Good evening. It is 6:30 on Wednesday, September 24th, and I am calling this meeting of the Chsford Planning Board to order. My name is Chris Lavali and I'm the chair of the board. Tonight, we will be following the posted agenda. This meeting is is both in person and via
Zoom. Uh if Zoom fails at any point in the meeting, we'll continue in person. This meeting is being televised live and recorded by Chsford Teleia and will be available on their website and on YouTube for later viewing.
All right. First, we are going to start off the meeting with the managed growth strategy uh kickoff meeting. Um and so if you could pull up the slides. So first I want to welcome the folks who
have been um uh brought in to the uh managed growth strategy task force. Uh thank you for volunteering uh your time on this. We really appreciate it. Um we are gathering this task force
together. Uh some of you may have seen the documentation already uh but I quickly wanted to go through some of it uh this evening. So we have been tasked with the um with the strategic plan to create a managed growth strategy. Uh we
need to balance the growth with the character, the environment, infrastructure needs and finances of the town. Um we're being tasked with break making this a datadriven analysis. Uh we need to include input from board staff
and stakeholders. Um a lot of this information has already been collected and compiled in different ways. Uh we're not expecting this task force to redo all of that work, but to compile it all together, pull the uh information together and use those data points.
Um this task force is being asked to build um on that strategic plan and in existing data. Um we're estimating that this will be delivered by uh calendar year 2028. Uh but once the task force um
meets and starts their work um I'm sure that timeline can get adjusted. We have also submitted grant funding um or application for grant funding. We expect that uh to uh get back to us
sometime in October. Uh once we do um we will be asking the task force to pull together a statement of work um and to work on recommending a um consultant to the planning board for approval.
So roles and responsibilities um the task force uh needs to organize um we have selected the chairs uh co-chairs Mike Razbeck and John Souza from the planning board. Um if a vice chair is
needed uh the task force should uh should nominate that person, come up with a schedule. Um we really are looking also for the task force to define success criteria and focus areas. um recommend the consultant process,
excuse me. Engage the uh staff uh the boards and community to start pulling together the data, oversee the work of the consultant, and then deliver the final um managed growth strategy. The planning board will provide
direction and oversight. Um we will review and approve the milestones, approve the consultant contract, and coordinate with town leadership as well. Um we expect this to be a very close partnership between the task force and planning board um so that we can deliver
a really good product um to the town. Uh these are the timeline and milestones a draft I put together um just to help guide the task force um with some initial thoughts on the timeline. Uh these are not set in stone. Um but I do
expect that the task force can um form around these and and adjust them as needed. So this managed growth strategy um will fulfill objective one of the strategic plan. Uh it, as I mentioned before, needs to focus on zoning, on housing,
open space, economy, infrastructure, and finance. A pretty big area of of focus. Um it will help align our zoning um with growth and integrate any housing needs and planning that we have. Um the
housing production plan was just uh recommended by the board. Uh so that is also a really uh close uh tie-in to the managed growth strategy. Um we made some assumptions in that housing production plan um that we do expect to adjust and
and uh edit as needed based on the findings of this growth strategy. We also need to assess um the conditions of the infrastructure and water uh to facilitate the needs of of our growth.
Um we're asking for principles of inclusivity, integrity, financial responsibility, and sustainability um in putting this growth strategy together. So this growth strategy um will be a framework for as I said future zoning
changes, um capital planning from the town, uh land and conservation, housing development, infrastructure investment. Um, all of these things are going to be tied to the recommendations that come out of this managed growth strategy. Um, so we want to make sure that we're uh
balancing the proactive um with reactive as well as making sure that these are data driven decisions. As part of that, I wanted to ask um John Souza to also provide a little bit of background on the town's um financial
considerations. Um because some growth will be needed. Um as we all would like to have uh no growth um to keep this town a small town, uh the reality is is that some growth will likely be needed.
Um so we have to set the right expectations. Um and so I've asked John to uh present a little bit of the the financial picture so that we can um have the right framework going forward. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Good evening
everyone. So just to if we can go to the next slide just to put this in historical context for everyone. So Chumsford like many other municipalities has seen increasing pressure on our town's operating budget in recent years. If you think back before 2020 and the
pandemic era, the you the the national inflation rate was much closer to 2% for I'd say for for many many years. Um certainly we're down from the peak of 7% in 2022, but to this day it still hovers
around 3% between 2.8 3%. So that may not sound like a big difference, but keep that in mind um as we go forward. And the other economic conditions are the labor market continues to be tight and that means upward pressure on wages. We can go to the next slide.
Um so for a town like Chumsford um two major expenses because we're a service organization are personnel and health insurance premiums. Also like many residents and businesses the cost of electricity uh heating, building materials and other
services is also increased. If we can go to the next slide. So this is a shows a pie chart of the town's budgeted revenues for the current fiscal year just to show the key sources. And so one of the things when you look at this you see that the purple area um
over 76% of the town's revenue comes from property taxes. So if you think about that that's over 3/4 of the town's revenue. State aid is the second largest at just about 13%. And then um you know local receipts, that type of things,
available funds. Um certainly they're important such as u fees um motor vehicle excise tax, hotel room tax, meals tax, they account for about 8% or just under 8% of total revenue. So certainly property taxes are one of the
key parts uh to funding our town. So if we go to the next slide, um we can go one more please. So one key thing when you think of pro property taxes is that the annual increases are constrained by Proposition
2 and a half. And this is a state law that's been around since the early 1980s. And the goal was to protect taxpayers from significant increases uh yeartoear in property taxes. Um, historically, Chumsford's always been able to absorb cost increases of 2 and
a.5% or less. But during periods of higher inflation, it becomes much more difficult to absorb these increases. If we go to the next slide, and of course, inflation's impact on the town's budget depends on the rate of inflation, but also how long is the
cycle last. Are we talking a one-year event, a multi-year trend? Unfortunately, the cycle we're in right now is a multi-year trend. Um, and multiple years of higher inflation eventually result in a structural budget deficit. And that's just a fancy term
for when your recurring costs for personnel and services exceed your recurring revenues. Um, we if we delve in a little bit to how Proposition 2 and a half works, it limits the increase in the tax levy to 2 and a half% plus new growth and new
construction. New growth can include new construction, redevelopment to a property, additions to existing structures. The key thing to remember is a voter approval is required to exceed these limitations and that could be in the form of an operating budget override. However, that last occurred in
1992 and or more what we typically see is a debt exclusion to finance a specific capital project. The most recent one that was approved by voters was for the West and South fire stations. And so if we look at the numbers a
little more here for the property tax levy. Um this just shows kind of in num, you know, new a spreadsheet form how does it work. So you have your base factor, your 2 and 12% increase. The new growth line is highlighted in yellow and
then there's a debt exclusion line. The easiest way I can explain that if you're a non-finance person is that that is the amount of taxes that the town is allowed to raise to cover the bond payments for for a project that's approved by voters. And so it's outside of the regular tax
levy. So the money is collected but it goes right out for bond payments for the project. So it doesn't give you any room to maneuver in your operating budget. And if you think about it, the 2 and a half% line there, the the second one down, that's just a mathematical 2 and
a.5% times, you know, last year's uh historical figure. And so the really the only line there that we can have an impact here at the local level is the new the new growth line. And that escalates only about a 100,000 per year.
Um, and if you look at the line, I know the numbers a little small. You can see that if you go all across, it's about a 1.5 to 1.7 million in new growth. For 26, we're budgeting 2 million. And the only reason, one of the key reasons for
that is the um the new apartment complex at 255 Princeton Street. So, that had a key impact on that. And then just looking at the budget funding limitations. So, we saw in that previous slide that the new growth or um
two po 2 and a half% allowed under state law plus the new growth gave us 5.088 million for the for fiscal year 26. So, if you look at it, you say, "Wow, that that sounds like a lot of money." However, you'll see that when you're in
a period of high inflation, that is spent very quickly. So, here's three key budget drivers for the for the current fiscal year that we're in. Health insurance went up by nearly about just under 18% or 2.9 million. Our middle sex
retirement assessment increased just over a million and the school for the chumps public schools budget increased 1.77 million and that's significantly less than what they would typically need to cover their fixed costs. The one thing when you think about this is just
those three items alone accounted for nearly all of the new growth and new property tax revenue that we have for the for the fiscal year. So that's what made this year so challenging. It doesn't in and that doesn't include any increases for municipal departments, rubbish disposal, and other fixed cost
increases. So since fixed cost increases for fiscal year 26 exceeded all available new revenue, we had no choice. We had to make some tough decisions. And that that resulted in the reduction of five full-time and four part-time municipal positions. And when I talked earlier
about the school budget increasing 1.77 million, again, it sounds like a lot of money, uh, but it's really not. It's 1.4 4 million less than what the schools were received the prior fiscal year. And then this is just a historical slide
to show that u if you look at the breakout in the tax levy between residential valuation and commercial cips commercial industrial and personal property you can see that back in 2018 it was about just over 18%
and by 2025 it has declined to 15%. So that tells us a couple of things that the value of CIP property has declined over time and residents have seen a if we step back from the whole tax classification issue which is often a
hot topic in town there's been a shift in values away from commercial and industrial property towards residential. Go to the next slide. This is just a list, a slide showing the 10 largest taxpayers uh for fiscal year 25. And if
you look at the list, uh you'll see some familiar names, but the key point here is four of those um large taxpayers are a residential apartment building uh buildings. And so that's something that we've been seeing more and more of in town. and the
255 Princeton Street development that I mentioned will likely be added to this list for fiscal year 26. And then we thought it would be helpful just to mention um you know some how does how are some of the ways that commercial industrial development contributes to our town. Of course it
increases real estate tax revenue. Um in most cases it increases personal property tax revenue which is a tax that's levied on business fixtures and equipment. uh usually increases fee revenue, for example, building permits. Um it can also, depending on the type of
business, increase local option taxes such as hotels, meals, and then of course they expand employment opportunities in town. And however, it's also important just to look at both sides of the equation that certain businesses also result in increased
costs depending on the type of business. And then finally, uh just looking at um you know, hopefully what you see when you when you study the numbers here is that um some level of growth u is key for the town to be able to continue
affording the cost of providing essential services like public education and public safety over time. And also growth in our tax base is essential for the long-term fiscal stability of the town. Why? If growth stagnates, it becomes more difficult to absorb these
fixed cost increases and the town is eventually forced to reduce services or personnel to balance the budget. Um, you know, we're a service organization, so personnel costs account for about 70% of our total budget.
