e e e e for all right with it being 6:30 I call this uh February 26th meeting of the planning board to order uh my name is cryst I'm
the vice chair I will be leading tonight's meeting uh Deedra should be on Zoom she is on Zoom tonight uh the rest of the board is present um the all meetings are televised live and are available on Demand by chumford Tel
media uh this meeting will be conducted in person and as a as a courtesy using uh Zoom uh but that option for remote attendance and participation is being provided as a courtesy and if we do have problems uh with zoom and it goes down
uh we will try and and get things going again but if not uh we will not be suspending the meeting we will be moving forward so um tonight we have uh first on the agenda is public input so if
anyone from the public would like to uh have any comments uh or input that are not related to the subject of a Current public hearing uh before the finding board um but are related to our jurisdiction um need more than willing
to hear your your comments anyone on Zoom uh no okay with there being none we'll move on to the uh first public discussion Kate's Corner neighborhood uh this is a continuation of the discussion
with the neighborhood regarding uh the uh areas in Kate's Corner uh and the zoning conflicts in that area um there were two emails that were attached to the agenda one was the initial email U from locked Martin and
the second is a follow-up uh and so I will open it up at this time uh to Evan if there are any additional items or comments I don't have any at this time thank you all right any board
members have any comments suggestions items to discuss um before I open it up to the public yeah I I I'll make a couple of comments so I went through and I looked um up the different uses for CA CB and
IIA um just to try to get in a better appreciation of um what the differences are and so I put them in some slides and there they are um I was a little bit I I you know I think you normally expect that going from CA
to CBD there'd be an increasing intensity of use but what I was actually a little bit surprised to see is that CB has things that CA and IIA do not have um but anyway I I'll just go through the what what I did so what is allowed in CA
and CB but not IIA uh is pretty short list it's boarding house retail stores is probably the one that that most people think of and then also massage service establishment so those are things are allowed in CA and CB but not IIA what allowed in CB Andia so if
you're looking now to the more intensive use you would expect but not CA then there's a whole bunch of things um light manufacturing that's one that we've talked about but also Warehouse research and development outdoor contractor's yard which we're all aware of from a
recent application there access to private way to IIA uses I think that's important because we're talking about you currently it the area that is what is what was Maxwell's it is zon CB and one
of the things that it CB can provide is access to a private way to IIA uses which is what's right next door and then parking garage and structure and then there's a whole bunch of other things like funeral home so forth and so on um so going from going to a CB and IIA
there is a lot more uses there than you would get with just the ca so what's allowed in CB but not in CA or IIA this was the one that was interesting was motor vehicle uses and this was brought up in the application that was before before somebody said hey you could just
have a you could have Car Sales there um and so also restaurant bank or financial agency club or Lodge or body art so I think for example if we're considering going from CB to something
lower than CB B um or if we're considering something like a light IIA for that I think there's certain uses that we want to keep in mind that are allowed by CB that we may not necessarily want to continue to be allowed to be there uh and then the last
one is um so what's allowed in IIA but not CA or CB and now you have things like Municipal garages cemetery non-exempt and Earth removal wood operation and distribution centers small and medium distribution centers Rite and IIA but not in CA or CB and so this is
another case where as we're considering this what kinds of uses are we thinking about I would not want to have there necessarily in a light IIA kind of consideration is that the last one yes okay so originally when we were thinking
through this I was thinking okay I think that that the area that is currently I mean what I think what we're striving to do here is to reduce the zoning conflict right that was our original goal um so in particular we're focused on the
former Maxwell property because that is what exists between an existing IA and residential and so that one in particular I think we're we're focusing on and we were considering how would we go from CB to something else and sort of
in in at least looking through these things my conclusion is we had talked about a light IIA or something like that I think that it's difficult I I'm not even sure I would call it light IIA I think what we want to really do is perhap I think what we want to consider is a new zoning
district one that is we originally were sort of identifying as a light IIA but I think what we want to identify it as basically what would be a transition zone between residential and something that's like IIA or a light IIA that sort
of thing that we might then incorporate light IIA under and so I think that we want to I think if we're going to do that I think we want to carefully consider what are the different uses that are allowed and not allowed in each of these zones in fashioning that district and that would enable people to
still make you good use of their properties and so forth but I think in general at a minimum I would think that we would want to the current backyards of residences that are zoned CB right now I think we definitely would all agree that that should not continue as
CB um the current Maxwell property which is designated CB I think we want to make something less intensive than the uses that are allowed by CB but would be a good transition to IIA and then on the right on the uh road side the 27 side we
have a CA and a CB and exactly what we want to do there I don't know but nonetheless that's a little bit more appropriate for those kinds of uses because it's not a budding residential directly it's a budding a fairly fairly major road and so I'm I'm not here to
I'm not providing Solutions I'm just identifying I think the parameters of what we want to do is to look to reduce the zoning conflict likely come up with a new zoning district and especially one that's targeted towards transitioning from residential to the I and that's
that those those are the thoughts that I had anyone else nice job yeah I think you summed it up nice very nice I would only add two other goals in in addition to reducing conflict I would
also add that we're trying to protect the residents of the area and also not handtie the current property owners right um so I think those three three goals together
um would kind of guide us in in that that way all right any other comments before we res I have a couple I I'm want looking at that map you know we have a lot of
areas in town that are Patchwork like that but I mean I wonder if people have thoughts on should part of this exercise be making the general area more uniform I mean so we don't have cacb IA
all in a row um I I don't know and and I guess I I was kind of thinking along the lines of what Joel was of looking for um looking for uses that we would want in
this area and maybe calling it IB you know like we have CA and CB and um anyway I was thinking IB and that this might be a zoning um class that I we might want to
call we might want to rezone a number of you know other properties in town that we where we have similar goals um potentially for redevelopment
or um reducing conflict yeah I agree with that I think that this could be a good test case and and pilot area for that type of transition um Zone especially where you have like you know like it' be nice if
we whatever we do for this Zone we can then apply it to areas in town that you go from a neighborhood then this IB or whatever IIA light and then you go into IIA right so you have that transition
um that so what it kind of like when you look at like all our a zones they have a buffer of this lighter version right because those are the ones that directly would have but a neighborhood MH MH and that gives us a little bit more flexibility than in zoning IIA more
industrial versus are always having to worry about the neighbors you know those properties that that's right okay all right any other thoughts okay uh I'll now open it up to
public for thoughts and comments if anyone wish to speak hi everybody uh so good evening everyone my name is Anthony Pitman I am the general manager for the Lockheed Martin chelsford location on 16 Maple Road I
appreciate your time um as a relatively smaller site with a big company name um I often find that people aren't very familiar with the work that we do in our area so I want to just give a brief overview um we specialize in science and technology with a specific focus on engineering research and development and
light manufacturing of microelectronics so I think the board has mentioned clean tech pretty akin to what we do um our site has been part of the community for over 50 years um and we do take pride in operating both discreetly and respectful of our neighbors and of the charm that
we've come to enjoy as well um we also recognize that our neighbors are not just residents but they're also the local church Kate's Corner Bome Elementary School um so I just wanted to reinforce because of our long history history here maintaining how we operate today is also important to us and for
our employees who have a very strong connection to that location um I am certainly no expert in zoning um I don't know much about the legalities of it um but the feedback from the January planning board was insightful to me um to ensure that we
maintain that standard um we've been at 16 Maple for over 50 years and we look forward to being there for another 50 years um I'd like to offer commentary on two aspects of the zoning considerations um firstly as you can kind of see on the chart um our existing property as you
brought up is on 16 Maple Road is currently split between two zones IIA and CA so even without the discussions of growth or expansions um we understand the implications of rezoning need to be discussed and we too would like to be part of the solution to help simplify
the zoning uh for 16 Maple Road not just in whatever form it looks like not just to maintain how we operate but to provide the stability for the Neighbors as well as uh offer the town streamlining solutions for um zoning
regulations uh secondly I would like to acknowledge our interest in the 24 Maple Road so in the past when we do consider growth opportunities for our location um we have considered supplementary satellite locations in nearby towns or
adjacent areas um but the availability of 24 Maple Road adjacent to our property presents a unique opportunity for us to expand at our corite um and remain part of the community to be clear we're not looking to double the size of
our operation grow tremendously but rather just create some extra space to operate more efficiently for our customers in the same manner that our neighbors and residents have come to expect how we operate today um as you can see from the the the visual there the lot itself even with different
zoning to work through uh is unique in size and shape so some of our proposed solutions would even be naturally Limited in what we can offer um the most immediate need that we're thinking through is Parking Solutions or or possibly just using a modified use of
the existing structure now it's important to share that we're still working our internal review process related to the 24 Maple Road uh and it's still ongoing internally uh our teams are working very expeditiously to solidify that interest before the April
time frame um but I do want to acknowledge I recognize the Dilemma in considering changing the zoning of 24 Maple Road can seem premature in advance of a definitive agreement to purchase or even lease the property um especially with the concerns that we've heard in
public input um at the same time as you mentioned because our existing lot already exists on two different zones introducing a third new Zone from our standpoint um does add complexity to the business business case as well as the options that we can consider so in full
transparency we are open to options that allow us to consider for a win-win-win solution in whatever that looks like um so just wanted to share my thoughts on that um as we continue to engage this opportunity we're going to continue to be very transparent and public and open
taking into account the current future zoning regulations taking into account neighborhood feedback um as well as following all permit and approval processes so I just wanted to say I do appreciate the support and the feedback in the recent weeks not only from our residents our neighbors our abuts but
from the town planning board and the town manager as this is solidified uh in topic um so thanks for your attention I would like to introduce with me today an so balowski uh with the firm price lobal and Thai who has a little more technical experience in zoning and Regulation and
she can provide a little more technical Insight from our perspective as we're navigating through this thank thank you very much as as Anthony said I'm Ann sobleski I've been looking at um the zoning with respect to these parcels and just just for discussion purposes I
mean when you look at the map that we generated you can see within the boundaries of maple Route 27 and pond and parkerville that totals 25 acres including the the purely
residentially zone property and then of that property 20% is wetland So 20% is undevelopable as resource areas and then whatever areas border that that would be undevelopable as well um of that 25
acres 25% are Parcels owned by the town so those would not be redeveloped and then if you take out the Residential Properties the um the 24 Maple Street property is 1.9 acres and is a very
unique shape um lock heeds Parcels together total 6.9 Acres so that's that's the total area um that you know could be used for locks purposes and if you're considering you know what could
happen in the future long term obviously locked wants to stay there long term um but all in all that parcel size if if they were ever to leave and someone were to come in it is not a 20 acre parcel in and of itself it's only 6.9 Acres um as
the Maxwells is only 1.9 um and that constrains what kinds of future development could occur on that parcel because of its size you can't have a 75,000 squ foot Distribution Center there under the current zoning as
it is and you would be limited in what size Distribution Center if that is a fear you would you would be able to put on a parcel that size in the first place um so Additionally you know there's there's a number of uses that um lock
heat is making of its parcel that have not been controversial or caused problems as Anthony said they do research and development they do manufacturing light manufacturing and there is office um space involved uh one
of the things that would be of interest for the Maxwell's property would be to continue those kinds of uses but again that's constrained by the site and I would suggest that if you do decide to um eliminate the CB Zone in the rear of
those AB budding Parcels that you also take into consideration what effect um setbacks from residential districts that's elsewhere in your zoning would have because as you can see that Maxwell's parcel is very very narrow so
if you rezone all of those backyards to make it residential and then you have the setback requirements for the Maxwell's parcel be what they would be in residential because at a butts residential you would be extremely limiting what someone could do on that
site from a dimensional perspective without getting a dimensional variance I don't know if that's um with respect to that parcel again as Anthony said you know in a perfect world I would be able to come here and tell you we had this parcel under agreement and we have
a proposal and we would like to get into a Cooperative zoning discussion to limit what could be done on that site but I can't say that we have that because we're still working on it but we would very much like to work cooperatively with the board if we are able to put
this parcel under agreement to come up with a zoning proposal that addresses what locked would like to do with the parcel and also addresses the concerns of the neighborhood because at base they've been a good neighbor and
they want to continue being a good neighbor and I don't think that any proposed uses they would make on that site would be detrimental or offensive they're not talking about adding 2,000 jobs it's a much more
discreet uh potential expansion of their use any questions thank you Nancy arway 65 Littleton Road I'd like to commend LOL Joel on the comparison charts they're very very
useful for the purpose of evaluating uh zoning options um I'd like to also suggest that you add to those comparisons the impacts of ciod um in
particular it's going to affect the ability to put uh multif family housing in the commercial but not industrial um so unless you're under bad in on Route
129 the ciod will not uh permit multifam in industrial but it does in all the commercials so it it's a consideration that that should be looked
at thank you my name is Bob leaport I live at 38 parkerville Road and um basically our family has lived at 38 parkerville Road since the late 1930s and I grew up uh in that area so
I'm familiar with the land use changes that have taken place along parkerville road so in preparation for tonight I I went through the uh Town's master plan and and I think the
uh the proposal on changing some of the zoning and maybe creating another industrial district that is lower intensity has some bearing and uh because when you look at the uh the vision plan for the uh Town's master
plan they talk about ensuring that the town is safe and attractive and Community character is preserved um there are six of seven industrial nodes in Chelmsford and
clearly Maple Street is not in one of those industrial nodes you know those nodes are really set up by Highway access and uh and and that creates a greater industrial use so in growing up
on pille road I will just say that traffic on pille road has increased exponentially and I think residents on pille road are have a real concern about uh traffic impacts with any kind of
development whether it be on the Maxwell property or or other proper properties uh pille road is basically a rural Town Road after you get past the cemetery and it's used as the uh the way to get to
Interstate 495 so it does receive a lot of uh traffic and and school traffic um you know on page six the master plan states that
uh they talk about a seven gold goals and one is uh land use and Zoning manage and direct growth including Redevelopment and new development projects in a manner that is consistent with the community's character and ensure that the town zoning and land use
policies and practices are consistent with the approved master plan so in in listening to what you presented tonight on possible changes you know it struck me that uh especially
in the Maxwell property uh that maybe a new industrial zoning district is appropriate for that property um there is that question about setbacks on a residential neighborhood if those properties were instead of
split zoned entirely zoned residential but um you know what the town doesn't seem to have is a design review control and I think speaking as a
resident I would have I'd be concerned with design review control and intensity regulations that infect that affect this new zoning District in other words what are they going to put up what is it going to look
like is it appropriate for that transitional Zone to the residential uses and is it really appropriate for this little micro area uh that uh is the fmer Agway
store and with regard to the intensity regulations uh you know especially in this particular site because that long narrow strip you know really limits the uh feasible development that can take place on
it you know it seems to me that uh this potential new zoning District if we were to have the right controls you know maybe uh there can be an appropriate use industrial use on
that site but I think again this design review control having been a member of the historic district commission and I know that scares a lot of people about design review control but you know I think for a lot of us here
loat has been a good neighbor and the uh the design of the facility is fine but I think on this particular site it's appropriate to have some sort of design review control especially if it's going to be applied to other comparable
neighborhoods so that the planning board can look at uh site plan and they can look at what's going up and is it really appropriate for this transitional area that that we have here on Maple Street uh you know keeping in light of
uh you know there's going to be traffic problems that will occur uh especially at Kate's Connor uh and uh so I think and the other concern I have is we have hot Pond I'm a member of the hot Pond Association
and you know the town and the association has been battling with water quality on the pond and uh so that is another concern I think we all have uh it ABS a
recreational uh Beach and uh and the quality of water in the pond is has to be of some concern for this particular ague property uh but I think it sounds like the
potential of maybe creating a new zoning District that deals more appropriately with the issue on these transitional neighborhoods and I would say including some design review control and changing the intensity
requirements would go a long way to solving a reuse problem with this H particular property thank you thank you I do want to mention um that we I do want to clarify that the planning board does
have design review control and we do exercise that to the the extent we can um we are limited by the bylaws that are currently in place for each of the zones so I think having a new Zone with some
of that design built in as we're thinking about it um to give us more flexibility and more guidance for that specific type of Zone would be helpful um one of the challenges I know that the board has faced in the past is with IIA
districts we have very limited um control especially as it abuts some residential areas um and so we're limited and how much control we can apply to those areas creating this new transitional District would kind of help
us with that um that conundrum that we often face yeah so being on the historic district commission for many years uh you know we we fac this whole thing with design review control but you know without that
