##VIDEO ID:Rb1XZd4V6rM## [Music] good evening and welcome to the Tuesday November 26 2024 meeting of the Lakeville planning board it is 702 and we are meeting remotely we have Lake cam recording and streaming for us is anyone else recording this meeting no hearing none I will take that as a no and our first agenda item in accordance with the provisions Allowed by chapter 2 of the acts of 23 the November 26th 2024 public meeting of the planning board will be held remotely however to view this meeting in progress please go to facebook.com Lake cam you do not need a Facebook account to view the meeting this meeting will be recorded and available to be viewed at a later date at www. L.T agenda item number two is a public hearing for site plan review for 2 and four Bedford Street upon the application for site plan review and approval submitted by to embo LLC for proposed contractor Bay presented by Zenith Consulting Engineers discuss decision possible vote so this um public hearing had been closed at our last meeting and we are here this evening uh to make a determination and and decision on this uh we were provided some advice from Town Council um Amy did you want to speak to those options sure so so um so again Amy qule Town Council as I stated um at your at the last meeting before we before the meeting was closed the board um the board has two options here um the way that we see the bylaw the bylaw is written in 270 D um 6.7g uh it states you know it it controls architectural standards and it states the following architectural requirements shall apply to all structures so um these are requirements you know they're they're not guidelines they're not suggestions they are there is the word word requirement plus there's the sh um so you know th those need to be adhered to now um the plan the plans that I think are the most recent set of plans were the which were the plans that we saw two weeks ago um did not um you know in in my opinion did not comply with the architectural St requirements now that is of course up to the board to determine if they comply with the standards or not um and so you know in my opinion this board now is is faced with two options the first option is um that you know this uh the site plan review could be denied because these requirements are not um met or this board can condition the project on meeting the requirements and I did give you um you know we we laid out a few conditions that might um that might suffice for that now um I do want to you know I I want to remind the board that this is a this is site plan this is an as ofri right use that's subject to site plan so the use is Allowed no matter what this board is allowing the use so if there is a denial um that denial will specifically state that the use is allowed however it's being Deni you know the the the site plan has to be denied because the requirements of site plan are not being met or in the alternative the the decision will state that the use is allowed however in order to meet the the requirements of the bylaw the following conditions are being imposed so so that's that's where we're at so you guys as a board need to decide how you want to move forward and then once you do we have you know we have further options for you okay thank you Amy um I'd like to just um go around and let each of the planning board members um speak to uh what they would like to uh go forward with can we start with Dan certainly uh Dan wilgo um so we've been discussing this project now for several months um I've looked at um all the materials that attorney qule has sent on over some recommendations um you know this board has been back and forth uh with the developers um about these um conditions that we have uh I as a board member don't feel that um we should be making special exceptions to the rule from our current bylaws and our standards design standards that we have um in place uh because again we would have to you know make conditions you know and exceptions for everybody else I I think by following the guidelines and and um being more than accommodating um as a board over the last several months um you know we've given um these folks more than enough time to work with the board um the public has also spoken um with regards to this but um in my mind um you know I I feel we need to uh stick to uh the rules and regulations of which we already have in place so so we have the two options we have approved with some conditions that we would condition regarding the architectural elements or a denial so are you leaning towards denial or approve with conditions um unless the conditions that they come back with are in alignment with uh what we want to do for the front face of the building did you read what Amy sent to us I did yes okay so the those conditions were were built into it and she gave advice as to as to um you know whether she saw them uh fitting or not so did you did you think those conditions would work or would you rather an outright denial um at this point right now um it is a uh denial for me okay um Jack okay do you have a chance to review um what Amy had over to us do you have opinion yes and maybe I don't fully understand what Amy has written but let me just let me just say this we have we put together these exterior design criteria and I think it's a disservice to us to you who was one of the main uh champions of this into the town to say okay we're going to give someone we're going to give someone a pass I mean so unless Amy or you need to clarify better for me I don't want to make if we say Okay under these conditions so then Along Comes somebody else and somebody else so we're going to make changes every conditions every time down the road