So one of our key challenges um you know as I see for the managed growth uh task force is you know we when we look at our policies we want to um try to develop policies that encourage encourage some type of some level of growth in the
town's tax base but at the same time we have to look at not the reason to me is it's called a managed growth strategy. You don't want just unrestricted growth. whatsoever. Because what will happen is um if it if the level of growth is too high, then of
course the town is going to have to make major investments in new infrastructure and new facilities. And these could be school buildings, could be renovation of construction for classroom space, roadways, intersection improvements, and also water sewer. Uh and water is of
course um supplied by three independent districts. And the town does handle the sewer service. And so re uh just um in conclu you know coming to a conclusion um you know investments in infrastructure and
facilities as we know have significant costs and they usually spread over multiple fiscal years. Public school building projects uh require several years of planning and construction and are often done in partnership with the Mass School Building Authority.
Um so the the whole idea of this slide is these things take time. It's not something you can do in one fiscal year. So that's why the planning is so important. And then other considerations um would just be the oper operating budget impact. So you have public education. Um certainly um you know it
affects student teacher ratios, special education costs. Um public staffing, public safety staffing. We have to have adequate staff for an emergency response. And then public works, you know, the more the more residents you have, it's it's only it's it's a natural
thing. you're going to have increased um solid waste disposal costs. So then finally wrapping up, this is uh just looking at a 5-year operating budget forecast. This was presented uh last April and there'll be a a new five-year budget forecast will be
presented next month at town meeting. But you can see unfortunately um you know unless something changes the budget forecast for the next few years um the deficits unfortunately get progressively worse. So just shows the the importance of um trying to um
enhance revenues going forward. And whenever you do something like this, if we go to the next slide, everyone has different opinions on how to solve the problem. Um one of the things that's difficult to answer is um what's preferred by a majority of the town. Um
do we want to try to develop strategies to promote managed growth in the tax base? Um some residents might propose a Proposition 2 and a half override. um what are the consequences if we don't take action? It's definitely going to result in the loss of town and school
services over multiple years. So, that's just a quick look at our finances. Thank you, John. Um so, as you can see, the task force has a pretty big job ahead. Um we're really trying to figure out how the town balances um progress
and uh the growth it needs um with the impacts that come along with the growth. Uh so that's that's the charge of the task force uh to figure out how the town can balance those needs um and the growth in a sustainable responsible way.
Um so that is the task of the cha the task force. Um I am going to ask that the members of the task force come up and introduce themselves briefly. So we do have a face to um attach to the name.
Um but before we do that, I will give you some uh time. Are there any questions or comments from the board? Well, I'd like to say thanks for that that financial presentation. That's a good starter, an excellent starter.
I do have a question for John on the five-year operating budget forecast. That's the next to the last slide. So that essentially the the balance or the deficit is essentially what we're trying to see if we can make up with new growth. Is that
the fiveyear um it's basically to try to give us show everyone a trend of where we're going. So you know um because of because of recent trends with the costs escalating so much it's it's unusual to see this but you know you can see that the the deficits unfortunately
increasing. If you if we can add to the base um if new growth actually becomes part of the p future year's tax levy. So the more we can add it would soften the impact of some Right. Okay. Yeah. especially if it's
earlier on because then your percentage growth after that's less. So is there a way of being able or does it make sense to use that number to then look at how much we would want to look for commercial growth versus residential growth,
especially given the question of which one potentially could be more of an impact. your your point being that you would one of the reasons you'd want to restrict growth is to prevent the overuse of or exceed the resources that
we have right now. So, is there a way to to uh divide that out into at least some general goals as to what we would want in terms of commercial growth like in terms of square footage of commercial growth that we would want has some sort of a plan versus residential like so
many additional residential units or what kinds because I don't know if there's a difference in tax. Yeah, I mean at this stage I think that's something the committee is going to have or the task force is going to have to work on. I wouldn't want to um you know I wouldn't want to say that we have to try to hit a number with it's
more about developing policies to enhance um some new growth that would be beneficial to the town. And I think what I was trying to do with talking about the costs in the presentation is um you know if you pardon the analogy I want to
draw for the gardeners out there or whatever it in my mind just looking at it fiscally it's almost like adding fertilizer to a plant. If you add a little bit it the the plant will flourish and encourages a lot of growth
in the plant. If you add too much it has a detrimental effect. you can actually kill the plant because you know I mean it's it's you don't want to add so much growth that our services become or our facilities and our become over overburdened is I guess is what I'm
trying to say also I feel like these numbers are a guide for what because a lot of people have the position they don't want growth and these numbers are kind of an argument to why we need growth but I I don't think that these numbers are meant
to drive the cart I mean, I think that would be not a good strategy. I mean, we're trying to we're not trying to raise revenue. That's not our charge as a board or as a task force. I think our our charge is to
try and make a plan to contextualize the various needs and make a strategy. So, yeah, but I think you have to be care I I do think like you can't just look at that, right? Like you have to look at the numbers um because
but you can say we're going to drive x number of units or x square feet of no but there's a balancing act um that we have to be careful of and you know part of it infrastructure like do the school do we have enough room for the schools to like
expand I know that's on our our town meeting thing we're not supposed to include schools but um but again like I you know when do we put in for another school to like we're already at capacity with all of our schools and they you
know they're at 23 24 students per teacher, right? Like do we have room for another classroom if we are we have if we have a growth strategy of you know this is how much we want to grow. Well, is there a place for a new school to be built? Do we need a new
school? Like and when do we engage um and when do we start talking about that? Like I think like to do it properly, you have to bring in all these pieces. Um I'd also note and I think Joel you hit
on it. This is maybe your very first point. uh the relative uh increase in revenue and the relative increase in infrastructural needs is
different between residential and industrial. And a big part of the balancing act here is likely to be looking at those two and saying, "All right, we could stop all residential growth and do nothing but industrial and that has one set of
consequences or commercial. It has one set of consequences. Or we could go to the other way and it has another set of consequences." Um and balancing those two approaches uh is is likely to be a big part
of what this committee has to do. And those two also impact each other, right? And they impact growth in one impacts growth in the other. And and then redevelopment too, right? Like a lot of like a lot of our neighboring towns have seen a lot of you
know the ranch like for instance like you know a small thousand square foot home torn down and a McMansion being built on the same lot everywhere that brings it that's you've got permanent fe like you've got a whole different form of revenue right and
that's not hitting your necessarily hitting your infrastructure right like you've got all these other things that come into play that we haven't had in chs or we really have like the opposite. Um like we haven't seen a lot of that tear down and Oh yeah.
rebuilt as some of our neighboring towns have seen. Um but it's it's a lot. It's a Okay. Well, my comments stem from the managed growth examples that Evan provided us and in them they make a explicit number of units that they're
saying they're shooting for as their goal. And so, you know, if we have more explicit goals and we understand what those goals are and how we shape decisions that we make that could achieve those goals, then we'll have a better sense of our actions influencing
the outcomes that we want. But if it's more vague, then we could still say, well, I want to do this kind of thing, but maybe I'll try to do more of that thing over there, but we won't really have any sense of am I actually achieving the goal I'm trying to do with this, or am I just still vaguely kind of shooting in the dark. So that's why I
was driving to it. I think that I think likely if you put the numbers together it's probably some sort of optimum at which you have a trade-off between the two and that and potentially even within a particular category like residential because for example I think one of the things that we want to do from the plan
production housing plan some collection of those words together are the right one that um that is smaller units that are more affordable but that are not officially you know affordable in other But I would say we do want to have places where people are
able to come with young families and so forth and so on. And um you know but if we do that essentially what we're doing is we're are we giving up potential tax revenue and increasing potentially increasing the burdens on the resources because we're creating we're we're
having you know smaller uh smaller revenue generators that at the same time are putting greater burdens on the resources because of families and stuff like that. So I think there's got to be some sort of reasonable optimum that we want to look at and having having some sense of what that is I think would at
least help me to guide you know what kinds of things that we want to encourage in our zoning so forth and so on versus not. So that that's really the the gist of my point. Yeah. And I think that's something once we see what the task force comes with we
can see where it's heading and maybe narrow it down, broaden it, whatever we need to do. Yeah, I agree. Okay. All right. Um, so members of the task force, um, if you could come up, introduce yourselves, um, not too much
background because we do have your backgrounds here. Um, but it would be nice just to put, uh, names to faces. Um, and, uh, if you do have any questions or comments for us, that would be great, too. So, I'd invite anyone who
would be willing to come up and Sure. come up to the podium. Hi. Um, I'm I'm Victoria Fox, newly elected town meeting and represent for precinct 7. And, uh, one of the things that I would really love to be able to
do is have more of the citizens of Chumsford realize how much work and how much money it takes to keep Chumsford the way we want it and to still be progressive. So when there was the opportunity to be part of this task force, I says, "Oh my gosh, you know,
this is what I need to learn." And I'm saying, "I may get less sleepar, but I'll meet a lot of new great people who are like-minded." And um basically, this is why I'm here now. And so I'm say I'm here. Use me folks. I mean, I'll
accept it. Thank you. Hi, my name is Kate Wager. I haven't lived here for very long, but I have lived at Kinlock and now I live on Turnpike Road. Um, I have a vast experience from the town that I came from where I was the first selectman and I served on every single board that
there was. The only board I didn't serve on was the board you're on because I knew how difficult this board is. So, um, I wanted to learn more about the town. I figured this is a great way to do it. Um, as I said in my my letter, I understand how long and tedious these
committees are and I'm prepared for that and I'm retired and I have a lot of time. So, I appreciate you allowing me to be on this committee and now I know why there wasn't a big rush of people who wanted to be on it. Thank you. What was your name again?