uh neighborhood properties run the risk of lowering in value I mean it's just the reality where you get these transitional zones that uh this is going to be a potential negative impact on the residential property so I think careful
review uh needs to be done lock has been a good neighbor I always worry about the Next Generation because we've seen you know some industrial buildings recently toy went down there's new owners and new things happen so I think uh not
withstanding lock has been a good neighbor I worry about the second generation owner going forward too yeah thank you sorry Vivian marold 23 Maple Road I just have a quick question if you rezone
24 Maple Road with this light Industrial Area what happens to all the little backyard Parcels next door to it do they become part of that same zone or do they stay CB we would have to figure that out um given the the presentation that Joel
gave um my lean my preference would be probably to figure out how we can um bring those back into residential Zone and then figure out the the setback issue on this new transitional Zone okay
I'm just thinking you might get a little push back from the gentleman that lives at AP pille because he is actively running a business out of his house and that CB zone is very important to him so I don't know all right that was that was all thank you good evening my name is Pam bam
bravard I live at 49 first first Lane um and I apologize for being late I know your website said you started at 6:30 but last February it said that and I called and they said no seven you always start at s so I missed the um
presentation but just to bring me up to is this the latest proposal or is this this what it is now this is what it is now okay um and we are the slides that Joel went over was just compar ing the different zones and their uses okay
thank you all right I'm going to be a little wordy but I'll talk fast I'll try to talk fast um I want to paint a picture for you and while I'm painting the picture as you get it in your mind I want you to be thinking does this sound
like a great place to expand Industrial Development so in that area that you're talking about there are certain very important hisor iCal docu um buildings one is the hildr robins biome
Farm built in 1740 surrounded by conservation land and beautifully restored by Joe and Bob Morse it is a beautiful Colonial home and setting there's Kate's Corner built
in 1824 and in continual use as a store a post office and really the heart of our village Village at one time Ezekiel Bim the first manufacturer of sulfur matches
sold his matches from that building there's the First Baptist Church built in 1771 home of the first female Baptist Deaconess Grace Hutchin biome there's the Hart Pond Cemetery a
pre-revolutionary burial grounds described by the town's website as quiet Scenic peaceful there's the biam school in the apple orchard of my great-grandfather at the hildr robins biome Farm an
elementary school there's the Bruce Freeman rail trail going right between Lockheed and what was Maxwell's where people get to see beautiful Woodlands historic buildings on their way to the town
center there's Liberty Hall built in 18 81 as for meetings and social Gatherings of the people of South chemsford who were dedicated to improving beautifying and ornamenting their words their
Village that pride in the village is still alive and well among our citizens in South chemsford and last but certainly not least there is har Pond a 94 acre piece of of
Massachusetts Great Pond used by the town continually in their ads and publicity as a sign of how beautiful and inviting chumford is to
its citizens my concern primarily is not really the character of that area although I enjoy it and I hope it's protected but I'm primarily protective of the pond
this whole area that you're talking about is in the is part of the Watershed of the pond that means that all of its land and every material that lands on its land drains into the pond
eventually it's a bowl like structure where all the pieces of land you're talking about are on the rim of the bowl and it goes down into the pond and very important point is that no one in the town is
responsible for protecting that Watershed so if you are thinking oh that's conservation's jurisdiction they'll take care of it we don't have to worry about it that is not true conservation takes care of the first 100
feet off the Waterway and the rest is unprotected most of the Watershed is in Westford but but this part is in chamford we need help this this is the
only venue where we get to protect the water shed by coming and arguing about what goes in through the Watershed to begin with my concern is an increase in pavement parking areas we're not just
talking about Maxwells we're talking about the whole area being um designated as IND is my my understanding there are several studies that will clarify my concerns in that
area in 2016 the Hydra hydr I knew I couldn't pronounce this hydrological science journal issued a study that showed that runoff from paved areas contribute heavy metals sodium nitrate
phos litter rubber residue synthetic chemicals pesticides and far pharmacological into the land around it they showed that impacts it impacts
that rainfall how it's captured stored and released parking lots are engineered for maximal runoffs from the surface of course you want the run off
quickly by the shortest path and that Al Alters the Topography of the area in 2018 December 12th the department of biosystems engineering and soul science of the University of Tennessee published that
imperviousness alters the natural hydrology of a watershed by decreasing infiltration into the soil and increasing runoff and flow rates leading to increased stream sediment
loads they added imperviousness negatively affects water quality by by adding debris salts fertilizers vehicle based pollutants such as break and tire dust petroleum
based fluids so the pond we've heard the we we fight hard for that pond we reclaimed it it was filled with weeds in 2005 we've we've worked since to reclaim it and right now the biggest problem is algae
blooms the biggest impact causing a algae blooms are nitrogen and phosphorus and chemicals um and I got thinking well is there phosphorus in Asphalt I never heard of phosphorus in Asphalt I don't
think there is but the engineering science and technology Journal wrote about um a phosphorus slag it's called I don't know if you've ever heard of it but it's a yellow phosphorus
industry byproduct and it is used increasingly so as an additive for asphalt pavement that adds the phosphorus we fearing for the pond and also it it increases the
heavy metal load into the water um D also Z Sania EduCare 1325 published about algae the
deforestation and Land Development reduce the ability of the ecosystems to naturally F filter out the nutrients that spawn the algae growth so yes uh asphalt can have phosphorus
and again I ask you who would monitor that conservation does not look at the asphalt putting down as far as I know I can ask Dave Co but far as I know he does not review what is the makeup of the asphalt laid down
I don't know anybody who does that and yet is such a danger to our environment and our precious natural resource and again we're not just talking about Maxwells if you change the zoning we're talking about that whole area and I
don't care how clean the industry is they're going to have a parking lot for their employees and I think one of the the plans for lock heed is to use the Maxwells as a parking lot part of it it's a parking lot and I don't know if you correct you may
correct me okay other concerns I have I like Maxwells as a family they're nice people I wish them the best but we can't get lost
um weighing what's what might be profitable for one family as opposed to the impact it leaves for the rest of us for time in per perpetuity in 1963 a cousin of mine
Alabam sold her whole field beautiful field that the family wanted her to donate to the town as a park but she F sold it to frequency resources today that is the home of
loed so where I act now out of a sincere concern for the health of Hart Pond it may be out of a little bit of family guilt but it is an example of one person's profit versus a lifetime
detriment to the rest of us um another another concern I have well let me do say that later I'm and push back a little bit of push back or argu or a different point of view
against my concerns was someone said to me well Maxwell's already has a parking lot so it's already there my answer might be just because we made a mistake that's detrimental doesn't mean
we have to stay with that mistake we can correct that now we can get rid of that parking also Maxell isn't all that is not all p that whole area just around the building the rest is natural another
argument against my concerns might be if you make that residential well there's there's runoff you have driveways you have um roofs to contend with you know it's just as bad
however in the multidisciplinary uh digital publishing Institute um from the again from the University of Tennessee in 2018 they published a study that said that vehicle service and parking areas
had relatively high levels of suspended solids metals and hydrocarbons compared to landscaped areas I'm not naive landscaped areas and Lawns with the phosphorus fertilizers
are very dangerous to the pond but they can be Med they we can change our behavior in that area har Pond Association the last two years has had an initiative taken the initiative at their own expense of sending out
notices to every single person in their watershed area chamford and Westford notifying them of the damage that phosphates can do to the water and get offering them Alternatives other fertilizer that don't
have the phosphorus in it m biome could I ask you to wrap up please yes thank you um another question I had is public input versus corporate interests in February we had a good turnout and it
was very apparent I don't think anybody would argue with me that the resounding desire for the neighborhood was to turn it back to residential or in the very least neighborhood friendly commercial my P my my final comment is I
don't understand the town is now paying for the health of the pond so to to put to create a situation that possibly probably will cause an a further damage
to the pond and require further mitigation that we're going to have to pay for doesn't make sense to me thank you very much for listening sorry about the voice and I'm very sorry I was L thank you any other members of the public wish
to speak okay I'm going to send it around the board one more time quickly to give any last minute closing thoughts before we talk about next steps
Mike no okay John no I'm good thank you Anita just so my understand standing we've got a couple properties there that are um that are on um Route 27 that are that are owned by the town y those were were considering changing them to town
own right like probably yeah right that would make sense so those are um the two on 27 and there's one on Pond right yep those three okay then we're looking at and I've got them
so really need glasses that my my thinking is the rest of it's kind of up in the air and that's what we're trying to figure out so we've got then we have um the two Parcels on 27 that but the town property those that's a residential home correct
right now I'm not mistaken um and then we have the residential owners on parkerville thank you I couldn't read it parkerville yeah that are half CB and half RB okay um
then we have we don't want to touch Kate's corner or do we does CA make sense for that I'm just trying to understand what we're trying to do yeah um oh always got to clean up that CA that's part of Lockheed Martin right
then we've got Lockheed Martin's parking lot which is CA then we've got the building which is IIA M and then we've got Maxwell's which is CB and then we got the residential areas residential areas
yep yeah I mean again I think something like I was just kind of looking at our use chart um and putting together something that would allow for because right now under CB
Maxwell's could put an office building right I mean like there's an C right now CB you can put an office build if I'm um yeah I mean I I I would lean to maybe proposing like looking at this IIA light
and being very specific of what we want okay thanks Mike I I'm not gonna add to Anita she sum summarized it really well I think it was good though tonight to hear from Mrs Bam that on how that a got created so that that a piece to the pie we didn't know how that got
created but I think now it's starting to come together why we got so many little zones here you know from the history so it's kind of good to hear so thank you Joel yeah actually I have a question for Evan with regards to the setbacks and CB
and the fact that the residentials Residential Properties which are split between RB and CB so um not considering sead for a minute um if in fact those Residential Properties were RB all the way up to the property
line of CB does that affect the setbacks on CB because they're directly a budding residential um but in this case where are they considered a budding residential or not a budding residential because it's their lots are kind of
split between RB and CB yeah so this gets um into the the weeds of zoning but we have in our underlying zoning and within SE uh the seid we have a provision where um the setback is increased to 100 F feet we're abing a
residential used or zone property and that's applicable um within IIA um zoning within the um underlying and the seid right so so because so then you're saying that because it's those
are currently being used the setback yeah doesn't change so um that's what I heard I'm like you can your the cautionary tale
is while it's good to view this as a pilot that can be applied to other areas in town using 24 Maple for anything to apply to other parts of town particularly when it comes to
dimensional is not a good size because it's it's a odd shape mhm and it's only 1.9 Acres um and then you need to remember that regardless of what the outcome is if
your dimensional requirements are overly prescriptive trying to uh prescribe an intended outcome that's very predictable the existing conditions on the ground are likely going to be the starting point for a Redevelopment project what I mean by that is the
existing footprint of the building having a non-compliant sidey yard setback the developer is likely to going to come in and say well your new zoning requires 25 foot setbacks however I'm I have an existing structure here I'm pre-existing non-conforming I'm
proposing to demolish the existing structure and build it on the same footprint y so I think you need to keep that kind of in mind when you're trying to balance um something that's overly prescriptive which never
works um and I would encourage you to embrace the flexibility of seid maybe you tighten it up maybe you customize it for this new um uh industrial uh District um but that's going to be the challenge here the use the use exercise
is fairly straightforward um but I think I think unfortunately 24 Maple in its current state it's very odd shape um going to be difficult
to kind of apply that to other other areas in town okay and then just final comment yeah the the 100 foot setback again it it applies um to existing um
industrial you could apply it to your new industrial um but in practicality it's really not applicable it it would have been applicable for um Davis at riverneck entirely new
development um but for something like like this and other properties where you're trying to address um these neighborhood conflicts most developers going to come in leveraging existing conditions okay thank you anything else
Joel so just off the top of your head then what what are your thoughts about to what agree we limit the uh residences that have the CB that are Z partly zoned to C CV and I mean obviously this is of
interest to us because we have another area in town that we're very familiar with that's Zon I but has residences so yeah um I mean it'd be interesting to know the history as to why these residential lots are split zoned the
notion that they're split zoned simply to accommodate 100 foot um offset seems unlikely to me it seems too coincidental um but it'd be good to know the history of that and we can we can look at some you know historical documents to figure that
out um my suggestion is ideally the backyards of those single families would be Zone to residential clean it up um but in doing so whether it's at Kate's corn or anywhere else in town you're
going to have to quickly come to the um conclusion that you you can't apply that 100 foot set back um and in many of these uh situations you're not going to be able to apply um anything more restrictive than what's already on the books and
even those are somewhat restrictive again if the goal is to truly provide incentives for these Property Owners or investors to transition these properties to a desired outcome you have to Prov IDE flexibility and again that's that's
the the beauty of seid whether you know whether you like it or not that's the mechanism to get into a special permit process to to provide the flexibility on a case- by case b basis okay and then uh and I just wanted to make a comment to the concern for har
Pond um I'm I'm very familiar with the concern about har pond because I sat through a number of Conservation Commission meetings about the proper way in which to handle the the U the issues that are there um but in this case where we're talking about either development
of new structures or parking lots or Redevelopment of existing parking lots there are storm water standards that have to be met and many of the concerns that were expressed about storm water would be mitigated through that so um we're
not things whatever I don't know exactly what condition they're in right now either either at Maxwell's or or for that matter on the locked properties but anything that involves any sort of Redevelopment or new development is going to get reviewed with regards to storm water to ensure that a lot of
those issues are are are don't occur so I just wanted to make that comment just to piggyback on on Joel's comment and correct me if I'm wrong Joel Massachusetts I think is one of the few states that actually has specific storm water regulations that far exceed any
any federal yeah ours are ours are yeah so some of the studies that were cited weren't Massachusetts based they weren't Massachusetts specific so in other parts of the country um those studies were absolutely correct if there is no um if there's only a minimum federal standard
assuming there is that's not adequate Y which is why I think Massachusetts historically has had very stringent water quality Stone water standards still doesn't go all the way to protect Watershed level planning um but for purposes of specific uh development on
specific properties it's a pretty high threshold yeah but I do want to say the har Pond Association has done a tremendous job they have taken on a lot of responsibility for that area and have have really done a wonderful job with it so I think they should be highly commended for what they've done and we
would certainly be mindful of that in anything that we considered as far as resoning Mercy um no I Joel asked the same thing I was I was looking at cuz considering the uh properties over on the CB like if we rezone things how is that going to impact their properties how's that
rezoning and then hearing about like where the setbacks are going to be so that's definitely something I'm going to have to look into and how we want to do this but that was my biggest concern there is if we rezone that how does it impact the uh homeowners that are currently in the both residential and CB
Zone okay tedra well I think it's kind of a two a twart process one is to think about what is it we're trying to achieve um and and then
you know we don't have to rezone the whole Patchwork quilt exactly the same I mean you know some of it could be left as it is or some of it could be changed in a different way I don't know um I don't want to make something necessarily
worse or more complicated but I mean I think it has the potential to be um as the general manager of L keed said a win-win win or somebody said that um
and I think if we you know try and do it in a way that envisions what we want what the community wants what the business wants I think it's everyone has expressed a a desire to work together to make it work I think we can figure
something out but I mean I don't I don't think I'm I have any idea what that is yet but okay thanks and from my perspective I think everyone agrees that locked has been a great neighbor um they've been great to the town great to the residents
in that area um and I think we all want to do what's best for the Neighbors the residents the the the companies that are there um and for the future um I think one of the concerns from at least my
perspective on this planning board is I've seen many cases already where the current tenant or the current neighbor has been great there's been a zone that works well for them they move out and then it bites Us in the back um so I
think we want to my concern is that we want to try to avoid that um make it workable for everyone involved now um but also protect uh potential future issues so all right in terms of next
steps I would like to propose that one or two folks come up with a straw person proposal that we can look at next time based on all of the feedback um that we've gathered
today um and that way we can have something to look at react to adjust tweak um so I think we've had a few meetings now where we've gathered input and discussed and gotten some good ideas
on which direction everyone seems to be aligned on um so now I think it's just putting it down on paper and and reacting to that and seeing what we can do with it so do I hear any
volunteers I would volunteer for that i' volunteer so we have three people who volte ing who's volunteering Joel Anita and Mike if there's three do we have to call a meeting we meet no you should um just
leave it to two so we don't have to isn't four a quorum four is a quorum but the more people involved the more it should be a little bit more public with notes and minutes don't that
we we could post the meetings if it was I would like I would like to try and keep it to a minimum for this first draft and then have the reaction and discussion in a larger group like this um I think that works
well so Mike and Joel can you guys work together what about me I thought you said you wanted to back out no I didn't say that I'm I'm more than happy to I'm more than happy to provide input mhm and I'll I'll provide some of the products and
let them do the sausage making so all right so I'm fine with that all right Joel can you shoot some information over to Anita and Mike and Mike and Anita y the two of you run with it for y are you able to do something before
