this go before town meeting assuming the planning board can conduct
its hearing on a timely basis is that your plan or in hope it's my standing that it will be scheduled in March for public hearing so thank you'll have that opportunity Shireen anything no I was just going to make a
motion we'll take I'll take a motion okay I move that the proposed protective zoning bylaw Amendment be referred to the planning board for a public hearing second uh all those in favor Miss Davis Hi Mr Mets hi Mr Shell says I and
Mr necastro thank you sir thank you so much uh next we have um CPA I I I think this is you Mr
Tennyson am I wrong you're right okay welcome nice to see you yeah yeah I saw that thank you I'm Gary Tennyson the chairman of the chadam community preservation committee uh this year as you can see
we're recommending nine uh warrant uh articles for the uh town meeting that come to a total of 2, 358,000 35 should I go through these one at a
time um I I think I think we have a recommended motion uh to approve all of them which um is fine with me unless somebody on the board wants to carve one out okay then I'll go through them why don't you go through all them want carve
one out I don't I don't know about car we we'll we can ask individual questions uh okay on each one thank you all right so the first uh one on the list is what we do every year we provide uh or we recommend uh that $15,000 be provided to
cover the administrative cost of the community preservation committee this covers uh well every year it covers our clerical cost occasionally uh we have legal cost or surveying cost associated with evaluating a a project that comes
forward uh usually we only spend about half of this amount and what's left reverts to the fund uh the second item we also do every year uh and this is an article that's intended to make sure that we meet the
statutory requirement of committing 10% of our CPA annual revenue uh to each of the original allowable categories which are open space uh affordable housing and historic preservation this year our annual income
was almost uh 1,400,000 so 10% is uh 40,000 uh so we're recommending that 140,000 be put into the reserve account for each of those three categories which adds up to $42,000 that would be approved with this
article actually those funds we wind up turning around and using uh to support the some of the seven uh projects that are listed as U recommendations from applications that uh came into the CP
BC so as you can see from this list uh there are seven um articles that were recommending in response to applications that came in uh actually eight came in and we recommending
seven the first of those projects uh is the affordable housing trust fund uh this came to us from the town's Department of Community Development and it's requesting $500,000 for the fund I think all of you
know that the CPA is the primary source of funding for the affordable housing trust fund previous grants have helped the fund to purchase four properties in chadam that are currently in the process of having affordable housing placed on
them the uh fund is continuing to seek properties uh in chadam that can be used for affordable housing and this particular uh appropriation of 500,000 would bring their total balance up to slightly over $3
million which they can then use uh to respond quickly if opportunities to purchase such lands become available any questions all right the next one is the stall neck painting
preservation and this application came to us from the chadam historical society it's requesting $48,000 to restore and preserve the stall neck paintings that are on display in the mural Barn at the Atwood house uh
these paintings are beginning to show their age they're dirty there's some peeling and some cracking uh they need to be cleaned they need to be professionally restored uh glazed and reframed and so the um the Historical
Society has identified two professional firms Dickerson Fine Arts and Back Bay Fame framery uh that will be doing the work they'll be doing the work in the off season and it's a it's a tedious process
and so they're just doing some of the paintings uh uh at any particular time and the remainder will continue to be uh displayed I I think uh and the committee feels that these paintings are a real historic treasure in chadam and we
strongly recommend that uh These funds be approved for their preservation yeah sorry um do you know how many paintings we're talking about here I don't uh anybody willing to make a
guess is is that the mural that yes so yeah so there's a number of I mean they cover the pretty much the barn it's there's I'd guess 20 maybe okay I thank you uh the next item uh is uh
reconstruction of the Nickerson historic barn and this application comes from the Nickerson Family Association and they're requesting 275,000 for the Reconstruction and preservation of a a historic Barn that
was owned by William Nickerson II and he was the son of William neckerson I who was the founder of chadam and the barn was built in the 1700s a previous CPA Grant of
$300,000 provided funds for the very meticulous deconstruction of the barn which was then located at 68 shell Drive the movement of those components to the Nickerson Family Association campus which is on Orleans Road
and they have started the uh reconstruction process this grant will support the continuation and hopefully the completion of that restoration and reconstruction of the new site all of the work is being done as it
was originally done in the 1700s so they're using the same tools the same techniques uh that Carpenters used in the 1700s they've identified a carpenter and his an assistant who are experienced in that kind of work they're filming it
as they're going along so it'll be used as a educational tool uh at that at that site um and the barn should when it's complete become a real historical asset
in chadam and also an educational facility uh and a facility that can be used for various meetings Dean Gary thank thank you for that I just had one question so the barn is going to be or
is in the ownership of the association yes um and the town has kicked in a fair amount of money as you pointed out over the years and being asked to kick in some more now what Public Access is there do you have to be a member of the association to go into that Barn to look
at it or is it available only uh to the public when there are special events do we know um no it'll be open to the public you know the the calb house which is also on the uh Nickerson uh Family Association site
there is open to the public uh and the barn will be as well in addition to that they plan on scheduling a number of events that will be open to the public as I said there will be educational programs uh as well that will be there I
should point out that the there will be a deed restriction on the barn which first of all keeps it as an in in that historic State uh but that also basically makes it available for uh for
public use okay thank you thanks go ahead okay the next one is the Union Cemetery restoration and this application came from the Town Cemetery department and
the chadam Cemetery commission it's requesting $50,0 35 to restore 127 historic headstones at Union Cemetery all 127 have been clearly
identified uh this is the second phase of a long-term project to restore all historic headstones in chadam and a previous CPA Grant of $3 37,7 125 supported the first phase with
which was done at Seaside cemetery and you have probably seen the results at Seaside Cemetery as you drive into town and you look up on the hill there what used to be a rather dull Cemetery has stones that are kind of glowing uh White
now and uh the committee thinks that was a quite a success uh and we look forward to seeing the same results at uh at Union Cemetery and we recommend that this uh this Grant be approved Dean
thank you I don't have any question I just noticed there's an edit I think needs to be made in the motion in the draft motion um that Mr Tennyson will offer a town meeting in the third line it says undesigned I think you mean undes undesignated and then you probably want
to capitalize Cemetery division in the explanation in the first line okay that's it thank you okay the next uh article come is the salt marsh field studies uh and this uh application came
to us from the town's natural resources dep department and the energy and climate action committee and they are requesting $140,000 for phase two of field studies leading to a long-term plan for for
preserving jadams vital soft Marsh ecosystems uh the previous Grant of $120,000 support reported the field studies that are currently underway on four marshes four salt marshes along the
Nantucket Sound and this grant will support similar field studies on the nine remaining salt marshes in chadam the results will provide a science-based forecast of the impact of climate change and sea level rise on the
sord marshes marshes and provide a plan for their preservation the work is being done through a contract to the Center for Coastal studies in Provincetown the next item is for the chadam open space and Recreation plan
and this application came from three town departments Community Development community services and natural resources it requests $50,000 for a townwide project to develop a 7-year town of chadam open
space and Recreation plan a formal plan the town will work with an experienced consultant and it will seek significant public participation in this process the resulting plan will be used by the town and it will be submitted to
the state executive office of energy and environmental Affairs division of conservation Services if approved by that by the that division this should make chadam eligible for state grants that require
having such a plan and hopefully will lead to the state providing some of the funding for the implementation of the plan all right the last article is for the little milpond pier and this application
came from the town's Natural Resources Division it requests funds for the total reconstruction of the public Pier on Little Mill Pond the existing Pier is in bad shape which if any of you have been
down there you can attest to and needs to be replaced and upgraded the estimated cost is $500,000 and the CPC is recommending that that total amount be approved uh the new pier will support numerous
recreational activities help to build Coastal resiliency and promote environmental awareness I I did have a qu it appeared from the uh chart that's attached to the staff memo that the original request was $250,000 and the recommendation is 500 U
