Okay, let's see. It's se 6:30, so I'm going to call the February 9th planning board meeting to order. Um, I think present we have Brian Fry, >> uh, Peter Morton here, >> Sarah Payton, Chris >> here, Bister, and we have, uh, welcoming
our alternate our associate members. Um, we have tonight Isabella Bates. Um, I think we'll be here shortly. Um, and Mark Resnik, our planner. Thanks everybody for coming. Everybody's staying warm. Um the first
um item on our agenda is um any public comment on matters that are not on the agenda. All right. Um hearing none, um we will move on and uh the first thing we have is our public hearing for 22 Union
Street LLC um professional permit. And um I will take a motion to open the um um going to take a motion to open the uh public hearing for a special permit for
the use of a reconstructed and expanded um non-conforming building um and the site plan review which I went to 12 section 12.6. Um do I have a motion? >> Second.
>> We need a roll call vote. We have Brian. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Sen yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> And Isabella um is Yeah, you won't be voting yet, but you are present.
>> Great. Um thank you. So, um I will turn it over to Adam. >> Yep. >> Um >> thank you. >> Um who will walk us through and um you want to ask do you want to share the um anything any of the uh any visuals on the
>> Yes. screen. So if you for some reason I can't seem to give you the sharing rights until >> until you ask to share. >> Can you um aren't allowed please? I apologize for the video, folks. Um, we
don't have our normal um staff tonight, so we're happy that we got it to work. Okay. So, you should be able to share now. Excellent. Thank you. Um, I'm Adam Zer and I'm here uh present the application
street LLC. Um it's a special permit uh to use a expanded uh reconstructed building for three residential ground units whereas with two special permit uh we are also asking for
parking requirements units that will be in the property section 6.1.8 of the zoning bylaw. Uh and we're also asking for site plan approval uh pursuant to section 12.6 six zoning bylaw such other relief as may be
necessary. What I'd like to do is to let Chris Vance who's project architect run through the architecture and building the design sort of see uh the configuration of the units and the two options that uh we're seeking approval for. Um and then I turn back over myself
to sort of the factors. Just >> one quick thing. Uh can people online hear okay or or do we need to speak up? You have to unmute. >> I I cannot hear you. It's very faint.
>> Okay. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> When you speak up, I can hear you. >> Okay. Let's see if we can turn the microphone up. Can you see if you can just >> push this one? >> No, that the carrot
arrow. You can turn the mic up though. Just computer. >> I can't because I >> audio setting lower left. I don't know if that's going to have the volume microphone on the lower. See down below
input volume. Nope. There you go. Run that to the right. There we go. That should be >> okay. Now X out on the upper right. started. >> Okay, >> you hear us better. >> Yeah, better. >> Uh, yes. Thank you. That's an
improvement. >> Okay, excellent. We have, uh, joining us here, Nance Garvey, who's our other associate member. >> Um, okay. Take it away. Um, thank you. >> All right. Great. Yeah. Uh Chris Vansstein architects 85
Massachusetts with business address project architect for uh 22 union street. We also have been our civil engineer here as well. If there's a not
I will run through the uh plan and the architecture plan. Okay, great. So here is the uh existing uh survey of the property. Um I know most people are familiar with old card Lincoln building. located at 22 Union
Street. Um this plan here shows the existing outline of the building. Um we do have an access drive uh on the left side, the west side of the site um which is serves as a fair drive for our butters uh which gives them access to
their rear parking um also give them access to our parking area. Um the intent is to raise the building and build um as Adam mentioned renew residential units uh with retail. Um here's the proposed um plan. So the
post shade the gray area is the new building footprint. Um so it's smaller than the existing building footprint. current um building is in Lshape and there's a wing that um goes to the north uh which will be um completely
demolished. There's also a basement um the lower level that will be infilled. So the new building will build um slab on grade and above. May I ask one question? >> Yeah. Is the first B I can see the existing footprint here. Does that go
all the way down into a basement space? Um yeah. So, so the the building's an L and then this wing that comes uh to the north, this rectangle portion of the building has a full basement under it.
>> So, just just that rectangle. >> Yeah. And then the portion to the right to the east is slap. >> Yeah. And I say full basement, it's actually like, you know, maybe six feet ahead height and built into the ledge.
But there is a a basement space underneath that. Okay. So, um the proposed plan here, so yeah, the push area is our new building footprint. So, it's actually inside the existing footprint of the 22 Union Street. Um as you can see here, we're
proposing six um parking spaces for the residential units. These will actually be located under the third floor of the building. So, they're um under an overhang. It will be screened from our neighbors um which you'll see the elevations um shortly. Um and then the
building also steps back. Um we've purposely designed it to improve the sight lines as you come down the drive so that you have better sight visibility to the the left and and the right. Um so you can see that the footprint of the building can't. Um and it's also stepped
back from the street slightly and it undulates to give some um interest at that pedestrian level. You'll see later the 3D perspectives. Um and then we also continuing um the retail storefront. There'll be a small retail space here that's a
continuation of the Gladstone building because we do have a shared new wall um between the two buildings. Um so this illustration gives you a little better sense of the the site plan. Um so we'll have landscape areas
along the sidewalk at Union Street. Um we'll have a small landscape area um between our property and the butters. Um we're also leaving area for snow removal um accumulate for as we can see this sort of winter condition. We need it. Um
so on this upper right corner um an area for snow removal. We also have a screened trash area. That would be for the residential units um which is indicated here. Um and then you can see we have a a roof terrace that's above the onetory retail space um that is
going to be private use for one of the residential units. And then those are the six parking space that will be under the floor. Hey, I hate to ask. Yeah, don't go for it. Forgive me. You filled in the basement space in this this gone. That's gone.
Okay. Yep. No more basement. Yeah. So it be filled with graphical fill and then the first floor which discrete levels will be all yes questions or >> um so we have uh two proposed
uh first floor plans, one being uh retail use, second being between residential and retail. Um so this floor plan that I'm showing you now shows three retail spaces. Um there are small portion uh for residential stairs and
egress to the grade um that divide the retail spaces. Um, and the retail spaces range from about 600 square ft to 1,000 square ft. Um, retail 3 being the largest and then retail one and two
being the smaller of the two retail spaces. You can see that we have three stairs that access the residential units above the first floor. This is option B. second second option here that would be all residential and
one small retail space. Um the retail space here is about 450 square ft. Um and then the additional um floor area is is divided into the three residential units. So you have unit
one, two, and three. Um we're showing a um home occupation uh office on the the first floor at street level. Then there'd be a den or a family room towards the back. Again, remember this is built into the slope. So, this is pretty much buried as you move north on
the site. Um, and just the front portion of the building is exposed and has, you know, daylight windows access. So, now moving up to the second floor, one option, um, this would be all residential units here. So, this is the
primary living floor uh for the units. Uh so, you move up, you have your kitchen, living and dining. Um you have a small mudroom entry off the rear where the residents would park. Um so, each residential unit would have two parking spaces. Um and again, the the retail
space is only one level here. So, this would be a roof terrace for unit number three. So they would have a door that could go out and be exclusive use to that. Moving up to the third floor, you'd have all the sleeping rooms. Um so it's a mix. Uh the two end units have
three bedrooms and the middle unit has two bedrooms. Um they each have small outdoor u balconies off the primary bedrooms that are facing Union Street. that it' be a little clearer here in the
elevation. So this is the uh the front elevation from Union Street. So here you can see the small retail space. This is that exclusive use roof deck that's above the retail space. Um and then this these are the three residential units or
if we go with option A which would this would be all retail space at the first floor. the the program doesn't change between the two options for the second and third floor. It's really that first floor space that we're leaving kind of a market driven space um as we had uh it
was just other >> the footprint the footprint is the same. Yeah, the stairs coming down it's virtually the same. is just taking out the office and the bathroom for the residential use and it would just be a retail space and we would and the
determination of whether that's retail or residential is up to the owner of the >> well so we're going to market the should I um yeah so we're going to market the three retail spaces um it's not up to
the owners of the residential actually market those as condo retail spaces is if there's not a demand for that market, then we'll build them so that they're three residential units. Um, but we
wanted to leave the flexibility to have retail space there, which I know, you know, multiple meetings we've had with officials and that that is the desire and that's something that we're trying to bring to the town. Um, we've designed it in a way that is completely flexible.
Uh in terms of building code, we would make sure that there's the proper separation between the retail and residential use that would just be built in. It does have to be retail use. It might just have person. So um the floor prints the same every everything square
footage is the same. Um literally couple those residential pieces for the option B and I own one of those homes I can break that first retail.
>> So if you so if we built it as residential Yeah. you purchased as a threestory town home was the first floor. >> I think you could do that without right occasion
to you wouldn't be able to do that because we've asked for approval of two very specific floor plans. One floor plan has the one retail unit on the side. The other one has three. So if you if we if
you move we move forward with one one unit order wouldn't have the ability to change it come back and get authority probably in the cond that wasn't and it just would cause a little would have been a chaos we tried to keep things simple with the two very discreet
options either one or three >> um if I understand you right you're going to explore whether there's interest in retail before completing the final plans. >> No. will that will generally be the last
thing that you would you've built. the core and the shell of the building is identical and you proceed the upstairs are the same and you know at some point the marketing is going to start and and at some point along the way if there wasn't interest to build a few retail spaces you'd have to shift over to um
the residential but it wouldn't have any effect on the construction timeline uh because the retail spaces would be the last thing that would be finished in a building such as this anyway would typically leave the floor of crush stone so the retail ten would choose where they want their plumbing to go so naturally it's work from the bottom
be any effect on the construction sequencing. >> I just one question. Is it possible that you could have two of the units be retail on the first floor and the other one residential? We would have to repermit the project with the CBA
because there it's either all retail or all res. >> CBA was concerned u because they need to make what's a 4DA section six finding the change or pre-existing non-conforming use. um they were concerned enough about approving two
different iterations. So, we didn't want to push it and try to get too many options. If we figure if that's what it ends up um and we have two strong retailers that are interested, you know, I think we may we have to revisit at that time and potentially go to the ZBA
to have that approved. Uh it's possible it's not just something we haven't we haven't really thought about it. >> So, this may I continue? >> Sure. I I just said this is fascinating here. So if if in fact there's no interest in retail from the beginning in
the beginning when you market it then they could all become ret uh residential >> they will all become they'll be three level >> and you market as residential unit >> they would be they would be residential units they would that would be the floor plan. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> The residential those either or >> right >> and it depends on what the market sense at the moment. >> Correct. And even even if they are residential, we still have designed them for that home office. I mean they look like retail. Um there's the ability for the occupant to have a home occupation
or you could you know you could home occupation is broad. You could do a small little retail operation as long as the owner is the only one that's running the business. Um so there's still a possibility there. But yes, they would be those retail units, you know, those
of the those are the retail and then put the resial. Do >> you have any parameters on what kind of retail can go in there? I mean going to be like a restaurant. I mean like it's kind of seems broad to like
specifically what kind of who are you targeting for retail? >> There's there's not going to be food preparation. Okay. because it's a it's a you know there's residential upstairs that would too well together. Um but other than that just whatever the price
only has a broad definition of retail use and business it doesn't really separate out between various categories but >> and I just want to clarify in the option B there that retail space side that
would stay within option B >> so why wouldn't uh why would you make condo docks prohibit use the first floor for retail if the owner decided he wanted it. Let's say he needed to come to the zoning board to
get a special permit zoning board or if the zoning changes, maybe you can do it by right. Um, so why would uh as long as like let's say it's not uh like you say food prep that could be offensive to
depending on what you're making just regular retail why wouldn't be able to be able to do it. I think from my perspective it's an over complication because you're going to if if those become that's going to be
what's permitted. So those owners would be looking to make a change that would require a require because especially because the building's pre-existing not conforming and it's going to be subject to the special permit that the ZBA granted it would you know it that the
owner would be going forward and carrying the building into a a ZBA process which is not something own unit to the ZBA. >> Well and also something changes and You can have first floor by right. >> Okay.
>> Well, let's continue with our presentation. Are there other things you wanted to present? >> Yeah, I can walk through the rest of the where we left off here. Um, this is the
front elevation from Union. Um as you can see um you know we have the three stories um even though you know it meets the um Matt's height
because of the average grade see from other elevations here u so this is the side elevation this is from the access drive to the back parking so here um we have We're providing a screen
from or a butter and you would park underneath the third floor in between those columns. Um and here you can see the projected bays um that undulate along Union Street and provide outdoor space for the residential units.
