Gosh, can you hear me? Okay. Yes, you can hear me. Okay. Just want to make sure you can see me. Okay. Too. Okay. Great. Okay. Since I'm on a work trip, I figured I
would go and uh keep my uh my my business attire. How are we doing? Are we in attendance yet or? Okay. Yeah, you're on mute. Yeah. Lou, we're all set. We We're all set. If you'd like, we could probably get
started. >> Thank you so much, Josh. Appreciate it. >> Yep. Absolutely. >> Okay. And you can hear me? Okay. People can see me? >> Yes. Uh, pretty very clear. Perfect. Great. Okay. Well, very good. Good evening, everybody. Um, we're here
for the uh town of Danver's planning board meeting. So, tonight is March the 24th, 2026 at 700 p.m. Uh, the meeting is taking place at the TUMI room at Danver's Town Hall. Um, and my name is Lewis George. I'm the the chair of the
planning board. I will be participating by this this meeting remotely this evening. So, thank you for that. Um, and so I'm joined here today at the meeting. It's our clerk Jean Hartnett, uh, member Jim Sears, and Josh, um, and Josh
Morris, a principal planner, is here with the town of Danvers. Um, and so, uh, Josh will be giving me a hand as well in terms of, uh, helping to make sure that we're uh, keep an eye on in terms of calling on people and such during the course of our our meeting today. It's my understanding that Mike
Doulis is not present today. Is that correct, Josh? >> That is correct. That is correct. Yes. >> Okay. Very good. All right. So, we have a couple of um uh we have a a couple of agenda items here. And so, before I begin, I do want to just remind everybody to to please silence your cell
phones uh if you have them just so that they're uh they don't um uh create any noise during the course of the meeting. And so, why don't we begin? We we're going to have um uh just to just to discuss here. We're going to be beginning here. We have two public
hearings that we'll be having and these are going to be with respect to citizens petitions. And so just to give a little bit of a background. So in terms of these citizens petitions are um are coming before us as a public hearing. So our role at the planning board for the
zoning amendments is to um is to have public hearings on them. uh your you know questions from both members of the planning board as well as from members of the public and then ultimately it'll be our role to be making uh to be voting a recommendation on the uh on the
citizens petitions and ultimately from here they'll be going on to the select board and then um and then ultimately to the to the finance committee and then to town meeting floor for our uh annual
town meeting on May 18th. And so uh so today the you know we're we're beginning the public hearing on both of these. So it's it's anticipated that these will that the public hearing will continue um you know to to another meeting. Uh and
so we're not going to be um you know won't we won't be having a vote tonight, but this is an opportunity to hear the uh to the petitioners to present the on the petition as well as to entertain questions and comments from members of the board as well as from members of the
public. So um Josh, I did I cover the uh the sort of the ground rules. Okay. >> Yeah, that see that seems great. Yep. >> Okay. So why don't I begin though? I'm going to read the first agenda item here. Uh, it's a public hearing on the zoning map amendment and it's a citizens
petition submitted by Dana R. McName, manager of Bayate Real Estate Holdings LLC, site property owner, which proposes a zoning map amendment. The zoning map amendment consists of reszoning 249
Andover Street, map 47, parcel 015A from residential 3 R3 to the highway corer zone HCZ zoning district. And so um and so why don't we if we do have the
um uh the the petitioner here if they can go and uh you know introduce themselves and they can they can present then we'll come back to the board for any questions or comments that members of the board might have and then it will um then because this is a public hearing
we'll open it up for public comment and public uh and public questions. One note I did want to make a just a quick note of. So for any um any votes this evening because uh at least one of our members here, myself, is participating remotely. Everything will have any votes we have
will be on a roll call vote. Um but I don't anticipate that we would be having a a substantive vote on the these amendments this evening. This was a this is the initial public hearing on these items. So without further ado, can we um have the uh uh have the pet petitioner
is is Mr. McName here? Oh. >> Um. >> I am Dana Mcnammy. Is it on? >> Yes. >> Yes. Okay. >> Yes. Can hear you. >> Uh, I didn't realize making a
presentation tonight. Um, Ryan, you're not here, are you? >> Oh, there you are. >> Okay. I'm working with uh with Brian Dep. >> Oh, no problem. Yep. And I think we do
have some PowerPoints up on the screen as well. So, >> okay. So, I I'm one of the sponsors and uh my name is Mike Beno. I'm from Broadway Capital >> and we're um here tonight. >> Sorry, could you just introduce yourself
for the record? I'm sorry, I didn't >> Uh my name is Mike Veno uh with Broadway Capital and we're here on behalf of the petitioner uh as you stated um for a proposed zoning change or zoning amendment to reszone 249 Andover Street
from a residential 3R3 zone to a highway corridor zone HCZ. And you know, the purpose of this meeting or what we're trying to accomplish is to um get this zoning change. That's really the primary
purpose, but also we want to propose or present um what we'd like to do with the land going forward. Um and Peter Vanco, who's our architect, is here. Um and he he was going to walk through a presentation of, you know, what what our
proposal is for the land. Um, and it's kind of where we are right now. >> So, Peter. >> Yeah. Great. Sure. >> Great. >> Hi, good evening. My name is Peter Vanco, architect for the project. Um, maybe if we can jump forward a few
slides to the site plan. Um >> and just so ju and and and just for purpose of just for for clarification sake this you know um this meeting is to discuss the really in terms of the zoning amendment with respect to the um
you know just to to get that zoning you know as you requested to the from the residents to the highway corer zone. So um so really if you could just sort of focus your you know if if ultimately that ends up changing it would end you know a site plan review would ultimately
be go through the process and and go through the approval process but we're here for just the initial step but to the extent you want to explain the um sort of where you know the whole purpose of this and the and the plan that's that is that's you know I'm I'm that's that's fine and it gives it will give some some
background but I just wanted to give that just in terms of an initial um uh initial notice. if that's okay. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh I won't get into bathroom layouts then on this one. >> Okay. >> Um so um okay then let's zoom let's zoom way out. Okay. So the lot that we are
talking about is directly adjacent to the Home Depot. Um and in this plan it would be to our left. And our long lot line there that is to our far left is is effectively the fire lane for Home
Depot. And the relationship that these two sites have to one another is um separated only by a retaining wall that is effectively along that whole property line. Uh there's a there's an elevational change, but functionally
they really really this lot should be a continuation of what you see. um at the Home Depot and that commercial usage u we don't feel that it's um a drastic intrusion on the residential in any way, shape or form for this for this to
continue as as a commercial property. Do you have anything to add there? Mhm. >> Yeah. And just to add, I guess, um, as far as, uh, the zoning change goes, you know, currently, like we said, it was it's zoned in R3, and there was the Bayate Animal Clinic, which, uh, is
still the the property itself is still there. The the building, but it's no longer functioning as such. Um, so it was in some ways a non-conforming use on the R3 uh zone. So this this change
would um as Peter noted seems to make sense in that uh the adjacent lot is a highway corridor zone as well. So that's pretty much >> I think that covers it. >> Um and some of the challenges just with the site that we have are that the
yellow area is our is effectively the buildable area. So it is an extraordinarily difficult site. Um, so >> for it to be a single family home would be quite difficult to to pull that off. It actually it would be extremely
challenging because it is subdivided by by wetlands effectively down the center. Um, so that's the background. Ready for any questions? >> And I guess just a just a just a preliminary as well and just just reviewing. I know this is mentioned in
the in the presentation. And so I I didn't mean to in any way cut you short at all, but I just in terms of but in and this is in the in the petition itself though you do point out that um that this is going to be uh and that the proposed change I believe and if you can
if you can touch on this a bit to enable the future development of a community serving um ice skating rink facility. >> That's correct. We are that's our intention with this is it would be a community function. Ah, okay. And so that's something and
and so that's that's sort of the the and and and and so the ultimate purpose of that would be for the um you know again I'm just looking at the at the petition itself would be you know sort of a future development of this community ice skating ring facility. >> Yeah, that is that's precisely it. Um,
so it would have a have a community function, a much needed function as Denver's does not have a youth hockey rink and really is looking for one. >> Got it. All right. Um, very good. Do you have anything further to add before we
have before I turn to the board for questions? >> Yeah, maybe we could just go through the Do you want to go through the presentation and just uh we can take a look at uh if we go to the next slide? >> Sure. Uh >> okay. Yeah. I mean you can go if you go
back one. Um this is you know a rendering of where you know the the vision that we have for the ice skating rink. Mhm. >> And um it would be a single sheet rink roughly 50 off- streetet parking spots
and uh if you go to the next slide um there'd be a lobby, you know, some other potential, you know, concessions and maybe a pro shop. There'd be dedicated locker rooms. Um, we have been in touch with uh Danver's high school
hockey coach as well as Danver's youth hockey both who have, I would say, supported the the project. Um, and kind of emphasized that they, you know, definitely want a ice rink facility of their own, potentially their own locker
room. And, um, you know, we're we're happy to to be here to present this. And you know I think the next steps would be like I said tonight we're really here for just the zoning change but would be to go into you know some of the challenges that we're going to have
related to wetlands and parking etc. But that's I think for a different a different time. So I don't know Peter if you want to add anything else >> actually difficulty residential side >> to to get a residence there
from a broker stand he's offer >> Oh yeah you want you want me to >> Yeah. to you. >> Um, hello everyone. My name is Brian Deise. I am the principal of the Mega Group. It is a commercial real estate firm on Federal Street in Danvers. We were uh hired to market this property
for sale by Dr. Mcto and his wife uh in February of 2025. We put it on the market in June of 2025 and because of the zoning, it's zoned residential. Prior to listing the property, the words incorrectly zoned appeared in my
analysis three or four times. The property sits right next to Home Depot. It's zoned for a single family or a two family. I can't think of a a person that would like to live next to a Home Depot with lights on the parking lot on till 11 o'clock at night and whatnot. It's essentially been impossible to market as
a residential property. We've looked at uses under chapter 48 for churches and schools and we're very close on a couple of occasions and then this came across our table. So the idea of extending the zoning, we're not spot zoning the property. We're trying to extend the
zoning from high quarter zoning which is next to Home Depot to the left one lot and uh it makes perfect sense. It's been an animal clinic since 1977. I've been alive since 1971. So take a
look at me. It's how long it's been a commercial property. And before that it was other commercial uses dating back to I think the 50s and 60s. I can't quote me on that, but I think it's the 50s and 60s. It's been commercial since that long about 70 years. So all the petition
is doing is asking to reszone the property appropriately and permanently instead of having to go in front of the board for a variance or whatnot every single time they use changes. Thank you. Thank you very much. >> I I really think that that concludes our
presentation and uh summarizes our proposal this evening. >> Okay. Very good. Well, thank you very much and um I'm going to go and just now turn it over to uh to members of the board who have any um any questions for
the um uh for the petitioner. Uh why don't I start with um uh with Jim Sears. Um, do you have kind of an inventory of uh butters as to what their uses are and kind of a proximity to the site information on that that might be
helpful? >> As as I previously stated, Home Depot is uh uh to the right of the subject property and to the left is a there's a vast amount of conservation land and then beyond that is Leblanc Drive, which is a residential street, but it's set back by hundreds of feet. What about
across the street? >> Across the street, there's a number of commercial uses, office buildings, um a church, uh a landscaping yard. It's just it's all commercial on Route 114. It's got an Andover Street address. It's It's
commercial. Okay. >> Yeah. Two lanes of traffic going east and west. Uh and uh and a two-way entrance to the property as well. So, Okay, that's all I had. >> Any >> that's all I had. Um
>> Okay. >> The moment. >> Okay. Um Dean Harden, >> I have a couple questions. Um how how did you say how big the lot is? Is it three and a half acres? >> Yes, that's correct. Three and a half acres.
>> Okay. Um and then what is the use directly to the left? Is that residential? Yes, that's >> so that house that's directly to the left, that's >> it looks like there's a driveway off of Andover Street,
>> 251. >> Y >> Okay. And that's and that's residential. >> I thought you were talking about the parking lot, the existing animal clinic that drive. There's two entrances to the animal clinic and then to the left of that is a is um is a single family home
that was actually part of this lot originally. And then the blank drive is to the left of that. Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. Um Okay, those are my only questions. Um thank you. >> Great. Thank you, Jean. Is there um and I guess it's picking up on her on Jean's
question with respect to that to the single. So there is a single family home that's immediately abuing. I just want to I just want to see if I understand this correctly. >> There's probably about three or four if you count the blank drive. >> Okay.
Um, have you had any um uh have you had any any discussions with the Abutters or any any you know have um have they expressed any uh any concerns at all? >> We we haven't reached out directly but we wanted to have this meeting first and
then you know now after this we would reach out and >> and and see if there was any major concerns. >> Okay, got it. Okay. Um, very good. And, um,
Josh, uh, just a question for you just in terms of logistics here. Would they, um, uh, with respect to the citizens, uh, petition, would would Butters have received a notification? >> Uh, no.
