when you are. >> Thank you. >> Recording in progress. >> Okay. And good evening everyone and welcome to this our Monday July 13th
2026 meeting of Lunenburgg planning board. We are here at the Bilada meeting room at our beautiful town hall. We're upstairs. If uh this meeting is being recorded is on TV. If you're watching us at home and you want to participate
tonight, you can drive on down to town hall. You can also go find our agenda on the town website and get the Zoom link from the town agenda or from the plan board agenda on the town website. You
could also instead use the phone number on there to call in. As always, these features are available as a convenience to make it much easier to participate and give you the option from participating from home.
if for some reason they don't work, we still have the ability and generally will conduct the meeting regardless. Um, I believe that is all we need. So, thank you so much for joining us tonight
and I will open to ask if we have any board comment hearing. None. Mr. director. >> Good evening, planning board. Uh, by now you've all received drafts of the bylaws that we're going to work on
over the summer. And we've scheduled our first working session for next Monday night, 5:00 right here in this room down at that table. It will be filmed and recorded.
Um, I must tell you that I went to a housing conference a couple weeks ago and they had a eyeopening class on inclusionary zoning and the pitfalls for
communities as small as ours. So, um, I am rethinking our approach to the inclusionary bylaw, but I need to talk with town council and the town administrator
to pursue my thoughts a little further, but we can bat it around when we get together next Monday. >> Would uh would you if you feel uh would you feel it improper to share something that surprised you about all of this at
this time? Just to wet our whistles a little and you can say not yet. You want to talk to town council. That's more than fair. >> Well, no. Well, basically what I heard for towns our size that if we were to adopt an inclusionary housing bylaw for
the purpose of creating affordable housing, we're not going to get much out of it unless somebody proposes a multifamily development. >> Mhm. And whatever threshold we come up with, it's
likely that developers will come in one under the threshold to avoid the bylaw, even if we offer density bonus. >> Oh, even with a density bonus. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Um, so I don't want to come up with something that's going to function as a backdoor growth control technique. I
want to come up with something that will actually work. So, I want to explore that idea to make it work. I think we're going to need um some town council input and town manager input. So, let me have those discussions, but we'll talk further
about it when in our working session. >> I'm going to ask one more favor cuz I have caught us doing the thing that I hate when town boards do and I'm uh we're talking about a topic. Let's define it quickly. What is inclusionary zoning? inclusionary housing
uh an inclusionary housing bylaw is something that towns adopt uh requiring developers to set aside a certain percentage of the houses the the
units they build as affordable as deemed by the state. According to MGL chapter 40B, every community in Massachusetts is required to have at least 10% of its housing stock deemed affordable by the
state. And we're at uh I think 7.9 7.6 somewhere in there. Um so, um >> uh sorry for the delay. Um I am here now. >> Great Tim. Good to hear from you. Excellent.
So, some towns try to use inclusionary housing bylaws as a way to get affordable units built. Um, but I find that it works, those bylaws work best in those communities where they're going to build housing regardless. >> Mhm.
>> Like the Metro West communities right along 495 and inward towards Boston. I've written several inclusionary bylaws for small towns and central mass that have got no mileage out of it at all. Uh much like our
inclusionary provision we have in our zoning. So um I'd like to rethink that a bit. The other bylaws we're working on, uh, there's a senior housing bylaw and a clust uh, revising our cluster
housing bylaw and minor site plan review for um, small um, changes of use, things like that. So, we'll work on those over the summer,
present them to the public in the fall, um, and get them in shape for next year's town meeting. >> All right. I just wanted to put a fine point on what Steve was saying because I attended the same conference and I think it's not even just multif family, it's
multif family at scale where the proforma of building the housing is not hurt by the inclusion of the affordable units because they restrict the income
for renting or selling. So often they're a revenue neutral build for a developer and so that's why at single family and small multif family they avoid it like the plague. >> Yeah.
>> Um and for the public as well. This all gets back to that idea of um we have to hit that 10% cap for affordable housing. And this is what I mean affordable housing is a law defined thing in Massachusetts. That's why
you'll hear me talk about both affordable housing and you'll hear me say in town we need more affordable housing which is a legal thing. We also need more afford housing that's affordable. That isn't a legal thing but it's reflects the fact of what the
housing prices have done in the past several years. Um, and if you are under that 10% cap, that opens the door for developers. I already see some nods out there for people who have followed it in town. That opens the
door in town for developers to come in and >> build anywhere in town at any density. >> They they get to dictate the rules rather than our zoning bylaws dictating the rules. And if we get to that 10% we
control our own destiny. >> Exactly. And so that's the kind of carrot and stick approach a little bit. Um and you know the carrot of getting our own destiny sure sounds nicer. Um
okay. So thank you. And I see first on our agenda for tonight uh Mr. Wilsmer absent next to me is joining us remote remotely this evening. So votes will be by roll call. Uh I see that and Tim I
will always go through the three members to the left of me right from your view then you then myself. >> Sounds good to me. >> Okay. Um, we have a dimminimous change
in front of us for 942 to 944 Reservoir Road. Request to modify a special permit. So, board members, you might remember the Reservoir Road project from uh not too far back, like even last month,
uh approving three single family houses on Good Ridge Road and one new single family house lot on Reservoir Road. The applicant is back before us tonight because they'd like to change that single family house on
Reservoir Road to a duplex. Is that right, Brian? >> Yes, it is. >> Yeah. So, Brian Marchetti, McCarti Engineering, um as Mr. Wallace just said, um the development before you here, we
were here for both the corner of Good Rich. There are four lots. Uh tonight we're here just for the house that's on Reservoir Road. We originally had shown that as a single family. Uh a developer has purchased the property from the applicant uh who wishes to put a duplex
on the property. Overall development wise, the footprint of the rooftop gets a little smaller, but the driveway got a little bigger. Um so we added uh to comply with storm water a second driveway to the other unit uh storm
water cals were updated. We show uh pone diaphragms um and a a drywall for the rooftop like we had originally proposed. Um Jeff Walsh has reviewed it and he did provide a uh comment letter back saying he's satisfied with the changes. So like I
said it was a lot that was already approved. We have the exact same drainage design uh piece diaphragm along the driveway. We just split it up now because it's two separate driveways and again the rooftop got smaller, but the calculations show that we exceed the 1in
water quality volume. So we're providing everything that the town requires and Jeff Walsh has signed off on it. >> All right, looking for questions or thoughts from the board.
This is a really picky question, but it looks like the second driveway is made of stone. >> No. So, that was a construction controlish. Oh, that's >> that's all that was. I guess >> that was my second question. >> Yeah, it was shown because it's going to be that's where the actual
>> So, it's just all the layers piled on top of each other. Okay. >> Yeah. Yep. >> So, where you see the construction entrance today is where the first driveway is going to be. Other questions or thoughts?
>> This is for Steve. Can you refresh my memory? Did they do a can a sequencing schedule for this like we've been doing with the newer storm water permits like a phasing plan. >> I don't believe they did. >> Okay.
>> All right. So it's just switching to two I mean effectively just switching from two driveways to from one driveway to two >> correct >> to make use of a duplex there as is a by right use. >> Yes. >> Yep. >> Okay.
And this is to modify the special permit because it's a change to the common >> it's change to the storm water. >> Yes. Okay. Because I have it on as a dimminimous change for a change to their
special permit and storm water is >> I think they originally applied for a special permit for a common driveway and then withdrew it. >> This is a dimminimous change to the site plan and storm water permit for Zero Reservoir Road. >> Okay. Um it will it be an issue for us
that it was listed as a change to a special permit on the agenda? Great. That's all I care about. want to make sure that we're not going to get in trouble. Um, all right. Wonderful. So,
any concerns from the board? I >> All right. And Tim, just interrupt with thoughts. Speak out when you have them. Um, okay. In that case, we would need uh both a vote. >> Was that public?
>> Oh, do we need public comment on our de? I'm fine with it. Okay. Yeah. Well, it's dimminimous, so no, >> I'm I'm fine with soliciting public comment. I often ask anyway. So, just to be Do we have public comment for uh the request for a dimminimous change for the
storm water insight plan at 9:42 to 944 Reservoir Road hearing? Seeing none. All right. Okay. Um, first we need to have a vote to determine if this is a dimminimous change. >> So moved.
