##VIDEO ID:m4EeEng3P0M## e e e e [Laughter] with it being 6:30 um I am calling this January 22nd planning board meeting to order um my name is Chris Lali I'm the vice chair of the planning board um I will be running the meeting tonight in de's absence um she's traveling and hopefully will join us on Zoom um Anita tanini should also be joining us on Zoom um all of our meetings are televised and live streamed um and are available on Demand by chumford tele media uh this meeting will be conducted in a hybrid mode in person and as a the courtesy via remote through Zoom um if the remote uh Zoom link goes down we will try our best to get it back up and running uh but if we don't we will continue with the meeting as scheduled Anita has joined us okay thank you Anita's on and dud should be running late so uh first on the agenda today will be public input uh the public input should be limited to statements from the public uh pertaining to issues in the board's purview um that are on the agenda tonight or um not on the agenda but are not uh pending public hearings on the agenda uh those comments should be uh given during the public hearing itself so does anyone have any input for the board Evan anything on Zoom no all right seeing as there is none uh we'll move to the next agenda item and that is going to be the open space and Recreation plan presentation uh Mike aiola from ncog will be presenting thank you Chris um my name is Michael asola I'm the senior planner from the northern middle sex Council of governments um and I'm before you tonight uh to review the um the draft osrp open space and Recreation plan um and also request a letter of support from the board um to support the DCS Department of Conservation Services approval um next slide um tonight we're going to um go over an introduction um to the uh open space and Recreation committee um some background information on the the plan an overview of the uh the planning process um and a summary of the uh Outreach efforts the feedback we received I will review the um analysis of needs discuss kind of the uh the open space and Recreation goals and objectives we'll pause for a little for a question period and then discuss what's uh what the next steps are um again northern middle sex Council of governments we are um the one of the 13 Regional planning agencies in the state we uh support the greater LOL region and Peril um we're governed by a policy board comprised of local officials um appointed and elected from the member communities and we provide technical assistance and support um on planning projects across of a variety of areas um transportation housing um GIS um and open space Recreation planning too um the uh open space and Recreation uh committee has been meeting um since April of 2024 um they really guided the the ship um of the plan making all the decisions and recommendations um Carl Bishoff the chair who um is here tonight um Peter spawn uh Pat Wes Paul M McDougall um Brian strip Jerry uh Schmidt who's here as well tonight um Dave sper who's also here and then Christine Clancy and David C from the town um so first we'll start off kind of um with some background information as to what what open what is open space um it's land that's used for uh for many different types of of U land types and land uses from conservation um forest recreation agriculture uh quarter parks and amenities small gardens um green buffers um any any open area owned by an agency or uh organization dedicated to conservation um any undeveloped land with particular conservation or Recreation interest um and it can be for either passive or recreation use um so what is an open space and Recreation plan um it's it's a blueprint for enhancing and preserving our community's Open Spaces parks and recreational opportunities um it's a guide to ensure that everyone can enjoy the natural beauty um and recreational activities that make uh Chelmsford unique um so why does it matter um an open space and Recreation plan um it reflects the needs and the desires of the community um it lays out a plan to um maintain and enhance all of the uh benefits of open space that um that really make up the character of Chelmsford it ensures Equitable access to Green Space um it ensures uh it protects green infrastructure of the community um so that's the natural U the environment's ability to naturally um mitigate flood impacts and climate resilience um um there are also economic and and fiscal benefits um e tourism or or the the benefits that that the uh town can receive businesses can receive from um hosting um open uh either um sporting events or just people coming into tourists as tourists um it aligns the community's efforts with State um state level conservation and Recreation goals and ensures consistency with broader Regional and Statewide strategies um one of the more important aspects is that the eligibility of Grant pro programs like like um the local Acquisitions for natural diversity grant program and the Parkland AC Acquisitions uh Renovations for communities program also Land and Water Conservation fund grants um applications too that have Grant applications that have an osrp are also given uh priority and extra points during evaluation for a lot of State programs so you might think um that doesn't chelsford have a an open space and Recreation plan um the town's had a an active open space and Recreation plan since the 1960s so it's really nothing new for the town the current osrp was updated and adopted by the town in 2017 um the plan did not receive D DCS approval so um this go round we are striving to um to get the DCS approval so we can be eligible for the the grants um so H how is an osrp what is an osrp and how's it organized um we're going to look at kind of the plan structure um it follows the state's U open space and Recreation plan workbook uh has basically nine main sections to the plan um which the plan covers a 5year planning window so this will be probably from 2025 to 2029 um the first section is the plan summary which is kind of an executive summary of the plan uh the second section go is the introduction it um gives kind of the statement of purpose um which is kind of the the mission statement for the plan and then it reviews the um the process the public participation and the enhanced environment uh enh environmental justice Outreach that we did we'll talk more about that in a little bit um section three is a community setting which kind of gives um a snapshot of current conditions for the town as far as kind of the uh so social aspect of it um section four is an environmental inventory analysis which is more of a snapshot into the um uh the natural um you know what's on the ground the um ecology um geology soils topography um Water Resources vegetation section five is the inventory of um lands for conservation and Recreation interest um it it lays out um what exactly the the town has for um conservation and recreation resources um what public and private nonpar uh uh Partners um have for for activities within the town um and shows U there's also mapping which lays out the um the areas of the plan areas of uh land areas um section six is the Community Vision which describes the process um and statements of uh open space and Recreation goals uh the section sevens the analysis of needs which we'll talk a little bit more about later but um it basically analyzes all of the data and the Outreach that we do um section eight is the goals and objectives which are are laid out and we'll talk about that more and then probably the most important part um is um section nine which is the year action plan and we'll get more into the details of that um so the planning process um we we kicked off in April with um community outreach and engagement um there were there was a series of um public events and we'll talk about that in the next slides um then there's a phase of collecting and analyzing data um and community outreach input um then we use that information to define the goals and then formulate object objectives and action items um to achieve the goals then we draft the plan um and we review the plan with the public take the feedback public and the um um committee and also Town staff then we take the comments and revisions um and bring them back and that's pretty much where we are now with a uh a complete um final plan you can go to the next slide so Community engagement um started in June through um October uh the open space and Recreation plan committee had monthly meetings um that's where a lot of the the decisions were made and discussions about goals and and policy um community events we started at the market on the common uh for two tabling sessions um in early June uh the survey launched from June June 1st to um I believe September 1st and then we had a two public for actually three public forums um one at the senior center in June um another was part of the Strategic plan um meeting that was in September um and we last month had a um an online virtual um Forum where we uh previewed the um the plan we also had um semi-structured interviews and focus groups that were um more part of the um environmental justice Outreach um so again environmental justice um this is defined by the state as as um a neighborhood or senseless block that meets one of the following criteria all of the um Chelmsford um block census blocks that that met the criteria were for minorities comprising 25% or more of the population and the annual median household income um did not exceed 150% of the um of the Statewide annual median income so again with the with the Outreach we had a series of focus groups um with um chumford Housing Authority um residents um chumford high school students we had semi-structured interviews with um chumford residents identified through community Comm service um we had a um we did have some Outreach to the um one of the shelters that was in town um and we targeted EJ neighborhoods with survey and event Flyers making sure that they were they um were aware of the um the survey and Outreach efforts that we're we're making um and this is feedback from uh for U this information is uh the Outreach information that we gather from this group is some that's typically not um part of the normal um town hall meeting or um it's usually an UND under represented uh voice so um with the survey that that we were discussing we heard um there were three um three topics that kept coming up throughout the survey um accessible amenities recreational programming and better Communications so um we talked about the Outreach data just now um we also take into consideration what the existing plans are what um you know what the uh master plan says about um various topics in town um and then we take into consideration to the community and environmental data and we synthesize this data dat and that that creates the um analysis of needs um so through that process we identified um the resource protections need needed uh flood mitigation and store Water Management uh Water Resource protection wildlife habitat and biodiversity um climate in climate resilient infrastructure and public education on resource protection as far as a community needs um recreational opportunities were identified um connectivity and access um were a major theme equity and inclusion um climate adapted amenities agricultural lands and youth and Sport senior engagement um so the um statement of purpose and goals the statement of purpose um is basically summary of what we heard and what are what the goals that were drafted um represent so the the statement of purpose was that Chelmsford strives to create a future that prioritizes sustainable land use Equitable Recreation access and resilience to climate change by expanding and protecting Open Spaces the town aims to Foster accessibility enhance the quality of life and build a community that thrives for generations to come so the development of the um of the goals utilizes the analysis of needs um to develop the the goals and the the um statement of purpose um after the goals are identified and prioritized um we try to find a path to achieve the goals we create objectives and action mods to make those goals um attainable so with that we'll go through there are um five main goals in the in the plan the first goal is to increase um Community engagement with open space so the objectives that we have we had five objectives um it's to enhance communication about the town's resources and activities expand public education uh programs on environmental historical and recreational topics improve information access engage youth through um environmental programs and strengthen Partnerships and relationships with non-governmental organizations engaged in open space and recreational efforts the second goal is to enhance um accessibility and promote equity in Open Spaces to uh the objectives are to ex expand accessible trails and safety features um improve physical access through sidewalks and Trail connections and to focus investments in underserved neighborhoods the third goal to improve climate resilience through strategic land uses the five objectives are to prioritize um land conservation and climate vulnerable areas protect drinking water quality adapt open spaces for climate change identify opportunities for local food production and increase public awareness of open space benefits goal four to maintain upgrade and Steward Community spaces for high quality conservation Recreation ecological and agricultural uses um we identified four objectives they were to develop comprehensive Land Management and maintenance plans to explore opportunities to upgrade facilities for improved safety and comfort for active