[music] Good evening. Welcome to the Thursday, June 25th, 2026 meeting of the Lakeville Planning Board. It is 6:30 p.m. and we are meeting this evening at the Lakeville Police Station at 323 Bedford Street. We have Lake Cam recording. Is anyone else recording?
Hearing none, we do have a quorum this evening. And jumping into agenda item number one, we have public hearing. Site plan review accessory dwelling unit ADU for 55 Longpoint Road continued to this evening. Upon the application for an ADU site plan review and approval submitted
by Derek Maxi for proposed 900 foot ADU above a garage possible vote. Welcome. >> How you doing? >> Fellow committee members. Uh board members. So I gave you the water result. finally got those back and unfortunately they the well guy didn't put them on the
expedited path I guess. So I just end up get I got the test rep a couple days ago but I just got the letter from uh the board of health today for the water test. >> Okay. So, the water test came back and um we I did get an email from the health
agent said we received a passing water analysis for 55 Long Point and we are waiting for the installer to sign the certificate of compliance and that's for the septic. >> So, um at this point if if nobody else has any further questions I think I
would suggest we could condition it. our our standard condition. Uh number two, it does um speak to all applicable requirements of Lakeville Board of Health, building department conservation, etc. um are hereby
incorporated as a reference and as a requirement of the approved decision. So I don't see why we can't um >> preliminary approval >> do do a >> condition >> approve with the uh standard conditions
[clears throat] as long as everyone's on board with that. >> All right. So would someone like to motion to um we can close the hearing and then um
>> issue. I make a motion to close the hearing for the site plan review accessory dwelling unit at 55 Long Point Road. >> Second. >> Motion and a second. All in favor? >> I I >> hearing's closed. And would someone like
to uh motion to approve with the standard set of conditions? Uh, I'll make a motion to approve the ADU uh on 55 Longpoint Road uh subject to
our standard uh conditions. >> All right, we have a motion. >> Second. >> And a second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> All right, >> that was good. Well, thank you guys very much and thanks for coming out and doing this for the community. We really appreciate it. >> No problem. Thanks, Eric. Have a good
night. >> You too. That was quick and easy, huh? Yeah. All right. Agenda item number two, ANR plan 92 Taton Street continue to this evening. Silva Engineering Associates possible vote. Uh we do we did receive
updated uh plans. Welcome. >> Welcome. Thank you, Rebecca. Silver Engineering uh 615 1615 Bedford Street Bridgewater. Um yeah, that one seems to have drawing been drawn out a little longer than needed to be, but that's our fault as well. Um, funny thing was Taton
kind of made it a little longer because they signed the wrong spot the first time. >> So, it's an interesting one where it's uh across the line and when we were starting to do the work and the due diligence of the land survey, we realized some of it was in Taton. So, you see the sliver that is for Taton. Um, we're trying to just take the parent
building outside of it so that they can get some equity in the land. Um, we made the revisions for uh showing the relocation of the sheds and we do have confirmation that they are on Taton water. Okay. So, I think that answers the questions from last time. >> If anyone else have any questions,
>> I just had a question about the signature um on the plan. >> Yes. Which signature? >> Planning board is there's only one member of >> Oh, Taton. >> Taon. They chose just to do one. >> Taunt. Okay. >> They voted just to do one. >> Yeah. So, you can vote because they
oopsed. So, the night of the meeting, they all signed it in the wrong spot. Uh, >> so when we went back with it corrected, they were like, "We don't have time for all of you. We just want to Gotcha." That's okay. [snorts] >> Thank you. >> This has been a fun one. This has been an interesting