>> Second. >> All right. Moved and seconded. All in favor? Mr. Niccastro? >> I. >> Mr. Bernie. >> I. >> Miss Reed. >> I. >> Mr. Wilsmer. >> I. >> And I from myself. Great. Now we would
need a move uh a vote to accept the de change or to accept the dimminimous change. >> So moved. Second. >> Moved and seconded. Um, I always say all in favor, but it's really just roll call vote. Mr. Niccastro,
>> I. >> Mr. Bernie, >> I. >> Miss Reed, >> I. >> Mr. Wilsmer, >> I. >> And an I from myself. >> Nice and easy. >> Appreciate it. >> Great. Thank you. All set. Now, after this, we have public
hearings. It is my intent to take the public hearings tonight in order as listed on the agenda. So, we will move on uh to 171 Arbor Street, conveniently enough. >> Mhm.
>> And uh this is a new public hearing, correct? >> Yep. >> Take it away, Miss Reed. Uh, the Lunberg Planning Board will hold a public hearing on Monday, July 3rd, 2026 at 6 PM Town Hall, 17 Main Street, Lunberg, Mass, to hear and review a request to modify a special permit for a shared
driveway and a dimminimous change to a storm water permit for previously approved residential construction at 171 Arbor Street, pursuant to chapter 250-6.4C7 4C7 and chapter 204, storm water and storm
sewers of the code of the town of Lunenburgg. Subject property information. The location is 171 Arbor Street, Lunenberg, Mass. Assessor's map 68, parcel number 21.3. Applicant is Scott Perry, 429 Arbor
Street, Lunenberg, Mass 01462. Uh owner is Steven R. Powell Trustee 133 Lemonster Shirley Road in Lunenberg, Mass. Uh you can view materials online at lunbergmma ma.portal.openggov.com/arch with record ID1412
or via an email request to the planning office planning at lunenbergmma.gov or in person at the planning office at 960 Mass Avenue in Lunenburgg. So again, Brian Maretti, Marty Engineering, uh here on behalf of Scott
Perry, the owner of uh lot 2 and uh Steve Powell. So this whole project was approved as a three lot common drive over a year ago. Um earth work was done on these back two
lots, lot two and three. Um that's all been done. That work was completed. uh just getting the lots down to grade. Uh the intent was then to sell the lots off after lot one was purchased by the Abutter John Road. So lot one was left
completely vegetated and undeveloped. So that's in its existing state. Lot two contains um or rather yeah lot two is is the majority of the parcel includes the
wetlands. That one is currently not planned to be built upon. Uh, one of the other neighbors is looking to purchase that one. So, we've come back here with just lot three development. Mr. Perry is purchasing that from Steve Powell. Um,
when we permitted these plans, we showed a house footprint, a design to accommodate the storm water in the driveway. Um, so now Mr. Perry bought it. This is the house he's actually going to build. So, we just changed the footprint of the house uh and the location and orientation of the driveway. Uh the current plan is to just
pave the common driveway right here to just past his driveway and not pave the rest of it up to the full extent of lot too. Um so, we originally had asked for a dimminimous change, but the board want us to come back for a modification. So,
uh that's why we're here now. So, storm water has been revised to accommodate the change. um the subdivision or common driveway rather roadway storm water is all staying the same uh with the exception of back here that's been removed. So the storm water for the
individual lot has been updated with again the rooftop drywells and um um the pone diaphragms along the driveway shoulders. So the grading on the lot changed, the size of the house changed, the orientation of the driveway changed, but again the stol remains the
same uh same type of design that we had we had proposed and was previously approved. Uh Engraves Engineering has reviewed it and did provide their comment letter back um with their acceptance of the design. >> Great. And I know we talked about it the
other week as well because of the looking evaluating as you said if it was a dimminimus um Graves Graves came back right looking to members of the board. >> No I don't have any issue with this if it if it calcs out for storm water.
>> Yep. Yep. >> All right. Great. This is however a public hearing so I am going to make sure we ask for public comment as well. Is there public comment for the request for modification at 171 Arbor Street?
Seeing none, >> now that no one has public comment, I did have a question. >> Excellent. >> Uh, driving by the site, >> there's clearly been a fair amount of earth removal done in order for preparation. >> Um, much of it outside of the lot in
question. >> Mhm. And what is the closure plan for those remaining lots to ensure that they reveate? >> So it's it is I believe it's already been led and seated. >> It has. Okay.
>> So they're all led and seated. The the trees were taken down. Uh the lom that was taken up in order to remove the gravel has all been put back and it was seated. So that's seated. Um we've actually filed with Nishap because this was part of the blending turtle area. So
the deed restriction area that's been recorded is all established. The b the bounds are out there. The fence is up. The signage is up. So we actually got a a partial certificate of compliance from Nishap. Uh the turtle biologist has been out there and reviewed what we had done
and signed off on it. >> Okay. Just for an FYI, we originally planned to remove 80,000 yards of material and they only took about 40. >> So much the better. >> All right. Other questions from the board or concerns or anything else they
want to voice before we close the public hearing? >> Hearing none. Is there anything else you want to tell us before we close? Didn't think so. Um, I would look for a motion to close the public hearing for 171 Arbor Street. So moved. >> Second.
>> Moved and seconded. Roll call vote. Mr. Niccastro. >> I. >> Mr. Bernie. >> I. >> Miss. Reed. >> I. >> Mr. Wilsmer. >> I. >> And I from myself. Excellent. Um, do we have any motions on the request
for modification? >> I move that we approve record 1412 for 7 or 171 Arbor Street. uh modification to the common driveway special permit and storm water plan.
>> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Further discussion. >> Um oh >> construction hours. >> Can they >> construction hours should be included in the decision? No. >> Yes.
>> Uh so seeing as it's a residential neighborhood, this lot sits behind other residences. I would say 7 to 4 Monday through Friday, 8 to 1 on Saturday. No Sunday's holidays. >> Second.
>> Okay. Moved and seconded. We'll do a roll call vote. Mr. Niccastro. >> I. >> Mr. Bernie. >> I. M. >> I. >> Mr. Wils. >> I. >> And an I for myself. >> Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. Okay. Board. Uh, you
know the drill. I'll write the decision tomorrow, send it off to you folks and the applicant. >> Yep. >> If I don't receive any comments by next Monday, we'll assume that you're good with the decision and Lee will begin securing your signatures.
>> Are we changing the numbering in open gov? the request the question being because it's the 142 record 1412 as opposed >> will start being reflected as the date they quarantine open
>> uh okay >> okay >> thank you >> great wonderful >> all right thank you >> thank you question I was assuming maybe it was a because it was a modification was getting their own ID number and they hadn't programmed it >> well I gone to the the one that was
listed in the email and it was the 2024 permit and I couldn't figure out why it was >> Yeah. >> why it wasn't driving. >> There we go. >> Okay. Next up would be um our public hearing for 10 public
hearings uh for 10 Parameter Road. That includes storm water permits PBSW 2612 and 2613 and special permits PBSP 263
>> and 264. This has been continued from our May 5th 2026 meeting. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. Uh Ryan Proctor, Dillis, and Roy here tonight representing the applicant. Uh once again, Benjamin
Builders. Uh so just for uh to catch everyone up to speed and a quick refresher, these lots are lots 2 through 4 and 5 through13 Parmentor. Uh we had continued last meeting, we were waiting for a follow-up review letter from Graves Engineering relative to our uh
revised plans and materials uh for the peerreview consultant relative to storm water and the common driveways. We have since received that uh on Friday of last week. uh they've indicated that they are satisfied with the layout and storm water design that we've presented. I will not go through the whole letter
because there were no condition related items or any additional items. I'm happy to address any particular questions you have on the letter itself. The only two uh other items that we had as as homework if you will was a sequencing plan and then some draft HOA
documents. Uh we we are working on an HOA or an alternative to that um some sort of mechanism within the deed an agreement or common uh common driveway maintenance agreement. Um and we are also today we prepared a phasing plan which I will upload to the portal to
give you a chance to review. Um but on a high level I'd like to just kind of talk through it tonight if that's all right. Um and I will just say for the record I believe Ally from Benjamin Builders is on the call uh with us as well. >> How's it going? >> Great. Thank you.
So, uh, we had talked about phasing. Um, we had talked about tree clearing at the last meeting and we have a limit of clearing shown on all site plans for, uh, this entire lot, not just for these two permits that we're talking about right now. Um, but from a clearing perspective, we had talked about it last
meeting about clearing within the limits of clearing. The actual construction we will have phased and given the nature of the project, these are ANR lots. um are are uh we are anticipating to treat each lot as its own phase where we can
mobilize on site uh poor foundation again this is high level I will provide the letter that we have here uh poor foundation move on to the next lot pour foundation there and then the subsequent subs would come in behind there and our expectation and our plan is to not have
more than six dwellings go going at one time so before we move on to the next one we would have either a certificate of occupancy or a temporary O for that first lot prior to moving on to uh the seventh lot. Um so that's our intention. Again, I will upload this letter to the
portal so you have a chance to review and provide comments on that. Um but that is our initial thoughts uh relative to that. So other than that, I'm happy to take any questions or comments you may have. >> What's the average limit of work per lot in square feet?