>> Can you just walk uh us through the elevations there? The average elevation um your elevation so forth. Yeah. Uh yeah. So our calculated average uh grade elevation is 27.85.
Um and so our roof height, max roof height from that average grade is 31 2 in. Um we're allowed by right to go 35 ft. Uh working with the butters. Um we not want to max it out and allow, you
know, our butters to have a view corridor. Um so we have the uh designed it so that the max height is 312 inches from the average grade. You can see from Union Street well Union Street does have a slope. So this is
from the first far left unit uh which is the lowest point um is 37 ft. You know from that front elevation would be 37 but from the average grade it's 31 18 in. >> Okay. And you have a full third story correct? full third floor and that was
granted a variance by the CDA. >> Yep. Yeah. We Yeah. We're allowed two and a half stories, but because of the conditions of the site where we had to park, it condensed this second floor. And by the definition
of a story, half a story, it can't be more than 2/ird of the floor below. uh which you can see if we were twothirds of that story below we'd only have a bedroom and a bathroom third floor. So we really to make the unit work um we need to have a
whole story in there and have parking but we designed it with the manor roof so it really looks like a two and a half story building we're maximizing the volume that roof allows you uh third story
and we have stopped at historic a couple of times. So, we did work with him a lot on the detailing um yours. So, >> it's a very nice presentation >> and again just procedurally you've
received your um review from the historic district commission. >> No, I mean the historic uh approval we only have for the two family design, but this is a virtually identical all the exterior architectural features are virtually identical with this one. So
yes, we'll be going back to them. That's the last stop hopefully. They did issue us a certificate of appropriateness previous design which if I I didn't bring it but it virtually
is identical to this this minus this. We had we didn't have any building here. Um we we were abiding by the 10- foot setback by your your bylaws. So this was actually just a void. Um which there was
some uh dislike of that. Um and then so but this mass itself is virtually the same as it was when it was two. >> And did CDI give you a variance on that side effect? >> Well, we're not conforming. Um so
>> pre-existing pre-existing non-conforming. >> Yeah. You're taking the building down, >> but the building currently goes to the plot line. You don't need to get another variance. When you're constructing a building, >> we have to raise that existing building. Is that true? >> Yep.
That would be for understand the average grade elevation versus the sidewalk and someone standing on the sidewalk and looking up to the top. So you talk about 31 ft. So that 31 ft
is basically the 59 ft minus the average elevation of 27. Is that correct? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So someone standing on the sidewalk would I mean because it's a mansart the
59 won't perhaps seem so overbearing but it's 59 ft above the sidewalk level. >> No no it's 37. The 59. The 59 is a um survey point. >> That's why the number below see is 36.
>> That's that's a building elevation 59. >> You guys ever been? >> Yeah. to get the average points all the way around. That's where you get your
because we have such a steep. Yeah. Right. And then this is the rear elevation. So when you're standing back of the building, it's like a one story structure. Um, and
you basically park. These are covered parking bays on the back of the building. And then this is the third floor. This is where all the bedrooms are located. Um, again, we work with our neighbors pretty extensively to kind of minimize windows and just view and
privacy. Um so that >> how many parking spaces >> we have two residential >> and do those calledate the parking spaces? >> Yeah. Right. >> So this only shows two stories. So the
third story is basically no windows. You explain that it's very right. >> Yes. So the So you can see this is the first floor. So this is Union Street here. >> So the back of this floor,
>> yeah, >> is into the hillside. So you only have windows along the front of the building. There's no windows in the back >> at that first floor. >> Do you have a thermal advantage of doing that?
>> Oh yeah, absolutely. >> Yeah. Um, but they're uh Yeah, but the second and third floor all have windows because they're above that. Still have a nice big thermal master
there. Um, this is the last elevation. So, this is if you're standing in Gladstone looking at the building. This is the roof terrace there. So again, you can see it's one and a half stories up at this level. Um that's the door that
comes out to the private roof terrace that's over the retail space. And again, here's the covered parking area. Um here's a elevation along the streetscape just giving some context the surrounding buildings.
I fit into that streetscape. Um, here's the building section. So, this sort of illustrates how this back is built into the the hillside. So, there's no windows there, but you do have the three stories. Um, so this is either the
retail or residential primary living floor and the bedrooms only the whole time. >> Yeah. This this entire wall >> is underground. >> Is all underground.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's about roughly here where you start to like come out of the grade. Um, quickly just some of the finishes. This we've worked through with historic but uh
something to use a similar brick that Ricardo is constructed of now. Bring that back which is along the base of the building. um going to have uh you know two over two windows, asphalt shingle
roofs, uh wood railings, uh flatboards. The the first floor is going to have windows that represent more of a retail commercial space, so they're larger, more of a storefront window. And then as you move up to the second, third floor,
more of a residential scale double lock window. Um, and then here's perspective uh being street summer. You can see how
retail space is a continuation of this retail front and then it turns into um the residential units and it it gives you some undulation and some articulation along the street. Cargo building just very stark and sidewalks narrow. there's really no
relief or any sort of pedestrian level interaction with it. Um, this gives you much more, you know, playfulness and aireriness and bringing some vegetation in. Um, you won't have the snow piled up against the building and, you know, falling into the sidewalk. So,
design quickly, this is a phototric study that we had done. Um so showing that we are not spilling light into our uh property our neighbors properties. Uh we'll have uh dark sky compliant lighting. Uh we do have some motion
sensor lighting uh towards the back. Uh we have some uh safety lighting along the access drive on the um wall facing the west side. Uh but again a lot of this lighting we worked through it historic as well. Um, so we have sort of
the brass fixture is the handle here and all that package. If you want to see that booming light levels, they're they're in there and you can see that we don't spill over to the neighbors.
Um, anybody has any questions on the design? Uh, I was just going to quickly run through the bylaw criteria. Uh, mainly because we have to uh section 12.5 through the bylaw. It lays out nine criteria that the board have to
consider u for special permit use rather than two that would be allowed as right. They have to find you have to find that the adverse effect of the proposed use are not going to the beneficial impacts of the town. Um we think that project
easily satisfies all of them basic standards. The first one uh first one is the criteria that are set for section 36.3 with the bylaw to group lighting. Uh obviously Chris just showed you the lighting plan. There's not going to be any light diffusion on group properties.
It's a small unit project. I don't think anyone could reasonably expect it to generate noise uh that would be adverse to the town especially right in the downtown area. It's perfectly appropriate place for reunit uh dwelling uh topographical standards clearing
sites already fully developed. There's not going to be any clearing here. So that standards easily satisfied. One thing I don't think was noted Chris's presentation is that uh the new design is going to reduce the overall building in lot coverage. So it's going to end up going below the 70% that's
required in the bylaw. So the new design will actually be more conforming in that regard site development standards. Um it's a bit of a hard hard one but uh as some of you on the board know this design has gone through a number of changes. The
first standard would have cut it even further back into the hillside. This design sort of brings it up forward reuses uh for the most part the existing cargo footprint. Um so in that regard it's have a minimal adverse impacts on the site the environment pedestrian and
vehicular access traffic management parking uh the applicants we did a parking study to the CPA as part of that process uh they reviewed it found that there wasn't going to be any substantion that building town the existing use uh
and that traffic that even be reduced uh from what it would be because the park in the building that we would use retail use that standard is easily satisfied. Aesthetics home run building is gorgeous. I think it'll be back
throughout the town. Um even from some folks who weren't in favor of this originally um after seeing the beautiful work that that Chris and his team has done the remarks that we're getting on it favorable. Uh so we can pass standards easily satisfy landscaping. Um, again,
there's there's a landscape that I'm not sure we went through tonight, but uh it's got some unique features going to have a little bit more green there existing. So, that one I think also satisfied utilities right public direct
access. So that that criteria satisfies fiscal impact. Uh again that criteria as well that tax is going to advance substantially which goes forward. Uh the tax benefits the real estate tax income
probably you know quadruple uh from what the town is generating for the site now. Um not to mention the fact that we'll have uh you know some residents downtown frequent businesses potentially up to three additional businesses operating at this site. Moving on for the other criteria that
are in 12.5.2 social, economic, community needs, again adding some diverse housing to the town. We don't have many townhouse homes like this. Um, so the housing stock is going to get a little bit more variety than it does today. You know, potentially we're going to at least have one business location
there that we think is appropriate size. We've all felt that part of the piece of cardboard didn't quite succeed. It's just such a large space uh and and hard for somebody to justify the rent and have that big of a retail operation. So, we actually think that even though that
space that that's that's shown on the plan there is smaller in size that it's actually more appropriate and we're going to be able to get some sort of vibrant use in there and potentially do additional ones if uh if there's interest units. Uh criteria number three which is
traffic flow and safety. Again, uh we've uh had a traffic study that evaluated the the additional traffic trips uh and the turning radius on site. Um we have enough backup room for cars to park maybe back into the garage uh and people
out. Uh we're also widening the driveway from 10 ft to 12 feet, so the sight lines will be better than they are today. The building is also cut back uh to increase the sight line from what it is today. So we think that's that that criteria is also satisfied. Um adequacy of utilities public services covered
that already. Um the improved character social structures uh you know this building we think is going to fit right at the sun Chris has here model up there some other buildings we found over on Central Street. Um we think it it has the potential to fit right in and become
an iconic people drive by just the house up the hill uh is notable. So, we think that uh it's going to fit right in um preservation, enhancement, creation of existing proposed scenic viewsheds. Chris mentioned before um that it was
important to not go to the max to uh neighbors and the building's also being moved back two feet. So, that drag and down was actually wider than what it was what it is today. Um so, we think that criteria is easily satisfied. impacts on
natural environment as we're feeling none here. Um said the site's already fully developed. If anything, the environmental situation is going to be better because that existing building is not in good shape. There's mold, there's detration that crumbling onto the sidewalk. So that all going to be
resolved against product climate resiliency and adaptation. The last the second to last criteria, this this building is is going to be designed to much higher standard than what's there today. uh quickly go into details if you want to hear about the systems energy efficiency. Um there's going to
be high efficiency heat pumps, energy recovery ventilation units, electric vehicle charging stations, uh high performance LED lighting u just in in every way we think that criteria is satisfied as well. Um and the last criteria number nine again this one in
fact that was already covering the center three criteria but again adding patrol at least one business hope more residents right downtown in a site that right now is essentially generating nothing for us. Um so we're really excited about this. It's been I think 10
months since we first met with some of you with the with the original design. uh every time we come back we think we're done and then we get suggestions uh to change it and uh think that we're at a place now where we've got a plan that easily the standards that is
approvable that uh hopefully most people get excited about I guess there will be any other questions yes I didn't see it at the plan that >> yes but the I guess
>> two per two for a >> couple just um could you talk a little bit about the timeline for the marketing and when it sound it sounds as if correct me if I'm wrong here that you're going to start out with a notion that it's
commercial space on the first floor >> correct >> and then there'll be a period of time in which you attempt to market that and then at some point you're going to have to if if there's nobody to see. Can you talk about the timeline for that? How it's going to work?
>> Yeah, I mean I think what would happen I think the plan as soon as affirmative becomes a little clearer as we go on the market as soon as possible with the with the residential three commercial units uh looking for businesses that want to set up shop here that have relatively
small space requirements um that are interested in uh in renting or hopefully owning their own spot. We think that's a big potential selling point. A lot of the one of the hardest things if you're a small business owner is paying rent. Uh and so we think that the potential of
condo ownership for a commercial unit is going to be very attractive to small business owners. But it's just but it's still a question of construction costs, you know, land acquisition costs and you know folks that you know want to make that commitment because it's still a
significant investment. So I think we're hopeful. I think everybody is thinking that you know self signaling is coming in. that's still ways away, but I think there's the hope that that's going to bring a lot more people into town and the businesses are going to have a fighting chance and so hopeful that it
is going to happen. I think obviously it's not going to be done this summer. So I think the first businesses will be looking to sort of gear up for next summer um which is a ways. So I think there's some time to see how it works before the the plant shifts to residential. And like I mentioned before
building that resial space that's like really the last thing you do. you got working. So there's time to see if it works. I think we'll >> good. So it's like about a year year and a half of vac. Yeah. It's probably going to be like a
year of construction. So you know markets tend to speak pretty quickly and this is on zoning but we'll have a next month. >> A couple questions. Um just to clarify
uh you're looking for um a determination um that you do not need any parking for your commercial use, right? That's the issue because you do comply with the residential parking >> requirements. The ZBA waiver, but we'd like the landlords
>> and so just to you know if we were to pass the downtown zoning this any commercial that in that area would need parking space. That's right. So, in our proposal, um, so that's just to remind people
about that. Um, and then a couple other things. Um, how will this affect the, um, two related questions kind of, um, the sidewalk that's there now? Um, and,
uh, you know, clearly when you jack up, you know, it's going to get disrupted. What do you, what are you thinking? would you be open to, you know, restoring that sidewalk to a uh town standard which uh is still in the
development? Um and fixing the cross slope problem and all of that. Um so that's the first question. >> Yeah, I did. Yeah, I met with Chuck at DPW. We could talk a little bit about um sort of standard that you guys
developing for sidewalks. Um, and yeah, it would be amendable to looking at standards that you're potentially developing. Um, and obviously we're going to be disrupting almost all of that sidewalk during the construction. So, we're going to have to reconstruct
it. Um, so we can look at what that reconstruction looks like. Great. And then can you talk a um explain to us how the construction itself will happen so it doesn't disrupt Union Street?