Can you give us a little detail as to how that transpired yes uh when Greg presented that to us he was requesting 20 $50,000 and was proposing that there be another item presented at town meeting
where the town would provide $250,000 not CPA funding but I'm not sure what what source that would come from uh and turns out that we had quite a large Reserve under the open space
Recreation category uh and since the funds were basically coming from the same taxpayers uh in discussions with Greg we offered uh to provide the total amount and he very willingly accepted
okay uh the cpc's offer got it thank you thank you that's it um I did have I I wonder if you could just there there are two items on that chart that that um one of which had an amount requested that was the rehabilitation of the Depot Street
tennis courts which which you didn't make you you declined to recommend apparently and then something for the um the rail trail um at uh Main Street and and and Route 137 I don't know if there was a request
there but there seems to have been a vote in both cases do you do you want to comment on that yeah sorry I think the rail trail was left on there from last year yeah that was not this year sorry about that that's a mistake no problem no problem both of those items that the
committee um it's actually a split vote uh voted not to support uh the rail trail was last year this year was the tennis courts um I was in the majority on that so maybe I can speak for the majority
and say that we considered that really to be a maintenance rather than a reconstruction or a re rebuilding and didn't want to set a precedent of supporting maintenance projects that's really now
what CPA funds are intended for right thank you anybody else uh if that's the case then I would accept a motion to place and then recommend these [Applause]
articles Mr chair sorry just recommend chair oh recommend sorry um I move to recommend the CPA articles all those in favor uh Mr Mets I Mr Shell says I Mr necastro hi and Miss
Davis Hi I think that's it thank you much thank you very much recommend I I we just recommended okay and apparently they're somehow or otherwise in place got it fine with me okay thank you
[Music] um I think we are now up to the uh presentation of the test fits I see M um mcferson here do you want to help
us with that Gloria hi everyone um as you might recall at a meeting um several months ago the select board requested um test fits to be performed for the property at 127 old Harbor Road the select board
also put parameters on those test fits they wanted to see between two and six units on the site a month or so later the town contracted with util architecture and planning to do those test fits and um we're here to present the first uh round of test fits to you
tonight and I see Courtney um on the screen thank you welcome thanks uh this is Tim love um I don't know if you can see me too um I'm a principal at U just to te this off we you're going to see a lot of variations
of how this mixed number of units work along um the road uh because I think it's very important that we get the scale right relative to the existing
neighborhood scale and the kind of character along the road um and so there's a a kind of art here about um making this mix of buildings that you're going to see look organic and almost like they were always there so maybe
that's the lens that that we could all use as courtne OS through the different Scapes I don't know Gloria if that's a good introduction to what they're going to be seeing tonight I think that's a great way to put it so with that I'll turn it over to my colleague Courtney all right thank you
so much Tim um I'll just share my screen uh just for a little intro about me I am an urban designer here at util and I Am project managing and designing this project and uh Jesse Yang is also here and he's also helping through the project management and um assisting with
the design um is everybody able to see my screen it looks great yeah everything's very tiny but it's all there okay perfect okay so I just wanted to give a broad overview of what we're going to be showing so first we have the existing conditions which walk through
and then we have 12 different scenarios that we will um further walk through which are all within their own categories so just to zoom in quickly again we have the existing conditions we have three options for reusing the existing structures which are then broken down into one option in the
current locations and two options in new locations we then have three options for new two unit scenarios three options for 3 to four unit scenarios and three options for four to six unit scenarios and from here we'll be selecting couple of these and developing them a little bit further for the next select board
meeting um it's also helpful to note that we have typical floor plans for the unit layouts for both the single and the duplexes but not for the existing conditions um as we don't know what those floor plans would necessarily look like so just to give you an idea of the site I'll zoom in here a little bit for
each of these scenarios we have kind of a broader axonometric one that's a bit more zoomed in and also a site plan um and we can also go back to everything when we're done just to zoom in a little bit more if there's anything you'd like to see in more detail but on the site um currently we have the existing home and
the existing barn and there's this large parking lot that sits in front of the barn that has 13 parking spaces at the back of the site there is also a Swale that has its own setbacks um so we've taken that into account as we've been doing these test fits um the front
setbacks is 25 ft the abing setbacks is 15 ft and the parking set backs um there is none so the total lot area is just over 40,000 square ft um and again going into the existing home and barn breakdown um the existing home has um
over two stories has a max height of 29 ft um and has we what we were assuming to be three bedrooms with a combined 13 parking spaces between both we're also assuming currently that the barn does not have um any bedrooms in it we're assuming that it kind of it's like a an
open floor plan so going from there this the first aide of reusing the existing structures within their current locations um where we only are requiring four parking spaces instead of 13 because each unit would require two um
it's unclear to us right now why there might be 13 parking spaces um but this can be brought down to to four with within the existing zoning um one thing that I will note and this will carry through for all of the examples is that this example currently exceeds the what
is currently zoned as R20 which is two single family dwellings on a single property and would require special permit which is an affordable apartment incidental to a single family dwelling so again these are just within excuse me both enlarge this and also we increase the volume a little bit
on oh thank you I can try to speak up a little bit too if that if that happs that would be it's yeah it's loud on our end so it might be also the speaker through the can you hear us better now yes it is okay that's perfect we're in a new space
as well so I'm getting used to the Acoustics in here so um is does this size kind of work a little bit better for you guys yeah that's good okay perfect so again these are both within the existing spots most of what's changed here is that the the parking has
been limited down to four again instead of 13 and going to look at the existing Barn this can then be renovated to allow for um bedrooms inside so the next option is reusing the existing structures but moving them to a
new location um so for this the existing home stays where it is and the barn is then moved this also currently is exceeding the R20 zoning and would require the same special permit as the previous one um an advantage of this however is then splitting up the parking
so you have four spaces within tandem parking um again pretty much same breakdown as before where where the um the existing Barn that's relocated um is renovated to allow for bedrooms to be placed inside and this is what that site plan would look like um and the
advantage here the advantage here is that it then opens up the rest of the site as open space yeah so you're able to have this large open space to the north side of the site which is different from where we are then splitting up the site um into two 20K
square foot sites to um adhere to the R20 zoning another um um sorry here here um this these are also tandem parking spots instead of a a large combined um parking space um and
again these this is the existing Barn that is being reused and renovated to allow for um bedrooms inside and this this house remains as is um and I'll just scroll through just so you can see a bit closer up and then the site plan again I can go
back to any of these as we reach our discussion Point um for more clarification so the next option is the new two unit two unit options so these are pretty similar to um how they're placed where we're moving around the um existing
buildings but the units are a little bit smaller um because of the floor plan design so similar to what I was discussing with um the moving of the two buildings is that these exceed the R20 zoning um but would require the special
permit and these are two new three bed units that both have tandem parking and again as Tim said before this allows us to free up the north side of the site if it is wanting to be split into two separate sites to allow for further development on the other side and um again we can jump into this
bit more but we have just pretty much a base floor plan layout um for how these units would start to look the next moves this to the north side of the site instead of on the South Side it again does it again exceeds the
tning zoning but instead of having two um tandem driveways you have all of the the um parking combined um this option however does um involve the removal of one existing tree one thing that we were trying to do with
these test foots is maintain a lot of these trees so all of these scenarios are are trying to fit in in a way where all of the trees are being maintained because they do seem to be historic trees so any of them that do end up removing a tree for the drive aisle have been noted but otherwise we've tried to
slot everything in um strategically to to mitigate this it might be worth chiming with this scenario if you zoom into the the the image of the scheme on the far left Courtney Y is that um whenever we've been
