Okay, good evening and welcome to the 9th meeting of fiscal year 2026. At this time, I would like to now call the meeting to order um and begin by introducing the members of the planning board and our staff. You like to start? >> Cher Alagayas, secretary. >> Sean Fe, member.
>> Mag Yfield, member. >> Jim Davis, member. And tonight we have with us our staff, our planning director, >> Liz Manny, >> and we would like to welcome Avante, our new assistant town planner. So, welcome. Thank you for joining us. And um we're
glad to have you here tonight. So, thank you. >> Yeah, thanks for having me. >> Yes. And Liz will give you a further introduction with a staff update. Um at this time, I'd like to now begin with the administrative items um meeting minutes. We have five sets to approve
and I don't know if the members have had a chance to review these. Um they're minutes from June 16th, June 17th, July 10th, uh sorry, I June 26th, I skipped those
and July 24th. Have the members had a chance to review and any comments on those minutes? So I have on um one set on the June 26
meeting, it says Miss Oakfield said that she had met with the town administrator and assistant town administrator regarding the open meeting law. And I didn't meet with them. I spoke with the assistant town
administrator. >> Okay. >> So, you want to make that amendment to say that she had spoke had spoken with >> Yeah. >> spoken with instead of met >> with the assistant town administrator. >> Still trying to get in. >> Okay. Not the town administrator.
>> Correct. Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. So, do you want to take that? You can. >> Mhm. >> That's okay. >> Everybody comments. >> Okay. Um, so then if I could have a motion to accept those the five um sets
of minutes. >> So, Meredith, I wasn't here on the 26th. >> Okay. >> And I think Sean wasn't here on the 26th and July 24th. >> That's right. >> So, we have to do three separate motions here. >> Okay. That's correct. So, I to make a
motion to I'll make a motion to approve uh June 16th, June 17th, July 24th meeting minutes. >> July. >> What about July? What about July 10th? >> Uh, was there a July 10th?
>> There was. >> Oh, I was here on July 10th. >> Yes. >> But for some reason, I don't remember seeing those. But that's all right. I'm sure they're fine. >> So, motion 16th, 17th, July. >> July 10th and July 24th. Thanks, Maggie. motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All in favor?
>> I. >> Great. >> Okay. And then separating out the June 26th. Um I'll make a motion to approve the June 26 minutes as amended this evening. >> Second.
>> Okay. Um and we'll do roll call on this. Cheryl, >> you don't have to do roll call. >> All in favor? I >> only the three and then sorry >> I was going to record those as individual votes but that was easier. >> Okay, great.
Um and then >> I want to see the 10th. No, I'm good. >> We have our future um future meeting dates. Um and that we are not meeting uh the week of Thanksgiving. So we have our
uh our next meeting dates will be let's see in December is a shorter month. So we have that would be our scheduled December 18th meeting. >> The 11th. So you have the >> Oh, sorry. The 11th.
>> The 11th. >> The 11th and not the 18th. >> And just the one >> just the one. >> Just the one in December. unless we feel that we need to >> add a second um for some reason, but I think at this time it can be just December 11th.
>> I think I'll miss that unfortunately, but I'm in New York for work on >> Okay. >> the end of that week. >> Okay. Thank you. I'll note that. Okay. So, December 11th. Okay. Great.
Okay. And then my goal was to have a um have kind of like a look ahead calendar. >> Yeah. >> At the December meeting and then we can kind of talk about it maybe some of the dates and and try to you know >> have sort of a time frame and >> yeah spring town meeting and when
>> exactly things just kind of kind of look at look at some of those kind of a little bit further ahead. It I'm being selfish. probably will help me too >> to have a little bit more, you know, kind of heads up for some of those. Maybe even if we do it quarterly, >> doesn't necessarily have to be have to
be a whole year's worth of meeting dates, but quarterly would be good. >> That's great. >> Okay. Um, and so with that, we can roll into the staff update. Liz, if you want to um >> Sure.
>> All right. keep on your updates and >> and so um the first item on my this memo that I prepared for you folks today. The goal is to have this in your in your folder the week the Friday before the meeting. So I'm I'm getting there. But
um that we'll see. Uh the first item on the memo is to uh to introduce Avante. He's been on board for almost two weeks now. Great. and um he has recently graduated from Northeastern with a masters in planning and he has an undergrad in geography. Um and as I said
in here, an excellent combination for a planner. I've I've worked with a couple of a couple of gentlemen over the years that had that same that same uh academic uh background and they're both terrific planners. Um so yeah, so we've been
really busy and um and it's it's good so far. I think I think we're figuring it out, right? >> Mhm. Yep. learning lots. Yeah. >> So, so if I don't if you want to say anything or hand it over to you or not to put you on the spot, but >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, um Liz covered a lot
of the basics. Um I think for me, my um studies have always been kind of focused in like the environment sustainability. So, my undergrad was focused in environmental systems. My graduate was uh program was focused in sustainability and resilience. Um over the summer I did
an internship where I worked with a nonprofit where I did some client action work um and some community engagement related to that. So um so that's kind of been my focus, but I've been passionate about urban planning and yeah, everything related to it. So yeah, I'm
happy to be here. >> Great. But welcome. Nice to have you. >> Anything else, Liz, on >> Yeah. So, um, so I I I had had some conversations with with Meredith about, um, the housing production plan and getting, you know, trying to get get
some, uh, feedback from the prior consultant that was used back in 2020, Karen Sunborg. So, I've reached out to to her to hopefully get some sense on some, um, you know, scope and budget and and, you know, kind of to be determined how that how that's how that effort's
going to get funded. Um we've been we had a traffic commission meeting at the end of um October. It was a pretty packed agenda. There was discussion of um some valet parking in East Villain Square. Um traffic counts and calming
measures on several several side streets, some of which are being affected by the Randolph A road diet, some of which are kind of longstanding um you know, sort of adjacent to Governor's Road. Uh Nick had asked me to to pass to pass
along this um link to a um I think it's a mass dot meeting on um November 20th on um improvements at Route 138 in Bradley Road. I'm not exactly certain. I don't know a lot about that particular project, so
I'll have to do a little bit more homework on that particular project, but he wanted you guys to know that that was that that was happening. So there's a hyperlink in that in that memo. um had a conversation with the folks that are staffing our shared housing
support office. Um very interested actually I just got an email back today from the woman who is the um the the contact on that one. Um very interested to get connected with them because I'm going to use them for as much as I can
on the 4D stuff. Um, and so, you know, not exactly certain what they're what they're providing and kind of how it works, but um, I'm definitely going to be leaning on that if if it's if it's a resource that's there. Sounds like it was kind of like a Do you guys know much about that
effort? I think >> I don't know anything. Will you elaborate a little? I think I think it was created from what I can tell I think it it started as sort of like a regional like a regional effort among similar towns that were all being faced with multiple 40B applications.
>> And so this was like an attempt to have um you know uh housing expertise available kind of on call. >> Gotcha. Um and so um yeah, so I sat in on I think they do
quarterly meetings. I sat in on that meeting. Um the other communities were, you know, clearly more, you know, engaged with with what's going on with the various projects in their communities. Um Hop Hopington, Medfield, Norwood, Sharon, and I think Randolph
may have been part of it, but I think they dropped out recently. I'm not 100% on that one. Um, so yeah, so that so that's going to be a really good resource um, which like I said, I'm going to definitely lean on that um, for any kind of, you know, reporting or any
monitoring efforts that are required for those projects. Um, and then with the sign review committee, sovonte and I attended that last night. Um, been working with um, Mike on, you know, kind of the process for getting those um, you know, kind of ready for the committee to
to work on. um was really helpful because a couple of different types of um situations uh one in a residence area and then one sort of in you know kind of like highway adjacent area the two the two locations um
you know very helpful to kind of get an understanding of like you know how the process works and what people are concerned about and you know how that affects you know sort of what you guys want to do with with adjusting your bylaw for that um open space and recreation plan. Had had some
conversations with Meredith on that. Hopefully going to get an update from Horesley Whitten, the consultants on that. It sounds like it's close to the finish line. And I don't want to get ahead because I know that's on the agenda, too, to talk about that. Um,
and do you guys Oh, and I I I don't want to forget to ask if you folks want to maybe think about meeting in the fire station meeting room. So that was sort of out there as a as a question for you guys to to to think about if you want to want to meet over there.
>> Okay. >> Terrific. All right. Thank you. >> Can I ask a couple questions? >> Yeah. >> Uh Liz, are is the plane department to have a member on the traffic commission? So is that one of the memberships? I
recall in the past I think >> I think it's I think it's the planning director is appointed to it. Tim used to staff it. >> Yeah. Well, but I don't know if that was >> it's like it's like vote and it's a voting member. >> Yeah. So, um I think the sign review I
think maybe the pling director is exeicio, but I think on the traffic commission it's it's vote it's a voting member the the position. So, um, yeah, but that's I I don't I I've just been at that one meeting, so I haven't really dug in too
much to that of those projects and kind of what's going on with with in that world because there's a lot happening obviously. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. You know, I I mentioned um in the final report of the MEC about the
traffic mitigation committee's report from 2020 >> and there are some recommendations in there that are really I think still very relevant >> and I don't one of the things that we highlighted was that there's nobody sort
of owns the followup on the recommendations of that report. Mhm. >> Um, so I think if you could read through that report and and think about whether you could bring, you know, some of those recommendations to the committee or at least even the report to the committee
because I'm not sure, you know, >> Yeah. >> Um, what you know, committees change and staff change and everything. So like it might not be something that some people are familiar with. >> Okay. >> And and whether they feel like they have the ownership of it or not, at least it would be good to be aware of it.
>> Absolutely. Um, some really good work there, I think. >> Okay. >> And then, um, you didn't mention the economic development study. Um, and I don't know if you have an update on that where that stands. >> I think it was the grant money was lost,
right? Because it was >> like an earark or something. >> Yeah, it was either federal or um somehow I don't recall the details, Meredith, maybe you do, on where that funding was lost. It was a grant that was given to us that was funded through
June 30 through the end of June and at the time it was it was going to be good through 2027. The towns would have had a or the end of 2026 or into 2027 but because we hadn't hired anybody, the
town or the state um it was fedally funded and the state did not get the the money that they were counting on. So they are not um they are not honoring that grant. >> We had hired someone though. We had MAPC remember they came >> that's for the economic feasibility.
>> No, I think it was for the economic development too, right? They came and spoke to us like a year ago maybe. >> Oh, I'm sorry. That's we did talk about that. I'm sorry. Now >> because we we did encumber funds >> for the economic feasibility with MAPC, I believe,
>> right? Yeah, that's that's being that's being completed. That they were they were hoping to come tonight, but but the um staff person in MAPC was leading that up has just accepted a new position with the MBTA. So, >> she wanted to kind of transition the
whoever was going to come and report to you guys. So, that so that report on that study may not h I'm hoping it will happen on December 11th. The the econ the feasibility analysis. >> The feasibility analysis. Yes. >> The economic development plan. initiated that. Yes, that's what now
>> progress. Yeah, it just got, >> you know, >> it got side >> when Tim left it got, I think, ownership of it just kind of got put on hold for a bit. >> Yeah. So, if we did initiate that, I would think that we paid the consultants at least a portion because they did
come. >> Yeah. There was about there was about 14,000 uh paid to MAPC. >> Um and the the balance of the of the earmark was was was cancelled for lack of a better word. I don't know. I don't know. Clawed back. I don't know. Um so
Avante actually sat in on a TA session yesterday um for MEPC has their um TAP. >> Yeah. Technical assistance program. >> Yeah. So, so that's due the first week of December.
>> Yeah. >> Grant application. >> Um, that's like somewhere around like December 3rd. Um, yeah, they MAPC said that they're kind of flexible with the due date, but yeah, obviously if you can get it before then, that would be ideal
for when they um provide the grant award for the next year, >> which I think is in spring that they >> did. think what the balance would be of what we would to complete it would the cost would be >> the the the that contract I think was
like 150,000 if I remember correctly >> it's big to do >> yeah so I don't know if their tap awards that much I don't think they do has anybody gotten one recently I feel like it's less than that >> but maybe like around 30 I think is what
we've had but or maybe up to 40 but >> and I think I'm sorry Nick did say um I'm recalling our conversation He was going to try to see if they could try to get the same, you know, most of what we were trying to achieve, but maybe narrow the scope or maybe we did a
portion of it that that would sort of get us to where we want to be, but come in at a lower cost. >> So, I don't know where that if he's had that conversation on. >> So, they can probably my experience with that program is if they want to fund you, they'll figure out a way to make it
work within the resources they have available. Um, so I think what we discussed was just kind of taking whatever the scope was for the prior effort and submitting it something that's close to that. >> Um, and then kind of, you know, maybe
see what they come back with. They might say, you know, we need to reduce the scope because, you know, we can't, you know, this level of like, >> but it sounds like definitely applying for that and trying to see. >> I think so. that that's going to be that's my suggestion to to to apply for
that project because it seems to make the most sense and it also seems to be the one that's like I mean obviously the housing production plan as well but there might be some other funding for that avail other funding sources for that. Um so um yeah I think that's makes the most
sense. So, can we get um so I remember um the woman coming and she came on a night um um that the fruit center was on, right? >> And so she did sit through um some of
our discussion on that so she could hear kind of um what neighbors were talking about or or their concerns about having um businesses. So, um, could we get a
report up to when the funding stopped? Because she came to a meeting. She spent some time >> our different >> We were upstairs. >> We were upstairs. Correct. Yeah. I don't think Sean was there cuz I rewatched it and um
>> and so I would so if we could find out what the grant money was that we contracted with what amount was actually spent because I don't know how much effort she put in. I know she came to at least one meeting and it was more of a listening
session. So, I'm not sure what um she did after that meeting >> and then um kind of get their bill up to that point and see what is left on the contract, what they owe us actually. >> Yeah. >> And the total if you can find out what
the total was. >> Yeah. >> Mhm. Yeah. No, absolutely. And and and I think that's I think that's very worthwhile to see if we can get some type of like a memorandum or something that summarizes like what they like you said what they heard at that at that hearing and and uh maybe some of their
sort of like preliminary >> preliminary you know recommendations or what have you. Um yeah I I I can definitely do that. >> I have two more things. Okay. And just so I'm clear with how this works, MAPC has grant money and we
request or we write a grant, try to get that money, and then we turn around and hire them with that money. Is that pretty much what I'm hearing? >> I I think so. I mean, I the the most recent project that I did with them was in Quinsey. It was a small business a small business plan. Um, and we applied
for their technical assistance program and they essentially you hire them. >> You hire you hire their resources. >> There were times in the past, I think, when they probably did have like other grant programs where you would have the flexibility to maybe go out and shop
around for other other consultants. Um, and they may still have that, but I don't think this technical assistance program is that. I think I think you work you work with MAPC. >> Yeah. I'm not looking to rock the boat. I'm just trying to figure out how it all works. >> Yeah. >> It's interesting to me. >> And honestly, it's been a bit so I'd
have to kind of go back because because I I applied for that money >> pro precoid and so all the federal stimulus and all the you know like this earmark like that's all kind of those are a lot of that stuff was probably like one time money.
