Can you ask her if she can hear us sound? >> She just unmuted. >> Is she muted? >> Yes, I can hear you. >> Thank you. >> So, one thing on >> Go ahead. Sorry. >> I just curiosity. Will they have to go
back to the historic commission because they've changed their plan? But they feel fairly because they've used most of the design elements from the previous plan and materials that they feel that which is why they're
going to the zod to get permission for they'd like to do as well. >> Okay. So the question is uh do we accept what the change that Mark
has presented or do we want to use the two and a half story limit as in currently in the general district? >> I feel like we should keep with the two and a half um
because we're already allowing more more opportunities for property owners to include more residences. And >> I think the other piece, the reason I
agree with Sue and um take the AUS for a second, the ZBA wants us to revisit ADUs after we pass them. if this becomes the thing that every person, every developer goes to the ZBA
>> and then it could be modified. Um, and I just feel like it's about scale and the fact of the matter is it's not really two and a half stories. It's really two and two/3, right? >> Right. Well, time is almost right. >> Well, I guess you Yeah, it's assuming
that some portion of the four feet is that's why it's because it's not really a house. Anyway, >> I so I think it keep I feel it keeps scale >> I think scale's really important and um I agree with Sue. I I think um the
comments that I've heard are um on the one hand uh kind of don't change anything and on the other hand we're not doing enough development, right? And so our job is to
kind of balance I think and I think there's so much in the town center district that improves the current zoning that that's enough already. >> The other thing is that just to add one
more thing is that we are allowing 60% by structures where there is currently only allowed 40% by structures >> in the general district. >> Oh wow. Okay. That's a pretty big That's a pretty big uh >> change.
>> You're allowing a a building that is um half again as big, >> right? If it was 40% of the lot, now it would be 60% of the lot. >> Not I mean the three story is not unreasonable when we think about the
goal of trying to preserve the variety of buildings and their >> Yeah. you know, I mean, zoning came in after most of those buildings were built, so they have nothing to do with current zoning. And so, you know, I
understand the three stories. It's not, you know, it's not out of the question at all. But I just feel like for right now, we need to stick with the two and a half. >> I think it just makes the explanation of what we're doing simpler, and I think that helps.
>> Okay. So, anybody gonna So, we'll go to the two and a half stories. Gordon, let me blink. Anybody Everybody okay with that for now? We'll we'll keep it as a >> I think it's a good idea and I'm >> braining around this that
don't try too hard. >> I I'm glad Mark raised it. >> I think it's a really I think it's an important issue and it will be interesting to see how people respond to all of this at the point. >> Okay. So, >> um, great. Any other comments on the
zoning? So, Mark, you're going to make those changes and put the new draft up on that? >> Yep. >> Um, just make sure that everything says draft and is um Okay, stop sharing. Um, the next um
topic is the plan for the December 4th public forum. Um Sue and I did uh meet and have prepared a um an outline for a presentation.
It's a work in progress. >> Um we also talked about trying to have people um a number of people speak so that it's not just one talking head. Um, and I think what we'll do is divide it up and and
get, you know, talk to you and sign things individually. I don't think we need to spend too much time now unless somebody has >> uh doesn't want to uh >> Okay. Um, if somebody doesn't want to speak, that's certainly fine, too.
>> Um, my plea is that um I hope we can do the present. So we're calling it a forum. So that gives people an expectation about a level of interactivity. >> Yes. And so if there's a way to do the
presentation in chunks so that there's a chunk you know that's a five or 10 minutes of presenting and then there's another five plus minutes of a little back and forth and then you know and then to to contain it by saying well
there'll be more of this afterwards blah blah blah and then you go on to the next piece of the presentation because as as a citizen too much talking is >> it's too much right and it and it also it used to make me berserk to go to meetings and have to wait until the very
end to make my comments when I everyone had for the discussion had moved on and it was anyway so if there's a way to do the presentation way that allows for commentary and interaction as you go along a bit that I
>> I agree with you because it's a forum on the other hand is a bit of level setting thing that kind of you need to do to you kind of need to understand it in its totality to have things. So the way we've structured is sort of the what and why
>> a quick what's the town center district what are the criteria in the town center district just use setbacks parking and design requirements >> and some photos of >> and photos to illustrate that
>> and then saying here's where the Harvard edge district is. >> So you could pause after that first thing. >> You could except then people would be like, well, what about Harbor Point? Uh >> so I think I kind of I think it I think
if it's short if it's succinct >> then it can um what we could do is take questions on we could divide the question areas like what are you know do people have questions about where we're talking about >> and then we could talk about do we have
questions about town center so that the so that the questions stay focused on a particular aspect. Yeah, I I I think it just works better if people get to talk sooner, if the audience has a few
comments a little bit sooner. And you know, it'll give you a sense too about where people are at, which is not a bad thing. I don't I mean, I have no idea how to divide it up. I mean, I'd be happy to look at it and make a couple suggestions, but if there are three parts, let's say, if you can divide it
somehow into what is it, >> why are we doing it, what do we think the effect will be? Um, I mean, I don't know, that's just >> think about that >> off the seat of my pants, but it's like, yeah. >> Okay. So, um,
so that let's we'll come back to whether we need another communications meeting, which probably is the right place to do that. Um, the general communications, where are we on the website? And the frequently asked questions. >> I looked at the website today and the
FAQs weren't there, but everything else we talked about was there. We should talk about whether we want to put Chris's document on the downtown zoning proposal explained. Um, which I think I
would be in favor of. um we should talk about the document first but um I think that would be helpful but the FAQs are not there so and I couldn't find where the most recent ones are so where
>> the FAS I know the FAQ file is empty >> I may have been going to put them in but I think um you put something up Sarah I think today or yesterday but it would it was like draft 6 or something. >> Yeah.
>> No, there was a draft that we did and then Chris did some edits to it maybe. >> And then there was and then there were comments. >> You were going to finish it. >> I know. And I didn't quite get to that. So, >> um I don't know. Do you want to sit down tomorrow?
>> Sure. >> Sure. >> And just get it and get it done and get it we'll get it posted. >> The 6.1 was the may be the last one. So, I'm going to put that in the um I'll put that in the >> Can we do it in the morning? >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Okay. I'll do that. I'll put that in the folder right now. Excuse me. Or is your family? >> It could have been my mind. >> Um Okay. So, you guys are going to finish up the um the uh >> FAQ FAQs. >> FAQs. I'm going to put them in the I'm
going to put what I have as the latest in the FAQ folder. >> Okay. >> Right now. >> All right. Great. >> Um, okay. And then we have the document that Chris um the one pager >> was one page.
>> Yes. A little dribbly. We'll see. We're still one. >> That's the challenge without >> Okay. So, it's all about font size. and >> I would just make one >> comment. I don't know if we're to the
point where we want to talk about >> the specific document. >> Yep. Um like halfway down where it's the first bulleted features of the new zoning districts blah blah blah. >> One, two, three. In the fourth bullet,
um oh no, I'm sorry, it's the fifth bullet. Um, all projects would require conformance with the do design standards and review process. CHAZ I would put um or the historic district commission. I
would make a reference to that in that bullet. >> However you want to refer if it's in historic district. Okay. I know Sandy wants to get rid of the acronyms. Definitely get rid of
an anti-ac mission there. >> That's gonna add a lot to it. >> You can change the font size the margin for the margin. And it's all right if it's a page. Um I have a I don't know how um you'd
react to this, but I think um and please correct me if I'm wrong here because I'm not as familiar with the zoning and the existing properties and all the details of it, but it seems to me that this is something that is beneficial for property owners and we might want to
specifically say that so that the existing regulations that I'm on the third paragraph uh third sentence existing rigs are not compatible with conditions and needs of the downtown commercial center and say something to the effect that this reflect this
creates current properties most current properties being non-conforming which means that they have to go to the ZBA for a variance or PE planning board for a special permit so we're to some degree relieving a regulatory burden on
people who own properties there. >> I think we'll say that during the forum presentation, but I think there's enough in the two sentences you just read that we don't need to keep >> in this short document. I don't think we
have to explain keep explaining. Do you know what I mean? Yes. >> But we will make that specific point during the forum because it's a really good one. But I thought Chris did a good job of like bringing up the point without spelling all of the
>> well and it also has I mean my comment violates the Sue Henson Filberg rule of just the fact >> you know so it is a little bit um advocating so
>> that's okay Um >> okay. Um so >> oh there is one thing um a specific thing on the um second dimensional and other requirements that bullet point
list um okay two three four five six seven on the seventh one maximum number of residential units. Um, I think you want to say four per lot or four. Yeah, four per lot in the TCD.
>> Yes, definitely. >> Yeah, that's good ideas. >> And the what? >> Pot wash my mouth. That was so Oh gosh. Um, just one thing to add where it says all
projects will require compliance with the design standards and review spars as spelled out in the MBTA ch regulations or historic district guidelines. Yeah, >> because half of the district is historic. >> Do people know what the MBTA Chad design
standards are? Why not just say the design standards in section 9 whatever? >> Yeah. Right. >> That's a good idea. Yeah. >> Yeah. And >> then in talk if you're talking about it, you can say those are design standards we developed >> to provide oversight for the MBTA
zoning. But >> section >> again, >> what is that section >> XYZ? Yeah, nine or five something. >> Speaking of that, this is totally off subject, but can we get copies of the
current voting bylaw? Would that make you think? >> Oh gosh, it would be great. Yeah, that would be wonderful. >> Oh, and I'm gonna I'll send Kendra. I think we could all use a copy. >> That would be really nice. >> Three whole We all have a >> like what I have here. >> Yeah, that would be awesome.
>> I will have Yes, I agree. >> She can print a double-sided. That's okay. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Kendra Kendall asking her right now. Mine's like I've got things stuck in it.