and passive Recreation to Foster Community stewardship and to identify farmlands of local importance and protect them to limit loss um the the last goal that we had was to expand recreational opportunities and Facilities investigate the development of flexible multi-use Open Spaces to serve a a broad range of community recreation needs explore uh costs and potential for development of new playgrounds amenities and recreational facilities to meet uh the community and neighborhood demands to explore potential amenities that that meet the needs of the community and to provide additional Recreation programming to serve residents of all ages within the community um so again what the probably the most important section of the plan is the implementation section which is section n um it's a five-year action plan um and it aligns the goals objectives and actions um it also identifies responsible party um initiation priority and potential funding sources so each goal has underneath them the objectives and then potential action items um that can could be used to um support the objective and the goal um each of those um breaks down again who the responsible party is or parties um and then prioritizes when the um the action should take place and then uh the final column there is potential funding ources um so that's kind of a a rough uh breakdown of um how the plan is what the structure is and um kind of the background as to why it's important for for the town um so if anyone has any questions they'll be happy to answer them now um yeah I would be interested if you're in a position to speak on it um for uh to understand a little bit better the agricultural aspect of this I think we all recognize that it's not a farm town anymore on the other hand uh I saw commentary in here that talked about limiting the loss but how about going the other way we have lands in town that some of which could be reasonably used in agriculture what are the plans as represented here um there really aren't any plans that they're their objectives yeah but objectives yeah and there there are a couple um I know one plan is you know even the Community Gardens to um to potentially expand Community Gardens or yeah that would certainly be a very good thing yeah y um but I was asking more in terms of larger pieces of land and and slightly more uh aggressive agriculture yep the the plan um kind of gives criteria as to to what um would be useful um and the fact that um we don't want a net loss which is happening you know every every year um and to potentially add add so it's not um I I I think if we were to say to expand agriculture um without kind of having without having um an entity or or people that are looking to advance it's kind of a tough um certainly you you don't do that in a vacuum yeah so does the plan have um look at different areas of town and identify these areas would be good for this type of you know satisfy this goal or this objective or that sort of thing yep it outlines certain certain areas that um like around Wellhead protection or um or or uh areas prone for flooding um those are identified as potential okay so more by descriptive criteria something like that not like a specific on a map on a map this area we'd like to do central because don't don't for affordable housing don't they actually identify these areas would be good for affordable housing that sort of thing correct and so the osr as I understand it the osrp plan committee did not want to identify any specific Parcels right okay okay I can understand why not yeah yeah just wanted to know that was the case um another question I had was um uh there was was there a discussion about basically looking to as far as you know the kinds of things that we deal with where open space most often would come into play as if there is an application where we feel there should be some open space on the property to you know you know accommodate uh basically provide something for the residents that are going to be there like I say if it's a multiple residential kind of thing so was that considered in terms of saying yeah an objective is that you know as we as we you know develop new areas that we want to make sure there's some kind of open space included in that it it didn't specifically because with like a say multif family residential development that's part of the project and the we're looking at more um broad open space um we're we're talking more whole Parcels but we did reference that there's an equity mapping um section of of the plan that gets into the issues of um where there are areas that that lack um parks and other recreational amenities um and trying to Target those areas for um open space and Recreation um uh purchase or um you know providing different amenities in in those to those areas so where would that be in the plan um good question I you can you can you can you can say later yeah it's it's more like you know if somebody comes before us and we say hey we want you to have some open space it'd be nice if you could point to something and say because our osrp says dot dot dot and and so that's what that's what I'm looking for yeah uh it does get to the the issue that where there are a lot of um multif Family developments that maybe aren't uh that don't have as much land per person per capita that we need need to provide more in those areas okay Evan has the slide up where has the map it's part of goal two I think yeah and on the map the um the areas that are outlined in that brown those are the um the census block groups that are um the environmental justice um neighborhoods so we we did an analysis um with access points and and walking um in where there's sidewalk connection um to see exactly what um what amenities the the residents of those those areas have um available to them any other questions I just wanted to say thanks to Mike for his help on the MBTA was deeply appreciated Anita and dudra are online now okay good dudra Anita do you guys have any questions or comments no I also would like to thank Mike for his hard work on this project in addition to the MBTA um and I mean I I I feel like it's a very good um place to start I mean it seems like from what Mike mentioned about you know potentially procuring additional spaces or maybe even transferring use of spaces that are already possibly could be used as opener agricultural that aren't currently like there's places we could go with this further but it's a very good um working document I would say yeah I would like to thank Mike and and the rest of the ncog representatives the committee um it's a great analysis um for me I think the key is the implementation piece of it that I know concom is is going to be looking at next my biggest concern is um trying to implement this stuff as we go into some tight budget years um that's going to be the biggest challenge so I think grant funding as you mentioned earlier in the presentation is going to be critical to a lot of pieces of this um so hopefully that'll be available for the town yeah and there are some low low hanging fruit action items that um are basically um you know communication improvements um so so as Mike mentioned uh you're looking for a motion to um sign a letter of support correct I I would certainly make that motion motion by Mike second second by with enthusias I might add we got put the word enthusiasm into that letter and with two members on Zoom we are doing a roll call so I start this section Mike I I I you're not voting I'm not voting dearra hi and Anita hi right got it great thank you thank you Evan I know Mike gave you a letter I could if it's I don't have it with me tonight we'll uh Mike's going to email to me and we'll get it out okay sounds good thank thank you all right next up on the agenda is the proposed lighting bylaw uh I don't see Kelly uh with us at this point all right do we want to uh table that for the moment and come back to it a little later uh flood plane bylaw updates Evan so uh no major updates here I just wanted to um put it on the agenda to let the board know that I continue to uh work through the final details with the FEMA flood plane coordinator um so this is probably uh final working draft there are several uh uh remaining details that need to be worked out uh before it is uh finalized uh as you recall we're targeting um Springtown meeting uh along with several other um planning board uh Warren articles before we leave tonight um we should probably discuss um when the board is interested in um opening that that that public hearing for flood plane the miscellaneous MBTA articles in the um deletion of the existing um illumination bylaw that's a um an Associated component of what uh Kelly Bey is um is sponsoring so you have um my suggestion is maybe your second meeting in February or any meeting in March uh just understand that the board is scheduled to sign the warrant on Monday February 24th I think as we as as we all have discussed um the flood plane is kind of a take it or leave it there isn't much to debate or discuss particularly on town meeting floor the MBTA miscellaneous ones are housekeeping pretty straightforward and then on the outdoor illumination it's a deletion of existing uh zoning bylaw text the point there is that normally we're concerned that once the board signs the warrant that we don't want any major changes for these three articles I wouldn't expect there to be any changes for that matter so I think you're probably safe to open uh late February or even into March for an April town meeting didn't we have something coming up on the 26 that we were 26 you have Kate's Corner Kate's Corner okay and then as of right now there are no new uh regulatory um projects in the queue okay and then on on these three we have to open a separate public hearing for each one it'll be it be advertised as as one hearing but three separate um items yeah uh because they're three separate articles okay de and committee do you think the 26 would be a good meeting for these I mean I think it's tight I think it's tight but yeah is is there any possibility of doing it at the earlier meeting is there any particular reason why that would not be a good thing the February 12th yeah except that we're like mean my thought was February 12th uh you likely be um either closing or issuing decisions for the two regulatory projects that are currently in front of you the 26 says Kate's Corner uh you could open these public hearings on the 26th um and then March I think is you know pretty pretty free and clear yeah but we still need the final version of the flood plane yeah you'll have the final probably uh by the 12th so I can put that on the agenda for February 12th um we'll definitely have the final version yeah Anita you were going to say something I think the 26 is doable yeah it might be good to have the um I'm thinking if we finalize the lighting in the flood plane on the 12th and then have the public hearing for all of them on the 26th I think we could do it in one night and then close it I don't see a ton of discussion happening on those especially if we finalize it on the the meeting before D are you okay with that sounds great okay all right let's do that then okay you want to move on to contined public hearings and maybe um Kelly will Jo be joining us yep so the next item on the agenda is 65 dunable Road it's a continuation of the uh public hearing um do we have Doug I believe Doug wanted to Doug Duan is on Zoom okay yes Mr chairman I'm ready when you are okay take it away Doug all right um uh Mr chairman members of the board good evening uh Douglas desan from ferin and Nicholson representing um Chris and Kelly Sullivan uh with regard to their property at 65 uh Dunstable Road uh as the board will recall um you have previously approved um a special permit and site plan to allow for the development of a 2unit residential structure and Associated site improvements at 65 dunable road which is within your seid um District um however you'll also recall that the original design called for uh side load garages uh which were going to be accessed over an easement um across the neighbors property uh the reason for that design was that at the time we understood that we needed to provide onsite sewage Disposal Systems or system um uh to support the structure however subsequent to the approvals it was determined that in fact this lot had um paid whatever betterments are were necessary and that there was in fact uh capacity allotted to this lot uh so my client decided that it would be u a good idea uh to redesign the structure to be front-facing in other words both the garage doors and the front door to the residents will be facing uh Dunstable Road which is certainly uh in compliance or consistent with uh the way the rest of the neighborhood is uh laid out um and in doing so we really feel we were able to better situate the project uh the the the structure on the lot uh we meet all of your uh dimensional requirements and restrictions setbacks height uh lot coverage um and in fact we meet the most stringent of the applicable dimensional requirements uh as you know within the seid you can by um by special permit actually reduce those setbacks but uh in fact we didn't need to we just um we were able to more than exceed all of the restrictions so after our first meeting the board had a number of questions uh we were awaiting uh comments from the DPW and you'll recall that at the last moment we received a letter from one of our Butters Mr Duffy who had concerns about the drainage and potential impacts to his property so um in talking with staff and and talking with my client we decided it would be best to seek a continuance uh from that last meeting