Heat. Heat. N. Good evening and welcome to the for 14th meeting of fiscal year 2026 for the Milton Planning Board. At this time, I would like to now call the meeting to order and begin by the intro introducing the members of the planning board and our staff this evening.
Jim Davis, member, >> Magfield, member. >> Sean, member, >> Cheryl Taya, secretary, >> and Mayor Depal serving as chair. Um, with us tonight, we have our staff, >> Avante Grady, assistant director, >> Liz Manning, planning director.
>> Thank you. And thank you all for joining us this evening. Um, we first have our administrative items. Um, we do have a set of minutes from our lengthy meeting on the 29th. Um and um for approval if
has everyone had a chance to look over. >> You were not. Yes. Correct. >> I just have um sorry I have an edit which one the >> the 29th. >> Oh I'm sorry. Yes. The 15th first.
>> Okay. I was fine on the 15th. >> Yeah. >> So, a motion to approve the minutes for February 15th. >> That's as amended. >> As amended by Cheryl. Yes. >> Second. All in favor?
>> I. >> Thank you. Um and then our meeting minutes for January 29th. Um, I had a few minor little typo things, but um, Maggie, if you want to go, we might have the same item. >> Oh, hello. So, mine was on uh page four
um just under um my my um my comment about my committee. So, I it was the one, two, three, fourth line
down. Rex said she said the town would need $40 million of business. It was the $40 million of property value. >> I was wondering about that, but I didn't go back and check.
>> It was $40 million of property value >> approximately equivalent to 18 >> 18 Okay. And just while we're on that same page when um if you go down one the next
paragraph which starts with Mr. Behe, the fourth line is old field said only completed I think it should be buildings or projects rather than building are factored
just an s added to the end. >> And then did you have anything else? Um, no. >> And then just on the the first page, um, the the top of the last paragraph where it starts, Miss Banning, the second
line, she says. So, just removing the s on that. And then or uh four lines up from the final line on the first page, support bike lanes
and expressed heritage because of ESD. >> Little little minor things. Thank you. >> Um thank you for doing this. Um if there is a motion to approve as amended,
>> I'll make that motion. No second. All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. Are approved. Um future minute dates. This is easy. The exact same dates as this month. So the 12th and the 26th are
our next regular scheduled meetings in March. So 7 p.m. Um and then staff update. Why don't you start?
>> Yeah. Um, so I've been working on the Eco1top application um for the climate draft climate action plan. And so I met with Alex Hasha with Liz on
February 10th. And so that was a nice informative meeting. We kind of went through the application, some of the questions. We got kind of some of his input about what sort of departments should be involved, you know, in the plan moving forward. Departments like
consolidated facilities, public schools, public works. U so that was good insight. So I've been kind of working on his draft scope he's created for finishing up the plan and where he um would like to get assistance through this application uh where we're seeking
50,000 in planning grant funds. So the application deadline for that is March 20th. So I've been kind of working on revising that scope and um kind of through that um our next steps are to send that over. We're thinking of
working with MAPC >> um as a consultant so to kind of get an estimate from them and from there I can get more details on kind of the budget and the timeline things I'll need for finishing up the application. So Sam
>> just a question is the eco onetop that's a state um grant program is that run through like the mass works program or is it a different program? >> Yeah. Yeah, it is a state program. This is like it consolidates a bunch of different state like grant
opportunities. Um they're trying to streamline it so that people don't have to apply to a bunch of separate grants. Uh so like the MVP action grant is like one of the grants under that umbrella. There's also like a resilient coast grant. There's this planning grant. And
so there's some questions are specific to the certain grant, but there's some that everyone has to answer. So I've been working on those questions kind of. >> And is this an annual grant program? So like if if we weren't to get if we were
not to get this, we would be at of the running for another year or you know >> I'll have to double check. I believe it's an annual uh sort of opportunity but but I'd have to double check.
>> Thank you. >> So I'll pick up um actually I'll probably just hand it back to Avanti to update you on the open space and recreation plan. The the second item on the report is about the um the Boston Blue Hills project which is on the agenda otherwise. So it probably makes
sense just to wait and chat with the folks from MPC when you're here for that agenda item. So do you want to talk about >> Yes. Yep. So I've been working on a few different things related to the plan. So just been again trying to look into some
of the data. I've communicated some of the information you shared with me about some of the inventory gaps to Craig. sent over some shape files related to scenic roads because Liz and I thought that would be beneficial to include in one of the maps. I um have kind of sent
over a couple documents to the conservation commission for them to review. I've not heard back. Um I I've reached out to them again. So hopefully I get in touch with them soon on that and they can get me some answers on some
of the gaps. And let's see. Yeah, I'm working on a change order right now. It's pretty much finished. I still would like Liz to take a look and to just make some modifications, but kind of from there, I want to circulate that to the
consultant and to um the town administrator to get their sign off so we can get this project moving forward. So, >> that would be really great. I know the parks and rec department is really anxious to incorporate some of that information and data and have it sort of
a little more final. Um so and it would be great to get the committee back together. So >> yeah, absolutely. >> So a question u one of our recent meetings where we approved using planning board funds to um finish the project. One of the things we talked
about was a schedule that did if they would to commit to a schedule. >> I've been kind of spelling out a schedule and this like change order. So the different deadlines for some of those items that were uh discussed in
the memo um stuff related to the engagement and kind of the the inventory. So, I'm hoping like once he sees it and kind of gives his approval, we can kind of have a nice established
deadline where we can kind of get things uh deliverables complete um and make progress towards the plan. So, >> so this has to be approved by the state. Is that right?
>> Ultimately, yeah. Once the plan is kind of the draft plan is complete, it is get submitted to the state. >> Yeah. I'm just thinking about timing with respect to the parks and wreck and their their plan their um working on their recreational master
plan and the >> I think it's almost it's more important some of the grants that they're applying for are contingent upon having >> that's why I'm trying to understand too even grant cycles if they're annual grant cycles like >> this this uh ECO one then you know if if
it makes a difference for a month or two for horsely witten And that's why it's like it's important for them to commit to some time so that that committee can can kind of be uh working their schedule knowing that they've got this at least
being target date of a certain date even if it's not I know they're relying on other bodies like conservation commission etc. But if they could at least say if we receive this information by this date we can finish by this date. Um, that helps
everybody plan. I just think it's kind of out there. Never having a date that is your target has has led to it taking a very long time. >> Hopefully, he'll give feedback to the schedule that you're putting forth. So, we'll have a little more. >> Yeah. Yep. That's the goal.
>> Yes. >> Good. Good. >> All right. Okay. So, next item is um working with the shared supporting housing office, which is that multi- town group that um
shares the services of the um folks at Accenture. I've been working with them um having some communications with the affordable housing trust as well about utilizing their services for 440 Grand a for the regulatory agreement there. I
had a quick conversation with the um owner at 440 today to try to um just get get connected with their consultants for their um for their um marketing agreement and the and the various you
know um documents that are required for for compliance with that. So so getting the ball rolling with that. Um and um I think they're going to help us as well with the final pieces of getting the two
uh ownership units at 71 and 73 Warren AB onto the SHI. So those are sort of the immediate um tasks with that with that group. Um still TBD exactly how we're going to utilize them moving forward, but I'd like to be able to use them. So because
I think we can we can definitely use the support and the resources. um of their of their um you know through this program. I think I think I think it can be I think it could be really helpful. I'm just still trying to puzzle through exactly the best way to get get
the most uh bang for the town's buck on that one. Um with the traffic commission, as I'm reading this, I realized I probably should have followed up to see if the select board did endorse moving forward with this plan. I believe it was on their agenda on
Tuesday night. Uh this uh traffic calming master plan with tool design. Um so I can follow up on that unless somebody heard otherwise. Um my understanding was um it should have it
should it should be moving forward. Um housing production plan. I have I reached out to Karen's son of um to let her know that we were going to move forward. Haven't heard back, but that's sort of how it went the first time, but
I I didn't get I I had to kind of get her by phone. So, I'll I'll follow up with her. I'll I'll I'll make a phone call to her next week. Um and just kind of talk through how we're going to do that in terms of schedules and everything else. Um, and just kind of getting a getting a contract out to her
to get things rolling. Um, >> just have a question. How long does a um does it normally take to generate a housing production plan? >> I think her proposal was like in the sixmonth range.
Yeah. Yeah. I I I don't I don't It's It's a $22,000 scope, so there's not like tons and tons and tons of meetings and what have you. Um, and because she did the last one, which was a it was a huge effort to really get that in good
shape, she hopefully can build on that work that's been done previously. Yeah, hopefully. Yeah. So, that so that would be the plan. The plan would be to try to try to have that have that in hand. I don't know what is it, end of
February. I don't know, early fall, early early midfall maybe summer time >> because having that is a key component of um you know >> safe harbor >> safe be yeah in safe harbor so I feel
like that's really important >> yeah just >> there's going to be committee right so can the committee be appointed >> uh yeah >> who's going to be representative from the affordable housing trust life board planning board at least three item
one of you, right? So, um it just seems like we should be ready. >> Was putting that Yeah. Yeah. I agree. >> And the good news is um Winter Valley did get their funding for those additional 36 units in the back. So, they were are now going to be able to
move forward. So, which is great to add to our >> All right. So, MBTA communities data. So, we followed up on that um in terms of making sure we had sort of like a nice tight final list with all the
parcels. Um I I did confirm with our consultants at UTL that there was a little bit of a housekeeping very minor um issue with with how some of the parcels were designated between adjacent rapid transit. Some of the parcels were
not designated either. it did not impact any of the calculations and any of the, you know, the the the models and what have you that were required by the state. So, they went ahead and they just kind of cleaned that up. Very simple. Um, so now what we have is a is an Excel
spreadsheet. I'd love to be able to, you know, kind of divvy that out into something that's a little bit more user friendly. I also talked to them about creating a story map. um they kind of came back with like a like more of a dashboard which I'm sort
of feeling like might be overkill because this is you know kind of a pretty finite set of data. I think it's like maybe like 450 parcels or something. Um so still kind of figuring that one out. Um, but ideally we'd have
something that's like really simple that people could just click on on the town website and just see their parcel and see what the zoning is. So I thought that Alan Bishop had a separate map like if you went to the town website on pling board MBTA
communities and there was a link to a map but it's and then it takes you to the GIS but if you go to the town the homepage on the town website go to the GIS that database isn't in there so you it's like two different places but I
thought Alan said that he could put it there in that homepage place. So that means if you like now you can click on a parcel and you can see what the zoning is and you you know whatever information. So we actually we should be able to see what all the overlays are.
We didn't talk about this but right now you don't get the overlays like in Milton Village. You just get the underlying zoning. And so you'd have to you know like if you're think about it if you're a property owner or someone who's looking to buy a piece of property that's not very user friendly. You
should be able to go there, click on it, not just see what the underlying zoning is, but see what your overlay options are right there. >> So, >> yeah, >> and I I know Allan can do that. >> He could do it. Yeah. >> So, it would be terrific if he could do that, >> not just for the MBTA, but for Milton
Village overlay, East Milton Square overlay, and there's other overlays that we have. Um, >> so, so, so the the main town GIS mapper when you click on a parcel, it'll say RA Right. So, so if it's in one of the MBTA
zones, you want it to say RA and then you want it to say MBTA Blue Hills Parkway or whatever. Right. >> Um, what I'm anticipating is you can click on that parcel and it will have F. It will have side setbacks. It will have
like I thought that might be more useful. I don't think that's something that you want to do in like the sort of townwide JIS mapper. It's kind of getting into kind of like a level of detail that I don't know is is necessarily um >> we don't have
>> I I I I think it I I I think that's kind of why I thought it might be better to sort of break it break it off just specifically for MBTA communities. But I to I totally hear you. There's got to there's got to be ways to like have better richer data when you click that
that button for information. like they they're really so I think Allan can pretty readily add that layer to the town's main GIS mapper for the rapid transit districts, right? Um and then at
a minimum people would be able to go to that main landing page and you would be able to click that layer and you would be able to know right away like is my parcel in or out? Simple. So, one thing that was nice that's nice about the MBTA one on the the uh planning board website
is if you look at it actually the map, it has boundaries and color. >> We don't have that for any other overlay. So, like if you wanted to know where the, you know, the Milton Village overlay, those there's three overlays that actually apply that are in that area. They're not the exact same
boundaries, I don't think. But, you know, it it would be useful that if you had a layer that said, "Show me um, you know, mixeduse overlay and it would pop up at there's one in East Milton, there's one in Milton Village, or one that's like another kind of overlay um
that like let's say memory care or assisted living or just it would just make it easier for for all of us to use." >> Well, I mean, that should be like on a zoning layer. >> Yeah. So, so maybe that's another ask. Maybe one ask is get the rapid transit
layer onto the main landing page. And then also let's update the zoning layer so that it has the overlays included. And maybe it's a crosshatch or whatever. I don't know because it's going to, you know, can might get a little muddy, but maybe maybe it's separate. Maybe you can sort of click zoning and then you can
have a separate click for zoning overlays so it's not quite as muddy. I don't know. But we yeah, we should be able to do something like that. I I I Allan's um Yeah, I mean I can definitely talk to Alan about it for sure. >> Okay, that would be great.
>> Okay. And then um so the next item is the um community planning trainers collaborative. >> Citizen planner training. >> Citizen planner training collaborative. Right. So that's a hyperlink. I don't know if you guys notice that on your on
your reports. So, if you go into your document, that's a hyperlink that's going to take you right to the registration page. Um, we will um we will work together to get you guys registered because there's a fee if you'd like to go. I think it is $30
maybe something like that. >> Um, and you also need to pick um like a breakout session. >> Oh, it's 105. Oh. Oh gosh, it's been a while since I've gone. It's been a long time since I've gone. Um, so yeah. So, so if anybody's
interested in going to that, if you could let us know by March 4th. And what is the topic of that? >> So, it's going to be a kind of conference where there will be different sort of breakout sessions throughout the
entire day. So, there's kind of three major sections. So there's a let's see here there's the early morning sessions where they have eight to choose from. There's also
um late morning sessions. So, the late morning sessions are from 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The early morning sessions are from 9:15 to 10:45 a.m. And then they have one more session in the afternoon, which is from 1:30 p.m. to
3:00 p.m. So, there's in each session eight sort of uh breakouts to choose from. They have various topics, very interesting and useful stuff related to planning. So, I recommend if you're interested, >> you'll send that out.
