##VIDEO ID:y1Pk6bL2CbU## [Music] for okay the meeting will come to order please um let's see I should have had my agenda out before I said that mine's got notes all over [Applause] it okay we begin with public comment and that's a time when if you have something you want to talk to the board about um that isn't on the agenda now is the time and when we give instructions for how to talk to us you come to that microphone over there that connects you to uh fctv and please before you say anything else give your name and why you're speaking so is there anyone who wants to speak on something that isn't on the agenda yes you have to come forward and speak there Char r hi I'm Charles Raider I'm at 44 Alvar Avenue and this is on the agenda but I'd like to have an opportunity to speak about it uh when you get to the discussion of the planning of the planning bylaw about short-term rentals I'd like to make some comments and I can make them now or then I don't other than a report on last night's meeting I don't think that's on the agenda it was last time I looked but well what he's looking at yeah discussion you're welcome to talk about short-term rentals for two minutes right yeah right now if you want right now let her rip maybe I can uh I was at the town meeting when the presentation was almost made uh and after the town meeting I had an Insight which was that uh there's a part of both state and federal law that says that if you rent your property for less than 15 days it's a tax-free thing I had remembered that from long ago and I'm assuming I don't have any statistics about this that there are people who are uh in such Financial condition is having difficulty keeping their being able to afford to keep their house and May be using this as a a way to just stretch stretch it out and uh I dropped that in a note to Paul Brier and then uh I found out later that there was this Supreme Court ruling that was uh limited short-term rentals to 30 days which would throw nothing the town did if that couldn't be overturned would uh would protect these people so I thought the thing to recommend is that in the shortterm in the short-term rental whatever however it works out it would be good to include a statement something like this and I'm not a lawyer this may may not be exactly how to do it but nothing in this bylaw shall prevent any Resident homeowner from renting out his habital habitable property for no more than 14 days in any year such that if if the Supreme Court decision does get overturned or modified we wouldn't be in the position of having the bad guys that's all I want to say well thank you for that reminder I think that's still on the books I think the way um public comment goes is we're not supposed to comment on what you comment on that's fine it's not on the agenda but make note but I'm glad to uh Jeb JB some copies of this thank you anyone else no and then we'll move on but I would like to uh to point out something um it's on the agenda but you may not uh be reading it the people who have come for uh to talk about the uh development that's going to be down there by um Duncan Donuts um it's last on the agenda but the applicant has requested a continuance so if you've come to talk about that we're not going to get to it tonight because there'll be a continuance so that just saves you waiting for that PA the [Music] minutes Madam chair I recommend approval of the minutes of January 14th 2025 is written second all in favor right thank you Paul okay moving on um our first order of business is a partial Covenant release on Elsie's way 540 carage shop Road um Kevin thank you evening Madam chair members of the board um this is this is unusual one so for the record Kevin Clow I'm an attorney here in town uh and I'm before you this evening representing uh Helen and Ahmed Mustafa who are the owners of 540 carage shop Road and also Shawn and Lila Daly um who are the daughter and son-in-law of the owners and who are potentially purchasing this property from them we are before you requesting a partial release of the Covenant in place for the development of El's way we're requesting this relative only to 540 Carriage shop Road this requires a bit of history and there are a lot of moving pieces so I would ask that you bear with me so 540 carage shop was this parcel you see outlined here um presently it is this parcel lot one that is what exists today but previously it was this parcel that's why it has a carriage shop Road address and previously had Frontage along Carriage shop when this home was constructed in 1972 in 1999 GB Management Inc the owner of the 11 acre parcel to the rear which is this parcel shown as lot two back here um submitted a subdivision plan that plan included a part of 540 carot shop which is highlighted here as parcel k um this is the portion of what was formerly 540 carot shop that was included within the subdivision plan that constituted the frontage long Carriage shop and and is the driveway for that property um so after the approval of the subdivision plan 540 carage shop became lot one shown here parcel K was deed to George patello Inc on July 23rd 1999 this is by the previous owners Paul and Natalie guy they reserve the rights to this parcel K in that deed to use for Access being being the location of their driveway a covenant was placed on all the Lots involved in a subdivision which included lot one the Covenant prohibited sale the Lots until the covenants released needless to say Elsie's way was never constructed Covenant was never released the prior owners Paul and Natalie guy then conveyed the property to Helen and Med Mustafa in 2003 the Mustafa are now looking to sell the property to their daughter and son-in-law but this Covenant is still in place and remains a cloud on title so the road was never constructed but the driveway remains over what was parcel K which they have the rights to however it's not as simple as them constructing the road for one they no longer own it this is deed to George pello Inc uh but more than that they had a plan prepared which showed the Wetland deline a of that potential roadway and the buffers to that Wetland the entirety of the proposed road is within the buffers to the Wetland and concom will not allow the road construction to be completed they can't simply undo the subdivision because if they tried to do that they're creating new non-conforming Lots um we wouldn't have requisite lot with and because we're creating effectively creating a new lot it wouldn't uh have the benefit of protections as a pre-existing non-conforming lot uh there is an adequate FR Frontage and lot withd so they wouldn't be able to Avail themselves of any relief from the zoning bylaw which brings us here tonight we're requesting release of the Covenant only as to 540 Carriage shop effectively we're asking for Equitable relief this property was developed long before the subdivision the house was built in approximately 1972 it still has access over what was parcel k it has utilities and the burden of the road the burden of building a road that cannot be built should not be placed on these owners they weren't a party to the subdivision and they're unable to convey the property due to the Covenant even if they had the means the roads can't be constructed and undoing the subdivision as of noted only creates new problems which would still result in the property not being marketable releasing 540 carage shop does not create any new issues or liabilities the house is there it was not constructed as a result of the subdivision and the Covenant would remain relative to the rest of the property there is simply no other path available to the owners they can't build uh they can't they can't build the road the road can't be built they can't undo the subdivision they are between a rock and a hard place here this board can grant them Relief by releasing the Covenant as it pertains to 540 Carriage shop this does not reward bad behavior the house was there house was not built as a result of the subdivision and these owners didn't certainly did nothing wrong releasing the Covenant as to this property provides them relief in a way that's fair that does not run contrary to the regulations or intent of the zoning bylaw with the subdivision regulations I hope that this board will consider this and provide these owners with the requested relief in the form of granting a release of the Covenant as to this property I would be happy to address any questions that the board might have could I just say Kevin thank you um I think you're in a tangle of paper the planning board went uh to the Town Council and the Town Council has advised us did everyone get a copy of this was this the only one handed out no everyone got everyone has a copy um read the last paragraph on the back page that kind of sums it up um we have been advised that you won't be able to get clear Deeds this way and that we really should not go forward with your request until you've complied with the terms of it and I'm sure if you want to elucidate now or he can help you um at a different time and place to go through it so I I think your what Town Council is referring to is um condition seven of the Covenant which is a deed or of any part of the uh subdivision in violation of the Covenant shall be avoidable by the grantee prior to the release of the Covenant but not later than 3 years from the date of such deed the grantee if the Covenant was not released could say you know what there's a covenant here I don't want this and void the deed but that's not if the covenant's released if the Covenant is released as to this lot that would that that condition would no longer be in effect because the Covenant would no longer control this lot I think we're going to go by the advice of our Council want to speak yeah I do because I didn't have any advice in front of me when I read the Covenant originally and when I read it paragraph 2 said that no lot has to be conveyed until the construction of the ways and installation of the necessary Municipal Services is complete M and the whole thing wasn't completed yet and yet the lot was conveyed so it was already in conflict with the Covenant so these owners could have voided the deed between 2003 and 2006 because it gave them a three-year window the statute provides a three-year window they did not they weren't aware of it but you know it's it's a it's it's a situation where we have someone being punished for for something they they had no no part of no no part in the creation of no part in anything and all they're trying to do is be able to have clear title to their property I understand what attorney o'keef is saying but I think that if this Covenant is actually released relative