>> Okay. Got it. Okay. But it was advertised in the newspaper twice >> to two specific dates uh >> was sent to the six the surrounding towns and sent to the uh the two re
planning agencies. So or just there um just in terms of uh notification that's who's been notified. >> Got it. Okay. Um, very good. Any other uh in terms of my own uh any other questions I have? Yeah, the the main
question I have is just in terms of um uh in terms of a butter notification in terms of you know uh you know that's in terms of any sort of outreach to um to a butters who would who may not be aware of this. So um so that would that's that would be my question only question for
the for the um for the petitioners and um so I but I'd be interested to hear in terms of um in terms of any members of any members of the public um but be just before I do that any any other uh questions um from members of the board
before I turn it over to the public. >> I just have one other question. Um would this require a bridge over wetlands to get to the site? >> It does indeed. There is a linkage that will be required from the lower yellow
portion in the bottom of the sheet there to the upper yellow and that is one of the prohibitive aspects of this site in general for use. >> Okay. >> How wide area you talking about? We are
looking at a 70 foot span pylon to pylon. Uh we believe that we can do it easily within the no build zone of the the 35 to the 50. We shouldn't have any trouble um making that happen. >> That's length, not width, right?
>> That's length. Yeah. Yeah. Length. >> What's the width about >> about 30 feet? Try to get two lanes of traffic and at least one hopefully two pedestrian paths. >> I think it's on the next slide if you want to go to it. You can see the >> do you have to be able to enable a fire apparatus through there?
>> We do indeed. And we need a uh NFPA turnaround at once we get up to the face of the building. So, and we just make it. So, >> you can see it in that layout. It's up on the screen. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> And just point of clarification, um there would be a public aspect of this in our upcoming in the subsequent stage. Correct. There would be mailing, there would be that a butter engagement and all of that. Correct. >> Okay. Yeah,
>> that's all I have for now, Lou. >> Okay. And just um and just a follow-up question uh just with respect to and this is sort of getting into um uh you know, sort of next you know, sort of next stages, but what would you anticipate in terms of of of relief you
would be you would need to seek? would you need to go to what what what other um uh um um missions would you need to um in in order to sort of reach this uh to in order to get this vision that you're you're looking at and and when you do respond just because I am I am
remote if you can just uh state your name before you respond that that just helps me a bit. >> Yeah, this is Mike. >> I know we have a bunch of Okay. >> Yeah. So, we probably need relief from the uh the the zoning board, the finance committee. No, it's um >> but definitely the zoning board for
potential setbacks. >> Um and parking relief potentially. >> I don't think you need parking. >> Okay. >> But uh you need water selectment approval to own the property. >> No, I was more talking about the >> Well, you know, we know they already he already went through that. Yeah. Yeah. I
think >> there's a ton if we couldvation for sure. >> If we could just have one person at a time per just speak to the microphone, that would just be that would be helpful. That's all. >> Yep. Peter Vanco here. I believe from a yard
standpoint, we are mostly compliant except for the side facing Home Depot where we would be looking for yard relief. That sideyard >> um is insufficient >> and and conservation commission as well. >> We would need conservation commission.
We do need to land bridge pylons in the zone >> in the no build. >> Sure. >> I don't. And then ultimately site plan site plan review by planning board. >> Indeed. >> Okay. Got it. Okay.
Very good. All right. I don't have any um any other questions on on my end here, but uh this is a public hearing, so um if we uh if members of the public are interested uh and have any questions or for the petitioner or any comments,
um they can do so now. And um and Josh, if you can just help me out here, uh just to please um uh if you can help me in terms of uh identifying those who have raised their hand. Uh and when you do come to the podium, please make sure to identify your name and you know,
state your name and address. And also please direct any questions or comments to the chair as opposed to just directly to the to the applicant. Okay. >> Josh, do we have anybody who's >> you'd like to >> Yep, we do. We have a Yep. Um, she's got
that >> be great. So, >> she's going to the podium now. So, >> Yep. Great. >> Uh, Joanne Vaguchi, town meeting member, precinct 2. >> Has the property been sold yet? >> So, it hasn't been sold. So, we're
looking So, they're looking for the change from R3 to commercial prior to the sale. >> Correct. >> Is that correct? I know, but I'm just asking. Thank you. >> Um, okay. Um,
so if for some reason, this is sort of just not really a question, but a concern is that if some reason this sounds like there's a lot of hurdles for this project to go through, if for some reason they don't get financing for the project, conservation committee doesn't
approve it, zoning, there's issues. I think my concern is once it's turned over to commercial and it's not this community skating rink, what could go there? And then potentially for the re for the residents to the left um you know that might be more than
they're not living next to a Home Depot but then what are they living next to a different commercial building that they don't want to be. So that's just a concern sort of popping into my head. Um if this project which I think is nice um just doesn't go through. It's a bit of
concern for the residents that are on the blank and to the left of the project. Thank you. Very good. Thank you very much. Uh >> are there any other questions or or comments? Yeah. >> Yes. There's a gentleman coming to the podium.
>> Great. Thank you. Again, if you can just please identify yourself and your name and address and uh direct any questions or comments to the chair. Thank you. >> Sure. Kevin Barrett, 34 Popler Street, and uh re very recently a town meeting
member. So I uh I think this this change is a little extreme to do what they want to do. I I think uh I share the concerns with the previous speaker. So, um they could go from one non-conforming use to another non-conforming use with a finding from
from the ZBA, right? >> No. >> Is it somebody >> is that a question? >> I guess >> um Lou, would you like me to respond? >> Yes. If you can respond to the to to the
question posed in terms of uh by Mr. Barrett >> and the question is >> why why not just go from one non-conforming use to another. They're not locked into residential right now. It's not residential right now. >> It's non residential. >> Yeah. Yeah. Is it like >> it's res?
>> Um >> right. But you can go from one non-conforming use to another. >> Right. With a with a with a finding. >> That's how our that's how our bylaws work. No, >> that >> I can probably answer >> that is true. >> Um, >> does the petitioner have the answer to
that question? >> That is >> you you you can you could substitute a pre-existing non-con non-conforming use with another with a finding from the zoning board of appeals. Is that the question? >> Yes. >> Yes, you can. >> Thank you. So, so I think given that in order to build what the applicant seeks
to build, there is a much simpler solution than uh than what they've proposed here, at least a simpler solution that a board could consider. So, the the problem is if once this becomes highway corridor zone, let's say the financing on the ice rink falls
through, right? We've seen this on how many properties that the planning boards approved over the last couple years, right? There was an architect on High Street that swore to you he was building himself an office. That project's now for sale. Right? So once you reszone this or town meeting reszones it, this
can become anything that's allowed in the highway corridor zone. So it could very easily find out that the market for ice rinks isn't great and we've got a self- storage facility or an office building or or or anything else that's allowed in the highway corridor zone.
this is a whole lot of relief, a whole lot of change uh when I think there's a much simpler path to to relief in this case. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um
>> yes, gentlemen. Yep. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dave McKenna, precinct a town meeting member, neighbor about a half mile down the street and a longtime friend of the doctor. He uh helped heal a lot of my furry little
friends and unfortunately ease too many across the other side when it became necessary. Just to answer the question we just raised earlier, yes, that is an option available, but you have to show that the new proposed use is not substantially more detrimental than the
current use. I think something that big would be a tough sell. So, it's not quite that easy, but it is an option open. Um, a couple I'm just trying to read the map. I think looking at the yellow was up your property. Obviously, Home Depot was to the right in that
picture. Is that correct? >> Okay. And 114 is at the bottom. Okay. Um, just to clarify another statement made earlier, um, the land across the street is substantially residential. There is five lanes of traffic in between, but it is residential homes
across the street as well. Um, could it go to another use? Absolutely. Yes, it could. Um, if if this were reszoned and they go forward with this proposal, I believe they would need to get a permit from the state, a curb cut permit. >> No, we have
>> you already have it. >> Well, I think >> I don't know if we should do the sidebar. If you could just ask a question through the >> Will you direct any questions? Yes. To the to the through the through the chair. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Direct that question to the board, please.
>> What? Um, yeah. I mean, if you add if you're trying to access or change the curb cuts from 114, you would need a cur potentially for modifying them, you would need some type of permit from Mass DOT. That's your question. Yes.
>> Okay. and and a question and I I did hear from did the applicant or or rather that did the petitioner indicate that they that they either saw it or they have that I think that's where I heard maybe some of the sidebar. Can can the petitioner answer that? um they haven't
gone that far yet uh because the property is not even appropriately zoned which is step number one but um I think if you look at the plans closely the intent there was two curb cuts existing on route 114 uh both of which except uh east and westbound traffic and uh I
think that if you look at it closely the curb cut to the right is the one they're going to use and the curb cut to the left will be closed. I'm not sure if I accurate or not, but there was two existing curve cuts and one of them uh that will take you to the bridge is already there.
>> Yeah. >> Thank you. I want to turn things back to Mr. McKenna. Mr. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh I I don't really have an objection to this um proposal. It's right on the edge. It's it's been used commercially as is an expansion. I think we need to look at it very carefully when they come forward
with it. But um like I guess right on the edge of the highway card is a use that would be beneficial to the town into the school system but I think we need to consider very carefully that should this fall through you've reszoned it for almost anything else that could
go there. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> Thank you Mr. McKenna Josh. Any other questions or comments by members of the public? >> Um yes Mr. Bradford. Can sure
>> Bill Brad Street tell me precinct one. This might not be the card before the horse. But in trying to look at this property, I'd need a I'd like a Google map of that area taken in
the fall or after all the leaves have fallen off the tree to get a better view of what is where. I mean, I it's like looking at someone produ producing a rendering. That's an ideal situation. I don't look at this as being an ideal
situation. And I I personally would need more information. And a nice picture is worth a thousand words. >> It's a s >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Oh, yep. >> Does the
>> Yep. There's something. >> And I was going to ask just just with respect to to Mr. Bradstreet's question, does the petitioner have any additional I know we saw the renderings. Does it does the petitioner, you know, have any additional photos or any of that of the of the site?
>> Um, like to respond to his concern. Would >> someone from the development team be able to answer that? Just say >> y uh we do have them. I don't know if they were included in the presentation, but we do have them. >> Okay. I think if if if they're not, I think
that could be helpful in terms of I know this is not the uh um you know, as I mentioned at the beginning, we would be looking at uh at coming um you know, at at uh at coming back for a subsequent meeting. So
that could potentially be helpful. Okay, >> Josh, is there someone else? >> Yep, there's someone from the public at the podium. >> Hello, G. Hi, my name is Bill McKenzie, precinct 3 town meeting member. Couple questions. What is the total occupancy
of this building proposed? >> Anybody know? >> Do the petitioner >> provide that information? >> So, they they've not calculated yet, but 50 cars is not going to work in that piece of property coming on to 114, especially where you got cars coming off
of Route One and merging in with cars coming out of Home Depot. I myself find it very difficult. I I really don't think the access to this piece of property is going to be proper for 50 cars or more. That's all I got to say.
Thank you very much, Mr. McKenzie. Okay. Are there any other public comments? I do see we have a U Josh. I'm not sure where where this uh this came up. I do see a a hand raised on uh on the uh
virtually. >> Okay. Um let me just um if you don't mind if there's anyone else in the room physically who had a comment and then maybe do the virtual one. Does that Louis sound all right? >> That's that sounds fine. >> Okay.
>> Just just stand by. >> Okay. I guess we'll go then to um let me see Mr. um Casey. Hold on one sec. Let me just see how to do this. >> Yeah. And for the person who raised
their hand virtually, so same thing if they can just identify yourself and your um where you're from. >> Right. >> Thank you. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Speak up a little more if you don't mind. >> Hi Denise Casey, 9 Label Road, Danverse,
Mass. has there been any sort of traffic study done um because this is very close to the great rock church which on the weekends is very active. So I would be interested to know if there was any um sort of a traffic study done and also a
noise study done for those neighbors that are very closely abuing the building. Has there been any sort of consideration for noise for people in the neighborhood? >> Okay, great. Thank you very much, Miss Casey. um for the petitioner is uh um
could you answer um could you answer that uh the resident's question? >> Uh neither have been produced as of yet, but >> could you state your name again? I'm sorry. Just so >> sorry, Peter Vanco. Neither have been produced yet, but they definitely will
be coming down the line. >> Thank you. Okay. Any other um are there any other Josh? Can you help me here? Any other questions or comments by members of the public? >> Um yes.
>> Okay. >> And I also see Janice Casey virtually her her hand is still up so I'm not sure if she have if she has another question or or not. >> Okay. >> Okay. Very good. Thank you. >> Yes. Good evening. >> Hi. Good evening. Linda Pulcari, Pine
Street. Uh, I'm just a little confused about um if you can go back to the yellow map. So, the upper yellow part, is that whole thing going to be paved with the building on it? >> I don't know how large it is. So, what's
what's the actual um you know the setup that they're planning? So, there's going to be a bridge from the lower yellow part going into the larger yellow part. So how much of that is going to be covered with pavement and building?
>> I'd maybe have might be appropriate for the development team to maybe comment on that. >> Sure. >> Maybe I guess potentially >> if you can comment on that that question and I think Doc did turn to a slide which I believe shows that but if you can describe it for the um uh from his pulari that would be great.
>> Indeed. Um Peter Vanco um responding to that. So we do have from the lower yellow section there is a bridge that goes over. The upper yellow section is effectively all covered by pavement or building. Um
it's um it looks large there in the plan but only about half of it is building. The the lower portion that connects down to the bridge and everything that would be a parking zone. So essentially be um standard parking spaces. And there's um
it's not going to be full of cars essentially because we need to have a a 90 foot diameter turning radius or turning diameter for a large fire truck there. So it is it is definitely asphalt u it's comparative to the rest of the
site um it's very the rest of the site's very very very green. Of that three and a half acres we are using about an acre and a quarter. So there is a there's a lot of open space that is that is naturally going to be maintained on this
on this site. So >> okay uh one other question I guess. So the rest of the land is all wetlands is is what you're telling me? Yes. >> Yes, Peter Vanco. Yes, that's correct. It's all wetlands. >> Okay. So, I mean, I I like this idea
that um you know, that there's a ice rink for the kids or whatever, but I'm just concerned about the wetlands aspect of this. Um if that whole area, you know, and plus they're going to probably remove a lot of trees, I am I'm assuming.