to allow us to address those so thank you for accommodating Us in this uh in that continuance request so I'm now here hopefully to provide you um all of the answers to those questions uh we'll start with Mr Duffy um uh there's a letter that's been submitted from Hancock Associates uh addressing our work with Mr Duffy um my client Mr Sullivan along with our engineer uh John Riley um and again I apologize uh I Mr uh Sullivan and Mr Riley are there uh this evening and and will be looking I'll be looking to them to answer questions but um Mr Sullivan and um Mr Riley met or had a conversation with Mr Duffy who um expressed the fact that he in fact had um uh cons greater concerns with regard to flooding and that the flooding of his property is really a larger problem with the surrounding areas and that he agreed that our project as proposed would not cause an increase in flooding uh to his property however to further ensure that the project does not add to his current situation um we agreed that we would um run the roof drains from the proposed DW dwelling and tie them into the uh drainage system within unable Road fortunately there just happens to be a catch Basin directly in front of the property that will serve as the tie-in point and as I understand from Mr Riley and Mr gau's letter um the the Department of Public Works has verbally confirmed that this is a viable option and that the submitted plans have been refi uh Revis to reflect this acceptable change so um we're glad we took the time to to talk with Mr Duffy address his concerns and then provide him some accommodation to provide him additional assurances um as I mentioned we were waiting to have um to Reed comments from the DPW um they had originally made some con comments about our separation between utility lines uh and they had some other minor comments and Grading comments um we have subsequently modified the plans um and submitted those with a letter from Hancock addressing all of the different um questions and issues that DPW had and as I understand DPW has reviewed those revisions and no longer has concerns uh with the project um there was another uh comment letter from the tax successor questioning whether Mr uh Sullivan had paid the taxes on this separate lot um in fact I understand my client did in fact go into the assessor's office he made sure that all the taxes had been up to date and we provided evidence um that the taxes are in fact up to date um the next set of comments were from the water district um they also had uh issues with the way we were going to connect uh the public water supply to the two units they wanted them piped separately uh so again uh we revised the plans uh we submitted them um for review and we have not heard that the water district is not satisfied uh with those minor modifications they just wanted to make sure that we ran the water lines in a particular manner so it was pretty easy to satisfy that um you'll also recall that the board had some questions uh relating to the Landscaping tree removal Al and potential for um the planting of additional trees on the site and one of the biggest areas of concern was uh our neighbor to the right uh you recall that that home was originally owned by Mr Sullivan he subsequently sold it however he did meet with the um president uh Mrs niogi or narog I apologize if I'm um I'm pronouncing it incorrectly um but she was kind enough to send us a letter which we submitted uh whereby she said that uh she's in support of the project she has no concerns and in fact um she would prefer that we left the area between the proposed building and the um and the property at 61 dunable open um she said that she you know we offered her fencing plantings uh but she prefers to have it open especially now where we're not going to be loading in the side garage that way it'll be a an open space grass lawn between the properties and um you know she's very comfortable with that she did say that if um time came where they thought a fence or or additional plannings would be helpful um they asked Mr Sullivan if they would have you know get permission to put those in or if he would work with them and and they've come to an agreement that but at this point um M noroi um does not want to see any additional uh plantings between the property she likes the idea of it being open um we also provided you an updated landscape plan uh there were questions about what vegetation was going to be removed what was going to be added and again the question of um uh Landscaping between those two homes um as you'll see from the landscape plan that we submitted we are removing one large tree uh out along dunable Road it it quite frankly sits dead center to where the driveways are need to go but we so we are proposing that one tree removal we have um we have um not proposed to remove any other existing uh uh trees um we are going to remove a row of arraes that are um currently existing to the to the left of the existing garage which is also dead center in the new new uh structure so we will be removing those aritis uh to the extent they could be moved around and replanted we'll take a look at that but it's probably going to be difficult to try and replant those um other than that we are not proposing to touch any of the trees in the back of the uh proposed dwelling uh we are not proposing to touch any of the existing tree line which runs along the back of the property adjacent to Mr Duffy's property or to the left of the property uh which um uh where there's an existing tree line now so we're not touching any of the tree line along two sides of the property um um at all so again not a lot going on as far as our removal of trees um but then again there's uh no idea uh no plan for additional plannings as um as the board asked us to look into so um lastly um the the board had some questions and I apologize for my confusion um but they wanted to know exactly what this building as proposed is was going to be in terms of height in terms of stories um so we did provide an updated set of architectural drawings which you will note um uh does provide the heights of the building as it is defined by the chumford zoning bylaw uh and although we are in a zone that allows for four stories and 45 ft uh we are proposing three stories and 35 ft which will meet the uh residential height restrictions uh in you know the adjacent res idential uh District so I think you know in addressing your concerns and and answering the questions uh I think we've made it clear that this building uh is certainly uh in many ways an improvement over the originally approved building I think it's going to fit more um better with the neighborhood as far as being front-facing uh and being only 35 ft tall um if you look down dille road heading to towards uh North chumford Center um that's when you see that the uh commercial business buildings start to come into play and you know a short distance down from where we are proposing this building there is uh a number of uh three-story buildings which exceed uh 35 ft so we will by no means be the largest or tallest uh building in that General District um and in fact we meet the residential own a requirement for the height so uh I think we've tightened things up I hope we have answered all your questions uh but again uh Mr Sullivan and Mr Riley are there with you um to answer any engineering or um other numbers associated with the plans uh which can be shown and I'm here to answer any other questions you might have so with that Mr chairman I appreciate your time and uh we're here to answer any further questions the board might have thank you Evan did you have anything else I don't have anything okay all right we'll go around um Mike any questions comments I don't have any particular questions here I think we covered a lot of it last time okay John I don't have any questions after we do planning board comments would you like me to read those two letters in there any a butter letter into the record that ref okay Mike uh no questions all my comments all my questions have been answered Joel no questions questions drra any questions yeah just one one quick easy one um how many Arbor VY are going to be removed or probably removed um I I if you look on the landscape plan they they kind of identify it as a row of bar I they kind of just grown into this stra row um so I I can't tell you the exact number um but um you know it's a it's it's a a hedge that runs about the full width of the proposed building so if I jump over to the building plan I can at least tell you how many or how wide that is um oh boy it's not even that easy to uh attend would you like me to answer this question yeah Chris sure I Liv there for about 20 years so um so there's there's about four big arbues about I don't know five by 5T tall and they would be obviously going right where the footprint of the building is so we will try to replan them and reuse them but they unfortunately have to go okay thank you anything else Tira okay Anita no okay I've got a few questions um on that Landscaping plan if you look at the left set of trees it looks like trees are coming out of that left um section uh the the GR out piece of the tree line goes out further towards the house than the new tree line so it absolutely looks like there are trees coming out of that left side y uh so I believe sorry um John Riley Hancock Associates I believe there's some lower line kind of shrubs underneath the trees that are there so the symbols where the trees are obviously are shot and located whereas that I believe if you look at street view is kind of a lower Ling Bush okay which is not going to be impacted okay and then I was just trying to show with the darker line connect the dots on the trees okay thank you um the other question or concern I had um or one of the other ones is the prior Arch the prior architecture plans the layout has a loft floor but the current ones have that Loft floor removed but the same height is there going to be a loft floor above that third floor there's no it's an it's an attic it's not a livable space is it an enclosed Attic So that it's front to back there's no stairs to it it's a pull down kind of attic just like can get access to it okay so the the front the front bedrooms are are not going to be a a loft ceiling it'll be a low flat ceiling yes yes okay um and then the last qu the last thing was um related to the storm water thank you for um addressing those storm water concerns uh that is appreciated across the street there is storm water Culvert um almost directly across from the property that looks like it's feeding Down Under the Street and going somewhere based on the videos that we've seen from the abutter MR Duffy there's some significant water flow coming from that underground area I did talk to him a little bit and he did have the DPW out there they did see I believe it was uh Sheila from the DPW did see significant water flowing um and he told me that she was going to um open uh a an investigation into the cause with the covert directly across and the water flowing I know that it's probably not directly from this property but it would be great if while the excavation is happening for this property if you could work with the DPW to figure out what the potential cause of the I'm assuming leak or something and then if there is something under the property that the DPW can fix while it's being developed I think that would be a good yeah thing to do uh for coordinating potential fixes between the the various parties yeah no problem no problem okay I think that would be a good thing to coordinate with the DPW on so if we could somehow track that so if there's some Culvert leak or something like that that's causing this that it might be able to be repaired while the excavation is happening for this project and that might help the uh Mr Duffy's issue as well um okay that's all the concerns I have if you want to read the letters oh sure so we have a letter dated January 8th 2025 from the Department of Public Works Sheila Joyce project engineer of the planning board I'm going to paraphrase due to the length and the fact that these are available publicly in the agenda um site plan review outstanding DPW engineering issues not addressed based on the comment letter from from Hancock Associates dated December 17th 2024 DPW site plan review concerns have been satisfied sore comments no increase to the town of chsf sore infrastructure shall be more than 500 gallons per day this project proposes two two-bedroom duplexes uh recommended General conditions of approval is listed in previous letter dated December 6 2024 remain pertinent to this project then we have an email from Anthony Ruchi Town engineering division uh dated January 21st 2025 to Becky D Silva um request for comments 65 dunable Road hi Becky the DPW does not have any additional comments I spoke with Hancock the other day and can confirm that the roof leaders can be tied into the town's drainage system with a license contractor as they have agreed to do this and all of the DPW comments recommended for approval from December we do not have any additional comments thank you Tony and then we have um a new the abutters letter uh from Ruth n George or nroi 61 dunable Road dear planning board this is Ruth nroi the owner of 61 dunable Road Chris and Kelly Sullivan sold me their home a few years back the transaction was very smooth and I'm very happy with them being my neighbor I fully support the construction of the two family next door to me I would much rather a nice two family go in next door than a commercial building that would be very weird in the neighborhood I have seen the drawings and love the style of