[music] Good evening. Welcome to the Thursday, November 20th, 2025 meeting of the Lakeville Planning Board. It is 6:32 and we are meeting this evening at the Lakeville Public Library at 4 Precinct Street. We do have a quorum this evening
with Mr. Walga, Mr. Lodge, myself and then our associate med me member Donna is with us as well. I believe Jack will be joining us momentarily but our first um oh we have Lake Cam recording for the record is anyone else recording hearing
none. The first item on our agenda is executive session possible executive session pursuant to open meeting law general law chapter 30A section 21A7 review approval and possible release of
executive session minutes pursuant to general law 38 section 22F March 24, 2025 and March 2725 and to return to open session. So would someone like to make a motion to enter executive session?
>> I make a motion that we enter executive session. >> Second. >> Motion in a second. All in favor? I >> All right. We will take a momentary um absence and we'll return. Would
someone like to make a motion to return to open session? >> I make a motion that we return to open session. >> Second. >> Motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> All right. Agenda item number two, vote to release executive session minutes.
Would someone like to make that motion? Um, I make a motion to release the executive session minutes. >> Second >> for March 24th and March 27, 2025. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second. All in
favor? >> I >> I. Motion carries. The minutes will be released. Uh, agenda item number three, meet with Serpent regarding rules and regulations update. Welcome. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for coming out on this dark and cold night. It was very dark. I was
just saying that on the drive. I was like, it's always a little scary once I get off the highway. >> The Bridgewater Triangle. [laughter] >> You got to watch out. >> Such good work. >> Um, well, thank you folks for the record. My name is Taylor Perez. I'm joined by my colleague Robert Fro and Sean Hilton from Comprehensive and
Transportation Planning, respectively. We just wanted to give you folks an update on what's going on with the the rules and regulations review. And then we have some questions which is mostly why Rob and Sean are here to kind of speak to some of the you know design principles behind our questions and the transportation
um standards. So you know they can answer any questions but we'll just kind of walk through them. The updates to begin with is that we are going to work with your legal counsel to do a review um work with the town admin to get that going. Um we're finalizing a fee
schedule for the board's review uh comparing mostly neighboring communities and communities throughout the surf region, but there are some external ones. We didn't see anything like crazy. Um the only form that was I guess leaning higher than others was for ANRS.
>> Um but otherwise it wasn't like there was anything crazy standing out. >> Next things on our agenda to kind of start reviewing and incorporating is the time frames for review and getting those storm water um that stormwater langage incorporated. have been coordinating
with Sara and our environmental department who I know produced the bylaw for you folks. So Kathy forwarded me some questions. We're coordinating to make sure that they get incorporated correctly. >> All right. Um so starting with questions um unless anyone has questions about
>> anyone have questions? No. >> No. >> So I asked Kathy this I just wanted to clarify with you folks so I understand. I know that there are not many uses that you are a special permit granting authority for, but there are some. Correct. >> Correct.
>> Do you folks have existing rules and regulations for the approval of special permits? >> Uh, standalone rules and regulations, right? >> I not that I'm aware of. >> Okay. I I didn't see any either. Um, I was So, as a special perma granting
authority, typically there would be some sort of rules and regulations associated with the special permits. Um I I don't know if they're kind of like baked into the zoning board's um rules and regulations, but we just wanted to check on our end because there are communities who kind of bake that into their you
know >> the rules and regs and their totality. >> That would be that's something and actually you bring up an interesting question. So planning board is the PPA authority uh plan approval for the uh 40R
district. And although we haven't had a meeting, we're we are still supposed to meet and go and I believe there are rules and regs for that. >> Okay. >> Which I I think I've seen maybe looked at once. >> Um because it's
>> Yeah, it's all built out. Yeah. >> Um so I don't know if it's worth mentioning or incorporating any of that or taking a look at that. >> Sure, I can definitely take a look at it. Yeah, because I was I know Kathy directed me to some language in the
existing zoning bylaws particularly for I think it was the flood plane um permitting processes, but I know that the bylaws for other um uses that are specified have language something along the lines of the planning board will adopt rules and rags for the you know
approval of these special permits. So if it's something that doesn't exist elsewhere, we can definitely inoration of something like that. >> Yeah. Not that I'm aware of. >> Okay. I'll do a little extra digging. Um probably just jump on a call with Kathy at some point to confirm.
>> Yeah. >> And then we can look into what that would take. >> All right. Sounds good. So starting with some questions as we were kind of working through um particularly the design standards and
you know focusing on the things that came up in all of the different waiverss that you folks typically give out. Um the first one I have here is about public versus private roads. And so when I was talking with Rob, we were and Sean as well, we were trying to understand
exactly what is make or break for the town to accept a road versus, you know, it remaining private in perpetuity. So for example, are there, you know, certain road specifications that DPW would need or the fire department would need for, you know, plowing, utility
maintenance, safety, etc. So what are those? I think when I had spoken with Frank, the DPW director about it, um he had mentioned how we should have the peer review at every step of the way so
that we're ensuring that the roads are being built, you know, as as they should be. >> Um which would obviously be a little more costly than if it's a private road and maybe not having as many >> points of
>> points of review. Exactly. Um, and obviously the record tracking for that so that he'd be able to look at it and and ensure that everything was done properly. >> Okay. >> So, I think it was more of just making sure that it's done per the specs. >> Okay.
>> Um, at that time so that it's not, oh, now we have a road, we have no um record of anything and they're trying to go to town meeting for acceptance, >> right? And no one's inspected or whatever the date [snorts] kind of the issue,
>> right? Yeah. Okay. Um, so do you have any questions on that? Does that make sense? >> Yeah. So, we can um >> I guess the one would you want something in the way of a sort of checklist of requirements or you think it would be more ad hoc because of things like
topography or >> like how much can you bake into >> Yeah, I would love to see a checklist and maybe I'll, you know, have uh DBW director look at it and see if that works for him. You can loop him in in that portion of it. Right. Because I think it would be, you know, when we
were discussing again the idea is like, you know, giving them as much as possible, I suppose, to even potentially limit the necessary inspections along the way or the review along the way so that you know it's understood from jump at [snorts] the bare minimum. Exactly. >> We need to do X, Y, and Z. >> Yes, absolutely.
>> Cool. >> Yeah. So, if if we could coordinate with DPW somehow to again like fully understand exactly what make or break items are, that way those are very clearly specified and then a review process um some language about that >> because the goal here right is just to
not have the town receiving a road that's ownorous to maintain >> more than is necessary right I mean that would basically >> right I mean the town is very it's it's >> very adamant against adopting more roads so like they just want to make sure that
everything's been done and it's in place and all everything that was supposed to be has been done >> lots of private roads and Yeah, >> as you can see with the waiverss requested, there's so many um that that
are typically requested for the private roads and oh well, it's going to be remain in perpetuity private. So that's why we're thinking >> allowing lesser standards for the private versus anything going for acceptance. >> It's understandable and it seems to me
that certainly the scale of what's around the road, a full subdivision would warrant sort of level scrutiny that splitting into two or something like that. I share what's in your driveway or something. >> Understand that. >> Great.
>> Okay. I don't think I have any additional questions about that beyond again just like coordinating with DPW and um you know understanding some of those kind of bare minimum requirements and then getting into sidewalks. We discuss we had a good conversation about
that and I know when we last talked we were talking about requiring sidewalks for all subdivisions and the applicant essentially prove hardship otherwise. So you know no exemptions without um you know again substantial proof. >> We talked about this I guess in the
context of like the purpose of the sidewalk and the connectivity um and there were some other options that we wanted to put before you folks. For example, requiring sidewalks only for subdivisions of a certain size whether that's based on the number of lots or units within it. Um or requiring
sidewalks for subdivisions that connect either to a numbered roadway or two to a road with like an existing sidewalk. So you're actually like connecting to a grid and not just like installing a sidewalk that goes nowhere. >> That's kind of been the excuse. Well, there's [clears throat] no existing.
However, our master plan talks about walkability and creating that connectivity. And even though like Sub Route 79 >> has been pushed out and pushed out, but we're supposed to get sidewalks over there. And I know um >> I know it it is a desire to have more
sidewalks throughout town. I don't really want to be able to use that excuse of well there's no existing sidewalk. >> I see. >> Then why should we provide a sidewalk when we also um don't know what the future holds for certain roads in town?