>> Uh yes, Peter Vanco here. Anything that is outside of the wetlands, we are utilizing for construction here in one way, shape, or form. But um yet again about twothirds of the site is maintained um that remains treed.
>> Okay. Okay. I just uh that's all. Thank you. Just wanted to kind of look into that a little bit if you would consider that. >> Thank you. >> Any other any other questions or or comments from
from members of the public at all? Josh? Um it does not appear. So no. Um >> okay. All right. Again this is not going to be the you know this is the it's it's anticipated here that we would end up that we would come back to a subsequent
meeting. So we would have further opportunity for um you know for um for public comment as well. So, um, okay. I'm going to come back to the, uh, if there's no other public comment, I'm going to come back to the board just to
see if there's anything any further questions or comments based on on on on any of the public comments. So, why don't we begin with um, uh, Gene Hartnett? Anything from from you, Jean? >> No. Um, just procedural question. So, ultimately, whenever we vote, we're
going to be voting to put this in front of town meeting to vote for approval. That's correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um, Jim Sears, >> well, I think it's a recommendation to the finance committee. >> Yeah. >> Which then goes to the
>> right. There's lots of steps. >> Selectman back to the finance committee. >> Yep. >> But yes. >> Yeah. >> Ultimately, >> I have nothing further. >> Yeah. No, I I I don't think I have anything further. I do have a um I guess
just a you know I guess a follow-up question in terms of just to the um to the petitioner just you know kind of with with respect to the question that was uh that was raised by by Kevin Barrett in terms of the the um in terms
of a in terms of a finding and I know Mr. McKenna had mentioned something about that as well. had had the had the petitioner, you know, um you know, had they had they had they thought of going to the um to to the zoning board as sort of a as sort of a first step or I just
wanted to see if the petitioner has any thoughts on that. I know that that Mr. McKenna sort of had had mentioned that, but I just wanted to see if if they have any response to that. >> Yeah, Mike Veno. Yeah, we brought this in front of the planning board, Brian Zakelli, and he mentioned that that was
not going to be a feasible route to do the uh >> You mean planning? You mean planning staff? I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. Yes, planning staff. Correct. >> And he mentioned that would not be a feasible route to do um the change from one non-conforming use to another. That
was our initial route that we wanted to take and that's what we proposed initially, but uh Brian mentioned that that wouldn't be feasible. So, I think it's something that we should probably circle back with Brian just to confirm
>> uh that that's that's in fact the case. >> I appreciate that. That sounds good. Okay. Um yeah, I don't think I have any further questions. I think just procedurally and as as Jim had had touched upon um uh Josh so there sort of you know we'll we'll we'll be back here
in terms of um uh this will come back to our to the planning board for any further discussions or comments. Um but then we're uh and then ultimately it we'll be making a recommendation now because this is the citizens petition. So it's my understanding we'll be making
a recommendation you know either you know it's either you know favorably or unfavorably and then it will go then to the um and is that correct? Then it goes to it goes to select board then finance committee and then ultimately to to the floor of town meeting. >> That's correct.
>> Okay. Got it. Okay. So, and so because it did the citizens petition, it will end up with, you know, on the on the town meeting floor, um, you know, with regardless of recommendations, but it's just it'll come forward with a with a recommendation from ultimately from the
finance committee. >> That's right. >> Okay. Got it. Okay. Very good. All right. If we have nothing nothing further on this one, this uh we we do want to continue this item. So, um,
so Josh, would we be would we be looking at uh would I want to entertain a motion to continue the public hearing? Would it be to our next >> our next meeting? >> Yeah, I think it Yeah, I think Yes. on April 6th. Yes. >> Okay.
Great. And so I would entertain a motion to continue the public hearing on uh on the Let me see here. Um, so I would I would entertain a motion to continue the public hearing on uh the zoning uh map
amendment with respect to reszoning 249 Andover Street um to the planning board meeting of April 6. So is there someone who'd like to make that motion? >> I just have a point of clarification. Why why are we continuing it?
Um, >> no. >> What's the purpose of the continuence? >> To um in case there are any other comments from the select board or FINCOM during this process that we don't want to close the public hearing. So, we would we're just keeping it open
so that if there are two >> were there meetings on the same subject? >> Yeah. Like dur you know they're kind of they get concurrent event. They're the select board is going to be talking about this on April 7th. Okay. >> But also, we just want to, you know, just have the opportunity for the p
public for commentary. Um, you know, when if Mike has comments at our next meeting. >> So, are we going to have an additional presentation or just a vote? >> Um, I don't know if >> are they coming back to answer further questions or not? >> I mean, it will be on our agenda. I'm
not sure what will be presented, but it will have an opportunity for the board andor the public to talk. So our recommendation right now was just to to close it. Not not to close it, but just to continue it. >> So is that a normal protocol? >> Yeah, for sure. Yeah. >> Meetings. >> Mhm.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. And I think we I I think we've done that before and I think it would be in the in the in the petitioner's, you know, interest to come to the meeting as well if there are any if there are any further questions. And this way also it just, you know, we're, you know, so so so today we were we were we were
beginning it and then we would we would just continue to our next meeting. Yeah. It sounded like the butters had not been notified also. So maybe they want to weigh in. >> Yeah, I think that's a I think that's a that's a um Yeah, I think that that's
that's an an additional reason for uh for continuing it. So, would someone like to um uh would someone like to make a motion to continue this um uh the public hearing to our next meeting of April 6? >> So, moved.
>> Second. >> Jim Sears made the motion. >> Yeah. Could would you mind just doing the saying the motion and then >> move that we continue this uh meeting public hearing until our next meeting on April 6, Monday, April 6th. >> Second.
Okay, very good. Um, I think we also said too that the Just for clarification sake, Jim, I think you said um, let's see here. >> That's right. It's Monday. Good. They get the days of the week, right? Monday, April 6th.
>> Jim was right. Jim was right. >> Okay. It's been a long day schedule. So, we usually meet second fourth Tuesdays, but our next meeting is going to be >> Monday, April 6th. Right. That's right. >> Got it. Thank you for for for refreshing my recollection as they say.
>> All right. We have a motion that's been made. It's been seconded. Um any discussion on the motion? >> Okay. Um hearing none, I'm going to I'm going to call the uh call the role on the motion um to continue the public hearing. Um Jim Sears,
>> yes. >> Gene Hardick, >> yes. >> And I say yes as well. Okay. So, we've moved. So, it has been um so we'll have our next uh um so we'll continue this public hearing to um uh to Monday, April
the 6th. Okay. Thank you very much. Um All right. So, we have our next um Thanks. >> Yep. Absolutely. Thank you. Yep. >> All right. And so, our next um uh public hearing is um is a zoning bylaw amendment. And this is another citizens
petition. Uh, and so this is a citizens petition submitted by uh Melissa Nardone, which proposes to amend table one, table of allowable uses of the Danvers zoning bylaw. The zoning amendment is proposing to amend the
kennel commercial boarding use in table one from a prohibited use in the residential one R1, residential 2, R2, and residential 3 R3 zoning districts to a use allowed by special permit from the zoning board of appeals
in residential 1, residential 2 and residential three zoning districts. And so, um, if the petitioner is here, and I hope I pronounce is your is the last name is is it pronounced Ms. Nardone? >> Well, would you mind going to the podium?
>> Yeah, that'd be great. Thank you. >> Right. If you could go to the podium and um if you can if you can go to the podium and just introduce yourself, provide your, you know, just your just your name and address and then just uh and explain the explain the amendment and what you're um sort of, you know,
what you're what you're seeking and the and the rationale behind it. Okay, good evening. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. My name is Melissa Nardone. I live at 184 Center Street in Danverse. I'm here tonight to ask the board to support a proposal that would allow
residents in residential one, two, and three zoning districts the opportunity to apply for a special permit for small controlled in-home dog daycare businesses reviewed on a case-bycase basis. I believe this is exactly the
kind of use that fits the special permit process because it allows the town to evaluate each situation individually and determine whether it is appropriate within a neighborhood. This proposal is not about creating something new. It is
about creating a safe and responsible way to oversee something that already exists. Today, the way people live and work has changed. Many households have two working adults. long commutes or single parents balancing full-time
responsibilities. And for many, pets are an important part of the family. Because of that, the need for safe and reliable dog care has grown significantly. Small indo inhome dog daycarees help
meet that need in a way that is very different from large commercial kennels. They are quiet homebased environments where dogs are cared for in small groups. This allows for more individualized attention and stronger bonds between the dog and the caregiver.
For many dogs, especially those that are anxious, older, or don't do well in high volume environments, a home setting can be a safer and a more appropriate fit. A special permit process would allow the town to ensure operations remain small
and controlled, safety standards are followed, neighbors have a voice, and appropriate oversight is in place. The modern internet economy has created new opportunities for people to responsibly build homebased businesses
such as inhome pet care and pursue the American dream through entrepreneurship. This supports small local businesses, meets the evolving needs of the community, and does so without creating any additional burden on town services
or neighborhood character. Massachusetts has already recognized the importance of safety in dog care settings through Ali's law, which was passed after a tragic incident and established stronger safety standards, oversight, and accountability for
licensed facilities across the state. A special permit process at the local level would allow towns like Danvers to apply that same kind of oversight to small inhome settings. When something already exists in a community, the
responsible approach is not to ignore it, but to manage it with clear, thoughtful oversight. Thank you for taking this time to listen and to consider this proposal for our community. >> Okay, very good. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for the
presentation. Thank you. And um so let me uh so just like the other um uh you know the other citizens petition we'll ask um uh members of the board if they have any questions or or comments for the petitioner and then once our board has question has posed questions and
comments uh we'll have it's a public hearing so we'll ask if members of the public have any um any questions or comments as well. So, uh, so starting with the with the board, why don't we, uh, we start with, uh, with with Jean. >> Um, I don't think I I have any
questions. Um, so basically the framework is it would be a case-bycase basis and everyone would still have to follow the the rule, the laws and regulations for a pet daycare that already exists. So, correct. >> Um, yeah, I'm okay with that.
>> Thank you. Okay. >> Okay. Uh Jim Sears, >> are you capping the number at five dogs? >> Am I capping the number? >> What's >> the decision would be? This is where it would be up to the zoning board and the board of health would go into each home
and decide the appropriate na um amount of dogs that would be comfortably able to be in a home. So, each home would have a different number depending on what the zoning board approves. But is that the isn't that the number now? >> So right now you are allowed to have up
to four dogs without a kennel license. Personal use only. Um anything at five or more is considered considered a commercial kennel in personal use also would have to apply for um kennel
license as well as commercial facilities. And right now inhome pet care is not allowed if we take any form of compensation regardless of it's it's one dog or five dogs.
>> Um not to interrupt um I think it might be beneficial potentially for the board and for the public. I was just going to read what the def so what's being proposed is the ch um in the use table. Gosh, that would be great if you can
give a little background. That would be that would probably be helpful. >> Recently, >> so we just adopted in February of 2025, we adopted all the states definitions related to um kennels. So what we're what's the petition is to
abandon the use table, the definition that I'm about to read. Um so let me just read it and then I'll try and provide some more context for the whole um petition. So the definition is kennel commercial boarding or training. An
establishment used for boarding, holding, daycare, overnight stays or training of animals that are not the property of the owner of the establishment at which such services are rendered in exchange for consideration and in the absence of the owner of any
such animal provided. However, that commercial boarding or training kennel shall not include an animal shelter or animal control facility, a pet shop licensed licensed under section 39A of chapter 129, a grooming facility
operated solely for the purpose of grooming and not for overnight boarding or an individual who temporar temporarily and not in the normal course of business boards or cares for animals owned by others. So just so what's being what's in front
of the board or and in the community is this definition and currently as we speak this kennel commercial boarding or training is a is a prohibited use in residential 1 2 and three and the
petition is to make in the use table the change from what you would see in the use table X's to say SP P special permit with the zoning board of appeals in those three zoning districts. And just to clarify your question earlier about
how number of dogs, I sort of think if it's if it's it's your personal dogs versus dogs that are not yours. And if they're your dogs, you could have up to four by right. And then if you your personal yours, five and more, you need a special permit. But in this context,
we're talking just the the commercial component and not dogs owned by the the owner, but the the commercial if that >> So, how many dogs could someone have at their house? >> If this passes, >> I guess the question
>> is that a question to >> Yeah. Whoever would like to answer it, >> you can have as a personal pet, >> right? Anybody can have up to four dogs >> by right >> by right. >> And then >> if you
wanted to have dogs in what you're suggesting, how many dogs would you have on top of that? >> That would be um the decision of the board of health or the zoning board to allow what would be allowed in a home if it
was a if it was a business. If it's not your personal dogs, Jim, there is right >> in the definition. There is no there's no maximum >> if that's your question. >> So if you had four of your own and you wanted to have five or 10 more,
>> I would have to apply with the zoning board >> correct >> for a kennel license and it would have to be approved also, >> correct? >> By the board of health and they could deny that. >> That's that would be a kennel. >> That's under the under this proposal. This is under the proposal, Josh. Is that correct? But as as the law
currently stands now, I just want this is more for clarification. Yes. >> As the as the as the zoning bylaw currently stands, if you have one dog that you are commercially boarding in your in a home in a residential neighborhood, that is not allowed.