>> Very good. Well, would someone like to um make a motion to approve? >> I make a motion to approve the ANR plan for 92 Taton Street. >> Second. >> Motion and a second. All in favor? I >> I >> that has been approved and we will sign
the plans this evening after the meeting. I will bring them in tomorrow to the planning office at 900 a.m. >> So someone can pick it up then. >> You can. Yep. You can have somebody. >> Will we get a call or we just assume it's there? >> Um I'm going to say it's going to be
there by 9:30 at the latest tomorrow. >> Okay. No worries. I just wanted to make sure. >> And [snorts] we'll um Oh, >> perfect. Thank you so much. >> Have that ready for you. All right. Thank you. >> Have a good one. You too. You want to hand those down? All right. Agenda item number three. Meet with Sarpid regarding
rules and regulations update. Welcome, Taylor. >> So nice to see you again. >> I think I'm on a streak. >> You are. >> It's four weeks, I think, or four meetings. [laughter] >> Eight weeks. >> And I didn't know if you were going to come because we didn't get the response from town council yet. >> Yeah. But I was like, I have some other
updates that I can provide. Um, so for the record, my name is Taylor Present from Sarpet here to discuss the rules and regulations update. I don't have um obviously questions from council yet. I did speak with Andrew. I spoke with him between last meeting
and now, so I think it was probably sometime last week. I gave him a call to confirm about the direct cost that we set aside for legal review, which was $2,000, just to make sure that all of that was fine. And um I know I don't think council has invoiced yet, but he was like they're aware of the budget and
it all sounded fine. So, we intend to leave a small surplus of probably closer to 2100 to account for, you know, if they take extra time for questions. >> Okay. >> Um, but that's really more just close out details. Um, but otherwise, I have
gone back in the meantime and clarified some of those questions we had from the late May meeting. Um, so I have a couple notes here. We talked about site plan review, major versus minor. And I'm sorry I know you guys don't have an updated fresh copy on you to see the changes, but figure we'll just talk through them.
>> Yeah, >> I did clarify in the table um that site plan review. So the reason it said major and minor is because I think it was if you had an edit to it, it was classified as that originally. So it just ended up transferring weird into
the table. So I just clarified that it was the base 10,000 plus the 500, you know, up to three acres. And then again my assumption was always that that's the max that you would charge for anything beyond 3 acres is charged at that max
fee. That makes sense. So it would be,5 to 2500 max for site plan review for three plus acres is how the fee would shake out. >> I can't even remember. It's been so many years [laughter] we discussed that change of a fee.
>> Yeah. Um but let's leave it at that for now and we can I can I can check back in um >> right >> minutes possibly. >> That sounds good. Um if you for some reason again this is I don't think the
fees are a large deal to change um you know you folks have probably somewhere in the minutes that comparison of fees across communities and whatnot. So if for some reason between now and June 30th or I mean really July 15th when we close out you
>> you know have second thoughts about the fee or whatever that's totally fine. We can update it. >> Okay. >> Um and so then what I did and again apologies you don't have it in front of you but what I I added a second line underneath it site plan review modification where it's that $500 fee if you come >> right
>> with a modification and per requested change is how it's written. 500 per requested change. So, that's kind of how it shook out. >> Um, I added the mailing fees into the table. I think that section, um, again,
it's hopefully on a similar page to what you folks have, but the other costs and expenses section covers it, but just for consistency sake, since we have inspection fees and engineering review fees in there, I was like, we'll just add it in there for consistency.
