coordinated way. >> We're Is um we're here for the planning board meeting Thursday, July 9th, 2026 at the multi-purpose room center on Chad Street. Let's uh stand up and do the pledge of
>> allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands under. >> Okay. Uh board business. Minutes of prayer
meetings. Um this um minutes regime is going really well. We're getting them, you know, like right away. Did anyone have any comments? >> Can I have hear a motion? >> Make a motion to approve minutes of June
25th. >> Can I have a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Uh the next item is planning board new member guide. Now, our new member, did you have a chance to look at that?
>> Um, no. Well, I looked at what I received. >> Yeah. The Mansfield. Yeah. >> In March. >> Okay. >> Um, nothing else beyond. >> Okay, that's fine. Um, you came up with a guide from
>> town. Sarah does Sarah Roza the planning director there does a wonderful job of a lot of things for little specific items. Um I think I'll take you off of there. I just have
>> Oh, that's good. Yeah. Um board member updates under this item. Uh we had a request for a um planning board input into
um a small group looking at data centers and two people raised their hand uh Margot and Daryl. Um and I guess the and that's great. I'm glad. Um, and I guess Marin just had a comment
that as long as it's not something that has to be have minutes and would you explain your concern? Um yeah, if if it's a one time policy meeting um where you're just exchanging ideas um
with member of the select board and a member of the LEPD um that's not a problem. If it's going to be an ongoing um discussion um then consider having it be ad hoc committee
with as an open meeting minutes. Yeah, I mean, you know, I I I have some questions in terms of like what exactly they're looking at trying to do. And my personal preference would be is is um it sounds like this is
coming from the board of selectman. So, I'd like them to take lead on this as opposed to, you know, so they need us for input kind of view it as as we can provide it as it goes along. But I don't personally see driving, you know, creation of that
um you know, proposed by Yeah, my understanding is that it's to develop a a new bylaw. So, it will be an ongoing discussion um discussion group. So, I guess to for it to be an ad hoc committee. What is that? How is that
different? What is >> you would have to have an agreement between the other people, you know, they they may just want to know what's going through. I mean, we had talked about having something as simple as a loan
schedule. and then can go all you know forward to what conditions would anyway so I I think >> why don't you assess what the feeling is that this you know you guys get together
and then come back and we'll figure it out >> you have a lot of questions I will give them >> suggest a discussion with town clerk she'll guide you on um question of whether it's
>> we'll see how the first meeting the first discussion goes. Um the the the next item is public input. Is there anyone here who has any comments in general?
Um okay it having reached >> oh >> I wanted to talk about a specific topic would I talk now >> the a specific topic that isn't on the agenda >> I think it's on the agenda >> then then wait until that item
>> okay >> yeah because we'll take public comment um so it's past 6:35 and we have a continue public hearing scheduled for Blueird
Farm, 359 King Street. Uh I understand Gold here to ask for a contin to respond and interact with Green. So yes, we would like to next
please. Our next meeting is August 6th, um 21st at 6:45. Would that be okay with you? >> Thank you. Yes, we do that at 6:45. that leaves time for another discussion on
that. >> Um, yes. >> So, can I have a motion to continue make a motion to continue the public hearing from Blueberg Farm 359 King Street to
August 6 at 6:45? >> I have a second. We need a second. >> Second. >> Thank you. All in favor? Hi. Hi. >> Okay, we'll see you. >> Thank you very much. >> Next month. >> So, do we not have a meeting on the
29th? >> We have talked about Okay. >> I mean, unless you guys really >> No, no, no. I can take a >> It is summer and everyone before us is
suffering the same slowdown and >> kind of pale. Um, okay. So, we have a scheduled discussion on the ADU bylaw after which we will vote to schedule to
open a public hearing on a proposed bylaw that was scheduled for 650. Since it isn't a public hearing, let's um go into it now. So, I'm going to ask each of you to comment on uh
at least the draft bylaw that's been circulated. And um why don't we start with you? >> I'm going to interrupt just a second. Um so, we do have Gwen um from MAPC. She's the one that's been working with us, >> okay,
>> all along. And Chris will be joining us shortly. >> Okay. Thank you for doing this tonight. Um Marin had circulated a uh our existing accessory
um highlighting all the things that we couldn't do anymore. And I thought that was very effective because it was the almost the entire document was um was highlighted. I guess that's the way to put it. uninforced way. Um
and uh so that was a you know a starting point and I just want to show you know this is the sort of the yellow is highlighting what is now unimposable
under state law. Um so back to you comments. Well, um, yeah, I I wanted to discuss the the,200 square foot, um, maximum size. I'm I'm just wondering
what our target demographic is. I lived in a,200 foot apartment with three bedrooms. It was very comfortable with, you know, that size. If the dining room was made into an eating kitchen, then you could get three bedrooms in there.
And um I'm just wondering if we really want ADUs that big. I don't know what really the target demographic is. I I I share a similar thing that I I would prefer that we go to the state 900
square feet which seems to be a pretty pretty robust um you know size for au >> um just to share the reasoning with going 12 with 1200 is that's what the current ADU bylaw allows and that was it
was um bill received at town meeting to support the 1200 spread at that time. >> But my concern is this 1,200 is is a pretty, you know, it's the size of a three-bedroom ranch, which is pretty large for something to
get dropped into possibly in a backyard uh there, which then sort of starts putting it out of scale with, you know, the houses around, you know, the main unit and the other one. I know there's sighting issues associated with whether you could actually do that, but it is, you know,
if you drive through the Navnasset area of Westford, those are all thousand square foot ranches built in the 50s, you know, so it's those are pretty reasonable size houses uh there. So that's why I'm thinking that 900 would
be better a better number. My recommendation on that. So, the other um I think it has to be bigger because if you go to Costco to buy an 85 in television for $300, now you need a
bigger room to put it in, you know. Um having said that, my real reason is because everybody I think 900 might be too small, 1,200 people working from home now. You're going to have to accommodate the fact
that there might have to be an office in there. It's not just a two-bedroom unit. >> Yeah. But but the purpose of the bylaw is to provide h you know more housing, not to provide home office space. >> But people are working from home now. So maybe it's does have to be I mean I don't care what the number is. I'm just
saying the reason it should be maybe a little bigger is because we're doing more stuff at home now. That's all. >> That's fair. But I mean there are tiny houses. There have always been studio apartments where somebody sets up like a work from home corner. Um I think like
to Bartlett's point, I grew up in a thousand square foot ranch that was a two-bedroom and then my grandmother lived with us briefly and so it became a threebedroom and it worked and I think if it it worked in the 80s it could
>> as someone who works from home. I >> mean I don't really care. The big thing to me is that it has to stay in common. I'm going to ship it. >> Yes, I saw that. >> That's an important >> I saw that. >> Um, so if you could provide the direction on what number board members want to use that
>> so once we get to the hearing we can't we get to the hearing. So let's um well no Martin's saying that we should at this point >> right come to a >> so we're allowed to guide the what the input is for the hearing I wanted to
make sure process wise >> the hearing could change it to bigger >> so uh is there anyone interested in a thousand >> just I I would point out that 900 is in
the old days was a HUD maximum for two bedroom >> and that was a lot of housing was built under that um dimension. So process-wise, if I say I'd like to propose that be 900 square feet,
what do you need from the board to >> It's just consensus. Yeah. >> All right. I make a recommendation that it be 900 square ft and if you could pull the board if that would be what you would like to see as of initial draft. >> And you're you're basing that on the fact that that's the state
>> that's the state size that we can't go under 900. >> Do we um when did the state set that standard? >> Just last year. And then do we know what other towns that have implemented ADU bylaws what um square footage they've been hitting?
>> No. >> There's been a variety. I can I've worked with some different municipalities. Some are doing 900,200 is actually pretty common number that we're seeing for people that want to put in a little bit more flexibility. Um,
and I would say the reasoning that we've also talked about doing 1,200 is just really it's a pro housing policy. It's a way to increase access to housing, different types of housing. And um it's not that you can't fit a lot of bedrooms
in 900, but doing 1,200 might allow for more families um to live in an ADU or different groups have more people living in a house. Um so that's what we're thinking about there with the 1,200 square f feet >> and
I understand that rationale but given that this is by right uh at 1,200 I I think you know we're the impacts on uh neighbors as you start putting larger ADUs becomes more significant uh there if by right we can get 900 but by right
for 1200 I said like I said that's that's a healthy size three-bedroom ranch to drop into uh neighborhoods uh there and that has a to me a significant impact on the neighborhood. I know that you know while we can still meet the goals of providing more um
rentable housing uh at 900 ft. Um, so can I have I heard from on this? Do we want So the issue is is the 900 if
can we agree on the state um minimum state? Well, state maximum the minimum maximum, right? The minimum maximum. Now my my concern is that somehow in my mind I have the image of
these uh adus as being one story and a 12,200 square foot one story is that's a big big thing on your property. >> Um you're you're going to have to have a driveway and you know I also
uh you don't have to have a driveway. Well, you have to have parking unless it's near the, you know, you you'll have to have anyway. And then the other thing is what what about if they want to build a garage? What about if this what about that? And that has to do with, you know,
does it have a basement? If it has if it's 900 square ft with a basement, uh, do we have that? Does it have I mean there's nuance y >> to this which we can thrash out in the um hearing
>> another term that I heard and I think act is using you know I don't know their exact terminology but is there some definition of habitable space that we could use in here >> well >> gross floor area I'll let um Gwen or
Chris take that one with the gross floor area calculation. >> Well, that depends on our bi on our by >> No, actually that um that is defined by state law. Can everybody hear me? Okay. >> Yes. >> Y
>> great. So that yeah that is um gross floor area is defined in the state regulations that were adopted last year and includes the sum of the areas of all stories of the building of compliant ceiling height pursuant to the building
code including basements, lofts and intermediate floor tiers measured from the interior bases of exterior walls or from the center line of walls separating buildings or dwellings units but excluding crawl spaces, garage, parking areas, attics, enclosed porches and similar spaces.
Um, so it specifically excludes garages. >> Specifically certain that excludes garages and that that I think is primarily in there to because we use gross floor area in I think two ways. One for in the
usual case um the gross floor area of the principal dwelling might matter for in terms of how big the ADU can be. Um because under state law the ADU can be 900 square ft or half the square footage
of the principal development whichever is smaller. So the the inclusion of the garage in that definition is I think intended to keep the garage from counting um for purposes of the calculation of the ADU's permissible
size. So they we they could build an an ADU then add a garage but the garage doesn't count against the what square foot footage allocated to the ADU space. Yeah. >> Right. But there's they but they can't
convert that garage to livable space afterwards. What's our mechanism to make sure that that doesn't occur? that would be handled by our lot coverage and setbacks and our other
regular baseline dimension requirements in the zoning environment. >> And the gross floor area though does include a basement whether or not it is finished as habitable space. >> No. >> Yeah. >> Sounded like you said it does. Well, in
Actton, what they do is they they specify grossly by the height of the ceiling, state code, it's 7 feet or more is habitable. So, if you do a basement that has a ceiling and you do this
structurally so that it can't be changed, uh although they they I think go down to six. Uh but there are ways I don't know what what are other communities doing to control this >> but to I think back to the Darl's
question about uh homes built ADU is built there's an extra garage somewhere that cannot be converted to part of ADU because of the definition of ADU um gives it the maximum size.