>> Correct. >> Even by going even by going to the zone even even if you go to the zoning board. >> Well, you Yeah, you can't. Right now, you don't even have the opportunity to do that if you're in a residential zoning district. Yeah. Does that make sense? >> Yes.
>> It's kind of like one way to think of Carmental Carmentalize it is is if it's your personal dogs or it's commercial. They're you're do you're watching taking care of or you know all these things that I just listed not your personal dogs but it's other folks dogs right? So
kind of just everything's in two buckets >> and you can kennel them overnight. In which situation are you asking >> in the proposed? >> That's what I'm proposing to be allowed to do to continue a business as a personal
>> pet. So as a in-home dog business, >> I am not allowed to have even one dog if I take compensation. It is just not allowed whatsoever. So I'm trying to
propose because it's existing in our town. There are multiple multiple inhome doggy daycarees that are happening as we speak. Um there's internet platforms that help people have
these businesses. Um, so my proposal is to be allowed to have inhome doggy daycare facilities regulated um, and allowed obviously through the zoning board and the board of health um, and through
>> So, how many would you say are in Damas in your research? >> Um, in research rover.com there's at least 12 and then I know of at least five more because they promote themselves on the damas page on a regular basis. So, there's at least 15 to 20 that I know of, which
>> I'm trying to help them along as we go with this whole thing. >> So, who's going to enforce this? >> Who Who's going to Well, the reason if I'm Excuse me. If I'm your neighbor >> Y >> and you had four dogs of your own. >> Mhm. >> And now all of a sudden, you've got another five.
>> Mhm. >> Overnight on a regular basis. And I love dogs, but dogs make a lot of noise, right? So now I've got nine dogs living next to me. >> And that's why we want to have I want to
have the regulation in the case by case. >> So how many dog officers are we going to have to hire for 20 different >> Well, that's the thing. It would be so >> patient. >> The reason why I'm here is because this is what happened to me. I've been running a business for 12 years
>> and all the other inhome doggy daycarees have been doing it for multiple years as well with no complaints. their neighbors are supportive. I just happen to have somebody rat me out out of spite which has brought me here today a year later. I've been fighting for
this for myself and now I'm fighting for the whole town and for the dogs because due to Ali's law, I feel like since this is happening already in our town by regulating it under the zoning board and by the board of health, it has safety
safety precautions and will also the neighbors have a voice and can oversee these businesses. And if somebody's bringing in 20 dogs into their home, then obviously that's a huge problem. I would never expect that. >> It doesn't have to be 20. It could be a
couple bad behaved dogs. >> Well, that's when the person who takes the business, such as me, I interview the clients. I see how these dogs are. I'm not going to take a combative, barking, loud, aggressive dog into my
home. We want a quiet atmosphere for these dogs. We don't want the chaos and dogs jumping around and barking all over the people's backyards and disturbing the neighborhoods. And I've been doing this for 12 years with no complaints with my neighbors. Um, if the dogs do
get loud or unruly, I bring them into the house. So, in that aspect, that would have to be the person who is running this business, that would have to be them respecting their neighbors as well. And >> but you might be the model, right? You
might be the best person at this and there might be others that maybe not as well intended and nice and maybe try to take advantage of a situation and have more than what they might have put on their application. And now the whole neighborhood
is going to deal with it. And now we have to hire a new dog officer to maintain or to deal with this overpopulation of doggy in daycare centers. So, who's going to pay for that? Are we going to
charge you a fee so we can now, you know, >> to continue running my livelihood? If I need to pay a specific fee to the town of Danverse, >> y >> I would because this has been my livelihood for 12 years. The other inhome doggy daycarees, they're very
respectful with their I know who some of them are. Um, they're very wellliked and loved as well as I am respected. I'm just the one that happens to be here. Um, I would never want the town to approve
an inhome doggy daycare to a small home and have them have 15 to 20 dogs and disturbing the home neighborhood. That is not my proposal at all. It's basically just to have some safety standards control regulation over what's already happening in our town.
>> But you're proposing it for all three residential zoning districts. Well, that's >> one, two, and three, which consists of, >> you know, >> the whole >> which that's why I'm also willing to take feedback if that's not something feasible, then it could >> Well, I'm just saying from a from a
density standpoint, you go from, >> you know, lots that are >> 10,000 ft or less >> to a 30,000t lot, which obviously, >> you know, may imply that you can handle more dogs, but I don't know. just it's just it's a
lot I think that you're asking for out of the gate. >> Um but I' I'd love to hear what other people think. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Great. All right. Thank you. >> So you have um my name is Vanessa White. Um you have one you have a health a
health department person, right? >> Sorry I'm like so mad about this whole contract. >> I understand but I ma'am I ma'am I understand but yet >> I haven't opened it up to public comment yet. >> Oh sorry. I I understand I have not opened it up to public comment yet. >> I have not opened it up to public
comment yet. So, it's only just right now the petitioner and we're at the uh the point where the members of the planning board have questions. I still have a few questions and so then ma'am once we're once we're done I'll call on you and you can you can you can um you can ask questions or or pro provide a
comment. Okay. >> All right. So the only um for the and for um Ms. Nardone, I guess the question I I have for you is just in terms of and I understand. I appreciate you sharing your story and your and your situation and the um uh and in terms of where you
currently um live just so I can understand sort of just the background of this. Are you in um uh what zoning district are you currently in now? >> Schedule 3 R3. >> I sir. Okay. Um yeah and and in terms of the I guess the question I would have
and this is for uh you know and I understand in terms of a um uh in terms of a uh you know in in terms of you know I know you've you know explained sort of the advantages of of a of an inhome um do you know uh pet care
as opposed to a um you know like I've I' I've seen places that you know really commercial enterprises as well like you get like Dogtopia and such like that. So, um, what would I guess in terms of looking just at the at the citizens petition in terms of way it's it's drawn
up. I guess a a concern I have and this is just a you know is is the is the number of um is the number of of of pets. And so both for a residential as well as potentially for let's say a commercial enterprise wants to come in
like a dogtopia or or a um not count not naming those is but just just one that comes to mind. So, I guess what would you say to what would you say or what would you express to someone, Ms. Nardon, who has a concern about the the size in terms of either that a that a a
residence would maybe take on too many or that you have a a corporate dog daycare place or dog hotel that wants to locate in a in a residential zone? No, I wouldn't want um corporate or
large Dogtopia going into any type of residential zoning. That isn't what my proposal is about. My proposal is about um having the town, the zoning board and board of health be part of what's
already happening in this town by regulating the 15 or so inhome doggy daycarees that are already existing in this town. um that have not had any complaints. This isn't about adding more inh home doggy daycare businesses. This is about
supporting the small businesses that are already existing. Um this is many people's livelihoods and there hasn't been a complaint or anyone who has even brought up these other inhome doggy daycarees. So clearly they are in
control. um the neighborhoods aren't being overly populated with doggy daycarees everywhere and disturbing um the character of these neighborhoods. It's just
I feel that it is a wonderful business in um opportunity for people and for the people that have already been doing this for m multiple years. It's just I wouldn't be here today if I didn't have somebody rat me out, which I
also don't believe. The fact that if I didn't get ratted out, these businesses would still be existing and being ignored and the safety standards and regulations >> would not be happening. And then there's no safety protocols for
any of these inhome doggy daycarees that are existing right now in this town. And I already know with rover.com there's over 2500 of them existing between the Damas PVD Salem and Middleton our surrounding ne towns. Um so my proposal
is basically just to allow the people that are already doing this to continue in a safe controlled environment through the town and the ZBA in the board of health because that's what happens with me. The board of health came into my home. I got approved
for the temporary license until the May meeting. Um, I've obeyed the rules. I've done what I've been told to do. I don't have out an outstanding amount of dogs in my home. Um, I keep it quiet. I keep it clean. And I just would expect
everyone else that does what I do to do the same thing that I'm doing to run their business in a safe manner. >> And thank you, Miss N. And one question I did have is just in terms of as you're
talking about other um doggy you know you know daycares and in your experience and both with your own as well as others you've seen what would you generally see as as the as you know as sort of the average number what you would think of would be an average number of dogs who
would be um you know that that that would be boarding. that would sort of also distinguish you distinguish a like a you know a well-run um a well-run you know u you know personal business versus a corporate >> depending on the size of the homes um
understanding our one the homes are much smaller I don't really know if there's any businesses in that part but >> for me I am legally allowed I take eight dogs at my home >> and I've been keeping it at that since I've been approved that amount of and I
have over 30,000 well I'm R3 so um and it's a safe environment it's not all the time sometimes I have two dogs um there's times where I don't have any dogs so it's not like every day I have this amount of dogs it's just the amount
maximum amount of number is eight which I was allowed >> okay and in terms of that and that was you know um and in terms of with your own situation I know in bit in bit given your I was in circumstances and that's and
that's eight um eight eight boarding dogs versus versus any of you know any dogs that any personal pets you have. >> Actually, one is including my own dog. So technically seven. >> I see. Okay.
No, I was just I was sort of interested. Yeah. And because that's the the area I've you know you get you know is is understanding the the rationale behind doing it. Um and uh and I and I appreciate you sharing your story. the yeah the the concern you know I have and
I'm glad you're here to you know hear any any concerns or questions is just the um is in order is is is is to to is the number is the number and that that number might be a uh it might be higher it might be lower depending where on on
on the the type of zone you're in >> yes it would depend on the zoning you might not even approve a couple of the zoning areas um but I wanted to keep it open for everyone to have that opportunity in those residential zones.
>> Got it. >> So, it would ultimately be up to the town meeting members. Yes, >> it would. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Very good. Any other uh questions or comments by members of the of the the board before
we uh before we turn over to to public uh comments and questions? >> Dean or Jim? >> I have a comment. Um it it just sounds like that instead of having the town turn a blind eye on what's already happening, she wants to bring people
into complian if if this does pass through town meeting um have more regulations on it. So I think that's just what she's asking. She's and it would be a case byase basis. So, you know, depending on the size of the home, you could have one
approved for one dog or potentially more if you're in a larger space. So, um I'm for it just because I think that it's beneficial for the dogs because if they are in doggy daycare homes right now,
which it sounds like is happening, and there's no oversight, um I would rather have, you know, whether it's the board of health or they pay into something to hire somebody, just more oversight of what is actually going on.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Dean. And Josh, just a um just a before I turn over to the members of the public, just a quick question. Um this is more of a clarifying question. If if you were to have if if this if the if the bylaw would be, you know, would be passed by
town meeting as it currently as it currently is, you know, as it would this um uh you could still you could have a commercial um you could have a commercial kennel like a non you know, family sort of, you know, not not out of their personal residence. You could have
a commercial kennel construct in a uh in a residential zone so long as you go through the zoning board of appeals. >> Um, no. As we speak right now, as we speak?
>> No, I'm I'm saying if if this were if this were enacted as it's currently written. >> Oh, so you're saying if this proposal move forward, is that what you're saying? This petition? >> Correct. As as currently written. Yeah. with all you know zones and there's no number limitation or anything like that. So
>> yeah, >> um could a commercial a you know someone who's you know corporate kennel could they come in and and locate I mean assuming they'd still have to go through ZBA but they but >> you know what I'm asking
>> now I think I yeah so corporate I mean the way the business is set up if it's corporate or mom and pop you know whatever you want to call it if you're if the if you're meeting the definition the the kennel commercial boarding your training, which I stated at the
beginning of the conversation. Um >> Mhm. >> they would uh be required to get a special permit at the zoning board of appeals for the five members of the ZBA and then they would potentially be able to operate as
the petition uh currently states, you know, in residential zones 1, two, and three. >> Is that your question? >> Yeah, it is. and would require you said a four out of five vote. >> Yeah, it would be a super majority with this zorning board of appeals.
Um a as how that's how this petition currently would if it was approved at town meeting. That's how and that was how we amended the use table. That's what would that what that process would be. Um is was that your question? Did I
answer it? >> So it was yeah that was my question. >> Okay. I guess there's no distinction between mom and pop and and corporate. Correct. Jim, sorry. >> Yes, sir. >> Just follow up. Um, >> so the way I look at this, uh, what's proposed, I mean, you get three
different zones which are varying size, and I think we we probably have to look at them one by one, but I I would like to get some input from the town dog officer, the town enforcement agency, um, just to see if it is a problem.
she's representing, you know, there's 15 or 20 of these and everyone does a great job. And I don't know if that's true or not. I mean, we don't we don't know, you know, I think it's worth cuz this is a this is a townwide change and it's it's it's it's a big change where you're
allowing this in residents one, two, and three. You know, is it more appropriate in three versus one and two because those are smaller lots, smaller the proximity to the house next to you. if you've got five dogs in the yard next to you. Um I don't know without a fence. I
mean, do you have a dog fence? I mean, it's just I just don't know if that's something that how that would work. And now you're you're setting up a new system that we're going to try to, you know, capture all these um
uses that are presently being done. kind of like when we switched to the uh um you know the efflow where we tried to legalize all the in-laws, all the splits, all the in-law apartments. So, we set up a system to do that and you know people would pay into the system.