Okay, other comments on Chris, maybe you guys can finish that up and get that onto the website. >> Excellent. Thank you. Really, >> it's been a pleasure. >> We actually know but and so Mark's got the map, right? >> Map. >> Yeah. Yeah.
the latest version is much which >> Yeah, it's >> we just add it to this. >> Yeah. >> On the second page. >> Yes. >> Oh, you want to put this map along with that like back to back. Okay.
>> Not the not the map that's with the thing now. >> No, because that's Well, I mean this >> it's the other one. >> This this map. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yes. Okay. Um, the last piece of this I think is should we have another communications
meeting? >> Probably if we can >> Monday or Tuesday people's availability. >> I am not available Monday. >> Wait Tuesday. Uh, we can also do a a
>> Zoom night, right? >> But um >> No, I have to be out of town on Monday and part of Tuesday. >> I feel like >> But you can do it without me because we will have like you can definitely do it without me.
>> Yeah. Um, t Tuesday is a pretty good day for work. You're talking about during the day, Sarah? >> Yeah. Like fourth or Tuesday is actually for the Olympics. >> What day of the week?
>> December second. >> It's a little I mean Monday might be better just because the fourth is really creeping up. It's >> Yeah, >> the afternoon of the first. Can we post that? Yeah, we can. Um
I think I can do either works better for at least a few people just to kind of put another set of eyes sometimes. >> Sure. >> Sure. >> Presentation in particular. >> It doesn't have to be everybody. >> My schedule's pretty flexible those first. >> What about uh
>> so you can >> 3:00 on Monday? Does that work for you? >> I don't even know that you need to be there but >> checking right now. >> What? Yeah. >> And what about Gordon? >> I think Gordon is getting
>> getting crazy. I think it's fine if you're not We just have a few people to put a second set of a third set of eyes on the presentation. >> So I'm fine. I'm fine for Monday afternoon. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And just sort of actually later afternoon is better for if you can do 4.
Usually better. So 4 4:30. Let's start with four. It's >> better for Peter and Brian if they want to try. I'm sure Brian probably not. >> I might send it to him. He's got a really good eye. >> Brian has a great eye. >> He has a great eye for >> very good with a turn of
>> he looks very but >> he's also supposed to meet in person. >> Yes. >> Okay, great. Um, anything else on uh um so like 4:30?
>> 4:00. >> Let's say 4:00. >> 4:30. >> Yeah, I might be able to get there towards the end of it. >> Okay. Or we could give you a Zoom. >> Yeah. I can't do that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay, great. Um, thank you. Um, the frequent outly asked questions. My
latest one is now in the folder. >> Okay. Um, great. So, I think that's downtown improvement. Let's let's talk about hotels and insely. >> We have uh the old hotel article and
then I think there was a revised in article. Um so I think that moves us ahead. Um >> here we go. Yeah, this is this came into the folder locally, but um so adding a definition
in a building or any part of a building up the screen >> uh facilities >> um without cooking facilities for transient occupancy and having a common entrance or entrances an inch of a limited to a maximum of 12 rooms for
overnight guests and including restaurant, bar, tavern and accessory Recreational facilities provided they are also allowed in the district. It's not include a hotel, motel, boarding house, lodging or rooming house. >> Is that a bed and breakfast?
>> Yeah, I think it could say Well, if you have a rat bar >> Yeah, that would be a >> typically have tea tea. You know, tea or coffee bar. I think that's fine. So,
I just thought we should take that it out. >> Yeah. >> And replace it with an in. I think. >> Yep. >> I think. >> Oh, you mean the last sentence? >> See, I put a comment there. You can see. >> Yeah. Okay.
>> Do doesn't Anna have recreational facilities? Oh, provide they're allowed in the district. That's nice. Good. >> Okay. >> And then the proposal is to allow >> Before you before you go on for the definition, if I may, sorry. Absolutely.
>> This is Chris. Chris, you wrote this. >> No, Mark wrote this. Okay. >> Mark wrote this. So, contains rooming. So, this is like a single room occupancy with no cooking facilities. >> No. >> No. >> That people rent out for short term. No, this is the small.
>> It's like a hotel. >> It's like a bed and breakfast. >> It's like a boutique in >> or a bed and breakfast. >> Then it gets down the bottom saying does it does not include a hotel. >> So our our definition of a hotel is this definition except it doesn't limit the
size. >> Okay. So >> this by putting the 12 room capacity >> that defines it as an in. >> Right. That's a good choice of size, I think. >> Yes. >> Yeah.
>> But it's not an SRO. >> We have we allow that up to five, I believe. >> So, okay. And they shall be allowed right now. we proposed in the LCB,
the town center and the harbor edge >> for the moment with a special permit in the general. >> That's all good. >> I think that's fine for this good good starting point. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Good job. >> And add to off streetet parking and in
is one space for guest room. Um and which is what we have for hotel already. >> Yes. However, what about like staff working? Um because you might have, you know, a
custodian and a um a desk clerk and um um you know, personalities maintain a you might have a um a couple housekeeping and well, >> you might say one space plus one for
each room. Whereas in the in might only most of the time we'll have one person. >> A couple people. Yeah. Yeah. >> Maybe just leave it at one per guest room. That's what we have for hotels right now. And at that >> Yep. >> One of my favorite guest spaces. You let
yourself in. >> No. There's like you get a they email you the code and >> Yep. And you have a little thing to punch it in. >> Yeah. So I always wonder if they change the code between rooms. >> Between guests. Okay. >> I've been in a few where I wasn't so
sure. >> You can lock the room on the side. >> Right. Okay. So, any other changes? So, um we did uh Sue and I did think about um communications for this and we thought we would
do it after some Q&A about the um downtown district. Um, and it may get lost, but we have time to hold another forum or public meeting or
thing on just hotels later. >> And so even if we don't get to it for some reason, we could um we've got time. Well, we probably ought to have something on a bunch of the other because we're still going to have some additional articles that aren't downtown
related. >> The general >> So, we probably will want to have something later. >> Yes. >> But that >> we should put together a calendar. So, time is ticking actually. >> Kind of downtown related. >> Yeah, downtown related.
>> They are. And it was comments that came up in the July >> meeting. You know, people talked about having him in. So, >> yeah. >> I mean, I think this is the very much thematically related to the whole downtown, >> the thriving vibrancy, more people
around. Yeah. >> Okay, great. Um, thank you for doing that. Um, senior housing. So, we have, um, I know Mark put into the packet, I fell down on this the job
on this one. Um, a revise sharing um draft by a lot. I know Chris went through it and has some comments. So, um should we just walk walk through it?
Sure. So, I've got it up on the screen. The first is to add a new section two a new definition of se senior housing development. >> Do I want to strike the word development? I don't use it anywhere
else in in why should we say development here >> just say simply senior housing >> housing >> why why would you want to leave it in fact it's what it is >> because they don't use it anywhere else design >> nowhere else right
>> then and it's sort of pjorative I think >> well it raises people's >> okay yeah I'm fine with that it's all the way through office. >> Y so um we have several house several
senior housing definitions. >> So I want to strike them and put these put new ones in because the ones in the existing B are in the wrong order. It's confusing >> and it includes the long-term care
facility which is already defined in the zoning bylaw anyway and it's not really senior housing so we should take it out of the definitions under senior housing >> you got development in but
>> yeah I started taking it out I didn't take them all out though >> just just to make sure >> so you actually proposed >> I I proposed calling it senior housing development. Chris suggested that I took
it out and I started doing that but I >> left a few in just to >> so actually Tris has gone through and been more specific saying senior housing is housing for persons over the age of 55 subject to the senior housing laws as
senior housing laws are blah blah blah and then the types of senior housing are assisted living facility independent living uh and this care facility or a long-term care facility. Is it just a care facility? >> Continuing care facility. >> Should say continuing.
>> Yeah. >> Well, Chris, we're not we're not proposing any of these other than senior housing 55s, is it? Correct. >> Well, the these are all examples of it. >> So >> So we also have to delete the existing
>> definition. Yeah. I thought you were talking, hey Bob, forgive me. I thought you were talking about independent living in in a separate living unit 55 one person has to do but none of the care that's provided down below would be >> so assisted living is actually a bunch
of apartments. >> Yeah. >> Just like an independent living. It's just that they also >> have food >> have food services and >> personal care services. But the the problem with that is that that requires
staffing, delivery. It's it's you're creating a facility and and um you know, it's it's not just housing for people 55 and older. So if you do just 55 and older and they need
an aid, they need you know visiting nurse, whatever, that's they arrange for it themselves and and stuff like that. But uh this is now allowing for the development of a like a commercial facility. And yes, it's for people 55
and under, but it's it's more than just housing. And so I thought, and I drafted this, this is why I didn't incorporate this comment in here, that we were at the last meeting, that we were just going to start with regular 55 and older
housing and not incorporate the facilities, that we would revisit that, call it something else, assisted living facility or in, you know, something else. um or incorporate all of those into
um like a later draft because I took out some of the other language that was in the previous draft that would addressed some of the needs if you're building a facility for things like extra parking deliveries, better
screening and buffering that type of stuff. So um >> so just to stop there just so I understand >> if we had senior housing without amenities >> you would and you so you age restricted
housing the the the property owner or the developer or the owner could age restrict the property and get a density bonus. that that's the sort of the the in that scenario that's the
>> the pro you know that's the benefit to the town is you get a density bonus in terms of the numbers of units per um >> acre >> acre or per lot or whatever however we do it because you're age restricting.
