something for working no I think you need to mute yours says that your audience better I think we're good now better no okay and can they hear us yeah it comes through there okay
asking Mark do you know FL is coming I do not oh there she is do find her way through oh that chair hey think you call the planning board
meeting uh to order speak evening um a roll call Mary here Peter here Chris is here only La here um Sarah has a conflict um so she is
not uh first is correspondence and I think we received two from line Yani um I didn't have a chance to read the one from today but we received one on Friday okay
all right we'll go into our approval not required um we'll do going to reverse um and do the um 239 Summer Street first thank you madam chair my name is
Tom I'm engineer with Han Associates I'll be representing Tom evening and his request for an anr um for you you see we have our anr plan we just highlighted it up a little bit for you all um in blue you can see our proposed lot lines uh we
have one lot here to the North and then one lot here to the South and what we're proposing to do is we're in green here is the existing lot line and we're basically this lot is non-conforming already and the lot line is right next
to the building so we're requesting that we move the lot line to make it more of a conforming lot and give the property in a little bit more of a yard space pretty cut and dry any questions anyone have any questions from
the board is that the full intent though just to give yourself yes yes space on the back of the building it's already an existing non-conforming lot and we're just altering the lot lines so that there's some type of yard space no impact on the the adjacent lot at all no
no is it non-conforming due to size and Frontage yeah size we don't have much area it's still not conforming to area but uh Frontage is the other not track but we're not we're not altering anything in this area it's just the rear
of the lot so no construction no Road realignment no disturbance of any sort literally just changing the lot line yep they just have a common drive and that's it anyone from the public um here to on thisr anyone from the board have other
questions yes um there's a large one in the back here and then on this lot you have the smaller one here you can see how the property line is right up against it is there any um that you endorse the
foret is they're not affecting the frontage or access to the property what was that well move that we endorse the plan submitted by hanock Associates plan of
land for the trustees of and Dodge revocable trust the 239 summer dated 12225 um and I note that the uh the plan does state that the planning board
endorsement does not certify complies only move it's already been a second motion excuse me there is one um we did make one edit to the references in the deed book so the new date of the plan is 2625 oh okay so we did have to add one
reference from that's the only change we have made amended on I amend it to the date of 22625 2625 2625 sorry okay any
discussion we take a vote uh laa yes yes I vote Yes I vote Yes cour yes yes thank you um Mark has updated myarm so that um I should get some
I should get some updated paper copies as well of course y I can do that thank you agenda is the LLC 30 I'm not prepar to you um we just need to
capture that you can see but we need to yeah of course but I thought I was put e lot lot and I became involved in the property because long ago and far away I worked for Bill Hatcher the landscaper after he
passed and his sister sold the to sell the house she contacted that's how I became involved in the 35 Street property which is the Hatcher house it had been my intention to keep the Hatcher house on the corner of de Hill
and Pine Street the big white one and add two lots fores after the side but after the community I always get this WR after the
community housing overlay District yeah that overlay District thank you um got pass it became clear that I could do up to 10 Lots because I also ended up buying the 309 Street lot 10 Lots 10
Lots 10 units 10 units yes because I had bought property 305 Street 34 34 oh oh 30 you 34 Street um this
plan was me that's before you was meant to represent three foret single family on Pine Street consistent with the existing look and fi place and two D duplexes under the
Community lot at Outback but the reality is I guess I'm short Frontage here because I thought I could use the community Frontage lot but I'm informed by Mark that it has to be the underlying zoning so I'll have to
bring this back to you with a modification to bring this slot up to uh the zoning that exists in [Music] a resid a so you're requesting an extension
because your plan was filed on February 10th and so your 21 days would expire on the 3rd of March so are you requesting any exension of this time it sounds like he's withdrawing it and resubmitting oh okay is that what you would like to do
no because I'm already here and because I only heard about this remark about 8 minutes so I'd like to know how important you think maintaining that house is UN important back the house
three lck for so can I can I ask a couple questions I'm confused um all of those lots are in the future MBTA overlay District hasn't been
approved yet so we can't assess I mean we can't assess under that because it's not in our laws yet um and then so all four of those lots are in there so and and what do you need on
Deer Hill 160 ft for Frontage well you'll forgive me well now I'm confused I thought that had been approved it's been approved by town meeting it's awaiting the attorney generals and the states approval as well
so you can seek approvals but you can't get a building permit for anything under so if these Lots were approved you still can't let's say pull a permit for a five unit so um but the point is is that
you're trying to do this under the existing Zone I think that's correct yes and the only thing is is that the three lots along Pine Street conform with the
existing zoning the only issue is the frontage for the lot in the back yes so that's something so are you so then your
question having to do with so then your question having to do with um would we prefer that that house remain on the corner would that mean if you asked for
a variance or fronted that that you could retain that house doesn't app I know that doesn't really relate to the application for the anr it only only concerned with the
frontage and the well it's quite easy to modify this plan to reply what I did understand is the r requirement for them but it will require at least some considerable demolition on
this but apparently that's this house adjacent the adjacent house 34 is is coming down anyway to prep it but I guess which is different than what I had in my so in terms of your course of action
would you like to withdraw what you filed or do you want to extend and modify Mark what would you it's up to the applicant it can be done either way I I think it's e thing
is just withdraw raise that on which is not what I thought you would want because I'm thinking that the BL Street cargo should look to the extent that
get like it does but these will all be available to be duplex new zoning multi family well it could be a two family or a multi no it's two two families on a
lot or one three family so he can build under our current zoning which would be a two family only on lot two not lot three under our current he wants under our current zoning you can only build a two family if there's an existing
structure you can bu build a one family on lot fre on the existing but if the if the once the chart is finally approved and if variation of this is approved and he chose to build two units on one of
those instead of three or four he could do that as long as the total didn't exceed now now he's got New Lots if he doesn't if he doesn't if lot two and three remain one lot then he can build two twoes on one lot
but if they're separate Lots what is that Sarah again if if Lots two and three the definition of the multif family housing is either a three family on one lot or two two families and so the under the CH you
have to do the multi and so if Lots two and three are separate you can do a three family on each one but you can't do a two family
because it's not a multif family if Lots two and three or one lot then you could do two two families on that one lot under the CH and he can mix a match he picks he he does builds under
current zoning or new zoning correct on all different Lots well it would be the lots that exist did on November 18th of 2024 well but you can't you can't I'm
sorry but you can't mix and match that criteria in the sense that if he wanted to build a two family on a lot with an existing house and then a lot next to it build five units he could as long as
they were the lots that existed on November 18th yeah uh no they don't the exact Lots don't have to exist because yes otherwise we wouldn't be able to approve an an anr help me understand because I thought the
originales that I bought would allow me to do 10 unit under the so my original proposal was 1 2 3 and 405
7 but now if I changed this such that this is a you know has Frontage then I don't know what I've been do 26 what is it again 2 46 and 10 more No 2
46 sorry I I don't think that's my intention because I thought p is the neighborhood of single families with a few exceptions there's a couple of but I thought these should be single
family homes on P Street and it's quite easier to pickes or incredibly for bungal my intention on this which was come
in the approve is to take this back pull back from the agenda TR again with the that sense but I'd like to know that I leave here understanding what is the
LA well the only thing we're deciding today is the an anr that's before us we can't really give you advice on what to change it to I you can meet with the
planner um but we can't really give you advice on how to change your PL tonight just dealing with the an so what's the action plan then from now I'm going to take this home I'm
going to ask you all to let me withdraw it I'm going to bring it back likely as three foret and one lot behind that does have the requisite FR it and you going see it
again as a form without respect to any uh do you think you should just vote to accept the um any discussion on the proposed withdrawal can I give a friendly suggestion yes you
might want to without any other discussion on the withdrawal who is there town of Manchester hand up on the zoom no oh there is a hand up mbtf ask one more is there an expectation as to when
the 3A will be ined by um their n excuse me the 90 days is um I think I sent you the date Mary 11th I think of March so we should hear by the 11th of March
unless they request I don't think this plan predicated on anything okay can you tell me what form a mean not requ Sor I got
okay um I can't did they put their hand down okay all right that's certainly but I um any other discussion among the
board yes yes sorry no prejudice I'm sorry you had to come in no no thank you thanks all right um next Summer Street um we're not this is
not the hearing on the application for a special permit but we did invite um the representative of the applicant to come in um because of posting issues we can't have the special permit
hearing so we invited on the S sidewalk um with three of us um were present with the representative and the owner um we invited the representative come in and talk a little
bit about the application without having the official hear um yes yeah so you guys you have any questions okay any questions you may have from the S sidewalk I know only a few of us were there um but yeah if you
have any questions specific could somebody give quick overviews make it you went on a sidewalk yes oh um so this is 206 208 Summer Street um
lock um you want to just summarize what it is what very important just for the board Tom sa again Associates so yep uh we last meeting um I was here for an anr plan for 206 208 Summer Street um during our site walk we were um focusing on the
special perit application for um earth work um there's a few of those standards that we will that are applying to our project we moving you know exceeding the cut bill for an area there's certain amount of cubic yards that will be moving on and off site um so during our
site walk we basically just went through the plan together we looked at locations where we are moving more soil specifically around the septic around the drive way and around where the house proposed um describe the plan but um
everything that we're doing is catering around those three factors the building the driveway and the septic um if you're on site you remember it was quite a steep driveway um everything is to the town fire department standards for the driveway design um the septic we did