Well, maybe they will be expanded. Maybe they will be >> added the sidewalks eventually. So now all the subdivisions don't have sidewalks and if they add them in the future. >> Um because so master plan implementation committ we of them. Um, one member, she
had said, you know, she was very surprised that we were allowing the wave of both sidewalks rather than just one. >> Right. >> So, I could see, you know, that being an allowance for a accepted road, it has to have the sidewalks on both sides. But if
it's going to be private, then maybe allow, like you said, show show hardship for why you can't provide the sidewalk. >> That makes sense to me. >> Yeah. Is that >> I would agree with that.
>> Yeah. I mean, you can expect that that many of these roads are going to be expanded over the years. like Rhode Island for instance, >> it's going to have sidewalks put in >> and you've got subdivisions down there that I don't think have sidewalks
>> that connect that connect to >> and even so even in the area of the schools like I know there's children that walk to schools and there's no sidewalks over there and now we just we've been putting in subdivisions over there so eventually I'm sure people are going to want to see sidewalks over
there and now we have subdivisions without sidewalks in the you know, close to the schools, too. >> Right. >> Okay. Yeah. So, I have accepted road like to be accepted, it has to have sidewalks on both sides, but if it's going to be private in perpetuity, you
could you would allow a waiver of up to one of the two sidewalks, you know, on one side of the street, right? >> But nothing more. >> Okay, cool. >> Would we want to say no? Never. >> Yeah. Would you I guess would you be willing to wave the requirement for
>> I could understand some hypothetical where again like the grading or some sight constraint is so tight in the subdivision so minor that it may not be relevant um to have the walkability there again
like these situations that I I think come up in communities like Lakeville where the the road is really >> kind of a driveway >> would it be de facto sort of disallowing splitting of lots if they're required to
put infrastructure but then I understand your ambition to make sure that >> so that's where I think >> um to prove the hardship or or some there should be a caveat that where >> right >> it doesn't make sense to require that >> because right
>> and I guess the question here too is it like when you are requesting the waiver will the allowance of again the potential waiver for both sides is that something that you folks are comfortable again with proof of hardship.
>> Yeah, I think Yeah, I think we definitely would want to allow that. Yeah. >> Great. >> Yeah. >> Cool. Um, another thing that came up that I don't know it was specifically discussed, but we were looking at we spent a lot of time looking at the site plan um, associated with the example
subdivision that Kathy sent and um, we talked about the curbi and noting the minimum for 30 ft and we're just curious if you folks were interested in either lowering that requirement or maybe setting requirements based on the use
case, the the type of road, etc. >> Yeah. visibility or what because I I feel like it doesn't matter as much if you have a if you still have a good sight line, >> right, >> than um >> Yeah, >> definitely more of a
per project. That's what I would I would >> Yeah. kind of how many houses does the private road serve, >> right? >> I mean serves only two for instance. >> Well, It's just sort of the the angle of
the road coming to the road that's existing. So >> be a case by case basis. >> Yeah, >> the 30 minimum >> I would defer to Sean a little bit on this given that but it's sort of uh not not an outrageous number to me uh for a
curb cut, >> but it is a little vehicular centric. The wider the curb cut, the faster car can kind of come in and out of there. Um, tighter curve cuts are associated generally with more, if you think of like crossing the street, you can hit more of a
>> something close to a 90 degree angle on your crosswalk or whatever, it's a little more pedestrianentric. It kind of holds that corner. >> Um, but I'd say that's the trade-off is and and also of course like loading and unloading for large trucks and whatever, the >> bigger the vehicle
>> like the radius on the different >> larger the number. Yeah. >> Garbage trucks and True. And actually, so the thing is we don't have town pickup, so residents are typically responsible for their own trash. So we do have >> Okay.
>> Um, you know, dumpster a lot of dumpster rentals. Not everybody has um the weekly pickup. >> So that is something to consider, I guess. >> Right. >> So I guess we would defer to whatever you recommend. >> Sure. I don't know how you feel. I think
the the not having consideration for a limitless high end of a radius could introduce maybe maybe just having some guideline there talking about >> right >> just something to help make that decision because >> not having on the high end you could
have some scenario where someone recommends a ridiculously large >> radius on a curb cut that just maybe doesn't meet the goals of that site that was more I think >> yeah that's where we were getting into different use cases perhaps like a neighborhood street
>> do you want Uh, for instance, a 10 foot uh would probably be better suited in a neighborhood setting, whereas a 30 foot might be good for a commercial driveway or perhaps even larger. So, we could we could break it into different use cases if that would be more useful.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Because like to David's point, you know, it depends on [snorts] how many homes you have, >> right? >> Yeah. It it's one of those things where it really kind of depends on the specific circumstance and that gets to be very difficult to try to >> codify,
>> right? >> So, you know, you're you're >> I mean, I hate to make language in in regulations that somewhat ambiguous, >> right? >> But, uh sometimes maybe that's the best
>> approach that you >> Yeah. that you let them know that that were looking at it and considering it and uh to see or something by case we could review it. >> Yeah, because I know the the site plan
>> that we looked at was um I think the the waiver was like what it was 10 or something and then there was a much steeper one on the other side. But we we talked so much about like you were saying like the sideline like oh like you know you actually make the turn in it's not going to be as extreme. So not
removing the possibility for that to be considered but maybe better codifying the range of options and expectations particularly I think um in the you know with the goals of like having sidewalk networks and whatnot
like if you're expecting >> sidewalks to connect to numbered roads or roads with you know existing sidewalks and then eventually looking at like crossings and whatnot again like not having that you know curving into the the crosswalk itself can
>> matter. I mean you you just used a word that would be [snorts] I mean almost central to this and it was expectations >> and you know our expectations are to achieve a certain >> kind of a certain goal or a certain
>> set of standards without establishing the specific standards because you can't. >> Right. >> Cool. Great. Okay. We have some nice um visuals too that I think we could potentially incorporate in there. Um >> so that makes sense.
>> Yeah. >> You want to swap back so you can be recorded. I'm talking about plantings. >> Yeah. So um Rob is a landscape architect by trade. Um so of course I was like please talk to me about plantings. Um I know last
time we talked we were talking about um one the street just like as a common waiver >> and also the types of plantings you folks were looking for. I did try and find the existing list of native plantings that it sounds like the open space
>> they have one I couldn't find. >> Yeah, if you can point it, you know, send it my way or something. Um, but we can also I mean it's up to you folks if you want to have a list or if you have >> there are others many lists, you know, statewide or
whatever. >> What list? >> I'm gonna just text I know Mike Schroeder had had the list, but she's no longer with us. Um Liz, I don't think she's on Open Space anymore either, but she might have it that at least I can if she can forward it to me,
I can forward it to you guys. >> Okay, sure. >> Um because they're I mean these two women are just they they know they're species. They know they're natives. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> Um >> and we have so many different types of
scenarios for native plantings. I mean, whether it be for uh you know property lines um you know coverings that kind of thing or uh for streets that
>> yeah and I know one of the issues so we like the street trees for that sort of the um the aesthetic and you know the screening but then when they're planted along the road it can cause issues with the road so that's commonly
why we allow them to w the trees. I think with this example that you saw, we allowed them, >> you actually I'm not sure if you saw, but we allowed them to just place two trees per lot. Okay. >> Um, so if there's something else that we could use for,
>> you know, the aesthetic for the screening that makes sense. >> Um, if you've seen something else that another town does that works. >> Yeah. and and something you know some of the other commercial uh properties that we've recently approved and so forth. I
mean, we've had to figure out different ways of, you know, whether they abut, you know, residential area or whatnot. You know, what is the most nice aesthetic, what grows fast, but is deer resistant. You know, there's so many different, >> you know, variables, but to make it look
good, too, so that it's a nice happy medium between the residents and the and the uh business owner. >> Yeah. If I might ask, too, so I I heard a couple potential applications. One is sort of row of trees lining a street
>> that you're driving along and then the other is screening the budding property. So it' be helpful to have just some kind of recommendations for these various situations. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. Yeah. in lie of maybe something that says like in lie of street trees um
you know or maybe because I don't know if we want to get rid of it alto together or if it's something that we want to have you know >> as a supplement >> as like options maybe these are accepted >> um alternatives >> species that can be used
>> yeah the species definitely because we've seen you know the deer can just do it >> yeah on the arborites [clears throat] I think the the one the great whatever arborite that we've been referring to because it not only grows fast but it
gets you know fairly heavy cover but it also >> resistant maintenance. >> Yeah. trees around the along the sidewalks are usually like over by a hill or >> 40 ft apart there to help screen out
some of the sun because there's no other trees >> sound that kind of weather to screen the sound screen up the sun >> we have too but they're there for
privacy but along the to provide. >> Yeah, >> totally. Yeah. Uh I apologize. I'm not familiar with with this uh part of your bylaw or anything, but do you have any recommendations or requirements for fencing in situations
or is this something you'd be interested in? >> Not in subdivision. >> Okay. >> I don't know if it's like a budding. >> I guess if if someone was coming to a subdivision, then they would probably be responsible. >> Yeah. When it's like a business residential district.
