Yeah, >> New Brunswick, right? Somewhere down there. >> Just north of that. Yeah, my wife's from New Brunswick, which Well, okay. Technically technically that's that's north of where I'm from, but if you take any of the roads, it's farther south. It Yeah, [laughter]
we had that long discussion when we first started dating. >> So, uh, I lived in I went to Madison High School, which is between Summit and Morristown. >> Um, okay. And I also from 18 months through second grade was in Berkeley
Heights which is also close to Summit. I'm very much New York suburbs. >> Yeah, we played >> Hi everybody. This is Ham. We're all set to go. >> Fantastic. >> Thank you. >> By the way, Ron, hello. I didn't mean to leave you out.
You have any New Jersey connections, Ron? I think you're muted, but that looks like a no on your head. >> It's not looking good for me. >> Well, I don't Is Nick Nick is not a
committee member? I don't think. >> No, he's not. >> Nor is Matt. So, we're at four right now. Matthew. >> All right. Just to let you know, Ron, Matthew and I have u have Muffin House treats on the
line here in a bet for attendance. [laughter] >> Oh, wait a minute. Arnold's here. >> All right, >> there's five. >> Hello. Here I am. >> Hi, Arnold. It's good to see you. We'll wait just a couple more minutes to
see if the bet is settled. I guess we didn't make a provision. If the meeting starts and then we go into my zone, do I win or is it the number at the start of the meeting? >> Uh, I think it's the number at which we get quorum. [laughter] It's kind of a headsy win tales you lose situation. [laughter]
I'm good at those. We'll give you a few minutes past uh >> All right. Um, >> let's see what we got. Well, how about I begin to read the script and we can do some um less interesting business first and we'll see
if anyone shows up. If we are into our first legitimate agenda item and we have five, you win. How's that sound? >> I'll go with that. >> I'm talking about the ADU discussion. All right. I'm going to get us started
reading the script. Uh pursuant to chapter 2 of the acts of 2025, this meeting will be conducted via remote means in accordance with applicable law. This means that the members of the public body as well as the members of the public may access
this meeting via virtual means. Participants may access this meeting through the remote meeting link as posted on the meeting agenda and through the town's online calendar when required by law or allowed by the chair. Persons
wishing to provide public comment or otherwise participate in the meeting may do so by raising their hand or otherwise signaling their intent to speak. This meeting will be recorded. Please take care to mute your microphone unless you
have been recognized by the chair. We will now confirm attendance of members. Please respond with present if you are on this call. Matthew Verona >> present. Ron Foysy, >> present. >> Arnold Cohen,
>> present. >> Uh, Quad Ashan S. >> I'm sorry, Quad, I mispronounced your name. >> That's okay. Thank you. >> And I don't see any other committee members right now. And I am Ted Barkerhook, chair of the zoning advisory
committee. Uh, and one more attendance. Uh, Aneri Patel, the principal planner. >> Present. >> Great. Um, we do have five, so we have enough for a quorum to begin the meeting. Um, we will start, as I often like to start and knock off some
minutes. We've had them sitting on our desk for a while, the minutes of September 15th and September 29th. Uh, does anybody have any corrections or amendments to the minutes >> there? Matthew >> like to give you as much time as
possible here, Ted. Um, [laughter] I would propose for September 29th, uh, expanding TBH to Ted Barker Hook each time it's there and also the first time ADU is mentioned, expanding it to accessory dwelling units and putting ADU in parenthesis.
>> Is there anyone who has a complaint about that? >> Nope. >> You know, it's funny. Um, I saw the TBH at school. the kids other teachers parents call me TBH and it struck me that I was TBH in the minutes and nobody
else was was initial. I'm accustomed to TBH but I have no trouble with that correction as well. Um okay with those amendments any other amendments or adjustments or corrections? >> Like to make a motion to approve the
minutes of September 15th and 29th as amended. >> Great. Can we get a second to that? >> Second. >> All right, let's do a roll call vote. Matthew Verona, >> yes. >> Ron Foy, >> yes. >> Quad Assan, >> yes.
>> Arnold Cohen, >> yes. >> And Ted Barker Hook is also a yes. We can put that agenda item aside. And I owe Matthew a muffin. [laughter] All right. So, here we go to our first
uh >> agenda. What? >> Sorry to interrupt. Did you approve both the minutes September 15 and 29? >> That's how I understood the motion. Okay. Yes. >> Just making sure. >> It looks like Ron, you're agreeing that that was your motion. Okay, great. So,
um our first media agenda item is a discussion on the accessory dwelling unit lot dimensions. Um, I will uh get the ball rolling with a reminder, at least what I understood the proposal to be from a member of the public. Um, I will offer a slew of
thoughts and then open up to discussion if that works for the committee members. Um we got a proposal from the public to move from the 900 square foot maximum size which um the commonwealth has
stipulated is a byight um size that that is allowed. Uh the proposal was moved from 900 ft to uh 33% bigger at,200 square foot um by right
ADU and also the proposal was to eliminate the up to 50% of gross floor area whichever is uh uh smaller I believe is the way the ADU is written currently. Um the hope is I think um
several it seems to me there's four reasons for ADUs and changing the lot size. One is to provide more affordable or attainable housing in Hopington. Um some of that is to keep um
uh empty nesters in town to allow parents to move into a smaller dwelling or perhaps allow their kids to have a first dwelling in an ADU. Um, we have in the past talked about ADUs as possible help for um, health aids on the property
for some of our more elderly citizens. And then I I think that it's while it is not the goal of the state, I think that another reason to have ADUs is allow homeowners an additional stream of income if they choose to add an ADU.
Since now there are no regulations that uh residents in the p primary or accessory unit be family members, family related or owners of the property at all. Um it allows potential landlord possibilities. Um,
so it seems to me those are the reasons to expand and the state's stated p uh purpose is to add more affordable attainable housing to the state. We are strapped. Uh, by the way, welcome Steve. If you want to chip in on Matthew's
muffin, I'll take the money. [laughter] >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. Um, so in thinking this through, I did say to you guys before that I've been on the zoning advisory committee for a while and we've talked about ADU several times and I've been of different minds as we've gone through
it. I have gotten much more sympathetic to the affordable housing argument than I used to be. Um, and so that certainly to me is worthy of consideration and I think the state's goal is admirable in creating more affordable housing. Um
the question is should we allow a larger house by right? Should we eliminate the 50% um and allow whatever or up to,200 ft or bigger than 50% um by right? And I think that's part of
the key is what do we allow by right? I did a little bit of research and I looked at 10 towns around us, most of which I think are similar to us. I would put in a a basket of the kind of town that we have. And here's what I found.