the next meeting we could probably get a couple of pages out I don't know what do you think I yeah okay all right let's put it on for the next meeting um I'm thinking if you outline the goals of what we're
trying to do um I think we're hearing that we want to try and do a new zone so without naming the Zone because we can do that later maybe create what the uses might look
like felt we were Ed yeah and then if you have a map of what the zones would be on the map so those three things now do I'm assuming that we want to think about this not just in the
context of this particular neighborhood but possibly also in the context of a general idea how to solve this kind of problem in other places okay I just want to make sure that that's part of the Charter here
Y and I'm available to assist that with uh that working group if need be okay great all right so it's not technically a public hearing so we don't need to continue it
correct okay all right so we will uh put that on the agenda for the beginning of next meeting all right next on the agenda zoning bylaw amendments for town
meeting um I think how I want to handle this um we've got four areas we've got lighting the general bylaw changes flood plane and um the 129 overlay I think
what we can do is uh since Kelly is here we can do that one first followed by um General bylaw which is fairly easy then flood plane and then the 129 overlay um what I'm thinking we can do is have that
short presentation for each one do question and answer um public input on that specific one and then if we feel like we can vote tonight um take a vote on whether to move it forward uh and
support it for town meeting if we feel like it needs to continue we we can continue it to next meeting can I make a recommendation yeah since we have um four pallet Drive of people here for that do we want to take that first
before we go into the zoning amendments I mean I'm sure we could I don't know how many people are here for the zoning amendments but we might want to get these people first in and out yeah okay we can do that um all right so
why don't we take that out of order and we will do for payot drive now if Casey is here I did see him poking in oh yeah I should probably make that announcement um so the town manager um I
looked over the spring meeting Town warrant and the town manager did remove um the uh katees Corner area from the potential bylaw changes at town meeting um so we will not be discussing those um
in the zoning uh bylaw hearing um because those are removed and those will not be brought forward to town meeting unless we're ready to down the road my all right um Acy hello hello
Casey Ferrero with Howard Stein Hudson uh thank you very much for having us back here um quick update we did receive Conservation Commission approval last night so we'll look to get that order of conditions issued to us
um diving into the changes since the last time we were here I know last time I was here I presented you all with kind of conceptual um idea of of changes that would reduce the impacts
into uh the Wetland buffer zone which I know is not your primary concern but overall reduce the scope of the project um and then additionally we would be removing uh the the encumbrance of the castory parking lot that they paved over into our
property um what you've seen in your submission packet that you received is the full engineering for that conceptual um which shows where we still meet all storm water standards um as part of a Redevelopment project we do end up with uh slightly less impervious
in the end with getting rid of the Castor parking lot versus the addition of our parking lot um another item that you received in your packet was a landscaping plan to reduce uh or to uh reintroduce some additional plantings um to make back for
what we're removing as part of The Proposal um in that Landscaping plan you'll see two maple trees um eight Ferns and six Barberry shrubs um six the six or the eight ferns rather are listed
under shrubs in the the landscape schedule um I learned last night that they are actually not shrubs they are ferns um thought they would be wanting the same but they are not but they are actually really good for the the Wetland buffer zone there so we're going to maintain them as the proposal um they
provide habitat for reptiles amphibians they good for water quality they have a good root system to protect erosion control which is kind of necessary where we're trying to reestablish that area after we remove the pavement um and then
additionally we added a bunch of stuff to the operation maintenance plan that was discussed uh at this meeting the last time we were here some of that is the line striping snow removal um and we also added a plan um that doesn't necessarily dictate where to put the
snow as much as it dictates where we don't want you to put the snow um you know the smaller events where you're not going to be piling it in locations we still want you to be able to plow it to the curb lines um it's really those bigger events where you're going to be looking for space we want to tell you where not to put it in addition to that
maintenance plan that is uh in your packet we're also going to put signage up um so signage up on that kind of plan cell the bottom side where we a but up against the drainage disch that goes back behind dunshire we don't want snow piling up there and then additionally um
right up against the infiltration Basin we're adding some signage for no snow storage there um and then where where we are removing the the pavement from the Castor parking lot we're going to sign that for no snow storage as well um that's because we don't want them pushing snow and Sal back into what we
just reestablished excuse me um I did receive an engineering letter from DPW yesterday afternoon um as far as the planning board comments
there was three outstanding um one of which was regarding freeboard on the infiltration Basin so I touched base with Sheila this afternoon um we do indeed meet that one foot of freeboard um so she's all set with that um the mounding analysis is a pretty easy fix
we just have to extend out um the duration and time at which she wants us uh to analyze it and what that does is essentially takes what we analyzed was the 24-hour of the storm itself um what she wants us to extend that to just to
make sure is the additional 13 hours of draw down that the infiltration Basin will have after that um so extending that time period uh she'll be satisfied with that and then the final comment she had was to sign the snowband parking uh
for no parking unless in an emergency I discussed that with her this after afternoon because I really don't want to put signage in the middle of that grass field or grass area in the back that we want to have kind of for the children to play and then essentially what she said and she talked about it with Tony was if
the plany board feels that signage itself is not necessary um we can put it into writing into the conditions or some other form uh you know we can put it in supplemental data report or something to say that it will be operated by the
management company of the facility to ensure that no parking is taking place except for those emergency situations um and she said she would be fine with that um I just don't want random sign post in the middle of where we want the
children playing back there beyond that I don't think I have any other changes it was mostly just engineering what we presented to you last time um so I'll open it up for any
questions here from the board Evan do you have any other items dad um I do not thank you all right we'll take it around the board I'll start with Mike I think the bases are covered about
as well as they can be okay John yeah it sounds like you've addressed um the things that came up at the last meeting so Anita Mike uh no comments
Joel I did look at the the supplemental data report not just that one but the last two or three sure um and um because I I was concerned about the reduction in the size of the Basin and uh also the flow the direction
of the flow the Overflow um and in general I think that uh that what's being proposed is an improvement from the existing conditions I mean it would have been ideal if you could have gotten gotten the water more directly into the Wetland as opposed to into the ditch but that's
just not possible and U so it's being directed as far away as it as it possibly can be which is an improvement over the way it is now and it meets all of the the standards and it is an improvement so I
you know I I I think um I think the a nod to the especially the Caputo Stark weathers Stark weather caputos I don't remember which way it goes but um but uh I I I yield to your desire for greater trees and commissions and um and in
general I think that this is this is definitely a workable plan and you know I'm perfectly perfectly fine with it okay rcy just a moment dearra you're on mute you're on mute I'm good thank you for
uh everybody putting their heads together and trying to come up with a better solution hey Chris just one thing in the decision it says the fence needs to be repaired or replaced I know we'll get to we'll get to some of that okay in a
bit um all right I noticed that the omm plan doesn't have anything about the mirror you mentioned that you guys were going to put the mirror and then so if that is something
solidified that you guys want um I know Kathy came up and spoke that that walkway is actually just down to a laundry room that doesn't actually get used on a day-to-day basis so uh we kind of thought we were okay without that but if that's something that the board wants
us to install in that fence certainly add it before my large and just have it on the plans end in the the mental that report or the omm rather totally up to you guys I think it might be a good idea to have it because if someone is carrying stuff up from the basement they might not be able to see
around the corner very clearly well I think I think the point of that was that if they're coming up from the basement from laundry room they're not going out into the driveway they're coming up and going back into the building to carry the laundry in okay does it go into a boiler room or
anything like that or is it just laundry room it it's the basement for the entire building okay so there there's really only I think two units that don't have access to the basement
and you need to have a name okay we adding a mirror or not adding a mirror I'm fine without it yeah yeah it's not make it more complicated than it has to be
and then um I would be fine with the no parking with no no parking signs in that those spaces and just put it into the on M plan that they would have to maintain
that um as we're going into the omm plan just trying to Envision how that would go in or how you would want to see it or special condition maybe I was thinking maybe a special condition yeah okay so uh no parking in the grass area
um unless it's a declared snow emergency correct yep and then I think Sera May address this but I'm going to address it first um the recycling um I noticed in some of the pictures that uh where you
guys are proposing the recycling is completely plowed in with snow and I know that that's probably a town plowing issue um but it would be good to maybe put some no snow storage signs there as
well if you could like around that telephone pole maybe or the light pole so I agree that it's likely where the town is plowing the culdesac um we can prob I don't I'm trying to see
where a sign would actually help that um we could also make it as part of their property management company to ensure that it stays clear even after the town plows that'd be a good idea because the
town's going I plowed for the town for a while they're going to do what they want to do so um i' I'd say maybe a condition that make sure that the property ures said it's clear and accessible that' be good if that's
good all right that's all I have um any members of the public want to speaka Fernandez 27 dunshire Drive um if you wouldn't mind pulling up what I sent some of this we'll go through quickly because some of it was addressed last night have some answers on some of the
things so tried to make it quick so we didn't have to hop between drawings um sorry I just keep on going if you want to go to the next part I'm showing this part because I want to show a little bit of the history of the property to understand something that's beyond the
coverts being undersized um back in December of 2021 Four Points who's the maintenance company for payot Drive they came in and they hand dug a ditch from payot to the back of my property in the purpose of drainage for that area um
this was done um in what we consider now the 25t buffer zone there was no contact in conservation um they didn't contact the town engineer at that time I had made some calls because I didn't even know if this was allowable because there at that time was no drainage um if you
go to the next slide um this is some of the impact of what happened when they dug that ditch you can see that erosion occurred it just kept on sliding through after the time when they did it it was in the winter time by the summertime water just kept on coming through in that area and just digging it deeper and actually sliding
down the back hill and making it worse you can go to the next one so I kept on contact in the town trying to find out more information um we know that trash goes back there um water's going back there we talk about the fence um we're you know they're going to be moving the
recycling bins we'll talk about that a little bit later cuz I don't know what they're doing is really feasible but right now I told them yesterday I was kind of hoping they go pick them up they're recycling bins right now in my backyard tipped over the stuff's coming out of them I can't get to them um I hope they go and pick them up tomorrow
but they're not even using them for like the last two weeks since it's been snowed in um this is interesting so back in 1962 this is the original Road plan for palot they actually had a catch Basin at the bottom and a pipe and just show you originally they had a catch Bas in
here there's a pipe going to the back of the eement which is what you would expect because it's a low Point um in the mid 90s when the sewer company came in they actually took away that catch base and it became the sewer manhole and no drainage all drainage was taken out at that point so about 1995 is um to
2021 when they had dug the ditch there was no drainage whatsoever in this area and then just a little bit more history as I was still fighting um erosion contacted the storm water superintendent um at the time that was Dennis um they came in and this was
interesting to me and a little frustrating because they came in and they just clear clearcut um they went through like a loader um they dug it out behind this is the property to the right of me um and they just they didn't keep grades or anything during the project and then
they put in some RI wrap they put in a sale which you can see in the next picture and so what the end product was was they put some rip wrap here to extend it in and it did divert the water into there but part of the problem is is because that's so flat it just backs up
so can go to the next one we were still having issues with water you can see here because this is where their dumpster was a long time ago for the water just eroding down the hill they came in and they installed some curving you can see here it's very minimal um but they came in and did that that seemed to help divert the water down but
you go to the next after all that was done water still pools here and as we get storms this actually comes closer and closer to my house back in December not this December but the previous December it got within 7 feet of my garage I'm glad it didn't go in but that's kind of like the
result go um one of the things I noticed through the drawings that they had in their plot plan there's an elevation marker here 98.4 you have another one over here which goes to 97 this is one of those pipes that we're talking about for an exit way over approximately 264 60 ft it
only has a half a perc grade going down there it's pretty flat and I didn't have areas in here but there is some pretty flat sections even when you look at it and you almost wonder if it goes uphill a little bit before it goes down so the reason why I kind of bring that up if you go to the
next the direction that they're going to be flowing the water now is going into here my fear is that because this area is flat it's going to back back up and just add to the excess water load that we have that's why I really was hoping when they were talking about it coming out of the side they were going to get
it shuffled this direction I really frustrated because this is the pipe that's coming out here the water's going to come down it's going to go on either side I hope it stays that way I mean there's a lot of like water at sometimes that's going to be coming out of there a pretty good rate um so that's that's
kind of why I showed you some of this because water just pulling up is going to cause problems so it would have been nice to see it if they could have it some way that way um the other thing is just in a lot of the dryings and the current conditions there's nothing that shows the swell so that's why it would have
been nice to see that and either the town drawings or whatever um yesterday at the conservation meeting um David is looking at some of those things and he's trying to help me a little bit talking to the DPW to see if there's anything that could be done we don't know so he is looking at it um
this next section is about the snow removal plans and if you go up here um I did question this last night a little bit because that area in yellow is not included the red is all the ones that they're saying is no snow the one in yellow is not included there and part of the problem is that's adjacent to the
Swale right now the sale gets covered with snow all the time you can't see it so I did ask about having ballards put in but I guess it's something to ask more of the Town than them um but this snow piling up and something I want to show you this dumpster by the way isn't even
in it's enclosure all the way because they can't even get it straight on because all the snow piling up is not allowing them to get a straight shot into there so I that's I was appreciative about you're talking about the sign about no snow because it it's just blocking but it's still going to block on the right and
you keep on going next one yeah next one please and that one's just accidental um and this is in regards to the parking I asked about this last night if you can go to the next one that one par parking spot that is there is
directly adjacent to the soale and it's pretty close to the Wetland right there I'm concerned just with the fact that you're putting a car there that is going to be dripping stuff and it's going to have direct impact to the Wetland that was discussed a little bit last night um part of the discussion was they felt like it would hinder the apartment
complex having to find one more space somewhere I you know I don't know about that but um this got taken care of I saw that in the email so you can skip that uh the Trap my favorite topic um we know that this keeps on getting
pushed over we talked about it before um I really would like them to get a new fence if possible to help contain that um if you go up I have still have concerns about these things being able to go in straight I don't know if it's even something that we could ask for I don't
know if that pad could be made wider tipped out so that it could fit both the recycling and the trash because right now I mean I just quickly took a look at the jarring and you can actually see by the tire tracks they're unable to drive in straight right now there to put it in what happens when we put a car there that's parking there all the time are
they really going to be able to get into there to empty the trash um in the upper one you can see how crooked it is there the fence post there to there it's a pretty good portion it's Kitty cornered out right there um and as you can see too the side doors open this is
their their trash right now that's over there but the recycling is being planned to be put here right which would be right behind this side of this door you can go to the next one 100% of the time there isn't any time of the year that these fence doors
are closed so if they're going to be storing those recycling there how's the recycling truck going to see it um and if they're not seeing it they're not going to pick it up um they can say that they're going to have somebody pull it out but who because there's no maintenance on site there so I like I said I don't know if this can be widened
as an ask I don't know if you can make it so it contains the recycling I don't even know if it's sufficient I mean they have two recycling bins for like eight apartments two bedroom apartments it seems pretty small let's go to the next um this is just some pictures different parts of the season because I
see out of my backyard um but if you can go with just up here on the to Corner the orange I kind of put a line in that's the corner of my property and that's where they are right now um your have properties on the other side of the fence this side yeah so if
you go up do you know when you looked at the back of the sale yeah that's my yard so my yard goes this way yeah so on the orange fence up there is actually my my edge of my property which is the top of the easement the chain link fence right here is the the other end of the
easement so I have the easement fenced in on my side and this fence actually that they have here is actually for a couple sections is not even on their property just I just would like them to ensure that their recycling is contained properly again the fencing this one um
the next slide was about you know we T I wasn't I was talking about the 6inch clearance I found out yesterday that is going to be a requirement for any of the fencing within the buffer zone which would be this section here all the way around here um and anything that they put new I guess down here or
repaired go to the next one I was wasn't clear when I first looked at this if there actually was going to be a fence in this area cuz this drawing said existing fence would remain this one didn't say anything um last night Casey did say they are going to plan on keeping that fence there um like I said
I would like to ask that it be a new fence and also if it's possible have this section of fence actually be on their property good news for them is I'm putting up a fence next summer um so from here over is going to be all fence for myself um just it's General
you skip that that's just why a fence is good um keep on going I think that was proposed plannings he talked a little bit about this um I would like to see more shrubs but it sounded like you used the ferns instead the ferns are good go to the next