>> Yeah, >> something like that requires this the additional buffer and screening, >> right? >> You see a lot of that plastic >> fancy. >> That's what I was wondering. >> Everywhere and it blocks out. We had it put over because it blocks out the
noise. We have a sewage treatment system that blocks that may come from that noise, >> right? >> Believe it or not. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, our existing B to allow for fencing >> so I just have notes here um a list of
those plantings coming through and then um addressing one screening preferences for plantings um and then providing some alternatives you know in lie of street trees which I guess you and I can game out what some
of those alternatives could >> absolutely We'll probably, you know, show some images, recommendations, >> pick the ones you like and >> Right. >> Rale each one, >> right? Perfect.
>> I mean, ju just from from experience and I don't know if something we we want to think about or put in there is is uh you regarding tree replacement. >> Yeah. Um, yeah. >> I mean, I'm thinking of of one example
here uh along the uh Crooked Lane where the solar farm is. >> That's a big deal in town. These trees died and they were never replaced and they're still there and it's an eyesore and it's >> and they're dead and it's a fire hazard.
So, >> yeah, something like that. >> There were spruces like Christmas trees and There was 45 or 50 of them >> and majority have died. Some matured, some did not.
>> But those were screening of a solar farm. So it's not >> right. So it's like 10 trees and the solar. >> I drove by on the way here. Yeah. Yeah. Notice. Yeah. Yeah. >> Um, may I ask how long they they've lived or if you have like a requirement like because you know trees usually come with like a warranty and I didn't know
if there's a and a lot of times in the landscape architect side of things you'll have to have a year or two of uh >> right written into the conditions and we it's definitely something that was picked up on after this >> occurrence but unfortunately I I don't
believe there was anything in it was but prior to myself on this on planet board so it's going back a little ways. Part of my question is how long can you >> run that out for? you know, can you >> like what they were, >> you know, do it for perpetuity or, you
know, >> I mean, and and you know, on the >> personal experience side of things, I remember cities in the Midwest where Dutch elm disease took out all >> the elms and >> I remember getting cut out of my grandmother's
>> boulevard area and they put a lynen in to to replace it. >> And that was so long ago that that tree is very big now, too, >> right? But >> but at least that was city property and we're dealing with you know private property locations. >> But if a tree is
>> required in the regulations there ought to be some semblance of a way of enforcing its >> perpetuity. Certainly I mean to speak abstractly I suppose um there's like establishment period
where like any planting I think needs more irrigation than it's going to need for the rest of it life cycle and it roots are more robust. >> Yeah. So at that point, >> the Crooked Lane example was very very dry summer when that was I think it was 2016
somewhere around there. 2015 when those were planted and they just they did irrigate them, but it they just the conditions weren't favorable. So >> that makes sense. Yeah. So I mean then there's sort of the liability between the owner and the person they purchased
the trees from, you know, during that establishment period. put the the onus on on them and not the town at least at that point I think to have >> unless there's >> service involved unless there's a longare service involved >> or or I mean but it wouldn't be yeah >> right well the good thing is
>> then figured out if you're requiring for that establishment period I guess what I would say >> and typically so we'll have an HOA agreement that the town council will review so um maybe that that's something that um if the rules and rags >> can pick up on that that we can maybe
mirror it in the conditions. Make sure that the HOA is aware that you know to maintain or replace any >> and beyond that. >> Oh, sorry. >> No, no, go ahead. >> I was going to say at that point you're getting into sort of maintenance agreements, I suppose, which could they
could go on for a long time, but it it sort of I guess depends what you all feel is like a reason. >> Yeah. I mean, we do the same thing with storm water and and you know, storm water uh uh infrastructure >> and landscape. I would think you'd kind
of handle it the same way. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. I remember seeing a note about that. Um that you folks like do look for the the maintaining of existing plantings. Um I and forgive me I didn't like look closely.
Is that stipulated right now within it? I mean I can check >> that I don't I can't tell you off the top of my head. I'm not sure. >> Yeah. Because if not, we can definitely put like, you know, an operation
maintenance like statement in there like we do. >> We put it in zoning, right? All the time, >> right? >> It would just be like a similar statement. Um, >> yeah. Yeah. So, okay. >> Confirming the maintenance, uh, confirming the replacement.
>> I think we usually write five years in for maintenance if I'm thinking. I'm trying to recall. >> And so, that would be >> and that gives it enough time to establish. I was going to say that's long enough. >> One to two years I think is usually >> healthy. >> And that's like if you buy from a nursery the warranty on like even a
perennial I think is usually like a year that growing season. >> I don't remember if it's more or less depends but >> anything beyond one or two years the plant should really start to feel established on their own. So five would be
>> I mean that sounds good to me. >> Seems reasonable. >> Yeah. We'll cross reference to with others just to um ensure but five feels reasonable to me. >> Yeah. Then then the other part of replacement too I didn't know if you were uh thinking along these lines too
is if somebody wipes out a tree right away are they required to replace it in kind or I'm sorry I'm not familiar with that either. >> I'm not sure. I don't >> I don't believe it's in there. >> No. No. >> Is that would that be a priority for the
town to cover all bases. >> No, this is so this is for subdivisions. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah, because I I mean that is true like on the extreme end like Cambridge and stuff they they do have protected species even fully in people's
private properties and things like that like Palo Alto and California where like big old oak trees and stuff but then again it gets into the sort of >> oh California is such a different beast especially private property rights and you know what your bundle of rights are as a property owner so that's on the on
the like the far end of it you can go very very far probably further than I would think but >> it's beautiful out there. >> Yeah. So it totally depends on I think people collectively agree is like fair meets the priorities of the town. >> Yeah. >> Understand there's you know infinite
tradeoffs >> right and I don't want to create something that's a hard hardship for an owner but just something that maintains what they're >> right >> required to put in you know >> for um >> right >> for initial for the initial subdivision
I think. >> Okay. >> Okay great. Um, lighting was the last one. Uh, we're going to incorporate the language about the driveway lanterns. I was just curious if one like there's any sort of
specific design preferences you have >> um regarding that even >> so just the language I think so we do have the dark sky bylaw. So it's just the >> downfacing um >> I don't think there's
lumens but You know, it does talk about light trespass and >> um yeah, just the direction and not to be shining on the body properties. Right. >> Again, that kind of you end up with
different circumstances in different locations and and uh kind of telegraphing our our intentions or our desires >> uh without being too specific
perspective. Right. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I didn't know there was anything beyond just the kind of reference to the lighting bylaw and that that is an alternative is to provide driveway lanterns, but we can do that. >> Um, >> is there any aesthetic kind of concerns you guys have? >> Right. That's kind of what I was
alluding to. >> We haven't required any. >> We have in the in the past and >> I mean it would be nice to, but you I don't think you >> Yeah. >> Right. Right. Right.