>> I would say it's less than an acre, I believe, because a lot of the lots are uh an acre. Um I I don't have that number in front of me, but I'm happy to provide that. >> I mean, looking at it, we're talking maybe 25,000 square feet, >> I think. That's on average, >> I'd say. So, yes. >> Um
so, six lots is what? Uh >> 15. >> That's threeish three and a quarter acres open at a time. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, yeah. And is the entire limit of work
surrounded by silt fence? >> We do. Yep. We have a pretty robust uh silk fence barrier on all of the lots. I haven't been here long, so I don't know of an instance where our building commissioner has issued a temporary
certificate of occupancy. Um, >> he has directed storm water applicants to bond work that isn't complete until and and and in that way we have a bond in place
while you get your CO. So you'd go a full CO, we would take a bond for the work. So let's say phase one, you're ready to move on, but your grass isn't growing or you have some minor issue. >> It needs to go through a growing season.
>> Yeah. And so we would take the bond in the cash amount plus 25 or 30% for the work contained in phase one and after that passes, we release that bond and move through. And that gives your client the ability
to move at the speed that they would like to, but you're not dealing with a maximum of 90 days for attempt CO where I mean you're not going to get through a growing season in 90 days, >> right?
And I think I mean if we average it out it's probably less than $10,000 you know probably somewhere in the ballpark of five for lom seed that kind of stuff. Um so unless there's any other major issue dealing with storm water.
There shouldn't be any significant cost. >> Correct. Yeah. And each lot has its own storm water system. Correct. With the exception of the common driveways. >> So yeah those those would be in place at that point as well. And I mean, I think what would happen the way I would see it, and again, I'm I'm only one member,
and I think that Steve and the building inspector would need to talk it out, but is >> uh the last house on the common driveway >> would probably get stuck waiting if there was an issue with the drainage on the common driveway. Okay.
Good thing you know we did finish >> and you mentioned the tree clearing. >> We're I want to make sure we're on the same page. My my feeling is I'm happy for you to cut trees. >> As long as the stumps remain in place
until that lot becomes active in the construction. Yes. Yeah. I think we clarified that last meeting, but thank you for saying it again. >> Okay. We're also clear that no >> earth removal, no >> no no site work is to begin.
>> Absolutely. Yes. >> Yeah. >> It's the >> Hey Tim, I just want to let you know that I think we're getting some of the friendly voices at your location as well. >> Oh, my apologies. I thought I was on mute. Okay,
>> no worries. Um I thought that was public comment. I mean, they were clearly comments. Everyone heard them. >> They said they're happy with it. >> Um, I'm going to turn to the board for other comments, questions, thoughts before I
go for public comment. >> The Sorry, >> please. the phasing schedule is so is it six total between the two permits open at one time or are we talking six on one and three on the other? So that that was
that's a good question. I was going to ask that uh before we close out tonight. So our intention is to do the six lots um just given the nature if someone wants to buy a lot on you know in a separate portion of the site we don't necessarily want to be restricted to six adjacent lots in between. So >> I'm I'm not against that. I just want to
be clear that we're not going to have 9 or 12 acres open because there's three permits and there's, >> you know, six six lots open on each permit, >> right? Yeah. No, it would be in totality. >> Yep. >> Okay.
Thank you for asking that because I just kind of assumed that that's what they meant and I actually feel much better having that clarification now. >> I've made too many assumptions in my life. >> I understand that. Um, all right. I am going to see if we have public comment for the public
hearings tonight at 10 Paramea Road and I see please I'm going to ask you to come on up. You can speak at is coming up to the microphones a difficulty. We can have one brought to you as well and that's for everyone. Um and when you come up please share your name and your
address and share your thoughts. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. Gail Lawless from 21 Parameter Street. So obviously we're, you know, con deeply concerned about what's going on. Um, a couple of questions. I wasn't really understanding
the phasing of that. So, um, Parent Street, uh, there are existing houses that are lower than that's that's quite a steep hill that that goes up. And I don't know if you can tell that. I'm not
a map reader that way, so I don't know if it's indicated that way, but um clearing trees and and us being lower. >> Mhm.
>> Uh concerned about rainwater runoff. That's that's that's a concern. So when we're talking phasing, would we be talking um all the lots on Parmentor at one time to take all the trees down and clear?
>> So I'm going to ex uh unless anyone of the board minds, I'd like to explain the process as I understand it. If other board members understand it differently, please correct me. If I understand it differently than what you thought you were describing, please jump up and correct me because this is a
actually a good check for us to make sure we're all talking about the exact same thing. Now, a lot of this is going to be formalized in writing as has been said, but let's make sure we all have the same understanding. Um,
so to prevent storm water runoff, we're going to have you're going to have a few things protecting you during the construction phase. One of which are the silt fences as described which are there to prevent runoff more or less at the border.
>> Mhm. >> And those are going to be straw bales and staked in fences and other things to keep that particulate runoff where it's supposed to be. um as well as they are going to because
of the cost of bringing in the heavy equipment needed to clear trees. The entire project the entire project is going to be cleared of trees at more or less at at once. Correct. >> Within a limit of clearing minus
>> Yeah. So for the clearing they're planning to do, they're going to do it all at once. Don't want to say they're going to clear everything. That's not the plan. But they're going to cut all the trees. They are not going to remove the stumps. And that's because those
stumps are what are holding that soil in place to prevent runoff and everything else. At any given time, they will have six up to six lots that are being actively developed as this phasing goes. Mhm.
>> When one lot gets to the point that okay, development's done minus maybe some plants growing in and and that isn't really development. And we you you heard us talk about the bond. We have a way to make sure that work is done. But basically, there'll be six lots in
development at a time on the whole project. And then when one of those lots is completed to that point, they might bond it out for that last bit of waiting. Then they would start I mean at some point they could start another one. They
might do what hasn't been said to us yet and I don't know is super relevant is if they're going to start the next one right after the last or maybe they let three get finished and then go just for the sake of having crews move efficiently. That I don't know. But the goal is to
have the stump stay in place along with the silt fence to make to keep that runoff. And these are standard protocols for a storm water. And the phasing is to make sure that we don't have the whole area stripped at once. And that could
make a much bigger deal. So there will be a limited area that is really grubbed out and cleared and then being rebuilt at a time. >> And that would be the stumps you're talking about. >> Yeah. They're going to go up. They'll take out the stumps. They'll do whatever
whatever else they're doing as maybe as simple as, oh, we're going to make sure the lom is good and throw down some seed. It could be in other areas there'll be other work being done store water-wise, but the appropriate work done at the appropriate time in the phase >> and our engineer will be out there
inspecting periodically. >> Okay. Thank you. And I think the other thing to take into account is currently all of these lots are adjacent to Ruth Street if I'm not mistaken. >> Can you point out the the six lots in
question? >> Yeah, sorry. >> I was trying to match the the map to the >> the common driveway is on Ruth Street. This is >> Ruth Street here. >> These ones are actually on both Ruth Street on >> Yeah. Ruth and >> Par,
>> are you able to point out where her property abuts? >> Uh, it's at the bottom left of that map across from the lowest >> parcel. So, that that was another question. Would the um it it may be jumping the
gun, right? But, uh, is there our concern is also driveways being directly across rather than being offset? Is there >> um I am not equipped to help you answer that question. I would ask if the if uh
the applicant would like to answer that question about driveways being offset or across or what the plans are there. >> Uh so the the driveways locations are primarily uh topography driven so that we can get adequate slopes up the driveway. So that's why they landed
where they are and so that we can get storm water. We have some rain gardens along the front. So making sure that we can get gravity flow into that. So that that's ultimately what drove the um the locations right there. >> Okay. Are you concerned about if if there will be a driveway directly across
from yours in particular? >> Yes. And runoff again because our properties are lower. >> Um this is quite a rise. >> So the one the first thing I'll tell you um now I don't I don't know and maybe you could answer if it's directly across
from her property or not. That I don't know. But a lot of the other words that were said were about the storm water infrastructure in place to prevent that runoff from just shooting down across and back onto your property where where
they talked about the stone diaphragms in the rain gardens. Those are all being built in to mitigate that factor. >> It it appears that you have a lot of driveway on your parcel. >> We do. So, it's going I mean that that's going to be a a a challenge for some of
these lots. It appears that the one shown on this plan it that the driveway is closer to the grass area between your two driveways, but I think when you get to the next lot to the south, it there's no way for it to not be across from the
large driveway in front of your home. Um, again, if you look at this plan, you'll notice that there's this sort of dark finger that points up next to the street, and that is what um, Mr. Proctor
was discussing as the storm water management system. So the lot is shaped in a way that the water is intended to run off into that and the applicant or developer will be paying our engineer to go out and verify that the work that's
being done on site by the contractors as verified by Mr. Proctor's firm is accurate to the plan that was submitted. So I can't say and no one ever can say that you'll never see some runoff. Um, I
imagine that in some of the storms we've had recently, like last week when we had that crazy storm, the ground was so dry that you were probably getting some water from the hill already. So, this project won't make anything that you currently get better, but the design is
intended and shouldn't make anything worse. >> Um, >> yeah, the runoff that the way that property goes, there is a kind of a gully in the bottom of the hill before the street. So, >> and that that's this storm water system is intended to replicate that capture. >> Yeah, I understand that. Um, okay, I
think that's all the questions and it's not just Parmentor. Uh, I believe the May 11th meeting >> there was um a comment from one of the uh residents on Ruth Street about the the same situation. So, um
>> feel better about an engineer as well taking a look at it. So, thank you. >> Yep. >> Thank you. And if it makes you feel even better, it's not your tax dollars that pay for the engineer. It is the applicant that pays for the engineer. So there you go.