to this lot that condition no longer applies because the Covenant no longer applies to the lot any other member of the board want to comment I'd like to make a comment according to what um Town Council gave us I'll read this it says that um providing a release this is the last sentence providing a release partial or whole without completion of the work runs contrary to the statute and may very well subject the planning board to litigation have you have you seen this I have not seen I have not seen the and as I as I hear um your your argument uh just I want to ask you uh is this couple allowed to sell the property or needed the property well they can't they can't convey good title to the property they can't get a clear title yeah so they can't convey clear title so without relief it's almost like a taking in a way I mean it's what happens I mean I don't know I mean I truly I I've I've beat this around with Jed and Melinda for a few months and and this is is sort of our last ditch effort because I I I don't know what the recourse here is or what possibility there is if this road can't be constructed which it sounds like it cannot and you know we can't for the reasons of I've gone over I don't think you can undo the subdivision do you think the courts could could issue any releas releas I don't I don't know but I mean how many hundreds of thousands of dollars are we talking about in court fees like you know legal fees and and it's and that is that is probably a a 2 to 5 year process okay Jim do you want to say I have a question is it because the town changed the setback from 50 feet to 100 feet is that the issue I'm I'm not sure what the wetlands regulations were in effect in 1999 um this was clearly Allowed by the planning board whether it was vetted by conservation at the time I don't know I had a similar situation in Helma Circle Helma Circle it was uh deed for 30 20 years was in place and then the town changed the setback from uh 50 ft to 100 we couldn't build our road mhm it's now a 40b we wasn't there a case in we blew away the town's bylaw went to the state and got it done because the state said we could do 50 ft but the town would not let them build helmis Lane so so there's a it's happened to other people yeah you know we we certainly don't want to do a 40b here no I'm just saying the town changed the bylaw yeah and this is what happens when you change bylaws it has may or may not happen have happened here um Bob did you want to say yeah uh what's shown there that that's a paper road right now that's what was supposed to be constructed in 1999 so but there is a driveway that goes to that house now so if you if you were to go there there was a sign that says Elie's way out on carage shop Road okay and it's basically 12 14 ft wide and it's a driveway that services this 540 carage shop okay so uh if the driveway is only 12 ft and this road will was I can't see how wide it was think it was laid out at 40 yeah it was laid out at 40 uh how close does does that gets you to 100 ft so the driveway exists within what is this parcel K right now yeah right the driveway is there yeah um if you were to look at you can see the existing gravel driveway yeah and that's entirely within the 100 foot set back yeah was I'm just wondering why a road would have to be built it's a driveway now well in order to comply with the Covenant right because there was a road layout plan that was filed as part of the Covenant in 1999 and that road layout Plan called for um payment to be installed down to this point effectively yeah J could you shed some light on this well I think attorney Clow has has done a a remarkable job of explaining the um unfortunate situation that these this homeowner is in um and he's right we have uh gone back and forth on trying to figure out how to solve this um I I agree with attorney o' Keef's um recommendation that you should not release the Covenant um unfortunately I I think uh that likely they would have to go to Lan Court to try and figure out how to if possible undo the subdivision because clearly L's way is not going to be able to be built uh anytime in the future so it's um above our pay grade if you will and unfortunately it's some of the uh challenge when regulations so it's just to be clear this isn't a zoning bylaw change it was Wetland regulations that did change and so now those regulations are prohibiting the construction of this road and could this road be built if it was still 50 ft no no it even it's no still too close so it never could be built because that 50 foot law has been in place for a long time exactly that was a mistake in the beginning well I think our understanding when talking with the conservation agent uh administrator was that the regulations were different back in 1998 and so it was it was able to be approved back in 1988 with that uh space from the Wetland but now those regulations are different and in order to build the road you need to be offset of a certain number of feet which as you can see on the screen is not possible so the road effectively can never be built and so there has to be some um Avenue to undo what was done in the past and it is simply not your uh ability so I think I my recommendation is that you not release the Covenant and hope that the uh land owners can work together to figure out a good solution John is there any possibility that conservation could Grant relief get getting a variance from conservation is a non-starter because you need to show why the public is benefited by the granting of an easement and it's um just fill in a little bit of the it is well that's that's a different that's a different conversation John just a thought yeah um I have a suggestion Miss Harris so I have not had an opportunity to review um the report from attorney O'Keefe generally speaking her feeling is and I don't want to put words in her mouth but what's been told to me is her feeling is that this is uh work product that she's delivered to you as as the client effectively what the zoning board has done in a number of occasions is voted to release that to me so I have a chance to respond and perhaps authorize me to dialogue with attorney O'Keefe about why I don't think this is creating any new liabilities for the planning board let's do that do we actually need a vote or may I just hand it over it's completely up to you thank you because when I heard it it sounded really foolish to hold you up on it but if we're subject to litigation and whoever is dealing with it now can have a clear deed then uh both sides are are in some kind of Jeopardy so I'm glad you suggested us is this okay with the rest of the board yeah yes yes yes yeah I think you know I mean it's I have not seen anything like this this is a first for me um and it's weird that's a technical legal term uh but it's a really weird difficult situation with with no good or clear answer and um it seems like we should be able to avoid forcing these people into litigation that that's going to take a lot of time money and effort that that hopefully isn't necessary it does if you find a solution would you let us know so what I'd like to do um is is to effectively continue this this matter do we need to continue it or would I just submit a new request I I would say just submit a new request so what I'd like to do is withdraw this without prejudice for the time being um and if if you as a board could authorize attorney o'keef to dialogue with me about this I think that would be very helpful so that I can I can have a conversation with her about again why I it's my opinion and I don't litigate but it's my opinion that this would not open them up to liabilities because this was an existing structure in house and they still have access access regardless I'd love to be a part of that conversation happy yeah happy to do so okay and I don't think we need to take any action for you to go forward and do that all right thank you all very much appreciate your time we'll see you in about five minutes yeah a good resolution next up you're lucky uh Mr bunker um uh plan of land to combine two lots into one at zero West Balou Highway and a R approval not required Madam shair um you all have a copy of the large print out um Melinda has called the uh Anar up on the screen uh it's staff's recommendation that uh due to the fact that it does meet the requisite Frontage as uh required in the RB district and it does allow access to the building pieces of land that you endorse the anr as presented so it has Frontage it has access do we have a motion second Mo second all in favor I I done Kevin Clower again oh think you may have no I skipped one um James Hall on behalf of Patricia WI a definitive plan modification application to make a roadway and utility improvements at 04 5 Hall Lane and 345 old barnable Road notice notices oh and the notices please chair the notice of the public hearing for this project was published on 11025 and 11725 and 34 Butters were notified by regular mail and we might have a Butters here Mr uh Brian Wall for for the applicant Madam chairman um good evening and members of the board I I'm here tonight representing James Hall and this is an application to modify a subdivision plan that was approved by the board in 1989 um I'm here tonight with Mike brelli who's going to talk about the details of the plan and also um the buyer of the lot that we're going to be talking about Eric Stewart is also in in the audience so the 1989 subdivision plan approved three lots um two of which I I'm going to call house-sized lots and then the remaining part of the subdivision is a large 4.76 acre lot identified as zero Hall Lane and it's also identified on the 1989 plan as lot 2A the two house lots that I mentioned and you can see them on the plan have been improved with single family dwellings in lot 2A remains undeveloped as as of today access is currently provided over a 73 foot wide layout on which there's an 18t wide Gravel Road Mr Hall intends to sell lot 2A to Mr Stewart and Mr Stewart wants to build a single family home on the lot and does not want to further subdivide the lot in any way so we're before you tonight seeking a modification of the plan for the following reason the 1989 plan has a notation on the 4.76 acre lot that states the following lot 2A shall not be built upon until the road is constructed to subdivision control law standards and so our view of that notation was that it was put on the plan by the board in 1989 to reserve to the board the right to have any further sub Division come back before the board so in other words if Mr Hall were here tonight seeking to have two or three more Lots then this the board would decide what kind of access would be required for that what