of the Manchester planning board to order sorry um thank you for your patience um first uh item on the agenda is to acknowledge correspondence um yeah roll call thank you uher Chris here sah pres Sue Sue Mary Foley and Peter Morton's on Zoom here AB thank you uh the first
order of businesses to acknowledge uh correspondents um we had two correspondents about CST noise from Elizabeth Thomas audio I just mute it okay thanks two correspondents from Elizabeth
Thomas on uh 115 about noise we had a correspondence from Christine deliso about the posting our failure to post mics um if you guys can mute yourselves um going online um we had correspondence from um Lorraine Ione on um two
on 122 about MBTA uh zonings and uh one on draft regulations for chapter 97 that are pending at the state we had one from line Ione on January 23rd about uh the fire and we had two from line Ione on January 28th um uh not sure what those were concerning I failed to write that down but we
um all received those were there any other correspondents Mark um only one pertaining to the form a okay so we'll um one of the four yes okay we list that one um any other correspondents that we didn't list okay um we do have a a special permit that was posted for uh about 7 Central at 6:30 but we are going to take the two I hope uh quick
or uh approval not required first so apology to the um Central folks um so first I'll take uh 206 Summer Street and tonight we have Tom Sachs from Hanover Hancock sorry um to tell us what um is being proposed thank you um so uh my name is Tom saaks I'm an engineer with Hancock Associates I will be representing Mr Tim Huff this evening for you
is our proposed anr plan Mr Huff is the owner of both properties um this plan actually our anr has been done in the past for these Lots um we're basically just seeking a revision um just through another anr um the reason for the anr is this is a very steep Hillside water drains downhill into Wetland area um because of the steepest the hill for our design purposes we have located the
dwelling along this property line that's kind of the regulations um so we have this dwelling along the property line here we are proposing this green line top here as our new property line and that will just comply with building setbacks so Mr Huff is just taking his property adjusting the lines to fit for the dwelling any questions it oh right go
ahead does it affect since you're since you're moving into the other property and taking land away from it does it affect any access Frontage or anything at all no the still viable lot yep still a viable lot all your Frontage for this larger properties right here the bottom um your axis we have an axis easement it's a common Drive they'll be running to the back of the property and then all of our setbacks they're they're okay and if if you wouldn't mind just on
the right hand side there's no there's no topographic anything on there no grading at all where where is this steep part start and stop so it's it's kind of hard so this whole side of the property is just a Hillside and it drains down towards the Wetland so it it's pretty much all a 3 to1 slope from the common Drive axis easement up to the top of the hill um we've basically pulled the dwelling going through conservation we had looked into this area um
we were running into resource areas through conservation so we've pulled the dwelling out of the resource areas and then we've just worked the driveway length to the maximum slope we can achieve and then we just found our flat spot for the house is it extensive cut in order to get a flat area for yes there is there is extensive cut um we're filing for the special permit um I will note that for the driveway area down here can't really see grades but this is more of a fill and then this is our cut
at the top so in the end our cut fill balances out is ideal so you won't have trucks running down the streets but we'll get into that for us tonight is just the lot line adjustment and then we will be uh have the special permit I believe at the next meeting so um so our lot line adjustment is really just about um does it have area can you indicate where the house is going to be again just yeah so it's right along this property line so it's just
simar in this area I don't have a full size of the house but it's just so that we have all of our setbacks to work so this is our rear yard we'll pull this in I believe that's uh 40 foot at 50 foot set back so um yeah it's just kind of located in this area the driveway runs up from the access easement and then we gradually it sneaks around to the front of the house at the top here what about on the other lot the other lot the access drive so we have a common drive here and it just runs flat along
just here the other house is going to be where it's yeah so the other other dwelling would in this area and the driveway has already been pre-approved in that in the past okay Mark did you have um a recommendation on this for us yeah um that this this can be okay and is this the one that we had a comment on the you said there was a comment on the anr oh no that was for the other one it
wasn't really a comment okay um is there anybody uh in the public who wanted to just ask a question on this any other questions from the board Peter or um anybody okay um so I'll take a motion to endorse the uh plan of land for 206 Summer Street as approval not required move um second um any other discussion uh does
the plan indicate that this is not an endorsement of zoning the note yeah I believe that is this oh the bottom underneath the uh dino
yeah not comp okay okay any other questions comments all right um all in favor hi hi Peter hi thank you um any post exensions okay um unanimously approved great okay um I will sign the Myer and get it unless you have it I'll leave it at Town clerks for you okay sounds great um so maybe
there's um and then the second piece that we'll just uh we do have a public hearing um in two weeks or whatever our next meeting is for uh the cut and fill so um we wanted to just have a site walk um wondering about Wednesday afternoon at 4 pm I think that worked for a couple people how about Mary or Peter does that work for you you can also arrange a second one if that does work
you can make it a 4:15 4:15 okay or 4:30 it's fine got my phone okay let's um plan on 4:30 at uh 4:30 on Wednesday for those who can make it at the at the site if you want to post it I won't be able to do that um okay how about the following week I can't do rest of the
week and you won't be here if I could do it alone I could just literally go there and see and I don't understand what's going on and we have the Clon fil plan so I don't know if any people saw Shannon's email he's now putting the folders with um plans down by the mailbox so if you didn't get it did you bring them it's not there yet so oh yeah I you apprehended them yes well no there
still in the office he hadn't put him out yet sry so Sarah don't don't schedule around me I we can't po we can't do it on um W Wednesday we said we were going to try to post the S sidewalks so um Thursday's going to be a pouring down mess about next
week next week um um it's B's GNA look at it on its own anyway yeah Monday is a holiday um what about Tuesday at 4 yeah that works that's fine with me Peter
does that work for you it does at four is okay Mary do you think that works okay we're gonna post for the 18th at 4 o'clock um great I just add are we we stop poting posting meeting pack don't have tonight's out there oh um yeah Shannon's out I
forgot to get it post so okay let's stick to our um uh okay great uh you'll be in touch about Tuesday to confirm Tuesday at 4M at 206 Summer Street great and we'll get everybody a a um and I'm GNA give you this one in case you're um and can he go walk is that okay if he goes out there and um let me just follow up with the client just because it's his property and to make sure it's okay okay or maybe you
can just be in touch with him directly yeah okay great um thank you very much thank you so much our next um anr tonight is uh to Orchard Street um Orchard Lane Orchard Orchard Lane ma uh Madam chair for the record John Jud representing Dr Walker um and if I could I could uh maybe bring up the plan or if Mark you want to bring up the plan I can bring it
up if you allow me to share yeah on there you go all right thank you let me uh see if this is something that uh you can see John you're from uh Gateway Consultants uh we are the uh engineering firm that prepared the plan for
Dr Walker uh who owns the property what's the name of the firm Gateway it's Gateway Consultants it's on the title block okay great thank you yeah so uh representing Dr Walker who is uh on the uh the the call tonight as well uh uh Dr Walker owns the property known as two Orchard Lane uh and he's looking to subdivide you can see this proposed line here uh that separates the uh the the existing house from from the vacant portion
which would be Lot B here U each of the we do have the statement that uh the A&R statements required as far as the U the local bylaw as well as the certification that not conforming to zoning uh we did meet with Mr Resnik and we also met with uh uh the building inspector Paul Orlando regarding the uh configuration uh the lot B would be 1.8 acres and the remaining would be 3 I
believe it's 3.8 Acres as well over here uh there's an existing driveway through a driveway easement here uh and that would be extended through the proposed Lot B to continue to serve Dr Walker's house here uh so the frontage for both lots are on Forester Road and uh this uh proposed uh uh easement would would continue to serve Dr Walker as it does now and uh both lots have the required uh area and Frontage
and setbacks uh so you can answer any questions you might have great U Mark any comments no U the only thing is we did get request for an extension to tonight's meeting because the 20 days oh yeah okay so that's what I was going men so yes this was within the uh we were due to see it to uh hear this two weeks
ago so thank you um the applicant for being willing to work with us to get to uh request an extension thank you um so this complies with the the requirements of an anr yes um I have a quick question that I should know the answer to but I don't um turn it off Emil I I gave you no more I already gave you your warning give me the remote
um the frontage and the address not being on the road that we're considering Frontage um have we done that before I believe the the if I could answer that Madam chair that I believe that was uh for 911 purposes uh to access over here and that's where the
the a access actually takes place is off Orchard Lane they uh this this yelling at me um that's not my side that must be another attendee I did okay but in any event um so that's I believe that's a 911 uh situation where the fire chief would like to see this labeled off of because that's where it gains access uh from Orchard Lane I just know we had an issue
with the fire an anr where they wanted access actually just when we had okayed this one prior the one before the anr before this that they couldn't have Frontage on a street that was behind them because they weren't accessing from there um I I just confused how we can pick access road that doesn't have access so the
way the law reads it's a little odd but this is how it is that you have to be have Frontage right on a road of suitable grades and widths to to be able to access buildable portion of your land however you don't have to build it that way you can come in a different way so this lot has Frontage on Forester road and it is possible although it might be expensive to get from forest the road
up to the buildable portion clearly they as John said they plan on coming in through the easement in the back so that's why it would get numbered differently numbering is not part of stat statute required for to work at so so um yeah and then and then so the fire chief said that the 20 foot wide driveway was adequate for two
houses off of that drive if if I could um Mark maybe I can jump in we're not looking to access the new lot off of this uh that would come in through its own Frontage they has this line has Frontage on both Orchard and Forester as Mark points out this is a possible area for a house right here this is access and dry AIS and you know it's it's not too bad here it gets a little steep in this area here but this is a possible area uh the applicant
uh first obviously in this area here would be the likely spot where someone would build the house uh and that would access through here through its own Frontage off of or driveway okay thank you y if you even though the driveway exists though if you do use it as a common driveway then that needs a special permit applicant's aware of that yeah he's aware of that all right
other questions or comments from the board um any comments from the public that on uh two Orchard Le if I don't it's a little hard for me to see if anybody hasn't please just speak up okay um hearing none um any other comments from the board or questions if not I'll take a motion to approve the application by uh for two Orchard Lane uh prepared for Eric
and c and walk offer by Gateway Consultants dated uh January 2nd 2025 scale 1 in 30 ft as approval not endorsed as approval noires moved than any other discussion any questions Peter no um okay all in favor I I Peter hi thank you uh any oppos uh okay great thank you um we'll
have the mys for you at Town Clerk by Wednesday terrific thank you very much have a good night okay thank you all right uh next we have um need to open the public hearing for um uh 7 Central um the notice was held for um tonight at 30 for an applications submitted
by AG GM 7 Central LLC for a special permit pursuant to section 4.2 table of uses a five of the zoning bylaw to allow the renovation of existing building to accommodate three residential units in existing to the existing restaurant use at 7 Central Street um so uh take a roll call vote to open the hearing um Mary py
yes then I have a question sber yes um Chris Al yes G Brer yes Peter Morton yes uh there votes yeah Mary go ahead um just like Mark had mentioned the uh extension for to Orchard Lane did we get an extension for Seven Central because they applied November of 24 and we're pass days there needs to be a written request to
the special actually I think that they had not their application was not complete they had not F they had not um submitted a check so it was actually despite the fact that we had it I believe it was not um it was stamped in by the clerk on January 9th yeah so we did it wasn't that was why we had toly fil yeah you so it was stamped in by the cler okay but thank you
um okay so um tonight we have um John Harding and we have somebody online I think probably uh and arur agem also okay um I don't have to make co-host because I have the presentation yeah you would so um is it okay to stand here and speak yeah um just as
long as people can hear sometimes it's hard yeah I'm sorry I'm just trying I lost my zoom screen here
I don't know where everybody went there am I still in the meeting no okay I I can see you Sarah yeah okay um I all right I don't I have a mouse
what are you looking for I'm looking for my zoom screen so I can share to have disappeared can you see it up on top no no sorry I have the post attendees help me
maybe I just C I don't know you don't see any blue round in the zoom meeting
all right about it NOP oh wait um where's my zoom
what happened to my meeting oh this is what I've got right there where the video camera is right yeah oh no return to meeting yeah ah there we go thank you okay sorry about that back in Action all right now I gotta pull back up the presentation oh my god when I do the presentation that's what it's the
it was better somebody else has the presentation we've got this easier but not necessarily better what did she say return to the meeting I lose the presentation when I return to the meeting does somebody online have it no you could share the screen let's see if I can do that yeah that should work
now I have to go back to meeting first oh you know what maybe if I share man I don't usually have this problem share screen to it's me it's a giant file maybe you can uh John can you just give it to Mary and maybe she can pull it
up know why I can't um whatever I W know how to oh is that it that's but that's not the right thing I only have it open like 4,000 times there we go all right I got it sorry I can't see them wor
