Good evening and welcome to the Thursday, March 12th, 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 Deadford Street and we have Lake Cam recording. Is anyone else recording?
Hearing none. Um, just to go around and take attendance real quick. Donna Gay, associate member, >> John Cabarall, >> Michelle McGaffer, >> Dan Wilgga, >> and we have Kathy Murray. Um, moving on to our first agenda item.
Well, actually, we're going to take it out of order real quick um to allow for the engineer with us tonight um to move on to his next uh engagement. Um, under number four, administrative update, possible vote on any item listed below, we have Bellaway update.
>> Good evening. Thank you for taking us out of order. I appreciate that. Uh, Jamie Beset from Zenith Consulting Engineers, Bob Paluchi, uh, Bellaway uh, Lakeville is what we're here tonight to discuss. Um, I know I've appeared and spoken uh, several months back about
trying to wrap the project up. Uh, Bob's here tonight. Um, and between him and I, hopefully we can answer any questions the board has uh to to try to wrap this thing up. And um, and you've got both of us here. So, >> I think it might be.
>> So, that's a reference. Yeah. So, I'll flag it here. Highlight it. I've been trying to highlight it as I go through. So, I >> Right. Right. And I didn't see it. So, I wasn't sure. >> No, thank you. Yes. Yes. >> Um, and so you are reviewing the forms. >> Mhm. >> Okay, good.
>> Because I know those are all referenced. >> Yeah, I figure we can list them in the appendices as well or something. Um, >> yeah, >> make it nice and again consolidated. the endor under endorsement on page 22 that eight years is that the standard
>> I think so. Okay. >> So I did look that up and it said three years. So yes could you just check that? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I think I've heard so that could have been >> right because you never know like if you ask a question then ask it differently
sometimes you get different. >> That's where I just don't ask. Um my understanding and I think this was from uh a training conducted by um you know a legal consultant talking
about rules and regulations and whatnot and I believe that 8year period was brought up where sometimes um >> use it to their advantage for lack of better words like when you have >> like a zoning freeze sort of thing. >> Yes. Exactly. So let me um I will triple
check that. Um, but that was my recollection as of January of this year that I hadn't seen. >> Um, I guess I and then my my page 23. I just once again, Kathy, as far as the release of performance guarantee, I just want to make sure that that's all in
line with how it's been. >> Well, I just I read through this. I didn't just to kind of get a brief overview of how it was had changed, but I really didn't substantively go through it. So, I just didn't have time for that.
>> Okay. So, that just I mean, >> and again, we haven't changed anything here in this section. Um, >> to my understanding, it's all pretty standard. And this is kind of where I'm going to >> what I'd like to do. I'm getting ahead of myself here talking about timeline. But my my goal for this work is to
present a final draft with a whole set of questions for town council so that it's easy for them rather than being like peace meal can you you know answer this question or that question. >> Um this is something that I would probably defer to them be like can you just ensure that we're doing everything here um correctly. So I'll flag it
specifically just so we don't we don't lose that thread. Um, page 25 >> in the red highlight. Is that is that what you added? Is that I guess my question was just why is it red? >> Let me open up the red line cuz I'm looking at the clean version here. Um,
that might just be uh because of the fact that it's a red line. Um, this is 25. >> 25. Yeah. So my own. >> So you're looking at >> no street or away. >> Yeah. Right here. >> Through private property.
>> No, I don't see that on my end. >> Oh, okay. So it's the second >> unless I'm on the wrong page. >> 25. >> Section four, design construction. A second paragraph. >> Sorry. >> No, you're good.
>> No, no, thank you. Yeah, please. Uh, oh yes. Um, it's a comment, I guess. Maybe it doesn't show. Um, >> I just have a likely consolidated into the previous paragraph. Um, >> oh, so it's just like a note on our end. >> Okay.
>> Sorry for the confusion there. And so I know throughout this section as well, this is where I'm really trying to work with transportation and some of the kind of um for lack of better words like more boutiquey things I I hope we get to do towards the end or provide visuals and things to kind of guide some of the recommendations in this section. Um I'll
likely work with my colleague Rob, who you've met before, who was here last time to do that. And again, I'd like to get to that once we kind of get through the organizational portions of it and have all of our ducks in a row again before we start adding new content. Um, but I've also throughout here been
trying to do my best to reference the uh standard specifications just again make it clearer um as we go throughout. So, you'll notice that not everything has been referenced yet. I was just working my way through it. Um, so my goal is to have all of that done for you folks as well so it's again nice and easy and
clear. Um, but if you have any questions about any of that or any additional thoughts, let me know. >> Tracing cloth. We're still using tracing cloth. >> Yeah. >> Oh, yeah. >> Under
utilities. Um, page 33. My question with regards to, you know, some of the utility companies, do we have to specify the names of the utility companies? So, for example, Milboro electric.
>> Does that have to be specified? >> I don't know. I'll make a note of that. That's a good question. >> Um, just because of their our provider and I think I don't know what they call the natural gas. Uh, if you is it's not
Liberty Gas anymore, I think. >> And there's only a few areas. >> There's only Yeah. MG >> PMLP and never source about >> but that's for power right
>> for for gas like I I don't know if they got bought out >> I don't it might be MG& then >> it's MG I think >> cuz that's if they do the power of industrial park they'd probably do the gas then I was going to say I know they do
>> in addition to that what about cable cuz that's a >> utility. So I I was just thinking of that as well >> because those are
>> just specifying all >> Yeah. Well, whether or not they're on the pole versus buried underground, >> you know, >> let me look into that and get back to you. I don't have an answer right now. Um at least that's okay. Yeah, in
regards to cable, I'll consult um with my colleague Caitlyn because I know she she works more on the um internet infrastructure side but might know something since it's related. >> Um and then I'll yeah I'll consult some other regulations too and see >> for Lakeville. Right now it's just
Verizon and Comcast um >> for for both telephone >> and I'll make >> Was there a place John that you you were saying there was tracing cloth that should should it be up >> I was going to say it definitely it
could be >> it's on it was on that uh that page >> yeah look at that the definitive plan shall be >> tracing black >> back to 1930 now Let me flag that. I think I caught one elsewhere too and I
was like I don't think that's >> right. Let me flag that. Um and then for page 31 with the road acceptance, I just I reached out this morning just to see do we have a policy in place? It sounds like we just go with the state guidelines. So
>> yeah. And um the only state references to any sort of road acceptance procedures that I'm aware of is in chapter 82. Um, and it's very bare bones. So, >> I guess it depends on >> and there's some questions I think I would.
>> Yeah. I mean, Kathy sent out something. >> Yes. >> But the only thing is I know that we have the DPW and he does his review. Slideboard does their review, then we have to do. So, I didn't know if it needs to be more detailed or not. >> It's up to you folks. I think if you if
you think it's helpful. Well, I mean, I know it appears in some communities, rules and rags. Um, you know, again, the there was one very detailed procedure that I sent um I think it was East Bridgewater as well cuz it's again it's at like the very bottom of their almost
like an appendix of the process for acceptance. And again, >> that makes sense. I kind of like it as an >> because it's a workflow, you know, so you want to make sure that everybody that needs to be involved is >> Yeah. And I it doesn't happen frequently enough, right?
>> So that people automatically know, you know what I mean? So it's always a very cumbersome sort of situation. So I think it would be good to have it all outlined. >> Sure. >> And like you said, if we can do it as an appendex. >> Yeah. >> I think that would be ideal where you can reference, you know, in the document
and then just have it. >> So I can make a note. Um I'm doing it right now adding a section for the appendices which will include uh the road of acceptance procedures and we might have to coordinate you know boarding with you Kathy um and um the
executive assistant to the select board uh again just to make sure that we outline everything correctly. So we'll have board acceptance procedures here all of our forms and the appendices. >> Um yeah. Okay. Um, I have a few more things while we're
actually on this subject. So, did we at some point, and I think we discussed this a long time ago before, the reason this stands out, uh, entrances of certain subdivisions may have signage for lighting.