we're here actually for is to simply request the board to remove that notation because there is no further subdivision sought of lot 2A we are also proposing some improvements to the road that currently exists to accommodate the additional traffic that will be generated by um the the new house on lot 2A the improvements that you'll hear Mr Borelli talk about in one minute are essentially to continue to maintain the existing gravel driveway albeit improved with some improvements regarding grading and drainage and width um we have talked or through the planning board uh through the planning office the fire department has approved of the proposed changes that we're making we're not proposing a full-blown road because we're only adding one house to an already existing subdivision and in addition to saving money for that would uh be that would cost to build a road Mr Hall also wants to preserve the character of the neighborhood the two homes that are currently there use the existing Gravel Road and by adding only one more house we simply want to improve what's already there in order to accomplish that our application requests a number of waivers that we're hoping the board would see fit to Grant and I'm sure the board is well aware that you have broad discretion to Grant such waivers and one of the factors that you're allowed to consider is the character of the neighborhood itself and so we would suggest to you that the waivers are warranted under the circumstances and that you can feel very comfortable that there's safe and adequate access to the to the property um and having said that I turn it over to Mr Borelli to go over some of the details of the changes to the road that we're proposing thank you thank you madam chairman members of the board for the record Mike Borelli fouth engineering and I represent the applicant um currently on the site there are uh two lots that are developed lot one which has Frontage on Hall Lane and also has Frontage on Old bonable Road this is the uh the home of the uh applicant um the second lot has a single family dwelling on it as well and access is overhaul Lane to their driveway the the current road is um adequate it's stable compacted crushed stone surface it currently is not 18 ft wide the first lot having uh a corner on old bonable has Frontage and we all know that old bonable road is adequate as far as pavement uh with and things of that nature um my experience being on the property on numerous occasions is that the the road is adequate for the first two lots um however there are certain standards that uh we know that the planning board would like followed so early on on the process we met with your staff to talk about what type of uh improvements would be acceptable and coste effective just so that one additional house can be constructed at the end of this road and through the help of um your uh assistant home planner and planner um they advised us after speaking with uh uh um the fire department personnel uh that they would like to see a uh 18t wide um stable crushed stone travel surface with uh twoot wide shoulders so that you in effect have um 18 ft of width to D drive a a fire engine or another emergency uh apparatus on and then you also have the shoulders uh the fire department says that's uh I believe that they are of the opinion that's more than adequate the road layout itself of Hall Lane when it was uh designed back in at the time that the planning board reviewed it had anticipated that there'd be a potential um hammerhead turnaround at the end because the we're not changing the road layout at all but we are um widening the travel surface of Hall Lane which uh today averages about 14t in width to 18 and then uh it currently terminates at the nearby the uh house that's on lot three because there's no further need to have a road beyond that currently but we're proposing to um construct it within its existing Road layout uh at the 18t width with the shoulders in accordance with the cross-section we submitted um and then to construct a hammerhead turnaround here and this has been designed and it fits within the existing uh Road layout to the geometry within your subdivision uh regulations for uh turning radius and and um overall length for the Hammerhead so that the uh apparatus can come in and make a turn and and then drive out from that point that' just be a driveway to a house um and there would be one house on this four plus acre parcel the existing uh driveway is such that um there's no drainage issues whatsoever it's a permeable surface it's crushed stone I've been out there on numerous occasions during substantial uh rainfall events and saw no substantial issues with any drainage there might be a a puddle to that are minor in nature um but we've uh prop proposed to do a complete overlay of crushed stone and grade it such that um it will uh drain to a natural low point that is here and uh I believe at the time the engineer that um submitted the original application must have anticipated that someday that this might get extended because the definitive plan uh has a drainage easement on it there is there is a drainage easement on lot 2A that make makes use and takes advantage of the existing uh topography which is a a sort of a low depression here so we Design This Gravel Road such that it could uh it pitches to in surface water which would be minor in nature because it's crushed stone and perable but it would still uh flow to that uh low Point um there'll be uh in individual separate uh underground utilities including uh electricity and gas to the new lot um the ab buding uh subdivision which is poter Drive uh which is another culdesac that's fully developed with houses um at the time that uh subdivision uh was constructed uh and reviewed first by the planning board um there was some uh foresight and there was a uh easement created for Utilities in this case a water main in the developer of poter Drive um at that time as the fender um actually constructed and installed an 8 in diameter water main to this property line um the the referral I've seen from the water department for this application have indicated that um that water main is available if it's extended just a short distance to service this one lot so there'll be no need to build a separate 8 in water main down Hall Lane which would be just cost prohibitive for one lot so in that referral from the water department there was a suggestion that perhaps a hydrant would be a good idea um but they defer to the fire department um the fire department remains silent on that but the owner is uh willing to put the hydrant in it's the right thing to do um because there are two hydrants and technically they're within 500 ft of the lot but it's just a good thing to have one more hydrant here so that referral mentions a hydrant was certainly amendable to having a hydrant be installed right at right at the turnaround for Hall Lane I think that sums it up just be aware this is not creating any new Lots it's going to be one single family dwelling this road has been adequate for two and the improvements we're going to make should make it more than adequate for one more house so the request for tonight is to remove the note correct and to approve waivers is that what we're doing tonight if if if we do and I would add to that the road improvements so yes um the road improvements as as proposed remove note 2A and Grant the waivers that were requested they were listed in as an exhibit to my letter they are here okay any questions from the board John you go first go ahead so um in in uh this discussion about the town water the water main the fire hydrant uh Mr Fender's name came up multiple times does he has he granted permission to you to get a water service from his his water service we have not spoken to Mr Fender it's my understanding that when Putter Drive is it called Putter Drive that's ironic isn't it Putter Drive um the water Ms turned over to the town and the easement is there so I I think that the town has permission to Grant the easement over Mr fenders property to this lot is there it's there and the water main itself is physically there and I think the water main is the property of the town so the town can grant permission to connect to that and and who would install the hydrant um I believe Mr botell um a contractor would install it as that that would be the property owners responsibility yes as a condition not Mr Fender but this property owner this property owner the applicants it would be the applicant's responsibility yeah okay thank you Bob um how much are we adding to the length of the street because I I can't really read the dimensions of the Lots but it looks like it's over 500 uh how much longer is it going to be is the other plan available oh did you so it's so it's 50t more than what I think to the middle it's around 550 according to my calculations but Mike can from the the driveway currently ends here um you can see it on the plan it's it's a red line yeah um so the distance from the end of the crush Stone Drive uh roadway uh to here is um about 150 ft okay so totally from there to the street but from from there to the from the Hammerhead to the street uh as as it's drawn there old bille road yeah I can't scale these so it's yeah I know I I couldn't can I zoom in on this do we have a larger plan oh here we go you can go to map Geo and measure it with the tool we have on our weite well I can show you this Dimension here see this Dimension here yeah it's 486 ft from here to here okay so we're probably not much more than it's about 550 total I measured it yeah that's that's what I was looking for because that is one of the uh can you tell us it is Melinda it's not on here not on there no but I didn't I have the so the length of the proposed Road isn't on the plan well it's an existing Road well it's going to be an extended existing Road it's not existing yet is it to the end it's approximately 550 ft okay thank you is you concern that it's too long for dead end no because that's what I'm looking for because it's typically 500 ft right right yeah but there'd be some question in my mind is this a road at some point or is it a driveway it's going to one house it's a definitive plan yeah so it is a sub division correct and they're asking for a change to the subdivision correct well the previously the previously approved plan it's still within the previously approved layout so it's not I mean although it's extending the physical Road that's there it's not extending the road that was proposed right previously the Shaded are is already approved we're we're we're building within what was approved by the planning board for a road layout just by extending it from the existing edge