so um okay I'm going to put it in presentation mode maybe sure I just go to the first slide okay just um sah I guess I'll just say perfect that's great okay thank you very much so um again we're here to talk about seven Central um which all as you all know is actually very important building in our little town uh right Central
to our to our town to our um Town common or the front of town hall um and a building that we all pass by probably every day um and it's always been the home of uh well in our most recent history a restaurant of various types over the years um but in order to give you guys a sense of what we're proposing we thought it might be interesting and actually kind of fun to give you a little tour through some of the other projects that um that Ed
and his son Arthur had done in town mostly um to show you the type of quality of the work that we are doing and also the nature of it because it's a little bit unique um to be very honest Ed and and Arthur really enjoy bringing things that were really old back to life and this is something that has to happen every once in a while about every 50 to 100 years in the life of a building because buildings age buildings fall apart buildings
start to um not last uh as long as they might and so every once in a while you have to come in and renovate them right and really save them restore them bring them back to to what they were so um I also wanted to to show these because um I think my client really enjoys doing this and so he asked he actually shared a bunch of really fun images uh with me that I can share with you kind of show show you all why he he does this and and how how they enjoy
it so uh what we're looking at here um uh I can't quite see the bottom of the slid s but that's okay this is this is down at the bottom of um Central Street so this is two sorry School Street this is two School Street you guys might recognize it it has um a very recognizable sort of half cylinder um that that is still there as as part of the building but back in the day it was an old drugstore um this door doorway
is still there there's there lots of things that are still there no longer this canopy that says soda and drugs and cigars um but it's definitely an important part of history of our town like all of these other buildings that we're about to show you sir if you go to the next slide and when my client found the building uh a few years ago um this is what it looked like um it was okay you know it definitely needed some work and renovation um and in fact if you go
to the next slide Sarah you'll see um that it indeed has been preserved and uh really done a beautiful job to make it um hopefully last another hundred years right that's sort of the the goal um without changing the character or really anything else about it in fact in in many ways trying to to make it um return to its historic nature when possible um next slide so
this is another property um this is I believe 11 Central which is uh just next door actually to 7 Central uh and this I'm sure was taken on the 4th of July um in some year I don't know exactly when but a long long time ago and um it doesn't look entirely different from today I Love Actually the the chairs up here they were there's a little roof thing and they were going to watch the parade from there like we all gather and and do today still maybe not up on the roof but on
on the street and the next slide s uh and this is what it looked like a few years ago um you guys might remember some of those stores that were there and at some point they added this piece on on the front um and next slide and this is how it was restored and actually brought back to look a little bit more like it did historically really great job um I'm not sure people would would even know that it's an old building it was done so nice looks
really quite um quite sharp and new next slide this is the old Floyd's building is that I'm not sure yeah great yeah uh okay so this is a really neat photograph um on a day not like one we had recently with a lot of snow um note the two horses that are walking down um this is Central as it joins up to Union and in fact that building on the right there is uh I think it's 38 Union Street and that building that we're actually see
to the left is no longer there that is that is gone this one must have met it demise at some point um you bet it didn't save that one yeah it's a beauty and this is what it was like a few years ago um just as as as my client was purchasing the the building and if you go to the next slide we'll see that um he has cleaned it up preserved it
and really made it look quite beautiful um so again it'll last another hundred years very tasteful um this it's really a good example of of the work um that they do next slide okay this is a little bit further up I think this is 29 Central Street uh good historic photo I'm not sure the the date of this but this is also a neat example you go to the next slide when this was purchased uh it looked something like like this um big tree in
front of it can't quite see the the building and then the the next slide you'll see that it's been preserved again and looks beautiful today this actually has one of the greatest porches I think that's on Town that's in town on this part with the beautiful grass in front and the granite looks really sharp and very nice again um one more example of taking a really fine old building in town and preserving it and making it last okay this is a
really fun one this is nine Ashlin and we were in front of the historic board probably four years ago to to talk about this one um this was a really important building in town it's called a uh a carpenter's Gothic it's one of the few examples actually in our area of a building like this um you might be able to see here in this image this sort of looks like Stone it's not Stone it was all wood but it was
detailed and um made to look like it was sort of an ashar pattern um out of stone um and you just see this this um carriage house is still there and all all of those details were still part of the house they just uh hadn't been cared for for a long time go to the next slide just be careful you don't touch the screen yeah I just realized that thank you um so this is what what it looked like um it had in fact been and in
the same family for many many years um and it came on on the market and was purchased by my client if you go to the next slide you'll see it doesn't look very different but it looks almost like it's brand new in fact it was fully restored all of these really interesting neat windows with the gothic arches and the the little window up there at the top at the top that those were all created to look the way that they were
originally um designed and buil and next slide so course uh two school this is one School Street which is kind of neat because this one's in process uh again very important building in town right on on the corner of school and uh Central Street another uh Pharmacy apparently there were you know very popular business back in the day um and it looks very much like um
it does today without the awning and such and you'll see that building tucked in behind there is now actually attached right there's a a roof here which is the entry and connects to both the front and the back next slide sir in fact that is the back as it existed not too long ago next slide and how it is today again in process so um my Cent is starting at
the rear and making their way towards the front um using all you know the the materials and the windows and the colors um that we would hope that they would and keeping that that quality um very high um and we heard I heard tonight from my client that one of the tenants in the front who they were waiting to to move so they could start work in the front that has happened so soon these things can take time but soon to start working which is very exciting
um it'd be interested to know there were 13 units in this building that's incredible so one of the densest buildings for sure in our downtown area and a very interesting example given the 3A process that we just went um and some people have said actually during that process that this building was one of their favorite buildings in town so thank goodness it is preserved
beautiful um next slide I think is just one more view of that this is around the corner um where where the work is continuing on the back side and one more slide yeah again this is the the facade on on School Street so that brings us then if you go to the next slide Sarah to the reason why we are here today so this is an early photograph of Seven Central doesn't look
quite like it because it's quite it's taller in its proportion but you'll see where the door um elevation is at the at the sill of the door it looks like the street got higher maybe about a foot higher um uh which is interesting but that does happen also with time but uh you can see the building even when it was built back in the day had a little bit of a bow in the roof which it still does today next
slide and this is what it looked like recently uh this was back when it was sou Central um I believe it then became antique table um and uh there was a bar quite a popular bar in the front part of the building um you'll notice that that piece that was added at some point we think 1960s probably has been removed so this part um had some structural issues and um and is now gone um but
the goal is to try and take it back and make it look more like it looked um in the past and we have been in front of the historic commission for this as well so uh the reason we're here today obviously is because we are um proposing three residential units in the back part of this building uh for two and then actually one unit upstairs on the second floor here and then um the lower
level where the restaurant was will become in a smaller footprint a cafe and we're not sure exactly what or who yet that's all still in in the works as again these things sometimes take time um but I think it's a proven thing that this this restaurant really didn't work in the size that it was if you might recall there was a back area with a back bar in an upstairs area which I think I went to once for a work event um but a lot
of seating and a lot of area uh the front part I think the bar especially got a lot of use but not so much the back and that may have been part of the reason why the restaurants didn't didn't survive um although one was there for a very long long time um but uh the last few um didn't survive as well so the hope is to put something there that's a little bit more pedestrian actually where you may not have to drive to come here but people would walk here
much like we do to our downtown um and uh they have high hopes for a place that serves really great coffee um so if you're a coffee connoisseur this might be your spot as well as pastries as well as sandwiches something like that um is the is the thought so um so the reason we're here then is to ask for a special permit because of the uses table under uh section 4.2 and no five if
uh you want to do up to four units in the General District we must come and ask for a special permit and talk about how it's not more detrimental to the neighborhood and I think actually the opposite to that this is maybe the Prototype of what we want in our downtown um as we all know from the 3A process there's a lot of discussion about this about appropriately sized um opportunities in town right uh things
with three two three or four units perhaps within walking distance to to downtown in in my opinion U multi-use so that perhaps it had a retail use on the first floor and then apartments up above is is in fact exactly what happens next door in the building U to the left 11 Central as well as next door to the building the right so above Helen's B shop there are units up there on the
second and third floor as well so this is what I think we all hope would get developed in our town something that's in keeping with the scale in keeping with the character can yes add residential units which we definitely need but also add some life and Vibrance to our downtown by maintaining the retail use um so I have just after this a few uh plans site plan plans and elevations that I can just quickly
share go to the next slides so here's Central Street the bottom here um this is actually a plan of the lowest level but simply to illustrate that there is parking at the back for for three units we are required to have five parking spaces there are three really great parking spaces that exist that are tucked in beneath an existing deck in the back the idea is that those three units would be assigned one to each unit and then they we're showing two piggyback
spaces at the back in our mind those would be perfect for folks who might work in the cafe or for an additional car if needed for for the units um of course there's also parking out on the Central Street and there's also parking of course behind Town Hall in in the public parking lot um I have a personal opinion about parking which is mostly that you can never provide enough because people perceive that there's always
a lack of parking however I can attest that I have never ever not been able to park anytime I've ever driven downtown whether it's to Crosby's Halas wherever and I'm embarrassed to say I live just on School Street I should not be driving to town but when I do um there's not a real issue which I I like I I enjoy having the option and being able to walk um but uh this
use also changing to residential and a smaller footprint for that Cafe I would argue that it would have a much smaller um demand for for people parking and and coming here um the cafe is more of a pedestrian thing where people will come walk get a coffee maybe they come stop while they're walking their dog that sort of thing feels uh feels right in in this area um next slide so as I mentioned
there the cafe will be down here on the first floor it's actually small enough it's less than 2, sare ft so only one bathroom is required uh roughly speaking where the bar is now will likely be a bar but more of a breakfast bar and where the coffee and pastries would be served and the rest would be um open seating for people who are enjoying their practice or coffee um Outdoors here where that old addition was will now be an out door patio we can all imagine walking down on the
beautiful day in the spring or summer sitting outside and enjoying our pastries and seeing people who passed by um this is something that's actually not as common as you would think in our town but um where there's an opportunity to have an outdoor patio for for something like this we think it would be really great and upstairs on the second floor we think actually historically there was a unit up here there's evidence that there were people perhaps living there in some sort of sort of apartment but we
going to clean it up it also grab a bit of space up in the Raptors of the am roof and have a a small two two-bedroom apartment um up above the the front part we we did note when we were walking through the building and um measuring and taking note of of the structure it is very old lots of the original beams
and posts are still place um we think many of the projects that that I showed you my client has essentially rebuilt these buildings from the inside out um sometimes that's required it's not the easiest way to do it it' be far easier to knock this down and build new but with the Conservation Commission the adjacency to to the water that gets tricky um plus there's a lot of nostalgia and history with this building so as
is my my client's um uh um typical practice we will try and and rebuild this from from the inside out there might be some things that may need to be replaced entirely um but it's our hope to work with this as much as possible just a quick Story one corner of the building this corner here there's probably a 6 in difference in height
and it slopes dramatically up that corner no idea why it's actually framed that way uh don't know must have been that way a long time um so we'll have to try and mitigate things like that to make it a little bit more usable for people who live there or um next slide sir next is just the uh two units in the back so very very simply all of this is now either kitchen and and more dining back here we're
going to Simply take that and and divide it in half it would be a twostory unit on the left a two story unit on the right the entry will be actually off of the back off the deck which will be close to to the parking at the rear um and then upstairs there'll be a bedroom at the front in both units and two bedrooms at the back now this is one little place where we actually are adding a little square footage right here on the corner on the second