arranging these houses or or two family buildings we're arranging them looking at the patterns of the existing buildings along along the road and across the street and so we just like the pattern where one house was turned one way or the other because it it it
picks up the rhythm of the of the existing structures and it's back to my kind of introductory comment that we're looking for solutions that provide housing here but um create a kind of consistent looking feel along the
road it's also oh go ahead I'm sorry to interrupt but I I I you made a comment um earlier uh about the the the portion of the where you had both buildings either existing or new um all the way to the
left leaving what was at one point referred to as open space and then at another point was referred to as an opportunity for future development it I I suppose both of those can be true but to what extent do does one or
the other um Drive the um what I'll call the design um impetus I think it has to do with decisions about land banking part of the site for a future decision I suppose um versus near-term decisions I mean I think
that's one of the issues that can be discussed um in terms of the pro pros and cons of all of the scenarios okay thank you um one thing that I was just going to add on to what Tim was saying about the character of the site is that these
um units that were showing in the yellow that will'll carry through for the rest of it are massings just for now so if you were to actually take one of these um scenarios and develop it further you would start to see articulations like Dormers Windows
um like jut outs in the in the facades like these are are pretty much the the simplest massings that we could produce to show you kind of how these would be um put on the site but you can see like the context those would be taken into account um to further develop each of the units but I just wanted to point
that out in case there was any questions of of further character um okay so again these these options are very similar to the previous because it is still two units on the site before we dive into the 3 to four and the 5 to six um unit
scenarios so again um these ones are splitting the site into two 20K sites which allows us to adhere to the R20 zoning um and then that also splits up the parking into two um Drive aisles that have tandem parking and and again similar to what Tim was saying is like
rotating the units these could have both been um units that are facing the same way as like say this unit or state this unit like they both face the same way but we feel it's most advantageous to start to break that up um to allow for this kind of character that that chadam
has along this road um to be carried forward um and again I can go back to any of these if you have any more questions but I'll I'll carry forward for now so then we get into the three to four unit scenarios this first scenario has three curb cuts
and again all of the ones that are not a split up site exceed the R20 zoning um by having more than one unit on a property but we would just need to have require or have a special permit um that would be applied for so this option is four of the same three-bedroom unit that
also again is rotated to allow for this character to be carried through the next option starts to look at different sizes of units while having one large parking lot at the back instead of having tandem spaces this is having two three-bedroom
units and two two-bedroom units and these two-bedroom units are of different sizes as well so there's like a square a square shape there's a more rectilinear shape and again there's the three beted option um these these two are pretty similar like we could have we could have put ton parking here but we also wanted
to show that you could have a large parking lot at the back that is well within the setbacks required for um the Swale at the back of the site yeah I think in in all cases you'll see whether we're just simply rotating the same building volume or we're we're like in
this case the two bedroom units are actually one's squatter and more square and what's longer we we think the right design move here is not to have a kind of cookie cutter building type that's repeated um
but have those differences make it look like this was developed a little bit more organically over time and so that's if hopefully that's the vibe you're getting as Courtney goes through these um and additionally like when we
started doing these couple test fits um a lot of it was kind of getting all over our thinking out onto onto from putting our brain to paper or whatever that that saying might be but for this for this option specifically these units can all be kind of like moved around so um just
by the way that they fit in here now this is how it showed up but we could always move this three-bedroom to be here where the two-bedroom goes over here so it kind of has that um more kind of random appearance from the street level as as Tim was saying to kind of again accommodate the character of the site so it's not looking like it's a
developer that came in and just put the same building next to each other a bunch of times um because when you're on the street level people can't tell necessarily that this is one large site like you don't see site like property lines when you're actually there it's only when you're looking at something
like this so you actually see it so we want to make sure that these buildings are appearing you know to the character of the rest of the site um and not appearing as one large development necessarily the last of the three to four unit scenarios is a three-unit scenario which is adhering to the zoning
so we were wanting to make sure that all of our scenarios had one option within the unit count that had one that adhered to the zoning so the north side aderes to the zoning well the South Side would require the special permit because it's again two two unit on one property line
um and again this is showing tandem parking for this one side while having combined parking on this side and this is still using the three-unit rectilinear scenario um and having one twed unit that's more square and one twed unit that's more rectilinear um and this one was kind of placed here because
of how narrow this site this side of the site is with the setbacks to allow for it to fit in um conveniently without having things be [Music] repetitive so the last of these scenarios is the four to six unit scenarios and these include duplexes as
part of the test fitting so this is our first six unit scenario with two duplexes on the North side and two single family units on the south side and this again is exceeding the R20 zoning and would require a special permit but we are having two three bedroom units again that are rotated to
allow for that character and two twoed duplexes that are again unique to each other and I can go down to our loose floor plans here to show kind of how those fit together but again we were wanting to make sure that there's nothing that's appearing too similar on the site and allowing for that um kind
of Randomness to appear um and everything was able to fit nicely um based on where um the parking kind of had to fit in so this one has a larger parking lot at the back to allow for um these four units to have combined parking the next is a five unit scenario
where instead of having two twoed duplexes we have a three bed duplex and two- bed duplex in a similar arrangement to the last one um and only one three-bedroom unit and again this one has um all of the parking put together at the back of the site and is still
within the setbacks of um the sale and our last one adheres to the zoning because this again being split into two 20K sites to allow for the three-bedroom unit to be at the south side of the site and to have two duplexes on the North side and again
this is unique um because there is a one bed duplex which when we were in discussion with Gloria we were talking about having the variety um of different housing typologies um scattered throughout these scenarios so if we're wanting to have um a one bed unit we're able to fit it in um with a scenario as
well as having a a tu bed duplex that is arranged differently than um the other two so these are a bit more Square in shape just based on how they kind of had to fit into the site but we were able to make um all of these all of these work um and that's that's where we're at for
right now I can go back to any of the scenarios if you're wanting to see any more deeply or if you have any immediate questions um I can kind of pan around and and show everyone again what we were what we were working with Gloria you want to pick it up from
here maybe Gloria any um framing or comments um the only thing I want to add is that um I know that Courtney was talking about special permits but there's always the option when you have more units than are allowed um under
zoning to do a 40b and there are various different ways that you can do that and especially when you talk about um dividing the site into two 20,000 foot Lots where one could hold one unit by right and the other one could potentially have you know two three or
four um that are affordable so I just wanted to put it out there that um you could include affordable units through 40b um or you could you know just maximize the site based on the the R20
zoning so if I can just uh maybe refine that a little bit the R20 zoning contemplate splitting the the the site into two two um two Z two uh Lots am I right that's correct
because the overall parcel is a little bit more than 40,000 ft okay so I just want to follow up assuming we do that are we saying that we can build any one of these um with a with with a special permit you could build either one of
those with um by right if you just did a single family house on your slot or you could do um both by using a comprehensive permit for affordable housing or you can do one or the other but but the designs that we've been
shown for for the moment let's say three four and five at 3 four five six units uh whichever ones are on on two separate uh Lots can they with a special permit could you build those never mind
affordable housing just build those um assuming you're the developer with a special could you zoom in uh could you zoom in Courtney to one of the two lot denser uh schemes just to put a yeah thank you that will so we put it
like this one for example that's a good one okay yeah so the the question is can could that be done with uh uh assuming that you both you've separated the Lots with a special permit okay so looking at