of gravel to here so the overall length of road is a proximately 550 ft yeah okay and and would the applicant be okay with the condition no further subdivision allowed yeah they would they would have to condition that I think we'd have to right and uh I wouldn't be in FA hydr for waving the hydron I would like to see a hydron yeah I agree with that and he's accepted the hydron I think we just add to the conditions just before you go too far with the hydrant so um we did receive a referral from the fire department which indicated if it's a single family home no additional hydrant would be necessary so that being said we'd still like we think it's in the best interest of fire prevention and fire protection and fire Insurance yeah to put the hydron in so we're we're we intend to put the hydron in right optional but desirable okay Jim yeah I had just a couple of questions uh normally when a street goes in the planning board goes out and says yeah the street was built according to plan this street wasn't there's there's about 50 ft of this is nothing but Woods it was never built so how did that happen well the planning board actually did release the Covenant they did even though the street wasn't built and the turn around wasn't there because of the note on the plan which indicated that the that's what I was questioned it's not shown here but basically from just about where there's there's probably 70t of wood still yeah I I mean you're proposing to cut down all the trees right you're not I mean I I think if they buil it the way it was supposed to be built I could go along with it but there's a lot of trees and woods and clearing and drainage oh yeah and I'd like to see them do it right the note that they're asking us to would you like me to read you the note the note says lot 2A which is what we're discussing not to be built upon until the road is constructed to subdivision control law standards right but they're asking for all these waivers that's not going to happen that means sidewalks all these other things they don't want any of that then we would get to that I think Madam chair if I may um it's also consistent with and you have it in your exhibits um the previous planning board's decision on the original application which granted the waiver for the sidewalk which allowed the gravel road and which allowed the current ride of way as you see it yeah um and so for that reason the planning staff is recommending that you um consider uh the waivers that they asked for would you like to discuss I wasn't finished I was just just said my car I was I wanted to say that I would go along with it as long as they built it as as it was originally planned they showed what was supposed to be done in the beginning and then I'm okay with the waivers and everything but I I just think right now I went out there there it's all Woods I don't did anyone else go out there no I have't I drove by the end of it no you got to go down to the end of the street then measure and find out how much farther it is to get to that the it's got to 50 75 ft of woods so if I could say a few things about that um I think it's important to remember that the plan that was approved in 1989 came with a number of waivers itself including a waiver of the road WID of the road surface from 22 down to 18 from concrete to gravel and without sidewalks so I I think what was contemplated by the board was built partially not the full length but that's actually what we're proposing to do now um the second comment I wanted to make is our our view of note two when it says subdivision control law standards our view is that that's kind of shorthand for saying you have to come back to the planning board and let the planning board decide what is necessary for these circumstances I don't think that that was a statement that it had to be built to current subdivision regulations in other words you know 22ft wide Road with shoulders Etc the fire department did review it and as Mr Borelli said they're looking for the width of 18 with two foot shoulders on each side and also the referral mentions a height of 13 ft six so that a a truck can get in and that's what we're proposing to do so we we actually would respectfully suggest that this is an improvement over existing conditions and that the extension of the physical road again within the approved layout which was already approved um is sufficient for the additional traffic that that's being generated by one house so that that's what that that was our thinking behind the request P I agree with Bob no further subdivision should be noted um I don't have a problem with the waivers my question is because it's going to be 3 houses here and the fire department as I well know requires a certain width and a certain height that there needs to be something put in about the owners plural have to keep the vegetation trimmed to that because I happened to live on a street that a fir truck refused to go down when there was a tree on fire so I think it's critical that somehow that be mentioned in the decision too the that is what the fire department referral says and so I think a condition of approval would would be fine and the buyer is here he's assured me that he's comfortable with no I don't represent him I represent the property owner um but the ultimate buyer has no intent to further subdivide Intent no in other words he has no objection to that condition okay yeah let me rephrase that Paul yeah my original issue was the uh utility easement but that's been addressed already so I'm not going to bring it up I looked at the 14 or 16 waivers and the only one seemed to be concern to me as the fire hydrant that we're discussing here the others uh I don't see a problem with that yeah and again we're we we're actually affirmatively proposing to agree to the fire hydr yeah I don't see a problem with the waivers as well um I'm in agreement with the fire hydrant and just a basic point just make sure there's hardener underneath that gravel roadway you know inclement weather I've seen emergency vehicles get stuck or have trouble navigating they do yeah they do it's specified one of the drawing thank you good cross-section John I just one just one final question on the the twoot shoulders what's going to be the material for that on each side lman seed was the what was intended okay thank you here and public comment any public comment if the owners are here is there anyone who wishes to comment on this project no um nor do I have a comment it looks as if You' addressed uh everything and the comments that we uh that I would have suggested have already been made so I think what we would do is ask for a positive motion for our next uh our next meeting with the conditions that have been mentioned and that would be um no further subdivisions um hydrant uh on the town water main the 22t way maintained um over time by all the owners and I don't believe there were any other additions to to that remove so it would be to uh r as they asked plus the waivers with and removing the note oh and removing well that's this one and built as shown on the plant not just a driveway going through the woods right and just to be clear the list of waivers will be modified to remove 30529 fire hydrants yeah just for the record right well and it seems that from what U Mr wall said some of these request for waivers in fact had already been uh built into the original approval so you might just check for that right okay so that would be ready for our next meeting there a motion can we make a motion to to close the hearing and and to draft a positive want move close the hearing I move that we close the hearing second all in favor I all set thank you very much for your time appreciate it surprised we didn't go see this so we didn't go see it but it's through the woods I was amazed when I went there oh I I did not I should I looked at the end of the road and I looked at it on a map and I looked at all the areal pictures going back the road was never go it's always oh closed it but if you built it as Accord to the regular plan and do it no where where was it it's amazing things that they're like ghost plans oh I know like on our I thought you had the agend open applications yeah as far as the you may not have to do it for Kevin because I think he has his own plans okay Moving On Again on behalf of K Cod young men's Christian Association special perit application to allow parking excuse me parking in the front yard at 485 Brick kilm Road would you like to describe this to us [Applause] Madam chair um Paul has a notice it's right here yes mam chair the notice to this hearing was published on January 10th 2025 and January 17th 2025 and 11 Butters of Butters were notified by regular mail and we might have a Butters here maybe okay Kevin uh thank you again Madam chair members of the board for the record Kevin Clow um we are looking at two separate matters for the YMCA tonight uh we the next matter is the continuation of our side plan review this is a separate request for a special permit uh to allow under Section 24141 i5b um that that section of the bylaw allows for parking located in front yard as the board is aware the YMCA is proposing their new facility on a uh 6.16 acre parcel which is formerly part of 485 brick Hill Road um the anr plan has been formally uh reported at the registry of deeds um and the Y is now the owner of this parcel um so we can this will be known as 487 Brill Road the assessor gets around to putting a new number on it so the YMCA development proposes to locate the parking uh both to the east of the building over here and then to the south of the building here um in a shared arrangement with the Christ Lutheran Church the parking area to the South will be located in the front yard of the YMCA as defined by the zoning bylaw so section 2401 14.1 i5b states that the planning board May Grant a special permit to allow parking in the front yard or within Andor within 5 ft of property line which is exactly what is being requested this evening bylaw does not set forth any standards for the special permit so we default to 240 uh 12.1 e which governs all special permits um which effectively asks does does this proposal have adverse effects that outweigh the beneficial effects in this case I think the answer is clearly not while this is technically in the front yard it is still located to the rear of the Christ Lutheran Church and the overall development of the YMCA has a number of net positive beneficial aspects to the town locating the parking here does not run contrary to the intent of the bylaw it allows for Less overall disturbance of the parcel and economical use of shared parking with the abing church parcel um I'd be glad to