>> That's right. >> Okay. So if we and you get um it seems to me that a uh so that's independent living any of them but yes it's certainly
living >> you're basically renting an apartment in a building >> could be condo could be a condo as well purchase yeah >> housy kind of thing the stuff we saw in
Wenham. >> Yeah. Was uh looked like um just small town houses kind of linked together. >> Small, some of them. >> So all right. Some of them were big. >> Some of these developments,
big. >> Yeah. So the the proposal right now as it stands is that basically we say it's allowed everywhere with a special permit and let the special permit process >> sort it out. >> Sort it out. >> No, which is I think a good way to do it
because I know >> no expectation of services. You buy it, you live in it or you rent it, you live in it and that's it. >> Well, this is saying that any type of senior housing. >> Yeah, that's is there danger in that? I just I don't know. Look at the list of
>> the more independent um living thing we saw Gordon um with the really large units um there were commu communal facilities. So there was a notion about not just
this was a bunch of dense housing but that it was a quote unquote community and there were you know events and so there was a common room and a I don't know >> a dining room. >> Um no I think that would be more an
assisted living cocktail hour. >> Yeah. Yeah. a shared pool >> or a swimming pool or something like that. >> Recreational facilities. >> So there was some notion of community. I don't know how you embedded in this thing. But
>> really the difference between assisted living now and independent living is that in independent living if you need personal care you call for an outside agent to come in and do it. With assisted living, it's all coordinated within the facility or within the
>> So, you need a management firm to to control the building and how it operates. >> Sure. Yeah, you have an operator. Absolutely. >> But you have a management company managing an apartment building, too. >> But you have a lot more permanent staff. >> What is our goal by putting the zoning
in here then? What is our goal? So there's a huge need for senior housing in Manchester, both for independent living and presumably for assisted living. >> Oh, you think there's that? There's still >> Absolutely. Yeah. People if you if you
suddenly can't walk anymore or >> Oh gosh. >> have trouble getting around, you have to move to Beverly, >> right? You can't. >> And people are doing that all the time. And if you want to downsize, you have to move to Beverly also because there's no
place to downsize to. >> How big was plac in one of them that you went to? How many units? >> There were three of them that we went to. >> So, one was 29 units and the average square footage was 3,000 square feet. They were all three bedrooms.
>> They were big >> and they were sold for a million and a half dollars. There was another one just down the street called the Maples >> in an old >> in an old mansion and a bunch of little town houses around it and they were all two one and two bedrooms and they sold
for 155,000 and then we saw a an affordable one also in one >> which is 40 units I think done by Harbor Light and they're all onebedroom units and they all rent for, you know, 400,
500 bucks a month. >> Um, so Chris, this is intriguing stuff. So because if a developer were to come in here and said, "I want to build senior housing, which would be the more attractive thing
independent living of just uh for 55 and over age restricted or would it be the larger full array of services provided? Which one would be more likely to be built >> first?"
I don't know the answer to that. I don't know >> whether whether it's a just a building where you live on your own but it's age restricted versus the buildings you went to which have the community places. >> So just to be clear assisted living is like $6,000 a month.
>> $6,000 a month. >> Yeah. But you get a me get your meals get the the apartment cleaned. You get um if you there's a nursing service there to give you your meds and stuff. So it's
for people who are less able to take care of themselves. >> I would think a developer would want obviously return on their dollar to make that work. So it would be a larger facility. >> Well, generally there are firms that just do assisted living and
know how to do it and do it well. And then there are lots of people who do independent living. That's all. They don't do assisted living. So I feel like realistically I mean an assisted living facility is larger.
There's nowhere where one could go except the LCD. >> No actually no there's >> uh their assisted living there's assisted living in Mthuan that's only nine units and it's very successful. There's one in
Salem in an old mansion with 12 units >> that is assisted living. >> Assistant living. So, it has services. >> It has services. They're not there all the time. They come in, you know, in the mornings and do all the stuff they're going to do probably and maybe have someone there uh
keeping watch or whatever. >> So, I don't I'm not worried about them proliferating wildly, actually. Um I'm also not worried that they're gonna you know sideline become adult
entertainment facilities or whatever you know worry that that kind that you know whatever tragic tragic um thing might befall us. Um my as I think about the zoning, my question is quite simply,
does the special permit process provide the right >> uh oversight? And um the special permit process does allow us to hire a consultant at the applicant's expense to you know we could
hire somebody if we had a a larger size proposal on our doorstep. We don't really know how they're run and what the questions are. We could hire a consultant who would walk us through what particular conditions would make sense for this kind of facility. We do
have a mechanism. That's true. >> You're not entirely relying on your expert >> expertise with the various facilities we've all been involved with. Yes. >> For too long. Um and so the the special permit process does allow us to hire
expertise and it does put guard rails on things and we'll get push back. The other thing is on the flip side of that, the special permit can be appealed if we don't use our criteria in judiciously. Um, and it could be appealed by
neighbors or by an applicant, but that's, you know, something. And um you know unless we feel strongly that it's not shouldn't be allowed in a place or should only be allowed in one place,
I don't know. I don't think it's too scary. >> So Mark and I went back and forth about whether or not it should be allowed everywhere. And I think the compromise we kind of stumbled into was that Mark came up with was different minimum lot
sizes depending on what zone you're in. It also occurred to me as you could put notes into the thing, >> other things to protect zoning districts. Um cuz I couldn't think of a a district where maybe the D district would be
inappropriate, but I think the inappropriateness is lot size, not the zone you're in. >> Do you think town center? >> I think that's a great place for it. Absolutely. >> It's probably the best place for them if
you have the room. So some of the houses for example that are between uh copper shed and the museum as a for instance those >> Santandere bank. >> Santandere bank. Yeah. Or or the gas
station or maybe it's the upper floors in the harbor's edge district. Yeah they do have an elevator. The only thing that I worried about was on was to Sue's point a moment ago which
you uh gave comfort on Chris which is the scale of the thing. And on page three um I think it's 9.5.2D it says for developments exceeding 60
residential units. That's just too big a number. I mean, maybe it's 15, maybe it's 20, something like that. >> There was there was something in the previous version that had So, I just left it there and then fiddled with the
number a little bit and said, "Well, we'll discuss it and see whether people still want it or not." >> Yeah. What do you think is the >> So, what we've said, what we came up with was no more than 10 units an acre. Mhm. >> So with a with some bonuses for
affordability. >> Mhm. >> So 10 year and uh so that means that's going to limit the size of anything. There aren't any 5 acre sites really available. >> Curl island.
>> Well, you're saying 10 units an acre. So someone assembled a a 10 acre parcel, they could have a 100 units. Is that correct? >> Yes. If they assembled to 10 acre >> Yeah.
>> I don't know where that would be. >> Well, the LCD >> the Well, the LCD is owned by only three people anyway, so Yeah. >> Yeah. But the >> Yes, that's right. Gordon College might do it. The Mac could be the
>> Mac could do it. Yeah, absolutely. >> The se the section D sort of gives me curly hair. I mean, it it's um it just talking about something that's a 60 residential size gives a whole different
feel than what you and I saw. And um and the examples you were just giving. >> No, don't get me wrong. There are plenty of 60 unit facilities. >> Yeah. And there are some, you know, there's Brooksby Village, which is I don't remember. >> That's not, in my opinion, that doesn't
fit here, a Brooksby Village >> or or anything close to that size, >> even in the LCD. >> But that's just my opinion. >> People may have a different view. In fact, we had the correspondence from Lorraine
and she wants it everywhere, every size it seemed to me. Um, so clearly that's how I read her >> correspondence. So I mean that is a view and I guess we should know
>> we could certainly ask it at a special forum on it. It should be interesting. >> Yeah. Now, there should be a separate form for senior housing because it's really >> LCD currently allows that bizarre charitable
>> Oh, any any district allows a charitable long-term care facility. Yeah. >> Is that right? >> No, it's like nonprofit. >> Yeah. Do we currently allow charitable or philanthropic use hospital nursing
facility or sanatorium by planning board special permit everywhere except the LCD? >> Oh my god about nonsense. >> We also strike that. >> Yeah. Um
>> yes as part of the senior office >> there's so many >> it's a community facilities number six >> so I think one of the rationale for this is we have this concepts
>> right >> um and so same as the downtown >> I almost feel like by Maybe the simplest way to do this is just put this word very factly without huge force and just say
we're fixing this. >> You mean you're you >> just say we're getting rid of charitable or philanthropic use hospital nursing care facilities and sanitariums. Yeah, it doesn't make any sense >> everywhere. And we're simply define and
we're fixing our S senior housing definitions. We're allowing them throughout by special permit and we've identified some specific um it seems like you were just saying
that everything has to be we've increased the setbacks and we've limited their size. That's a that's a big one to limit the size to no more than two bedrooms per living unit. >> Well, actually it would change a little
bit. It says that no more than 20% can be three bedrooms or more. >> So >> just to give it more >> for every 10 created one unit maybe three bedrooms or you change that a little bit to be 20%
>> but nonetheless whether what the details are. I like the fact that we've created scale. >> Yeah. Um, and at least one bedroom and bathroom are located on the same floor. >> I mean, it's sort of silly to say, but
>> this is you have to climb a ladder to get to the bathroom. They're all loft units. >> This modern, you know, >> oh my god, >> have stories. We used to stay in a skiing place that
had a a pole that the kids could sit down like a firefall so you could work your way up like a monkey. >> No, we don't want that. >> And there's a density bonus. >> So Sarah, are are you guys thinking about you want to do this also at
Springtown meeting? >> When are we going to do it if we don't spring? It's been it's been on the docket to do about five times maybe. >> Chris, I'm trying to think of having spent so much time with you talking
about this. I'm trying to think of somebody coming in here wanting to actually develop one of these even a smaller facility. What's what's the inducement for them to do it? What what is the zoning? >> They can't do they can't do it now.
>> They can't do it now. So, we're saying it's, >> you know, and every other town and city around here allows them in some form or other. >> Yeah. At this density, this is huge. If you're a private developer wanting to build housing, you're a housing
developer and you want to Yeah, sure. The units have to be smaller, but you can get what uh 10 an acre instead of one or two one an accessory. So, um, this for regular senior housing,
I think we would see some movement on this. If we can discuss the affordability, I think you're this might be a little too restrictive, but um, but I think you would get a lot
of interest from developers being able because I think they would find it financially feasible. >> You know, think about it. you can, you know, you have a lot of, you don't have a lot of options here on the Northshore if you want to
>> downsize from that, you know, nice three, four bedroomedroom house with a few bathrooms and but you want to stay here or even if it's you're in Essex or, you know, right around here and you can beautiful place that's new in Manchester,
you know, they pay if you conded it. Um, considerable amount of money, but it'll be a lot less than if they have to buy something in a nonrestricted, you know, place somewhere else. So,
>> we talked about a local um >> preference. >> Preference. >> Yeah. >> Um can you build it into this? Yeah, I think we still have it in. >> I think we should have my one thing that
>> um because uh we if we build it I think we will see a market from the outside. I don't know how you do that. >> So the other thing is affordability.