>> You know what I mean? >> I I don't know. And and my understanding is we do pay um MAPC um I don't know why I'm thinking $17,000 a year. So we pay them. So what my
question is do what do we get in return for that? Is there a breakdown as to what we get for our payment? H >> we get the services of having a I think a world-class regional planning agency you know kind of at our you know
available to us and they they support they support um peer you know sort of gatherings they they do regional based planning um there's they have a ton of data that they you know population projections
um a lot of work on in the in the climate world with climate climate resilience and sort of um you know modeling bylaws and I I mean I' I've I've used their resources a lot in my career. Um it it
kind of depends. I mean it depends what the town needs from them. you know, if the town wants to go to them for expertise on, you know, like if the school department's thinking about, you know, do we want to build a new school in this part of town, you know, they could go to them for, you know, population projections and sort of like
demographic analysis. >> And that would be part of our what we pay them. >> Well, >> and then not not paying them to do extra. I guess that's what I'm >> Well, that's what I I mean, yeah, they they they they also kind of function sort of as like a quasi like, you know,
they're like quasi they're they're like a quasi state agency in a sense, right? Cuz like the people that work there are state employees, I believe. I I could be wrong on that. >> Um and so and the procurement's a little bit different because they are like a
quasi, you know, state a state public agency. So, so you don't have to do the same level of procurement when you when you go out for their services. Um but um I but my but again my experience with them is has been that they're that
they're a really you know first class group and they have >> I I think the question you're asking is what do we get for the 17,000 if that's what we pay >> and when do we transition to having to hire them as a consultant because we we're you know we probably are are maybe
that's the question that that right >> we're we're we're allowed the information that they collect from the database face Liz and everything else that they do as an agency, but at some point we must >> we must hit a line where um we have to
hire them as a consultant for something beyond. So that's all you're asking, right? >> Correct. Right. >> Going to add that we do have representation u um Taber Key is our town's representative. U I think that means he
serves on the board or serves on advisory committee of some sort. So, I'm sure if you wanted to reach out to >> Taber, >> he could give you more information about what his role is and and probably more about um >> might be good to >> what our expectations are. Yeah.
>> And I'm sure he would come to one of our meetings. I I would I I would say a great example based on the very little bit of research I've done onto this supportive shared shared housing support
office that that that creating that regional like ability cuz I I and again I could be wrong on this but the consultants from Asenture I think they were I think the firm that they started with was maybe bought by
Asenture Sure, maybe I could be wrong on that one, too. Um, but it's it, you know, to to have that resource available to the town when you don't have like the the ability to have that level of housing expertise or or even the time to
do the monitoring, right? Like Mike and I were talking about it, how he used to have to wear that hat like in a community that he worked in, you know, in in the past because you don't have that. you don't in a in a smaller town, you just don't have that level of expertise. So So that that would be a
really good example of of of of a value that that's brought to the table. >> I don't think I'm sorry I interrupt you. I don't think it's about whether they bring value or have value. It's what can we get for what we pay them, right? What what can we utilize them for for what we
pay them? I'm hoping that if our town sends a payment of whatever dollar value it is, there's a document that defines what we get in return. I hope there's I hope there's something on paper that says >> I don't I don't know how that works. I feel like I feel like it's almost like an >> off of our cherry it's a cherry it's off
our cherry sheet. >> Yeah, I just like just like the MBTA 2.2 million. Yeah, >> that might be fine though. But there has to be something that defines that every town if you contribute right to supporting financially um uh MAPC this
is what we're going to provide you for services or this is what we're going to provide you that that's that's just simple and basic. MAPC >> they should be able to give it to you. You know Taber Taber is probably great but we should be able to contact MAPC and say what outlines what you provide
to all towns that contribute to supporting MAPC. >> Yeah. Yes. >> And and can any board member just call them up? Say if I have a question, >> um could I call them up randomly and ask questions? Would they take my call?
>> I think we actually dab when I was on the webinar last night that like yeah, you can reach out to somebody and we'll they'll answer and respond. So, >> so uh for example, I reached out to uh Josh Fiala since we all know Josh and I
had asked him um if there were any other examples of EMPIC final reports, you know, that we could look at as a resource. And so he reached out to people within um you know their agency to get back to me. And then I also reached out to him about um intratown
shuttle. did other were there other towns that had that that they were aware of any resources. So again, he did the same thing, reached out, he sent it back to me. So, um and and if he didn't have it, you know, he could he would send me to someone that did. So, um I don't
know, you know, if everyone knows like they can reach that reach out or if there's a person we're supposed to reach out or if we're supposed to do it through the planning department, but it'd be good to clarify it, you know. >> Yeah, I think so. I Well, and you know what? I I didn't I didn't even know that there was an assessment on the cherry
sheet. I didn't even know that. I mean, I guess I probably kind of knew it. But but um so yeah, that's we should we should know that. We should know. We should know sort of like what the you know what if there's a if there's a list and and and what's on it. And I mean I know the things that they've done for me
>> in the past as far as you know technical assistance and and facilitation and data and what have you. Um, but I think that would be Yeah, I think that's very worthwhile. >> Liz, do you know if Brain Street paid the same 17 grand or how much they pay more because they're >> I think it's based on population.
>> Sure. >> Maybe. >> Or something some factor is most likely. Um, I'm sure Quinzy pays, you know, maybe a >> little bit more. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, I have two more. >> Why don't you finish then? Okay. I want
to break. Um some of us went to the um select board sponsored and planning board posted meeting at the um about the fire station east Milton. >> I saw it on TV. >> Yeah. I I just um going to suggest that
um planning needs to kind of be involved in the discussion even though it was post I mean at the meeting I suggested that there needed to be more uh engagement before and more analysis at least in my table I said you know we
need more analysis economic analysis like that's what one of the interests of me in the economic development study is like the mix of businesses like how do we a lot of people in in my experience in um in being on the board and in the
master plan committee back when was people have an express interest in the diversity of bu of businesses >> and when there's a storefront that opens people say oh gee I hope it's not going to be another real estate realtor's office no offense to realtors or another
dry cleaner or nail salon because we have a lot of them >> so like you know what does it take to get the kind of businesses. And at that meeting the other night, there was >> there was some interest in like cafe, coffee shop, bookstore, you know, just places for people to gather kind of
>> where a nail salon, you get a service, but it's not a gathering place, you know. Um, >> so I I do think um >> one of the challenges too is we all know in our um parcels in our business districts are small. You can't really
park on park the business on site. So, you know, it's if somebody has to come now, if it's an existing business, you know, it's pre-existing non-conforming and they don't have to provide that parking. But if it's a new business in a municipal building, what's what's going to be the approval path? I think we need
to think about, >> you know, for a use and I'm sure you're going to be interested in that too, right? Um, and so I I just feel like there's some more discussion that needs to happen even in internally. it's, you know, even if it doesn't come to planning board for some kind of
official, um, >> application, >> planning department definitely should be part of the discussion. So, um, >> and I do think more community outreach needs to happen there. So, I just want to make >> just wanted to bring that up. Um, and then the other thing is,
>> well, just on that note, Cheryl, the select board doesn't have to >> they're going to proceed with selling it or keeping it or whatever on their own, right? They're not asking us for our input. Well, I'm just suggesting at least the planning department >> and you know I can do I I'm happy to
reach out to the select board and to Nick Milano, you know, and make these comments too, but I thought I would just raise them here just to >> they make the decision on what to do with it whether they're going to dispense of the property or not. >> That's what that's the feeling I got from the meeting. >> But I think what the purp the purpose
was to say, okay, what does the community want? Do they want it to be dispensed of or do they want to see a new use or you know or restrictions on what can be done on that property? So >> this was a listening session I think for for you back through MAPC.
>> I understand all that. I just wanted to be clear that it's it's right now it's not coming to us is what I'm saying. But would we and is it appropriate for us to take an official vote to say either you know we think they should dispense of it
or we think that they should keep it >> because there's no I think that's the biggest question not necessarily >> this point I think it's it's premature to do that but but I think being part of the process and I think
>> thought more thought has to go into it I think that's what came out of it it's that they shouldn't rush to there should not be a decision made. I mean, I think I would support if we wanted to do outreach to say, you know, through Meredith to say we we would like to be engaged in the discussion about this,
you know, and and think about with the building uh, you know, department and um and planning department, you know, how what the path might be for a part um whether it's a sale or a lease, you know, just >> it's more about they're going to make
that decision with hopefully with the most information and they've got resources that can help them make, you know, provide the information. >> So, um, >> yeah, but it certainly sound like a building that people wanted to hang on to was, but more needs to be studied on
it. >> It's in the business district, right? So, >> it's I'm not even sure a municipal use for property in the business district. So, it's not a grandfathered as a business use. I wouldn't think. So, I
don't know. I mean it. So what if they did lease it or sell it and it's they can't park it, right? So >> I don't know. It's just >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Question I have. You definitely want you're going to have >> you still has to get something approved,
right? Whether it's EBA ZBA or here. >> I I just think that should be thought out before decisions made. >> Unless of course we make it a parking lot cuz Milton desperately needs parking. I know you're going to kill me on the historic >> support tearing down that building for a parking lot. >> Oh, I I 100% do. That would be my goal.
>> The town gets to hold the land, so if you ever need it, you can develop it. And you you create valuable parking for East Milton Square. >> And and the question is, are there other um properties that are is owned by the town
a municipal building that is used that is located in a business district? The art is the art center is the art center. When I was um and the yacht club, I don't know if that would be considered that business. >> Yeah.
>> Well, if the the right now the the town um projects don't require um planning board review, site plan review, right? >> Some communities I I think that they do. Um, >> but it was um, you know, so like if a
town if the town did something with, you know, a field, was there adequate parking or is I think that came to us before like do you does the town review parking for that field or the the lights that they want to put in that field or review the new school design or whatever
it is and we don't now. Um, so that's that's something I think we we talked about maybe thinking about in the future. it would only make good sense to utilize your planning department and your planning board. >> So, I know on the in the um we kind of
asked the fire station building committee at for the town center one, but I don't think we really reviewed the East Milton one and um there's Athetherton to come. So, um, and there's some discussion, I think, about whether
to demolish the Athetherton station, which, um, is another conversation, but I think >> it's a much nicer building. >> No, that would be shameful. >> Um, >> East Milton Square is just ugly. Looks like two Legos. >> I don't think I think
>> I mean, it's not too I just want to bring out another thing. I would like to introduce our new building. So, a couple of people have asked me, "How do I know if if my property or whatever property is in the MBTA zoning?" And I don't think that the parcel list of what's in
that is something that was asked for before. Um, and I don't know like if somebody called the building department, if you have that parcel list because the maps, you know, >> aren't that aren't that easy to read. >> Aren't that easy to read for people? Um,
and some people who have asked are like right close to the edge, you know, like they don't know, am I in or am I out and they just then they want to know. Um, or is that property my neighbor in or out? And they want to know. So, it's just um a question that I >> Did the consultant prepare that list for
you guys? Did you Did you see that list? >> No, because it was st the approval was on the citizens petition. >> Oh, okay. But it hadn't been created prior to that because that 25% was sort of like always out there, right? >> It had been created, but it changed.
There was some slight parcel change. There was some things that changed. So, I don't think we we saw we didn't see the final um >> parcels. I mean, it shouldn't be it shouldn't be hard to do. I mean, I mean, someone just needs the polygons for the >> who has
just need to ask you for them. >> Okay. Yes. And I'm pretty sure it matches up with the citizens petition. This board um had approved a a plan and that it then um rescended about 5 days later, but that's what was the basis of the citizens petition. So I'm pretty
sure that the >> retail would have it >> based on that vote >> and the AG has not finalized >> the zoning. That's the one that's I think that's the one they had until what November 23rd or something there was a Yeah. There's there was a date. Yeah.
Right. Because what was that? Five and six or something. >> Articles five and six. >> Um >> and six was the >> six was you guys and then the five was the citizens petition. >> No, the opposite >> opposite. Okay. Yeah.
>> It was six that got approved. So >> yeah, I think I just happened to see something yesterday or today that it was the November. >> So people start putting applications in because until it's approved. >> Okay. So, so the so, so try to get a list of those properties.
>> That would be helpful. Yeah, >> I think just posted or somewhere on the town website. >> Okay. >> Would be great. >> Okay. >> And if it needs to wait until the AG's. >> Yeah, I don't know. That's a good That's a good question. >> It could be something, you know, that
it's still pending at the age. >> I mean, I could I mean, if somebody really wanted to know, they could come in and I'd pull I just >> Yeah. pull it up. Yeah. and show them pull up pull up their property and tell them >> I mean I might be I don't have full
access to all of the GIS so I'll probably need to talk to Alan a little bit about that Alan Bishop okay terrific and and this is I guess just a little bit sort of part Oh no we have it on there never mind we'll I'll wait on
the agenda so anything else on that Liz or that's good for your staff update. I think that was pretty comprehensive. Okay. Um now we have time for public comment. If there's anyone here in the audience who would like to speak to
something or anyone online, um if you'd like to raise your hand, um now is your time to be able to speak. Don't see anybody in the audience. All right. Um, so if it's okay, I just would like to maybe move up item five so
we won't keep our building commissioner here any longer than he has to. Um, but I would like to welcome Michael White, our new building commissioner. >> Uh, please come and feel free to join us. >> Nice to meet you guys. >> Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you, too.