>> Mhm. >> Is does that need to be put in here? So we have a so actually under our street lights we do have a bylaw that exists that covers lighting in the in the town >> and we do look at it site plan review
>> um and then the other thing this is a common waiver >> that we always allow >> in lie of street lights we do the driveway post however >> if we have a commercial subdivision >> where we want to ensure that they have
>> street lights and utility poles. Yeah. Or not utility bills, but street lights. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> Um for a commercial we have coming, >> right? So I I don't want to just tailor it to residential. >> No, that's fine. I was just trying to
>> No, but I know what you're saying, but cuz you brought it up about the >> So the entrance to a subdivision where they have the the nice signs and >> Yeah. They've got the lighting, >> but I don't I don't know if we maybe just reference the light bylaw. That was our plan. Yeah. So, once we got
everything in order, I remember we talked about it I think in November to reference um I have it down here in my notes. Where is it? >> Um reference the dark sky bylaw uh and reference the existing lighting bylaw. So, we can do that and we can probably also in that section address um
>> waiver provisions. Okay. >> Now, the other thing >> I know we're skipping around here, but it's the same subject. So, we've got trees here. Yep. >> We also as part of our site plan review have >> plantings
>> of which we reference um from our open space. >> Yes. >> Yes. And I did get that. >> Good. All right. >> Yeah. Cuz that was great. That that was really good. Um and you know the nature not natural but the native species that kind of thing.
>> Yeah. So I got that list. That will be um we'll be sticking that in there again once we make it through the organizational side. That's all. Great. Be quiet. >> You're fine. >> Um, the next thing I had was on page 42
>> under it talks about the building permit and um, in the event about halfway down the second paragraph, uh, in the event that more than one building for dwelling purposes be erected or placed on or converted to use >> as such on any lot, the building
inspector satisfied consents been obtained. Um, I don't know if it's worth noting here. We have other bylaws now. We have um accessory structure bylaw now. So, I don't know if that's worth incorporating in this
because there's it's a tiered bylaw that we put in place that requires a special permit through based off of lot size, how much um square footage. >> Gotcha. Okay. I actually had something that ties in
with that back on page eight. The D more than one building for purposes. >> Oh, yeah. >> If that should be included excluding the AU, which is my right. >> That sounds correct.
>> Oh, right. Yeah. I know we um a couple uh references just like giving attention to any sort of laws included chapter 48 which would cover um >> the ADU stuff but I think it's I don't think there's any harm in calling it out explicitly so we can certainly do that.
Okay. Um and then I have just my my finishing up. Um >> so planning board is the authority for
approval and denial of subdivision. But say after a subdivision is built >> and there's an issue after the fact, >> whose authority is that? That is your question. >> So my question is I'd like to maybe
include that as like a final section. >> Okay. >> Of addressing issues after the fact. >> Sure. >> For remediation. Um and then also Yeah. Because if we have released the funds then there's nothing really tying
anyone to address those issues after the fact. >> Sure. So, I guess that's my question. >> Do you have an example of a scenario? >> I do. Well, so, um, gosh, was it last year? Two years ago now, uh, we had a a situation where a subdivision was
draining onto an abuing road. >> Okay. >> Um, >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. >> Mhm. That was last year. >> Was it last year? Okay. >> Okay. So they and I think it was they had to clean their um once a division
>> had to do some upkeep to their drainage. Um >> that's one that comes to mind. >> Mhm. >> Okay. I've made a note. Um it's probably I'll do some digging, but that's probably going to be something that again I'll flag to council just to be
crystal clear on. >> Okay. >> Um great. Okay. >> Madam Chair, how was that issue resolved? Was it the planning board that had to step in and enforce or >> So, we had asked to have a letter sent to the residents of that subdivision.
>> Okay. >> So, >> that was the extent of the planning. >> That was the extent. Yeah. Cuz >> you know when we don't have a plan to really stay on top of that and >> Okay. Um, and then I guess so I know it's still a
work in progress in in some respects. I I didn't see a distinguished >> private road versus accepted. >> Right. So that's what I wanted to work through um once we got through again a lot of these um kind and then what I'm trying to
figure out too is how to relate that to something like the roadway acceptance procedures and like including the references where it's going to be a public way etc. >> Um so that's where I was trying to get with there and my hope is to >> coordinate with our transportation department which we've been kind of
doing and I appreciate everyone's patience because I know it's been a little bit of a slow process. Um, and I guess that gets into timeline here. So, kind of skipping through some of my notes. I would like to bring these for legal review with your town council by
midappril. So, that would mean that I will probably return in a month or so. Um, where we would actually be talking about substantive edits including the private versus public roads, the lighting, the inclusion of tree plantings, um, you
know, new content. Okay. uh with the aim to have a final draft to you folks by late April, early May. Um so that if there's any final changes or additions, we can have it back and forth in May uh into June and then we can adopt it >> by then. Um does that timeline work?
>> Yeah. Because this doesn't have to fall in line with how I'm meeting, right? >> You can do a public hearing. So that that's absolutely >> workable. Did Kathy, did you have anything else? >> I actually I do have a few things, too. >> Mhm. >> So back on page 10. Yep. >> There's some piece there that we don't
have anymore. >> Okay, let's get that out of there. And I I think I left a question in there about um the Well, so let's talk about what's not there anymore. And let's remove those.
The um all three of those under the other costs and expenses. >> I see. Okay. Oh. Go. The question I had for you folks, I think was on it's on the previous page. Um 200 per residential unit or $500 per
developed acre, but it's not clear to me. Um, yes, the or whichever is less, whichever is more. Um, if I'm misunderstanding, please correct me, but I just wanted to clarify.
>> You should say whichever is more, right? >> Which which one is that? That's for a >> chapter 43 local $1,000 200 per residential unit or Oh, is it because if it's not
a residential development, it's a business development. Is that what >> that would be my guess? Maybe, >> but we can clarify it. So the only location that this 43D is um over right now is the hospital site and that's
mixed use >> majority but it's also business in the front residential in the back. So I think that >> is does that sound right? >> Do you remember? >> Sure. >> I think but um >> and we can we can note it as well. Um
and I can always go back to um the actual zoning and kind of parse that. >> Any other major thoughts here on page 12? >> Yep. Um, so at the bottom of that listing have
the Lakeville funding board's endorsement makes no determination, but that's I don't know if you want to change that to a 15 because that's actually something they want to see on the plan that statement. >> All right. Yeah, it almost looks like it just
missed that 15 or the next item in there. Could you give me the page number one more time? >> 12. >> Thank you. >> You put that. Why is Why are page numbers so difficult
for me to I see. Yeah. Yes. Um Yes. Yeah. I was I could have gone either way on that. I remember like removing it and being like, >> hm, >> does this make sense as its own sentence um or not? But okay, I made that note there. Thank you.
>> Um page 15, this just like a title. >> Um it has 11 ft instead of 11 in >> corrected. Thank you. And page 16 is that um facing cloth.
>> Yep. I already highlighted that. >> And page 18, same thing. And page 25. >> I'll just make a note. >> Yeah, >> we'll be clear about those. >> You can do a fine burn place, right? Yeah, a web finder request
>> page 23. Just let me know when you're ready. Also, >> I am on page 23. >> Okay. It just says the applicant under recording shall deliver to the the board. >> Seems to have been >> Yep. >> taken out there.
>> Um, page 25 is the tracing block again. >> Yep. Caught that. So page 35. >> Yep. >> This is just a question. Uh storm drains and retention basins will be designed based on the 25 years storm.
>> So I don't think that they really use that because of the intensity of storms, >> right? Let me ask S about that. >> And then also the one below at the 10 year. >> Yeah. See if it should be like 50 years or
something. >> Okay. And page 39 a question with the bullet too. Uh number four, the de the developer will be liable for the trees for one year after planting.
Thought you had discussed that in another circumstance. >> Yes, I think we conditioned it with the last subdivision we just had on Holland, right? >> I don't recall. >> I don't remember either.