So Mark and I went around and around them. >> Uh so I would argue that if you you want to have a 10% affordability inclusionary zoning essentially you're making all the other seniors pay for it
>> which seems to be a little unfair but I understand that it's an issue. So I would rather see a bonus rather than a inclusion. So there's a compromise which says for every 10 units one has to be affordable.
>> Oh, they did read that. >> But if you want to have you can have two more if those are affordable also. So that would mean a 10 unit uh project could have three affordable units actually become 12 units.
>> Yeah. I'm I'm very confused with works. I read that and I'm like, "Yeah, no one's going to do that because they're going to lose money on those addition. Why build the extra two when I can build 10 and only provide
one affordably?" So, no one's going to um >> Well, you're not giving away the two. >> Yeah, but still that it's probably going to cost them more to build it than they're going to sell them for or rent them for. >> I don't think so, but maybe.
So for example um I think um um we might see de somebody proposing something shot
and uh they're only going to do four units although they could do more. So um because of that extra that affordable so >> are you saying
>> wait are you saying that there is such an instance that has occurred Mark sure >> no nothing just no but um it might happen >> so are there examples where
an affordability provision has worked. >> Oh, sure. >> Around here. >> I don't I don't know about around here. >> Yeah. All street the the Oh, yeah. >> Saw circle. >> Yeah, there were two came out of that. >> I'm wondering about in a senior
community. >> We've never done a senior community. >> No, I know. Other >> like nearby. Do you know if >> Yeah. So what I had done was I had said for every five units you have to create
an an additional unit but you get a bonus unit for every five non bonus. So so if you do five you get a bonus unit so you get six. You can build six but one of the six has to be affordable. You
do 10 you get another bonus unit. You have to provide two affordable, but now you get 12. >> That's the same thing. That's what I'm saying. >> Yeah. >> Okay. That's what >> Well, yours was seemed a little different here. >> Well, so I was So I said you also have
to have 10% one of them has to be affordable anyway. >> Oh, okay. >> So it's a little bit of inclusion, a little bit of bonus, >> but I'll be happy to give away the >> Okay. Yeah, I think the the way it was
written, it just seemed that >> was it was very >> you get the bonus units if you provide the extra two as opposed to >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's very conf >> Yeah, >> it it is simpler. I think the rate just
sat because I was very confused about whether um if you develop 10 units, do you must you are you required to develop are you required to have two of those units
be affordable >> or no? Okay. You just get to build two more units and those are and those are affordable. So, somebody asked um about town meeting in April
and um I think we should my opinion is that we should move ahead to talk about this and to um that it may whether there's a space in the
meeting for two fairly large articles. I don't know. We'll have to I think we'll have to kind of see >> and because the select board does determine whether things go on the warrant or not. >> Well, if it's not in the spring, it
would be good to have an understanding it would be a November and the FMX coming. >> So, I don't know, you know, how we're gonna >> Well, let's see if we can get this thing cranked out first. >> Get this cranked out first. So the other
thing occurred to me on downtown and this and is that we haven't yet sent them to town council >> or the building inspector. >> No, you sent it to him. Have you gotten any comments? Um, so I think we should resend it both
of and I would say let's get this in draft and let's send it to it's a little bit backwards from what we have but sometimes we get town council too late and let's get their review on this. Um,
>> they did review a a previous one to venue. >> I know, but you know, >> yeah, I I would first of all, I think we need to send a downtown one to town council so that we don't end up in March and saying, >> right, >> the other thing is because we've been
working on it for a while. >> Yeah. >> And people know that we have been, we might get questions saying, hey, is town council waiting? this piece legal or someone might question something which I know it'll all clear but you know
>> but I think um certainly the downtown should go can you you know and we have a um they can weigh in on anything before the forum that would be great >> um but uh and then maybe what we do is
take uh a little bit I mean I don't know if this one's ready to go to town council for a review as well. >> So, this one is um mostly
where uh condensed version of what was previously sent to council with some uh other additions from some of the bylaws >> and rewarding a few things. So, um, so
it should be a pretty easy review by them. Probably not going to be >> Well, we should probably dig out what they told us before. >> Oh, it's it's the first I It's um Yeah, >> I think we only asked them about
definitions, but maybe Robin did. >> Yeah. No, I'm pretty sure the version I have is >> she reviewed. >> Yeah, it's their reviewed version. >> Okay. Yeah, I think so, too. >> Okay, >> we can check. Let's let's find it.
>> Yeah. Well, the one I have that I worked off of as a you know, >> uh file how they save files. >> Yeah, >> that's that's the one I took and worked off.
>> But she had a bunch of questions and things. Um the other uh piece is that you have that the special permit procedure shall be by 12.5. Do we need to say the special
permit criteria are section whatever it is 6.2? >> No. Okay. >> Yeah. Because in 12 Yeah. Um, >> so then then maybe what we need to do is
hold in January sort of a meeting to find out what the public thinks about this. >> Yeah. >> The the on the senior housing. Yeah. Yeah. >> And see if we're ready. I'm not. >> Yep. But um
I mean we're going to move it ahead whether it's in April or in November. Let's have a public meeting. Let's So Mark, I think you and I need to sit down and map out our next few meetings getting ourselves to March 1st because these
>> It's only five meetings between now and then. >> It'll happen fast. >> Something like that. Yeah, it'll happen fast. >> Okay. And you'll send the downtown one to the town council. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Okay. Great. Um, okay. Uh, we will I'm going to ask
everybody to now really dig into this. We'll add line numbers and let's have a thorough review of this at our next meeting. >> Okay. See, >> the only question I have is do you want to include assisted living in this or
>> or not? Because if you do, I would add back a lot of things I took out of here. Um, So >> such as >> I I don't remember there was a bunch of
other protections and things in the assisted living version and that included assisted living that I didn't think was and if this is just straight senior housing there's a a lot of other just straight senior housing 55 and older. There's a
lot of a bunch of redundant things that aren't really necessary because if you're reviewing it under a special permit, you don't need to um go on about uh review of access and
circulation that's already in your design standards, landscaping. A lot of these things I would pair down and and remove >> um just because it's redundant and if you're trying to have another article
besides our big article having you know another six page document is kind of that which is unnecessary. >> But we're saying that senior housing includes assisted living. >> Well that's the question
>> under the current proposal. I think I read it that senior housing includes assisted living. >> Well, I I Well, that's why I had two definitions. Chris is blind. If you want to have it in there, I'm going to have to work on this a little
bit more. >> And the the things that you took out were on like just more specificity about >> more specificity and more prescriptive requirements and it was things that was in our in the bylaw that you had from
before. So, >> okay. >> So, it may not be that um Let's talk about tomorrow. >> Yeah. Okay. Can you >> Yeah. Sorry. I >> I have a question about because the Chris's definition also includes care
facility which is more like a nursing care facility. >> Yeah. Which is more like a nursing home. >> Well, no. Continuing care is combination of independent >> because of Oh, I see. >> That's independent living and then you go to I see. Got you. You the progression.
>> Yeah. You moved down. you moved up which is up up in terms of the level of care required. Okay. >> So that's a lot more than we need to know. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Um okay.
>> I think to me the big question is does the special permit give us the categories the the ultra site that we want? And I think it does
I think I feel actually as a general comment >> that um we see things my concern about special permits in general is we see them too late. So someone has to come.
So this is maybe a for a future. Somebody has to come to us with a pretty well-baked plan and then to get a well-baked plan you actually have to spend a fair amount of money and people get committed >> and then they get committed to it.
So is there a way maybe for senior housing the people could you know come to us for a with a concept plan in a discussion >> actually that is in a number of there
you say that applicants are encouraged to make a preliminary proposal >> they don't >> well that you can't >> I can write it into I mean it is written into areas of the specialized bylaws But in this case,
>> yes, I feel that type thing. >> Sure. >> What do you flesh that out a little bit? You're talking about have them come see us before they draw anything the idea in their head. >> I can come in and they say, "I want to put in, you know, 60 units.
>> The best thing ever if they could figure out how to, you know, >> Yeah. That's not the wheel. There's language to do. >> Yeah. And I just that's where my concern, my question was, does the special permit give us the tools?
>> And you know, I keep going back to the house on top of the cliff, >> right? Um they were they were so far along on that idea >> that we could have said no but you know it's one house lot and you know it's
just sort of um and if he come to us long before I but maybe we wouldn't have it also means we have to take that step really seriously >> um and you don't have the benefit necessarily of public input Um, but they
you have to do it then before the person purchases the property. I mean, once the person owns the property, you know, >> that's a little bit higher everywhere, but yeah. >> Why do why couldn't why could if I had a
concept I want to come to Manchester, I hear you have a zoning law that now allows senior housing in here. I want to just touch base with you to see if it's see what the viability of that, what the challenges are. Why wouldn't we invite that? That would be great. Yeah. As a m
as a matter of fact, for all developers I've ever worked for, I've often said just unfortunately, let's go visit the planning board. Let's go visit the town planner. Let's just talk about what we're intending to do. Even though the it's a private developer and they had it wasn't this,
>> it was a private developer had they had something in mind and they just wanted to bounce the idea. >> We always thought that was a great idea. Then you get a sense of whether it's worth it or not to even go in that town. >> Can you procedurally require it? I mean,
can you make the special permit process include a preliminary review? >> Special permit is a >> it wouldn't be uh sit down. But my thought Yeah. >> sit down and talk about what my my thought is my concept about putting
senior housing in management. >> Yeah. So >> the concept for >> I assume they looked at real estate agents and the brokers would have showed them properties availability kind of juices them up then maybe they want to take that next step.