>> Oh, we have what's that? >> Zoom. >> Zoom. Okay. Uh we're going to go we're going to go to our Zoom our friend on Zoom and then I will invite you up. Okay. And can I ask the name on Zoom?
>> Hi. Uh, this is Kim. >> Hello. Good evening. This is Kim Duffy 1479 Massav. Uh, thanks for taking my comment. Um, I had a question. And so I am I'm just looking at this lot on the map and comparing it to the site plan
and what I'm noticing is that this really blocks off what looks to be a a major kind of wildlife corridor. And so given that I'm I'm curious, you know, how this site plan, you know, did this con was that considered in this site
plan? And if not, like could it be? um you know just because this is a large parcel strip of land between you know the lake as well as um you know the uh heating and what you know that >> I'm going to I'm going to interrupt you
for a moment and apologize you're a little hard to understand if I could ask you to maybe get a little closer to the microphone >> and I think just do the acoustics in this room and we're hearing you from the TV in the back if you could slow down
just a little. You're not speaking fast, but extra slow will help us. So, could you restate the main piece of your concern and go on from there? >> Sure. Um, I'm looking at the site plan and how it's laid out. I'm just concerned about the wildlife corridor.
Um, based on the layout, it really blocks it. So, I'm curious if that was considered and if not, could it be? >> Okay. So, again, a little hard to understand. You say, "Was your concern about a wildlife corridor?" >> Yes.
>> Okay. All right. Um I don't know. So, first of all, thank you for your >> comment, Kim. Um,
I do not know how much that influences these aspects of it, but I think it's still a fair I think it's still a question from the public that's worth hearing. Was thought put into um a there being a wildlife corridor or other
passage for native otter? >> Not specifically that I'm aware of for a wildlife corridor. I will say and you can see on this plan that I've colored up here, we we have tried to be intentional with the limit of clearing where we're really limiting clearing to what we need for the house septic and the driveway. Um these are ANR lots. So
the driveways have to come off the road. Uh obviously except where we have the common driveways which again limits the clearing that would otherwise be needed for an individual driveway. Um so we have been intentional in that regard in terms of retaining trees where we're able to. >> All right.
And um depending on the direction I do I do see some fully contiguous tree areas depending which direction of travel >> right >> for wildlife overall. All right. Thank you. Um I know we have comment in the
room as well sir. First off I apologize. Uh my name is Bart Lawless. I'm Gail's husband, 21 Palenter Street. Uh, these are hearing aids, but they also don't quite pick up everything. So, I apologize if you covered it or if a little bit about out
of sequence. Um, the same questions that Gail had asked, I'd like to put a little bit into perspective. Uh, first, I don't believe that section of Palenter and Round Road are adjacent to um Ruth. Ruth
is uh several houses down the street and then makes right. So uh just to put that in >> the plans that I saw I think going back to the convers the conservation committee
puts three driveways directly across the street from me. Two of them are going to be empty. the the uh double driveway is comes right across the street where my well is. So if for some reason water
breaks loose um my wells in the way. The other driveway on the other side of the my property uh tails right into my driveway which gives any runoff a direct run right into
Lake Shirley. Not sure that's a good thing to have. Um, but that's something I think we should be aware of because I also, and I am not an engineer by any stretch of the imagination, but I do know you cannot control water.
You can direct it, but you can't control it. If we do have some kind of mitigation there, then you're putting that right in front of my house. the 25% left that the driveways aren't picking up. And that
means that I'm going to be having I guess what we used to call them cotton tails or cattails. Uh and water's only going to fill up so much there and then it's going to come. So I'd like you to be at least aware of
>> of what's happening uh in that situation. And then the last thing I have and I'm also not a tree hugger but I really wonder why because I also come out the project they the developed that was just
here prior to uh prior to this uh has just cleared totally uh reservoir road and and gothy road. My god. Uh, I would really I don't have to look at it because I have beautiful Lake Shirley to look at, but I don't
know why trees have to be clearcut when you could leave them there instead of the slump to absorb the water and put it back into the atmosphere rather than this very stiff uh I don't want to say it's a cliff cuz it's not. It's it's about a 3540 degree
angle. if you've seen the typography out there >> on this side or the one on Reser. >> I I don't know. I I can't, as I said, I can't read maps and stuff like that. I just know at 80 years old, I can't walk up to take a stroll into the woods. It's
it's just too too much. So, you're you're talking about water that's going to be empowered because there's nothing there to stop it. It's going to hit whatever barriers. I mean, water gardens to me is nothing more than a a fancy name for a retaining pit. Um,
and I'm sitting smack in front of it. >> Uh, I could probably do my own mitigation by building a a wall, but that's just putting the problem on my neighbor John Tucker or my neighbor Roland Smith, Roland Leger on the other
side, and I'm not about to do that. So, I don't know why you couldn't have the builder where the dual driveway is use that as access to that entire park for his construction vehicles and then when it
was finished put the driveway in. doesn't help me, but it still would leave the trees, which I think would be somewhat of a saving grace if there was like a I don't know 50 foot border between the street and um where he's going to do because the houses are not
anywhere near the street. The houses are up on top of the hill. So, thank you. >> I don't know if I can interject to kind of answer some of the tree clearing >> please >> question. So, I think the >> Please give your name and and address,
please. >> Ali Benjamin Builders, the developer. Um, so just to kind of ease some concern, we we definitely don't plan on clearcutting by any means. Um, you know, we want these homes to be nice, to be
well marketed. Um, we plan on leaving a substantial amount of trees. We're only clearing what's needed to place the house, a small yard, and the septic system. So, there still will be many trees. Um, the whole lot won't be
clearcut. We just plan on cutting what we're going to cut at the same time, so we're disturbing less of the neighborhood with the tree clearing, you know, all the equipment. Um, so they're going to go in and out and be done with it. Um, but there'll be many trees left
behind. A lot of people, you know, they don't want to see their neighbor. We're going to leave as much buffer as we can in between houses so that they're more marketable lots. >> All right. Thank you. So, we've heard from the builder about
the intent to leave as many trees as they feasibly can because they want the trees there from their own for their own fiscal reasons. Both >> marketing. >> Yeah. It is both people want houses surrounded by trees and any tree you
don't cut down is a tree you do not have to pay to get cut down. >> Exactly. Um, so they have a fiscal incentive in that direction. Um, all right. No, I appreciate this. Do we
have other public comment at this time? Okay. uh for the board. I think between now and the next time we meet to review this, I think that we should consider um a
predetermined schedule of inspections by Graves as opposed to a reactionary schedule of inspections based on the size of open area and the potential impacts of failed silt fence or
otherwise. >> That makes sense. And I think that, you know, I I don't have an idea of exactly what that looks like, but I think it's something as we move towards a decision we should consider. >> How about I get you together with Jeff
from Graves and you work out a uh a a fairly detailed sequence of construction? >> Sure. >> Okay. We'll do that between now and the next meeting. You'll also be updating your phasing plan or uploading your phasing plan. Yes, we will.