have a proposed retaining wall um some people weren in the retaining wall but it is necessary to get our separation ground Waters and we it was asked why don't you move the stck that site is a lot of ledge and that was the best testing
results that we received on the site so that site was that specific area um we were pretty lucky to find that so um and then just all the cut fill will be related to the driveway so when I did the calculation as you'll see in the memos you'll see next week um um yeah
it's just uh there's a lot of earthwork being done and that's it uh one question that did come up on the site walk was what materials you were planning to use for the retaining wall and approximately how
high the retaining wall would be yeah so and if I could just say there wasn't an issue on the retaining is the materials that supposed to use so um the Height's going to vary along the driveway it's a 15% slope and then it grades down to an eight and a 4% slope so it's going to be
basically a wall that's going to gradually get taller as you go down the driveway um your max height is at 10t at the bottom of the driveway um the material we were suggesting was modular block um it was requested that we may
look into Boulder walls the issue is we need separation between the septic field and the retaining wall and with folders you start getting thicker and thicker walls and then next thing you know the boulder will be on top of the septic area which we can't have and that's constrained by the common driveway so um
we were proposing modular block uh prast concrete um I was going to dig up some examples for our informal meeting together um and we can review those at that time what's the informal is this the informal
meeting um no we're scheduling something outside um Sarah uh proposed that we because we got pushed in the cricet the March 10th meeting that we do an informal meeting outside of um Monday nights and uh we just discuss any other issues that they had with the
plan or any topics of concern I would suggest that all those happen at a public meeting so all here on um I think these oneof meeting problem I thought you some examples but
[Music] I I don't think s that she would need individual yeah you meant specifically it wouldn't be a public hearing yeah that's what what tonight no
one I'm sorry but it's something I could definitely forward over some type yeah you if you send some some some respect I don't want I can forward obviously my client's going to be the one building this and I don't want to step outside I
think would work but if it's outside like it it's up to him in the end so run by him so are we allowed to discuss this thing are we allowed to talk about it at all I think we are yes because this is this is this is I may this is just a
massive amount of earth work on it is is amazing I followed all those grades around they said holy moly um so you will see on the plan that we were restricted by the 200 Vernal pool buffer which is sitting over here
yes we originally submitted the plan through conservation and we were just trying to see if we have the driveway a little bit shorter but um they did not want any work inside the Vernal pool outside ofing so all retaining walls driveway dwelling um that that was all
of our moved from here so later on down the road I came we came to you and we proposed the anrs because we've moved the building outside those resource areas and um yeah there's there's a lot of earth work it's just you're you're limited because of the driveway design
of a 15% grade and as you know on site and as you know Mark it's very steep on site so you're never really catching the grade unless you're doing a cut because the hill is exceeding it's probably a two to one slope naturally yeah I look at the gray I was amazed yeah yeah so um
but that was we were trying to be as conservative as we could um between the driveway and the common Drive Drive you'll notice that it's going to be all naturalized area we're going to do Native species going to help with um holding the holding the side of the Hill back and that's uh I think that's in our
plan plan on the first sheet back from Summer Street um I'd have to measure it out but it's probably looking about 300 feet it's not you if you stick your head around the corner you can see it but if
you're going by Summer by the property at 40 m hour on Summer Street you know I I drove by at 10 miles an hour well yeah you got a little bit it was pretty impressive amount of construction going on so is the drive
and the I'll call it the parking patio if you will are they perious materials so the uh parking court is going to be a perious material um and then we proposed uh previous patio in the back we did not we did um pervious aers are very high
upkeep so instead of doing that down the driveway we propos an infiltration trench along the sides so it's a pitched at a 2% slope into the side of the Hill towards the infiltration trench and that'll just catch any type of runoff and the intent is to catch it but have
it infiltrate the soil AB not not rain it all the way down the exactly yeah you'll see it's kind of hard to see on the plans but there are check dams along the way and it's to reduce any type of flow down the hill we want to infiltrate we got good soils for the septic so we kind of pulled that information said all
right soils are decent so think was a lomy sand so it has a better infiltration rate the septic field is all the way down at the base yes yeah so you're starting at elevation 87 and you''ll be coming down to
Elevation down yeah you're dropping fast what your intent there for the yeah the septic field how are you going to get down to it um so can all be gravity we're proposing a drop store manhole about halfway down drop
straight down and yeah straight down usually kind of yeah yeah okay I was going to say there's no way you're gonna do a gravity it'll just no it's significant drop wow okay sorry Su no no this is
this was supposed to be the point I I was interested in how they just mechanics of how going to do this pretty pretty dramatic so you're building a plateau and then behind this retaining wall is that kind of what's Happening yeah for the septic field yeah because
you need the 4 foot separation to groundwater and redo or redo morphic features so estimates High ground water was relatively high so from that we had to build up four feet and then you need your pipe and stone P Stone and then one foot of cover so you can see how you
really it adds up you know you're probably looking that uh probably four feet of fill that area so what was the issue with the retaining W material besides the The Boulders versus
the I think the appearance and the height I mean a 10 foot wall is that's a really high wall That's the height of this tow over anybody sorry true retaining wall well from an engineering standpoint Boulder walls really get wide
CU you're just stacking rocks when it's a modular block you have all these options you can do geogrid you can tie it back a little bit um gravity walls go up to 20 feet typically it'd be probably a larger block um the face would be the same it just goes deeper into the into
the side of the hill but it it wouldn't compare to like if you're using a boulder wall doing a boulder wall and you stacking rocks after a while that thing is probably like 8T thick is there a fence along the top of it um we do not want have one proposed I
believe um but we typically do uh request that there is some type of fencing along the top fall protection so um yeah that should be added definitely that's going to make it look even taller though I mean I don't know if you could plant it but put a put fence on top of a
tler wall yeah um we could look into that um but I do see fall protection is one of our standards we we do recommend especially when you start getting above 14 was it ever looked at lowering the elevation of the garage and stepping the
house down the hill at all or so the driveway length is indicative of the hillside so as I mentioned at 15% slope you're trying to catch the hillside that's at a 2 to one slope so two to one's like 50% slope so our driveway
length had to go all the way up the hill and that's cutting and then extend into the other property because we couldn't catch that so that garage floor elevation is solely dictated by the the uh fire department
design standards W it kind of reads like it's designed by the fire department no disrespect but it's it's pretty heavy engineering it doesn't feel like there's anything natural left of this float yeah I I agree the whole thing's just blasted away and it feels like it's engineered
by the fire department I would say there is a significant cut but a big part of it for us is to Reet the um side of the hill and basically build it back so that the hous is incorporated the hillside so I see you see it now and it's pretty drastic but
we have gone through conservation they seemed okay with these types of uh plantings that we're proposing we're planting new trees we're doing a lot of native stuff for erosion control on the side of the Hill yeah you're planting 10 not even 10 trees I mean is
that is this is this two different plant schedules here so there's a plant schedule for the 100 foot bucker area and then there's a plant schedule for the hillside so which one is the hillside restoration area or up one restoration would be the 100 foot buffer
okay and then the other one I think it be native talking three and three canopy trees so six canopy trees and some flowering dogwood so it's it's
not you know it's not going to feel like it's a wooden Hillside again anytime soon yeah it will it will definitely take time um our Wetland scientists typically C it out based on area it's something we can take a look at yeah that's not much density of planting considering the area if you could look
any more at denser coverage um to really and it's a lot of slope to hold so um you know a lot of this is perennials and ground covers and they're going to contribute but they're not going to hold the slope like tree roots are going to hold yeah so anything
outside of 3:1 that we are not disturbing we're trying to leave it as is and then everything that we are disturbing greater than 3:1 we either have retaining wall slope stability and then 3 to one is self self sustain self sustaining excuse me so all that grading along the sides other than the areas
where we call out for the reement um that's all three to one self grading assuming planted yeah at least yeah exactly and so is it indicated what's
lawn versus what is wooded in the restoration area it's a little hard to tell plan it's a little early the game we will eventually have some type of landscape architect take a look at everything um but for right now that we just wanted to get a account for conservation and anywhere everything
else is get relatively the erosion control uh uh seed get involved I don't know if there's any if you're going to have a landscape arcct involved getting involved at this stage to see if there's anything you could do with a more um you know a
gentler Drive perhaps setting the FL elevations at a lower level well the floor elevations were dictated By the Hillside and the the driveway design stat Department yeah I can't believe there's only there's not one level to set a house at or a driveway at like
there are choices you can make right so said there's never only one design option yes I understand there's one constraint set by the fire department we've relocated we've looked at middle of the hillside um and so relatively if you have a 25
foot change in elevation think about you lose all that driveway length so we just have to keep extending the driveway to make up that elevation still so it still have a big loop around it still have to go to the top of the hill and I would tend to agree with Lara though there is there is definitely more than one design
solution this looks being an engineer having worked in engineering and architecture for years decades this looks like it's really engineered to solve a problem without really thought about the design of how the landscape will look and appear in the roadway and
everything else so if there's an opportunity I suggest you just take a look at it and bring on your landscape architect now to kind of soften the blow of what looks like something that's just going to look designed by an engineer versus really thought through mm
and maybe you can balance the cut and fill a little more and save some money ination yeah for the site it's relatively balanced soil's brought down for the septic area and then there's a lot of cutting at the top so the site is
relatively balanced it's just the the soil is moved throughout the property and that's what triggers the special perit it's just move Earth disturbance so yeah no blast um they have done blasting permits I believe so there's Ben blasting already yes yeah