I I guess my question is is that in our best interest or in the town's best interest and if if it isn't then I side with Dan no he they knew what the design criteria were it's not like they knew it last week and if they didn't want to comply with it they should have told us upfront and now they don't see that I got a sense from the last meeting they didn't really seem to be too enthusiastic about doing that so my point is it I mean if if if we if we think that strongly about design C interor then it all stick to our guns and say no okay so so Jack just so or I'm sorry Mr Lynch just so we're all the um the results you know hopefully would be the same meaning that either this will be denied and um you know they they could they could appeal it it could go to court um you know as you could see from my um from the email that was sent uh we have we have had this issue in the past go to court and the court has upheld that the requirements were valid um you know or they could say okay we'll redesign the project we'll come back with a compliant project or you guys could actually you know do the work and condition it and I understand what you're saying Mr Lynch you're saying basically that you are and I agree with you 100% the planning board should not be designing projects that that you should never be designing projects um with this being a site plan for an approve for an allowed use I'm a little bit I'm a little bit okay with bending my normal rule which is the site the planning board should never you know should never design a project I'm okay because this is site plan for an approved use that if you guys want to issue conditions to make it in compliance I'm okay with that but again it is it is up to the board I understand you know I understand Dan's position I you know I understand the fact that yeah you guys did you you went through this you put in these requirements they should be followed thank you Amy um dve did you want to speak to um what you're leaning towards yeah I'm I'm I'm leaning more towards an outright denile um uh you one one of the things that they've claimed is that uh you know they'll they'll take us to court but at the same time they've been claiming well they don't have the money to do the project more in in in tune in tune with the way we would like to have it done and it's kind of well if you have to spend on lawyers you certainly have money on to spend doing the project the right way um you know so I I I look at that as being kind of a factious argument um and I I I think we ought to I think we ought to you know kind of stand up stand stand behind the the zoning ordinance as it's written and and uh and turn them down okay and now um Amy do you have a um do you see a stronger argument um for denial or for condition or do you think it's about the same it's it's about the same I think that the um I think a stronger argument would be conditioning it um and then having them appeal those conditions because the conditions would but but again I think it's the same because our decision will um will clearly State the fact that the planning board pointed out numerous times that this is not in compliance with you know with the regulation or with the bylaw and the requirements of the bylaw etc etc so um it's about 51 to 49 if that Math Makes yeah that math is right so um yeah I I think I think we've kind of made some good points as far as um you know we don't want to set a precedent by allowing anything that goes against our recently um improved site plan review which Incorporated those architectural standards um and I I guess it's a good point about you know creating the conditions that they have to adhere to rather than letting them potentially reapply with some other um design um I guess I was I was leaning more towards approval with conditions because I felt like that was like from a legal standpoint it was um in my opinion a um very I don't I don't know what how to put it but it was it was very lenient I guess because um it was allowing them to just address the front um Road facing side um even though you know we do have you know existing residential use on one side and then another um another Street on the other side of it um so really just about every side of the of those buildings will be viewed um yeah even with the screening with the trees uh it will take take a number of years for those 4ot trees to grow tall enough to properly screen these buildings especially with the amount of um you know the height of them yeah the height of the buildings as well as as how they're bringing in the F too can I speak to that issue okay go ahead and finish I want to talk to the Tre so I guess I mean am a question what yep go ahead no no finish I want you to finish well my next step would be to take a vat um because I I think I I lean with you you all if I could just say something about the treats I don't know if any of you have been over to learon Hills country club though in our street they we had them put in all new Evergreens down by the sewage waste treatment center and these are Big Trees and it's all they they cost a lot of money some of these trees are $5,000 trees and they're fully grown so they're available now my question is are these people willing to pay that kind of money I would venture to say no so that's one is I mean my Amy if I may say Council if if if we do it I am not opposed to the conditions my point is that if this gets around so okay so now I come along I want conditions too and I want conditions I mean and I don't I'm not being trying to be disrespectful to anybody is that what we want to [Music] do no I understand I understand your concern I do um and host see if I it'll let me stream it Jose