that one the one on the left would require no special permit because that's a single family on one lot and then to the north my understanding is that it needs a comprehensive permit and that you can't do a special permit to increase so that's a 40b proposition it
is okay are we all in agreement on that I guess silence is Tim did you want to weigh in on that I I I think Gloria is right I think that that would be a 40b project but but I
you know I I defer to the experts in the town okay well so far we we don't have any experts disagreeing with you so we're okay I I I'm sorry I'm going to I just can we see is there one that has four
units um on two sites on on two separate Lots I guess the answer there is there is not because we were trying to make like we only have four units on one whole lot because we were trying to make sure that at least one side was Zing you you've really answered
answered my question if you put multiple units on a a a 20,000 foot lot you are talking about 40b right a comprehensive okay I'm sorry Cory go ahead no just just for just for my own clarification so I mean basically this parcel right
now is mun is Zone Municipal right so the recommendation is R20 which is the most dense residential zoning that we would really be viable for us we could do the you know as was explained two houses two separate Lots 20,000 ft or the other scenarios that have been
played out so the recommendation is to rezone it as in an R20 so that that depends on what you want to do so if you um want to do two units of attainable housing then I would
recommend dividing it into two 20,000 foot Lots um plus or minus more plus um and do one single family house on each if however you do want to have more than two units and you want to have an affordable
component you don't need to change the zoning or divide the Lots because a comprehensive permit can do that for you the other option is divide the Lots change it to R20 divide it have one that's just developed regularly which is
probably more attractive to a developer and then on the other one do a 40b there's also a numbers game to be played on that because if you have if you have have five units and you put them all on a single lot 40b requires 25% of those
units to be affordable minimum so it would actually be two of those five units if it was one big lot if however you do a single unit on its own 20,000 foot lot that's by right then you have four more units then 25% is only one
affordable so in that scenario by dividing the Lots by doing the 20,000 square feet by having one by right you have one out of five affordable as opposed to two out of five affordable but just forgive me I just want on on
your five hypothetical on one with a 40b you could have a payment in Luke could you not um not under 40b you have to get over you have to so that as a matter of of fact you have to have two are
affordable in that scenario under you would because one out of five doesn't hit the 25% yeah it's there's all little like numbers games that you can play with how you want to do this I mean there there are also development advantages to doing like an individual
lot with an individual house because that's going to be you know worth more so it's probably easier to develop and sell profits from that can be like turned into the other ones easier you get a little bit more variety right You' got two different development
entities yeah you know with design guidelines helping to not make it look like one project um so so I I think although I don't think any of these look like one project I think that they look like they fit in with the pattern of all of the existing buildings on the street
like I think when they're done um that no one would really know that you know they weren't there for years right one thing I definitely want I want to make sure we're solid on is because I remember earlier conversations but we've had this these conversations on 27 Old h
Road for a fair amount of years and we talk about numbers there have been questions about the actual square footage of the lot the assessors the card Etc are we absolutely certain have we verified this the acreage or the
square footage of this parcel because there's been suggestions that there's a discrepancy in the data so we've never surveyed this lot we've never divided out that for ,000 plus square feet we
did a rough line for town meeting we said that it was slightly over 40,000 ft when we do finally survey it we'll make sure that what we carve out is 40,000 plus you know 50 square feet or something like that so we're certain
that we end up with two lots but there this the lot hasn't been pulled out so that's why there's a discrepancy in the assessor records it's just it's still officially and legally part of the over all parcel but but if you're going to
subdivide it and rely on 40b for one side of it you only really need to get one for sure 20,000 foot lot is that not correct that's true for a moment Dean thank you I I got into that that whole issue a few years
ago and M aan who is not here at the moment she was pressed me on it and I spoke with the the the director of assessing and she said until you get a survey you're really not going to know the difference uh I just want to sort of come at this um kind of at a higher
level um I have a couple of questions um um and some of the comments some of my comments may go beyond the the physical sketches which I appreciate um but I think it we're going to have to make some determination to give guidance to
the staff and the consultants and I think some of some of the points um that I want to raise should elicit some information in that regard that would be helpful um I'm assuming I know that the first couple of sketches um dealt with the existing
structures but you know we heard a presentation from The Building Commissioner recently and the house itself to me is a candidate for absolute demolition I just don't see the town or
anybody wanting to put put money into that building I mean true you can save anything if you're willing to spend a fortune on it but so I'm I'm sort of assuming that that that goes um maybe you can do something with the barn um if the case had been
different then I probably would be inclining toward you know keeping those two structures and doing something with them but um that leads me to um wanting to try to serve two goals one
one is um having having um a development that is in keeping with the character of the general neighborhood which is I what I think the Consultants are proposing and the other is to uh try to maximize within reason the
number of units of housing that we can put on that property um I just have one question where from what I see I went over there again today to look at it I didn't realize there was a plaque on the I never seen that plaque before it's on the other
side of the house you know it says donated to the town for an additional play as an additional playground for the students we're talking about using that potentially for that area that's we're not preserving anything as Koda playground are we in any of these that the Assumption being here that we're
we're using it all um you mean the actual playground structure we're not no I'm just saying we that plaque is on a portion of the property to the left of the house which says this was dedicated by Mr and Mrs Ellis as a playground but we're assuming we're going to be using
that that area that part of the property is a candidate for the development so in many scenarios yes that portion of the property is used for housing not in all of the scenarios though okay I think you have to I mean it would
be likely no matter what that it's going to be a playground in any sense that we would think of as a playground I assume I'm assuming that yeah the so the there's an existing playground staying
right exactly no add additional playground right that that I just want to be yeah and I'm that clearing that I'm just no I I I want to be clear about that the existing playground is that on the school property it is yeah okay I mean there there could potentially be
something clever like maybe on the left hand side you maintain like a little 10ft um foot path and put the plaque there so people can actually walk up to the playground that would be ni like I would never yeah propose that we eliminate the plaque and actually in
some ways it might be nice to bring it closer to the street so people can see it when they walk by and then walk back one one other um I won't call it an imperative but it's certainly been a theme we've heard consistently since we've ever talk began to thinking about this property for housing um was the
ability to use it to house certain types of professions in in the town or or trades you know ideally a teacher and so forth uh and of course uh if if we in uh invoke
40b there there's no way of guaranteeing that right so the so not with the affordable units if but with the other units you can and and now with seasonal communities if the town votes at town meeting to accept the seasonal
community's designation um from the affordable homes Act of 2024 um section 32 um there are a lot of things that the town would be able to do that we've never been able to do before that no town has been able to do it allows you
to do yearr round restrictions not a not tied to affordability so the non-aff units could be restricted year round it allows the town to expend funds to develop housing specifically for
Municipal Employees and two um groups of employees that are that are explicitly mentioned in in section 32 are teachers and First Responders so I think that before the affordable homes act in seasonal communities we would not have
had this kind of um control or ability to do something like that and that would attain under that act even if we went 40b here correct because that's only the affordable unit that it has to go through like and I think we are we've been asked by the
partnership to put something on the warrant for to accept it um apart from that if we we were just going attainable we can do anything we want right true okay
um I guess I just wanted to make one last last comment comment well I wanted to ask about local preference okay if if we if we are purely attainable we don't invoke 40b whatever scheme we
choose um are we limited by state local preference rules so there's no local preference for anything other than affordable units so if you do two attainable units there's no you know
local preference um and if you do a project where 25% are affordable um there's local preference for that unless you only have one unit then you can't use local preference for it because it would be 100% as opposed to the 70% Max