yeah they had the mats up there when we did the sidewalk so but isn't blasting part of the earth removal bylaw and the Earth removal bylaw I don't know that you do it before you get the permit special permit from what I've gathered they've
done the permit but they didn't know that they had significant amount of Earth removal or Earth movement to trigger a special mark look into because I see they special permit supposed to come before the blasting if you're doing our
through yeah and then once we realized we had a significant amount of cut in the area with the design we stopped work and now we were proposing the special you moved the house from its original location further over
down further over did that then it's been moved already Mark we you it's been moved already so this this house the original location was a little was adjacent to the veral pool buffer over here back there so going through
conservation we discussed it and they did not want to see any type of imperious area within the veral pool understandable so we relocated the house further back into the adjacent property that Mr Huff owned and that was for the anr two weeks ago
where we got the approval for the new property line wow but yeah all that is is just dictated by the slope of the hill and the driveway design because just to catch that grade at the for the garage that's you just need that length of
driveway challenging site yes plus you're limited where the septic is at the bottom it's the best soil test testing we got um it's is very challenging but I still don't understand why you can't just lower the elevation
of the house and garage so you don't have to gain so much um you don't have to travel 40 40 plus feet up because you're creating a platform for the house but there's cut on this side of it yeah so on one side of the
house I believe the elevation was 78 then on the other adjacent side of the house it was 98 the opposite side so it's that's just your crazy two to one slope yeah that's across the footprint of the building wow so we're basically adding a fill
area to level it out and then setting the building on it and then just catching the slope with the turf reinforcement mats and retaining wall you can only cut so much into the hillside it's it's just a strong it's just a tough site
any other questions Sarah Pier Sarah Pierce go ahead yes hi thank you Sarah Pierce nine friend street so I'm just a little um curious so you can actually start blasting on a project
before getting a permit or going before the planning board no now you need to go to the planing board before you do any type of blasting oh I guess I misunderstood what was said that I thought I thought I this
permit is not excuse me sorry no go ahead this permit is not for the blasting it's for the change in Earth removal the cut fill um we triggered a few of the uh yardage um say bylaws for lack of a
better term so once we realize we were moving that much Earth we needed to go back to the planning board and get this approved so did you blast before you got a permit or did you get one from the fire department I don't understand no we
did not blast before we got our blasting permit um this is not a blasting permit this is a permit for um moving more soil material more material on site okay I'm just concern
because it seems like there's so much blasting going on throughout Town especially like spyrock SE Street area that was a tremendous amount of blasting that happened and forever change that area um and I just also wondered what is
being built back there um it is the site we're talking about is a is a house for a family just a single family house yep the owner owns the property we're discussing and the adjacent lot it's his family's house and
his um hopefully his parents house oh wow okay all right thank you y any other questions from the board what what is there we're not making decisions we're not making no because of the posting issue we couldn't have the
official hearing on the special permit application Mar but at the S sidewalk um Sarah had invited uh the representative to come tonight to informally go over the
project so um if you would consider bringing your landscape AR on and taking another look see if there's something that's a little more patic to the of the
neighborhood and the yeah it's definitely something into so you're looking for more relative like plantings not not just plantings I'm looking at the grading of the site alignment of the site and seeing if there's a way I mean you're talking about a 10- foot retaining wall there's a lot
of expense and Earth removal that is um creating a very unnatural looking condition in the in the way that the site is graded and that the road is um retained and
so it might be more efficient and possibly better outcome if you were to collaborate with the landscape architect that you're bringing on board anyhow in the sighting of the house driveway and the setting of The Finish floor elevation in the the driveway yes so
it's something that we could definitely discuss but the for the relative design it's going to be all on the Civil side they're not going to take into account typically the driveway um Rags um it's it's it's going to be still more on the Civil side we can collab and determine
like more plantings and make it more visually appealing but it's definitely like it's a tough site there's going to be a lot of cut for a feasible driveway in a house there's another
hand um is it Zoom user hey Zoom user I'm assuming that may be me um sorry Adam zagger um I just wanted to correct the record um I represent the owners of the Sea Street property that was just referred to there's been no blasting um at that site I think the planning
board's aware of that but I just wanted to correct that for the record um thank you oh thank you any other questions any other questions from the public on um 20628 Summer Street but we'll have
the actual hearing yes on May 10 March March sorry I'm sorry been pushed off enough right thank you for coming in aome sorry I didn't have anything for
you guys is Adam your fight what's that is Adam for C Street not Summer Street not Summer Street C Street the street oh okay it's been on building committees with me that's
what yeah I didn't recognize him talk sorry just listen just mostly listening in but wanted to correct that record on behalf of Liz and and Tim oh no he is he is our project he listen to Adam are you still there yeah
yes I am still here so you are you are familiar with the site with Mr H ex I'm I was just commenting on on on the SE Street site that Sarah had had referenced as have been subject of
blasting talking I'm sorry it's all right I won't hijack thank you thank you thank you all right next up um the driveway
entrance possible change Mark you want to talk a little bit about that came up the driveway entrances came up uh for couple couple different reasons um one is um there was recently a
driveway that was constructed as a loop driveway with two in and um as well as um um so questions about whether driveway entrance two entrances would be
allowed by permit or not kind of bylaw itself it says can't happen but later in the bylaw it says well planning board can issue special permits for things that are different
than in here but I thought it'd be better just to clarify driveway entrances and just and and to allow specifically the uh driveway entrances with a special permit from the planning board um so that uh it's
specifically allows that and I also and then at the end of uh what you have is I added an enforcement section uh as well which mirrors some of the other enforcement sections
bylaw um and then uh I also met with uh a fire chief and there were um a couple things that he felt should be um amended in both bylaw and in our
regulation so we didn't because of the short time period we didn't discuss other changes to the regulations which are a little more specific about construction standards uh but he thought you know
after we discuss we we should May perhaps make a couple other changes to the um to the bylaw itself so for discussion purposes I put them down in here and um which would be
to um he wanted the minimum driveway width increased from 8 ft to 10 feet he says uh one of his trucks is uh his ladder truck is 8 foot 6 in wide so um that wouldn't work uh so he wants it be
a minimum of 10 ft and um you know if we have a Max maximum of 12 ft but so we talked about what if someone has you know side by side um uh garages which
are 20 feet roughly wide now they can't have an extra wide drive to the street so um and that's not always since we have a lot of houses in the village and just beyond um we talked about maybe increasing that
20 ft um I'm sorry I didn't understand that second part about the double wide drive so if you have side by side garages generally you you and you have a
driveway that goes out to the street um typically it' be 20 ft wide what is our um current maximum is 12 current maximum is 12 so we want to change the minimum 10
from eight and the maximum from 12 to 20 so why didn't he put this on the memo that he sent us 20 is really wide we spent all this time trying to narrow it down and if you have a double wide
garage you don't back straight out you back out to the where the driveway Narrows so I think we're going backwards on this one okay well that's that's not something that he his concern has to do
with minimum standards not maximum standard that's correct so um the other thing is this um driveway entran is the maximum grade of 6% within 25
ft um so that is something that he needs otherwise his lad truck bottoms out as it begins to go up so he can't have steep grade coming down has to be 6% and then it can increase but they've got to
be able to get the truck in there first was that was designed by the fire department 15% the prior on I can't
get these are these are bit the the changes that um to the byog itself is this to be considered for Springtown meeting that's correct so the the Springtown meeting
schedule would be we discuss stuff tonight as well this and some some others if you want put them all on the agenda we would do a final discussion on
March 10th we are as we discussed previously we scheduled the public hearing for the associate member and for the two articles related to accessory dwelling units for the 10th it won't be the official legal public hearing but
it'll be a notice public hearing um so that you can make a final decision on what language to send to the select board regarding like numbers of asso members and length of terms that
type of thing you wanted some input same thing with the adus you would then vote all the Articles after the 10th at at the meeting of the 10th and then uh it would go to the select board and um they
would vote to place it on the warrant at their meeting Le the week later 17th and we would schedule our public hearing for so is that the 60 days so we are we getting it to the select board 60 days before town
meeting well about 60 days of February 28th um that's what KP law says was it 60 days before all town meeting refer any articles to the board of Select are we meeting those dates uh I don't
know what you're reading from but we are meeting the uh select words deadline for closing the warrant so KP law um gave us Manchester a town meeting checklist and it goes by
the deadline dates and so for all town meeting which is different than special town meeting we have 60 days before all town meeting get these to fincom the select board um for their review I don't know
whether it's in the statute oh I don't know what they're referring it is in our general bylaw okay I'll have to look that so I just want to make sure we're meeting the appropriate deadline well the select board did at
its last meeting um review not the um the driveway but they review the others that we had discussed the associate members the special permit um criteria the introduction
change and 2 Adu possibilities they reviewed all of those and gave Mark comments on that um but I don't know if that meet that requirement um and I don't know if that's a statutory
requirement it would only it is if it's in our general bylaw but but we haven't completed the Adu bylaw so I don't know what they reviewed yet well they reviewed what we had discussed thus far but not the final
right we don't have a right that's why I'm saying we got to make I mean I think obviously we're not meeting the deadlines if we we haven't done anything yet with the final so um but anyway can I make comments on
the driveway entrance y um so I think it's it's good to clarify um that if somebody wants two openings that they have to get a special permit I
think that currently isn't clear there um but I do think if we're going to change details other details in the the bylaw we should change them all at once and not DBS and drabs over over time um and