>> Okay. Uh any anyway, I we probably didn't need need to make sure that we have that definition of gross floor areas, but it's not in our draft right now. Um here, uh but um it still sounds like it sounds like there's a loophole
here that if they built the the garage doesn't count as part of the 900 square ft of ADU because it's doesn't make that part of the definition uh there. Uh, but I don't see any provision that prevents them
that from then converting it to a bedroom. >> Pull a permit and >> but there's nothing to prevent them from adding on to the ADU. >> Yeah, it does. They only have 900 ft. So, if it's 900 ft and they try to pull a building permit to turn the garage
another 250 ft to it, they can't pull the building permit. The building inspector hopefully would catch that and say, "No, you can't add to your ADU." >> So, >> yeah, I think it's fair. I think it's safe to say. I mean there the adus are protected in in in any number of
ways under the new regs but I think it is fair to say that you could not build a dwelling structure ADU dwelling structure that contains 900 ft and then add a garage onto that ADU that that would not be allowed. And the reason I
bring it up is in the um meadows, whatever the one, the 40B, >> Wildflower Meadows, >> Wildflower Meadows. Um you know, in their permit and stuff, it said no additions. But sure enough, they were going to the building department to get building permits and I think they got
several granted before the ZBA told them to stop it. I was a butter. I was notified of those hearings. I made sure that we had input on that uh there. So I see it as a natural evolution of the process here that um you know that uh
we want to be I want to be careful we don't have a loophole that could be exploited uh by people on it. I don't know if >> I can I can I guess two two responses to that. One I can think about how to best defend
against that scenario. Okay. But two, I don't believe state law would allow for the concern that that that units express. I think I think they get a basically 900 ft of living area in
an ADU and once that's constructed, the ADU doesn't um doesn't allow more. Now if that assumes though that by adding the ADU you know the residential lot has
maxed out its um you know the developable capacity of a particular lot. If you know if you had a big lot with a principal dwelling and so now I'm going to go in circles. You
had a big lot with a principal dwelling and the lot had plenty of um available lot coverage, floor area ratio, wasn't close to any of the setbacks, etc. And they put it in a 900 foot ADU, detached
freestanding 900 foot ADU, and still had a lot of dimensional capacity to work with. you know, there's that in that scenario, there's no reason why they couldn't put a new garage on the principal dwelling or elsewhere on the lot, I suppose, if the zoning otherwise
allowed for it. So, I think uh I it seems to me that state law doesn't compel an ADU having a garage, but I can think about again I can think about between now and the public hearing. I can think about how we >> because I I know of a lot that's a sort
of a corner lot and it butts two streets and the backyard is, you know, if you split the lot in half, it it's two lots. I don't know who might that be, but um I looked at their yard the other day. Again,
it's it's not the normal case. It's it's my concern is is is the potential for abuse of the intent of what we're doing here. >> Um I think that we can work on uh this definition, an enforceable
definition of whatever maximum gross air floor area um we're going to put in the bylaw. But it seems to me consensus wise that we're going toward 900. Is that the case
for the initial hearing? And then >> Yes. >> Do we have anything that specifies in here? I didn't read anything that made it clear that you can only have one ADU on a if you have a very large law
>> or to that end. >> Okay. Yeah, the >> I don't even understand why we are going to allow a second. >> That's for there for discussion. >> Okay. Good. >> Right.
>> One protected use ADU on every >> Okay. So, it allows for one and then you could deter you could in your community say will allow others. Grant says a maximum of two may be allowed >> right when you get back to
>> 3D. >> Yeah. 3D. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. More discussion. So this uh and and this says that we would be allowed as a special permit. Now for the um
the planners here we in our community the the um limiting factor is going to be septic and I just don't see Even allowing a use case of a second ADU
even by special permit is worth the trouble. But what do we I I don't think we should rely on the technology of subject systems to be the thing that influences our planning here because that technology is constantly changing. Well, that that's a good point, but
>> um that that is going to be the limiting factor almost always in town even with one ADU. Um anyway, I was wondering about that too because where it says here including a
provision for an appropriate reserve area on site or appropriate sewer service. As far as appropriate reserve area on site, would an ADU be tapping into existing septic on site? Because if
a septic is sized based on the number of bedrooms in the primary dwelling unit and now we're playing with the additional number of bedrooms. Is that what happens or do we require an additional septic system? supportive health issue. But in general,
uh, septic systems are provided based on the bedrooms and structure. And if you're adding bedrooms, you'd have to either redo the septic system or do a separate, >> but it doesn't preclude putting in a separate um >> No, I do not allow a second.
I I think when we get to that section, I >> I just don't think it's worth the trouble for >> um the the other big issue with common ownership. uh our
bylaw and the bylaw proposed states that the principal structure in the ADU would have to remain in common ownership. Now, we can talk about it at the I'm looking at you, Sherry, because
>> because uh you know, from the real estate attorney point of view, um ownership isn't necessarily a uh z is a zoning issue. Um, and let's let's
go to town council and other um our other expert. Um, you can condo anything and zoning. >> Talking to Chris the zoning expert. >> Let's talk Chris talk about common
ownership. How how is that a realistic restriction? So this is so the language that you have in the draft you're looking at tonight is not required by state law but this is one of the areas where we can regulate
if we want to. So this is this the planning board should regard this section of the draft as optional not required. Um and you were right Jeff that in almost all cases um zoning does not regulate
the form of ownership. You know, if you've got a two family allowed in a zoning district, it can be owned by one one person or you can condoise it and sell the two units and the two family to two different people. Um, this is a
slight I I think this is an interesting and slightly different uh context than we're used to in sort of all of the other zoning practice that we do where we say that you can't regulate form of ownership. And this is a little bit different um because the ADU does have
to be accessory to the principal dwelling. That's a fundamental component of what's being allowed here. And if you've got a principal dwelling that's 2,000 square ft and an accessory dwelling unit with 900 ft and they're both on the same lot and they're both
owned by the same person, um it it it necessarily follows that the ADU is indeed accessory to the principal dwelling as um in terms of how you think about it. If the two though are are turned into a
condominium or somehow subdivided and sold off to two different entities, um you know, it seems to me that you may be losing the um accessory nature of the ADU as compared to the rental particularly if
they're own by two different people um that are independent and entirely unrelated. So I think there is um the way we used to think about ADUs and the way we think about ADUs under current new I think it makes some sense for them to
remain in common ownership to preserve the accessory primary um relationship that's part of this um relationship between the two structures. But again, that's that's me that that these
comments constitute me um uh you know, sort of doing some editorial thinking about this. Again, it is not required that you prohibit the conveyance of the ADU and December. I I buy your argument
because I could see that if condoization occurs, then this relationship sort of disappears with the various owners who may not even understand what you know what this original
relationship was. And so the one owner and what had been the ADU goes, "Oh, I'm going to do an addition or I'm going to do this." and then shows up and and if if the ownership is divided then can
they do whatever they want? I mean I I this this is why there is a reason to go into this common ownership issue whether um it's eventually upheld by case law I
through the chair to Chris and just some thoughts that I've been stewing over for a long time now. I believe that clever attorneys are going to be able to condominiumize the principle and accessory into one unit ownership being
the condominium association and be able to say to lawyers to the public to the town. It's still a accessory to the principal dwelling or the principal building because the condominium owns it all and then sell one unit to each
condominium unit owner. So, I think it's going to be hard to draft legislation like that, Chris. Maybe there needs to be the addition of a bylaw requiring permission to condominiumize in this town, which Somerville and other towns have, so we can capture that problem.
That's that's to me a primary problem if we don't want to have separate owners. The other side of that coin that's been troubling me a lot is that I'm having an awful lot of clients now as I age, aging with me or ahead of me, some of them behind me. But the common common
question now is if my kids and I want to develop an ADU on this property, which we're allowed to do, what happens if old people die and the kids are stuck with this behemoth of a house or the ADU and no exit strategy? or what happens if
kids get a divorce and now parents are stuck with amortizing the cost of the ideal. So the argument runs both ways about whether to be able to separate it or not because it could be an expensive proposition for a family who in good
conscience and good faith were trying to create housing and then had no exit strategy for the end. And and I think the board just needs to talk about those. So, I guess I wouldn't Chris, you can think about this, but is
there a way if condominium ownership was allowed, is there a way of in the bylaw making the ADU status specific and not, you know, not able to go away because the other the other option is, you you
know, you have you build an ADU, you should still be able to add to your home. the principal dwelling should still be able to be added to and altered and this and that the other thing but in the same way the ADU may not I mean
could we do it in that way or um >> so that's I mean that is an interesting um consequence of allowing the the principal dwelling and the ADU to be sold into two separate condominium
units. The principal dwelling, as you said, Jeff, could get bigger over time, um, and be, you know, renovated, expanded, altered in any way that you would do to a normal single family dwelling. The ADU, if it's
built in 900 ft on day one, could never ever get bigger. So if you've got two units in a condominium, it's a little awkward to have one that is amendable to expansion and alteration and one that is sort of stuck with the same footprint
and square footage that it was built with uh in the first place. But I'm not sure that answered your question. >> No, I don't like the last part of what you said. One of the objections that I've heard and from members of my board, the board is that
they envision this town becoming a two family town without a two family zoning bylaw. And I think we're already seeing it. I don't know what the proposals on the drawing board here are, but for instance, there's a proposal to build a five or a 7 unit
uh dwelling project and maybe even as a um open space. If every if that builder decides to build an ADU along with every one of those structures and condominiumizing is allowed, all of a sudden your seven lot subdivision that you approved as an open space is going
to be 14 whether you like it or not. condominiumize each one as one separate condo and sell two units off. And that's something I just want you to think about. Um, obviously it's going to come up at town meeting. And just one other thing, I'm sorry to
do this to backtrack, Darl, but your comment was about the garages being improved, and they will be. I mean, you can you can make livable space out of a garage without going to see the building inspector anywhere, and it happens. But the other side of the coin was Chris
said square footage by the state is x square feet or one no greater than 1/2 of the principal and that may be a way to solve your 900 1200 1,000 square ft or no greater than half of the principal
might be the way to do it but he I also think I heard you say in in discovering how big the principal is you do count the grub garage. >> No, >> you don't count the garage. You do not count the garage.
>> And you you may have and and you you may count the basement. Many basements are >> many basement, >> you may have attic. So the principal structure while not seeming large and this gross definition, but the way the
state says is that whichever is smaller. So a large principal structure does not mean that ADU can be bigger. >> That's correct. I like the smaller idea. >> Yeah. >> The other thing is on the 1200 1000 just just for input. Sorry to take so much of
your time, but we found at the ZBA when we used to have to get permission at the ZBA for these things. What happened was a lot of people were converting the big barns and the big barns were more than 12,200 square ft. And I think that
number evolved because they didn't want wasted space in the barn. I don't think the normal creation of a brand new ADU structure came in at 1200 ever. So just interesting food for thought >> and you know so I use for context um you
know it's it's what happens elsewhere in the country and stuff like that and yes we got topology things we got uh septnic limitations but you know we've seen in other parts of the country where developers are building large large you
know large things of housing uh there and some of them are not being for sale they're all be designed for rent so the concept of putting two on one lot is very appealable appealing to them because they're they're not there to sell it to somebody. They're there to
just rent it and and for income and and I think in the general sense we think that's not what people are going to do here. But again, I I just take the perspective we have to look at, you know, potential abuses of that uh system. And
if we need to make exceptions in certain cases, you know, for a barn conversion to it, we figure out a different process to allow the barn to be converted to an ADU >> as opposed to doing it by right uh at that size. >> And wouldn't that give the CBA some
future business security? I I mean seriously if you have a 1,00 or 900 they'll come before the CBA for variance to >> they also had I know one specific uh when I was on the CBA where the proposal
was to add on to the principal structure and because of the percentage they would then be allowed to have a bigger ADU which is perfectly logical but h how's that work so anyway Yeah.
>> So, we have we have four things here. We have I had a couple other >> Okay. But I'm just talking about the we come to a consensus on the maximum gross. Come to a consensus on to allow or not
allow a second ADU by special permit. We need to come to a consensus on common ownership to allow it or not allow it. There will be nuance in all of this. And then the final thing was no short-term
rentals. Now, I would just mention that um we did a quick survey about like a year and a half ago and people weren't very exercised about short-term rentals. And you know,
granted, the survey, who knows, you know, whether it was statistically valid or not to represent um but um how do we feel about that? I think the um purpose of the state bylaw is to
create housing, not rental, not short-term uh vacation rentals. So, I'm I'm opposed to um deleting the short-term rental. I want to keep that in there. >> Okay. Um, >> can we do that?