Yeah. So, obviously it's a a travel intersection. Uh we understand that. Um so, you know, we've already started uh talking to the police chief. Uh I think you guys did receive a memo from them about uh that we're in discussions. We
kind of come up with a lease detail and a route that they're comfortable with during heavy construction period. U so we ideally we'd like to start before the summer season, the spring summer season. So, you know, we're we're trying to work through um so planning board to get
approval so that we can start the demolition of the the project because that's going to be disruptive. U the plan is to implode it on itself, load it on a truck and get it out. Um and it's going to probably take about a week to do that. Um so we hope to do that before
uh you know the busy sort of beach summer season starts. Um and then obviously um you know we'll have construction vents keep the site safe. Uh we'll have postings about the the schedule or discussion with all of our abutters um you know letting them know
exactly what's going to be happening the schedule so that we can minimize disruption as much as possible. But yes we do understand it's a busy a busy intersection. It's a sensitive site. So a lot of cautions can be taken.
And when you're when you're u after you've imploded it, then you're going to start digging out the ground floor, which for the two units closest to the driveway will require
excavation, quite a bit of excavation of bash. So that that's just a slab there. They're gonna >> Yeah, that's Yeah, that's all going to be that's slab on grade underneath it. So yeah, we'll be taking out the existing slab that's there now. Uh we'll be filling in the basement as sort of
like phase one with structural fill. Um and our plan is to use cargo's existing foundation walls as our stoing site. U so that we can build sort of on top of
that and and up using the resist >> any tra you know hammering a ledge or blasting. No, we've specifically kept building footprint inside, you know, aligned with Cargo's footprint because we don't want CO.
>> So then when you're So are you you're building the walls? >> Yeah. >> Are you I mean the outside wall on Union Street. I'm not a construction guy, but I would imagine you're going to be you're going to be inside building the wall up or you going to be on Union. How's that?
>> No. So we'll take we'll take down the exterior walls. >> Yeah. I'm talking about the second and third stores building up. >> Yeah, that will have a lot of scaffolding on scaffolding that'll be on. So that sidewalk will be likely closed by
construction. >> Yeah, we're working out that timeline schedule right now. Um and if we need to provide sort of temporary crosswalks for that portion uh I'm just meeting with the contractor today out sequencing and
you know exactly we can do it in a successful way. Nothing shut down the sidewalk. I mean luckily we don't have parking um along that sidewalk. All the parking is on the other side and off the street. So that actually helps uh because gives us more opportunity to
stage a truck, get it out. Uh but yes there will be periods of time depends on west mountain is the >> I have seen a lot of scaffolding in which pedestrians can walk underneath it. >> Yep. Yeah we we're discussing that today. Yep.
>> Would that be a possibility? >> Yeah. So yeah we get that sort of first floor we would absolutely do have we have scaff >> about storm water. Um, yeah. And I remember one meeting there was discussion that there was sort of water running through the basement. >> Yeah.
>> And so uh where's that coming from and um where's it going to go? >> Yeah. So all that water comes up off the hill down the uh it's all ledge there and it fills up our basement low point. U so that's why we intend to fill the
basement up. Uh but uh we do we're going to catch the waters coming down that the hill and have uh infiltration. Uh we're leaving a gravel driveway pave the driveway up there so that we can get as much uh impervious surface or pvious
surface u so that all that water can infiltrate to the the ground. >> You're going to infiltrate it in under the foundation. >> Yeah. >> Well, it come down right now there's it all kind of collects in the basement. There's a sub pump that pumps it out into the sanitary system. So the the
storm water line and so you know we're going to have to do the similar thing and collect it um infiltrate as much as we can uh collect it off the roof and gutters >> and collect it off the roof and gutters and put it into the storm system.
>> The drain system. >> Say that again. >> Into the drain system. Yeah. >> Yes. You think >> is it just the uh so it will be surface water into the drains or will it go will it actually >> so the runoff that Chris was saying comes off the hill it's going to we have a flat area in back that'll be a gra
parking lot that'll slow as much of this around and then what we'll most likely do is just gently graded around the building so it comes down the sides of the building a lot of it comes down the right of wood now but you want the roof runoff to go down directly into the drain into the street so that doesn't go
across the sidewalk create icing and that type of Right. So, it's going to physically connect to the storm. >> That's that's the plan. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Is do we have a storm water plant >> there? There isn't a specific storm
water plan. Um only because this is a redevelopment. So, I was going to talk to Chris at some point about you know, I don't even know where the existing plates where the utilities come out of building now and reuse and what type of condition they're in. That's something we normally work out with the DPW to see what they want, where they want to
connect. Um and then uh two other quick questions. Um you divided off a piece of the back layout is still part of this lot. Um is there any uh
anything besides the procedural? >> Okay. Okay. And then um what about um go back to the um picture of of the facade and talk a little bit about um snow
fall and ice fall off of roofs onto the sidewalk and how far back that is from the sidewalk. Yeah. So, our our um exterior wall here is is set back from the sidewalk. Uh it
varies along Union Street uh from two to five feet as we sort of can't the building back where the um access drive is. And then the bays are what you know project forward of the exterior wall. Those will have gutters that collect
water. So, there really shouldn't be an accumulation of ice or anything that's near the sidewalk at all. It's all going to be set back. Um, so you shouldn't really have any issues with ice falling directly onto the sidewalk. Ice does
build up. I mean, with the new construction, it it's going to be so tight there should be barely any ice that is forming forming. Uh most these older homes and homes every you know all the heat's escaping melting the snow but it freezes as soon as it gets cold.
>> That facade that you just pointed is how how many feet from the edge of the sidewalk just um >> I mean >> yeah so here it's 7 ft. >> That's the furthest point away which
>> closest point is that one? Yeah, the closest point is going seem to be sweep through the region of uh flat stone, but you know it steps back gradually to you know one ft here and it steps back to three feet. So it kind of modulates
along but as you can see it's never over it's never right against the sidewalk or sidewalk. >> Okay. And then one one last question two questions. Uh, are you going to have a um
a natur boiler? And if so, where's that exhaust? >> Yeah, we're we're going to plan out the electric >> and um and um is there a landscape plan? >> Yeah, right here.
Um yeah, so we have a plan several show area. >> Okay. Um okay, let's go to Chris. >> So uh it's a tricky site. You guys done a fabulous job. I want to point out to everybody that by your right you could
build single family with a front lawn and a driveway or garage and this is so much better for commen you for I appreciate that. Thank you
for a minute. Yeah. Um, >> clearly the the Mansard roof won't hold snow for long at all. It'll come right off. What's the top of the roof? Is it flat? It's a Yeah, it's a flat roof, but
it's a it's a low rubber roof >> because you know uh with the amount of snow that we've had, you know, what's the three feet of snow on top of that look like >> in terms of >> I mean, everything's everything's designed to be
extreme. So, you know, it's going to be structurally overengineered. Um, every building now is is engineered with a four dime safety factor. So I would >> I have a friend who who lives in the mountains and he basically only puts
metal roofs on houses so that the snow will come off them. >> Yeah. >> You know, and but it comes off in a hurry and piles onto the side of the house. >> But here it won't cling on the mansard part for sure. Probably would just come
right off. But uh flat roof in Manchester, we'll see how much snow we get. >> We have lots of flat roof. >> Big problem. >> Today's Crosby schools both have
>> portions. Someone once asked me, "What color do you want your roofs to be?" And I didn't even know that roofs came in different colors. I started looking and there's different colors everywhere. >> There sure are. Yeah, question. >> Yeah, you sort of that parking rendering
again. I'm just curiously distance between the columns because I was just trying to see maybe I missed it. Okay. But there's another photo that shows the columns building. >> Yeah. And so there should those columns
are with six parts, right? So >> yeah, it this is a little like the >> Yeah. So this one's at an angle. So these two look >> but they're the same. >> And what is it the width is a standard width between each one of those columns
>> there? Yeah. >> So like six eight >> 10 ft. And the height is the same height as the >> is it 8 10 8T >> to the underside of the the soft. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. I'm just saying because these cars just keep getting bigger and
bigger. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean I you probably want to drive in there with your ebon right there. Right. >> True. True. >> Yeah. >> Um Okay. I'm gonna um any other questions from the board?
>> I just wanted to make a comment. I wanted to second what Chris had to say because I remember when you first came in with the garage doors right on the street and um when I went through this packet I
thought wow what a lot of work >> what a lot of listening and responding to comments so thank you >> it's going to transform that corner >> we're excited about it >> um okay any question uh uh questions or comments from people online.
>> Uh, I have a question. >> Go ahead, G. >> Um, so I have three points. >> I'm sorry. Introduce yourself. So, so we have your name, address. >> I live on 11 Jersey Lane, but I am also a neighbor because I have a property
down the street at 33 Union Street with seven apartments in it. Um, first I'd like to say this is historically probably closer to what was there before the second store was taken off of uh,
Cargo Unlimited. So, it has a historical reference. Uh, since that used to be a higher property. Uh secondly, I believe this is aesthetically excellent, but I think it's going to be
a challenge for your contractor and I think this board should be aware of the drawing they're seeing and what gets produced. So that's my second point. And uh as a as a uh the third point is
frankly as a neighbor we are we are supportive of more uh activity in in the downtown area and we recognize the challenge of finding new uh retail or
commercial tenants on our first floors and I think this is a a very good approach to finding a solution. if it's there. So that's my that's my comment. >> Can you for me can you elaborate on your
second point? Uh uh be clear for me about what the what exactly you mean? concerned that our our proponent here has uh both the contracting skills and
it may be that they have chosen a contractor or maybe not to actually execute what is obviously not a simple u uh architectural plan and I Mr. Vance is obviously a very capable
architect. So I know I know he'll be sensitive, but I think that what comes out at the end is often a little different. And I think that he it's incumbent on him to uh make sure that that what is what is built and his
choice of of contractors is appropriate. And I think it's, as I say, incumbent on this board to see to it that uh that what is what is built here is consistent with the with the renderings that we've been we've been seeing. I I'm not I
actually think the renderings are lovely. Uh but it's it's not a uh a walk in the park as they say. So, I think it's it's very important to have uh the discipline to to see to it that that
what it gets built in our downtown in a in an arguably uh landmark location um is consistent with the with the you know all these wonderful drawings we've seen. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah, it's a very
detailed a lot of architectural details. >> Okay. Thank you, Gar. Um other comments from um others um just raise your hand or even unmute and go ahead and speak. Um okay. Um
I'm not seeing any. Um, so I think what we probably want to do, um, we often take a sitewalk for, um, these kinds of projects, but I feel like we
all can take our own sitewalk and uh, we know what the site is. So, I don't think that that is necessary unless anybody feels that it is. Um and um I'm thinking that we've talked about a number of um
uh issues predominantly around you know repairing sidewalks and I think the disruptive disruption of the the construction disruption and the um impress the last comment need to think a little bit about that. So what I would
suggest is that we um ask Mark to draft some cons some a draft of the conditions special permit um and site plan review for a next meeting and continue uh this public hearing until then but then try
to wrap it up next meeting um with that makes sense to people obviously uh and we can all think a little bit more about any conditions send them to Mark that that you're concerned about. Um we may uh by continuing we also do give the
it's prominent project we give the public one more chance to have input. Um so if everybody's in agreement with that um >> can we just um identify just a couple of conditions that >> we
so I think one is the sidewalk um extending the sidewalk and the one of the um >> you mean return >> the sidewalk to well I think that question is um we're about to undertake a sidewalk project so how do we um reflect a future that is a little bit
uncertain that's going to be a sidewalk Um, so that's that's something we will let Mark figure out. Um, the con a construction plan that is >> about gold bricks though. >> Gold bricks um uh ice bricks
um uh the constructability plan. Um how do we uh ensure that that intersection and traffic flow are not significantly impeded? I think from my perspective, it's more than just coordinating with police when you need to shut the road,
but how do you actually um uh how does that happen so that that is minimized? >> Um >> so is that something that we have to evolve from that discussion and made the space plan? >> So I think between now and next week we
need to have a conversation with them. >> Yeah. Um and um so those are the two. I also would like to just um look a little bit more detail at the landscape
plan. Ask Laura to take a look at it. >> Storm water. >> I think the storm water question we check. >> Can I ask just one question? Is it is it internal drainage off of flat roots? >> You don't run it through a permit. You
run it to the inside. run it down by and out of the building >> currently or for the you know what you plan uh gutters >> gutters you're going to run to the perimeter and then gutter >> yes a lot of this flood water >> and you're planning to connect it to the but you don't yet know where the
existing storm water system is. >> Uh I haven't Chris and I haven't talked about where we want to uh have you know collection point where we're going to put it out. We um we have to find a spot in the drain line just to go out. So I was planning on just getting a comment back from DPW as to where they would
like to do that which >> and have you already submitted something to them comment back? >> No, just this is this is the site plans we've uh just generated for the the special department. So we can we can certainly look at that and and get back to you on that. No problem. It's a good
>> one. I think that um there's also the storm water management portion of the the regulations and um maybe we can invite uh at least check in with them and >> check with Chuck. Yes.