floor um there's an incomplete piece they they didn't quite fill in all of that all that roof area like they did on on this side so to make these equal we're proposing we just fill that in a little bit the good news is you really can't see it from the back you really can't see it from the front it's in the the middle of of both of those in an area which is currently just roof right now so we think it's an ideal place to grab a little extra square footage to make a two-bedroom unit uh Fe
next slide sir here we see the front um it looks unremarkable but just like it it did historically quite a simple building notice there's no bow in my drawing but we'll try and straighten it out we'll see how how well we can do with that um but it will be the entry to the cafe and seating to the left and then more the kind of retail area to the right you see the outdoor patio right there um
color we're showing sort of a dark gray we'll we'll see how that goes the historic folks might want to opinion to to try in there we'll see but at the back we are adding something make this um feel a little bit more like entry we are going to add a very simple porch roof for the two entry doors so that when they are getting their keys out and going in door they're not getting rain done
but also so that it simply feels a little bit more like a residential entry um and then there is a piece coming off now which has s of 1980s looking looking window that we're not terribly fond of um but to again make these units the same we'll be taking that off and fix the roof make it look a little bit more appropriate as it you see down here those three parking
spots beneath what is a concrete deck have one more slide left which is just the the side elevations this one is as if you're walking down um Central the building will be on on your right looking down in between the two buildings this is that outdoor patio area uh the unit up above there and the two units in the back and then this piece right here is that
area that I described as being added so as you can see it's between the front Gambrell part and the back gable roof part and there's this area there that's just roof right now a little odd but it is what it is so we're going to infill a piece of that um but it's nice that it's not a change that will be really perceived from the front on the street or really from the back because it's tucked in Middle will look exactly like the other side
so I think it's a solution that actually looks like aizon that's it um is there any Landscaping um not really as you know the building is right on the street could not get closer to that sidewalk um they do can't really call it Landscaping but historically they've really done a nice
job with the planter boxes I would expect that that would remain something that's important and then the back I would imagine that the deck now that it would be um two units that might become something that the tenants might also um have flowers and things out on but there there's really no landscape to speak of besides that that's question do do you have the image
of the the Central Street side do you have that image you yes um existing or proposed proposed proposed yeah can you just go back one SL so this is the facade that faces so that basically is the facade that we have today ex Administration window door opening everything else exactly and the historic folks actually had an opinion about the the windows if you remember
the image I showed way back that was historic they were all uh 6 over six windows up top as well as on the bottom as things in history go you can pick your moment in time that you want to restore things back to they have a strong opinion of having it look this way so we said okay that's right and it it really is okay because as a a commercial un on the first floor it can be different it's all commercial use in
the first floor on on the front correct on the front yeah your client desire that as it is that is um on that note by the way a little off topic but at one School Street he's proposing to change the front of that back to retail as well it has not been retail for a very long so that's exciting he is gonna
have retail front that's the idea wow uh Ed if you're you're on and if I misspoke please correct me but that's my yeah hi good evening good evening everyone yeah that is correct on one School Street I I am posing or I would like to put it back exactly way I think there's an image there I'm not sure if there isn't I can set to your John that was done in uh
1800 and 18 I think it was 1860s or something like that that and it was a pharmacy there that's the way I'd like to put it back I don't know what will go in there but that's how I will uh make it look like exactly the way the image if you have that image on the on one of the uh pictures that we sent to you maybe you can show that but that's how it will look okay s um did you talk about lighting a little bit sure exterior light lighting around parking lot front
side good good question so we will definitely have some lighting and signage which we haven't designed yet don't really know yet what it's going to be exactly um as you might recall there's a large uh sign that's there actually it's not there now it it was there when it was Seven Central um then anti table had more of a round almost like like the seal um but there we will probably have some lighting on the front to light that um to like that sign now
on the back um there's simply two entry doors so we will have some lighting beneath that new porch roof um maybe not even actually visible from from outside that because it's a nice way to tuck it underneath there again simply for for building entry um the the deck what where the cars are it's quite low I'm not sure we'll be able to do lighting beneath that I'm not sure it's really necessary either then there there's
no other real public um actually go to the next slide sir the the entry to the unit above the cafe is along the side up a set of stairs and an entry door there so there will be a light there but besides that this is not really a public path I think we would not really encourage people to to to go there um there is a set of stairs here and
on the other side that should be lit by by some means which we'll look at I'm not sure exactly there might be step lights there or perhaps a light fixure up above that would like there just just receive it that is sort of my concern when you said there would be nothing but a parking yeah for safety yeah we could we could probably find a way um do some site lighting we we always try to keep
the the lights pointing down not pointing up um but we can we can take a look at that people walk from the cars up that steps trying to find a way to like I have a quick question uh are you concerned about water level rise in the back and whe whether whatever is in the basement that yeah Be Blood protected because I think
so there there's a reason we're not showing anything in the basement besides B um it it will likely have um sorry the the stairs in the back units will go down the basement so they will have access to it uh we're not going to have anything down there but storage place for bikes place for bags place for things that people have right um but it should not be occupiable
because it will flood I'm certain of it it has in the past um If This Were uh a building being built today we couldn't build it here because of that because of that reason Mary I have some a few random questions um so not what's not what is there currently because there's nothing currently in there what was on the
second and third floor before yeah so there was called it a function room up on the second floor that looked out it was up here that looked out um kind of a big window to the I think that was a space that was rented out for parties or lunches and things like that um besides that there were two bathrooms up there and that's it um upstairs here on the second floor
of the front part not really sure how they used that most recently it was sort of there's some signs that maybe uh it was like an office for people who worked restaurant maybe they had to order food up there or something like that but it wasn't occupied for for a long time maybe someone a person who worked in restaurant could have lived up there probably not legally but um it was sort of set up that way and what was
the other space downstairs in the back going to be yeah oh going to be so so that will be part of the two new units in the back so that the units will be two floors um the floor that's at the uh so if you entering off of off the central if you walk back there's actually a step up that gets you to this back area that's currently a back bar an ex seating uh right
about at this point here it will be Cafe in front and then then the unit will start at the back here so that first floor unit the first floor of this unit will be the entry and then a living space and kitchen and then there'll be stairs that go up to the bedrooms upstairs thank you I mean I think it' be good to have the fire chief here or somewhere to understand
all the fire requirements but um yeah it it'll be sprinkler um because it has to be yeah near a kitchen yeah well as a multi-use building that's adding a residential use it it has um yeah with the flooding in the back and the parking yeah um I see that as a potential issue and how do you handle that yeah so it's
an issue for every property along that area um in fact the uh building next door this building one next door to that um um the hoopers the old hoopers building and even the firehouse and the church all of those properties flood um once a year probably um they don't flood to a disaster as level it'll it'll
flood 6 in sort of thing so for a car it's annoying but definitely not detrimental um and I believe all of those buildings that are in that area for example the the church the church I I know well has a basement and all its mechanical stuff down at that level um anything that is in that situation should bring that mechanical stuff up high enough that it won't flood again in this case just a couple feet would would
uh would suffice so in our case whatever we have down there we would recommend that it it's raised a couple Peet um in the case that it does flood but there's not a whole lot else you can do so my obvious concern is that require um relying on off street parking for an area that we know potential of flood and probably will flood more so so that could kick the cars out to the street for parking more
often than not and well I'll put it this way um in case of a flood event like that the public parking area back here is ocean um and wor flooded yes yeah so where the the question is where do the cars go I think in a community like like ours we just have to do the best we we can um you know one would ask the same question about people who work here in City
Hall when that floods what do we do um yes some people will probably be pushed to the street imagine people might park next to the Firehouse go go to the school um uh which is what we do today um this is when that that happen um so the cafe will has parking requirements so one off Street spot
per four person capacity where is that proposed to go yeah so if you go back to the site plan a couple slides up so um one more great so we're we're proposing that the two of the spots at the back could be used for employees at the cafe um besides that because it's it's an existing restaurant space that has no parking at the moment
that's that's our existing condition and because that's not not a change of use uh we're not providing any more parking than what they've had for the last 100 years so but those two spots are for dwelling unit that you just pointed to yeah so so five spots are required for three units um and it's it's it's up to to the the owner to allocate that um certainly if there's a tenant who
requires two two parking spaces then he can allocate one of those Extra Spaces to that um if if I were the owner I would say you have one space with a unit and that's that's what um which is up up to the owner to manage um and if a person has five cars then they don't rent that apartment um and just the I haven't been back to the
right of way back there so is that dead end yeah this is sort of curious um there's definitely a an area that allows access from next to hoopers to come down and and next to the firehouse and come across the back that's all kept clear it seems and when you get back to here there's no evidence of this connection out to to the street so I'm
not sure when in time or um that might be just something that exists on paper and doesn't exist it might be um in case something ever happens to that parking lot over here at at hoopers um but I'm not totally sure exactly how that works that's beyond our our property so who plows back there the right of way for who what um that's a good question actually I I wonder if um do you
have a plowing service or anything for for your properties currently in the back yeah I do I have currently I've been plowing it for since the day I owned it I take care actually all behind the property there and sometimes we do the fire station also we plow it down the end there just to help them out he owns all those property so he just plows it anyway yeah he owns uh one two three and then
it's hoers which which they do not own questions um you actually could put another three cars there so while there's not uh you know we all live have lived in places where you had to move cars in and out so in point
of fact there are um probably another there probably are eight or nine parking spaces on the property um in practice because yeah in practice you could put eight or nine cars I think um and you stand out there and not even being in the right of way correct um just I think um I I try to not draw stuff on property that we don't that my client doesn't own no right right that's not so good to do I'm not talking about the right away
I'm just talking about that actually you could put Cars one behind the other and you would meet the the you know if you stri it and said Unit A gets okay so then my other my question is is there any um increase in footprint in what you're doing okay and the exist sorry only on the second floor right but I meant footprint on the ground p and then the existing parking spaces
are there today and all of that per impervious correct area is already there today so um in fact um and I think that that that's important um okay uh the other thing um I guess is is this anticipated to remain single owner oh that's an interesting question
and um if you don't mind answering that question do you plan on owning this building and renting the units or will it at some point become um condominum no no no we're going to like we do all the other properties we we're going to own it and just rent if that answer the question is that was that the question I'm sorry I think so yes I'm not outcome of
social permit but it could be a question uh Peter any question for Peter Morton no I don't I just well I just had one excuse me observation and I was trying to read it off of the plan it's kind of tight but the uh the clearance for the parking spaces in the back was it six feet John is that what it is uh it should be8 feet eight feet okay all right that answers my question actually it should be nine
feet I'll I'll I'll check that there are two there are two existing uh concrete post which will absolutely dictate um that parking but parking wants to be between eight and nine feet um so I'll I'll check that and make sure there's a dimension but it's also small I can't on 8 fo4 yeah which is isn't terrible
that's that's 88.4 height wi oh no width is is 8 fo4 um height um I don't know if I have that off the top of of my head it's not terribly tall but it it is certainly tall enough to be able to open the door and get out and stand and uh you know I you wouldn't be able to park a van underneath it um nor or a large SUV but that's that's
not part of this discussion I was just curious yeah so in actuality our requirement is nine foot spaces so you need a um Sarah what's sort of interesting is that they are existing yeah we know sorry Mary we was it 9 by 18 9 by um
okay other questions comments um if you didn't get the sense of it I'm really excited that we're doing housing downtown even three units um and I think this hopefully will be something that that is uh continued on other properties and maybe the General District might one day have this by by