>> Yes. And go ahead. Yeah. Okay. >> Uh, one of the one of the few things that we're allowed to do with data use is prohibit them from being used short-term rentals. That's consistent. >> And as Cherry pointed out with the garages, that doesn't mean people won't
go in, but um, okay. So, there's a lot of things that we can talk about at our hearing, but what Lauren wanted us to do is to hit on these
four major issues to include in the bylaw for the hearing. And my sort of um understanding of what we've been talking about is we don't want to go to 1,200
but is it 900 or 1,000? >> I'd say 900 and we can discuss going >> is that is that okay? >> That's fine with that. >> I'm fine with that too. Uh not allowing a second ADU. Sorry, Sher. No business for you. >> I'll take you in a minute, George. Um
uh not allowing common ownership to which we'll have to have >> remain in common ownership. >> Remain in common >> remain in com ex I apologize not allowing uncommon ownership um and then note and not allowing short-term
rentals. Now there will be nuance. I think there's nuance in the gross floor area issue but as I understand from the state has defined it in a way that I understand uh there's nuance in common ownership. Um and
so so okay now George you had your I while we have legal on the thing here there's two section two clauses in here. In the first page, we have this protected use dwelling unit. There's the last sentence. An ADU that is non-conforming
to zoning shall qualify as protected use if otherwise meets this definition. And then there's three A2 which has language again about um the allowance of
the ADU. And then there's section four which talks about non-conformance which seems to be the most clear of the se sections there. So can can we do something about either deleting these extra phrases about these other
non-conforming definitions and just go with the one that's on 84? >> Yes, I can attempt to reconcile all of that for a slightly revised draft. it'll, you know, circulate before your public hearing. And I I will say that
the um in the various drafts that we've been working on, there there's some language that popped up in section 4 in section 4, section dealing with nonformance that I think I need to work
on in order to make a consistent state law. Um B in particular, I think needs to I need to I need to work on a little bit more that that will be revised. But there will be because there is um the reality is going to be
that nonconforming lots and existing non-conforming structures um in most cases can have an ADU. Um, so they're >> I'm okay with them having an ADU, but the ADU needs to be compliant with the
setbacks and not grandfathered on their nonexisting nonconformities. >> So there that that is not exactly how it's going to work. Um if an if a
pre-existing structure is non-conforming as to setback currently um it can almost certainly be expanded or altered to contain an ADU not withstanding the fact that it doesn't meet our current setback
requirement. Um there is language in the state rags that says that nonconformance is not a basis to deny an ADU. So, >> like I said, I'm I'm willing to let them have the ADU on their property. It's
just that the new structure needs to, you know, like there's a poster child building I use on Russell Street that butts up right against the sidewalk. So, if they technically built their ADU down the sidewalk, it's doesn't extend the nonconformity. I can make So, Right. So,
>> let's go back to the ZBA because this hap this is >> No, this happened. This is >> No, no, no, no, no. But I'm I'm just saying that there is established case law on whether or not this can be allowed. And I'm confused because it was one way and then it was the other way. >> Right. Right. And I think if I
understand Chris correctly, um the state law, the new state law overrides the that requirement. So there's nothing that Littleton could put in here that a lot of negatives here that would
disallow what you hope to >> Could it be done under a special permit so that there's some because the >> Okay. Well, I'm just saying just the background. The Board of the Fields allows neighbors to come forward and have their concerns
met and if something is allowed as of right, they'll never they won't be able to do that. So, what we can build in to the bylaw and what I've built in in other bylaws that we've worked on
is what we call a section six finding to author from the ZBA to authorize the expansion of the non-conforming structure to contain an ADU. Um I the language that I use there is carefully
chosen because what the attorney general has said about ADUs is that we cannot require a special permit for an ADU even if the proposed ADU does involve expansion of a non-conforming structure. What you can and how what you can
however require is a quote unquote finding from the ZBA that the proposed expansion is number than what is out there today. Um many zoning bylaws I'd have to double check Littleton's you know do those
types of findings all the time for non-conforming expansions that are not related to an ADU. Um, but if we want to do that here, it is important to sort of make a dedicated section calling this
out and specifically labeling it a finding as opposed to do a special permit because if we call it a special permit, the attorney general won't approve that section of I think something like that's necessary. So it gives the ZVA's review of, you know,
expansion of a nonconformity is almost granted by right as long as it doesn't extend the nonconformity and uh >> and it's not detrimental to the neighbors. It gives the neighbors a chance to come in and weigh in. >> But we need to make sure that we have a
provision that we can have some kind of review on that. >> Just what Chris said. Yeah. So I foresee you know all kinds of weird situations where we're in in our minds I think a lot of us are thinking of these ads as separate structures but many of them may
be attached to the principal dwellings and in that case the extending the nonconformity is a big issue because if the existing dwelling is non-conforming you just you know and that's established
you know and as allowed you know to is you you can't go beyond the nonconformity but you can extend the non-conformity so there's there going to be a lot of anyway so Chris yes I I think we would like to direct you to do
this finding thing Sherry's excited because it's yet one more thing that you know >> the CBA can you know >> I'm excited to let the neighbors see >> absolutely but we need to make sure that there's a checkpoint in there for those kinds expansions.
>> Okay. Any any other comments from down the Okay, George. up to 900. >> The the state the state law is 900. You can't go below 900. You can go the
state would allow you to go above 900, but you can't go below 900. >> Is that right? >> In in the >> in the becomes half of the law. >> Oh, okay. I I might be wrong here. Let
Let me clarify this. We We our bylaw goes up to 900 because we can't specify a number smaller than that. We can't say you can go up to 800, you can go up to 700, you
can go up to 900. So Chris, if you do the percentage, you can't you >> Well, the percentage works. You you could you do the percentage up to 900 or not? >> If the percentage is so under the state
rules, if the percentage calculation results in a maximum 80 units 700 ft, 700 ft is the maximum. >> It's 900 ft or half of the area of the principal, whichever is the smaller
number, >> right? >> Okay. So, >> and that becomes a maximum. me going back to my three-bedroom ranch. If you have a three-bedroom ranch of 1,200 square feet, the biggest ADU you could build is 600 square feet. >> Correct. >> Under the state law, that's that's what's proposed here
>> under the state law. That's correct. But that's not what's proposed here. >> We're allowing 900s by >> up to 900. And I that that sort of makes sense to me because you could just add to your
you know to your branch to the degree to which you could get a 900. Um anyway is that does that answer your question George? >> Well I'm just thinking you talk about having two ownerships
as a possibility as well. Uh then to me I don't think lots and lot is that big that you can put first off 1,200 square ft in there like said that's another ranch and I'm looking at uh how
many lots in the town that you can put this in like that and I think you got a cluster that's going to take place even though they want to uh increase housing but I think that opportunity is that uh
some people want to do it. Uh let's say they want to just add ADU of one bedroom. I mean, why couldn't they do it? >> They can. >> That that may be all that they're able to do on their lot,
>> right? The homeowner can build an ADU that's smaller than 900, but the bylaw can't be approved with a maximum. Is that right? That's under 900. >> Right. Right. >> We have to up to 900. But people can can
build less. >> But you can also do one half of the existing dwelling though. >> Whichever's lesser. >> Oh, whichever's less. Yes. And and I thought we had that language. >> We did in the last version. This one. >> I prefer if we had that language back in >> I I don't know if I agree with that.
Okay. >> Because why would you preclude I don't know. I just don't I I don't know. It just doesn't seem right that if you have a small house, you couldn't do it right here.
>> I think it goes back to what what Chris had said that it's supposed to be an accessory to the principal dwelling, not something that looms over the principal dwelling because >> principal dwelling was small, but now you're building something. I think if we
want to attempt to legislate maintaining aesthetics um to increase housing production while preserving the character of Littleton's neighborhoods and protecting property values, I think this is the way we do it
to say you can build something new to increase housing density which we need but it shouldn't be it needs to be an appropriate scale to what's already there. All by that I will also note that um but but I think we could maybe allow
by special permit or finding or special per finding is non-conform by special permit a larger structure than what might if you have a 900 foot house and you want to build an ADU and you wanted to build a 600 foot ADU would that be so
terrible under special permit >> if you do a special permit permit you will you have to allow two ADUs like Chris was talking about earlier that you cannot >> have a special permit of the protected use ADU. So if you want to do that you
can but it would have to be a second type of ADU. >> Okay. Um so but I would like to point out in terms of the aesthetic uh point of view is that we we uh state law says that we have to the ADUs
have to be um placed on the uh the lot in the same with the same um setbacks and height and lot you know coverage the zoning district that they're in. In our um
our present zoning bylaw, a accessory building can be closer to the lot line than um the principal structure. And so part of this would be to change that from 10 to 15 ft
because now a an ADU could be as close as 10 ft to the lot line. uh which in you know that that accessory building number was for sheds uh possibly garages
um and not for long. So um so we have to do that under two separate town meeting votes with ADU would require the civil majority
change the setback require can can I again sorry if you have an existing garage and it makes sense for me to convert that garage into housing for my I don't know stay-at-home daughter who never got a job. Why
wouldn't the 10- foot be okay with that? I don't have a problem with that. >> Well, that's the whole thing about the finding because it's non-conforming. >> But so I'm going to build one now. You've already said it's okay for what? >> A detached ADU. >> Okay. >> Or detached garage.
>> Well, you can build >> right now. It lets me do it within 10 ft of the sideline. What's the difference between a small ADU 10 ft from the sideline and a garage 10 ft from the sideline? >> The neighbors. It's a difference to have a garage next to your, you know, your house and your
bedroom window than to have another. And and it's it's just the development pattern of our town. It's just we're not that dense. >> Then going back one time to the 900 or half of the square footage of the other and you said special permit and the
advisor said no special permit, but >> well, she said yes, special permit, but then we'd have to allow a second. But can't that that bylaw can read 900 or 1/2 of the principal dwelling, but a variance could
be granted to go larger than 1/ half of the principal dwelling. >> That's what I would think I would like to see. >> That's what I'd like to see. um is that >> when and Chris
>> that >> to go back to the language. >> Okay, so let's let's >> Okay, what what do what do our experts say? So, I think as long as we're allowing a 9 up to 900 square foot ADU by right,
um I think we could so yes, I think someone could apply for a variance to of the 900 ft and just try to build a bigger ADU. No, not not for the 900 ft. for the H. If we went to the
language of half of the principal dwelling >> up to 900 >> up to 900 square ft >> 900 or the lesser of whatever% of the principal dwelling if that lesser ends up being 600 square ft but the applicant
wants 700 square ft the lesser is 600 ft I think by variance they can get the 700 >> as long as it does not go over 900. >> So >> as long and as long as we're not denying a building permit should they ever decide to simply just build the 600
square foot like it's >> no they they would be able to do that by right. >> Yeah. As long as the by right use is protected. I think >> they could get creative in terms of >> so that would add in the half. >> So do No, but do we have consensus on the half? What do we think about that?
>> I'm in favor of it. >> I don't think we gain anything. I I don't care what we have. I don't gain anything. They're just going to be smaller than 900 ft, which we were okay with. >> Well, the Marggo's um argument aesthetic
basically a >> a 900 square foot ADU next to a 900 foot ranch house. Then it's no longer an accessory unit. It's we've got two houses on that lot. >> And why don't we just put in the
language that it can't be any that ADU can't be bigger than the accessory dwelling and leave it at that. Can't be more than 80% of the size >> bigger than the principal dwelling. That way we don't have to do half of this and be math wizards and everything. Why
don't you say we can only be 75% of it being bigger than 75 or 80% of the principal dwelling? >> I mean, it seems like that would take care of most exceptions that we might see. >> Just to allow you just do the half and
then allow a variance process. I I'm I'm in favor of using the state the language the state already has written because that's less likely to get contested because the state already has language that says half or 900 >> the smaller >> the smaller of the two that's already
written by the state so we don't we're not inventing new language but then but then would you like to allow a variance process >> if I'm okay with the variance process >> yeah it's not going to go above 900 >> but a variance process should you We we
actually don't need to >> variance >> include a variance process in the bylaw if that's what you're attempting to accomplish. >> Anyone can apply for a variance at any time for of anything in the zoning bylaw. They're rarely granted. Um >> well Sherry's
>> well no but that gives it the ZBA to say that wait a minute that's out of portion with the thing here not consistent with the neighborhood and those other checks that we can't put into the ADU bylaw >> there's no need to put that in the bylaw
>> so then this consensus is that we we add back in the you know the 50% of the principal >> um And the state I presume would define you know because they have these definitions of gross floor area that would come under that.
>> So be because we have a the rest of the meetings and we were able to consume that time we're we're beyond we're beyond our schedule here and we have uh sort of a step. Yes. >> I just have a quick question. It's more
for more on the common ownership. Um, you said that like the 900 you can't go below or change, right? Um, once you go to the public hearing, what's the rules on the common ownership? If you're
at the public hearing, what can and can't be changed the public hearing on the common ownership versus what's in here now. >> So, in in general, you can become more per permissive in in the public hearing process. You can't become more restrictive. So we're assuming that the
restricting com common ownership is the restriction. Um okay. So we will have a hearing on this. Everyone who's here interested in this matter can come to a hearing. Uh can we schedule
Well, first of all, we need a vote. Are we um can I have a motion to vote to schedule a public hearing on the ADU bylaw? Make a motion to schedule the um public hearing on the ADU bylaw. And I have a second. >> All in favor?