the home Chris asked me if I could write a letter of support for the project one of the items in question is if I would like a fence or bushes put up between the property lines I do not require this at time of construction and feel there is adequate space between the homes for privacy if in the future fut I decide to build a fence I put bushes in Chris said that is okay with him uh side note currently Chris and his oldest son takes care of my Landscaping in my yard for me they do a great job and keep everything perfect there is no doubt they will do a great job with the Landscaping next door with the new project hope this seases your concern thank you Evan I noticed on the prior decision there was a special condition about a $500 fee or something uh traffic mitigation special condition was likely for uh creation of new parking spaces maybe is that still applicable in this case yep okay so we should probably carry it over yeah to the new yeah I mean we'll carry um we'll carry you know all applicable conditions okay um are there any special conditions that people would like to think about on this one the one I would like to add um if it's okay with the applicant is that no trees on that left property line be removed without coming back to the board or bringing it up to uh the tree Warden anything else from folks uh do we want a motion now or do we want to uh get a draft uh I'd like to see a draft first um just to be consistent with what we usually do yeah um we do it both ways Evan what special permits for this one I think at this point it was just the um parking within the front yard I know the legal ad references several others but I believe those have um I think they're no longer applicable okay so we would we would only be you're issuing site plan and uh seid and then that uh the uh uh front yard parking within the front yard okay so that's what we'd be voting on okay um so at this point uh Evan if you could draft the decision and we can vote on that next meeting um February 12th February 12th okay so at this point I would entertain public comments first are there any comments from the public anyone on Zoom not for this and I will move to close the public hearing or do you want to close it or continue it let's continue it till next meeting okay i' be glad to do that too all right motion from Mike to continue the public hearing until next meeting second second from John and we'll do roll call Mike hi John hi Mike hi Joel hi Anita onute hi dearra hi and I am an i unanimous we'll continue to next meeting thank you gentlemen thank you very much Mr chairman and members of the board we appreciate your time so Kelly Bey has joined us um I don't know if you want to take that up now or or um take up payet and then go back to Kelly yeah why don't we take up pet first and then go back to Kelly after okay all right we have Casey for four palot Drive good evening uh Casey Faro with Howard Stein Hudson um so I want to start off by saying you did not receive a full updated pack P AG you receive two exhibits uh these exhibits are based on the conversations that we had at concom unfortunately with the alternating schedule for this month we got those comments back on Tuesday with a deadline to submit back to you guys on Wednesday um so we didn't give you the full package or everything that we promised what we did was we took the comments that um concom had which required us to revise the plan at least to some extent um and we provided that back to you in an exhibit plan just for discussion so we don't we're not expecting a vote tonight what we what Our intention is is to make sure that you guys also agree that this is um still in the same direction that you guys agreed with two weeks ago um we'll meet back with concom again next week uh to show them the same thing I'm going to show you guys tonight and then hopefully in the first set of meetings of February we can close this out and uh hopefully have an approval so what I do uh a little bit of background is so we went to concom um last Tuesday for the most part the reception was the same um it is a better plan improved with the new orientation um one hump that we couldn't get past Was the removal of trees without replacing them um one of the items that came up was all of the space that we had left on the site was being used for one function or another whether it was storm water conveying storm water which would then you know drown most plants or for snow storage which you're going to dump snow onto freshly planted bushes and then kill them anyway so I talked uh with our client here the applicant the new plan what we want to do CU it's probably the best place to be able to plant new plantings we're just going to take all the asphalt that Castor paved several years ago we're going to remove it and use that area um to plant new plantings in the amount um that we're removing now in doing so removing all that pavement actually took us from a development project to a Redevelopment project so the storm water standards became less stringent um we maintained the pond that we had so we could maintain the significant decrease in the flooding and the significant decrease in the flow um it's just not as big uh by reducing the size of that pond and still maintaining those reductions we also reduce the number of or the extent of the development so instead of removing 16 trees behind that fence now we're down to removing just eight trees which are basically in a line from the top of the property to the bottom of the property and those trees are falling essentially where the pond is going to be and then also the conveyant soil that goes around the pond um in an effort to be more in keeping with conservation's concerns we're still going to replant 16 tree or 16 Plants we're not going to plant 16 trees but we're going to have 16 Plants replanted um I believe we're talking two trees that we're going to plant and then 14 bushes that are native uh that can survive in the habitat that we're going to put them in um so as far as the idea of the plan that is essentially the the revisions that you've seen um we're adding to the operational maintenance plan snow removal uh so we'll show and dictate exactly where snow removal or snow storage is allowed and not allowed um we're going to we added in Curbing and then also pay markings into that operation maintenance plan that way we have a consistent um or at least a yearly lookover of all of the features of that site to make sure that stuff is still in working order and functioning properly um one of the other items that you'll see in the new package is we're going to add in or we did add in the the recycle bins that are in the front they're two wheeled recycle bins they're going to be added and and put in permanently right next to where the trash enclosure is um um they're they're on Wheels so essentially they're going to have to be wheeled out to where the truck is going to be for the recycle you know um but that'll be part of the agreement with the with the recycling company that maintains it um beyond that uh you'll see a new revision package hopefully in the coming days and we'll hopefully get a good sign off from concom next week and then we can move forward into the early February meetings open for questions Evan anything from you no not not at this time okay we'll go around in reverse order to this time thanks um I know last week um it was brought up a couple times about a little closer sorry um about the fencing and so it was asked if seen it I actually did go out this week and take a look at that fencing is in poor shape and would highly recommend that that fencing be repaired or replaced um in this project because I can see um it causing creating lots of problems with the residents on dunsh trash being sent through there um you know we say there's going to be a spot for snow removal but I can see snow getting pushed up against that and taking that down which fence are you talking about the one along the dun dunshire side there's going to be no snow storage allowed on that side just fly but um I don't entirely agree I think the fence is in at least shape where you can repair it with the panels that we're removing um but I'm open for other comments and seeing how the board the board as a majority feels well I agree with Marcy I went out there too and I looked at the fence and I said that fence has got to be replaced um but I want to ask um so is the bottom l so what exactly is the plan for the um for the is that a retention Basin is an infiltration base and what the same an infiltration Bas in that it always was smaller so so it so I mean which one is it you're proposing or is that is that the question is that you have two different Alternatives what do you mean which one we're going to move forward with this this design that you see here the smaller infiltration where is it so which because in the at least in the plans that I was looking at was attached it showed what we we saw last week which was that you had the basically the the uh overflow that was heading directly D directly to the right can you go down to the grading plan the last last sheet uh yes so just to walk you through the idea here so this is about half the width that the previous one was so this is the one you're proposing this is the current proposal so instead of now because we don't have to fight the flow and we don't have to fight the volume to the extent that we did before we don't need the outlet structure that's sending the pipe out um but in order to still get the elevations that we need to be able to outlet it the outlet has to be on this bottom side right and the reason that you're doing that is because concom doesn't want you to remove those eight trees correct we want well kcom was okay with the removal of the eight trees but with the condition that we replace the trees that we're removing but in doing so we found the only place we could adequately plant new trees would be up where that pavement is being removed right which changes the storm water regulations that we have to meet right so I don't want to I don't want to put you into a pickle but I don't like this plan I liked the previous plan and the reason I liked the previous plan was it was better suited to accommodate what what understand to be experiencing quite a bit of flow and because particularly the Overflow was was directed towards the Wetland not towards this that sort of between the dunure and and Road properties on this property and I also looked at the trees because I and it was an interesting question and I'm not convinced that those trees are of such value to us that I would say that this is a better plan at least as far as the functions for well let me offer this then we can go back to the outlet control structure that we had before have the pipe go to where the pipe was going previously and still have the outlet on the side so we could go back to that we didn't need it anymore for flow and volume but we can use it to prevent the the Weir on the plan southern side I I that would that's that's my concern my concern is that the flow be directed towards the Wetland not towards the dunure properties that's that's really my conc so we can add back in basically the I'll say Outlet orientation of the previous design um yeah and would that be a happy medium for you know the revised Pawn but still the same outling strategy well for that but also I mean it is basically it's smaller right so it's not handling as much water as it was before correct correct and the reason that you're doing that is because actually your requirements have gone down because of the Redevelopment I prefer the earlier one because I think given given all the issues we've had in this area I think having the ability to handle greater volume of water is a good idea not a bad idea and well you also have to there's a reduction overall going to that whole drainage system and ecosystem down there and the reduction of over 5,000 square ft of pavement true that's true that's true uh but I haven't looked at the numbers closely enough to see just exactly relationship very short okay then I'll take a know I'll I'll I'll well I do have I I can give you the numbers I have them I just haven't submitted them to you um overall so the previous plan had an approximate reduction of 100 cubic feet in the 100e storm event this has a reduction of 1,728 cubic feet so a reduction overall of almost let's say 15x well I still I mean you know I'm going to want to look at the numbers so I will I want to do that but um but those are that's certainly my concern is one the ability to handle you know volumes of water and two the the outlet uh for the um for the majority of the flow being towards the I'm okay with the the pipe that makes sense having to go there I wasn't against that before but I would like the um the um the Overflow to go towards the Wetland and um and and in my opinion that's of greater value than the trees absolutely but that's my opinion I'm just one vote I was told Mike I have nothing new to add okay John yeah some of some fellow board members mentioned I would support U you know making a condition about the fence I think now is the goal and time to if you're going to make all these other improvements at this property um once it gets to a certain point I don't think you can bring it back so I would support that that's all for me Mike well I guess I don't really care how the fence gets fixed whether it gets torn down and rebuilt or whether it's built with the pieces that are there uh as long as the result is the same so I'm perfectly happy to let the applicant make that decision subject to our going over there and saying hey wait a minute if