>> Y >> Yeah. Welcome. We're glad to have you and >> thanks for having me. >> You're doing a great job. We hear wonderful things and I know you came before the historical commission and you've been kindly going to the different boards and introducing yourself which >> Yeah, I wanted to at least start off
with all the boards and committees that I deal with that it would be nice to have a face behind the emails that I'm sending out to everybody. >> Absolutely. And yeah, and working with Liz because you all work so closely together in the with the planning department. Um
>> I'm hoping to get more caught up. I've been so busy. I haven't had as much time as I'd like to coordinate efforts. >> Mhm. Absolutely. Absolutely. >> It'll get better. I've been >> Anything that's a problem, I like to try to fix it as quick as possible. So, I've
been digging in deep and >> Great. >> Actually, the ADU stuff's been big, trying to finalize what's right, what's wrong. I think I contacted the attorney general's office that reviewed our bylaw to get >> great
>> answers to some of my questions and then some of it was over their head and they sent me to other agencies. >> Wow, >> that's all. Yeah. >> So, actually that worked out good that she got me connected with it. I didn't even know there was an ADU uh unit with
the state, which they did a presentation at my Southeast Mass building officials training all day yesterday. So, that was good. >> Oh, great. That's good. >> But we're like digging in the weeds. There's a lot of crazy zoning stuff that we didn't realize that they can
basically cherry pick. Take the accessory structure 8T side set back 8T rear. Then take the 20ft primary structure front set back do a detach 2 and 1/2 story.
>> So like figuring all that stuff out. What's right? What's wrong? >> Yeah. >> And then I want to try to with our bylaw gel it all together. then have Nick Milano and KP Law look at it before we say this is what we think is right,
>> right? >> The process and all the the rules, regulations, and we got a lot of stuff on the building code side that affects what happens too, especially when a unit's built inside of an existing home >> with fire ratings and things like that.
>> Right. >> So, how many applications have you received or have you received ADU applications? We probably have about 12 I think a lot of them. So that was an issue we weren't realizing. A lot of people were putting internal ADUs but
doing a massive renovation to the house. So they were putting them in as alteration renovation. >> So when we came across that we were switching it to ADUs. future ones, we're going to have them pull a separate permit because they actually need separate HERS raiders
because it's basically another house. The state energy department was actually at the train in they want a separate HERS raider for the ADU. Then if the project or if it's a new house would be two HERS ratings >> and a separate CO also.
>> Yeah, two separate cos. >> That's good. It's a pain in the ass for you, but it's good. >> Yeah. H >> because we have to as a town we have to track the ADUs and submit it. So if it was going as um as just part of a
general built U renovation then we're not tracking it as an ADU. So then how are we reporting it? We're going to moving forward anything that came in as an alteration. We're calling in an ADU because that's more important to track
that than the renovation. And then moving forward, >> we're actually on this paperwork. We're going to spell that out. If it's two, you want we want two separate permits cuz it's going to be two sets of different information
>> needed for each. >> Okay. But a lot of I think like I sent you on that site plan that the address should be the first thing. That's been another issue that we want the address set before they pull the permit cuz it
just creates confusion >> trying to Allan will give it a different number. Now we have a permit that they pulled under this address and if it is an alteration in an ADU we got a problem. So, a single family where they're adding where they're adding
square footage, that's going to come to us because they're adding they're adding square footage, but it's all within the same existing single family. That's going to get a second address. >> It's mandatory by the state law for it. if it's detached internal.
>> Okay. >> But the the way we did our bylaw is that only comes to planning board. If it's an addition >> or a detached if it's an internal renovation, it doesn't come to us,
>> right? >> Yeah. We don't >> Yeah. Yeah. But but you somebody could be somebody could be doing a small addition and then I was just I was just curious if a single family with a small addition on the back gets a second address because the small addition contains the 800 square foot you know
ADU. >> I think it sounds like every ADU gets its own address. >> Yeah, that's what that's what I was curious about. >> We've had basement ones that Allan's given it. So actually we had between police, fire, all emergency personnel. He was trying to figure out
>> how to make it a little bit easier for a first responder to know where they're going. So, I don't remember if it's if it's in the basement, it's the house number, then B. If it's detached, the house number D meaning detached
>> or first floor, second floor, just to help >> an emergency responder know where they're going. >> That's great. So, Mike, are you seeing any illegal ADUs or illegal apartments being legitimized with this new law?
>> A lot of inquiries about turning the temporary apartments into ADUs. A tremendous amount of that. >> I think the fire rating is going to be the biggest hindrance for anyone trying to retrofit into it. what if it's an
existing apartment that they have a temporary apartment or trying to morph a part of their house >> because they got to fire rate both sides of the walls the ceiling the whole ADU on both sides in a fire rated cocoon
basically so you've got >> something already finished >> you'd be tearing everything apart >> like the ceiling has to go over the top of the wall. So if the wall burns, it can't just catch the frame and above
that fire rating has to be at the top of the wall. So >> becomes complicated. They actually at the end of the day yesterday, someone came in looking to do that. I'm like, it's complicated. I'd get a contractor. >> Yeah. >> Find out what it's going to cost to the
fire ratings. The biggest thing and I said the only exemption is if you sprinkler and that could be cheaper. A residential pex sprinkler system may be cheaper than trying to fire rate something that's already there.
>> And is the code forcing you to split the utilities also? >> No. >> No. Okay. >> Was a question I had. Yeah. >> Yeah. I believe they actually want it all connected >> because the one they're attached or detach is always supposed to be. they
can't sell it off >> to someone else. So that would help prohibit that if they keep all the utilities to one the primary residence and then they're just tapped off >> whether it's attached or detached. >> So it would have one electric meter, one
gas meter. >> Yeah. >> Interesting. >> One water meter. >> It could be either. >> Okay. But >> so depending on I I think I think you could do both because I do know um >> No, I think you can. I was just asking
if it's required if the code forces it. >> An extra septic. >> Yeah, >> cuz but you don't want to if it's unnecessary to have to add an you don't want to force somebody to add an extra septic or an extra water line, you know, and >> go to that if it's not necessary. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We talked about that too
yesterday, which it was good. So they said some things like could be completely unrealistic if you're going to force them to pay 100 grand or 150 for a onebedroom ADU. But there were other options like if
they had not enough bedroom capacity on a septic, they could eliminate something in the house and call that an office or whatever in a bedroom. Yeah. take off a bedroom and put it
>> and by taking off a bedroom then the um how would that affects property tax? Wouldn't really I guess if you're picking up a bedroom somewhere else would the property tax be um >> that's actually a good call. >> It might it might reduce the property
tax on the primary resident cuz and then and then the other one will go up significantly. >> Yeah. Is there any trigger? I mean, I'm sorry. >> I'm not sure on the property tax end of things how that works. >> Like, do you notify the assessor when an
ADU is complete? >> They have access to our system. Actually, I think they're they're paying extra just recently to like have I think it's going to sink almost every day, which we need because when there's a transfer of sale, I'm not sure what the
frequency of the system is. All the perodized systems are based on the assessor's database. So if we don't connect to them frequently enough I'm reviewing permits it's saying the owner I I the system someone else
>> right >> and even if I go to GIS is based on it's the same. So, I have to ask for a quick claim deed >> if they're pulling it as the homeowner. I need to know that it's really them and >> yeah, >> not someone trying to pull something.
>> Wow. >> So, that'll be helpful to get that squared away. >> Mhm. >> Somewhere down the line too, the system's pretty powerful. And I don't know the split in Milton. I think tomorrow is going to be month four for
me. Yeah. But how many are on septic? And it doesn't sound like there's a tremendous amount, but if uh talked to Marina or in border health about >> getting those addresses and the system can alert me. So that would help me
>> when there is a creation of a new bedroom. I'm hitting DPW, Marina, and Border Health cuz I have no clue if it's sewer or septic to get their approval. Sewer, it's not an issue. bought a hell septic, it could be an issue. But then I
can highlight those actually when you just mentioned the parcels for the MBTA zone and I could have that put into the system so it would automatically flash that this property's in the MBTA zoning district which I mentioned to historic down the
road. I'd like to you get me the list. anything on the state and national historic register, anything significant. And we I did it in other communities, a flashing thing. This is a historic property for us to pay more
attention cuz we don't know. I don't know, >> right? >> I'm new here. It'll take me 5 years before I know >> someone's name and where every piece is and what it is. So I think the easiest way to go forward is what Joe Pondock
would do is anything 75 years or older just you know an email gets sent to Steve O'Donnell and he'll um >> help yeah determine. Yeah. >> So I think right when I started there was some contentious what demolition was
and the attorney >> said complete tear down and that's all they had control over. We have to do something that I think is significant. I'm just as a courtesy, I just did one >> to let him know even though he has no
power, just to let him know what's happening. >> Right. Thanks. >> So, one of the things you've probably seen in your four months is that we have a lot of pre-existing non-conforming and um and we have some things where now it's special permit and then it's
variance. Um I would be curious um as you see the applications what are you finding most common as triggering a variance and in the pre-existing nonconforming is it set back is it
height is it because I'm wondering whether we need to think look at the zoning further and um and not make it as difficult as it is currently for you and for owners of property you know where It's just the zoning was added after
things were built for the most part in Milton. >> I would think that's our biggest roadblock is the zoning. We literally the time we spend debating and try to interpretate and there's a lot of sections.
>> I'll read two or three pages. I got it. Then I turn to the fourth page. >> Disregard everything you just read. >> Exactly. So that's why we I think we all support the codification you know where we actually look at making it more user
friendly >> having tables dimensionals dimensional tables and and cleaning there's not even definitions that are consistent right there's not many in the overall then you get to one section the definition of height is different than the definition in a different section how you measure
it >> that must drive >> everyone crazy I know that in my time you know it's I've become aware aware of this just from uh seeing things. Um but I think it would be very valuable for you to um take a look at a a report that
was done a few years ago where um when we had the uh bu the zoning code and the bylaws uh for the whole town codified and they're they're on searchable and electronic now. But there was a report that highlighted a number of things um
that could be done uh and should be cleaned up, things that were inconsistent with state law, for example. >> Um so I think the clerk has that. Um but it would be really I think beneficial. We one of the things we've talked about
was seeking looking at funding to get that work done and to have your input and Liz's input into that and make it much easier because I actually think it's very wasteful to have your department have to spend a ton of man hours or woman hours, you know, on on
this. And it it's >> homeowners have to hire attorneys. They shouldn't have to hire attorneys for simple things. We just had a simple thing, but the homeowner pushed back on the pool set back 12 ft, but the bylaw
says a new pool shall not be constructed within 12 ft of an existing structure. They had the pool and wanted to build closer and they said it says the opposite. I'm like, it can't be. This bylaw would be junk. So I they pushed it
and I had to have KP law >> give an opinion and it is both ways and they said that would be just the bylaw would be useless if it was that way. >> You could put the pool in and then build wherever you want a foot off the pool.
>> But I how much money we're going to give to KP law when we could just fix the bylaws and make it understandable. >> Definitely. Yeah. So all of those things that you you encounter, it would be good to document >> so that the list. >> I do have a running list.
>> Okay. Great. Great. >> Is like just the accessory structures is a conflict. One section says the height's 20 ft. One says 21. >> 21 ft. Yep. >> And it's actually not in the height. It's in the sideyard setbacks, the
heights of the accessory structures, which makes no sense, >> right? That's a great >> But I had early on showed Nick Milano, I gave him from one of the previous communities I was in the table of uses,
and I said, "You can look at this in less than 10 seconds. >> They can see what they can and can't do in every zone and district, every use that's allowed and not allowed." Same with the dimension and area and lot coverage and other table that you can
instantly >> Exactly. figure it out. Another thing I think that would be helpful is the non-conforming businesses that are in residential zones because we um have seen that like let's
just say with Milton Marketplace but there's other things you know like um 7-Elevens in several places you know other >> other things and they're kind of um have to go to the zoning board of appeals to when they need any um when they need a
change done or want to make a change. Um and so I think um it would be interesting to just understand how many of those there are. >> There's a ton. >> Yeah. So I I I think you know having those >> I showed them that too, but I think it was more variance and one of the
communities I had five things that I could approve if it was just one thing wrong. missing frontage, missing one setback. I could grant it, not have to send 500 applications >> for variances. But we do, we have a
right now a tremendous amount of nonconforming stuff going to the ZBA. I think they're booked into the 4th of July just about >> and and I think that's the kind of thing that we should look at what we can do at on the zoning revision or zoning
amendment and your input on that would be helpful. >> Yeah, that'd be great if I don't know the funding that's the biggest challenge I'm assuming but to get something started cuz I know it takes a long time. It's something you can't just do in a
couple months. Well, don't we have 40 grand allocated for recotification? >> We didn't. I don't think that >> we requested it. >> It didn't come. >> We requested 50, >> but we have 50,000 that we haven't tapped into for this fiscal year. >> Let's blow it
>> on recotification. >> We have a lot. That's why we'll talk later about what it's why I wanted to to get Mr. White's input on the codification and what he sees so far in the four months. Well, we have $4.5 million in for free cash. So, I think
the selectman could be able to um afford the um recodification. >> I think we should use our budget to hire like KP Law to help write our um >> the zoning, right? They they have the ability to
>> Well, they can do that, but that can be also with with um their within their contract. >> Oh, is Oh, okay. So there are things that they can do within. >> So I think it would be very helpful if you outline just thinking if you wanted to make a case for free cash use >> say that would save your department x
number of manh hours and absolutely >> and then you think about like the the building permit values of this and the and the basically people's property tax will go up and they make improvements, right? So all these things are in a log jam. They're costing you the town more money because of how much time it takes
you. Cost the homeowners more because they have to hire attorneys >> and maybe architects too before they hire their contractor. And you know, they might have to hire them in advance of even knowing whether they can do it. >> Yeah. >> If if it's easier for them to figure out whether they can do it and it makes
sense, >> I I just think it's going to be so much >> Yeah. It kills me. We actually see the burden put on the contractor puts it in thinking he's good to go and then they find out they got to go to the zoning board. >> Mhm. >> And then they're so far out that
actually one I think this week the woman they bought the house to renovate it and get it ready for their new baby and they can't go into the house. the contractor can't start. >> And Bill's I think booking into January,
February, and every week it's getting further and further out. Right. >> The holidays obviously aren't helping anything the next few months, >> right? >> Well, and just as a side note, at the at the budget coordination committee last
week, it was brought up that we need to come up with ways to slow down our growth rate. So this is actually doing it. >> Jesus. >> Slow down your growth rate whatsoever. >> Yeah, that was brought up because we can't keep up with it.