>> So what? >> So we're going to shoot for the September um meeting. >> Okay. And uh why don't we put that? Do you want to put it first or do you want to leave room for something else? Okay. >> Whatever. So we will uh pick up this
matter as a public hearing. It'll be advertised. Please come everyone. It's um well there's not a huge amount of um yeah a huge amount of most of it is taken out of our hands by the state but
there are the things we've discussed tonight that are are in our program. Uh okay. Next item number four uh with as we've passed 7:15 is a public hearing 410 great road affordable senior
housing site plan storm water program and then we're going to um present. >> Yes. Okay. >> Thank you. I think we need to be let in. >> Oh yeah, that would be great. >> You can do it. I have
>> no we want you to go. >> That's not your job. >> Water management plan 410 Brave Road affordable senior housing. Littleton Planning Board will hold a public hearing on Thursday, July 9th, 2026 at 7:15 p.m. in multi-purpose
room one in the center on Shadex Street uh 33 Shaduk Street to consider a storm water management permit application under chapter 38 of the code of Littleton and site plan review under Littleton zoning bylaw section 3 article 31 property 410 great road assessor maps
U9-23 and E9-28 owner of 550 street LLC applicant is TEC Inc. and property owner. Proposed project is phase one of the redevelopment of 410 Great Road and
proposes 86 units of affordable senior housing. Applications and plans can be viewed online in the planning board page of the town website at littletonmma ma.org or the planning board and town clerk's office during their business hours. Any person interested or wishing to be heard on the proposed work should
provide written comment to the planning board office or attend the public hearing. Any questions, please contact the planning board office. phone number or even um signed Margo. Oops. Clark. >> Okay. Morgan, Mr. Chair, members of the
board, Morgan Pearson of the Poly Companies proponent. This evening, we have uh several site plan um submissions to the board this evening. Um before I jump in, as I as I like to do, I'd like to just mention a few team members that are here. You're going to hear from others tonight. It's not just me,
thankfully. Chris Raymond, Alex Cer from TEC, uh Dave uh Snell the last name from PCA. We also have uh Mike and Mary Donado from the Leoli family and he's a huge part of this project. Um and hiding in the back as always is Gary Armstrong,
our head of construction. Um I did want to, you know, that was a really interesting conversation I need to use. We'll go back into it, but I I think someone mentioned wanting to increase housing density in Littleton, and I think as the board knows that's a a big mission of of this project at 550
King Street and 410. So, I feel compelled to uh to emphasize that. Uh and tonight, one of the one of the submissions of course is speaking directly to that in terms of housing. Um so, we're pleased to present tonight the uh several applications as I mentioned
um which are outlined here. affordable senior housing, which is a really important and and big deal. Uh key retail and anchor retail for the 550 King Street project and the relocation of the historic tunnel house. Um I think
when I first presented to the board a couple of years ago, I don't know if I would have ever imagined that we would have a meeting like this with these pieces all in one place. We're talking about moving a historic building that's super important to the town, providing affordable housing almost all at once um
and frontloaded and and of course looking for approval for a key element of the retail that will help unlock that that really important element of the project. Um, as as uh as we've talked about in the past, I did want to start with an
estimated timeline and update for the board about the project, some of which you've approved already and some of which we're we're working on as we speak. Don't know how legible that is. Um, the other announcement is that Chris gave me a laser pointer. So, >> um, that's going to be a problem probably, but
>> we don't have any cats. we not much has changed here and I and I'll let the board you know we've shared this and and you can go through it um but pretty much where where we have been in the past these are the the top three which the board has already approved for site plan and then I've I've now I've
inserted what we're we're speaking on tonight at the bottom here and uh you know just made some assumptions but they're placeholders for for the sake of conversation um welcome happy to come back to at I I did want to just pause on the this master
plan uh in the context of the timeline and also the importance of what we're presenting tonight. So we are of course talking about what we're calling 1900, 600, 800 and the Tuttle House and um these are really
sort of phase one of two and I know we we throw around phases a lot but of a greater project which we're trying to come before the board as soon as possible which is on this white box here which we've labeled as 1,00 but these elements are all really interlocked and
it's important I think to emphasize that to the board. Um, interlocked in an economic way. The this anchor tenant is vital and and really a cornerstone to to really attracting and and and accelerating our
retail effort within the village that has been partially approved by the board already. Um, I can I can speak to that and Mary can as well, but really as we we speak to tenants and and and um capital partners, having a an anchor tenant like that is just critical to
signing new leases and bringing more people on board. Equally important is that we wanted to be before the board as quickly as possible, especially in relation to the affordable senior housing. if we had if we we could have waited
until fall and really submitted all at once with including this 10,00 parcel. But all of these pieces really 1000 the this bank that we're going to talk about as well as this anchor tenant all function as um the catalyst for the retail but also generating revenue and
income and showing um the viability economic viability of this project to help justify with our financial partners the tremendous investment that is what we're trying to attempt here with um the nonprofit senior housing partner at
1900. So, it's I I I may have mumbled through that, but really all this whole section here unlocks what's going on over at 410. And so, I just wanted to make it's a good visual and and that's why I demanded my laser pointer, but it is it's hopefully um that's clear to the
board, but that's something we wanted to emphasize uh and happy to talk about that more. This is a a a map you've seen before. I just wanted to um illustrate, you know, how we've been thinking about the elements here being presented this evening. Um I should have didn't have
time to label these, but this is the anchor tenant back here. You know, there's King Street, this is the Tuttle House, and this is the bank, and and this is the affordable senior housing over here. Um just shows kind of the location as it relates to the formbbased code, which is
within that blue outline area. So, as the agenda says, we'll start at 410 Great Road. Um, this is something that we're we're of course very excited about. We have been working on really, really hard. It is a
complicated, lengthy, um, uh, and very difficult process. And we're we're happy we've gotten to this point, but of course there's a long way to go. It really stems from and I think it's worth mentioning this evening the dating back to really the beginning of this project
before my time but but not before others here where it was clear to the community to the board to the select board to others within Littleton the importance of bringing senior housing to to this to this town and not only uh senior housing
but affordable senior housing. Um, as I've been more involved recently, it's become clear, I think, in interactions with the board and the community that there was a strong desire to um what I would say sort of fasttrack or
frontload or bring on affordable housing sooner than than is outlined in the town's bylaws. And um you know, I think we have made a very good faith effort to be responsive to that request from from this board and this community. Um, even having received the letter from the
zoning uh enforcement officer saying that we are within our rights to to sort of follow the path within the bylaws, we have really pivoted pretty strongly and put a lot of resources within our network and within the state level to find a really really really strong
senior housing affordable senior housing partner. Some of you have have spoken to them. Um, you know, that's that is a really exciting partnership, I think, not only for the Holy Family, but I think the town as well. Um, and we've heard that from this board, and we appreciate that feedback as well,
because we're excited as well. Um, so I'd like to also just provide a refresher or a reminder. This was, and I won't go into the history of us acquiring the site, although I'm happy to if if anyone needs
a reminder, but really this was approved uh back in 2022 for 285 units. And at the time that was achieved through a six six-story building with a fourstory element along Great Road. And that's shown here. This is this is from the
approval. Um it has the 10% affordable and the required parking spaces. Again, just a reminder was there. Also, I would I would also point out that we've been faithful to locating um some open space and a we'll speak on this later in the uh honoring the United Elastics um
company that was at the mill many many many years ago. Here's the updated master plan just illustrating what we're talking about. We have since again under the heading of a lot of work to get to where we are. We've bifurcated the site um and we've
introduced this new kind of concept here where we can uh fasttrack the affordable component um a big portion of the affordable component of the project. So I'll have Dave come up. His team has been working uh side by side with our
senior affordable senior housing partner to design this building. Um, oh, I get the point. Make sure I know what I'm doing. All right. Uh, good evening, uh, ladies and gentlemen, board. Uh, it's nice to be back with you. I had a nice little break from some of these, but, uh, good to be back in
Littleton, uh, for this. And we're, uh, as Morgan mentioned, we were really excited about this building and, uh, really finding a way to bring this critical use, um, you know, to the project. So, uh, to give you a little bit of context for this building, um,
you know, Morgan mentioned bifurcating the site and that preserves the ability to, you know, bring more housing in the future. Um, and we have, and I think you all know, as you drive up Great Road, there's a ton of grade change on this site. It's an extremely uh, complex
site. And so, the way in which we've situated this building uh, works within that grade. It expresses itself along uh the ground here in the foreground. Um and the grade continues to raise up and it kind of buries itself into the hill
uh for the first story. Um but uh maybe more broadly speaking just about the building as a whole. We we have a a five-story building. portion of it here on the corner is as four stories and we have worked within um you know the
spirit of the formbbased code here in many different facets of the design. Um I think what you see here in the facades a lot of movement in and out. You see different roof lines. Uh you see a materials pallet that is and design
elements that are all born of New England traditional uh architectural design language. uh not only are they pulling from those references and you know many of the forms we see in the form based code but they're also pulling from the history of the site and old photos that we've seen of the building
you know the pallet um you know the reddish hues that we're using here is pulling from the brick on the historic building the charcoal colors um you know pull from some old photographs we saw of it in earlier years uh the divided light windows that we brought in are you know
referencing that the windows is up in the peaks of the roof. So, we we tried to pay homage to the history of this site with being inspired by it um and bring some of that character through. You also see um we're using different textures in the materials and subtle
differences in the colors. And we think all of this really helps to create movement in the facade, help to break down the scale. Um, you know, as as we have a a long building, I think it's also important to remember when you think about how this building is viewed, you know, there's what it's going to be
viewed as today, but then there's the future in which, you know, not all of this building will be readily visible as you drive up Great Road. You know, a lot of it will be obscured by other buildings in the future. And so, we paid a lot of attention to, you know, to create this step down and and to focus a
lot of our energy on how this meets Great Road. Um, you'll see here on the end of the building, you know, large 8 foot setback between the masses. All of the um you know, dimensions are born from the primary mass maximum dimensions uh in the form
based code. Um and we you know we also using some of the frontage types like the gallery typology which you see here fronting on the um the elastics park that is a 6,000t open space at the front door of this building. Um we also have
another gallery uh you know covered outdoor space here uh adjacent to the entry of the building which has a large canopy that we've extended out to you know provide more cover uh it's adjacent to drop off there. So again working with our uh affordable senior partners
thinking about the residents and the uh the people who will live here trying to make sure that you have a welcoming environment um you know through and through. But these are some tactics that we've used um when we've worked with them in the past. Other things to point
out in this view um you know at the top here we have some outdoor space accessed by some small interior amenity space in the building and um you know it's great to have you know just another element of uh outdoor um use for the residents of
this building. The let me see the next. All right. So, the ground floor of this building, and I'll probably fall back to the rendering in a moment, but the ground floor is the large communal gathering spaces uh for the residents of this building. So, 86
units in here. And when we do projects like this, how you create this area community is really critical. uh this kind of space has multi-function rooms, it has fitness uses, it has a hair salon, it has a small residence
market, it has offices, you know, a lot of these things that are tried and true to, you know, creating residents communities and building relationships uh in and among the people who work uh who live here. Um so the entire first floor is dedicated to that. Uh and it,
you know, has some amount a small amount back here of covered uh parking as as we kind of uh extend the building out. That's where our accessible spaces are. So our most uh you know, our residents are protected, you know, getting out of those spaces. They have plenty of room to move in and out through a secondary
lobby here. Primary uh vestibule entry uh is here at the center. Um at the second floor we've included and this is you know typical typical residential floor.