Of the 10, nine have stuck to the 900 ft or 50% guideline that the state is or bylaw that the state has given us. Um, those are Southboro, Ashland, Hollist,
Dover, Upton, Grafton, Shrewsbury, Sherburn, and I even went to Framingham, even though I don't think they're quite the same kind of town that we are. The one town that is allowed larger than 900 square feet is Westboro. They're at
1,000 square feet by right for their ADUs. And all of them say or 50% whichever is smaller. Um a couple other things. Southboro, Ashland, Westboro,
Upton, Grafton, Shrewsbury, Sherburn, and Framingham all have within their town bylaws no short-term Oh, no. I take it back. Hollison, do have no language uh preventing short-term rentals. All of
the other towns have language that prevent essentially turning an ADU into an Airbnb or a Verbbo. Um, we, as far as my reading is, we have no language about short-term rentals now. And as long as we're discussing these other issues, I
thought that might be something we want to take a look at. Um, a couple other things for context. Um the house that I'm living in right now when we purchased and when we had two adults and two children living in it
was,00 square feet. I am on Grove Street. I can see the water towers from my house. Um and I don't think anyone would look at it and say that that is um I don't know a clubhouse or or a house that's too small for a family with
children even, let alone two adults. Um my mother-in-law lives in the senior housing down um over by the senior center and by the police station. Those are by my estimate about 500 square ft. Um just to give a s I'm not very good at
picturing what 8 900 square f feet is or what, 1200 square feet looks like. Um my house is now larger than 12,200 ft. We had a pretty substantial uh one room addition put on and we added a bedroom upstairs. Um, I don't know exactly where we are now, but when our kids became
teenagers and beyond, um, we thought we needed a little more room. Um, I wonder, Aneri, I don't know. I I like that you are hosting this Zoom meeting, but I I looked up really quickly and I just want to share a video again to put square
feet into some context. Um, this happens to be one of the first ones I found. This is a cabin in Vermont. I think um a small house that is 800 square feet. So, let me see if I can pull that up. I haven't done this
since COVID times when I taught on Zoom constantly. So, let me see if I can pull this off. Sharing is not turned off. Excuse me. Send request to share. Okay. Now, I want to press share.
I want to press share. Can you see my Zoom screen? Yes. >> Okay. So, here is it's some real litter. I think I I'm not interested in you buying the house, but this was helpful to me to see what an 800 square f foot
house might look like. And I thought it might be helpful to some of you. So, we'll just let this play a little bit. You're going to get a little house tour. Um I think in the middle there's an an ad for something and I'll fast forward through it. So, just humor me for maybe four minutes.
>> Right here. cool wood slats. And then this door has a screen door. This just makes it feel like home if you ask me enough. I've never seen an Airbnb with a screen door. So, we'll open that up and we'll walk inside. Inside, this is about 800ish square ft of living space. And there's two beds and one full bathroom
in here. Immediately, we're in this little small foyer area. And you can hang your clothes here. There's a small bench. They leave your towels for the hot tub right here as well. Then, we can kind of walk around this corner and enter into your main living space. This is all open. Your kitchen, your living
room. I'm loving the exposed ceilings with the beams going across the wood design in here. Just makes it very cozy. That's why they named it the cozy rock cabin. And I couldn't agree more. I love all the color and texture around in here. The windows. There's a bunch of skylight.
>> All right, I'm going to fast forward a little so that we can see bathroom and bedroom. Maybe a better look at the kitchen, but I think you get the idea there. Um, here's this guy. Here's where he tells us to go eat somewhere in town.
So, we'll skip that. Um, okay. So, here's a bathroom in the 800 foot house. >> Dog bowl right here. If you do decide to bring your dog anyway, we'll walk through the bathroom now. And this is a large bathroom space. My favorite
feature though is the heated floor set at 75°. It comes on automatically for you and you'll never have cold feet. And this kind of heats the full tile shower with a glass door and then your toilet kind of tucked away behind the shower. There's even room for a bench to kind of
sit at. >> Let me just find a bedroom and then my tour will be done. >> Oh, it's multiple stories. >> To the back half of this cabin, which is where your beds are at in here. Very large room. Open ceilings right here.
desk on this left side to work at, set your stuff at, whatever you need a desk for. And then continuing down on this bottom floor is your king-size bed right here in the middle. Windows on this right side and above it. They have lights on both sides of this bed as well. And
>> see if we can go upstairs. Whoops. >> Case taking up this entire wall. They even organize the books by color. And there's a window in the middle. There's two skylights up here, windows by the bed. The natural lighting is just amazing here. >> And that's all unless anyone wants to
see any other part of that I will stop sharing. So I offer that only because I wanted context for what 800 square ft is. 900 square f feet is um I I don't know if you can picture the houses that are near just before you get to the
middle school, but again that's the neighborhood I live in. My house was about,00 square feet before the addition. Um so finally my final thoughts and then I promise I will be quiet and I would love to just have a conversation. Um
what I see is obviously if we do get new ADUs built in town that will increase our housing stock and it will hopefully provide I'll put aside even affordable attainable for a second. More homes
means lower prices. That's I teach basic economics at school. Um, more homes is more supply. More supply lowers prices. Probably if they were smalish homes, they would be closer to the attainable side, if not affordable. Um, and again,
that would work well for firsttime home livers. I'm a little unclear if these would be houses for purchase or only for rental. It seems to me they're only rental because we're not subdividing lots and stuff like that.
So, somebody would be renting them to someone else. But anyway, first-time families would have more of a chance. And again, empty nesters looking to downsize could hopefully stay in the town that they hopefully still love. Um, the con,
um, I could see potential, um, especially if we allow bigger homes, change, significant change to neighborhood fields, um, to the feel of neighborhoods for what, um, other homeowners thought they were buying into. And I think that could create some
frustration. Um and along the same line, um we do allow ADUs right now with the new law from the Commonwealth with many many many many fewer restrictions. So that's already been achieved. The
question is, do we want to allow larger ADUs? And that's my own hesitation is the buy right part of that to allow a larger home by right. I feel like maybe might be a dangerous step. I didn't see
in the language, but maybe an area you could help. Maybe [clears throat] I missed something. Maybe I don't understand the bylaw well enough. I did not see language that allowed a larger ADU by special permit, but maybe that's understood to always be true, but maybe
not. um if we need to if we wanted to allow larger ADUs and if we needed language for a special permit that's another route for us to take if we wanted to do that. Um so those were my
thoughts having put in a few hours and a little bit of research. Um I laid a lot on your tables. Um I would love to have a discussion and I would love to make it as easy as possible as long as we don't talk over everyone. I don't feel a need for through the chair.