the fire chief gave us very clear um statements of what he wanted to see and so I don't know why we wouldn't do that all at once um so he read recommended the the minimum withd to 10 ft he did not give any maximum and I
personally would keep 12T maximum that we it's been a long time discussing um and then he goes into braid requirements um and the
90° angles intersecting the road um and driveway lengths and things like that so if we're going to start putting in slopes 6% you know we should just again do it all at once what he
suggested um so I think we need to talk about that and then the other thing is that when you're adding something to section D the last paragraph you have to clarify it says um enforcement is through the
mechanism set forth in Article 1 Section 4 but then you have to clarify that that's section 4 section B but section 4 section B doesn't actually give any mechanism
for a a fine a $300 fine for driveways so they list out um Wetland violations things parking violation things like that but there's nothing for driveway so the way I read it it just kind of
goes into that's why I put it in this specific section because some of the some of the uh regulation or bylaws in the general bylaw have the penalty in the section and some like you said are
listed in the that article one4 under those was use so it's done both ways but where are you attempting to put it in Article 1 Section 4 no no I'm saying there's also the enforcement mechanism
is in article in section 4 um and then here we're putting what penalty on the penalty would it make sense to put all the penalties in one document so that when you update things update them holistically yeah yes I
think we talked about that but that's the detail but I know we' discussed our Fe behind here mpali I just they were all in one do or one section well um our current what I'm
proposing to remove is is in the section which is $50 a day so that's why I put it back in the section but I increased it to 300 but there is
some of the other sect so who's the enforcement agent for driveways commission so he has I believe taken on that role because last I spoke with him he
said it was not in his venue okay the several of the other bylaws refer to the enforcement agent so that I'll I'll check on that so I think it's just the same
question that we've had um when we were talking about that school street address that that you sent a letter to right did we hear back from them no I haven't can you send us a copy of
that um that that we were going round and round with the discussion of who's the actual enforcement officer for these dryway entrances and I don't think we've settled that
yet so I'll talk to Paul talk Greg trying out to the enforcement agent also look through I'm not as familiar with the general bylaw but I'll read through it a little bit more and see if I can't
find a reference yeah so and we as a board discuss that I I mean again I think it's great to clarify that if it's more than one entrance it gets a landing board special permit but if we're going to change the minimum
with and the fire chief needs certain requirements for um his as he describes you know safety access I don't know why we wouldn't do it all at once well I think well because the other
is your plenty board regulation which is what bylaw authorizes you to adopt and that's where you have more of your construction standards the these are just a couple specific things that um you already had the minimum
width in the in the bylaw not the regulation you know and you already had number of entrances bylaw so you already had a few design elements in the bylaw so I didn't really um want
to take it out because then you wouldn't have anything unless you subsequently added those to the regulations given a short length of time wanted to give you something that um would be or or town
meeting where we could amend the bylaw so and add this one section about the 6% grade because that's kind of something that he always have to have so um the rest of the regulations you can work on meet with
him with um again to incorporate the rest of those design elements into um adjusting the rest of our I have some more comments that are somewhat complimentary to marm are a
little different um on the first point which is there shall not be more than one apron and curb cut for residential lot and remove that we did have a lot of discussion around that and I think that the intent I felt like the intent was to
not allow double entrances on a residential lot and so now by just taking it out and saying you need a special permit that implies that sure you can have a double driveway entrance just come and get a special permit we don't
we need a good reason to to disallow a special permit so if we're giving special permits for for double curb cuts it seems to me that there's sort of a an opening to allow those in a more um in a more uh a regular way and so I would
Advocate not making it a special permit but simply clarifying it if we need to save one curve cut for residential lot if they're already two maybe those are Grand powdered in but going forward one curve cut a lot if the board agrees that
that was the intent I don't know why we would allow a special permit to service one lot U and then on the dimensional requirements um I would strike the maximum driveway width I don't think that's related to
safety um and I do have a concern with what seems like dimensionally small changes are going to have a multiplying effect in terms of um areas of aing and potentially impervious for heat island effect or
removal of um you know landscaped areas and so could we I'm wondering on the I think we should just strike the maximum change we should keep the 12 width the 12T width that we originally um decided on and in terms of changing from 8 to 10
if the current width of the truck is 86 and we're just talking about you know Tire clearance could we compromise at not these are not you know these are not buildings that are need to be circulated all the way around you have a road in front of the building too I certainly
want to allow safety access but I'm just wondering what's the smallest we can neck it down that would serve the fire chiefs he said he said 10 because well just for example previous driveway that you're talking about that goes up a hill yeah you know if if there's plantings
and other stuff like right there as the truck turns going to need room to clear because do so is he wanting it to be 10 at the entrance or 10 all the way up so so a
minimum a minimum of 10 all the way up the driveway he within the bylaw he's going to want us to look at and discuss and here what we require for
um radiuses she's got some standards in their or turning radiuses we have something uh refer to different things so we're going have to figure out what
what's so yeah uh other things like pillars like we have to add something in the regulations if already have something because someone sets a pillar right near the entrance um and he's not going to be
able to make radius turn with this truck stuff so so I hear that so so the these are all things that we would discuss later in adjusting the regulation these are just a couple things and I I I get
keeping the 12 ft yeah you know I get that and clarifying the enforcement uh thing but um so I understand about the 8 to 10 and why the 10 is necessary however this is driveway entrances so we're just talking about what occurs at the road this is the
regulation that defines the width of the driveway all the way up I mean we spend a lot of time saying that's somewhere else so I just don't think that other than at the entrance it just doesn't seem like the driveway width at 10 ft all the way up applies to this regulation because it's driveway
entrance oh okay so wherever that belongs so that would have to be in the our planning board regulations that we pass off to DPW so we should we should make that change make
these changes because we're not very good at updating our doc so so these changes so my plan was is we would get these changes to town meeting so we fix the bylaw but then
once uh we get a little slow down we will then go pull out the regulations thereare it with what the chief submitted um and try and update those to incorporate everything together but that's something the planning board can
do at their Leisure um now just to be clear this is a change to the general byw not the Z byw that's correct well that really has to put up select board not us that's
correct you're the board I believe who worked on it so they're looking for they looking for recommendations from us yes so what should we do about the special permit in the two openings or think about that so I not
having been part of the original discussion I think what the point you made Laura was a good one and then why open that option I just think that gives people reason to I agree in principle except I'll give you an example of where
a double entrance we gave one and that was because there was a child living in the house who was um a paraplegic or something and the van would come and pick her up and the van couldn't come into the driveway remember that case yeah I remember there was also some
contention about it because it was not necessary for the van to have a double entrance to back out they were simply trying to um you know stop the beeping noise from the backup van and there were
I remember we discussed it as a hardship we ended up granting that I think there was some there was fair bit of discussion and then afterwards there was discussion that some of you know some of the neighbors were opposed to that and
and actually um uh you know there were other factors and it was not there was no functional requirement why you needed a double driveway there I mean it was a convenience and it was a hardship in
that case which was certainly um you know there was a human story there but I think that there are functional requirements about backing in and backing out and if it works for you know if it functionally works and we're allowing one curve cut
having two curve Cuts has other implications I mean it makes it less safe for The Pedestrian because you go across that many more curve Cuts it's that much more impervious surface and Paving so I just think it has rations and as soon as you say we you can do it with a special permit well then you just
pay the P special permit fee and you come in and you make your case and what grounds do we have to say no if they make a justifiable case double driveway well and especially if we haven't laid out anything in the bylaw that says you have to meet these requirements for the
special permit right if you just say oh you need to come special permit there's no rules yeah so with that particular case that you're talking about that was in front of us would that potentially fall under the
do amendment that for those reasons it would have to go through anyway so we wouldn't need that in our it's not the do Amendment but I know what you mean it's the um uh like the equal access whatever yeah um
good question but but I think we could adopt I mean there are some some circumstances or some some places where it wouldn't be a problem having two interest so special accomodation yeah so and so we could write something in you
know obviously if someone has a large estate lot and wants to have a driveway with a couple entrances or have Frontage on a couple different roads there a private road let's say 127 they wanted to have access in and
then through mean technically it's two driveways um you know you could write some certain standards where where you would not find um that problematic you know uh that they would have
to meet in order to obtain uh you could put in safety standards so it might be e good to get as the Kirby Road allow them to have an AIS in at a particular location but site distance coming out
may not be very good so they have a different inant so they One Way Loop exit and another location so there are some circumstances where you just because there's another
driveway entrance doesn't make it unsafe actually so driveway sight lines you might just pick the place with better sight lines you're going to have and still have one instead of two I mean it seems like we get into a lot of discussion about
what's the criteria to have two and what are the kind of exceptions that we would make for that and spin ourselves into a lot of discussion around when is it Justified and you can never really you can't you can't know the next one in the door right and what the reasons
might be for it but I do worry that with a special permit for for making it just a little little less convenient but still um so so in the case that you Chris where it sounds like a second
driver was granted that was granted by the planning board yeah so it came in it just landed here because because well that's when they that's when we approved all driver oh okay so that all right okay and in that case I think the work