that doesn't work I I kind of agree with Joel a bit on the volume of the pond but I'm not deeply wetted to it and I don't want to get us to get into a pushing match with the concom uh and to some degree this is concom territory a little bit more than ours in my opinion so whatever they require or are happy with I think we should probably accept as long as it's not outlandish okay Anita I'm in favor of requiring a fence um and I agree with Joel um about um this plan I'm wondering if maybe Chris did you attend the comcom discuss this yep so and were you able to yeah the the concom concom was in a little bit of a quandry too because it wasn't just concom but residents wanted um restoration of some trees um there was a feeling of of the fact that we were disturbing too much of the wetlands in this project the problem is like Casey said there's no other place on that other uh plan to put trees um so I think it was a a wish from the concom to try and figure out a a solution um but there wasn't a there wasn't a a feeling that there might be an easy solution um when I saw these plans I was shocked cuz I wasn't expecting this change at all um after the kcom meeting um so how so what you mean how so do you like you weren't expecting these changes smaller Pond I I wasn't expecting that pavement to be going away um so I think based on the feedback that concom gave and I think they're going to be happy with this plan but that's just my my gut feeling I think the amount of pavement that's being removed is significant on this plan and I think that'll address their concerns okay anything else that's all I have okay dearer did we lose drra no sorry I was I was muted I'm pleased that the pavement is going away um though I didn't see that happening at all I'm surprised pleasantly I'm pleased that the trees will be um moved or replaced um I'm generally pleased with the plan in terms of the work that's been done and the compromises that have been achieved um so I I'm um generally happy with the plan and I also think that the fence needs to be either repaired or replaced or something but in a way that's workable for all okay um from my perspective I agree with Joel's um recommendation of putting the pipe back in and moving the Weir uh Direction um I agree with the the fence I if it can be repaired to its wholeness I think that's fine um but if not then I would like to see it um replaced or at least sections replaced so that the entire thing is somehow whole again AL so what I'm thinking on that front is I would like to go down a route where we could go with we want to fix it and have you guys look back on it and make sure it's to what you guys would want but I can't figure out where the protection for the board would be in that scenario um because I know that's going to be important to the board is not just giving us the permission to fix it but you also need a way to bring us back to do it the way you want it if you didn't like it in the end um so if anybody has any ideas on that I'm I'm willing to hear it we we can specify height we can specify that there shall be a fence a continuous fence a continuous fence of new and old panels of whatever it is I don't I don't think we should we should mess around with well so that's I mean that's the proposal that we have regardless is that we are going to use the old panels to go through and make sure that the the fence is continuous every missing panel is replaced any place that as rotten or crack panels gets replaced that's still the proposal that we have in front of you as part of these plans yeah um so I think we just need to say there shall be a fence and leave it at that um I I am I'm sorry which which panels were you were you going to use there's a there's a rear fence that goes across that's being completely removed that goes across it's the same it's the same fencing around this yeah where exactly is this okay there's a rear fence that's getting completely yeah I remember seeing the rear fence okay and that's the one that you're going to use using it's the same exact fence same exact height same exact material so we're using all those panels or you know pieces of the panels to basically reinstall along that was the plan from the beginning okay yeah I I still don't think they look great sorry but we can put that in the condition I mean I mean we can say new fence I you don't think so I just say fence okay you know we should say what and not how okay or in good working order or some language so that it doesn't last like 6 months and then fall over I think the only way you're going to get that is to say a new fence they may find that when they get there well we're not closing anyway so we can think about that a little bit um has castor's agreed to the removal yep so well the first part of that is this is under landc Court property anyway so even if Castor wanted to claim adverse possession they couldn't um but then second we did approach Castor the new owners of the the building and they were completely supportive of it um basically said that you know we're going to give them so as part of the plan as well is a gravel strip that goes along the what the new edge of payment's going to be that's going to act in a couple manners it's going to be Edge protection for the pavement so it doesn't just crack away it's going to stop their storm water runoff or at least be able to mitigate some of it so it doesn't just come off and aod all the dirt um but then on a third it's going to help their truck turn around the building so it's going to give them the 24 foot that they would otherwise had excellent um the only other comment that I had and I don't want to throw a monkey wrench into your plan as I was looking at this plan and looking at the snow storage y I was realizing how are you going how are they going to plow the snow into the snow storage areas with cars parked in those spots well I mean in a lot of scenarios in a lot of buildings what they do is they notify the residents when they're coming in to do the snow removal and they have to remove like I've lived in condos and town houses before they come out and you have to move your car for that time being when they're plowing yeah [Music] okay all right any other questions or comments [Music] all right we'll open it up for public input more moile this week all right a couple things um I had a lot more to say before I heard all the stuff today Fernandez s Fernandez 27 dunshire Drive um when I looked at the plan the other day I had a lot more comments and I'm glad to hear a lot of the stuff that came up today one of the things I want to mention is at the conservation meeting Casey was tasked with thinking outside the box to come up with another way when I first opened up this plan my Hope was that area that was having the pavement removed would be restored back to being you know I've heard of the conservation meetings all the time where they come in and they bring in Wetland plants buffer plants you know stuff that's native to that area and that would give back to that area and I agree with Joel about the trees that are there that they're talking about not removing those things are inundated with Bittersweet there's a lot of that in our area I know we've been fighting it for years I don't think those should be there anymore um I think they're going to fall down I I liked the plan that was here previously with the size I think it's very interesting that previously they weren't including these pavement areas because they said it wasn't their fault all the stuff that was happening wasn't their issue but now that they're removing the pl the pavement all of a sudden they're using that to their advantage to make the retention Pond smaller so I just find that interesting with everything that we've been discussing um I'm looking forward again to see some of the updates they're making like changing the we to come out to the side um and I know that we were talking about we talked a little bit about this and I think we talked about the side being changed they're also removing the burm that was there that they said was going to push the water towards the wetlands that's gone I believe in the new plan so it'll be interesting to see if that comes back um they talked about the recycling I'll look forward to see that I didn't notice it in the current plan but maybe I wasn't looking at the right section so it'll be good for me to see what they're doing to make sure that's not blocking the parking lot um we talked a little bit about the snow storage again I haven't seen the updated onm plan but I'm looking forward to see what that is I would like to still ask that there's a sign placed along the dunshire drive section of where the snow's going to be pushed just because when somebody's plowing they're not looking at the O onm plan so I'd like to see that um we talked about the outlet facing towards us I'm glad that we're talking about not having that happen cuz that would just add to we're dealing with today um on the drawing itself I notice if we're in the Fireland section um they note on the drawing that the fire LS to be striped but on the no parking section there's nothing on the drawing saying that that's going to be striped I'd like to ask that that gets added in just to be clear there was discussion that the striping itself would be brought up in the onm looking forward to that as well um the other thing that I would just like to ask for and this thing is because we're making all these changes to this culvert KAC I know that we keep on talking about not lining out the spaces but when they do the snow removal what's going to happen they're all going to park out in that section again they're going to park perpendicular it's going to happen we're making changes to this PL this kvasac as well by adding the fire lane by adding the no parking zone why can't we add the parallel parking spaces it's not that much lines they were lining the property with their parking spaces for years so I know that we keep on coming back to say you know not you know they don't want to do it but why so let's kind of like I said I'm looking forward to see what this looks like cuz right now it's I don't know what this final lot is going to look like so this is it thank you Casey could you address the um question of the the BM I'm unclear on which burm we're talking about if we're talking about the burm that's up adjacent to the pond preventing what used to be the Castor parking well we're adding a sale in between there that's why I meant the sale yeah so there's still a s there so the sale still is there okay the S that's coming here coming around this one 101 gets pulled up so all the low side comes down here you have a portion of 103 that's remaining so you have a 101 to a 103 so there's a two foot that's going to remain okay and then in the on M can you confirm that the the striping will include both and yeah I'm going to add a not to the plan that says that's going to be sted as well and I should have noted there are two signs that's going to be on that bottom dunshire that says no snow storage and then I know DPW is not allowing you to stripe correct clear that they are vly against and will not allow it y all right thanks y Michelle kuto stri witha 19 dunshire drive so I would just like to start with saying thank you so much for listening to us because I know we were like lunatics last meeting um I I we do really feel strongly about the trees the restoration of the the buffer zones um and the amount of wildlife that we have back there so the fact that there is a new plan obviously we just have like a basic picture and we don't have all the backup and truthfully I struggle with reading all that backup up I'm going to defer back to the dpw's engineering department with the new again plan I do understand that when we removed when they're going to remove some of the pavement it's actually a significant amount of pavement that that should allow for better Water Management by the ground and the land rather than just running off into our properties um and the only thing I really had questions on because stha covered pretty much all the other things that I didn't even think about um would be where the plantings are going to go are they going to be like up in the where the pavement was or is it going to be more like along the edges or you know what the plan is for that um and I assume that will show up in the next set of plans if Casey would like to answer he's welcome to but just it's going to it's just going to show up in the pl plans that's fine I'm assuming we're not going to go like okay it's good now and you know it's going to be again another meeting or two or however many meetings it takes to get there but I like I left here initially feeling better and then not and um I'm actually feeling really good about this and that I feel like there is a compromise we never had an issue with what size is the parking lot it's just that in the area that it is there's only so much that can fit in there and we do understand that but also don't want to see the whole buffer zone decimated so thank you very much for all of your give and take and helping us get to a place where I actually feel a lot better about this I don't know about the rest of my neighbors but I'm feeling a lot better thank you thank you I'll just address the one question about the locational Landscaping so I thought I maybe mentioned this before but maybe I didn't um the all the the 16 plantings that we're proposing are all going to be within that previous area of pavement and that's going to be an effort to basically restore that buffer zone area it's not going to be Wetland plants cuz that's not actually a wetland