So, I open the floor. Go ahead, Ron. Why don't you get us started? >> All right. Thank you. Um I I think there are a couple of considerations for having this discussion. I appreciate you taking the lead, Ted. That was a great open and um I just I think that
Hopington is unique and has in the past in in many matters taken the lead instead of following what other towns around us are doing. And I I think that the uh character of the town over the
last 20 years has changed dramatically uh in terms of the size and and the dimensions of the residences that are in town. And so, you know, the first thing is is a statewide standard that applies to Dorchester
or Roxberry or Jamaica Plane be the same standard that we apply to Hington. I just think it's a good thing to have that discussion. Um, and I I totally agree with the economic aspect. The more supply that we bring in into town, it's
it's going to have a positive effect on the price of that of rental units in the area or availability of housing in the area. And the the last thing and and I don't have data to support this, but I've uh been having conversations with
people that are wondering once all of our new schools are up and running, there is some concern that the population may not continue to grow the way that it's projected to and we could
use more kids in the school systems to keep them up at running at at capacity. But that's certainly something that we could talk with the school department about at some point to try to get um an update on that particular situation. But
you know that our neighborhood changed over the last couple of years with 4500 square foot homes going up in a neighborhood where 1500 2,000 square foot homes. And you know, if if they spend $2 million for their house and
they want to build a carriage house in the back for their relatives to come and spend six months living there, they're probably not going to be as comfortable in a 900 square foot unit when they're accustomed to a much more grandiose
living. So, it's just, you know, I economic diversity is a great thing. I don't think affordable in uh this part of Middle Sex County is going to be a dream that we're going to achieve in my lifetime, but attainability is something
that I think we should go for and giving people more options, I think, increases the likelihood that it will it will uh take effect. >> Someone want to jump in? >> Steve, I saw you unmute. Go ahead. Yes. Thanks, Ted. So, I I was I was
reading through these various bylaws and so so forth couple of weeks ago when we met and um I can't find my notes, so I'm just going to try to remember what I was reading, but um so I I had some confusion about standalone these ADUs
being standalone homes um you know, versus what was just mentioned um and some public comment in the past relative to you know, there's a larger home with uh you know presumably enough land to
add say a 900 square foot ADU. Um it seems to be to me two different things, right? So are we t you know to you Ted, as you understand it, are we talking about both circumstances, both an addition to an existing home or a
standalone ADU? So I my understanding of the new state law um is that we are not allowed to put restrictions on whether the ADU is attached or not attached. Um when I was first on Zach the ADU had to
be attached, had to have a door that went into the main dwelling and had to have its own separate entrance. While well before the state changed the laws, we opened things up a little more to allow an unattached ADU. Um my
understanding of the new state law is that we're not allowed to say one way or the other. They're both allowed by right. I see. So and and so with that said, my only concern were were language that was in the
various um proposed language that we were talking about change changing it to and as I recall you know there's this by right you know special permit as you said you know that you can get um I didn't have much objection to what I was
reading my my only concern was is you know circumventing normal um approval processes for the permit. That that was an issue that I wasn't clear on and it seemed like in the process and I don't have it right in
front of me, but in the process of getting the permit for the ADU, uh I saw some contradiction, you know, as I as I read through it. Uh I wouldn't want to take a lot of time here to to go over that. I'm just recommending that we
carefully look at the permitting process and make sure that everybody is comfortable with the permitting of an ADU. Uh both from a you know safety standpoint, fire hazard standpoint, setback issues, things of this nature that you know you would expect normally,
you know, if you were just adding to to your home for example, >> right? >> That that was that was my main concern. As far as the 900 ft, I I grew up in a 900 foot home, a 950 foot home in uh right on the Newton Watertown line in
Watertown in Newton, so I know exactly what a three-bedroom 950T home looks like. [laughter] And uh exactly. Um and you know, small bedrooms, especially if you have if you have three bedrooms, it'd be they're very small.
And uh it was only one bathroom and kitchens are very small and but it did have a it did have a separate dining room and a separate living room. So it is possible uh and you and if you know if you ever if you're familiar with Watertown Newton so forth there's
thousands of you know ranches that were built in the 50s of that size. And as mentioned by uh Ron, you know, things have changed, you know, um you know, we're living in a different era right now. Uh but those houses are sold and
resold and resold again just as they are because the lots are only 5,000 square feet. >> So um and they have high value uh because you're closer to Boston, you know, so they're they're livable, but not necessarily there's there's
functional obsolescence. >> Yeah. Um, nobody here has suggested this, but years ago, I I think I'm the only person currently on Zach that was on the committee for the the comment I'm about to mention, but when we were
talking about ADUs eight years ago, um, one of the people pushing for a larger square footage used the term, um, I want
for older folks to be able to live with dignity and 800 at the time it was 800 square feet does not allow a person to live with dignity and I found that type of thinking deeply deeply offensive. Um
I don't think anyone in here is saying that it's too small to live with dignity. Um but that has stuck in my head for a long time. Um, I think our town has changed and I think that there are some in town who think that if you're less than much bigger than 800
square feet. It is undignified. It is something um to look down your nose at. And and I certainly don't feel that way at all. And to me, that's not by itself a reason to allow anything bigger. Um, and maybe you're growing up, Steve. Uh,
it may have been cozy for your family. I don't think you think it was undignified. [laughter] >> No, we didn't we didn't look at it that way at all. >> Yeah. >> Other thoughts? >> Um, yeah, I have have a few few thoughts or questions. No, I grew up and I'm older
than a lot of the people here, probably everybody, but uh in the 50s and that's the way houses were about that size. And uh you know, you can live on it and u you know uh building these huge houses
is uh one reason why I think I think they do it because p the land is so expensive that the only way they developer can make money is by building a big expensive house. But anyway, um
it seemed like in this draft, did I miss something or is there nothing in it about short-term rentals? So, my understanding is in our bylaw, as it's currently written, we don't have any regulation on short-term rentals of
ADUs, which is why I said that might be a discussion we want to take up regardless of what we do with the by right size of an ADU. Um, I would say for now, let's table the short-term rental discussion um and deal with what
the public asked us to look at, which is the size of it and what Ron is encouraging us to look at as well. >> All right. Well, okay. I mean, it it seems something that would belong in this particular bylaw if if that's what the town wants or we
think would be best. But I'll >> I agree. I just think we ought to hold off on that discussion um for now. >> All right. >> But like like I said, of the 10 towns I looked at, only two of them do not have language about short-term rentals. So,
>> yeah. Well, maybe that's be up to the committee, I guess, to what they want to do about that. But uh uh am I correct that under the present uh bylaw uh it's the occupants are
restricted to being family members or >> I don't believe that's correct anymore and the state doesn't allow that. In fact >> currently >> neither the occupant of the primary home nor the accessory home need to be owners of the property. I'm talking about
presently, not the way this the law >> No, no, that's the way it is now. As of February 2025, um, and we had to adopt and I believe at town meeting, we adopted the change so that we conform to the state law. And the state law right
now as we sit here says nobody has to be family, nobody in either dwelling has to be even owner of the property anymore. >> Okay. So we we adopted uh a bylaw uh based on the change in the
state law and these regulations are based on the change in the in the state law that >> Yes, I believe that be true. Yes. >> And but we already acted in response to the state law. Yes, we are >> talking about now is to just kind of
tune it up a little bit more according to these regulations. >> Yes. So the the proposal was we have adopted the state laws um maximum 900 ft which upped us from 800 square feet which was our old bylaw. Um, and we've
adopted all of the other or gotten rid of all the other restrictions that we had to allow more uh freedom in creating and renting out uh buying property and building another house. All of those things we have we are now in we conform
to the state law. >> Yeah. Well, it it seems like based on the change in the state law, I don't know if it's happened yet, but [clears throat] well, so if you if you own a lot, a single
family house on a lot uh under the state law, you can build um uh uh this type of a building, which uh an ADU
uh up to 900 square ft and theoretically we could make it bigger. We you could just kind of be like a landlord and rent it out to somebody assuming you're meeting setback requirements and other things like that. But yes.