>> Um and I think if you can provide us with a narrative at least if we will um of what the the plan is for um for that we can so that so that Chuck will have something to respond to
>> they won't actually be generating more water than what's being generated now, >> right? But that doesn't mean that the water now is being properly >> well. So that's not the standard. >> Need to talk to Chuck to see what the
storm water regul that situation, >> right? Because you're not going to have any space to treat any site. >> No. And so it Yeah. Overall, this is a decrease, which everybody agrees is a good thing. So, we we'll work out with what's what's best for the project and
for the town. And um if more water goes into our municipal without going across where people walk is better. >> Okay. So, so to your point, storm water is another issue that I think needs some uh >> to remind the board that technically
this building has been approved. The board's decision is based upon the request to have three units as opposed to two units. The ZBA has jurisdiction over the structure of the building. So
when you're evaluating these factors, it's really what the effect of having three units as opposed to two would be like these questions are all I mean to me construction sidewalks relate to things that happen for any project. It's going to be the same for a two family
retail. The same things with regards to drainage. The building is identical. It's just that you've got three. The request is for three units rather than two. Um, so that's really the scope of what the board's inquiry should be. I think we're happy to come back two weeks
just so you can have better. But >> you still have to deal regardless of whether you have three units or two units or one unit, you still have to deal with the storm water. >> Correct. But the building has been approved. Are you still looking at storm water from a building? It has to be dealt
with. So, okay, we will talk to Chuck and make sure that we can just understand that there's reasonable he's comfortable with a the narrative that you're going to provide us. Not it's not going to be a design, but it's going to be a narrative. All of these
things all fall under site plan review standards that we adhere to regardless of whether ZBA grant approval. >> It's a site plan review. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um any other things that
>> related to the the discussion with the police is just the whole communication. We think we've learned from sell signaling how important that is for the developer to have a plan in place to communicate to the town's people especially is something that's going to
be as disruptive for a short period of time as this. You're just going to be much better off if you get it out as wide and far as you possibly can. I think the police chief will help too. >> And I think Chris has spoken the police chief.
chief is satisfied with what we're doing is that I think this is this is going to be a private project, not a public project. So, we have the ability to control that messaging. >> Yeah. Directly. >> But it's going to be on public road right up in the middle of
period of time. I just think if people know that Yeah. Um and then the other uh issue that um is in the bylaw is hours of construction which um are have a late start of 8:00
a.m. Um and I just bring that to your attention. That is not we don't uh we're not the enforcement focus on that but um it is in the bylaw and that that may fly in counter to
uh working on Union Street when Union Street is not um heavily used. So um >> um >> we we might want to think about that with lease. >> Yeah. So, that was another one I had.
Um, okay. Any other things right now? We can, this doesn't need to be our only shot at this. Um, as they come up, you can also, you know, email Mark. Okay. With that, I'm going to take a motion to continue the public hearing um to
our next meeting, which is that the 25th >> 23rd. Um, right. February 23rd at 6:30 p.m. >> second. I do need a roll call on this. Um Gordon, >> yes. >> Yes.
>> Sarah votes yes. Uh Peter, >> yes. >> Brian and Sandy. Okay. Um great. Thank you very much for your uh wellprepared um nice looking project and uh we'll see you in two weeks. We're going to get a narrative about the storm water um as
soon as possible. Great. Thank you very much. >> Um the next uh items um you um Isabella and Nancy are welcome to
stay but um we don't have to and thank you for coming and um fun. Okay, the next thing um Okay, watch the other things. Thank you.
Um the downtown we have the zoning. So the we really need to get these finalized for all of you. Chris and I um did uh go through downtown and senior
housing with some excruciating detail. Um, did you >> I'm gonna ask you guys that at least look at the one that I we made a couple of substantive changes on reser administrative
and if you're okay with the uh allowing ARC to uh opine on the administrative typos um that I I'm thinking that would be certainly willing willing to get your input and then um we'll have a final
read of this. >> That's right. So I did send it get these in the packet. >> Um so the overall thing we did is we moved anything that had a definition elsewhere >> or a section elsewhere like parking and
height and uh into those sections that already exist. rather than putting them in this. And there a couple of reasons. One is it's where they belong. And two, we've spent a lot of time a lot of time cleaning up this redundant
placement of parking with every special. You know, it's easier to write it because then the public sees right there that parking is how many spaces and height, but it's better zoning to put parking numbers and height parks in parking section. So we did that in both
of those. Um and a couple of uh just the same with the um the business of the uh you measure the grade is for height for example. Okay. So in terms of uh oh did
you print out that other alternative table? I made uh one suggestion on page four that's substantive. Um >> yeah, thanks. Um so on page four, maintaining any on any lot not more than
one commercial vehicle. Um we suggested that in the harbor district that they that it be planning board and thating or maintaining more than four automobile speed in the harder edge. It
didn't make sense that we would have um it didn't really make sense the way we had it listed. You do you see the change on pink? Okay. But there's no objection. This is the this is what I'm talking
about. Okay. And then the next substantive change, we'll talk about the mixed use table in a minute. Um I think we Oh. Um
on page nine, um we had said that we had said parking shall not be allowed between the front of a building and the street um in both districts. We had them lumped together. Do you see that? And I've um
so I separated them into the town center and the harbor district, one space for residential unit. Oh, because um but in the harbor's edge, it seems that we don't need to have parking. We didn't need to say that parking should not be
allowed between the brilliant street. You think about Crosby's or MADM or hardware store and they're all going to have a site and review. So I think that does not make sense. >> I was going to strike that shall not be
allowed between the front of the building%. >> Okay. Yeah, but that's a substantive change. Um, and I think um the right now it's redundant
with the I added I um again page nine that says oh community facilities no spaces required commercial facilities No space is required except for motor vehicle light service because that was stuck in another section in under the
regulations. Okay. And then the last um change that's not substantive but just to bring to uh point out is that section 8.5 now has the requirement of u
um requirements that I've moved from other places and then a new um are all moved. Oh, um the other thing is that I um notice that the section 9.4.10
of the zoning uh is applicable only to the child. a mark, you need to check that language in that work and see if it needs to be said or as specified elsewhere. You know what I mean? If if the
applicability of that section is only child, I believe it said that's what it says, then we need to modify that flip section. Is that making sense to me to you?
>> Okay. So >> 9.4.10 says shall apply to developments within the CHOD. >> So the same portability.
>> So just to make sure that that works. So, those were the substantive changes with the one with a um um and I think I'm gonna suggest Mark handle the administrative
and then I did suggest a new um table for the mixed use. You're trying to uh clarify the language which we struggled with a little bit and um it may not. So this would replace
the table on six. >> Page six. Yes. Six and seven. So >> any titles we should just give tomorrow. >> Yes. Any type of just circle. Yeah. >> Yeah. I certainly probably have
>> There's just a few actually. and you know at night. >> Okay. Um so my hope was to try to clarify that.
Yeah, there was some wrong numbering. Um um let's start with the bottom one. The bottom one is the construction or conversion of first floor commercial to residential. And that was just categorized under commercial. And I
thought it would make sense to keep it under residential. It does a couple things. One is it is residential. And secondly, it just means now we have one table in the in the bylaw instead of two, one section. You know, it's a little clearer. And then I just um instead of having all these notes, I
suggested just having a a description. Um, so mixed use with up to four residential units and commercial community uses on the first floor with a minimum of 25 ft along the street side. I should say in a minimum the wordings
may still need to be in a minimum of 25 ft along the street side frontage of the building in um and that's in that's allowed by right in town center but not in harvest. and mixed use with up to 15 residential
units per acre. Um, and commercial community use on the entire first floor. So, that's the Harbor's Edge. So, those are the two that we're talking about. And, um, it kind of shows how
they're different. >> So, because there's no eight, eight is correct. >> Yeah, eight. I literally it was a redundant >> they have to be reumbered. >> Yeah. Everything that re I didn't worry about re numbering this the fact changes
in tables. Um so that's why I separated this. Um I also suggested um that we add a note at the top of the col the column headers town center and harbor's edge. just move
that district that says um subject to the requirements of 8.5 district in the use table. Um so that note because that note was only in um the mixed use
um before. So, um I was trying to think about this to developments that have happened um that we're pleased to see happen.
What >> that we're pleased to see happen. So if you think about uh Brendy Crosby's old building at the corner of um that would not have been allowed by
right because it's only four residents and it's got 11 >> and the depth of the commercial is only 16. >> Right. Exactly. And I I think um and I I did express I I think the original
formulation of mixed use with first floor residential mixed use without was simpler. Um I think some of your I think your attempt to get some of the dimensional stuff out of the table of uses and into
other places um didn't happen here. And I think I I it it feels complicated. More complicated. >> More complicated. Okay. >> Yeah. >> I don't know if it hit anybody that way, but when I thought about that project and I thought, well, it wouldn't have
been approved. We kind of would like to see it. >> Well, it would have because there were already 11 units there. >> 13. >> 13. So, it that's a different case. But if you think about um think about property, but it's seven.
>> Yeah. But think about um Seven Central which was a restaurant >> and that was it and now has been developed into three living units and a commercial on the first floor.
>> Um I don't know what that depth is um of that first floor uh commercial, but that's what we really want to see is something like that. You know, that's a total um increased residential
maintaining street side um uh um so I I think that's um I think we're in agreement about what we want. questions. How do we convey? Um,
and is it better to put the um the descriptions into the table or to put them as notes? >> I think the notes are clear. >> Okay. And that leaves it open.
>> Okay, that's fine. >> That's that's my only thing. Most of the other >> Yeah, >> that's my only thing. I don't see any problem with moving if you want to move the D2 to
number nine. >> But I think the Bible has set up that way with all these laws. >> Okay. >> 15 others already. >> I think it's a great to do it in the >> perfect. Okay. There's agreement that
that we we'll let Mark's uh version stand and we'll just take another read and make sure it's really working on. That's totally fine. I'm looking at >> um fight with that table. >> Um I do have one other thing though that
is important on the on the very bottom of this um single page administrative. Let's take this opportunity to fix the typo of note four and note five in the table
the um I can show you later just circle it in big red this table at the very bottom note four in the table 4.2 to is misnumbered. So, let's use this opportunity to fix
it. It's an easy fix to just fix and type. I I it's on the bottom. It's on that back side. That's all right. Um any other I think if I went through the substantive comments any other comments
or substantive comments that people have um downtown we want to do anything about the house actually you have a recommendation on that right? Yeah, I I think um
I don't think it affects the what we're trying to do for the zoning board of anything they do today. I think >> it's just
we have So we remain in district 1950 >> when it still could be >> so the opportunity for it to be. >> So what he was talking about doing perhaps one day was maybe the two units instead of the one unit it is today
which kind of goes along with adding some residential to the downtown. Um and he wouldn't be subject to the first floor commercial like the parking is right by the railroad tracks.