They'd have to come in front of the board. So, we're talking about something similar to that. And I and I look at kind of like a somewhat like a home office, right? So, we have a home office bylaw. So, if I decide to run my office out of my home, I could have a small office, maybe one
other person, couple cars, but now I've got 10 people working for me, a lot more traffic, a lot larger space in my house. So, now we're going from, you know, I got a dog, maybe got a few more dogs, maybe the dog office is
on vacation this week. I'll take a couple more. No one's going to bother me. No one's really bothered me in town. I'm a good person. And I'm not saying this to cast dispersions of you. I'm just know human nature being what it is, right? So now I've got 15 dogs in the backyard just for a couple days cuz I
need to make a couple extra bucks this week. Is that going to require the dog officer complaints? People coming out, who's going to be enforcing this? Who's going to be handling these complaints? Are there a lot of complaints now? I don't know. We
haven't heard any evidence to that fact. And I don't know. you're telling me there isn't, but I'm sorry, but I'm not just going to take your word for it cuz you're the petitioner, right? So, I think it's worth um getting a little more education as to, you know, what goes on in that vein and it might be the
best thing ever, you know, but we do need to respect neighbors. I've got neighbors and we've got couple new dogs behind me. I've got a dog behind me on one side, two dogs on the other side. And and dogs bark. They bark all hours of the night. People let them out and
people leave them out. People leave them out for hours at a time. >> Yeah. >> And they bark. >> Owners do that. >> Well, I don't know what you do. I don't know if you have them all inside at the same time. You know, I don't know what you do. I've never been. I don't know what your experience. I'm I'm not planning for the best person. I'm
planning for the worst person. Right? Whenever we do whatever we plan, we do planning. We plan, you know, like people said earlier, what if you're allowing this to be a commercial use? What's the worst thing they can put in there? Right? Because if that business fails and goes out of business 10 years from now, what's the worst thing that can go
in there? You know what I mean? So, if everyone's not as perfect and as great as you, and now we have neighbors who are coming to the town hall and coming to these meetings saying, "Oh my god, this guy over here has got six dogs. This one over here has got five dogs."
And love dogs, don't get me wrong, but they can be they can be a nuisance. And you know, just like those commercial businesses, you get to a point where how many is too many. >> Exactly. >> You know, if I if I have a business, I'm running out of my house and I'm taking
the whole house and the whole yard with commercial equipment and all that, I got to go get commercial space. I have to go get a commercial garage. I can't leave my commercial vehicles at my house. There's a point in time where you get too big. So, we need to figure out that
I think especially for the residents, one, two, and three people, the the smaller residences. I mean, if you got a 5,000 square foot lot and and you have five or six dogs there, I'm not sure your neighbors are going to love that versus, okay, you got a 30,000 foot lot, but but who knows? I don't know the
proximity of your yard to your neighbor's yards and so on. So, you're asking to, you know, go to that level. I think it's not clear. We don't have a limited number. You're just saying, "Okay, I can have four of my own and however many more of other people's
dogs." And it's not just during the day. It's overnight. So, we're kenneling dogs now overnight. So, those are just my concerns. I think you need to >> I'm trying to explain the difference between So, I'm not proposing commercial
kennel facilities. Inhome small settings are categorized the same as large. There's such a difference. I would never want the homes to have that many dogs. The point is >> So, put a limit on it. >> Well, that's why >> that's why we have four. Four and five.
>> Yeah, exactly. So, >> that's the limit. >> It's the limit. But I'm trying permission. >> I'm trying to get permission to be allowed to even have one is to get >> Yeah. >> Legally, financially, >> right, >> income. I'm I'm I'm
residential one. Maybe they can't do this. Um, my point is I'm not proposing large commercial facilities in neighborhoods at all. I'm just trying to keep what's already happening in what already exists in every town. It's a
it's a big big thing people need and want. I'm just trying to make it where the town is accountable for what's happening. Not to ignore it, not to wait until one of these little daycarees do have a complaint and something tragic happens.
These homes would be regulated and under the agreement with the zoning board of approval and the town and the board of health coming in to oversee. Even if it's once a year for the board of health just to see if you we are doing what we're supposed to do like cleaning up
the messes in the backyard, making sure there's fenced in yards, having adequate water for these dogs, just safety environments. Some of these dogs need medications. Um, I'm just here to propose to do the right thing for the town to do the right thing because I know the town is completely
aware of all these inh home doggy daycarees that are existing and I'm just here to make it where it's legal and we're allowed to do it and not ignored. Right. Thank you.
Jim, anything um any any further comments at all before we turn it to the public? >> Nope. Okay. All right. Very good. And um All right. I'll go and uh Josh, I know we have some members of the public who are
um uh who are interested in speaking. And so uh if you can help me in terms of uh calling on any folks again, please please direct any comments or questions to the um through the chair. And if you can just identify yourself, state your address when you when you begin
speaking. I do see we do have one virtual comment there as well, but let's or person has their hand raised. So, but why don't we um if we can begin with just the um uh the members of the public at uh at the Tomb Room, please. >> Yep. Uh Nova,
>> uh Nova Samade, town meeting member, precinct 12. Um, I'm also in favor of this mostly because if um if a personal kennel can only have four and they also need to go in front of the ZBA to get
more, there's nothing holding them back from getting 15 either except for the ZBA. So if p if a personal person just not running a daycare, if they just want to have 15 dogs, they also have to go
through the ZBA. So, I don't see the difference between um a small doggy daycare having to go to the ZBA and a personal kennel person having to go to the ZBA. It seems like it's the same kind of idea of like
managing how many dogs are in homes. Um so, that's all. And I I agree that maybe there are some residential districts that it can't work in or maybe they can have one dog. Um, but I can't control how many dogs my neighbor has for
personal use unless they go to the ZBA. So, this seems like >> they can't have more than four dogs. >> Yes, they can. By special permit, they can. >> Yes. >> Well, they have to go and get permission. >> Yeah. Yeah. Special permit, >> right?
>> Through the ZBA, right? So, that's the same as what this would be. >> Not exactly. >> Why not? >> This is a business. I know, but it's still determining how many dogs you can have on the property or like because a personal kennel person like if I have
four dogs and I want to go get six more, I have to go to the ZBA to say, "Hey, can I get six more?" And they will decide whether or not I can have six more. So this seems like the same idea where like she has one dog of her own.
So she can go and to the ZBA and say I would like to kennel seven dogs during the day or sometimes overnight and they would determine. So it's feels like it's still just a special permit and whether it's a business or it's a personal
kennel where personal kennels I think they can also breed. Um I think that's allowed in the personal kennel. um law. So that's a whole other thing too, but still special permit. So that's all I just wanted to say. I support this with a special
permit from the ZBA and the health department. >> Well, thank you. Okay. Uh Dod, can you help me in terms of anyone else who has their I see some people have their hand raised. >> Uh yeah, Mr. Mr. Brad, please.
>> Yeah. I know the individual who had there who who wanted to speak earlier. I'm not sure if she also has her hand had her hand raised too. >> Yeah. But >> Mr. Bradstre first Brad Street town meeting of a precinct
one. Uh couple of questions a statement. Uh does a kennel refer to a structure that only houses dogs? Could it be cats, hamsters, goats?
Is a kennel just specifically for dogs? Danas is a a law like some others do that every dog owner has to license his dog in town. If you pass this, would this a kennel
>> only allow Danvas licensed dogs? Just a question. >> Doc, can you help out with it e to the kennel question for Mr. Brad Street. >> Yes, I'll do the best I can. Um, so the definition of kennel, although that's
not what we're definition of kennel, a pack or collection of dogs on a single premise including a commercial boarding or training kennel, commercial breeder kennel. But the one, you know, as the ones that we're describing or having the
conversation tonight is particularly on the kennel/commercial boarding or training. It says an establishment used for boarding, holding, daycare, overnight stays or training of animals that are not the property of the owner of the establishment at which such
services are rendered. So um use the word animal, but I it appears that it is referring to a dog. Um but that would be um my quick interpretation.
Mr. Bradstreet, did you have another >> I heard that, but what I heard was it appears to be just for dogs. My question is, is a kennel a place where other animals can live or be not stored but housed?
the uh does the petitioner have a >> and again the other part of it one of the other parts was Damas requires dogs to be licensed in this town and I think in the past it's been made public knowledge that nobody not everyone
licenses their dogs as would this refer to only dogs that are licensed in Danvas just a question I'm not I'm not objecting to what the lady is asking for. It's just a simple question I'd
like answered. At least I think it's simple. >> It I don't And yeah, I don't >> It's not on her petition. Doesn't go to that kind of detail. >> But that's needs to be teased out. It needs to be >> Yeah. >> The definition doesn't say anything of that kind of
>> detail. Well, >> one question I'd have though. Yes, Josh. Just in terms of this with respect to like Mr. Brad Street's question about Danver's licensed dogs and such, could that be something that could be, and this is just a question, is this a is this something that could be conditioned as part of a special permit grant that
it have that certain parameters have to be met which includes the dogs have to have Danver's license or have to have a license or, you know, and so on. um potentially just like that question of like kind of could the ZBA during that public hearing process kind of put a
condition on the number of dogs for each indivividual particular >> um I think that it it certainly you know potentially could be conditioned um the number of dogs and then also the thing that you're referring to right now although you know you start to kind of
get into that kind of gray area um of kind of not overreach But, you know, it has to be appropriate, right? You can't >> say, you know, you couldn't be like they could just do dogs that are brown or dogs that are, you know, start you start getting kind of, you know, you just have
to be kind of careful with with that. That's >> Josh, I have a question. So, the the commercial kennels and Danverse, they don't they don't make have a rule that they can only accept dogs from Damverse, >> right? So, so I don't >> right
>> think that would apply to >> right it seems like >> in home >> right I mean it seems like >> I think a reasonable and like appropriateness are usually like words that come to my head and uh I think yeah not being able to like but that would be
that would be part that would be part of the ZBA public hearing special permit process they you they potentially could I don't know if I would recommend that they would condition do a condition of that nature um saying only you can only do dogs register to Danverse.
um you start to get kind of yeah to a place that >> but they could certainly register though a they but they could certainly require though as a condition um the number because it sounds like mone indicated that between the health department and ZBA she was she was you know there was a
there's sort of a there's a number that she has that she can't exceed >> right I mean if you think about it right just in terms of this discussion you know the R1 houses that you know in terms of the lot area probably that you know they are smaller than the houses
the the property is smaller than the in than R3. So you it is rational that potentially some of the if this was to move forward in residential one on a small property particular if it wasn't even 10,000 but if it was 5,000 or 4,000
ft if the zoning board during the process felt like you know a particular property it would be appropriate to limit the number of dogs. Um that seems like that could be a potentially you know like appropriate course of action.
So, >> yeah. Got it. >> So, are you suggesting that's written to the bylaw? >> What's that? >> That that is written into the additionally written into her proposal. >> Well, I wouldn't re Well, I can't amend
the proposal, but and I'm not and I wouldn't recommend uh >> I wouldn't recommend changing any of the definitions for sure. No, it seems like there needs to be more study on further review
>> as to dealing with those different pockets, those different those different zones. >> Yeah. >> So, do you amend it at this level? You ever come back? >> You know what I mean? >> Yeah. Just sort of just >> this is what's in front of us. >> Citizens petition as well, >> right?
>> So, it's not it wasn't an an internal >> right >> zoning amendment. So, uh I hope so. which she could agree to amendment perhaps or you have to amend it on the floor. >> That's probably what would have to happen. Yeah. >> Send it back for further
>> you'd have I think you'd have to amend it on the floor but >> you probably have to amend it on the floor if you >> Mhm. So yeah, but or or else that's something that you know or it Yeah. It's either something that's amended on the floor or it's something that is um
that's you know that is that is teased out on an individual you know individual basis with respect to um you know in terms of granting of special permits >> right yeah okay other um uh I know we're in the middle of of uh additional public
>> Can I finish >> yeah Mr. to Brad Street still there. Y >> yes, I'm older than a lot of people in here and I remember a long time ago there was two houses together. One house had a dog that was very vocal. The town uh I believe forced the owner of the dog
to have the dog's vocal cords cut or get rid of the dog. >> Is that something that's going to come into play into this? I certainly hope not, but I'm just bringing it up as something that has happened. We know
>> don't Yeah. >> And a little abuse. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Okay. I don't think we um I don't think that's necessary to answer that question. >> I just want I just want it out there because it pertains to what we've been talking about barking dogs. That would
be an extreme. But I guess >> but I guess the question though is is if they if you have a barking dog though it would be it could be subject to a um I assume that it would be it would be something that could be a Josh in terms of if you have a a dog that is you know
what would be the procedure in terms of you do have you know if if you did have a barking dog situation would that go to the zoning enforcement officer? >> Not not a barking dog. Oh, it it would only be at a situation where
>> like for a personal like if someone >> someone for their had six dogs personally and they never had got the special permit that's a zoning violation or if this move forward in the ZBA and you you could get six but you have 10 >> but no a barking dog I think is more of
a nuisance type situation like a police matter not a not it's certainly not a zone I wouldn't say a zone complaint right yeah Yep. >> Okay. Got it. >> Okay. Um, >> Mr. Brad, anything further before we
>> I'll listen to the other people. I've already spoken more than enough. There were a couple of people, young ladies would like to talk. >> Okay. Josh, can you help me in terms of >> u Miss Reguchi would like to speak? >> I think I the reason thank you for
letting me come up, Mr. chairman because with this discussion I think there's a couple of questions that came up that maybe I can clarify it a little bit from >> um my experiences um I'm also one of the petitioners on this citizens petition um that I signed for Melissa
>> and I'm very much in favor for it. >> Um I think people were asking about Mr. Bradreet a answered if asked if it could be it just has to be a licensed dog in Danvers and the number of dogs. I think one thing that putting on sort of I'm
involved with um service dog training and one of our requirements for any dog that comes into our training facility is that they have to have certain vaccinations. Um and those have to be kept on file
with us each year. So, we're all up to date on their So, we know all our dogs are up to date on their rabies, their distemper. Uh, kennel c kennel cough is a big thing when it's a kennel or if it's um in a training facility, it's very contagious
with dogs. So, that maybe we could rework this. I know this is a public hearing. Maybe we could go back and rework a little bit saying, you know, we the um residential dog kennel has to keep on file all their
clients. They have to be up to date with the dogs shots, which would mean, I mean, the town, any town requires a rabies shot. So, usually if your dog is done with rabies, usually they're licensed wherever they live. usually.