>> Yeah. I mean it seemed to me I'm not sure but it could be an incentive to people to really uh build these. >> I think that was the whole point of >> Yeah. I guess that's the idea. [laughter] uh you know uh um you know I'm inclined
to keep it at the 900 but 1,200 I think is too big maybe a thousand but I >> Okay. >> All right. Let's let's >> Matthew you guys have been silent so far. Do you have anything to offer? I was curious how many before we changed
it to well actually originally before February was were they all attached or was that >> No, that had already been changed to allow separate um >> so I'm I'm curious up until February like what size were people making ADUs and probably too soon to see a change
but have we seen any like how close to the maximum do people tend to build these currently? >> So that's a question I have too. I don't have an answer. Um my my sense is we didn't have a whole lot of ADUs being built. Um that there were
some in existence and then there were restrictions about who could stay there and if the owner of the property moved, the ADU was no longer allowed to be an ADU without reapplying. That's also been removed from restrictions. But my sense
was not very many were being built. Um how many have been built since February since we've added 900 ft? I have no idea. My sense is not many, but I watch a lot of the town meetings. I don't watch all of them. So, I don't know.
But I do think um that maybe you're hinting at this, Matthew. I think Arnold did too. Um, we've had the new dramatically less restrictive law for
10 months or maybe since town meeting, maybe less. Um, in our town, it might be a little early to assess whether the less restrictive rules are doing what they're supposed to do or not, whether it's 800 feet or 900 ft. Um, it seems to
me maybe more important than the size is how little restriction there is to building them now. And I don't know if we've had enough time to assess whether it's working in Hopkin or the rest of the state. >> Uh, I will just add one point. Um, while
working with Wayan and as well as since I'm here since last month, >> we did not receive that many inquiries to build the ADU. It's not like state adopted the bylaw and allowed that by right to build 900 square ft or 50% of
the principal unit but other sector like factors also are important setback zoning if the homeowner do not have any enough space they cannot do the ADU they need to take care of the septic if it's a septic I mean [snorts] based upon [clears throat] water sewer so those
aspects also matter and that's one of the reason people decide not to do ADUs because to build the ADU they need to upgrade a lot of stuff. They need enough land to build the ADUs, >> right? >> So, um yeah.
>> Right. So, Matthew, I cut you off before you were done. >> No, I mean that that that's that's a part of my thought is like is what you said. My other question like the thing that keeps coming through my mind is I listen to what Ron says, right? makes sense if you've got 10 acres like you might want to put a 1200 foot house
somewhere and it's not going to impact the look and feel of the area um without any restrictions on short-term rentals for instance is just one concern I'm trying to think of like what use cases uh are kind of like the pathological
case here where somebody fits as much as they can on a small lot and what does that end up looking like um where would that go um I don't that that I can picture 900 foot house. I'm I'm having trouble picturing like what that would look like in town and what sort of lots
that would look like. Um is there any restriction on how close I mean it could be attached, right? So there's no restriction on how close the ADU could be. It's just the setbacks from the property is if >> Yeah, I don't think so. Since it can be attached, I think it could also be two feet away or 20 feet or 200 feet. I I
think all of those are fine if the other setbacks are met. >> And it is not like just Sorry to interrupt. It isn't just not like attach or detach. They can do a bow and in the um basement too. So those >> so like a a rightesque sort of uh
hanging house on top of another. >> I mean it could just be the second floor as long as it has its own entrance as well. So you'd have to have some stairs going up to to its own front door if you will. >> So you just build a house way up. What's
the height limit? Yeah. >> I'm not sure. I guess that is a way you could do it though is put a third floor on your house and that could be an ADU. >> No. >> And again, >> so you cannot do third feet. Again, you need to check the zoning and what is the maximum height allowed. So if I'm not
wrong, it's 35 ft. So that usually two two and a half story if I'm not wrong. So if you have one story and if you are adding one above it and making it as a that's fine but you cannot go above that or >> we must have houses that are three
stories though in town. We must >> we do. >> So there must be some areas where it's more than 35 ft for a roof line. Anyway, >> if I could just respond to Matt's comment about other uses. I mean, I my
own personal interest is on, you know, I'm in a non-conforming lot in Hopington, but I can fit a,000 square foot ADU in the back of my property that's going to be medically equipped to
allow me to age in place. I mean, I' I've lived in Hopington since ' 89. I've lived in this house since 2000. I don't want to leave here, but because the taxes and the insurance costs are going up at such an astronomical rate, I
can't, you know, long term, I can't afford to live here and I don't want to leave, >> right? So I, you know, moving to the back, but when we met with architects and started laying out this, I mean, when Steve was talking about growing up as a kid, I mean, I grew up in a family
with four kids in a twobedroom, 800 square foot house, okay? But I didn't age there. I didn't have wheelchairs. I didn't have walkers. I didn't have all of the things that aging in place needs. And and that's, you know, it it's very
personal for me because I I wanna I want to stay in town. It's a great town. I don't want to leave, but the cost of living that's escalating right now is going to force me out of town. And >> there's one other cohort that I think
might be very interested in ADUs around town as a rental and and that's divorced couples. So, you know, they, you know, they split up. They want to stay close. Well, if you've got a big enough property, build build an ADU in the
backyard and one of you I I don't know. I mean, it's that there >> it all depends on the divorce, doesn't it? [laughter] >> Um, Arnold, I certainly hear you and and I think you're not alone in being someone who wants to stay in town. And
if we have a second house on a property, obviously the taxes will go up on that property, but they're not likely to double. So, two different wage earners sharing the taxes obviously makes it more affordable. So, I get all that completely. Um, and and hopefully
whether we make changes or not, because our rules are already less restrictive because of the state, hopefully we get some of those. Um, and you know, and I did not take into account wheelchairs when I was thinking things through, but my first reaction is
I think the designers of the senior housing in town did take that into account, and those are much much smaller. My, again, my mother-in-law lives there, and it's a cozy place, but there are uh senior married couples that live in those places. Um, and they make
it work. Um, I'm certainly not suggesting nor are we allowed to reduce to 500 feet, but again, as I'm trying to wrap my head around what living space is, that's what I estimate those to be. Um,
do you have any thoughts? And if you don't, that's fine. I don't want to put anybody on the spot. I just want to open opportunities. >> I don't have any thoughts. >> Okay. All right. Um, can I ask you, Aneri, because I think that you know much more about these things than I, and
maybe Matthew, with all your um, planning board experience. If I do not see, and maybe I just missed it, but if I don't see language about larger than 900 ft by special permit, does that mean it's not allowed at all?