>> Uh, >> we could we could send it email if you want, but it's also it's the link is is >> the link should show all the different >> Perfect breakouts. can yeah >> I've gone all the years except the co years without where they weren't doing
it in person that since I've been on the board and they um they add some of them are basic like introduction to the zoning act or writing defensible decisions but other things as things change they they add um topics and so
there's always something I found that's interesting the other interesting thing is there's a keynote speaker at lunch and then there's like a speaker at in Continental breakfast and you're there with hundreds of uh people who are on planning and zoning boards from across the state from Western Mass to the Cape
to Northshore Southshore. So when you're sitting at the table having lunch or sitting in the in the sessions you you know you're learning from what other um people in other communities are doing which I found it's it's really nice and helpful and interesting. Um, and then
you know there's also people who some some staff who go, but it's um I I have found it to be very valuable and I'll be going. So if anybody wants to carpool it is out at Holy Cross, so it's and it starts early. >> Yeah.
>> And it's a Saturday, right? >> Saturday. It's an all day affair. >> Yeah. It's very good. I've been It's been several years obviously, but it's it's very good. It's a lovely conference facility, too. All right. And then on the same on a
similar topic, also hyperl on the um report is the three rivers interlocal council legislative breakfast which is a week from tomorrow. And I don't have the location, but I think it's in conquered. I want to say it's at some kind of
interesting place in conquered because it kind of caught my eye. Um this this apparently is a really good take. a lot of elected repres elected officials and and and you know your cohorts and different communities and um worth it if
you've if you've got the ability to be there on a Friday morning. >> So is this because we we somehow are part of two different councils. We're part of MAPC and part of this one. So this is a sub region. So I think we're I think we are
>> I don't know if Milton's technically in the inner core. >> I think I think we're sort of technically in this trick and then inner core this like there's sort of you know crossover obviously because we've got the border with Boston and Quinzy.
Okay. >> So, we were going to try to kind of >> bounce back and forth between the two the two sub regions if we can. >> Uh, saying it's in Canton. Click the hyperlink. Am I in the wrong place? >> I think it's in I think it's in conquer.
I feel like the event's in conquer heritage site. Canton. >> Oh, Canton. >> Never heard of the Paul River heritage site in Canton. >> Okay. might have been why I was why I was thinking >> rare you think of Lexington and >> has to do with I get it a lot of detail.
>> All right, the link >> it'll be close. >> Yeah, >> that's much easier. Yeah, >> closer which is good. >> And Taber Keely >> is our um is our representative to MAPC and he he's he's strongly strongly
recommended attend you know who folks could folks could get there. It's definitely a really good take. Uh, all right. So, that's it. Um, I'm going to circle back if you don't mind if the when we finish with the the sign bylaw discussion about the dates for the
public hearing. Um, because we're kind of getting close to needing to get that advertised. And also just a quick teaser, the board of selectmen appointed their two
uh representatives from the master plan committee on Tuesday night. So at our next meeting, we'll have the um the balance of the candidates to look at for you guys to make your appointments. Okay. Okay. All right.
Yeah. Do they normally send those to Have they been sending those to you? What is the best way to access that? >> Nick Nick shared a folder with me like what's today? Thursday, maybe earlier this week.
>> So I had said, would you mind if I if I get that out with their next round of of materials for the next meeting and he was okay with that. >> So I know how sensitive it was. >> Yeah. if he was waiting for a few more people to
>> I think I feel >> I feel there's still maybe seven candidates left even after the >> even after the uh selectman made their selection. So I I I think there was a good there was a good group. Yeah.
>> So I'll get that out to you guys. The um I think they do a what like a form or something? They fill out like a form. >> Yeah. It's a volunteer form office. Blackboard's office. Okay, that's it.
All right. Um, then we can now move to our public comment. If there's anyone here um who would like to speak or online and you'd like to come and join us, welcome. And you state your name and your address for the record. That would be great.
Dan Cararsski and I live at 75 Oak Street. I think he has a town meeting member um precinct one. And what I'd like to speak about is the Boston to Blue Hills project.
Um there was a meeting I I've been involved with various issues along the Parkway for I don't know as long as there's been issues along the Parkway. Um because the street I live on is on
the side of Tucker School and there's a lot of activity. Um, I went to the meeting that was um neighborhood meeting that was called by the project team
and um the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, the Nepons River Watershed Association, Meet Engineering, the town of Milton, and the uh Department of Conservation Recreation.
There were on a cold winter night about 75 people um that showed up and I recognized a number of the faces, but there were others that I had seen in the
neighborhood or did not recognize at all. And what I found out is postcards were sent to people who live along Blue Hills Parkway. And that was really great because these
are people who will be saying in a couple years, I didn't even know that was happening. And I believe the number of people who were there was um a direct response
to the postcard invitation. >> Good public outreach. >> Yeah, it was really good public outreach. the um various groups had um
boards around talking boards around um one section of the Milton High School library. So people who had gotten there earlier and were having beverages and practice, whatever, could go around and read. And
there would be staff people from each of the groups who could you could ask questions one on- one. And that was really helpful because then when the primary presentation occurred,
people had already kind of gotten their small questions out and clarified. So that was great. And um it was I've got to applaud them. They did an incredible
job presenting and asking the residents what alternatives. There were various plans for the parkway and what alternative they would be interested in. And you could have seen
already these alternatives close up on these boards which was great. So now when they put the slide you already had some understanding. What was very interesting is,
and sometimes you don't realize it, that there wasn't any opposition there to the plan for the um project. Everyone was enthusiastic at some level
or curious because they weren't aware of it. So um that is a good thing because so often there's like an opposition side. Um but if you go review the work they
have done prior to their presentation, you can see they've had focus groups, they've had community meetings, they've met with staff from various organizations. So when they finally did present it to the
residents, there weren't like hanging pieces unanswered here and there. It was comprehensive and um I believe it could have been alternative
for that people really um like the best. But you know and it was a nice kind of group discussion because everyone by then you see the boards you now had watched slides and their
explanation and then people just huddled together naturally and kind of were making up the decisions their mind on the uh which one they preferred and then someone would point out something cuz these are small groups
of maybe seven. Three. Oh, no. I don't think that'll work because of this or I think this is great. And um I'm looking forward
to what does occur along the parkway. It's going to really revitalize the parkway and um huzzah huzzah to them. >> Thank you. And you're here on a good
night because that's our next item on our agenda. Yes. Is the presentation from um our >> I think you'll be impressed. >> Great. So >> by them as well um all the residents who are there. Thank you. >> Thank you >> and your neighbors for all attending.
Oh, I mean to get 75 people out. >> I know >> for an informational session. >> Yeah, we had a planning board that night, but I know you all went early and >> you went >> I was there for a bit. Yeah, it was excellent. I was taking I was taking pictures because I was like I really liked how they did that that horseshoe
with the >> boards. Yeah, it was a it wasn't it was very very very well done. Yeah, it was clear that they have done similar presentations and they have the uh pattern down of how best to do
that which is um impressive. >> Thank you. So with that, we can move to our agenda item number four, Boston to Blue Hills project presentation. And we can welcome the folks from MAPC. We're here tonight with us. >> Hi everyone. Um u my name is Mara
Holland. I'm a senior transportation planner with Metropolitan Area Planning Council. Um and I really appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight. And I will hand it to my colleague Andre who is here as well. >> Thanks Mara. Uh hi everyone. My name is Andre Surley. I am the Greenway program director at the Nepon River Wershed
Association and we partner with MAPC on this project. Great. And um I um can share my screen and um if I can just get permission to do
that and then I will hand it to Andre to get us started. I think you should you should be able to should be able to tomorrow. Y great >> turn this way. >> Yeah.
>> Great. Can you all in the room see the presentation? Okay. >> Yes. >> Great. Um so yeah, thanks again for having us tonight. Uh again, we're from MAPC and EPRA and we've been working on the Boston and Blue Hills initiative for about the past four years. So tonight, we just wanted to give you all an update
as to what we've been working on, what the past few years have looked like, uh give a recap of the public meeting, um and then talk about next steps. Um I think we can skip through this one again, just like I said, talking about uh what we've been up to recently. Um
again, the project team is MAPC and NEPRA. I think you guys are both I think you all are familiar with our organizations um and what we do but we're very um involved in the local community especially in Milton and we partnered as well with niche engineering on this effort as well as the town of
Milton and DCR. You want to give a little maybe a quick background I guess Mora or should we skip? >> Sure. Um uh if folks are not familiar either in the room or or virtually um MAPC is the regional planning agency. We over we partner with 101 cities and
towns to provide a wide variety of different planning services um including transportation, land use, uh public health, arts and culture, economic development, housing, etc. Um and we often uh work with Milton
>> and uh for on side we're a nonprofit that's been around for about 50 years. We work to clean and protect the river and the surrounding tributaries and lands. Uh at a more hyper local level in Milton, we go to all the fifth grade classes and teach the students about uh water conservation and storm water
pollution. We do a lot of work along the Milton Greenway and of course try to just in general create more access to green space which includes this project connected to the Blue Hills. Um, we work a lot with town staff and try to help uh the town meet their storm water requirements through our Nepona storm water partnership program. And we do a
lot of other advocacy things in the town just again trying to increase access to the Neponeta, bring more awareness to it and hope people can connect to this beautiful asset that we have in the community. And we again we partnered with NICH on this project. Um they were an awesome engineering firm who helped us with the
traffic counts on Blue Hills Parkway, helped to create some of the alternatives and brought an important perspective into the effort. So what is Boston to Blue Hills? Um like I said, we've been working on this project since around the 2022 time frame and we're really looking at uh the
opportunities to create a walking, biking, and rolling route from the Nepon River Greenway to the Blue Hills Reservation. So this includes both uh on street routes and off- streetet routes and in some areas maybe even a combination of both. Um this plan has been identified in a
bunch of different other plans. I think it's you know important when talking about where this came about especially when you talk to the community about why we're doing this. It's important to identify these different plans that mention this. So, in MAPC's landline plan, in the town of Milton's bike and pedestrian plan that MAPC actually worked with the town on a few years
back, um in DCR's parkways master plan, Liverpool Streets Emerald Network, go Boston 2030 and the Quinsey bike and ped plan. All of these different plans uh mentioned goals for greater connections to the Blue Hills in this specific area that we're talking about tonight.
Uh here's just a map that I think helps to really articulate the area that we're looking in here. um in green on the top uh and the running kind of down to the left. That is the existing Neponet River Greenway Trail about 9 miles long. Huge portion of that runs through the town of Milton. Um I think you can click on the
next image. Um and this just shows uh the specific area that we're talking about tonight which focuses on Blue Hills Parkway in a bit of Unqui Road which we'll get into in a little while as well. Um and that was the area that we decided to focus on for this project. Um so right off the bat when we started
this in 2022 uh we knew that community engagement was going to be a very important piece of this effort. We have obviously a lot of local residents who live in Milton. We have folks um in the Boston area uh in Madapan High Park Dorchester um all looking to have
opportunities for better access here. But in order for us to have uh specific data, just anecdotal data, anecdotal data on that, we wanted to meet with community members and key stakeholders um to engage with them and hear their perspectives, their stories, their own personal connections or desires to get
to the Blue Hills. Um so right off the bat, we started with targeted outreach again to those key stakeholders, which were both in the form of one-on-one interviews and focus groups and got a lot of great data and information and other community contacts through that effort. Um, shortly after meeting with
those key stakeholders, we also wanted to get out a public survey because we wanted to have multiple opportunities for people to provide us with their input and with their perspective. So, we were able to put out a public survey in Haitian, Creole, simplified Chinese, Spanish, and English. And we were fortunate enough through our contacts
and through our outreach efforts to get over a thousand responses from the local community through that survey, which asked questions about, you know, where do you live? Uh, do you have any current relationship with the Blue Hills? If so, how do you get to the Blue Hills? Um, are there any barriers that don't allow you to get to the Blue Hills? A variety
of questions that again are giving us some more concrete data to refer to during this effort. Um, we'll actually go over in a little bit some of the results of that survey. So, you can see more about the responses that we got. But in addition to that public survey, we also attended a handful of community
events. Um, NEPRA runs the Neponeta Day every year. That's right on the corner of Dorchester and Milton actually. And so that was one event where we had flyers and surveys for people to take and to get feedback on. Um we went to the Hide Park Junth event. We've gone to a bunch of Milton farmers markets and other opportunities in the town to again
try to meet with people where they're at and get that feedback. Um we of course did a handful of site visits. It's very important for the project team to actually understand the area on the ground that we're working in. So we were able to go and look around uh both with the town of Milton and with uh DCR staff
and have those conversations on site. And then we had our first public meeting in August 1st of 2023. And then since then I've had a a series of other meetings as well to give updates to the community. Um I think one of my favorite parts of this project was our opportunities to actually engage with youth as well.
Oftentimes as you're all probably familiar with when you have these planning efforts are going on youth are either a not really interested in what's going on or they're just not being reached out to. And so we found especially because obviously Blue Hills Parkway has not just the Tucker School but also the Milton High School there.
We really wanted to engage with youth and hear about their perspective along the Parkway um or adjacent experiences to the parkway. So we were able to meet with the Madapan food and fitness vigorous youth and have a a variety of exercises and had them, you know, draw out on maps and articulate some of the
concerns or desires that they had as well as also engage with the Milton High School and Milton Academy youth and a really awesome uh workshop experience where again had maps laid out, had kids drawing on them, asking questions um and really giving us some really important data that ultimately influenced the
alternatives that we were proposing. Um, and then circling back to the survey again, just a couple key data points for us to highlight that um, were not super surprising to the project team based on the stakeholder uh, engagements that we did, but again a great data points for us to refer to. Um, 90% of survey
respondents would like to have more ways to get to the Blue Hills, which is really good for us to see. Um, a not so surprising stat would be that out of all those survey respondents who had been to the Blue Hills before, 91% of them have been there by car. Um, we know that
currently the infrastructure to get to the Blue Hills, it's very difficult to walk or bike there. Most folks are driving there. And of course, we all know that if you're in the area on a Saturday or even in a nice day during the week, Hotton's Pond parking lot, the Trusside Museum parking lot, they're always packed to the brim with cars and
leading to traffic. And it'd be better to have more opportunities for folks to get there besides just the car. Obviously, the the effort by Madapan Food and Fitness and other folks to try to get the MBTA bus to go there more frequently on the weekends is something that we support and we've been trying to uplift as well, but of course, our
project would also try to create other ways for people to get there besides just taking the bus or driving a car. Um, some more data points here of those survey respondents who had not been to the Blue Hills before, 70% of them said their biggest barrier was that they didn't have any way of getting there. So
again, that speaks to the lack of if you don't have a car, for example, you're very limited with your opportunities for actually getting to the reservation. And then 677% of survey respondents said biking to the Blue Hills feels unsafe, which again makes complete sense. We don't have a greenway that gets all the way to the reservation right now. Um
both 138 and Road and some of the other roads that are around the perimeter of the reservation, uh we have cars going very fast and it doesn't quite feel safe for folks. So again, good data points for us to refer to in this project. Um, and while we were of course doing all of that work and engaging with
people and trying to get an understanding of folks desires and perspectives, we also were doing a lot of work to collect data on the ground when it came to traffic counts. I'm going to pass it off to Mora now to go into more detail about that. >> Thanks, Andre. Um in um as Andre mentioned, we started this project in
2022 and and really had a um diverse approach to community engagement and spent a lot of time uh talking and listening to folks before we moved to a more technical side of this project. Um, in early 2024, we hired an engineering
consultant to help us do um, uh, both data, more data collection work, um, data analysis, and then get into designs. And so that's what I'm going to talk to you a little bit about um, in the rest of this presentation. Um, uh, NIH went out in the spring of 2024 and
collected counts of, uh, vehicles, bike, bicyclists, and pedestrians at three points along Blue Hills Parkway. One of which, um, is just north of Brook Road, which we know is a very challenging area of Blue Hills Parkway. Um, one was just south of Brook Road, which is right
around where the Tucker Elementary School is. And then one was right around where the Pine Tree Brook Trail crosses um Blue Hills Parkway, which was just north of where the high school um road intersects with Blue Hills Parkway.