>> So maybe just something to um >> Yeah, we should check. >> Yeah. >> And um maybe revise it to that. >> I'm trying to look back cuz I know we talked about this. I just don't know that we talked about a timeline necessarily. Um I think the question was about the
>> should be at least the same length as the when they have to go and maintain their drainage wheels, >> right? Didn't Jamie just say they required the two two year to go and do their cleaning of the come from the second year maintenance for the
>> maintaining it. Um is that what it like is that per D or is that no I don't think so. That would be locally, right? >> I don't know. Um
>> I wish I knew right off the top of my head how long a tree takes to really um >> and if Rob was here, he could answer. I think we, like I said, I think we talked about it, but I just don't have a note on it. So, I just made a note here >> to check the time frame. Um >> Okay, that's good enough for me.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. And then page 43, >> just for the inspections, it's saying the developer must notify the DPW director. >> I don't think he's really involved in
any of those inspections anymore. >> Is there anyone else? So a design of the planning board, they're going to contact peer review engineer. So I guess this is so this is where if it was going to be an accepted road he would so DPW director he would
have his peer review >> right I know we have that in there >> so I think that's where >> we clarify it >> um yes exactly maybe leave it like this for accepted >> right >> and then for private not so much
>> but yeah >> doesn't say inspection on page 442 the sub The subdivider shall notify the DPW director and engineer designated by the board at least 48 hours prior time at which one of the required inspections should take place. >> Yeah. So I think that would cover it if
it's an accepted. So like he would want to be involved um to get eyes on it as well as the peerreview engineer. >> So I've made a note about that as well. >> All right. Any other questions?
Is there anything else you'd like to see in the appendices? >> So, do we have to put any of our forms like samples of our forms? >> You said the forms. >> Um, we talked about the road exceptions procedures. >> We talked about species.
>> Oh, yeah. The trees maybe. I don't know if >> that's what I was I'm going to I'm going to have to game out if it's appropriate for an appendicy or if it can actually go in the design standards themselves. Um >> would that be with lighting too? >> Yes. >> I mean we could always um
>> I wouldn't want to put something in there that's subject to change frequently if at all. So that's where um Right. >> Yeah. So usually like a reference to the section to the zoning whatever >> is going to be better because >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah.
Okay. Um, great. I have a bunch of notes there. Um, my notes here, I think we covered most of them. Um, I guess we were talking about the road acceptance procedures in general. There
were some communities and again I don't know it was this is actually more of a question for the select board since you know it that is t that is where statuto starts. Um there is, you know, sometimes
notification to the butters and like a consent, you know, for lack of better words, like consenting and agreeing to accept the road. This is something that I again I think I kind of want to work with town council to game out, but I wanted you folks to be aware that there
are some procedures that do things like that. Um, and again, if we want to just restate kind of what's already going on and not get too in the weeds, we can just do that. But, um, there are some communities that do that. And I'm
looking right here, Dennis. And then I think there was one other um that does something like that. But then there are you know there are communities in our region again kind of more comp communities someone like Freetown who just has a very simple again procedure
without um any additional kind of bells and whistles. So again if we just want to start with the simple take a look at it go from there um >> yeah because anything road except I think definitely would need to go
>> um because the way that is right now Yes. I think it starts through them, >> but we also have to hold a public hearing. The PW director has to weigh in with the engineer >> um goes to town meeting. So >> do and we also have to hold a public
hearing. >> So right for anything going to town meeting >> I think the select board does all >> they hear usually responsibility vote to approve the layout.
Um so they hold the public hearing which would be a notice right? >> Yeah that's a public notice and notice switch that I don't know. Okay. >> Okay. Um let's just keep it simple for now and uh again like you said
it's within the kind of select boards per curview so it might not be an issue for us to be navigating here. Um I had the note on the storm water. I saw the feedback sent to Sara who looked myself Michelle Tinger in environmental and a couple others in
I will this is and again I apologize for kind of the slow moving nature of some of this you know incorporating storm water >> yeah um I just need to figure out like the best way to navigate this year and I think that's what we've talked about even with like the line item about storm
water itself so it's still a little bit of a TBD but again given the timeline. Um I plan to confront that issue and uh we'll just figure out what the best path forward is considering you know the SAS
things go talked about um I already gave you the note on incorporating substantive edits in the next month now that we're kind of I think largely through the organizational and clarical nature um edits. I talked about the timeline already mid April
give or take. I'll I'll obviously could um coordinate with Andrew and co to make sure that uh town council is aware that this is coming in so we're not just like dropping it on them and I'd like to give them you know at least a couple weeks with it. >> Oh yeah, >> usually.
>> Um but we I can plan looking at my calendar now. >> So >> April 9th say about a month out it's April 9th. I don't have any conflicts nothing on the calendar. So I can put
the hold in now just to plan to be here in a month. Um provide so that's three weeks from now for a final draft. Um and then you know we'll confirm all the again more substanceoriented edits that we
feel good about things and then we ship it off to town council >> four weeks. >> Well three I I'll give you guys a week of time. >> Yeah. >> Can I ask you another question? >> Yes. Um, we have
someone interested in creating a 40y district. Okay. >> We I know Kathy had shared information that you all had some funds available to help with ADU. >> Correct. >> Is that 40 Y and ADU something we could
tackle at the same time or not? So, >> I don't think so. just based on the nature of the application that we submitted and the the nature of the funds we do and this is um kind of a
tentative project we're working on and I guess this actual I'll bounce back to a question that I have for you folks um with community one stop for growth you know applications due by June we always as the regional planning agency try and do regional project and so that's what
ADUs is this year we have been kicking around the idea because we have so many communities interested in adopting 40y districts um of doing a regional grant application for >> so there might be something separate >> so if this is a successful grant application again I I say if because I
we're still in kind of in the early phases of determining all of this but it is one of it's on the docket as probably you know the strongest potential at the moment for us to pursue that kicks in January 2027 if awarded so it depends on
how rapid the turnaround is Um, but we have a lot of communities in our region who are interested in 40 wide and the regulations are not final yet. So there's again I >> Oh, they're not. >> That is, you know what? That's interesting. >> That is my understanding as of the last time I looked, which was
a couple weeks ago. Um, but I know they've been in draft format for a while and open for public comment. Um, and I I I don't think they have been finalized yet because usually I'll get, you know, a not like we get a notification of of the new program. Um,
and I don't see I don't see anything here on the the site. It still lists the um 760 CMR69 is the the regulations. Those are still draft. So there have the only community I'm aware of in the region who has attempted to pursue a 40y
is Mansfield. Um, and I don't know that I actually ever went to town meeting. I know that there was a lot of work up to town meeting and we we weren't involved. I just was kind of like digging around to see who's even tried to do anything since the rights came out. Um, that's the only one I could find in our region.
So, at least in my mind, the way that I've always thought about 40y is um it'll be good to wait until the regs are final. I don't anticipate them changing much from the draft regulations, but >> I >> Which one was it? Marchfield or Mansfield? >> Mansfield.
Yep. Um, so all that to say that's kind of in we're cooking that up for regional and again hopefully it's successful. Um, we've we've kind of just been driving towards like a lot of regional zoning technical assistance work because it seems to be the most helpful for our communities.
>> So on the docket, TPD in the works. Um, all of those those kind of caveats, but >> it could happen. Um, that's all I've got for for now to to be helpful there. Um there could be potentially other funding sources you could pursue um
if you again wanted to do it sooner. There's a very rapid turnaround if you were to decide. Right now there's the eco onetop um which is essentially the executive office of energy environmental affairs version of the community onetop which is the OLC and E and other things
um where they've consolidated their grant programs and those are due this upcoming Friday. Um, but we're always happy to do a quick pivot if we need to. Um, >> I don't know. So, I think what you just said about if it's not finalized, maybe we should I think that's something that
we should probably share with is the interest of party that is not finalized. >> That's usually my recommendation. It's it's the easiest way >> and then and it's not on the agenda tonight. So, we can put it on the next meeting and further discuss it, I guess. And we'll
we'll see. And I know it'll probably be past that eco onetop, but >> definitely um yeah. >> Um but I think I've mentioned this and um you know I know the capacity and whatnot. Just if you need any help with grant writing, if you need any help with
potential projects for next year, let us know. Eco is obviously a quick turnar around, but community one stop is June. Um >> so there's plenty of opportunities. Just just let us know. Um but that is all I have. you have the timeline circling
back to the rules and rags. Um, we talked about that. Is there any other questions you have for me while I'm here? >> No. >> No. Good. >> All good. >> Okay. So, I will plan to see you folks April 9th um Thursday, April 9th.