>> Probably not bad thing just to leave it, >> right? If we could put it in town center then that would be different but that doesn't make sense. >> But then it starts separated by another >> right that doesn't make any sense. >> Okay. Um, do we have a do I have a
motion to exclude that we from second >> from town center? Any other discussion? >> All in favor? >> Okay, >> that's great. >> Yeah,
>> okay. Great. Um, anything else on downtown? >> So, Mark's gonna make these final changes and then we're going to do one. We're gonna all go through it. >> Yeah, I think we did a pretty >> So, at the at the uh select board meeting last week, did we decide on when
they're expecting these from us? >> We have to vote next week. >> They wanted like before that. >> Yeah. Because didn't Tony say the seventh something? It was >> all right. Then let's um what I'm going to suggest is that we um take a motion
to uh submit. This isn't the final file, right? We have what >> goes should be the schedule. >> I have it in what's your time? Let's just vote the
Let's just vote them to with the edits. Um and then authorize Chris uh uh um maybe authorize Mark to to do the changes and I'm going to ask um you've
got a very good eye uh Peter and Chris to review it um in its final form >> to submit >> and to submit it to and Mark to submit it to the Blackboard. >> Okay. Do I have a motion to that effect
to approve the zoning >> draft zing? >> I all in favor. >> Great. Excellent. Thank you. >> But we're now working off the 2826 draft. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> And and are we are we in agreement on exactly which ones we're submitting? Is it senior? >> Well, let's go. Yeah, that's one one at a time. >> Um, the next on the agenda is our in
article. Um, and I think that one is ready to go. Uh, um, but I think we had it from last time. Um,
We'll tell 112. Thanks. So, we're allowing them with planning board of uh special permit in the general bylaw
uh allowed in the limited commercial allowed in town center and allowed ends of 12 rooms. of 12 rooms or less with one space per guest. Do we have plus?
>> Um, probably two. >> I think we're talking about district >> a general >> but for guests. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Okay. I think that's fine. Okay.
So that um So I'll take a motion to advance the article for ends um to the select board. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> Okay, great. Um the next one is hotels
and I think at the last meeting we decided that we were the December 12th meeting we decided we were going to table that. Y >> is anybody want to suggest otherwise at this point? Seeing anybody? So, I think we're going to let that stand. We had we had voted
out at or consensus was at the last meeting table. Um, okay. The next one is senior housing. Um, and again, I apologize, but Chris and I did go through that one as well. Some administrative changes and a couple
of substantive changes. Um, so if I can walk you through those again. Sorry, >> those are the packing too. Yeah, they were that just sometimes it's good to have in front of us. Thank you. >> Is that different than what was in there
or two versions unfortunately in the packet. One was the and this just went in. >> So the first was I changed development to facility. I think we had talked about doing that. Um
most facility always plungers up for the institutional. Can you just say how you >> I thought we talked about doing that. Um it's not a big deal. Um development also I think
>> development is bad word I just senior independent senior senior housing independent living senior we just call it housing but people think about it as fun. >> That's true. call it a residential.
>> It's in the definition of a residential either development or facility. What do you say? Residential homes. >> That's not that sounds like >> residential homes. >> You can say assisted living.
>> How about assisted living residences? >> Yeah. Well, then we have to change. The problem with that is then you got to go through and change it everywhere. >> Yeah, because we're calling it. Yeah, that's right.
>> I I just struck development in most places. >> Yeah. >> So, I'm going to let we'll think a little bit about that. Move on to the um oh I suggested on the next on page two
adding senior housing continuing care facility which we have added a definition and just saying no across the board. Yeah, >> there are two reasons for that. One makes it very clear. The um other thing is it makes it easier to amend this
later if we want to add it. The danger is that it could be amended on town meeting because it's in there where somebody could say I think we should have continuing care in the LCD. Um
that's a risk. >> What I would do is I would strike the definition in this and that there. >> Yeah. And that something you can Okay. >> So let's strike the definition.
and stuff like that. That's fine. I just didn't want to have one out the other. >> Okay. >> The other thing as far as language, I would call the independent living called the
assisted living facility >> because that's what they are. >> Okay. >> Assisted living >> facility >> is a facility run by people in independent living we say housing units
with occupancy I think that when we've got >> or housing we call that a development keep development step okay um so um
the new idea on page three um the um suggested that space for accessory uses be limited to 10% of the residential area unless otherwise allowed. Um, so
the thought was maybe that's just overly prescriptive and because it's um I think you and I talked you know about that but um whether or not >> what
>> would you >> or a percentage it doesn't have to be 12%. Why? >> Why? >> They're only going to build what's necessary because it cost money to build extra space. So, >> maybe that's unnecessary. You and I talked about it. Chris, what do you think? Rid of it.
>> Get rid of it. Okay. >> You have these ideas and then when you come back to Joseph, you think, >> right? Sorry. Um, >> leave the rest. >> You put a line through instead.
>> Right. Um, and then on page four, we added de restriction. And I I did note that Mark, you need to kind of put the right stuff in there, but deed wasn't anywhere in here. And these need to be deed.
>> Yes. Okay. Oh, okay. So, minimum lot size. Now, it's that. Okay. So, I took um non rounds. Um now, we have that other piece of paper that I asked. Sorry, one more thing.
Um so, I took the assessor's records and said in each district, how many um lots do we have over an acre? How many lots do we have over a half acre? And how many lots do we have that are compliant with zoning? Now,
I didn't have time to take out the big lots that you're not going to make into senior housing, which are cemeteries, the schools as Hispanic. Well, I guess that's good. Not like me. um you know uh three part.
So so this is this is you know my subtract two to four in a and general and you know take it with a grain of salt. Yeah I've got very
numbers there. I mean much bigger >> much bigger >> over an acre. I I uh basically if you go over an acre I got almost in
all the districts I got uh almost 700 bots. >> They're only like >> they're 2554 bots. >> Okay. >> And um so I don't know why our numbers are different. So we should probably
check. I should have >> I can I can send you the big spreadsheet. >> Okay. Great. >> And but so there's no worry I think because John seemed to be concerned that um there weren't enough opportunities. I
think there's a bunch of opportunities. Yeah, they're sufficient. And in fact, >> um maybe there too many. So, >> right. >> Okay. So let's if my my number is what I use an old database I got from so you may have some >> I I use the thing you use for MT.
>> Okay. So let's go this way. Um well the um but the so the question is what's the what's the right minimum lot size a lot is going to have so I thought a little bit more about this and say in E
district E a lot to make a new lot out of the existing lot you have to have 90,000 square feet but that's not the right question if there's a halfacre in district E because that's the biggest the question is could that be that
already exists an existing field or an existing not not whether or not could be divided because let's assume it has to already exist if it's under it's not would that be what do you need to be how big does it need to be to be in one of these facilities
and um it does seem to me that it does matter a little bit by district maybe um I mean my conclusion looking at the numbers and I I I mean I did it over
just a fairly short period of time is that maybe what we say is that the minimum lot size for this kind of facility is the minimum lot size in the district. I thought about that. But the problem is
that we might have especially in E. >> I mean most of E is nonfme is non-compliant and we have a lot of big homes there would not do conversion. >> I got 129 lots or graded two
>> and I did I didn't do this for the other uh zones but I did look um >> yeah I have 128. >> Okay. that that number is closed and I threw out the cemeteries and the municipal staff and all that. >> But I said that but but it there's
non-compliant lots in E of 100. >> So in district E there are 100ish lots that are under two acres that exist today. And it seems like we shouldn't restrict our senior housing to those
that are two acres. Why not? I mean 128 opportunities. >> So how are >> say well how how big do you think these facilities should be? The bigger is the minimum lot size the bigger the facility
is going to be. So if the character of the town smaller development we should be pushing smaller lot sizes because that's going to reduce the number of units. Well, yes. >> So, which is
>> which is an argument actually for using the existing lot of places in the district and and the second if because you also have a cap of 10 units. >> So, that means the D district or
C district >> the D district isn't winds up being out because it's 6,000 >> the G district which would be a good place. Yeah, >> you wouldn't be able to do anything. >> Well, that's because of the capped tent units.
>> Because of the life, a lot size of 6,000 square feet, you're only going to be able to put one unit. >> So, I wondered if I don't know how we solve that problem. >> I wondered in terms minimum wide size if
the arches say nothing about it. So you have a lot. It's a half acre and it's in C. So it's it's an existing lot. It doesn't comply with zoning, >> right? >> But you could have five
independent living there >> with a check. Yeah. >> Yeah. With no 10 per acre. >> 10. >> So yeah, in that halfacre lot that exists today, it's an existing home. I don't think we want to go to the full lots. There's so many non-compliant lots
of >> convert existing homes. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> I have a pretty big house type. My h my lot is non-compliant. >> So, you remain silent, but you still have the problem that Chris raised, which is what do you do with that 10
minutes per acre in Egypt? Well, you just have to go to the halfacre lot to get >> And there are some >> and there are some >> there are some there are there are not a lot. Yeah, indeed. There's size of four
and g there's 12 or half acres. Uh 16. >> Yeah, 16. I can't I didn't seem to know why I didn't have enough math in that. But anyway, the point being there are some that are half acre or more in
>> So do we. So that's a very good idea. The question is how do where you're saying it could be built on a non-compliant lot. Do we actually see that >> because a lot already exists. We have things built on non-compliant lots all
over town. >> We got non-compliant lot. Well, we have we do have things that say if you can do this if if existing, right? If a lot exists,
>> this a thing that the CPA would have to special. >> What do you think? >> I think we ought to have these larger watches. Um because I think and again some of these districts they're against
districts and know more of like a neighbor concern often now bunch of units um and that having larger lot sizes allows you some flexibility of design
so it minimizes not that the impacts are going to be all that great. It's my likes factory but you know >> but there but there are some three three units of 600 square ft is 14 acre
in G D and B and one anchor basically would be uh one acre in I don't C and B. I'm not sure about A which way that goes.
It's not many options. Doesn't seem like one size fits all. >> It doesn't. I think it just gets confusing, >> right? Criteria. Um, almost there.
>> You're right. Well, the thing that's tough is what you're saying is in some of the I mean, it's one of Gary's comments that the places that would be good for senior independent living housing are G
and the whole idea of a walkable downtown, right? But we are doing a lot toward I mean between the Chads and the to increase those could all be any and the the new downtown districts those any of
those could also be senior housing under the you know those can available to seniors if they're not team restricted. So >> even if they weren't restricted, multif family, >> right? And multi we've done a lot a lot
to do multif family housing. >> So what this comes down to is one acre or a half acre. If it's a one acre, you're getting 10 units or more every project which is a small that we want.
>> Yeah. If you want a smaller scale, then you have to define it. So of Pat Baker across the board. >> That's what I would argue for. Right again. So
anybody wants to go >> I would say you know it's a choice for for you to debate and discuss but I'm just thinking about kind of meeting to get it past and trying to >> just initially kind of do something that
>> might address you know not everybody's >> so ad rather have 10 unit projects and five unit perhaps. Well, but again with five project it's going to be somewhere small
to bigger where you have more flexibility offering rotation those types of site design. But what if we did? I have a half acre
in B, D, G, and the downtown district. We got to move those put those in here, too. And the minimum lot size as one acre in A, C, and E. That makes that makes at least to me makes more sense. You just need to find
out what the numbers really are so two acres in AC. Yeah. So I think one acre in A C and E. We want those conversions >> and a halfacre in B C B D G and
down center and harvest edge need to go in there. >> So is that going to be done in text or tables? >> It's going to be a text in the in the standards. Yeah. Yeah. It's in the 9.5.4 minimum.
>> I think it can be in the standards. I think it's okay. Okay, we do we have a anybody object to half acre in BDB G Town Center Harbor's Edge and minimum lot as one
acre in the A C and D >> it does say okay I hear no objections we'll move on um the next administrative we we um move
the 1500 just the movement. Um, and then the parking again, I moved that into the parking table section. Um, okay. Affordable units. >> Um, Mark said this.