>> Perfect. So, that is in there as well. Um, I talked with transportation and environmental before we closed out just to make sure um all of the standard specification references have been updated to the most recent version. Um and it's clear that any new mass dot
revision to the standard specifications will supersede what is referenced here in the reg. So it's not like you have to go back and change it every time. Um some you know at some point those references to specific sections may become out of date but you know most of them actually really weren't. and they were referencing like the 19 I don't
know 60 something version or whatever. It was an older version and a lot of them were still the same. So I think you'll probably be fine. It's fairly future proof. >> So those are updated and then I did remove references to the standard cross-section figures which were in
there um because I consulted with Jackie Jones and transportation who you might know she works on a lot of bike and pet stuff but she's a civil engineer. She's great. And um we were chatting about those references and what they actually referenced because they're not in the newest edition of the standard
specifications and it's because mas dot switched to a context sensitive like roadway design. So there is no standard roadway design. It's based on the existing context. So it's no there's no figure to reference that was once a
thing in these older rags. it is no longer okay a reference. >> So you just took that out, >> right? >> Okay. >> Um and the only other kind of lingering thing I think with environmental that I wanted to talk with them about was whether or not in the drainage section
we should be using the 25 or the 50year storm. >> I talked with Alex who you know uh working on the OSRD and he said that 25 is just the industry standard so we're probably just best off >> leaving it as such. >> Okay. Um, and then we talked last time
about the tree warden and that question. The way I rephrased it was just for it to say uh DPW or its designate >> perfect review for trees and landscaping. I was like that's just going to be because it could one it could be a tree warden or it could be >> the director >> and I did look it up and it is our DPW
director. So yeah. >> So they probably have to designate >> right someone should they wish to. >> Those are the major edits on my end. Again, I I'm not anticipating that we're going to change anything that we're asking legal questions about. It's truly
again more for a deliverable for you folks to understand why some of those more detailed changes happen. >> Agreed. Yes. >> Um so my hope is that I can just pass along the answers to those questions to you folks whether it's in writing or I just talk to you again in July. Um and at that time I will also have the paper
copies. Um whether or not I deliver them here or I just drop them off at the planning office. >> Up to you folks. and probably depending on if I have a lot to talk about um to come back, but otherwise I think the close out will be easy peasy. We've got it'll be two weeks into July and voicing
is usually around the 15th for the um the grant program. So, >> I think all is well, but I just wanted to let folks know that those were some of the changes that got incorporated in the last couple weeks. Um >> and if anything major comes up with council's, you know, answers to those
questions, obviously I will let you know, but I'm not anticipating that. >> Okay. So just want to pop in. >> Great. Yeah. Um do we do does anyone have any questions on that? >> No. No >> questions. No. Okay. So, uh before you
leave, we do have the ADU bylaw on our administrative update agenda item. Did you want to share anything with that? >> I don't have anything major to report. Uh my colleague Caitlyn, who I'm going to be working with and who you have also met at a different point, who is she's currently working on the layout for rules and regulations. so that you have
again we talked about this nice like streamlined pretty >> um you know document and she also put together anou I just have to review it um so it's really on my desk and waiting for me but um we should be kicking off in July so >> and that'll go to Andrew once that's once you review it
>> yeah exactly and then I imagine what will happen is you know we'll deliver rules and rags kick this off get moving um we just finished up our you know request for qualifications for our own third party legal counsel as well so you know things are moving coming along and I think we'll be in good shape.
>> Excellent. >> Yeah. >> Sounds great. >> Great. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> All right. >> Of course. >> Thank you, Taylor. >> Well, so we may see you in two weeks. >> You may see me in two weeks. And if not, you will hear from me virtually and find
a nice stack of updated rules and regulations in your planning office. >> And then we'll see you in August, >> July 9th. >> Yeah. Next. July >> 9th. Right. >> Um >> Yeah. And if if you do bring them down
on a day that's not a Friday, anyone in town hall, whether it's a town clerk or um town administrator office should be able to take that for you. >> Okay. Awesome. >> That's all. >> All right. Great. I appreciate it. >> Maybe I'll see you in two weeks. And if not, it won't be that long. I'm sure it'll be a month and a half at best with
the >> Okay. All right. Very good. [laughter] >> We appreciate all the hard work you put in. Thank you. >> All right. Agenda item number four, discuss and possible vote regarding joint meeting with
economic development committee. Dian, this is on the agenda um per your request if you'd like to speak to it. >> Yeah, sure. So, uh, per our meeting the on June 15th, um, we had a collaborative
discussion about, um, how the economic development committee and the planning board can have some synergy and meet discussing some of our latest um, rules and regulations as well as um, you know, any anything from the economic
development side that may be common barriers. that we may be facing um as new businesses try to come in and so forth. So um the thought was to uh at a future meeting, I know we've got a pretty packed schedule for July, but
maybe August um to have a uh joint meeting with and an opportunity for this board to meet uh members of the economic development committee, but also um be available for, you know, any questions that uh may come up. Okay.