>> Okay. >> Financially, >> but what growth rate do we have? >> Yeah, >> we don't have a big population growth. >> Just it was just it brought up that that's what our next >> um assignment is to do. Come up with ideas to slow down our
>> other than the 40 BS. There's not a tremendous amount. Like I'm used to betting on South where I'm living Bridgewater. >> We'd have two or 300 new houses a year. This Milton looks like 10ish maybe.
>> Yeah. >> But the 40Bs, that's another story. >> Yeah. But there's an unbelievable amount of people renovating, taking these small homes and doubling, tripling the size of them, putting massive additions on.
>> Mhm. >> That's the biggest thing that's happening. >> That's what people want. Big houses on small lots. Nobody cuts their own lawn anymore. >> They don't want to lose their 3% interest rate that too on their on their mortgage. >> And maybe they like their neighborhood. Kids can walk to school. It's like, you
know, >> well, they there's a where where would they go is becomes the question, right? There's just not a lot of other inventory of things that are available is what I hear from people. >> Yeah. And so that's sort of the problem is people are taking the starter homes, they're putting additions on instead of
moving >> and and then what happens is we lose our starter homes, which is also our downsizing home. So when people then say, "Oh, we don't have um the smaller houses like literally
affordable houses. We don't have that." It's because we've allowed these houses to expand. So we are um in the end a little bit hurting ourselves because we are allowing the starter homes to no longer
become starter homes. Well, one thing I would I've said before is that we have no F requirements for single families >> and we only have, you know, the the side lot lines um or the the setbacks are
what are and height are what control uh the size. We have more far more restrictions on our overlay zoning, our MBTA zoning than we do on our single family from that a size perspective. >> Yeah. So, is it typ I'm sorry.
>> No, go ahead. >> Is it typical for building inspectors to have a little bit of power to to grant a variance if what you said is like if they have one or two things that are not in >> it has to be in the zone and if it's written into the zone and whatever that
is. So the of the other communities I think both Bridgewater and West I had that if just one thing was wrong and it was defined >> what it was I could granted and it was great that I'm I didn't have to tell
someone yeah you got to go to the ZBA for this. >> It's fantastic. That's not out of the ordinary. That's >> No, it's not >> tie up. That's the other thing. A lot of these could tie up four months. You got to get there, have the hearing, get the
decision, wait the 20day appeal period. The that whole process could take 4 months easy. >> Mhm. >> Michael, can you share with us your experience prior to arriving here in Milton where where you've been in the
past? I was in West Bridgewater prior to here, which was I think they only had like 8,000 people in the community, but and I don't understand they directly boarded Bridgewater, which is I was a
commissioner there. There was a over 30,000 people >> and that West Bridgewwater is closer to Route 24 and for some reason their farmland didn't get developed. Bridgewater exploded in the 80s and 90s
and 2000s. All the small town, we had like 15 familyrun farms back then and they just I don't know what happened. The government did something with the milk subsidized the cost and it put all the little independent guys out
>> and they just sold their land and there were two 300 house subdivisions going in everywhere. >> Mhm. >> Exploding. Mhm. >> Then that West Bridgewater in the more recent that started to happen cuz
Bridgewater built out most of the land. So they slid to West Bridgewater and a lot of large spec warehouses like 500,000 square foot empty warehouses waiting for Amazon or someone like them to come because they're right on the
Route 24 corridor. >> Interesting. I was actually when I was polishing up my resume to apply here, I was looking at what I in Bridgewater. I don't know why, but they had me into everything. Traffic study committees,
housing partnership. I was the chairman. I produced the housing production plan. >> There you go, Liz. had the green community put the green community stuff together with me and one of the town managers secretaries were involved in
everything but the list I looked I'm like I forgot >> most of the stuff that I was involved with it was but it was great learning experience >> how many years were you in Bridgewater Michael? >> Uh about 12 >> in West Bridgewater. How long? >> Eight.
>> Okay. Yeah. So you spent a lot of time in that community. Yeah. Yeah, I love to learn. So I I know that's I got into it when the town manager he actually had me fill in his seat when he couldn't go. I was
brokering power purchase agreements for solar fields with Bridgewater State University going into Boston to I forgot what it used to be called battling 40b developers. >> Wow. But I was >> housing the housing appeals committee
>> the hack >> prior to your work in Bridgewater. Were you >> I've been self employed running my own construction company since the ninth grade of high school. That was my main career. >> Still doing small stuff on the side for
friends and family. So coming up on like 40 something years. >> That's great. So can I um pivot speaking of being in the construction the new um specialized stretch code
um how are you finding um and how that you can ensure compliance with that? So it's new construction we don't have a lot um but the 40bs are they subject to it?
Yeah, there's commercial uh criteria that they have to meet. So, those all have to have a HERS raider, which I've actually been having trouble with the HERS raider. That's I had to get in touch with the state, whoever's in charge of them.
>> They give us an initial report that shows the numbers, but on the top of it, it's supposed to tell me what codes they modeled their report after. And some of them are coming in blank or with codes that are 5 years out of date. So I have
to keep have the hers raider and put the right language the 2021 base code with mass amendments the stretch code the specialized code cuz I don't know and it there's no way for me to tell what the computer model the energy compliance is
multiple different paths to to meet meet what they need to do. So, I've actually sent five more and today I'm like, here's another patch. >> So, do you do you um think or have you ever utilized like some outside
expertise to to help you on these more complicated projects, you know, like for that compliance because they're going to be needing to do um their testing like commissioning and all of that, right? So like you you feel like
>> the 40Bs I'm not sure of. I think 582 when I started I kind of got thrown into the fire and that was half reviewed kind of and I so they wanted the permit and I'm like I don't
see nobody. I reached out to everyone trying to find out who was the master of all the information and the decision that was required to be submitted to the town before a permit could be issued. >> And we couldn't really find anything.
So, I had to start from ground zero, >> go through it and get the applicant to give us everything. And now it's all uploaded with the permit. But in that particular decision they set aside funds for I think the DPW and myself if we
need consultants or outside engineers on normal projects we don't have that. >> Mhm. >> We'd need to create some kind of a revolving account that we could I don't know how to feed it. So, I have one other >> I was going to say just on one that
because there were there were particular issues with the storm water systems on that which definitely you'll want to have reviewed um by engineers. Yeah. >> You know, >> so I know like 582 everybody and then I held a preconstruction meeting and
>> the neighbors came. >> No, not the neighbors internally, but that jawed some of the department's memories. Oh, yeah. We need this right >> after they already thought they had everything. But that got issued and I'm com I like to know that everyone's all set. I would
never Yeah, it looks like they reviewed it and just issue it and find out we never got >> we didn't have 80% of the stuff that was in the decision required. >> It's really important. The zoning board of appeals should have provided that to your department. I would think
>> yeahision actually when I think Cheyenne was like her last week >> and she couldn't find it cuz I thought maybe the planning department would >> like be the >> master keeper of all the stuff.
>> Mhm. Which brings me to my next point which is I know the previous building commissioner had uh expressed to us that special permits like we don't have a template and so he as he had to go look at each special
permit because what was required in one might be different than another. So we're going out to do a site inspection >> needing to reread the permit the special permit issued by this board. I you know I can't speak really for the ZBA but um
so you know anything that you would want to say to us to make your job easier on the enforcement side. So if you once you're reviewing uh any special permit that we issue and so I'm thinking like probably one will be the memory care
facility on Highland A right because they haven't file they haven't filed for the building permit yet and that went through a long uh review process with us and so you know making sure that the um the conditions are enforced is you know important and what we found I think
oftent times too is like the tree protection is something that's hard to to monitor and enforce sometimes and it's really we you know later they'll people will come back later and say well can we take this tree down five years later because they didn't protect it
during construction >> so 333 Brush Hill Road which was >> they came in and developer they clearcut the lot and it became a drainage issues for >> and >> we had a subdivision in Bridgewater that
I think it was a 40B they called it the preserve and they clearcut 88 the acres of trees to put it in. >> So, it was called a preserve. >> Did they get paid for the trees >> on our um >> the gardener, right? The gardener school
um you know, we put in the permit that they were only to take trees down as necessary for the construction progress, right? I don't know if that how that you know gets interpreted by uh you but that came out of this 333 Brushel Road that
ended up in lawsuits and um you know that we uh as a planning board and had to um hire a civil engineer, a surveyor through town council, you know, figure out how that was paid for
>> and it was a it was a real mess and it was a real impact to some director Butters to it. And so it was something where, you know, we we learned that the position of these three houses had been approved by uh the planning board, but
when they went for permits, the they were in different locations and it didn't get flagged by the building official. And so when we're looking at the plans that they're actually having the problems, we're like, well, this isn't where it was approved and that's not the grading plan that we approved,
you know, and how did that happen? So this kind of, you know, if you tell us certain things are hard to enforce, then we have to figure out how to write a different special permit. So we need to work together and your input, you know, on anything that you're going to be
looking at, not to go back in history, but like going forward. Yeah. >> Yeah. That 582 decision, they actually there were a bunch of checks for different things. One was trees and landscaping a bunch like if the the developer bailed
or they failed to do this, but it did not say who was enforcing this. I'm like, this isn't I don't know anything about trees and plants. >> And there there's a historic garden in that site. So that should be marked off and and somehow
>> we got the check but there was who's supposed to be it didn't state DPW or parks and Rex or whoever would be the one handling this. >> Yeah. >> Or is that an insttor storm water issues? You would assume it would be DPW
but it didn't state. >> So that's good. >> Who had the access to the funds to use it? >> Yeah. I got a call about I got a call about Woodmir and and an annual report on their on their I don't know the storm water system or what have you and um
it's I couldn't find anything in the file about it you know I don't know if it's been filed annually if is it something that should go to the DPW because they might have a process for that. So I mean there's just been there already have been sort of like multiple
instances of you know you know enforcement and maintenance and you know kind of you know once the permit's already been issued and and um so I think I think that hopefully we'll work we'll work towards a development review
system for these larger projects where myself you know Mike the folks in engineering the DPW maybe if there's other town departments the the town manager's office town administrator's office probably as well. Um, that's sort of at the beginning. You make sure you
get your pre-construction meeting. You make sure you have sort of like, you know, whatever check-ins as the project unfolds. So hopefully some of that stuff will be like there'll be just be more communication like as things are move moving through the system. Um, but um,
>> but it's it's just it's just there's a lot there's a lot going on in this lot of stuff to be chasing, >> especially 582 is a big project. That's part of my early growing pains is that there wasn't anyone. Cheyenne was gone 3 days later, but I was trying to figure
out the process and how the >> the wheels gelled together. And so I just on things I'm like, well, it could pertain to them. So I email everyone and >> I don't know just >> oh I mean honestly having a change at the building commissioner the planning
director and the DPW director all at the same time there's a lot of institutional knowledge that gets lost right and that's where the systems that you're talking about come into play right um >> and I learned too that with some like even the assistant position I think
there's been at least four or five since I've been um on the board and what their computers get wiped after a certain period of time and so all the documents that they may have had you know so I just started keeping all my own copies of all the documents so I wouldn't lose access to documents
>> that's what I did and I just created a new template for Milton from another one that I created somewhere else >> like how'd you do that >> but as you're starting new you you have an opportunity to kind of help improve those systems that would work better for
um on things that have permits. I'm like V if you go into one of mine a bigger pro anything I have like in the chat everything anyone can go in they'll go in there a 100red years from now and know what what was going on any
pertinent emails are turned into PDFs and put in emails between me and whoever if it's something that's not in the system so all that historic data is in there >> y >> we actually had what made be amped up
down on can't nav that a house lot I think that it's been contentious that had a variance but never got recorded. Oh yeah, there's a foundation going in. >> And that was right when I started. >> Uh Joe Au, the previous commission
commissioner approved that. But in the system, no documentation. I think he had the last entry was a stop work order. I'm like great, he's gone. We don't know where he is. >> Right. >> So the luckily the contractor had the
email correspondence between himself and Joe Wu. I'm like, "Send me all that." And that gave me the evidence >> to back up. Yep. He approved it. And then I put all that stuff in the system >> and released it. I said, "This permit's
active based on the attached emails from the previous commissioner with the dates." >> Mhm. >> But that I said that stuff's important. Like you said, those all those emails when the employees gone, everything's gone. >> Gone. Yeah. Mhm.
>> Have you had a pre-construction meeting on 582? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Actually, that was your first day. I think I asked Nick Milano for your email and he gave me El Manning. So, El Manning got the meeting request, not E.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So I So I I'll I'm I'm looking at the decision for 711 because they want Randolph because they want a sign and we're trying to figure out whether or not there's any language in any of the decisions about signage on
Randolph A. So I've I'm I'm looking at that. We took a ride past 582 and tried to figure out, you know, what was going on. I didn't want to go in because I wasn't dressed for it. Um, but you know, I'm I'm I'm slowly kind of getting up to speed with, you know,
where the different projects are at and and uh >> and um >> yeah, I mean I think it seems like Tim was sort of functioning as like the like the quarterback for lack of a better term. I mean, and so so um but there's
also there's a there's a ton of information on the town website. >> Somebody kept really really detailed records on all of those projects on the town website. So there's like multiple multiple folders um for for a lot of them. So yeah, it's just trying to get a
handle on all of it. You know, >> who's in charge of the website? Cuz they have Nick Khan is still as the contact person for planning board. >> I think I think I think Avante and I are supposed to be figuring figuring that out. >> Let me log in yesterday.
>> It's going to be a wonderful website. I I've been I've been waiting to have business cards I've been waiting to have business cards printed because I didn't want to hand them out. >> Yeah. No, that's got to get fixed. That's Yeah, that's got to get fixed.
That That's why no one's calling me. That's funny. >> So, >> well, this has been helpful and I hope we can, you know, continue the communication and working together in any way we can support you. Just please feel free to reach out through Liz and
let us know. >> That's how I prefer to operate instead of me operating in the building department silo and then there's grenades blowing off everywhere. The headaches after the fact are much worse than >> trying to figure everything out up front. I prefer to get everything up
front, issue the permit, and hopefully have a smooth headacheless project. >> Absolutely. And to Cheryl's point, if you do have um a a template of a special permit that you have found to be complete, maybe you should forward that.