You can't ask for a special permit for larger than 900 ft. So as per the current Hopkins ADU bylaw which town adopted in town meeting um did not mention that you can do larger one um larger ADUs but if I'm not wrong
in the past before this bylaw adopted Hopkin used to issue the larger ADU through special permit and um there are a couple of cases which I saw recently and one is going right now in front of zoning board for a larger ADU uh
currently. So I think you can do with a special permit but >> so that language doesn't need to be in the bylaw. It's just understood. You may always ask for something. >> Yeah, you can ask zoning officer and you can mention it. U but as for this bylaw
it's not specified. >> Okay. So, can I ask the folks in front of me, what are your thoughts on larger whether it's 1,200 or a thousand by right versus special permit?
>> I I would rather see it by special permit. And there's like I started to say, you know, and it was just brought up. was one of the issues that I had about, you know, septic systems. You know, great part of the town is on sewer. You know, I happen to live in an
area where I have a septic system. If I were to add a thousand, you know, I have fairly goodized house. Um I'm an empty, you know, empty neester um with my wife, but um you know, we my my septic system would
definitely have to be expanded, you know, in order to accommodate an ADU. Um the other the other issue, the other concern I had, and I I just found my notes, as I said, I had written down about the parking issue. um you know all all the
um sort of virtuous way uh things that were mentioned in terms of you know having these ADUs and I and I agree with all of those comments is one thing but if somebody wants to build a 1,200 foot unit start using it as an Airbnb what's your parking going to look like in your
neighborhood when all of a sudden three you know two or three cars shows up every once in a while and you know parking lots are expanded and things of that nature. Um, I'm I'm a little concerned about that
and there has been no discussion about parking. I believe there's a certain amount of parking. That's >> Yeah, I'm I'm looking through the state law because I remember reading something about parking there, but I'm looking for it right now. >> Yeah, I think it was one
a minimum of I think there's a minimum, Ted, of one spot. >> I think so, too. And I think >> I think it's a maximum is >> or is it a maximum? I'm I'm not sure. >> Maximum. >> Not more than one off streetet parking. So it's a maximum in the in our bylaw.
>> Not more than one. Okay. Yeah. Okay. So you would need a special I suppose a special. Yeah. >> Can >> not more than one would be required. >> That's where I was about to go. >> Required. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So you're allowed to put in more parking, but we can't require more than
one. >> Right. Okay. Good. and I don't have to look for it anymore. That's what I was looking for. >> Yeah. So, so just to summarize, you know, just think about that, you know, I the, you know, anecdotally the I just would hate to see a unit built for the
purpose of, you know, Airbnb and all of a sudden there's three or four cars plus the maybe three cars that the family already had. All of a sudden, I got six cars sitting sitting in the you know, >> right? Um, I will propose,
um, I'm not saying we close this discussion right now because I want to hear more about by right versus special permit, but I will propose, we're not going to finish this tonight, that we put it on the agenda for our next meeting and we make sure that we have some discussion of uh, short-term rental
um, because I do think we need to talk about that. And my sense is looking at your bobbing heads, everyone agrees that that's probably something we need to put into the bylaw that we don't see right now. So, let's put that off till next meeting. Um because I do think it needs
to be discussed. I just don't want to sidetrack us right now. Um so, other thoughts on special permit versus by right? Go ahead, Ron. >> Just um my own personal experience in going to the building department to ask for a greater than
allowed to buy right square footage was that it had to be a variance rather than a special permit. And variances are held to a very uh strict specific standard that makes it much more difficult to get than a uh special permit.
>> And Erie, can you help with that? >> Yes, that is correct. And I can check with the Chris the building zoning enforcement officer but if I'm not wrong uh it needs to go through variance and
also um special permit f by planning board if they want to do a bigger adus because um the current bot do not allow in the past it happened to be approved through special permit and Hopkin didn't allow that. So if anybody wants to do
like right now in today's time 900 more than 900 square feet bigger I mean bigger ADU they need a variance and special permit both >> they need both. So, if we looked at the bylaw and put language in about special permits, is that a way I don't know
enough about variances, and I'm not proposing this yet because I don't know enough, but is that a way to allow a simpler process, but one that is more thought out and avoid the variance process? If we put in language about you
must get a special permit for up to,200 square feet. uh that I can take a look and because I need to see what was allowed, what was mentioned on the old ADU section of the zoning bylaw if there is any um
>> like [snorts] currently I do not have that in front of me but I can take a look. Yeah. >> Um because if we are exploring by right versus special permit um I again I I believe everything Ron tells me. So, I
believe that you've had a headache with that. Um, I'm not trying to create headaches for people, but I if a special permit allows us to slow things down a little bit to be thoughtful to allow some protection for neighbors who might
be alarmed, um, a trip to the uh, ZBA is not necessarily that ownerous, I don't think. >> Yeah. Um, Ted, um, >> yeah. >> Yeah. I think um I'm actually on the board of of appeals, but I don't have
the answer. Um, but I I would think that if you're going to talk about a special permit for a larger size ADU, we would uh need to look at the other
zoning bylaws about special permits. And uh, you know, I you know, just put a sentence in this bylaw to say, well, if you want to get a larger one, you have to get a special permit. uh you might want to look at the part of
the bylaw that talks about special permits to see if something else would h you need more than just [clears throat] more than just that because it might could be you could do it that way but you should look at look at the whole bylar and look at
uh whether you'd have where with the if it would fit in with the uh other part of bylaw. >> I agree with you, Arnold, and I think I'd lean on Aneri to help with that. [laughter] >> Go ahead. >> So, just go ahead, Matthew. Just want
>> Sorry. Yeah, this is looking at 71032 under prohibited regulations or 7103 and I I I guess this would be something for council to weigh in on, but like the unreasonable regulations except as provided under five and six, which are
multiple ADUs, which are in here already, and then like flood plan or something like that. um you wouldn't be required you you couldn't require a special permit waiver or variance or other zoning relief for [snorts] the ADU. So I' I'd worry that saying
certain things could be done under those. Somebody could argue that we're requiring special permit or variance um in some cases and say that >> I reread those sections several times and I'm confused by the wording in a lot
of them. My understanding was you can't allow or you can't allow requirement of special permit for 900 ft or smaller. That was my reading. That that needs to be by right, which
I think means you can allow bigger than 900 ft and you can make up your own rules about what is allowed for bigger than 900 square feet. That was the way I read it. But >> there seem to be a lot of double negatives going on in those sections. So
>> yeah, I I know there's also guidance that says that this wasn't intended to be to prohibit it from being less restrictive, >> right? >> And I I don't know how they interpret that from reading this myself. Um so maybe that Yeah, I mean I think we just definitely if if we were trying to
do certain things by special permit, we need somebody to try and interpret that all for us. Maybe even at the state level verify >> and Right. and my first stop would be Aneri and then if we need uh our new town council to help us out if we decide to go that way. We're making no decisions right now. Um but I think
those would be the steps we take to make sure we're not running a foul of the Commonwealth. >> Oh, go ahead and please. >> So I will just brief out um special permit variance and ADU. Uh again as per the straight rule and the town adapter
you can do 900 square foot ADU by ride but you need to make sure as I said setbacks and everything and we need to check if there is any overlay district or anything going on that particular parcel which going to affect the
requirements setbacks and everything and because of that if it's triggering any other sector they need a special permit. So for example, you want to do ADU, you already like non-conforming lot, you don't have enough setbacks on any side
of your property, then you need a variance. So that's why I said like special permit and v variance in that terms and I think that's the thing Ron is trying to address. So location of your ADU that matters as well as the zoning and
>> so Ron maybe you can help me and we're not trying to solve your problem but you provided an example. >> Yes. >> When when you talk about your lot is a thousand ft ADU not workable because of setbacks?