>> So, typically we try to forego the second meeting in August if we can. >> That's right. >> U, we do have a public hearing for July 9th. We're going to be um >> seeing uh a public hearing on the 9th and then the public hearing for that's a
a minor modification to an existing subdivision. And then we're going to have another um public hearing opening for the rules and regulations adoption on the following meeting. >> So
probably our first meeting in August would be a good >> Yeah. >> Um goal >> and be preferable to probably have it the joint meeting be part of this meeting. Yeah, that that probably >> because I don't recall when our next
meeting is. It will be in August, but um >> August 13th, it looks like. So, we can um tentatively throw that date out to EDC. I don't know if you want >> me to send an email or do you want to bring it back to us? >> Um I can bring it up to them. >> Okay.
>> And send them an email. >> All right. >> What's the public hearing for July 9th? >> Uh a minor modification to a subdivision. So, we'll see that. Um, anything else?
>> Nope. >> All right. So, do we want to take a vote on sending Dan to send an email over to EDC? Make a motion to have Dan send an email to EDC
to schedule a joint meeting with the planning board on 81326. Motion >> second. >> Second. All in favor? >> I >> I. >> And that motion carries. Thank you, Dan. Just copy me on that if you wouldn't
mind. >> Agenda item number five, approve May 14, 2026 meeting minutes. We do not have a set of minutes right now. Um Kathy is getting back into the office. She was in uh for a short time on Wednesday
evening. I met with her. She was possibly going in this evening. tomorrow morning definitely she's going to be there. Um town clerk needs something from for uh from the town meeting as well. [clears throat] >> So um
you know minutes are not going to be a priority and unless she has that time to get to it. Um so right now we don't have a fresh set of minutes in our packet. Agenda item number six, administrative update. Possible vote on any items
listed below. uh the storm water management bylaw update. Um nothing new on that. The open space residential development or the OSRD update, uh conservation commission, they did discuss it finally. Um Nancy said that she expects to send a
memo over sometime soon. I haven't seen it come through yet. As soon as I see it, I'll forward it on to everyone. Um, and I did ask her to send it on to Alexandra Bergstrom as well, who's been uh working on that.
>> Um, hopefully we can get all of the questions, comments, edits, uh, integrated into that well in time for um, town meeting in the fall. Um I think
on our next meeting we'll discuss um sending recommend uh placeholder recommend um requests over to the select board so that we can get these placeholders in place for what we're going to >> be bringing to fall. Um, I guess my
concern is if OSRD references a storm water bylaw that we don't have. >> Mhm. >> Because there's there's no enforcement piece for that, we may need to ask Alex to um have a standalone version.
>> So, I'm thinking that may be a request at this point if if you all agree. Yeah. >> Mhm. [clears throat] >> So, a standalone OSRD uh without uh relying on the passage of
a stormwater bylaw. >> Okay. And then maybe what we could do is anything that was included in OSRD that does rely on a stormwater bylaw, if and when we bring a storm water bylaw, those items could be a second um
article on a warrant that would make edits to the OSRD and incorporate them at that time. So an after the fact edit, >> okay, >> is something we could. So, if you're all on board, I can >> I'll email. >> I'll eventually have legal review, too,
right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, now that So, now that con we've gotten everybody's comments back. >> Yeah, we can move forward. Yeah. >> Good. >> Um, so are you >> I'm on board. >> You're on board. Do do we want to take a
vote to um ask Alex to separate out um Stonewater? Um >> you're just going to have them revise the
the the bylaw right right now the proposed bylaw. >> So I would just ask him to take them out. Don't delete them, but take them and maybe keep the reference section that they each anything that was referenced goes to. That way we could potentially integrated back in if and
when there's a storm water by in place. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, that works. >> Okay. So, just process-wise, if open space goes before the town in the fall, >> then we would have spring town meeting
to make any changes to integrate storm water bylaw if that comes along after the fall? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Or at any time that fi finally if is if it is ready to go.