had already been done and they and they discovered and they came back they came in sort of acting back yeah I think that's right yeah so where do we leave this do we take out what you put in with special permit or do
Vote or I I'm sort of on the fence because I look at people who have a very small lot on a very busy road and have difficult maneuvering um on and off a very busy
street but I'm also very sensitive to the too much pavement issue and other safety issues safety of pedestrians and biker um but I'm sort of on
a it's a tough one cuz we did a driveway entrance um another half circle what do you call so two entrances and we put on the
permit that you can't you have to like go in one way come out one way and then you know I forget the the exact streets but it was like you can't like Park and have your cars facing out and zoom out of both ends right so we literally put that on the
special permit well every time I drive by that driveway guess where those two cars are Bo ready to head out on a I know the streets I'm just not g to say it on a busy street um for kids walking to school so
now they've got you know pretty close by and so I don't think we did the neighborhood any favors we we tried to accommodate the applicant and by putting it on that you know you can't do this but we know there's no enforcement with
that so it doesn't mean anything um so I guess that's just an example of a two entrance driveway gone a little bad yeah every time there's a curb cut across the sidewalk of the chance foring vehicle conflict and the more times that
you break through that um more chances there are I understand it for commercial for uh you know businesses all of that makes sense for institutional a church I mean we had the um church that came before us we had a lot of discussion
around the driveway circulation there but for house I think that um we live in a village where people back out into the street all the time as a traffic
coming effect and I just think the sidewalks and the you know the safety of kids and people walking on the sidewalks merits the same kind of consideration as the convenience of pulling out and having to driveways
okay any other thoughts I just wonder if we if we Grant a a special permit that identifying what the criteria is if we decide to include
criteria really hard right we're going to forget something or leave something out someone's gonna contest it and then that's just going to be it oh you can I would say either we it's in or it's not CU trying to come up with
the criteria so we could leave it the way it is is what it sounds like and confusing it sounds clarifying helpful well it currently says you can't have two so okay so it's it's pretty clear okay um
so what we could do is say well let's put in a couple of these other things and we'll revisit that when we have time to to look at the regulations in that
first uh part here and we'll work on them concurrently so if we then say okay we have some clear standards of when it's okay you know and um so now
we'll put the two yeah things forward together and um and do it that way sometimes it's okay to put things quickly and sometimes it might need to think I think that's good it's less change to the intent of this you were
making a few adjustments for our department safety I think with this about grads and withd of the opening of the driveway and it really should be about the entrance of the driveway not the WID all the way up then say the um one curve cut or two for the bigger
discussion okay I'll make that adjustment and uh we'll have a final review on the okay sounds good thank you is everyone comfortable with that strategy but but I do worry about the
phrase when we have time and at your leisure because then another law is going to get P we have to scramble comply with um but hopefully not okay um moving on um associate
planning board members um so I did go to the select board meeting um when they discussed that and they felt strongly it could be one not two um
and one year correct I don't think there was that set on one year or two years but they were more said on uh a joint appointment yes um they were quite clear that they felt
that if there's a vacancy it's done jointly and that they wanted to keep that standard what does that mean Mar joint yeah planning board and planning board when you got appointed there was a joint
appointment by the selector the appointment okay so not sharing one how would you do that um so we our um intent was to finalize that one the select reference and then get public
comment on that on the good me public um one of the uh objections in the past come up from the public is they would rather not have an
Appo remember other public that's just my memory so site plan review applicability um the select board did not have much comment on that that I
would I just have a typo on there uh number three um any development expansion or zoning introduction uh the select
word understands that it doesn't need to be in the actual BW but they do want a One pager um that would be separate and available and they also one
the my memory yes so will um basically put up the information sheet onto the M website on kind of the
procedure uh that's outlined uh in here then other something else explaining other development where you can find other development regulation so um any comments on
that like a good idea yes uh Adu um so we talked about both um and they agreed that we need to get public perment as to whether or not residents
one we have the discretionary uh additional Zoning for larger a maybe something that people feel strugling we should not have or we should realizing that there are already
large Carriage Houses garage apartments life garages I think there was a proposal that there be a backup bylaw proposal change that would
be withdrawn if thiss oh regarding the which we simply say that Char rentals are not allowed so I have comments because there was changes right which one um there's a document
in yeah so for both of them so for the general and the large um so I had oh no um I go through them yes
um which one are you starting with Mary um the general I guess I don't know what we're calling it standard standard standard the required that's what it is um okay I'll just go from the top um so
number one and maybe I'm just reading this incorrectly it says only one accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted on a lot or in a structure isn't it that we're only allowing one on a lot period whether
it's attached or detached so I kind of read that too yeah where where I'm on like last page 9.1.3 doeses anybody else read it like that or is that just
me actually I think isn't that one that an pointed out yeah now that I'm listening to Mary yeah she did point out that was a little confusing and I think I put it in there just to maybe say that you can't have a house with two
accessory dwelling units you're only allowed to have one access well that was very clear what you just said so wouldn't you just take out the last or in a structure just say only one accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted on a
lot yeah I guess I don't need the structure just that makes it simple that's clear um so with three four and five what we've done in other areas of
the bylaws is we always clarify that they're Massachusetts licensed um either architect engineer whatever do we need to clarify that here as well we could put that in our introduction the general
requirement I don't think that that's necessary I mean I've worked on numerous projects where Engineers or other people are out of state architect they're not necessarily
Mass so I think Massachusetts does require that they they are are in state Ron was a stickler on this one um work in Partnership um we can I'm just saying we was he intent was he intent of having
did Mary was the you need a registered architect or registered engineer to do something registered in massachus Mass what though um stamp stamp the plans stamp of plans for a residential unit no
we're talking about adus adus well I'm just saying in other parts of our bylaw when we say reference an architect or um engineer whatever we always clarify so what I I wrote was stamp architectural floor plan shall be
submitted for new units is there a better way of worrying that and then the next one said exterior architectural plan shall be submitted for any application requiring in addition to any building for
habit no architectural architectural drawings are required for residential units in Massachusetts no no no we are requ whether it's ad or not but for anything a stamped architectural plan that would seem to
be to be made up I've I've done plans I've done my own I understand this is a little bit more than what is necessarily required yeah definitely is I understand that I think they came out of the design guidelines is that no I I don't know I
didn't pull it I just the for of this particular thing thinking people may want to be more precise about that because it is something new so that's why I put it in you don't think it needs to be well if
somebody's got to stamp it it's got to be from the state where you are where the project is have be I just wondered about whether it's necessary to have stamped engineering
or Bo to discuss I I put it in there thinking dwelling units by bright are new therefore yes you can do it but you have to provide a higher level of you know
submittal in order to ensure that you know that you are following them so you have to submit an architectural water plan you have to submit if you're going to add on to the building you want to
see you know architectural drawings elevation drawings or want to see an engineered site plan it it might be over the top I mean that's up to you to discuss I guess I guess you can have it I I I'm not saying
it's not over the top so I I don't have my Cy of the regulation but is that something that we require for single family it's because
are weed by those regulations on the standard which are the required are we regulations put higher level um I would bet not well I think
um well well if we whatever for some things we can yes for some things we can you remember what it says in the regular we can't do anything more honorous for an Adu than for a single family um but
we've already said we can do a site plan review and design guidelines for adus so I don't know if this can then fall under those umbrellas I'm not sure we can if we don't require one for a single family house that would be my own
presentation if we could just figure that apologize well if we are permitted to is that something that we want add um I guess I'd like to understand what the building inspector currently
requires for buite bills right so what does he look at when a single family home is being built bet he doesn't there is there is criteria in this massas building code which says the criteria by which you
need a f stamp mechanical electrical Plumbing architectural whatever it is and when you don't need it it's based on the size of the project that's the world I lived in because we all did it we did all commercial projects did we just refer to the building code you can refer to the
building code as far as the need for a stamp yeah it's very clearly defined in there why don't we just do that but you're talking about for the adus I'm talking about do you want to Ure the you have stamp plans for
years so what that means though Mark is an an architectural designer not an architect an architectural designer designs the whole thing and now he has to go find a stamp stamp that the proof is done same thing with engineering drawings too yeah talking about
Structural Engineering yeah they have to go well no say we going to do an addition for an Adu we going to do an addition can I suggest can I suggest let me do a little let me do a little research on my end of it okay I lived on the high end of it where we needed
everything to be stamped for the for everything and let me let me do a little research on it and I'll let everybody know but the other question is do you want to even if you normally wouldn't need a stamp do you still want to
require I believe you can D so that's question while you're researching number 13 I think we have an unintentional meaning there that we want a permanent construction but
we're permanent foundation and if you all adds to except structure shall Foundation may not be temporary I understand that I'm say we're not allowing a temporary structure
but if we say a foundation or you know we're saying how the thing is supported Foundation putting spear micropiles whatever like can we just I think we're maybe getting a little too prescripted there we want it to be a permanent construction and not you say that and
not I'm just reacting the word foundation because I think that has a specific structural meaning that we're not necessarily yeah if it does then you're then you're talking about paring pressure and everything else associated with the foundation design right right