>> And I will be in touch at least 48 hours before that meeting um with a final, you know, version similar to what I provided here tonight. And I'm sure we'll talk more in the interim um if we need to. So great. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. Have a good
night. >> Madame Chair, um as a order, I was wondering if we could move. >> Yes, that was my >> We got some gentlemen here. >> Yes, we got a lot to talk about tonight.
>> I will take it out because you guys are here for Pinerest. Um it's just under administrative update agenda item number four. uh possible vote on any item listed below. Uh we did have contact from a resident um a butter to rest village, the new
subdivision and um there were concerns regarding some items. Uh we did get um some feedback from the conservation agent. So the
conservation agent went out there today and took some photos which is helpful. Um showing the detention ponds the road as well. No discharge observe water levels and
detention pond well below the level of the covertation barrier infiltration pond is there. Um sediment through bay the grass swale from frog pond to long pond. Water was flowing under beach tree
drive. Culverts were in perfect working order, not crushed or collapsed. Taken from steel plate installed to protect the roadway culverts. We do see that the steel plates are there. Um, pictures of the frog pond.
The gravel BM located west side of Beach Tree Drive immediately north and steel plate/frog ponds across from 14 Beach Tree Drive. The burm appears to be the result of snow removal/plowing activity. The gravel had been pushed to the edge of
the adjacent wetland area mapped as wooded deciduous swamp. And then another photo portion of gravel burm on the edge of uh deciduous pulp on the west side of beach tree drive.
So he did say that um he visited the site. Uh the complaint alleged inter aliyah that there was excessive amount of sediment being transported away from the construction site down Pinerest Drive that ultimately was being deposited on
the driveway of 22 Beach Tree Drive and into the Association Beach area. The conditions I observed did not comport with the allegation. Please see attached photos. My observation was that Pinerest Drive from its intersection with Beach Tree Lane was almost completely dry with
no vis visual evidence of water flow or sediment transport. I walked the per perimeter of the detention infiltration pond. The pond appears to be functioning as designed. Uh recommendations. I did not observe any evidence that runoff from the construction site was flowing
down Pine Drive or transporting sediment down the roadway. Uh please see test photos. The infiltration detention tones appear to be functioning properly as designed. The sedimentation control fencing/waddle is in place and appears to be functioning properly. Per the order of conditions, I've requested the
property owner inspect the siltation control to ensure it remains intact and functioning properly and correct any areas that need to be fixed uh including restaple siltation fencing to stakes in any places that need it. I have continued to make routine visits
uh site visits given the level of scrutiny given this project since the end of last year I visited the site on numerous occasions including uh March 11th 2026 25 to 526 123125 I made a number of other announced and
unannounced visits throughout 2025 concerns were transmitted to me about the potential impacts of heavy equipment transis transiting transiting Pineest arrived to the Pineest Village project. There are currently two excavators on site. The second one reportedly arriving on site
31126. I see no impact the area where the steel plate was placed to avoid minimized impacts of roadway and culverts which located beneath the road. I inspected the culverts. There is no apparent compression or collapse of the culverts. Water is flowing through to the grass swale on the other side of the road and onto Long Pond. Uh there is
evidence of snow plowing, snow removal along this portion of the roadway. On previous visits this winter, I observed piling of snow at the bend in the roadway where Hickory Lane enters Pinerest Drive. The snow was pushed/piled against the outer portion of the bend in the road directly in
front of two beach drive. Presumably this entailed some amount of plowing/ snow removal activity. So, that was um from the conservation agent and you're welcome to come up and uh please state name for the record and if there's anything that you'd like to
share with us. We'll hear your concerns. Mike Netti, 8. I'm kind of doing this off the cuff because John John Lens is out of town. He's the president. He's the one that actually initiated the letter. Um, ever
since they put the uh houses on uh above us, we've been getting flooded down below. I mean, my outer yards are always flooded. It's going down the road, across the road. The houses up top are pumping out of their driveways down
the road. >> So, what the houses on Pinerest haven't been built yet? >> No, that's flowing like a river though cuz I'm on Pinerest Drive on the last house >> and it there's water constantly running down. coming up >> down that road. >> They never alleviated any of the you
guys talking the storm went off the whole thing. So >> So yes, actually what you just heard was our uh rules and regulations of the subdivision control law which haven't been updated since >> 19 87 87 or something like that. So >> this road was
>> we're we're trying to update them to address these issues going forward as you all listen to. But um are you saying that the new construction is what's creating th >> this road was designed in 54? >> It wasn't designed to have 20 houses
above it. It was designed that was supposed to be an access road to the lakeside houses. They put the houses above and they did nothing to the lower end to alleviate the runoff coming down to us. I own all across from my house
from um McDermott all the way out to the frog pond. That was never wet. Ever wet. Now it's a swamp. >> And this is on Pinerest. >> No, this is on Beach Street. >> On Beach Street. >> Pineer Crest is is I mean that's just an
open shot straight downhill, right? >> There's nothing stopping that water from John's house. >> Yeah. going right down. Right down driveway that's paved, but then there's a section towards the end. >> Yeah, cuz I I called a few times of putting that gravel down because
>> I almost got stuck cuz it was all in front of my garage and it was just all mud. >> Are you the house that's right there? >> Yeah, somebody house right there. The last one at the top of the hill. >> Which numbers are you guys? >> Number three. >> You're number three. And I'm 8. >> So you mean the houses when they they built them on Mark Twain? >> Yes. Drive. Yeah,
>> if you if you look at that frog pond, >> you can you can see so much sediment coming down that was never there. That frog pond used to be 7 or 8 ft deep. Now it's just below the three pipes that we put in. So we are getting a ton of
runoff which is undermining the road all over the place. From Mark Twain down, that whole road is all cracked, undermined. They added a probably like a 5ft extension for the for the fire trucks cuz one of the trucks got stuck in my neighbor's house
burned down. That whole thing is all caving in. It's all getting undermined. There's no control of the water from Mark Twain down. It's just flowing like a river. It ices up all the time. My yard is completely wet. My neighbor's
yard is so wet his he had to take his car out of the driveway cuz it was a mit. >> Yeah. It's it's a neverending I've been we've had the house 70 years. Well, >> I used to be able to cut the lawn like nothing. Now I this half my lawn I can't cut. >> And now the challenge is we're in the
melting phase of winter and it's getting >> all summer long. >> Yeah. >> So the winter Yes. But >> the pro the problem is we we tried to address this when Moroni built those houses up on M Twain and we were kind of pushed aside >> but now the evidence is there. It's
literally running down the road. It's always frozen during the winter. >> So, we know in town we have high water, we have a lot of wetlands, we have all these ponds. So, listen, we've been working on trying to pass a storm water bylaw for almost two years. We've been trying to get this over the finish line.
And that's another thing that we've incorporated. We were asking Serpent about we're trying to get it over the finish line to address these issues because we know we're aware of the issues, but we have to have something in place in order to address them properly and ensure that there is no water running onto neighbors property from I
mean the rock still slowing it down still it's still running straight down pine. So the the the good thing is for this new development that has been permitted, they still have to provide as belts that peer review has to make sure that everything has been installed as they
are supposed to and ensure that all of that water is being captured from the new development. >> It is pushed onto my land. >> So that's what I think we're still in the process of. We're not >> Well, M 20's been done for years. Well,
so that's something >> and then they added >> remember when I just asked Serpent, what enforcement do we have when there is no uh shy held after the subdivision has been released and built? And I mean really that's why it becomes an HOA
problem because it's a private way. The road isn't going to it's not conforming. Nothing was built to conform to the standards to be accepted by the town as a road. So now it becomes the HOA's duty to keep up with it. So the the problem that started with the planning board
allowing those houses to be built on a non-conforming lot, raising up four lots at least 20 ft above grade, pushing all that storm water down below is now going to be the association's problem. >> So did you all appeal it? appeal their
decision within within 20 days because that's something like >> I feel as though you're trying to address something that is not in >> the the main concern right now is make sure that there's a bond in place >> that's going to tie him to fix the road and fix the drainage.