>> Yeah. And the hope the hope is that they would both be ready by fall. >> I don't see storm water um >> moving forward at this point. Um Okay. Yeah. So, would someone like to motion to
allow me to send that email over to Alex to remove the um some more specific items and set them aside for possibly another town meeting. Okay, I make a motion to
uh have Alex u remove uh references to storm water management in the >> Yeah, >> any storm water dependent like if they're dependent on the bylaw. >> Yeah. Any Yeah. Any dependencies on
storm water management in the OSRD in the proposed OSRD. >> Great. Thank you. We have a motion. Second >> and a second. All in favor? >> I I >> All right. Thank you. And we'll send over that email to him. I'll let you
I'll let you all know. Clue you all in. Um consultant for Lakeville Hospital determination for brownfields. Um we did get a response back, an email from Andrew um in regards to the memos that
were sent over to the select board. Um I feel as though the response is a little bit congruent to the specific ask. Um but he did say that um in speaking with
Rhino Capital that they had um made claims that brownfields would be applicable for the hospital site. Uh there was no mention of uh whether it could be designated as super fun site or
not. Um but I did ask him is that possible to get in writing from Rhino because I mean them claiming it and having that determination in hand is two different things I think. >> So um yeah, we'll see if he can um get
anything in writing from them or not. Um to me this was more of like a standalone. It's not dependent on who owns it. it's for the property itself whether it's designated or not. And um
it just see it seems like people are very um shy of it becoming a town liability which is understandable but at the same time we did get we did get legal opinion um that a determination for eligibility
for brownfields or super fund would not uh trigger a liability to the town. So, I guess I'm I'm not quite sure. >> I have a question. It's it's more of a history item because it it was something
that passed through us uh kind of right after Dan and I joined the board. Um they had subdivided that property at some point. >> Okay. >> Hadn't they? Into a couple different lots.
>> Yeah, they have approved projects. Well, they have an approved project, but there was also >> a subdivision. Yeah. >> A subdivision that was that was done. And I was wondering if I mean I' I'd have to go digging through to see if I could figure out, you know, how the
subdivision worked, but I'm I'm wondering if uh the parcel that's close to Main Street, if it's a separate parcel, can that be handled outside of >> No. So there's there's a standing order
from D that that um that site was supposed to be cleaned up prior to any subdivision. So they can't >> Okay. >> They can't subdivide it without cleaning it up first. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. They've got to do a lot of site
work and earth removal and all that other stuff before they can get to that part. >> Right. I mean, in other discussions that I've had with people, they've they've wondered how how the state, you know, since this was a piece of state property, how the state has avoided any
liabilities for it >> by right by the sale and transfer of the ownership. So, but let's um let's keep this on um I'd like to keep it on our agenda going forward so we can keep an eye on it. Um
>> and just to clarify, Andrew reached out again to So, I had asked some follow-up questions, and one of my questions today was whether or not he's gotten it in writing. So, um Okay. >> I don't We'll see if he is able to get
that in writing or not. >> Okay. >> Very good. >> Yeah. All right. >> To be continued. >> Yes. I'll keep that on here. Um planning staff update. Uh we are continuing to uh interview for the planning clerk
position. There's another interview coming up this coming week. Um, we're hoping to make a determination some point next week as to >> very good >> that direction. Um, and we do have
Kathy. Um, she's able to work up to 15 hours a week. You know, obviously she's got a full-time job and her schedule, >> her personal schedule as well. So, um, good thing we have her to hopefully train whoever is brought in.
Um, the next item, ADU bylaw SERed, we did just touch on that with Taylor. And then Pinerest Village update. Um, that applicant is looking for a release of lots and I did let him know that Kathy will be in the office tomorrow.