and we might be able to do something that sits a little lighter on the site but it's still permanent construction attached to a main dwelling or something like that so my question my question on just reading that thing what's the intent you want it to be a permanent structure based there corre not mounted on a trailer or anything like that well
that's not my sentence but um if if that's what we want if that's what we we don't want a you know something that can be wheeled off the site and parked somewhere else and I'm not I have no judge I'm just saying if that's the goal then if we we're asking permanent construction I'm just saying not let's
not be prescriptive unintentionally about how that construction is built to be fair this language was plucked from another towns that I thought sounded good but I'm not married to it by any
means but the the point being that we should probably ensure yeah that we don't have mobile homes as an ad yes um so whatever words yeah it's just the word foundation
that I was reacting better way to do is to say it can't it can't be built on a mobile home or it can't be built something like that it's got be per construction you know appropriately anchored to the site or whatever the right enging terms are modular you could stand it up right you don't necessarily foundation for
that what's a different word than Foundation um because Foundation you think of as Foundation I mean Foundation is how you Anor the building into the ground there's many different ways it doesn't can be a slab it can be on te
it's not specifying you have to have a Basement foundation so I think just that research maybe it's fine I just wanted so and then for number seven I thought we had um
discussed so we say in six that we don't allow short-term rentals and then well one I thought we were kind of going to try to merge six and seven but if we keep them separate I thought we had discussed at least for a period of not less than one year but I could be wrong
I think I originally had some like three or four months thinking that you may want let someone Summer Rental and then find the winter rental many people need winter rentals so then I think we talked
about at the meeting people not wanting to do that and so they wanted six months so that's what I put down I think that is one we need feedback from residents
yeah um I do think six and seven should be combined could need to strike six if you say you can't rent it for less than six months what else do you need to say well shortterm rentals are people wanted Clarity on I mean that's such a even if
it's even if it's redundancy okay that's redundancy Fusion so maybe we and then what about number 14 no borders what does that mean in relation to six and seven what's a border well
that's a totally different part of our bylaw so we allow to four borders in a house blah blah blah and so we were just saying that um adus wouldn't be used for borders and how is a border different
Border Room as opposed to a dwelling um so with number 12 I just don't think it's it's clear enough um that shall comply with lot coverage requirements primary building setbacks
and dimensional requirements I think we have to my suggestion would State the actual section in the bylaw that it must I don't have the exact section here yet but shall comply with all district dimensional regulations height
regulations and height regulations for accessories from oh for you mean for the dimensional requirement section and just refer to that yeah you refer to um not the use table but you refer
to uh 5.4 yep and then 5.5 and 5.6 well that's different that's in conflict with 13 well the no you wouldn't
you want them to comply with with um you want them to comply with the setback requirements five more that for the primary the same setback requirements as for a primary house yeah you yes so that's section 54
okay yeah and then 56 is just the with that you only want them to comply with five 55 and 56 no 56 is accessory right but
and if it's it's attached Adu that's an accessory structure yeah but you want that accessory structure I thought comply with the primary setback you don't want I'm sorry yeah yeah yeah you're right where do we say accessory height
of the well this is confusing because we have 5.6 defines what the height is but then it also defines the se you see that yeah we only talked about the height as far as um we didn't talk about the height we only talked
about setback but if they're adding on to the primary dwelling then the primary dwelling Ty would be the requirement if it's an accessory dwelling let's say they have a two-car garage but a flat roof they want
to build up still the accessory dwelling so they have to comply with that height so how do we get that if it's a a detached accessory structure that it falls within that one
and a half story accessory structure well if they're adding a second it's a brand new Carriage because my concern is if this is the basis for this and the large Adu if
that goes through and so we're allowing a large Adu to be pretty large and somebody could do three stories they can't do it's it's the same two which is two
and a half 35t and so with an accessory structure we say that can be 25t I know just he may have I'm sorry go ahead Mary that
was that was I what I thought we talked about last meeting I mean that's my recommendation I think we were very clear last morning meeting that we wanted an accessory structure to be accessory in look and feel and everything else and so we
didn't want you know a 35 foot house and then a 35 foot Adu next to it so if you had a garage however and your back backyard and put an accessory unit above it you couldn't be one and a half storage between two and a
half but that's an an existing structure I think we kind of have to go into some of these nuances because I if we don't then we might end up getting things that residents don't
want that's going to happen any people don't like well and that's why you know as I look at some other towns with their proposed by write ad by laws and they' you know their their draft is you know six pages long
and ours is like a page like oh we got to beef this up a little bit with requirements because um well it' be pretty tough to build a 900 squ foot building on two an half that's true I'm talking about if the large went through because this is also the basis for the
LGE even a 1500 square foot I guess it could be three stor but it be almost taller than it is why yeah but you see it all over the place if you don't if you're trying to meet you know setbacks or you don't have the space
whatever you build up right isn't that the latest thing that they've you build up so if you're going to build up I don't know how accessory that
was right I am going to listen to Adam here oh hold on can't hear you you're muted thanks um I wanted to weigh in on that the question that you guys were talking about with regards to the architect and the stamp plans um because this is something I've
I've worked on you know including in Manchester in Massachusetts a single family or a two family dwelling does not require an architect and stamp plans um part of the reason if if you started to do that obviously limit uh you know the
the profession you couldn't use design Professionals in other words folks who are out there that do this on a you know day in day out basis um some of them are even in Manchester some of them are really good they've appeared before you guys before I'm not going to name any names but you probably would know there's a long list of them so if you
guys impose that requirement uh to require stamp plans you'd essentially disqualify that class of professionals from working on this my guess is because it's more onerous than I mean what what we're talking about single families with an accessory unit in it which is effectively a two family
so You' being imposing a requirement that was more onerous than what state law allows so I'm not sure it would even get approved but even if it would I just don't I don't think it's a good idea because you've got some really really talented design professionals that you'd sort of push out of the pool of people who could work on the these and you'd
drive up the costs for people because they'd have to go and you know get you know an architect a registered architect or a registered engineer to do it so I just wanted to weigh in on that because I noticed everybody was going back and forth and try to give a little perspective um and then the other thing
I wanted to just mention um I know everybody's really quick to say hey we don't want these to be used for short-term rentals but I think one of the things that that you as a board have to really think about here is that we're not like some of these other towns that
you know hotel and motel to protect and and and and make sure you don't want to have short-term rentals that would eat into that business we're the opposite we have no Hotel no motel and I think that has a really really significant effect
on on business downtown uh I think we'd like to be able to have more customers we'd like to be a have some more vibrancy um if these units are going to get built I think we ought to be really careful about just throwing a blanket restriction um on no short-term rentals
some of the folks who come and rent you know shortterm you know with us have been you know great people great you know great additions to the town they've enjoyed their time here they've shopped at local stores and restaurants um so I think the board ought to think about that really carefully uh you know the police in town can do a great job if
there's noise and anything uh that that's a problem from these but uh I would urge you guys to really really think about that in the context of Manchester and what we have what we're sort of looking to do uh over the long term you you might be in the minority
with that view I'm I'm I'm happy to be in the minority but I'd like to be I'd like to be in the thoughtful minority and and uh and bring it up to you guys because I really think it's something to consider the fact that we don't have any kind of hospitality industry to protect we need to bring in more people to
frequent our stores and our shops to keep them open you know get everything to be more vibrant than it is today I would think that I'm actually in the majority of town would like things to be a little bit more vibrant than is looking out for the commercial downtown so I I really think it's something to
think about great thank you thank you will you um we're going to clarify 12 yeah did we get any agreement and I probably should remove
the word stamp and just say plans I mean to that point the whole thing read the thing we have design guidelines asking for all this stuff um no we don't have we don't have design guidelines for adus the only
thing we would have in here is if they if they do want to build in a historic district they have to comply but that's consistent with what say drawings in number four you mean
elevations what is an exterior architectural plan yeah elevation elevation so why don't I say that elevation and I'll remove the word stamp from the first from number three will be submitted to the building
inspector these right yes I I want to say in regards I I don't think we need to say anything about the meth building code because the building code already says what it governs so we don't need to refer to it but in the terms of getting stamped
registered um there there is uh health safety welfare behind that and so I think that um I'm not saying that we need to require it here but there's a reason why you get a stamped engineered plan or a stamped architectural plan in addition to
uh you know a level of professionalism as a design professional it's also about we don't mated on residential buildings I'm not saying that we should mandate it I'm just saying that there there's a there's something behind the registration it's not just sort of an
ice extract have it is have to do with public health safety and Welfare the clarification and for the um hearing the select board asked that I combine the into one separate section
number 6 7 and 14 which are the occupancy related ones under it you know togethers just to pull it out just for clarity so I would also under 9.1.4 one clarify and say one off street
parking SP yes just put off Street in there oh um did we want to say anywhere that the once in Adu has been added at 900 square
feet or larger that Adu shall not be en except by a special permit do we have to clarify that I think so because it fall would fall within
the the second the large the large one yeah um and then this will just lapse over to the large one is that we have 9.1.2 here it just kind of hangs by itself don't know what it is all accessory Welling unit shall with