>> So an example is the I mean >> the ADU that came before the ZBA >> it's not allowed in that district >> at the size that they proposed.
It would be allowed if it was small. Correct. >> It would be allowed if it was small, but now they've already designed it >> and they've come to the ZBA and they've started their hearing process. So to redesign it, if they wanted to make it
in the 900 square foot, there's a fair amount of, you know, and they're kind of wed to the idea. And they may be it may be very good reasons. They could connect it to their house and make it a two two a duplex is allowed in the district. So they can do that, >> right? They could have done that. But it
sounds like if they had just maybe they came and asked you or talked to the building inspector something before >> I believe they >> they did. Yes. Yes. >> They may have talked to somebody along. They had talked to people before they submitted that plan
>> and they knew it wasn't allowed in the district at West. >> They filed actually filed for the variance, >> right? The use it was a use variance. >> Yes. And knowing that used variances typically are not allowed. >> But but we see that times. We you
certainly >> you see that from time to time, but the zoning board has not approved them in the past. >> Yeah. So, for example, >> and they're not going to approve this one. >> No. >> Oh, that's
not >> um Okay, let's come back to senior housing, but um next steps. I hate to ask Chris and Mark to go hammer this out some more, but you're going to hammer it out some more. We are going to all
>> I'm reading everything >> come back and read this with a fine tooth comb >> and we will put line numbers on it. >> Line numbers. >> Okay. You guys are going to have a long meeting tomorrow. All right. >> But thank you for moving that along.
Um I have one more zoning. Oh no, that's the next I'm going to jump to zoning about the large ADUs. >> Yes. >> In uh D1 D2. Um, so Sarah asked asked she I I met with her and uh she was
going to send us an email. She sort of sent me an email um that said she thinks we should have large ADUs in district D1 and D2 and that we should put forward something at town meeting. She would like us to >> I wouldn't be opposed.
>> So why did we not include it in D1 and D2? because because we thought two families were already sufficient because two families are already allowed and um >> well but you'd want to allow it only in single family homes right because you
don't want a two family >> yeah the problem is if you build your 1200 square foot ADU >> right >> and single families are allowed in the district so you have a two family
with an ADU or a single family with an ADU. >> Yeah, >> you are still a large ADU. You are still allowed a standard. >> Okay. >> So, >> so if you have a duplex, you can put an ADU there. >> You can put the 900
>> 900. So, we're talking about >> a three family, >> but you can do that. So, what we're talking about is allowing a slightly bigger one with the special permit, right? Um, >> we're talking about an extra 300 square
feet or something. >> Okay. >> And you still have to meet all the setback and lot coverage and all that stuff. >> Okay. Well, I think part of why we didn't do it, why we excluded them in this area is because we were on the
heels of MBTA zoning and there was so much concern about density and what would be built and parts of D1 are in a chad and um I think that was part of it
just Yeah. >> Not wanting to appear like we want more density, more density, more density. And that was a way we could comply with the ADU law,
but offer something for the areas where we have acre zoning or two acre zoning. And um that would be a sensible thing. I think that was part of the rationale. Yeah. So we have a use case now which is
sort of the first use case and um a use case a use case of one is not how we should develop policy. >> Right. Right. Um um and my concern is to
sort of around density is um this is a very exactly what we what we say we want to see which is the kids are taking over the home and the parents are moving into the ADU >> but uh you know parents don't live
forever and then that use eventually uh changes and I'm not sure it matters but I don't think we should So thus I don't think that we should use the it's what we want as the rationale. It's basically
two families living together you know they happen to be related in this case but eventually >> um things will change they'll sell the property whatever will happen you know and it will be two which is >> which is fine. Yeah. And which which is fine, which is sort of consistent to how
some of the denser parts of town got developed. You know, the parents brought a house and then they built something for the kids. >> That's old enough now. >> But my point is just because it's the use case we want to see >> to me doesn't justify
that's not the justification. We can't say it's not always going to be that. So that's to me that's not that's not relevant. I'd like to build an ADU for rent. >> I'm still incredibly confused about how the whole ADU thing works. So, if you
don't mind helping me, I would really appreciate it. So, okay. So, let's say it's a single family home. They have the right, no asking anybody about anything, to put on a 900 small ID.
>> They have the right with a special permit. So the right is, you know, shaped by by the planning board to put on a large ADU. >> But ZBA, >> but okay. And but that's all they can't
put a small ADU on the big ADU, right? So they're only and they can't put both a small ADU and a large ADU on one single family home. Is that correct? >> That's not clear. That's not clear. >> Oh, we got to get that clear.
>> The law is not clear. The law is not clear. >> Nothing to do with us. >> You can put a We believe that you can put the standard small on a property where you already have the large, but our rad say you can't put the large if you already have the small.
>> Oh jeez. >> Uh, okay. >> I know. Oh my gosh. >> Okay. any okay so let let me proceed so we've hit one little pocket of ambiguity there so okay so the so worst case what
could happen is a single family would become a three family which is kind of allowed in the district already correct >> no >> yeah okay so if you've got a two family then what can each of those units have
an ADU so a two family becomes a >> limits ADUs Under the state law, if they're standard ADU thing, 900 ft. >> 900 ft. >> The only limit we can reasonably put on them them is lot coverage and setbacks.
>> Oh wow. >> And that's a state law. >> But an ADU is by its definition something that's attached to a unit. Not attached accessory to >> accessory too. Okay. But there's only
one per unit >> that exists on the property. Is that correct? >> No, not under the state law. >> Oh, >> the state law says you can place an ADU on a property that is zoned for a single
fit that allows single family. >> Even if it's two family, >> so I could put three ADUs on my property. He had >> no cuz you have a No, it's accessory to your dwelling, >> right? >> There's no but there's no limit to the
number you could build theoretically. >> There's nothing confusing. >> I'm not sure that's right. >> I haven't looked at this in a while, but >> I'm in need of help. the number of of
protected ADUs or what we call standard. There's nothing that limits that number >> on a lot. >> It doesn't say you're restricted to one ad. >> Doesn't say you're restricted to one. And so right now I don't believe there's any.
>> Is it allowed there'll be a case? >> Is it allowed to say that you that there's one ADU per existing unit? You're allowed to say that for the large ones, but not for the the protected use
ones. >> So, technically, if I had the right size lot and coverage and all of that, I could put three ADUs on my property if I wanted to. >> That's what's unclear with this with the way the law doesn't sound right. >> That doesn't sound right. No, I think
what what is I think that's I think you can only one per >> existing unit residency. So you might if you have a duplex be able to put one certainly if you I think if you have a duplex you can put one standard and if you have a four unit for whatever reason
it's grandfathered you can put one standard if single family is allowed in the district but if you have a single family home you can put your large ADU and then subsequently put the small one
you can't reverse because our large ADU bylaw says only one per unit per lot. M >> so if you order them right the I think uh if you're talking about densities bad which you know if you have a lot of the
sort of they um that's the we we made comments on that >> because the law was >> and they did not address it >> and so the question about whether >> that some of that is a little bit unclear in the state
>> yeah I did not understand really what you said about if it's two family. So, how >> how many ADUs can I have if it's a two? If I'm a two family, >> same number as if you had one >> at least one. No, one but not you can't
have the large one in our bylaw. >> No, we're just talking about standard, >> right? Okay. But you can only have one standard. >> I'm getting two different answers here. >> I don't think there's anything in the state law that limits the number of >> on a particular property. The law does
not say you can only build the ones. >> Wow. That kind of goes against the whole notion of what an ADU is, >> right? >> That's the problem with the state law, the way it was. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So, because So, in terms of going back to Sarah's request
that we change the bylaw at this point, it's my opinion that we need a little more time to pass >> and absolutely a couple. We need um the the courts to figure out a few of these
things probably about um how they actually shake out or get some clarity on from the the AG or um our council on how these things shake out. Um
the other piece that's open to the so the the applicant in this case has a number of options. They can wait until we change the bylaw. They can build a 900 square foot. They can build a duplex. So, they can connect the two
buildings somehow with a breezeway or something. Um, or they could make it adjacent to their building. >> Could they get a variance to have their duplex on two buildings? >> They could get a variance to potentially
have it in two buildings. To me, I'd rather change the two building thing than rather than change the ADU thing because we because we enter to be in two separate buildings. >> Yeah. >> But it's still a it's still an ADU
that's upgraded 900 ft. >> Well, it also creates a kind of a loophole on that it's no longer an accessory. >> You know, >> well, but in the D1, you can build a duplex. even right. >> So
>> I think another specific fact of this case was their lot is large which is not the case in most of D1 and D2. They have a large lot so
they have room to do the larger ADU. Um, I mean just lots of factors unfortunately at play in the first one that comes up. >> And it would be illegal to say to put a condition that says if you do this large
the condition of doing the large ADU is that you can do no more ADU. >> That would be illegal. >> We have that would be illegal. >> That's right. >> Yep. O. So, um >> I I like your last solution the best,
Sarah. >> Just wait a little bit and see. Oh, >> no. If you're going to change the bylaw, change it to make the >> duplex have two >> two be attached, right? >> Yeah. Not be attached. >> So, that be by right or by special
purpose. special per I don't know where is that in this um >> yeah yeah there you go >> so right now in district one conversion of a one family dwelling into a two family dwelling is uh with the ZBA and
it has no three or >> something dumb >> oh it's that god off the top all right first of all D2 the conversion of single family resident a lot as of however conversion of a two
you can't increase this height volume or structure including construction >> that's ridiculous >> well it actually says D2 and we're talking about D1 so >> yeah D1 is a little more liberal um than D2
So >> I mean if you know how to read this in terms of where it says it has to be connect the single single building >> I think it's it actually is that you're only allowed one >> one building on a lot in the hometown
sensory structures. >> Okay. Well, um that would make sense. >> Yeah. When you think about >> all these cases of dividing properties. Yeah. >> Right. >> Um All right. Let me if we are in agreement to sort of at least go back
and talk with Sarah and say here's what we talked about. We're concerned about this. If she wants to make a >> proposal, specific proposals, we can do that. Okay. Um sorry, I jumped ahead in the agenda. Um all right. Um Mark, can
you tell us about the onetop grant and the brick side program, please? >> Okay. a one-stop grant we received um uh to put together two things. One is to
do a planning study for the general zoning district uh of which we have um the downtown is a portion of but we continue to move forward after because
we um had written into the grant that we were doing visioning for the downtown and we continue to move forward which is fine but the general district is a huge area. So, we'll still do the uh the
zoning for the rest of the general district, but it also included um putting together a um a streetscape plan for downtown and trying to bring that plan to as close to 25% drawings is
what I've u been told or a portion of it. We're not going to be able to do the entire downtown, but a portion of phase 2 to 25% drawing so we can apply for a grant for construction funding. >> In order to apply for Mass Works
funding, you really need to have a plan at that level or pretty pretty darn close in order to get that funding. So um so the DIP had worked on a concept plan. So what we would do is kind of
build off of that. We you know maybe have uh another uh engineering firm look at it within you know fresh look at and say well these are some really good things out of
this plan. These are a few additional things you may want to consider. Upgrade the pallet of of uh materials and so on and so forth and and um submit that and
and and put bring that to 25% for a portion of the downtown including s they have to do survey work and stuff for the downtown area. they they pretty much they don't have to survey the entire thing because that would use up most of
the funds, but um ideally the the second section of the downtown. Um and so that's that's where we're at with that. The contract will be signed sometime in
December, which will give us like a we can proceed in January. We have an 18 months to complete the project um until the end of June the following year.