one uh bear berries isn't the best choice here we talked a little bit about that last night uh Casey actually agreed that it probably wasn't the best choice but he said if they survive they're good if they don't survive he'll pick something else um cuz they're actually meant to be in drier drier areas not a wet area go to
the next one oh wait hold on a second back up the reason why is they're putting them here where's all the water coming out from the retention Pond right there so they'll get wet um I I was asking about where the shrubs were last night he said they were
the ferns they are good um like I said it would be great to see something extra um they are putting in red Maples another awesome choice I think they're fantastic it would have been great to see another one here maybe one up by the dumpster but didn't really look like it was in their plan invasive management we kind of took care of that last night so
I don't really have any exture on that so I think that was it thanks Casey would you like to comment on anything sure
um I think um a good major or a good portion of that was regarding the the trash and the recycle up front um we did run Auto turn on the the dumpster truck or the the trash truck it can access it it can get in there whether they have to kitty corner it when we're another
that's how they're going to do it I'm not going to dictate for them how to do their job the recycle we we're not planning on keeping it inside the enclosure we're keeping it right outside it's not um messy materials in there it's supposed to be clean recycle um so I don't really have concerns about it being outside of the dumpster pad itself
especially where they're just the barrels are not an actual um you know like a 2- yard dumpster something like that or 5 yard or so um as far as the trash goes I don't I don't necessarily think there's any issues if the board feels otherwise please let me know um I
asked the client um or the applicant how often they have recycle um emptied and uh she said she's going to find that out uh from the management company we can review that if it happens if it needs to be increased based on usage we can
certainly do that um and we'll work with our management company to make sure that that happens um as far as the snow we talked about this yesterday the having that put in as the snow store or into the snow storage plan or snow removal plan that area up
there by the dumpster um the only real areas that are going to be pushed into there is from the culdesac none of our areas like our the parking in the front there is just going to be pushed straight back up into our property it's not going to be pushed down FL further KAC so I don't really think it's
necessary to add that into the stor removal again Town's not going to have any desire to look at our plans on where to put their stuff so um as far as the the bear berries go um they don't thrive
in wet um areas what I told David and the Conservation Commission yesterday was that um you know that is in an area it's has about 3ft separation from the water table or more um it's not at the end of the pipe it's
to replace the disturbance caused by adding in that pipe so it's around the top of the pipe so it's not going to be um inundated with water on every storm event um it's only going to be wet as water
does over top the wear of the pond which does happen um in you know a 2-year 5year storm event um it doesn't happen with every storm event so it will see water but anywhere you put them it's going to see some sort of water um I do think it's dry enough for them to be put
in if we decide that we want to change that um planting to something that might Thrive better there we'll certainly review that and I told David that I would work with our um environmental scientist to maybe recommend something that might be better um but for now we
will proceed with the plantings as proposed because as part of a standard condition in the order of conditions I believe it also makes it into the decision is that we have to guarantee the Landscaping um at least through when I think it's a 2-year growing period or
a one-year growing period and it's even I believe it made it into our operation and maintenance plan um that anything that dies has to be replaced so if we plant it and it dies and I can't certify the as built we're going to have to rectify that anyway um so we'd like to
move forward with the Landscaping plan as proposed and if we do want to change the plantings I'll ask David I'll ask Evan as if they're good with it um and I think that's kind of the path forward that we'd like to take on the on the plantings there
um a lot of what she talked about the Swale is just not under my jurisdiction I did have a pretty long conversation with Trevor DP assistant DPW director assist DW engineer today um and they do have a watershed study going on for this
area actively they have retained a civil engineer that is actively looking at the stun Shire area um so while personally and my the applicant here we can't do anything about the ditch itself or how pale it is graded or how pale it drains um it is being looked into and whether
they have faith in the town to do it I can't help that either but it is actively being looked into um beyond that I don't think there's anything else that I need to address okay thank you so I have a question on the on the
dumpster pad sure um that the reason that it's in the it will continue in the orientation that it is is because you're not touching the dumpster pad just leaving it as is correct you want to leave that area existing okay and um
and I mean it seems like it's more of a management thing but the do being left open um continuously I definitely agree would hide the existence of the recycle so what is it that can be done about that the doors being left open I mean we
can have I don't know necessarily know how this would go in but we'll make sure our management company knows that they need to be shut it might be the trash removal company themselves just opening it and then leaving it open um again I don't have we don't have control over them but we can make sure
that the company on that is on site that's visiting the site knows if they see it open get them closed okay so um yeah that would that would be good and um the have you looked at the access to the dumpster pad given the current
markings and if there is a car there what that access will be so you've looked at that as far as how we've looked at the autoturn of that with a fulls sizee trash you have okay correct all right well good luck to that person parking there if that if it doesn't work all right thank you just go you just
going to ask is there anything that could be done to um you know either house or keep those recycling bins stable so they're not flip like say there's a winter storm and you have high winds and it blows them over it look from the photos like they're blown over partially covered by snow and so I think
that's due to where they were located they were located at the end of the culdesac um where basically the town was plowing into them anyway so they're likely knocked over by snow being pushed up against that we're proposing to relocate them up right next to that um the where the dumpster pad is so they'll
be up against the fence if they are if there is wind Force that's going to knock them over they just get knocked over into the fence and then kind of write themselves but um they should be inside is there any reason they're not there now we can have them move there tomorrow I'm sure why are they not in
the enclosure I there's room I don't think yeah I don't think there's room I mean it it looks dumpy I mean it needs to be cleaned up and I mean recycle is yes recycle but it's still trash mhm and it should be in the inclosure of the dumpster for the
facility so what we can do is we can evaluate whether or not there is room within it to get them in uh I'm just looking at the area we have there and then if there is not perhaps we can just expand the fencing to um it
seems like that would solve a lot of problems if you're keeping the do shut then the neighbors would not see the trash of the facility we can yeah we can evaluate that as well that should be done thank you y anything
else right when are we having a discussion on the fence next okay you said it would come up so do you have the topic for the fence no I just think the fence the the discussion and the decision is to be repaired or
replaced so which is the board what does the board want well I think I think the I think the fence should be replaced two in agreement on that one a new Stockade Fence put down 6 foot to block the neighbors that have been there's not much
happening none of this Improvement is is is helping the neighbors and I think a fence for visual would help the Neighbors at least they're getting something out of this hole they've been here for they've been taking care of this right so I think dealing with this situation that's my just my opinion I
mean this you guys all have decisions too so I agree with me no I'm in agreement after taking a look at it myself I think the evence really repairing it's not going to do enough I think it does need to be replaced well I agree there needs to be a fence
I don't think we should involve ourselves necessarily in how that fence gets there I think you may be right I think it may be impractical to repair but I don't think we ought to be the judges of that what we ought to say is
there shall be off fence so who is the judge who's the judge it's not going to be the neighbor it's not going to be the owner it's not going to be the building inspector the only Authority in front of the to help solve this is the planning book but I think it's a pretty OB
standard that there is a functional full fence yeah there is or there isn't yeah okay is it functional now no no doesn't appear but I think in the last meeting Casey mentioned that they would take the panels from the other side replace what
they can and then create new panels or buy new panels for the rest of what couldn't be repaired we're definitely agreeing that there's going to be a a functional fence as part of that and it's in the plans as the fence to be repaired um so there will be a
functional 6ot fence it's how we're getting to it is I guess the question um chain link or is it no no stock stock okay yeah I just want to make sure that's the and I think the last meeting you said you're going to take the old
sections and put as many as you can and then if we work with a contractor and they say there's simply not enough here to put this into functional condition your best option is to replace it then that's the path we're going to have to go because as I certify this I have to certify to the plans that I proposed and
my plans propose that the fence is going to be repaired so if the fence does not end up repaired my certification is going to have to say please accept this even though the fence is not repaired and that's simply not going to happen by either this board or the Conservation Commission
um are we are we allowed to ask for a new fence or are we it's a reasonable condition um it's not as uh as Mike indicated it's not something that the board has typically specified I mean the as long as it's functional and serves its intended
purpose which is um you know um visual screening I still want a new fence I just don't believe it's going to be repaired adequately I think it may pass some some other third party who's not involved and hasn't heard the whole
story but we've heard the whole story we've seen it I just don't believe that anything other than a new fence is going to work so just to add some clarity to this uh in addition to the engineer certification prior to final um well
prior the occupancy of the site improvements uh David kunon and myself will go out and do inspections on behalf of the commission and planning board let's assume it passes that visual inspection that day of and there's a windstorm and then sections of it uh be
you know come loose the condition still applies they're responsible and perpetuity to maintain a functional fence normally what happens is after the fact is in a butter will will notify town hall and then we'll initiate enforcement still feel the
same we can we this just says offense need to be to replace make sure yeah we can probably reward it to say a fully functional fence needs to be no I want The Stockade like I just don't want like a chain link fence this just says a fence I think there's a plan
detail is there yeah there's PL detail detail for a stock fence it's not going to be chain link so we can say maybe a fully functional Stockade Fence there it is right here Anita yeah yeah it's on there that's fine I mean I didn't
realize you inspected it and I didn't realize that you have to certify it so hearing that um you certify that this fence is going to be repealed to Evan and the officials likings hopefully it meets
muster there's a real quick question get sua Fernandez 27 dunshire Drive the fence that's directly adjacent to the dumpster is not on their property so can there be a condition that there's fencing put up on their property line to block the trash on that section it you
can see it in the line of the property because my fear is they'll say it's not their fence they don't have to replace it and that's like a really shitty section sorry for my word but um I think you can see it is it in that plan yeah right here I mean you can see this section here um and you can kind of
see it next to mine this this area here their fencing comes over into this person's property so it would really be beneficial if they could extend their fence out and keep it in their property and actually repair that section cuz it's really bad bad I I also I mean they've had the opportunity
to repair this fence for I've lived there 10 years I mean there's times I went up there with a zip tie to try to help keep it together because it's that bad I I don't see I mean we we deal with this all the time I really would like to see a new fence I don't think it's a detrimental ask with everything else that's occurring to us not to have a new
fence there thanks just as far as that one section goes if you want to add a condition that we work with the property owner down there to move that section of the fence onto our property as part of the repair it's fair enough we can do that to get it on our property and then it's our
responsibility so is that fence right now not your fence it's our fence it's part of our fence line it just dips into their property okay so so we can work with that property have to take put it on your property anyways right so that's what I'm saying if we want to make it a condition that well her concern was that
since it's not on our property we'd claim that it's not our respons responsibility I'm offering to move it onto my property to make sure it is my responsibility okay make that condition Evan you got that thank all right any other members of the public Michelle kuto Stark weather 19
onsh drive so actually I'm going to start with the state statement that we were quite panicky about all of the destruction and we're grateful that some of that destruction now involves the impermeable surface at castores and it's going to be somewhat rewilded and we're
very grateful for that and like our stress level went down to I don't know like a five instead of a 12 on the scale of 1 to 10 um I did mention at the meeting last night um with the Conservation Commission that
um there's coming through the the water mitigation ditch I'm at 19 at 21 um because it's easier to get down her driveway than behind my house and behind the fence I took pictures of that little teeny
tiny um the the tube that goes the covert it goes underneath my um the corner of my yard that's literally all of the covert that I own is just that little tube um I did take pictures of it because and I had taken it before it
snowed um and I'll show you it's pretty much full that's part of the reason the water's not moving it's going to decide it's not going to work anymore just because it's ornery but um you can see it's that's on TW on 21 side it is maybe
15 in of open and the rest is full y um and the the water mitigation ditch on Patty
side 21 is that full as well on the other side on on my side of the to of the pipe it's quite a bit more open it's still pretty full but it's quite a bit more open and it's deeper so all of that water that's pooling at at SAS and at
patties and and all of those other yards it does pull in my yard too it will come up over the water mitigation ditch but a big portion of this is simply that it is full of sediment um I do know that mass mosquito had sent out they came out
Katrina came out and I mentioned this to the cons Conservation Commission that K Katrina from um Mass mosquito came out they are scheduling sometime in the spring to come and clean that out because I guess Mass mosquito can come and do that because it helps prevent
mosquito infestations um but also I've heard rumors that maybe DPW might consider at least getting that tube less sediment filled um I think that would make a big difference and I know I had called and they were kind of like we're not sure if we're allowed to touch that
so so however that works um we would be grateful because that adds one less or takes away one more thing that causes flooding in everybody's backyards um but I'll also mention we were we were
excited there were going to be 14 TRS yay and now we're down to six we were a little disappointed I get it you got eight ferns if we could have a few more shrubs in addition to or in replacement we'd be happier my daughter who's usually the leaf litter girl of I we
need to have deciduous leaves and we need to have because that's the wildlife said oh if you could mention like the the um the Wild Roses that live in this area they're supposed be very good for wetlands and Wildlife um you know the the natural ones not like the hybrid
what whatever and I said well I'll see if I can get that in there she couldn't make it tonight so said I'll toss it in there so um we were hoping for more shrubs but at the same time we're very grateful that there's going to be a lot more planting it's not going to be all impermeable surface and um and I guess
you know we we were all kind of like we're going to give they're going to give and um in the end I think this is mostly pretty much the best compromise and I'm very grateful for everyone that has been willing to compromise all
around thank you thank you I did want to point out that anything related to that swail or the ditch or drainage um is really not in our purview um it's mostly a DPW conservation issue um so I'd
highly encourage folks to work with David Coons and um and DPW to keep trying to resolve that that area hi Julian Lam N dunshire I would also uh I was looking at like the fence
while walking and I would really love to see a new fence from where I live and just it would be one thing with the trees gone just to have and I've lived there for eight years almost nine years and it hasn't gotten any better and it
really isn't going to get any better and so I would really like to see a new fence just to help our side of the neighborhood kind of keep the trash out and just to finally replace it cuz I know fences are expensive but it's
just really not a pretty fence so I'm tired thank you guys thank you have a good night any other members of the public wish to speak I was just going to offer um to show
folks the pictures that I had taken of the fence back in January um yes could you come up to the microphone yeah I was going to offer to show the pictures that I had taken to everybody here so they
see the same picture um the um yes the fence at the back of the property is in poor repair but I think the fence that goes along the brook is in pretty reasonable shape yeah there are a few
missing pieces but we intend to replace those um so um if you'd like I can show you the pictures that I sure took yep and this is probably the worst end of it
um you know this is the other end looking towards the front Okay so I think the fence that is along the brook is yeah is is probably repairable yes the fence
along the back is in poor repair we were going to replace it until this paring go to the microphone it it was in the replacing the fence was in our list of things to do until this parking lot project came
along um so as time goes on you know we would replace the other sections but we only want to replace the sections that we really need to right now and I don't think that
entire line along the brook needs to be done at this time okay thank you Casey any last items uh no actually I just wanted to reiterate that I don't necessarily know that this holds any weight to the decision um but I had been
told by Kathy several times that there is plans they do plan on repairing or sorry fully replacing the fence over time they're trying to see what damage this project is going to do to their budgets as it is for when they figure out when they have money to place that
fence so the ask is for now if we are able to let us repair the fence as through the condition we want to put it in a functional form and then in time when the money comes back after um the project is completed they need to
replace the fence anyway they're going to do that on their own without you know the implementation of that through a decision from the planning board um I know that doesn't make it into the decision it doesn't really hold weight for you guys but that is still their plan
okay thank you sure all right any other comments one more very small question I think it was answered what kind of maple red red okay that's appropriate for that that's
spine all right before we get to the fence topic any other special conditions or questions all right in terms of the fence what are people thinking new fence
repair as much as they can and then new sections for what they can't to the standards of the engineering certification and inspection are people okay with
that I'm fine with that hearing I didn't hear know that he was going to certify it and I didn't know that the Tom was going to inspect it but just hearing what the owner just mentioned that the backside really needs to be reped I mean that all the entire fence has to be reped not just the swill part the entire
property line so the backside is getting removed altogether as part of the project but you a putting no one back in not in the back right okay um not what crosses the property the part that's there's going to be a new fence along the Ting broo R ting a road side of it so that top
side of the plan there's there's going to be a new fence those panels are what's going to be used to replace the bottom fill corre between the neighbors correct so Joel are you okay with that no but on the other hand it doesn't rise to the
level of voting no in my opinion so I I would not I mean I would be willing to vote Yes even though I still think it should have a new fence because I think in many other ways uh there's been a lot of compromises which are appreciated and um