Kate Rager. Nancy Arowway. Um, uh, 2020 master plan and a lot of years on the planning board and such. Um, I'd like to thank John for putting that presentation together. I think that's a
really spectacular starting point to launch off this committee. um not because we're trying to solve the economic issues for the town, but because solving or supporting the
economic issues of the town is a big piece of what planning is about. I listen to you all commenting and and jumping on pieces of it and it's like, yeah, this reminds me of a lot of committees I've been on where we want to
solve it immediately. Um, I think the the only thing that I'd like to say is we are looking for plans for strategies that will support
the ongoing functions in our town and and to make life for all of our citizens as good or better going forward. And a big piece of that is the financial picture. But as we evaluate no growth,
slow growth, progrowth, the options, we're also looking at the impacts on the environment, the impacts on housing and society, how that affects the various demographics of our town, the society of
our town, and the community of our town. And that's why I'm interested in this committee. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, Debb Verna. I've been in Chumsford since 1987. I've seen a lot of changes. I have served on the strategic plan,
master plan implementation, housing advisory. I want to see how the all the pieces fit together and help make them fit together. Uh, I grew up in a town that they didn't do the proper planning and it almost killed the town. It took them years to come back. So, that's part
of why I'm interested in this. Thank you. Good evening. Uh, Chuck Mooney. I'll also answer to Charles or whatever you want to call me is fine. Um, I am 39 years in Chsford, a long time. I grew up
in Lexington, so I'm a Bostononian by heart, I guess. Uh, I served on the strategic plan steering committee. I see the value in strategic plans. I also saw that many boards, groups, etc. in
Charlesford have developed a number of really good plans that need to come together. And you know when I hear things somehow the word growth scares people I think of it more in terms of evolution and things that don't evolve perish.
So you know to me zero growth or is isn't it's not it's not realistic. I think it's something that comes home to roost. So you want to call it managed growth, you want to call it evolution. I think it's important to bring these things together holistically and that
the town all work together to move forward. And I'm also going to thank John for the presentation. You know, it's a pretty sobering picture, much like it was when I was starting out and bought houses and a few of you as
well. So, thank you all. Thank you. Is there anyone else? Yes, good evening everyone. Um Aaron Cunningham, for those that don't know, uh I'm on the select board and I was also part of the committee that this
resulted out of. So, um I may or may not have had a hand in getting this to the to the planning board. Um but I will say um I really am looking forward to this coming to fruition. And I think the way um Chris framed it tonight, I think we
we were challenged and as as Chris knows, we were challenged at getting this to them and and there were a lot of questions. And I think what got boiled down tonight as our pathway is I couldn't have articulated that way, but that's where I was hoping this would go. And then John just really emphasized
that. Again, I don't think we're looking to to fill that gap, but we need to start adding that fertilizer and getting a little bit of growth there so that gap closes at the end. and and and we'll always continue to refresh to try to close that gap. Um so I'm I'm thankful
for the for the select board at um having me be the representative member. I definitely look forward to working with this crew and uh some of my new and old friends on doing this. So thanks for putting this together tonight. Thank you. Ravi Robbie's online.
Ravi, hi. Uh good evening everyone. Sorry I couldn't be there. Um I am trying to see if I can start my video. Sorry, one second. There you go. Uh sorry I I Hi, good evening everyone. Sorry I couldn't
be there. I had to go to India for a family emergency and uh yeah this is uh this is the first time I will be in any committee for the town. Uh my main purpose was to uh you know just get
involved learn from obviously the lot more experienced people that are there in this group and contribute. I work for Citizens Bank on their IT side and uh I'm also you know involved in some uh um
you know real estate uh ventures of my own and I I thought the two things and my interest in in the town and its growth and more importantly manage growth uh would help me drive towards contributing towards this committee.
Again, more importantly, I'm here to learn a lot from all of you guys and hopefully set the stage for more such involvement with the town moving forward. Thank you. Thank you, Ravi. And thank you for waking up so early to join us.
No worries. Thanks. All right. Is there anyone else? Okay. Oh, you got two more. Hi, I'm Karen Walton. I've been a resident since 2001. I was a teacher in
LOL for 30 years and also an adjunct at the University of Fitchburg. I now serve as primary um manager for the Thanksgiving pollinator garden and native plant site. I am a new town meeting member and also
co-chair of the Democratic town meeting. I'm deeply committed to establishing eco ecological green spaces in Chelmsford, particularly bee pollinator gardens
and building um gardens in the spaces the open spaces in Chelmswood which is very easy native gardens and I look forward to working in that capacity because as my I'm a master gardener and I've gone to green school and I have a lot of background in gardening and
landscaping. So putting that in place in Chumpsville is what I'm committed to do. I think if there's room for it in this committee. Thank you. Thank you. Hi everyone. Peter Swan, um
environmental and civil engineer, been in town over 40 years. I've had the opportunity the last three years to get involved in a whole bunch of different committees. Um that's given me a very good understanding of how the town approaches one of the big limits to
growth which is our natural space which includes things like drinking water and sewers but also open space and flooding and whatnot. Um my personal philosophy is the country has doubled the population as when I was a kid. So
obviously we're going to grow and the question is how. And I believe that we can do that in a smart and sustainable way that doesn't muck up the things I care about which tend to be the environmental factors that impact things
like uh our health. and don't want to go down that road, but you're going to talk about PAS next, so you know what I'm referring to. Um, I am the rep from the Concom and um, I just want to remind everybody the Conservation Commission has a charter in
town bylaws and the state wetland protection act to support a whole bunch of things that affect growth, water pollution, groundwater and drinking water quality, um, habitat, flood mitigation, uh, and a host of other things in our
town bylaw. those are all impacted by how you do growth. So, I'm looking forward to working with everyone and representing uh the conservation commission. So, thank you. Thank you, Peter. And one last person,
but not least. Hi, my name is Badrien for those who don't know me yet. Um, short and simple. Um, 20 years in town. um first uh volunteer green coordinator
of town of Chsford, now CAS, clean energy and sustainability committee chair, troublemaker to um strategic planning committee that established this task force in some ways um in some ways and obviously the lobbyist who came in and convinced Joel to uh vote for the
establishment and planning book to take the lead which he changed the mind. So hey, got my ability to influence people. Um, John, the budget of 2050 is $365 million roughly. So, take it from me.
Let's take a bet how close I am to this. This is the number that I project. Now, 320 to 335, but if the inflation stacks up, $350 million. Hopefully, I'll be there to see it. I I I certainly hope that you are there. Um, but that's a reality in my world,
which is when I retire and live in town for about 10 years or give or take, that's what I see as the town budget. Today, it's $162 million give or take chump change. So, when somebody asks the question, what is the revenue production plan and everything else, I want to make
sure that in the committee uh in the task force, uh, my voice will be to say it can't be a five-year view. This is a very long-term view. This is managing growth is a philosophy. It's a strategy.
It's an integrated perspective of um how people live. This is in the context of the strategic plan and vision statement that says that we will acknowledge history. We will live a welcoming community, a learning community, a healthy community. So there are multiple
facets. This is not just in one facet of economic growth. We may be a poor community but we may be a very happy community. That's the extreme one level right and growth means multiffactorial. It's not revenue alone. Um and a lot of different
points have been brought up as we industrialize or as we continue the pathway. I think the core principle if not at least for myself that I will be looking at and hopefully we can all leave uh this for the future is
um to be a good ancestor. So in 25 years when somebody looks back and said hey this task force this planning boat this select board committee they all looked it up and set us up 2550 years were successful and they were a good ancestor to us all. That would be the motivation
that I would want us all to think about. other communities have their own challenges but if we chem and oasis of of hope in the kinds of divisions of what we want and and that's the spirit we should be embodying in thank you thank you
all right um so thank you all uh members of the task force for again volunteering your time and energy on this um John and Mike will be reaching out to you soon uh to start scheduling the first task force
meeting. Um, so thank you all. All right, moving on to our next agenda item, the Chelford Water District Crooked Spring Water Treatment Plant PAS upgrades requesting a waiver from the
full site plan review process. Yes, good evening everyone. I'm Steve D. Francesco. I'm with the uh consulting firm of AECOM engineering cons consulting firm. are located right here on uh in Chelmsford at 250 Apollo Drive
and um representing the Chelmsford Water District for um the design of their their PAS treatment facilities. Um so, as you said, we're seeking a waiver from Full Site Plan Review. I'd like to
give you a little bit of overview about the project and why we think it it applies for that. need my glasses to re I put these slides together, but um so in 2021 uh the Crooked Springs uh water treatment plant
and there's two major water treatment plants that the Chelmsford water district has in Chelmsford. One is up at Crooked Springs and the which is near the high school and the other one is down at Riverneck. Um the Crooked Springs plant experienced or they tested for they tested their water for PAS and
they exceeded the state limit for PAS and the state put them under a consent order to build treatment to treat treat the PAS. So this project is is part of that and it really contains two two different elements. One of them is just
a PAS building. Um, and that's a 6250 square foot masonry building that's going to contain the um the granular activated carbon vessels that will that will the water will will filter through. And and the next is the next element is
a recycle basin 4,300 square feet. It's about 12 ft deep uh uh concrete basin that'll be underground that will take uh these filters have to be backwashed periodically say about every month. So when you backwash them, we will put the
the back the spent backwash water into this basin and then slowly recycle it back to the plant. Um so un unfortunately I didn't bring a laser point. Did you have one Evan or Okay. So, um, this is a a the site plant of
the existing plant. So, right right up there now, there's a there's a plant that removes iron and and manganesees from from the water. That's this pretty much the square structure that you see right in in the middle of the plan. And you and there's access roads that
correct right there that that go all around. Um, so the the new treatment facility is going to be off to the right. Um, and the the spent backwash water concrete basin is going to be the the structure that
you see over to the left just to give you some some orientation there. Point that out on the screen. Can I point it out? Sure. This is going to be the treatment facility here. This is the spent backwash. This is a a below
ground. It comes up above ground about a foot of concrete. So when you backwash the filters here, it's going to go down to this basin here and then re be recycled back to the plant and reuse the water. So, we took some we took uh this from
your your GIS map and you can see there's a red dash line that goes all the way that that's the the red dash line goes around the perimeter of the Chumsford Water District property up at Crooked Springs. And we just wanted to show here where the structures were
relative to the property lines and the distance. So the closest distance for the to a property line is is approximately it's almost 300 ft and that would be from the the treatment facility over to the to the right side. The the
other measurements if you can read them those are 5 to 600 ft. So uh it's within the existing property exist existing fenced in area. This is just a site plan or excuse me a floor plan of the of the treatment plant. We just wanted to show
there really is no frrills to this building. It's it's building just large enough to contain the the granular act activated carbon filters. Those are represented by all all the circles that are there. Off to the left is is the
backwash pumps and off to the right is a uh is an electrical room to service the pumps. the um it had we have a an HVAC a mechanical room and uh just a storage room and that is a
section cut through the building. So you can see why it uh the height of the building is is driven by the height of these granular activated carbon vessels. Um so these are the some of the characteristics and why we think it um
this this project is is deserving of a waiver. Uh there's no change in use. There's a there's an existing water treatment facility at the site and we're going to continue with that. The structures are not close to any property lines. We're we're in we're in the existing fence line of the facility.