>> It was a big improvement on the language, the new language. Except you can't have board may allow addition >> can't be you can't do that. Now although that sounds a little confusing the the
paragraph that we had it's very clear you understand it and people reading this are developed right >> but I couldn't understand it so I >> Mark are you objecting to the alternative
>> the second parag where it says the planning board may allow units to promote the construction of affordably units there's No. >> Is that specific enough? >> Yeah. >> Can we say you add 10% more? >> Up to 10% more.
>> Yeah. But again, it's what's what's the criteria? What's the standard? May or may not allow it. But >> isn't it the standards though of the site plan review or special program review?
You can't it can't be arbitrary but >> and the problem with using the chod requirements is that doesn't have >> well someplace else if the bonus thing continued to live >> right
>> but I I also have a clarifying question on the alternative language which I I thought was much better um uh 10 to 15 units would include two affordable units I think if I understand correctly, it
would be 10 to 14 units, which >> is 15 would have three. >> Yep, you're right. 10 to 14. Yes, exactly. >> So, >> I don't understand your I thought actually the flexibility was a big thing
the entire thing. You're saying it's >> Yeah, you can't. It's arbitrary. You can't can't have arbitrary extra things. >> All right. Yes, we're going to strike that sentence. >> That begins the planning board. >> Yes. Mhm. >> Um
what I objected to in the one above was that I couldn't figure out how many of the that 12 units were affordable or how many were not affordable. So I wanted to use the word total units.
In fact, it should say 10 to 14 total units. Um two or four units. Um let's let's before we write try to worry about the wording. Let's what is our intent?
So if you have two affordable units in a 10 unit facility, this is independent living. This doesn't apply to assisted living. This that doesn't make any sense. So we're just this just applies to
>> independent living. >> So um what is our intent? >> Providing subject. >> Okay. But but if I'm building 10 to 14 units, two of them are affordable.
And then if I want to add one more affordable, I can or two more affordable. What's that's the intent is >> Yeah. I'm trying to think for an existing building. >> Yeah. But just in terms of numbers of units, if I if I'm building 12 with two affordable, I'd get I can build two more
if I want it. >> Yeah, sure. Somehow the math works out better to have 14 as opposed to 12 if the and then four would be affordable and that's a result we would all see.
So could we say double the number of affordable units? >> Oh, is they getting extra units on the phone? >> So I guess I'm trying to understand what we want to achieve first then. >> Right. >> I was going to what I'm trying to
achieve for every affordable. >> Yeah, that's Yes. >> Yes. So that's a doubling. >> That's a doubling. >> So I have I'm building 10 units. I'm required to build two that are affordable.
>> Now how do you do for those 12? >> But that's only with our discretion. You can't just do it. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's not really discretion. Well, is that what you're saying? Is that's you know assuming you can make it work
on the site everything else has you can arbit through the neighborhood but um So Mark, you were okay with the length, the original length which said
additional bonus unit and additional bonus affordable unit shall be allowed for every five non bonus units. >> Yeah, one affordable unit shall be created for every five units. However, additional bonus unit shall be allowed
for every five nonaffordable. Can we say call them market rate? >> Yeah, there'll be five market rate units. >> But it's a bonus affordable, right? >> Yeah.
>> Yeah, that's the question. Yes. >> But that's >> Well, then why even bother having a state, >> right? >> Well, you're trying to encourage someone to
build four or five years. So that >> I see that somebody has their hand raised. Um well, let's just let us get we'll get to you in a minute. But I I just
>> You don't do it at all. Just leave it like the exact see what happens. So from getting this passed, one of the advantages of referencing 9.4.10
is then 9.4.10 is not subject to amendment and this is going to for sure get as written is very still partial understanding.
Um I bonus unit because then the density does reference >> then the other thing is that it makes it consistent if we have to describe it for the downtown now we're describing it
again. It's the same standard. >> Same standard across the board. >> And then if we wanted to stress bonus units, we could add it into >> in one place. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So,
>> yeah. So, and you don't have to repeat the what is an affordable unit too because it's in that this definition 9.4. Okay. Great. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, one on also on page five, um, Chris and I were talking about the the
size of assisted living with a onebedroom, two-bedroom, threebedroom thing doesn't really make much sense because nobody's going to build an assisted living facility instead of bedroom a unit that's 1500 ft. So, we said assisted living unit of 600 square
feet unless otherwise allowed by special permit. Um, >> we could say 600 square f feet per res. >> Oh, yeah. That's a good idea. >> So, some of the >> I talked to my friend. Some of the
assist living facilities have the bigger units corners of the buildings. >> Okay. >> They'll have some one bedrooms. Then the rest will be what you know slash is what they are.
>> Yeah. Um maybe connected something. >> Yeah. Do we even need that? Do we even need a maximum? >> I don't need >> You don't think we need it? >> That's I mean realistically you don't get rid of it. >> It's a real facility.
>> Yeah, I agree. So, we're getting rid of the >> Okay. >> Maximum 600 >> and the we're going to use the assisted living. We're going to use the half acre again and the one acre and add in town
center and harbor. Are we is That's a question. >> No, I thought we decided not to add >> Oh, right. because of parking and all that. >> Y thank you.
Um >> the size. >> So we're going to strength the size here. >> Oh no, that we'll leave the minimum lot size. Same thing. Half acre for B and E. Minimum lot size one acre and AC
60. Then we should have a 60 unit total. >> Do we have it? Yeah. >> No, we don't have 60 units on the assisted living. >> That's just for the independent
>> independent. So, do we think we want to have a 60? I think we need 60. So when you add in the 60 unit tax >> okay >> so then we don't
okay and then I just separated out Um does the parking from is it lumping up together? Interestingly enough, we have to um Oh, I know. The first thing was to strike
the parking requirements that we currently have for senior housing, which is one for each resident and 75 for each assisted living unit. and um
is vague. I mean, do you want to specify? You just leave because that's in the parking lot. they submit a staffing plan. >> Can you just review that wording and make sure it makes sense? >> Um, so I don't think we did any other
substantive changes. >> I do think one parking space for every five residential units in assisted living. >> No, it's not. staff. Okay. >> How many times? >> Okay.
Um, so I just moved the stuff out of the I just cut it wholesale from the narrative in the text and put it in the parking table. Okay. All right. Um, I'm going to take a
motion to uh advance the senior housing draft 2.6 6 two February 6 26 um with a review by Mark and another final review by Peter and uh Chris to
the select board for um their >> so all in favor oh I'm sorry I want to take the iPhone comment in case there's some Thank you sorry Can you hear me? >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Um, this is Gary Gilbert, 11 Magnolia. Um, >> Gary, hold up. Can you hold hold one one um just before I'm going to let you speak in a second? We did all receive your email and we have a um draft
response to your email and when Chris and I reviewed this, we did look through your email. So, we've we've looked at your email and um appreciate your time to put that together. So, if there's things that are redundant with that email, uh maybe you can paraphrase or
but so go ahead. >> Okay. A couple of questions and then I have a recommendation. Um I'll jump to the biggest one. You you just mixed around the zoning districts and saying half halfacre requirement in BG
etc. the town center and harbor point. Um, do you know how many lots in district B are a half an acre? Because most of them are right around what's required, a third of an acre. Do you have a count on that or an idea? >> They're two pounds.
>> Yeah, two. >> I So nine um are uh a half acre or or higher. So yeah, there a bunch. >> Nine. >> Yeah, >> that's not many for district for the whole district B. Yeah, the whole district only has
uh um Are you saying B or D? >> Yeah, a total of 19 plus. >> Okay, then let's go. >> The district is very few. >> Okay. District A. District A you're requiring one acre. That means how many
lots in district A are double lot size. How many? Because that's a halfacre minimum. How many lots >> a were incl. I looked at that and found uh almost 140 lots >> that are one acre.
>> Congrats. I was surprised. >> I went to the assessor this morning. She couldn't You obviously know how to use the database better than her. Um, she couldn't. I used to be able to look this stuff up. Couldn't. So, you're saying that there's ample opportunity in a um >> Yes.
>> I was I was going to suggest that you you consider that the amount of units that can end. Well, let's not forget about poor district and G. If if D needs a half an acre, you need three and three/4ers of a lot. So, you basically need quadruple lot size to
do something in district D. Um, and the general district also I would suggest that you say you already are limiting the amount of units that can be by 15 units per acre. So those >> what 10 units >> 10 units per acre. Okay. Oh, okay. Well,
then they wouldn't be able to have anything if they're 6,000 square foot lots. But >> I'm sorry, what? >> Yes, >> correct. You are correct. I was going to say you rely on your maximum density to be your limit and then and let everybody
else just simply have the minimum lot size for their their district except change unit uh district E which would be a great thing and say that all you need is one acre because they've really been hit hard because of this upzoning to two to or down zoning to two acres per lot.
let everybody else, as was suggested earlier tonight, to just simply have to have the minimum lot size and they're limited by the density of 10 units per acre. Anyhow, >> I think I'm agreeing with you, Gary, in but not quite agreeing with you. I actually think that A belongs in the
halfacre category because its minimum lot size is a halfacre. So, anything that's compliant, so A should be in with a halfacre. So, halfacre would >> and unless you do this, District D and G
are thrown out the window because they they can't um they're never going to satisfy this. >> There may be some few. >> But why leave it to just a few? Why not just say minimal lot size? is because you've got the density already regulated
>> there because there there are too few units you could create something >> a 6,000 square foot lot you could do >> you could do what under your proposed zoning of a half an acre you can't do anything with 6,000 square feet >> you can do two
>> okay um do you have another comment Gary >> well no half an acre is 22,500 square feet >> sure you can do >> so in district you can't do any senior housing. >> That's not true. >> That's not true. >> We have We have at least nine.
>> Yeah. I have 13 actually. >> Yeah. Nine for 13. A dozen. >> Yeah. >> In district. >> And in G in G it's >> okay. If you're >> if you're if you're happy with it, then I'll jump to two other points.
>> Okay. Can I can I just um for our benefit suggest that we move A into the halfacre category because A is only a halfacre minimum lawn size with every other Sure. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So K is the halfacre,
>> right? >> Two two other things. Um, I I sent you a letter with a bunch of stuff in it, but um, in item G, I guess it's on page uh, four, local preference, you really I think you should change the language
there that um, uh, the applicant shouldn't have to prepare a local preference plan unless they you should just add in there unless they have afford if they don't have affordable housing units, um, if they only got four units, they shouldn't have to prepare that plan. So you should just say and
change that language that they don't have to do it unless they have an affordable unit as part of their project. >> What's your rationale for that? >> Because local preference plan cannot would would not you can't prepare one if you've got a 4unit elderly housing project and none of the units are
affordable. It's not relevant. What basically say >> because you can build up to four units. Once you build the fifth unit, then you need to have that fifth unit has to be affordable. Correct. >> And affordable and local are different.
>> No, but if you've got four units and you're just renting them, >> Yeah. >> why do you need an a local preference plan? Is there such a thing as a local preference plan if you're renting apartments? Yeah, I was saying that you have you can give preference to somebody who lives in
Manchester who's >> for a rental for a four-unit rental building. >> Sure. >> That's deed restricted to 55. You you're going to have a local preference plan, which sounds cumbersome. And who's going to administer it? I thought it was only
relevant to affordable housing units. >> I don't know that that's true. >> Is it true? >> Yeah. It's a cumbersome thing. I mean, you you do it if you're on a register. This is from my understanding. It's if it's registered, then then that comes into
effect or it's a it's an option once it's in in in a system, but it's there's no system if there's only four units or three or whatever. Um, and the other thing is in um senior the independent living 954
E3, you have size limits. And I suggest and if someone doesn't comply with those size limits, they need a variance. And I suggest because we have such an idiosyncratic town, houses and dead-end streets, isolated from others, all sorts of odd situations, give yourself the
latitude by saying this adding to that unless the special permit granting authority, which would be the SPGA or which would be the planning board, uh, determines that it is in the best, you know, however you want to word it, in the best interest of the town to allow larger units.
Um, so that way you're not locked into it. And I know John Brown agrees with me that these unit sizes are fairly small, which has a advantage to it to keep the prices down. I I I support that, but you should allow yourself the latitude when you're granting special permit to use a
special permit for what it's for, a special consideration of something. Um, and it gives you guys a bit more power control, but also control and review. Isn't that in here though? >> No, >> it says a less modified special.