>> Um I mean, I've seen the concrete pillars and I've seen the metal and >> um I think this Have you seen wooden ones even? I'm not sure. >> Uh no, I can't think of anything offh hand
like that, but I I do, you know, some are built into, you know, the stone facade, that kind of thing. >> Um granite posts, >> right? >> That kind of thing. I haven't seen anything specifically. >> It gets tough. It gets tough because you
know if you have a good special district where it's feels like a downtown can create an aesthetic but townwide I think it's >> Yeah, we don't >> it's tough. >> We don't even Yeah, we don't even have like a specific historic district even though I think they are working on >> towards trying to have this area
designated but >> right here. [laughter] >> Yeah. So, >> okay, cool. So we can just keep that language pretty general and again just like address it as an alternative um option, but we don't have to provide any sort of like aesthetic references necessarily. >> Um and one day in the future if you
wanted to, you can always put something like that in there. >> Um and so the last question I had for you folks regarding the design standards was, you know, we talked about some diagrams that we would we think could be helpful. You know, for example, the the
curb radi um you know, the planting options alternatives to street trees, but we were curious if there were any other um diagrams or visual aids that you think, you know, would be helpful in
the process. >> Not sure. I mean, I I I think what would be helpful is what some of the area towns are doing. Um >> that that would be a good benchmark to look at. Um, you know, >> what were you going to say, Jack?
>> Sorry. >> Is any of that already in our design exterior design? >> So, no. So, because we only have the design standards for the commercial buildings. This is for residential. So, >> [snorts] >> um, we don't really have design standards for that.
>> But as far as layout, um, I mean, I keep thinking of like the OSRD that we're >> looking at as well. I know they have specific sort of layouts or examples, but I can't think of anything where we would have a standard subdivision look
aside from these specific items that you're mentioning, the trees, the radi. I think I think those are >> Yeah. >> I think there'd be a lot of push back. >> Yeah. >> Because so one of the common allowances
we have um the the Cape Cop arm as opposed to the >> right sure >> the vertical curve or whatever. >> Yeah. Granite. Um, >> so I guess maybe just some, you know,
these are allowed maybe diagrams of what's allowed. >> Sure. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Um, >> do we have anything about the subdivision name? Not so much the street name, but like I think of like Leberon Hills says the cottages on the outside.
I mean, of the entrance. I don't know if that's anything not to be required, but suggested for Yeah, >> I don't even know if that's even >> I feel like it would be redundant with
our sign by one, but I don't know. No, because that's obviously commercial versus >> if you think >> Yeah. I mean, I don't know if you want to get into that at all. Other than if somebody does
something that's kind of obviously >> Yeah. >> Do you Right. >> Right. >> Have you seen anything like that where they have like the signs? Because I know what he's talking about. Everyone in town that I've seen, they look nice. They're done. I think it's typically like rock or >> Yeah. With some sort
>> off the ground. >> Yeah. >> The entrance of a >> development. sometimes like you'll um I don't know if you folks have a specific signage bylaw that's like >> we do have a sign bylaw but it's for commercial um
>> as opposed to like a residential subdivision sign I don't think there's any mention of that in there >> like Learon for some of their and I use them as because it's the most relevant community that's recently come up I mean
there there is some um I I think for most of the entrances like there's the cottages >> that's low that's only about four feet of house >> there's the residences up front is 8 ft
>> well yeah I mean the one coming in from from >> you know on Learon >> it's probably still you know only three feet off the ground to the bottom of it because it's got a stone wall in front of it >> you have the settlement >> but it's pretty good size
>> estates all feeling low. Most of them go around different >> developments. All the signs are mainly >> 10 ft >> probably. >> And I'd like to go back to this the light.
>> Should we control or limit the amount of lumens so it's not too bright for the guy next to his? So, I think I think with that light trespass that should be because as long as it's not shining on your neighbor's property and your neighbor's window while they're trying
to sleep, I think that's the goal. Um, which it should be covered with that dark sky night compliant. I think reference unless you think there should be additional >> my sorry >> just um point of clarification because
I'm seeing things in the town code that reference lighting >> y >> um are those things that we would use to guide it talks about lumens >> oh it does talk about the lumens >> so okay >> just for my own understanding of how
things work would those be bylaws because in the code it does say this bylaw. >> Correct. Yes. >> So that would that could potentially guide. >> So you're probably that the the dark sky compl
is here. But then I also see another one 180 section 180-2 light trespass. It defines all things >> findings and purpose. So from my understanding as a someone who was new, >> is that where we would find the language
to inform >> for for the subdivisions, too? >> Yes. >> I I think they could reference our bylaws. Yeah. >> In there to to mirror it. >> I would feel a lot more comfortable doing that than relying on my own knowledge of like lumens or something
like that. Um >> I find it Even as someone who's done a lot of lighting plan, it's very technical and hard to understand, >> you know, the spread of a light and how it filters out around it periphery versus the height of thing. It gets very
um technical in a way that I >> Right. And we just ask for the PL like for the site plan. We look at the plan that they show us and make sure there's nothing outside of it and >> Right. >> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Beyond that, I wouldn't even know much, you know. >> Yeah. and and you know lumens is the is the measure of of how much light is
emitted by a by a fixture but not necessarily how much gets outside. >> Um you know you can I mean as an example you could put a high lumen fixture uh in a enclosure that's got tinted glass on
it and it's not admit ad emitting as much. Yeah, you're almost better doing quick candle measurements, but I'm not going to argue with, you know, >> well, I think as long as we have something that references existing B stays in line with that, it should be
>> I I assume it should be good as long as they're, you know, staying in line with what exists. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> And I don't know how specific those are because you just mentioned something that might be a little bit more specific, right? >> Yes. These are more general maybe. I
don't know. We could certainly take a look at it and and we'll we'll see to what extent we can kind of interpret what it's trying to get at with this discussion of lumens or just general discussion of dark sky. Um but we understand or to confirm we
understand the intent to be to not shine light >> property disrupt uh the dark sky or disrupt the neighbors enjoyment of their correct property >> while still providing a bit of light for emergency services and being able to see
where you're going. So the only other last minutes I had was I mean I'm just more summarizing here was looking at the signage bylaw because again it rep it's for commercial but um I didn't see anything beyond street signs in the reg so maybe some language around that for residential
subdivisions. >> So to summarize everything just for tonight um speaking with the DPW director about that kind of peer review process for roads intended to be accepted and establishing some kind of like bare minimum requirements to understand from
jump if you intend to have the you know town accept this road you need to have x y and z. >> Um the requirement for sidewalks in all subdivisions with the applicant needing to prove hardship to remove sidewalks. Um a diagram for the curb radi
discussing you know kind of potential use cases and expectations. some language about plantings particularly alternatives to street trees. Uh screening preferences, the you know requirements for replacing
uh the you know lost trees um as well as maintenance ensuring that that is you know adequately addressed referencing the lighting bylaw and again providing an alternative for driveway lanterns as long as they're D compliant etc. And
then um you know additional visual aids we can provide that um visually describe what's allowed within the regulations. Um the example I have was the uh the BMS and whatnot. And then again that signage point that I was just making
>> street signage take control by the fire department those green >> it's so um I believe it's also state that does uh some road signs but then DP T D T D T D T D T D T D T D T D T D T DW does other
signs. >> Yeah, it says that they're the ones setting the standards the road I think that's all I have beyond um you know anything else that you folks can think of between now and when we meet next. I obviously have kind of our uh next steps beyond what we've already
discussed again those review time frames. Uh providing you the kind of example of the fees across different communities um checking in about the special permit granting authority rules and rags. Um taking a look at you know the 40R for example and then u
confirming with Kathy that those you know truly don't exist and that they're not referenced in like the zoning boards rags um or elsewhere >> and then again I'll let you folks know if I have any additional questions on the storm water bylaw um okay said Sara should be you know she's always very
helpful so I'm sure that she'll kind of you know get things in line but I've seen it in others where it's referenced pretty clearly so >> yeah and there were two sections right >> that council basically said these shouldn't be in the storm water this should be in rolls. Okay. So,
>> that's all I have. Um I anticipate that, you know, with the holidays coming up, we'll probably meet again in the new year. Um perhaps, you know, late January or so. Uh if that works for folks, I can obviously coordinate at that time probably in December to get on the
agenda. Um but you know where I am if you have questions. Anything else in your room that you want clarification? >> No, thank you very much for your time. >> Appreciate you folks coming out the presentation. Great. >> Of course. Anytime. >> Yeah. So maybe January 22nd around the
end for um an anticipated return on January 22nd. >> I'll just make sure we don't have anything on our calendar confirm with Kathy. All right, >> at least work for now. >> Good. Appreciate all your help with
this. >> Pleasure. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. >> All right. Agenda item number four, ANR plan 27 Reservoir of Derek Maxi Madigan Land Serveying LLC. How are you?