yes and local preference as we know requires some approval from the state itet certain stand but I but I think that with seasonal communities there's so much flexibility to do the kinds of things we've always been talking about doing but the kinds of things that until
now haven't haven't been um legal and um but so if if we were to Simply have this as an attainable project and put putting aside this flexibility under the new act the town of chadam if it wanted to I think this is correct tell me if
I'm wrong because you know this better than I do um to Cham could put a structure there and say we're going to rent this or we're going to sell this to someone who lives in chadam or Works in chadam we could do that right only if you adopt
seasonal communities well that's under 40b but if if we're not using 40b no not not under 40b because otherwise you run a foul of fair housing law like the town can't be a landlord and then self- select okay who they want to rent to
unless you have the ability to put those year round restrictions on or actually create housing for that's even on the attainable side because of the fair housing okay y I guess my just general comment is I'd like and I don't know what the
number is but I'd like to see fewer structures on the property where the structures whether whether it's condo or or rented um
accommodate at least one of the structures accommodate at more than um one unit one unit of dwelling rather than having four or five structures on that property which could probably can you go to one at the bottom row like maybe this one Courtney the these are um
two two unit buildings and one single family and and and this is the scenario that that Gloria was framing uh you know in the answer to a question earlier in the conversation that in a way those could be two projects one single
family kind of Workforce house and then two two unit projects equaling five and and I think if you if you go Courtney to the left to the zoom out of that one um and you look at some of the footprints of some of the
bigger rambling houses and the other kind of attached structures those duplexes and we could bring the the the haunches of the roofs lower so that you know that that's a roof on top of two stories but those could come down with Dormers um in terms of the the volume of
the buildings that they're very compatible with the rest of the road how many curb Cuts do you have in that one two two just two yeah yeah I I wouldn't like to see more than two I mean I was actually looking at one of the earlier ones that had three a total of three units in two
structures um but anyway I'm not I'm open to considering you know multiple structures but I don't know how far along I'm I'm wanting to go at the moment it's hard to tell because these all look like Monopoly houses on except
they're yellow green and red they look like they look like the Monopoly Hotels they don't look like the Monopoly houses thank you very much Shireen do you have anything you would like to ask or say yes I I just wanted to make a couple of comment observation comments and and
Dean yeah you're right that was my first thought they did look like um we're a monopoly but um in saying all that I I really appreciated uh seeing the designs the way they were and the respect for The Eclectic nature of the neighborhood um it's you know any one of these
scenarios does keep in into consideration the character um across the street there's uh you know like a farmhouse with a small cottage behind it and several out structures and and whatnot and and um homes that are closer
together um so I'm really appreciative to see that that kind of design um um Coming forward um and um I'm really really happy about that as far as the idea of um breaking out the lots and and
how many um units to go with I I'm leaning you know to always leaning towards best case scenario as far as you know trying to do as much as we can without overdoing it however I'd be uh
very amenable to seeing you know a scenario like Dean head um and keeping it um with two curb cuts um it looks like we have you know this has been um set up to have a lot of open space in
the back and I don't know the square footage per se but you know if you I mean it seems like there's a bit of land back there for play um so yes it could be considered you know playground area if there's families there and whatnot
good good places for Gardens and um just general good space in in all of it um it's a unique uh area of town and um I think this is being well well done as we plan forward I don't really have a set
uh Concept in mind it's just we're just in the beginning of the process I feel and um that's what I have so um I certainly agree with virtually everything that uh Shireen said I I I would not have used the word
maximize but having heard Dean use it I I I I well I'm going to put it in I'm going to say it a different way I my my reaction here is that let me start by saying forgive me but you it always in the back of my mind
is you know how do we pay for this how does this get done where's the money coming from and um that should not dictate what we do but it it it it's going to be an influence like like it or not um and so for that reason that the
first consideration in my mind that that has some that is is somewhat influenced by that is the uh the the two unit Alternatives which basically um whether it's the existing
um the the existing buildings or new buildings um to me th those are basically I mean we're we're we're just you know we're we're developing that the way same way you would develop any other site you're not really thinking uh I
mean you could be but basically you're not really thinking about um you know use using the site at least somewhat for either affordable or attainable housing and I say that partly
because I think that you know that that kind of a a a solution just doesn't carry the kind of financing that um is is either going to be available from a private developer or that the town wants
to participate in or whatever so you know if if those are the desirable results I I kind of fall into the category of saying well let's sell the property um and let somebody else figure this out um and which of course doesn't
address what we're trying to do which is create housing for people who need it and who can't afford for it um I I one of the factors in my mind and by the way I I I want everybody to understand I've driven by that a bunch of times I've
walked it um I've looked at what that area looks like what the surrounding buildings look like homes look like this needs to be this needs to fit right into that area in a way that as Gloria was
saying doesn't look like a development and looks like it's been there for a long time um I one of my factors is I I suppose I could live with two curb Cuts but I'd love to get away with one um and
and so that's that's a that's a factor in my mind I I guess I kind of liked the four units one curb cut um you know not necessarily as the best but as something that that began
to um address what I think are you know yeah that's the one um that began to address this sort of collection of or permutation of of of of factors to take
into account um and and I you know I'm not I'm not um sort of dug in on that but that seems to be a compromise that I I would like maybe only three units um
maybe maybe five um I I'm not wildly enthusiastic about the six unit solution but that's a possibility um I I'm to me it's it's how do we sort of pursue something that has
a reasonable chance of being financeable with some contribution from us but which a private party a private developer and and it can be a a nonprofit developer but somebody can um can get built for
you know a reasonable amount of money coming from everybody and address the the needs that we're talking about namely affordable and attainable so those are th those are those are my thoughts yeah uh sorry Cory thank you Mr chair I just got to say this two cents
worth because I mean we' have a long history on this property um you know this came to town meeting um essentially package as low hanging fruit let's kind of get these structur and get them rolling and now we're talking about you know it's not we haven't confirmed this
but it appears that the structures are going to be recommended as tear Downs properties that are owned and managed by the town um so we're talking about removing very historic structures with a plaque on it um I mean you're
very well aware of my pH philosophical position on the intent of the property from the from the donor um and the legal opinions that brought brought us to the fact that we can move forward on this project and and now we're looking at tearing down these structures um whether it be two units or four units it's hard
to have a great feeling about it I'm not knocking the affordable housing components that are being proposed we definitely need it and I have no problem putting it there but we are so far away from what we pitched at town meeting that I have philosophical issues with it
um you know it's going to land where it's going to land but we can't be dismissive of that I mean we you know I don't I can't as a as a custodian of the town you know being on this board for so long and knowing that this town you know this property was under our ownership and management and we didn't care for it
and that's that doesn't feel good so um I don't know where this is going to land um you know hopefully as constructive as possible but I want to keep it with the character of the neighborhood as best as we can any any other comments I oh I'm
sorry Shireen yeah yeah I just out of all due respect to Corey we haven't been good stewards of the property and and we know that and so I think this is uh this is a really really fair look at the property uh keeping in the character of
it um I think we are moving forward in a way that offers opportunity for for some um much needed housing and um I hope at some point um that you'll be able to find your way through
this yeah de um I just want to say everybody knows that Cory and I think shared the same position on this historically and and I still stand by my my position in opposing this the use of this for
housing um but town meeting has said they wanted for housing and you know I think we have to deal with that um and come up with the plan that is respectful of that wish
and also um respectful of the neighborhood and it I mean Gloria can tell me if this is um out of the ballpark but could we not put out an RFP that includes the possibility of