we can hear you are we having an issue Jo Jose oh okay um so I understand I no I I I I definitely understand your concern concern I do um and you know again um not if you think it's best thing to do with the conditions if you think it's the best thing to do with the conditions as long as the rest of the world says okay then I'm going to do the same thing if you think it's the right thing to do you you know there's better than way than I do so if that's what you want to do I'd go with the conditions other than that no so I can tell you that the Salsbury um that I won um based on you know pretty much you know a very similar fact pattern that was a um that was an you know that was site plan approval with conditions and they appealed the conditions and the Court held that the conditions were reasonable um so you know and then they had to go back and redesign their project so um yeah I guess you know a a an approval with conditions is is better but I do I I've got to say do understand your concern I understand the fact that you're now you're thinking well what's the next guy going to do because the planning board cannot design every single project they can't I'll do whatever you think is the right I if you think we should go with conditions then I'll change and I'll go there but I am not going to let these people dictate if it's good for me it's good for them and I'll do it and then you and I you are going through lawsuits you know every other time we come down with a project which is I guess good for you but really respect but you know is that is that the way we want to go I mean if if the the design criteria was what we wanted then stick to our guns you don't like it you don't like playing in our in our playground then leave I you know I I'm getting I'm getting out of all right so so um I I can can I say one one one more thing you know one probably two points you know one uh I I am careful about you know do we set a precedent that will operate with conditions with future uh applicants just like uh just like Jack was saying uh the uh the other thing now escaped oh the other thing is that uh since since I've been on the board or Dan and I have been on the board we've always been unanimous and I'd like to see that continue so you know if if if we're somewhat divided I'd rather kind of continue to talk I am I'm flexible uh Jack indicated that he was somewhat flexible uh but I think this might be an important thing for for us to be uh unanimous on right well uh um Amy so um if if I ask somebody to make a motion um do we have to word it in a s such a way if it's a denial what um so oh yes so the denal um so if it if you're going to make a motion um the um the denial is is um based on the uh the fact that the plan the fact that the use is allowed and the planning board acknowledges that the use is allowed plan does not conform to uh section 27067 6.7g so so that would be the denial motion which again I can I can repeat that and somebody can say so moved but um for option for the for the option number two which is the approval with conditions um I just did want to you know go through just quickly the conditions which would be that um you know if there's metal or prefab materials are used for the three accessory storage buildings as well as the three non Street facing sides of the build of building a the panel the panels um shall be installed horizontally to give the appearance of shingled siding um number two is addition of architectural elements to the Bedford Street facing side of building a to to include varying colors materials with uh possibly I put in possibly stone veneer um below the vinyl siding and a 30 foot long farmer's porch included on the front of the street facing office door and windows um condition three would be installation of six foot tall stockade fence along the southern border of exist of the existing residential use approximately 120 ft back towards the tree line starting 15 ft back from the Street and then we would also do a condition that would require um the applicant be responsible for the upkeep of that fence on number four would be the placing of 4ot evergreen trees along the southern border of Bedford Street setback 15 feet from the roadway as screening and the fifth would be placing the 4- foot evergreen trees along the northern side of the entrance replacing the red maple which is deciduous and does not provide screening during the winter months so those would be the conditions I I would like to add one if we could there too and uh I've talked about it uh before but the the accessory use or the accessory portion of the office building um certainly could be offset from the office building and set back oh six six to 10 ft you know without interfering with with any uh other sight plan issues drainage or anything like that and I think that you know uh again that's that's me as the architect talking and and and us not really wanting to design it for him but I that would be one of the very first things that I would that I would want to see okay is that one also within the scope I yes I think so yeah because that goes towards the Bedford Street facing side yes yes it does so we have sorry hold on one second Jack so we have five plus um well a sixth condition that would be added and that would be a conditional approval correct or we have um the denial um which would repeat for us again and I'm sorry Jack did you have another question I guess my I probably talk a way out of term but if rhino ever found out we've made all these conditional changes for these folks with all the money God knows how much money they've spent on that Lakeville Hospital they're going to say what right it's okay for me but