applicable sections of the bylaw because in the large Adu you say um application complies with the section 9.1 to um of this of the like so go refers to
9.12 but really all of the regulations fall in 9.13 I'm just not clear what okay then where uh yes you're correct that should be 9.13 okay I'm still not clear on 9.12
but at least it l to the right had a couple on com anybody else on the standard no I have the okay Mark or you sir oh mine is freak if um
9.1.3 number four that last point about two off street parking spaces are required for the large versus one perect small um we had made the example of you might have an existing Carriage House or something so it doesn't imply to me that you necessarily have more drivers in the
family or more people I think we should have the same off street parking requirements one and one both again I worry about the leap of pavement and parking I I know there are differences of opinion but I'm going to take my claim here that I would recommend one
off street parking I'll support you on that a large so folks think about I I put two primarily because you could have
three bedrooms easily in 1500 you have two drivers you know um so at least two cars probably so that's why I would agree with that I if we're
if this bylaw which in and of itself I don't necessarily agree with but if if we have a large Adu bylaw an existing Carriage House is a oneoff somebody could go ahead and build a whole new structure
that's upwards of how many square feet this comes out to be and and there's going to be additional cars so again it's the Nuance of okay it might be something existing and and you know mom's living in this house now and
she's going to move to the Carriage House so there's no added cars but it could also be it's a whole new structure and we're trying to not burden the streets more with off street parking and so I say you know this isn't the buy
right this is a special permit required I think if it's going to be as big as a as a house it should have the same room so for 901 square feet you'd require two cars well this is where it
gets into the nuances right I mean you know if we want to scale it all up we could definitely do that but you know you can't you know again you can do the scenario of oh it's Granny and she doesn't drive right like so we can all
come up with scenarios for for whatever side we're on um I think if we're trying to do right by the town and be aware of the off street parking issue aware that they are going to come usually with cars
that we address the problem up front rather than having an issue down well is it going to prevent someone has a smaller property of being able to
have a little bit larger Abu having the find Space on their property for car so I worry about that and then oh I do also worry about all the pay you know do we really
need that for an a that as a require well we're adding pavement so to speak building the Adu so if you want an Adu you have to accommodate parking um so you know and I get all that I'm just
stating where where and there's different parts of towns that it might be more impactful than other right like the you know if if you're building an Adu on Pine Street and your extra car is is ending up in the street that's going
to be more impactful than if you do it pick some Far Away street that you know nobody travels down right so um if it has to be a blanket bylaw for everywhere in town um my opinion is that
um we shouldn't further burden the streets with on street parking if we're allowing an Adu and our current Adu bylaw this two parking spots so we're not doing anything that we don't currently do but we don't allow any to
use in practicality anyway um well we have an Adu BW we have an BW but you can't build an Adu you you require a double lot so you might as well build another house and subdivide your lot but I think the more important Point here is
that we're not preventing people from having two parking spaces if you're going to build a three-bedroom 1500 square foot Adu for your son and daughter who moving in with their children they're going to have two cars so you're going to have
two parking spaces but if you're building a, square foot home for your mother who doesn't even drive why would you need two parking spaces that makes no sense well again it's two scenarios yes with two outcomes but you can't
guarantee that for the life of that Adu it's going to be one outcome or the other no I'm just trying to solve a problem that we know we have um this idea that there won't be cars is just not real and so we just
have different opinions on it I'm saying my opinion I think we we clearly should if we're GNA let a large Adu be built yes you might more of a chance have one car with 900 square feet versus 1500 square feet
um I'm just living in reality and saying it's going to come with two if you have a 1500 foot Adu more than likely it's going to come with two cars and let's try to accommodate but if that happens it's more than likely they're going to build two parking spaces when they build
it maybe not if we don't require it because well I think your assumption is that people aren't G to they're always going to go to the maximum maximum what we have to require the
maximum amount of cars amount of driveway whatever well I mean perhaps but then you're going to the minimum so it just does I mean we're both just kind of stating what our opinion is well we we do have lot coverage
requirements you can't have more than certain percentage of your lot with impervious surface I don't know what that means that but well well that limit residents will decide they will um but what do
what would we prefer to have in our propos and then do we have a preference um as board we want to put one SL two get opinions what I would go with just one but I'm sorry I might have missed this
so you're we're talking about the requirement for both the standard and the large just the large we're only allowed to require one standard just talking about the large yeah just the large y i I tend to agree with Mary that we do
have a um on street parking issue in a you know the C central part of our town and um that that should be a consideration for why we would to or
I'm afraid I'm a bit of a contrarian I the idea of a larger edu is I'm just not I think 900 square F feet is a it's fine with me 1500 square feet is a second house it is so I I which is why you need
you know the intent is to relieve the the uh lack of housing that we have here and the 900 square feet would do that if you if you open up the gates and make it a 1500 square feet so I know I'm going topic no but so you would prefer to not
even have discuss that I mean do prefer not to have the bar okay should we discuss that do we want to even present a large as a board I I personally don't I just think it defeats the purpose of what the Adu
is intended to be I agree with you the 900 is I'm sorry the 900 is what is required in the State we're just going with the with the state languag is there right yeah I um there may be times when there's a carriage house or something that is a
th000 feet instead of 900 but if we're starting with this is what the state has defined as an Adu then let's go with that let's not have a large Adu I mean that 1500 1500 is a house I my only
hesitation with that yeah um I mean I tend to agree with that but I also know if you live in area e and you have two acres um and you don't have a carriage house yet maybe you want to build one
have an apartment in it um and so we are foreclosing that as an option for that part of town I know we have lots more regulations to plan in the future and and maybe just starting with a standard
which is as you know pretty much as the state has written it and so there's a solid compelling case I mean compelling in a legal form right this is why we need to do it it's required there are also housing reasons to do it but you with the large as soon as you open the door to the large you
get into all of that we'll be up to how many parking spaces why why here and not there you know maybe we just start with the standard so I disagree 900 square ft is a pretty small place to live it's not going to solve our housing but it's a
it's it's an accessory dwelling unit it's not a dwelling unit it's accessory to what you already have Mish will tell you that what she's getting for applications for people with employee for employee housing is consistently
1500 square feet and larger but then maybe we just keep the employee by law because again I think there's only been about two of those cases in the last 10 years I don't think Sarah would say that but I her other cases have been not well fake employees
they been fake employees but but but yeah so um say with that but um I I don't know that we write bylaws based on what people are bringing to the zoning board
and wanting right I mean that could be that could be a slippery slope um the I like Laura's idea and Gordon that you know State's requiring 900 square feet let's do that
we're also facing the MBTA overlay which is supposed to do another size housing um Niche and I think that might be enough that we getting off for three
months and kind of see how things start going with those well we can I can we haven't noticed for public hearing on the 10th so you can make your final decision about whether to see what
folks say see what people say what you think whether you want to like put it off work on it a little bit more whether you think this is okay for um if there's something else in specific you want added to this like or
if you're going to do something bigger or like say if you're going to do a third bedroom then you need a second thing or if you're going to go one one parking space to until you get hit 12200 squar
and then you need a second one you know there there are ways it I guess I would like to get their uh their Craton opinion on the large so i' like to keep the large in the
mix um for now but I I understand your points and I that too so can I give you the my quick other edits on that then um with the
large I mentioned this last meeting and I don't know we'll I guess we'll just have to decide so I would not have it in D1 and D2 which is already to family um I actually agree with that that's how we currently have it um and then in that
grid I also don't know why G would be a yes and not a zba approval so two families are allowed by life but an Adu is different than a two family not
really may you can be detached a two family has to be detached firewall good point first how do folks feel about excluding D1 and D2 which is the denser area
area so we be foreclosing a homeowner in D1 D2 from having a large I can see the logic but on the other hand the large to me feels like enough
of a departure that start modifying it for some districts and not others on the one hand you might say I'm living in D1 and I'm relieved that my neighbor's not going to BU a to a big one on the other one on the other hand I might say well I live there I don't have any land because I'm so my lot's so small but I have a
garage it's a, 1100 ft and I'd like to put an apartment on top of it you know for my kid who's moving home and why can't I have it or in my basement or in my basement or whatever it might be so like I can see I think it's complicated I see so so
one I was taking it just because currently we don't you know with our current Adu which we're g to get rid of but to your point I think again it's a clarification that you wouldn't want or maybe you would but I don't know a two family and then an
Adu if you had a single family in D and then wanted to do ad perhaps but not three doesn't doesn't somewhere else in here say if you have the you have a multif family you don't also have an Adu isn't that in the base part of this
we're trying to we want that included that that's on number two of the general regulation multif family isn't a two family it says accessory dwelling unit shall not be permitted on two family or multif family where are you looking mark
on the uh under the standard standard okay the general regulations okay so that wouldn't allow so if you have a legal to family you wouldn't be allowed to add accessory dwelling units
to all of a sudden you got four units so do that what number yeah what number Mark um 9 1.3 and it's number two
yeah okay um okay um and then I just um so 9.1.2 to um I don't know why that wouldn't just default back to the regular one which we just clarified with 5.4
5.5 see well just that they had to meet the setep backs and lot coverage and oh yeah the measure well they all have to comply the first one right well why this date is April 28th because it's
me but wouldn't this just revert back to the base bylaw that's already has those requirements that it has to Le meet lot coverage and clarifying question to what you're asking this large building upon the