However, at the second floor we've integrated um exits on either end to allow for a walking loop. So this is something that we try and do in a lot of our senior projects. Um the the folks who live in these buildings love to walk uh with one another and to have a nice
way to do that inside, do that outside, connecting through um and so we've integrated that here and that uh can provide connectivity on the site as well. But taking advantage of that grade change that I mentioned before, this is a really nice amenity uh for the
residents. Other thing to note, we have laundry on every floor. Those laundry rooms become again other points of gathering and socialization. Um and we've centralized the core here that minimizes the walking distance required for all of the all the residents. So
these are the kinds of um these are subtle design moves but they're important uh to consider making this a building that's extremely functional and welcoming uh for the seniors who will inhabit it. Um, and you know, when you come back to the, you know, to how the
building sits on the site, we feel like, um, we are shorter than the approved height. We are, you know, one story less than what Morgan mentioned, we still integrate a step down. And by really pulling in some of these setbacks and
the movement along the facade, the subtle changes in the materials, we think we're uh bringing forth a lot of the spirit of the formbbased coat. um and how it would relate to a building of this scale on this site and um you know and how this park and how it fronts on
the street we think is a really nice thing as you're coming up the street. It's going to be really welcoming. So with that I will pop it over to Alex finish Alex
for the project. Um, so as Dave mentioned, we like to emphasize the for the senior use, we like to have loops around the site. Um, and he identified one second floor loop. And we also have that you can see um that utilizes the
front of the site that's a bit of a longer loop um that goes and even utilizes some of the uh frontage along Great Road and into the Elasics Monument Park. Um, and that's at the top right of the screen here of the building. Um, and
just to highlight a couple other features of the of the parking area, we have a we try to keep it, you know, relatively simple and um, you know, efficient layout for this, you know, this use. And, uh, we have a a loading
pulloff in the uh, front entry area. So, you can see about in the center of that main drive aisle. Use the laser right here. Fire the laser. >> And um so here's here's the pulloff right here. >> And then uh along so we have also two
two access uh points along one one along Great Road about across the street from the entry at 550 at the 550 King Street development and then again uh accessing King Street at the bottom left of the screen here. Um, so we we try to
maximize perpendicular parking and wide drive aisles and even have um as Dave mentioned uh previously we have this area that houses about 14 15 uh covered covered spots including some additional
accessessible parking. Um so as we as we mentioned about the uh United Elastics Monument Park, uh we envision this to be uh you know a mix between movable and fixed objects that
uh you know provide shade, uh tables, uh seating and um additional uh area for for congregation for an outdoor amenity space to be used with senior housing facility as well as uh dual dual um you
know combined uses with with potentially reusing some uh features of the existing building. uh that, you know, we we haven't fully vetted this yet, but you know, our our envision is to our vision is to utilize maybe some of the brick
along this along that uh frontage to to incorporate into the pavers or some of the features on here or if there's some um something that we can find through the process of reviewing that existing facility to be incorporated as a monument in this area, that would be our envision. Um, and also a fun feature of
this park is that it's it's angled in size to the to the degree of that that building at that location. So that shape is actually sized to that building and and um >> it's like a shadow of the old building that's being replicated on the ground.
>> Exactly. So we we thought that was a fun and creative way to u you know pay homage to to the uh historical use here. Um, quickly, I know this is a bit of a busy shot here, but um, this is another
site view. Uh, you can see, uh, in blue. I know this is kind of technical, sorry. Um, but just just really wanted to highlight that we are in the aquifer protection district. We are upgrading this uh site to be uh up to current storm water code as is required. But it
it does it does just show the emphasis of the infrastructure that we're installing and investing to get our groundwater recharge which is incredibly important in this district. Skip one here.
Uh again, another technical plan here, but u we tried to put some color to this. There's um here's the utility connections that we intend for this for the site. A little bit challenging to see on this uh projector, but um the intent here is for sewers to um come out
of the about center point of the building and go down Great Road heading to 495 at the top of the screen um and connect to a municipal or private. We're still working with LWD on a on a municipal pump station that could potentially be at that location. And
then come up on the left hand side to connect to um there to be a force man connection to the main along King Street. And then um also on King Street, we'll be pulling um gas and um getting water and electric through road.
>> And at that point, I'll hand it back to Morgan to field some questions. Yeah, excited to hear from the board, happy to hear from the board. I just before open it up and the community as well. Um, I wanted to express a little bit of gratitude or some some sincere
gratitude to some people who have helped us get to this point because this has happened relatively quickly despite the months and months of of effort. But, um, Marian here is here from the affordable housing trust. um she and and and um
Marlet were able to join us on a tour of one of the facilities of this um senior affordable senior housing uh partner that we're working with. And I sort of like I can't overstate the how meaningful that was to them to have members and leaders of the community
drive to Brookline to tour their property to understand what their their organization was about, ask really uh intelligent questions and continue to engage with this group. we are moving very quickly for them but only because of the response from from this board and
from this community and I think um you know we continue to be blown away of how quickly we've gotten to this point and I I I think a lot of credit goes to some of the people I just mentioned. So I think it's important to say that and the other thing I I I meant to mention is as we look at this project not only in the
context of Littleton which I think is very very large and meaningful in terms of creating and delivering ground up affordable senior housing but even for the state of Massachusetts this will be one of the largest animal projects of its kind um especially when we're talking about the deeply affordable elements. So I I am not patting myself
on the back or our team but I think this this partnership which is sort of a three-legged stool. it's this board in the community, the Loli family, um, as well as our our affordable housing partner. Um, it's it's really something that I don't want to jinx us because it's we have a long way to go, but I
think it's really to take a moment and appreciate that. Um, so with that, would love to hear from from the board and anyone else who' like to speak on this. >> Let's let's just go down the down the line here. I
One more sort of random cross. I'd like to see the shape of the roof from from King Street. I'm just wondering about that gable and how far that reach goes because that's going to be visible um from from the common. Um I generally
don't think it's a good plan. I think that it works site. Um, I have a lot of questions about um affordable units and how that how that's
going to work with the other affordable units that are going to appear on. Sorry, I'm just sort of just 80 units. How many of those are deeply affordable? How many of other
price points? Well, I can answer that for you because we had a meeting a couple of days ago and consensus the talk was that all of them are going to be completely oil and they're going to be in the 30 to 60% raise. Is that >> that's our understanding as well. I mean
I I think >> amazing. Yeah, it is it is extraordinary and I but I think that the our partner is also looking to see if they can expand that up, you know, up to 80% on some of the units and um but that's a that's an ongoing conversation and unfortunately because of the process as I'm learning it in terms of you know
getting additional funding from the state that that's something that they just can't commit to right away but certainly the 60 to 30 which is which is really great. Um and I will say that um you partnered with probably one of the best um senior housing component uh
opponents in the state. They're topnotch. They do a great job. Everything everybody I talked to about them and yeah when they came to had a little meeting here I was here my was there 30 to 60% of 86 units. That's
that's as I've said before and I'll say it again. 25 years I've been sitting here and the seniors have all been here. This is the best thing that has come through the door and I'm ecstatic that we're we're on the forefront of it. And the reason we're going so fast is
because there's money out there. We want to Littleton wants to be the first one to have their hand out to get this so that we can get this project in town and it's desperately needed for the seniors. I just think it's Great. So, so far I'm
I I think we should go faster, but that's a great job. Great job. We're trying. Thank you. Well, I would just just respond a little bit to that because I appreciate those words. just, you know, again, I continue to learn about this this because this is not something we do every day, but it's it really is a again going to back to my
terrible stool analogy, but in in the success of getting those funds to make this possible, it is dependent on the the interest from the town, um the commitment from the town, both I think in this way and and and in a monetary way, but also, you know, the sponsor
partner, which is the poly companies, um and then of course most importantly really is the uh the nonprofit profit affordable senior housing developer and their reputation. So I I it is meaningful and we we also have feel a bit of luck even though we've worked really hard to get them interested with
with others I mentioned but um we feel I think really confident that if we can make it work we can make it work. >> And the other thing that came from that meeting not was that we're right we're the number one we're who they're looking for right now. We're number three on
their list. They're in Brooklyn and Sto. So, it's not like there's a big long list and maybe we'll get into where where they're focused and that's I think that's fantastic. >> It's very exciting. >> All right, I'm done.
>> Um I appreciate seeing all the attention to form based code um to to our bylaw in that regard. Um I had a couple questions around that. um in one of the the early diagrams where you showed the
I keep going back. Um so that overhang like where that blue car is parked are those outdoor spaces as well for gathering and and whatnot like benches and stuff.
>> Yeah. quickly. So yes, you know, the the way in which we've thought about those is, you know, build and I think you can see some benches in the rendering, but the idea is that up against the glass, which the whole first floor is all all very glassy, that is all your resident amenity community space. And so the idea
is that we'd kind of put some benches up against that. You'd be under overhangs. And so we've taken those out with some columns at like the edge of the curb. So the entire, you know, sidewalk uh is covered there. that we would add some seating and so similar what's easier to
see at the front uh under the 410 great roadside it's it's a similar in nature to what you're seeing there. >> Okay. >> Good. Good. Yeah. I mean I think that that's that's great. It really activates the edges and then the way you have like the different setbacks and whatnot. Um
that's in line with the code and all. I'm curious about, and this is kind of like what what Bartlett said with wanting to see the I guess the Great Road elevation and the King Street elevation to see what those gables look like. What's happening in that middle section? Is that a flat roof there?
>> Uh yeah, we've we've you know, in order to make this work, um you know, there's a lot of equipment that ends up on the roof, so we we needed some components of flat roof. Um, and you know, so we played with just I mean as we were
developing these concepts, we played with whether or not we wanted any peaks in the middle, but then they'd all have to be really fake, you know, uh, so that we had enough room to put the equipment behind them. So, uh, and then honestly the elevation of the building, I know
it's maybe more architectural in nature, but it started to feel a little more even busier. So we capped the two ends with the gables was the approach and then kept it a little bit similar s simpler in the middle with the flat roofs and you know the variety of
height. So you even see at the entry the parapet height drops down and so again those masses where's this is just worth noting but like there's reveals here >> here and here where the roof line
actually drops too. So like you'll see like this is a lower roof elevation here than this portion. So >> so we're putting in variety and I think what you what you'll see in that nature is you know they'll read as much you know as actual forms instead of just pumping in and out they're also going up
and down a little bit. >> That's great. Um one question I pulled up my notes from last time. Last time um you had said that parking had expanded from 46 to 102 spaces and there were 84
units. Now there's 86 units. So has parking increased as well or >> Yeah. I mean yes it I mean we're atund 95. Oh, sorry. We're at 95, right? 1.1 ratio on the the 86 units with the
understanding that there'll be the a few other spaces that'll be shared with the phase two of this project. I mean, assuming this is built right away without phase two on for 410 catching up, you know, we'll have plenty of space to create some parking there and then when it that gets um developed, we'll
have an opportunity to share parking, which um I consulted with subject because it was one of my questions. What does uh HSL say about parking count? What what are their finding? >> Yeah, I
mean they have they have said 75 really is where they maybe a little bit higher for staff, but um I mean really we are overparked for their use already without getting to 125. >> I mean in fairness we're in a more suburban location. So
>> I think it has more to do I mean with how many of them just drive period >> the residents >> and then relating to that >> and the handicap space number seems low for an elderly unit then I mean
>> it's what we it's what we typically do with them. I mean it's following Massachusetts requirements. Well, I know it's Massachusetts, but this is I that's just a comment and I >> I think you'll see a lot more, you know, again, when you get to the this is why we have a very big drop off
>> area in the front is because I do think that uh a lot of their residents use transportation services like that. >> I was surprised at how few handicap spots were at many of the facilities I visited when I was looking at facilities. >> I mean, I have no experience with that.
>> Uh Margot, anything else? Um, I was just curious if you could go back to showing the overhead shot with like the the driveways and whatnot. >> Yeah. With um the discussion around um a bus going from like here to 550 or
from here to the the commuter rail. Um how do you foresee that? What would traffic or what would that look like? Thanks for that question because it is it is something we have been coordinating with across town connect um
and MRTA and the LRTA system in particular this we're we're still at the preliminary stages here but for this type of use a cross town connect a 24-hour call ahead service is something that's um would be most beneficial for
these type of uses. So that's why we sized that pulloff space the way we did um a full bus stop that an MRTA or LRTA um was is really more focused on the 550 side. >> Okay. >> Where where the cross town connect size
is just more applicable for this use. >> So are you done? So, while you have this one up, so the other site plan you have um with the white part there shows the road going from 495 all the way down through there. Is that
going to not going to be discontinued? >> Probably Darl, you always catch me on when we try to catch up with master plans. >> Well, yes. >> Yeah. Sorry. >> Are you talking about this right here? >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. that that that is a current placeholder, but it does make sense because there's there's an entry here and because there's you know we we have also talked about a pump station here and maybe potentially an easement to connect to the sewer up at King Street. >> So, so the concern I have is both
between particularly that one there if it stays is that so some people trying to use that as a shortcut to avoid the light up at um King Street uh there. And then the same thing would be even on your smaller one there, you have a cut through that you might want to do some
kind of road stuff to so that it's not amanable to being a cut through. >> You're talking about like right like this >> y >> or the one all the way from the from the top. >> Yep. >> So I think you should pay some attention to driving habits. We'll try to use that as a cut through. Yeah.