So that gives us um >> not to complete the whole project >> complete the study and the the not the construction because we don't have construction fund but complete the uh
drawings for the for the streetscape portion and the planning for the general district. So um and so we have 18 months to complete that grant. Um
so uh we uh applied for I think 135,000 in the planning board. You had committed 15,000 out of this year's budget is the match. So they funded us at 110. So in total we have about
um 25 yes 125 toward the project. So Should we talk about ski concerned? >> Yes. Well, that'll be all part of it. So, we wrote into that um as we work
through the streetscape portion, we would um involve the downtown improvement committee in the design process for uh the streetscape of downtown. So, >> makes sense. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, it's it's right in what
I wrote. So, um, I didn't I did not exclude them from this and say we the planning board had some we had some discussions about this before we even submitted the grant because you had to vote to appropriate the uh the $15,000.
So, um, or to commit the $15,000. Sorry. >> Can I add a little color commentary to >> Yes, you may. So I'm I'm part of the DIP committee, too. And Mark was on the phone. He expressed all this. He and
Steve Carart has spoken just before the meeting, a day before the meeting. And since Steve called me after the meeting and said in so many words, what's going on? It feels like we're being taken out of the equation and we're not really a part of this anymore. So he was a bit he was a
bit hurt. I I did tell him that tried to assuage his concerns by saying that's not the case that I know that what Mark intent is to have another designer look at the downtown and not provide ba basically what uh BHB provided the
engineer provided was basically an engineering solution to sidewalks and curves without an aesthetic or a feel or a look or a touch that that it needs. So I I tend to agree with Mark in that case, but he wants to be part of it. He
wants the downtown improvement to be part of it. I will say the dynamic within the downtown improvement committee is Steve is really the the motivation. Gar is on that as is Susan Crosby and others. They're very
interested, but they're not so much into the detail the design is. It's more Steve and he wants to feel that he is part of it. So, I believe we're going to have a little get together with you and me and Steve probably early next week
sometime to just just kind of lay out what had been done so far, show what is beneficial to be reused again and then to now bridge on to what was was I think realistically is the next best step is to have a real designer take a look at
this whole thing from beginning to end. So, can I ask an organizational question about this? >> So, the contracts with the town of Manchester, I assume. >> Yeah. >> And so, Tony >> contract this one. >> Yeah. >> The mass works. >> And so, Tony Barleta is really the final
say on any decisions because he's a town for the select board. >> Yes. All of the above. >> All the above. So in in terms of daytoday >> uh supervision that's you. >> Yes.
>> In terms of day-to-day oversight that's >> us. Yes. Yes. Well I wrote it as as so this is a planning study. So, it is the planning board who is going to be doing the planning study with a consultant
just like we >> we did with Kathy McCabe for the downtown or we did with Emily for the uh MBTA. So, we'll we'll put that out there um for response. And then the the
question would be do I and a lot of times you include these planning studies you include the engineering component as part of it but whereas we're already pulled out the downtown we might do it separately you know we'll have to look
at it but a lot of times you put out one RFP for a team that includes an engineer surveyor design landscape architect who is the designer and the planner who works on the zoning. So those three
those that team is what usually works with the planning board when they're doing uh something like this. So >> So we're fortunate to have Gordon because he can >> he can do everything. >> He can do it all. That's right.
>> Talk about that next. >> He feels he feels like it's being taken away from him. Stephen had planned on doing a small section of downtown like from Elm Street to School Street, a tiny little portion before the Culver goes in and that that sort of design, but now he
feels like it's with Mark's proposal is being moved away from them. We're we're kind of not using the VHB design documentation done to date and and uh he was actually planning to figure out how to finance this too. all the time. He planned on doing the whole thing, but
now it's a different approach. Personally, one that I would agree is a better approach because I think we get done. And I and if I can say that out loud, if they're not here right now, I don't think that we should have public works department the effort because then
it turns into a really engineering design. >> What happened before is that we were we on the downtown improvement was kind of removed from it. We we our interface was with public works. >> They went to the consultants. We had to
go to them to get them to come see us and it wasn't the best. In this particular case, it sounds like the designer would be work more directly for the town for us. We have a more straightforward approach. >> But is there not a way to have us
include the dip? >> Um, yes. I simply hope we do. >> Yes. I think I think be part of the outcome of the meeting maybe is to figure out how exactly that works. >> And that's what I told Steve too. I think the intent is let's let's figure
out how we can get this done here. If it turns out to be smoother approach, more easy and frankly maybe get something done rather than spending years and years talking about it, >> then he would agree with this approach as well. >> Mark, you report to I mean you go to
their meetings. You don't go to their meetings. >> I attend their meetings. >> Yeah, he's there. But I I report to the town ministry. >> Right. >> No, but you have mentioned the study. >> Yes. >> Oh, I've mentioned the study last Wednesday.
>> I've mentioned this a a lot within even even a year ago or something, you know, when we were putting this together. So, um I think it's it's just that Steve is very ready to
what they did. He feels because he was the like the primary person very invested in what came out and what came out is just a concept plan. It is not it is based on the GIS,
you know, info information. There's no real survey. There's no prospect. There's no >> um and the pallet, which is what you call like the benches and the lights and everything. Um, and the type of
materials you use is very basic, straightforward engineering stuff that the VHB just kind of pulled out. >> Um, >> very engineery. >> Yeah. And so these are all the things that you want to look at in detail um in
in greater detail to really create a a sense of place for your downtown is what we're trying to do is, you know, the zoning is one piece of what we're trying to do. the the streetscapes. Another piece. Improvements to public properties
is a third piece. Marketing and trying to get people to see what's here and find out what's here, you know, is another thing. You know, we we did create a on our web page now, we have a visitors line on the head, one of the head on the main heading, you know, and
we can build that out because we don't have a local, you know, Manchester Chamber of Commerce. So, you know, it's kind of falls on >> economic development committee. >> No economic development committee, you know. Um, so it kind of falls on us to
build that out, you know. So, so all of these things, you know, people say they want a vibrant downtown and want businesses to survive. Well, you need to do all of these things. There's no one silver bullet that's going to bring
enough people or, you know, uh to to keep all the storefronts filled. So, >> so we we're working on the downtown zoning. >> Is there more zoning that you're considering? What?
>> Yes, the rest of the general district. So, we're going to be okay >> doing this. >> Finish your question. S >> we're going to be considering additional changes to the zoning bylaw relating to downtown. >> Probably not relating to downtown, but
relating to the rest of the general, remember the downtown, Gordon has this up, the downtown's only 20% of the general district. >> True. So the general district includes large areas of area that are places that
are residential right now >> as down summer street to Lincoln Street. >> You know, you may want to you may want to incorporate some of those residential are properties into the D district or whatever it is that abutts there because
it's also mostly fairly small lot housing. But you may want to keep, you know, a general district, you know, along the summer street because it's a main road. You have a mix of of commercial properties, so you may want
to keep a general district. Um, and uh but you may want to fold in some of the residential areas into some other residential zoning districts. Um, you may want to keep a a general district
for like the boatyards and where they store properties there as well. So, you don't you don't want to completely eliminate it, but you may want to adjust the local. Okay.
>> So, clearly if there we're looking at zoning, planning board has to be involved. Um, I can totally understand that that someone who has worked very hard on the downtown uh look and feel
might feel a little um >> I think we I think we could make it work though if we engage Steve in this process here. >> So, feels like he he's doing something. >> So, I think you guys should meet with Steve. I also um talked to Annne Harrison because I think the select
board has some sort of uh interest in the look and feel of downtown which brings us to Brick Sidewalk as our next discussion item. So, I'm gonna propose that we actually have a meeting that's Tony
and me, Steve, maybe Gordon, and Mark um to to sort out like whose responsibility >> for what what the roles are. And probably it's going to be a subgroup with a person from each or
>> to to lead at least this this um street skate effort. >> Like the facilities commission. >> Yeah. street no street skate pass for it
>> and I do think that there is probably a wider variety of opinions about uh streetscape than oh man >> they might anticipate or want. Um
>> just the downtown improvement committee alone has tremendous some focus on parking some focus on bumpouts of other than on the street traffic wise other it's pretty amazing and that's just that little group >> so a somebody like a Kathy might be very
helpful at helping us to articulate goals and then you can implement the goals rather than uh you knowation and saying well what are we trying to achieve here? >> She's been very good with with Steve and
recrafting the mission for what the downtown was about. So, she would >> um so I think that I'd like to broaden the effort at least as a to try to figure this out because I think it's >> we'll be more successful if everyone is
pulling in the same direction. >> That's a good idea, Sarah. >> Yeah. So, um, but back to downtown zoning, one of the things that occurred to me is if there is a design standard for sidewalks in front of your
redeveloped Santan Bank. Um, is there a way that zoning can say if you touch the sidewalk, here's how you have to that, you know, here's the spec.