write more that than we do but um but with my client very happy to to be able to start somewhere well I'm gonna clip that and ask if there's a um it seems I'm excited that you're keeping uh a commercial space on the first floor and I would like to see that um be a condition of the special permit is that the that that um Street
side Central Street um unit first floor Central Street Unit be remain with some sort of commercial use as a condition of the special permit I'm sure that would be a problem but and I I won't speak for you could you just repeat that I'm sorry well um I think what I'm going to propose to the board is that that one of the conditions of the special permit is that the uh Central Street first floor Street side unit which is currently proposed
as some sort of a cafe but might be retail or office or something remain a commercial use as a condition of the special permit yeah I I my intentions are to just reiterate is to to keep a commercial space at this Seven Central and also to add another one or two commercial spaces at one School Street to keep the Synergy for one School Street two School Street 11 Central all for
the downtown the same as it was back in you know 1800s so yes I'm keeping as commercial space um okay other questions or comments from the board so are we looking at this as the cafe use or we don't look at what the use is on the first floor or do we just look at it as the commercial use if we're looking at it you know it's Cafe I mean I would ask questions like what are the hours blah blah
blah but that's not our perview then good question I think we're posed as a cafe so if we if I think we could um Mark help me out well looking at the special permit conditions and I don't see the specific use as so this is that's not that's not what the
special permit necessarily is for the specific use so it's for the three residentials and the change of use um so you suggesting we dictate VI no I'm not I'm no I'm just saying and I don't think it's us but you know and not that they're going to but who in town then says oh you know they presented it's going to be a c Cafe and then two months from now it's a
tattoo like who oversees that in town maybe it's the the building the select board I don't know so if if it's a use that's allowed in in town by right the owner can do whatever they they like and if it's a tattoo part I don't think that uses a lot nor uh no nor something that might like I don't know if there are rules like this in pan but probably can't be open till 2 in the morning right um so there probably are things that are logical yeah ation um but you know could it be a bookstore yes could it
be a uh there's a list there's a list of commercial uses and that is business or professional office office of a doctor medical office if it has a CBA General retail personal general service restaurant indoor Recreation Club is not allowed Printing and Publishing is allowed yach storage is allowed fish and shellfish wind energy conversion is not allowed and wind monitoring is not
allowed so um oh a couple others helicopter landing is not allowed unless you have a special permit adult entertainment is not allowed doesn't CBA look at change of use so that is actually that's a great question so uh at the end of this month we are coming back actually for that because it's a non-conforming building yeah that's having a change of VI maybe I'm misre this but in
12.54 hold on let's do bring something up um it does say uh conditions may be Li limitation as to size number of occupant or method and time of operation of any propos so I think we can ask about the time okay um wonder if that might fall under the zba that special um okay but
we we could require we could dictate it whether we choose to or not I think also if you have a liquor license or some certain Board of Health restaurant must have a license from the town right that was probably stickly hours as well I would think yeah um and um okay any other questions from the board right now or comments I see that um I think Sarah Pierce you had your hand up yes hi thank you Sarah Paris 9 friend
Street um first of all I'd love to just comment that the renovations that the owner who is on right now have done are outstanding really great work and keeping in with the character of the town it's very uh nice to see that type of work happening in the downtown of Manchester uh I wondered uh the architect speaking has referenced the 3A multiple times and wondered if since
there are multiple buildings that the owner has in town if you would ever consider one of the units in this new location as an affordable unit since we are trying to achieve that it isn't with walking to the MBTA Etc following those types of guidelines yeah I I I think within our our ordinance um it is not required
if you're under a certain number of of unit um and I know that the logic behind that is that um to develop a small number of units is much more expensive than to develop a larger number of units so it an extra burden um do that however I I I shouldn't speak for Ed um I assume that he's doing these as as market rate but we haven't had that discussion okay yeah I I completely
understand that I'm just wondering at what point will things not become market rate when they're in the village um and if it's just something that would be considered at some point or how how would we go about approaching that or asking the owner yeah I'm gonna just jump in Sarah and I think I'm gonna rephrase your comment to if you don't mind to say
that to the extent possible you would like to see if one of these could be affordable and then I'm going to respond to say that the applicant is not required and I think nor are we able to create any Market uh requirements um well I know I know it's not in one of the overlay districts or like a 3A District but I just was wondering since the planning board has quite a bit of over oversight on how zoning changes or if we could I don't know how that works that's why I'm just
asking I'm I'm trying to help solve the affordability issue we have in Manchester and just thought that would be a prime location for a unit so just just a question and thank you so much thank you for that com go ahead so uh I don't think it would be um reasonable to require an affordable unit as a condition of a special permit but I will say that the affordable house trust would probably be willing to
discuss providing a financial subsidy or an incentive uh to make some of these units affordable and that I can put that on the table fore to think about and um uh we we' really love to work with Ed on on creating some affordability in the downtown maybe a great opportunity yeah Abol thank you so much I could yeah would that go on the Shi sure
absolutely could yeah I'm sorry I've lost my got stop sharing I don't know why I'm having such okay um uh Sandy Rogers go ahead great thank you I first want to preface this is that you say your address please oh um Sandy Rogers 82 old Essex Road um I want to prep preface this is that I came in late to the discussion so apologies ahead of time if
this was covered um my question um sort of stems from the last bit of the discussion on what is the current use of whether it be a restaurant or another commercial use um combined with residential um is there something in the process of being approved by the planning board um regarding anything to do with
ventilation um fire code anything like that um that is necessary when you combine residential with um a facility that um is a restaurant versus like a a storefront where there's more kinds of fumes and need for all of the sort of safety requirements that especially when you're dealing with an older building thank you um I
think uh building codes and fire codes dictate that um and John is nodding and and I will affirm that um I think that answers the question I think that's handled by uh the code officials but you're right it there are considerations and fire fire considerations um I also want to just come back to Mary's question about uh fire and um building inspector and um
Mark and I met about driveways with fire and the building inspector and we asked about this project and they said they didn't have any comments that it was um that they would require fire suppression because it's um of that size and that there were a number of codes that need need to be meet but they didn't see a problem they didn't have any uh negative impact input or um special conditions to advise us yeah I was going to ask following up on
that question if we could get something from the fire chief that he's looked at it from having access on that right of way for now residential dwellings in the back which is not currently there um yeah so when we submit this for a building permit it will be circulated to fire to the health inspector to everyone who uh in town needs to to look at it they will then comment and uh we sometimes meet with with the fire as well
just to go over things like that so there is part of the as part of the the building permit process yeah and we usually ask for input to the and this was circulated to building fire DPW and Poli and you not re com go ahead from the police department that they have no concern okay so we get these things in writing though because we don't we don't we're
not privy to any of these conversations outside of the meeting well I'm reporting out that from that discuss from that we actually had a face to face where we as asked them if they had any concerns and they said no so um and then Mark has communicated with them so um okay um other questions from the board and what do we think about conditions that we might impose that I'd like to see us um I have a couple
that I would like to suggest we mentioned um mention commercial on the front commercial on the front um Sue mentioned lighting I think that um that what I was going to suggest is that all lighting should comply with the um boning um requirements um for lighting in um and and with the historic um commission's um review of lighting um um so uh that was another one and then the other
one was um because I think uh it's um section 6.3.8 which is pedestrian vehicle accident traffic Management number six that we um can approve a reduction in parking given that a
cafe needs parking for for residents um and I would say that the this planning board May reduce the number of required bases to those existing um consider uh uh and the rationale is that this was a much larger restaurant in the past than
the um proposed new use and thus um the existing um five to eight spaces on the property um will be uh deemed to be sufficient that would be another um suggestion can we just clarify if when you say eight spaces those those aren't in the setback because it seemed like there wasn't a lot you're doing tandem I couldn't see on the map if how
much space do you have do you meet the setb parking and how many feet left over um parking can be in the set doesn't doesn't the property run to the yeah um just the right away the property line is shown um in front of the BR but in any case uh there's
approximately um more than 20 feet behind each parking space that that we've shown right um so uh if one wanted to and there's nothing in Arizona that says you can't do a tandem behind each one we could have as much as two four six eight so that's 20 fet okay yeah um and then my
personal in uh response in terms of fire access the building exists today and thus um this isn't a increase in footprint and so um I don't know what you know I don't think it's within our purview to ask the Bing nor would people be very happy with us if we ask the portion of the building to come down um so I think the fire axis is kind of and
there is the right way well my concern with the fire AIS was because we're changing uses to now dwelling so we' had recent fires so I want to make sure that the fire department has said they can cleanly get back there with their fire apparatus if needed that was my question and and Mary there there are a number of things just to to address what will have to happen with with the building first of all if you add a residential use to an existing building the building
must be Sprint so that that's the first thing which is great um second when there's a mixed use of a commercial use on the first floor and residential above there must be a a rated uh assembly between those those two so that ceiling of the first floor and the floor of the second floor must be rated um and uh there will certainly be a new um fire alarm system installed as well which will be up to the to the uh
to today's code um which is great and also very important I think what else um any new kitchen uh equipment that goes in will also have to be up to to the new code as well um so uh I'm sure there's stuff that had been in there that probably wasn't that will also be be to the buildings benefit um those are the things I can think about on top of my head yeah and that's great I'm just saying you know as our part of
site plan we get Consulting from the fire department to say they can access as they need to and I'm just looking um because it will be residential frankly I just want to say this is probably the best outcome we could have hoped for for this building so I don't you know I think the conditions that we enumerated are reasonable
and think we should graft them and I have I see one more comment from Sandy Rogers do you still have a new comment uh yes thank you I meant to bring this up um I in looking at the schematics with it sounds like you're talking about parking in the rear and I would recommend it evaluation of the water
table um as well as um just emergency access um because it's pretty tight there and I don't know what's going to change um with the cul work um because that can that has been flooding more um at times so just to put that on your radar thank you thank you um what's the board's um um we
like to CL public hearing tonight and um approve this or um uh do we want to wait till addal information I guess those specific request is from the fire dep I think we should what's your schedule we'd like to move ahead we're we're already about a month behind where we wanted to I think the the building looks like it's
half worked on we want to get it look like it's fully worked on yeah um Mark do you think there um we have enough yeah to go on you have plenty of information to go on I think uh as what usually happens if the department has a concern usually you hear from them about what their concerns are I think in this Cas I talked to yes I mean we've talked to about this as well so um I think there's
no concern here so I mean obviously they have need all the fire code requirements as well as building code requirement okay um so I'll take a uh I'm hearing it a motion to close to close the Public Public hearing I second that okay um a motion to close the public hearing uh any discussion um roll call vote uh Gordon Brewster yes uh Chris Su
fil yes Mary Foley uh Peter Morton yes um and Sarah Katon votes yes so we have a unanimous vote to close the public hearing um now I'll take a motion to uh approve the special permit with the conditions um that Mark is going to summarize for us uh lighting shall comply with the historic commission um with theor commission requirements or review bring it back to
them uh and uh and the zoning requirements uh for our lighting section and uh commercial in the front portion of the building uh which is uh shall the front portion of the building shall remain as commercial space um in specifically the area that's currently proposed as a Cafe restaurant and that board finds that the uh parking uh uh requirement is less than
the previous use um and notes that the uh site can accommodate five GA spaces in the rear of the prop any other conditions can I just excuse me can I just uh because I think John brought this up about the signage do we need to put a similar condition on the signage as we did the lighting that it's just yes I think that's a good suggestion Peter thank you do that there are signed bylaws but um I think the historic um commission would like to
weigh on the sign good suggestion thank you um any other conditions or concerns all right um I'll take a do we have a motion to sure I'll I'll move that we approve the special permit as requested with the conditions uh outlined by Mark second okay um any other discussion um I'll take a roll call vote
Gordon yes Chris yes to yes Mary yes Peter yes uh Sarah votes yes um great thank you thank you guys very much you'll get a um decision um good thank you for your patience on this and great presentation thank you thank you uh to Ed as well great okay um L to do tonight um