>> No setback setbacks are are perfect. Everything lines up for it. So, you have plenty of property to not impinge on neighbors or wetlands or anything like that. >> Exactly. >> Right. >> And the the only the only thing I wanted to change was a square footage because
I'm in a 1500 square foot house. >> Right. >> So, I'm I'm maxed out at 750 square feet. And by the time you put all the medical stuff and all the rest of this stuff in there, it's very hard for my wife and I to envision leaving our house
and moving in there for a for a nice aging in place experience. >> Which then gets to the other thing we haven't discussed tonight, which is the 900 900 square feet or 50% of the primary house, whichever is smaller,
>> right? Um, so we have not touched on that tonight. I'm looking at my watch. I wonder if we could give this topic at most 10 to 15 minutes more chat and then we
will just table it and pick it up again. So Ron now is providing a different thing to consider which is that 50% whichever is smaller. in Ron's case, just as an example, not because we're trying to I don't want anyone in town. I don't want the independent to say, "Oh
my gosh, Zach is trying to fix Ron's issue." We're not. It just provides a discussion point. >> Um, in Ron's case, the most he could go is [clears throat] 750 ft. Whether we change it to from 900 to a,000 or 12,
whatever, because of the 50% rule, he's stuck. So, what are our thoughts on the or 50% whichever is smaller? Before we go further, and this is not to shoot down Ron's hopes, it is still in our
bylaw uh this language. It is also the intent to asssure that the single family character of the neighborhood will be maintained and and this part I double underlined the accessory unit remains subordinate to the principal living
quarters. The way I read that is it is clear that we don't have two equalizes on the same property is the way I read that. Matthew, you want to start? >> Yeah. So, uh, it definitely helps to have a use case to to talk about straw
man or or Ron or whatever. Um, so I guess first starting off, so he talked about in his example, he's trying to build something that's further back in his lot. I I'm I'm trying to just for the sake of framing this, um, subdivision doesn't work in this case. It like because of access, because of
Okay. Um, >> I'm I'm at 33,000 square foot lot and it's a 45,000 square foot zone. So that's So I'm already nonconforming to begin with. >> And and if I may, I think I don't know if we subdivided that would not
necessarily fix the tax issue anyway, right? because then you have a whole separate lot where you're paying separate taxes >> because subdiv subdividing would not be possible based on frontage requirements in this zone. >> But even if it were, I'm saying your tax
burden wouldn't change all that much at all. >> Would not change. Correct. >> Right. >> So, if we're trying to solve for people uh retiring and living in a place, it's not going to solve that problem. But it would address if somebody needed two two equally sized houses for renting, for
instance, they could subdivide. But in this case, it's not working. >> And just from from a chamber of commerce perspective, and that's my seat on this board, you know, population density, as much as we hate it in the school districts because of all the the
building that's going on, population density helps the businesses and and and make it a thriving community. and would will provide us some economic diversity in town by allowing people into smaller units than than are currently available.
And I think diversity is a great thing. >> I think helping uh people get around either younger or older to different parts of the town and having more businesses might help with that. Just on that topic, but >> do you have thoughts then Matthew on the 50% whichever is smaller?
Again, not to solve Ron's question, but just it gives us something to think about. >> Yeah, I understand the frame that he's coming from and obviously like anybody from the town who's got problems and giving us specific examples helps us kind of frame the general uh you know, build a general case from what are we
trying to solve here? So, these this is helpful information. What what what's in my mind, right, is if we let to 100% right, we come back to two equal property houses like that doesn't that doesn't work, >> right? >> Um >> so, I guess the question is what are we looking at? Are we looking at increasing
50% somewhere? Is it just like figuring out where that threshold is? Um [snorts] I think the original proposal during the uh open discussion uh during the second meeting was getting rid of it entirely. Might have been proposed.
Yeah. >> But also frankly, I don't think he had fully thought out that part. It seemed to be kind of like um I think we should get rid of it. Um but it doesn't matter whether it's thought out. gives us something to talk about. So, >> I think proportionality is is
appropriate. You know, on the flip side, if I were an auto collector and wanted to build a 2,000 square foot garage in my backyard, I could do that right now and it would dwarf my house, but it would it would fit within the setback
requirements. M >> or if you just want to throw a big party and have a dance floor, [laughter] >> just don't sell tickets because that's forbidden. >> Any thoughts on the 50% piece of this
discussion. >> Okay. So here then is what I propose. I say that we we end this discussion for tonight. Um, I think everyone has some thought homework. Go back and and try to parse this ridiculously dense language
again. Um, and I guess you have a little bit of homework to help us think through what kind of language if we did want to talk about special permit but not further ownorous burdens. If you want to go above the current 900 square feet, if you could help us think through that a little bit
and what would be required. Um, and then of course next time we will talk about um whether we want and what it should look like to restrict short-term rentals on ADUs. Does that sound good? Does everyone feel like we're good with that for tonight?
Okay, with that, um, we don't have to have votes to close any agenda items. So, let's go to our last and I think for a lot of this one, Aneri is going to try to get us up to speed and then it might be mostly a Q&A time right now before we
propose solutions. Although, when I talked to John Gelich, he thought, at least as of July, that there might be some fairly quick fixes to the little bit of a jam we're in. But I'll let Aneri take over if you're comfortable with that, Aneri.
>> Just a second. Okay. So, let me just quickly share what we approved back in town hall um during our fall town special town meeting regarding
MBTA. Can you see my screen? >> I don't see anything on it. >> Oh. Oh, can you see it now? >> No. Do I have to >> start? Let me try again. >> Is there anything I have to do to
unshare or >> I think you can see now. I see Hopkins has started screen sharing >> but I don't see any image beyond that. >> Now I do. >> Now I see it. >> Okay, perfect.