reuse of the existing structures or as an alternative new structures yeah definitely if someone feels they can come in and Rehab that house I think if we if I was a private person buying that house for myself I probably wouldn't want to do
that unless I had a lot of money and wanted to wanted to save that Farmhouse and maybe somebody might do something like that we saw the gentleman that purchased the Nickerson property um the the barn of which is now over at on on
Orleans Road um I want to say that um and I think this is in keeping with historical use of the property I I have a little bit of difficulty getting to a point of wanting to see more than two or possibly three
structures on that property so the the scenario that Mr chairman that you pointed to had four structures as I saw it I think that probably is a bit much uh I certainly wouldn't would be pleased with one curb cut um two curb Cuts is the most I would like to see but that's
sort of where I'm coming from and um I think if we have um um can you go to the um one curve cut three structure scheme that we had up earlier I think it's the bottom row
right side yeah yeah I I mean we we would eliminate we would eliminate the Cur this is a scheme that has one parking lot isn't there with these courney I guess not there there is for this one but it's just if you're wanting
to split the site or not right um and I mean I I'd have to look back at the zoning in Gloria or anybody else might have a better idea but I'm not sure if you're able to have parking for something like this where we're splitting the site the parking that would go over the sight line you can't
do that yeah y again you know these are fits this isn't a design plan so it's hard for me anyway to make a judgment um it's different from seeing as you know what we saw that came in with the rfps on on the Buckley property and The
Meeting House Road property we could see what people were planning to put up what the buildings were going to look like we had elevations and so forth we don't have that we just have these blocks it's looks a little voluminous to me that that site but maybe in reality it
wouldn't be but um anyway I well can I just ask uh uh the the concept here was that we would have this conversation and we would give a direction asking for some number of um these
possibilities um to be further and and more elaborately developed my question is um can we have three um we had we had talked about three with the consultant so I think courney does that sound right if they
pick three would you be able to refine three of these I believe we were scoped for two but we also developed way more here than we originally scoped for and I think if the units are repetitive enough then I think three is still within a means of yeah
they might be Vari they might be variations of the theme for example how handled and things um yeah I think one one consideration down the line for this is that one of the important roles of an RFP is that
you can set as the as the selection criteria that the design guidelines that are in the RFP are closely followed so um you can be fairly prescriptive about the buildings and their Arrangement um which gives you more
control than if this was just a Zone site um and so um when we do a lot of this work with other municipalities um uh we set the rules for preferred responses now you can't make this tight that nobody responds but um we're able
to um kind of set the expectations about what the town is looking for I don't know glor if you've had that discussion with the the board here or not we have not gotten to that point but um I will second what Tim said U has done really excellent work for other towns in
scoping out um what the parameters are for development rfps yeah I I mean I I think think we're trying to find at least I'm trying to find um some basis for enough consensus
among the four of us that we can pick three three Alternatives and ask them to bring those back well one of the things I've gleaned um is that everyone basically is in agreement that there should be two curb Cuts
Max I think that's right I know Mike you said you liked four units with one curb cup but you could do three or five Dean likes two to three structures on the property but they don't have to be single family um and Corey's specified in keeping with the character of the neighborhood which to me means like the
placement on the site so that they're not um out of character with the rhythm of the rest of the neighborhood um so I don't know if you want to focus in on Courtney I don't know if you want to show us like all of the options that
have three on the site not three not three dwelling units but three structures say three three buildings versus three three units building anything with three units let's see okay this one has three units and also has
two curb cuts um and this is yeah the three unit um example so there's that and I think the only other two that are three units or sorry three buildings not three units are these two duplex options so again this is a three bed duplex a
two bed looks in a three bed one curb cut and then this is um go here two a twoed duplex a one bed duplex and a three bed duplex and this one is requiring for the parking to be separate because of how the the lot is being
divided I mean technically you could do that one new three-bedroom unit I suppose could be a duplex too I mean there's so much flexibility in how they're we we get that we're we're trying to find um some consensus here among the four of us and and Dean go
ahead yeah I just I just want to clarify I two to three in my case I'm reluctant at the three but I I'm willing to look at it um I think the I'm talking structures there um
three units is fine I mean what I had starred the one that said and they had it up in the screen new three unit and divide the site but that has three structures and I'm a little concerned about that but that's can can the four select board members who are here come
to consensus on a maximum number of structures like are you an agreement that you would want well I mean I'm asking yeah like not not talking about unit count but like no no no but so Dean said up to three I know you're okay Corey
would you ever consider three structures on the property I mean my preference my preference my preference is two two Yeah by preference is two structures y so but it let me ask you this if we ask for two
structures three structures and four structures does that get us home yeah I don't know that you have I don't know that a majority of the select board here is interested in seeing four structures well I haven't waiting yet yeah well sorry go ahead goad I mean I'm
only sitting out here as like yeah um I think we're almost there at the three structures I mean it could you if you if we looked at three structures no more than two curb Cuts I'm fine with that that also uh I think you know that would
consider like if if it's just two you could still get a good idea about that um you're looking at how much more money we have to spend to do this is that what we're what we're you know or what the contract was Gloria
you mean for for the for the test fit project yes um so the the way the scope was written after you guys give feedback and pick a few plans that you want further develop they're going to do that they're going to kind of flush out those buildings a little bit more so they look
real so they don't look like um Monopoly houses um but that's part of this test fit contract okay all right well I'm I'm I'm fine with the three unit um no more than two curb cut scenario to have them um um
enhanced to see three units or three structures I thought we were talking about three structures three excuse me three structures three structures could could I I think the caveat to that is are we still interested in subdividing the lot and
having a single family house on one of them and duplexes on the other or are we considering this as a single project that's a that's a kind of Gateway choice about um the development strategy um I
if I could editorialize for a minute I like the subdivision only because we're going to get a little bit more variety of people living along that edge of the neighborhood and it might be better for some political audiences that it's not
one project you know we're reconstituting at least in the imagination maybe buildings that used to be there of a similar scale to the existing ones and I think um that might be one advantage of this
Dean I I don't have an answer to that question it sounds like your your editorial preference makes some sense I was just going to putos it you could POS could you possibly have three structures which is defined as the two
existing structures however you want to locate them plus a new one plus one new one I was I was just going to say like this three bedroom unit that we're showing here from what I'm remembering I'll go back to where the existing structure is that one could be the
existing home sorry or that could be an option if you if you subdivided that you could either keep the existing home or consider a tear down I I think that house is impossible to move the barn is more feasible to move which is what I did in these
scenarios I moved the bar keep you're keeping the existing house in that what you just said I think that there's a if you go back to the scenario we were looking at with the subdivision and the three structures it it could be an option
because I think the subdivision still works you know in terms of a future RFP for that site that the person who acquires that subdivided lot could either keep the existing structure and we could allow some allowance for some addition to it or they could tear it down we could leave that a decision for
the market let's say so so design guidelines for the new structure so you could so there is a possibility that you could keep the existing house rehabit that would preserve the historical value of it which I think you know Corey has
expressed concern about and I share that um you could keep the the barn or do whatever you want with it and out a third structure is that well the barn would have to be moved to make I get that I get that but you it could be an option yeah I
think I think in the case of an RFP I think if you require keeping the existing house and you require moving the barn to the lot to the right where the two darker yellow buildings are you're going to restrict choice for
potential participants in this process and probably maybe reduce the chances that you're going to find the development Partners you're looking for um so I I I think that might be too restrictive relative to who might be