should say thank you thank you very much everyone thank you okay got our meeting back um so we have a number of uh zoning um that we've been talking about for um the spring town meeting or for future Town meetings so we're going to work through these um in the
order be easier than copies of everything copies of everything may be easier okay let's so the first um uh the first one uh is the um establishment of a associate members so the background for people um is that
uh state law allows planning boards to have associate members who vote on special permits um or special permits in s plan review there's a little bit of un lack of clarity in the state statute about that but um and um take for example uh t and a special permit requires five affirmative votes and in order to see special permits um in a timely way we
need to make sure we have um really five six or seven members who can review the permit and act on it in a timely way and sometimes people are sick um thank you for coming tonight Peter and um you know Laura's out sick tonight um and and that is difficult for applicants and sometimes when these go um several nights in as they're complicated um
people have other obligations and um it can jeopardize both the town's interests and an applicant's interest and so the proposal here is the planning board should have one associate member appointed by the select board the associate members term should run for one year and the chairman of the board May designate the associate member to sit for the purpose of acting on any appliation before the board indicates of absences inability to act or conflict of interest on the part of any regular
member of the board Andor in the event of a vacancy so that's the proposal um soon so I think it's essential that we have at least one associate member I would like to see two um as the planning boards liaison on the CBA I mean they only have five members and they have two um associate members and
they use them you know all the time um so and I would also like to see the term be two years rather than one um I just think in order to meet our goal of making things run smoothly or applicants in the town um would be great of two and their terms could be two years I would say I would agree both both those things and it's they could be staggered stagged two
two years two so what what would be the commitment of the individuals would they have to show up at every meeting they would be their commitment would be when called you know tonight we don't have a quorum or tonight we don't have U enough people to act on a special we're hearing a special permit so I think they but they would be invited to come call me I would think that I think they would need here so they're aware of what's going on they're not speed with everything if we're talking about zoning
changes they don't necessarily need to move that their obligation would be when actually designated for a particular matter we would be called upon when needed versus right we'd say we have a special permit tonight I think we they would sit for special permit site plan review because particularly those things that are going to go a number of nights like self- signaling yeah you know and the other the other thing I'm say is that there's a lot of pressure we're volunteers and you
know we've had to take you know sell signaling people took participated from airports and boats and other things to try to make sure that we had a the requisite number of people at the requisite number of meeting so and when we voted I think we were one short right one member short when we actually took the vot we were five we had five five two members short so that's a good example yeah I
only have one point uh currently when there's a vacancy on the planning board a new member is selected jointly by this select board and the planning board and I think that should be the case here as well okay I was going to suggest we take out the vacancy because there's another process for vacancies oh I'm not suggesting it be in here yeah it's in here it's in this draft so I think we don't want it in there here because there's a process for filling a vacancy which it's
at the end or EV vacancy so I don't think we want that because there is already a regular member of the board so strike that okay okay um and so I think the question is what if what if there's a vacancy but we have get to what then we be had then use the associate member yeah for to Ru on um yeah yeah that's
an absence of a member okay go ahead um so I don't think we're like the zba the zba only listens to special permits so we don't have as many special permits so I don't think we need as many associate members um and then my other question would be about the select board appointing the associate member that's going to
decide on a special permit that an elected planning board member would do it seems kind of a conflict of um Powers here that it would be the planning board that appoints an associate member in my opinion um the zba is not an elected board so they have associate members and I know for Mass law you the planning board can have associate members but you
know we're really elected to do this and it's going to be in a rare case that we can't so um those are my thoughts okay so we have the number the appointing and the duration and the term those really the the issues um strong feeling about question I felt the the reason why I proposed it this way I'll explain and then okay go Ahad maybe that'll help a
little bit so I felt that the number of special permits that we have is relatively small and most of them are for something relatively simple although it may take a couple two three meetings generally your special permits uh aside from CST don't have a lot of land area where you're going to have a lot of other big developments that are going to take the 68 months to get through a process so that's why I felt
one associate member would be sufficient for the board um the annual appointments is through the select board I don't really have a strong feeling either way I just figured for ease of um appointments and getting it through a process you don't have to have a joint meeting it's for an associate member it's on an annual basis the person doesn't work out it just is an interested doesn't attend enough meetings they be reappointed the next somebody else can
be appointed the next year um and then the third issue was the um body that does the appointment body ter liit oh the term yeah and that's why I figured one year and I figured the select word for ease of point point that's that's why I did that and I felt that the having one extra person here the alternate really should be although they may only vote from time to time they really should be at every
meeting because it's basically a planning board member in training and they should be learning everything that board talks about and does and finds out whether they're interested in really running point or SE so so the select board um I mean it certainly would make it easier if the select like one more thing for them to do that's the other thing but and they're
elected to Mar I mean they're also elected so um I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other um I just I don't have a strong feeling one way I just want to have at least one associate member and the question is what is well why don't we put it out exactly the way it's written here and we'll have some input in a public hearing which just the intent of the public hearing and maybe we could say um when we put it
for we could say one or two and we could put one or two terms and we could put by The Landing board select board and in the draft that's at at the Town Clerk and we'll get some input in the public hearings make sense can we do that just in parentheses put one parentheses or two Sarah are you asking can we do this should we do this or are we going to do it now we're only
talking about term and number so what what we're proposing is put forward an article at Springtown meeting and the process for doing that is we have to have hold a public hearing okay so instead of us going around in circles why don't we ask for input about that at the public hearing it's pretty simple to understand so I'd like to suggest that we do that and move on to the next one sure okay great the next one is to um
make a clearer statement about the applicability of site plan review So currently our site plan review is um really only triggered by off street parking except there are a few places in the bylaw that also say site plan review but are not referenced in
the applicability section and Mark has suggested that um we should expand our site plan review uh criteria so Mark you want to just review why each of these proposed um so right now um really site plan review is um for any new development expansion or change other than a single or two Family Residence which would under the
schedule of parking require five or more spaces uh regardless of the pre-existing number of spaces so for um anything that's kind of a existing commercial property they really don't have to come to py plan review unless they're really expanding so uh the area which is why for example the um storage place to come to planning Court um so typically
any sort of major Redevelopment of the site even if it's just for uh same use but different would come so I basically uh went through and uh noted the various types of uh uh site plan review criteria that you typically see do work well in other
communities um so obviously for new struct new construction of a structure for commercial uses um additions to instruction uh structures over 400 square feet so if someone's doing any sort of addition um to a commercial property that would come under site plan review um change of occupancy uh which increases the load by
10% so um again for commercial uses change of an existing residential structure to commercial um struction of a drive-through facility multifam uh construction know three or more units and then any alteration of land greater than an acre So currently um any sort of sight clearing you know if you're expanding your yard that shouldn't have to
sight some sort of an acre or more doesn't always go to the cons there could be substantial drainage changes and other things um and we added a couple um exemptions for um smaller additions the board made wave even though it's over 400 but it's not more than a th000 square fet L these requirements
and um if you're going to do a special perit plan review would happen currently that uh applicant doesn't have come back to re-review the same thing okay I think it's good I uh has Town Council taking a look at this no after can I so I went through
the bylaw and did a search for site plan review and found that there are several instances where we actually require site plan review which are not listed in 12.6 and I think that that is we can list those are um uh in the addition of any new accessory used to the principal use where addition
exceeds the threshold in 12.6 um allowed use in the LCD offices within a single building of not more than three medical doctors marijuana businesses um and uh the S the lgbi that's the um the energy facilities so I think what we should do is just reference any other places any places cited
in this bylaw so I was thinking of number eight we're otherwise required by Z byw because what happens sometimes is we get also citizens petitions in the future that require site plan review um and certainly the multifam the 3A um districts require site plan review there also the do Amendment stuff yeah so list put any other
places listed in this Von as another we would definitely want U on all of these get Town Council review prior to the they may have some suggestions so is the um construction of any drive-thru facility in there just because it's in our use table yes number five um and on
number four does it make any sense to add so it says a change in use of an existing residential structure to commercial use in District G or the LCD since those are the only two districts that allow commercial right there commercial uses existing ones that are out there right like um on Summer Street I wouldn't I wouldn't because what if you change something to allow some certain commercial uses in the residential district we
may want to have a review of that you know my neighborhood oh like that oh um so I'll just raise it here and um feel the wrath and then we can discuss it in the ATU section as well I've looked at a lot of towns proposed Adu bylaws and surprisingly for the by um a
lot of them are asking for site plan review um to make sure that the Adu isn't you know in front of the primary building or you know all sorts of things so it's a topic to discuss if we would although it's by right they're asking for Cy plan review I see Merit in that but so what I would suggest is that a couple more down when we get to discussing that discuss whether we want to
add that to that adding number eight would if it was required in the Adu section it would it would then it would be in covered okay um are we in agreement that we should move this to public hearing and uh Town Council and get yes input on this can we make sure craft the notice of public intent public notice on this one that is Broad so that
um if there are other uses that come up in the hearing that we won't be limited just to whatever we've thought of so far yeah but I I I kind of have to have a because I have to file this I have to file this very specific document so for the public hearing notice so um again we can change it as long as it's not really um Chang the major intent of what we're trying to do how many more
meetings will we have before the public hearing let's the I think our goal is to have um the public Hearing in four weeks that way it gives us time to um notice another one if we need another one if we have major changes I think that actually gives us time right before town meeting if we need to have so if we have a a change that's out of the scope of our
public hearing notice we would have time to post again so we could discuss it on the 24th and then post no we need to post um before that we need to post between now and then 24th in order to hold it in the first meeting in March which then gives us time we hold a public hearing and the first meeting in March and we have I'm trying to avoid the last minute thing if we have changes on that first meeting in
March we then can post and have another public hearing if needed before town meeting looked at it our first meeting in March is March 10th I think 10 yeah okay let's go on to um the zoning introduction
um Mark I'm GNA let you so basically the uh as we discovered um earlier obviously now a change in the statute that doesn't require 23ds vote um for certain zoning articles and this uh as required 2/3 but reading through this what this is is really an information sheet about zoning
and although it's pretty detailed and it includes a lot of good information it really doesn't need to be in the zoning bylaw itself and I think what it should be is it should be like an information sheet that's posted to the town website uh so that people have questions about Zing bylaw want to learn about it amended without going to town meeting yes um so we could
uh edit this and then put it on planning board website foration that's the recommendation Mark's recommendations is we delete it and that we asked Town Council for obviously yeah wow could we have some introduction of like here's our zoning bylaws I mean something well I think this would be a background piece that when we can modify when Title five
changes to title six and whatever the other codes are I think it's a great idea but um so we don't have to go back to meeting every time simply this let's get I would say we get Town council's advice on it the one um is one there is the date of when um zoning was adopted might need to be in our introduction because that's
sometimes a DAT that's important but still could be in background I think asking Town Council is a good idea point just more baggage it's a radical idea easy to understand moving a whole ping easy okay let's uh um um now we get to some less easy things so um the next
topic we're going to talk about is accessory dwelling units oh you the board want to move this forward to public hearing as well think what we want to do on this one is yes but let's get Town council's input yeah I'll get Town council's input on everything so that at public hearing we can um read the well um not knowing all the the