>> Oh, we added that. >> Yes, I added that. >> You don't have a new version. It said unless modified by the special government. >> Your suggestion has already been taken. >> Your suggestion. Yeah, we >> So Gary, I'm going to read you. I just I just Googled local preference for senior
housing. Here's what I got. It allows municipalities to prioritize current residents, their family members, municipal employees, and local business employees for new affordable or age restricted developments. Often up to a
70% cap areas like Massachusetts. These policies aimed to help seniors stay in their communities usually requiring proof of residency through documents like voter registration or utility clause. >> Okay.
>> And you and uh Mark maybe in your experience don't see that as being too cumbersome. I didn't realize that was allowed and already flagged and but is it too cumbersome a demand or if not >> I don't think it's I don't think it has to be cumbersome. No. >> Okay. All right. All right. I thought it
was part of a much bigger uh thing. Um Okay. Those were my comments. Thank you. >> Okay. Great. Um thank you uh for that, Gary. Um so to Gary's point, I failed to mention
that I had added in at unless modified by special permit for the sizes of the units. So that is a substantive change. Sorry I didn't make that, but it's a great change. >> Okay. Um and
um so we voted this and uh we did just make the change to move a into the halfacre. >> Y make a motion to do that. >> Okay. Can we make a motion to move uh district a uh the minimum lot I'm going
to that we're going to I'm going to Here's the motion. The minimum lot size for both independent housing and assisted living shall be a halfacre in B in in districts A, B, D, and G.
And for uh and independent living would include town center and hours edge. And the minimum lot size shall be one acre in C and E districts. Are you moving the assisted living also?
>> So, yes, but assisted living at Town Center or Harvest Edge. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Do I have a motion to move? >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> Okay. Great. Unanimous. Thank you. Okay.
So, that's senior >> anybody. Is anybody else on the line going to waiting to talk about any other zoning list? Okay, great. Let's that's that's Thank you. Let's do that. Okay, we just first >> see one other thing which is I had a
discussion with Sarah Bellish this morning about uh changing the accessory use >> a to district. which he would like us to
consider changing the ends for the D1 and the D2 to ZBA for large accessory to prepared the >> but we haven't the question and something else as part of that when
I was doing research on this the heading for 9.1 currently says special housing provisions that I really should say dwelling >> oh yeah that's just to say
okay so the question is do we would do we consider advancing this on behalf of this be a quick yes or no I don't think it's a bad idea Yeah, I don't know what wants to pick it up.
>> Yeah, I we should take it to the SL board. I mean, if Sarah's asking to do that and it makes things simpler, why not? >> I'd agree with that. >> If the select board says no, okay. >> Okay. Um, do you have is that a motion?
>> Make that a motion. >> Second. >> Okay. Um, uh, all in favor? I >> So, >> okay. >> You're gonna ask Sarah to bring it directly to the select. >> We're bring
So, you do. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> All right. I was >> Okay, we have um we only have driveway entrance. So, let's just finish this. Sorry. I know you've been waiting a while. Let's Let's get through this. Driveway entrance by
law. Again, we skimmed it. We you looked at more. I think the only change that's needed there is to say that the regulations are going to be promulgated by the planning court that they don't say how the regulations are. >> Okay. Yep.
Um, so and then we do have draft regulations which we should >> adopt them and finalize which we have not and I think we can't do it until the bylaw passes. Yeah, >> be given authority to promate. Right.
>> Well, besides people have half whatever, >> right? So, we should have a draft ready so people can see. >> So, I'll put it on the next agenda. The last draft I had had comments I think from Chuck myself. So, I'll incorporate everything. So, we'll get a nice clean copy
for the probably put it on the next. >> Yeah, that's fine. I think about we so I'll take a motion to advance the driveway entrance bylaw with a change that regulations are promulgated by the planning board um to the um select board.
>> So second >> all in favor. >> So >> it's the 122 document that's in here. the one that's in the fac. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um before we do housing production plan, let's have a discussion with um
Peter Con. Great. Welcome. >> Thank you for your patience. >> This my neighbor Chris Day who lives >> on the other side of the property. Do I go here? >> Sure. >> You just sit here. >> Anywhere you want. I can bring up the
plans if you want. Yeah, sure. Um, I might as well make it official. >> I can pull it up. I'm on this one, too. >> Oh, sure. Um, yep. Uh, >> yep. You just have to ask me to for
permission. >> Pop up on the screen. not asking me. >> I wish up there. Yeah. >> Oh, you got the magic touch. >> Okay. >> So,
>> I I set Mark a little I did earlier today. >> Um I just want to set the stage here. I'm Peter Considine. I live at 25 Pleasant Street, which is this house where my cursor is right here. >> Okay.
>> And about three weeks ago, I purchased 115 School Street. Um, which I've been looking over the fence at for the last 11 years. >> Um, a handful of you, I think, or maybe many of you have been there and are
aware of the the conditions of the property. And I'm really here just looking for guidance. I I have some thoughts and plans. It was I'm not a house flipper or a real estate developer. I'm really here as a community member and a neighbor who um
opportunity saw a problem and had some inspiration and decided to get involved. You know, we'll see if that was the right or not. But I my plan is to live in this house that I'm in now for the rest of my life and have a lot of concerns about
what was going on at 115 school and um really think that it's a very nice property in its own ways. Um, and when when I started here, they had big F of July parties and uh an active residential scene there and it just has
gone went downhill and I've long kind of looked over the fence and just had dreams of expanding my property and um and then ultimately as you know I don't want to I know it's public forum as things got worse over there it just got to be really concerning um as neighbors
um and Chris can maybe speak to that at some point. Um, so again, I'm here looking for guidance and feedback. Um, and when doing research, I, you know, I fully understand that we're in the A district, which has some real
limitations to what you can do. Um, but again, I bought it not up to make money, not necessarily with any specific plan, but just to um purch where where it goes from here. Um,
so what I've what I'm hoping to do, just pull up the other back here. I wouldn't be here so quickly. I have to stop sharing. Please be here so quickly if it wasn't for town meeting.
My plan was to spend quite a bit of time cleaning up the property, which I'm sorry, I seem to have xed out of that deck that I put together. I can pull up but it's easier for someone else
to >> it's progressed a little. So, I just did this today when I was nursing my Super Bowl hangover, >> trying to avoid real work. So, this is the property. This is my my house here. Um,
and I did want to stop talk just a little bit about the current conditions of the house. So, um, anyone's welcome to come by. We're actually getting all this junk out of here, um, later this week. So, we're at a at a really ex
exorbitant expense to myself, we're we're clearing all this stuff out. They're saying 30 39 dumpsters to get all the junk out of there. So, and I am uh >> I have something to gain out of it. So, I thought maybe bringing a neighbor down who who isn't involved in this maybe to
just talk about what we've been dealing with the last uh 10 years or I guess you've been there for years. Four. Yeah. Chris, want to just give me a little >> Yeah, I mean, you know, so, uh, background, uh, Chris Day, I live at 117
School Street, moved in there in September of 21. Um, you know, when we first got there, I was actually invited over to 115 to meet with the former owner of the property, ASDON. Um, and went in and, you know, it
was a little bit rundown. Um, but over the last four years, it's definitely gotten substantially worse in terms of, you know, a degradation of kind of the back area with the pool and it sounded like a zoo back there. Number of kind of
animals seem to be kind of moving around. Um, more recently, we did some work in our back. When the fence between the two houses went down, the contractor was, you know, kind of saying, "Hey, you've got some stuff going on over there." it's, you know, a little bit
concerning. Um, and, you know, then went in with Pete, uh, more recently, and I can say, you know, from 2021, Septemberish of 21 to present, it's gotten substantially, you know, more challenging uh, in terms of its physical
layout. >> I think it'd be helpful to get to the the where you want to go. >> Sorry, we made the point. It's a >> And if you want to go, that's fine. not releving.
>> Um I totally get that. So here is um the current zoning. We're in the D zone at 25 school. This is all in the A district, B district across the street. Um, every every home in the A district
other than 115 School Street does not meet the fronted regulations and tends to have uh buildings that are within the setback requirements. Um, and just looking at my options here, um, I
recognize they are relatively few in the A zone. So, uh, in pursuing alternatives, what I am planning to do and hoping to do is to submit a citizen's petition to reszone the um, a
district portions on the I don't know which side is that the east on my side of school street, the four properties to the residential B district, which would allow for uh the
three homes above me to now uh be conforming to the frontage requirements. And um and really meet what the the area has for for uh lot sizes. And
additionally, it would allow me to I ultimately would like to do is find a path to subdivide the property. Um uh because when I looked at
opportunities to create two housing lots out of this 1.3 acre property in the A subdis district, the only real potential path would be through demolishing the house that sits up front, which has some
real historic qualities to it. Um, and the more time I spend in it in it, and once I get past the junk, it does seem like it has another another act in it, so to speak, and to demolish it only to be able to use this halfacre of land in
the rear just seems like a a a shame. And and it may it may be what I ultimately decide to do. Um, but this plan, I think, is a pretty elegant solution uh to create ample access for a
modest home in the rear to allow for the primary residence to remain. And ultimately, what I'm hoping to do is expand my property. Um, which is what I I've been dreaming about looking over
the fence all these years. Um, so again, I'm I'm I have a plan and that my plan is to start with my neighbors and get signatures on a citizens petition to reszone the property. I obviously recognize this um board has a lot to say
about that. Um, and I'm really not trying to jam anything down anyone's throats. I'm just looking for feedback on um what you all are open to and um any guidance you're willing to give me. Um,
that's the last page. Oh, I should just give a little summary here. This is the A subd district and the B subd district. Just from listening guys, it sounds like you you have this stuff
pretty well screwed into your head. Um, but uh it would it it would allow our neighborhood to fit more into the village than it does. It seems like that a subd district doesn't really necessarily
meet what our part of town reflects and um allow for another home to be built in Manchester. And the only thing I'll leave is that part of this is um I have a brother who's 11 years younger than me that's been looking for a house for two
years down and I hope that he's ultimately a resident of that that rear parcel. Um, I can't promise that that's what he hopes, but but it it sort of spurred this this thinking on, you know, I'm just gonna buy it and we're gonna
figure it out. And it is it's a I know a lot of people come up here that do this a lot. This is not my day job. Um, and it's a very big investment for myself and um, I'm hoping just to have a open discussion about how to maximize value
and the the benefit to the neighborhood and the town of of 115 school street. >> That's really >> So Peter, could you put up again the map? >> Yes.
So that plan is uh because if it were in B district, it would be conforming in terms of frontage. Is that what you're trying to achieve? >> It would it would it would allow for conforming frontage. It would allow for conforming lot size of uh all of these
lots. Um it it's still a concept. So it's, you know, it's by no means a final concept. Again, I bought this 3 weeks ago and if it wasn't for the planning board meeting, I just be out there with my, you know, with my dumpsters messing around with it. Um, but since this
planning board is coming down the pipe, I met with Mark and he, you know, told me what my timeline was. I said, "No, I might as well put the pivots together um and take a swing."
So again, it's very much a concept and ready to be evolved. It would probably still require variances um even within the B district. So I'm not by any means saying like this is this is me asking for you to approve
this plan. It's more putting it on a path to turn a 1.3 acre property in the village into two homes and retain the existing to physical plant.
>> Well, you have enough acreage to do two homes. What you don't have what you want is the uh large the addition to your property and that's the piece that precludes the division of this property into two
lots. >> Corre well frontage properties. >> Well, you could do a subdivision road. >> Correct. >> Yeah. It's if if I were to um ban the A district and decide that this is about maximizing my exit here, I would
demolish the house, put a set a road down or stays the side of this property and have two lots here. Um and I can do that. Um but again, I really don't want to
demolish the house and I would like to expand my property. So yeah, I agree. >> I guess my point is when you're saying it can't be two house lots, I think I disagree with you in its current form. >> Um the the is the wild card here is that
you want to this addition to your own to your property >> you should move to the big house. So, um this would be by uh citizens petition. Um
the other one thing we don't talk about enough, but I'm looking at the um maps right now. Um this is in the watershed protection district um which is arguably um
some of the you know why are certain uh parcels zoned way I don't know sometimes it's like anybody's guess but but that might be one of the um criteria that was
um for that so there are um additional requirements that we don't pay enough attention to um but for development in that area. So >> what is the implications of that Sarah?
It's zone three of >> um it's looks like zone three. I don't know the difference between >> storage of >> runoff this system.