>> Uh there. And if you could flip back to the one that you had just before with with Margo >> that one there. Um again given given my own personal experience there. How big of a canopy do you have uh for getting
out of your cars and you know so like these recent downpours that you have it takes a long time sometimes for a senior citizen to go from the car to to there. that having as big of a canopy there is something I don't really see that in
that in those pictures there. >> Yeah, it's shaded if you Yeah, there. So that shading is the canopy for drop off. So that goes out over 10 ft I would say. >> So we you know we bringing it basically right to the curb
>> of where we're doing that. Yeah, you just want to I just encourage you to have that as big and maybe even wider, you know, uh cuz your parking your entryway goes down a little bit further. I know your door is up at that end, but anyway, you might want to just look at making that canopy as big as you can
reasonably make it. And then at the same time, I'm just concerned again, you get the when we have the summer here and there's a lot of pavement here, is whether that really wants to be a grass park down there rather than a paper uh park just to cut down some of the some
of the heat absorbing areas that are right where you know the the readily accessible pieces there are going to be baking zones in the summer. Um, so anyway, that's they're just feedback uh from where the plan.
>> I appreciate that. For what it's worth on the canopy, I think our initial design didn't have one, Darl, and then and then our affordable senior housing partner stepped in and said, "No, no, no, you got to have something." And and Dave's team jumped on it right away. And so that is a that may get bigger or not,
but they are satisfied with this for what it's worth so far. But if it matched the cutout of the thing there, it' be a little easier when you're getting out of the car. >> That's a permanent structure, too. They may want to put a canvas canopy over with their name and all that other stuff on it. Get a real a fancy entrance way
to >> Yeah. Yeah. But anyway, just watching the downpours that we have and then how much paving is there. If you can maybe I would encourage you to maybe think about whether that should be a green space rather than a paver space. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, but that's that's a good
point. We can we can sort of think about that and noodle on it. Um, Alex, Chris, I should note this, but is this right out only? >> That was my question. >> Yeah. So, the the >> the intent here is that when we go I mean, we would love for this to be a left hand, too, but it just doesn't make
sense here. >> Um, we it's it's intended to be a right in right out, >> right? >> Uh, let's lead this up here. I got one more. Um, and then if you flip to the one that had the building profile, >> just to finish that though, right, Darl,
that that prevents the cut through. I mean, that's a pretty silly cut through to come through here. Then you're out in the intersection again anyway. So, >> no, if you come you come off a 495. You're >> saying you're coming here. >> Yeah, you cut through like that. >> That's the And then you avoid the light at the top of the building. >> I would do that.
>> Yeah. Now, if you could just flip to the one that had the profile of the building again. >> Uh, and rendering >> the rendering. There we go. Again, not none of my business, but I think it's going to be yours. Those two valleys dumping onto that flat roof where you
got your thing there. You might want to re relook at that. >> We're going to have we're going to have better. >> No, but I mean that's, you know, I have two valleys that come together. >> Okay. >> In snow and rain, that's that's going to
just dump right onto your your porch there. I mean, I can just tell you from retail phase one that we've, you know, been progressing like we've been getting more detailed into how the gutters and the down spouts and whether we have snow guards and all those things. So, that's a higher level of detail, but we are concerned. >> I I I just don't think your down spots are going to cover it. Anyway, that's
not that's what you got to worry about, >> but you might want to really look at that. >> Fair enough. So I appreciate your effort in this building which is pretty pragmatic building. Um at the same time and I
definitely appreciate the sort of heightened parapits that you're using in the flat roofed areas because nothing is more annoying than just seeing the HVAC. And I presume these will be like split systems or is this might actually get a central system. Okay. Um we're
investigating all of that and you know >> well if it's a central system they can be really large and it's >> yeah and we we have the avail I think to your point like the the sight lines that we're talking about and the height of those parapits I think you know it's kind of screaming
>> um to Bartlett's point I agree I'd like to see what it looks like from Main Street you know the extent of the I I don't you know I just want to see what you're thinking about Um, and when we say from King Street, you know, we're going to we're going to be seeing it
behind the existing buildings on King Street. >> Yeah, we didn't do that cuz then we'd have to model all those, but we can. >> I I know. You know, we we'd like to I think it's it's worth it. Now, my my if let's go back to the site plan. Um the landscape plan.
>> Uh I I think you know, you're getting this going. I I think that um like some other comments, this space along Great Road, which is great, uh especially because it's not going to
be flat. It's going to be, you know, hilly or there there's going to be some grade there. I agree. I you know because everyone in this room who lives here has spent half their life waiting at the light on Great Road to enter the
common. This is not a good place to hang out. It's just not. And so you have some I I I just think let's think about it some more. >> You suggesting buffering elements? Well,
I I love the idea of uh showing activity, but it might be sort of at the corner where your loop is or something that's removed from next to the road. Um, that's my opinion. The other thing
is about the sidewalk. I understand the sidewalk uh alongside the existing, you know, the what we used to call the Conan store uh is has to be right along the road. But I would consider at some point shifting it
in from the curb. Uh because there will be cars there almost 100% of the time idling. Um and so I guess my my overall comment is let's
brainstorm a little bit on that thing because it could be fantastic. It's it it is fantastic with um the situation where we have a single car there, but there is never a single car there. In
fact, it goes way beyond there. In fact, you may not even be able to make an easy left-hand turn. I mean, right-hand turn out of the thing. But, and the other thing is in terms of the overall site plan, the cutthrough thing is interesting. um you
you know possibly may be dealing with that in the other side of great road. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but in this case it would be bad because it's a senior housing complex and we don't need to introduce a lot. So I don't have the
answer, but it's worth thinking about. And uh then I just had a question from Morgan. What's the sewer situation? Yeah. So, we have been in active conversations with LWD with NALER and um
the we've all acknowledged that we need to make a formal um request to transfer capacity over for this phase from 550. Um and that involves likely a pump station here that could be covered through some of their mass works grants that we've been working on. We actually
had it in in a previous submission um but have pushed that to later this year or next year. Um and then hooking in on King Street right here. >> Okay. >> Through this through the way. >> Um okay. So next, who here would like to
have comments? Mark. Uh Mark Granbacher 205 Heartwell. Well, first thank you for bringing the affordable housing. I think this is all great. Most of my comments are a little minor. Um some of them are a little more. I'm I I'm a little concerned about the entrance there being right across
basically from your 550 entrance. You're going to have people that are going to make a right turn and try and make an immediate left out of those two. It's that's going to be confusing. I don't know how this these entrances jive with what the state report said where they
wanted you to come out basically at the 495 light. Um, I don't know what the plan is for doing that because you took that off of this immediate plan and I thought that was one of the things you were supposed to have to do as an initial stage. Um, that's one comment.
Another is your path there for walking doesn't have you have steps down to get to the down right by this right at the end of the building. You need an ADA way to get down. Um, other than that's awfully steep. I don't know if that actually I don't know if that sidewalk
is in ADA grade. Um so you might have to check that. >> Um if you go back to the building the the the Yeah, that um your your porch,
patio, whatever you want to call it there on the fourth floor there. Um I question whether you might want that on the back of the building rather than the front of the building because that's right over 495. I don't know how loud that will be up there versus if you made it on the other side. It would also be
helpful. Um I don't know the way you show this now behind the building. It looks wide open like you can see for miles behind it, but you can't. There there's buildings right there. So it's kind of deceiving in this view that it looks like, you know, you can see from
miles off in the but you're not. You're going to be really close back. So something just a view that shows where those buildings are >> um on one of your renderings. I know you don't want to render it in detail, but just like >> relative heights and things and relative
views would be helpful. >> So um but my main cons the bigger concern is those two driveways are really close. You're going to have problems for entrance and exit. So George
George, you should take Morgan's seat at the next meeting so that we can >> compress the time. >> You guys George saying 62. Um, I'm going to take a little bit of a
different approach here. Um, uh, I talked to Sale and, uh, he was, uh, planning on being here, he told me, for this >> his lunch, you know, lunch. But, uh, this is his,
uh, 32nd anniversary. So, he took his bride to wherever they met or, wherever he proposed or whatever the case is. That's where he's at. actually he took time to call me uh this afternoon. But anyway, what I want to say is that uh
this is a project that the governor is also looking down on and with loads of uh getting everything in line to get up there and get this money first in line up there. I know that they got a couple other big projects going on, but the
main thing is to um get this thing in in position where we can get this in. And this is his baby. Uh S is wanting to do this for the seniors here in Loen. And I told them that if they couldn't come out
here uh to the meeting that they could watch it on LCTV. And I hope a lot of them are watching this on LCTV. This is important. This is a very very important project here in the town of
Lily. This is the first time that we're really going to get something that is going to benefit some needed people in this community and that is our seniors. We are always last at you know getting
what they need. But he's putting this on front because it was said and this is what Sam said to me. He said it was said that this going to be seven or eight years down the road before we get this house. He says, "No, I decide that I'm going to put it up front
and you're going to see that it's going to be put on at the same time that we're starting to wick over at 550." So I said, "Well, that's great. And you're going to prove a lot of people wrong, saying it's going to be seven, eight years down the road before we see this."
So it's very important that this honorable body here gives the poly company what they need to prepare the paperwork and get it up at
the state house where they can get the funding for this project along with the other partners that they have in this project. And I think that we have a golden opportunity here to provide
quality housing here for seniors in the town of Leelton. and I look forward to us helping him to launch this and get shovels in the ground. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else? >> Yes, Maryann.
>> Maryanne here, Whitetailway Affordable Housing Trust. Just reiterating what I said last time. Um, we're fully on board as the affordable housing trust behind this project. I think we are really fortunate to have the partnership that Lei has with HSL and um employee support
moving forward. Um if we can look at the design overview for one second, a lot of us I know in this room have had the chance to look at uh different senior housing facilities for family members. And I was really happy to see in this view all of the windows, especially in
the gallery area. Um, I think when you're looking at places, first impressions matter and having a lot of natural lighting um is is really important. So, I was really happy to see that. I think the building looks great and we're just super excited to move forward. >> Thank you.
>> Thanks. Um I would like to you know address um these comments and on behalf of the board and I think the our board is completely aligned with you know moving this forward as fast as we can. Um but
that's the actual movement isn't in our purview. It's you know we want to do whatever we can to support it. uh for that matter we are and we have opened opened a hearing for um the site plan
storm water review. We do uh site plan review also because this is in formbbas based code you know uh reflects that we've had comments I think we've all commented on the building um and in general what we've commented on tonight
are details and quibbles and um the general um you know the general outcome is really heartening and if it can get going that's you know Great. Marren, what is the status of peer review?
>> Um, so, uh, we do have the cost estimates that came in today. Just forwarded those. Um, Green is able to start the review, um, under an old contract um because they have a few hours left on a prior review. So, we'll
get that started while we're doing the paperwork um, contracting and all that. So, that will get underway right away. Um I I had one comment that I didn't get to and that was just the you're going to
have to tear down the entire mill to do this which will leave uh and we've you know this has happened in some of the other uh phases. What is it going to look like after you um tear down the
bill? >> Um better. >> Yeah. I mean it it will I mean Gary I don't know if you have a thought on this but it's it's going to be graded and um I mean obviously there'll be some construction fencing around this side of it but the the the bulk of phase two if
I can go to that um you know this is already sort of as is now the mill is all up here so it will be sort of it's a parking lot now I don't think a lot of that will remain be used for uh staging and construction but I think it probably will look
better. So, this being said, we are going to continue this public hearing um to >> August >> August 6th. Uh what time do we want to do it? 7:15 again or what are we doing
before? >> It's only at 7:15. >> Okay. Uh can I have a motion to >> make a motion to continue the public hearing on Portrait Road to August 6 at 7:50? >> 7:50.
Second. >> Thank you. Uh, all in favor? >> Okay. Thank you. Now, I was going to just add one. I I looked at the um they had their waiverss in their thing there. I didn't see any showstoppers in their their waiver request either. I just want
to signal that, you know, we're >> I appreciate the waiver um uh narrative. Um we sort of assume with a building like this that it's not going to be a little villagey, you know,
thing, but um I I think the board appreciates the fact he went to the effort to um you know, to not justify but to explain >> and I was just being bold to say I
didn't see showstoppers in the in the in the waiverss just in terms of like >> that took effort too but we >> because if we if we had showstoppers. I think I would have tried to bring >> and we all had it. >> Yeah, >> that's great.