>> CMX >> with some black splotches. >> Hopefully in a moment the screen the zooms panel. Oh god. I don't know what is going on. Okay, I think you can see now. Are you
seeing our MBTA map which town adopted the district map? >> Yep. >> Okay. >> And now we can see the inserts as well. Although you just scrolled away from them, but yeah. >> Okay. So I will just brief brief out um
back in the town meeting special town meeting town adopted the bylaw with these three district Walcott Valley downtown and preserve subd district we reach out to state submitted our adopted bylaw and state send us a letter
mentioning that we are meeting not 100% state requirements regarding MBTA so they just gave us like partial compliance approval based on our MBTA zoning bylaw. We are meeting two of the
condition as per them. One is like a land acre area require 50 acres. We as per our bylaw it's 54 acres and we are meeting the multif family unit capacity. As per the state you need 750 and we
have 782 at the moment. The only condition we are not meeting is the 50% of contigious area which uh we need to figure that out and we have time till May 2026
to come up with the new uh option and adopt that bylaw and reach out to state regarding that. So um there are three option as per my
understanding. One we can expand any uh other like any current district. One is the preserve one. If we decide to expand this district we need to add somewhere around 5 acres
to this district. Oh this is downtown. My bad. So somewhere around 10 to 15 um acre near this area and if we want to expand this district then we need to come up
with the five acres somewhere around 5 acres. So we need like somewhere around 27 acres in one district to meet our 50% contiguous area requirement. And the other option state recommend you
can create a fourth district establish that and based upon current zoning and areas. >> So I'm sorry if we have a fourth district none of them have to be 50%. >> No we need to meet like we can create
one more district here somewhere. >> Oh okay to add to it. Yeah. >> Right. Okay. So adding as let me see I can so as you can see the table there are three islands. So as I said
currently in preserve area uh district we have 22.9 we can do plus minus 9 I mean 5 acres add that and make it as a 50% contiguous area we can do near downtown
um I had a little discussion with John and he was mentioning that um board Zach discuss about some area near downtown district which we need to
come up with where we can add and where we cannot add the district basically. Okay. So, I'm a history teacher, not a math teacher. Um, and if the state tells
us by adding, say, 10 acres to downtown and we're set, then great. But if we add 10 acres to downtown, that makes downtown 27.9.
And by the math right now, we need 27.3 acres. So it would seem to solve the issue. But if we add 10 acres, our total acreage goes up to 64.6 acres and 50% of
64 is 32. So going to 27 downtown still doesn't give us one area that's 50%. Am I right? We would have to add acreage to one and
remove the same acreage from another one to keep it 54 acres. So that the what we got to get is 27.3. >> So you can increase the acres but you cannot go below 50 acres. >> Right? But if you increase the total
acreage, >> then 50% becomes a bigger acreage as well. >> Ron, you nodded. Am I Am I thinking this through correctly? >> If we were to add 10 acres downtown, then our total zoned acreage would be
64.6 acres. >> We need to add about 10.9 acres to downtown. >> Okay, but just call it 10 to make the math easy. My point is then we need a district that is >> sorry 20.9 20.9 acres to downtown
>> and then that takes in what I'm saying where >> yes because it's 22.9 plus 14.8 that's 36 uh 37.7 is the acreage of the other two. So you need to get downtown be over that. >> Okay, that's another way to do the math. Great. So
right 10 acres the point is 10 acres doesn't do it because we're increasing our total acreage. So, we're making it harder to get to the 50%. If our total acreage stays at 54.6, then we need 27.3 in one of them. But if
we add acres to any of the zones, we're adding to the total acreage, which means 50% is bigger than 27.3. But I'm a history teacher. [laughter] >> So So Ted, if if if we came up with a
totally new area, does does that calculus that you just did, does that affect the other three areas? In other words, if we added whatever acreage we need, it by whatever means I I have an idea that's pretty
controversial, but um I'll I'll hold I'll hold up on that. But my my question is if if we because I think you mentioned earlier we one of the options is just to create another zone. >> No, I asked if that was an option. I I understood a neri to say that we could
create a force zone. What exactly >> 50% >> add more >> to one of the zones. >> Yeah. I'm sorry. >> The 50% will come into play also. If you add >> it will still come into play, >> right? You still need to have one zone
be 50%. >> I see. Okay. So, the two most >> the two most straightforward things is uh there's a a a restaurant across from the preserves which would bring it up to 39.7 acres >> and that gets us back to our first time
voting on this whole thing. [laughter] >> Um the other options like Walcott and downtown are pretty close to each other. Uh if those were to be connected, we we're back to two zones. >> Yep. And that could also solve it. Um
the the map, could you show us the map again, please? >> And zoom in on the downtown and um Walcott. >> Can you see my screen? >> Not yet.
>> It came and went away again. >> Okay. Share >> now. >> No, [sighs and gasps] >> I'm sorry. I don't know what is going on.
Well, while you're trying, this the map that's in our packet is just so small and it's for me impossible to see how many properties separate Walcott from downtown. >> But you're right, Matthew. If we join
those two, then we easily clear the bar. >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean there's about a block and a half um more or less along 85 that connects them and then there's um >> what's involved in making a zone? I mean
>> has to vote on it. >> Planning board has to put it before town and and then the town has to vote on it. What? What's along Walcott Street there, Matthew? Maybe you have a better map than I have in front of me. >> I'm sorry. Something is wrong. I cannot
share my screen. >> You've got Is that the same map I [laughter] >> Yeah, same app. >> Um, use Archess as might be easier to navigate, but um
>> All right, let me see. What time is it? Are we still okay on time? We are. Let me see if I can pull up the town's planning map and share my screen. >> Yeah, I just zoomed into the PDF quite a bit. >> Uhm.gov. >> I also shared through email, but I don't
know why I'm not able to share my screen again. >> I don't know. [snorts] My computer's not going to Oh, it's because I didn't spell it right. Hopkins [snorts] now. It seems to be not loading. Well, I can't seem to get the town
website up. Try one more time. There it is. Um, where search? How do I feedback? >> What's going on? >> This is the exciting part of the meeting
right now. >> I just shared the screen and I can't know. >> Oh, it didn't work. Um, >> that help at all? Say better. Why can't I find what I found so quickly other times?
Why can't I find it? Our town website ought to have a little search feature. I don't see one. All right, let's [clears throat] try this. Public safety town manager select board land use
planning. If I go here, can I get a map? Where's the map? >> Oh my gosh. >> Ted, can you open I mean you can ask me to share screen through your email and then you can open the document I shared. >> Oh,
>> I don't that you can >> let me look at my email. Um, >> yep. And then let me see if I can see what you sent me. Um, is this the document that I'm looking at? The one with the map?
>> Yeah, that's the one we approved. >> When did you send that? Do you remember? Just so I can go to the date. >> Let me tell you. >> October 23rd, maybe. >> You can find in that one, too. or November I mean last week
>> or last week's. All right. >> November 19th. >> All right. I am so sorry, guys. We really [laughter] This is not what any of us signed up for right now. >> Yeah. I'm sorry. I didn't know.