>> Okay. >> And >> I don't know if we could chat in a little bit more detail about that along with the HOA prior to the next meeting just so that we can get something in front of you that more accurately reflects what you're thinking
as well as what we're going for. >> Yep. That's why I brought it up. >> Yep. Ryan, did you uh submit a draft HOA? >> Not at this time. Ally and I were speaking today about I mentioned it earlier an alternative mechanism um some sort of agreement that
is maybe in the deeds where it is in perpetuity it transfers with the sale of the land easier. Um so we're working on that right now and >> I think you said you want to cover some of that with us at a high level before you walk away tonight. Did I understand that correctly? >> That's correct. Yeah. Exactly. >> Okay. Great. Before we go there, I just
again knowing that we have concerned citizens in the virtual and literal audience, I want to make sure that some of the things we just talked about are really clear. Um in that what part of that discussion was was about making
sure that the among other things that the pro that the things that are put in place during construction to make sure that runoff is handled appropriately are getting inspected in a timely and an
appropriate way by the town's engineer but by the engineer the town contracts with to represent our collective interests as a town and then an agree a quick discussion with Mr. Wallace saying that he would get the engineers together to figure out
a plan for that that worked for everybody. So that was just again a detail that if you're not following the back and forth real quick and know who they're talking about, you might want to know. Again, the goal is we try to put in
the state has requirements to protect you. As a as a planning board, we have proposed in the past and as a town, we voted on additional protections making our storm water bylaw tighter than the states. And then as a board here and as
a planner, Mr. Wallace does due diligence to make sure that these things are getting viewed and enforced correctly as well. So, I would like to move on to long-term maintenance by the property owners. >> Yes.
If there are um storm water facilities that are shared, um it's been our past practice to have uh the maintenance responsibilities spelled out in a homeowner association
document and not simply reference in a deed. Yeah, I can let um I can let Ally speak to this a little bit, but I will just say the the only shared storm water systems are within the common driveways themselves. The individual ANR lots have are completely isolated with respect to
storm water and that's that's >> and those would be the lots I mean and maybe it's a series of smaller homeowners associations if there's some other legal method that's equivalent that has a financial component that ensures that the funds
are there for the maintenance. I think I would be at least willing to have town council review it, but there needs to be a shared responsibility both fiscal and operational amongst the folks who contribute to that driveway,
>> right? On the common driveways. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Mhm. I don't know if I should. So, um, we were hoping to do alternatively where an HOA has a lot of upkeep to it yearly with, you know, boards and contributions
and filings. No homeowner really wants to come into that. It's a hard sell on the marketing side of homes. um versus if you have deed restrictions or covenants that run with the lots that
spell out the financial contributions, the enforcements and the actual action plan if one of the neighbors isn't um you know paying for their portion. So, there's a built-in,
I guess, um, predisposed consequence and what to do spelled out versus having the HOA just constantly going. Um, I know as a realtor myself, selling an HOA that
people people don't have legal backgrounds. People don't want to deal with the upkeep of that. And frankly, my experience is covenants and deed restrictions are failures waiting to happen where they are often
ignored and they go owners upon owners upon owners, everything fails and everyone just kind of points to the deed restriction and there's no one left to truly enforce it. Uh so I would need in order to be comfortable with something
like that some concrete examples of places that it has actually worked and where enforcement and um you know either restitution or reconstruction or penalties were actually enforced that we could ensure
that that's happening. Um I think an HOA can be done in a fairly limited scale. it can be a fairly low monthly contribution uh and can require a very minimal amount of work. I mean, we're not talking about Brookline condos or
highrises in Boston. We're talking about four single family homes. And I think there are ways to craft the language and the operation of it that are approachable for folks who are buying what I'm assuming are going to be 7 to
$900,000 homes. Correct my memory if I'm wrong here, but didn't we just require a homeowner association for the reservoir road? Yes, we did. >> And that was three >> for um the front of the property where
the drainage structures were only handling 20% >> of the storm water runoff. >> Absolutely correct. >> And it wasn't that big of a deal. >> Correct. Yeah. >> Um I want to agree with what Mr. Bernie said as well. My family owns a home in Westminster and it's on a lake and we
have deeds and it was great a hundred years ago when my family bought the house and everybody got along and it was mostly like my greatgrandparents cousins who own the other houses but now it is absolutely atrocious. Uh it's not enforceable at
all. uh and the only thing we can do is point a finger and say you don't get the key to the boat ramp if you don't pay your dues and that does nothing because then somebody just gives them the boat ramp key. So I I don't I haven't seen that ever work in my own experience. So I think in HOA
>> Mhm. >> even if it's limited as Mr. Bernie says um I think that's the best way to go. It it feels and as one of the people who said I like the idea of HOAs for this um it feels reminiscent of a classic condex
agreement um which is just the a common term for when you have a duplex in the agreement that exists for the shared maintenance of a duplex roof or roofs driveways however it's set up um I can
completely understand not wanting to deal with it as an owner or as a person trying to sell these homes. However, as a board and I think as a municipality, what we really don't want
to deal with are all of these tightly designed, wellthoughtout storm water systems failing. not now but 5 >> 10 >> 10 20 years in the future because they
haven't received the proper maintenance. We have not seen besides an HOA structure another method that seems likely to meet that need effectively. And as Mr. Bernie said if it's out there I believe as a
board we'd be very happy to review it because our goal is not to say this is the way it has well we are saying this is the way it has to be but what we're saying has to be is that those storm water systems are
appropriately and thoroughly protected for the future for the municipality and for the other residents in the area that >> and however you get there is okay. We've only just seen one way that gets this seems likely to get there effectively. I welcome having another valid option to
point people at. And if it's that much of a hurdle, put in individual driveways for the lots that are on the commons and redesign your storm water to accommodate. Okay. So, between now and the next time Ryan comes back,
we're looking for him to upload the phasing schedule. >> I will contact Graves tomorrow and copy Ryan and get them together for to put together an inspection schedule that makes sense.
Um, I don't know how much you've got in your 53G, but uh we we can also ask Graves to cost it out if you want to do that. >> Sure. >> At this point. >> Um, anything else that we need from the
applicant between now and the next meeting? >> Just the time when he thinks he'll be ready ready to roll. I >> think we like to try for your next meeting if that's uh >> Okay. >> agreeable. >> Nope. That sounds >> 27. 27th. >> Yeah, 27th. Um, and did you have
anything else you wanted to bring to us tonight? >> Not at this time. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Great. >> And, uh, as we we're going to move off from this public hearing to others. But again, I want to thank everyone uh, especially those from the public who car
came and shared their thoughts because these are important things to make sure we understand from every angle so that we can meet everyone's needs the best we can. >> And was this both properties? that we tal just talked about both
permits or both sets of permits for parameter. >> We that is what we were oh that is what we were in theory discussing. >> Okay. So uh I move we continue 10 Parameter Road PBSP26-6
PBSP26-7 and >> oh um I'm sorry to interrupt. I do not believe we have opened those two numbers. >> Oh I'm sorry. That's that's I'm I'm I'm down a line. Um, sorry. I withdraw that. I have it right here. Uh, I move that we continue 10 Parmentor Road, PBSW2612
and PBSW2613 and PBSP26-3 and PBSP 26-4 to27 July at 6 p.m. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. We'll do a roll call
vote. Mr. Niccastro. >> Hi, >> Mr. Bernie. >> Hi, >> Miss Reed. >> Hi, >> Mr. Wilsmer. >> I >> and an I from myself. >> See you in two weeks. >> Thank you. >> All right,
that brings us up uh well, I guess to the next >> I was going to say it doesn't bring us up much of anywhere. >> Mr. Chair, there's a question in the back. >> Yes. >> Oh, Mr. Mr. Proctor switching his boards.
>> So yeah, just come on up with your qu if your is your question about the other parameter. We're going to now look at those. >> I'm sorry. >> We are now go what we just did was for some of the lots on Parmentor that were
already started. Now we're going to look at more Parmentor road. More of the lots. >> Okay. >> It has to do with the way the permits are filed. I would wanted what I wanted to do was to thank you >> for looking at the whole project of water because there's a lot of wetlands
and everything else up there. So, thank you. >> You are welcome. >> Okay. And so now we have to open some special hear some uh hearings for 10 road. >> Okay. The Lunberg Planning Board will hold a
public hearing on Monday, July 13th, 2026 at 6 p.m. Town Hall 17 Main Street, Lunberg, Mass. to hear and review two shared driveway special permit applications for six single family house
lots at the following addresses, 12 and 20 Parmentor Road and 115, 123, 131, and 139 Round Road pursuant to chapter 250-6.4A7
4 A7 of the code of the town of Lunenburgg. The planning board will also hear and review an application for a storm water permit for single family house lots at the following addresses. 412 and 20
Parmena Road and 83 91 99 107 115 1231 139 and 147. Round Road pursuant to chapter 204 storm water and storm sewers
of the code of the town of Lunenburgg. Subject property information the address is 10 Parmentor Road Lunberg Mass. Assessor's map 136 parcel number 29. Applicant is Dillis and Roy Engineering
1 Main Street Lunberg Mass 01462. owner is Benjamin Builders, 69 Mass Avenue in Lunberg, 01462. Uh, you can view materials online at lunmberergmma.al.opengv.com/arch opengv.com/arch
with record IDs PBSP-26-6 PBSP-26-7 and PBSW-26-16 or an email request to the planning office at planning at lunbergmma.gov or in person at the planning office at 960 Mass Avenue in Lunberg.