>> So we have it in the condition for the new development. Yeah, >> we have it in the condition for the new development. If you guys were here, if you were here, right, for >> any damage done to the road, it is condition. We do have some money in the 53G account. >> We, like I said, we we still plan on
doing the peer review the of the asbuilt and all of that um to address it, but it we're not there yet. You know, it it has to be So, the drainage is supposed to be installed prior to them building. >> So, they are supposed >> Isn't the road supposed to be put in
place before anything's supposed to be built? Correct. The roadway is supposed to be in place, >> the drainage and the the um >> the roadway before they can actually >> the binder. >> Yeah. >> Which is the first layer, >> right? Right. Because they're not going to leave it like with all that rock
that's down there cuz that's just I mean it helps but I don't know if it's like helping >> like the stone you're talking about. >> Yeah. I mean it's I mean they're like big chunks of stone. It's >> Well, a lot of that is because of all the the heavy equipment that's going >> No, I I get that.
control too. >> Yeah, I know apologize for three days. >> What? I've been listening to them break up that lock. >> Oh yeah. 7:30 in the morning they were going to start breaking >> seven. It is seven is the regulations and it was so in the conditions for
weekday it starts at 7:00. >> Somebody said that they started at 6:30 and the board of health was out there to address the noise complaint and apparently they said it was a one-off that they started at 6:30 but during the week it's 7:00 to 5. I did check the the conditions. >> Okay. I thought it was I thought it was 8:30.
>> Uh it's later on the weekend. >> Okay. Sunday though, right? Sunday wasn't enough. >> Not Sunday and holidays. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So So how when what's going to be done to take the water coming off of Pine Crest? So it's not I mean it's a
straight shot into John's driveway right into his garage. Road comes down right into his house. How are we going how are we going to prevent that from infiltrating his property if there's no there's no sore up there? There's no nothing. All there is is
>> there's just curve to the road and then that's it. Nothing removing storm water >> at all. >> What number? >> When was this house built? >> John is 22. >> And I'm three. >> Yeah. >> When was that house built? Do you know >> that you're talking about that's just dumping? >> That's been 10 years.
>> Oh. Yeah. >> Yeah. Was it a single house or it was built as part of the house? >> Oh, so it went through ZBA for >> We didn't have these issues until you took off all the the trees and everything up top. Now there's nothing
holding the water. It was just coming right down. >> All those trees got cut down. I actually lost a tree and that ended up landing on my car after they cut them down. Yeah, it was in my driveway and it Yeah, it wasn't even my >> property. All the all the construction
up there has just ruined the water flow and and it's inundated the whole length of beach. >> There is a lot of water where it's supposed to be diverting it to but it's still flowing right down the road. I don't know. >> So I don't know like we just had record
number snow fall >> but it's been before the snow like since they taken the trees down it's just been non-stop flowing down the road. It's actually like washing where the actual pavement ends in front of my house is like old pavement. It's actually washing that away and that's
>> they started they started the tree in last year. >> Yeah, like the start of the end of spring or something. >> There was a big summer or June. >> I guess my question Kathy, did we have peer review out to inspect the drainage or any of that? >> So they cut the trees down and that was
it. They didn't do anything. >> I know Stephanie did an inspection. I'm not sure what that was though. >> Okay. >> She did one of the first inspe we've been there all our lives so we know how the water flows, how it was flowing and how it's flowing now. >> Okay. So, what I'd like to do is contact
peer review. Okay. Um I'm thinking we contact them, ask them, you know, where because if you don't know what I'm not sure what milestones that they've been out there for to inspect. Was it PS and Thomas >> inspection office?
>> Right. So, I'd like if we could just confirm what inspections have been done with uh for Pinerest. >> Mhm. >> And if we could get an inspection set up, you probably need to get some more uh funds put into that 53G account. um
as well as uh a cushion to address any um damage because that's even though that's condition I think we should maybe ask town council about um I don't know if there's a certain figure monetary figure
that we should ensure that they have in that account for that purpose or >> well you probably have to determine what inspections are needed and get a proposal >> well I'm I'm talking not talking about just the inspection I'm talking about um for the damage damage if there's any
damage because that is a condition but I don't recall if we had asked them to put anything aside for that purpose. >> I I think there is a bond but I'd have to check on that. >> Okay. >> Is there a way you can put some sort of a stipulation before they close out on
the permit a the road is back to the way it was because of all the runoff. >> Yes. So the the drainage absolutely is supposed to >> and the drainage between be from beach tree all the way up to Pinerest cuz he's the one that built those houses
previously including the Stan the Stanley house wasn't even supposed to be built. That's supposed to be the firetruck turnaround and somehow he got a permit to put a house up there. So now there's no fire truck turnaround. >> My house almost burned down
>> because they couldn't get the fire truck. Yes, that was your house. that my house is the blue house. My house almost burned down because they couldn't get the fire trucks down there. >> Right. We heard all >> they got stuck. Yeah, that road is nonconforming. And by adding 20 houses to a non-conforming road, you really
made the situation 10 times worse. >> And now we have to suffer for it. And it's >> so the thing is the thing is they could have built a single house without going through site plan review, without getting the peer review on the drainage. So to allow it was either if we didn't allow it, you'd actually probably be
worse off without getting that drainage peer review. And so at least now we have an engineer peer review that's going to go out and review the drainage, ensure that it is being captured for the new houses being built. >> So that I'd say is the only upside to
the caveat of >> I mean if you if you go down there and look at where they did that new paving, you can see how it's eroded away. >> Mhm. And it's it's not >> you're talking about on the sides of the road. >> Yeah. What they did is where the where the shock bend is cracking, >> they pushed it all back, piled it up,
and then there's dump some asphalt without grading it or anything. So now instead of the water going this way, the water's coming this way back onto the road and coming down even like 5t or something like that. Maybe >> we we need we need drainage from the
stop. There used to be a pipe over there that drain >> under the road to the to the lake where they put that. >> And we need drainage along beach tree between my house and my land on the land side to drain that down into the frog pond and
then that'll drain out. But right now it's just staying. I can't even put my trash out. It's so wet. >> Right. So it's always >> I mean I I' I'd have to look at what sort of we'd have to look back through documentation. What does the HOA agreement say? You know, what are you
responsible to do on your own now that it's, you know, a private road? The There's a lot of that I'm assuming is not something we can um control or help with, but we can go >> going forward. The new construction
construction items is what we can >> check to help with. Yeah. >> Peer review check to see that drainage is being >> I don't I just don't think they're done yet cuz it's supposed to be in there. supposed to be a >> well you know it's coming down right 74 74 72 >> and then it comes down to 71 and up
where the per the temporary ones I guess they just haven't done it yet >> I don't know if the water's making it into the >> I know some of it's in there but that's just water standing water from rain and snow melting right >> what are you talking about >> no what I'm talking about their their end goal for their I'm just looking at
the drainage or are they supposed to put a retaining pond any place up there besides the one next to his house and is is Is there any piping to direct the water or is it just going to run down the road? >> So, >> you know what I'm saying? If it's just going to run down the road, it's going to go right into John's house. You got to re got to redirect it somehow.
>> They are supposed to redirect, but it's only for their road. So, what happens is what they're doing is the road is supposed to go into this. But anything beyond around that, I don't know. >> But this hasn't been constructed yet, right? >> It's all full of water already. >> Point process is like that.
>> It's it's dug. It's already full of water, >> right? But And it's also it's showing that it's working as it should in these photos because it's not coming out the other side, >> right? >> It's not it's not overflowing >> till they put the house as though it's just going to compress everything that's
underneath it. Push it. >> There's just nowhere for the water to go. >> Yeah, it is. >> There's no drainage down there except for >> I just don't want to come in my backyard cuz my septic tank's in the back >> and my leeing fields back there. >> Well, and it looks like it's supposed to capture it before it goes down there. So
that's what I think we should do agree on. Do you think get in peer review to give us >> I want to make sure. Yeah, because that is supposed to be used for >> those will be done for the construction. >> Yeah, the drainage was supposed to be put in first.
>> Yeah. Utiliz as construction here. >> I didn't see pipes. I just saw they just dug it. I didn't see any pipes back there. >> Yeah, >> cuz on the other side of where they dug, you can I mean it's it's wet like around the outside. Let me get a look at it. >> Wet on the outside edges around my my
property already. >> So, um, are we good with Do you agree? Yeah. >> Ask Kathy to get a quote from peer review to get out there, see if they can check on the milestones where they stand >> and we can put it on our next agenda so we can
>> So, did you say is there a pipe in that plan for where the retention where it's supposed to retain the water or is it just supposed to hold it? >> There is a pipe. There is supposed to be a 12 in. This is what it's showing. >> Dumps out dump out to >> behind your >> Oh, that's the frog pond.