You have to once we have that spec, here's how you have to put it back. >> Yeah. Sure. Why Why can't we >> No, you can't put that in zoning. >> You can't really put that in zoning. What you can do is make that a condition of plan review and make every do it, you
know, because usually they always want um some sort of, you know, accommodation for something that's um or a variance. So they want need
something waiver, some strict standards. So >> Right. >> Yeah. So, so those are those are often times uh where you can get off-site improvements and >> but if let's just say cargo is going to
you know I don't even know how they're going to construct that building in their limited >> you know but there are lots of ways to do things like that >> um they're going to disrupt that sidewalk >> so who puts it back and with what material how do we specify how does how
does that how where do we put that. So I think where is it? >> That is on on public works. Once the standard is adopted for downtown sidewalks, then it's on public works is okay. You're you know going to destroy
this during construction. That's fine. >> When you're done, you have to put it back to this standard. >> Maybe it goes. >> So this is Yeah. >> Yeah. That seems to make sense that sidewalk
construction should be in general. doesn't it? I don't know you know whether they have cons I don't know whether they have structures specify >> I think they just materials or anything else in
>> in any of the bylaws would be actually specification of the design materials the section granite curb the brick surface whatever they have their own construction standards that they've adopted that if someone is let's say
you're the develop veloping a property and so you have to you're moving the driveway. So you're going to reset the granite curving and you're going to slope the driveway in and you have to reconstruct the sidewalk in front. >> Let's say it's not the just somewhere randomly in the town. They probably have
adopted construction standards you have to follow for the trans curbing, how it gets set, the base of the sidewalk, how thick of the substrate, how you compact it, you know, all of the standards what you put down for material. So
subsequently if to select if we u adopt you know have further discussions with them about adopting a standard for the downtown area but then they could require that. >> Yeah. So I'm just looking at the general
bylaws. I'm looking to see if you have to inspect a sidewalk just for a little levity. No person shall suffer any horse or grazing beast or swine to run at large in the town or feed within limits of any sidewalk, street or open space.
>> Oh, just in case you were wondering. >> Oh, it makes the zoning by feel very modern. >> Oh, absolutely. >> Anyway, approach though about the sidewalks itself and the selection of brick and where it's run. I know there's a little
now. >> Yeah. So that >> we could talk about swine. >> There is a bunch of stuff about you can't open the sidewalk and there's some
>> can't dig up any part of a sidewalk or open any public use removing any gravel. Therefore, um without permission of select board members, um you can't dig or break any part of the sidewalk
in case you have to repair and make it the same as it was before. >> So, that's general bylaw. >> That's a general bylaw. So, it sounds like we're kind of >> Okay, good. All right. >> Okay. So the next step on this is you guys are going to talk to Steve, but
then I I'll pull together a meeting to sort of talk about the larger issue of how we're going to oversee this >> to get the best value for the >> Yeah. >> So okay, >> that's all feed works. >> Right. Right. Okay. Talk about uh the
brick sidewalk. So, the brick sidewalk um well, it's it's first off, it's something that typically communities do if they're trying to like create a sense of place. They use some sort of brick um
sidewalk in their downtown area. Also, in historic districts, they do the same thing. Here we have our downtown is a historic district, so we kind of have to lane. So, um, we also have a property owner who's super excited about
replacing his sidewalks in front of his properties, multiples, with brick. Um, he has brought that issue forward before. I don't think it really went anywhere. Again, I haven't gone to the select words, so I don't know whether
it's going to uh u move forward with them either, but um I have talked to a few of them who who are open to the idea. Um, so I I researched uh and several of the communities have a
voluntary brick sidewalk program whereby if you own a property and you want to replace your sidewalk in front of your house or um or your business, you can do so. You let's uh submit a request. You
hire your contractor, work out the schedule with public works, and you go ahead and do it. and you have to install a certain brick um uh particular thing and construct it to a certain standard.
So I've drafted a uh voluntary sidewalk program whereby um kind of matching similar um bylaws or or programs in other communities.
uh basically saying that the historic district, the National Register District, and then two areas of our downtown um are areas that would be um allowed to
to uh for property owners to do so. And uh public works has reviewed and selected um certain design criteria for installing the uh the brick. Um
and so today actually I was down at a I went to a supply house that um huge yard full of pallets of bricks and they supply actually many other communities
with uh burial. So uh I brought back a whole bunch of samples, sample boards and some bricks as well. Um, so that's where we're at. Um, I talked to
the bike and pedestrian committee. Favor of this. The story commission is in favor of this. Don't know whether I talked to the chip about it yet or not, but here we are.
So how does this interface with the engineering plans? >> So what this would so these would be bricks they would be able to be removed and if we have to move a curb out they
would remove the bricks and you know reset the curb and then put back the new underllayment one way or another. But most of the sidewalk would already be completed. So it would be kind of a head start on some
of this stuff. So that's the way >> I know for a fact that part of the part of the phase two downtown improvement program that was done years ago here the uh the curb line going through town the main the main road town
>> by the library for example >> would be altered would be because we've got a variety of streets was this wide and this wide taking turns is tough so the curb line would be adjusted >> no matter where we did it so that would whatever we do >> that on a state road >> huh We can do that on a state road.
>> Uh don't know. Don't know. However, that's the the downtown because we had some places we have wide sidewalks, other place we have no sidewalks. >> That would be the thinking there. So what >> if I may Mark just being the idea of
doing this, we would have to do this. I would hope that we would do it as a continuous all the way through the town and not just have it done portion and then whatever and then another portion or whatever. That would look worse. We're
only really talking about one major road that you would be done the downtown area. Are you thinking about individuals can come up and do this? >> Yes. >> So, so this will be a couple years before we get construction money. if we
get construction money with our first application. So, um in the interim, if somebody wants to put this down in the springtime, you know, you would have um bunch of properties already with brick sidewalks
in this area. You'd be kind of moving kind of in that direction. But what if brick is not the design >> uh yeah >> that we want that we that the process comes up with
>> you know that the streetscape is is >> that's what I'm worried about >> it is not going to be brick. So now we have this again a hodge podge >> it's brick but it's a different kind of brick. Well, this is what we go to the select board now with and get them to
select a a brick that we would use. We would use for, you know, moving forward in this plan as well. >> So, what criteria would the select board use in selecting? >> I mean, you're going to have a designer who's going to take >> it would have to be based on this design
consultant we hire. We come up with a what we think. >> Well, if that were the case, I feel better about it. Sounds like >> the type of brick you pick is really aesthetic. It it's it's nothing else because all the the the clay bricks, not
all, but the ones that they're get are the wire cut bricks and their their clean edge and and uh you know, they it's it's it's all aesthetics. Do you want something that's very traditional, historic looking like
red? You want something that's mix? How do you tell? How can you say that now? >> So, I think that >> I think that's what he's talking about. >> That's a challenge. If we decide that we want planting beds in throughout there
and there in addition to the brick, in addition to the granite curve >> and someone says, "Okay, I I can do this. I put it in and then we come back and dig it up." And it's it would be it really has to be well thought through >> from from beginning to end versus
my thought. >> So my that's my concern is that we've got a brick somebody who's pushing brick in front of properties and willing to pay for it. >> Great. >> But now it's kind of like the horse before the cart, right? And um because
there I think are considerations that are I I don't know much about sidewalks but safety first, aesthetics second or and that look and feel. And we may decide that we like the concrete sidewalks because we want to have more
space and money for >> flower beds. Just saying whatever >> tables, benches, >> tables, benches, flower beds, street trees, whatever it is. And so I think that if we're have brick in certain places and I am concerned if the downtown
improvement committee has not yet weighed in on the brick this brick proposal >> they we haven't talked about it. So >> because we're we're under they we're asking them their mission and their 25 years has been on the streetscape.
Whether we like what they've done or not I'm not going to even I think they by and large >> they've done a lot of good work. Steve does talk about concrete. >> Absolutely. >> Not a padded concrete, but just simple. >> Yeah. And the other thing is that go that new report is having a big huge
fight about whether they're going to continue to have brick sidewalks. >> Um now there some of their brick sidewalks is this the old historic stuff and they're throughout the entire town and all that. Um, so I'm so let's again let's take let's have
this conversation with Tony and Steve and we're to figure out how we're going to see our way through this. I think it's great to res to try to get uh property owners to do to pay for municipal work which is which is great.
Um, but I I'm worried that we're the cart before the horse, but it doesn't seem that it's entirely a planning board function, but we are a part of it. And, you know, arguably the cart before the horse is the fact that we're presenting downtown zoning before we're having the general
district. So, the same could be said, >> right? >> Although I think we've we've uh we've grazed that horse on the sidewalk. >> Well, not the swine. Yeah. Fine. >> So, the other thing I want to say is that it doesn't have to be uniform all
the way through the >> So, maybe it doesn't, right? No, it's a vision. >> And maybe it's brick trim here and full brick there and >> or concrete with brick around. >> It's all fine. Yeah, that >> so that's but that's a vision, >> right? >> That's a vision. It needs to be decided.