so I still think should be a new fence but it's not going to make me vote no okay I'm with Joel with the new fence I just don't see I I just don't think the incremental cost of this of a fence like between repairing it trying to move
it versus just putting it in I just I yeah someone who just put in a new fence not that long ago it's extremely expensive especially for sections where that picture just showed what I just saw in the picture
there are sections that are perfectly fine and a big stretch of fence seems to be fine yeah I mean yeah there are sections that are completely torn down and non-existent but if they have enough
panels to put those in yeah if they don't then they'll have to buy new panels yeah I don't know it just seems a little uh cost ineffective to try to repair and move a fence and then let's say two or three years down the line that fence Just Junk you know and now we
got to replace it so you're paying for a fence twice versus paying for it once we're also trying to work with a budget that we have right now I don't think we should be be worrying about that we should worry about what not how any more than we should worry about what
kind of uh you know what kind of uh wiring they've got or you there there are a million things here that are decisions at the construction point I agree I my guess is they're probably going to wind up replacing the darn thing in a couple of years anyway but
that's not coming out of our budget as long as we can guarantee the result I think we're fine okay all right yes
sure Michelle Caputo Stark weather 19 D Sher drive so as a Butters and neighbors um what is our recourse if we are looking at a fence and saying wow that really that lasted 15 minutes or that lasted 2 years or however long what is
our recourse and you know just because if you say okay well they have to repair it they had to repair it a long time ago and it didn't get repaired it's my understanding that you're responsible for maintaining your fence and you know I've heard multiple of my
neighbors saying that fence has never been repaired as far as they can tell so I'm just curious what is our recourse if there is an issue and like how strong is that enforcement thank so Evan can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe
that because this is part of a project with a um condition they they do have recourse in terms of the building inspector yeah even without a condition it's shown on the plan yeah um so you will be um making contact with the
Building Commissioner and asking him to enforce the planning board's decision that required is a functional fence that goes for landscaping lighting anything else that's shown on the plan or in the in the decision thank you and part of the
reason why it wasn't applicable before is because there was no project with plans right under our jurisdiction thank you but Evan there will be a condition for this correct yeah there definitely will be a
condition uh for this particular uh decision may I suggest uh at a minimum you may want to consider closing the hearing yep if you want to take the time to uh review and vote the draft decision you can do that tonight if you don't I
can clean it up and have it for you for your March 12th meeting are people comfortable voting on the decision did people read the decision ahead of time pretty minimal conditions except
for the ones we added tonight yeah Evan could you go have four special conditions first one is um the fence along the southern property line with dunair
Drive um shall be um repaired or replaced to be uh functional uh number two functional Stockade yep number
two uh no parking Within the uh uh grass area unless declared snow emergency number three property management company uh shall clear snow around
dumpster in recycling to maintain clearance and um let's see back up to number one it's also two it's is the fence all fencing shall be located on property coordination with the budding property
as necessary and then the fourth one is wasn't uh definitive Definitive but recycling bins to be located within dumpster enclosure or um consideration or exploration I think
is what Casey suggested are you okay with the definitive on that one or yeah so what I what I'm offering is we'll see if we can locate them within the existing enclosure we have now we'll do that if not we'll expand the fence to go around where they would fit so I'm not going to
expand the concrete pad itself but I'll expand the fence enclosure that goes around so either way the recycle bins will go inside and enclosure makes sense that helps and then Evan I did have one
additional correction first page number three missing an e on my cired that as we were as we were doing it all right all right if people are comfortable voting on this decision
tonight we can close the public hearing and go right to a vote well I'll I'll give you a motion to close the public hearing second all right um we'll have to do a roll call um dear I'm I I'll to close it yeah oh uh
motion by Mike second by Anita dearra yes okay uh Joel yes Mike yes any yes yes yes Mike yes me yes so unanimous
public uh hearing is closed um next I'll will take a motion to approve the decision as amended tonight I I'd like to propose another change and that is on
the facts on number eight six number six um I'd like to strike the word only and then it would just read eight trees will be removed versus 16 previously proposed or something like that I know
the public hearing is closed but I believe the number now is 10 is that correct me it's 10 as as the current proposal has it thank you for that correction yeah thank you for the correction thank you for anticipating we were going to ask you that that's that was the only all right
I'll take a motion I make a motion to accept um to approve to approve the um what is this uh for it special permit site plan
yeah Special Department site plan for payot drive with the conditions as amended tonight I will second that and the motion made by Anita second by Mike and I'd like to make a comment before we vote sure I still
think that we should ask for a new fence that's all noted for the record Joel yeah all right roll call deardra I Joel I Mike hi Anita I John I
Mike I and I am an i unanimous approval for for palot thank you everyone thank you all very much have a great night all right now we'll move on to the zoning articles again just as a reminder we
will do the presentation and or introduction um board question answer we'll do public input uh board comment and discussion and then either voting to continue to
next meeting or voting to um approve and put to town meeting all right so we'll take Lighting First well good evening I'm Kelly Bey 117 Park Road uh the principal author of
this bylaw and I have a uh prepared some um this is essentially what I would give at town meeting and we'll step through it first a little bit of History this is uh our we've had a bylaw for outdoor lighting on the book since at least
200000 sorry to interrupt you Kelly um do we need to read the I just realized this is a public hearing um you don't you can if you want U but you did indicate you're opening the public hearing okay has not on the agenda okay thanks sorry okay um the existing law
was passed unanimously at town meeting in in Fall of 2000 uh it is basic as many there are more than 50 towns in the Commonwealth that have similar bylaws it's pretty basic it essentially requires that above
a certain brightness in terms of lumens that a light needs to be pointed down so that all the light falls below horizontal there are some exceptions um but it doesn't really have a lot of spe specific it is a zoning bylaw uh there's some
exemptions for emergency lighting and so forth because it is a zoning bylaw it is complaint driven and so in the 25 years that this has been on the books I have maybe on one hand uh that's the number of times I've reported to the Building
Commissioner that something was egregiously bad and maybe maybe needed to be fixed I have certainly not been the lighting police for the town cheler next one please but a lot has changed in that 25 years and principally it is the uh development
of a once in a multigenerational change in how we light the night and that is LEDs uh they they have been uh it's a tremendous technology in a lot of ways uh most notably because they deliver a lot of
light a lot of lumens for very few watts and so consequently they've been embraced the problem is that um any LED that has been installed in the town either on a residence or on a business has been installed since our original
bylaw was in in place and I can tell you that there's been widespread disregard for this basic concept of pointing them down people think that if they put a a an LED on the side of a building and blast it out sideways to light every corner of their property or parking lot
that they're doing a good thing that's not the case uh what has happened in addition is that we have learned a lot about lighting science in that time we know uh two things that I want to point out tonight that glare is especially bad uh
that is to say when you see that light shining on you it inhibits your ability to see well in the darkness and the second thing is that LEDs generate a lot of blue wavelengths which are ubiquitously bad for every aspect of the nighttime environment for plants for
people for uh nocturnal creatures for skylow it's It All Points back to the blue wavelengths of light so so um and in particular there has demonstrated harm to humans uh from Bad light the Circadian disruption has been shown to
be a uh probable cancer cause so there's there's a lot that has gone on so what I did was I worked with many many stakeholders to develop the bylaw that you see um I consulted two lighting professionals I checked in with every
major stakeholder in town um and um and so you can see there that uh I I want to just point out if I can back up there what right there this is when I'm talking about glare this is not light that is above horizontal that's in this
slice of the uh distribution that's just below horizontal you know glare when you see it you've seen it from bright headlights you've seen it uh going coming around a corner and having um a wallpack from a business hit you in the eye especially if you're a senior I know
none of you are seniors but if you if you were you would know that as you get this becomes a bigger problem glare is a big big problem for seniors and so we want to try to attack the glare this is not in Cher this is I I want to show you this is a really bad example of glare
this is from a school on Nantucket and all they did you can see how your ability to see is compromised here and what they did was they took those very same lights and simply pointed them down and the next slide shows the result um it is it is a dramatic change
and I'd submit that a lot of the lighting that has been installed here in town in the last quarter Century could be made to be compliant just by turning it down pointing it down so let's get into the details uh one more detail of what I propose uh this notion of color
temperature that is it's a way to use a temperature in Kelvin to approximate the color of the light that's coming out of the bulb the higher the temperature the Bluer the bulb uh just as a gauge our our resident our street lights that were
installed about 12 years ago have a color temperature of 4,000 Kelvin uh this bylaw calls for 2700 Kelvin which is somewhat warmer uh an example of that is the the lighting that exists um in
the chelster Plaza parking lot and now in the Summer Street Plaza parking lot that is 2700 Kelvin it's very pleasant it does a good job of Illuminating and just to be clear a change in color temperature is not the same as a change
in brightness you can the lumens the the term lumens determines how bright it is color temperature is just what color it is and in fact color temperature is now something that is available on every bulb that you buy in a store so it it is a a common concept that's and being
embraced by the lighting industry so what our bylaw calls for is a couple of things first of all and most foremost is that I'm uh proposing and we have osed uh to replace the zoning bylaw which allows grandfathering of pre-existing
non-conforming uh fixtures with a general bylaw that would now make all of those noncon any existing lighting that doesn't conform would be non-conforming and there' be a 10-year period to to bring that into compliance another reason for a general
bylaw is that um uh it would Embrace uh both Municipal lighting and also utility lighting anyone who's gone down Cher Street knows that there are very many spotlights that are uh attached to utility poles that try to illuminate a
parking lot for a business that um are are owned by uh National Grid and those would be captured by a general bylaw as well one other thing that's that would be uh very novel in this framework would be U comp I would have to say for every
lighting bylaw that exists compliance is the Achilles heel uh and and enforcement and so I'm proposing to have a designated lighting standards officer that could be somebody from the building Commissioner's Office it could be a
contracted lighting professional for for difficult situations or in your case when you have a complicated development that comes before you and you want to make sure that the lighting plan that's being submitted is uh conforming then you could you and the cost for that
would be borne by the developer in that case in terms of the standards uh there are more numbers in this one than there were in the other one uh we would ask that uh not only that a certain above a certain brightness that that bulb be
fully shielded but we also talk about uh limiting the number the amount of light on a given property and in particular limiting the amount of light allowed to uh go over the property line through a measurement something called uh foot candles that can be measured uh this
this would be a new way to prevent somebody from shining a very strong light into their neighbors window there there would be a standard for that um it would set a color temperatures I mentioned of 2700 Kelvin uh there would
be certain situations where we defer to the standards set by The Illuminating engineering Society or the IES which is the national standard setting Organization for this the number of exemptions would be expanded uh to include things like sports lighting none
of this was covered in the original bylaw that the exemptions would be much more specific but on the other hand there would be some new standards that maybe no one ever thought of before things like landscape lighting uh Lighting on facades on buildings uh uh
string lighting uh in a in a bar you know outdoor bar situation not so much problem here in chelsford but in a lot of communities residences put string lighting that just annoys the heck out of their neighbors and so this would be a way to to control that um and that is
the end of my presentation thank you all right any questions comments from the board I like the stream lightings on my neighbor's yard I'm sorry I didn't realize stream lighting
was a problem I kind of like it just to be clear you can have string lighting oh okay good but it can't be above a certain bright and it has to be uh uh abide by a curfew yeah okay that's fine okay then I'm
good I have a question for Evan actually how does this uh if this if this goes uh if Town votes for this and we have applicants that come before us typically there's a lighting PL lighting page um they the applicants then are going to be
required to comply with this bylaw MH okay and so then we would be evaluating their compliance with the BW which may involve our depending on the situation may involve our needing to hire somebody that can do that assessment with regards to the bylaw yeah I mean what what
council's indicated in his um legal review um which is why in article 30 he removed um which is the zoning article he removed uh section B uh he's he his guidance and advice to
the town is that it is only the lighting standards officer who can make formal and legal determinations of compliance the planning board as part of your uh uh regulatory process uh can provide that
review um and then the lighting standard officer presumably would um refer to it in order to determine compliance so the board isn't necessarily being asked as you are now
um to ensure compliance the council was indicated as part of your regular review your submission requirements still require uh the applicant to submit a lighting plan for your site plan um submission requirements um and that you can um
initiate peer review um essentially at that point the lighting standings officer presumably wouldn't need to do peer review okay am I allowed to amplify that um one of the things that happens is you see a lighting plan in an architectural uh
plan and what happens when you finally get to turn on the lights can be very different uh no contractors I know this is going to come as a shock to you but contractors don't always follow the instructions and so one of the things that the lighting uh standards officer
would be uh charged with is making sure that what's in the plan that comes before you and then you sign off on that ends up being installed and ends up being the correct amount so so we would be looking at we would be looking at a number of things presumably I mean I'm
used to seeing that page that shows you know the Matrix of uh just what the you know I guess it's Lumen or I never actually checked to see what it was but there but then we would also be looking at are these the right acceptable fixtures and are these I mean are we
also going to be I mean we we wouldn't in a plan actually be looking at how they're mounted I Pres Zoom uh no so again just trying to get a sense of like what what's the level at which we're council's indicating that
you don't you don't need to do a full lighting review like as you currently do because this bylaw is clearly indicating that it is the the sole responsibility the primary responsibility of the lighting standings officer to ensure
compliance however not every project um go not some projects go before the planning board so I think procedurally it makes sense for the planning board uh to try to do that review to the maximum extent
feasible um and that that can include a peer review but we've seen in other cases in other projects where if we can't do that that analysis we do the
peer review but then as projects go on we're a little stuck in terms of well if we've done it for this project we should be doing it for this project should we standardize on either a peer review or not for this lighting
plan um the way Kelly's explained it uh to me and I think to others is that it's kind of based upon the complexity of the project okay or the sensitivity of the project and
I can't tell you exactly what a complex or sensitive lighting plan would be maybe we can you know continue to have the assistance of of Kelly and others uh to help us um but I can also say that I
don't think the um there's no one within the building department right now who has the expertise so even if the planning board didn't exist the U existing staff would likely need to peer review almost every project and we may
need to figure out uh some sort of standardized uh you know sliding scale as to how certain types of projects are handled it may be over time with again with Kelly's assistance some and some training maybe some of the uh simpler projects smaller projects don't need to
be peer reviewed okay but anything that came before our planning board and that triggered a a zoning approval I mean those likely will need to be peer reviewed and and if I may if if you had a particularly complex situation uh my
concept is that you could have that plan adjudicated by a lighting professional and the cost for that would be borne by the proponent yeah right and procedurally that uh would presumably assist the lighting standards officer because the planning board would have already done a peer review and it would
have been uh the consultant would have deemed it compliant so if this passes a town meeting we should probably soon after have a discussion about how to incorporate it into our procedures yeah yeah because I think it's going to be a learning curve I mean because a certain number of things like storm water
whatever we have a sense of yeah it's complicated it's not complicated whatever it took a while and so lighting is going to have to be a new thing yeah okay any other questions comments for we Kelly Kelly presented
article 29 which is the non Zone bylaw article 30 is the actual um zoning bylaw which deletes um the existing outdoor illumination zoning bylaw in its entirety and um and then just has a
section A I'm I'm scrolling to it right now and if I may you the pre-existing bylaw had a whole section on sign lighting and uh that was in conflict with the sign bylaw which had lighting added to
it so one of the the the things that I tried to do was remove any signage uh issues from this new one so that there would be the the proper separation of those two yep and why why is there like why do we
have to have this person this what do we call him the lighting compliance the allance comp I mean considering that we just we cut two heads from well someone's got to enforce it and I believe without an actual
person it would fall to the Building Commissioner right that's what like again we just cut two heads and next year doesn't look any better if I made this doesn't require you to hire anybody all all well it's a lot of extra
work to make it this is very I mean this is very very detailed right and but it's work that technically should be done now anyway with the current bylaw just in a different way this is a lot more specific yeah a lot more specific it
easier maybe this is not the right form maybe the fincom will be the right form for this discussion but considering that we're cut two heads we had to cut to the heads this year this is a lot more work I'm not opposed to in theory having
some you know some regulations around lighting but the enforcement of This concerns me um and how detailed and like I was I went back and we read our current zoning bylaw and I'm like
all right this seems reasonable to me like at this point today you know well well I I think you got two things here one is determination that a new project is being put together in a compliant
way and uh and that we do to some degree Now by looking at the lighting plans the second is uh inforcement down the road should somebody be concerned that uh
that some lights violate the bylaw I think that's somewhat separate the first I think in part we can we can even put on the proponent of a project if it's a large enough project we can get them if I understand correctly Evan we
can get them to pay for the analysis essentially uh peer review yes section 7.2 cies that and so so we're okay with the new projects it's uh it's stuff that's been out there for