interested in tackling this project with you but to in include as an option that you can keep the existing house or tear it down and build a new one following design guidelines that we'll have in the RFP I think you'll get more um interesting capable development Partners
to participate for the reasons that some of you said I would I would rather live in a new house there than try to fix that old house I well there there is some sentiment in town for keeping that house um it but are you I want to make sure I
understand you are you saying that you either in your RFP make clear you want to keep the house or give them the option of replacing it right um right that it's it's an option but if you do that you
you're saying you can't also say keep the barn even though you can move the barn you could move the barn you could you could have the barn be available for relocation um onto one of the Lots as a condition as a as an option on the RFP
but you're saying it's components you're thinking it's too restrictive for marketing purposes to say we want to keep both the house and the barn no matter where you want to locate yeah I don't think I I don't think you'll get you'll get you'd have to find a
I think that that that the the Returns on investment and the costs I think you know I think it's a marginal proposition for a development partner and sometimes it's really hard to redevelop Barns and agricultural
buildings for housing like just because it's in better shape structurally because it does have a post and beam structure doesn't mean that the cost to redevelop that for an entirely different use which is housing wouldn't be proh hited
prohibitive yeah because of of of Massachusetts energy code and the I mean I think it's more likely the house would be redeveloped than the barn personally yeah but again challenging because of the house the condition I know
yeah but at Le but it's at least it's a house it's already a res as opposed to a barn I I agree well look I I I I don't know whether I'm the flying the ointment but if if what we're looking at now is one of the op one of the three things
they expand on I'm that that's fine with me if that solves if that brings us to a consensus as to what the three are going to be you mean keeping the house I'm not talking about keeping the house I I my view is is what we were just saying you
can you can make it an option as long as it's an option that's fine with me okay that can be one of the three scen scenarios I think that makes sense I'm talking about what what's on the screen right now I'm not talking about the well I mean that's not really that the location of the existing house right now
that's a the existing house moves a little I know but he I think I think I think uh what he's saying is this is the base option but then in the RFP we' have an option if you want to you could keep the existing house right that's fine the qualification that this is the base
option yes yes and then can we go down to the single parking lot option too um uh and I suppose this would be um the other option if somebody wanted to bid
on both lots and do a single project and have a single parking lot it's kind of a sub option of the other option it has to do with a decision by a development entity whether they want to just tackle the two duplexes or pull the house into development I'm just thinking about you
know optionality that might be built into a future RFP because the the built form along the road would be the same and you'd have one less curve cut to to to me I this in in terms of identifying three things that we're
going to get expanded to me this is the same thing is what we were just looking at for purposes of looking at how does it look how does it look in the in the in the in the neighborhood and what do the buildings look like and and what's the
architecture and all that that they're they're the same y right got it yep and then we could have two site plans and say as part of that presentation there's two ways to do this in terms of L subdivision but it's it's the same Cadence of buildings along the
road I like that word Cadence do we have um do we have a two single family house one duplex option is or part of our mix uh two single friendly one duplex no we have a two two and two but
right I mean that's that's feasible you just take one of them off right I think we were trying to maximize density in these four to six unit options so that's why we're leaning more towards the side instead of the single family side I think a couple of people
on the board had here have said the same thing which is our goal was to maximize the number of units and still have it look textually appropriate and uh retroactively
inevitable as if they were always there and so um is a strategy um it's a design strategy that's been called gentle density lately which is um to use uh kind of picturesque roof forms and
footprints that are compatible in terms of the building Footprints with nearby buildings to still take advantage of maximizing housing production here so um it's why uh we were doing our best to
get the five and six unit schemes to look really good so that was um in our in our the iterations we generated first with Gloria we were seeing how far we could go with it and I I think we landed on on
five to six units being as much as you could do and make a really nice kind of uh uh uh kind of streetcape along there and so I I like the three building rule because it just because I do think it's tough in that narrow part of the lot to
get a house to work well anyway so I I like the three structure rule yeah even for the ones where we were doing four unit you kind of have to rotate it to be along the narrow side to get something to fit here um nicely due
to the set box can I then um propose as the consultant here a um a game plan is it okay sure yes please which is I think one scenario would be going from
might the left single family house duplex duplex and with minor variations that could be one lot or two lot and I think we should do a um a two single family one duplex option that would be roughly the same
site plan and and Gloria and team we can decide do we want to have single family house duplex then single family or single single duplex maybe if you go to the it might want to be single family single family duplex just because of the the other structures along the road um
and maybe maybe that really does boil it down to two options I'm throwing that out um uh as a as a a a working consensus um
frk yeah attempt over to the board my problem with that is that you're not including a two structure sounds like each of your options has three structures on it and I'd like to see one that has
two I'm not saying two units I'm saying two [Music] structures maybe I'm the only one that thinks that no no I I I would like to see that I I it's not I I would like to see that but it could be two duplexes or
yeah family duplex or or a duplex and a single family two two structures would be my preference we we need two structures okay so just for my understanding we're saying we want two three structure
options and one two unit two structure option if that's not being too too greedy that would be wonderful we only have two we we the we we have one option is house duplex
duplex because the the the lot subdivision on the parking is not going to have an impact on the on the on the perspective views we do MH and then we're going to have a single family single family house duplex option and then we're going to have a two structure option which I think would want to be
two duplexes because we want to have enough units here this is all worth the town's wild right and in that two two sorry I'm getting mixed up in my head of unit versus structure in the two structure option would we prefer if we were to divide the site or say that it's one
large site this is um a question for the town I think we're keep it one sight because we can't we can't shove a duplex in the in the and the and the lot to the right yeah I'd have to see if it would fit but it would have to be something like this where it's long and narrow to
be able to fit on the side yeah I I don't think we should do that I think we'd rather keep it a single a single Lot leave the lot as it is okay can we say then that that we're going to have no more no fewer than four and no more than five
units as I search for the guard rails here well I mean you could have six units if two of them were smaller one better I I think what he suggested I I I mean it may not get a unanimous vote here but people might be able to accept it yes except what agreed no more than
five and no less than four un I would I would say no I for me I would say no less than three units we're talking about not I know I know but you're you're saying you want
to have at least let me this this is I I I'm hearing this is a is is largely an economic comment from mtil I I what I'm going to say to try to get you comfortable here Dean is that if we're
looking at two duplexes on a two two structures of each one being a duplex that gives us enough to to to to to decide if we if we want to and we think it's economically feasible to cut one of
those down to to um to a single family home but one of the two structure options but one um aspect of the tooth structure option is that you would one of those structures would be could be the existing house right and are you
talking about making a duplex a two family house out of that CU that's you're not you're not no I I I mean I'll be honest with you I I realize you and I are maybe a little bit in a different place but to me um the saving that house is just a
bridge too far I mean I think that's probably the I I agree with that okay but I you know if someone can come in with a proposal to do it we would certainly look at it um I don't want to discourage that but I if if these two
structures were in great shape I think all we would be talking about is is using the one house the house for as a single family dwelling and maybe putting two units in that's I'll be honest with you I would be talking about selling the
property but you know I I I um yeah but anyway I the sad reality the sad reality is that is probably the most economical return but it's not on the table you know no I wouldn't necessarily say not on the table you could subdivide the
house and sell that and then put the returns into the other half of the property that Mike but Mike yeah go ahead I'm sorry yeah go ahead I feel like we're going to I feel like we're going down a rabbit hole right now I'm just you know we're trying to get to a
consensus on what we are looking at and what we want um the the Consultants to go ahead and do next and and I just feel like we're just going someplace I'm not sure is going to be beneficial to us I think if we can stick to what we're trying to decide by consensus I think i'