>> Um, next. Um, we are >> Okay, you want to read the verbiage? >> Go. Public hearing. Storm water management permit site plan 550 King
Street retail phase 2 north and south. Littleton Planning Board will hold a public hearing on Thursday, July 9, 2026 at 7:35 p.m. in multi-purpose room one in the center of Shadic at 33 Shadic Street to consider storm water management permit applications under
chapter 38 of the code of Littleton and site plan review under Littleton zoning bylaw section 173 article 31 property 550 King Street assessor's map U8 10-1 U86070
and U8 um- 10 through20 or south applicant 550 King Street LLC owner. It was 550 King Street LLC. Applicants TDC, Inc. on behalf of property owner. Uh retail phase 2 north
development proposes the construction of a 23,000 ft commercial retail building with associated grading, parking, pedestrian accessess, underground utilities, site lighting, and uh storm water improvements throughout the site. Uh the
retail phase 2 south development project proposes one new building with 5,917 square feet of commercial retail use and relocation of the tele house. It tells again where to see applications and
plans and to provide comment signed Margo clerk. >> Okay, you're up. Excellent. Thank you. Uh thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the board for having me this evening. Uh my name is Chris Raymond from TEC. I am
excited to uh be able to present tonight on retail phase 2. We're going to start with the retail phase of development. Um but actually before I do that, I do just want to jump in and kind of give a an update on on where we are um with the infrastructure projects that have that
have been going on out there for the last couple of years. Um allowing us to actually be here tonight to present uh some of these projects for you. So uh currently we have uh three phases of infrastructure that are um ongoing I'll
call it but um we have phase one infrastructure in FA uh which is shown here in green uh and phase two infrastructure project that is shown in this in the cyan color leading towards towards great road. uh just recently over the last month or so those projects
um um have been completed uh which installed uh crucial infrastructure to be able to actually support the developments that we've presented to you guys. Um so these have been these have been uh awesome projects that we've been able to work on uh in collaboration with
with the town and and with the state. Um, and we are currently in design of what's highland here in red and that's the phase 3 infrastructure project. And you can just see the proximity of these infrastructure projects and and the location of of development phases that
we've presented to you. You can see where residential phase one is is located um as well as I have a laser pointer. uh residential phase one is located and then our approved uh retail phase one development and uh and green
uh town green development um all supported by this uh crucial crucial infrastructure and that includes uh the proposed retail phase 2 that we're going to discuss tonight. So in proposed retail phase 2, we've split it up into two parts. We have the
north development and the south development. uh north development you can see here highlighted in blue and the south development you can see uh highlighted in red. So we're going to dive into uh the north uh development and for this development we're we're
proposing uh an anchor retail tenant. Um uh this is going to be a onestory commercial retail building uh roughly 23,500 uh square feet in size. And you'll see um after so after many
many many many many iterations of looking at how we can u make a make a a retail tenant uh work on this site uh we've we've landed on on this layout here. Um it's uh we spent many early mornings and late nights.
Thank you Morgan and Gary. uh trying to really uh uh massage this this plan to to uh make everything work uh from both a tenant perspective, customer perspective and an infrastructure perspective. So uh the site here is um
is comprised of of a single retail building centrally located. Um and uh we've we've situated all primary customer parking in the front of the of the building. Um, and this is enhanced by landscape islands, uh, pedestrian uh,
improvements and ADA accessibility to really allow a a central customer corridor, I'll call it, um, to and from the build building, allowing uh, you know, safe passage for customers um, to get to the building and back to their cars. And as part of this layout, um
we've kind of created what I'll call a a ring road here with two points of access onto the uh the proposed uh infrastructure. Uh this is the the central boulevard running through the site. So we have two points of access here and this was kind of created to
allow uh truck and loading traffic to be able to circulate the building away from the customers uh so that they can feel safe when they're um you know parking and loading and going to and from the building. Um so as part of this design we've also situated
uh loading and dumpster operations to the rear of the building so it's out of sight. Um, and we've also incorporated a nice landscape buffer. And you can't really see here, but we are proposing a fence along uh this boundary here uh to to just screen this from uh the the
residential face of the project, which are located kind of plan north. So, just diving into some of the technical aspects of this. Um, this site is uh existing today. It's just it's a big parking lot. I'm sure you guys have been out there. Uh it's a big paved
parking lot. Um um and the grading actually slopes uh plan north here down to plan south. Um so to kind of counteract this so that we can create a nice level path uh to be able to build a building here. Uh we we're proposing a
retaining wall along this boundary highlighted in green. uh that's going to allow us to uh pick up some of that grade, flatten out the site, and make a much more comfortable um uh retail pad here. So, uh um along with that, we've
also uh we're proposing a a severely upgraded uh storm water system, storm water treatment system uh where we you can see that all highlighted in blue. um that is comprised of some deep sunk catch basins um to pre-treat storm water
runoff. Those are all directed into you can see these yellow areas here some water quality units um for further treatment before being directed into a uh storm water a subsurface storm water system below the parking area uh to allow that storm water to infiltrate um
with any additional storm water um uh being directed down through this pipe. And now and actually the pipe here is an existing storm water outlet that we're looking to tie into um with much cleaner storm water after being treated and
flows reduced. Looking at some of the utilities on site as I mentioned earlier as part of the phase 2 infrastructure project we're able to install some of the crucial uh infrastructure to be able to support this development. So you'll see a lot of the utilities here um being directed
towards the front of the site along the boulevard where we can tie into um recently installed infrastructure for water, sewer, electric, and the like. So with that, um actually want to jump over to we'll move south a little bit and we're going to talk about retail uh
phase uh phase two south. Uh so we're excited to present this portion of the of the development because it does finally answer the question that we've received so many times. Uh what are you guys going to do with the title house? Um so uh we we have an answer and
that answer comes from a lot of feedback that we've gained from multiple members of this board and the community. Um is relocating uh the Tuttle House into this corner here. Um, this is the closest possible uh spot for the tunnel house to
be in proximity to uh the town common. Um, so this really acts as like a gateway into this new project. Um, while paying respect to the to the history of the site and and to Littleton's downtown. Um, and I know many members of
you have have uh have offered up this idea and we listened and and we really tried to make it happen. So, um, so we we are excited to finally give you that answer. So, um, we're looking to, uh, situate the title house in this corner
here. Um, and then we kind of once we do that that we do are we are kind of left with this weird kind of awkward L-shaped uh, lot. Um, so we did multiple iterations of what to do with the
remainder of this site. And uh after there wasn't a whole lot of room for like a a substantial building here, but what did fit nicely uh was a bank. So we are locating or we're proposing a bank at the northern portion of the southern portion of this site and uh so that it's
situated along the the central boulevard. Um this the site will be accessed by uh there's two driveway locations along the boulevard and then we have one driveway location along King Street and uh this driveway location
here actually will be consolidating three uh in the existing condition if you were go out there today there's actually three access points right here and we're looking to consolidate those down to one and um so Um
the site entrance here we've actually designed um similar to what we did in retail phase one is we've pulled the parking back into the site a little bit allowing um you know safe uh access for uh vehicles coming in and out of the
site as well as um the ability for cars to adequately park. um not have any conflicts um with with in incoming traffic and and cars parking. It also allows a a great opportunity for us to enhance some landscape um at the the
driveway and entrance to this site. Um the remainder of the site we've been filled with as much parking as we could as we could fit in here as well as um pedestrian and landscaping improvements. Um and you can see we this isn't to scale here. Here you can see we kind of have this brake line so that uh we could
show you how it kind of lines up uh with the town with the the town green or the park or um whatever we're going to call it. Um so we've uh we can see we have pedestrian access uh from both of these sites with uh there will be a continued
pedestrian corridor that uh will be able to walk straight into uh into the green. Um so with that um dive into the technical aspects of this site and similar to to the north site, we're looking to install
a an updated storm water system that includes uh a deep sump catch basins directed into a water quality unit um before hitting an infiltration basin um and being outleted actually into the same system that was shown on on retail
phase 2 north. And also similar similarly with the utilities uh because of the utility infrastructure that we've been able to uh install as part of uh the phase 2 infrastructure project um we'll be uh tying these buildings into uh into that
infrastructure uh to the north of the site here. Um and we have been able to start some discussions with uh LWD on how we we support these two these two buildings. Uh so with that I'm going to turn it over to Dave to talk about some
architecture. So uh you know here on this uh bank building a sliver of uh a sliver of this part of the partial sorry part of the parcel is in the form base code area. So again, we're trying to pull from a lot
of the tools uh that we've used in other parts of the site. Um working with the primary masses, offsets, um and you know, creating a pallet that is uh you know, not too many different colors. One thing I want to just point
out is that because of the location of the site, uh for this this bank, it is oriented towards Great Road and or Entry Boulevard. So, you know, a lot of the articulation, the primary entry is all
um acknowledging that this, you know, this new site entrance is really what it is fronting on. So, uh you know, we've put a lot of articulation on the end of this which faces Great Road and the primary entrance here along the boulevard. Um and so, just wanted to
flag that that that's how we're we're orienting it rather than orienting it towards King Street, which it's obviously very far removed from. Um, other than that, very simple, very similar uh tactics used at other buildings in the retail village with um,
you know, traditional moving materials, the sloping roofs. Uh, this one has some, uh, brick on it, and, uh, we're still doing things like the projecting storefronts, uh, here, u, integrating some canopies, uh, at the main entrance,
>> um, and and trying to make this fit with the rest of the, you know, the development. Um the other thing I would just say is that um we are working very closely with some prototype plans from the bank that we're
trying to lease this to. And so like a lot of these moves we're trying to blend between what they have for functional requirements about how this thing works uh and where we need to enter and like we've flipped and mirrored and rotated and and mushed it around and get it to
uh really do as much of the things that we can do for the form code while also delivering on what the functional requirements have to be. Um so I will leave it at that. Uh just to note that, you know, we we think we're still doing a lot of the same things that we're
trying to do in the other other buildings. And this one has some we don't have a lot of good slides for this, but we did want to speak to the um the tunnel house. Chris already touched on on it, but I wanted to provide this um just a visual for the board here
where it currently is and um where we're looking to slide it to. Um and you know it will look something like this. But this is of course just the current uh view as a reminder. Um don't want to uh to understate about you know the importance of this move and being able to preserve this building.
um looking to hand it over to for for questions uh comments, but I did want to just go back quickly if I could to um these this anchor tenant layout because we we met with the board um last month
and certainly heard some feedback and we as a team went back and we we looked at uh different configurations here uh given some of the feedback from board members and Chris spoke to some of this but I wanted to just reiterate it which is we we also reached out to the tenant that we're really courting for this site
and I you've heard me say it so many times and the importance of having them as an anchor tenant. Um Chris talked about the flow, you know, the delivery, the loading, uh the screening, the orientation towards the residential, the public safety element that they they
when we we approached them again saying, you know, could you twist this? Could you move it up? their, you know, some of their initial immediate feedback was, um, our trucks really benefit from circling the building instead of cutting it in front of it. So, if you, if we had turned this up this way and we had
trucks cutting in front of the main entrance, um, it's just a public safety hazard. It's an operational uh, negative for them, for their for their customer experience. Um, and then the other thing they they mentioned is is customers need
to see an obvious place. where am I going to park and where am I going in and how am I leaving? Um, and by tucking parking behind the building, it creates confusion they have found in other locations when they've when they've tried that. But but more importantly is our our team kind of chewed on the
feedback from the board. Um, we really we realized somewhat intentionally somewhat nod that we um the parking here is is actually really enticing for the rest of the project as well because of its proximity and what's not really shown in this updated render. We wanted
to give you this view because it it does feel like it's part of the other retail village. Um, but because of its size and scale, it it does make sense to be a little bit set back. But right here is where that bank will go. It's right off screen here. Um, and we can maybe update
that if we need to show the board the context of this, but um, there's a world where after hours or even during shopping, someone parks their car here and then just walks the 25 ft over to to get to the rest of go to the bank or go into one of the restaurants there that
we're building here or take, you know, have coffee in the uh, King Street Green. This parking is beneficial to the overall project as well. So, I just wanted the board to feel like we heard you. We've really looked at what this could be in another way, but but really
it comes back to this is the the best layout to have a su a tenant be successful here, but also all the other reasons, the safety, the connectivity to the rest of the campus. Um, so that's why you see what you see today. >> Can can you flip back to that rendering
again? >> One of the people that one. So, the I didn't notice it until it became prominent. Here is show the crosswalks down the boulevard, but if you parked over in the in the parking there, what's
your walk path across this? >> It's right It's right here. Um there's a there's a the plan prominent piece uh sidewalk right here. >> So, there would be a crosswalk there. >> Yeah, it's very prominent. You know, I I
this is our our renderings are very illustrative, Darl, and I I I apologize that they're not all literal, but it's it's right here. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Just look around the corner. >> You had some kind of block along the parking and along the property line. >> Yeah. >> Um
>> I think this is the real function here. And then there's there's sidewalks that come across here. >> You see it right there. It's a little offset. >> Okay. This is this is accurate whereas the >> Okay, so let's um I appreciate your
comments about you know because we did give you feedback on this building which didn't alter it very much and I appreciate you acknowledging that you you know
that you did work with our comments and ultimately it didn't work out. Um, whatever. Um, so anyway, I'm going to go down the board again partly. >> Well, um,
I guess I was the most critical of having the parking lot next to them. The rendering, um, does make it look like it makes some sense. So, you know, with your explanation of the
trucks and the psychology of people going to grocery stores, um, accept the way it is. I a little bit nervous about your division between the store and the apartment
building. I mean, that apartment building isn't defined yet, but I just don't know how that I mean how how how impeous or impervious is that going to be >> that dotted line doesn't tell me much about
>> in terms of a buffer you mean or >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean just I mean you don't want people going back, you know, walking back into the loading dock, >> right? >> But um so I mean that's just >> it's definitely a consideration as we >> need to be some kind of transition
between the apartment building and the parking lot. >> Yeah, we're working through that design, but that definitely was something will be important for for both for both this group here and and of course the residents. I mean, you could do it if you know if the apartment's
low from the other side and that's the back and you have a fence in the backyard for the ground floor. That that could work. >> There's topography there as well, Parllet, too. So, he might be sitting above, but um that that is uh thankfully we have Dave and his team.