it's not okay for them that's my concern I agree I I just think you know you got to draw a line in the sand either either we want these to follow these regulations or we don't and I I don't want to do anything that's not in the benefit of the town if you guys you and am think it's the best thing to do conditions I'll change other than that I say no I think I I think I'm leaning more towards the denial myself honestly um it looks like there's a question from Nick Val valoo uh Nick Volo twin boy LLC uh I I know this uh the public portion has been closed but I was wondering if I was able to correct some comments I heard that I do not uh feel were accurate No okay we we specifically noted and and and made it clear that the public hearing was closed he requested the public hearing be closed right I I am the okay right okay so we're just we're we're coming to a determination at this point right so I can't ask any questions if there's something for clarification that is that allowed Amy or no you're not allowed to take any new information okay thank you no not at this point well it wouldn't be new information it would be clarification and questions on on what you have previously discussed at this meeting no we were we specifically stated that there would be no comment it was your they requested the public hearing be closed that is exactly why when I was sitting there I said if they want if they are going to close the public hearing there's no more public there's no more testimony cannot take any more testimony once the public hearing is closed thank you Amy all right so um is anyone ready to make uh the motion or that Amy has prepared for us for denial or um go ahead David or for condition if Amy could say it again and then I'll I'll say so moved or or um I did just lose my contact so hold on okay so it would be a um it's a motion um to uh deny the project which the planning board acknowledged is an as of right use pursuant to section 270 D or pursuant to yes pursuant to 27- 6.7 F the requirements therein not being met uh so moved there you go okay so we have a motion second we have a second and I will do a roll call vote um all in favor Dan wilga no no so this you're you're your no to the motion that you just seconded you're are you a yay or a nay the motion is to deny want to be a yay David a yay is to deny [Music] it oh Dan are you with us think we lost him okay um we need to wait um when we call look maybe he's going to rejoin okay [Music] hold on hey you going to join us okay so we'll wait we'll wait for you you can log in okay byebye log in me how did that gentleman get in on that meet this meeting he's allowed to he's allowed to view it yep no they're allow anyone's allowed to be on the meeting it's a public meeting so welcome back Dan can you hear us yes I can't sorry I lost sound okay all right so we have a motion I'm actually gonna should I start over Michelle just so we know that we know that everybody can hear okay so um it would be the suggested motion would be a motion to deny pursuant to uh to deny the use which is an allowed use to deny the site plan because the plan is not in conformance with section um so Dan yeah uh Dan wilga nay so you're you don't want to deny the sorry sorry I I I do so um I I make a yes so I okay so uh David I jack I and mck and I so the motion carries unanimously with the four planning board members present so we have a denial and um Amy are you Kathy did you get that denial or do you need it anything additional did you get the word yeah so um um so Michelle I will um I can I will work with you and Kathy on um drafting the decision um but I'm just check when is the um when was the decision due we talk so we had 21 days and that's why we were meeting this evening right 21 hold on looks like we're at 12 days yeah I believe that's where we're we at so a decision would need to be by December yep okay so um so um Madam chair how do you guys issue your decisions do you have just the chair sign them or does um the board signed them how do you do that just the chair signs okay great so we will coordinate with you on getting the decision um signed and filed with the town clerk by the um by the 5th okay should we take a a vote for that as well for me to sign it sure you can okay I'll uh take a roll call vote ation to allow the chair to sign the decision so if somebody wants to make that motion do we have a motion second and the second and a roll call vote Dan wilga I David I jack hi and Macker I so I will work with Amy and Cathy on that and sign it as soon as it's available yep we'll get you a draft okay okay soon does the developer owner see it I'm sorry Jack what did you say how soon does these the owner developer see this decision so I I think that when it's filed with the town clerk Kathy in um lets them know or is that how it goes Kathy uh yeah well usually it's they know because it's been approved so they wait just wait the 20 days but I I'll let him know as soon as we file it yeah that would be great all right agenda I item number three discuss meetings regarding osrd BW creation possible vote um now this we had discussed at our last meeting um about reaching out to various uh boards committees Etc regarding uh crafting and osrd that would uh be specific to uh Rocky woods and I did reach out to a number of individuals I've gotten confirmation back from the open space um chairperson uh the Board of Health agent uh the conservation chair um cor Pierce from the narag tribe uh the Town Administrator and uh the uh Building Commissioner also said he he'll be available I have not heard back from the developer yet um the hope is to meet on December 26 which was going to be our scheduled planning