Thank you very much. Uh again, Ryan Proctor, Dillis, and Roy representing the applicant. Um so, thank you for again again for your time tonight. Um this is sort of the last leg of this project. Um the last set of lots, lots 14 through 24. Um as was just read. There have been property addresses that
have since been signed. Um again, this is a very similar um site design practice to the previous. We have a a combination of common driveways and private lots. Uh there is a common driveway serving lots 14 and 15 and a common driveway serving four lots uh lot
20, 21, 23 and 24. The rest will have private driveways. The stormwater design approach is nearly identical to the previous iterations of the other lots uh where we have rain gardens along the property frontage, stone diaphragms along the proposed driveways and roof
infiltration areas at each of the proposed dwellings. Since we had gone through a couple of different uh permanent permits applications with the previous lots, we did incorporate some of the comments that we'd received from Graves into this design and this application. So, the
letter is much shorter uh than we're used to in a good way. Um so, there are only four action items as a result of the letter. I will just go through those quickly. Um we did get this letter on Friday from Graves. So, uh there was a a discrepancy. our uh hydraological
calculations had a um roof infiltration trench on lot 18 uh which is this lot here and that was not depictked on the site plan. Um so we just need to add that for consistency with our calculations. We had performed soil testing uh on lot 18 again along the property frontage
where the rain garden will be. Uh given the elevation of the wetland across the street, Graves asked us to go a little bit deeper with the test hole um just to verify that we have adequate separation between the bottom of our basin, our rain garden, and the wetland area. So, we intend to do that. Uh there was a
question about the cross slope on the driveways. In certain portions, we did not have a 2% cross slope getting water into the stone diaphragm that ultimately routes to the storm water uh rain gardens. Um so, we're going to adjust that grading. And then lastly, there was a typographic area we labeled a drip
line recharge trench as an infiltration trench. Um, so we will revise that just for consistency uh with the details in the site plan. Aside from that, all of the previous conversation that we just had as part of the previous applications that we were discussing tonight, we will
incorporate into these lots as well. Um, so >> Ryan, did you see the fire department's comments? >> I did not. >> Okay. They are on open gov. Okay. >> Uh he does want a couple turnarounds. >> Okay. >> Um
he beat me to it. >> Oh, >> you you actually have his words in front of you if you want. >> Yeah, I know. My my question was I hadn't looked at his. I was going to ask about getting the full turning movement, like the full driveway turning movement for each of them.
>> It looks like you just did the end turnound. >> Yep. Um, I think just for the record, it's good to have that turning movement on record. Sure. >> Um, and then to the fire department's point, um, it didn't look like there were
actual turnarounds in there. >> Okay. I will uh we will review those. I I know we have them on the common driveway, but I'll I'll take a look at those and we'll make sure to address those with the Graves comments as well. Other
questions from the board? >> Um, what is the full length of the longer common driveway? >> It is 854 ft to the to the turnaround at the end. Okay. And there is water in
uh round >> uh our proposal is to run water. >> Yes. >> Y >> um I know that each of these are separate permits and everything as we've
discussed and we've as we've requested. Very happy with all of that. Do you happen to have a paper with you that shows or that you could that has the whole because originally when you this came to us for the ANR way back it was
Yeah. Great. Thank you. That is what I was hoping to see was the map of everything. Okay. I was trying to wrap my mind around that fire road 15 or whatever it is area and I didn't think
you would you were touching it based on memory. >> Correct. >> And I just wanted to make sure >> seeing everything in bits and pieces for me is different than seeing the whole layout. >> Absolutely. >> And so, okay, this answers >> a bunch of my questions. >> So, the last section that we're talking
about now is is this common driveway here and then these individual lots there. >> Yep. >> Great. Thank you. We can go back to the other >> Okay. stuff. Now, I just I couldn't really in my mind conceptualize of how much of that whole area we were looking at versus weren't. And now I see it.
Thank you. >> Yep. You're welcome. >> All right. >> It is a public hearing. Do we have public comment on this part of the whole what what I'm
going to call the parameter road development. It's separated by different permits. But so this is another section. And if you're saying I don't know if it applies to this section, you come and come up speak. We'll figure it out.
Don't worry. But do we have additional public comment? Seeing none. Okay, great. So, I just want to after seeing this and hearing the developers comments about not knowing who's going to want to purchase what lot and sequencing, I think that
should be an important part of the conversation with Graves, which is why I talked about regular inspections and visits because if we're talking about six lots dotted across the entire landscape under construction at any one
time, um it's different than clusters. And the sequencing is a little harder to plan out and predict if they're going to allow folks to choose lots and theoretically choose one of three or four houses that they have in a book and
you know do you want the garage on the left or the right and do you want the round dormers or the square dorm like so I just think um having a time weekly bi-weekly that Graves is there to ensure
that erosion control is working that there isn't a sedimentation issue. That sort of thing is sort of where I was going with that. Um so that's I just want to round out my comment. >> I would suggest bi-weekly and after heavy storm events.
>> Mhm. That that's Yeah. >> Yeah. And I would like there to be at least an option or an understanding that if we go through three or four bi-weeklys that are dicey, it it might become weekly to
ensure that there aren't. >> Yep. >> And I mean, I trust you and Brian to figure that out, but >> um I feel like I'm not doing my part if I don't say so. >> Great. Other questions or comments from the
board? Seeing none. And so you have a few things that you still need to clear. I mean, you've brought up Graves concerns. You're going to address them. >> We are. >> Um, okay. Great. Would you like to
continue this to our next meeting as well? >> Please. >> Okay. I move we continue 10 Parmentor Road, excuse me, PBSP26-6, PBSP26-7,
and PBSW26-16 to 27 July at 6 p.m. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Uh, roll call vote. Mr. Niccastro, >> I. >> Mr. Bernie, >> I. >> Miss Reed, >> I. >> Mr. for Wellsmart.
>> I >> and an I from myself. >> Great. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. And at our next meeting, will we be able to lump all these together into one?
like oh I'm just wondering purely from the like when we talk about them will we be talking about them as two separate things like we did tonight or now that this is >> well as they were advertised as different hearings >> I would say yeah keep keep them in in
the two phases that they've been presented to us >> okay >> but you know would you you saw tonight we had common issues >> yes >> among both >> no I and we as a board are still capable of taking comments on one and because we
can use our judgment moving them back and forth as appropriate. Wonderful. Great. I I want to make sure everything is as user friendly on that end out there as possible so that things go
smoothly. Great. Thank you. And now next up would be continued from March 860 New West Townson Road. These would be planning uh these would be uh site
plan review PBSA26-1, storm water permit PBSW26-1 and a special permit PBSP 26-1. Did we not assist continued for March, but we just talked about this or was it different permits? >> That would have been the the opening hearing potentially back in March.