that's the resource uh it's the the buffer zone of that resource area um but it'll be all native plants and you know we want to try to um the the question from concom was habitat related so we're trying to choose things that are going to enhance the habitat that we are trying to replace and knowing that section is in the no pave no disturb and no building buffer concom will be controlling a lot of that detail correct yeah I'm sorry Casey the where you're removing the pavement so you're going to be instead putting plantings there so there's all of this pavement that's uh kind of highlighted here yeah is all off this C parking lot we're going to move everything up to the property line and and what you're putting in place you said something about a gravel something yeah so right along Evan if you go down one plan right so not in place the whole thing there's going to be a 3ft to 7ft strip of gravel so the 7ft strip of gravel is just to achieve the 25 or 24t kind of Drive Val that they had before so that their trucks can still turn around that building and not kind of decimate new plantings that are going to be there but the rest of it is just going to be a 3ft strip of gravel across the whole thing thing and that's basically just to try and mitigate storm water from eroding okay so so you're going from asphalt to this sort of gravel thing and and then plantings so what are what are the runoff numbers that you're basically planted so we're we when we calculated we calculated the remainder of it as grass okay yeah that includes the gravel thing as well corre they're doing that as grass no the the gravel area itself is going to be gravel okay but it's basically um in the calculation it's being used as grass okay okay okay any other public on Zoom yes Michelle Caputo Stark weather 19 dunshire drive back again so my daughter is not feeling well that's why I'm wearing a mask just in case I'm fine but just in case um and I would be remiss if I did not bring up her statement from the other day um that we have a lot of deciduous trees and a lot of leaf leaf fall I can't say it but Leaf fall and that actually adds to the um environment for keeping our Wildlife Area and so of course our request if it's possible is to add at least some deciduous tree or something that's going to have Leaf fall thank you yeah and I'm sure the concom committee will be heavily involved in that and be requesting a lot of that as well if I know Peter he'll be uh all over that oh yeah oh yes he will question sure all right Sia Fernandez 27 dunshire drive just really quick because I know it's been a while since we've talked to the PW about those lines is it possible to Reas them with all the other changes that have happened make like a formal request you know just eliminating those lines and see if they're willing that's all did that did that come up in the meeting that that that big pow I thought it came up with the uh at the work session meeting and I thought correct either Anthony Anthony as as answered it or or Sheila was there as well I how about I send an email and I'll formally request it one more time and we'll I'll submit the email response that we receive thank you thanks thank you Casey okay anything else I just want to say thanks to stha for the excellent review of these filings very thorough and very helpful for us so you might take note that the uh in upcoming elections the alternate position is open all right so I will take a motion to continue this until next meeting be glad to do that okay Mike makes the motion to continue this until the 12th or the 20th February 12th February 12th meeting yeah second John seconds and roll call Joel hi Mike hi John hi Mike hi deardra hi Anita hi and I am and I unanimous continue to next meeting thank you everyone have a great night thank you lighting that was okay so next on the agenda um looks need you are you staying with us you're on mute I need I want to drop off I want to drop off okay for the record Anita is has to leave the meeting and we have Kelly Bey were the lighting bylaw yes I'm here thank you for um I'm sorry for the delay in getting here uh I am somewhere off the coast of Haiti and uh time slipped by I apologize not a problem all these people away I'm not sure I would be calling in myself if wait a minute wait a minute you called in from Italy yeah that was a okay there we go thank you thank you for joining us Kelly all right um would you like to give us a little bit of an overview of what you've been doing since our last discussion yeah for sure um I've had um uh extended discussions with multiple stakeholders um uh the in particular the chord Business Association has been fully briefed on this and and they're they continue to be supportive um and also I had a meeting uh through week three weeks ago or so with with Evan and Mike um to go over the draft Evan's been super supportive and and has made some great suggestions and then finally this has been looked over by two lighting professionals uh one of whom lives in Cher and ironically or fortuitously uh works for an enormous lighting company called signify and she her name is Kelly Seager is uh one of the the um uh management people who is in charge of policies and regulations so go figure um I don't know whether Evan uh distributed the most recent draft that we've come up with uh if it's got the definitions and figures at the beginning which it seems to have then that's the most recent version I left a lot of the side annotations uh which sort of set the stage for why we're doing what what why we're doing what I'm suggesting to do and uh I consider this pretty solid uh Evan gave some some last minute changes just within the last few days which are Incorporated here and um so I I think it's ready for prime time at least for council's inspection okay thank you and anything D no but I think what it may make sense is to send it to council um you know as soon as possible um that way if Council does have suggested changes we're able to make them between now and the 12th and then the opening of the public hearing on the 26th yeah and then just to clarify um either tonight or at some point uh you'll need to work with Kelly to figure out if in fact the planning board is sponsoring the non zoning General bylaw as well maybe it's a a co-sponsor with with Kelly uh in the in the board okay all right yeah and just to put a a Cote on that if if this moves forward forward um then we will have to resend the existing zoning bylaw as a part of the package for approving this at town meeting yeah assum gets that far okay thank you all right we'll take it around Mike any my first comment would be yeah I've I've read it I met with these guys uh I think it's pretty good uh it's quite thorough um and I would suggest that this board consider uh co-p answering it with uh with Kelly I think that might help it along and uh you know you could argue that here and there there are minor bylaw implications um there is one area that come that has come up to me in conversation with others about it people just wanting to know just exactly how this thing is going to be uh enforced and I know there's information in there that covers that but um I think we need to be prepared to to say what that would be particularly a town meeting other than that I'm all thumbs up Mike would you like me to to to address that well yeah I don't know if if the board would like to hear just a couple of minutes about about that that gets it on the record people can yeah I I think that's a good idea Kelly if you could so so um uh first of all let's let's back up for a second the reason this is a general bylaw and not a zoning bylaw is that I'm proposing a sunset clause for existing non-conforming lagging which over a period of 10 years will claw back to become conforming and part of the issue has always been not just with with Cher but every town that has a lighting bylaw struggles with enforcement because it usually falls to the building department or the building inspector to enforce who rarely if ever has any kind of background in lighting exterior light in um and you can you know you can specify I know that sometimes you do you do site plan reviews that have require the the proponents to specify what the lighting is but there are multiple steps until that gets installed it goes to a contractor it gets installed might not be the right way and there's no good mechanism for making sure that that it gets put in the right way or it's the right strength whatever where I propose to sort of break new ground if for of a better word is to have the authority be with the building department and the building inspector but also to have on call at the inspector's U uh beck and call a lighting professional who can advise the planning board can adjudicate disagreements can confirm that what is specified in a site plan uh is actually installed that way uh and the the burden this would not be a town employee it would strictly be on a contract basis or paid for by the proponents of a given uh proposal um and actually I've had a couple of people come forward in the lighting industry uh to me and say that's a good idea and I might like to be that person so uh you know when when I first approach this with Evan the the the idea arose that maybe this could be a resource this person whoever it might be uh could be a shared resource with other towns who want to approach us the same way that we do so Mike to the to your point um there's sort of multiple layers if if the if the building inspector feels that he is capable of ascertaining what's going on uh that's great if he thinks he needs help then there's a number he can dial great thanks thanks that's that's what we needed Kelly has the town manager weighed in on that because that would that would add responsibilities to the the building um inspector but it may also increase costs to the town um for bringing in the Consultants well my my idea is that the if if a consultant needs to be brought into say like one of the one of the precepts is that anytime a building CH a property changes hands that it be brought into conformance and the burden of that will fall on the uh seller or the owner and the cost for making that ascertainment would it also fall on the owner so uh the town might not necess necessarily be involved at least in terms of an hourly rate or anything like that at all um or there could or the the proponents for a property could find some lighting professional who is qualified to to make the ascertainment um I have not brought it up specifically with Paul one onone but we did have a Department's uh head meeting where a lot of this was discussed um Evan I think was there and uh that particular issue was not brought up per se though uh Jose the the building inspector was there and and we you know he was part of that discussion and I didn't hear any objections to it yeah okay all right good John yeah I read through it I think it's well thought out I I was pleased to see the um you know lengthening of the recommended time to 10 years for the pre-existing non-conforming lighting because I think that will that may ease some concerns with some town meeting Representatives that you know we're not trying to do a lighting police where if you have pre-existing non-conforming that you you know that the town's looking to like do this quickly or you know you know make everyone change their lighting it's just but it gives it kind of shows that it's it will be a longer term change over will be allowed so I think that's that's a good I I I think it raises the chances of it or eases some of the fears that you may see with some Representatives thanks Mike uh I know I think it's a good report and uh thanks for uh putting the time and effort into it Kelly Joel yeah I don't have anything to add rcy um no I read it uh this weekend I remember when you guys were here at the start of this uh sitting in the audience listening to this presentation and actually seeing it looks pretty good you dearer I also think it's a Well Done report and appreciate your work Kelly and I'm in favor of a co-sponsor between the planning board and Kelly okay um for my perspective Kelly I think that the approach to the uh non-conforming is great um I like how you broke apart the single and two family versus multif family and and others I did have some questions um in the definitions you talk about a Lumiere is a string of lights would that be considered one Lumiere or would that be multiple lumir right that's that's a great question um I think it the the string of lights collectively would be a Luminaire uh but in in that particular context where we're talking about you know string lights uh and we've seen some of those here in town not very many but believe me there are some towns that are are fighting a real battle with this neighbors and so forth because they get left on all night so in that particular case the this is what we would consider um uh a sort of uh incidental outdoor lighting I'm trying to think of the term that I use but it's not primarily for uh Safety and Security it's more for Aesthetics like landscape lighting is there are some specific in there on how bright each bulb in that string can be and how bright the entire string can be okay so uh yes Luminaire in this context to get back to your question is it's the entire fixture so if you if you imagine for example a a security light with two bulbs pointing out the sides uh the entire package is considered the luminary okay all right thanks and then on section 33 you mentioned 25% of the gross floor area I'm assuming uh where did I uh no the replacement of more than 25% uh 33 um okay 25% of the existing system of luminares right