Um what we found was that um the traffic volumes on Blue Hills Parkway were are actually quite low even at peak hours. So they collected traffic data in the morning peak and then in the afternoon peak. And what we found was that the
traffic levels are actually less than half um around half and less than half of what you would consider like a normal uh lane capacity. Um and usually above 1500 cars per hour, you
want more than one lane. And as you can see, we're well below that right now. Um and uh due to that uh we think it's very easy to reduce one of the northbound lanes on Blue Hills Parkway um at the
moment based on our our traffic analysis. Um many of you may have seen uh this graphic before. It's it's essentially showing how speeds in track um speeds uh affect uh fatality rates along roadways.
So at a lower speed, people driving have a lot more ability to kind of see people around them, especially folks sort of more on the periphery that are trying to cross the roadways. Um and also at that lower speed, there is um much less likelihood of a fatality or severe
injury. But then as you get into higher speeds such as this 40 mile per hour range, you're really seeing a much reduced level of visibility as well as a higher fatality and injury rate. Um and so as we keep that in mind, um these are
the speeds that we're seeing along Blue Hills Parkway at the moment. um uh at uh Willoughby Road and um at Oak Street near Tucker Elementary School, the speed limit is 20 miles per hour and we're seeing speeds um roughly into kind of
like the 3540 mph range. Um and then uh at Pine Tree Brook Trail, which is a little bit further south near Molton High School, the speed limit is around 35 and we're seeing speeds of around 50. Um and uh you know similar to on the north
on the southbound side of the roadway as well, we're really seeing um speeds that are much higher than the posted speeds along this um this roadway, which is also um really a high risk for um fatalities and injuries along this
roadway. Um and uh we've also been seeing a number of crashes. So, we we took some crash data from the state database um between January 2021 and March 2024. So, roughly a three-year period. Um and in that period, we saw
about 20 crashes at the Brook Road intersection. Um and about 50 crashes um when you go a little bit further south on Blue Hills Parkway. So, we are seeing um quite a lot of safety challenges along Blue Hills Parkway, both folks,
you know, driving very fast um and actual, um crashes that are occurring, um on the roadway. And so, um now I'm going to get into some of our design alternatives to really think about how do we address some of these challenges that, um both
we're seeing in our data and that Andreas and I have heard from the community engagement work that we have done as well. This is these are really consistent themes. Um this is the existing condition of Blue Hills Parkway. So right now um there's a um going from um east to west here. Uh
there's a parking lane. Uh there's a striped bike lane and then there's a there's two travel lanes going northbound. Um then there's this really beautiful median in the center with a lot of really nice healthy trees. And then going southbound, there's one lane,
one driving lane, uh, one striped bike lane, and then, um, a parking lane as well. Um, and again, uh, just kind of reiterating, we've heard a lot of concerns around speeding, safety concerns, sort of a lack of sense of place. like this is actually a really
like gorgeous roadway, but there's not really a designated place to to spend time um or to kind of uh have some more activity with your neighbors along this route. Um we heard a number of comments related to kind of activating this
center median. That was one of the things especially we heard from the youth engagement um that we did and um increasing safety especially for families with children, adding crosswalks, signage, lighting, things like that were all ideas that we've heard um throughout the engagement work
that we've done. And so we came up with six alternatives to think about how can we address uh some of these concerns that we've heard. Um and the first one is is a fairly minor change. It basically just moves the bike lane um
next to the existing curb and then moves the the parking out. So we call these parking protected bike lanes. Um, however, this design when you actually count up all the driveways that intersect the roadways as well as the intersecting roads have 110 conflict
points up and down Blue Hills Parkway, which means that's 110 essentially like opportunities for for um uh more uh uh crashes to to occur with people walking and biking.
Um the next design we call alternative two um has a two-way bikeway that goes along the eastbound side of the road and then reduces one trouble lane northbound. Again, this still maintains that 110 conflict points um up and down
the roadway. Alternative three reduces parking but maintains the two northbound driving lanes. Um, one thing that we've heard pretty clearly in our um, outreach as well as the public meeting that we had in January that parking, especially um,
north of Pine Treebrook Trail, is really important to maintain on the Parkway as there are a lot of folks, especially on the side streets that utilize the parking on this DCR owned roadway when there's no parking available at night on the the Milton roads. Um,
alternative four is the alternative that we have received really overwhelming um, support for and excitement around. Um there's been a lot of folks that have mentioned that this really does address a lot of the concerns that folks have
around safety, around uh creating the sense of place, activating the center median, creating really this like gorgeous like park space that this parkway was meant to be. Um the center running path um will go from the 110
conflict points that we were talking about on the first three alternatives and bring it down to 11 conflict points. um throughout the entire corridor. So, we're really talking about a significant um increase in safety and ability for people to um spend time here um in a
much safer. Um alternative the next two alternatives all five and six are sort of continuing alternative four further down but changing the south side of um Blue Hills Parkway um
to essentially create more park space as at the moment um there are no houses directly on the Parkway on the souththeastern side of Blue Hills Parkway. although we know that there are some roads that intersect there, including Milton High School um in the
neighborhood further south. So, this alternative moves um the two driving lanes to the western side of the road and eliminates parking. And then, um alternative six um maintains parking and gets rid of a line of trees that is
existing there currently. Um and in our public meeting in in January, we heard that both of these two options um are not preferable for for a whole number of reasons due to traffic, loss of parking, loss of trees. Um and so that was
noteworthy to us to hear that information. Andre, I'll hand it back to you. >> Thank you. Um, and so I know you all already heard tonight from the woman who came in during the public comment period and gave kind of an overview on how this played out. And I actually remember
engaging with her and hearing some short-term updates that she would like us to include in the plan, which is also very helpful to hear. Um, but after doing all of this community engagement and spending a lot of time with uh DCR, uh, getting on the same page about what the next steps are and what we can move forward to the public with, um, we were
able to have this public meeting in January that, um, as woman mentioned earlier, we really wanted to do a lot of outreach for. We engaged a lot with the local community. Um, and something that I guess I forgot to mention even in that community engagement period was the last year we really went hyper local with our
engagement and talked a lot with the friends of the Blue Hills Parkway as well as the friends of the Pine Tree Brook Trail and surrounding neighborhood associations and got a lot of great feedback. Had one-on-one meetings with those folks and then used them um as a great resource to kind of spread the word about this meeting and and help us
get the word out. So, in addition to um you know through their contacts and through Facebook and all those fun platforms, we also did the mailing us that woman talked about earlier and made sure that everyone along the Parkway um got an envelope in their mailbox explaining that this meeting was happening soon with a QR code to learn
more about it online before it even took place. Um and we were very happy to see a great turnout. Again, around 75 attendees uh in early January at the high school. Um, we wanted to have it be more of a workshop feel and more engaging than just folks coming in, sitting down, hearing us talk for a while, maybe answering a couple
questions, and then people having to disperse. Um, we had this great setup where we had all the boards around the room. Folks could come in, look at the boards a little bit, try to, you know, uh, create their own opinions on what they were seeing. Then we came together as a group and we gave an update on what we've been up to and, um, some of the
data that Mara was already providing earlier tonight. And then from there, again, we broke out into smaller groups and had folks um gave folks the opportunity to come up to us, ask us questions, tell us about their own personal experiences, um highlight things that they liked or did not like from what we mentioned. And I think one
of the key um activities that we allowed folks to do that maybe more, you can go to the next slide and and it shows this um is that we we wanted folks to give us feedback in in a variety of different ways. Um, a please, you know, take a sticky note and put it on any of the boards and, you know, write out your
thoughts or um, whether that's positive or negative, but also we gave folks both green and red dots to put on the six different alternatives, which again are another way that we can collect data. And as you can see here, alternative four had an overwhelming amount of support and only had two red dots on it,
while the other alternatives were all closer to maybe a 50/50 splitter or in some cases even more folks saying, "No, we don't like that." compared to folks actually supporting it. So, um, in addition to obviously having the dots and visually being able to understand what folks were excited about or had concerns about, we also again had all
this great written down data on sticky notes and in other forms that folks could provide it to us with that night. and it um allowed us just to get again one additional uh final piece of community engagement that we can include in the feasibility study and make sure that's memorialized in the effort that we're hoping to complete in the near
future. >> Thanks Andre. Um and a little bit about next steps for this project. Um as we had mentioned, we've been working on this for about four years so far. Um, and our January public meeting, uh, we
were, uh, hoping to get, um, consensus on, uh, a final design that we could move forward in our feasibility study. Um, and, uh, we did get that, um, from the public that attended in January, as well as a lot of our public uh,
one-on-one conversations uh, that we had in the fall with folks. Um we've been spending this month um looking um at the public feedback that we received. As Andre mentioned, we had written feedback. We had the dot voting exercise and and we've received a few emails as
well from folks with some additional information. Um now we're working on finalizing the feasibility study. We're actually doing two different feasibility studies. Um, one is going to be specifically focused on Blue Hills Parkway. And then the second one will focus on the reservation roads including
Unqui, Chikataba, and Hillside to really be able to bring people all the way to um, H Hotton's Pond and the other really great opportunities that exist within um, the Blue Hills Reservation. Um, and then, uh, later this spring and and summer, we're hoping to discuss the next
phase of this project with DCR. Um, I may not have mentioned this, but but DCR owns uh all of these roadways. And although um they are within um Milton, DCR is is responsible for uh the redesign of these roadways. And so uh we've been working collaboratively with
them for the last four years as well. And and we hope to continue to work with them um to move this project forward. And um that is all my slides. So I will stop sharing. and we are um happy to
take any questions if folks may have. >> Thank you. Yes, Cheryl. >> Yeah, thank you uh so much. I really appreciate the presentation and your work on this and I think we all spoke at our last meeting about agreeing with the other residents on alternative 4. But as
one who rides the parkway to get to the Neponit trail, I find the area um at you know from Brook to the trail or to the river to the bridge the the dicey part and you ride by the white bicycle it's a reminder of the person who was
killed there on her on her bike. Um what's your planning for that section? Where does that because that's so important, you know, to get to make that connection if we can just only between Brook Road and Canton Avenue is, you know, is it's nice, but it's it's that
connection. Even if getting beyond, you know, to the Blue Hills is another thing, but just to get to the Nepons River, once you get there, you can go quite a distance uh without having to be on the road. >> Absolutely. Um, I've been referring to
that, um, space um, north of Brook Road as a figure eight intersection. Um, it is an incredibly challenging intersection for anyone that utilizes that area, whether you're driving, walking, biking, scootering, you know,
any any um, opportunity to try to use that space is very challenging. Um uh from what I from the information that I can find online that is a mixture of um ownership between DCR and MASDOT and uh we have been in touch with both of those
organizations. We feel like because that is such a a challenging area that it really needs its own engineering analysis um beyond what this project can do since we are just uh working on a feasibility
study really to look at design options. um that one needs a really detailed engineering analysis beyond what we're able to do and uh we've been in touch like I said both with with MASDOT and DCR and we hope that that could have um
some priority in it because um you all may know that um DCR hired NICH to do an analysis of of Brush Hill Road thinking about adding walking and biking accommodations there that would interact with that figure eight. Um, MASDOT is
also doing some work 138 and eventually, I think in the next few years, they're hoping to have walking and biking um, accommodations on 138, which intersects that figure 8. And then with our project um, that intersects at the bottom. And
then, um, in the Milton uh, bike plan um, uh, we also put in uh, improvements to Brook Road. So all of those um, intersect in that area. So, to your point, it is an incredibly important um
area to look into, and I think at the very least having some short-term improvements there, such as uh lighting, better striping, um a little bit more signage, I think could help in the short term, but I do feel like long term it needs a pretty significant uh
reconstruction project in order to make that um better for all users. So, is there something that we can do um as a town to help advocate for that engineering work to be done there to piggy back on this to really have
this work well that that really needs to advance as well? Sort of like on a parallel path. >> Yeah, I I think it would be great to to talk about that a little bit more. I think in the near term, I think a a written letter from the town of Milton
um would be really fantastic. Um like I said, I think DCR owns most of that figure 8 and Masot owns the part from 138 that just sort of intersects at the bottom. And um I'll also mention that at the state level right now in the
statewide budget, the governor has proposed uh 200 million for parkways um in the chapter chapter 90 uh bill. And that is a huge opportunity for us to think about how we can um utilize some of those funds for Blue Hills Parkway.
And I think that um potentially that that figure eight intersection as well, but but DCR would be the um primary uh group to make uh improvements to that roadway. So I would say first of all, I think a a letter from the town of Milton
noting kind of all of these projects in Milton that are intersectioning at that roadway um would be a great start. >> Excellent. Thank you. So, Liz, is that something that you think that um you just could speak to town administrator about?