We're not clearing any trees. We're not adding any new treatment chemicals. We're not adding any access roads. We're not adding any traffic. There'll be no additional staff at the facility. There'll be no additional parking or parking spaces. Uh runoff from the two structures will be handled by
underground infiltration trenches adjacent to the structures. Uh there'll be no additional site lighting. Uh we're disturbing under an acre. The building is less than the uh the 35 ft limit. We're a foot and a half below that. Uh
we have had communications with the conservation commission. We're not impacting any wetland resource areas. We're not within any buffers. Uh we're not within any flood planes. We've spoken to the fire department about the project. Uh sprinkler systems are not required and the site the existing site
access is acceptable. So those are all the characteristics and um we're asking for a waiver for the full site plan review. Excuse me. I had a question. What are the major? We It's not a public hearing. It's an
administrative review. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I was just wondering what the changes are to this. Unfortunately, you're not allowed to ask questions in the administrative reviews. Sorry. Are there any questions from the
planning board? One very small one. I mean, the what you're asking for makes very good sense to me, but I'm just kind of curious how this mechanism works. You filter to the carbon. Yes.
Then you backwash. No. Now all your PAS winds up in a tank. Nope. All the PAS remains on is absor it's absorbed by the granular activated car. Okay. So the backwashing does not remove it and put in a separate tank. Sometimes it may be a little iron coming
through that will plug. That's what I wanted to know. The top, right? So and so the carbon is changed out. We don't exactly know. We've done some testing. We think typically what you do is you you want to do maybe half the vessels every year. So
truck shows up with new carbon. You empty the old carbon on the truck. You you add new carbon and and and then a once a year thing. We don't know. Maybe we're hoping it's longer than that and it depends on what the PAS levels are, but they'll be
monitored on on a on a monthly basis. All right, I'm covered. Joel, are you in an aquifer area? Yes, we have wells all around. That's what I thought. Yes. So, you are don't need to apply for an aquifer permit, protection permit.
I mean, the the aquifer is is controlled by by the by the uh the Chumpsford Water District. It's their it's their wells. So, I'm not sure what's required for the aquifer permit referring to zoning. Yeah.
Yes. This this this project would normally trigger a site plan review, right, for any building over 500 square feet. Uh it would also trigger the the uh lot coverage under aquifer. Yes, that's what I'm referring to. Yeah. Okay. But that's not we're not taking
that up today. So, my understanding of the request um is in its entirety is what I think they were intending on requesting. Okay. Because is a is a is a It's a a waiver from uh submitting for
approval from the planning board for site plan and the special permit as I understand it. Okay. Because the site plan I can see this the the acryer permit I'm I'm not I I would want to see a storm water analysis
um because I I think it's it's a standard we should apply to everybody including a water district. John, uh, no questions at this time. Anita, um,
just curious as to where why this area was selected for the new building. Can you just go back on the slide like that corner versus maybe a little bit further off the street? Can you go up one one one more one more
slide to there? It was a flat area that was because the water is going to go through the existing plant. So, we don't want it too far too far from the existing plant and it's right next to a road. So, we didn't have to build any more road or any more
imperous surfaces. The water will go through the existing plant, run through the new plant on the line that used to go out to the community. It now goes through the filters and then goes out to the community. So it also is right there where the where the water line le leaves the site
and this is for chumsford water chsford water district not north chsford and not east chsford no um what are the and I'm sure you probably don't know this but like have we looked at the pas at those I no okay just
you're I'm good I'm good I agree with Joel in the sense that I would like of storm water analysis in this area and also I think it should come back for allowing public input to be able to talk to it. This is something
that's affecting people. Um I also agree with Joel on the special permit. Um, I am curious about the site plan waiver request because it looks like you've done almost everything that you
would need to do for the site plan review, including come before us for this waiver. So, I don't think it would have been a whole lot more work um to actually go forward with the site plan review
um because you've got all the the drawings, you've already contacted the departments that are most critical. Um I think from a legal perspective protecting both you and the town,
my recommend especially with around PIFA, my recommendation would be to move forward with the process of uh the site plan and the special permit um and get the the official letters from the
departments that there are no concerns because I think if something goes wrong in the future that could be a pretty big liability for both the town and for the the water district. So my recommendation would be to go through the process.
Based on what I'm seeing, I don't think it would be a long process. I can't imagine it would be any more than one meeting. Um pretty simple project. Um no complications, no major issues. So,
I would like to see it go with the site plan review and special permit with departmental letters. Um, and we can I don't think it would go more than one meeting. Any other questions or comments? At this point, I would take a motion.
So, there's a motion to deny What was the I don't know if you need to formally take any motion. Okay, if you want to, you can um but just add some more context to this. Um they obviously provided a bit more
context. Uh when I met with them, I had indicated uh to the district that I don't have the administrative authority have to go to the board. um as a PL plan B um we did work with the district to um
already submit the legal ads. Uh so this is scheduled to open on October 8th. Legal ads have gone in. They they ran last week, they'll run this week. A butter notification will also go out. Um, and that was, you know, for obvious
reasons in the in the event that the uh the board wanted the district to uh to apply. Is the legal ad for the site plan review and also the aquifer permit? Yes. So, it's covered because I I've got to say I'm I'm not particularly concerned about the site plan, but I
completely agree with you on the special permit. Yeah. And like I said, I don't I don't expect there to be any questions or concerns. Yeah. I mean, this is we've basically seen the presentation. Yeah. And I think that it's just a matter of making sure that we have the letters. I mean, I trust that the
departments didn't have any comments, but it would be nice to have those official letters in the in the file. Just as a protection. Um, all right. So I no motion but are I'm seeing a lot of
nodding that people are in favor of not granting the waiver and then having them come back for the special permit and the site plan on the ETH. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thanks for All right. Before we go to the next
administrative review, um since we do have a number of public hearings that are going to be continued, I want to make sure we take care of those sooner rather than later. Would you like some motions? Yes, please. Okay. Uh on 152 Steedman Street, I move
that this uh hearing be continued to October 8th. Actually, we should push that out to October 22nd. 22nd. Okay. Um because October 8th will be pretty crowded and not going to be ready. I don't think they'll they're going to be ready. They may not be ready.
Concom has them going at towards the later part of October as well. So, okay. Well, then make that the 22nd. I'll second that. Uh motion by Mike, second by Anita. All in favor? I I unanimous. All right. Uh,
I would then move that uh we continue the public hearing on 191 to 195 Riverneck Road to You want that one on the 8th? Yep. To October 8th. I'll second. Motion by Mike, second by Anita. All in favor? I. And we agreed they would be first on the agenda.
Yes. Yeah. And I number three. You ready for it? Yes. Okay. Okay. I move that uh the uh the uh hearing for 133 Princeton Street be continued. Again, you want this on the 8th, October 8th. That is
Do we want it on the 22nd? Because on that one, I think we're more wanting to hear how this came about. And I I think we might have a little more time for that on the 26th on the 8th. I don't know people at this point,
but our eth is looking I will adjust my motion accordingly. You just tell me. We also have Chford Street on the ETH. So I think it's a good idea to move this to the 22nd. Chumsford Street meeting at Chster Street Mall. Yeah. Yeah. It'll be long and I think we'll both
come out with traffic reviews. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Make that the 22nd. Motion by Mike, second by Anita. All in favor? I. Unanimous. All right. So those three public hearings are continued to those dates.
Moving on to 242 Bill Ricka Road. Review and endorse certificate of decision. So at this point, I think the hearing's been closed. Yep. Yes. Uh you have a draft decision in front of you. Um I provided hard copies slightly
different than what's on the agenda. Uh, attorney Duchain has reviewed it on behalf of the uh the applicant. Um, his comments are redlined. Uh, Chris has provided um the findings
um determinations. So, those numbers have been incorporated on page three of six. And Chris has also um uh refined uh several special conditions.
Was there something on the special conditions about a path being maintained between the parking? I think I I think not not specifically but um I I expected that to be uh per special
condition number two. What was discussed was that um actually this special condition number 1B theou. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But but if you want we can we can
ind we can specifically indicate that theou shall provide provisions for uh maintenance maintenance of the walkway between the two properties. I thought we said that was a Yep. And um the applicant is okay with the red
lines and the the Yes, we've reviewed it. In fact, some of the red lines are mine. I just you know filling in info but u my client's comfortable with all the conditions and everything and wanted to thank you for your time.
All right. So I will take a motion. Uh now we have already approved this. We've already approved it. It's essentially ratified. I move that we we ratify the certificate of decision as presented with the additional uh comment concerning maintenance of the
path. Motion by Mike. I'll second. Second by Deerra. She got it first. All in favor? I. Unanimous. Thank you very much. Have a great night. All right. Next up on the agenda,
12K Road. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Mr. Balansky, uh my name is Pete Nakosi. I'm the attorney for the applicant property owner, Loop Real Estate Corp. I know the majority of you are new members on this board and and uh
got to avoid the pleasure of the proceedings of the underlying grant of this special permit uh for an industrial building development that took place some time ago. The board had originally granted a special permit back in September of 2016.
Um in the midst of it, there was a private land rights dispute which sort of was pervasive throughout the proceedings um which ultimately degenerated into a private land rights litigation, Middle Sex Superior Court between my client and uh and a butter,
Joseph Haidider, who's represented by attorney Doug Howler, who's here today. And um as a result of you know how the site plan was being laid out and that boundary dispute issue that was taking place at the time, I think the board
took comfort in installing a condition into the special permit decision condition number 10 about moving this stone boundary wall which was on the property at the time. And it was really the board being cognizant of the fact
that it was an unsettled issue between the private parties. And obviously the board is not going to be the arbiter of private land rights disputes. Um but felt that that condition should be put in place just to uh protect the abuter.