standard have standard and then I'm not reading that in the lot that you everything in the standard apply is BL that's why the select board one it combin part of combin that clear okay oh they want it to be one
byla well that's why it says special permit May DBA provided the application complies with section 9.12 it says they shall maybe I take out
912 yeah and just say they shall comply with the regulations under 93 that makesense and then the other thing I had with that was which we currently have is with these large adus is owner occupancy in
one of the units oh in the large yeah we're not permitted to have that in the standard but yeah I yeah why not is there a reason why not
what owner occupancy hard to regulate I mean we have no enforcement but true but if a neighbor complained you know
that LLC in Colorado you know is has two you know a house and an Adu and renting out both and wild things are going on that at least we would have in our bylaws that say well you know one of these have to be owner obv but it is
hard to enfor you want to add that and do we really care what difference does it make it well because you still want a neighborhood feel of that these aren't just rotating rentals um you know for the Neighbors as well
right like that that they feel that okay there's you know an Adu that's being rented out or whatever but um but then you're there's oversight then you're going to get into uh you I have family who live on theck year round
and we're then we're going to get into the you know what if a family goes to Florida for the winter they can't rent their Adu out in larger Adu for a year it just you well in our current bylaw we
address that so again I would just copy over some of our language that says you know you can do minor absences not for more than six months at a time blah blah blah BL or yeah for six months or less I don't know thinking about it
now um I think I would not want that requirement but bring it up what others think on the owner IDE in the large on one of the you said
large yeah and I you know again I'm not really backing it either but last meeting we had talked about putting the language in that what we currently have that not exceed 35% of the floor area blah blah blah and somehow that translated to half the gross floor area
1500 so I don't know where those came from so I think we're we made it bigger than we even wanted last meeting um I would change those doesn't that make this smaller yeah it makes it smaller if you it can't
be more than half the growth floor area 1500 square feet well I think we had talked 1,200 square feet and U for the absolute number you have a couple hands no no as R so I'm sure we have a
lot of houses in here that are way more than 3,000 square ft 3,000 square foot house would only be able to have, 1500 half of that floor area is 500 so if you have a 4,000 s foot house
or 6,000 squ 12 you know whatever you can still only have so so relatively 3,000 square feet you know plenty plenty plenty of houses that
are that so I mean you know 1500 that's large to me as for an U that's any other thoughts on that okay we do the RF
RF oh yes hi this is Doner Z Blossom Lane can you hear me yes we can hi good evening guys um I'm just want to just just a quick thing I like the 900 square feet um with an Adu because my definition of an Adu is a very small
residential space and it for me I I'm always thinking between 400 and 800 square feet to accommodate one or two people with a single bedroom bathroom kitchen and you know I lived in an apartment with my husband that was 900 it was square feet and it was huge in
Chicago my in-laws lived in an apartment in Salem 900 square F feet huge and you can even have even a child or so when I think of 1500 square feet and if let's say I even just added 600 onto my apartment in Chicago it would have been
massive we had so much space for a couple of two I just really would be mindful of like why were like why would you need a I mean a 1500 square foot is a really nice size home like let's let's be honest like I mean, 1500 F feet is pretty big so I just would be mindful
about I think we just start with that 9 00 Square fet let's get those adus under our belt like let's allow the elderly let's allow like a small family a couple with a child you know a child to to kind of get into here before we start really expanding to like what would be a home
an actual 1500 squ foot home so that's I I I like the 900 square feet I hope you guys kind of stick to that yet I do understand if you already have an existing structure like a garage or even a basement and your square footage in the basement would be a thousand or above I guess I wouldn't mind if that
just stayed the same because the structure and kind of the footprint doesn't change but, 1500 squ feet to me seems pretty large that's my comment thank you very much you guys are doing a great job thank you I think that's that that's interesting that you know if there was an existing
structure that part of it wanted to be converted or the whole thing to an Adu that's different than creating a whole new 1500 sare foot structure um so maybe something like that could be a special permit that you know you have
a an existing garage structure whatever that you now want to convert to an th000 square foot Adu you're repurposing an existing
building um I guess I could see that better than a new structure you you'd address that particular problem at time that it submitted to well yeah you would just
tag on to the the general Adu bylaw that um you know guess it would take some time to figure up the wording because you wouldn't want somebody to convert a garage and then get rid of their parking spots so but
do that now I mean well yeah and that's why you know I don't know we we shouldn't be adding to a problem that we already have any other thought all right we're on done with large on the flood plane I'm going to update us on the
status of flood plane um what is um pretty much I believe it was unchanged um at the select board meeting but we're we still have the map problem so the map problem is been
promised that we will be all set with map final map by the uh um by our meeting in March not sooner so the one comment that the select board
had on this was they wanted to have Mark have a discussion with Town Council about whether or not the blood plane bylaw could be structured in the same
way as the storm waterer bylaw was um yeah I tried to explain that the the this is the outline seeing what the zones are and what the overall parameters are
but the building code is the regulation that this applies to because the building code dictates how you build in flood planes based on type of flood plane you're in so um I
have called the theate flood plane coordinator to Ure that that correct so they're the ones they're the ones who are saying we have to adopt it in this format in that format that's correct so
otherwise we're non-compliance and then people get flood insurance so yeah this this model bylaw is for the state like did they want to change just the format yes they asked the question the
select board the question that could they because apparently when they did the storm water the storm water was one one document when the state sent it but then they said you could split it
into you could take out all the regulatory U requirements and make it in your local regulations and just have the format structure um and so they let them do
that this way in that in not sure why I wasn't part of the whole flood plane I mean the storm water discussion that was all on public so um so they just wanted me to
check but um my understanding is that we have to go with what the state we have to go with what the state says I'm just confirming that that the case that miror
that the regulations so to speak would be and that is already separate okay any comments on flood PL I know okay Bill
Stone hi all um my comment's not about flood planes so forgive me um I just got back from the kids vac you know school break and got a notice tonight about 30 Mill Street and I was uh I guess it must have been covered earlier in the meeting
um was there anything voted on for that 30 Mill Street maybe you have maybe it's a different meeting yeah is that is that a conservation notice yes oh that's tomorrow night oh sorry guys okay it
must be on a different time zone thank you thank you sorry about that I just got the notice and joined about a half hour after your call or this started so I was waiting to see if it came up thanks I'm sorry you had to wait all night for no God you guys are doing great I sat here going oh they're they're trying to think of all the
different things that that affect everything so thanks for doing what you're doing oh thank you right any other hands Mary no okay anything oh um the ason
reports I would say the down the downtown Improvement committee is quite uh active engaged quite engaged and quite active they're they're rather boisterous meanings I mean they get to the point of like burning torches and
charging up the hill but they're but they they are tremendous advocates for betterment of the town getting bathrooms in here getting the commuting Center up the front getting signings in the town and
and lastly is trying to improve the whole retail environment to because those discussions are really quite of fertile and quite active I happen to be taking the notes from them too so I'm so I get to read I get to hear it
all over again it's pretty it's pretty amazing and they they are great advocates for for us too I I do hope I've expressed this to Sarah many times I hope that we coordinate with them which is also me on that side of the
equation do here they're they're great they're great they're funny they're passionate great sounds like gar has been there gar it's actually Marlene stolen she's really she's she she gets up point
to swear and we have to like T bleep it out of the it's pretty passionate but she's right you know she she wants she wants something that's for the better of town you get lingers and lingers and lingers and doesn't gets done he wants
it no that was great thank you horrible housing TR we have a survey done on Newport Park which people can look at I guess uh it shows a little more difficulty in developing the part
of the land but it's still possible um we're also having a survey done the PLS to see what constraints we have there um and we've been discussing um a
potential um transaction with a current property owner in partnership with a nonprofit corporation if we can all get that put together that' be great the powderhouse uh Lane lip application has
gone into the state finally yes and it's under review and they haven't asked for any more information that's which is amazing how many units is that eight it would be no it would be the entire development because
25% if if reviewed and okay 25% of the units are already rented um in accordance with the requirement and that's the property at the end of yes all 29 units would would
then go on to the there only eight that are on currently well no there's zero what does that do to our percentage helps a little bit done the math but it's not it's not very
much but it's a good step that's right um any other public comment on anything that we covered tonight not anything I have two topics um can we do
the minutes first I didn't see any minutes I didn't either yeah I didn't either if they weren't in the online packet then they okay oh Sarah Pi okay then Mary oh sorry uh yeah Sarah Paris 9 friend Street I
just wondered when would it be an appropriate time to ask to go back to the 30 and I believe 34 Pine Street with the amount of lots separated or combined what is the maximum amount of units that
could be built there in my view it depends on what to take it from what Hees um which D he goes under he was sort of flopping back and forth between
different so um the way when we adopted that Amendment on the floor town meeting it's it limits it to even if he divides it into multiple Lots the most he could do with the existing two Lots so I
believe he could get five units on each of the existing two Parcels which means in 30 and 34 combined he could do 10 um but um right now he was trying to divide
three single family homes in the front three small lots and one bigger lot in the back but it's still even if you divided it into those four Parcels the most you could put on the properties combined would be 10
units okay and so would that require two out of the 10 to be affordable yes yes okay thank you good question though
yes you're not building five okay Mary five other matters um Mary's bring up other men so we did a special permit last meeting and um for Seven Central and something was
bothering me I went home and looked on the map um we approved off street parking behind 7 Central the issue is is the the road right behind 7 Central is town-owned which is
fine but to get there is a right of way owned by 19 Central so we need to