board meeting even though we hadn't um put anything on that agenda yet um the hope is to take a look at the 300 acre parcel and uh determine what areas are are most desirable to be preserved and which are most uh desirable to be developed on if if the open space plan would allow 100 um 150 acres to be preserved and 150 to be built on so that that is um The Hope for this um meeting on the 26th um um I wanted to know is everybody available for that date I know it's right after Christmas I know Amy said she's not available until after January so we'll do another meeting in January to go over the language specifically but this this meeting will be uh more about determining the best areas to avoid um the development on yeah I I'm fine with um do we have a forum do we have I'll be there yes so Dan I'll be there Jack you're available yeah I available as well you are okay and David yep I'm I'm available okay so we would have a quorum so we can post it as a regular planning board meeting Kathy for the 26 all right um and then I only put possible vote in case you wanted to um designate me to just attend on your behalf but if everybody wants to join then that's fine we don't have to yeah that's good all right so agenda item number four uh we have administrative update and there's 13 Main Street possible vote this was something that was brought to my attention over the weekend um it was a prior site plan review that was approved with conditions um conditions six and seven were in regards to the 55 plus component and um it was brought to my attention that um some of these units are now um being advertised on uh real estate uh websites for lease and um we haven't seen uh the lease agreement so um the condition number seven was actually um in regards to the planning board being able to review the lease agreement that they will be having with their um their rent residents uh to ensure for compliance with the bylaw because you know this the apartment buildings were allowed as of right under mixed use because of that 55 plus component and the um real estate listing that I've seen does not even mention the 55 plus component um I did find out today from um the zoning enforcement officer that they have not not yet been um issued a occupancy permit oh but that's interesting because um it says that these apartments are available starting December 1st which just way so Amy I I wanted to just pick your brain um I did send you I don't know if you had a chance to see that email and then Nate followup um because they are at the conditions um specified that we should be viewing that lease agreement and we haven't seen it yet and it was not specific as to when that was supposed to be given to us can you just let us know what you think um sure so this again is a site plan approval um the use is allowed as you said and um this is a little bit of an unusual situation because the use is allowed because of the 55 and over provision um and so so I I would agree with the zoning enforcement officer that because this is site plan review site plan review is a uh mechanism that is a prerequisite to a building permit so it's a prerequisite to a building permit it's a prerequisite to an an occupancy permit it's different than a special permit um so if this were a special permit um I would say that you know perhaps the planning board would have a role some some kind of role in the enforcement of this but because because this is site plan approval um the build the zoning enforcement officer and the building the Building Commissioner they're the ones that would enforce this and so um you know Nate does plan on on on checking on this I I I do find it interesting that um that the um the ad that was that you sent to me does say that these are available December 1 but there's not even a um Au permit I I highly doubt that um you know that um poor Nate's goingon to show up on Thanksgiving and issue you know ISS occupancy permits I would hope that he doesn't um I hope that he enjoys Thanksgiving with his family instead um so you know I I think that um I think Nate's suggestion of having him reach out and um you know confirming that that they're going to be submitting the lease um to the planning board is is the right is the right to do right now okay all right so I just want to kind of I think that was a good catch though whoever caught that Michelle that was a good catch oh yeah I know there's a lot of good doobies out there in Lakeville keep an eye on everything um so I can't even take you know credit it me and I was like oh wow that's interesting yeah we we we definitely didn't and I checked with Kathy and she confirmed that we didn't have the um release agreement yet okay so let's just kind of keep this um close to the surface here and hopefully the lease agreement will show up and then I guess we will expect to send it over for you to um review as well Amy yep definitely all right um so I guess we don't need to take a vote on that either um the next meeting will be December 12th 2024 at the Lakeville police station do we have any other business um I do plan on being at the December 12th meeting for the that is the hospital correct it is and we also have a special permit okay um attorney Mather did um did um discuss sending me a draft so I haven't received one yet just as an update I haven't received a draft yet but um if I do receive one for then um hopefully I'll be able to comment on it we'll have something to discuss on the 12 okay great all right would someone like to make a motion to adjourn I'll make a motion that we adjourn second have a motion in a second and I'll do a roll call vote Dan will got I David I jack I I motion carries meeting is adjourned e