import of all that elimination what that means what does it mean Mark you're eliminating a bunch of stuff here yeah I don't want to go through it Li by it but you yes but this is really an explanation of various parts of the zoning as well as various other state laws it's educational not regulatory exactly and your zoning is a regulat document so you have the purpose explains why you have it and then you have the regulations um but
this is kind of an information piece um which explains some of the other stuff that might apply to land use um and other things um about elimination of all this this yes FR back is not regulatory in any not going to affect anything no right so there is a purpose section in the bylaw which does say what zoning what we're trying to achieve with zoning so I
I mean from the standpoint of trying to help people that don't look at this stuff all the time like we do um I think it's I mean I'm fine either way but I think you know it does help people to understand you know that variances laps within a year special permits laps within two you know people don't know where to go to find that stuff I mean we
do but they don't so if we could do an introduction that um you know listed the law and maybe the few quick sections and they could look but I I do think a lot of residents are blind because they don't know how to look these but can we make an introduction that is not regulatory I think that's that doesn't have to be voted on until Mee so you could reference the 4A and say 4A section 10 you know
4 section 9 is whatever I think what we could do is on our web page put more information about the process because that is not really up on our various Pages you know we we have you know various bylaws and other information about certain applications where to get the applications but we don't really have explanation of some of the
processes that are listed really on just on the front and then some of this on the back is other laws that might might apply so I think you could do a better job um you know uh that's what I was saying we P this in onto web page maybe break it out into a couple sections in one of planning boarding the processes well the
next topic which is accessory dwelling units is a good example because the regulations for the what we're calling small accessory dwelling units standard um are regulated by the state statute and regulations and that's an example of that would be really useful to have in a web in a guide to navigating the zoning
and the what's allowed but we would have to amend the introduction at town meeting to add the regulations so it's an example of how if we don't have it in a regulatory document we can add it and thus help residents I do think res I agree with you Mary that residents don't know where to go and that we need to do a better job of that so but regulation anyway okay so the next topic is the accessory dwelling units
so by way of background um the state had the Housing Act um provided um as of right accessory dwelling units called protected use terrible terrible terms accessory dwelling units and we're going to call them we propose to call them standard uh dwelling units
and those are small 900 square square feet or half the size of the principal dwelling unit whichever is smaller and that rule that law went into effect February 2nd regardless of whether we have it in our zoning or not um and without any uh um and we are able to regulate those
small standard units uh marginally I guess is um there are um so Mark took oh and the other thing is that an article to provide some marginal regulations on them would only require a 50% vote at town meeting which is why we propos it as two articles we'll
come to the second one in a minute um so um that's the background um and I think we would reference the um state regulations um and the proposal here is that they would be um we would be remove it the other part of this is to remove the
existing um accessory dwelling unit language that we currently have to kind of align standard sure those that are under 900 square F feet with the second proposal which is larger so they all look the same in terms of their format of the regulations um they don't all have the same regulations um so the accessory
dwelling units would be allowed in any District where single family houses are allowed and that's what the law is we don't have any um and we would um we propose to say this is the new section 91.2 only
one accessory dwelling unit from uh standard unit talking about here oh yeah we need to put standard in here well no because this applies to all accessory dwelling in it so if we pass the second one which is the larger one okay you want to apply as well okay good so that um accessory dwelling areas is
one on one in a lot for structure they shall not be permitted on two family or multif family properties that is a gray area in the um for the protected use adus in the um Regular but we would like to have it if we can we'll we'll try well did the the new ones kind of clarify that to me they took out that other definition but they don't say that it's
allowed only in single family so they don't say it's yeah they don't say it's can't do this they don't say you can't So based on kind of maybe what they had before people are wondering if it's great my opinion is we'll see what council says is that if it's not the law doesn't not let us do this then we then we can do this and so that's my
opinion that the state law is generally strict yeah I mean I'll just say the four other towns that I've looked at they're proposed all have it just in single family yeah so they have something like this um that's not permitted on two family or multi family property yes but this doesn't match page one table that want to add that's for standard just said
um these regulations were for everything right yeah so so yes there these would apply to the standard size and if we have V to at larger ones by special permit these would also apply to so then I'm just saying on the page the first page the table isn't says add to section 4.2 why
is that incorrect you would put n's in D1 D2 and G no but you could have it in a um if you had a single family it could be a single family if it's a single family home in D1 or D2 then it's allowed by right oh what I'm saying what pwns are doing in single family District All Over Districts except the LCD or single family District the single family District by the regulations is defined
as a place where a single family home is allowed right that's how the first draft read and then the second draft for my reading changed it but I don't think so they took out that other I don't I didn't bring the other paper they took out that um not clear definition okay get coun yeah definitely I if that's true that's great yeah um so
yeah just to clarify the question is it is unclear if we can restrict this to only single family home dwellings primary dwelling or whether the accessory dwelling units are allowed in a to or a three family um and exterior
architectural plans are required engineering plans um short-term rentals shall not be permitted in any accessory dwelling unit we going to put that what defines that by defined bymr State Law whatever that's yeah that state law wasn't very clear right and that's why I left it off because if we Define short-term rentals well what
if um what don't we just put it in here what if we just say take out number six and just have seven ch um I thought
is there a different difference between R and Z not really I just thought it' be good to be clear if there's a difference between what and what rentals and Lease yeah so what if someone says well I'm not really leasing it it's a short you know it's I'm R it by the weekend
it's not a lease it's you know program yeah by the day whatever by the hour so so that's why um you know I I don't just I would be extra clear I would also leave short-term rentals because that is the language that's allowed by the statute is to prohibit short-term rentals that's true well so with the four months though that gets to the concern of people leasing or renting them for
the summer was brought up at last meeting um didn't we want to avoid that well not I'm not sure if that's something you actually want to avoid I mean um that's kind of hisorical throughout England is a lot of people along the coastline rent in the summer and then they have a winter rental rents in the winter whether it be college students or uh people who might
have to live in a campground and live somewhere else but then they rent a place uh for for the winter to kind people who are building houses and can't live in the noret there you go there's another example but so that's that's typically um that's why I didn't want to make it uh too long so people can't can't do that but um so that's why I put four months and discuss what so I guess it to me it gets
down to are are we is Manchester and the state looking to create these shorter term rentals for four months are we looking for smaller scale housing that's what we're looking for and so I think if we're accommodating the shorter term rentals we're not doing what we're setting out to do well I think it does oh it's not everybody who creates a accessory unit is going to do
only probably a small percentage but actually don't forget our purpose here tonight is to move this to a public hearing where we're going to get input on these things from and we see how people feel about yeah I yeah we can change it to six for the purposes of because you can always make it you know was makeing more or less as long as we kind of have something yeah let's change it so then one more question I
had that along those lines are borders allowed in adus oh because our bylaw currently just says in a single family dwelling which an Adu will become a single family dwelling yeah that's a good point so we might want to yeah if people feel this way
to say the not allowing these for borders it's only allowed in a single family dwelling this is not bad yeah it is because an Adu becomes a single dwelling unit they should be clarified yeah okay it might be a question for Town Council because I
think it is important we don't that so okay why don't we put a proabition on borders and again get Town Council that's a good idea how would you def I don't know I'm actually well they are allowed in our C bylaw so one of the thoughts I'm having is
that um we probably need to hold two public hearings we may not this one may not be ready for we may need to get Town council's input on a number of these things and we'll have the the public hearing for this on the second meeting in March which should still be time to get it to the warrant right we need to check that that's the issue might not be enough time that's the
issue I do would like I'm sorry madam may I may I I'm looking right at you um I would like to have something that says that you can't use adus and as short-term rentals I recognize that many of these other uh suggest much
of this person language is valuable but if we're going to run any risk of not getting something on the warrant that says specifically no short-term rentals then just cut back on this get something simple get it on the warrant get that passed come back in the fall or effort to deal with rest so if you can't get this in shape that you're willing to have it on
the first hearing um come up with a a addition to to uh somewhere that says short-term rentals are not allowed in natives that's a good suggestion so I would say that the changes were discussing of the language or minor if if the council says change this word this or that or strike this they're relatively minor to this entire
article so um I I don't see a reason to put off hosting this for the first meeting in March okay the other thing an is that there are some really important things with these protected use aduse um that they must comply with flood plane and groundwater surface that's that's allowed in the regulation we think um historic um the other one
is the sfax do we have sfax the setbacks number 13 13 yeah the setbacks um that they comply with the primary uh building setbacks all of those are um the Allowed by the regulations we believe and um are making those protected use adus um I think people are worried that right about this and I think we are I think this draft the intent
of this draft whether it does it yet or not I'm not sure but is to recognize they're Allowed by law and to regulate them to the extent that we're allowed to I understand your concern over short-term rental but other people would not care about that but they would care about some of these other things and so saying cut it I'm saying if it gets confusing and late okay
yeah yeah let's also post mark how about to an's point a draft article that simply says shortterm accessory dwelling units may not be used for short-term rentals that way we will have held the hearing for that article we don't need to take that article to town meeting if we can get this one in shap but then we have will have held that hearing for that purpose make sense yeah no
yeah no I don't think you should try and do that unless there's some I mean you've got it right in here and so and the rest of this article I mean it's important but it's in here so I don't understand why you would pull it to separated it oh no not pull it out have an alternate article available a backup a with the hearing whether we put it on
the warrant or not we can decide in four weeks the problem is with the 3- week posting at the cricket and the date that we need to get the warrant done you can't so you want me to uh try and figure out where where I would put that zoning bylaw as far as a restriction that's the problem here yeah it really is why not add a line
to the trable um that says uh says accessory dwelling units used a short-term rental no no no no no uh well what it could I don't know I have to think there's there's a way to do it um probably is to Define is to Define is to Define short-term rentals that's true in the definitions
and then say short-term rentals are not permitted in Access accessory dwelling units not doing as a zoning bylaw but as a general bylaw right that General bylaw well I know that there was some discussion Greg about changing your General bylaw the general by
on short ter rentals problem okay so but that can't be changed see you're trying to do your thing here we want you to do our thing yeah I would like to get
some things out of the general bylaw that are more housing related building land use related but we've been trying to get them out well the general bylaw is going to let it be regulated throughout its life whereas the zoning is when they building it okay so I so I could do that so I could leave it in here and we can post this
for a public hearing and have it reviewed by Council Etc but kind of a belt and suspenders would be to add a definition of adus into the zoning and at the end of the definition saying adus are prohibited from I mean rentals are prohibited in adus and just that way in the definition it's very clear that can't have adus and
then this just reiterates that the other thing is if you post this whole thing and we opt to only pull out number whichever six as the warrant article I would argue that you would posted for that can you regulate with the definition let's ask Town Council yeah yeah yeah you you can do that it's not really the preferred way but since it's something very specific you let's
just get this into shape yeah let just get this into shape okay so I think we're um are there any other so Mary mentioned earlier uh site plan review oh I have a lot of stuff um well site plan review so in the public hearing any bylaws that you're looking at that predate the regulations May no longer be um valid so the apparently wallf there was
an example given at the public hearing for the regulations and they said that W fam said you can't do that you had to have site plan review but you didn't have to have it for the primary dwelling and so they they gave a whole list of things that towns have done to try to uh discourage accessory dwelling units and they were giving examples that they were not compliant with the regulations um there was a whole list I don't know what they were so
I mean I have my other notes but um yeah what she I think what she to clarify Would S is saying is you can't require anything more different from what you do for a primary residence right so if we don't allow we don't have site plan review for primary residents we can't have it for an accessory unfortunately I wish we could yeah no I I understand that so um you know