>> Yeah. >> You know, and maybe it's, you know, a business in a residential or a business in a commercial or a housing project or something. >> I've been creating some templates just because of the nonconforming. There's so
many. I said, I need to create a review template. So, I'm capturing all the same information cuz I can't remember it all. I'm like, >> I need this this this year that it was built, average grades, all this other stuff.
>> Right. Right. >> Well, thank you and we're so >> thanks for having me. >> We feel very fortunate to have you on board. So, >> thank you. >> It's going to be great. >> All right. Have a good day. >> Great to meet you much. Um so with our theme of communication
um the one of the things that we've talked about is just having a running agenda item um committee updates. So thought tonight could be um I could sort of go first with the the subcommittee that I um sit in on. And this has been a
very interesting um committee because it's gone back to 2022 really um and it was we we currently have an open space and recreation plan but we hired um the
consultant Horley Whitten and um a committee was formed by the select board which has representatives from the conservation commission, the planning board, the parks department, the playground planners um and then and members of at large. And what we began
by doing is sort of looking at what our existing sort of the format was and what the state requires because it's a state required um and it's required that we update our master our Milton open space and recreation plan in order to be able
to get future grants that we're looking at how we're planning how we're utilizing um what is our land use in town. One of the things that um and Tim was um sort of overseeing the committee
was um we put out a survey to the town. So there is a survey. There's survey results. I don't know if you remember me bringing these cards to a meeting one time, but Tim was passing these out. Take the survey. Just have one for each of you tonight just to remember and
please, you know, >> I just pass it. >> Pass them on. Yeah, we can pass them on. But this was our outreach. Um, thank you. And in addition, we also did a public forum. >> We also did a public forum that we held at the library. So there was results
from that public forum. I think a lot of us I don't I can't remember exactly who attended, but it was really saying what do you want to see in the town? What are you looking for from your parks, from your playgrounds, for you know um um
conservation land? It was a just a MAPC ran it and it was or I'm sorry Horley Whitten ran that too and there was really good um the library keys room was filled and there was a lot of good communication on what people wanted to
see um and it directly a lot of it directly relates to the master plan on sort of the goals and the initiatives um carry through. So, community forum, there's been a survey, but then we went into the process of identifying the
parcels of land. And this really ended up taking a long time working with our GIS coordinator, Tim, and really evaluating, all right, we've got all these parcels. And honestly, you know, the conservation
commission didn't even know what all of the conservation parcels were. And what is what is protected conservation land under what is what is conservation but could be disposed of. So what is you know in perpetuity? What is preserved?
What is DCR land? >> What is conser what is privatelyowned land that either has a conservation restriction on it or doesn't have a conservation restriction. So when you start getting into all of these, it
really um it's been good because I think it's never really been addressed in the town >> and there's a lot of little small parcels that had um during when John Cronin was town administrator, a lot of the the the reason why some of the
scenic roadways are as beautiful as they are is because John Cronin, the town it was before Prop 2 and a half, the town was flushed with cash and was able to buy up intersections and corners like the Lily corner, like the horserough corner at the library when you stop and
you see the horse trough. Different intersections have little small parcels that the town owns that it would never make sense to sell or they could never be developed, but it helped protect sort of the green space along along the road
a lot of the scenic roadways. Um so that has been sort of a um identifying all of those parcels. Then all of those results of what we had was sent to the committee. The committee um Horesley
Whitten was going to then send all of those results and those identification of parcels to the conservation commission >> for their review. And then the next step was the plan was to then go to the um parks department after that. But I think
that's when Tim left. So it had gone to the conservation commission. I don't know if they ever really did an indepth evaluation of those >> um and looking at them and there's been some changes to conservation land. There's been additional
>> properties acquired. When the last open space and recreation plan was done, the Eustace estate, Historic New England, bought that parcel and protected the 40 acres, you know, and then bought the two adjacent parcels and put a conservation restriction on those.
>> So, that was new. The Wakefield estate was also new um preservation. So, some of these parcels are are going into the history and what is when Forbes Woods was updated because there's been over time different large areas that have
been protected, but this was sort of identifying all of these parcels and making sure everything is up to date. So, although it's taken a long time, it's really good work and we are close to finishing up. I think once we just
want to make sure that everyone can review all of these parcels and understand yes these are these are actually protected or they're conservation that's maybe not protected. So um so that's also something that >> we've been trying to identify and I
would love to see sort of a colorcoded map so people know >> what is identified as as whether it's DCR land whether it's Milton town land etc. Mhm. >> So um
is it a plan to change anything or is it just a plan which documents things? It's there's a plan that is um it is updating things that are new um such as like the history there have been like the each
each person did some updates to that plan um and so I think that's taking all of this information and adding what has been done. It's it's different from what sort of M um Empic did as far as it's
not really done as a chart. It's more in sort of the body of the different sections. So, playground planners wrote I haven't seen what the each of the updates had been. Horsesley Whitten has been working on taking that information and consolidating that.
>> So, is it something where a body such as Select Board Planning Board has to approve the plan? >> My I always assumed that it would have to go to town meeting >> to town meeting. Okay. I I'm assuming that um but I should get clarification on that because I'm not
>> Yeah, I'm not I'm not too sure. I mean, my guess has been that it it gets it gets approved by the state, >> right? Or maybe the state maybe the state goes. >> So, but there could be local approval. I'm I'm I'm not I'm not 100% on that. >> So, I think it would be I think you're
right. I think maybe it does go to the state, but I was thinking maybe do both. I know that the um the parks commissioners are working on a recreational master plan. You know, they got CPC funding for that and you know there's a lot of
people who say whether there's a shortage of fields and >> you know facilities for youth sports etc. So, I guess I'm wondering is part of that plan identifying parcels that would be suitable for that or is it part of it just saying here's conservation, here's parks, here's
>> No, there is part of that which I would I and that's what I think um the parks department was supposed to write that part of it. >> Okay. But I have to say Ted Carroll had been the chair of this and then there was a new person who came on who really
didn't attend the last couple the last person who was a representative didn't attend many meetings. So I don't I don't know where that ended up being um >> from the parks department because I think one of my concerns was that I didn't know if the parks department even knew the open space and recreation plan
was happening. So I did confirm with Nick that he felt that they were very different. But there is that's why there's a representative from the parks department to be the liaison to make sure that whatever that section is is is trying to identify and helping the parks
department identify those parcels. Um well hopefully the there'll be a sort of a communication about the two plans because I know that um the parks department reapply for grants because we
don't have an approved open space plan open space and recreation plan. Um, so I know that they seem to um >> yeah, >> kind of wanting to get get that across the finish line. And I don't know I I'm
just curious like how >> um if there's anything that let's just say it's town owned land, but it's not identified as parks jurisdiction or conservation jurisdiction. >> Um you know, like one I know when the
animal shelter was looking foration. So, um, >> that's correct. And I think that's been part of the problem when it comes to whether it's affordable housing, whether it's parks, it's we are so built out um or and we have we have the Blue Hills,
we have the DCR, which consumes a huge amount of of um which is a wonderful thing. I think it's a great treasure that we that we have this um this land, but there's limited um the town unfortunately has historically sold off any there's been a lot of land given to
the town and the town disposed of it and so wasn't I think and and years going back wasn't strategic in preserving um was not preserving the land and um and
so now we we really don't have access but that's why CPC funds are great at looking at do we acquire um >> yeah so I guess I just would be curious what the recommendations are going to be coming out of that plan and then how it
dovetales into any other needs because as you know um the presentation that I um gave at town meeting um I I I all of the work like the people do on the individual committees whether it's the
school building committee or the fire station building committee or these open space plans like who's looking out over all of it? You know, it's like there's limited town own land and is there somebody who can say, you know, here's our inventory of property, here's what's
in conservation, here's what's wet, you know, what's taking so long. And then, you know, what else do we like have that we could use for something if the need arises, you know, to your point about not selling everything off? I think you've said the same thing, but I don't
think anybody has that list. Maybe that's part of it. Tim worked on one and Bill before him worked on one >> and it would it would just be good not to um have a recommendation >> um you know to sell or to to convert to conservation or to convert to parks
without having the big picture in mind first. >> Yeah. And that's what this and that's what is um it is sort of a holistic view of all the land. Um, I don't think there's recommendations to necessarily like
dispose of something or buy. It's not that specific. It's more in general. What are our assets and what are our goals? Like what do our goals for playgrounds? What are our goals for recreational fields? It's more general in that scope. >> Um, not really making a recommendation.
So I think that's why maybe the state it's more of a state level than because it's not requiring any specific decisions but more of goals. But um I did send Rob Lavash a draft. I said it's in a draft form. These aren't finalized.
Um so that the parks cuz I they were chomping at the bit to say what can we you know where can we look? And I I said we're we're really getting into the um the weeds on just trying to identify what parcels are designated as as so in
that in the designation. So we ran into this in the land swap and so you know since whatever 1978 the Pope's Pond land was approved at town meeting
to be deed conservation and for whatever reason it never got um deed so it was left to yeah it wasn't recorded so it was just left as um municipal town land and so when I did the walk with the
conservation commission a couple years ago when this was revealed. You know, I said to them, I said, "Well, this was on a Saturday." I said, "Well, why don't you just walk up down on Monday to the registry of deeds and get
it deeded cuz that's what it was supposed to be." And they said, "Well, it's not as easy as that, you know." And then I called the environmental um the office of environmental affairs and I discussed it with um the gentleman
in there and he told me specifically yes we told the town of Milton reps that this Pope's Pond land should be deed as quickly as possible and they wrapped it up into the whole land swap and it
really shouldn't have been I mean eventually it could have been voted on a town meeting to be land swapped, but the process was just jumped. So that's my biggest issue with this whole land swap. My whole entire life, 56 years, the land at Pope's Pond was always protected
conservation land. And for whatever reason, it never went to the registry to get deed. Now all of a sudden was hijacked and now it's considered like new new conservation land. And it's really not new. It's always been that way. So, is this going to actually say
who is the deed? Not just like conservation commission. I mean, it has to be like deed to the conservation. Yeah. >> Where then the owner of the parks um department cuz even up off Randolph A, my understanding up off the access road,
there's parkowned land up there. And when we did I think the the capping of the dump, I think Quarry Hills gave the town of Milton like $100,000 to create new fields up there. And
instead at that time, they decided to take that money and put it to the fields like a high school. So they they diverted the funds from what the original request was. So now we have fields up off the access road for park
and wreck to use, but now there's probably not any money to make them usable fields. >> So like I think we need to have a list of every single parcel and it has been frustrating. I've tried looking, you
know, for it and you can't find the information anywhere and it's not accurate and what we know in our institutional knowledge is no longer accurate. And to me, I'm afraid of this because we have always relied on people,
the generosity of the residents of the town to actually give to the town of Milton land. And my fear is that goodwill is probably gone. And um and I
think we need to somehow reestablish that somehow. And um so when we encourage people to um to donate land and even just as Michael White was talking about all the farmland and Bridgewater, the town of Milton is
actually very shortsighted in protecting our agricultural uses and giving farms um a tax abatement. Um because if you get um if a farm is classified and get a
tax abatement, then when the farm goes to sell, the town has the first right of refusal to buy. And so there's a benefit and that's where all the fields and the schools and all of these towns and like Dover and Westwood and Sherborn, they're
all getting built on farmland because they were recognized. They're a right to farm town. And then the town has the first right of refusal to buy and Milton doesn't recognize that. >> Are there any I mean Indian Cliffs was a
big farm I like that was developed in the 70s, right? >> Horse farm. >> Um but two parcels that I'm thinking of that I don't know how well are documented. One was that Tim Serinsky had identified when we were doing planning at Milton Landing is at the
very end of the landing. It's like a mud flat thing there, but that was donated to the town for a beach >> and it's just in the kind of at the end there and it's nothing has happened with it. Another parcel which is next to seven brushill road where the DCR
property is, there's a 3 acre parcel there that apparently is under parks jurisdiction. It's supposed to be a playground there. The playground was never built there. >> And so, u like what's the like what happens when it's donated for that use and it never happens? I don't know. But
there's those kinds of things that are there, right, that are in some of this land. >> And then the question is what do you do if you if you can use it for a different use like >> Well, and same with like on School Street. There was a house on School Street that the town got um you know tax
title to. They demolished it and it's within walking distance of a trolley. The town it was an ideal place to put affordable housing cuz there was an existing house there. Um, and now it was tied, it got eaten up into the land
swap. So, I remember talking to Tim with this and Tim was furious that he goes, "Here we have a legitimate place that would make a great place for affordable housing. Um, it's walkable, but now we've just included it as conservation."
So, we took buildable land and put it into conservation. >> That's not the only place that that happened in the 75 acres. >> Yeah. And I think it's no longer buildable. >> It's a lot of that's >> it's wet now. >> It was all wet. It was all wetlands. And I don't even know how they got a permit
to build it in the first place. I think it was >> Yeah. >> It wouldn't become common. >> Well, the land slopes off. You could probably do something with stilts in the back. >> Yeah. But I mean to Maggie's point about goodwill, I mean if I was the guy who donated that 3acre parcel at 7 Brchell
Road for a playground, it never got built and then the town decided to put affordable housing on it. I would be pissed. And if I was the next guy, I would never donate land again. I mean, that's like that's what happened with the land swap in the in the Lambisters land. Now we're >> we're setting the same precedent.
>> It could be a playground. I'm saying if you make it a playground, sure >> jurisdiction and nothing's happened with this. all and say it it's it's just that we have some of these parcels that have a use that they were designated for that hasn't happened. >> Yeah. >> And just like the beach, you know, and I
don't know how many others are like that. Those are happen to be two that I'm aware of, but you know, there could be more. >> Yeah. As long as the same use, you know, as long as you still do a playground, that's great. But if you look at it and say, "Oh, this isn't, you know, we blew the money somewhere else on the playground. Let's put something else up there. Let's put a parking lot up there."