a while or people that backslide right or the person who wants to add an addition to their house or wants to do something different I mean as like someone who's not a lighting person yeah I look at this and I'm like I don't want to deal with it as a Citizens I'm
like well I have no idea if I'm comping or not no one's complained about my lights like I don't put a lot of lights on but like right but an that exists today with the current bylaw yeah it's just a different level of compliance right that's what I'm saying like I don't know this seems like a lot it
seems like like i' rather just one of the if I may one of the things that made the original bylaw unenforceable was that it was so vague it didn't have a lot of specificity to it and what we've what I can tell you
and you can probably prove to yourself just going around town there was wide there has been widespread disregard for that bylaw because not everybody comes before you when they want to put a aition on their house or they want to slap a security light in their backyard
they just do it and so part of what I am hoping for in this is a group Consciousness raising uh uh attitude adjustment if you will to encourage people to do the right thing I've had multiple discussions with
the Cher Business Association who is uh uh they they're completely sympathetic to this this 10year Sunset period would allow most businesses within that period of time they're probably going to change their lights anyway and so they will simply
put in the right lights in place of they're wrong lights now at some point down the road um how we certify that that happens I think we we've kind of come around to this that if it's a simple project we'll be able to know if it's if it's the right lighting or not
if it's a few lights if it's a complex project like a you know a a Walmart or something like that coming to town or or a large development there then there that would be when you trigger a a professional review not by me by the way
uh to make sure that not only is the lighting plan that's presented correct but that the installation is correct and I also think that we should be putting forward clear guidance how and when we enforce it is a
different topic that if there's not enough money to enforce it doesn't mean we have to enforce it but every project that like anybody who's doing an addition needs to pull a permit and that all falls on the building inspector right so we have these guidelines they're going to have to make sure that this is being followed it's a worthwhile
conversation for fincom all right but just to clarify I think for purposes of compliance section 7.2 clearly indicates that whether the demonstration of compliance is being done by the existing staff or new staff or the planning board
it can be uh the peer review can be required and paid for by the proponent as Mike indicated enforcement is going to re require some additional capacity but that capacity is is contemplated over a 10-year
period because that's that's the that's the sunset Clause but the spirit but you're right you're right the spirit of intent of this bylaw if Tom meeting passes it is that it will be enforced and that enforcement will require some additional capacity that
may be ex training of existing employees or maybe over time high Hing you know a part-time employee or something I I guess my point here is I would like it to be a little bit less um a little bit more
flexible um and less complex that is definitely a planning board that would discuss require would not be um not require us having to hire additional people cuz again we're I would like to chime in
that I don't think anyone's proposing hiring any people um I personally as someone who's sitting sck at my kitchen table looking across the um my backyard in the wetlands to bright bright lights
shining in my face from the liquor store on Summer Street um I'm very excited by the General T tone of this that you point your lights down and you use warm light and you buy a lower strength light bulb I mean that seems
like great from a like stewardship and Good Neighbor standpoint to me I also think the 10year sunet Clause has left plenty of room for people who aren't ready to do the change now to do it over time I
mean but that's what our current LEDs LEDs have made it possible for us to do something like this in a fiscally responsible way for new projects coming before us so I don't I I don't really understand your well that's what our current bylaw says right our current
bylaw says that right like you know no it doesn't this this is making it much more specific okay it's like a modernization of the first generation lighting bylaw yeah and I think the
sunset Clause the 10 years pushes out that enforcement to really 10 years from now with a little bit of luck by then every will have replaced the lights anyway yeah and the enforcement problem won't be nearly I think most of the burden is going to be on new projects
and on us with this because new projects are going to have to comply and but with the new technology is not going to cost them anymore they're just going to have to use a plan that follows these guidelines yeah but I think most of the complaints and the
retroactive work that the Building Commissioner would have to deal with is not going to be needed until closer to 10 years from now when is the schedule to go before fincom next week no finom next meeting
is the 13th week after the week after the 13th no the 13th after our next meeting the reason I ask is the board inclined to keep this open until you know after fincom or my guess is that they'd want us to good
point yeah weigh in first and then have their discussion they usually usually likes the planning board's recommendation I'm okay I mean I'm prepared to take a position on
it I would like to get public input too so if no one has any other questions or comments we can take public input anyone from the public or Paul I appreciate what Paul Cohen toown manager I appreciate what what Kelly's doing and I admire his passion for this
my concern is the implementation of it and the enforcement of it um yeah you say it's 10 years for compliance but but it's not 10 years it's going to be 10 weeks because any new fixture that goes in during that period is subject to the standards of
the law so how is the bill commissioner or the lighting standards officer going to know you know after a period of time what's new and what's old out there so it's not oh we don't have to do anything for 10 years it's going to be gradual as it goes in the bigger concern I have
though is the enforcement of it lighting is on at night all of our inspectors work during the day so now what are we going to say to the Building Commissioner the lighting standards officer or so forth oh go out well like today it's Mar it's not even
March yet and it doesn't get dark till 5:30 6:30 we're going to turn the clocks ahead in two weeks and then it gets light at 6:00 in the morning and then as you know as we get to June it doesn't get dark till 9:00 so when the complaints come in from
the neighbors or whatever of the over the thousands of properties that we own how are we going to compensate that person you know what the standard is if somebody comes in during off hours it's usually a 4-Hour minimum or maybe a 2 a minimum how many nights a week are we
going to expect this person or persons to go out because you know it's going to happen we have people come to the select board complain about out of state license plates you don't think we're going to have people come to the select board or to the to my office saying my neighbors put in a a flood light for
security reasons and it doesn't comply and therefore you know what's the lighting standards officer doing about it and then we're going to have to send him or her out to do it and if you look at the the bylaw the appeals are coming to you because if they're not satisfied with the lighting standards officer under this bylaw they come into the planning
board yeah so I I I I appreciate and I and I I'd like it too I like dark skies in fact I you know I I really appreciate it it's better for the Wildlife it's better for for humans it's everything else but my concern is any bylaw we have
we have to be able to enforce it because we don't enforce it we're going to get vilified as a community for not enforcing the laws that we have on but but the other problem is trying to enforce it it's going to be very costly in terms of time and commitment to people and the problem is is yeah if the inspector goes out on a Tuesday night
well that means he's going to take comp time or or overtime on a Thursday or Friday for the workload that's significant so I admire what's going on here I'm just concerned about whether it's going to be enforcable and reasonable for the town to be able to do this when it gets into
effect how do other towns your colleagues do they are towns have the a lighting policy at all and if they do how do they enforce it I'm not aware of any Community having a standard to this to this level I mean every Community has lighting standards for their zoning bylaws and so forth and as you can tell
that oftentimes there isn't a great enforcement or adherence to that but this is bringing it up to another level which I admire and I appreciate I just don't know if it's going to be achievable to the point where it's you know it how are we going to be
adjudicating it when we have you know you know we have over 10,000 res single family homes and now you have adus and other things and neighbors closer to each other and everything else this I'm just concerned about the the issues in terms of how it's going to be in
effectively implemented in terms of enforcement by a lighting standards officer because it's not just a 10year weight you know how are we going to you know how you going to keep track of of what's going on in the meantime or the other problem is the neighbor turns the fixture down 3 weeks later they turn it
back up you know or change it you know how people get they get stubborn on both sides and that's the concern I have is I admire this I I want to see this done I'm just concerned about the ability to enforce the the standards mik I want to make a point here the light doesn't have
to be on for most of this stuff to be determined you can tell whether the thing points down uh there are certain pieces of this uh having to do with when a light ought to be turned out which I will admit going to have to be observed
at night but I think a great deal of this can be determined at noon you know Mike you know how it works what they're going to say is just like it is now you come out here in the dark
and see what it's like right it's not it's not going to be oh you can see what it is in the daytime they're going to want they going to want the inspector out there going to want you to go there but they're wanting you to go there doesn't mean you have to how you going to evaluate how you going to evaluate the light you know if
the string light if it's over the maximums unless you're out there looking at at night there are some things you would need to be there and see of at night but there are a great number of things sure I'm not yeah yeah you can go to the Walmart and see the fixture I'm not doubting that that's not what's concerning me I'm not concerned about the Walmart of the Summer Street pauses
I'm more concerned about I'm more concerned about the the single family res presential uh issues that are going to come up in neighborhoods where with the with the lighting that's going to be out there because you know we we we have a with noise we we we've gone to those issues with noise complaints and out
there with the decibal meters and everything else and I just now you're introducing the light complaints which I think is much more prevalent than than than the noise my question though is we have lighting bylaws in place now that need to be enforced how do we enforce
them we don't there's and I think this is where Kelly is um is his starting point he's acknowledging that historically Lighting in chumford has not been treated the same way as other zoning violations and that's likely a
community value which is not isolated to chelsford so I think that's one of Kelly's uh primary interests in elevating it and this is this is a new mechanism of elevating it he's also indicated that it's not common it's not
currently common in Suburban communities um but if the town is interested in trying to elevate lighting compliance modernized standards modern technology uh in elevated compliance and
enforcement you could do that through zoning but this is a stronger mechanism and he's Kell's clearly indicated that why this is the stronger mechanism and I and I get that and at the same time we currently have lighting bylaws in place
that are not enforced they're enforced on a case-by Case basis uh complaint driven just like just like Kelly indicated um we don't get a lot of complaints as Kelly's indicated as well as I indicated
to you if town meeting chooses to adopt this I think it sends a very clear message which is I think is what Paul's expressing as a concern to bring this a full circle when this originally I think Kelly can attested this the one of the first areas of concern that was
expressed across the board planning board staff was the inclusion of single family houses within the bylaw as currently drafted it still includes requires compliance with single family homes um and that's obviously a significant burden and that's where the
sensitivity related to a butter complaints uh much of the afterhour uh enforcement would would be related or associated with single family properties so that that's likely the biggest new burden or required capacity associated
with the bylaw like 10,000 single family properties in town like I'd be more comfortable if this was just on the commercial right to you know for because I that makes if we excluded the single family homes I would be a little bit more comfortable with that because I
think that's less burdensome it does come most most so those will come through the planning board we can apply these standards I think that I would that would that's the issue I have with this but given how many single family houses there are in chumford
uh it would seem to me that to put an exclusion in like that would essentially gut the law from a practical point and Kelly's indicated that yeah just gut it I mean 95% of the light around town would
be exempt what's the problem light the problem lights are from the commercial no I think the problem but we the problem is overall we see it in a bigger chunk when we have a commercial project right but those can be complaint driven
yeah and handled right on a Case by case basis because we do have that in our bylaw that they shouldn't be shining in someone else's yard they should be pointed down we already have that already in there well I I think this offers more detail as to what that means in is probably more if it were just if
it were just isolated to um downward lighting shielded the current bylaw would suffice but as I understand the proposal it it it it codifies light temperature and brightness the modernization of the illumination
technology which the Cent B doesn't doesn't right and again like the purpose for like you know residents is I just don't want this blaring light coming in my living room right like I you know know like it like to me like I just want
some a mechanism to call up someone and say hey my next door neighbor's flashing a spotlight into my family room right like that's really burdensome I don't want that I'm not so sure I really care about the color or you know like or the temperature
um I guess I'm just confused as to why this would create more complaints than we currently have now I I can tell you the most Virginia R most prent compl we had was a few years ago was the Rison sign right across across the way they they and and that was address we were
out there they you know it all got resolved the concern I have is is the is the residential aspect of it is that you know the idea that light is trespassing across the boundary line into their property which again can't be known unless it's at night and those type of things which are totally different than
than going to a commercial Walmart or to Rison and seeing are they adhering to the standard I think that's the that's a big concern that I have but technically our current bylaw applies to single family right it too does it does but the the Community Values and how zoning has
been evolved over the years and it's it's there's no mechanism and there's also no uh Community um sentiment to to apply it to single family so but why would that change with this BW is very
specific of course it is but it helps it's it and to answer your question it it introduces a notion of uh nuisance lighting the current bylaw is really silent on on nuisance lighting so if you introduce new terminology related
to compliance and enforcement it's logical to assume that there's going to be increases in complaints I disagree with if I may the existing bylaw applies to all properties single family including let me read from
it here's the part that is squishy and vague if a spotter flood light luminer rated at th000 lumens or less is directed or focused such as to cause direct light to be cast toward residential buildings on adjacent property or nearby land or to create
glare perceptible to persons operating Motor Vehicles the luminer shall be redirected or its light output controlled as necessary to eliminate such conditions that's in the existing bylaw it applies to everybody but it's completely unenforceable because it's so
vague and that is what we're coming that's why we're coming when right now if the if if somebody complained to the Building Commissioner about their neighbors Spotlight they'd still have to go out at night to try to rectify it that's not
changed Paul I'm sorry and they'd have no way to determine whether an actual transgression was occurring or not because there's no specificity so everyone goes away unhappy you know no CU a guy can say standards this is kind of going in here
complicated standards get changed all the time in the building code in the plumbing code in the electrical code and they're in kind of they're they're to most people those are not overt they're not visible because the the building inspector and the
contractors take care of that where the there's a gaping hole there there's gaping holes for like noise pollution or or if somebody's water is running them up because those are not really covered by the building code this is one of those situations that's not covered by
building code and that's why it's up to local bylaws like this to fill that void but it I just want to be clear the existing bylaw applies to single family homes too I will also mention that there are some uh circuit breakers for lack of
a better word for the single family homes if you've got a bright Spotlight and you want to keep that bright Spotlight you can do that but you have to put it on a motion sensor there there's there are some there's places in here that I've built in wiggle room for
especially residential property owners to to uh to be able to keep what they've got I'm not going after you know uh I'm not going after their their porch lights I would go after allight security lights that are really bright and shining in
the's you know in her in her bedroom there are many situations I have heard where developers have put up really bright lights to the point that they are obnoxiously uh um affecting U residential and the and the
developers say put up light blocking Shades in your house I I don't disagree again I don't disagree with that I just think this is a little too much my person for my personal all right um don't disagree on the developer side of
it new commercial I I get that but I just think this is a little too much okay are there any other Casey i' just like to ask a quick question um and maybe I missed this part of the discussion but on the peer review
part it says proponent may be required to pay for thirdparty review services to be utilized only where the lighting standards officer Andor planning board does not have the equipment or expertise to evaluate if if there's a complaint against a single family home and the
town currently doesn't have staff does the owner of that single family home because it does say regarding that it would be the the owner of the property shall have the burden is the single family home going to be forced to pay for a peer review of the lighting how is that going to go I
just don't want like you know my house I put up a flood light it's in compliance but now I have to pay for a peerreview to prove that type of thing how does that get get worked in enforced who decides when the peer review is required is that building is that being brought to the planning
board for discussion that's my question I would think that might be the planning board I would if it's in front of the planning board the planning board can hire third party peer I'm ask specifically about like sing so single family is going to
be the determination is going to be initially done made by the lighting standards officer right I'm saying it says in if there isn't a lighting standards officer or anybody with the capacity that be an existing employee as designated right and that that uh that
position will make that determination what I'm suggesting is sooner rather than later initial initial training will likely take place particularly for single family if it's included in the byw I think single
family is likely an area that is more straightforward than other areas yeah I just don't know if there's going to be an overlap from when this goes in until there's the training provided to either a town employee or someone hired with that experience where there may
complaint it would be a period of transition where the town would have to build its capacity and that's going to take time this is only going to get enforced by complaints no this res families are
not going to go change their lights to agree to the bylaw unless they're forced to if you install a spotlight on the side of your house a security light you don't have to have this the lighting standards officer certify that when you install it where that would be triggered is if your
neighbor decides that your light is is a nuisance ask all right and and you know that basically exists now and so what I've I've tried to do is to create a formalism a procedure a set of of a set
of Pathways to allow that to ascertainment to happen and a resolution to be achieved all right if and if and I think you're right in in in the sense that if you put up a light that is nonconforming and it it and you know
it's non-conforming and your neighbor complains shouldn't you have the burden to make it a conforming light I'm asking Kelly Kelly should be addressing could you address I'm sorry thanks I'm sorry I