Um since that time many years later the parties uh involved in that private lands rights dispute resolved their disputes and the uh there was a settlement agreement. Uh the case has been disposed of and the settlement agreement calls for you know various
obligations of the respective parties with respect to this common boundary and there is some uh you know site disturbance and regrading and moving of the wall and and uh surveying work that has taken place. So the parties have
begun that. Um, but we're to a point now where we're getting ready to move this wall and this condition actually poses an impediment to the parties completing their settlement agreement. So before we embark on the rest of the work, um, we
knew we had to come back here and ask for special dispensation to lift that condition. Um, in knowing that it was motivated by the abuter, as part of the settlement agreement, Attorney Hler provided a letter of consent for the affected party to agree to the
removal of that condition, so long as obviously the parties comply with what their respective work requirements are on the project itself. Um, and I've further committed to Attorney Howler tonight that um, we're we're gonna have a site meeting before any further work
takes place to move the wall to eliminate any confusion over who has what remaining work and where things are and making sure that the parties are sticking to the literal terms of the settlement agreement. So, I' I've committed to that site meeting before we actually move the wall. And um but
again, we can't proceed any further until we get uh relief from this board. And um I suspect that attorney Howler is in support of that path. And I'm here to request that uh minor modification, removing condition number 10 from the
original special decision. Thank you. And I think Evan ran into the same thing I did when I was reviewing this. I looked at special condition 10 and it looked like it referenced a spill kit. Oh, I may I may be referencing a different number then. So, I think it's fact 10.
Fact 10, excuse me. So, I wanted to make sure we had that cleared up before we vote on it. Yes, I agree. I you know, I also had the pleasure of not being involved in the underlying special permit grant or the litigation itself. I have I have been brought into
triage issues since then. Um, so thank you for that clarification. Could you somebody have a copy in front of them of of exactly what that uh that provision is so I can understand what we're up to here? I have it.
Is it the recorded decision 2016? Is that what we're looking at? Yes. Fact 10 right there. No stone walls will be removed. Yes. Okay. Got it. Removed or moved.
Um, could we hear from attorney Howler? Because it was an administrative matter. I didn't think I was I don't I don't have a problem with him speaking. So, thank you. Attorney has laid out exactly what we had discussed. Um, I trust him
implicitly. He's a man of his word. My client will look forward to working with his client to resolve any other open issues. This is a first procedural step. As long as no other work is being done until we're
locked down, we're okay with it. And I want to thank the board for listening to this. Thank you. Okay. Any questions, comments? That was a little too. That was much easier than I anticipated. Well, it's because you've witnessed Doug
and I go at it on this issue before in this room. So I the only I guess procedural question I have is it it sounds like the two attorneys are confident that the um site meeting between the applicant and the uh and the abuter will be successful.
Yeah. But history has shown that really hasn't been the case. So I guess my question is what happens if it's not successful? Well, that's that's not an issue for this board because there there is a
settlement agreement which has been submitted to the court and approved by a superior court judge which specifically outlines the field work obligations of the parties, the engineering obligations of the parties. It is unambiguous.
It deals with where things are being moved, grading levels. um any dispute over the scope of the performance of that settlement agreement is resolved by the superior court and not an issue for this board. The only thing that's in front of this board right now is just
that municipal condition to allow us to look to perform the settlement agreement. So, um Mr. Bolansky's concerns can be resolved knowing that any subsequent disputes are resolved by a superior court judge, not by this board. Is it likely that there'll be
other conditions or other issues that we would need to reverse as a result of this? Not to my to my knowledge. I can't imagine. Okay. Yeah. I just because I don't know this. Is there a white PVC fence that's still
further on? Yes. Is that staying there? So, there was a temporary fence that the board had approved to allow to be constructed. Um the the language in the settlement agreement spells out fencing and boundary lines and all of those things. So all of those issues are going
to be addressed. Um I I can't speak specifically to give you the the great details of the work, but it's spelled out in the settlement agreement. Again, we're unable to perform our settlement agreement unless you approve this. So are they not able like they don't have to do another site plan because the
fence was temporary? Nope. that way. So, the expectation per the the board's approved plans was originally at the walls removed. In exchange, there's a uh white stockade fence installed, two rows of arborite,
and then the detention basin. So, that's what I'll be looking for um as part of uh final inspections, and hopefully that's what the settlement agreement contemplates. Well, whatever the decision prescribes, okay, we have the decision. If we're going to
vary from the decision, we will have to come back here for a further modification. If we're going to vary or there's any dispute over the Superior Court settlement agreement, the other lawyers will be back in front of a judge to address those issues. I'm not envisioning any of that. I think, you know, the matter has progressed so much
under the settlement agreement to this point where now we're at that critical phase where we are approaching wall removal. So we said, "Well, before we put a shovel in the dirt, we have to go back here and and get this approval first." Which I appreciate, by the way. Yeah.
Before is always there some people in this town that come after forgiveness than right. They come after that we'll be looking at in a couple weeks, a couple meetings down the road. All right. Are you ready for a motion? I want to say thank you.
I'm sure I'll be back with an after the fact request on something else. almost guaranteed. All right. Any uh any other questions? All right. I will entertain a motion. I'm going to make a motion that we um
approve this modification to the certificate of decision for 12 KD Road. Um modification being to strike fact 10. No stone walls be removed from the decision.
I'll second. All right. Motion by Deerro, second by Anita. All in favor? I. Unanimous. Thanks. Thank you. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Good luck. That was Anita, you were on that. I think Deerra
was on that because I remember you asking about that. I'm sure you were. I've been on it when when this was first before us. No, they came to us with complaints. No, not first, but the the modification. The modification with the fence. There were multiple modifications. No. Yeah, but I remember dear asking
questions about it cuz I was I wasn't on the board, but I was in the audience, so I was watching. All right. 345 North Road overlay. I'm back. Welcome back. You didn't go anywhere. Welcome back. It's nice to see you
again. Uh for the record, Pete Nikosi, the attorney for the uh the property owner and the applicant. Um property owner is a a realy trust, but the principal behind it is Vnode Patel. He may very well be on Zoom. Uh no, Ron Bour.
Ron Bour, the architect, uh is on Zoom, so he's available. Uh Jesse Johnson from Weston Samson is the chief engineer on the project. He's he's here available as well. Uh Mr. Patel was traveling. He was going to try to get on. He's he's I think he's on his way to India. Um so
there may be some logistic issues there. Um so anyways, we're in front of you tonight um on a a request for you know determination as to whether this project fits into um the sead is what I call it
I guess the community enhancement investment overlay uh district projects. Uh this is 345 North Road. It's a it's a a strip mall which I'm sure you've all driven by a thousand times in your lifetime as I have. And um you know it's
it's historically been you know commercial with mom and pop shops. There's a daycare there. You know there's been a mortgage lender, a hairdresser and everything in between. So, you know, as we've seen in a lot of our small communities, I'm I'm I I based
out of Tingsboro, but Tingsboro is not wholly dissimilar to Chumsid and some of the surrounding towns that where we have been typically bedroom communities with a sprinkling of these strip malls uh all throughout as part of our economic development. Well, eventually over time these things become depressed and you
know obviously the economy has been somewhat turbulent over the last several years and um you know my client uh wants to take advantage of the overlay district and uh revitalize the parcel and I think the proposed revitalization
is consistent with your zoning planning objectives here in town. Um and basically what what they're proposing to do is build within the existing footprint. We're not doing any site alterations. We're not doing any I don't think we're doing any height alterations at all. We're building within the
existing structure. Uh but sort of retrofitting it for a combined commercial residential use. So, the daycare is staying, and what we're looking to do is put in um a series of um two and one-bedroom uh apartments uh
with six units on the first floor and another six units on the second floor. Um so, what I've provided to you is sort of a summary narrative of what, you know, generally speaking, high level, this project is about. So you have that, you have an existing condition site plan
which Weston Samson had provided uh with a top topographical plan and then you have some uh structural floor plans and elevations from Ron Bourke the architect uh to show you know how it's intended to be laid out. Now
we worked a lot with Mr. Balansky before we thought about coming forward with this. um he rightly so directed us to water and sewer first, you know, because of the past moratorum and capacity issues, but we've passed muster with them. They've done all the calculations
and we have a clean bill of health for them for this project to move forward. Um so we went on from there because under B CIOD bylaw, it required us to move it to a departmental review next. So we had a large-scale departmental
meeting with all your department heads. Um, I think the project was received pretty favorably there from all the department heads. I didn't hear anything negative. I mean, everybody had constructive input and I I think, you know, for any type of project like this, I think it's great
for the department heads to get their fingerprints on it before we, you know, start pushing plans forward. And um so I felt that that meeting was positive and successful such that we could at least move it to the next phase which is this appearance in front of your board for
your input and your determination as to whether it fits into the bylaw. So we think it fits into the adaptive reuse uh project uh category under the um under the zoning code. Um we think it's appropriate for the site. Um, you know,
obviously Massachusetts as a whole and lots of these communities have been trying to get creative on creating new housing stock, especially affordable housing stock. Um, this obviously would be subject to your inclusionary zoning bylaw. So, we're aware of that. Um, you
know, but there's not a lot of this type of stock in inventory in the area, you know, and obviously the state has just redone their uh accessory used dwelling by law, which towns are grappling with. Um, a lot of communities have adopted the MPTA overlay district trying to
stimulate growth. Well, here's a perfect example of of now just relying upon the good zoning planning for this town and trying to take advantage of one of these overlay districts and having local control over a mixeduse project that
gives you the housing stock and continues to have some type of commercial uh element to it. So, um, because there's no sight disturbance, we we did I did confirm with the conservation director again before coming here because I we offered to
appear in front of them, you know, because it's technically in an Aquafor district. Um, but they he indicated that no appearance was necessary, at least at this stage. Um, and again, we're staying within the full same footprint, no site alterations. Um, and we we think it's a
good foot uh fit for the site. So, we're here to solicit your input um on the project under the you know criteria of the bylaw and and I have the the smart people here with me to answer questions um that I can't answer and um happy to
hear your questions and comments. Thank you. Evan, do you have anything to add? Yeah, just uh indicate that um this would uh trigger the inclusionary which was mentioned as you recall um our inclusionary is
designed where the affordable units are at 50% AMI which means per 40B um regulations all 12 units would count towards our SHI. This is very similar to three meeting
house. Um so that's that's really the biggest benefit the town can get um in approving projects like this converting nonresidential space into residential space.