>> Sure. Okay. >> Absolutely. And and um and also the DPW director. >> Okay. Have a conversation. Um I'm honestly just learning about some of these projects just right now. So, um absolutely. >> Yeah. I I think it uh there's there was
some planning work that was done through the master plan implementation committee sort of community visioning in the in the areas. Um, I guess it's west of the parkway and safety was something that was that came up, you know, and so, um, there's a parcel that DCR owns and, uh,
it's like a park there. Um, it's seven Brush Hill Road. Um, and people were interested in the curatorship program there, but one of the things that came up was safety just to cross the street to get to it. There was also not far
from there a young woman was killed trying to cross the street to go towards Manipan. So um there's youth that um are interested in in having places to to you know to gather. Um so I I really do think if we can help in any way as a
town to to push for um uh act action on these plans because some of the plans have been around for a bit. I think like the um the Blue Hill AB one or the state roadway one and I don't I don't uh claim
to be an expert on how those decisions get made and when the funding cycles happen. Um but I know I saw that plan years ago. So I I'd love to to have the our board work with whome whomever else in town and with MAPC and NEPRA to to
push for these improvements. Sean, you >> sure? Yeah, I I have um first more thank you to you and Andre's great presentation. Um and concise, too. I I'm so glad we ended. I was not in the last meeting, but I thought alternative floor
was great. Um when I reviewed the information that Liz had sent out to us for the meeting, so I think it's excellent. Um do we know what the cost of the project is? Is there is there an approximate cost? Um our engineering consultant is working
on that now and that will be included in the feasibility study which will be done this spring. So we'll know very soon. >> Okay. And 100% of the funding is anticipated come through some state allocated monies for greenways. >> We don't know that yet. Um we that would
be kind of the next phase of the project is to figure out where the funding would come from. I will say that it's a huge opportunity if this uh the chapter 90 um bill goes through at the state level as funded that this $200 million
allocating towards parkways um would be a really fabulous opportunity that we would be able to tap into. >> Yeah. Okay. And and typically how does that work if if are some of these projects funded 100% through that through those available funds?
I'd say for a lot of transportation projects, uh, they're funded in multiple ways. Um, and it kind of depends on a variety of different factors. I think, um, I'd say in general, um, the funding,
um, challenges that we're seeing at the state, um, are anticipated to continue. However, from a transportation perspective, uh we have been very lucky at the state level to have many um opportunities for transportation funding
in many different ways. And at our Boston MO, uh they are really fabulous partners for us as well. And so I think that um funding is is definitely something that that we can uh work on with uh DCR and
the town of Milton. Yeah, it's a great project, but funding it is really the key >> if the money is >> Yeah, to add to that, I think in order to really get the funding, we we need to show that it's a priority for all the key stakeholders who are involved. I mean, we've we've didn't mention it
earlier, but we've also met with all the elected officials and um Representative Wells and Senator Driscoll and uh Rep. Fluger Reed, like we met with these folks to really explain what we're trying to do here and and see if they also agreed that it was a priority. and they also all supported the effort that
we're working on here. So, we really do think that it's going to take the collective group here, not just the project team, but also the elected officials and of course the select board and key folks who live along the Parkway as well to show DCR that they want to see this actually happen. We don't want to see this great feasibility study set
on a shelf for multiple years. They really want to see if we can get funding and show it that it can be one of the priorities in DCR's greenway and parkways projects in the coming years. So, I really do think it's going to take a team effort and of course we'll continue to reach out to you all with ways that we can work together to show DCR that there's a lot of support for this.
>> Well, I think one of the keys, Andre, to to that is to be able to emphasize how this is beneficial to the adjacent community of Boston and Matipan and I think it was Maggie some time ago that talked about the history of the parkway and how the parkway was really the
gateway to the Blue Hills for the city. Uh so you know we need to make sure that this isn't you know the emphasis isn't what it does for Milton and the people that live in Milton but the emphasis of what it creates so that you know the adjacent community can benefit as well. That I think is really you know part of
the the opportunity here that we have to capitalize on. So just my point of view anyway. >> Yeah. Couldn't agree more. Couldn't agree more. >> Agree. And the city is working on a redesign for uh the
Blue Hill Avenue from Madapan Square going north. So having bike lanes there too, a protected bus lanes. And so this would be a continuation of being able to go north and south in a more in a safer
bike lane scenario. And we had um this the community preservation committee even in you know they're looking at how to get people safely from through me into Boston uh in bike lanes as well. So that connectivity which you were talking about in one of your early slides I
think is really one of the strong reasons why state funding you know the so it does serve many communities north and south. Yeah, definitely. I had a few more questions I just want to run by. But to that point, I think this is
the safest style of biking that is created. Uh I personally am not a not a fan of biking in between traffic and parked cars. I I honestly think that's just it's quite dangerous. Um so I think it's terrific. Now it looks like we're
taking a full lane and adding that full lane, right? We're taking 12 ft, which is we're reducing the northbound side to one driving lane. Am I right? >> Uh in alternative 4. Yes. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, um that means we leave the median intact. We don't touch the median. It doesn't get disturbed at all. We we actually add to the median by creating this area that becomes the travel lane and that becomes landscaped as well. >> Yes. And we'd be adding a row of trees
as well. Yeah, that's awesome. Um, and then I Cheryl mentioned this earlier and I think this is I have one more question, but Cheryl mentioned something earlier too. Once we create this area, what what I think is definitely be a concern is it's going to be so inviting making it
possible for people to safely cross, you know, and and one of the problems we have is nobody wants to walk the distance that they need to walk to get to a safe crossing, right? I mean, too often people are crossing a roadway where there is not a crosswalk and there is not a there is not a purposeful stop
of traffic and that's how we end up with some of the issues that we have with pedestrians and vehicles. So I'm an advocate for figuring out how we can create as many safe crossings as possible. So so we limit you know the risk that people take. Um and then my
last question is what is the distance of alternative 4 like in in any of the in miles is it what what is that total distance that this project would be from uh the full length of our project from
that figure 8 intersection down to the blue hills is about three miles. I'm I believe Blue Hills Parkway is about a mile of that. Um, if I'm correct, a >> little over a mile. >> Just a little over a mile.
>> Yeah, right around there. >> Okay. So, so the taking of that drive lane is in and then creating this. It's one mile of that. >> Roughly. Yes. >> Okay. >> I think it starts, correct me if I'm wrong, but does would that start just south of the Brook Road intersection,
right? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And like Oh, sorry. Go ahead. I was just going to say to the the point that was made earlier, I think when when we get to kind of Burke Road and North, we need to to think a little differently
um because there is both a lot more traffic and less space. Um and I think that needs to be considered um a little bit more as well. What we were thinking in this particular feasibility study was more of a temporary solution once you
get to Brook Road up to uh the bridge to think about just a way to kind of get people like onto the sidewalk that then connects to there's a two-way bikeway and a sidewalk that comes right into the north side of Milton just south of the bridge. So, we were hoping to kind of
just make a connection there for for the interim when that figure eight and sort of just south of Brook Road is done in sort of a larger project. >> Okay. >> That's that's a really tricky connection right now even like I I feel like you
should get off of the roadway sooner to get onto that shared because it feels dicey in that bike lane just with the cars there. So it it's really something as people start looking at it, they go out on a bike and and experience that
when making those um design decisions because it wasn't actually all that long ago. I remember then that whole intersection was done the way it is right now. And some of it I feel like it's just when you when you like you said um Sean when you you're going to cross where you're going to cross. Well,
some of the way they have you cross as a pedestrian or a bicyclist is so non-intuitive. It's not the way you would want to cross. So, it means people will do things that are Yeah. >> less safe. >> Yeah. Yeah. We're just inviting problems. Yeah. I think it's a great project. And I'll close with this. Even
if we only get a mile of that done while we try to accomplish the rest to get into the Blue Hills, we've created a mile of a beautiful park and a beautiful sanctuary that everybody can use. And there will be people much like you see on commab in Boston. People just go out and sit on the benches and enjoy, you
know, the area that's been created. So it has it's not just a travel way that's going to be created. It it is going to be a beautiful sanctuary for people to use. I love it. I think it's a great project. >> So I want So Sean Sean making that uh point about sitting there. I just wanted to highlight because I don't know if you
have that in your studies. There are a couple of uh senior housing developments right at at the end of Canton Aavat, right? Or um at the end of the Parkway at Cantonav and um having people be able to get to this uh safely from those
places you there um years ago when we were looking at the ice house property and the um um I'm forgetting the name of the development there right now on Canton Avenue. I mean on the Parkway, >> sorry.
>> Home Inc. Yeah. People there wanted to be able to walk to something at the ice house to to meet up with their neighbors to grab a coffee or something. And so that there's no crossing there >> either. And there is a small commercial space. I don't know what's going to go
into it yet, but um there's still these um I think your point about not having we talked about not having crossing places. You think about from Cantonav how far down you have to go before there's a place that you can actually cross
safely. Uh it's very long distance and then there so there are users there who aren't able to get out to that green space. Yeah, I'd advocate if you guys drive over to Selby, um I go over there affirm and you go along by the beach and they have installed those flashing
stop signs, you know, and sometimes it's hard to recognize that you need to stop that there's somebody standing there. So that but something like that so so we can create opportunities for people to cross would be a really really good idea. And then my I promise it's my last comment, you know, um setting them up
with plenty of benches so people can't, you know, so it's not just for for people that walk. I mean, not everybody can walk and ride and run and do all those things, but you know, people would just love to enjoy it and be out there on a beautiful day and have a bench to sit on. So, I'm an advocate for creating plenty of seating. And as you said,
whether it's homemake or or even further down the road, what's um what's the is it is it an house all the way down the end? It's okay, but you know, giving people a chance to get out of of their of their residences and enjoy the outside. Thank you. >> One last thing I'm going to mention
though, I think, you know, looking at this, I was in a European city with Copenhagen in the fall and there this there was this roadway like this where there's a green space in the middle. There was a small playground. There was a botchi court. There were benches and so there were, you know, not just a
green space and a place to sit, but and it was probably not even as big as us, but there was a lot of activity. So, you know, every all different ages were were using it. So, there's that's another thing to think about whether there's at at some point um some opportunity for
other other than passive in there. >> We don't have anything we don't have anything in Milton that's a mile long that's 40t wide. >> Yeah. This this this ultimately probably be one of the biggest parks in Milton if you want to look at it that way. >> Great. Love it. It's a great point. >> Yeah, absolutely. Um if I could take a
couple more minutes, I'd love to talk about the the crossings um and kind of spending time just for maybe two minutes. >> Sure. >> Um I'll just say all of that is very consistent with uh what we've been
hearing in a lot of our community engagement work as well. Um although we're not showing it yet in some of these cross-sections that we showed you, um we do plan to recommend a number of different crossings throughout the uh parkway. Um one of the crossings in
particular that we really want to enhance is the Pine Treebrook Trail crossing. On our first site visit a few years ago, um we didn't even realize there was this gorgeous trail that crossed Blue Hills Parkway um until Tim took us down there. And uh there's
really up until very recently, there has been no signage there. Um there's no accessible way to get across. There's really no way to even tell that this trail is there. And it is such an incredible asset that connects multiple communities as well as the high school.
And so that um is something we've heard from folks and and want to make sure that we incorporate into this project. Um and uh having a sense of place is is absolutely in line with a lot of what we have heard as well and thinking about you know not just folks traveling
through it um but being able to just spend time on it. you know, maybe we heard at the public meeting in January, someone mentioned like having maybe like outdoor exercise equipment um in this sort of linear park that we would create and having benches and and places where
parents could teach their kids to ride a bike or people could walk their dogs and things like that. And um I think there's a really huge opportunity to create um a really incredible community space with this in addition to um a much safer and
more enjoyable transportation corridor. Thank you. Great. >> So that um so I am a huge advocate of getting rid of and eliminating um imperous
um um surfaces. So I think um adding another row of trees and eliminating a bike I mean a travel lane um is beneficial. Um I have a big concern though once you cross Cannav and once you're into the Blue Hills if you read
the um the bike and master plan um there's a discussion about um making Chikatavi and Chikataba wider. Um, so I live up in that neighborhood and my
neighborhood association did send a letter into um the select board and the planning board about our concerns about um making Unqui and Chikataba wider and increasing imperous um surfaces. So we
would not support any um project that would increase that area going into the reservation. Um, so I walk on um Chicatabin and Anqui um a lot. My daughter runs um and you
know I've been there for 57 years and yes the increase of traffic but it is still I think one of the safest places to walk safer than Randolph Fab which is our other my other place that I can walk. Um and that's not very safe. Well,
it's safe for now, but um so I um wouldn't want to take whatever you're doing um on the Blue Hill Parkway and just assume that it's going to be the same on Chickav. So, breaking it down
into different projects might be better because you are then also addressing different neighborhoods and different neighborhoods have different concerns. Um I also did live on Blue Hill Parkway and on one of the other side streets uh
West Street and um parking is a concern. It was mentioned um um before. So, I don't think it would be great to get rid of parking um um on Blue Hill Parkway. Um
and because we depend on it um and a lot there's a lot of I live in lived in two families down there and we just depended on um the parkway for additional parking. I also did go to Tucker school down there and I rode my bike um from
Hillside down to Tucker school and it's all downhill and going back home was more challenging because that was uphill but um I think um making it safer um for the kids to bike is hugely important. My
other question is when I look at the bike path, and I'm not a big biker, but the bike lane, I always am wondering why it's put on the inside of parking because as a driver of the vehicle,
you know, I'm in control of the car and I'm used to looking in my rearview mirror to see what's coming up behind me. So when I get out of a car, I look to see, but I feel like maybe the passengers aren't always as aware and
they just might open the door to to bikers or, you know, walking by. Um, so is that a concern or I mean you guys obviously did all the studies that it's probably safer when you're traveling, but are there any incidences where the
bikers are getting hurt by people opening their car doors? on central app. >> Yeah. Um that was our alternative one proposal um that did not receive a lot
of positive community feedback. Um we do have at least in the design built in like a buffer area on the the inside on the passenger side of where the cars would park. So theoretically that would give enough space for the car car door
to open so that a cyclist doesn't like get hit by the door. Um however it's definitely not a perfect solution. Um anytime where there's uh conflicts between cars and people biking um or or
walking it there are conflict points for sure. Um, we included that design as probably like the easiest and lowest cost option, but it really doesn't address a lot of the challenges that we've heard around um safety, a sense of
place, you know, really doing something um that would create a much better space on Blue Hills Parkway. And so we included that as kind of a progre one of our progressive options, but it's definitely not one of our preferred. Um, you know, I've almost gotten doored a
number of times, um, both from the designs of being sort of on the passenger side of the car and on the driver's side as well. And it definitely, um, is not an ideal situation for sure. Um, to speak to a couple of your other points, um, uh, I I
am familiar with the the Milson Beck and Pet plan. Um, I actually wrote wrote wrote the plan for you guys. Um so I am uh very familiar with that plan and um I absolutely hear you around a different treatment for Chikatabet um Enquity and