address any questions the board may have on this otherwise I would request that you grant this special permit I think we discussed the Merit of this before yeah I mean a lot of this has been covered in our site plan review process didn't finish it yeah yeah yeah well we you I mean we because this was the first time this particular hearing has been opened yeah but I think a lot you know the reality is a lot of this is cover you know covered by the discussions we have within our site planner view but I think for the record we needed to establish all that within the parameters of this hearing let's do that is there any further question from the board anything more you want to know no no any comment from the public no a motion to close the hearing so moved a motion to second appr it she motion I second yep all in favor hi thank you just to show this is awesome this is a lot we talking about I could even drive out there oh W okay next more um finishing up here Madam chair for uh Clarity sake are you asking uh staff to provide a positive motion for the next meeting on the special permit yes we will do so I thought we actually had done that and didn't need to take that step you could just write it out perhaps I missed it I missed things whatever you think makes the more complete record I think you kned off I saw I his head bobing okay so now again uh site plan review application to construct a 68 8,470 ft YMCA recreational education facility at 485 brick Kil Road thank you again Madam chair um so again for the YMCA uh I'm here also tonight with Stuart Clark from Green cell environmental and state q is here as well uh from the Y so this is following up after our most recent presentation which was just two weeks ago on the 14th uh in our initial presentation presentation which was back in uh November so so following the last hearing we've had an opportunity to review and address uh the engineering referral that came in the updated engineering referral that came in after the hearing and to um respond to some questions that uh both the town planner and Mr shet and the engineer presented so we received the updated engineering review on January 16th we've made some adjustments to the plans in order to address those comments All of which have been submitted to the planning staff specifically the site plans were updated uh the zoning compliance plan which which is actually up on the screen right now which is sheet c103 uh we corrected some percentage calculations uh sheet c503 was revised to move the uh EV ballards into um the the twoot strip and sheet c107 was added which showed the sight line distances along per Kil which are both in a range of 500 ft uh updated Landscaping plans were provided um sheet l1.2 of those plans included some details on the bike racks there are currently five separate racks provided which would allow for parking for for 10 bikes there and there's the ability to expand that U bike parking as well and Sheet L 3.0 was added uh was was revised which shows the permeable surface detail that engineering was requesting uh in addition the we provided the town plan planner with some answers to a few questions I'd like to run through a few of those um there's a question regarding the possibility of adding additional parking since we are requesting a reduction from the zoning board we feel that the the bylaw is pretty conservative in its parking requirements um in this case it's based on the square footage of the building but I think it's important to note that of of this building 14,000 ft of it is a pool something not really envisioned by the bylaw that 14,000 ft² in and of itself is 46 parking spaces uh the Consultants believe that based on established use patterns and and their experience with YMCA is that the total number we we've suggested are more than sufficient and the bu law provides a mechanism for Relief uh in this case would be through the zoning board for a further reduction in parking requirements so would' like to proceed um with the parking that we have suggested knowing that if there's push back from the planning board we may need to modify this site plan review um if we have to add some additional parking um there were some questions about the shared parking we provided a breakdown of both the existing and proposed Church spots as well as a copy of the recorded easement with the church um Mr corach asked about the driveway Loop and potential Conflict for the fire department with Park cars uh the Bus Loop is intended for drop off only parking there would be strictly prohibited and the fire department referral did not express any concerns uh along of this nature there was an additional comment about snow removal um that's noow removal will be be done at the end of each aisle along the Eastern side of the property um and then lastly there was uh an inquiry about the mees review in potential burm um I believe there was correspondence receiv received from the planning staff from Chuck Martinson um the plantings have been updated on revised planting plans and we have been exploring the possibility of uh a burm between us and the development to the West um so we have been exploring that possibility and will continue to do so but we would respectfully request that the board accept the design showing the fencing and plantings as shown on the submitted drawings the design team for the YMCA is currently developing a design plan option for a raised bed uh raised and planted burm option which we'll discuss with Mr solando we believe that any change that was agreed upon could be approved administratively by the town planner uh Mr K and I had discussed that and he indicated he would be comfortable with something along those lines other with those questions answered and with those updated plans presented I believe that we' addressed all the outstanding questions and concerns within the staff report and Engineering referral uh and comments that came up during the last hearings I'd happy be happy to discuss any questions the board may still have uh Mr Clark is here with us tonight as is Miss Pew if there's any questions that they can address otherwise I believe that you should have more than sufficient information to um approve the site plan review approval uh process okay let's start down the other end Tom no just my whole thing was really the burm when you addressed it um can it come back through us or does it have to go through to that that's up to you guys um we you know something like that if you've approved one thing and we're making a modification depending on the severity of what that changes it can sometimes be done administratively um you know I think it's it's an easier process when it can be done administratively shortens the time frame um but that's up to the board okay that's just my only thing that I'm focusing on tonight could we talk a little bit about the burm considering likely it's not going to come back here we can talk about you go over and take a look at it he's been in conversations when you go and look at the land the place where it's very very close to the uh subdivision right next to it it's really close that road and the land comes down from there backyards makes a dip and then comes up to what is now the Lutheran Church's parking lot so that before you can build a a bur you'd have to fill it in yes um Madam chair for the records Stuart Clark with green seal uh environmental yeah that was um what we discussed with um uh Mees and uh Chuck Martinson um because I didn't know if the town or the Environmental Services was going to mandate that we keep that area natural um but uh after my conversation with him last week um sitting down looking at the plans he said said didn't mind if there was um if we took down some of the trees in there and put a BM in there he said that would not deter the the white tail deer from moving through there he said that the the biggest concern he had was um the possible encroachment from the 40b people cuz you know they got a small backyard and they can start eating away at that um that Wildlife Corridor and he'd like us to see us put us some signs along there saying Wildlife Corridor please do not disturb um but he says as for putting in a burm he says he wanted uh I think in the latter he says he wanted vertical and horizontal uh divers diversity in the plant material and he would like to review that plant material with our landscape architect um when when and if we go that route because it could be that a bms's not the best solution cuz what they're looking for is being shielded from it MH so it's what what is the best way to do that it could be plantings so what we have right here ideal yeah what we have right here this is the this is really the area in question and there's the fence and then you know a significant number of plantings on this side you know this is all going to be part of an ongoing conversation with Mr solomond about what works best for everyone yeah and I don't know what the timeline to resolution on that would be and I think that you know we're committed to being the wise committed to being good neighbors I'm sure Mr Sal is as well we we think that the plan right now provides them with an awful lot of coverage but if it turns out that the best result is a is a lower burm with with different plantings we're certainly happy to discuss that um I think it's a matter of of working through that but I you know I don't know what that time frame looks like because we just kind of got this this information back uh in the past few days that that they could potentially do it but there's going to be a lot of details to iron out so what we're proposing is not nothing what we're proposing is a substantial amount of plantings and the fence that's going to provide them with an awful lot of shielding and if the end result is that a lower burm with plantings is better we're happy to have that conversation and I think you're also proposing to work administratively to resolve this appropriately correct yeah John um question about the uh again about the drainage area what is the depth of that please proposed depth the water the water dra I I did shall that out by two feet so now the bottom of it 49 the the top is 54 so it's at five feet at the maximum but there's no more um slopes that are um steep they're all three to one okay um and I just rir I redirected some of the water over to an infiltrator uh on on one of the other infiltrators just to and can you put any kind of fening or anything around it we would prefer to do that with plantings okay you just don't you don't want any any uh not yeah any disaster there and it would be a disaster and I did the I did the draw down calculations and they only hold water for 9 