Um as part of the departmental meeting um you know my focus uh with the applicant uh was to encourage them to uh focus their energies on the streetscape the the public realm meaning the
updating the sidewalk as necessary. Um it really is limited opportunity um to add landscaping within the parking field. Uh I think as it is they are deficient by a couple spaces. Um that
I'll leave it at that. Okay. Sera any questions? Not yet. I might come back. Mercy. So what's going above the daycare in this plan?
Um, residential units shelf shelf space. There's nothing like I don't know if that's Yeah, storage or maybe some utility connections? Not for certain. Ron, do you can you
hear us? Uh, can you hear me? Yep. Okay, good. Can you speak? Uh, yeah, that's uh there is some utility rooms up there. Uh, essentially it's going to be storage at this point. Okay. And is this going to have like a hallway
up there for these the units on the second floor to get to their units? How is this? That's correct. So, if you see the boxes with the X in them, those will be stairwells. Okay. And they'll be short short hallways. Okay. So, there'll be multiple entry points on
the first floor. Um, and really this is just diagrammatic as a test fit. Uh there's quite a few there's quite a quite a large uh amount of ceiling space up there because it is a high gable because of the depth of the building. So um it's pretty much all developable.
Um you know as you see the footprint we don't have a lot of space that's taken up by the roof pitching. Okay. Dearra, um, could you just I mean I guess it's maybe a little ahead of ourselves, but I'm just wondering it seems intuitively
that the parking would be a bigger issue than it sounds like Evan is indicating that it is. So, we're we're close on spaces and I I I'll I'll let Jesse speak to this in a in a moment, but there's also different peak usage hours, too. You know, the
daycare is going to be closed when the residents are home. True. you know, so um that sort of queuing is a is a factor as well, but I I'll let Jesse speak to the the parking counts. Good evening. For the record, Jesse Johnson, Weston and Samson. I'm the civil engineer for record on this. So,
we did look at the parking and if you go by just your requirements and all the things are calculated based off of the usage and the square footage, uh it does fall short, but then you do have the provision to um calculate at 80% because of the overlay and it then does fit
within that requirement. So, we have 39 provided and that calculation comes out to 37.8. But I did I did notice and I don't know how all these um ratios were determined but the calculations are a little unique in how they
they want um one visitor spot for every three units which is pretty robust for a parking spot I think for four visitor spots for 12 units and then more even more so on the daycare it's one per one for every employee and then um with the students
that was generating I think a requirement of um 10 parking stalls for 38 students. So I I thought that was probably not really practical or what's actually happening there. And then also the transition of who's going to be
using it during the day and then that turnover that so I don't feel parking would be an issue at all. I mean you have to remember too we're going from you know a far more intense usage of retail businesses with traffic in and out all day to to this. So, it's
certainly a less intense use. But he's right. You know, unless we have some students that have stayed back for a few years and have driver's licenses, I don't know that we'll be using those faces. So, Anita, I mean, the only question I because I've
been into I've used the businesses in there just like you're not going to increase the height of the structure. You think you have enough room? Trying to visualize it when I was Yeah, it's, you know, I did too and then I made the mistake of going on the site
visit to to go up and look into that space. Um, yeah. No, the the space is there. It's somewhat deceiving. Okay. Are there going to be dormers? Because there's no windows in the upstairs. Sean, do you want to speak to
that? Um, yes, there will be dormers. Uh there'll be a shed dormer on the rear of the building so you wouldn't see it. As well as uh maybe reconfiguring some of the dormers that are in the front to allow some windows. For example, we could bridge across two of those dormers
to create a window wall. Okay. But we we will limit we will limit the construction to the minimal. John, I think as a first glance, um, it makes sense to me as a as a good reuse. Um,
you know, given that given the difficulty trying to retract, um, commercial clients in there. Uh, the other thing that's a plus for me as I see is the it's on a state highway. Um, and so, you know, I don't see that
as opposed to impacting if if this was in closer to a residential neighborhood. That's one of the factors under the bylaw to be considered. So, okay, Joel, Mike, well, it certainly falls within the the
ceiling. No question there. And I think a lot of the other questions that we're bringing up are really questions for the next step, not for this. So, in ter in terms of uh of COID approval, I'm certainly for it.
Evan, it doesn't technically matter which category um of reuse, does it? I mean, it doesn't trigger any different as part of your applicability. Um passports have articulated
um which one it fits into. It's not critical. Um but there are no different um uh different standards. Okay. No, no, it's more it's more as the bylaws evolved and as you can you know you draw
the line from manage growth strategy and some of the other strategies the board's been talking about you can reflect on some of those seoid types and it begins to you know get slotted in a logical manner.
Okay. And it looks like since this would be more than eight units it would require a special permit. Um, okay. Yeah, I'll work with the applicant on the uh on the actual legal ad and what specific uh permits are necessary.
Okay. I don't have any questions. I think this is a really really interesting nice project. Um, I think it meets a lot of the needs of the area and I think it's a a great reuse of the uh the building.
Yeah. Well, I will move that we uh grant uh COID approval for 345 North Road for applicability. Yeah, applicability. Motion by Mike. I'll second. Second by Dearra. All in favor?
Unanimous. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Sure. I'll see you soon. Next up, 91 Tingsboro Road. Say applicability as well.
Good evening. Attorney Katherine Flood, Floodlaw Office, 549 Roger Street, Lel here on behalf of Jerry and Tina Daly, trustees of Mattie K. Realy Trust, owners of property located at 91 Tingsboro Road. We are here tonight to
see the applicability of the project in the community enhancement and investment overlay district. Here with me tonight is Matt Hammer from Landplex. As you can see from the plans we submitted, my client proposes to construct a two-story commercial building in the rear of the
above reference property with sufficient parking having 17 spaces. The property is located within the roadside commercial district in the community enhancement and investment overlay district. My clients purchased the property in 2014 and used the property to operate
their family-owned business, Jerry Daly and Sons Plumbing and Heating, which has operated in Chumsford since approximately 1972. Over the years, the business has grown and they need more space. They currently
employ over 22 professionals. They operate Monday through Friday, 7 to 4, and they currently own 11 vans. The proposed construction will allow them additional space to park vehicles, office space for their staff, and a conference room to conduct training for
their employees. Their proposed redevelopment will allow them to keep their current business in Chsford. The intent is to keep the existing parking area and the existing curb cut. Um the proposed development fits within
the CEO districts by the expansion of small businesses, continued growth and enhancement of commercial districts and the development will enhance the municipal tax base. I will turn it over to Matt to go over the plans that were submitted with the filing.
Good evening. Matt Bremer, Lamplex Engineering. Go to the microphone, please. Oh, sorry. Thank you. 60 Fletcher Street, uh, Low, Massachusetts. So, the the parcel itself is, uh, 24,271
square ft. Uh, there's an existing structure, uh, directly adjacent to, uh, Kingsboro Road where they operate out of currently today. The, um, paved area, which is shown in gray, is going to
remain. So, we're not going to be um expanding that pavement area um from what's there today. And the new building in the rear is 68 by 32. Um it's got a ground level um garage
area for loading the vehicles with supplies. And on the second floor, there's office space as well as a uh conference room. the um the project is in a flood plane. So, we'll be going to conservation uh
for the project. Um as well as the existing building once the new building in the back is constructed, the the the existing building will be removed and replaced in kind. I can uh put it to the board.
Evan, anything to add? No, no, I don't have anything to add. Mike questions. Um, you say that you will after the new building is constructed, uh, will you be replacing the old building? Uh, yes.
It would be in the same footprint. In the same footprint. In order to meet the performance standards for doing work in a flood plane, the foundation has to be a flowth through foundation. Okay. And that that obviously is so ancient it. Yeah, it is. Okay. So, understood.
I'm sorry. Did you Can you repeat that? The foundation would have to what? Yeah. So, when you do work in a flood plane, the foundation needs to be flow through, meaning the water can go underneath the building if need be in the in the event that there is a flood. Got it.
Yeah. Of course, I would I will add um the only reason if I understand the project is using COID is for a sideyard setback. That's correct, Mr. Bolinsky. Okay. which sideyard. Yeah. So, there's diff excuse me uh
there's different setbacks uh as to whether you abut a residential um uh neighborhood or not. So, on one side we have the town of Chsford's property and then on the other side we have the uh the property u that's occupied by the
bu Buddhist monks. Can you step up there and just show you can talk in front of there. There's a microphone. Yeah. So that's this property here. That's residential. That's correct. Residentially zoned, not necessarily. Yeah. Residentally zoned.
They may have usually residential component. The primary use there is a is a religious use, but it's in a residential zone. It's like a temple. So what's the difference between the setback for what with using CO and not? So the
commercial if you could ex um pan over to the uh zoning chart Evan. So here um so the sideyard in the allowable in the se so oops so here's the commercial district
setback line here okay which is 30 on the sides if you bought a so this building is within that setback so if we utilize the cooid setbacks
we would have a side set back here of 10 and a side set back here of 25. So then we would be proposing to have the building 26 ft from the side line utilizing the seoid setbacks. Okay.
Otherwise the setback needs to be 30 30 30. Yes. I'm sorry. Can you just tell me what was on the left hand side of the building over here? Yeah. No, the other the next property it's the town of Chsford just open just
an open green well. Gotcha. Okay. And then I I should also note, excuse me, we have a railroad track. Right. Right. Yeah. From a applicability point of view, I don't think the setbacks are highly
relevant. I mean, it's that will have to be determined later on. I personally don't see an immediate problem. Uh but I don't think that affects the applicability. I don't know if I
any other questions. That's it. Joel, no. I I think it's I think it's applicable, John. I think it fits applicability. I I think just um I know what just looking at the architecture I thought it fits in well with the
with the area and the exist you know I know you're trying you said you would replace the existing buildings I think the building out front would almost remind you of a small residential home if you drove by quickly Anita no and I appreciate the drawings like at
this stage I really do appreciate the drawings and the view. I don't we don't get that very often and I really like that and I like the idea um about where the trucks are parked behind the house or hidden. Mhm. Um, so I'm fine from an applicability and
Okay, do you this? Yeah, I'm I think it meets applicability and I like the idea and I happy that the building the the company is expanding in Chelsea
Mercy. Um, no. I actually like these drawings. Like it just looking at what they're trying to do with it making it almost look like their houses versus like these just big businesses. So it just sort of makes the neighborhood especially next to the you know church instead of the um temple. I think it
would fit in perfectly there. So I think the applicabilities would work here. I agree with the applicability. Okay. I just had a couple questions. You said the front building is going to get um replaced or is that not being
touched? Okay, that's okay. That's the one that's going in its current footprint. Yeah. Okay. I thought I heard the rear building which was really confusing me because there is no building in the back. Um the other comment I had is it looks
like the these um architectural D uh drawings are reversed from the plans. If you look at this one, the the trash and the extension of the pavements
going to the left of the building. If you look at the architectural, it's to the other side. Yeah. So, so you're you're absolutely correct. Um, the architectural plans were were uh prepared before we we solved the grading. Okay. Uh, issues that we had to contend with
with the compensatory storage calculations for doing work in the flood plane. So, you're right. The this this this has changed from the architectural. So, so that side of the would be on the other side. So, we're going to have a fenced in dumpster enclosure.