>> Well, like the beach thing, it's never beach. So then you know what do you what can you well it's >> well talk about unbuildable that's about as unbuildable as you can get >> but you can have another water resource >> put a dock on it or something like if that parks decided the playground wasn't
appropriate there but some other recreational use was when you make the donation so specific I don't know I don't know the mechanisms for this does that mean it just sits there nothing ever happens with it or can they petition to have something else done I don't know I mean >> that's where con that's where I've been
asking are It's conservation land, but is it is it protected conservation land or >> and who controls it? >> Because the other the other pieces and this is what I was asking them to identify is we had had a Milton land trust up until
probably 10 years ago now that was dissolved. So all of that Milton land trust was then transferred into the either it went two places. It went to the Wildlands >> Okay. >> group. >> Yeah. And so I've asked, can you please identify what parcels are wildlands now
or what went into the care and custody of the conservation commission? Okay. >> And are those parcels under the Conservation Commission now protected because they were protected under the Milton Land Trust? And I believe that transfer was the understanding that they
would be protected when the >> It's interesting because Hong Kong has no budget. >> I think they do. I I was told they don't. But >> if if there's parcels that you're interested in, if there's like a recorded conservation restriction on them, it's pretty it should be pretty
straightforward. It we should be able to find it on the registry website. Right. >> So that's what I would love to find and I don't know if that's if they're working on it. >> I mean, are there are there specific I mean I'm just looking at the map. I'm just looking at the state map, you know, that that's available and has, you know,
>> open space by ownership, you know, federal, DCR, Department of Fish and Game, you know, Commonwealth of Mass, County, Municipal, public nonprofit, land trust, conservation organization. Like, this is a this is a, you know, a layer >> statewide map of >> it's a layer that's available for, you
know, so so I I haven't dug into this enough to figure out like who's done what already. I haven't even talked to the consultant. Um helpful to maybe overlay that on >> well just based on what's been just based on what's been spent >> right >> so far a lot of this work's probably
already done right >> I mean this is just something that's you know this again this does isn't going to tell you that you know this private non public nonprofit piece of land has this conservation restriction held by this entity that's whatever it's not going to
have that level of detail but is that is that the type of stuff that people are trying to figure out Mhm. Yeah. >> Um, so, so I'm guessing that they, the Corsley Whitten must have done a like a tremendous amount of this work. I'm guessing they have
>> they have and I sent you the I did send the graph and I'll share that with you. I just didn't I wanted it to be a little more finalized and then have the planning board look it over too to see, you know, if there's things that you might see that I that I missed as the representative. But
>> um but it's really good that we're doing this because I don't think it's ever been done. >> Mhm. >> So I had heard it was um Horley Whitten that was the old up at this juncture. >> So maybe just speaking to them about
where they are with it, what if they've run into difficulties, what's their timeline? >> Yeah. >> I don't know. I guess >> we just now that we have, >> you know, some you back. >> Yeah. It was really I think when Tim left it was just >> okay
>> I think um I think the effort of the committee is a great effort. You know my opinion is this is the planning department. >> Mhm. >> And that list that's the placeholder for the list. It you should be the keeper of once this data is compiled and you know
when you when I think through it I think there should be you know identifying the source of the land. How is it that it's now Milton's property? Was it donated by somebody or did Milton acquire it in some other way over the course of time? What restrictions does it have? What
jurisdictions in the town have control over it? Some pieces are controlled by conservation. Some pieces are controlled by the select board. >> You know, I think a really thorough database of all the land and all of the, you know, I guess all of the important factors of that piece of land and it stays in planning and community
development. So everybody would know that the keeper of the record of Milton's land is there. there isn't anything there's no other department of town that that I think should be the keeper of that kind of information >> and this does really fall under the planning department's um
>> you know and then then I think we have an opportunity maybe even on an annual basis to look at the land and to have discussions of what we could do with it you know if we're short on fields and the parks department needs fields we should you know when you when you consider what is what is on our list of
you know hopes for next year for 26 Maybe that should be one of them. One of them should be looking at all the open space >> and making some recommendations on something that could be done. But, you know, it strikes me as something that the information is not, you know, collected and it's not in the same. It's
not in one place. And, you know, maybe too many different groups in town have some ideas of what it is and what they want to do with it. And and as a result, nothing happens. And and if anything comes of it, the people that contribute land will recognize that the town cares.
>> And if we demonstrate that we care, people will be more likely, you know, we have a process for how we how we use the land that's given to the town. Maybe people then will care a little bit more and they they won't have the reaction that you're worried about. You know what I mean? >> And I think the Milton Land Trust is something that should be revisited,
bringing it back. I think it was >> they were aging out. It was Peter Jeff. Um there was a few people who were on it and >> just couldn't keep they didn't want to be responsible anymore for the trust >> and I know Judith Daryl Kemp had wanted to who we've now lost who was a
conservation commission member wanted to keep it going and she ended up >> um unfortunately passing away before it was um dissolved. But um it I think that's a really important thing because it does there is a trust when you get
when you donate land and it goes into a trust that it will be in perpetuity >> and or or it will be for the purpose you know would be for the purpose also of >> what it was donated for >> and it is kind of sad that the land had to go to an organization outside of Milton right so the wildlands
>> is outside of Milton I do believe we have a Milton resident who's actually on the board um but Um it's just kind of a shame um that it has to go outside. >> Yeah. When does the committee think they might
have a >> Well, Liz has um has reached out to Horesley Whitten to Craig, our consultant, to to re-upstart, you know, sort of get us um back on track because it really was it was when Tim left it was sort of because he had been working
very closely with Craig on identifying these parcels and with our GIS um sort of mapping department. So, I think I I think we're in the home stretch. Um, I haven't seen the final, you know, >> what people have updated as far as
playground planners, parks and wreck, what their updates are. >> So, um, >> yeah. Yeah. And I'll, and I I think that's part of what I need to figure out, too, is sort of like who the key people are in these different on either on these different committees or in these different departments that are
that are that are serving up the the the meat for the sandwich. >> Yep. you know, because that seems like, you know, putting the plan together. It sounds like there's been there's been nice outreach done, there was a survey, there's been a process, but now it's sort of, you know, just kind of pulling it all together and and I'm still trying
to figure out who who who's got what piece of it, you know. >> Great. >> Um, >> so >> good. So, yeah. So, stay tuned. But that is sort of just an update and sort of what our the um the committee's been
doing and and where we are in the process. So >> So thank you. >> It's a good group. It's a good group. >> Great work. >> Okay. So >> yeah. >> All right. So um next we can move to item number six ADU site plan review the
draft rules and regulations. Um and thank you. This is another really good helpful um step in um which ties in sort of to what we were talking about with our building commissioner, but ways to
>> help streamline information as applications as they come in. I don't think >> I'll turn it over to you to sort of >> everything >> if you want. I don't know if you want to pull >> up any documents or read through anything, but >> um yeah, I didn't really have any um
>> Do you want me to share my screen? Do Do you need me to do that? >> We don't We don't need If you want to just sort of maybe highlight it and throw it. >> This is This is This is really simple. Um I just >> It's sort of a work in progress still. >> Yeah. and and and um Mike got back to me on he's he's looked at it and he he's
he's comfortable with this with with this approach. Um so his only addition was to um the first stop's going to be to um Allan Bishop to get to get the second address for the property. Um and then they'll be able to come into the
building department. They'll be able to start their permit, you know, application permit process. Um, sounds like Mike, which is what I'm hoping happens, it sounds like he wants to do a separate type of permit application for the ADUs so that they're differentiated from the uh alterations and renovations.
Um, I was seeing just like a single a residential permit. um when I was looking in there. So, so I'll I'll have some conversations with him about that, but um essentially they're just going to be uploading their their documents to
permit us and um and then probably printing something out for us because we have like a we have an obligation to act within a certain time period. It's not the same time period that he I I believe his is 30 days. Um, so I want to make
sure that when something comes to us, we sort of like have like a start date, like a stamp date, you know, and that we've got this this time period that's in the bylaw that says um it has to be it has to be no less than 30 days after date of submission. So I think that
means that we have at least what 30 days, right, to process it? I think that was that sort of the idea. and then and then 75 days you guys are supposed to to um to to rule to recommend or whatnot um within within no more than 75 days after
after the day of submission. So that's all that's all in here. Um it's really just these four items. Um some of it actually might already get captured in his in his permit um you know application. the existing square
footage, the proposed square footage, um the architectural plans, showing the the layouts, what have you. That's probably already going to get captured by him. Um I don't know that they would do well, yeah, he probably would get exterior
elevations as well, right, for for for like a an alteration or renovation. Um, so really the only other item I think that's going to be sort of on top of what would would have to come into the building department anyway is the is the site plan.
Um, so um, that's pretty much it. I I put in some language in here about being able to to deny it if it's incomplete. It's probably worth it to have it in there. I don't know if there's going to be any push back on that because I know the the
whole, you know, protected use thing. Um yeah, the AG's letter um was very cautionary about denying anything. >> Yeah. Well, this is this is not denying it. This is this is an incomplete application. So um
>> if if it's deemed to be incomplete, they'll be notified in writing and given the opportunity within a specified period of time. Um, but if it's yeah, if if it's the subject of a notice and it's not brought into compliance, it will be denied for failure to comply with the
rules. So, if the rules are considered fair, then I'm guessing that that's probably especially if there's a process, if there's a very clear process um for that, I I could see somebody not wanting
to spend the money for a for a surveyed site plan. So, I had a question about that. I think it's good to have that in there, but what if the applicant actually gets denied for whatever reason and then wants to resubmit because they get their act together in 3 months? Is
there any time limit that will I guess deny them the opportunity to resubmit or can they just >> I don't think so. Like I wouldn't want to shut somebody out if let's say they're on vacation or they had some kind of a financial problem but then they
>> you know >> okay you know I can't get this last document in but maybe in 3 months I can they do they've already been denied they come back to you >> is just a simple resubmitt and a new fee. >> You know I I have no problem with with the way this is written. I just don't
want to shut anybody out for >> I don't know death in the family or something or >> Yeah. Yeah. I I don't I don't see I don't see that that would be an issue. Um you know, it wouldn't be sort of like what like if you get a no vote, you can't come back for two years.
>> Exact. That's exactly what I'm thinking. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's I don't Well, I mean I I wouldn't I don't see that that could happen, but I guess if somebody wanted to push it from the other direction maybe and say, "Well, you can't come back, so why are you letting come back?"
>> Yeah, >> that's the Yeah, that's valid. I I I don't know the answer to that. Okay. >> So, maybe you just put a sentence in saying it doesn't prohibit you from resubmitting a complete application. >> Yeah. >> So, I think
>> I think this is something where the AG's letter um you know, it says we should it should be reviewed the bylaw should be reviewed and this comment letter should be reviewed with town council >> and and it's and it's talking
specifically about denial. So, um to There's no problem from >> if says if the approved provisions in article 38 are used to deny a protected use ADU or otherwise applied in ways that constitute an unreasonable regulation in conflict with 760 CMR
71.03 such application would violate general law chapter 48 and the regulations anyway it says the town should consult with town council and EOHLC to ensure that the approved bylaw provisions are applied consistent with general law. So,
I just feel like we should we should follow up on that to be sure. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> And I think that's what the building commissioner has been I think he's been working closely into Absolutely. >> doing that to make sure. >> And then on the site plan, >> the prior um building commissioner
>> if you're doing an addition or a a separate structure would require a site plan by a surveyor. >> Mhm. So, I don't know if that's I can't imagine that that should be deemed an unreasonable regulation, but it's worth
confirming because >> Okay. >> Because I I don't think a site plan is unreasonable. >> You wouldn't need a site plan. Yeah. You wouldn't need a site plan for a um like the types of projects we've been talking about when somebody takes like a
1500T house and they bump it out in the back and they bump it out on top and now it's a 4,000t house, right? That doesn't require a site plan. It has in Milton. >> It has. >> Well, they don't require it, but in some in if you're close to the property line, >> single family confirm that it made
zoning. >> If it's close to the lot line, sometimes they'll look at it. They'll look at the assessor's parcel and say, "Oh, you should probably get a survey for this >> an a stamped site plan for a single family house." >> Well, survey, is that what you're talking about? >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Yeah. I'm mixing up my terms, but not site plan.
>> So, this isn't something that needs to go to the zoning board. You talking about setbacks and things. It's not something that has to go to the zoning board >> if you're in violation. If your zoning our zone uh building commissioner is our zoning enforcement officer, right? Right. >> So, if >> No, I don't think so. I think it's a
Isn't it a woman? There's a woman that I came There's a there's a woman's name. She is technically the zoning enforcement officer. >> All right. Well, then always in the past it was the building commissioner. I don't know if that's changed. >> Okay. >> But >> so may so maybe this won't be an issue. Maybe people are used to these the
contractors are used to doing it and it's not going to be a heavy lift. I don't know. I just kind of thought it was going to be might be there might be some some push back on it. >> I think it's subjective depending on how close you are to the lot lines. That's been my experience. >> Okay. So, you know, you want to build a
deck and the sideline set back is 10 ft. You want to come to within a foot of that, they'll they get it surveyed. >> Okay? >> But if it's in the back and you have 90 ft of backyard and you want to go off the backyard, you know, the back the back of the house 20 ft, they're usually
fine with it. You don't have to get a survey. >> Okay. >> I would I would ask Michael how he's approaching it because it could be different now than prior commissioners. It's really Um, my understanding is like they're the
ones have to sign off that meets zoning. >> So, if a neighbor were to say, "You you approve this, Mr. Building Official." And I don't think it meets zoning. >> Mhm. >> Then, you know, what are they basing their decision on? >> You got to leave one door open for the
open meeting law. >> I know. Just crack. Yeah. Maybe you can open it. >> Thank you. >> I've done that a few times. No, it's worth a conversation. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, absolutely. Absolutely. >> Doing that interpretation because maybe was inconsistently applied before.
>> Yes. >> By a prior commissioner or plan reviewer, but it should be very clear for homeowners for sure. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um Yeah. and and that'll and that'll get that'll get looped into um
you know this whole sort of overall you know kind of like the resolution with you know sort of like how these how the standards are going to get applied with these accessory structures etc and and whatnot. So so that'll that'll get looped that'll get looped together. So I will I will follow through on that with
having this this looked at this particular item looked at as well by town by town council. I mean, my opinion is they shouldn't be approving additions and structures without a survey, without a site proposed site plan. Um, but
>> well, it depends on how big the lot is. It's just, you know, in some if they if there something is approved and built, you know, um I've I've heard of where, you know, if somebody challenges it, it could be have
to be torn down if it doesn't comply. >> So, you know, whose liability is it if a building official gives the approval? I don't know. Mhm. >> But it it's >> people were concerned about how the ADUs would affect backyards and in this especially in the
residency district. >> Mhm. >> Um but it should be something whether it's an ADU or not that they should have assurance that it meets the zoning >> and setbacks and height. >> Um you know you can't just say well yeah
it kind of meets it >> as one who has to It's there to protect the smaller lots, not the bigger ones. >> What would you say, Maggie? >> It's there to protect the smaller lots. >> I I think Cheryl's point is uh the correct one. I think if you're
>> I I think having a having a site plan that that dimensions where you're where you're building in proximity to the property lines is basic, simple, and responsible, and not that expensive.