hours on that one during the 100 years storm do you understand my concern it happened before and I don't want to vote for something that yeah sometimes they do retention basins would have water in them all the time but this is not this drains down right within eight eight hours okay then my other comment is that um Jim you represented a a group group that has a similar situation um small Lots neighbors right next door how did they work how did that get resolved J we put a fence all the way along the put the fence up the developer put a fence and did it come out really nice it came out really nice and it protected the view from the neighbors next door it did everything it well there it actually was a huge Improvement because there was halfhazard fence of 30 years from all these different people was a total mess fences here or there and now it's one straight clean fence nice design yeah but this is woods and not houses back to back yeah I yes highend I'm just asking I'm not highend vinyl fence it's actually beautiful and so there's no encroachment yeah and uh I personally don't have a concern about a burm so that's my comment having a there or not having it there which way if they put a burm in nice if they don't I don't have a concern about it yeah I want the project to move along I think uh administratively this should be able would be dealt with uh one way or the other whether it even even administratively can't they come back to the whole board administratively if they if everyone was really concerned about it I'm not but I just want to finish this and get it started yeah I've been waiting for this pool for a long time I think the uh between the developer and uh the why and the and our administrator we should be able to take care of it yeah they're addressing the only issue I had so I'm really happy with it John and just one John one final question uh the reduction in the parking mhm if it turns out that uh it's granted and it's not adequate do you have room to add additional parking I think so yeah I mean there is maybe eight or 10 spots so so there's a few ways that could go have to show it on the plan I'm just asking there's a few ways that could go Mr dry because you could you you know it would have to be in connection with the church but this area here could potentially be expanded um and there's potential to this is a open fire lane you know if the absorption system was designed to to be load bearing that could be additional uh gravel parking or any number of things overflow it may be uh more popular than you're planning on you know that we we we want it to be successful um but it needs to it needs to make you know if we don't have enough parking that's a problem we'll have to address okay thank you so much I think if I had my brothers I would prefer a BM a planted BM just simply to continue the natural look of that area but if I can't have my brother's hey whatever works Paul my concern uh continually is on the west side where you have the bus parking I mean you have a very nice emergency vehicle access all around the building but it's going to be tough getting by that West corner there outside that feature will you have bus parking and I I would think you can put that somewhere else on the site rather than constrain that any m emergency vehicle have to get in there you see what I'm talking about on the west side right here right there yeah yeah um my swept analysis had the emergency vehicle going in on the east side and going around the build and that was the exit side was on the west side but a straight shot coming right on in except for that area could be a constraint so I mean my response to that would think about I mentioned it before yeah I mean we we did run this through the fire department and the fire department was satisfied with the plan as presented um which I think you know speaks a lot to this the the bus there is is not a parking spot for a bus it's a it's a drop off it's a loading and unloading spot so if there's fire fire truck coming in the bus is going to move um but more than that the fire department was satisfied with the proposed sweat path plan I think he said he can Bus Parking can go anywhere yeah got around this way so so basically you know what would happen and and the fire department has seen this is the yeah it'll you know you come in this way and come kind of counterclockwise around the building uh is what the fire department would likely do because of the ability to make that turn into the uh fire access from the other direction so they've reviewed this they're satisfied with it and again that is not Bus Parking that is loading and unloading we all said yeah I'm with Jim I'd like to see this move along I think we can um close the public meeting and request a uh a positive decision is the board in agreement on that yes yes we are do you need do you need I I I would love for you to close nothing more than for you to close this but do you need to take public but do you need to take public comment first I did for it anything Madam chair if I may could we just see the detail of the bicycle rack real quick yes you got the Landscaping plan up 1.2 the new one I just think it's the coolest bicycle rack I've ever seen oh oh so this is just to admire it yeah I get past it I think it's at the end y you just passed it drop a little right there at the bottom bottom oh there they are yeah yeah so these are the bike racks can you zoom in a little yeah how neat is that too much hold on so those are the bike racks and it'd be five five of these lined up and you'd be able to put a bike on either side and lock through the uh through the birds nice that's a sculpture that's great pil who's going to make that I thought so I thought it was really nice that is a nice touch that that can't be a standard order somebody must be sculpting that I'm not part of the procurement team so positive motion for the next meeting for both the special permit and the site plane review excellent and good luck with the whole thing soon we've taken comment before but we could take it again I just thought she did I didn't know if she did or not oh last meeting we did we did and we did now anybody hi madam chair members of the board my name is Mike salamando representing the village of brick kilm you know I'm willing to work with Stuart Kevin uh you know I'm I'm I'm happy at least that they you know that we listen to some extent on the on the um in doing some typee of burm I think a plant I would' like to see a planted burm there ourselves I'm willing to work with them we're kind of doing a makeshift on our side of the line uh as best we can but I think if if with with an effort on on their side to to to come with you know somewhere in there and uh uh along especially and I I can't but especially along you know this area in here yeah in that area really affects our our homeowners the most and uh I mean we work together the we pointed out the only other source bar is the bus turn around there cuz you I mean if that's where they're going to let the people they're going to unload right in somebody's almost in somebody's backyard as a matter of fact from the from the back from the back of their porch and unfortunately the planning U the planning excuse me the the zoning board has pushed your up towards the back of the line and uh which was not our original plan but that's where they thought it should be and I mean you're going to unload kids on the back off the back of the porch it's going to be right against that wall you know that's how far away so we got to somehow make this BM or I think they could drop him up at the front door I I I I I would rather they do that just put the bus there at the end why would they Park them way down there when they can no if they dropped them that would be a better but it looks like the if they're not going to park it there then I don't know that looks to me the same as the drop off point so maybe they're dropping two at a time I you know at the same time but that's the you know it I'm will like I said I'm willing to work with Kevin and Stewart and uh it's uh I wish we had gotten there ahead of the game uh but uh when they first came out but you know we can we'll do what what we can we'll work with what we we make when life gives you lemons you make lemonade so I try to work with them see what we can do uh as as long as they're willing to work with me I I'll work with them as much as I can thank you residents might want a path to this L CU we gave them I mean I I thought I was doing them a favor when we came in we we gave them almost 400 500 ft of water we brought the water but now I guess the town's making you Loop but anyway but I thought I was giving him $85 $100,000 Head Start you know when we when we put the water line in and I offered I wasn't dictated to do that by the zoning board I offered do that because we want to see the why we want to see it succeed but I want to work together and I I I I need to get I need to protect the people that are buying for me so that's that's all I have to say to the boy well there's certainly Goodwill now let's just hope there's Goodwill later okay okay thank you thank you thank you next Steven develin okay a site plan review application to construct an attached accessory dwelling at five at 58 marav Vista Avenue Extension notice yes this is it mam chair FAL Enterprise published the notice of this uh hearing on January 10th 2025 32 of Butters were sent a notice by regular mail and down we don't see any upset of Butters okay okay and they're all all the plant and stuff so this is in an attached attached okay this is by right it's attached it's um above a garage the gar in existence just what we planned yep except there's a number of bedrooms issue yeah Madam chairperson members of the board I'm Mike McCarthy I'm actually the homeowner uh Steve uh is the contractor but he couldn't come tonight so it's okay uh so we want we built in a gar we built a garage and we want to put an apartment above it and so I guess there were some questions uh we're actually uh we're a two up two down Cape now um but one of the bedrooms we turned into a den and on the plans it shows the uh CED opening mhm uh but that's not 4T wide cuz the hallway is not 4T wide so I guess I think there's a it's downstairs bedroom that's a downstairs bed when we turned it into a den you can sort of see it here um we got a slider there and um so there it is there's no door there so um I think that was one of the questions and uh with regards to flow right because we're not adding any flow because this is going to be a one-bedroom upstairs which is uh it's actually lab this is so this is the these are the plans it's um labeled as an office here but it's