Okay. The site plan is the plan they're going with, it sounds like. Yeah. Yes. So, the van the parking will still be behind that correct building, but the dumpster area will be to the right of the building instead of the left. Left. Okay. There's still parking there on the
right. Yeah, there's a bunch of parking. Yeah, there is. Okay. Um I'm sorry. Go ahead. The building in the back will have a also a flow through foundation. Yes. Any
other questions or comments? Is this going to come Does this come back to us for any site plan review? Okay. Yeah. Yeah. This is going to trigger uh full site plan review. Uh the uh CEO setback special permit.
Yeah. Um a special permit with the zoning board for the flood plane and Hong Kong. Okay. All right. I will take a motion. I move that we uh make a determination of CO applicability for 91 Kingsboro Road.
I'll second. Motion by Mike, second by Anita. All in favor? I unanimous. Thank you for your time. Thank you. All right. No new public hearings. Are we supposed to say something about without reference to zoning or without Isn't there supposed to be a
little bit on the end of the applicability? No, no, not not on CO. That's good. I know. I just want to know who think of it then. That's for ANRS. Okay. Okay. Good. All right.
Okay. Community development director report. Here we go. What's coming up? Um, so just uh five items. Uh first one is at the um I sent an email to you back uh prior to the September 8th slotboard meeting. At that meeting they had the
presentation of the MWR connection feasibility analysis. Uh I imagine that report will be uh incorporated into the managed growth task force uh consolidation of existing reports. Uh it identified uh five
options. Each option had a projected range of new wastewater flows uh capacity added as well as a 10-year estimated uh cost. Um so some some
pretty big numbers as far as cost. Uh not exactly sure where the slutboard left at other than the presentation. Um but like I said I I imagine that will be picked up and as an input into the
managed growth strategy. Second item is um permit fees. Uh this is the second um second year that the select boards requested and I gave you a print out of the uh a very high level um assessment
of permit fees comparing to um neighboring communities. Well, obviously the planning board is you don't have it. Oh, you don't have that? No. Oh, my apologies. Um I thought I made copies. Um
third item, uh just some recent inquiries. Uh 21 Alpha Road, 7 Stewart, 93 Brick Kill, and 150 Steedman Street for a variety of um for a variety of potential projects.
Most of them fit within uh kind of the common themes that that uh that we're aware of. What's 90 What's 93? 93 is where the board approved a I think it was a 50,000 foot warehouse. Yeah, it never happened.
That that did not move forward. It's being sold. Wait, 93 what? Brick next to UPS. Testing area. There's a lot of time on that one. We did. Yep. Yep. Yep. So the your No,
no, your approvals have um have uh a permit validity provision. Uh they can ask for an extension prior to uh expiration otherwise the permit lapse and they they would have to come back to rebuild that project or or a new
project. So who what what are they thinking about? Are they So that inquiry was related to a hotel. It seemed optimistic um with the initial uh inquiry um and just haven't heard back.
Hoteling considering that we just like we're changing over all our hotels and shelters. I'm sorry. No, just interesting. Yeah, I it was it was caught me off guard. I was I mean I had I had known at one time the town
was actively pursuing a hotel in 129. the market uh seemed interested but couldn't find a site. Then obviously during CO the demand seemed to have uh gone away. Seems like hotels are being built again. Um so that was a um
that was a good inquiry and I' followed up but for whatever reason uh it doesn't appear as though it's it's uh moving forward. Uh third item is um I think I sent this
out on Monday, October 6th. Uh the Center Village Master Plan Committee working with Northern Middle Sex Council of Governments is hosting a Chumred Street uh visioning workshop at the library from 6:00 to
7:30. And this is a stop at any time. Um so it's not going to be a continuous hour and a half uh program. Uh the uh visioning um process is looking at um complete streets, trees,
pedestrian amenities, bicycle amenities, uh curb cut management, um so things within the public realm. It also has a an associated land use and zoning uh component with that. All property owners have have received direct notification.
I hand delivered um this flyer to the businesses last week. I've sent it out to tree committee, uh bicycle pedestrian committee, energy and sustainability committee. Uh it's been posted on Facebook.
Uh so hopefully we have a decent a decent turnout on that. What's the output of that expected to be? The outputs are going to be a um uh b primarily some um a graphic concept
plan. If you're familiar with the uh vinyl square process, this is following a very similar process whereby the committee identified um a project. We worked with NIMCOG, created some concept plans, project
narrative, feasibility study, some recommendations. Uh, and then with Vinyl Square that is actually advancing to 25% design, which is a significant investment on the town's part. Um, and then ultimately um
it'd be a a capital project. Would there need to be any any connection into zoning for that work or any changes required or anything like that? Not necessarily. Um although I think
there are some synergies. Um you know some of the um some of the um initial considerations related to curbcut management. uh quickly get into um
uh private you know private property impacts related to um curb cuts and parking configurations. Um so some of the concepts have have talked about placing parallel parking within the right of way
doing curb cut management some landscaping uh to clean it up beautify it. Um obviously if that has direct impacts to private property uh primarily related to the loss of parking existing
zoning such as the seoid uh may may provide uh market compensation. Uh in addition this study is looking specifically at um alternative uh land use and zoning arrangements for chumps street.
Okay. Um so so there's yeah there is a planning component there whether whether the two you know are directly related or or you know or the transportation improvements could be could be advanced without um
significant zoning um changes remains to be seen. It'd be good to get periodic updates and presentations on how things are going and how we might be able to help. Sure. Absolutely. I'm Marcy Mayo. I may have taken some of
Marcy's thunder on the flyer. And then final item is um October 8th. Um I mentioned earlier 33 Glenn Aav informal meeting. Um this is not something that uh I've typically
offered uh but it seems like uh the board is is open and amendable and interested in having those informal meetings. This would not necessarily be coming to you as seoid applicability at this point.
Um but that's for 33 Glenn a and then uh as we discussed earlier uh the Chunshire water district 50 do road project that public hearing will be uh opening on October 8th. That's all I have. It's 33 Glenn a looking at it.
33 Glenn a is the first building on the right after the um after Katrina. It's a first generation industrial warehouse. Oh, okay. Which I think has been there a long time.
Okay. Are there any updates on the Hilddrth appeal? Nothing. Okay. Nothing. I don't even think it's been scheduled. Oh, we had Mr. House. I know. I don't I have a question for Evan.
What are the criteria for determining say applicability? So, because it doesn't look like there is specific criteria. Yeah, there's there's a brief um section in the bylaw
section 111. No, section 119B 119 finding of applicability B1. It's remember like I can remember it's very high level um
in a number of years ago um there was a project where the uh majority of the board did not like the project uh and wanted to provide direct um
voting in accordance with not really supporting it. um council at the time um issued a memo indicating that within the spirit and intent of the way CEO is laid out in providing due process
that uh that that council did not recommend the board ever voting a negative determination because it doesn't it doesn't lead to uh supporting due process meaning all you're looking at is concept plans. So what was advised
was um kind of doing issuing positive applicability but with itemized areas of concern or interest. Uh that way the board is clearly articulating and documenting and putting
a a potential applicant on on notice uh that there are areas of concern or significant concern. So, we've uh I'm sorry. No, no. I was just saying Okay. But I think that there might be a
problem with that. If I remember a couple projects since I've been on the board that I was part of the project review when the applicability had already been decided and I was looking at the project
I couldn't understand how that project was applicable. Um but if it's such high level and town council never recommended not be applicable.
Council council at the time did not did not advise ever um voting a negative applicability. In doing so in doing so would mean that you would prevent the applicant from making a full submission triggering the public hearing in a butter notification. Is there any way to
do it that you don't give approval and then you require the site plan? No, but I think I think I think you'd essentially be issuing a conditional a conditional is probably how does that prevent the applicant from submitting a like a full plan and come in from the
board for well they could do it underlying zoning. Yes, correct. But but you would you would be preventing them from uh using seaweed. But but then why but then why have applicability in the first place? So I'm I don't disagree
with you. I think I think the way the way it played out was that it was basically a conditional applicability uh conditional in the sense that the the majority of the board articulated
um areas of concern. So what happens with that? If you approve it and there's areas of concern, how what's the recourse to take it away? We don't have to approve the special when the project is actually submitted. To Chris's point, it makes it because now
can we look at our criteria for applicability and maybe have council look at it and see if maybe we need to change the criteria for it. That would allow us. We can certainly do that. And if you know if applicability if the board is
more open to informal meetings um and wants to embrace that practice in lie of applicability I think it say serves the same purpose. Mhm. Um, back when COID was written, we were
trying to codify a process whereby informal meetings would would be um a routine and regular and understood and accepted practice. It's 10 10 plus years later. I think boards, particularly this board, is more
open and probably willing and interested in having informal meetings. Um definitely right now we right now under C they're just it's formally called applicability and but I mean I don't think changing the criteria
is going to change the basic issue it sounds like town council has which is that we really shouldn't say no because we're denying them we can ask council to uh revisit review and revisit even bother because if yeah because if we're if we're going
to essentially say yes yes but conditionally then actually the things we're looking at it's a much broader perspective because now we're looking at all kinds of things to say well I'm concerned about this I'm concerned about that whereas right now at least the criteria we have it's you
know proposed type size and location and that like use isn't even so I apologize I I thought board members um knew or uh wanted to express any and allies of interest of concern.
No, I I agree. I I do think that's what that's that's that is what provides the value to a potential applicant. So, what I'm wondering is do we want that in a policy? I mean, right now we have this sort of understood but unspecified way that we're going to be handling these things.