Mhm. >> But >> Mhm. >> eliminates a lot of problems. If I was the building official, I'd want it, >> right? >> Yeah. >> That's what I thought that they >> You wanted as a homeowner. >> Yeah. >> I'd want to know where my investment was going. >> I I um >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. I mean, it happens too often that somebody misunderstands where their property line is. Um I I have a a neighbor who's a was a dear friend. He's no longer with us any longer. But uh um I had
established my property line and put a fence in and I came home and my neighbor was in a panic because once my property line was established, he recognized that his artisian well was on my property. >> But over time, we can all lose track of
where our lawn ends and where someone else's lawn begins. And that's that's simply what happened. >> Yeah, >> that was a non-issue. I mean, we had a great relationship, but >> it's it's um it happens. >> Yeah. >> All too often.
>> Well, we know even Scenic Road where trees and everything were removed and stonewall and Yeah. >> because they thought that was a property. It wasn't. >> Yeah. >> So, um All right. So, >> Liz, that's great. Thank you. That's >> Yeah. So, hopefully hopefully they'll be
pretty um fingers crossed, you know, they'll be pretty straightforward when they come in. Oh, good. It won't be too too sort of, you know, like running around with our heads cut off. >> Great. Great. >> We'll see. >> Thank you. That's great to have um to
have that. And that sort of segus into um the AG's the ADU bylaw discussion of bylaw amendments needed regarding the attorney general's correspondence dated October 20th, 2025. When I read through these, they were
things that we had clearly had talked about and we we questioned ourselves on whether to put those in or not. Um, and I think they were very some it's a matter of striking a few words in in places and just taking off some
>> um additional language that was sort of superfluous and not even necessary um and wouldn't affect our intent in what we were doing. My question is um and I I asked Liz to maybe check with
Nick. I believe that you don't have to go back to town meeting if it's a if it's very small minor changes that that does not mean requiring to go back with those zoning bylaw to town meeting um that the clerk can allow us to you you can strike some of those language before
it goes to print. Did you have a chance to speak with >> So I did I did that I I didn't understand I'll just be perfectly honest. I didn't understand that the AG striking these these phrases was that's how
that's that's it. They're they're they're gone. Right. >> Yeah. >> So so there's there the there were the items does not include a mobile home trailer however mounted. But that's one statement that's been struck by the by the attorney general. Another statement
and shall not be less than 350 ft. That's been struck. And then the third one is or otherwise for boarding and lodging or other commercial use. That's been struck. So when this gets published by the town clerk, those three state
those three um >> just get removed >> are just removed. And then were you interested in some other language that beyond beyond those three? No, I just >> things that were being struck. >> No. And that was my always my understanding from town council is they
can still they can still accept our article. >> Mhm. >> But but they'll strike certain things that >> I mean that's I I personally I've I this is my first time dealing with with a bylaw where language has been struck by
the attorney general. So, so, um, I'm assuming that's the process that what gets what gets, um, published by the town clerk will will be a version of this article with those three phrases struck. >> Yeah. >> And and that and that and once that's
published, that will be the that will be the official bylaw. >> That will be the >> And the question is, does it does it does it get printed with those items that are struck or they just out of it? >> I don't know. that pro maybe that would
be something for to ask the >> clerk. I mean, I would think not having it in it would be more clear. I agree. >> I I wouldn't I would not want to see like language that Yeah. an edited version. >> That's what my understanding is. I just
want to make sure Sue Galvin when she prints it that that's the way it goes. >> You know, it it's I think it's a really good question. If the attorney general strikes those sections, I would think they would want a resubmission of your article now revised to comply with what
they struck and that ends up being the permanent, you know, bylaw. I mean, I can't imagine that that is the end of it. You're not going to publish that. >> I think it might be just but again, I it's town council that >> Okay. >> But but it doesn't have the strike. it it doesn't have the those it just
>> and they just trust that we did it and then if we didn't do it and somebody challenges it the AG says no this is what we approved for Milton so it would hold up >> but in but as as a town we don't want a bylaw that has >> no no absolutely not >> yeah we look like
>> I don't think we have to resubmit it I think it just can be accepted >> I I just we need town council to tell us this and tell us what we need to do with this bylaw I don't I don't trust that we uh have the expertise to know how to handle a legal document from the AG. So,
I I would like town council's advice on what to do because I re read through it and it's not clear to me that >> that that's what we have to do and and also whether we should consider any other changes to the language. We have new town council now that wasn't here at the time that this was drafted, >> right?
>> And that would be my recommendation. >> No, definitely. I want to get town councils, but that's >> Yeah, I agree. I believe what I've been told before, but yeah, we should get confirmation one way or the other. >> So, just so I know what you guys want.
So, um, are we looking for a a memo from town council on like what next steps on dealing with the dealing with the um the um >> I guess a written response, Liz, you
know, what what do we do now with the bylaw that's been edited by what is required? Yeah. >> Okay. >> And not just those three bullet points, the other cautionary things because I don't think we want to be caught up in challenges right off the bat. I mean, if there's something we need to clear up,
you know, to make more clear about, let's say, denial, for example. >> Mhm. >> I wasn't thinking we touched the other things. I thought it was just those three and we just stopped there. I mean, those are >> I I like his the town council's opinion
all on all of it. The whole letter. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I think it can't hurt and >> Okay. And maybe this new town council has a better >> could be a a better um
>> edu by law that they recommend. >> If you read the language of it, they say that part of why something is stricken is because we don't have it elsewhere in the zoning. Right. >> So the recommendation might be to revise the zoning and keep it the way it is.
>> Yeah. Like the whole trailer. >> Yeah. I want the whole thing looked at because >> Right. Right. >> Yeah. That we don't want trailers anywhere in town. >> Yeah. But they still have to be Yeah. >> I mean, we're getting trailers. They just they have to be permanently
attached. I get it. >> I mean, the reasons for striking certain things have to do with what's already in our zoning bylaw. And so, the question is, do you take the in keep the strikes or do you revise the zoning bylaw? So, >> well, isn't there two possible reasons?
Well, that's one of the reasons. The other reason is that >> we're not aligned with the state. Right. So, there are two possible reasons. >> Yeah. But they they say here on for example on the um
both the trailer and the boarding and lodging it has to do with our bylaw. Mhm. >> So two out of the three and this um the prohibiting the the size has is related to the regulation itself because
>> of the size of the home could be certain size and it might 350 might be more restrictive. >> Well, if we if we um I mean that let's see what he has to say. We may want to go back and change some of our zoning >> if we feel strongly about some of these
aspects. The size thing is always going to concern me. Now, there's no minimum size. >> Yeah. >> It's driven by the It's driven by the building code, >> which is small. Which is really small. >> Yeah. >> 110 ft for a bedroom, I think. And I don't know what it is for >> Yeah.
>> studio apartment, but more Mike's going to have to >> sort that sweat that out. I It just makes his work harder. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Great. All right. Thank you for following up with that. And then our
last item um we were just and we sort of started to talk a little bit about our fiscal year 27 planning board budget request and Liz if you want to talk about that. I know you have sort of submitted our level funding because that
was asked. >> Yeah, the request was the request was level funding. So this is just this is just showing the um this doesn't show any staff. my my position and and Avante's position are are in the selectman's um st I believe in the in a
different in a different budget. Um the um part-time admin is in the planning board budget, but that's that was sort of arranged a specific way with the stipend from CPC and what have you. So that's still kind of being worked out. So I didn't bother to I didn't bother to
really, you know, put any put stuff put put information on that in front of you tonight. So, what you're looking at is mostly just, you know, the the general um expenses for the board and then the um the big item is really the planning studies. Um so, as Cheryl pointed out
earlier, there's still funding appropriated for this current fiscal year, $50,000 is is available. Um there's an ask for an additional $50,000 um which would be fiscal 27, which
starts July 1st of 26. Um so that you know roughly within the next six months in theory that's about $100,000 worth of you know assuming the 50,000 comes through within 6 to 7 months that's roughly 100 grand in in funding for
planning studies. Um if there's a desire for additional funds um you know I know there was some discussion as well about you know making a making a a request for free cash potentially u for something specific. So, I just kind of wanted to put that out there is trying to get a
better understanding of like, you know, um timing on some of these things. I know part of it as well is not really having a really strong grasp yet on what something's going to cost. I mean, I know what some studies have costed that that I've worked on the last couple of
years and everything's everything's 50,000 if and up, you know? I mean even for simple simple things it's it's just it's just the way things are. Um so yeah so so that that's what's there. Um but again
you know if there's if there's something that you want me want back in terms of additional resources or so one thing Liz you mentioned the admin support there's no line item here CPC has only been around
a few years. >> Yep. an admin was uh here well before CPC passed. Yep. >> So that was a town budget item that didn't come out of CPC funding, >> right? Yes. >> So um can you explain how now there's no
it doesn't even show here for fiscal? >> I I didn't I I that's that that's that's me. I didn't I didn't I didn't bother to print that page that had the that had the part-time admin listed on it. Um it's um I can provide that to you. It's it's it's a um I think oh god I'd have
to I'd have to look it up to see what the funding was but it it's I think it's based on a 22 1/2 hour position um and I believe it was also kind of there was a stipended component as well to support the CPC >> right
>> so so I don't I don't know because that because that position is vacant right now I'm kind of like I don't I'm not working with a lot of information right now >> so I just know as CPC C meeting that the chair said that this is an item under
discussion because there's an interest from the town administrator to have more CPC funding for an admin position than had been before >> and there's been a real question about whether the CPC needs that additional
admin support. >> Okay. >> And so it hasn't been approved yet at the CPC. Okay, >> you know for um because it would come out of CPC admin funding and that you
know there's a that would increase the admin amount and that means there would be less funding available for projects and so it's a discussion point. So, I'm not comfortable saying we shouldn't have any admin funding in our request when
that's not been a decision that's been made and it would still have to go to town meeting perhaps even um because all of the allocations out of CPC. I don't know maybe on the admin side it just lies within the committee but I'm just raising it as a something that's not
decided yet and I um and if this is going um in I just felt like you all should know about that discussion. >> Mhm. >> So I'm confused. Are we splitting our 22 and 1/2 hours with the CPC or >> the former admin person you know Julia
>> Julia? Yeah. She had, you know, a full-time position that was composed of part-time here and part-time for CPC. >> Okay. >> And the part-time here was funded out of the this budget. >> 22 and a2 hours >> out of the planning. >> Yeah. I thought it was 19 hours.
>> I don't remember how many hours. >> I thought it was planning board was 19. >> I honestly I'd have to go back and look at the number of hours. that that part-time position whether it's whether it's 19 or 22 and a2 that number from from at fiscal 26 was
carried forward to fiscal 27. So so I I should have I should have brought that page as well. I didn't. Um and part part of it was because I wasn't 100% certain if there was going to be potentially maybe additional funding for some for some more resource. Um, so and and
exactly and and whether or not that that stipen was specific to sort of like a prior a prior, you know, staffer and and arrangements, I just don't didn't have all the answers to that. So, um, so the the part-time position for the planning
board is still there and then additional funding potentially from CPC is I guess a is is being discussed >> for her to work for the CPC, right? Not for her to work for us. you would very specifically need to be supporting CPC projects
>> if they're Yeah, that's what I'm trying to clear up. and and what what what comes up is um because my my position actually in Brainree was was funded through the CPC um is there's a there's a lot of crossover because because the
CPC projects tend to be in the arena of of multiple planning projects whether it's housing whether it's historic preservation whether it's you know um open space you know preservation um a lot of those projects that the CP CPC is
involved in in funding >> tend to tend to, you know, tend to be to be ones that that the planning department planning staff would be would be >> consulting on. >> So our budget then is 559
plus whatever Julia's um >> position pay >> position pay. So So it's plus whatever that is. Okay, >> that makes sense. And >> and As far as the um the 50,000 that we have
this fiscal year, um I don't know if that's part of this discussion if it's still I think it's relevant because when we ask for 50, if we're not spending the 50 we have this year, >> um you know, you're giving back to free
cash, right? So, um, what did we think that, um, we've talked Yeah. like what we So, they're funding I saw in your memo for the housing production plan. Is there going to be a request to the
affordable housing trust? So, we don't necessarily have to >> That's what we're waiting on some of these because we don't know yet. And then as far as we know, like the economic development study could need some funding >> and and maybe >> that's
some of planning board. Um >> I'd like to see that one done. >> Yeah, I think finishing something before starting something new is important. >> And then codification too, right? Is that going to come from us or >> So that's where I um
it's it's a good if there's no other source of funding for it. I mean, this has been Alex Whiteside was working on this codification >> when he the first thing I voted on when I came on the board. Yeah. >> You know, this is how long it's been in
the process. So, I feel like that's another unfinished piece of business again that would be good to get done. So, if we're going to do do that, then we need to increase >> because if it's $50,000.