Um, so maybe that might be something that be required that when the health department comes out to do the check and they go up in front of the ZBA, yes, I have all the paperwork in order and that's depend and they're going to do that because their license is dependent
upon it. Um, so I just kind of wanted to add that a little bit because that is something that we are held account to um, from the dog training um, aspect of it. Also, maybe perhaps Melissa, you
know, with the petition, maybe I know there's some concerns about the different residential zones, maybe if it was proposed to ease people's angst about it is to have the number of dogs per per zone or maybe exclude zones
like you said. So, um, but I think I'm I'm very much in favor of this because I think especially post pandemic, we're seeing all sorts of different ways that people are working from home and just
different ways people are working in general. So, and as Nova said, we have to go towards if I wanted, you know, four more dogs, I only have one. I'd have to come up and get an approval. It's the same thing. I think we just
have to think a little bit outside the box. And maybe we can install some language where it's not going to be a dogtopia that's going to come in next to you. It's going to be the homeowner. It's the person that owns the home that's doing this small. It It's like a
daycare. You know, a day somebody's not going to build a commercial daycare if they're taking in three, four, five children. they have to be licensed for that. So, it's sort of I think same little aspect of it.
Just just um my feedback, but I hope as we go forward um with the public hearings on this that um we can get a positive uh recommendation from this board and going forward for this proposal. I think it's is a great thing for the town. I think it's a great thing
for the dogs and the dog owners. gives them a peace of mind which I know as a dog owner I would love to if I had to put my dog in care I would not want to put them in a commercial kennel. I want to would put them with someone like Melissa or someone else that I could
trust that would care for my dog that would give them the medication on time. Um so again I hope it's something that the town can do and and kind of be a trailblazer for businesses like this. Thank you. Thank you very much, M. Laguchi. Um
Josh, do we have any other uh I do see some hands raised, so can you help me out here just because I'm I'm remote. >> Thank you. >> I need I need to take a moment. So, it's good that I got to wait a few more. Um my name is >> to say your name and your address. Sorry, I didn't mean to step on you. Yeah.
>> No, I'm Vanessa White and I actually everyone's going to laugh at me, but I'm actually resident of Beverly. Um, but I'm Melissa's client for 10 years, so I'm here in support of her. Um, my background, so yes, I have two dogs. I also volunteer for a dog rescue. Um, I
have a lot of experience with dogs that misbehave and um, I have surrounded by people with dogs in my neighborhood. Um, I kind of wanted to respond to the people who are grumbling about negative parts of dogs um, and like in their neighborhoods. Um because obviously I
totally agree what was what what was just said about like the positive part of housing your dog or h or kenneling your dog with Melissa but um unfortunately yes I mean dogs bark and that is out of all of our control. Uh I
have a dog next door to my house that drives me crazy but I have learned that that is part of living amongst other people. Um, so you can no matter how whether this law goes forward or or this amendment goes forward or not, you're
still risk having someone move into your neighborhood and have four dogs barking. Um, I have had instances in Beverly where I felt like a dog was not a problem dog, but was maybe in a dangerous situation. Um, for example, like being um the lead going way too
close to the street where it was endanger like endangering the dog and other dogs passing by. I call the animal control officer and they say, "We can't do anything about it. It's on their property." I think that's pretty much the case a lot of places. So, a lot of these complaints about being able to
control dogs in the neighborhood if they're on the property are just like moot points to be honest. So, all of this kind of rumbling about that is not a thing. Right now, as Melissa said, you have like 15 or so at least on Rover, right? Then
you can go on Next Door. You can go on Facebook. You can find all these people operating. I know there are people, you know, in the rescue that I work in, they're always, "Oh, do you know anyone who watches there are so many people doing this work? They are not asking for licenses. They are not they do not have
insurance. They are not asking for vaccinations. They are just doing it. So these people who are concerned about having dogs in their neighborhood in um in these daycare situations, those dogs are much more dangerous if they are not licensed. So because they could they
could not have their rabies vaccine. They could run out and they could bite you and you know what's going to happen if they don't have their rabies vaccine? You're going to have to get rabies vaccines. We've had that happen at the rescue if a dog is not vaccinated. So you have to go three times and get shots to get make sure that you don't get rabies. So all of this stuff, this is
already happening. It's not like Danvers is going to put a banner in the middle of town, open a home dog daycare, a doggy daycare. It's like just to have this documented. In addition to doggy daycarees, there's multiple child daycarees running. You have 125 Airbnbs
>> in in Danver. So there's a lot of people in your neighborhoods that you don't know who are from out of town that could be what doing whatever they want. So that's the other thing to consider is like there's a lot of this going on in general and it's acknowledging it and making sure that it is like you know you
guys have a health inspector that goes to restaurants. Maybe maybe not. Those restaurants pay for a permit. That's how people who are producing jams and cookies and breads out of their home kitchen. They're permitted. That's so that don't they don't go to a farmers market and sell bread with poop on it.
So it's like all the same stuff, right? So, I don't really understand all this is all to keep the community safe and aware of what's going on. >> Thank you very much. >> Josh, can you help me? >> Y
>> Lauren Steves, precinct 3. Um, as the citizens petition is written, I wouldn't support it because I think that we need to more so amend our zoning around dog kennels so that when they go before the
ZBA for a special permit, it's, you know, one person doesn't have a permit for XYZ, but the other one has a permit for Elemental PQRS, and that they're not fair. So, it makes more sense to update our bylaws saying if you have this amount of square foot, you can have a
dog. Do you have a fenced in yard? How many pe a rat a ratio of person per how many dogs you're allowed to watch? What we think is safe? I think all these things need to be governed in our bylaws and not oneoff scenarios in front of the zoning board of appeals. I think we also
need to have uh maybe the the board of health needs to have an annual visit to all of these um these kennels, but that's not the way the citizens petition is written. It's it's kind of a blanket. We're just going to approve it in all areas and we're going to let the zoning
board of appeals handle it. And I I don't think that that's probably the appropriate avenue for us to be taking. And I think it makes more sense to amend our zoning bylaws to kind of really narrow it down. And then you go in front of the the ZBA and you say, "I've met
XYZ criteria. This is what I want. Can I have it?" Um, I think this open-ended we just uh approve it in all residential zones. Uh, I think it's a recipe for disaster in my opinion. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. Hi, Lisa Silva, precinct 7 town meeting member. I'm also supporting Melissa's petition. Um, I just want to make it clear that what she is asking is for an
opportunity to apply for a special permit. And when you apply for a special permit, these are the six things, just so everybody knows because I didn't know this before I read it, that they consider. So the the determination shall
be in consider of each of the following. One, social, economic, or community needs which are served by the proposal. Two, traffic flow and safety including parking and loading. Three, adequacy of utilities and other public services.
Four, compatibility with size, scale, and design of other structures in the neighborhood. Five, impacts on the natural environment. And six, potential fiscal impact, including impact on town services, tax base, and employment. So
every single person who is already operating does not have to think about these things. But if we change the X to an SP,
it doesn't necessarily have to be in all of the residential zones. I think that Melissa is more than happy to narrow that down. um every single person would have to think about these things and I don't
we're making it more difficult. We're not making it easier. So when people are like saying oh like you know all of these people are going to start like doing doggy daycare businesses we're actually making it more difficult for that to happen and more regulated. So, I
just wanted to kind of point that out because I didn't know that and I don't think that the regular citizen probably understands what a special permit process is like. Thanks.
>> Thank you, Josh. I see one person with their hand there. Yeah, I'm just >> Hi, Ann Callahan, >> precinct 8. >> Um, I have some questions and concerns
um about the way it the um petition appears to be written. And the first of that is and when I look on the agenda um the language talks about kennel and changing kennel
um allowance of use but when I look at the table in the bylaws there's actually a kennel line and a pet daycare line. So the kennel
law as it exists for for R1 is not allowed. However, R2 and R3 currently are allowed SPZBA. So that's already in place for a kennel.
And the pet daycare is not allowed in any of the um our one, two or three. there is um allowance in commercial zones for a pet daycare. Um so I would I
would ask for clarification. What exactly is this petition for? Is it for a kennel or is it for doggy daycarees? And there seems to be language issues. I'm not an attorney, but there seems to be language issues that would need
clarification. does >> I'm just going to pause just for a second and just see Josh Morris is taking a look at that. So I just want to see if we can get a little illumination in terms of that and I'm wondering if it's relating to
>> 74 on the on the uh online I think if I remember correctly from when I printed it. Well, I mean the beginning of this discussion as we sort of started here um you know we're talking about
the kennel, commercial or boarding or training and we're talking about in the use table right now that phrase or that row right now is being not allowed in our one, two and three. So
>> no the language is about kennel. The table for kennel is not allowed in R1. It is allowed to request a special permit in R2 and R3 already existing.
Is that correct? So, so I think basic point one is the petitioner needs to clarify what is being asked for >> because for some reason it's identified as two separate things in our table of
use. >> I'm not sure what um I'm not sure if this is the arena or whatever. Um, it just I'm looking at the Zonabella right now and I'm just I'm not Maybe we could talk after the meeting and you could show me I don't know if you're looking at like an older We did just redo all this.
>> I printed it today. >> Oh, okay. So, >> went to planning. >> Yeah. >> Town bylaws. >> Yeah. >> And um searched for kennel. >> Okay. Well, I'm looking for >> and then when I looked at kennel, I found doggy daycare underneath it. So
that's I just think if you're going >> to ask for a petition, it needs to be specific in what you're asking for. That's all. I don't have an objection to it. I just >> Yeah. So personal kennel is referring to personal kennel is referring to the
personal what we described tonight when you're >> then the language needs to match. >> That's all the language needs to match because in home pet sitting >> your language needs to match. in home pet versus apples and >> right the personal kennel the definition
is what we've been sort of talking about tonight in that someone at their house personal >> I get that >> okay >> that's not what we've been talking about though the petition says kennel which is separate from doggy daycare
>> the petition says inhome pet sitting inhome pet sitting is what she's saying >> and that's not defined in the bylaw >> so we need to I I That's all the language needs to be looked at not accurate in the current form. >> It's over broad. It needs to be
clarified. >> Right. >> Right. So, and then another concern I have um is the broadess of the request across R1, R2, and R3. Um I think my
opinion would be that there's room in an R3. Um, I I would consider it very inappropriate for an R1. Um, I also and R2 I, you know, I'm not sure. Um, is it
unreasonable for a homeowner who has purchased property in an R1 zone to expect businesses to exist in commercial zones? I I don't know that that's unreasonable for them to expect that. Um, the question I have about the
special permit, is that the same as a request for a variance, just different language? >> Say that one more time. >> It's not. >> Okay. So, >> no, it's not. >> Thank you. >> And excuse me, just for a moment. I just want to say Josh, you was asking also if
the request for a special permit if that's a uh if that's the same as a request for a variance. >> Oh, no. They're they're very different. Yes. >> Okay. So I know that a request for a variance notifies a butters and a butters have the opportunity to come in
and discuss. Is that the same with the request for a special permit? >> The the yeah the yes the notifications would be very similar for a special permit and a variance. Yes. A butter is 300 ft in the newspaper twice.
>> So the neighbors would be notified that the request was for yes place. Okay. >> Um which brings me to my next concern. Is it reasonable to put the onus of the neighbors to challenge a petition for
special permit should someone wish to run their business out of their home? Um and I asked that because I've been involved in previous um requests for variances and um that can create a tremendous amount of animosity and ill
will in a neighborhood. Um, and it just concerns me and that I would ask the board to consider that as part of their process of evaluating this situation. Um, I I don't know that the onus should
be on the neighbor to make a stink about someone requesting to break the law. Um, and then there is noise pollution and that goes back >> just a just a quick clarification by saying to request to break the law. I I
think if if this were um if this zoning amendment were to were to pass, I think the intent was just to so that they would request a special permit so they would be able to be in compliance with the law. >> Okay, I I accept that. That makes sense to me. >> Okay.