>> Oh, okay. Probably. Yeah, cuz I'm like we were just I was thinking the number was Yeah, go on. >> Thank you. Uh Ryan, Proctor, Dillis, and Roy. I'm here tonight representing the owners and applicants, Dan and Rachel Brackett, who are with us tonight in the audience. Uh so, just a brief update for this one. We had uh I had a couple items
for homework at the last meeting. We were again waiting for a final uh peer review from Graves Engineering which we did receive on Friday. Um there were no follow-up action items for them. There were uh two conditions. One of them we are proposing to lower the grade the
border along the property frontage to for a couple reasons. One to provide access for our common driveway, but for a second reason to provide some better sight distance for the users of the road and and open that up. Um, so Graves uh recommended that they provide an
additional analysis during that after the grade is removed to make sure that it is adequate. Um, so we have no we have no issue with that. And then lastly, the storm water basin that we're proposing at the property frontage is currently under where there is a mound of material right now. So they uh
advised that it would be wise to perform soil testing again during construction just to verify that we have that um groundwater offset from the bottom of our basin to storm water. Again, we have no issues with that as well. Um, aside from that, there were it was a clean letter, if you will. They were satisfied. Um, one other item that we
had discussed at the last meeting was relative to fire. Um, so I did meet with Lieutenant Lacaditis at the fire department. Well, he came to our office. Um, but we talked about the design of the common driveway with a couple regards. The, uh, first of which was
relative to firefighting. Um, just as a reminder, we're proposing a fire system uh at the turnaround um that will ultimately be designed and coordinated with the fire department and by a fire protection engineer. Um, but he reviewed that and he explained to me that even if
the last sistern or hydrant was at the road, they would have adequate hose to fight a fire all the way at the top of the hill. Um, so he had no concerns um based on where it is currently cited. And then lastly, uh he had asked us to grade in some turnarounds at the longer
of the three driveways. So on lots one, uh two and three, I graded in some turnarounds. I did supply some updated turning movement diagrams and um uh Lieutenant Lacaditis updated an additional comment in open gov uh saying again that he was satisfied with the
design and summarizing our meeting that we had together. Uh so th those are the only plan related changes uh at this point. Um, if there any questions on either of those items, I'm happy to take them. >> Oh, I'm sorry. One more item. Um, we we
did upload a draft HOA agreement uh which was sent to town council for review last week. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Have we heard back from town c? >> We have not. >> Okay. >> I ask that they respond by the 27th, I believe. >> Yes. Okay.
I'm processing a little bit. Uh well, actually I have a question. So you made is the eternal back and forth. You made changes to the you added turnarounds. >> Um
were those included in what Graves reviewed? >> They they were. >> Oh, okay. Yeah, great. So Graves did review with these new turnarounds and >> with the updated calc. Yes. Oh, that that Oh, thank goodness. Yep.
>> Um, all right. I would want to hear town council's review on the HOA to make sure we're square there myself, but other looking Yeah, I see not from the board. That's good. Um, other thoughts from the board
at this time? >> I mean, they've satisfied all of our >> Yeah. engineering requests. They've they've listened to us. Um I still hate this plan. Um and I that's not the engineer's fault. Um I think that
this is probably a note to readress our common driveway bylaw. uh to include that they are for by right uses in the residential zones and avoid
this type of of issue in the future. Um I mean I know we need housing. I I don't know that this is the best way to go about it up there. Um it's it's just I think it's a challenging
um way to do it and I I think it's I mean it ends up being legal. The zoning board approved it. Um but I think it's counterintuitive to a thoughtful approach to constructing housing in places and ways that are needed and
necessary in the community. That's more of an editorial than it is anything about uh the design itself. >> No, understood. I will continue to look at this and feel like this was a subdivision
that made use of a flaw I didn't see in our um common driveway law when we were writing it. >> Oh, uh one what I'm sorry to interrupt. Um,
I I did ask for Graves opinion on the subbase of the road >> and I believe I shared that opinion with you folks. >> I think >> so. Did I share it with you, Ryan? >> I don't think so. >> Okay, let me get you uh Graves opinion
on the subbase. >> Thank you. And this isn't really our Bailey Wick, but it I guess sort of is in some way. These are all five unit buildings, so they'll be full NFPA
standpipe systems, and you have adequate water to to supply that. >> Yeah, that'll that'll be designed with the sistern. That's going to have to be a fire protection engineer, but Yep. All right. Um, I missed that note from Graves. Was that
in your >> It It It came like two days after the last meeting. >> Oh, okay. That's why it's further back there. Okay. Um, all right. I I'll look in a bit. Um, do we have other
thoughts or comments at this time? It sounds like we still need to hear back on the HOA. >> Mhm. >> Before we before I I would want to go forward because we need that aspect. >> Yeah. No. >> Squared away. >> I have a question, Mr. Chairman. >> Please. So, you're going to put the Sistn in, right?
>> Yep. >> With a pump. >> Correct. What's the recharge rate >> of the system itself or >> Yeah. How how long is it going to take to provide adequate water to continuously fight these fires? Cuz if
that doesn't happen, the fire chief's going to have to roll some tanker trucks. So, I'm not a fire protection engineer, >> nor am I. >> Nor am I. >> Yeah. >> But, I mean, we're going to draw from the groundwater. There's got to be adequate amount of water if that's our
only plan to fight fire. I just want to make sure there's an adequate amount of water. I'm just trying to protect the town's interests. >> Understood? Yeah. Yeah. >> And that that would be part of the building permit process. So in before they got their first building permit, the system would have to be designed and
certified to provide adequate flow to the buildings. And most likely it will be sized that the sistern will be able to fight the fire and not need recharge during fighting. So it'll be like what
you probably have it spec 20 and 30,000. >> That's a 30,000 gallon shot. Yeah. >> Thank you. No other f no further questions. >> All right. Okay.
And so our next meeting is on 27th >> 27th. So, we expect to hear back from town council by then. >> Yep. >> Would you like to >> move? >> Oh, sorry. >> Would you like to be continued till then? >> Yeah, unless there's any public comment. I just >> Yeah. So, you're right. We should check. Thank you for the reminder.
>> Do we have public comment for 860 New West Townsen Road? Seeing none. >> All right. >> Move to continue. 860 New West Towns and Road, PBSA26-1, PBSW26-1,
and PBSP 26-1 to 27 July at 6 p.m. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Roll call vote. Mr. Niccastro. >> I. >> Mr. Bernie, >> I. >> Miss Reed, >> I. >> Mr. Wils, >> hi.
>> And an I from myself. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Have a good night. >> Take care. >> We know what Mr. Proctor was doing on January 1st. He was filing permits for this project. Clearly >> one one of my schedule Monday nights reoccurring Lunberg planning board.
>> All right. And now continued from June 8th, we have 9:34 Massav storm water permit PBSW2614. For those watching at home going, why do they keep throwing out numbers and letters? Those are the reference numbers
and for all of the permits we're discussing in the open gov platform. So you can take those and and we're reading them right off our agenda. By the way, you can click on the agenda to get links
to those and all the public all the public documents or you can go to the open gov website. However you do that and for Lunenburgg, I frankly don't know cuz I click on agenda things. Um, and
enter the those numbers and get these permits and everything else. So, the files we look at are the files you also get. Amanda, you missed. >> I tried. I tried. >> You need chopsticks. >> I tried. No, I can't do the
>> What you may not pick up at home is there is a fly that is really doing the rounds up here tonight in front of all of us. Just always in your periphery or in Amanda's case on our keyboard. >> Unbelievable. >> Take it away.
>> Good evening. Thank you for having me again. Uh Tang Chans from TF Morant. Uh as you mentioned um this project in front of the board about a month ago. Um, since then we have revised the plans to address some minor comments from
Grace Engineer and we have received a letters from Grace Engineer on June 22nd and it's clean. Um, all the comments have been addressed. There's no conditions on it. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have um
concerns. All right. I'm diving back into my copy of the plan and I will ask as we as we have them, I'd look for comments or thoughts from the board. >> No, I think they've addressed all the comments. I mean,
>> yep. >> I think we all like to have reliable power. >> Yeah. Funny that. Um, all right. and everything set with graves. Great. Fantastic. Any other
Well, it is a public hearing. Do we have I see no public in the room. There might be on Zoom, but I'll ask do we have any public comment hearing? Seeing none. Um, if there's nothing else from the board as we can take a I'm happy to give us
more time to review. But if we're all set, we can close the public hearing and deliberate. >> I have a question, >> please. >> I was not present for this. >> Okay. >> Do I have to abstain from voting? >> Um, did you We would have to have the Mullen rule
filed before this meeting begins. Correct. >> Have you reviewed? >> Have you reviewed it? It doesn't matter. Like you first of all Okay. >> Yeah. Then >> then no, you don't vote. >> You would just sit on your hands. >> Yep. >> Perfect. >> And I can just not call her in the vote.
Correct. Okay. Great. >> If you remember. >> All right. And if there's nothing else, we could >> bless you. >> Bless you. >> Close the public hearing. I move we close the public hearing for
9:34 Mass A PBS2614. >> Can I have a second? >> I second. >> Moved and seconded. Roll call. Mr. Niccastro. >> I. >> Mr. Bernie. >> I. >> Mr. Wils.
>> I. >> And an I from myself. Great. Um, next up would be I move we approve the project for 934 Massav PBSW 26-4 with construction hours of 700 a.m.
to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 100 p.m. on Saturdays due to the proximity to uh several residential homes. >> I second. >> Moved and seconded,
Mr. Mr. Niccastro. >> I, >> Mr. Bernie. >> I, >> Mr. Wilsmer. >> I, >> and I for myself. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Love it when a plan comes together. All right,
that is it for public hearings tonight. Um I sent to us a bit ago um the kind of final draft of the master plan and it's se several components thereof.