Hillside. Um and so we are doing two separate feasibility studies. one for Blue Hills Parkway because from all of the engagement that we have heard, we do feel like that one um is in a place that's that could be much um I
want to say fast-tracked, but could be done faster and easier to move forward with. I think that there is um more attention that needs to be paid to enquitab and hillside. Um we did one of our original thoughts on on Enquity was
widening the roadway which we wrote in the Milton bike and ped plan. Um however with further discussion with DCR. Um, we feel like that could um not only be be concerns for for what you had mentioned, but also might have some
impacts on um drainage and um uh potentially um some of the species along the way and then some cultural resources that might be under the ground. And so we have been working with DCR on some potential alternatives to think about um
how to create a safer space into the parkway that would not widen the roadway at all. Um and so that just needs some more time I think to to talk with DCR and some more engineering to kind of think about which is why we're doing two separate designs. But, um, I think the
the concerns that you brought up, uh, we have heard as well. And so, they're really in line with, um, some of the the other feedback that we've heard. Um, in our last site visit, um, Andreas and I spent a lot of time talking to the, um, Boy Scouts, um, that are on
Enquity Road and hearing a lot about their concerns with safety on, um, Enquit, especially for all the the kids that they have um, at their camps. And we're really supportive of thinking about improving safety on Enquity. um
you know, slowing traffic down, thinking about how to create some type of a safe space for people to walk and bike, addressing some of the parking issues. Um yeah, and I will say it is a tricky um space and I think we are hearing a
lot of feedback and we continue to listen to the feedback that um folks are are telling us and trying to kind of navigate within some of those concerns so that um they can all be addressed um as we move forward that that separate
feasibility study. And I think it's great to um to increase access, but when you increase access, you also um increase the opportunity for trash being left behind. So, I'm hoping that um that
there's also a plan to provide for maintenance um you know, trash pickup. So even along the parkway or even ony maybe we need some trash cans um so bikers and walkers have a place to put
their trash and then get on a a you know a a system where the trash is um picked up regularly um because so many people just throw uh trash out the windows. So, um, so I
would hope that some funding would also go, um, would be built in for maintenance and also with the trees down the center. I know um some residents down there have always been diligent about replacing some trees and there
have been years where some trees have died and it's taken more years to get them replaced or then they're replaced with um undersized trees and there's a lot of zelcoas planted down there which are not native. Um, so just getting on a
a more regular maintenance um schedule for the parkway in particular um would be helpful and hopefully that would come along with some funding. And with um just a financial question with that $200 million in funding, how many um parkways
are there in the state which would be competing for um from that pool of funding? Yeah, I'm not sure how many are in this the state. Um DCR has a parkways master plan which is um one of the plans that helped influence the work that we've
done. Um and there are a number of parkways in the MAPC region that we've been looking at. Um not all of the parkways have active projects on them. I would say it's a smaller percentage that
would be even ready for for some of those capital funds. Um so it it wouldn't be like across you know every one of the parkways. I'd say ours um would probably be a candidate because
we have we will have finished a feasibility study which is usually the first step you want to do to be able to get into 10% 25% 50% design. Um but I I I couldn't tell you how many parkways
are at the stage where they could apply for capital funds at the moment. Um, but I could ask DCR that question. >> I think the barrier to success is going to be money. >> Yeah, >> that's going to be it. And you know, we
have plenty of our own financial issues in town already. >> Um, so our taxpayers are are looking to us to make good decisions, but it's a great project. >> Yeah, >> we just need >> the timing might be good. We just need MAPC to be exceptional as
salespeople >> and pitch this in such a great way that we get 100% funding. >> I think the safety >> I I will do my best. I can >> No pressure. No pressure. >> I just wanted to give Jim a chance to >> Yeah. So, most of my concerns and questions have been answered with the
crossings and with really with funding. Um I was concerned that this doesn't cost Milton any money just because we're hurting for money like most other towns. Um, and I am a proponent of of alternate 4. I think it's great. And and one of my questions that I wrote down, Maggie hit
on, which was the what do you call it? Parking protected bike lane. Um, I they're new to me. I have a hard time with those. And I really feel and I I have not done any kind of study or have any kind of stats to back it up that the damage to somebody getting doored um is
pretty high. I mean, I don't know what it would take to just switch that to the street side. That would be my only sort of constructive criticism. Other than that, I have a question about um south of Canton A. Is the goal to have a bike lane and a walking lane all the way to
the trailside museum or or do we hit the first trail head and stop? Like I'm just wondering where where it ends the overall plan >> in our in our in that feasibility study that we are working on. Um we are
tentatively hoping to do some type of like side path that doesn't um does not add any pavement but um narrows the driving lanes a bit to one side. Um one of the ways that uh one
really effective way to calm traffic is to narrow driving lanes. Um, so I think on Blue Hills Parkway right now they're at 12 feet. And even if you just narrowed it, like moved the paint in and moved them to like nine and a half or 10
feet. Um, that alone can can be a really great strategy to calm traffic. And so on um Unqui Road, we are thinking uh one possibility that we may include in the feasibility study is narrowing those
driving lanes and keeping it two-way and just moving them over slightly and having um a rather thin path on the side that could be protected so that folks could walk or bike there. Um it's not ideal and we're still kind of exploring
some options, but we would expect that it would go from Canton Avenue um all the way onto Hillside to um the H Hotton's Pond Parking area is the um end of our study area on the sort of
southwestern side. And then um we're still considering what we could do on Chikatabet that would go up to Route 28. Um we know that there's a project happening there as well. Um so we're thinking about what might be possible
there within the existing pavement. Um but it is um it is tricky to kind of fit everything um in there at the moment. Laura, if you did if you did pitch that in your feasibility study, um would you
would you use like a vertical uh barrier so that so that traffic and walkers and riders could be separated? You know, you're probably familiar with what was done on Randolph A and those what do you call those vertical um
>> you know they're flexible >> but you know that I travel I travel uncerty quite a bit >> that's a dangerous road um and I you know I it's very difficult to walk that roadway and feel safe if you're walking and if you don't put something vertical to help people distinguish what is the
roadway and what's not the roadway. You know, I know it's a long distance and it's a lot of those vertical flexible ballards, but >> you could save lives. Pardon me. Do they? >> Yeah. Yeah, if you live in Quinzy and some of the areas >> really
>> they haven't gotten hit. >> As someone who um has spent a lot of time biking on Enquity, I I feel very strongly that um there if we were to do a side path on Enquit on the existing pavement that there would need to be um
some significant uh separation there. Um, we've also talked about putting the side path on the eastern side or the western side. And having it on the eastern side, I think can be more challenging because that's where the cars are going downhill and pretty like
going um quite a bit faster. Um, but having the path on the western side is where cars are going uphill. So, it it does create a little bit more of um an aspect of of safety because you're next to sort of the slower moving vehicles.
Um, but I think there would absolutely have to be some level of separation. I think the challenge again is the total amount of space that we have. I think we averaged when we went out and measured I think the average is about 32 feet of width um throughout when and then when
you add in you know two 10-ft driving lanes um and then you need um buffer space on either side and then you think about um some type of a separation it really narrows the possibilities. So that's kind of where our um where our
challenge is is existing now, which is why we're doing two separate feasibility studies because we feel like Blue Hills Parkway um really just has so much support, has so much width to work with um that we feel like that one has
possibility to kind of move forward faster with um both community support and um the funding that I'm going to find. Um and uh but uh Chikatabed and Hillside uh really need I think some
more um some more work. >> Mora, you get that 100% funded. We're going to put your name on one of those benches. >> I just I just recorded, right? >> Yes, of course it is. >> And I just wanted to say this is such an
excellent project. It really, this was really going back to the turn of the century where Olmstead really had the vision of the emerald necklace coming out of the city, being able to access the Blue Hills, really ending, you know, Franklin Park coming up through that
area and this and being such a historic continuation of this. Obviously, Charles Elliott designed the parkway. The parkway in Milton is very historic as well. Um I'm assuming you would continue
with um keeping the historic feel, the granite curbing, you know, when you add when you increase to continue um the uh the project as you have it. Um obviously sidewalk repairs for safety need to be done in that area. The tree plantings
which have been great. That's been something um some residents in Milton have been working with DCR to really um there was a great loss of trees to have those all replaced to create a wonderful shade and canopy. Um, but the other thing that would be really nice and I
know when they when they had done in Madapan the Blue Hills Parkway is if they could bury utility lines and have historic lighting along that way, that would really give it a sense of wow, this is really special because it is
it's so beautiful right now as it is. But if you buried those utility lines, had historic lighting, everything that you're, you know, you've been talking about doing, continuing the granite curbing, it would really draw people and really be inviting for those coming out of the city or, you know, traveling in
that area safely to um to really enjoy it as a sense of place. So, um I would love to see that as incorporated as part of the as part of the project. But um I think this is really a a continuation of Olstead's vision of of what um was wanted to be to connect the Blue Hills
in Boston. So thank you for your work on this and whatever we can do to support the project. Yes, go during the meeting was the sidewalks which you just mentioned because many of
the sidewalks along the parkway are broken, uneven, you know, um who would be responsible for replacing the sidewalks? Is that DCR or is that the town?
>> DCR. Yeah, >> that would be DCR >> because um many people wanted that piece incorporated >> because they feel like if they have a stroller, >> right, >> they can't.
>> It's all part of safety and ADA accessibility and yeah, it just >> Yeah. I mean, it isn't. And now with the new variety store up the street, you know, someone has a rollolator >> Mhm. >> or something like that, there's >> you want it to be safe and easy to access.
>> It's very difficult. So >> yeah, >> that would be nice to couple that in with the plan. >> Anything else? And Liz, did you have anything? >> Well, this is wonderful. Thank you so much for your time this evening. And I
think for people watching, this will really be um something they can get excited about and and hopefully we can see come to fruition. So, thank you for joining us tonight. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, thank you. Thank you all for having us. Uh we really appreciate the opportunity to talk to you and and again
hear more feedback. I think this is um really fabulous for us and we would really love to partner with you on moving this forward. I think the idea of, you know, utilities and and, you know, the curbing kind of those details, I think it would be really fabulous to work in partnership uh with the town of
Milton when we're getting further into the design process to understand how um those important details can be incorporated too. >> Great. >> Terrific. Thank you. >> Thank you, Laura. Thank you.
Have a great night. Thank you all so much. See you then. Thank you. Yeah. impressive. Thank >> Yeah, they really did great job. Um, great. So, now, uh, we can move to item number five, which is our signed bylaw
zoning amendment, um, which we have been working on for the last two years. Hopefully, we can get move forward. And, oh, and we have Carolyn with us, which is great. Um, our town council and I think John Sichowitz was going to join
us. um on Zoom if we can invite John in and Kathleen O'Donnell. >> And Kathleen O'Donnell. >> Yes. >> Got extra sets, hard copies if anyone's interested. So, when we last left off, um,
we just gone through and there were a few items that we were, um, just going to clean up a little bit and ask Caroline to go back and, um, I know Liz sent around, um, a copy of her handwritten notes which were conveyed to
Carolyn and incorporated into this draft. So, Liz, if you do you want to walk through um with those changes or should we do we want Caroline to go through? Yeah, I Carolyn, what what do you think? I I mean, I had offered to Meredith to to put up on the screen that
document that sort of encapsulated all of the the comments from the meeting on the 12th. Um I don't know if we need to go to that level of detail. I'm happy to do it if people if people want it or if it makes more sense just to kind of focus on the document in front of us
tonight. Um >> we could do that and go through because I think you colorcoded where those changes were. So maybe that would make sense. >> Yeah. I I I mean I'll I'll I'll do it I'll I'll handle it however however people think it will be most efficient.
>> Just focus on this. >> Focus on the the dock the dock in front of us tonight. Sure. Okay. >> Right. Okay. Um, so on page one, make sure it's the
date. Yeah. The draft February. Does it say February 12th at the top? Is that the one you give us? >> February. >> February 19th. >> February 19th. >> You know, I think I got Let me see. Hold on. Oh, >> I'm sorry. I have I do have it. You got it. Sorry. I just have many copies of
different drafts. Okay. So, on the 19th, um any questions on um page one on this? Go through that way. There were no changes on page two
that were made on page three. There were no changes made to that. Um the bottom of page four number 15 we had discussed
the six changing it to six square feet in area. That was the only item there. There was nothing on page five. Page six. >> Oh, Meredith. Oh, yeah. Sorry. >> I did have a question on six. Um, if we
look at um the prohibited sign number 13, um, it says LED price signs. is prohibited. And then we have on page
nine under special permit waiver variance B1B C rather LED price signs at fuel service stations in the business districts. So,
do we need to clarify that LED price signs that are prohibited are not are those that are not associated with gas stations? >> Yeah. Caroline, what do you what are your thoughts on that? But this was
something where we realized it's it's um with gas stations, we wanted to be more flexible and allow them there, but we just didn't want LED price signs in all of our >> Right. But I'm just wondering whether it's so broad under prohibited. It
doesn't even reference the gas station or is that is it sufficient that it says it under on page nine that you can have you can get that by special permit if you're a guest. >> What are your thoughts on that? Carolyn.
>> Thank you. So good evening everyone and for the record Carolyn Murray from KP Law and um special hello out there to Kathleen O'Donnell my former colleague. Um um I I I certainly can see where you
might feel uh more comfortable if under prohibited signs we could certainly say um after LED price signs we could say except as otherwise allowed by special permit under section 9. We could do that. >> That would cover it. >> Um
>> okay. All right. And then obviously we just had the date that we will put in with our town meeting date. Um fill in on page six there. >> I'm sorry I have a question too on that
same point. Sorry my video is not working for some reason. I'm not sure why. >> This welcome Don. Yeah. on that same 13 um it says light emmitting dodes. Is that referred to LED
lights? >> That's that's what they actually are. We call them LEDs, but they that's light emmitting dodes. >> But that's every probably 99% of lights used nowadays are LED. So if we prohibit
LED lights, we won't have any lights at all. That was going to be a point of mine some later also under I think it was under the variance one. >> Then do we just want to prohibit LED price signs?
>> Yes, that's what I would say. Price signs, digital displays and >> and neon LED signs. Yeah. >> Yeah. All all lights are LED nowadays. >> Fair point.
So, we're going to get rid of LED digital displays as well. >> Uh, I don't know. I I' I'm just I'd like to strike the light emmitting diodes words, but LED digital. I'm not sure what that
means. >> Would that be sort of what we were talking about with the open signs? Um, that might be more. Um, >> yeah. I >> dig digital. >> I Yeah, >> cuz John, do you know when you think of
a digital? >> So like the the sign that you see over rebuilt fitness, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, that that would I would leave that in there. >> So yeah. So >> So take out the dodes, but leave the LED
digital and everything else the others. >> Yeah, leave the LED price signs, LED digital, and LED neon. Unless it's clear that the light that the words light emmitting diodes refer to LED
only related to the price signs. >> Yeah, I I will I will clarify that. >> Okay. I think if we just take out or put LED in in um parentheses show that it is the more colloial term but light
emmitting diodes we can capture that there. >> Um and on the other >> sorry the other thing just to point out to folks is number 14 the illuminated group signs. I know roof signs were
prohibited, then they were moved to special permit. Now we're back to illuminated roof signs would be prohibited, but other roof signs would now be by special permit, >> right? >> I think that's Yep.