so that would be if you have I'm just trying to figure out what that would be in Practical terms like well give if I can give you an example yeah under the existing bylaw that ex that has been in place since 2000 that same wording is in there okay and that actually came into play when the owners of the chelmford mall um uh brought in Kohls and they replaced the lighting around Kohls but not the rest of the of the mall and I brought that to the attention of it was a long time ago not sure who and the owners um uh agreed and replace all of the lighting in the parking lot even though not all of it was intended to be replaced and did a pretty good job of it those are good quality lights and including the lights that are actually there along chump Street if you ever go by there notice that they actually have shields on them to kind of um uh control the light with regard to the homes that are across the street there so in that case I thought they did a great job and that's exactly the kind of of situation that would be that would come into play for that particular phrasing that particular section okay thanks yeah and then in section 4 five it's my last specific question you mentioned holiday lighting um do we have a definition of holiday or is it open to interpretation which could be a very wide interpretation open um you know um in in early versions of this I had a little bit more stricter like has to be down within six weeks or something and there was a a a thread on the uh on Facebook uh involving holiday lighting uh around Christmas time and how some people you know they leave it up for a long time and it was a flame War um and I took real careful note of that and so I I don't try to Define what holiday lighting is and um uh I I don't think it's it's just like a third rail here and I I I want to mention it but I don't want to prescribe specific uh uh Tim taes or uh illumination levels or anything like that yeah okay that might be an area that we would want Town Council to weigh in on if we even have it in there or is if having it in there is going to well you know the worst that happens is that it's not actionable but it's still there we've got lots of down laws like that remember the the flags yeah you know I it's certainly doesn't hurt to have it there and I kind of gives the idea and then the last question I had on that section is what if there's overlap between the different types so if something if a a set of Lights is can be considered in either of those or multiple categories is there some measure of it's the more it you the more stringent or the less stringent of the two um what would be an example yeah I'm not sure that actually comes up here landscape lighting that's also holiday lighting or or string lights that's also holiday lighting um if they're two different thresholds and two different measures but a specific lighting could fall into either or both categories is there some so what you're concerned about is is if someone if there's a particular lighting situation that the commissioner receives a a complaint or inquiry and the person who has the light said it's a holiday light is that what you're someone someone would just by default say it's a holiday light or or or landscape lighting that's also facade lighting um one person sees it one way one person sees it the other it could be both um but they're two different standards which standard applies it would be without definitions it's that may be where council is is keying in on I think you're I think you're going to find it's going to wind up being the less stringent assuming that that the arguments are valid and but that's my point is that we should have something in there that says if there that's where I think that's where Law's going to take consideration of two different types then yeah if I may I would I would refer you back to the overarching with what's now 4.3 under nuisance and light trespass regardless of the lighting Source uh there are limits to how much light can be at your property line and so it doesn't matter whe in my mind it doesn't matter whether it's security lighting or holiday lighting or feston lighting whatever it might be you still have to control it uh the the analogy I've used as is if your if your sprinkler system went berserk and was was uh flooding your neighbor with with water that wasn't desired uh it wouldn't take long to have a a a um a complaint Lodge and I I think that that here it's going to continue to be a complaint driven bylaw right yeah so um I think that that that ultimate the ultimate Line in the Sand is how much light is shining off property okay the have you brought this before conservation commission yet yes I have um I pretty much hit every community in town uh not with this particular version but I've distributed it in in one of the early drafts and honestly the early draft is not that dramatically different from what you see before you um concom um historic commission the energy sustainability commission the bicycle and pedestrian safety I mean I've hit them all excellent uh I I I've you know so point is they've all been informed that this is coming down the road I've given them the opportunity to ask questions and to give input I've obviously solicited their support um and and um since I've done all of those meetings I really haven't gotten any feedback to be honest with you uh the one that I think is the the two areas that I'm I'm listening to mostly uh will be the Business Association and uh the DPW uh with an asterisk for the um uh where was I going with this public safety uh and and you know I I haven't really heard back from anyone in a in a sub substantive way and and obviously I welcome that I want to be able to answer what questions people might have just as here uh and maybe one thing to do is once this gets moving along is to do a little bit more proactive um assessment with those groups okay thanks um I yeah I think that we should move forward with this as a co-sponsored um article uh between Kelly and us I think um my recommendation at town meeting is that Kelly give the presentation because he knows this inside and out um and so I my recommendation would be that um we do co-sponsor it with Kelly giving the presentation a town meeting um and at the public hearing uh that we'll have to have before that actually I do have one question um I think this is more towards Evan so this bylaw will not be a zoning bylaw correct then we currently have a zoning bylaw and I'm thinking the Environmental Protection standards doesn't include light it's air quality noise and so forth correct the existing bylaw is essentially an Environmental Protection standard that's specifically in in so if we if it's if we don't have a zoning bylaw anymore then do we remove a protection as far as enforcing uh you know basically light light standards at um boundaries and so forth I I don't think we do um the way this uh Kelly's proposal is written it still maintains those existing zoning protections um and then if you read carefully uh the Kelly's proposal um basically ask the planning board anytime you're doing a site plan or a special permit review that you are reviewing this non zoning bylaw for compliance right that's section 4.8 sorry me get out of your way here and so that's something then that so we would still have that as something that we can say well this doesn't meet correct and therefore you need to adjust this thing okay I I don't think that the fact that something is or is not within the zoning bylaw section limits what the bylaws can actually uh turn over to the planning board the enforcement mechanisms are slightly different yeah if it were under zoning there's a very specific um procedures and protocols that are laid out uh for zoning enforcement but this is broader this this being this being proposed as a general Town bylaw um relies heavily on the non-criminal disposition um which is a daily finding system um and then Court proceedings if necessary um so how does that so how does that work so somebody somebody comes to the Building Commissioner says hey my neighbor isn't conforming to the bylaw or says that this is an issue when he makes a determination it's not conforming to the bylaw under if it's a zoning by law then he can take an enforcement action right which they can he can take enforcement under both which they can then okay and then and then if they appeal that then they would appeal that to the zba correct that's the major that's the ma one of the major differences the zoning uh someone who's grieved by the commissioner's decision can appeal it to the local zoning of appeals right non non- zoning bylaws will not be appealed locally so if someone's agreeded with either the um with the enforcement of the commissioner um they're going to have to take it to court well does it make sense then to have at least something that is a zoning by law so that we could we could ask Council if there within the non zoning by law if there is a if there's a local option a home rule option to include a local appeals process yeah I'd be interested in that question because that to me is that would be an issue is is uh is we're taking away then basically what most people have is as as an appeal path locally locally and we're changing that in this case from what it is now so that would be a difference is that I as a resident now don't don't have a local appeal path that's important yeah it is yep alternatively could we put in a zoning bylaw that essentially just references the standards here well I mean yeah that's what I was wondering that that would be a question of Town Council like how do we end that that's what I was thinking so instead of can be done a word it just having something there so that somebody could say okay now I have a path yeah so instead of removing it completely we would have some very short bylaw that just references the standards here yeah okay okay I mean it would it would be something like uh the Building Commissioner May enforce d da da a number of new law right uh subject to right the controls you know it's about about a one paragraph right all right so so as I mentioned earlier we'll put this back on for the the February 12th meeting yeah we'll finalize it council's review yep council's review those open-ended questions uh for February 12th um so Kelly if you're able to join us again on February 12th for finalizing it and then if you're able to join us on the 26th of February the coast of where not yes so so I I will join you on the 12th and uh in that case I'm going to be in California but I will definitely join again F and then also on the 26th of February we would be 26 I I can do that in person okay great we'll be starting our public hearing for those town meeting zoning bylaws and then and so um if if I may Evan how long do you think it will take Council to weigh in on this and then when does this appear before the select board so I'm going to send it to council tomorrow uh they shouldn't take more than a couple of weeks the board scheduled to sign the warrant on Monday February 24th but we wouldn't have to appear for that for these zoning articles Would we not a signing of the warrant when the when the board is doing their review and recommendation yeah both both the board and Kelly should should be participa so on the 26th we'll find out what that timeline is for the presentations to fincom select board correct okay that's great well thank you for your continued support um I'm obviously listening as much as uh uh proposing and it's it's great that you're seeing this as something to move forward thank you also um one other thing um the question about costs and responsibility ofay payment we should probably have the town address that sometime before town meeting um because I think that that may come up at town meeting so at some point maybe you or the town manager can talk about the financial implications and what the expectations are for who would pay for that type of I think what I heard Kelly say was that uh if it if the uh review was done by the planning board obviously the planning board can do a third party review um and if it's done by The Building Commissioner either as a project proposal or as a um a complaint the commissioner has the right to uh or what Kelly is suggesting is that you have an on call contract in which uh more often than not the proponent would be paying for the review if it were a complaint that may be the scenario where the town would have to cover the cost and that's kind of why I want to iron all those situations out and codify it so because I know it's going to come up in particular nail down the business about uh about the town paying and how legitimate or what we have to do in order to uh dump the burden onto the proponent there may be some specific yeah right I mean I think I think we have sort of a general statement don't we and a special permit I don't remember if we do in subdivision about uh yeah we do and we may need something like that that's what I was want yeah for our process but not for complaints or anything like that no no no I know I was just talk I was just thinking about our process that that covered as far as say to an applicant hey I want you to do X we checked the Board of Health I I dealt with it uh during the great chicken Wars and uh so they do have a process okay all right um I'm assuming we do we need to continue this or no it's just to administrative okay thanks Kelly enjoy all right I'm gonna jump off the call I have a uh Uber to the airport at 2:30 in the morning for a 5:00 a.m. flight good good Lu you got the right time good night good night all right is TSA there at 3 2:30 they don't get there until like 4 