>> Well, right. But but but but but there's also I what I heard Cheryl say as well was, you know, we've got the the economic the feasibility analysis with MAPC, which needs to get wrapped up. >> We've got the open space and recreation
plan, which needs to get wrapped up. um the economic development plan which in theory was was was launched and then just kind of stopped, right? So you've already got three plans that are in some
some level of of completion. So you know are you going to are you going to bite off a fourth plan in the next in the next you know what six months? So I think on the my understanding is the
open space um and recreation was already funded. Is that correct? >> I just mean in terms of I just mean in terms of Yes. Yes, it has been funded. Um more in terms of like workflow and >> capacity or work capacity >> and and re and resource. I mean, so so
so I I think there's a I get the sense that there's going to be some there's a there's there's a u receptiveness to finding additional funding for for for for planning studies. But I but I'm but I I'm I'm just thinking trying to
think through sort of like how this is how this is how this is going to sync up. So what there was before there was a bylaw review committee that was general bylaw review and it has um now completed and is no longer in existence but they
had a subcommittee that was re working on the zoning bylaw >> and I would think that um because of the opportunity to save a resources save time with the you know the building commissioner and and the building you
know the planning department you know that there could be a representative from our board and in one of you and hopefully that you know Michael or somebody from his office and with Sue Galvin and kind of get up to speed on where things were left off and at least
identify you know >> the first step of that next level of codification because there was an there was a um an audit done >> and the audit said you should identif you should address these things and and
Maybe um it can be done in phases then if it doesn't have to be the whole thing. But >> there even for the basics of compliance with state law or consistency with state law >> and tables of use and and dimensional
tables >> um definitions things like that. So that's not like changes in terms of other kinds of you know bylaw change. But >> but I think what with the workflow that would that would absolutely take a
consultant to to be working on that. I mean >> to do the work is the work for sure. And you know the that's who did this the codification before. I mean they could that part of the codification though that is fix the fixes the fix the inconsistencies could be done by the
same consultant who' put it together in the first place and Sue Galvin is has the contract for the up updates because I had asked like when we you know we approve these new zoning bylaws how do they get put into the the e-code and she
said that that's under contract in the clerk's office. So I just um They're posted to the title page. Have you seen them? >> Yeah, I saw that. But they should, >> but they're posted, but they're not incorporated in the body of the document. >> Okay. So, that's what we need to get back to. I thought that that was what
she is. >> That was new. That was that was pretty recent stuff, though. >> Yeah. >> Cuz I cuz I was the first thing, one of the first things I did was make sure I had the most current bylaw. Um, >> so just so you know, even the 40B developers who have their uh expensive
attorneys have made mistakes in the list of relief they need because our zoning bylaw is that challenge to work with, right? And that the more you dig into it, the more you'll see. >> Yeah. Um, and the more I think why I continue to advocate for the
codification and you know to your to your point about how many things can be >> um, you know, handled, it would be good to know what the timeline is for finishing these other pieces that are out there. >> But um, what we're talking about now for
next fiscal year, we're talking about starting next July. And so I think you know it we should hope that these other initiatives are done by next July >> um since they've been in the works for years and you know um and I do think a
prioritization on the codification for for next fiscal year. Um >> yeah I'm thinking next the >> be the next fiscal year. >> So Liz, when they asked you for level funding was that before or after the override? before
>> I I don't know. >> Okay. >> So, last year? >> I honestly don't know. >> Must have been before. >> It would be after cuz she just started. >> Yeah. >> After. Okay. >> So, Tim Tim, >> why would they ask for level funding if we have $4.5 million in free cash? >> It didn't make it in.
>> Should go for like 150 >> to get all the stuff done. >> There seems to be plenty of money around. >> So, they asked for level funding, not level service list. That was the request level funding. >> Yeah. I mean, honestly, I'd have to go
back and look at the wording on the on the um the guidance that I got. But but you know, the it beyond, you know, contractual obligations >> for for union, >> but I I think >> it was pretty much just you know, kind of car carry forward. I made I mean I
made a couple of minor adjustments based on, you know, actuals for the past couple of years. Like one of your budgets is always like in the negative. I don't know why advertising. So, I just kind of adjusted that a little bit. Um, but yeah, that's I didn't I didn't
really do a whole lot beyond that. >> That was a lot to do. We had um a lot more public hearings than would typically with MBTA and >> Mhm. >> and a lot of um narrative to go into the times. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Mhm. >> But um and I I I do believe that if we go in with the 50,000 again, some of these things are so important to the town that we should be able to if we can't get the grant funding, we should
be able to get free cash funding for these things >> and Nick felt comfortable that that something like the reclatification if if we need the funding and that would be expensive. Um and the housing production plan, we have to update that. I have to. That's important. >> So
>> that protects us from 40 BS. It's our only protection from 40 BS until we get the save. >> And so maybe half of it comes from us and half comes from the selectments budget >> and they can go for the free cash. You know, when I was on the warrant committee that was supposed to be for unexpected expenses like if you had an
expected expense like we've been talking about doing this for a few years. I don't know how this current warrant committee is going to think about it, but it's not unexpected to me. But and the question was we also questioned whether recottification should come even from the planning department because
this is a townwide you know making sure that our for our building commissioners that they have something that can work that it's it's not necessarily just planning it's something that is essential to functioning. So >> just just because we worked on it to have it done doesn't mean we should be
the source for funding it >> for funding it. Yeah. And that came with the first round. We well I you know I just for history Sue Galvin originally really wanted to get the codification of all the bylaws done >> and the I was on the planning board at
the time and um we had funds and we were reaching towards the end of the fiscal year and we she came into this room and made the case you know by the zoning bylaws should you know be included and we voted to allocate the funds because
we felt it was important and it wasn't going to get done otherwise. So, you know, I I'm all for seeing if we can get a split um because this it does affect the the departments. um but and being able to use people's
time wisely having this updated. But I also think if we're at a point where we're getting towards the end of the fiscal year and we still have a lot of cash left, >> I'd like to get that cash put to use at least on a partial contract and then get the rest of the contract the next fiscal
year. >> Um rather than send the the cash back. Mhm. >> Mhm. >> I mean that this is a matter of it's not whether it is going to get done. It's going to get done. The recotification we might as well do it if we get to that
point where we have funds available. >> Put it to work. >> So that's why I think it's worth getting a proposal and at least having a conversation. >> Maybe it's it's not a working group. Maybe it's a conversation between yourself, Michael, and Sue Galvin about, you know, what it would take to do the things at least in that were in that
audit. Uh, and I read the audit you several years ago. I don't remember all the details in it except that there were some things like that were non-compliant with state law. Um, and >> was that the you said there was a report from a committee >> report from the consultant. >> Oh, from consultant, but there was also
like a committee report that you >> you know if was a bylaw review committee or something. >> Yes. Um, >> Peter Mullen, >> Kathleen O'Donnell was our current ZBA chair was on that committee. >> Okay. Um, but the report itself that came out if I think I probably have a
copy an an online copy or electronic copy somewhere. >> Yeah, that would be helpful cuz I'm sure like you said like 70% of these things have already been flagged >> cuz I'm sure they've been driving people crazy forever, right? >> And the other thing is one of the things
that I liked about KP Law is they have experience with recottification. So, if we could do some of this in-house, it might save us money from going to a really expensive outside consultant. It might be something that they >> have somebody in their one of their
departments who can help us. Um, >> so you heard from Michael one of the frustrations. He's read three pages of what he thinks he knows what the requirements are and then he flips the page and it says, "Oh, but not never mind. >> Ignore that." That's the kind of thing where people
might not have read the fourth page, you know, because they thought they had their answer, right? >> That's the kind of thing that we're talking about. We're not talking about like, you know, a rewrite of the what's, you know, the dimensional standards in the resident zones, you know, we're talking about making it user friendly,
>> right? >> So, do you need a vote from us tonight um supporting the $50,000 request? I mean, obviously, we >> Yeah. feel we could in in part of your narrative that we are we feel justified to request >> additional funds or
>> I don't feel comfortable supporting the 559 yet until we know about the admin funding from CPC. >> What is your time frame on when you need >> I you know what let me I'll talk to I'll talk to Nick I'll talk to Nick and and
kind of check in because honestly I'm brand new to this and I I don't know exactly what the next step is as far as There's a lot of things up in the air and questions that >> Well, I feel like budgets are due >> according to the budget coordination
committee um I think by December 1st. >> I mean, it's coming up pretty quickly. >> Yeah. So, we won't have another meeting. >> We have a CPC meeting tomorrow night, but I don't believe this is on that is on the agenda. >> I think it's the first. >> So, what's the downside to asking for more than the 55? I mean, it just sounds
like we need more money. I know we were it was suggested that we ask for level funding but why couldn't we ask for more based on I mean for some reason 40 grand for freeotification sticks in my mind and I don't know what the economic study is going to cost but
seems like >> said he thought it was going to be >> I could have swore that one so anyway >> sounds about right although that was probably two years ago right >> and that's why I think we b we buffered we sort of um asked for 50,000 for that reason >> I remember him saying he could he that
we should go for a lot more like 150. I remember having that discussion every year. >> That's how we put in for 150 years. >> I could have swore but so anyway the point is can we ask for more or are we just you know is 55 our number because it was 50 was our number last year. >> I think you can ask for more. You just
have to make the case. I mean because you can >> I think we just made the case. >> The answer could always be no, >> right? >> You know. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> All right. I mean, we definitely >> So, if we if we find out how much >> cuz we need Julia in that and then add another 40 for recotification
>> and that doesn't even touch the economics. >> We're 14 grand into it, but we don't know. I think Liz mentioned it was going to be 150. >> We're not having another meeting this month. So, >> well, >> I think Liz would have to submitted, you know, that request. We
would have to ask her to submit that request tonight. Well, I mean, I would say at minimum it would be 90, you know, the 50 that we have plus 40. But >> I mean, we don't know. I don't know what was carried last year for admin, but it was in this budget last year. Um, so
>> Oh, yeah. The admin is over and above the 559. That's that's over and above. That position is over and above. I think it's it's in the 20. I I I'd have to go back and look, actually. So, I guess what we could say is, you know,
that in terms of the budget request, if we're if you need a some kind of a vote tonight, that uh I would say, you know, it we would need to have a pending uh resolution of how the admin position is funded. And I
I agree with Jim that we should ask for additional funds and they can always be, you know, not available, but um >> and we're pretty frugal. We don't seem to use all of our money. You know, we'll go back to free cash,
>> but and we we do, you know, a lot with grant money. We >> But that seems to be drying up. And, you know, I'd like to see the recotification done at at minimum. And you know if the admin gets funded
um you know through CPC um >> but wouldn't that only be their portion I'm sorry to interrupt you but wouldn't that only be their that would only be the portion that she's working for them we still have to come up with R 20 somewhere right >> so let me see >> I mean none of the projects that have been funded in the last three years have
come through the planning board you know they're um does the position get benefits cuz if the position doesn't get benefits and it's under 20 hours at 20 hours or more it triggers the benefits.
So the number I'm seeing is 40 is 41 412 41,200. That's the number I'm seeing for FY27. >> 41,000. >> Yeah. And it's and it's 6ft FTE. >> So >> what does 6 FTE mean?
>> Uh full-time equivalent. >> Oh. >> So yeah. So three three out of five days. Um so um yeah. So, so that that was that was that was sort of like status quo
assuming assuming that same person was was was still um in the position. >> So, last year's budget was 97,000 and change. >> Yeah, I'd have to go back and look at that. I'm sorry. I'm not I'm not as
prepared for this as I should be. Um and and and and but but in fairness to myself, it's partly because that position is sort of, you know, >> sometimes >> you can give yourself a break list just fine. You're doing a lot. >> Take it easy. >> You've been running your whole
department. >> Jeez, unloading everything on >> I know it's easy for us. Five people firing away at you. Just on you. >> No. Liz, are you saying that that that 412 is outside of the $50,000?
>> Yes. >> Yeah. So, so the number really doesn't matter to us. >> That's and and and and we're outside of it. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> I mean, so >> this is >> But, you know, I think if we if we're making a request,
>> um, if we could establish an approximate value for the items that we want and then submit it, right, that the the specific the specific items that we need the funds for, what we think that's going to cost us, and make that submission. Whether that ends up being
60, 70, 80, or 90, whatever it is. If we think it's 40,000 for recottification, establish that on a line, >> I think it's more than I think it's probably six, you know, again, >> but again, we don't know exactly. >> We have what, three days to figure it out.
>> If we say 40, that's our share of it. And if there's a town council share of it and if there's a select board share of it, we don't have to submit for 100% if we don't feel like it's 100% our responsibility. >> 40 40 I think that sounds good then.
>> And we refer to our 40 as planning board share just so there's no misunderstanding. >> Right. So then the motion would be the 50,000 for studies and the 40,000 for codifica planning boards share of the codification. The rest of it is whatever Liz and town administrator work out for
the the department. How's that? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, >> that's great. But but in in fear of getting rejected for the 90, would they come back to us and say, "Well, what are studies?" I understand the 40 for cotification, but like what are studies? Well, you know, each year they if people
have asked a little bit about we can say what we think we it might go towards, but we're talking like a year and a half from now when we we don't even know like >> things >> things can come up like >> that are even a requirement by the legislature again, you know, like
there's, you know, I actually >> fair. >> No, but that's good. So, you're justifying the number and that's great. That's that's what I'm asking. Fantastic. Yeah, >> I sat in on a American Institute of Architects Massachusetts chapter of the government affairs committee yesterday
and they went over like five or six housing bills that are pending in the state legislature and one or two of them related to zoning and then there's, you know, so we don't know what's going to come out of these things. Um, so I think >> good,
>> you know, if we think about like there are things that we had on our list, we don't have our list in front of us tonight, but there are zoning things that we have on our list. >> Yeah, there are, >> right? And so, um, we >> So, it's not a big ask for 90 and it's
justified. That's great. Good. >> 50 has been a standard for a long time. And it's um we get asked for matching funds sometimes when there's a grant application like you we've MAPC is uh some of the work that they've done for
us has been a matching grant. we've had to come up with some cash, you know, um and the work that they did, you know, for East Milton Overlay, remember it was the last minute pick $10,000 because we could get it in on our agenda fast
enough to get it to the deadline, get the deadline done in time. But it's like, so that was a $10,000 match for probably a $30,000 fee that they they they came in with. So, and and so we don't know. You might be applying
for something and we need a match. >> Yep. >> So, 90 is not unreasonable. So, it's just >> Nope. >> Not unreasonable and justifiable. >> Okay. Cool. Great. >> All right. So, let's just take a vote just um
>> could I have a motion to support the request of a $90,000 20? I think we should be specific that 40 of that is targeted for codification of training board. >> All right. Do you want to make that motion? >> I'll make it that I'll make a motion to
support a $50,000 uh request for planning studies and a $40,000 request for a planning board contribution to the zoning bylaw codification. >> Second that. >> All in favor? >> I I Great.
>> Okay. So that'll hopefully help you list when you >> go into that meeting since we're not able to meet. So >> all right. So our last item on the agenda if there is nothing else is to adjourn. So motion to adjurnn.
>> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Great. Good. Thank you.