it's going to be a bedroom uh this is the apartment part and it must be this little stub wall you're planning to take out in the den uh we're not planning to take that out unless we have to uh the the Privacy the door essentially creates the privacy that creates the bedroom along with square footage and having a window is our understanding so by removing the door and allowing that opening to be at least 48 in or 42 in wide uh it would not be considered a bedroom and therefore would not be counted towards the uh towards the flow for the subes right but his open take out the St wall yeah case opening isn't 4T no so like the hallway itself we don't even have right fouret in the hallway so so the thought is to speak with the Building Commissioner to decide what he would like to happen right there yeah and is that that's yeah I don't think it will hold anything up I think we can you know move forward and just see what he has to say about that is that Gary yeah yeah so I met with Gary before we even uh started any of this to talk to him about what do we need to do and so we did my impression at that time which was a while ago but was that we could just do that and even though it's not 4 feet just make a case opening because that's all we can do anyway and he was going to be okay with it at the time I mean no promises of course but the um the other issue was the second means of egress so the the what second means of egress so the accessory apartment has a access as an through stairs little platform and stairs down outside the back um however the inside stairs that go down to the garage go through the garage they don't go to a door at the bottom of the stairs so according to code building code is our understanding that that would not be um considered a second second means because it doesn't go right to a door in the the garage it goes just into the garage so we just have to double check with the Building Commissioner on that as well to see aren't all those issues really not ours correct that is a build those are all building code issues we're really just supposed to be looking at the this is a by right development and we're supposed to be doing a site plan um correct but we have to obviously mention that because the plans could change if that H if it happens that he has to make some changes oh he might have to put an erress to the site okay there's where that could kick in yeah yeah so it's just to mention so we're I don't think this needs to be held up but all everything else is fine the he is in a coastal Pond like you said he's taking out a bedroom um to put a bedroom in the um accessory apartment um the parking's fine the size is fine so it meets all of our our regulations other than um maybe possibly some building code issues so um go ahead just just a I'm just curious is the sewer available to this l they stopped at my next to an Nea okay so we're in you know where we are is we're across from T ticket Elementary School yeah so uh they ended at uh what is it number four matapan which is right next door to us so when they when they kick in we'll go but um and I did I met with Scott McAn before we did all this stuff to and we talked all that stuff through and because we are in the we're in a coastal zone overlaying so there is a byla I'm going back my memory but there is a bylaw that states if you add a bedroom even if you're not adding flow in that area uh you have to do the nitrogen septic but he said he said well I'm not going to make you spend $50,000 to put one in and then because sewer is imminent I would make you take it out again so and you're not adding flow so he was his recommendation again no promises but you know in our conversation he said I would I would go for what to say okay because sewer is imminent and because you're not adding flow I would right thank you yeah just uh so I'm looking on drawing uh A2 and it says proposed second floor plan so that's the accessory unit above the garage right in this in the garage is still a garage and my question is about the second means of egress um I mean I I see the stairs on the inside going to the inside of the garage yeah out and then outside and the question is because they don't go to a door yep to an exterior door I didn't understand that either yeah or to an exterior door so I guess those stairs would have to turn um and go out through that that side uh or or put a door at the foot of the stairs we don't see a floor plan for the first that's what I'm saying where that platform is that right but uh no you can't because that's still uh you still have to go down a flight okay like we said that's building department that's not us right any have the board member question Paul yeah I just have a question I looked through the drawings to find out how tall this building was and the only place I could find the elevation of the height is on A1 and it's listed at 22 ft 11 and 1932 of an inch uh that's pretty close to 22 23 ft I'm just curious how do you measure 302 of an inch I mean that's a shingle uh must be one of those digital rulers micrometer I don't know uh I don't there's no height it's no close it's not close to any height restriction they trying to stay under 23 ft is that what it is no I I don't know it's 35 ft right doesn't matter Paul I know but why that accuracy I do I work down at hoie I measure in 30 seconds frequently but maybe yeah but I don't do construction so no I was going to talk about D night and uh Town sewer but he addressed it that Pat I have any we're good um okay can we have a [Music] motion I move that we endorse oh we have to approve approve it's not Anar we approve yes Mr not Anar that we approve Mr Devin's site plan review application to Construction an attached accessory dwelling unit at 58 maravista Avenue Extension second all in favor I nicely done thank you thank you good luck thanks and for the record uh we we will draft a positive motion for you for the next meeting you'll read it into the record officially yeah great you do not need to be here for that um the board will just simply read it into the record no I think we're all set and I think that um uh we have to move the continuance yes do okay I move that we accept excuse me that we accept JJC Development LLC to request for a continuance of their application for site plan review to February 11 205 second all in favor I um okay we can move on now to our uh discussion I did want to tell you about the hearing last night before the select board they gave 60 minutes on their at the beginning of the business part of their meeting to talking about um uh short-term rentals um did any of you have an opportunity to tune into to that no um it attracted a lot more people than we attracted to our hearings here so that part was good I'll tell you the bottom line the decision was made at the end of the meeting to appoint a committee probably expanded from the workforce the task force that we had um last spring and fall uh and to change the composition of it to probably to include homeowners but that was not specified and uh in the discussion um contradictory uh positions were kind of established there were it turned out several lawyers there and one of them was the town lawyer um when I was given an opportunity to speak first and I uh cited the case where the uh Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has determined that it's uh not a resident that short-term rentals are not a residential use and they do not belong in residential zones so they have come out against it because it goes against the very nature of residential zoning to create a community to create a livable place and the trenchant nature of it is against that earlier the Massachusetts land Court um had also found against short-term uh rentals in residential areas but for a different reason their reason was that it's a commercial use of a residential Zone part of what they they were the two courts were saying um I found really you know instructive and you probably already know this but the way the Lindfield which is the bylaw they were working off of the way their bylaws are written and the way our bylaws are written Jed assures me is that if something is not specifically allowed then it's prohibited it has to be named to be there if I said that correctly you did I did so if it doesn't say short-term rental then it's not allowed so I went pouring through our bylaws looking at bylaws for commercial accommodations which had been mentioned for lodging for rooming houses um where does it say short-term rental it does not which isn't surprising short-term rental is a relatively new way to deal with rentals and hotel Arrangements so they don't happen to be in our bylaws in other words they are not affirmatively allowed in fouth I only objection I take I grew up in this town and I've lived in summer rentals my whole life I'm going to get there so I don't what what is a summer a week summer rentals are week long it's a past practice is what it is but it's about an 80-year past practice well yes so bit of a a Summer Rental but not a little unsupervised Hotel down the street operating year round that's a different kind of animal right so they're different kinds of animals here and we're getting them conflated but it sounds like the state saying we can't even do rent for a week anymore if you if you have a house and you rent it out for five weeks for the summer you can't do it the state went on to say something more the Supreme Judicial Court in their in their finding said incidental accessory use probably misquote that but it was accessory use that's okay but it didn't didn't Define itties can Define it and I have found in 48 which is our uh bylaw our whole bylaw that yes indeed that if it's for the 15 14 or 15 days you're allowed to do that annually so we do have that in our bylaws that is allowed and that's still in the bylaw so there's stuff there that we can build on it's whether or not should the town now leave that don't make short-term rentals a by right use in all residential and agricultural zones or should they now just restrict the kind that you're allowed to have as an accessory incidental use that's where it sits as it goes to a committee because they're competing interested uh at work here there are the people who've bought their houses depending on it the people who simply aged into it and find that they're depending on it I have a friend exactly in that situation and the people who want peace and quiet in their neighborhood and yet you look online and I'm going to stop in a minute that if you look online this whole industry is trying to grow and it is saying hey put in a swimming pool put in a fire pit put in a basketball court you'll really build up your business these