>> So I think you're smart to include the other properties in this reszoning effort. Otherwise it kind of looked like a spot zone thing. >> Understood. I would advise that since it's be across the street, it's not
officially a spot zone, but but I agree. It seems it just flows better. It makes more sense. Absolutely. It also solves their non-conforming issue. >> So, if you're going to do a citizens, are you asking the plane board to
support it, not oppose it? I guess support it, >> but but I I'm really here for guidance, you know, because I know I understand that that you guys been around that property and I and I, you know, I'm a concerned town member. The last thing I
want to do is have the perspective of coming in and trying to, you know, make a bunch of money or jam jam this down the town's throat. So, I'm here just out of I guess out of respect and looking for guidance and um because it is this
is a a big deal to me. I want to do it right and I want to do it respectfully and I'm also at peace with if it doesn't work out um I I'll figure it out. I'm not I'm not that stressed about it. >> So, my I need to explain background. So
the affordable housing trust tried to purchase this property also and so there's a bit of a complication of history here. The plan was to uh uh use
this property to create some 10 to 12 to maybe 15 affordable senior condos. Obviously, we went without the competition to purchase the property. So, here we are. Um, but I will point
out that under the senior housing bylaw, we just promised change the zoning, you would be allowed to create an acre was from 3/4 of an acre there in October. >> Where
>> after you take out your piece? Oh. Um, yeah. Plus or minus. >> So you could probably create eight senior condos, three in the house and buy at the bank or something without
having to subdivide the property except for your piece just just as an alter. the um and and I Chris and I have had a couple of conversations and I I uh
I'm open to any hat on the balance of the site. Um again, my I I'm thinking about my brother and his family for that rear parcel. >> No, he's starting he's 11 years younger than me. He's he's scratching and
flying. >> Both dead. Um sorry. Uh um uh so I don't see that in the rear park portion to be honest. I I want to be straightforward. I'm going to put both properties up for sale once I figure
out, you know, or or whatever's left is going to be up for sale. And like I told Chris, I'm not a big newbie. I don't I see what you're doing as a positive for the town. Um but I'm also I don't I don't want to be sort of put in the corner on having to do anything. And
it's certainly at this point. >> It's just an option. At this point, I'm just presenting. >> So, I'm open, but I'm also like I'm stretched just having bought it and cleaning it out. So, I I can't build a senior housing. I I just don't have the time or the skill set to do it.
>> Turn it over. >> Yeah. Um, and so and and the other thing is I would really like to see this house stay up. You know, again, it's like it's it's >> it's got a lot of good character to it. And and the bones are it's sort of the
higher you get in the house, the more >> okay it is. There's three floors up there, so the third floor is pretty darn good. Second floor is okay. Ground level is what you saw. But none of the zoning change or a subdivision
plan or a sale has any guarantee that a that that the house will still stand. I mean they're all independent things. the line the subdivision that you propose whether it would
you know we'd have to review an action plan whether the house would remain standing is conjecture we don't I mean those are all things that we'd like I agree house you know got a lot of great character
but me the question before us tonight is We want to take enough position on a reszoning and u and I think we don't have I I'll then I'll tell you my opinion. My opinion is that the board should not
advance this right now. We haven't thought about it long enough and we have as we you know as I my little chart showed we have half the parcels in town that are non-compliant with the area the area forget frontage and setbacks and everything else. Um, and to me there may
well be a justification for a whole bunch of reasonzoning in town, but taking a uh this this doesn't seem like a
comprehensive look at our zoning boundary and zoning district boundaries. And um so that's just where I come down on it just doesn't feel like
>> um the way we should be addressing our zoning district boundaries. >> Um just procedurally so everyone understands the citizens petition would get sent to the select board's office and then they would place it on the warrant.
>> Yes. playing board like any zoning article, you'll have to hold a public hearing just as if you forward put a zoning article forward or the select board puts it forward. >> Um and then you would have to vote hold
a public hearing and after which you would have to vote recommendation meeting. So those are procedurally the steps. I guess I was taking one other one other option is we could adopt this as our own idea and move it forward too.
I I think he's willing to do it by less unless of course you wanted to bring it forward in my experience a lot of times u you know where it's small lots
we've let it be done by petition kind of supported by the board um you know when when it makes sense Um, and so that's why I recommended
doing it by petition, but at least inform the board and discuss. >> Well, then maybe that's the Yeah, I mean, unless some somebody wants to advance it as a I guess I was trying to get to do we want to >> do does anybody have one of >> I think it's appropriate to do citizen
petition. >> See, it's appropriate for him to do the citizens petition. Sure. But to be sure I understand the process. >> So we as the board of jurisdiction
will be required to hold a hearing about the citizen petition and to hold a public hearing and then make a recommendation >> regardless. Yeah. >> Yeah. So regardless of exactly
regardless if you think about it you >> you have you are required by statute for any zoning articles to be submitted that are submitted no matter by who there's several other boards uh zoning board can
also submit articles planning board select board that might actually for zoning um uh and petitioner uh board has required public hearing and required to make
a report too. >> Yeah. Well, that's the recommendation. And so is your hope that if you were to drive the citizens provisions here, I hope that you get it on this town meeting coming up in April. >> Yes. >> Yeah.
Got everything that I need other than the signatures, but I just wanted to um have this meeting first just in case it sort of swayed my path at all. So, you know, and I I hear what you're saying about that none of these things are definite in terms of keeping the house
or um really anything else. And I I bluntly agree with that. Like I I could sell the house and someone else could demolish it and whether I liked it or not. So, um I don't deny that one bit. But I can tell you that my
my heart is is in the right place about what's what's going to have happen here, which is just to um expand my my home so maybe that we could stay there on more of a generational basis and to allow for one more home to be built in Manchester and
it will not be a large I'll make sure of that. >> I have two thoughts. One is just two comments. One is that it is in line with some of the
the board's general thrust about increasing density along, you know, already populated areas. So, it fits with that. Um certainly goes with what's across the street. Um,
and I um, you know, when you think about what people love about the town, it's it's idiosyncratic appearance, which is in part because things occur peacemeal.
And so while it's not part of a comprehensive look at things, um it's in the direction that we've seem to have been going and it also,
you know, is consistent with getting things. What is it you say, Chris? You you talk about the diversity and the variety in the town and that's that's a an after effect that's a result of things
happening in this sort of manner. >> I wasn't necessarily looking for a we're going to push it forward. It was and I know you guys have been for hours so >> we appreciate you. >> Yeah. and we'll wait to hear from this
select board that you've submitted a citizens petition and we'll back there for a public hearing. >> Okay. >> Great. >> Nice job. >> All right. Thanks for your patience tonight. >> Of course. >> Right. Um we have the Yeah. review of the housing
production plan proposals. Um Mark, can you just give the brief what is the historic the housing production plan and what what's your recommendation? >> So the housing production plan,
it's a plan. It's supposed to assist the supply. How do they evaluate? In some towns it's useful. In most towns it's prepared or or not. I've been
system here about preparing housing plan and um the only benefit really is that it does allow you to besides what comes up with you might find interesting and uh some
interesting statistics about housing in general. um uh is that once your plan is approved, you do have that ability to uh for safe harbor from fore.
However, safe harbor contrary to what a lot of people have talked about really is a meaningless kind of term because of the time it takes for a 4p development to go through the process. So um so if
the county gets safe harbor today and someone chooses to work on board would be by time they do their site pre-development information and puts together plans submit to housing get financing
go through that process that's fix you know and then eventually they have to then prepare better plan which takes several more months and file with the ZBA by which time your one year safe harbor is over
and so you know if you get a two-year safe harbor still sometimes the process may not be like a year so um uh but it is something that uh we
should move forward uh more because So, you know, some of the information is useful, but it may not get used a lot. Sometimes uh you know they can't identify certain parcels with certain things that you may want to move forward
toward uh uh whether it's town land you sell for affordable housing or uh other land you you uh identify that community like really evaluate
other land or come up with some uh uh properties or areas that put forward for for additional housing. So we have three proposals. Uh we have
one by the consultant Karen Thenberg who did the original plan 10 years ago and then did the update five years ago. Um her price is uh right around $20,000.
We have a a proposal from Cutie Barrett. I didn't ask her to put together a full comprehensive proposal because her price is twice as much. uh it would probably require her to she wrote in her email um
additional work, you know, trying to get up to speed with the community on additional public meetings and and so um and she didn't write the first month, but she we probably end up reformatting. So her prices twice is 40,000.
Then I um talked to uh MAPC about putting a plan together and their price they said uh I think it help was somewhere between 60 and 50 and 60 >> 60 and 70 yeah and then recently
had to do it and it was on the papers something like 55 >> we don't get any assistance that >> you can apply for some newsletters said they do, right? The NPC got letter. >> Yes. S said you can apply for some of
those funds funds anyway, right? Kevin, so we do have uh CBC funds that got approved last year to uh to >> which funded it the last time too, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. So,
>> so your recommendation is that we go with um >> Karen >> Karen Karen. So, can I just ask a question? I'm sorry. Yeah. What is this a every fiveyear? >> Yes. >> Expectation and almost requirement. Is it okay? >> And that's why I mean most of these
plans just fit realistically and that's that's why I not recommend you do this big elaborate plan and I know I know likes to do that. No, I don't look like Karen five years
ago in the preconnect and found her to be very thoughtful and I looked at some of the report. It's interesting. >> Yeah, it is interesting. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. We've actually made some changes to that finally this happens to zoning which will actually maybe the
need a little bit. So, um Okay. Uh I take a motion to uh follow um >> so uh our board's uh proposal to prepare the housing production plan as recommended by our planner.
>> So we have a motion and we have a second. Uh any other discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. How long process is that? Um, excuse me. >> Well, it may take a little longer because she has to update all of the
census data with the 2020 census and some new housing statistics that also come out from that. And so, it can take a little longer. You probably want to do a couple meetings with the planning board along the way.
of the process requires that board endorse the draft plan. Then the select board is that then it gets submitted to the state reviews the plan sends back any comments. There's a final set of approvals by the and adoption by the
planning board and final okay from the state. It's kind of like hopeful, I guess. >> Okay, we have a bunch of minutes. Okay, first one, the sitewalk 218.
I can uh take a motion. Gordon was not there and Sandy and Brian were not members yet, so I'll take a motion. You would move that. >> You're going to second our favor. Three of us can vote. Yes. Public forum 69. No
one was absent. Um Peter moves. >> Yeah. Seconds. Any discussion? >> Um sidewalk. Uh okay. The next two the 9325
everybody was present. >> Motion move. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Uh the regular meeting October 14th, >> no one was present. Do you have any comments? >> Okay. Good. >> Um,
uh, correspondent section the fifth bullet. >> Okay. >> There is a Sandy mentioned who did something and it wasn't me. >> That's probably Sandy Rogers, >> right? But she's going to be referred to as >> Sandy correspondence. Sandy is Sandy
Rogers 10:14. With that amendment, I'll take a motion. >> Peters and Sandy seconds. All in favor? >> Okay. Uh 1126 Peter was absent. So no.
>> Oh no. >> This is a test to see if we're paying attention. >> There are mistakes. >> Okay. Um you want significant? >> Uh well the it's misunderstanding mistakes. The district boundaries
it talk. Okay. Third sentence the child. It's not the central heart local rights district. the community has. >> Yes. >> And then there's a similar sort of mix up uh on the density bonus for
affordable housing. Uh it's called the chat which has a very funny history actually to fix such a >> let's review that one next time again. Okay. That was the 12th. >> That was the 12th.
>> Okay. We're gonna hold on that one. Can you um >> Why do you want to hold Okay. You're >> two things. Okay. And there's there's actually a a somewhat unclear about 20% affordable units for developments.
I think >> it's a 20% bonus. It's probably the missing word. >> Uh no, 20% affordable units for development with more than five units, but it's with five or more. >> Five or four units. Yep. Yeah, that's it.
>> Okay, I'll take the motion to approve uh January 12th as amended. >> Uh second and that vote. Anybody else? I Okay. Um 115. That was a working
session. Ryan, it was uh Sandy, Chris, and I were there. Take a motion to approve. 115. Uh Sandy. Um, all in favor I Okay. Uh, I think the regular meeting, regular 129
get in. >> I don't think they got in there. >> No, that was our Oh, that was um >> the joint meeting with the board. So,
no. >> I don't think there was in the back end. We're going to hold on that one. >> So, we did not do the 29th. Okay. Good job. Um, I'll take any other discussion or public comment.
>> Great. I'll take a motion to adjurnn. >> So, second. >> All in favor? Thank everybody. >> Wow. Thank you to you and Chris over that stuff.