I've seen all these scenarios where um towns don't want an accessory dwelling unit in front of the primary and we regulate that they don't want it um what were some of the other examples that um you know so if they comply so if they comply with setback then they can build the addition if they're in a historic district though it needs to get
reviewed and approved is bookie said by historic commission so um but know if you're have a 1 acre parcel on the edge of town somewhere and you want to stick it right in front as long as youly with setback if it's the standard but maybe it's the standard size so so certainly on the um larger we could include all of those kinds of things absolutely yeah had pictures and you know if it was within
the house or attached or detached um but just quickly getting back to to this uh just on a higher level why are we getting away from having the structure of a bylaw that has kind of like the purpose applicability um like um it just kind of D Dove right in
and then I I don't see even where we're clarifying that this is 900 square feet or half of the you know you reference the CMR 71.0 I but again residents are going to have no clue what that means they change CMR 120 change rules make it bigger make it um rid of some other change or say it's now
larger not the smaller of two by reference but I think what I mean you know Maes have to end up that the planning board in the future is just going to have to deal with these things because I just don't know how you can read a bylaw and have no idea what the size or the limitations or formulas or
anything um you know you can reference both but I think we have to say that it's 900 square fet or half of the primary dwelling unit whichever is less have to choice they want to put that forth I think Mary's right I think we should say what the state law said yeah and and I also think they instead of calling
them accessory units standard we should call them standard accessory dwelling unit very confusing to see accessory dwelling units large sads standard accessory sad I'm sorry it's getting that's good so that and I just throw some things out and you can either so um so is it clear
enough that this is is complying with the primary building requirements for setbacks and lot coverage yeah number 13 umri building probably shouldn't lot coverage coverage it's there anyway but might as well say it well yeah because it the maximum lock coverage allowed um and dimensional re y [Music] um well they can't
be oh yeah never mind yes um I would add about the borders um on line number eight I would be tempted to take out only I would just say one parking space I agree with you um um where are we going to and I would also note the eohc reporting requirement and who's
going to do it I think they remove that they reduced it they reduced it but I don't think it belongs in zoning um it just says we'll keep a record of each permit applied for Approved denied and then upon request that be the building inspector um okay I don't think it belongs
in yeah um so if this is for all of them thank you so you say State one parking no one parking space if it's greater than a half mile and then are you reliant on
the other bylaw for the additional parking that's yes but then it's not part of General requirement no so are you mixing General requirements for standard Adu and large Adu no the the general requirements apply to
all are the one through 13 yeah okay but then you mix in the parking for the know well I didn't think need to create another section for just one there I'm just wondering if we can separate it somehow because because then this makes it seem
like there's only one space needed if you're further out than a half mile but then the large Adu says you need two I mean I don't yeah um I can add 9.1.3 and say use regulations for standard views and then have this one line that's all I'll have
there I would suggest that we focus on the content and not worry about how it's organized so for right right now that we're so I think the the content issue is should we we can't change just background uh standard small protected use whatever they're called uh adus
and the regulations say we cannot require any parking within a half mile of the train and we can only require a maximum of one for Beyond a half mile but we have to actually have it in here and it has to be in the regulation in this stat in this zoning and the proposal for larger is that we have two parking spaces for the large accessory rolling
unit the um which is um the current proposal we can so I think where it goes and how it's organized to me it's not think Mark us a little bit and then we're going to send it to council if if you want I can take that one item out that regulation for Adu standard and I can move number eight you could put dimensional requirements in that same
general section right well you want these dimensional requirements to apply to both so you'd want to leave it in the first sector I just don't know whether there's anything else aside from this one thing related to parking that specific smaller for the smaller ones yeah the parking one you have to say or it's zero everywhere could you say could you just say um I can do that
that's not a big deal Mary it's it's easy okay I'll go on with my list so Adu dwelling and single family dwelling shall remain on same law and shall not be divided into separate law so we clarify that or is that a given somewhere else in our B are you talking about condo into
the condos because that's specific no I'm talking about you know say somebody had um a Big Lot in right and you could do um you know you did an accessory dwelling unit and but they have enough Frontage and enough they can yeah they could do it could they could do it and build a second house why build an accessory dwelling unit it's sort of like the
existing bylaw that we have which is so silly which says you can only do an accessory dwelling unit if you have a lot that's twice as big as what's required well if you had a lot that's twice as big you can create two lots and build two houses on we need all the stuff back okay um so no Adu shall be sold separately as a condominium or otherwise I don't think that's allowed by state law though is it that's not allowed in the
protected use one it is well we we have number 12 the accessory dwelling unit shall not be separated from the title of the primary unit is that a condo yeah that would be a condo I I think that's to do no they take it out y they changed that it was in that red line and
we can't State a minimum so for the law is this correct so we the town recently sold a bunch of those 716 square foot homes and then so then they could build a 358 squ foot Adu if they have the space do we care I think we care do it I don't know who want to live in something like do we have a height limit
based on our accessory structure of 25 ft the small ones can't be more retive than the primary dwelling so for either do we have a height restriction 35 ft well in the accessory if they're in an accessory building it would have to comply with accessory building like if they were going to do within the state say you can't
be more restrictive than in the small one in the small well for the big ones you could sure but on the big ones are we going to say it's an accessory so it's the 25 ft yes and the big ones I think when we get to it I think I say you have to meet primary setback if you're going to do an addition well that setbacks but I'm talking height well they would they would have to comply with I just want to
make sure so the way he handled it here is on the large accessory structur constructed after the town meeting date must comply with the primary building setback requirements for an accessory unit to be located within the structure oh that's the setback doesn't de with height so the question is so yeah so we have an accessory structure height limit of 25 so I'm just asking if that applies to
it would because it's still an accessory structure um and have we said about the entrance the side or rear entrance for these if they're within the structure that we want the entrances to be in the side or the rear we should say that we had that we wrote that in a draft
we had from before so I can that's for the protected use no for no for the oh for the oh you're jumping ahead for the protected use ones I'm not sure we can encourage but you can't re um and then we clarified I believe last meeting that if somebody wants to convert a garage or an existing unit that it can only happen if that garage meets the
setbacks for the what would be for primary correct we finess that a little bit saying that this the dwelling portion I mean the the habitable portion so well that's that was The Proposal yeah but the protected ones I don't think well that's not more restrictive than what we do for single family so
I think that's important for a Butter's so you're saying if you have a garage you want to convert the garage do what you can't do can't because it doesn't meet the setback meet the primary setback if it doesn't meet the primary building setbacks the accessory unit garage can't be converted to I don't think that's that's what was discussed last meeting and I won't speak for her but Sarah Mish said that you couldn't convert a garage if it doesn't
meet what we currently have for setbacks in that District or that's what I was proposing and I'm still proposing that that if we have structures that are now going to be dwelling units as opposed to garages that for neighborhoods of Butters that we would want to keep the set you say something like accessory structures
that do not conform to setbacks are not permitted be converted to an Adu so they they must comply with all dimensional requirements of the district for I think that might be not sure
I don't have my uh now I can't so I don't know what you're GNA do that but I'm marking that as an important one no you're marking it what as an important one for my side um then any proposed detached Adu or dish Adu that creates a new nonconformity or increased nonconformity shall be
prohibited don't think that see anything about non because we can do it for single family so I think we do it with a special permit so I think you should be
able to do with accessory uniform it says uh for pre-existing non-conforming structure yeah right um we may not prohibit the development of a protected use Adu in an existing structure or principal dwelling or lot due to non-conformance that could be used for or converted into a protected use ATU in conformance
with the building code and state law right so that's can't say that garage can't if it's already there no that that was an existing that was yeah for internal not just the internal in an existing structure or principal dwelling
so the garage an existing structure this is on the last page of the regulation under historic districts the next thing an existing okay no yeah thank you um so for a large one you could do it though yes for our
large we could do it okay um all detached adus must be of a permanent nature on a permanent foundation as defined by the mass building code and with permanent utility connections um temporary structure such as a trailer RV or other prefabricated temporary structure shall not qualify so that gets
to do we want can somebody say this trailer is now an Adu or can we put some hey if it's going to be an Adu and you can have it by right it has to be a fix to the ground I think that we can say that because they said um they said you can do uh modular homes but you can't but they didn't say that railers were they didn't they were silent on the on the mobile home
they yeah they actually made that a little more little more restrictive yeah I think we could try think we can say that yeah it has to be uh I may have to pair that language down but can you send me that language because I think I think we're references to building code I think we can't really can't regulate by um zoning but I think the some of the other language I can modify
that well where we I'm not coming up with this stuff I'm just bucking it from other towns but it is concern we don't want something like a camper vent to become yeah you don't want someone to stick a little Breezeway and call it called the camper van yes the Adu almost done once an Adu has been added so 900 ft or larger the Adu shall
never be enlarged beyond the 900 ft or the other larger you know that was well I think the don't the regulations say if you want to enlarge it you have to have a special you could you can require a special permit yeah that would kick off the special that would mean that it becomes a large one right do we want to say that in our bylaw or we relying that people are going to go or that I think the building 10 years
from now which hopefully none of us are on um um references back end or the building inspector what we could say is something like if you seek to expand um then if becomes subject to the regulations or the large ads whatever if you build a 600 foot one and then you want to expanded to 900 square feet
that's still protected yeah that's no if if your primary house is only 1,200 square well yes but so if you wanted to go larger on the 600 you would have to get a special sure in that case but if you had a 2,000 square foot yeah yeah well maybe just simply saying any addition any Adu that is going to exceed 900 sare ft
requires a special permit yeah well but again that going in I think that we're sort of covered on that yeah you don't want to say that because let's say this next section doesn't pass referencing something that doesn't exist yeah I I think that's kind of I think the point is is that people need to know know that if they do a you know the 900 or the 600 by right they can't then a year from now just say I'm going to add a few hundred feet onto it I think when they
come in for a building permit they'll find um again this is just towns because they're trying to make it as clear as possible any legally enacted townwide building moratoriums will apply to all new Adu proposals as well that cannot be allowed for the protected use that there's there's specific language in the regulations about that but
we could but a mem moratorium when you write it would be why would you you either allow the larger ones or you don't so um moratoriums are generally put in place when as temporary measures for you to craft the bylaw they need to be specific a time right or purpose for regulator some yeah waste waterer and do we say anything
about driveways or we just silent that it's meant to be accessories driveway so can we say yeah we use the same driveway yeah you can we could say that I don't think there's anything that would prohibit us from saying existing no use she'll
use the existing uh axis exting existing driveway entrance yeah Mary's point about purpose it probably should have a purpose
do with all the other yeah we just written in this but and it doesn't it's not even under the accessory dwelling unit section but uh the purpose is to comply with the I think that's probably what we should say well and again it's easy to pluck from other towns that has already created this but yeah it's you
know it's a one paragraph purpose and then applicability and go into the the regulations just a little more format to it um the other issue that sarahel suggested um back at my notes is that the short-term rental um uh prohibition be recorded
with we can ask Town Council no the purposes that are existing byw I think it's too I think it's too too restrictive that purpose yeah no I
yeah which page is it CH uh 64 following all this Peter ni yes I am here seems so this is 64
9.1.1 um I just I thought it we had a purpose in our the one we drafted we I'll find it I'll find the um the the purpose and the entrance if you really want I mean the purpose is very similar to a and you could just leave it at that
you don't need to all these other things you know I mean that's really the purpose of yeah so I like that availability of suitable housing for you know yeah well I would actually do A and E let's say what they are the purpose is to facilitate the availability of
suitable private housing for moderate lowincome elderly and younger citizens of the Town while preserving the existing character of single family districts and to ensure that all accessory dwelling units are created will comply with the building codes health safety and fire regulations does people seem to be worried about that yeah I mean not that our bylaw does that it's that's not what our zoning does but I don't know if we're going to