>> That's what my septic now. See that frog pond? >> Yeah. >> That frog pond is probably >> from here over how big it is. You look at it now. It's >> so not even 20 ft. >> It's not even 20 ft. >> And when you look at the flow from up top, you can see all the sediment coming
down. It was never like there's nothing living in there now. Okay. at all. >> Nothing living in there. >> There's nothing living in that fraud pond. >> I mean, >> well, I mean, the conservation agent did go out and he said that everything on
their end seems to be working as it should. >> Um, but like I said, we're going to we'll follow up with peer review. We're going to put it on a future agenda so that we can follow up and make sure that it's moving forward. But we do need to move on >> with this meeting as you know. So
>> peer review be in attendance for the next meeting? >> So probably not. Um but we can just ask them. >> Yeah, >> we can get an update. >> They can do can we set up a time so I can we can meet somebody out there to do the walk around? >> Would you mind? >> I know John's going to be back tomorrow.
>> Okay. >> He's in California right now. >> Yeah. So I think we have an email chain from John and what was your name again? >> Mike Nashi. >> Is Mike on that? >> No. Eric. Eric and >> so Eric and >> he's out of town too. >> It just happened.
>> Yeah, bad bad timing. That's why I'm like I'll come. >> I'm doing this off the cuff. >> Okay. Okay. So, you're not on here, but um if you would like to email Kathy, >> just give me your email and I'll >> um and then she can coordinate when she
finds out from peer review when they're going to go out. If you'd like to be able to meet up with them, that should be okay. get it. >> If if not, John John should have her email, >> too, because I think I think Nate >> Yeah, >> Nate responded to John and copy K. We
can give it to you anyway, but >> I think I have it. I think John sent it to me, too. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yep. So, Kathy was copied on that one, but we'll see what uh we can do. >> So, yeah, they'll we can we can let them know when PR is going to go out there, right?
>> Yeah. She'll be able to that, right? >> Yeah. Okay. Did you already lose somebody my number or >> um >> you want just you want to just email John and then John can get a hold of us? >> Yeah, if you if you're in contact with John, I'm sure he can arrange it too. >> There's her email. >> Okay, I appreciate it.
>> And we can we can put you on it as well. So that way >> and I just want to verify that you are going to put some sort of a binder on that that is going to be able to he has to finish all whatever before the permit is signed off on. Correct. That was the one thing that they were they worried about is making sure there's something
in there to hold them to it. >> I I don't want to speak out of context, but we would have to look through the paperwork that was filed and everything. >> So, with the decision that there was a set of conditions that go along with it, and one of those conditions is that the drainage has to be installed.
>> The road the road is the one thing that the road repair, >> right? And that is that is >> that is part of the question. That's the main thing. I appreciate it. >> All right. >> Thank you. Have a good night. All right, back to agenda item number two. Approve the January 22, 2026
meeting minutes. Has everyone had a chance to review the minutes? >> Madam Chair, I had no >> changes. >> No changes. All right. Would someone like to >> I'll make a motion to approve the Thursday, January 22nd, 2026 as meeting minutes as drafted.
>> Second. >> Motion and a second. All in favor? >> I. >> I. Minutes are approved. Agenda item number three, review the following zoning board of appeals petition. We have a Campanelli, 234 Kenneth Welch Drive. >> So in our packet, we have a special
permit for um they're looking to go through ZBA for height. Um >> now >> I know I saw it in here. Now I'm not
seeing it. Um, >> it's in. Yeah. But is it just height? It says see attached briefing, right? There's nothing. >> They were going to do um height. >> Yeah. Well, >> parking spaces.
>> I didn't see where the parking spaces were. >> H three out of five. The proposed. So they're talking about the building height is defined in Lakeville zoning laws is by and they have that and the applicant has no reasonable alternative available to accomplish this purpose and a man more compatible with the character
of the immediate neighborhood. So, um they're trying to say that um based on foregoing petitioner contends the zoning board appeals may determine that requirements of Lakeville zoning
board uh have been satisfied. So, he basically wrote up it sounds like a decision for the ZBA. Kathy, is this is that Shaughnessy seems to have drafted? >> Oh, yeah. Like a narrative.
>> Mhm. Okay. Um, >> I think last time Amy was here, it was the same situation that it's a uh it's a petition that's going to the CBA and the planning board and then she recommended not commenting. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. So, we will have them
come before us for site plan review. Okay. So, we shouldn't comment. >> No comment. >> All right. Want to make that motion >> cuz we're getting a special permit then. >> Okay. Well, they're getting they're going to ZBA for the special permit, but they're coming to us for site plan review. So, I guess >> under the special permit.
>> Yeah. No. Um No, it's not a special permit for us. It's just an addition that falls under site plan review because it's increasing the um lot coverage or >> by Yeah. 15 more than 150 ft. >> Yeah.
>> They're building going more than 1500 feet as well, right? >> Yes. But what but >> so the ZBA would be one if they're if they're they're changing the building height. >> Yeah. So and I don't know why looking through here like 12 times I I I know
it's going from 35.7 to 37.5 >> the addition going back because it's the addition going back the grade out back because they're they're in the buffer zone for the for wetlands. >> So that grade drops off. So now their building height is two feet higher because their addition is 2 feet more
out of whack than it was currently because of the grade of the new addition. >> Ah >> so the average building height goes up because of the grade dropping below which I I mean it's the building height I don't think is changing and I don't know I'm I don't think the building height is changing. I think it's just
that their grade is dropping off. >> Okay. >> So I'm okay I'm actually okay with that. Again, my more my more my concern is that the parking spaces that they haven't clearly defined how many are required, >> but we'll have a chance to go over that with site plan. >> As long as as long as Yeah. So, I guess the
>> the thing is though, this applicant is um is looking to sort of expedite and I did say that we could get quotes from peer review, but I told Kathy we're not sending it up to peer review before our first meeting. >> No, exactly. So,
>> yeah. Um, so do does anyone want to make a motion to make no comment on 234? >> Yeah, I I make a motion to um provide no comment to the ZBA regarding 234 Kenneth
Drive at this time. >> All right, we have a motion >> second >> and a second. All in favor? >> I. >> And B is Rubido Cornerstone. >> Yep. >> On 111 Highland Road. So, it looks like they are trying to put in a new sign,
replace the existing sign with a back lit sign. >> Yep. >> Uh it's a updated LED message board sign. >> So, they're going to the ZVA because >> um it's only allowed by special permit
for them to do a back lit message board. >> That's what I Yeah. >> Uh but the thing is um >> it's an LED display though, right? Is it going to be They're only they're they're not allowed um an electronic message board more than 12 feet. Uh but I guess this is not so I
guess it's not changing or is it? >> I don't know. I can't tell >> because right now I know that they have the changeable copy. So my thought was that it's probably going to be a sign that changes >> right. So, >> so I have a couple questions for Madam
Chair on the board regarding this because >> depending like I I I see where this is going, but there's no um plan as to whereabouts the sign's going to be located. >> Same spot. So, that would be Highland, not Highland, but
>> the corner of Highland and and and county. So I guess my question would be is it going to be um the same size and if it if it is now there is a house at the corner there >> right? Yes.
>> And that is that considered a residential area. They have business there too though the dogs. >> So it's a residential business though it's a residential zone. >> Right. Right. Um, so we do have in our sign bylaw, it says, you know, no illum,
it shall not be illuminated from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. shall not abut residential properties on side or across the street. Um, and internally illuminated signs greater than 24 square foot are prohibited. So
>> right now they're at the full size of a permitted sign, which is the 32 >> 32. >> So unless they're taking off. So that's where I guess I don't have enough knowledge because is this top piece not going to be internally illuminate? Is it
just this bottom portion? >> So I I think it's just going to be the bottom portion. I think the top portion is just their logo, but I could be wrong because it's tough to say because it's not indicating >> right. We're not getting a full
explanation >> what it is. So, I would suggest that we send to the zoning board um a recommendation to conform with our existing sign bylaw. Um and probably outline that um
>> clearly define >> these these one, two, three, four items. I think that electronic message board no more than 12 square feet. >> No illuminated 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. shall not uh but residential properties on side or across street
>> and also that um internally illuminated signs greater than 24 ft are prohibited. So that I think just taking those right out of the sign bylaw seem to be the ones that apply here. >> So I'd like to send that comment back to ZBA. >> Yep. >> If you all agree.