where she flying 4:30 from home she just wants to get on oh she's on the other side of I think she's in the Dr trying to get back yeah all right um liaz on updates any updates yeah um I attended a community preservation committee meeting last Wednesday on um January 15th and there were two projects proposed uh the first one was um kind of modest cost $4,500 by the uh community garden advisory committee to um bring um electricity uh to a portion of Sunny Meadow Farm for the community garden basically they're trying to replace a gasoline pump and it's going to make it a lot simpler to bring water to irrigate the 70 plots and then the larger project was um the town manager Cohen described um using community preservation funds that's been done in a couple other communities to um to um for the suppression of um utility lines in Central Square uh because it's just for a variety of reasons you've probably heard about in the past it's just no longer uh practical uh to rely on Verizon and um and other utilities to try to n try to collect the search charge you remember all the problems with that so um the cost of that that was proposed was 2 million um I had presented a plan just as an exercise to show what what it would cost if it was borrowed um and the committee uh approved the plan the project as a concept but we're going to go there will be a few further meeting to discuss whether it should be a combination of using Community preservation funds as cash and then some borrowing so that'll be in the future but okay yeah I think what's likely to come up there is I'd really like to know why we couldn't why we W unable to stick it to the power companies uh to put it bluntly uh we started out with the notion that they would bury the lines and they were taking the search charges to do that I'm not sure where it went off the rails but I sure would like to know any other updates yeah from this is from January 7th U the Board of Health and uh it was an hour and a half long meeting if you can imagine it's long for them uh it very long for them uh but a couple of things that I wanted to mention from that um One North chumford was there and I don't remember exactly what it was that they were there for but they were North CH North chumford Water um but they're definitely developing more of a proactive approach like Cent areas in other words um largely before the water districts were more B uh oriented towards Wellhead protection meaning that they they got concerned when they were seeing evidence of contamination at their well heads but now they're much more interested in in uh you know looking at areas having areas protected around those well hoods as a as a preemptive measure and in the things that are done in those areas and so that's why you've had Center come out and say you know we don't want septic so forth and so on so uh I'm I'm encouraged by that and I think that that's something that we definitely want to support wherever possible is you know um where we can and we have a jurisdiction to be able to do things that are in support of of preserving our water any any representation there from East jonesford water yet nope no it's north surprise but um in any case uh then uh also uh they brought up the thing about the Gap analysis and the person that will be representing the planning board is Richard day uh and um then since that's our next item I don't need to say much more about that and then so they are going to um go to um Zoom meetings when they have large hearings so when they have hearings they'll be on zoom and then otherwise they'll they'll do the usual you know going through flipping papers and corresponden and stuff that do they usually not have hearings hardly ever uh they rarely have hearings but they have the last one they had bfield Earth uh was uh in the senior center um which I think is just about the worst place to have a meeting but yeah you can't hear anything there you can't hear anything I know they had talked about a couple months ago moving their meetings up here so that they could be U broadcasting Chumps tele media media and through Zoom um especially as some of the hearings were getting a little big and people weren't fitting downstairs any other updates well master plan did meet yep uh and matter of fact we took up uh we took up some of the uh things that are on the plan planning board's list uh you've got the notes better than I yeah I may that may be a good update uh for the planning board to receive maybe in March yeah okay sounds good um in terms of concom update um this month we're alternating because of how the week the days fall um they received the open space presentation so tonight was my second time seeing it um they a Peter mentioned that were participating in an MCA Watershed study to make recommendations on how to make Watershed safer and increase the quality um I believe he's part of that um they did hear for uh pet and then they also had the 10 hildr hearing um they received the um input from natural heritage um David did follow up with natural heritage um got very vague answers um back from them about whether vernal pools were known to them and incorporated into the decision um not a lot of help from natural heritage uh in terms of information being readily available they're at the the point now where they are looking at special conditions uh for potential decision um but they're still waiting on the board of health Title Five approvals and contamination study um and they continue till their January 28th meeting so yeah by the way on the board of health with regards to that is that they were waiting to get results and then at that point they were going to schedule a hearing with regards to that okay so I think yeah I think that they're going to continue with the decision but not vote on anything until they hear back uh from the Board of Health on their decision first all right um next item Gap analysis Evan uh yeah so if you recall at your last meeting um um you considered uh what I what appeared to be a fairly straightforward uh question about how the board wanted to proceed uh related to their engagement in the process uh in the board um uh indicated uh engagement as a full board uh I reported that back to um Donna Greenwood director of health and Larry lard the consultant and um I guess that was not he he was somewhat surprised um so I asked him to provide some uh you know additional written kind of clarification for your consideration um as part of a reconsideration uh I believe the concom um was asked the same question at the last meeting and they decided to go with a TW member subset um what the consultant indicates here is at the initial there several phases of of what engagement and I think he envisions the first phase of Engagement to be as part of a subset and then potentially the this the latter part of Engagement uh could be with the with the full board um so the purpose of the agenda item is to see if the board uh is interested in uh reconsidering uh going with a a subset uh for the initial engagement with the consultant thoughts I have no issue I'll put my hand up to to to do that if you want he does as I'm as I'm rereading his um his email here uh as I've mentioned uh staff has engaged several times with him um trying to frame up you know what the effort in involves or entails and as he alludes to um those qu those conversations become very wide ranging uh with many sensitive and um sensitive issues so so to speak so that that may further explain why he envisioned having more of a subset where it's not in a formal meeting such as this or concom uh to get a an IAL um engagement going to better understand where where where the commission and members of the planning board are interested to engage from a regulatory perspective I mean I'm not opposed to doing a subset I mean it sounds like um I think one of the reasons we were trying to do this is we we felt there was some Gap so maybe I I I guess I can see that he might the consultant might feel uncomfortable for example if we were talking about either different departments interaction or with the water districts I think we a lot of this if I'm not mistaken where this came from yeah um so that might I I'm I'm not opposed to doing a subset of would it come back to us I guess is my question Evan like once the initial phase is done would it come back yeah I mean I think the um uh certainly like a presentation of facts and findings and recommendations I could Envision that coming back to the full board would you get an update too from two of the board members who are present yeah presumably you'll get an update every every meeting doing Lea on this was brought up at the concom commission um the problem the challenge with that is that this is going to be a very fast process so yes we the representatives could report out but if there was any further discussion or input it wouldn't get back in in time um because of the timeline and okay so that that's the challenge with that is that we would have if we do a subset we would have to get our input and concerns into those people like before they meet with the consultant and then the report out but if there was any follow-up questions or follow-up discussion we wouldn't be able to have it I like the idea of it being the whole board um and you know I I don't but frankly you know the main thing I'm concerned about is just preserving our jurisdictional power I I don't mean that because I'm a power freak I just mean that that as you know from the very beginning when I got on the board my interest has been in preserving the board's rightful powers and and to execute them uh and so you know whatever people want to figure out how to best do that that's fine but I am not interested in relegating or delegating a power that we have to exercise because it's our responsibility to do that as we've been empowered by the by laws and by the law to do that so that's I'm just going to leave it at that Marcy thoughts I don't know I can see the benefit in both but I I do tend to prefer like having the whole group because as you said you don't have a say necessarily right when something's brought up you have to wait and if you don't get we don't meet again before then our time to speak up is now gone um I can see why they would want a small subset of of Us coming in but I do kind of agree that in front of the whole board everyone has a chance to speak hear things ask questions and really have their input valued but are they not are they looking for this meeting not to be televised is this board has to be televised yeah so and if and and if and it's a public meeting right so are they looking not to have a public meeting so then they cannot have a quorum of all of us right so they can't have more than really probably two practically speak planning board members so you got to keep that in mind that's true of all the boards too so my thoughts on this is I I think if we had a longer timeline where there could be input report back input put report back that type of so similar to what we did with the subset groups for some of the projects we could potentially do that type of of process my concern is that with this compressed timeline that they want to do it in we wouldn't have that ability so I also think that the the hearings that precipitated all of this were very public the public also has some interest in this and I think that any issues that we are bringing up should be public um because they were public processes and I so I think having this even if it's not a public hearing where we get public input I'm fine with not doing that but I do think it should be the full board to be able to provide our our all of our input um and I would be fine with televising it and having it as a televised work session because I think that all of the issues we encountered around this were in the public forum yeah so it's not like it's not like there's anything that we would be bringing up that hasn't already been visible I agree with that so my my recommendation would be to push back and continue the full board again not necessarily A a public hearing session but definitely a work session with the full board that either is televised or is just a public meeting and and and the the other option here is to ex extend the timeline if that's doable I mean that there are two ways to approach the problem but you're right uh having a very short timeline and small subcommittees makes makes communication back and forth with the full board very difficult and are these small subcommittees that is are they going to have the planning board concom and all these other different groups yeah that's what it sounded like that's or is it going to be like we're just going to meet with this group then meet with that group and no it sounded to me like it would be Collective so do we need a motion I don't think we need a motion but I would like a show of hands who would prefer the full board I'll support your work session idea I think that's yeah I'm not wildly for again okay all right so in that case I think Evan if you could respond back and okay thank you I'll see what the Board of Health says to me the next [Laughter] time all right baby I know last item on the agenda meeting minutes January 8th did everyone review all right I will take a motion I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from January 8th as presented second I'll second motion from John and second from Mike risbeck all uh no one left on Zoom so all in favor I I I all opposed unanimous all right and next item I'll take a motion to ajour you got it question from Mike risbeck second second from Mike Walsh all in favor hi good night good night thank you everyone e e