Um a chance to discuss and if we're happy with it approve. >> I'm the bad kid in class. I haven't done my homework. Um okay. I didn't have a chance to read it in the last week or so. Okay. Um,
I thought based on my review of it, I was I felt that they took our feedback. Well, I did I will be the first to say I didn't go back to all of our notes of every request we made in fine to come,
>> but it seemed to meet our overall goals of increased legibility and communication. I mean, five years on, I don't think I'm going to be >> super picky about minor detail stuff, but uh I would like a chance to just get
my fingers on it. >> You'd like to read first >> if you don't mind. >> That's what we shouldn't approve if the board isn't ready. >> Um can we >> two weeks at this point isn't going to kill us. >> Yeah. Can we make a point of having that squared away for our next meeting? >> We can.
>> Okay, great. And I appreciate that, but that wasn't just an Adam thing. Are we all comfy with >> Mhm. >> Okay, great. >> I can answer for we >> I know. Yes. I wanted to make sure you knew I wasn't doing the passive aggressive. >> No, I Yes, I
>> which I hate that. Oh, can I do it too as as a parent and then I call myself >> Well, you were a teacher. So, >> yeah. And then I call myself out. I'm like, "Okay, boys. I'm doing the thing where I say we, but what I really mean is you." Can you
um All right. Okay. So, if the board needs a little more time, we will take that and then um vote at our next meeting, which is the 27th,
which is um two weeks from tonight. Yes, I'm I believe I'm antic I Yes, that is I 100% plan to be here. Super. I didn't know if that was a traveling time for me. I didn't remember it being, but I
wanted to look at my calendar in case. >> No, we are all set. >> Super. So, I know we're on to board discussions and there aren't any, but I want to ask Steve a question, >> please. I know we're doing four large bylaws. In
light of our common driveway issue, do you think it's unreasonable to try and fold that into our work program as a minor amendment or change? >> No. No. The town has traditionally been very accepting when we come to them with
minor amendments to our bylaws. traditionally. I mean, while I have been on the board, I I can't speak before then. >> Yeah. I I just with the way things have gone in municipal government, I don't want to lean on traditional too much anymore. >> That's
>> Well, we we are going to the November special town meeting with a series of editorial corrections. >> Oh, so we could include it in that. We could if I know what you want out of >> I mean single and two family are by
right. So those uses on a common driveway make sense. Uh and obviously ADUs are also by right. So, I mean, we're talking about no more than three units per lot, which I know seems picky since they only
had five, but it just it feels like somewhere else it could have been much more than I I would I wonder if this wording we can use to make it a little more specific because
yes, an ADU is another unit. >> Mhm. >> It by definition will not be the same as the other units. >> Correct. So, I wonder if there's language we can use is a little more
uh it could be two units, two standard units plus an ADU, or it could be per lot or if it could be phrased as by right uses so that we're not getting into
>> Yeah. I mean I that's why I said buy right off the cuff because that to me >> um I want to let Steve I I haven't really thought about it. It was I was sitting here >> I'll look at it. I think I got the gist of what you want to achieve here. >> Yeah. And that that's my cons my only concern is
an ADU is it it is a unit. It isn't a unit of a unit. >> Right. >> Mhm. No, I I agree with that. I was going to say using the slang for unit to mean something big like the kids and then I realized that's not kids slang anymore. That is
>> that's that's slang. >> Yeah. >> Oh my. >> All right. Um okay. Committee reports. Um master plan steering committee has not
met. Um, and hopefully we can get that squared away. Open space committee. >> Uh, I believe that meeting is Wednesday. This Wednesday. >> All right. Municipal Building Design
Committee. Um, I don't think we met since our last meeting or if we No, that we talked about at length. We have not met since our last meeting. Okay. Capital Planning Committee has not met since our last meeting. It's not capital
Planning season as that gets increasingly broadly defined. >> It's always capital planning season. >> Yes. But it's not capital planning committee season necessarily. Economic development committee meets tomorrow. >> Mhm.
Storm. Uh I will be I suspect I will have to miss that. Um, I will try not to, but that's the one day I could bring my boys into the city. >> I'm just going to be showing them our giant pair of scissors for ribbon cutting.
>> Um, if I have any thoughts off, >> I think it's awesome. >> You need a frog like the swords for them. >> I was thinking frog, not frog. And everyone's thinking only one version of frog. And that's fine, too. But yes, no,
we do, in fact, need a belt mounted clasp to hold our giant scissors. Baldrick and frog. >> Yep. Yes. Um, >> storm water. >> I have my collection. Okay. Wherever we
are, storm water task force. >> So, uh, we're we're trying to accelerate our meeting schedule. Um, I made two mistakes. Um, uh, I originally I was supposed to have scheduled a storm water meeting for today, uh, because I got my
schedules confused, but that ended up not happening. So, we are working at when our next meeting is going to be as soon as possible. >> All right. Montichus Regional Planning Commission. >> We did not meet this month.
>> Okay. Montichus Joint Transportation Committee. >> Same. We did not meet this month. >> Okay, that was easy. And we have minutes. >> Uh motion to approve as written. >> Second.
>> Okay. And that's for our June 8th and June 22nd meetings. >> That is >> okay. Great. Excellent. Further comment. >> I really love the format that we use. Uh and I think we should continue. >> I Yes,
it is delightfully clear without being too much. It's >> so board now that the uh writing of the minutes is being transferred to another staff member. >> We have a motion on the table to vote on. >> Yeah. >> Go ahead.
>> Mr. Niccastro. >> I. >> Mr. Bernie. >> I. >> Miss Reed. >> I. >> Mr. Wils. I >> I from myself. >> Take it away, Cap. >> Um, we're going to have a new staff member
writing our planning board meeting minutes from here on out. Um, I would like the board to direct her to use the existing format for preparing future meeting minutes. If you would. >> So moved.
>> Second. >> Roll call. Mr. Niccastro. >> I. >> Bernie. I >> Reed >> I >> Willsmer >> I >> Brener says I done. >> Okay. Yes. Because this is the right format.
>> Um okay. Meeting schedule friends. We meet twice a month on the second and fourth uh Mondays of the month here at town hall. We're up in the bulada meeting room and that is all. We meet at 6:00. This is
all unless otherwise specified. Um, finder agendas online. Upcoming anticipated meetings include the 27th the July, August 10th and 24th and September 14th. Now, we are having
another planning board meeting coming up on the 20th. Next Monday at 5:00, it's a working session on our zoning amendments. We're going to be sitting right down there at that table and hashing out the
language of the bylaws. >> And um people are, as always, it's a public meeting. People are welcome to attend. They are welcome to watch if it's broadcast somehow. >> It is.
>> If you're a massochist and you want a headache, come and talk zoning with us. >> Uh yeah, I I was actually that's the only thing I was going to say. Are we comfortable with do we want to say we're not expecting to take public comment at the meeting or are we looking still for public comment? >> I I would ask for it at the end.
>> I was going to say I would say that the board should have a discussion if there are folks here who think that they have things that they would like to contribute. I'm happy to hear them. But I think that inviting them into the conversation is going to bog it down. >> This is us doing our work.
>> I agree. That is my understanding. I wanted to make sure we're in agreement on that. And I want to remind the public this is the opposite of your last time to talk about it. This is before this is before you we would normally talk about. >> This is the embryionic stage of it.
>> This is us sitting down and and going over options and piecing them together. We will talk about this at meetings before we have the official public hearings and we will welcome public comment then we will welcome by law
public comment at the public hearings about this which will take place in March. >> Yep. So there is plenty of time. None of this, by the way, if you're thinking this sounds different that than what we might have done in the past, that's because we have another person in the
planer chair and we're doing it the way he wants to do it because that works for us. Don't read into it like these are bigger or scarier than anything else we've done. This is business as usual, slight differences about the aesthetics
thereof. All right. Do we have any board comment before we adjourn? Uh, I want to thank Lee for getting Docuine up and running. It is magnificent and it makes probably her
job much easier. >> She still has to call me and say, "Dude, sign it." >> Yeah, but but none of us have to go trotting into the office as we burn rubber to get home on time. >> Uh, yes. >> All right. Motion to adjurnn.
>> Second. Moved and seconded. Roll call one more time. Mr. Niccastro. >> I. >> Bernie. >> Hi. >> Miss Reed. >> Hi. >> Mr. Willsmark. >> Hi. >> And an I from myself. Friends, it's 7:47 cuz people say that when they end meetings for some reason is the time. I
hope you all have a great night. Take care. Lunberg. We will see you in two weeks. >> Recording stopped.