are unsupervised hotels in our neighborhoods we've got one onate yeah yeah we got one on our street and the pool they were pumping the pool out we thought the house had a water main break so we're running up there found out it was B you know IE eye rental or something like that but uh one of the things I wonder if it ever came up was uh if you have a host or not a host well interestingly enough in our bylaws under lodging and under one other it's there each time it's um uh homebased occupation each time you're actually allowed to have up to four borders under boarding house you have to have a family member dwelling in the house so they foresee this problem of borders being unsupervised and the our current zoning zones against it a family member has to be dwelling in the house I you know John have the courts defined the term short term they did not not that I could see but I could also see um uh that there are going to be lawyers on both sides and interestingly enough how how can we do town lawyer is on the side of you know let it rip how how can we impose something that doesn't have a definition to it we can Define it yeah for fouth we can write our definition can we well the state has defined it that's why I'm asking says 30 days or less okay so it's three days or less it's short term 30 days okay but they don't say how often you could do 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days all year long or only 30 days a year okay least is the definition yeah so so that could be 30 single separate rentals it's as many as you could put into a year yeah are you an attorney now Jim well it'll it' be difficult I know it's real easy to say it's not mentioned in the town but you know I paid uh rental fees to the town for having a summer rentals and they did inspections and they they were so if they it might not have been mentioned but it was some places in a bylaw that said that the town get to into do an inspection and charge a fee oh the town has all kinds of regulations about rentals well does what's the difference between a regulation and a bylaw they're differently enforced and it happens that our requirement to register all rentals has not been enforced Forest mm it's on the books that's true I met with the town manager on this also clearly I mean it's just a b under my saddle and I met with Mike Renshaw about it and he believes the first step is enforcing what we've got and that's the registration when I when I did it um when I went to when I came in and I told my insurance agent that I just rented the 11th week he said you can't do that he said anything more than 10 weeks turned into the commercial operation and that's always been the case but that was an insurance that's insurance I had to change my insurance if I wanted to do that say that again the insurance is the insurance said 10 weeks is okay it's a Summer Rental but as soon as you go to 11 now you're doing a commercial operation it's not not home that's what my insurance agent told me when I was in the Summer Rental business I wonder if that varies by insurance company but that's interesting I'm just those are just I'm just adding I I've heard a definition of time before and you know maybe 30-day rent Still Still you do three in the summer you can rent your house for the summer you still could do it right you can three it's not too bad people live it's not bad at all turnover it won't be the end of the world it certainly will change somebody's lives I mean I know people that survive they take their their vacations by renting their house out right that's how they get the only that's the only way they can afford their vacation that they're really have no way to do it but they rent their house out and then they get to go someplace and come back that's been part of f life for some of not everybody but the people that need it have been doing it for a long long time they have they have John is the town manager give you any indication how the enforcement or who would do the enforcement he thought that was his business so maybe they won't enforce this new bylaw anyway I like that I like that very much we'll give it to ice other comment on short ter call one had ice Madam chair if I may I I think it's important to to you know come back to the main point of that the select board authorized the town manager to create that committee so it will continue the public conversation and uh select board made it clear last night at least member Mcall um requested that those meetings be held um at different times right so it's not just an evening meeting that it that it perhaps be an afternoon meeting and so it gives people with daytime jobs or evening jobs an opportunity to come to that public session and provide input about what they want to see too so I think I think it's a good thing well the select board chair said at least twice that the committee will be appointed by the select board correct not by the planning board right so they'll advertise it'll be interviews just like they normally do for committees um and then once they form the committee then they're off and running so what happens now to people that are already doing it and just will it depends different communities have found different things to do if you look at the Nantucket um draft uh no Province Town draft um proposals they said if you're doing it now okay but as soon as you uh you either sell or die that's it you lose your license they have to be they move to licensing you get that license you have to renew it annually and if it's not within the the new regulations it only lasts as long as you do that would be one way but there might be other ways just just to be clear are those the only two options the pass Pretty definely planning department report I'm not sure I can follow that uh only two things uh first and foremost we're very excited to announce that the cape gun commission has awarded um the town um a dlta grant for design guidelines for the Mr Cod District so we put in an application for $48,000 and they accepted our application and we can now move forward once we sign an agreement with the cap commission we can move forward with hiring an outside consultant and start that really important work of um public interactions but also um developing design review and design guidelines for the Mr Cod District so we're very excited to announce that this is the grant you wrote yes congratulations would they be working under the planning board or somebody else well we will ask that they provide regular updates to the board in fact one of the first things I'd like them to do is come and meet with you and in a public setting like like you know this evening and and get your input so that they can take that back and start developing um some recommendations but then also come back and provide updates throughout the process they must already have our design guidelines from 2019 we will provide that in that right y so we just found out uh I think it was last week we late last week so good news and then the only other item that I have is tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. we be over at shiv Pond um there is a pre-bid uh meeting for any um contractors who are bidding on the project uh so there'll be an opportunity to answer questions related to the project itself but things are moving ahead on shck Fond that's exciting yes and this is specifically for the viewing platform so all right are we likely to have a platform for this summer yes okay maybe uh good just on a followup for that uh I drafted a letter for Dylan Fernandez giving him an update I reviewed it with Jed and with uh Jeremiah and Jeremiah want I suggest to add some more detail about what physically he's doing at the park because you go by now and you really can't tell what he's doing so he gave me that information today and as soon as I find out where Dylan Fernandez is these days I'll be able to send it to him so I don't think he's hiding no he was down the front I have three telephone numbers that don't work I called Plymouth I called everywhere else say he's no long answering phones at this place he's now a senator he gave a public hearing yesterday afternoon over at the hermit evening I sent him an email but I haven't heard back uh I believe he's holding office hours the select board just mentioned it last night I I don't recall the exact location but um I believe it was downtown perhaps at the French bakery um anyway we can we can look into that we'll give you the information I finally send him an email yeah the best town news of the week is that um is that the town clerk is going to stay um and run again that's really good for the town Mr fmer but I'm going to make a comment here to do I I was surprised that he was the only department head that was elected and I think considering the demands of Elections these days the things that are providing him stress are not going to go away and are probably going to be more stressful and is perhaps time to amend that way of doing things so it's an appointed department head I bet they're going to use some of the time that he's given the town to change the charter to make it an appointed position to make him a town employee so that that office which pays very well um has professional qualifications attached to it firmly commit report if he left and Lori left left right the only one that would be left that had any experience would be oh my God right a part time comes in during the elections to work not not good to contemplate no do we have any committee reports no I have report not really a committee report yesterday I attended the beach committee meeting on cult resiliency at at the library and they had two Consultants from houi who also work for the county and they went through a history of sand nourishment and so forth and it was uh uh videoed by by fctv so once they put it on those on their website might be worth looking at interesting okay they confirmed by 2021 sea level rise is going to be 3.9 to 4 feet announcements no future agenda items I have a couple um I've recently become interested in lighting and notice that we do not have any regulations concerning lighting we have opinions but nowhere to go with them so maybe we should begin looking at what other towns are doing about lighting regulations that we would tend to uh agree with um and be thinking about that maybe in terms of November town meeting that would be good um the other thing it's come up several times usually from new uh we know the town is overp parked looking again at the parking requirements let's do the lighting General correspondents I'm not aware of any then received next meeting February 11th and with that Mo I move adjournment favor hi hi done thank you [Music]