So, I think we ought to have it. Let me let me let me recirculate the the the the memo. Mhm. Um and we can review it uh put it on the agenda for for an item and uh maybe that
evolves into a a policy or maybe the board wants to have current council review and revisit it. It was prior council that made that. Oh, that was Yeah. Okay. And again, maybe like because of the way our like criteria is,
that's why he recommended a certain way. Like if we had different criteria, then we to me it just seems silly that like if you're telling me that I have to say yes, well, why do I even bother coming in? Like, wait a minute. I mean, I get I you don't have to do what your council
says. No, I know, but listen to it. I get that. But again, is it something is it the criteria so vague that We've had to trouble like what was it specifically? We've had past applicabilities where individual board members have
essentially voted a negatively, right? But the majority of the board voted in a positive manner. We had that in meeting house road. I don't recall the specifics, but yeah, there's been there's been a couple. Well, Beehive I mean Beehive Chris voted
no. Yeah. Yeah. There's Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. There's there's been a couple. And so I think what what council was was uh stressing was if an if if the entirety of the board or majority of the board
voted in a negative manner in that case you're not necessarily providing due process because you're not reviewing any of the any of the datadriven facts that you would use to ultimately determine whether to approve or not approve because the level of detail
they're required to submit is part of applicability is conceptual in nature. But I think it I think that depends on why you're voting no. If you're voting no because you don't like the project, that's I agree with that. But if you're voting no because you don't think it
should be coming in under the overlay and you should it should be coming in under the underlying zoning for the setbacks and the things like that, then I think that's a different Yeah. I mean that's a that's a differentiation we have to make here. And the standard really is different,
right, for applicability. And I've I've seen us go through a lot of applicability things where we start asking questions that are more appropriate for a site plan review. That's because we want to give them more information for that site plan. Yeah. We want to we want to give them feedback,
more detailed discussion, setting up the But my response to what uh you just said, Chris, is that decision's already been made. So on the on the Tinsboro Road, the bylaw
via the Tom meeting vote, a 20 foot setback is deemed um deemed reasonable with a special permit. Well, there's a by right and then there's a special permit. So if they come in with CO as a byite compliant setback,
I mean that that standard that standard is set. But yeah, like but that's what I was like for I think it was Kingsboro Road what I was asking about the residential, right? like you're we're doing applicability and if that was like a residential neighbor and I was looking
at the setbacks then I was like that's where I was thinking like if even in that case there's a there's a buy right setback and if they if they meet it but if they like if we said yes to COID then they then they got the relief on
the setback right they already have that relief. Well, no, but if if somebody were coming that would not have the relief unless they got Seyoid and we're looking at say se say and we're looking at sead and we're saying we're con we're considering
is this applicable that to me would be a valid thing to look that's if you think it's going but deciding that it's applicable doesn't mean you're going to give them the setback. No, because then under they've got the they've got the right you're basically saying this is not a zoning that I think works. Then I can't
say no to them when they come. You can say no to them. And this is this has been I know I do this has been this has been the the level of unc that some members have had uncomfortableness that members in the public have had with seoid
is that it by its definition it is trying to facilitate the the concept plans that you see to make a project pencil out and conceptually work for the proponent. Could they could they build
the building to comply at 30 and not not have that extra five feet? Probably. But CEO is designed to try to give a little bit to make projects work uh to incentivize people to apply
for something that they actually need for their for their for their project as opposed to, you know, work within the um the more restrictive underlying setbacks. There's a whole purpose behind that overlay that's been pretty well spelled out.
And to me, if a project doesn't if a proposed project doesn't meet any of those things agreed with you, it should be rejected. But according to that practice, we wouldn't reject it. We would have said, "Let me send it back. Let me send it back out. We'll put it on the agenda
and we'll get have the board, you know, discuss it and ultimately get maybe get council to review and revise. I guess one question just to ask on that. So, if you approve COD and they come in and you discover something like the setback isn't working, you then can
ask them to change that and that doesn't counter the COD or because they got COD approval that makes it harder to make a change. I don't think COD approval gives them anything effectively by right. depends. There are some there are some CO where there are no special permits, right?
But applicants applicants do when they come in with their say application point back to getting applicability and say see you thought this was a good idea, right? So now for you to think it's not a good idea is inconsistent with what you had said before. That's what they'll say,
right? That's what they have said and that's what they will say. which is why I had thought and again I may may have been been mistaken that board members were articulating any uh areas of of interest or concern.
Yeah. And I think we have it's still it's still not as clean as I think and I don't think it's like again you know maybe certain members on the board like we're like if we change out right that something that is not to your point
Joel like policy or like it needs to be clearly spelled out and easy for people to understand conceptual plan it's never going to be clearly spelled out. I mean it's but then that's not true though. things you know like for a beehive is a perfect good example that was a case where we
were concerned about the mixed use the use of a residential with potential children with contractor yard so that's a case where you're saying this is not a good use this is not a good I don't think seat applies here because what you would be doing with seat is something that doesn't fit with
what you're trying with zoning so I don't need to know the details of storm water I don't need to know setbacks I just from that alone I can say I don't think that's applicable so that would be the kind of thing I think it's important, you know, to have some sense of what it is that we're going to be able to say no on, you know,
or whether we can say no or whether we're even not going to bother to say no, but we're going to say like like Evan was suggesting is we're going to give you a lot of hints that if you show up here for a permit, there's going to be certain things we're not going to like. You know, you heard that. Yeah, that's exactly what it is.
Let's move on. All right. Anything else? Not yet. layers on updates. I have one thing just for layers on update because I haven't talked about in a while. I think we have a meeting next week, but I know that the VSAP committee
is really looking for a um North Chumsford business rep. They've had a vacancy um for a couple weeks. So, it is affecting them. Who I'm sorry, who's looking for Vinyl Square. It's VSAP VSSAP. Vinyl Square fulfillment plan.
Never heard it said like that. I'm adding it cuz it's a lot of words. I like your hand for what? That's good. What are they looking for? Does farming there make you a local business? Are you selling things? Yes, you can be on there. Selling them there, but I'm selling
them. Well, you're I mean, you do have farmland business. What are they looking business? Uh, they need a representative. So, the representative that they had from Vinyl Square left and they currently don't have one and they're limited on people right now within this committee. It's getting smaller, so they need another
person. Quite a few businesses that might be a possibility if they can't find a, you know, a storefront business owner that wants to do it. Okay, Marcy. Uh, so yeah, Evans gave up most of it. So, last Senate Village meeting, we met with uh Nimcog to talk about the meeting
that they're going to have at the library um on the 5th or the 6th, I can't remember. Fifth. Okay. um and like what businesses to reach out to and to include actually both um the Chumpsy youth baseball teams, the um Chsa girls softball league because they have the
fields that are on Chson Street and including even reaching out a little bit on to um Bill Ricker Road here for the church because they got those they're using the air all the time um and to sort of get everything set up for the presentation and also Nate Monto has now
joined the Central Village team to uh take over the vacant spot. So, who's who's he? Nate Monto. Nate Monto Street. Street's taken over. Yes. Take over the book. Did you say that you sent this to us?
Cuz I didn't see it. I will send it to you. You sent it to the Senate Village Committee cuz I have it. Are you going to send us the other thing too that you thought you sent us? Okay. Um I just have um I don't think we talked about this before. It's just one sentence. the uh we picked a consultant
for the low impact development. Did I mention that before? I don't think so. Nope. So, we picked of the three um Kleinfelter. Yep. Um and so now we have they're they're we're going to have a launch at some point. I think in October is the is the
timeline, but I don't think the date's been set yet. Is that correct? Correct. So, okay. Anya, any updates? Nope. John. So last week I attended a Northern Middle Sex Council of Governments meeting and um one announcement is that
um on when Nimco is having their annual meeting right here in one of the best towns in their of their membership. Um it will be at the Chumsford Center for the Arts on October 15th from 5:30 to 9:00 p.m. And the keynote speaker will be um Ed Augustus, Secretary of the
Massachusetts Office of Housing and Liveable Communities. So that should be a good good event. All right. Joel, did that did that potential for 191 we had somebody proposing a bike path
thing and was that he mentioned NIMCOG was involved in that. Has that come up at all the bike path thing? Not at the meetings I've been at. Okay. I don't I don't have any layers on it report. No, nothing from board of health. They didn't meet. They only meet once a month and that's right. I gave the report
once. Okay. master plan implementation did meet. We meet quarterly. Uh it's always an interesting meeting. You find out what what everybody's really doing in town. This was a good one. Uh we I think we fared fairly well as one of the uh one
of the committees being uh investigated. Actually Evan presented most of that. No particular surprises. Progress is being made against the master plan. Okay. That is a committee of the planning board. Yeah. Um and they talked about doing a
um an annual presentation. That'd be great. Planning board. Yes sir. When would that be? Um you maybe December maybe when it can quiet us down a little bit. We have to talk about December meetings
too because I think one of them falls on Christmas Eve. Oh yeah. Perfect. I won't be there. Um, do you think we could get the um the telecommunications people to film that um presentation by Augusta
so that it could be available on jumps or like Yeah, it probably be up to um I could talk to Jenny Ra and see get her that would be a good thing. I would love to be able to watch that and I won't be available that day. Um
nor will I be here on the ETH. I've got for Concom just a couple things. Uh 242 Bill Ricka Road ended up being continued to October 14th. They were no-show this week, which was interesting. Um Stemman uh was continued
to October 28th. Uh and they have agreed to the W Weston and Samson peer review uh for storm water. Um we do have meeting minutes to approve. I have read them. I will move if you
need it. Uh Joel, I think you were absent that day. Um couple minor typos, Evan, on that. Uh sorry, I think we had already did I send those
to you did. Okay. Um just missing an E and managed in the manage growth section. Um, so I will take a motion. I will move that we approve the meeting uh minutes of July 9th, 2025
as um motion by Mike, second by Dearra. All in favor? I Joel abstains everyone else is an I. Um all right, meeting dates October 8th and 22nd coming up. I will be also um
putting together a list of things that we might want to start looking into next uh for prioritization for zoning changes and things like that now that we um hopefully we'll have some time after these uh public hearings start wrapping
up. So I'll be getting that to everyone soon. Thank you everyone. Oh, actually I need a motion to adjurnn. I I Motion by Mike, second by Jerger. All in favor? I. Thank you.