>> Hello folks. >> Welcome back. >> We do have your application and the plan. We did add the um the existing septic and water existing in there. Um
and if you did you want to >> Oh, sorry. Yeah, I was looking at the plan myself. No, I I'm here today to uh request the planner board hopefully to approve my ANR for lot one and lot two reservoir F. Uh there is an existing
house there that belonged to the beach family that I purchased it uh because prior to me purchasing it, they actually own the 17th grain and I've been paying rent all the taxes and everything for the last what 10 years or whatever. So I thought it would be best to purchase
that and in hinds uh also in hindsight I was able to develop one extra lot farm and I think that was pretty much it. >> So so for myself I was curious and confused because I had never seen water included in the land area. So, I did
reach out to council just for that um piece of it. And she said that um you know, as long as you have the frontage, um it doesn't need to say that it's not considered a buildable law because you do have the verbiage here that says no
determination as to compliance with the zoning bylaw. Um so, that's fine because I didn't know if it had to say anything in there additionally >> to address that. Okay. >> Yeah. Um, and she said that it's up to uh zoning enforcement officer. Um, and
also I was confused because I know we have the plan for the Lakeville Country Club. >> Yes. >> So, it shows on the plan easement area, but it also so it showed that this was going to be part of the golf course. It says I think the fifth hole
>> uh the 17th green 18th hole 18th fairway 17th green >> but so so in the future plans shown for the proposal from Thornike. Yes, they have it. I think it's a fifth hole. Fifth or sixth. >> Ah in here. >> Yeah, I'm not 100% sure.
And I think they're moving forward which is good. Good. Yeah. Yeah, the fifth grain is shown in like the same area. >> Well, yeah, the fifth green and the and the six six teeth, >> but so I guess that's going
it's not in >> we haven't we haven't got that far with them to get on what's going to happen there. Uh my understanding what they'd like to do is a nine-hole golf course with housing in the middle >> and trying to keep all the other holes, but we haven't formalized that yet and I
think uh probably in the next few probably by the end of the year we'll have that all formalized and hopefully they'll be in front of you guys with their plan. >> Very good. >> Yeah. I just I just want to make sure that there's you make sure that when you're talking about >> what they need for an overlay for zoning
doesn't contradict that you're trying to do over here. So, just just so it's clear when we go to town meetings, we there's no, >> you know, the last thing we we need is something that jeopardizes it. >> Yeah. And uh these these two lots I
don't anticipate selling to him anyways. So, this will not be part of his plan when you do get the final plan. >> Okay. All right. Then, um did anyone else have any questions, comments? All right. Would someone like to make a
motion to approve this ANR? >> I make a motion to approve the ANR plan for 27 Reservoir. A >> second. >> Motion and a second. All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you guys. You're welcome. Have a
good holiday. Yes, you as well. Coming up quick. Oh yeah, >> it is. All right. Agenda item number five, storm water management bylaw review and update possible vote. So we do have in our packet um a copy of
the storm water bylaw. >> Um Kathy did go through it and I did make I wanted to compare to the last one that we had reviewed. I know she need some changes and I know uh Taylor just mentioned that um she's working with Kathy because a couple of the things
that we had said Kathy, you know, please ask Serpent for some advice on a couple for guidance on a couple questions that we had. Um I did notice on page five, section four, um it looks like when
Mr. Corvo reviewed it. He moved C from section four up to section three. So, it's actually repeated. So, I think it needs to be deleted >> in section four. Yeah, because it's >> um word for word the same. >> Okay.
>> Up above. Um other than that, she had addressed a couple of the other questions. And then, oh, the numbering. I did notice that. So the seven and the eight were the ones that should be removed and put into the rules and regs, but those are still in here, but the
numbering was done. >> So it's it does show the seven, eight, nine, 10. >> Yep. >> So anybody else have any questions, comments on the storm water? I think with just those couple edits to
to remove the sections as noted by council and then remove the the redundant um section. I think that's all that I saw. I think everything else we've already thoroughly gone through. Um that's all I'm seeing for edits and
um I think Kathy's passed them this on. I had asked her to send it to conservation. Make sure they I know NY's aware of it. she was going to get it on one of their agendas. >> Um I said, you know, send it off to Slideboard, Bo Health, whoever else um may be interested in seeing it.
>> Is there a timeline of when this needs to be buttoned up? >> So, I think as soon as we have >> any comments back, >> we can let Andrew know. >> Okay. >> For the placeholder for spring town meeting. So, that should be in March. So, we we have time. >> So, that's good. >> Yeah.
>> I think >> we say that now. >> I know. Don't like else, you know. >> All right. >> Yeah, >> sounds good. >> So, just my >> So, we don't need to take a vote or anything, right?
>> Um >> because it's ongoing. >> Do we want to take a vote just to make those minor edits and send it around? >> Yeah. So, um I make a motion that um we
app with the um with the recommendation that uh the um legal council edits are um taken into account as well as deleting uh one of the extra paragraphs uh section >> section 4 C
>> section 4 C >> motion and a second all in favor >> I motion carries I'm sure Kathy will watch this if not I will talk to her about it anyway Nice. Agenda item number six, we
have zoning bylaw discussion. In our packets, we have mixed use. >> So, I thought this was fun. I don't know if anybody else finds this fun, but um so Kathy was did some great research. Um
get down to it here. Gosh. So, we have the town of Dartmouth, we have the town of Marshfield, we have the town of Medfield, we have Winchester. And then we have Cape Cod Commission, mixed use model bylaw and
accompany accompanying guide. >> Um, she even broke it down so far as, you know, the population, median household income, as well as a square mile of the town for comparison. >> I thought these examples were really good. Um, and I like different things
from each one. Um, so >> so which one stood out to you? Um >> I don't so so this this was my thought. So in the very back of the keep card mixeduse model bylaw company guide
inside here in all these documents at the very end is actually a model bylaw which I thought was very handy. Um
So this model bylaw, it breaks it down. It lets you see the purpose, the definitions, and I feel as though we could use this model bylaw, take the parts that we like, >> yeah, >> and incorporate them. So if we like this purpose, use it as this purpose. So for
me, I liked >> the Dartmouth um purposes and how it has the allowed uses. I really liked how um it talks about in here. So
um a business apartment is defined as a residential unit available for use by one family which is located in a building being used for business purposes such as but not limited to retail, office, recreational, restaurant or limited production uses. One business
apartment is automatically allowed by right per lot. Up to two additional apartments are allowed by right up to three total per lot so long as the total square footage of all apartment housing shall not exceed the total square footage of all business uses on the lot. So I feel like this sort of addresses
where our mixed use says you can use it for business purposes or you can use it for they have the 55 plus housing and we've seen where there's just 55 house 55 plus complexes with no um no business
no retail anything. So, this creates a more of a mixeduse scenario where you have the business, but in order to put residential, you have to have the same square footage for the business. And it gives and it even gives some reasoning in here. The purpose of a business apartment is to
encourage small businesses and to provide convenient and affordable housing for individuals connected to the business, >> i.e. individuals who own or employed by the business if rented to others. The business apartment could help subsidize business space to make the business more affordable for starter businesses.
Business apartments can also help reduce commuter traffic if used by employers, employees of the business. So, I thought that was really good um to have right in the bylaw because it breaks down this is the benefit to having the apartment. A
small business can now you got your business space and now >> you've got some income from an apartment. And you said how many apartments? >> So that's where so it said up to three with no more than three. But we could also we don't have to go word for word.