apologize so broadly what I just said if just the installation of a light at a residence does not trigger a visit by the lighting enforcement officer it's only when a complaint is registered and when that complaint is registered the lighting enforcement officer during the
daytime can easily see whether that light is pointed down or not can easily check the the the Lumen output of the bulb to see if that's conforming that's all during the daytime I'm actually imagining that maybe the electrical inspector would be the most logical
person for this to fall to but it that's not my decision I think a lot of these things can be determined at the daytime and again it it gets escalated to you know a lighting professional uh only when uh a resolution can't be reached um
um and and that is a step that hasn't existed in the past and I have to say you know the status quo has not worked very well and our our town has um despite the
fact that it's had a lighting outdoor lighting ordinance um there are scores of businesses and countless homes that don't satisfy the existing ordinance the existing bylaw and so I've I've tried to
find a pathway to claw that back uh if we're no reason to appeal to people's sense of community their sense of of doing the right thing okay thank you Kelly to Casey's question um that um I
don't think that the town staff would hire a peer review right that I mean they would the building the building commissioner or lighting standard officer would have the legal ability to hire a PE review consult okay but I wouldn't expect most single family cases
would require as Kelly's indicating that's likely a a daytime visit to look at two or three four you know performance standards and so the issue the issue I think the issue is is there enough capacity based upon
how many how many potential complaints are going to come in well I think that's a separate issue I think the technical issue yes given the the standards that we have in this new bylaw and given the manufacturers information that they have
available I can't imagine most single family cases would require a special peer reviewer I would think that most most inspectors would be able to handle that pretty easily I would too okay Nancy looks like you would like
to speak yeah Nancy arway 65 Littleton Road sorry guys I've been sitting in the back listening to this and it's just kind of Dy having me crazy so having us crazy too yeah
really my concern is applying this to residences the existing B laws do apply to residences and they get applied for you know Ark
lights but this ends up applying it to all the lights that are you know all the outdoor door lights at the residence and I really think that's overregulation the problem is when you apply this
detail of a standard for a commercial industrial property the person dealing with compliance is an expert it's you've got engineering
involved and they understand this stuff when you start applying it in a household yeah there's some of us that are engineers and we do understand it but the fact is most people don't everything I've heard here refers
to installing a light at a residence but the fact is this compliance comes down to changing a light bulb because a light bulb as a lumen rating and it has a color
temperature and you change that light bulb you're in and out or in or out of compliance and you tell me how the average homeowner is going to deal with being able to comply with something that's this
detailed so I think applying it at the household level is simply opening us up to a lot of work a lot of animosity through a lot of complaints and I think it's the wrong thing to
do thank you thank you I actually don't agree with that that take I think that the current bylaw does apply to all out it says all outdoor lighting so anything in the new
bylaw that we're proposing is technically covered by the current bylaw doesn't do it very well because people any complaints that would arise from the new bylaw would be covered by this current bylaw the problem is is that no
one knows what it means so anyone can complain but no one can resolve it because the standards are not there it's completely open to interpretation so I don't think it's going to create any more more complaints
I actually think it'll make the complaints that do get that raised easier to resolve because they're objective standards that can be read on a new bulb box or the bulb itself actually and I
think that yes while it may be triggered by a changing of a new bulb unless it impinges on someone else's property it's not going to get a complaint and if it would get a complaint under the new bylaw it would
likely get a complaint under the old bylaw so I I got to agree completely with h Chris uh I think you're much much better off having clear standards than having
fuzzy standards fuzzy standards can be abused and people sometimes abuse them clear ones even if you get abuse you can get resolution fairly quickly um and I would agree most of the time nobody's going to check this Beyond is
the light shining down and is it so so large that it could light up a football field those are that's about the level that it's going to reach when you're dealing with with single family homes and we don't have we don't have
the problem now I don't think we would have it uh with a new with a new law I think we have to be careful too because from a from a town standpoint when you're dealing with a lot of residents I think everybody at this table is tries to be
rational um you you have to remember that thank we all yeah we all but many times in town government we encounter neighbors that have deep rooted animosity towards one another and they're not coming from a rational standpoint they just want to aggravate
or agitate their neighbor and so that's why I think we don't want to be drawn into that situation right so do you think that this would help that or enhance that I mean hearing that we I mean I could tell you again I don't want to bring Finance knowing that we we are reducing staff it doesn't sound like we
have the capacity in the inspector's office currently to do that uh or the knowledge we'd have to do training um I th those are some of my main concerns I think you're putting the inspections department in a bad position and that um
if we if town meeting votes for this and enacts these new standards um are we going to have to contract with a a lighting compliance officer I'm just trying to see how this all comes together because if we don't have the compliant if we don't have the in-house
knowledge to do it it's going to take resources either through a contractor or someone else to you know I'm not saying that I necessarily see it being a 40-hour week position but it may be pretty intense with with single family
homes I think we could have like again I think there could have been something done that would have been in the middle between maybe making our current bylaw a little bit tighter to this extreme and I agree with Nancy which is a rarity so I want to put that on the record that
Nancy and I agree on this um and Mike disagrees which is even which is even you know we should I'm just saying I agree with Mike yes I know so this is just changed the whole dynamic coup I I just think there could have
been something a little bit not as extreme so I'm not comfortable with this as presented so I think if I were going to have a feud with my neighbor I would not want this new bylaw because I think it would be
easier for me to to harass them to harass the neighbor with the old bylaw because there's no way to easily enforce it so I can keep complaining and there can never be a resolution whereas in the new one it's going to be
settled pretty quickly I think with the with the current standards but I think that the old way the old bylaw just I think creates a lot of problems that don't get resolved whereas the new bylaw covers the same exact things it just
provides a an easier mechanism for us to deal with lighting plans up front and it also provid provides a a mechanism where resolution can be sought pretty quickly with standards so I'll make a couple just
comments here I think when I was in my impression with Kelly St of this I thought it was commercial properties only that we were focusing on as mentioned driving around town you see the string lights I was under the impression that we were addressing the commercial only and I think the average
person in the residential doesn't know what lumens are and they don't know what wattage they have on the on the light bulbs and if you're going to test the Lumen output during the day you need to have that information people don't keep their information of the bulbs that are in there on the side of the house
they're out they get trashed out WR on the bulb we're going to go get a ladder and go up and and uh and check it when the inspector comes because you're going to look at that and you're going to pull it down you can do that okay but I think I think I've been wrong about Tom meeting before right every time I think
they're going to approve I don't think they'll approve and then they don't approve it right so but I think when you start to talk about personal property and controlling what's happening on personal property I think you'll have a big push back from town meeting on this that may be true commercial I understand
it and understanding so that we can when it comes to a meeting here the engineers can meet the the requirements that have been put forth regarding the lumens and the requirements I think residential I think you're going into a gray area that people don't want control that don't
want government in their their houses and I agree with you except our current bylaw provides that mechanism I agree but it and it currently controls it but what Kelly talked about it's turning the light down you pull the light down but it's not controlling what lumens is in the light bulb it stop shining it in
your neighbor's yacht that's in the law now not the bulb wattage actually brightness is is in there it just doesn't say how bright right right so but again again that's and that's open turn to your brightness may not be my
brightness but we're putting it in here yeah as as what the brightness should be and that's where the government over now you're now you're telling your neighbor what they should do and I don't I I think that crosses the line so that's why I was I was all father this and I appreciate Kelly on his vacation and and
traveling and doing all this work this is a phenomenal Pro uh article I just think if it was just commercial then I would be all for it now that it's going into residential and we dive more further into it and it's all about residential I think you're going to have a big push back on town
meeting so the question I would have if we did want to shift it to Only commercial how would we do that because our current bylaw does both so we would have to really figure out two sets of
bylaws one completely nebulous do whatever you want for residential and we would still have to change the current one I wouldn't say do whatever you want the you have in place now you can't because that applies to commercial and residential but then split this to the
commercial part you you you can control more commercial they're coming into town they've got experts at their table they can meet those criterias I think it's going to be very hard for residential and if you've got a two neighbors that don't get along you are just adding fuel
to the fire yep and it's going to be coming in front of the planning board for determination yep so you're going to have a lot more angry people throwing stuff at you that's just I mean just I'm just trying to me a laugh there but I mean I I'm looking at some of these fixtures
here and I have no idea like if I even have like I think I have this on my house like do I have that like that's in the ground but this is the ground but this is my little light like I just SP like $500 we do need to keep moving but my point is if I don't I'm sitting here right like trying to this I don't even
know what I have and what I don't have Jo the voice of reason let's say let's say Casey did you want to say something can I just add something quickly I think and I don't know if this is a perspective they actually want to hear but from the design standpoint where I usually am clear bylaws are very good
for commercial properties so I would fully endorse and agree with clarifying and and putting clear standards on lighting designs that you want to see from us on our side because you know I don't design the lighting
that I provide to the boards I ship it off to a lighting manufacturer and being able to provide them clear guidelines will actually help us again the concern lies more in the residential area so just wanted to add that all right we need to we need to wrap this one up
um you want to let it simmer to the 12th or are you going to I I don't think anything is going to change your voice a reason how did that happen I was just going to say that I think it's a very solid bylaw it it does
improve the bylaw what we're really discussing are things that I think are sort of above our level uh I think the town uh needs to make the decision about weighing you know the improvements that this bylaw could bring with the potential downfalls including the
economic implications which will be commented on by fincom uh I think we could certainly whatever we vote I mean if I if I voted yes I probably would vote Yes that I would um that would recommend this bylaw but with the caveat that there are known
issues that the town needs to take into consideration when they decide on it uh but the bylaw itself I think is very solid so I think a lot of what we're discussing is really sort of Beyond us so to speak any other closing
thoughts Kelly any closing thoughts for you from you um it only that only a very small fraction of the lighting that gets installed in this town comes before you you have to understand that there's a there's a common adage in the lighting
profession which is very little lighting gets designed most of it gets installed when a when a local business wants to add security lighting that doesn't come before you there's no permit it just happens and so that is one of the
reasons that we have the sit situation we're in now um I disagree to the connotation that this is mostly about residential it is not it's much more broad than just residential it speaks a
lot to commercial it exempts one and two family houses from certain of the provisions in there it allows someone with a bright security light in their backyard to allow them to keep that as long as they put it on a motion centor for example or turn it down for ex point
it down for example it also captures the lighting that's in the town much of which is not very good not just the street lighting but the area lighting um around the municipal buildings and such um and it also captures the lighting that the
utilities put in which is some of the most egregiously bad it's a very broad net and so because there a lot there are a lot of players involved here the residential is really a the the honestly the smallest part of this and I'm sorry
that you've latched on to that as the reason no question people are going to stand up a town meeting and say well you're coming after my lights no I'm not coming after your lights if your neighbor complains then I'm coming after your lights but not until that happens
just like now all right so the folks who are leaning towards not supporting this would there be any anything any changes or adjustments that could be made
to sway you in the other direction keep it to Commercial and I'm fine with the utilities like keep it okay Kelly would you be willing to have that
change I I think a lot of it would have to be Rewritten so I'd probably withdraw it from this town meeting okay then you'd also have to try to figure out what you're going to do now that you've taken a step backward because your existing bylaw does cover residences and now you're asking for a bylaw that
doesn't cover residences so now you've created a gap no I would say you're you would say just don't control residences not to this extent well different I I guess I'm I'm perplexed
you you want you want residences to be covered but but not with any kind of specificity I just don't want them shining their lights into someone else's yard I don't want to have to tell them voltage I don't want to have to tell them what kind of light I don't want to tell them that you can't have this light but you can have this light I just want
to tell them like hey just be a good neighbor if you're shining your light into someone else's yard then your the town will come out and will tell you not to do that but I don't think that's enforceable and that's one of the issues that we're running into with this current bylaw so I mean Kelly you get
into the lighting of a residential of 10 minutes that it can only be on for 10 minutes in order to retain the brightness of the light that you've got now but it doesn't say that yes it does it doesn't say the brightness of the light you got now it's it says it says non-conforming nuisance lights can
remain in place and a nuisance light is one that's shining across into your neighbor's yard for example if you put it on a motion sensor I've got lighting around my house that I can would not meet this bylaw yeah but but those lights in total are probably
on for a half an hour each year they'd be fine part of what I'm trying to capture here is the is the homeowner who has a light on the side of their house who wants to light their entire one acre
backyard with a single bright light and leaves it on all night that doesn't do anybody any good including the homeowner because it just shows the bad guys what they got in their backyard I I think you are I think there is more there is certainly a lot of
non-compliance in commercial buildings and for reasons I said a lot of the lighting gets installed that that is always under the radar but there is a as I as I talk to other towns that are trying to create bylaws just like this
one the principal complaint is neighbor on neighbor and so in that sense you've kind of gotten lucky that you haven't had more complaints than you've had um and I guess I just have to reiterate that the existing bylaw has always covered
residences and this gives a basis for quantifying the nature of the complaint and you know when you buy a light bulb at a at a store you don't just pick the one that's in front you
pick one that is the right brightness and the right shape for what you want the right you pick it according to color temperature it's called color temperature now but it used to be cool white and warm white and all that and you picked according to that and now you pick my choice my choice is what color I
want I understand that but in here you're telling me what I need to have I understand that that crosses the line okay so if you want to renew so for example excuse me you you were asking where we might if you want to remove the color temperature requirement that would
be something you could do to to uh uh at least in far as far as the residences I mean Ian I don't want you to pull this I think it it's a good discussion and I think it should we've never gone we don't always go uh unanimous right so
let take the vote the way it is bring it to town you've done a lot of work to this bring it to town meeting and hear what the residents have to say yeah and if the are are all far this by all means I'm far too if the residents are not then we modify it and next year you come
back want to put it to a vote are people comfortable with that y yep Kelly are you comfortable with that sure okay all right um are there any other folks who'd like to speak in public I'll take a motion to close public hearing on this
public hearing second motion by Mike Anita a second and roll call uh deardra I Joel I that also that we explain that we recognize their issues that are beyond
our wait AR this is closing public hearing we're I think we're just closing the hearing first closing the hearing that and no offence new fans thank you Anita I I Mike and I'm an i unanimous to
close the public hearing all right I'll take a motion to recommend this article to town meeting I'll second oh no I'll take a motion it's getting late I'll make a
motion to recommend this article to town meeting motion by Anita second second by Mike roll call dearra I'm an i Joel I what I said before and no Mike no no Anita
no John no I and I am an I so four to three four to three well we should we should be prepared to discuss it at town meeting when people ask us about that and absolutely it's it's a good conversation to have all right that covered article 29
that non- zoning bylaw yes you think it's time maybe to just sort of declare victory for that so what which on do we have to do we have to do General bylaw and flood plane should be very quick thank you all very much I appreciate the discussion thank you
thank you so much for your work let's do the flood plane real quick get that done and then and I feel bad the Paul's sitting in the back for the 129 no you get four hour remember four hour minimum all right let's plug ahead let's
do the uh the general byw and flood plane I think those are going to be quick um and then we'll get to 129 we'll at least open open the 129 and start it all right um so let's do article 31
the general zoning Evan may may I suggest there's a piece here where we adjust the zoning uh based on the light thing that we're proposing yes why don't we get
that out of the way okay is that separate from our recommendation I think and I would imagine the vote would be the same but I think technically we have to do that wouldn't you agree Evan the zoning article yeah technically we do have to do that one too that's that's within
yeah so let's do that one um that is article 30 article 30 yeah all right any public comment on that one all right I will take a motion to close the public hearing on that article I make the motion to close the public hearing
okay I was almost going to Second Anita motion second by Mike roll call JRA hi Jo uh Joel I Mike John Mike and I'm an i unanimous to
close a public hearing I will take a motion to recommend article 30 I make a motion to recommend article 30 as written second second by Mike a motion by Anita roll call deardra
hi Joel hi Mike no Anita John no Mike and I and I same vote four to three yep okay all right thank you article 31 all right um so this came up after
the mass attorney general office reviewed our um MBTA zoning review um they approved our MBTA zoning re um article but they did find a few other areas of the bylaws that were potentially problematic and suggested we
review them uh next slide Evan um the summary of the potential issues are uh erosion control possible conflicting languages um applying this requirement for special permits to as of right projects waivers and consideration of
fiscal impact um and specifically on school impacts and then the definition of family uh the Town Council uh did review these and he found uh no changes were needed in erosion