>> Okay. >> I'm sorry. Why Why could if you could allow a sign on a roof by special permit, why couldn't it be lit? because we we talked about that as um because it would be really hard to ever
get rid of the sleepy sign in the future or call it sleepies mattress firm call it or what um it's been a number rebuilt fitness we we would we thought you know what it would be reasonable sometimes to have a rooftop it could be on you know a
historic building they could want a sign on the roof but having a lit sign on the roof we didn't think that was sort of what we wanted to see. This is where we want to talk about the variance process when we get to that
because it ties back to the fact that these are prohibited >> things that are prohibited. It was said, well, people could apply for variance and wanted to talk about that. Yeah. >> Carolyn and with Kathleen.
>> Okay. Okay. Um, seven bottom attachments. This was um just we were going to delete that, right Carolyn? On that line, right? It just seemed to be a running list of here's what's required for the
application and here's an additional list. I I think it can all be combined. Keeping it simple. Yeah, that's good. Um, page eight. We didn't have anything on page eight.
Uh page nine, >> this is where again this idea of not by light emmitting diode LED. So I think to John's point, >> lighting is LED mostly now. So I I don't
think that that's necess we don't want to include that language here. So >> we'll delete and not by light emitting diodes. >> And then I wanted to >> LED. >> This says white light. Now with LED you
can have different colors of >> spect. And I wanted to ask John what his thoughts are. doesn't say under prohibited colored white. So, does this mean that any color but white is
prohibited with this language? And I wanted to ask John what he thought about that. Oh, having only white light? >> Yeah, I I had highlighted this section as a question too because I saw the same thing. Yeah, it could be I mean, what's a steady white light? I mean, sometimes
it's you know, different bulbs have different tones to them. It's not necessarily white. So, um I I was thinking that should this let's see special permit. Should this just say a a
internally illuminated sign? But did we just in the previous se that's what I'm getting the previous section we just said uh LED neon signs were prohibited
but now they're in here allowed by special permit under that section on that number 13 that we just looked at on page six. >> Right. We said they were prohibited, which means they would have to go for a variance, but now we're saying here
they're allowed by special permit. >> I I I think one of the distinctions, if I may, is what's prohibited are the signs where there's an exposed or visible light source >> versus
the special permit would still be something that would have to be internally illuminated. So contained within the structure of the sign. >> I guess I've never seen a neon that's internally illuminated. Neon's always exposed. >> Yeah, I think we wanted to remove that
that the um and have steady white light. Period. I thought and we took out the rest of the end of that. >> What about just steady light? >> Just steady light.
>> Yeah. And I I didn't see that we've defined the definitions internally illuminated sign. Does that need a definition or is that commonly understood? John, I I think it's understood, but maybe
not. >> Do we have any color any I'm just thinking in of those internally lit signs. Do we have anything John that isn't white >> in town? So, >> no, not at this not at this point, but
doesn't mean someone would want to in the future. >> You can program LED to all different temperatures of white, >> right? >> So, very cool to very warm. >> So, who what is white? >> Yeah. >> Is it a certain degree Kelvin?
>> So, a steady light. >> So, that's the difficulty when you say white, right? >> Okay. And I I could I mean we don't have anybody we don't have anybody in town that does that but I've had clients that >> you know for uh for breast cancer month
they might turn their lights to pink or for autism they might turn it to blue for that month to show support. So we don't have that yet but someone may. >> So B will just say via steady light period.
And then I have another question on that section at the start where um B where it says signs allowed by special permit. Should that say signs and illumination allowed by special permit? >> Well, we're only allowing
>> an illuminated sign. We're not we're not regulating illumination separate from signs. >> Okay? Because we do then have a separate section further on illumination of requirements. So that's why >> right we have a second section on
illumination, >> right? But it's under >> but it's under the the heading of standards applicable to all signs where we distinguish the type of illumination or the setback that um be required but I
I I think the subheading here is it captures it. >> Okay. Very good. Thank you. So nine um um page 10 we just had
in section N >> we back up >> oh sorry we back up just a at page nine under this still under the special permit section um there's the new sub paragraph E for signs accessory to and associated with permitted commercial
signs located in residential districts. >> Yes, sorry. Thank you. So I wanted this >> this was something that came up I think uh madam chair in conversations with you and uh the director um a week or so ago
and as I was rereading things again today um I think we should make a distinction here that what would be allowed by special permit would be new signs that are associated with a commercial
use in a residential district. Because if you are an existing sign associated with a commercial use in a business uh in a uh residential district, you're a pre-existing nonconforming use and therefore the sign is also
pre-existing non-conforming. So, I think we make a distinction between businesses that already exist in residential neighborhoods that already have signage versus I'm a business in a um in a residential neighborhood. I
might still be a a pre-existing non-conforming use as a business, but now I want to put up a different type of sign that I've never had before. >> Right? And this came because Liz said, "Well, what about our memory care when that opens? That's in a residential
area. And what about 7-Eleven Randolph Avenue when that comes on?" Which is in a resial. >> Is that covered under the term commercial? Because I was also thinking we have signs like, you know, for um
the Eustace estate, for daycare centers, for the Milton Arts Center, for churches, for all kinds of uses that aren't necessarily commercial. >> So it could just say non-residential. >> That's what I was thinking too. And that that comes up also under >> there's another area page 12. Yeah.
>> Right. I I think you did make a change on page 12 under residential districts and maybe that's where it might make sense to make um a further change there because we did add in on page 12 under paragraph 11A
under uh we did add in memory care facilities and similar uses. I don't know if that would necessarily cover everything that you're thinking of. >> I was thinking like Maggie, just to say non-residential uses.
>> Non-residentidential uses going where? In in 11 or going in 9B. >> Well, yeah. 9B section E. >> Yeah, where it says with permitted commercial, just get rid of >> But it would still say new signs. To Carolyn's point, you would still want to
say new signs accessory to and associated with permitted. >> But you're So now you're saying that those signs for like a daycare center are not as of right. They're they're by special permit if you put them in nine. >> So the distinction in 11 is it's as of
right and nine is by special permit. It seems like these other uses need signs. So to to require all of I mean John, what do you think >> that? Yeah, that was I that was that was the intent I think was to was to create
a more broad category for special permit, right? And then I suppose we could we could leave the the memory care if we wanted to limit the memory care to the 20 square feet. >> So all the special permits are going to go to the board of appeals, right?
Yes. So, Kathleen, >> they will get >> So, okay. So, um hi everybody and hi Caroline, my former office mate. Um I I have lots of concerns about the way this where this ends up with the board of
appeals. I can tell you right now, but um this whole discussion leads me to the question about what about signs on do uses? So you you know you have a you have a school, you have a you know you have a church, you have whatever that um is
going to be requiring a sign um you know what what happens with those because those are >> you know excluded from you know site plan review what what happens with sign what happens with those signs now >> that should come under but it's entirely
possible that um we do have religious symbols But maybe we should say any use protected under chapter 48 section 3 lists that under exemptions. >> But we've had current like right now we
have site plan review for do protected uses and we can re we did review locations of signs and John did you get did you re did you approve like the gardener the Goddard little sprouts all those signage signs? >> Yes we did. Yes and we were we approved
signage for some churches. We've approved signage for for Milton High School. >> Well, Dover just >> But those are not signs. Those are not those are not signs. I mean, so what what happens when somebody, you know, just turns them down? I don't think that
can go to the zoning board of appeals because it's a Dober use. >> Do just says you cannot unreasonably regulate. >> That's why I think it belongs in >> still regulate. You just cannot unre. Why they should be as of right because that's saying they're as of right
instead of special permit. I don't think they should be because then they don't get any review. >> No, I think they I think they can get reviewed, but as I said, they're as of right. I don't you know what I'm concerned about actually in all of this is is the things that are coming to the
zoning board of appeals which also goes to my basic first question is that um first of all I've never seen a sign of facade guidelines handbook um >> I'd be surprised if any member of our boards have
>> um it is sign review committee could it looks like this >> it's on our website >> it's on the website we're sending it to them Wow. And that's part of And so and so here here's the other thing. You've now said that when it comes to us that we have to um you know make our decision
blah, you know, like we normally do and that we have to make findings under section 9D of this bylaw. And 9D has all this stuff that's like aesthetics, its design, is it reasonable, is it in harmony, you know, what's neighborhood
context, you know, all that sort of stuff. Those are not decisions that zoning boards ever make. And so >> that's why my questions is No, no, let me finish. So my question is that if the
sign goes first to the sign review committee and they issue a report up or down or whatever, um why wouldn't the zoning board just be relying on the report that is done by the people that know what they're doing, the sign review committee?
Why do we have to make our own independent findings on something, you know, like reasonable continuity or reasonably compatible with building design or as I said, neighborhood context? I don't even understand what that's supposed to mean. >> This doesn't say you have to. This doesn't say
>> Yes, it does. >> No, it does. It says we have to make findings under section 9D >> criteria to be applied by >> It says that in section six and it says that in section 9B. So, as I said, all I'm thinking is why
couldn't we just rely on what, you know, why do we have to make our own separate findings? Why wouldn't we just rely on whatever was found by this the sign review committee? >> If I if I I mean, that's typically what happens now. We usually review the sign.
We write up a a letter to the ZBA and we send it to you guys and then you guys review our letter and make comments. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But I don't see why we have to make our own separate findings under 9D. Why would we just rely on you?
>> I I think you could just adopt their findings. You could >> Okay. >> Yeah. I mean I think and and I think the the that process with with a with something that doesn't require a special permit. That's the
process. The the sign review committee has a pretty has a pretty strong role where they can You could even recommend it be denied to the to the building commissioner. But I think the the types of signs that need to sort of be elevated to like the special permit sort
of, you know, whatever you want to call it, place plateau. >> Um there's a reason why that additional scrutiny is required. So perhaps um perhaps some of the
criteria is maybe you want to narrow the criteria and maybe you want to give the siren committee like a like a stronger role. Um I really wanted to make sure that there weren't competing public hearings. Um I really wanted to make sure that
there the committee's role was very clear in terms of timing. Um, but there's but the current bylaw is silent on anything that's outside of the business districts, right, in terms of signs.
>> Um, and then we're already having this conversation about um, you know, what do you do with Dover? I mean, the town has tons and tons of nonprofits and institutional players, right? So, um, yeah. So, so it's so there's there's
there's got to be an avenue to have it be more clear when you've got these when you've got these, you know, instances where it's not as of right, but there's sort of a higher bar. >> So, it seems to me the Dover amendment needs to be in section 11.
So, and then I don't know things like the uses estate like should they really have to get a special permit to put up their sign out there? I mean, if there's another one of a a state that comes along, um, >> I can see neighbors I can see neighbors
wanting that. >> I think they do. >> We did review the use estate signs. Yes. >> Well, they they as of right still gets reviewed, right? It's a question of whether it goes to the next level of a special permit.
>> Yeah. And it sound and and right now the the bylaw is silent, >> right? >> So, you know, I guess you could just continue kind of rolling that way. >> Well, I think um we could have it be
that special permit for non-residential uses and for do protected uses it goes in 11 as >> I think that makes >> that's consistent. I think >> but Could I just ask a question though because your do uses are not all going
to be in residential districts and that's what 11 is about, >> right? Well, Milton has mostly residential districts. It's like 97% of the land is residential district. >> That's true. Well, well, but you know, you know, maybe we put it both places,
but one thought is if if you currently require Dover protected uses to go through site plan review. >> We do. >> They could look at sign. That's more of a question. I thought I heard somebody say they go through site plan review
now. >> They do. They do. >> And Cath Kathleen's nodding. So why wouldn't we put dober protected uses under exemptions and say uses protected under chapter 48 section
3 are subject to site plan review. And when we say exemptions here to be clear we're not saying you get a free pass and the sign gets to go anywhere. We're saying that you don't have to get a permit a signed permit under this bylaw.
So if we say that signs associated with dover uses are going to be handled through the site plan review process, we just take it right out of here altogether. >> But that's inconsistent with what we've been doing. Like all the signs have gone through the sign review committee and the planning board just looks at the
location uh like when the gardener school came in, right? We just looked at the location relative to the driveway coming in and then knowing that the sign review committee was going to review the sign. And I I think they they're the ones with the expertise that that's the way it
should continue. >> I I just I don't know if this is contributing to help solve this or not because anyone has Dober protection should not preclude them from any of the processes in town. They they have Dober
protection but they should still be required to go. I'm not even sure why we even mention it. They should still be required. They know the protection they have if they're if they're a dop protected um entity, but why even bother
mentioning it? You know, they can they don't they can comply with something that the town may want. And if they don't want to comply, they can request relief under the do protection that they have. But why even distinguish it? You
should just leave it alone. And and you know, I think what you've said, Cheryl, is they've followed the typical path to to to any application for anything in town. I don't think you should even distinguish it in the language. Let let the protection is what the protection
is. And they may very well, you know, comply with what the town may want. And if they don't want to, they know the protection that they have. >> And my second my second is this. Um I think in in terms of the role that the
um um that the board of appeals has the board of appeals whether it's today's board of appeals or the board of appeals 20 years from now um allow them to have the opportunity to either uh stand by what the sign review
committee has or do something else. But, you know, um I think the way that it's worked is the way that you describe the sign review committee does their work and the board of appeals if it gets to it, they either support the decision that was made or but I think I mean we're not making a decision for today.
We're making a decision for forever. You know, this bylaw isn't going to be just for, you know, our board and the current board of appeals. It's going to be for the town until someone decides they want to change it. >> Right. So that's the issue right now, Sean, is that all our bylaw is silent on all of these signs that are outside the
business districts. >> So this is trying to bring them in. And so then where do we bring them in? So be so if you're a business, we're bringing them in saying you have to fi follow the business the requirements for the business districts. So that let's say
that's a to a 7-Eleven on Reedale, right? So they now under this bylaw, they'd have to follow the business district, whereas before there was really no guidance for how to do it. So it's the building department and the sign review committee, but they don't really have anything in the bylaw that's
telling them that this is what you have to do when you have a sign in a residential district. And as we all know, we have businesses in residential districts. We have all kinds of uses in residential districts. And so I I I support having those signs be covered in
the bylaw. And what I'm trying to do is distinguish like I don't think the word commercial is capturing all the kinds of signs. I don't think it's capturing nonprofits like the Milton Arts Center and the uses estate and I don't think
it's capturing things that are the do protected uses like the daycare centers and the churches. So those though shouldn't that Kathleen said those shouldn't be subject to special permit because they aren't dop protected. So in
that case, I think Caroline is saying you can put them in the exempt category, but my concern about putting them in the exempt category is that they'll then they're not required to be reviewed by the sign review committee, which is why I'm suggesting that those would be in
the um as of right category. And the ones like the nonprofits, they could be in the special permit category because they're not protected. And so they would then go to the still to the sign review committee but then to the ZBA too.