We could do one is by right and then two is special permit but have you know a special permit from planning board >> right? >> You know planning board need be a special authority for that potentially. >> I think it depends on the really the size of the lot and you know the the
size of the development that you're that you're talking about. But in some ways, I mean, it's it's I mean, it's kind kind of kind of cool in in in one way of thought because I, you know, I remember >> uh when you convenience store with gas
pumps out front with >> the people living >> in back in the same building, but you know, >> it's a lot like uh Fall River, New Bedford. >> I think of Heartley's Pies. The business is down. Seriously, the business is downstairs at the storefront and the
original family still lives upstairs. >> Yeah. >> But even in Middleboro, they have it. >> Middleboro, they've done it. >> They have apartments above >> their was something that was much more prevalent once upon a time >> and and you know, the the good the good locations >> got bought up by places like Cumberland
Farms and such. And >> so the only thing is so I actually they have gas stations as a allowed item and I thought that that to me was a no because you don't want to I wouldn't want to have >> gas station >> and um and and I mean it's a special
permit too and we're not the granting authority for that. So I wouldn't want to get into the gas station so much. And then it also has wireless communication sites. I wouldn't want to get get into any of that. We have a separate bylaw section for that. Um, so I would I would take some of this out
>> um and then like even so but we can you know obviously we want to include the height architectural appearances of the buildings um from Dartmouth. I thought that um the uses this was very
uh interesting that um they have fees. They break down the fees. >> Yep. >> They break down the review process. Um the design standards, they break that all down. I like um >> that so I thought maybe taking pieces of
Dartmouth, taking pieces of Marshfield and then from Medfield they had a lot of definitions. These two were lacking definitions. So then we have Medfield. It breaks down all of the definitions of these items that you're looking at. Obviously, we wouldn't have some of them
that would >> anything that we wouldn't have in our bylaw, we wouldn't need to define, but >> So this was the state hospital in Medfield >> that some of their >> redevelopment. Yep. The state hospital district. Um
>> yeah, they're still still kind of struggling with that as how they they actually do it. At least the arts group. >> Yes, >> the arts. Yeah, I remember you >> their thing because I I went to their >> Yeah. >> their lunch. >> So now an interesting thing about this
is they actually have different um breakdowns of the green, the cottage, the core campus, and they have different allowable items uh depending on which And to me, I was thinking if we do a mixed use, where are we looking to put
it? Do we have a a Route 18 district? Do we have a route 105? Is that something that we start with like a small section and then it could potentially expand if you know in the future? Is that is that something to consider that maybe we should have multiple districts for the
mil mixed use? Because so right now I know our 40R does have the mo the different breakdown within 40R the smart growth. So we could could even look at that >> tie into economic development. So >> that's so I think we definitely need
feedback. We need resident input, but I would like to get a rough draft to have something to put forth >> and then go from there and maybe build on and what do people like, what do people not like. >> We can see the the one place too where they've done some something new was
Norfick and to the to the north of downtown they put in a what looks like a condominium building, condominium [clears throat] development, but there are a lot of business business in there too. >> So that's similar to what they're doing
right now in Quinzy and and some of the outlying areas where they are putting businesses downstairs and then upstairs >> they've got apartments and >> I mean I don't want people to get skied here. No, but >> we're not talking highrise. We're
talking, you know, 35 35 foot max that we still want to keep within our >> our current regulations so it's not looking out of place. It's just literally given business as another option. >> Um [snorts]
>> some parts from Winchester um just like they have conflicting provisions. So if there's something that conflicts with any other section uh within this specific district, that's what governs um administration. So who
handles it? >> The boundaries. We definitely want to figure out where the boundaries are. And once again, maybe we could even um do some imagery >> diagrams. >> Yeah. And tables. I think wherever we
can break down information that's like >> right um like the tables here >> written. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Wherever we can do that for people to digest is good >> visually. >> Yeah.
>> So this will be a work in progress. >> Yeah. >> Essentially. So even it it shows how you're measuring the height too. So like there's not a question of how do you measure the height of the building and you're going for the midsection of so keeps it very straightforward. So
there's no all your ambiguity is answered. >> Yeah. Because I've had arguments with building inspectors over that before. >> Oh yeah. >> That building inspector though the though the well the zoning ordinance says maximum height 35 ft
>> from grade, >> right? >> And but he measures it to the peak >> and the building code says 35 ft and it measures it to half the height of a gable roof. >> Yep. Yeah. >> And I could never get him to to to take
the zoning definition and and apply it to the building code >> or sorry, the other way around. I could never get him to take the building code definition and get them to apply it to the zoning ordinance. So, I'm happy to see that in there.
>> So, another item I put a yes to is the connected parking lots. I feel like that's something we need more of, too. Instead of all these little >> egress, there's more chance for a connected parking lot. Um, and maybe we have to look at lot coverage with that. I'm not sure, but maybe an allowance for if
there's an ability to create a connected parking lot. Well, yeah. You know, th those are things where you kind of look look to the to to the future, what's next door, >> and making the site plan provide for a
connection to something that may happen next door, >> right? >> You know, >> yeah, >> I mean, kind of >> or behind >> the hospital property where we have the uh u the
What is it? 19 Main Street. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And and uh are they using the same entrance or they're building their own separate entrance? >> Separate. Yep. >> You know, so we end up with two, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Entrance is right there across from Bridge Street. >> Right. Right.
>> Where have the traffic problem? >> So once again, in the Cape Cod examples, there's some visual diagrams where it shows. Now, these are just these aren't just mixed use showing the upstairs as the apartments. It's actually showing accessory buildings behind. So, that's
what I would one of the things I'd like feedback from. Do residents are they interested in upstairs apartments? Are they interested in accessory building behind screened? Anything like like what is the preference? I think is what I'd want to see. One of the things I'd like
to hear back from residents um in relation to the mixed use proposal, >> where do where would ADUs fallen? Because we're using like accessory apartments, accessory buildings, but then we also have the ADU piece, would that fit into a mixeduse?
>> So, it depends. So, if we write this mixeduse bylaw to only allow X, Y, and Z. Okay. >> So, and if it if it has to be an apartment above a business with business space, then that's how it would have to be. But if it says that the um accessory
apartment can be a separate building behind, then that's where yeah, that would be an ADU. It would be an accessory dwelling unit to the business, but we'd be looking to still I think the purpose would be not just allow residential. We're looking to encourage
business growth. So it would be similar to like the language that I read from that first one. >> Okay. No more not to exceed whatever the business square footage is. >> Yeah, that was from Dartmouth, I think. Yeah. Okay. >> How far how far down Main Street does our business zone extend
right now? >> I mean, we got >> I'd have to look at the map. I know it's >> I mean, we got the Star Market and a couple of things across the street from it that seems to end >> there. It's Yeah, I'm not sure exactly without looking at the map.
>> Yeah. Okay. you know, I I'll look at it. But, uh, you know, you're you're kind of I I I guess, you know, my my initial impression is that, you know, from start back you
apply this this zoning. >> So, so that's another thing like I think we need feedback, you know, because we're not going to reszone anybody's property if they don't want to reszone it. So, we'd need to get feedback. >> Yeah. I mean, I did residents where do they want to see this um at the very
minimum because right now our only our existing mixed use is only at the hospital site. So you're talking business but this is mixed use. So the >> No. Yeah. No, I understand. Yeah. I was talking kind of where is our our business because that's where you're
going to uh where you're going to most successfully to be able to do mixed use, >> right? If Yeah. As long as people are, you know, in favor and think that this is a good thing. And yes, I remember, you know, during during my campaign for for this position that I said something
to about, you know, that business was going to kind of fill in or or creep down to to kind of where the star was. >> And there was one residential >> there's there are a number of residential houses
>> use there and and I got a a note, you can't do this in my neighborhood. Sure. And it was kind of wait a minute now just you know progress is marching on and uh >> but so anything like this would have to be done through a town meeting vote two3
two-thirds majority so we want it to be something that you know I'm not going to advocate for anything that people aren't in favor of. >> Oh yeah no but so I mean it could start at the hospital site you know we could just remove and replace you know but that's the thing is do we have the
multiple zones where we say this mix the mixuse a here. And I think from what town council had said about the smart growth, it had to be connected. So that's where we'd want to consider where do we want it to start, where do we want it to end, and
is there a potential for expansion in the future? Maybe if people So say if people aren't in favor of it right away, >> at least you have a zone where maybe you can start something here and if it goes well, the potential to like you said,
maybe then look at a further business. I mean I you know the obvious site that that you think about is the uh the bowling alley site >> right yeah >> so that already is zone business in the front I think it's residential in the back >> yeah but that would be a a perfect
>> mixeduse local I would you know at least in my opinion >> you know that if you could find a developer that that got the property and was kind of in that direction. >> Yeah,
>> that would be a >> So, I mean that's that's a way down the road. Y we're I think we'd have to come up with a draft that we are comfortable with, get some feedback from residents. Donna, you look like you had a question. >> Yeah. No, we do currently have mixed use.