control um we do need to change the um remove the school impacts from the special permit impact um considerations since that has been declared by land Court to be not of uh legitimate uh
impact to be considered and also the definition of family uh is problematic that we currently have and Town Council suggested that we adopt the Brookline definition as suggested by the Attorney General uh so the next two slides
actually show the specific changes um essentially on those two um sections of the uh articles removing the need for additional school facility ities and
specifically excluding public school system from the the um from the considerations in the next section the family definition um the actual dwelling
definition needs to be changed to remove the word family um and they're really just dwelling units as opposed to family dwelling units um and then just non profit housekeeping unit yeah this was
the Brookline definition that was acceptable to a lot of them didn't start out wanting to be nonprofit so those are the recommended changes um any questions
comments I get a slam dunk and I will move accordingly uh before we do any public comments anything on Zoom Evan no okay move to close the public hearing second Mike move to close the public hearing second
by Anita and we'll do a roll call deardra hi Joel hi Mike hi Anita hi John hi Mike hi and I am and I unanimous to close a public hearing I will take a motion to recommend these to town
meeting I U make a motion to recommend article 32 32 31 31 to tell me any further changes yeah uh need a motion second by Mike um roll call
deardra I Joel I Mike I Anita I John I Mike I and I an I unanimous all right flood plane let me pull up all right the flood
plane um the these are town meeting slides that I'll be using um you got a lot of this background so I'm not going to go through it um we essentially have to do this uh it is basically uh recommended can I make a
motion to close it you told us all this before some of it well because this is a public hearing we kind of need to at least see the slides um quickly these changes are needed because FEMA is requiring them um it includes
the map changes in the uh March River Watershed the prior map changes were focused on conquered River Watershed uh DCR flood Hazard Management program helped us out um we do have a little bit more restrictive
model than the Massachusetts model in our bylaws uh the map and Legend are also included and I have included additional links and information for people to preview before town meeting
beautiful make motion to close second Anita makes a motion to close Mike second and roll call dearra hi Joel hi Mike hi Anita hi John I Mike I and I'm an i Clos public
hearing is unanimous and I will take a motion to recommend these changes to town meeting I make a motion to recommend Article 28 322 32 what why I say 28 okay 32 motion by Anita second by Mike roll
call dearra I Joel hi Mike hi Anita hi John hi Mike I and I'm an i unanimous okay all right told you those would be quick all right next we have the 129
overlay Paul a you give me Paul com Town manager again I'll be quick um recognizing the hour and the fact that I was here at your last meeting um and it's we've almost sort of come full circle tonight in
terms of talking about individual properties and so forth and and so what's being proposed here I'm bringing forward based on my nine years of having seen the existing zoning revisions out in the 129
Corridor part of which were driven by the the desire and need and request for those out in the corridor to have amenities and since that time the only amenities that have gone out out there have been at Press Cafe um with the
drive-thru um what I'm proposing here is to amend our fast you know our casual restaurants overlay portion of the bylaw to change it to allow from from upscale to fast
casual um and basically to fill the remaining two drive-thru components that are allowed under the bylaw um and you can see the change in terms of R reducing the allowing them to be freestanding um and smaller in size and smaller in
seating um and really what this is about it and is I think to enhance the 129 Corridor as well as to take advantage of what really is a unique parcel site that i' I've sort of watched over the years
we're talking about 285 milroad um as shown on the map um it is bound by if you go to the next slide it is bound by the route three Clover Leaf they in the center as you know um basically
there's no residential impact it literally has roadway on four sides of the parcel uh primarily the um on-ramps to Route three um B rer Road and then M Road um and
I you know was most recently occupied by um Lighthouse school and prior to that by life links um and now basically there's an issue of tency and the property owner reached out to the town and from the information they're
receiving uh in terms of difficulty and and rening the place that the market for that property because of its location the fact that it's at the highway interchange there is a traffic signal that goes in at millroad is for basically fast
casual um the component if you look at the next slide you'll see sort of an illustration of how that would be the building would be torn down and you see an illustration that was provided by the property owner of two fast casual going through um on
that parcel um to Standalone fast casual with their own separate entrances their own parking and basically you know the way in and get out what what this would really mean is 90 plus per of your traffic flow would
come from the highway and it would go back to the highway um and then the other balance that primarily would come from Bill rer Road on that area and but for this parcel I wouldn't be here um because I think it is a unique parcel
and I think it will fulfill a an amenity need that's out there in the corridor um right now it's only Press Cafe um we've seen nine years only Press
Cafe and despite the phenomenal success by Press Cafe no one else is coming no one else has come and I don't think there's a reasonable expectation that anybody else is going to come so we're left with two options and this is what I'm asking the town meeting and for you to consider and
for the town meeting to decide is we can do nothing and there's no indication anything will change in terms of amenities out there or we can change the zoning this building will be raised a
new on that site and a new F fast casual drive-throughs will be installed it will hit our quota and it will provide amenities out there Beyond Press Cafe although notably on the edge of the corridor adjacent to Press Cafe and
therefore I don't think it diminishes from the 129 business Corridor I think it's basically it's your edge of your Corridor and basically much like Press Cafe you're going to draw from not only the corridor but you're going to draw significantly from the highway and yes
we have fast casual up in Drum Hill I think the difference is this is on the other side of the little connector and so if you're on this side of the little connector and going down towards Burlington this will draw and this will meet that
need I also did speak to a major employer out the there because as you know we're keeping a close eye on a major employer having to do with manufacturing out there U which I don't want to get into a name but you can figure out who that is since we've
been a town meeting recently about a concern of manufacturing out there and I asked the property owner representative company representative out there I said what your reaction if we were to offer you know an
upscale fast casual coffee shop and and a place where somebody could get a hamburger for their employees because the property owners request that we not identify franchises um and his reaction is yeah
our employees would love the idea to be able to go grab a coffee um or grab a bite to eat in addition to what we have out there at Press Cafe so that's what it comes down to um and and if you go to
the last Slide the last photo is this will provide the planning board with the permitting control so much like you did with the CVS years ago in the center in terms of the exterior appearance you can do that here and that's what a lot of these changes are
is allowing you to control the appearance of what would get built out there by your permitting process um in terms of how it looks aesthetically does it fit
um and I just think the end of the day I just think I just think it's it's something that we can add that I think and I use the word add to the corridor that I don't think will diminish the corridor um and I think will provide in
my mind you know part of the vision that we had years ago in terms of amenities out there um so that's my presentation and I'll answer any questions that you may have thank you any questions from the board questions
first um this is a question for Evan the current Bay OD that extends from I have a map thank you so the bayad covers um the entirety of um
the 129 area however the the um fast casual is only applicable to uh m road and b r Road portion of M Road correct not including the exclusion Zone along Mill Road which is in yellow so the bill
ricka road all the way up not the entire stretch but I assume but between um Town Line with B RKA and to um uh golden Cove um midx Turn Pike it
does um it goes from the um yes from the bka Town Line um to uh this portion of is there a word is there a way to word this such that's restricted to Alpha Road from B
Bill Bill Rick as Paul indicated the the current bylaw caps it at three and so there's already one out there this would be the second third yeah but it's this is zoning not a site plan review so we're talking about allowing two freestanding fast food restaurants
anywhere along the entire stretch of Bill rer Road so I think our zoning decision has to be based on the zoning not the the project right so I would I would want to know could we restrict it such that it's to Alpha Road that this
particular you know these particular changes are related to what we're going to allow on Bill rer Road up to Alpha Road and the reason I specify Alpha Road is because it's two lanes up to Alpha Road it's one lane past Alpha Road why can't you just do Mill Road Ro you
certainly could do that the original intent of extending it um along the entirety of Bill rle Road uh was that uh there were sites identified across from Apollo Drive where there was actually a permitted
project wasn't for freestanding fast casual but it was for a full service restaurant right um and then there are a variety of um existing single family homes in that same general location however as I indicated for purposes of what's being discussed here
if town meeting approves it and the planning board approves a project we've met our quota the B caps caps at three I I understand that but but what we're doing is tell meting is we're approving the zoning so I want to know can we can we
word this in such way that it restricts how much of Bill Rick a road this is zoning applies to in the Bayon y because that that would be the only way I would vote for it article 29 I'm sorry 28
um subsection a you could amend that okay I wouldn't just leave it the way it is it restrict it right yeah what are you driving at Joel it holds well it's Bill Ricker Road it's Bill rck Road I think it's the intersection you should
say the intersection of that no I'm willing to go up to Alpha drive but but it right now the way we understand the way it's mapped the way it's mapped it's the entire stretch of Bara Road from Bera Town Line to right that was golden Cove Turnpike and I don't think that we
should be zoning that entire thing for freestanding fast food I because because we're not spot zoning right can we go back can we go back to point but I would be fine go back no no no to the we we we're
taking out um because there are restaurants that would be freestanding and wouldn't would actually like not be bad like across from this is for fast casual this for fast casual well that's what I'm saying
because we're saying this is f because we're changing instead of we're changing the word upscale to fast right and that's where I have an issue with it um and we're getting rid of G must provide reusable dinwar
for the interior site I see your point so I rather have a nice restaurant all the way down right in those houses right free standing right all I'm all I'm asking for can do and will continue to be a because we have right now it has to be doesn't it have to be no no under
under Section 195 145b restaurants freestanding full service restaurants are permitted okay they are okay then never mind okay then I was this is only specific to drive-thru so we would be capped out of
the drive-thru but but additional restaurants would be okay correct yeah upscale traditional sit down full service restaurants are currently allowed and will continue to be allowed and they can locate anywhere they don't have to be along the main lines
okay and what if wanted to have what if they were a fullscale restaurant but they wanted to have a drive-thru they could get they could petition that or no no they were only allowed three okay no full service restaurants
are not allowed to have drive-throughs and years down the road could that be amended at town meeting right so we're turning this into like that's my all right before we go into too many comments any other questions
I'm going to quickly shift the discussion to any public comments okay there's no here okay now no sitting there not nice they said no all right no public comments so let's
any comments internal to the board have to close the public hearing I have not yet okay I have a comment um I generally am predisposed to oppose this because I'm not a fan of
having fast casual there and kind of locking ourselves out of something more upscale and I feel like um there'd be more of a incentive maybe for the Brokers to help us if they didn't know they
could kind of maneuver us into taking a chain however it's been however many years I think Paul just said nine it's probably been more than that and um it seems that
no additional amenities have come or are coming and I have been on the other end of this situation where something that I thought should be brought to town meeting an
inter intervening board prohibited like didn't let it go to town meeting and I feel like out of respect for the town manager and his um efforts to have a long scale vision for the town and
what's best for the town's interests um I think I'm going to support this um and mostly support that it comes to town meeting for decision this it's not really I mean we don't we're not going
to we're not going to decide anyway we're just going to decide to support it or not but I'm going to support it okay thanks any other comments I think it's I'm going to support this I think uh we've been waiting for something down there it
hasn't been happening and I like the idea of where it's so close located and um I think right after Drum Hill if you come down there's nothing to right off the highway until you get all the way to
Burlington so I think this may draw this may be something that could spark what we need for 129 there's nothing on Route three there's nothing it conquered no and if you have to go you have to go Inland into Bill rer and into Bedford to get to a good coffee shop or a good
burger place but I know where they are that's good place down there was the old Maples all right any comments yeah I just say that I would I would support the um I would support the concept with the um suggestion that Joel made because my concern is I think this is an ideal
location right next to the exit ramp or the onramp for the route three however should an investor back out hopefully they won't I would not want to see it go way down 129 at another parcel correct um my perspective is tradition
Al zoning amendments should be um developed and and put forward by the planning board um but I think in this case because of the conditions for the market um I agree with Town manager
bringing it Forward um but I also see how this overlay was initially developed it was developed with a pretty wide Community Committee um so I'm actually going to abstain as a planning board member um from this vote because I don't
feel it's the planning board's decision one way or the other um I would like to see a go to town meeting and I'll be debating as a town meeting rep um as part of that process but I think that's where this zoning amendment should be debated because of the way it was
initially created so but I do agree that if it does go before town meeting it should be restricted as Joel mentioned I I'll do that I'll put that okay okay want you to know that I will when the motion comes it will say from Alpha Road to to the
line all right excellent for those of you who are still listening at home and didn't hear that the town manager will amend this uh to say Alpha Road um to the bill Rec line in that case I'm in favor I agree with
Mike thank you all right so um I think we're at a point where we I will accept a motion to close the public hearing I will move the close the public hearing motion by Mike second by Anita roll call
deardra close the public I Joel Hi this close the Public Public hearing Mike is an i Anita i i i i unanimous all right um next I will take a motion to recommend this I make a
motion to recommend Article 28 as amended I'll second uh motion by Anita second by Mike roll call dudra hi not yet Joel hi Mike hi
Anita come back to me John I Mike I go back to her just do it it's tough they tell well while you're thinking I
abstaining Anita you're the one that wanted to get out of here no but really that ship sailed you've had plenty of time to think all right I'll obain instead of saying no all right I'll abstain all
right two abstentions the rest are support all right thank you so that takes care of all of our zoning amendments okay um so next item Al leis on updates well I my husband asked me to
see if we're having an appointment for Central Village and I I couldn't I didn't really remember when he asked me I think that we decided Anita was going to go until until the election which is probably one more meeting is that right
but I have my the problem is I have my fin I've got fincom that is running on Thursday nights which conflicts which ran into the problem last meeting so if they need to take a vote like I can't make I can't make that and
we'll run all of in March so that's my problem but don't they meet earlier they meet at 6 they meet at 6 and comp starts at 6:30 last couple ones they've started at 6:30 so that's been the problem so I'm
fine to stay on till April actually after April is when fin cop stops and I can actually actually go um but we said um Marc we would appoint Marcy in this for at least for the next meeting yeah why don't we do you want
are you okay with going for the next until the election yeah okay all right so Marcy will go in your place deardra it wasn't me it was Anita oh that's right your place okay so I make a do we have to make a motion for this or
do we just yes I make a motion that we appoint Marcy for the center Village liaison motion by Anita second by John three seconds and roll call dudra hi Joel hi Mike hi Anita
I and I an I the grant submission stuff can that wait till next meeting um or is that time sensitive that is due um let's doe on the 26 so yes you can wait till the 12th
that will be next meeting minutes oh I did have one um lays on update from concom that um in addition to the um payot approval they did mention that the demolition has started
at 270 b r Road um yeah so far um anyone who drives the roads they've demobilized the crew for about a month um but when they are back they're going to start the foundation and below ground beta will have a site
monitor on site um they are authorized to stop work if anything um is not according to the ram plan um and so they'll correct things and contact concom after the foundation work is done
they'll continue site prep and beta will continue to be the site monitor on that project great all right uh meeting minutes did people review the meeting minutes yes yes um I did you know I had a little I had a out update from housing advisor I
just I'll try and make it quick but um we had a presentation from mik aola from ncog he's putting together our ncog is working on a housing production plan everyone will be thrilled to hear um trying to find out the regional needs
for the ncog commun like circle of communities and he's that he's specifically working on ours and um he kind of presented an outline there's going to be a full launch of the plan
sometime I think May um but the outline was basically um bullet points they want to increase affordable housing diversify housing options preserve and improve the existing stock um address a vulnerable
population needs um and and it generated into a discussion of um of you know that we would like any housing Housing Development or produ ction plan in chelsford to focus
actually on the missing middle and um so we kind of threw some ideas around um I don't know if anyone I don't really want to go into much more than that at the moment cuz it's it kind of was a long conversation and it's
rather late but um but you know for a town that is built out and lacks infrastructure um but yet still has housing needs like what do we want to
focus on and how do we want to focus on that I guess are topics for Thought can we put that on the next agenda yeah all right I just want to um just kind of real quickly just point out um I sent it
to you there was um Healy um is on the Rampage about getting more housing so one of the things is Str they want she was looking at strengthening chapter 40b okay can we
discuss this next meeting well I just want to bring this on to you the Highlight for everybody okay can you send it an email all right I'll send it to all you guys good read may want to think about what other things may be what other surprises forth mandates we're going to have to deal with I'd rather not start on this topic because
it'll get me going about how we lack infrastructure and no help from the state to support that infrastructure I'm just saying that just there's something out there you guys okay um January 22nd meeting minutes Evan the votes are still off yeah
okay went back and looked at the video I was there and I did vote the Dunston Dunstable vote 65 vote was 7 nothing and Joel's name should be added and the four palot vote was 7
nothing thing and my name should be added okay other than that any other edits to the meeting minutes on the 22nd of January I'll take a motion to approve those meeting minutes motion to approve
as corrected John made the motion Joel Second roll call dearra you sleep hi Joel hi hi I'm an i John I Mike all eyes all right February 12th make a motion to approve
February 12th motion by Anita second by Mike roll call dearra hi Joel Hi hi Mike is an i Anita I I'm an i i John and Mike all of eyes I will take a next motion to
adjourn move to adjourn Mike second by Anita I your name hi Joel hi Mike Anita hi John Mike thank you everyone copy an email e