have a we could have e but I like having a yeah that would just say provide the preserving the character of existing districts take out the word yeah that's idea of course
line yeah I'll re re okay so the next steps on this these two are going to be going to rework them Council post the public hearing post the public hearing we may have to do a second one for that but yeah well I mean if these changes that we discussed reasonably sufficient as a public hearing for a few little weeks we can get input on some you know and
Council doesn't have right large portions of it that your hearing should be sufficient you know if you want a whole second hearing I would say final defend final things the select then we can post maybe a public hearing just right you know uh check our box
for afterwards for early April for all of them just I think we need to do a public meeting and are we all okay with the large ones being limited to 150000 is what we suggested but I make some comments on the large sure so since we're removing our current cust dwelling UNIF by laws replacing it and we've had issues
with our current cust Vol P law um so I guess just going top to bottom I still think 1500 square feet is large um again we saying these are accessory and that you know there's many houses in town that are so we'll find out from residents but I think that's high so should it have a to your point should it have a or not
more than half of the primary unit something that's relative makes it yeah larger than the it's like a carage house I mean yeah so I was going to get to what we currently have is that you know 35% grow Flor area or you know some such calculation and to just blanketly say you know can't exceed a certain thing so you're we're still opening it up to you could have a 2,000 square foot I'm sorry
you could have a um 1500 squ foot house and a, 1400999 accessory dwelling unit right like that's what we've been trying to avoid and so you want it like relative in size to so um so if you have a large lot with a mass and you have that car house that's pretty big to be able to convert yeah that formula that 35 you know whichever formula okay why don't we keep the same
just to trying to keep it parallel so it's not like two different standards if we kept it as half the primary dwelling or 1500 whichever is smaller just to keep it consistent I think that um but I I think it's a good point um I would also my opinion not have it in every
District so remove it from D1 D2 and G but you know if we have the standard has to be required in every district and we got the 3A you know that's all kind of settling in on D um NG so I would you know our current Adu bylaw
is just a b c and e interesting R I think the reason why I have that is [Music] because two family dwelling is allowed by wrri in the D1 and a special permit from the zone board in D2 and what was the Third District you mention g g is also by right in
r g District so although it's Adu large it's still another could you know it's it's it's smaller than what they could do by writing two of the districts or a special perit they essentially can do those family without two family we already defined and that's different than an Adu um because this could be attached detached I mean two
family has to be firewall attached um well that's why we we have it as a special permit and two of the three I mean maybe it should be a special permit under the G District as well just in case someone does want to do it oh so my suggestion would the districts
that are already two family that we wouldn't also allow an interesting thought um and then they still can't have an Adu if they already have a two the first part
of the bylaw wouldn't allow that right it's just about density in the districts right so um if you're allowing to family by right and somebody's got two family and then you're like okay now um now it's going to not be a two family next door it's going to be
a detached Adu that you know it's I think we're mixing a lot of things into a already very dense area of town and I think we it would benefit to slow that down a little bit well and they to then the the stand standard Adu is allowed by right so yeah so you're just saying the
large ones Sarah melish was just talking about whatever one on Harbor centr whichever what it was but so just kind of saying that it's an area of town that's has a lot going on um and and that that you say about the two two off Street yeah number
four two off Street yeah I would just say two off street parking spaces add the word off street instead of just parking that's I think those are good things to think about yes okay we're going to move that
one along I'm gonna move us along um so um the next one on the um agenda is the General District uh commercial use so um we have talked about trying to address the a requirement or commercial in the lower in the um
along the street first floor first floor in order to um respond to the the needs that we heard in the MBTA zoning and create an opport uh opportunity for mixed use explicitly not to try you know to try to re in the pressure for
uh easily developing allow um two family with special per 3 family in our downtown which could potentially get rid of commercial property commercial space along our streetcape um I think there's still a need an opportunity to do that as well but it's complicated more complicated than ad perhaps
how deep how uh how do you define mixed use and um it's my opinion that we don't have time to get something together for spring yeah that said I think we should be working on it with a planning exercise because I think we have both an opportunity and a vulnerability that um we want to be planful for yeah I
think um just get people thinking about it's an opportunity to make things better downtown um rather than an opportunity to you know have wild development I mean the our we don't own the buildings down town I mean one person owns quite a few and we have no say over who
can own property or not they're all privately held um buildings a private person or a commercial entity can own them and so this is our only tool to say what they can do with their property um and we should try and figure out the tools we want to use to get to the result that you know people want to have um which sounded like not have
every building converted to all residential um it has to be a balance I think I think people want a balance right I think people assume that the existing commercial will the bank for example be stay a bank for a commercial use and that or may not be the case just as an example so um but I just don't think we have time no no and in fact uh it turns out it's probably a much bigger problem than Z the
zoning can be part of a solution but it's not the solution the solution is going to require marketing by the uh brokers in town to attract businesses it's going to we have CST coming in which is going to have an impact I think uh um public improvements can be a big part of it the downtown Improvement committee can be you know it's got to be a partner in this as well definitely a want to be part yeah so I think that we just got
one tool in this bigger tool box that we have to coordinate with the other stakeholders so Chris had found a um model bylaw from Cape Cod which we'll share around and maybe we can um take some time at a meeting to actually walk through this uh kind of interesting slideshow that raises a whole bunch of planning questions in the abstract as a start and then I know Mark is thinking about getting a planning grants to
to undertake this comprehensively so those things are coming but we're not going to have that one and I think that's my feeling and we don't have a draft yeah it's a long it's a really ideally this is a long-term project we do a comprehensive look at the district I guess my concern was that it's a long-term project with a near-term pressure yes but maybe less near than we just April is coming qu quickly okay so
let's move on from that um to us I'm going to take a moment Sarah Pierce you have your hand up yes hi thank you so much for taking my comment Sarah Pierce nine friend Street I just wanted to say thank you for taking a pause um for the long-term planning with the commercial and the residential in the downtown uh we definitely have as a resident I can say it feels like there
is a ton being put on Manchester's plate as far as development and our future we have laws that we have to deal with the 40a we have to deal with the Adu by right we have to deal with CST is approved and that's the own entity we still have to deal with that but that's three huge things right there we have the 40b that's pending we don't know what will happen with that but I
think what we have to deal with is incredibly important to pay attention to and use our time to figure out the finite pieces of whether adus are you know 900 square ft I would go at this point if you have to make a decision I would go with the minimum and then go from there because you can always add but you can't take away I am concerned with enforcement with all of this who's overseeing this we have one building
inspector and multiple projects going on I'm also concerned with infrastructure and how we're going to support all of this so I I really do applaud your board for taking a pause on the downtown commercial area that's not something we have to do right now and really should take some time and think that through and do it the right way so that's my comment thank you
very much thank you I guess my my only response to that is we we are going to take it up because we worry that in the absence of rules we'll get whatever whatever we'll get so we do want to think about what we want but not tonight but thank you um okay um the last one on the agenda is flood um so so this is another one that
we have to do to U bring forth to town meeting and people won't be able to get flood shance anymore um so a um final version of this was bent around by the state for towns to um modify basically by putting in their towns information uh referencing the uh correct
uh flood zone districts um so and so forth so I've done that to the version here meant to replace our existing 10.2 and um this is very similar to a version that was reviewed I went back into our old meeting packets the last time it was discussed was in August of
23 and it was reviewed by Council um and theard I didn't go back to see how many meetings you talked about this but uh it was reviewed by Council in the state so this is very similar I believe States adjusted it a little bit since then and I will again send it to council for a final review but uh this essentially like the storm
water is something that which was passed in the fall time meeting that we kind of have to put forward you made any modifications from the model bylaw that are um or is there any discretion uh we can take not really um was a couple different sections were based on the community our community I had to um
um reference certain uh uh things but maps and but yeah it's pretty much as as given to us that state um I do have to remove a few of the flood zones I did get a confirmation that a few of these zones don't
exist so we have five zones and there are seven or eight zones listed in here so I have make a little adjustment to that um and it's been sent to the state to re-review so okay and is the I know one of the questions we had talked about at some length before is that the um this designates the inspector of buildings um to be the official flood plane administrator is that standard yes
I believe that's what our current bylaw said is there any other options Town Administrator could be conservation commissioner yeah I mean the apparently the town can designate anyone they choose um I don't know I mean that's the person who makes would because he does
the person who issues building permit oh at least we have one we don't have a conservation soon that's a Town Administrator so yeah well we have a conservation agent starting tomorrow just but I I would not designate the conservation agent because um really is a building code issue many
ways so the purpose of a I mean it says to protect um Public Safety and eliminate losses but but it's really to keep people from increasing flooding well that's also another goal the goal you know is is obviously if you have land in a
flood plane for example the back of Seven Central that back portion is in the flood plane that build the build there and displace the water therefore increasing water properties so that is one of the things that this would prohibit just as if you was able to build there he'd have to elevate the building to be above the flood plane things like he talked about uh he talked about the utilities in the basement need to be those need to
be elevated above the flood elevation so that it don't get damaged in if there was flooding in the basement so um the other thing is that the base flood of el elevation for subdivisions is for developments greater than 50 Lots or 5 Acres um is can we make that smaller because we're not likely to have 50 Lots or
even five acres um that's number of 10 we make it five Lots
or so number nine requires number 10 says proposed subdivisions of greater than 50 Lots must provide technical data to determine base elevations for each developable parcel I think we should have that be five Lots I don't see why
we couldn't make it more strict then this what the state requires I we couldn't make it less right you know how many um Town buildings are in the flood plane I know from the FEMA report that we have 94 properties in the flood plane do you know how many of them
are I don't I know the parks parks are probably in the flood plane in the St plant parking lot builing might be but that's all I know fire station oh fire station and then my only other
comment would be that so the building inspector the appropriate bit we have a very part-time building inspector and we keep adding on his duties and though I don't know that this gets triggered a whole a lot but um you know I think there's some training involved with this Etc and yearly training so I I just have concern with
that I can find out if our centor has gone through the training that they have um so I would guess he probably has um could it be the Town Administrator or his designate his designate which would mean he could Town Administrator does not have the time for well no
designate the building INSP or the Conservation Commission he thinks is best qualifi yeah that might be good better solution solution okay um great thank you for getting we've been talking about this one for a long time so I'm glad we finally have a draft it seems actually straight forward I will send this to council as well I
will put in the Town Administrator designa dat that's allow not I will turn it back to the Town Administrator and I will put the uh five lots for Acres yeah think that's five acres is fine it's the five lot I mean we're not in 50 is a really large and I will fix the flood zones specific great one thing about the design
idea I mean what if the Town Administrator says okay it's going to be the town clerk or the head of parks and W you know or you yeah we might we yeah I'm afraid Mike want to put some guard rails about who they the designate I'm sure yeah let's we can think about that yeah okay it's 10 o'clock um uh
is I I'm lost my meeting again I don't see any hands up so I'm going to continue um we have uh skip liaison reports complete we have two uh minutes to approve um I would love to get those approved um we have the minutes of um November 25th
2024 do I have a motion yeah I move them be approved okay Mary I don't think you were here here but I just as for clarification I thought the meeting minute said six voted yes there was only five peoplee you are correct about that that is I saw that in them it should be five five voted I believe no I think it was was the only one yeah someone was
on Zoom or something Chris was on Zoom yeah yeah I think we were incorrect yeah it was okay um so uh Chris has moved and I think sue seconded the approval of the uh November 25th um all in favor I Peter I all unanimous thank you um and then the other one is
uh 1133 I don't think those on the agenda but not in the folder yeah I didn't okay so we do not have that minutes um any uh other issues from the board any additional public comment hearing and seeing none thank you everybody this a good
meeting I'll take a motion to adjourn second second all in favor thank you for hanging in there Peter good night everybody