So, hopefully he'll um, hear from her tomorrow. And our next meeting is going to be July 9th, 2026 here at the police station. Um, oh, the other thing, the joint meeting with the select board,
>> that I still have is to be determined because, um, so one of the items in the email response from me, Andrew, pertain to that request for a joint meeting in regards to legal country. Have you have you had any further meetings? >> No, they they they they keep cancing every week.
>> Okay. It's [snorts] it's uh it's been a regular have a list of emails. Cancel this meeting. Cancel this. And and they call it a bi-weekly meeting, but I get one every week. >> So So the the response that we had got
is that um after they have the or if and when I believe is how it was worded, the development agreement is finalized. um that then we would have a joint meeting after that, which it kind of
defeats the purpose because I think part of it was yeah, we were hoping to find out what's going on, where it stands. And then my follow-up question was um did they plan on finalizing the development agreement prior to having the zoning overlay language in place, >> which doesn't make much sense to me. Why
would you final how could you finalize the development agreement without knowing um the densities of the proposed zoning overlay? So, Andrew did respond and say that um council is going over the zoning bylaw language and that when
he has a draft that we'll see it, but so I'm not sure when that will be. >> I would hope that we would see it before it's agreed to. And yeah, you know, >> I did request, you know, I sent the request for the joint meeting.
>> Question. >> Yes, Sue, if I may. Why is it taking so long for this? This has gone on for how many months now? Eight months, nine months. >> How is it possibly taking this long? >> So, I think that was our hope with the
joint meeting. Um, >> because I mean, this was supposed to go in front of the town, was it last fall, >> spring? I mean, it just keeps on getting delayed, delayed, delayed, and none of the residents know what's going on.
There's been no communication about it. I mean, this isn't your fault. This is purely the select board's just not being transparent with the, you know, residents of what's going on here. You know, why is it taking so long? >> Yeah, I know they've had a number of
executive session um meetings. Um I haven't seen any draft of the decision. >> No, I mean, we're in the dark as much as everybody else is, >> right? But I mean, why is it taking this long? I mean, there might come a point in time when Thor Thornuk just says this
has gone on long enough, right? >> You know, >> Yeah. But I think it's it's it's on their side of things. And I don't think they have kind of nailed down what they want to do. >> Oh, no. They they were targeting they wanted >> Yeah. No, >> last spring was their target. But but
you know, when when >> you know when when we've seen plans and such, it's just been housing. But now there are other components and other things that are being discussed. >> So I think that's just part of the zoning that we need to have tied down because we know that it's an existing
business zone. So even with an overlay, they could still do those business >> use. I understand that. But >> so I don't know. I I >> wish that we could have gotten a a firm meeting date. you know, we had been
given a meeting date and then, you know, you would think that the planning board would be involved in all of this. >> It just seems odd. >> Yeah. >> Hopefully, we can um get a joint meeting sometime before things are finalized so
that those two pieces actually work together. Hope and I would assume town council is is ensuring that. I would expect. >> Right. Just seems like it's been dragged out a long time.
>> Right. It is. It definitely is. >> Yeah. >> I don't think it's being dragged out because of things on the town side. I think it's more on Thorn Dike side. >> Okay. >> I would be surprised that that would
surprise me. But >> I mean, I know a lot of residents are concerned about the 400 units, but I mean, in the grand scheme of things, 400 units is nothing. is if it's a 40B, you know, it's going to be triple size >> and there'll be no golf course at all. So, >> right.
>> Well, and I think having that business underlay, >> right, >> zone or existing zone is um >> Well, it gives them flexibility, too. >> Correct. >> Right. >> Well, okay. I'd like to I'd like to find out myself. >> Hopefully, we will hear at some point. Thank you, Sue.
>> Thank you. >> Um, so otherwise, we don't have a joint meeting date yet. Um, our next meeting is July 9th here at the police station. Any other
business? >> Oh, anything? All right. Hearing none. Would someone like to motion to adjurnn? >> I make a motion to adjourn at 7:03 p.m. >> Second. >> Motion and a second. All in favor? I I Meeting is adjourned.