>> We do zones. >> So, yeah. So, it'd be that's a horrible I'm not a fan of it. I think we we did try to remove it just last year. uh it did fail. I think I'm not sure the argument was made
properly at town meeting because it was said well you know if we do away with it the uh people were concerned that one because the hospital uh projects had just been um had just been submitted so they knew that we were doing it so they
absolutely got it in under the under the time frame so that that was already grandfathered in but then I think they were saying they didn't want to see more residential, but it's already 60 ft back of business zone
there. >> Okay. >> But so if we take instead of doing just a full removal, if we have a remove and replace, maybe it would be more um palatable. >> Yeah. Aren't they aren't the apartments next to CVS, you know, the ones without the
elevators? Isn't that a mixeduse >> zone? and you know for for whatever they've >> got for business usage in there. I don't know if they >> No, they so that's just the 55 plus. So that's what I'm saying. So we even though it's a mixed use zone, it was
kind of like under our allowed uses and mixed juice, you could do any of these items and it's like you didn't have to combine >> combine them. Yeah. And that and that's Yeah, that's really kind of the key to it. It just says, you know, you can have, you know, multiple buildings on the same
lot. That's why we have 19 Main Street with a different configuration. They can have the principal, you know, multiple principal uses. Um, and then there's also the accessory uses allowed too. So, I think we just need a
better option >> and I think this these are some great examples that Kathy >> what we need to do. >> Um, At this point, I I would like to see a draft, like I said, put together from
portions from all of these using this model bylaw. So just use this as sort of the template and fit in the purpose that we like from one of them, the definitions from another
>> um and and make sure that it's covering each item application. >> Um the use regulations, principal structures,
use regulation, setback structures, development intensity, uh, dimensional regulations, lot size, lot coverage, all the things that we'd want to see in here. It's covering >> uh the frontage,
ground floor active space, ground floor height, upper height. So, I mean, it's it's pretty in depth. >> Pretty. Yeah. Yeah. >> That's great. >> That's the Cape Cod one. >> Yeah. So, this is at the very end. >> Clean. >> Yeah. >> Um, the the Cape Cod one. I mean, it's a
thick packet, but there's not a lot of information on each page, though, either. It's It It has definitions. It's got history. It's got quotations. It's It's I don't think we need to go that indepth. >> Yeah. >> Can I get a copy of all of that from >> This was in our packet. Yeah.
>> Oh, well, okay. I didn't >> I'm looking at the wrong packet then. >> Oh, really? >> I'm looking at the the one the last one that Kathy sent. >> Oh, yeah. This is for the six that was canceled. >> Okay. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. All right. So, we'll continue.
>> Yep. Um, if we want to take a vote to have Kathy start working on a draft if in her if she has some time between now because we don't really have >> we So, we have this meeting and then we have just the one meeting in December.
So, she may have some time stretch. >> Yeah, because this is something we probably want to bring to spring. No, I don't think we'll I think I think in spring we'll be gathering information. That's what I would see because I'd want to do an event where we're bringing
people in and talking to them. >> Do they still have a part-time town planner? Are they working on >> Yeah, just like specific projects assignments, >> but I think this is something that's enough like Kathy could probably >> she can do this >> pull these pieces together. >> Kathy could do this.
>> Well, we'll see what we can ask her if she can because she's she can she can work on some um items that fall under planner >> in the >> for Yeah. in the >> sounds good. >> Yeah. So, would we like to take a vote
to start a draft of this >> using the example that she provided? >> Um I make a motion that [clears throat] we um start putting together the uh revised
zoning bylaw for um mixed use um using some of the samples that was provided. >> Second motion and a second. All in favor? >> I motion carries.
Um the next thing use chart. This is just one of those things that I feel like we should look at. It hasn't I don't think it's been done in a while. Um, one more thing that I think we need
resident feedback for. What do you want to see in town? What's not included? What should be included? What um what are we missing? And maybe we should do the same thing and compare it to what other towns because obviously we saw in here these the different allowed uses
under mixed use. Maybe we can compare what other towns have for business, industrial, residential uses. >> Yeah, because ours might be different than what others may have on that list. So, one of the things that had come up
um going back a few years now was um because we have adult bookstore in here and it's just you know only allowed by special permit um in the industrial zone and at one point um I think our like the
prior planner to prior to our more recent one had suggested that if you don't >> allow it somewhere like like you have to allow it somewhere kind adult entertainment district. >> So, yeah,
>> Lakeville's premier uh business. >> Every time every time a new business opens, what is it? It's a strip club. It's a taco. [laughter] The same two things every time. >> Um, yeah. So, I' I' I'd like to look at
this and get feedback on this. Maybe it's something we can work on concurrently with mixed use. >> This is I think less of a lift if we can compare it to some towns, get some feedback. Do you want this in? Do you want this out? Where do you want to see it? Residential, business, industrial
>> a presentation those areas and yeah, I think we should definitely um look at that. Is there any So, we don't have anything like a use table yet part of our zoning. >> This is our use. >> So, that is our use table. Okay.
And we would add mixed use a column for mixed use or is that lumped into business? Trying to understand how >> well you're actually kind of creating a fourth category. >> Yeah. So, well, with mixed use, if we
have the uses specific to mixed use and in the BA, maybe we could create a column for that, but I guess it depends on because these are just the underlying zones. That would be an overlay. So, maybe not because it would be an overlay.
>> Thanks. I'm trying to >> No problem. But I mean, yeah, it's a good question. I mean, it's definitely something something to think of and consider. I mean, if we like like I said, if we come up with a use chart for the mixed use, >> I don't see why we couldn't just add it
>> because because you're already, you know, established or or voiced opinion on a couple things, gas stations and such that wouldn't go into mixed use. >> Or maybe it's just, you know, for mixeduse uses C and then reference where it is. Something like that. Again, you
know, if if because we're talking about something that, you know, could potentially you know, change in the future as opposed to what we have now. >> So, we might have to add in
senior. >> So, that's an overlay, too. So, that woulden So, that's going to be its own zoning bylaw language, you know. >> So, I don't know if we do need to add each of the overlays >> because we're also we're potentially
going to have an OSRD potentially. So, >> just a few things. >> Going to have to change it to landscape, not portrait. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> Well, okay. So, anybody questions, comments on this?
I'd say try to look through other towns like Kathy did gathering for the mixed use. Um, >> what do you want us to do? >> I'd like to see. So if you want to compare it to other towns, what they have for use charts, if there's ones
that you like for examples, we can review them, go through them, see what we like. And and then we need like an information session, whether it's a public hearing, whether maybe we do like a weekend here at the library and get try to get people to come out and share
their opinion on mixed use and use table, what they want to see. I don't know. Do we do it at the same time or is that too confusing? Do we do it separately? >> Um, I think for cleaning up a number of
things and and and you know, writing mixed use and such, probably ought to do it as kind of one comprehensive project >> because you probably want to introduce this all at the same
Then the other question becomes if you make it too complicated does it can you get it through town meeting? >> Right. Exactly. That's why we need outreach and input so it's not just >> but it also I think hinges on if we can get a planner in here when and then you
know what does it look like going forward because right now it's a slow winter >> which we haven't had in a couple years and it it could pick up. weekend resc how many questions would you ask? How
many different pieces of town you want to speak to this should they know obviously would have to go in advance to let them know what this is all >> I think it would have to be done as a
survey you know and maybe we'd have the paper surve and would have a QR code and have a maybe electronic survey. >> Do you you know and and probably group it by residential uses. Do you how do you feel about these residential uses? How do you feel about business uses?