well no I we I think we're virtually there Shireen we we we said we were going to look at two structures which would be each a duplex and then two variations on the three structure Alternatives um and I'm I was just
trying to make Dean comfortable with the fact that he that that neither one of those on its face accommodates the the house alternative that he's interested in fair enough if I may I I don't mind putting
that out as guidance to the consultant but I don't want to give up the prospect of putting out an r ofp that allows as an option saving the house that's all I'm saying done no problem I'm I'm in agreement with that I
don't want to dismiss yes so we can some reserve a decision on that until after we see what comes forward that helps move things along ton I I I I think that's yes we can do that and in fact uh we we've done this
for um the new zoning in Newton Massachusetts which is we could even allow in addition to the existing house up to 25% of the existing footprint of the house as long as it's more than 30 ft from the front face of the existing house and you know that might even
incentivize somebody this to say you know what if I put an addition on that house it might be worth it but I think it's just good politics too to to have that be an option okay public perception about the recipe that we're using here
um all right I are we clear as to what we've asked you to do um Tim as clear as a foggy morning in Shadow where where are you based I'm just curious we are based in in Boston uh
between Downtown Crossing and the Chinatown Gate and I know you've done some work for the town of China before have you done a fair amount of work on Cape Cod a ton we did a Model form based code for the Cape Cod Commission um and did uh we're doing the
Orleans form based zoning right now for their town center and we've done a ton of work for Elizabeth Jenkins in hyanis okay including their zoning thank you and um provinc town as well we were working
in provinc town currently y currently currently doing finishing up that yeah I'll be seeing you guys see you tomorrow night for that yeah that'll only be Kevin and Matthew I think I will not be in attendance for that due to the remaining fee I believe
okay um are there any questions for people online I I think we didn't advertise it in advance but um I'm going to if if there are comments from the public I'm going to before we close this out I'm going to offer the
opportunity I don't I can't tell if anybody's got their hand up online but I know somebody in the room has their hand up I think Carolyn if you'd like to say something please do carollyn mlen uh chair of the Community Housing Partnership um so
you're torturing me here uh listening to all these and I know everybody's trying their hardest to get through this scenario I know you're considering I think every time we bring it up everybody begins lamenting about things that they wish had happened that are no longer a possibility now in reality um
so I I understand that I did want to throw out one test fit scenario that I didn't see and I'll ask Gloria if financially is this like one of I I think one of the better scenarios would be to subdivide the lot so you have two lots you make one single family home and
then on the other one I'm going to say bad worms a Triplex one building that had three units in it so you only have the two units and then on that Triplex one you could have one unit would be affordable you could have it a one-bedroom unit at 80% Ami for a couple
or a single and then the other two units could be attainable now a Triplex wouldn't be too big there are property on that road that are huge sitting on a 20,000 ft lot so you wouldn't have to have I don't know how the building could be I don't
know what the square footage would be of two one-bedroom units and a two-bedroom unit um on one side and then the single family on the home on the other I would love to see what that might look like love it um and I think uh financially
that would involve a great incentive for the developer and the minimal commitment for us to subsidize so I would like to see that scenario I guess that's all I have to say at this point thank you okay thank you anybody else online I I I I want to go back to the
clear as a a foggy morning and and ask you to ask us what you need to to to go forward here Tim do you mind if I just try to frame this one more time please just so we we we all have our notes here we're going to do
um uh three visualizations at a higher level of architectural detail and they are um house duplex duplex house house
duplex and duplex duplex and and in all cases um well it won't matter so much for the visualizations but the the house duplex duplex will have two sub options in terms of site plan um the house duplex
duplex will either be one parking lot that's shared or the house will be uh uh uh uh on a separate lot and um it'll have its own tandem parking and that will be the option where it's optional to keep the existing house but those won't be part of the
visualizations more the strategy going forward as we look at the visualizations of those three uh perspective views does that I that that accommodates what I thought we were talking about but I think everybody ought to sign on or off
uh on their own I I think that's what we said Y and I just wanted to say you know the idea that Carolyn just put forward is something we can talk about when these come in I wanted I mean we can make whatever fine decisions we want at that point we could scrap them all scrap all
three and come up with a fourth it it captures Concepts that I'd be willing to have further conversation with some less less than others but yes it is a direction that I'm willing to go in okay Shireen I oh go ahead
shine oh you're muted Shen yes thank you I'm fine with the scenarios that are discussed I am interested in what Carolyn did say though okay good I I have one final clarification question for these these couple scenarios are we wanting in the
scenarios that we're going to be proposing um the three of them are we wanting to maximize the density in terms of maxing out that it's a three-bedroom one unit a three-bedroom dup or two three-bedroom duplexes or are we wanting to do it in a way that's kind of keeping
with the character in terms of showing different duplex sizes that are like a three-bedroom duplex a two-bedroom duplex a one-bedroom duplex like are we wanting to maximize it or kind of stylize it let's work let's work that with with Gloria I think getting the design right
we might back into the unit mix that's what I suspect and and my only comment is my my concern about a Triplex is it makes the building form very big it it is quite large um I made sure when I was doing all of these though that it was below the maximum Building height
currently but we can also attempt to make them smaller with I think I don't yeah I think um I think we'll be we'll be bringing the roof down and and having the second floors be occupiable with Dormers too so that we'll be doing things in the next
phase that will make uh the scale of the buildings uh you know even more compatible with the character along the road so that's that's our game plan next good anything else if not I I think
we're good thank you very very much okay fun assignment thanks thank you very much it's gentle appreciate it gentle density yeah gentle density that's a takeaway that's the that's the takeaway this go okay thanks Tim thanks
Courtney and Jesse all right bye bye thank you very much thanks good night uh so our last item is the town manager's report which I take it we're going to get from Kathy yes unfortunately the town manager had a
personal matter that came up so she had to leave a little early um but uh she asked to highlight um you have the report for January from the town manager and departments um January was a pretty busy month as you can see through the
different reports um to date we started off with the budget review and updates and included are the articles that have been uh placed and recommended both by the select board and the finance committee um the town manager asked to update for those who may be curious
about the capital project Center for active living the finance committee voted to recommend approval 8 um it was unit 80000 um and then the capital project and Deb exclusion borrowing Wastewater project um and ballot question they approved
701 so those were some updates that were not on the report at the time of printing but the finance committee has since voted um there's a couple of reminders about the annual election ction um some deadlines as to the last day to register to participate to be
eligible to vote in both the annual town meeting and annual Town election is Wednesday April 30th um the town clerk's office will be open until 5:00 P PM that day so if you are not yet registered to vote um and would like to participate in both the annual town meeting and annual
Town election that's your deadline um and also a reminder the last day to submit nomination papers for certification of signatures is Thursday March 27th uh there are four vacancies to be filled uh two select board uh one school committee and one seat on the Housing
Authority uh papers are available at the town clerk's office uh we had four anniversaries um upcoming in the month of March here uh fire captain Mark Higgins with 25 years uh projects and operations administrator Terry whan 20
years our director of Public Works and uh Rob failey and firefighter Ryan Fri are both celebrating two years with the town we did have two new hires as well um in February we um the council and aging Department assistant Maddie nner has
started I believe that's how you pronounce it apologies if not uh but she started uh February 18th and this past Monday uh the new public works department assistant Christine Brantley began her position um over at the uh
public works department the rest of the report is there for the board and public it is it will be posted online and made available to all um if there are any questions you can questions from the
board I don't have it's always sh it's always a good yeah it's just always a good report It's really informative and everybody should take a look at it every month thank you any questions NOP okay with that I
will take a motion to adjourn so moved second all the those in favor Miss Davis I Mr Mets hi Mr Shell says I Mr mccastro and thank you we are adjourned
at 7:39 good night chadam [Music] he [Music]