>> Yeah. I >> I think John was saying that the exempt site they still come before him. The building department >> the building department is sending them there but they don't have the the bylaw to back it up as far as I'm understanding this. Right. I mean it's not in the zoning bylaw to so if
somebody said hey you're not your bylaw doesn't require me to do that. I don't really have to do that. They could challenge the building commissioner on it is my understanding, which is why we're trying to get them included in here. >> Yeah. And I think the term you used earlier was non-residential signs. If
that collects everybody, you know that you're trying to I think the language is good. >> Yeah. There it was just this question then that came up about the having a dober protected. You just have to go to a special permit which Kathleen doesn't think. So if we go back to be
we we would say here new signs accessory to and associated with permitted non-residential uses located in residential zoning districts. >> Sorry, were you on >> on E? Going back to back to nine.
>> Yeah, sorry. Nine. What does that say? New signs accessory to and associated with permitted nonresidential. This is located in residential zoning districts. That captures everything that
just a question of whether you can do that for the Dober protected uses is the question then because this is saying you have to have a special permit >> other other than >> well I'm a do protected use and I still
need a special permit >> maybe >> but I didn't have to go through the the uh sign review my permits my signs come under my special permit >> you're pre-existing so we're trying to deal with This is just new. Yeah. >> So, I think it makes sense to have this
say non-residential and uh 9B, but I also am sensitive to not having Delted in here. And I don't know, maybe Carolyn and Guess Lee can think about >> I I I I am I am thinking and I realize
we're we're thinking and talking at the same time, but um amending 9B, if if 9B1E now says new signs accessory to and associated with non-residential uses
located in residential zoning districts. Well, I come in with a new church. >> Yeah. >> In a residential district, >> right? >> We can't require special permit, >> right, >> for that usage. >> Um,
>> that's why it needs to go in the left. >> I guess, you know, to to Sean's point, >> we know they've got do protection, so they're they're going to say you can't require special permit, and they would be correct. Um but do we want to make
something make it more clear to say the building inspector, the sign review committee and others what exactly should we do with a do use? One other thought I had is if we go to U page 15 under
paragraph J where we have all of these special provisions for you know restaurants and fuel service stations. If you wanted to add something in about protected uses, what if there added uses
protected under 4A section three um are subject to site plan review and then I guess the question but still shall be reviewed by the sign review committee. >> Yeah, I mean I think that makes sense to put it in there and and and I think you
could say site plan review and the sign review committee. We just don't want them coming to us. Right. I got that. >> That's That makes sense. If you both are happy with it, >> people wouldn't come to us. They would
say, "I'm sorry, but we don't have to do that." >> Right? >> Okay. I'll I'll add that under J as a new paragraph five then. So going back to my other question. So does every every sign remotely
on this planet in this town now go to the sign review committee for review >> except >> there's something that we let building commissioner review. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Because, as I said, I'm just trying to make sure that I've got the process because then on my board, if if
something gets denied and somebody appeals, >> we've then got the sign review committee's report because I don't think, you know, we really want to >> reinvent their work. >> Correct. >> So, as long as we're always getting that report and then we adopt those findings,
then I'm okay with the language that spans. >> Great. I don't want to have to make my own findings. And I can add language that the zoning board is free to adopt and incorporate the recommendation report of the signed
review committee so that that's clear to everyone. >> Yeah. >> And under those criteria on page 10, I think there's a typo in D3. >> D3 line column sill lies.
That's to be still lines or I'm not sure >> lines. This might have been taken from our old bylaw that there were a few. >> Yeah. I just don't want to have to have to sit around for four hours arguing about what neighborhood context is
supposed. >> No, the sign review committee does a great job. Very >> thorough. So, Sorry. I wanted to talk about on 11E which was not highlighted. So
>> 11 I'm sorry 9E >> 9E 9 is on page 11. >> So what I had wanted Is that where we are? I'm sorry. I don't want to jump ahead. >> No, hold on. Let me just get page 11. Sorry. I just wanted to get
>> just highlight the next thing that was on my I had highlighted. >> Is there anything else before we get to that? >> I'm sorry. What page was that again, Cheryl? >> 10. >> It's on page 11. >> You want to >> That was it for >> page 11. >> On page 11,
>> the variances. This is um what at the last meeting um I wanted to understand under what circumstances. So I guess under what findings or how difficult it would be for someone to um appeal a
decision and get a variance on the denial or on a prohibited sign. So let's say this sign the kinds of signs that are prohibited it was said well you can always apply for a variance for a prohibited sign
but in reality >> what would be the circumstances that a prohibited sign would get approved for a variance? >> Well, if I may, your bylaw currently allows for use
variances. Um, we could consider um putting in more explicit language here that doesn't allow for a use variance
that only dimensional variances relative to signs. Um, even if a use variance was still an option available to someone, your basis for a variance has to do with
shape, soil, or topography of the site, >> right? And from a practical standpoint, unless you have um this unique site that building is set way way way back from
the the street and you're in a ditch, I'm not so sure that there's going to be a situation where someone could make a viable argument to qualify for use variable time. And that kind of goes
back to when I when I asked um in a in a prior meeting, I said, "Look, even though the variant standard is the same across the state, I know some communities are a little more um flexible or liberal with their interpretation uh
for for the basis for variance versus others are very staunch. You know, no way, no how, you're never going to get a variance out of us." and you know, one community, it could change just with the membership of of a particular board. Um,
we can if if you're if you're really concerned about the fact that we've just said, for example, we're not going to allow illuminated uh rooftop signs that suddenly we're going to have something that looks like it belongs on the Las Vegas strip finding its way
getting approved through a use variance from the ZBA. If if that's the concern, I think we could make it more clear in this bylaw that dimensional variances are allowed but not use variances. So at the last meeting, yeah, at the last
meeting, I was concerned about putting numbers 13 and 14 into the prohibited because I was thinking that there might be some uh opport some time like today where maybe it would be appropriate to have a channel letter which had an
exposed light source. So you can think about like a or even a marquee kind of sign, a bowling alley, a movie theater, you know, um things that have a a little different kind of signage. We we basically wouldn't even be able to have
by variance really it sounds like to me. Um >> well, wouldn't you just um just delete the word use and just say a sign requiring a dimensional variance? >> We're talking about the use. You're trying to make it more
restrictive than what I was trying to to last time. >> Well, I mean very because well because you know I was educated by the same people that Carolyn was educated by which is variances are not supposed to be given all you know the way they do. I mean obviously in this town we're very
liberal with giving them but in you know that's unusual. Um and so you know the standards for a variance are I mean we just denied one the other day. I mean, you have to show hardship. You have to show special circumstances of the land and all that sort of stuff. So, it's
hard to imagine that you could get one for, as I said, for a sign period. Um, and um u, you know, as if you most of the times when we consider them is when we're looking at the whole project is
coming in for a variance. you know, it's a, you know, a special use in a in a residential district or something or it's a commercial use like, you know, the fruit center or something and so the sign is sort of part of that whole application. Um, so it's it's not coming
in by itself. >> Yeah. So, that's been my problem. I mean, I've got lots of problems, but one of my problems is really the historical um variance because when I went through my whole um
issue, I wanted a variance. I wanted a use variance. And if the town gave me a use variance, imagine all the money and time and effort that we would have saved these past 10 years because the town instead decided to give me a special
permit. So I wanted a use variance and I was told back then there's no way you're going to get a use variance. And so that's my frustration when I watch the ZBA um meetings that I see the variances giving out like lollipops to
people and it's so frustrating to me. And so I think the town has to decide are we going to give youth variances or aren't we? Because you can't just hand them out to some people and not hand them out to other people. It's that it's
so frustrating and it has affected everybody in town hall. It's affected my whole neighborhood. It's affected my family. And it's just so frustrating the inconsistency. So either we give out use variances or we don't.
>> So this is my point about not putting something in where you're driving somebody to a variance um because it's not the way to do it, especially for a sign. And the one of I don't know about use variances as much, but there are the
reason we have so many variances is all of our many of those uses and the buildings were built before the zoning was enacted and so they're pre-existing non-conforming. And so what are we going to tell people? You can't do anything with your property because it we decided
just to put a blanket zoning over the whole town in 1938 and change it very little since then. I mean this is a it's a big problem. um that's not been really it was that it was done that way. So, but I think here what I wanted to bring
back up was it's really not that easy to get a variance and I wanted the attorneys and the Z, you know, and and um to tell us that to confirm that uh because I do think um you know, we just should know that as we're putting this
forward and when we think about like uh some uses that what if extra space storage wasn't a storage space in the future? What if it was some kind of interesting other use? Let's say it's a bowling alley. I don't know what it is, but something that somebody could go to and now we're saying, you know, we're we
we've prohibited something which might be appropriate. If it let's say it's a theater, maybe it's a blackbox theater. We're not going to allow anything which kind of relates to that use because we've put it into a prohibited category. Everything else that's prohibited here has billboards. They have other sound
reasons to be under the prohibited. I just feel like 13 and 14. I know what you're trying to steer away from in in East Milton. Um, but this a special permit process where the ZBA is going to follow the recommendations of the sign
review committee. Um, I well I think I agree with what maybe Carolyn and and language Kathleen are putting in. I think we I think we can't be afraid to say, you know what, this is we've never been allowed to have
neon signs. I'm just going to use the we've never had neon signs. We've never been allowed to have neon signs. We we don't want to say we're I think what we want to do in this bylaw because right now in the past in the previous regulations, the bylaw internally
illuminated wasn't even allowed. It actually says in the handbook the select board have never approved a internally lit sign. But when I've talked to John and the and heard from the sign review committee is they have found times when it's appropriate to have an illuminated
sign. Maybe it's facing the highway. Maybe special circumstances and that's why we have carved out a pathway forward for illuminated signs. We're not encouraging illuminated signs in this bylaw. We're discouraging illuminated signs, but there are times when it's
appropriate. But if you look at 99% of the signs in Milton are are direct lit goose neck. They're they're not internally illuminated signs. I think we're being much more flexible in this
than in this bylaw. We're more flexible than the previous bylaw and what's ever been allowed in the past. and I want to see a pathway forward and make it clear. And to Maggie's point, we want to be consistent, but we also don't want to
say, well, it's it's, you know, under special permit, you can get a neon sign if you want, or under this, we're it's like we're saying we really don't want it, but we're going to create a pathway for you to do it. >> So, what happens, and I'll just let me just finish. So what happens is and and
this is a a what I my biggest concern is somebody finds that pathway they say oh you know this would be a really great neon sign or a really great mark marquee sign for whatever reason which I don't think is appropriate in any of our
business districts but um we'll discuss that as a board what happens is one person gets that sign and then somebody else is like I love a marquee sign I think I want a marquee sign. The next thing you know, it's not just it might be you say, "Oh, it's a one exception."
I think it would be very hard for the ZBA not to be challenged if it has been allowed by special permit in one location to deny another business that same right. I think it becomes and the more you have the more difficult it becomes. And that's why we right now
have all of those open neon signs and all the, you know, all the stuff going on which have not been allowed either and will be addressed by our our building department. But you all of a sudden see everything popping up. Well, he's doing it. Another nail salon just came in. Well, if that nail salon gets
to put up this neon sign and all these different places, can I do it? Because everybody's, you know, obviously wants their business to stand out. And I'm thinking long term, we've never we've never allowed neon signs. We've never
allowed digital channel lit signs. We're now being more flexible in allowing the illuminated signs, but some towns don't even allow illuminated signs. And it's, you know, go to Welssley, go to Hangingham, go to Norwell, go to Passic,
go to Dover. You know, you go any of these towns, you don't see you see gas stations with direct lit signs. They don't even have the internal LED. We're we are being much more flexible than we've ever been before. And we keep
saying, you know, we want we we're protecting Milton. We want it to feel like a town. We want it to feel like a suburb. You know, people describe it as a le a historic buolic leafy green town. And it could go sideways really quickly.
And I think it's we shouldn't be afraid to say no, we don't want neon signs and we don't want marquee signs. It just and and in some places like truly brewery like I like that there and I but that is off a highway. It's in a business park.
It's set it's not anywhere near anything residential. It's a it's a special location. In that case it it works there. and the Walter Baker Chocolate, you're going to Boston and all of a sudden you've got it's a whole different feel when you go into Dorchester, but
when you come into Milton, this is part of what we're trying to do. And in all of our design guidelines that we've done, everything is about keeping a historic feel to the to the business districts, enhancing our businesses and our business districts, but keeping it
um to a level that that attracts quality businesses and has a certain standard for an aesthetic and and I don't think we I think that's okay. I think we can do that because a lot of towns don't even allow any internally with signs.
>> So neck signs don't work on a building like two granite a which is off the highway and a big commercial building. They don't work on a building the scale of extra space storage. You're eliminating the kinds of signs that work for larger buildings. And I understand
>> internally lit signs are allow that's a special permit process. That's how they that's how and it was approved. um you know, it was reviewed and and it was approved and that's how they've got and I'm saying we're let's carve that out and create a a process for that to
happen and and thus be more flexible than we've been in the in the past. I think we're being we're being we're going to be being less flexible because we're putting more into the bylaw here because they've been granting a lot of permits
um because they there's not a lot in the bylaw and they've been able to work off of this. So now this is restricting them more. And so if John's still with us, I'd like his opinion also if he understands too. I think that there's
lots there's not just the walkable small kind of business. It's a little storefront kind of signage. You've got to think about this bylaw applying to buildings at all different scales and where you're seeing look you're not going to have a goose like a goose neck
light do anything for you when you're in a car and you're approaching to granite a or when you're approaching extra space storage. Those are just totally different scale buildings. >> This is allowing them to do that. And what's what's happened is and part of the reason why we're doing this is we've
had the bylaw, but we've had regulations. And I even, you know, I was talking to Larry Johnson and he said, I don't even look at the bylaw. I I look at the regulations that we have, but the problem is the regulations have been outside and separate from our bylaw. So
then when someone challenges it and says, well, it's not in the bylaw. Just say I can't have a neon light. Well, that it get it was able to be you know appealed because of for that reason. So we are trying to be consistent and we're trying to be as clear as possible so
that when someone comes there's an expectation that and everyone is treated any applicant will be treated equally but it will also be really clear with their expectations on okay this is we can do this this is by right we can go a
step further and it tends to be and John can talk to this but it tends to be more the the banks the chains the um businesses that are corporations with with deeper pockets that can afford a larger lit sign because they're
expensive. These I'm sure these signs um get you know Santandere and the different banks have put on and extra space storage. So I think we want to be consistent. We want to be as fair and it's like our site plan approval. We just want to we want to make the process
um simpler, more streamlined and just be able to, you know, um make it as easy as possible on the applicant by being as clear as possible and consistent with with everyone which and giving really the sign review
committee the the teeth that they can that they can say no like they really haven't they they turned things down they you know they even said well we don't allow billboards well it's never been in here and we just this is cleaning up the mess
that Tim was so frustrated with and the experience experience and John and all the gray areas we've had with our signs. This will this will make it clear and consistent. >> So, I would just like to ask John if he thinks that numbers 13 and 14 are best
on the prohibited list or on the special permit list. >> I'm looking Okay, let me take a look. 13. >> It's the pro It's the prohibited signs which starts on page five but 13 on page
six. the designs. Yep. Okay. So, which which numbers are you >> numbers 13 and 14? >> Oh, 13 14. Oh, those are ones we looked at already, >> right? So, I'm just bringing these back up because last meeting it was
mentioned, well, we're putting them in prohibited, but people can still apply for a variance. So now that knowing that it doesn't sound very likely a variance would ever be granted for a sign by itself, u are you feeling that this is the best
place for these type of signs to be absolutely prohibited? They could never be approved under any circumstance. >> Oh, a sign that has an exposed or visible light source. >> Correct. Or like a neon a neon sign. Yeah,
>> a neon sign. Yeah. It's not just neon. These are exposed. Could be like a an incandescent bulb in a channel letter. >> I mean, you could leave neon as it a prohibited, but this is broader than just a neon. Number 13.