>> Um there is noise pollution. That's why I think it's too broad. I I think where Melissa and I live, I you know, it makes sense, you know, in an R3. Um I'm not so sure the people on Arthur Street would feel the same. Um
it does create increased traffic. So, are there traffic requirements? I mean, are there parking space requirements for drop off? That sort of thing. I I would ask that those kind of things be specified and looked at in whatever the
final outcome would be, whether that has to be in the petition or if it's in the the law itself. Um the other thing about drop off um commercial commercial um businesses tend to have
safeguards in place for the arrival and departure of dogs at the same time. Um that would be a concern for me. Um, I don't know if you've ever dropped your dog at a at a at a commercial place and
it happens to be at the same time where another dog your dog doesn't care for. Um, that can get very agitated and very scary and bad things can happen. So, I don't know that that this sort of thing requires that, but I would ask that the
board think about that in their evaluation. Um, I also think that there needs to be a clear chain of command on who monitors and handles violations, um, and complaints and followup to
complaints with, you know, specific um, timelines and answers. Uh, and again to your point earlier, um, you know, the best, you know, take care of all these things. The not so great don't. So, it
it needs to be specified, I would think. Um, there's definitely a need to balance the pet owner needs with the homeowner and community needs. Um, expectations and quality of life in your own home and neighborhood are real and I think that
um that needs to be considered. Um, I'm concerned that case by case is being considered as a parameter. That seems tremendously suggestive. um subjective um and I would like that
to be looked at. Um and the other thing I think um one of the women said that um this would all be better because um the person owns the home and um if I'm not mistaken, the petitioner does not own
her home. Um it's she's not the legal >> listed. I don't know that that becomes a problem or it doesn't. Um I'm just saying uh you know if if you own your home and you're paying your property taxes, you
have a different level of skin in the game and that's playing devil's advocate. Um and just bringing up a point of concern. Um and that's all I would ask the board to think about those things. Thank you.
Good. Thank you very much, Josh. Are there any other um members of the public who have any uh questions or comments? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And since we have had a number of people who have spoken as well, if you can just uh uh uh please ensure to keep your you
know, you know, try you know keep your comments as as as succinct as you can. But uh but go ahead please. >> Hi uh Natalie Fiori, preaint 2. Um, so I've been in dog rescue for nine years and while I definitely see the benefits
of uh I used to be in a a larger rescue and now I'm in a very small rescue. So I do see the benefits of that as well as a large uh commercial uh doggy daycare and a small inhome doggy daycare. So I I do
understand different dogs react differently to different situations. Um, however, uh, I do work, uh, now with, um, animal control officers and I do not
see how this would all work without proper oversight. Um, the animal control officers, there's two, um, who go out and inspect yearly, make sure everything's up to date, all of that. They work directly
with Mass Department of Agriculture who oversees kennels. So the difference between is it a doggy daycare, which dogs are not going to stay overnight, or is it a kennel that dogs do stay overnight? If it's a kennel, it's
overseen by Mass Department of A. You have to have um people who know the rules, know how to work with Mass Department of A. I I I think having an animal control officer full-time
as opposed to what I believe we have a pdeium right now would would be a necessity if we were to go this route um for complaints for compliance and and all of that. The other thing too is as a
realtor, um I I do see some potential issues with property value. If you have a lot of these throughout the town, um I I know I personally don't know, and I'm a dog person devoting nine years of my
life to rescue um on a volunteer basis. I I don't know that I would necessarily want to buy a house next to a home that's got 10 12 dogs running around barking in the backyard all day and all night um on a continual basis. So, I I
think a lot of thought has to go into how this can be executed where um it's a win-win for everybody. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Are there any other members of the public who have any questions or comments?
>> Yes. Hi, Lois McKenzie, precinct 3. Um, one of my concerns is, you know, the people that are going to be checking on these dogs. It's going to be under the Department of Health. I have spoken to the Department of Health on numerous
occasions about dogs being allowed in restaurants, in grocery stores, and I have been told they're not allowed even if the owners want them there because it's against health laws. But I still see them in restaurants, in in
grocery stores, and as much of a dog lover I am, I don't own dogs, but I am also allergic to them. So, it can affect people in in other ways. I know dogs in somebody else's house in someone else's yard is not going to bother me. But I
live in our one and I can tell you being on a corner lot, I am surrounded by seven dogs in I don't know four houses and I hear them all the time. And I do
not want in the uh four, five, six fenced in lots that surround me to have six, eight dogs barking all day. I have to agree with Jim on you can run a a
home office, which we have for 25 years, but in the home office, we pay for personal property taxes for anything that's used for the business. We paid for Well, you have to have liability
insurance. Do they have to have a liability insurance in case any of those dogs get out, do damage, or hurt someone? I also have about a dozen kids living in my neighborhood. So, if this were worst case scenario, if there was a doggy daycare, they got out and they
hurt one of those kids, who's responsible? Um, the board of health can't keep up with what they have to do. Part-time dog officer, we don't even have a full-time officer. Who's going to pay for that
cost? As town meeting members, anybody that knows in this town, this town is broke. Basically, at this point, it's going to be a tough town meeting. So, this is putting something else on the town because somebody wants to
make their illegal businesses legal. And it kind of rubs me the wrong way being in business for 25 years and doing it right, paying all my taxes, paying my real estate taxes and everything else
that goes with running a business. Um, let me see what else. Oh, yeah. You have to have a town business license as well. Uh, I I just don't see how it's going to
work. There's there's too many open-ended questions and I don't know your name. I'm sorry. She made a lot of good points. Ann, she made a lot of good points. >> That's all I have. Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you, Miss McKenzie. >> Thank you, Josh. Mr. Chairman, David McKenna, precinct 8 committee member. I have a couple of procedural questions, but first of all, I I appreciate what you're trying to do with this petition. I think it's something we do need. Um, but I think we need to look a little
deeper into it. My question is first, um, going to town meeting and making amendments to this. My recollection is on a zoning amendment petition, you can't make amendments that make it more restrictive. So, please double check
with town council what you can or cannot amend at on town meeting floor. My other concern is this is being proposed as a special permit. My understanding of state law and a special permit if you meet all the criteria laid out for the
request the board of appeals has to grant it. What are the criteria for this? I haven't seen any. Maybe there's some written in the book that I'm not familiar with. >> U just not to cut you out. Um, just for informationational, uh, I think Lisa Silva, >> Josh, if you can just just forform
informationational purposes, if you can just just, um, >> I didn't mean to cut you address that. >> So, Mr. I just >> I could answer that one. >> Um, >> if there are specifics, just tell me where they are. I'll look them up. >> It's just a special permit criteria for the majority of special permits in town.
It's section 35. Um, >> I know Lisa listed some general ones about overbriding and that sort of thing, but >> Yeah, exactly. mostly if a special permit it says you have to have so many square feet per something or other >> no >> so much setback that sort of thing is
nothing like that for this >> no it would so this is the special permit criteria for the majority of special permits in town um Lisa Silva read them earlier this evening but happy to read them again so if this was to move forward and there was a there was an application
of ZBA to do a kennel commercial boarding and training which we're talking about tonight in order For it to move forward procedurally, it would need a supermajority vote. Four out of five members of the ZBA and it would need to meet all six or from the ZBA's
perspective all six of the following. One, social that social, economic or community needs which are served by the proposal, traffic flow and safety, including parking and loading, adequacy of utilities and other public services, compatibility with size, scale, and
design of other structures in the neighborhood. impacts on the natural environment and potential fiscal impact including impact on town services, tax base and employment. >> Okay. >> So, >> so there's nothing specific about this particular use that they would have to
meet specific criteria. No, the use the use as proposed if and when it went to the ZBA um level if the application at that time the CBA felt like felt that this
commercial kennel met this criteria and a particular property um then they could operate the business there. Does I think what you're referring to maybe is like dimen dimensional requirements. Is that what you're saying? No, at this time in
the definition. Um, but there would be dimensional requirements if there was like a structure, you know, like if there was like a associated like garage or that sort of thing. Um, but usually Yeah. Yeah. >> So, it's got to be a judgment call on
the on the part of the board of appeals then. >> What do you mean by judgment call? I'm sorry. >> They they say it is or isn't appropriate. They don't have any real criteria to base it on. Well, it was Yeah, it was a six criteria that I just explained. Not it just Yeah,
it doesn't say >> have the nebulous though. >> Yeah. Okay. I thought it had to be more specific than that. So, again, I I think there is definitely a place for this. Um maybe it needs more discussion because this does open the whole town to the
possibility of doggy daycarees popping up in every neighborhood. It's not just to protect the ones that are there already. So, let's think about it carefully before we vote. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. McKenna. >> Mr. Barrett, >> Josh, do we have any other >> Yep. >> members of the public?
>> Yep. >> Kevin Barrett, precinct 4. Um, so I I guess I'm going to maybe bring up some more procedural issues here. So, um, and I I I also would I'm not completely opposed to to
allowing doggy daycarees under some circumstances, but like much like we do for a cow or a horse, you have to have a certain number of, you know, certain size lot you and if for every additional 10,000 square feet, you're allowed one more, right? We don't there's no you can
have a cow in Danvers. You really can, right? But there's requirements. Um, and this we're just going to leave wide open, right? You can't have one in R1, by the way. >> So, so for those of you that live in uh >> Good to know. >> Yeah. So, so if you if you live as
>> an R1 resident, I appreciate if I can get information. >> If you live at Maple Square, don't get excited. Bessie Bessie cannot live with you. >> That's not That's not R1, but different issue. >> Sorry. If you live in an overlay district, still no. >> Depends. But yes. >> Um Okay. So, I I guess the petition is
to amend the table of use regulations. We don't have such a thing. We have a zoning bylaw and we have a zoning regulation. The zoning bylaw comes from town meetings. Zoning regulation comes from youth fine folks. The table of
allowable uses is in the bylaw, not the regulation. So we're asking to amend a section of a document that doesn't exist. Uh so this this unfortunately is why citizens petition >> for clarification sake. Mr. Barrett, I'm sorry. Could you could you could you
come again? Could you explain just say it again please? >> Sure. So the petition says this petition to amend the table of use regulations. We have a table of allowable use uses that is in the zoning bylaw, not the
zoning regulation, right? The zoning regulation is something this board wrote. The zoning bylaw is something passed by town meeting. So we're are we're for at the start we're asking to amend the wrong document and then has been otherwise pointed out
to allow in-home pet sitting that's not a line in that table. So like this it's very well-intentioned but this is why citizens petitions don't generally get anywhere right and and
like I I could hear Fincom right now with what with what they're going to say about this. So, like it's it's a great idea. It's well-intentioned. I would love for people to be able to operate small home businesses with lots of conditions and controls, but as written,
like we're not even asking to amend the right document right now. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. >> Hey, Josh, any any other any other questions or comments?
Um, not in the room. Just want to check back with if Denise was still here. >> Yeah, we did have I think Denise Casey. I didn't >> She She was It looked like she was on for the majority of the hearing. I just
was going to circle back with her, but it looks like she's not here anymore. >> Okay. I did note just for the record as well, there was um and I think this was in the packet. We did um we did receive and Josh if I'm not mistaken two email
correspondents. One from Kathleen and Wayne Jalbert of Five Sparrow Lane in Danver >> and another from Laura St. Sauer of 168R Center Street. We received correspondence both in support of this. Isn't that correct?
>> Um yeah. Yeah. And you had a chance to like completely read. So, the support piece, it was just my question. I I saw that they were in the I I forward them to the board. Um, >> they were in support. >> Okay. Yeah, they were in support. Yeah. Okay. I just didn't Yeah.
>> Just wanted just wanted to note that that they that that they've been in the that that they're within the file and and uh and they're part of our review. >> Sure. Y. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Very good. Are there any other um any other questions or comments from members of the public before we just come back
to the board? As I as I said before at the outset, here we are and it sounds like we do have a you know a number of uh um you know a number of questions that came up a number of comments that came in. Uh so um so I think there's a fair amount to still talk about. So
let's come back to the board. Um um so let's see. Jean Hartnett, anything you wanted to anything further you wanted to add? >> Yeah. Um, I agree with a number of the points that came up just based off of
the language and we want to make sure that the petition makes sense uh from the t the table of use and that we're going about it the right way and addressing the right thing. So, um I don't know maybe if you
want to look at re meeting with the planning staff and rewriting it and coming back to make sure that we address all of those issues that were brought up so that we are getting the you know the right avenue to bring it to town meeting
if that's what we end up voting for. Um, and I don't know if you even want to go further and work with staff and try and come up with some some proposed regulations, say like
based on square foot of your home or the size of your lot. Um, but also, you know, we don't have these regulations for owning a dog. You know, anybody, no matter what, our one, two, or three, can own up to
four dogs. So, if you own zero dogs and want to watch three dogs that belong to your friends, I don't see how that's worse off than anybody that wants to own dogs. So, there there's a lot of, you
know, give and take here on on the way this is written. Um, so I think that a lot of that should be addressed before we move forward. >> Thank >> Thank you, Jean. Um, Jim Sears, anything you wanted to
>> No, I would just agree in summary. I mean, it's it the language is over broad. I mean, the intent is over broad. The language is ambiguous and it needs to be sent back for further review. I don't think they'd have enough time to uh resubmit for this town meeting.
probably have to wait till the next one, but I'm not sure it's necessarily the the town staff's job to to prepare the um petition, but the petitioner could use counsel or someone
to help her, you know, with the language. It just it's just it's just too broad, I think. And and I think you're going to find that not just this board, but the other boards are going to feel the same way. You're just you're just trying to do too much with a broad brush. and and we've gone over this.