Where would you want to see these? Do you want to see them in you know you can have do you want to see it in residential business industrial only in this one >> or not? Because that's how it's laid out. >> But once again maybe um also
see what economic development committee is doing too if there's anything that could coincide there. >> Yeah. >> So, we go to this item. >> Yeah. All right. Um, next item on the
agenda number seven, approve the October 9th and October 23rd meeting minutes. Has everyone had a chance to review these minutes? >> Yes, I had no changes. >> Actually, do we have Um the only thing I had was on October 9th
page one where the second paragraph under um review storm water management bylaw just it says marker for spring maybe add town meeting. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. To be clarify it. >> Yeah.
>> Um That's the only edit I had done to Would someone like to make a motion to approve those? Would that one edit for the October 9th? >> Yeah. Um I make a motion to approve the uh meeting minutes for Thursday, October
9th, 2025 with uh the change to the second paragraph for storm water management bylaw. Um, and can I do both at the same time? >> Yeah. >> And um, also the Thursday, October 23rd,
2025 meeting minutes approval as well. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I. Motion carries. Are approved. Uh, number eight, administrative update, possible votes.
Five, Harding Street. Does she have anything? I'm trying to remember what street is. >> That is >> doing >> right. >> What's that? >> Is it >> I I keep getting these two confused
because they're both going forward right now. >> 10 is across from Monkeyy's I believe. across from. So that's So this is the one. >> This is the bond >> that that's >> this is the one next to the pet food place. So this is the one that peer
review I did sign the peer review um >> charges. So I know that they were moving forward with that development. >> Y >> and then ten Harding I believe the the bond form was finally satisfied. So,
that one should be moving forward, too. Um, the next one is Lakeville Country Club update. We do have in our packet. Um, we have the facts, the FAQs. >> Great. >> Um, and as well as the original map that
they presented and then the revised master plan as of November 3rd. Now, these two items are found on the select board website. They do have a Lakeville Country Club um >> link >> link that you can click into. >> I saw that get posted.
>> Yep. So, that's great. Um a couple were worth noting items, they did reduce. So, it says that um in response to community feedback, all fourstory buildings have been eliminated from the redesign. Um, also David, I know you're excited
about um the examining the road alignment to add visual variety. >> Yep. >> Um, were there any other questions that were major that you thought were answered here?
>> I had a couple. Sure. Can they do do they have projections of current developments that they've done? And what's the percentage of town towns people that actually move into
>> because they have a lot of developments that they've already done and somewhat completed and I'm just curious about the percentage of town people that actually move into the developments, >> right? Yeah, that's definitely something we can ask. >> Yeah, >> I didn't see it included in the answers
though, but I know they are working on getting some facts and figures to I was going to That's kind of the next item on the agenda. If we did can combine the the two. Um, >> is that a question maybe you could ask and just say planning board had asked about
>> Well, we did kind of. Okay. We had we've had two meetings, >> right? But no, so like Donna was was asking about um the demographics as to how many uh existing residents have moved into the other um >> developments. Yeah. Well, one of the
meetings dealt with the the physical fiscal impact of of the development >> and included in that would be, you know, where the uh you know, where where the the residents would be coming from. >> It was okay.
>> And all because because part of the fiscal impact is how many houses become available, right? >> Because you're >> kind of recycling, >> right, >> uh housing to other people, >> right? To free it up for other,
>> you know, because you know, though it's an over 55 development and there is no impact on the schools, >> there is because the people who move in, >> right, >> bring children with them >> if they are residents from the town
currently. >> Correct. >> That are moving from their home in town. >> And that and that's part of that fiscal impact is >> interesting. So that'll be interesting to see. that data. >> So, so you know, we had some discussion about that and that does, you know,
follow with how many people move from from somewhere else in town into this >> and their house becomes available and now all of a sudden you've got three kids that moved into that house because they were, you know, the people who moved out were seniors whose kids had grown, right?
So, you know, so the the idea that that uh a 55 development doesn't create any impact on the schools is is not entirely true. >> Um because of that u uh you know so so
going on from there you know we had a a meeting they they've hired a consultant uh from New Hampshire. His name is escaped me. I have it in my notes somewhere, but uh he's going to go through kind of all those bits and
pieces along with uh taking into account that we have other >> uh major developments, the hospital site and such >> that will be adding population >> and and you know, how does that impact
>> the the the town fiscally, >> right? >> You know, do we uh you know, how many more uh ambulance runs, >> right? >> Do we end up with? How many more police runs? Uh >> uh other, you know, just even other
governmental services, you know, h how much uh uh does the as a for instance the assessor uh does do they have to hire more people because now they have more properties that they're >> that they're trying to uh
>> assess assess? Yeah. All good questions to have answered and ready ready for people to ask. >> We know those questions are going to be asked, >> right? So So that first meeting uh with that consultant was just kind [clears throat] of going through all the bits and pieces that we
wanted to see >> and and and as you as you said, you know, how many how many people move from Lakeville into this and uh uh because there are other impacts
>> so >> that that go along with that meeting. >> Does that bring in school kids right >> into the recycled recycled house? The other meeting was a was a a legal
uh primarily legal orientation oriented meeting. Uh and uh the the the probably the the thing the clearest message that got transmitted to Thorn Dyke is that we
didn't want to do their zoning as a floating zone. That that had been a problem in this town once before, >> right? >> So that's where it's not specifically noted where it exists. So that
>> so so what what h happened with the hospital property originally? Do the development opportunities district that was never tied to a certain area. >> When the resident groups appealed that, it went through two sets of appeal court
judges and they all said that this was a floating district because it was never tied down to a specific area. So that's what So this is going to have to specifically outline the area of the Lake Country Club. >> Right. Right. That was that was the the
main thing that came out of that out of that meeting is that uh in their drafting a proposed zoning change for this land that we did not want it as a as a floating zone. >> Right. And and the map will have to be
updated and it's going to have to be shown as an overlay on the map in the zoning. >> Right. Right. Yeah. So that that's those are the things that happened in those in those two meetings. was mostly getting those getting those processes started.
>> Yeah. And and they're having an understanding of kind of what our ground rule rules we're going to we're going to start out as. >> And what's the next meeting? Do you have another one? >> Uh we don't have another one exactly scheduled. They were they were talking about trying to do the legal meeting like every two weeks,
>> but kind of as needed. And uh it we we've we've been two weeks out and I think they uh they they just weren't ready to do another one. >> Okay. >> And just yet. >> Just for clarification, the legal meetings were representatives from
Thornike. >> Uh was was Thorn Dyke and and uh uh building commissioner uh Cape Select Board, me uh uh who's our >> KP Law. Yeah. >> Amy
>> Quessle was it was in that meeting. Okay. >> Good. Very good. So everybody's on the same page. Good. >> Right. Right. So So all all the the >> important people were >> there. Everybody was represented. Thank
you, David. >> Yes. Thank you. Any more questions on that? >> Um the next item is committee liaison updates. I think you just covered that for Lakeville Country Club. Anybody else have any? >> I have a very quick update. Uh the economic development committee met on
this past Monday. Um we discussed at length um the economic development survey for both uh residential as well as for business. Um we hashed out every single question. Uh we have come to a a
finalization of the questions which is great >> for both sections. Uh next step is going to be the marketing plan. uh and getting it out via um a survey generated um service called service uh survey monkey.
>> So that will be uh going out to residents in the very near future and um you know we're hoping to get some great feedback from both uh there'll be a lot of advertising for it, postings and whatnot so we can get um a lot of
feedback from the residents and businesses. All right. Anybody else? All right. Our next meeting will be December 11th, 2025 at the Lakeville Police Station. Any other business?
Hearing none. >> Uh December 11th. >> Okay. Yeah, that's right. >> Um >> Okay. >> Okay. Jack, good luck. Um If you can watch the me. Oh, David. So,
that is the continuation date for the special permit that we have. Kathy said you have to watch the first meeting and you have to get with the town clerk to Mullanize. >> Okay. >> Um, unfortunately, >> which special permit? >> 160 Bedford. Unfortunately, Donna is not
able to sit in for Jack for this because she was it was it happened prior to her coming on. Jack, for the meeting, if you can watch it and when you're able to mullize with um the town cler. Okay. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> That's good. >> Other than that, does anyone want to make a motion to adjurnn?
>> Make a motion to adjourn. 8:15 p.m. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I meeting is adjourned. >> Just under the