>> It needs to be decided. And >> the other thing is that at least to date, we've heard a lot about a lot of pieces of downtown Not one that I can recall was about the sidewalks except for their safety. Steve
did, you know, like that they're um but the finish of the sidewalks has not come up. Now, as the second we raise it, I'm sure lots of people have lots of opinions. >> So, we do face one thing s this is Mark's proposing this and that gentleman
who's wants to do it for all his buildings here. He wants this probably post haste now. Mhm. >> Let's have a discussion about how we make those decisions and whether or not >> um I just feel like it should be
deliberate. I mean, >> yeah, >> it needs to be >> pro that it does need to have and I appreciate Mark's initiative to make this uh to move this thing forward >> and put together some what look to be reasonable
>> design standards. But I do think that the fastest way the fastest way to disempower >> discourage volunteers is to have people go away. >> Yes. >> Good. >> Yes. >> So let's um >> Simple.
>> So we'll have a meeting and the you're you're not getting the grant funding, but this is I think we need to have a little bit of clarity about how this works. Um and um who's doing what? And maybe the first order of business is
for the subgroup is to just sort of weigh in on this and how it's going to fit with larger vision. I'm not sure. >> So, um, okay, great. Thank you for the update, Mark, on that. Um, the
liaison reports. Um, I was going to assign I keep saying I'm going to assign somebody, but um, I will report that I have gone to two of the town green March meetings. March stands
for >> they're basically working on climate uh resilience >> and um uh as well as the a portion of the cloth climate conference that happened in
Gloucester on Friday. Did you went to the second half? I think >> um so the march town green march is a project of town green and Greg is now leading that effort. Um the interesting
uh thing is that we undertook a climate vulnerability master plan MVP and now MVP has MVP 2.0 O and in order to qualify for climate resilience future
climate grants to actually address problems >> we need to participate in MVP 2.0 and MVT 2.0 is about communicating with environmental justice communities in your community of which we have no
census blocks that are environmental justice. So unless we do 2.0 0 we can't get grants unless we communicate with environmental justice communities. We're not doing 2.0. So Essex, Rockport, Manchester, and
Gloucester are going to team up with MAPC and Town Green to undertake MVP 2.0, know which is about communicating climate problems to underserved and environmental justice communities of
which Gloucester has some and therefore by partnering regionally we qualify ourselves for the future grants. >> Yeah. So, um, Brendan Zuberki and the planner
in Gloucester and Rockport seem to be taking the lead on this. Brendan is the town manager in Essex. I talked to him uh, yes Friday. Um, and he's coordinating with Tony and I want to I'm going to go follow up with Tony. I see
this um as an important planning thing because the cl I think that we need to elevate our thoughts about how about climate and >> um understand what it's going to take on a planning level. It's going to be a
different kind of planning I think um and planning and implementation but um this MVP 2.0 now appears to be a uh I don't want to say a box to check but >> a box a process that we need to do to
qualify for state funding. You went for part of that meeting. Um I kind of got it. Do I have it more or less correct? >> Y >> um the other piece of this in the morning of the climate uh conference um I had forgotten and had not been paying
attention. Apparently there was some Harvard school uh school design urban office of urbanization >> who did a case study and I guess maybe they continue to talk about in the afternoon and they used Manchester as
the case study um which was quite interesting um on the concept level. The case study showed that a a third to a quarter quarter to a third of our assessed value is in there
were in along the coast. Not surprising. >> Which I thought is an interesting uh thought exercise uh or awareness. But then they said so we should move all those h those residences to the area
north of 128 versus all conservation land. and um >> and um that was the suggestion that their big idea. >> So I thought it was really an interesting thought exercise until that
point and then um >> and they had some interesting um thought exercises around uh you know basically protect things now so you don't have to fix them later. you know, that kind of stuff.
>> But they lost me a little bit on the gonna move housing. >> So, um, we could talk I could talk a lot about that offline about my opinions about that and, um, and also, um, you know, pretty interesting. Uh, it makes
you think about what is that tax base? Um, and how much does it cost terms of school kids, just almost nothing. and >> um all kinds of other things. So um uh the other thing um
I think that was the big takeaway that I had from the conference um and the two March meetings and I will continue to try to >> go to those. Um >> so um >> wow. >> Anyway, it was interesting.
>> So that's the update I have on that. Any other updates from any others? >> Yeah. >> Uh CPC is accepting uh applications for grant money for this year. >> Sidewalks. >> Sidewalks are not what? So there are
three categories of things that you're eligible. >> Historic things. >> There we go. >> Moving things and open space recreation things. >> What was the second one? >> Housing. >> Housing. Ah. So the the affordable housing trust is going to go back for
another chunk of money. >> Yeah. >> So maybe we can buy a house and um there a bunch of other the the parks department is coming with a bunch of them. Uh the historic commission
wants to do a study with some funding also. But I don't know if there's something any of you want to apply for. It would be a time Okay. Trying to talk about a little bit about things. So, we met today for how I
end up with with Tetratech who's been doing the uh feasibility studies, massing studies for police department, fire department, and for DPW. And the two sites, as everybody know, was the one up on School Street just before
Atwater Avenue that I use for for leaf and storage. The other one is on on Pleasant Street. So they went through their analysis and their options and their discussions about the possibilities of where these things are.
So it was a really good very fertile discussion about what the best ways to do this. It was everywhere. The fire department was representative, public works was representative and the police department representative in its sol there. And then this probably four or
five members of the committee there. And the we came up with what is going to be as as it should be. The idea that they're going to come up with all the options that are available, all the parses and pieces, mix them around, and then a pros and cons list of it to
evaluate it. And then from there we make a a true assessment of where is to go. So we actually added one today about not build public works where they are but build it in place build around it and build new facility and put public and
put fire department and police department up on school street and not really try and capture the site up above. So it was it was a very good discussion very good discussion. So, it's interesting that Tetto Tech is probably not probably not going to be
the architect and engineer who moves forward with the real design. We're going to go out for a proposal for design services, competitive proposal. And I asked today, I said specifically, are you from Massachusetts? And she said, no, I'm from Delaware. I'm from
here. I'm from there. I don't know if you know Tetra. They they they started off as an engineering firm and then they bought everybody. They grew by by >> everybody is doing that. >> Yeah. So they they're all over the place and not my favorite way to grow by the
way having been through both both sides of it. I like it. But it was a very interesting discussion. They're very competent and very capable and knowledgeable and hopefully we'll come up with an answer which we'll obviously have to go through the select board and plan. Uh just for a quick note on the
the Essex School Building Committee because one of the considerations as I mentioned before is building in Manchester on Mortal. The architect for that has come up with some concept plans of how you would add
K through K through five a whole basically a whole another educational wing to that site. NHS it makes you it made my blood boil like oh my god we're not going to consider that that would be that would be dumb as monkeys it's not good for planning not good for the
regional agreement not for good for anything not parking I mean nothing we lose the tennis courts >> oh my gosh it's terrible >> everything so I mean I think >> there are there proponents of that idea >> no there isn't a problem I mean it's all >> it's like the the idea was
>> we we've developed it enough to although we don't want to develop it anymore and that's going to be our kind of our our way out of that approach. But there is still talk about K through three would stay in Essex and then four and five from Essics would move to Manchester and
work within the existing facility. That's something that Pam Bod is working on to see if she can make it all work. >> It looks like I will say it looks like Essex site is the cleanest site. We build around the school. We destroy the school. with all the parking in
>> twice. >> That seems the logical way of doing it. Just like Sara, you and >> you've done it twice. >> We've done it twice. It's pretty much the same way again. But we have to go through the exercise for the MSBA >> and for due diligence. Yeah.
>> Yeah. For due diligence, it makes sense and I think it's actually pretty good. >> Yeah. One of the other things going back to the climate thing just because it's related is that somebody raised their hand said why don't towns just whatever the just
you know just down resone their downtowns whatever it was and I did stand up and say you know there's a whole bunch of fiscal you know uh meeting priorities and all these meetings are public I invite you know invite people to sort of learn the
variety of priorities and the process that people have to go through. It's um you know there's no just doing it >> just do it at least in >> in town. So it's not even putting in brick sidewalks. It's not a >> So I just want to add in the afternoon
they talked about different planning methodologies. >> Yeah. >> And they they ended up with probably the best one which is one I always advocate which is called muddling through. Do the best you can with what you have and
>> doing anything else is just a waste of time usually. >> Well, it means nothing gets done. >> Yeah. So, >> well, we got a lot done. >> All right. That uh let's see. We had some >> rack wait open space got one. Yeah, >> I've got one, but I'll be quick. So,
they're working on trails and they are a diligent bunch of folks. Western Woods, Dexter Pond, Gordon Woods, Powder House Hill, working on straightening out trails and improving including >> stopping a big mess at Dex at I guess
it's the Dexter. >> It is a mess. I was over there. >> There's a whole bunch of debris. I guess all this hockey stuff there and stuff and it's looks like it may hurt the bridge as
people there's some bridge there damage so they're on it which is good. >> Okay. Um any other updates? >> You all saw the ZBA so and I will watch the rest of the meeting.
I just couldn't take anymore. >> The driveway and the fire department, you know, I understand the neighbors. I do, you know, I empathize with them, but just >> Okay. Uh, do we have the minutes in our
packet? >> Yeah, I haven't had a chance to look. >> They looked good to me. >> All right, let's take them up next time. And um next meeting. So, we're adding to this
next meeting a Monday, December 1st working session, 4:00 at 4 p.m. Mark, if you'll post that. >> Yes. >> Um, we will have a forum on the 4th. At the 8th, we'll have a regular meeting and our plan is to not meet on December
22nd. We do have a special permit um on the 8th. Um, so >> this one I thought it was today, so I picked it up before I went out. >> Always prepared. >> No, I'm not.
>> I picked it up from Kendall. >> Okay. >> So, uh, we all need to get our stuff and it will go faster if we review it in advance. >> So, um, and maybe on the ETH we will probably limit our discussion. Well,
we'll have some form feedback, but yeah. Um, we want to make sure we have time to >> Okay, great. Um, any other things? Um, we'll take a motion to make sure there's no comments. >> Any public comments?
>> Thank you for being our uh audience of one. >> Is that Jane? She's with you all the time. >> She never leaves my sight. >> Okay. Um I'll take a motion to adjourn.
So move. All in favor? I