>> Okay. Here's November 19th. Here's a bunch of attachments. There is a map. >> Yep. >> All right. Now, let me see if my sharing helps us at all. >> Share. >> There you go.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. Now, can I zoom in anymore is my question. >> Yeah. With your uh >> There you go. >> There you go. >> That seems to be the most I can zoom in. >> But we've got I believe Can you see my cursor?
>> Yeah. >> Believe that's Walcott Street. >> Yes. So if we could zoom in more, we could see maybe what those properties are. But if we developed a link here, then our problems clearly would be
solved. If we only wanted to expand downtown, say this way, which Ron, you'll remember we talked about doing before, the police station, the fire station, but if we did that, 10 acres wouldn't be enough. If my understanding
of math is correct, we [clears throat] add it sounded like 20 acres if we wanted to go this way. And maybe that's doable if we I think the fire station might already be in the purple. I know we talked about the fire station being
zoned, but the police station is not. Um, but we'd have to add 20 acres if we wanted to go this way or this way or we could see what connected these and that would solve everything. Or as Matthew
points out, we could add the restaurant, [laughter] but we've already experienced that town meeting and that might not be worth bringing up again. [laughter] Um there was a plan once that included that and solved everything beautifully
but that failed. Um so maybe until we can get a closer look at this and I don't want to waste more time trying to find the more detailed zoning map. Maybe the thing to look at
for next time is what would it mean to look at these pro again I'm kind of using my cursor to figure out what these properties are what the neighbors would think etc. Um, thinking out loud, if you connected by just a couple
properties, I don't think that necessarily lends itself to rapid development of those properties. But it does make one contiguous lot, I would think, which would then satisfy our need because we have a
little purple strand connecting those bigger purple blocks. But maybe that's what we talk about next time. Um, I would say as much as I thought the restaurant up here was a great idea once upon a time, that's a can of worms I'm not ready to open again. It's been shot
down twice and I don't think we ought to bring it up again. Um, it seems to me the answer is down here. Whether it's building this bridge or expanding the downtown to the east andor the west. But
if we did that, we would have to zone more property than if we just connected these two. That's my assessment of the situation. Does anyone else have thoughts or or other things to explore between now and our next meeting?
>> Can you can you uh just zoom up I believe up to to the other area. So this is this is where the train down by where the train station is. So, the train station in South Burrow is right there. >> Okay. >> This is the um the preserve, the
condominium development, >> right? >> Right across is the entrance to Hopkinson State Park. >> Okay. >> Um this blue circle is a half mile within the train station. Um because we
are MBTA adjacent, we don't have to follow rules that the zones be within a half mile. But when we put together our map the first and the second time in Zach and then it seemed the planning board agreed, we liked the spirit of that part of the law to encourage use of
public transit. Um, and it seemed to be an area of highdensity uh housing already anyway. So if by some chance somebody decided to buy that land and the the people were willing to sell,
it wouldn't change as dramatically uh the makeup of that section. So that's how this got included. Once upon a time, Carbon's here across the street was in the plan, >> right? >> And that got rejected at town meeting and then got rejected, I guess, in the
planning board process, not at town meeting when we proposed that again. And and is there conservation land down in that area? >> Uh well, there's state land out here and we're not allowed to zone state land. >> Right. >> In here there was um a restriction.
There was a little strip of land somewhere in here that made property over here not developable. But someone on um Zach, and I was certainly one of those voices, was not a fan of zoning woods um because it's in my opinion
worthwhile to protect trees. And we were also trying to find places that weren't immediately uh developable and and mouthwatering to developers. And buying land with trees is much more mouthwatering than having to buy out homeowners on some other
land. But but Ted in that case and um we discussed this with John where I asked the questions back you know back when um the developer would kind of be discouraged from that land because they have to bear the infrastructure to get
into it. >> That was true of all of this down here. >> But this particular bit of wooded stuff also had a strip in front of it that made it unusable. >> I see. I think state stateowned land. >> I see.
>> For all of this um there's not um water supply. It's all on wells. Um and for some of us, we thought that that would be a uh disincentive for developing the Caron's land. But then at town meeting, some other people pretty
loudly voiced disagreement with that. >> Yeah, I remember that. Yeah. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> All right. Anything else on this then? I don't see everyone on the screen anymore. So, if you if you've got a
thought, speak up. Okay. So, here then I think are our marching orders for our next meeting. And our next meeting is when Neri I don't have it in front of me. >> 8th. >> So, >> November 8th. >> And that is Wednesday. >> Uh Monday again.
>> Monday. So, a week from >> two weeks from tonight. two weeks from tonight. Two weeks [clears throat] from tonight, um if you know anyone else on the zoning advisory committee who we haven't seen, give them a nudge. Hopefully, we can see him. But two weeks
from tonight, we will continue ADUs. Um hopefully Aneri can give us a little more information about language around special permitting that wouldn't be uh too ownorous. Um but that also obviously
doesn't violate the state laws. Um, we will talk about short-term rentals with ADUs. Uh, we will explore a little more that 50% rule. Um, and then we will take this up and hopefully have a map where we can zoom in a little bit better. Um,
I do encourage everyone to take a field trip downtown. Um, take a look at Walcott Street, go for a walk, maybe stop and get a little yogurt or pizza, maybe snappy dogs while they're still open. But if if you don't go downtown much, take a look at the area down there
so that you have some familiarity and not just a map with color blotches on it. >> Sound good? >> You want to do you want to schedule a sitewalk starting from Muffin House, Ted? [laughter] >> Only if Steve will be there to help defay the costs. [laughter]
>> That's uh that's a lot of calories. That's a long walk. That's very long walk. Two two pound muffin. >> Um All right. So, if everyone's good with that, I would love to get a motion to adjourn. >> Before we do that,
>> oh, sure. >> I was just wondering, I was asked from the affordable housing to talk about the payment in Le thing at some point maybe in the next meeting or we are open to having a joint meeting if that's
permitted and that helps. Okay, let me write a note to talk to Aneri about that. Whether we think it can fit on an agenda reasonably or whether we need to push it off a little further or maybe just have you represent maybe you have some answers to some of the questions we had before.
>> Yeah. >> So, I I'll talk to an offline and we'll see if we can put it on the next agenda or not. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Sounds good. >> Anything else before a motion to adjurnn? All right. Anyone with a motion in a second? I'd love to hear it.
>> So move. >> Second. >> There we go. Let me stop sharing my screen so I can see all of y'all. And let's have a roll call vote. Uh, Matthew, >> yes. >> Quad, >> yes. >> Ron,
>> yes. >> Arnold, >> yes. >> Steve, >> yes. >> And Ted Barker Oak is also a yes. It's unanimous. We are adjourned. Thank you everybody. Thank you for coming. I'm glad we finally got a Zach meeting to go. >> Happy
momentum two weeks from now. >> Thanks everyone. Thank you.