>> Yep. I agree. So move. >> All right. >> Yes. So moved. >> Motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> Okay. >> All right. We're on >> back to agenda item number four. We've already done Bella away. Um next item using serpent hours for open space plan.
So in our packet, there is a letter November 17, 2025. This is in response to the open space and recreational plan. It's directed at our town administrator from Melissa Cryan, the grant program supervisor. So there are a number of items that still need to be updated and
and um revised for the current open space plan. And previously planning board had allocated the 20 hours that we have yearly for open space to use Serpent to complete those items. I would like to suggest
that this board does that same >> at this time. We get 20 um serpent hours for free every year. Slack board does as well. um and they renew in July. So, we haven't had a reason to use them. We've already we've had other resources to be able to use Serped over the past year.
If someone would like to >> Yep. I'll make a motion to use the Serpad hours for open space plan. >> Uh just a quick discussion note. Um >> want a second and then discussion. >> Yep. Second. >> Okay. Discussion. >> Discussion. Um
when would they have to be used by >> July >> of this fiscal year? >> Yes. Okay, >> that's all I have. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I motion carries. Um, >> and I think you've already been in
contact. I think you've connected them already, Kathy. Thank you very much. Thank you, Joan, if you're watching. God bless you. Keep going. Um, next item, discuss planning consultant. Um, so we did lose the town planner. she is
willing to stay on as a consultant for certain items that she felt was in her wheelhouse, including the stormwater bylaw. And also, um the other item in the packet regarding the hospital site, there was something that she thought was worth exploring. Y >> um I thought
that seemed like a good idea if we could utilize her for those items. If we would like to take a vote to uh make a recommendation to the select board to uh utilize her for consultant purposes. >> I make a motion to make a recommendation
to the select board to maintain um previous town planner as a keep on as a planning consultant for the so mentioned items. >> So move motion then >> second. Second. >> All in favor? >> I I motion carries.
>> Yeah. All right. Uh, we already went over Pinerest Village. The next one is the hospital site Brownfield. So, in our packet, we had >> Which one is that one? >> An interesting email from Stephanie that um
>> it was okay. She had a teams meeting this morning with a few folks at Mass DP. It was set up by Mass DP to follow up on an inquiry I put into the local coordinator in the beginning of January. It was a good call with positive discussion and potential for moving that site in the right direction. So, she
goes into detail as to who was there and what was discussed. Um, so given the history of the site operating on this property and the possibility of being the cause of any hazards found on the site, it will lead to additional discussions with D and EPA on whether or not it's eligible for
funding. I recommend cross that bridge when you get there. There's been ample discussion around the risk and contamination prohibiting the developer from moving forward, but it is lacking in documentation with proper authorities. I believe this assessment would help get things moving and provide some answers and avenues for moving
forward. So, she's talking about an assessment um that the town could potentially apply for uh just for a determination >> and um the she doesn't believe there would be any um liability implications.
>> I do think we should probably just verify with town council. But if this is something that we could um explore, I think it's worth it >> because something needs to happen in that at that site. Um and this is one of the items she was interested in helping
us move forward if we are able to utilize her. >> Okay. >> So, um should we take a vote to y >> ask town council that question about liability if we were to move forward? probably just forward this email from Stephanie
>> and explain and ask town council is this a liability risk or is is this something that the town could apply for >> and um look for that assessment without any liability. >> Yeah, agreed. >> Okay. >> So moved. >> All right. We have a motion
>> second and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I motion carries. All right. >> Nice. So Kathy, do you want me to come down and I will sign that sign the I don't know if do I I'm assuming I still need to go down and sign that form.
>> Yeah, >> we took a vote. So it's a vote of the board. Okay, I'll come down and put that out and we can move forward with that. Next item, storm water management bylaw update. So Stephanie did give us a
detailed feedback. She went through the storm water bylaw, made a number of red line changes. Um, we are waiting to hear back from Serped on um, >> we did or we didn't. No, we're waiting
to hear back. But on um question of enforcement uh whether we can use um fees collected for for that purpose >> to um employ a >> whether it's like a peerreview engineer
or >> so a 53g. >> So that that's the question is how it how it could be done. So, we are waiting to hear back from them, but otherwise, I don't know if you guys had a chance to
go through it, but it seems pretty good. She's also got the rules and regulations. >> Oh. Um, well, Serpent had drafted them, but she's also gone through those. Um, and then also we had the interim town planner at a point. She had come up with the application process, and I think
Stephanie sort of tweaked that one as well. >> Um, she also came up with the storm water department application. And she did say one of the the major items I think um she does think that we should include
a specific storm water fee. I think I thought this was where she had noted it, but >> on the application or in the regulation. >> A lot of heads. Um I support the proposal to collect storm
a permit fee and place those fees into that's not where see this is a hurdle and do not recommend collecting a separate fee. Oh that's what it was. It was in regards to the tiered fee that we have.
There was a section proposed to collect a large fee based on acreage disturbed. Um that would go into the revolving fund. I see this as a hurdle. I do not recommend collecting a separate fee. Just stick to the initial permit fee. Reason being that typically the board
will need to review uh request peerreview services from an engineer consultant during site plan review subdivision control view of the plans and is also noted under standard order of conditions that a fee will be collected and put into a 53g account to support inspections.
>> This means a second large fee collected under stormwater permit is redundant. So anyways, this is another item where I feel like she would be a benefit to keeping on because when we >> make these final edits,
>> I'd like her to be able to speak to these >> cuz I think which I thought that it was in there, but I'm not seeing it right now. But I thought she had said we should still have a separate stormwater permit fee because it's another
and she It's instead. So she said we should go through the site plan review process first. Once that is completed then they would apply for the stormwater permit and then at that point >> they would be issued the permit and that it would be a separate permit and that it should be uh recorded separately
>> and um tracked as well because that has to go back to the state for the MS4 reporting purposes. So um >> madam chair is that what she's referring to in one of the iterations storm water revolving fund and then
>> um >> so that >> section 53E >> so that is the question of how we could utilize fees to use for purposes of enforcement. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Sure. Um so anyways, let's keep this on the agenda. We'll see if we can get some more feedback from Serped. Um the next item, open space residential
development update. So yesterday, thank you Kathy for printing these. So yesterday we had the monthly update from Alex and his team and these two items in the packet, the technical briefing
and uh best practices. So these these kind of outline what they've looked at and and they compared to the different analysis the um one was the Audabon and then the other one is
There's another one. So they plugged it in basically to the tool kits. >> Mhm. >> The preliminary wershed protection standards analysis. So they plugged it into these two different tool kits basically to see where our >> OSRD stands. Yes. And so
there were a few items in there that he he had questions that I we did kind of go over during the meeting, but I told him that um there was a few things that I would have us discuss and get back to him on.
All right. So documents analysis review subdivisions of So they're combined. So these are things that go along with the storm water as well as the rules and rags.
>> Um reference of priority protection areas, talks about the communities that he um looked at that were similar. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So one of the questions was the 200 acre minimum and I told him that that was
based off this rocky woods. Originally we had 20 acres. I I also asked Nancy if she could put it on for conservation to uh send us their recommendation >> for how many acres they think it should be. Um Serpent's recommendation is
between the 10 and 15. He said that um that is so Rainom has 15 acre minimum parcel size and that's what he suggested. He he said that Rainom is probably like the happy medium. Middlebar is zero. They have um no no
minimum. Taunt has a minimum of five acres. So, I said that we would discuss and give him our feedback on that. I would like to get the feedback from conservation as well. >> I thought 15 acres sounds good. We were at 20 previously. >> Yep.
>> I don't know if there's a benefit to 20 instead of 15, >> but Serpent did seem to um recommend 15. >> Yeah. I mean, being more in alignment with the peer towns is good. So >> yeah, I think >> you know, sounds appropriate.