I've been on this board 30 years and we've talked about dogs for a lot of years and we've just passed that recent uh legislation about the, you know, the defining the terms. So, I I I you know, I understand it's great to kind of, you
know, legalize this and and kind of control it to a certain degree, but you got to have specific criteria. It it's just way too broad to saying, "Let's do it over the the whole residential areas in town." You got to be specific and and you might not be one that would offend
it, but if you open it up without clear guidelines, people are going to get are going to push it to the max and maybe do more than they should and you're going to have a lot of unhappy neighbors. And um again, it's nothing against dogs. It's just
when you give people an opportunity, you don't clearly define what the rules are, you know, and you're running a business, but the business is too much in a residential area. If you buy a house in residence 3, you're paying top dollar. You could buy a same house in residence one or two and maybe cost more, maybe
cost less, but you've got more yard area. And as you know, the realtor said, do I have an expectation that I'm hopefully not going to be next to someone that has eight dogs? I might love dogs, but after a while, I might get I might not want to hear them, especially if they're sleeping
overnight. And we just got to you got to clear up the language cuz there's no such thing as an inhome pet sitting. That's that that's not a that's not a terminology. It's either kennel, which it sounds like we're talking about kenneling because we're we're staying overnight. Inhome pet sitting sounds
like we're going to babysit you for a few hours and you can go back home. But if we're we're boarding dogs, that's a whole different element. Jim, just for just for information, not um the definition of kennel commercial breeding is >> No, I know that
>> does does both like you could do the daycare and or the the over >> she's talking about overnight, >> right? >> Which is >> which is which is which which does be the definition, >> right? But in her petition, she's
talking about inh home pet sitting, >> right? >> So that's >> I think Jim's pointing out the ambiguity there. >> That's it's not it's ambigu ambiguous. Does she mean daycare during the day or overnight care? So, I think it's confusing. If there's confusion, then it I think it
needs to be clarified before it gets moved forward. >> In the legal ad, it says the correct information like >> what's it say? >> It says the kennel. It says kennel commercial border. In the legal ad, it uses this line, the correct line.
>> Okay. which is what you prepared >> when you when you you published it but not what people signed when they signed the petition to be >> sure >> clear. So cuz if I signed that I don't know if I would think that that meant overnight
inhome pets sitting sounds like hey you're going to babysit your kid for a few hours or your dog and they're not staying over all week. I mean that it's just you know and that's what I signed the petition for. So, I'm not sure that it was clear on the petition itself, but
you asked my opinion. I'm done. >> No, sounds sounds good. And, um, uh, as for me, I mean, in terms of looking at it, um, uh, yeah, I'm a, you know, I I I certainly appreciate the intent of this
and the the intent and the, um, and the and the desire. I have some concerns as well just with respect to some of the language um with you know with respect to the language in terms of the you know some of the the the definitional
concerns in terms of in you know inhome pet sitting as well as the um you know just as well as the as the breadth. And so and it's more of a and again it's more of a concern to me at least of the um of what the you know of the worst
case scenario. And so what could happen, you know, not with, you know, not necessarily with with with with what M. Nardon is doing, but just with respect to what what someone else could do, particularly if you start getting into, you know, um you know, not just R3, but
R2 and getting into into R1 as well. So, um so as it's currently as is as the petition's currently written, um you know, I have some uh I definitely have some reservations. Um so just a question
for for Josh I guess in terms of logistically I mean as I mentioned at the outset here we wanted to um you know continue this to our the hearing to our next meeting but sort of because this is a citizens petition is the only way that that any you know hearing some of the
feedback both from um from our the planning board as well as from you know from from even members of the audience who include town meeting members who will ultimately be voting on this. Is there um as a citizen's petition, what can the what can the petitioner do if if
she wishes to, you know, to address any of these things? >> Well, as we sit right now, I mean, I think um you know, I'd recommend at this moment, well, re I'd recommend at least if
there's all these, you know, there's comments, questions, obviously talked about this for >> quite some time tonight. Um, at this moment I would say that we should defin we should I'd recommend we continue it. >> Yes. >> To the next meeting
>> and then while we have time we could, >> you know, the the petitioner can figure out some of these questions or you know what I mean? Um, I don't think that right now I think as right now it's probably appropriate to continue it and
all the questions and comments that were brought up tonight >> then it would give them the the team that or you know the petitioner the opportunity to kind of >> figure out if you know the comments to the responses to some of the stuff that come up tonight
>> andor you could talk through um potential you know different avenues or you know what she what they want to do you know >> um to move forward. her, you know, >> I don't believe she can amend it at this point. >> She she can't amend it. So, coming back for another meeting, I'm not
sure well, my opinion what that's going to accomplish. >> Yeah, might it might it might the end game might not be different, but I think at this moment >> it could be it it can't be amended except it can be amended. I guess the only way it can be amended, it can be amended on um on town meeting floor.
We can't be more restrictive and we're talking about restrictions at least some of us are >> making right some of us are saying that it's over broad so to put criteria in make it a little more restrictive you can't do it at this point she'd have
to withdraw and come back withdraw >> you can't make it more restrictive on town meeting I know this is getting into you know town meeting practice but you can't make it more restrictive at town meeting floor versus because it's Is this because the way it's been advertised? Because the way it's advertised is more broad. So I'm
>> So is making it more narrow. That's not >> that can't be done on town meeting floor. >> Correct. You can't amend it to make it more narrow. >> Could she break could she list criteria that already exists that wasn't brought in tonight? For example, if there's a
statewide law that of how many dogs you can have based on the size of your space, similar to a restaurant or a child daycare, you could list those. I I don't know if that would help, but >> I think anything that could inform, you know, that I think Yeah, I think
anything that could inform us and inform members of the public of any of these, you know, to address some of the concerns. Maybe it won't address all the concerns, but it could address but it could address some of the concerns that were raised tonight. So, okay. >> You might want to get a
I think you may want to get a town council opinion in light of what's >> I think that though it's just one comment I would make it. I believe that it can be more restrictive. It can't get more broad. But that's just that's my opinion. I believe that it could be more
restrictive. It couldn't you could add zoning article you couldn't add zoning districts to the proposal at this point. Right. Right. But you could you can make it more restrictive on ton meeting floor >> because that seems to me to make sense because then because otherwise otherwise
if if if let's say this originally was very narrow like you know residents one and two let's say or let's say residence three residence three and then on town meeting floor you amended it to include three two and one that's more broad and maybe I maybe I would have not attended
the meeting because oh it doesn't affect me and then >> I think our My opinion is that it could be restrictive. It can't be more broad. So, >> but if it's advertised probably circle, >> but if it's advertised as one thing it >> and the petition is signed based on that
and now we're changing it before it goes before >> or even at town meeting. Is that is that a problem? I I think we need an opinion. I I would request >> another I think another petition would have council opinion. another petition would have to be >> in light of >> submitted. >> Yeah. >> What we're talking about cuz I don't I
don't think that's >> I don't think we can >> change it from what she presented. >> Josh. Yeah. >> Josh. >> Yes. Jim has asked to see if we can get, you know, an opinion like from from town council with respect to an amendment on
the >> I guess an I guess an amendment on the on the floor and to the how, you know, whether it can be more restrictive than >> right >> than currently. Is that um Jim, is that sort of what you're looking at? >> But also, even if even if we amend it at
our next meeting on April 6th, >> I don't know. I don't think we have enough time. There's not enough time. It hasn't been advertised for that meeting. So, I'm not sure you're going to it's it would prevail. I don't think you can change it >> and if we're all or we haven't voted on
it, but if we if we if we move it forward with not a positive recommendation, we don't recommend it. >> Um I guess what's the point at that at that point where we think it can be improved upon with further study? Why are we
pushing it to the ex the other two boards to pick it apart at that point? I don't know. >> At this point, it's just our recommendation. >> Just kick it back to further study and then a year later we come back and look
at a better product and and it's, you know, it's I understand what you're trying to do. We just need more guidance and >> yeah, >> it's it's complicated as you can see. >> But because it's a citizens petition though, it does Yeah. I mean it regardless of what we end up doing on it
ends up it still goes to select board still goes to fin and then town meeting. >> So I think that we could you know >> go ahead Jim >> unless she wants to withdraw at this point. If she wants to proceed she can
proceed but I I think that's at her it's her time. >> It's her option. Oh well, you know the um I mean right now what I would what I would wish to do is to um um I think it would make sense to
to continue this to our next meeting because a lot of comments have come in and you know and I think that it would be also a good opportunity to to to to see what sort of what options could be as you know as well just within the context of it being a citizens petition.
Um and if that is the if the option is the only option is you know amendment on the town meeting floor then um and then I think we'd like to know also about that question we had in terms of just to double check the issue of being rest you know restrictiveness. So I would I would
I would entertain a motion to to to continue it to our to our April 6th meeting. Any thoughts on that? >> I'll let you do it. >> Yeah, I Well, if we continue it, then does she still have the opportunity to
Yeah. >> withdraw before the meeting? She could do anything. >> If you want to >> change it. Yeah. >> Okay. Um I make a motion that we continue the uh citizens petition for the zoning bylaw amendment to our next
meeting, April 6th, 2026. Second. Is >> there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Second by Jim. Okay. Any discussion on this? >> And and it's a it's a motion to just to clarify. It's a motion and you said this, Gene, right? It's it's a motion to continue the public hearing.
>> Yeah. Motion to continue the public hearing. >> Okay. Sorry. Okay. There you go. >> I don't think it's been moved and seconded. >> Okay. It's getting a little late. Okay. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion on this? Okay. Hearing none,
I will call uh call a vote. Uh Jean, >> yes. >> Jim, >> yes. >> And I say yes. Okay. So, it has been uh so the item is going to be continued to our next meeting of April 6, Monday. And
um and so and uh and so I I guess the applicant probably should um you know, should plan on on attending that next meeting. And I think Josh, you know, from town staff's perspective, I think there just a few sort of clarifying questions that we that we have as well. >> Sure.
>> Yep. >> Okay. >> Sounds good. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you for the the applicant for coming tonight as also and thank you for th those uh um the residents who participated in tonight's uh in tonight's meeting. We're continuing the public hearing to our
next uh next meeting. Okay. All right. So Josh, can we have our um I'm just moving on to our next agenda item. I do have here we have meeting minutes. However, we don't have any meeting minutes currently. Is that right? >> Correct. Yeah, they weren't I wasn't able to uh
>> Yeah, it was a three-hour meeting the last meeting, so I wasn't able to put them all together. There's a draft, but wanted to go through it one more time. >> Home was >> um just one moment. >> We're actually still meeting. >> We're still having a meeting. >> Yeah. >> Um >> we're still in a meeting. If you guys can check it outside.
>> We're still in a meeting. So, could you please step outside if you'd like to speak? >> Trying to end the meeting. >> Louis, sorry. Uh, >> the room got uh >> very talkative.
>> No, it's okay. All right. So, so we'll have meeting minutes that are um likely at our next meeting. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Very good. Um, and so for April 6, what applications do we have that are um that are going to be uh anticipated? So, we have these two public hearings that were
continued to that evening. And we also have the open the public hearing opening for an application for 156 Maple Street downtown uh which is close to uh Maple Square on that same side. Uh
>> okay. >> So, it's several special permits and waiverss and site plan review for 156 Maple Street. >> Very good. Yes. >> Just on that matter, Jim, you indicated that you won't be available on the April
6th, correct? >> No, I'll be on the >> Oh, you will? Okay. >> Yeah, it was the 15th that 14th. >> Oh, so moving that it helps you, too. Okay. So, okay. >> Okay. So, it won't be too long. >> Excellent. >> I can't promise that.
>> Do our best. >> We'll see. >> Okay. >> Okay. Great. >> Is Mike going to be here that day? >> I think so. Yes. So, I think we moved it. Yeah. So, Okay. So there'll be four >> the new member >> I coming soon. >> What does that mean? So is uh Santa
Claus. >> The new member will be here. >> We still have >> the new member will be here some months before that. >> The new member will be here before Santa on the record. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Good. Okay. No, that sounds um that sounds good. And uh and and Josh, I think there's also I think you mentioned
at the last meeting we have the um is it on after we got the date? Is it on April 1st? >> What's that? the um the the training. >> Oh, yes. There's a >> there's an open meeting uh like public
hearing >> for Let me just look at the date. I'm sorry. It's it's a Thursday. >> I may have misspoke. Yeah, I'm having difficulties with days of the week. >> No, that's fine. It was uh or is >> the second
>> I think it's next Thursday, April 2nd. >> Got it. >> Um Okay. So, if you guys are available, that would be great for you to attend. Uh, I will be here. >> Uh, yeah, >> I plan as well. That's going to be on this that that's that's at 6 p.m. here at the TUMI room. >> That's right. Open meeting law and
hearing training. So, >> good times. >> Very good. All right. And um Okay. Sounds sounds good. Uh All right. I think if there's nothing further um nothing further on the agenda, I will uh
entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Motion's made by Jean. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Second, >> Jim. Okay, I'm going to call a roll. >> Jim, >> yes. >> Jean, >> yes.
>> And I say yes. Very good. All right. Thank you very much everybody. Have a good evening. Uh this concludes our planning board meeting for this evening and thank you uh thank you everybody for attending and thank you Josh for your assistance today too as well. >> Yes. Okay.
>> Have a good evening.