>> Okay. >> Yeah, I think with partial plans, I get it. But sorry, I didn't mean to jump on top, >> but as you >> see, >> but I it ties in only because when you build that second, was it building 500
or whatever it is >> now? You got an existing building there that you got to make sure that it didn't disrupt what you were going to have from views on that building. >> Sure. >> Are you done?
I was I was hoping I was next. >> Can you go back to the first? No, the other one. >> I think it's great that you've got it so that it's walkable. This whole thing is supposed to be walkable. You park there. You want to walk to the bank. You want to walk over and have a coffee, go have
something to eat. You don't have to keep moving your car around. I think be really cool. Um, this picture right here, could you superimpose the Beatles walking across that? That would really make it stick out.
>> Mary and Mike, nostalgia. >> I'll take that. The Beatles would have been cool if you did. But that's No, I I just think the layout I like the layout. We all know it's a sprouts. We all know there's a food component of a super smaller specialty supermarket. Going in
there. probably great for all the residents that are going to be there and people that are going to shop there. Um I think it fits I think it actually fits nicely. Thank you. >> I'm done now this end. >> Okay. Go. >> Thank you. Um I appreciate what you said
about like >> Nope. I appreciate what you said about going back to the prospective tenant and um and talking about how the the building is cited and I know like Bartland had raised that the issue last time. I think
um if I can quote you, he had also said it looks like a standard suburban mall and Littleton is not. And I think I called it a circuit city like Beige Box. And um I looked at the um like spec sheet sample sheet Yeah,
the elevations that you had submitted with like colors and materials that I'm still getting circuit city and um and I understand it is outside immediately outside of our formbbased code. I love that with the bank you're
like hey we need to bridge that a little bit. um this is not so far outside of the formbbased code and I think bringing in elements that can speak to it minimally while not compromising the space on the inside. I mean, yeah, maybe
you don't play with setbacks or something like that, but um I think doing something because this is um it's another kind of front door to the development and needs to feel more welcoming than that. And obviously,
there will be signage on it now eventually. Um but I think giving it more of a face both from this side as well as the side that is facing out to the street would be great. I think last time like Daryl mentioned um maybe you could incorporate a facade so that we're
not compromising on the interior needs for the tenant but also making it more engaging for residents. Um, that would be that would be terrific because I think yeah, we don't want to get in the way of the conversations that you're having with tenants, but we are all
accountable to residents and want to make sure that we're meeting those needs as well. And something that can kind of bridge the the aesthetics set by form-based code and everything else going on would be really great. Yeah, I mean we we agree on especially
on this side. It's important for us and the plan. One of the things we were talking about as a group was, you know, do do we commission a mural for that side. So to your point, we're not uh compromising the functionality of the building, but creating something that's maybe more compelling or interesting there, introducing
>> and I think facing like great road too. Yeah, >> it'll be visible on on this facade as well. Um, and also I wanted to ask, so last time around I thought that you had shown some on street parking for this
little boulevard going through as well, like three or four spots there. >> Still shown on your >> Are those still there? >> Yeah, you see the there's three. >> Okay, so we do still >> and on the other side, too. Yep. Yep. >> Okay. And then I was also just curious
um what other types of um tenants did you explore beyond a bank? And I'm asking that because again based on what we hear from residents with the addition of a bank there, it'll make for seven banks within a half mile radius.
>> Yeah. Yeah, I mean what I would say is we have talked to every possible tenant and not necessarily for that space, but the banks are unique in that they are okay on a standalone and whereas some of these other users whether it's they just they want to be part of the the heart or the beating heart of all the village
that you have and so it's a bit of a of a Goldilock situation where they're okay with this and they you know they need that they like that drive-thru. It's a really that as we've seen banks have evolved to having these drive-throughs, >> but you're not showing a drive-thru on this site plan. >> Uh there is
>> it's it's fairly subtle, but um because of this projection, but it's through here. That's that's the the >> Oh, I see. It just has a It's not a canopy. >> It shows up better here, Jeff. If you look at that, just you can see some arrows. >> And Margot, to to go on to Morgan's
point, too. and for the board as well because of that awkward L shape. You can only fit so many different types of buildings in there and that's more of a little jewel box, but also we didn't want the front of the entrance of this site to be just a huge parking lot,
something that was kind of small and and quaint. Um, and the biggest piece is kind of the financial part that this supports too. Um, so there it it was a really good question, but that's kind of how we backed into this ultimately. So, while we I I apologize, Darl, but while
we have this slide up, I think you also need to consider the cut through on this also from King Street to Great Road to avoid the um Yeah, I I don't know what to tell you, but I think that people
would find that as a way to avoid that line, >> which only is a problem during certain times of the afternoon. But I just think it needs some consideration. >> Speed bumps.
>> Yeah. Or more like traffic calming >> or no left-hand turn up at the end. >> Yeah. We have we have speed bumps in in our Riverwalk campus as well. Not necessarily for that reason, but um so we have that experience. But also, you know, today we obviously see people
cutting through uh as we speak, but when this is better configured and professionally managed, I think that's um I have a little more confidence, but I we certainly hear that comment and we need to give some thought. It's not it's not in our to our in our interest to have that.
>> Okay. >> Oh, I jumped on top of Mark. So, yeah. So, my my my questions for the bank drive-thru. I'm glad you don't have a canopy. Um the drive-thru from King Street to Great Road. And the other
question I have, and this is off the site, there's a large area now between the retail and the intersection of Great Road and 495, which is now there's a big
I guess it's a drainage structure. >> There's uh it's sort of wild. that's got some Yeah, it's got some willow. It's but but it's also hugely overtaken by invasive um species. So, what what's your image there? Are you going to
manicure that? Are you going to just let it go or what's the >> Yeah. >> What's the intention? >> Yeah, we would definitely go in and clean it up. One of the things that we had uh on the phase 2 north development was a was tying into some of that uh
infrastructure that that drains that way. When we go in there, we're actually planning to replace that pipe, make sure that it's up to speed and and working well. Um as well as clear out that any invasive vegetation u and really maintain it. It has definitely not been
maintained for a little while. But so we go in there, clean out some of the invasives, uh update the infrastructure that's there. Um and then there'll probably be more appropriate maintenance program that would go along with that. >> Okay. And just so you know, as part of
this uh because we do uh impact that area, we uh are going in front of conservation uh in a couple of weeks um to present this to them just for those those minor impacts there. So So those
those are my comments. Um Marin, what is Oh, well, okay, now's the time. Is any anyone else would like to speak to this? George. >> Oh, no. I was just uh George S2. First and foremost, uh I want to commend
that uh team of engineers for the job that they've been doing with these buildings and redesigning based on comments that's been given to you. I really appreciate that. And um I tell you I appreciate the most that uh when
they went in and when I wrote the sale about flipping the doves from the back to the front on King Street, which was one of the things that we had uh looked forward to being. And uh he said, "Well, I did one better, George. I put it on
both sides." So I really appreciate uh the work that Joel put in on this. The main thing that I want to talk about here is that uh a lot of people never knew uh that taxpayers was paying the
tax on 550 King Street even though we had some money bought it but assessment is something like about 41 million. It has to reach 60 million
before taxpayers will stop paying taxes to the town of 550 King Street. So you can understand as a taxpayer why it's so important that
the digging of putting foundations in the ground and putting buildings up mean that the assessors can get in and they can evaluate and they can increase the assessment on the taxes of that property
and get us out of the business of paying taxes. on the property. That is very important. A lot of people in this town did not know that we've been paying taxes on that ever since IBM left town. So, it's
been quite a while. So, I'm hoping that uh there'll be a a smooth selling with going forth here uh with these buildings and with the blessing of this board here to give them
the approval to go ahead and put these buildings and up there so that we can get this project up and going. And I appreciate everything that this board has done in terms of helping this
development. And I think we have a very good developer here in this town because he has listened to this board as well as listen to resident in this town and he wants to do well in this community. As
far as I'm concerned, as of right now, he's done nothing but well in this community. And I thank him for what he's done. And I look forward to us supporting him so that he can get these buildings up and uh I can get the town a
little out of my pocket. Thank you. >> Anyone else? Marker, 205 court. Uh, one comment on the bank with the drive-thru. You need to do a much better job on the driveway because it's not separated. It's not clear.
There's not like a pulloff lane for it. So, it needs to be somehow separated um from the rest of the traffic or you're going to it's just it's just part of the main there needs to need to be the island or something, right? Um and then
on the um the retail building, I have more of a comment for the planning board. Um the site plan that was approved in 2024 for the site had basically two apartment buildings in that site building and they were Eminemn which uh where's about 400 units. Um
this is taking up part of the the site part of the space for that those units. I hope that the building 500 when it comes in makes up for it. We've increased the uh retail use, retail commercial use of this building at the
cost the site at the cost of the residential and I hope we recover it in later in the phase. I'm not opposed to this project this going in, but I mean the plan as was presented had uh 400
apartments there and right now you had the building 500 and it I don't know how you have five I don't know how we recover those apartments in this plan versus what was originally proposed. >> Morgan, you've >> Yeah, you've talked to that. >> I would just I appreciate it, Mark. I
would just say you know absolutely residential here. Um, and we are also looking at other parts of the property to uh to make up for for that residential. So, this was not supposed to be residential over here, but it's it's a very good site for that. So, we're looking at it right now. It's not
give you some comfort. >> What's the concept for building what is it a thousand >> that we that's likely going to be complimentary retail because of uh right on the in the green there. >> Okay. >> Keeping with the uh form base code as well, the small smaller buildings. Do
you have a um a schedule about coming before us for that phase? >> Um honestly, it's going to be as soon as possible. We just we just uh you know, as soon as Dave finished with some of this, we got him going on some of the
designs for those buildings. So, my hope is honestly within the summer. We our intent is this summer. >> No, summer for Dave. Okay. >> Yeah. Um >> I already had my vacation. >> So, next month. >> Yeah. Yes. >> So, this uh I I'm now going to ask the
board to continue to approve whether or not we can continue this hearing to what would we continue it to? >> August 6 at 7. >> Will you have Well, >> do you want to do this before or after?
uh after and I think but also will there be I guess we can just continue because maybe do this at the last >> because if we don't have peer review back we >> that's pushing out right
>> we should should be time for back and forth on that >> okay um so what would be the timing So if we do like 7 40 7:30 >> so it would be continued to the August
6th uh meeting uh at 7:40. Um can I have a motion? Make a motion to continue the public hearing for 550 King Street site plan permit to August 6 at 7:40. Uh, can I have a second?
>> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. Uh, now the next order of business is um adjourning. Make a motion to adjurnn. >> Can I have a second? >> Second. >> Get my shirt over here. All in favor?
Thank you.