>> Okay. Yeah, we were like way out of line with other towns. >> Well, again, I think we we g it just so that it would only could only be offered to like that many. Yeah, but >> yeah, because we wanted to focus on larger parcels like Rockywood. So, >> the one that
>> that we were way out of line with that one. Uh and then so even right here where it said Rochester allows the board of health to determine lot sizes based on water wastewater capacity. We did um Ed the health inspector he did speak to that because at board of health that was
one of their caveats. >> Um so do we feel comfortable with the 15 acres? >> Yes. And he did say like it says here uh determining a balance for late book can be further refined through community
feedback. The event community event March 25th 4:00 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. at the Lakeville Library. Um he had one of my questions was how much feedback he's gotten so far because there is an electronic survey to
take and he said he's gotten 11 responses so far. So that's better than nothing. >> How many? >> 11. >> Okay. So, and they do they're not all in favor. Yeah. >> So, we'll see. We'll see what happens. Um,
>> and for that meeting is Lake Cam going to be >> Yes. Okay. >> Yes. Jose is aware and working on that. Um, one of the suggested was con consider combining with the stormwater permitting
special permit. Oh, so that's another thing. Um, oh, it's right here on page 10. Mandating special permit instead of byite approval. So, >> I saw it. Yeah. >> So, that's one of the things that I guess this board could could consider. Do we want it to be special permit or do
we want it to be a byite thing? Um, obviously I think Lakeville is probably more comfortable with its special permit. >> That's what I would >> but agree with, but >> um this four or fivestep design process I really liked that where um I don't
know if there's an example in here. Yes, right here. So page 12 is just an example model from Dyon and Middlebar. They have one of them has a five and one of them has a four-step process. >> Mhm. >> Which makes it um
pretty straightforward I guess. >> Yeah. >> For a developer um requiring 50% baseline preservation and offers no density bonus for providing public benefit. I don't know if that's something we want
to wiggle room with. Um, I think there was a suggestion about 65% >> and then allowing something else, but I feel as though we've been selling it as 50%. >> No, I think we 50/50. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Equal take to both developer and town.
>> Yeah. Because it already says that like it shouldn't all be wetlands either. Like it should be some decent >> well usable for the town. >> Yeah. Yeah. lacks any codified monitoring requirements. So, that's another thing
that sounds good that I'd like to do. Um, talking about after it's developed, monitoring, ongoing monitoring. He said that uh he couldn't find any good examples from other towns, but that this is probably something that >> should be done because >> we want to make sure that the open space
is being utilized as it should, that people aren't abusing it or trashing it or um so I would say yes to that personally if you're all on board that we would like to see some of that. >> Yeah,
>> absolutely. um where what purview would that fall under in terms of the monitoring. So that's what I think we would look for him to line it to outline um what that >> which which board >> what happens well would it be like with
peer review with a subdivision something maybe we have to have them set aside for a certain number of years so that we can monitor again in five years I don't know >> what you can >> potentially come up with >> I madam chair I think too for me
the um peer community analysis charts and the recommendations that were made were were clear. But then I think that this um the regulatory and best practices analysis was really for me
like an eye openener. They were really clear about the recommendations they they made and how a lot of the things that we should consider doing or are recommended doing align with the housing production plan, the master plan. so that we're rowing in the same direction.
And they clearly explained how those things are really important. >> Yeah. >> To the development. >> So for me to articulate to residents >> Yeah. >> when conflicts arise or they're uncertain about things,
>> this document was like super helpful. >> Yeah. So saying that it's in our housing production plan, it's in our master plan, it's in it's recommended across the board for a way of preserving open space and the reasoning behind the
recommendations, how it impacts the environment, the town >> um and benefits, >> right, >> in some ways like being really clear about how >> it would benefit. >> Okay. So, I just thought this was really
important. And I know we're having a meeting on the 25th >> for open space. >> So, like it's it's helpful to read. >> Oh, you mean? Oh, yeah. For the the library. It's not a meeting. It's just like a community community engagement. So that's what my hope is that if people
have are against it, they they show up and talk about it because like I'm still like the reason we haven't brought this is because I'm still kind of like not sure if I support it and but I want to bring something let the town vote on it and I want it to be the best possible option because do I think that if it's
in chapter 97 it can never be built on? Maybe. Could it potentially be built on someday? Maybe. Do I think that maybe individual homeowners are better off owning a larger piece of land rather than smaller piece of land and the government owning the bigger part? I
don't know. Like that's where I struggle personally, right? >> Because what happens with that land, you know, and and do I want to see open space preserved? Absolutely. Is that a a good way of putting open space aside?
Probably. Am I maybe just a little unnecessarily afraid maybe. But but that's been my two of the things holding me back. But let the talent decide, >> right? >> But they I I thought they did a good job
of laying out all the >> Yeah. Oh, absolutely. And >> and recommendations. >> It gets so in depth in here with why and how and >> yo, but I'm glad you found it useful. >> Yeah. So maybe you can speak to a town
meeting. Yeah. Oh, and we'll have to remember to post that, too, because I forgot to post it. I think for fall or something. I don't think we posted the planning board meeting for town meeting, but we'll have to remember so that every if anybody wants to get up and speak, it's not an open meeting law violation.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. >> All right. So, what do we think about special permit versus by right? >> I'm fine with special permit. >> I would agree. >> Okay. I do think >> I think the town would better >> feel better about Yeah. >> accept it. So, if I send him back
answers to these questions, we would like the special permit 15 acre seems good. We're waiting on feedback uh from conservation and what the public says. Um add this the four or fivestep process.
>> We're okay with the 50% baseline and yes to adding codified monitoring requirements. >> Is that good? >> That sounds great. permit shared wastewater treatment if needed. >> Yeah, >> that sounds fine. I think it says right
in our storm water to do it concurrently. >> Once again, that has to pass as well. So, these all these things sort of have to line up at the same time and follow like dominoes. Um, I think those were the questions.
Let me just quickly come through here. Oh, amend definitions. I think these are all things he's going to do anyways. >> So, are we going to but we are we going to allow them? I'm just looking at this. The allow open space to be wetlands. We don't want that though, right?
>> So, I think it says in there. So, we want to be able to protect wetlands. We want to use it as a tool to preserve it, but at the same time, we don't want it all to be wetlands. So, I think it says in there, um >> I don't remember exactly how it was written, but it was like the majority had
>> can't be all wetlands. Like, you can't just set aside your open space in public. >> Can't exclusively be wetlands. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> You got I don't know. >> But, I mean, obviously, if it's going to be walking trails, it's okay if your your walking trails are not within the wetland. >> Yeah. Area.
>> Yeah. community workshop March 25th. I already said that. Uh we have a next the next check-in meeting is the first Wednesday in April. If anybody else wants to attend, feel free to let me know and I'll send you >> I think we should put like a maximum
wetlands like like they did like he showed here. >> Yeah. Maximum wetland >> like Don Marian >> Middlebar reom. >> Okay. So you you want me to I'll add that as well. >> I think we add Yeah, I think we should if we're going to do it. Um, >> Carver was in there too, right?
>> Yeah. But Carver only had 15% minimum required open space. They have no no they don't have they can wetlands be used? No, but they don't. They only 15% >> okay >> space. But I like I think Marian is probably closer. So I mean Marian's 50% open space and then 50% of that can be
wetland. So at least 25% of the >> right. >> So of that 15 acres, you know, I mean you got seven and a half acres of >> Yeah. >> wetland. >> Well, yeah. Seven. You had seven and a half. You'll have what three or four acres of >> upland >> open space. Yeah. >> Of Yeah. Of upland. >> Okay. >> Cool.
>> All right. I added that if everybody sounds great agreement. That sounds good to me. >> All right. I'll get back to him with those. The next item opens it. >> That's it. Um committee >> liaison updates. >> No update. >> No update.
Yeah. And we had our public hearing for CBC. No one came. >> Um we're still working on the plan. If anybody has any comments on that, let me know. But I think pretty straightforward. Our next meeting is March 26,
2026 at the Lakeville Police Station. Any other business? Nope. >> Nope. >> All right. >> Make a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Motion and a second. All in favor? I >> I meeting is adjourned.