>> Um, we haven't seen anything like that. Could we? I guess we could. I mean, we we the the hypical lights we've seen are either the gooseeneck. We see in internally illuminated signs and we see uh halo lit or reverse lit signs
like uh extra space storage. Those are where we typically see and where we typically try to steer folks towards. So the those are, you know, we could you'd still get those through a special permit, you know, the reverse lit and
internally illuminated still a path to that that would and if we gave a recommendation to the ZBA, it sounds like they would uh review our recommendation and probably approve it. Um, so I it's it's an extra step, but it
doesn't seem like it would be an ownorous step to do. Um, but >> so do >> we eliminate exposed incandescent? I I don't know. We We haven't seen anything like that in town. So, that's up to you
if you want to uh put it into the special permit section or leave it in the prohibited. I mean, I think having neon be prohibited is is one thing, but I think having the the signs with letters where
you can't have even a small bulb being exposed, whether that's LED or incandescent, it just seems overly restrictive on the prohibited side. >> I just think it's very urban looking and
I and I think it's great in some places. I I'm not, you know, but I I think I think it has the potential to go sideways long term. >> Yeah. And just from a business owner's perspective,
I would be annoyed if I was denied and somebody else wasn't or if somebody applied and got it, then I would want to apply. So, I get it. And it's not that I don't like them in certain areas, but I'm taking the position of the more fair
route for everybody. Like I don't know. I just would be upset. >> So if somebody's business Yeah. So if somebody's business, you know, kind of wanted to give attention to like it was theatrical,
>> they might want that. And if somebody's business was something that wanted to show that they were more of a landscape. So like what if you had a display which had a a truck like and that we said you can't have a display which has a truck because that's that's too indicative of what your business is, you know. So what
we're saying is something that has any kind of entertainment value. We're not going to have signs that really can that might apply to that business. We're not going to allow it. So we're kind of saying we don't want that kind of entertainment business even though our bylaw allows us to have that kind the signage isn't going to be able to
indicate it. So, I just think, you know, it's it's a layer of of applying a bad sign situation too far. That's that's just >> I I I get the sense that I'm not in the majority on this, so we don't have to
continue talking about it, but I wanted to at least >> like I get what you're saying. I really do. >> And I do, too. >> Like, I do get it. Um, and I struggle because it goes back to if it's your brand, you know, I I
understand it. Oh, >> we see plenty of towns though where the identity and brand of the business is not allowed and and the town the town's the town's preference in terms of what it looks
like is is really the the um is really what defines what people get to do. You know, we the national brands don't look like national brands in some towns. They look like the town. So, you know, I guess a couple things I feel strongly
about is, you know, the, you know, the inequity that you feel how is something we want to avoid as much as we possibly can. And the only way to do that is to have less discretion, you know, in the bylaw, you know, and have the bylaw be
tight so that, you know, you don't, no one feels that they were treated differently than somebody else four, five, six years down the road. So, you know, it just means it's more restrictive. The whole bylaw is more restrictive.
>> But, >> well, it's more clear. It's it's what it's what the sign review committee's been doing, but it's never been made clear what their practice is. So, we're bringing it up to >> I understand. Yeah. But even still tight as tight as it canight eventually John
will get tired of doing what he's doing you know >> and so will Kathleen and it'll be a different board and you know they'll they'll be working with whatever the bylaw is and decisions will be made at that point in time that might be not not be uniform with a decision that's made in 2026 because John and Kathleen might
see it a certain way and so the more that we allow that the more latitude we allow the greater the likelihood of somebody's going to feel like I'm hoping this makes everyone's job easier. CBA, everyone
be more consistent. It goes back to sort of the site and review process like we just really want to be as clear and and consistent with all applicants. >> Setting boundaries is great. You know, I'm a no neon guy. I think no neon
period. If that means no marquees, I mean, in my opinion, that's okay if we're gonna stick to it. I don't have a problem with that. I mean, I understand what you're saying about a slippery slope because it is. You can go, you know, not that we're going to be Route 9 Framingham, but you can you can get real
commercial real quick. So, if we set a guideline, let's let's just stick to it. And one of the things we've talked about, not just on this topic, but now for our years together, is providing anyone that's coming into town enough information so they can know what is what they can do and what they can't do.
So long before someone has a business in town, if the bylaw defines what they can and can't do, they're not going to feel like the rules were changed on them, they had a chance to understand the rules. this this is going to be in place and someone can look at it and understand before they decide to put a
business here what's acceptable and what's not >> and I think Liz you can comment but you already see this and Carolyn had just done such a good job of I mean Kathleen I know you saw the last version of the bylaw this has been cleaned up so
Carolyn has done such a great job cutting this down getting rid of so much that was in our last and and you know I think >> so are you happy that I didn't decide to rewrite the whole thing for you. >> Carolyn Carolyn fortunately rewrote the
whole thing because it it needed a lot of help and and it's great >> on the table. >> I know a fresh perspective >> a fresh perspective. It really was great to come in and um have new fresh eyes on it. Um, we put a lot of work into it,
but um, and Liz is already seeing with the science coming in all the gray areas that, you know, I I think we're we're probably a point of frustration for the planning staff and um, and thank goodness John Ziggowitz has been on this
on his committee, you know, chairing it for so many years, so he understands and is very consistent with with what they do. um and has been been able to, you know, do an excellent job given the
confusing bylaw that we had. So, >> no, I I appreciate it. As I said, all I just was trying to make sure that um I understood how we were going to get our business and what we were going to do with it when we got it. Thank you. So I guess Carolyn, that's back to you
on the use on the not allowing the use variance your or language other than dimensional. >> Again, it's whatever the board would like to do. Um but we could easily amend on page 11 uh paragraph E
could easily amend that to make that clear that only dimensional variances can be sought not use variances and the other bit of flexibility that we did put in here is we are allowing which
I think is isn't in conflict but we're allowing the sign review committee some dimensional um up to 25% that they can increase the size of a sign giving them some flexibility if they think it looks more
appropriate on the building. It gives them, you know, an opportunity to without going to that variant step that they have some flexibility on dimensional standards. >> Even number 14, if I'm thinking about that, does the sign eliminated signs
located on the roof of a building or that extend above the building's roof line? So, what's our definition of roof line on a pitched roof? Is it the ridge line, which is the highest point, >> or is it
where the slope begins? What's the roof line? Some >> say the ridge. >> That's But it's not clear in the language. You say the ridge, but if I'm an applicant who says I want it higher, I'm just playing devil's advocate, you know. Is that the word? So the rebuilt
fitness is on the slope. It's It's >> Is that the ridge line? >> It's on the slope. >> It's on the slope. It's below. It's on the slope. >> Horizontal. >> It's on the slope. >> So it's below the ridge. I actually don't. Does the side stick up above the ridge on >> I don't think it does.
>> No, it does not. >> Yeah. >> Believe me, I'm taking special note of all signs as I drive. >> Earning your pay. Thank you. should hire a driver, Carol.
>> Yeah, just don't fill it that >> but but to Cheryl's point, we could certainly add in 14 um to make sure that it does not extend above the buildings uh the roof ridge line if that's what you'd like to do. Yeah, because you know
a a roof line, you might say if you have an elevator that goes above the roof or a stair that goes above the roof, somebody could say, "Hey, that's my highest roof line is that piece and that and therefore I can put it on this part of the roof because I'm not exceeding that roof line."
>> Maybe instead of a ridge because we do have flat roof conditions, we should right apply in every building, right? Maybe the highest um roof line. >> That That's where I'm getting. You might have a penthouse for a stair or an elevator or something.
>> Highest main roof line, >> occupied roof, something like that because we allow things to go above the roof that are aertances or something that are unoccupied. They can go above the height limit. So if you looked at that language, you could maybe tie it to
that. the building height, right? Because then it would account for what I'm what I'm talking about with not being able to interpret it as going to the highest roof element. >> So instead of line, you would want say element.
No, I think if you go back to in the zoning bylaw where we it's probably different in different places honestly, but on the on the height the definition of height it's tied to occupied space. So I think you could
have this be t the roof the highest point of an occupied space something like that. But that that language that's in there. Kathleen, do you know that language that I'm referring to? >> Yes. Yeah, we have that all the time because we was it's actually it's
measured from the basement. We run into having getting variances requested all the time for that. That language on height is completely goofy. >> But what's the classification for roof line? What's the wording for the highest point of the roof, but not like an
elevator tower carpet wall or something? I think what Charlie just said >> the >> yeah the highest occupied >> occupied. Yeah, because the what what you just described would not be occupied, right? The elevator sh
>> That sounds good. And and that way if somebody had like um a penthouse which is just mechanical equipment, you're not putting it as high as that. But I still don't like this here. But I'm done with I'm done with it.
All right. So what page seven? >> So I am going to delete use variances, right? >> I think to make it clear. >> Yes. >> Okay. There was nothing on page
page made it to page um 10. We had this still lines >> made to 11 to 11. >> All right. 11. There was nothing on 11. Uh page 12.
This is where the memory care facilities and similar uses we were going to address. Just want to say here also non-residential. >> Yes, >> I think that's better. I don't really like calling out some specific use like that.
>> Yeah, >> it looks too much like spot zone. >> Um there was Okay. on uh 13 under B principal signs. Um this was something that came up as was another question
that Carolyn had. Um and Liz had emailed John on this and we wanted to sort of a business may have two wall signs when contained in a building with two elevations visible from a public way,
parking or other public space. But we then said, well, John had said, well, I think you can have two wall signs, but you can also have a a separate freestanding sign in front of that wall sign.
And we wanted to So then we didn't want to just limit it to two signs. Is that correct, John? >> Oh, what I what I didn't want to see Can you can hear me, right? >> Yep. >> Okay. What I didn't want to see is someone saying, "Well, I've got this, you know, building facade and I want to
put because I have a I can put two principal signs, so I want to put two flat signs on the same building facade >> because according to this, you could >> go ahead. >> Sorry, John. I I agree with you on
that." And I actually edited it um to say that um only one wall sign per elevation. >> Right. But but um but should it and I was just thinking about this a little more. Should it say where it says a
principal sign may be a flat wall sign or projecting or freestanding? should then say a business cannot have two principal signs of the same type on one facade. That way it would eliminate you. That
way you can have one flat sign and a and a projecting sign, but you can't have two projecting. You can't have two flat. You can't have two freestanding. You can have you can have two of the three, but not the same kind. I guess that's what
I'm trying to eliminate. I like what you wrote in here, Carolyn. So, I don't know if that was clearer or more complicated. >> No, I that makes some sense. Uh the provided you cannot have two principal signs of
the same type. But so then you are saying that if you've got a a building >> and it has an elevation on say two streets, you're on a corner. can't have a wall sign on each elevation. >> Yes,
>> you could. >> Yes, you. >> Okay. So, that would allow them to have two of the same type of principal signs, >> but but not on the not on one facade is what I was saying. >> You could have you could have if you
have two elevations, yeah, you could have a flat sign on both elevations, but on one elevation you couldn't have two flat signs. Okay. So, we only want one sign per elevation. >> Yeah. >> No, not one sign per Well, because this
is saying you can have two signs. So, you can have two signs, but of two different types. You can't have the same type. >> Thought it was one principal sign per elevation. If the building's located, >> you can have two. According to this, you
can have a flat wall sign and a projecting sign >> or you can have a flat wall sign and a freestanding sign. >> So those are both principal signs, >> right? >> And this allows you to have two. I just don't want to see someone come in with
two of the same sign on the same elevation. >> Gotcha. And and I I was reading it where if it's like a corner lot, you probably don't want someone to get four signs, but do you want to allow them to have
three? Do you want them to have freestanding in a wall on the main elevation and then and then a wall on the kind of let's call it maybe secondary elevation because most likely one of the elevations is going to be less busy than the other,
>> right? So, so you probably don't want them to have four though. >> Well, but this the way it's written, it does it it would allow that, right? Even with the yellow highlighted section, you could still have four.
>> I think I think Carolyn had had drafted some language that would make it clear that that max was going to be three. >> Oh, okay. >> Did Did that come across? >> I was reading it differently. >> Yeah, that it's not in front of you. was sort of being developed today because I
I I didn't get that feedback to it as quickly as I should have. >> So the the main principal elevation could have two and then the secondary elevation could have one. >> That's what that's kind of how I
understood the conversation, especially kind of thinking about like that Starbucks example and that like the park with the with the um with the with the mural. >> Um But I don't think you want >> an insurance company that's going to
decide. >> No, no, I would. Yeah, I prefer not to have four. But like I said, I just don't want to have >> on the principal elevation two signs of the same type, >> right? >> Like you shouldn't be have two flat wall signs,
>> right? I agree. It should be no more than three then. >> Okay, that sounds good. >> Start to Okay. >> I'm sorry. Three per facade or three total on the >> three total total. >> Yeah.
>> If you have two If you have two walls. Yeah. >> If you have two elevations. >> Okay. Good. >> Yeah. >> All right. Um so then 14. Um we didn't have anything on 14. Uh page 15. This was the um under
the service fuel stations um service identification signs, advertising, oil changes, state inspections and similar services offered. >> That look good, John. That's okay with
>> Y put any sort of a size limit on those service identification signs or is that going to be just up to the discretion of the sign review board? >> I leave it up to the board. Personally,
>> I think that would work best because all building size all buildings are different sizes. So different different signs fit different facads. So >> before I just had a question on this one. I was confused. Um
so is is this 12 feet tall? The 24 square ft sign area. Is that sort of in addition to what what any business would be allowed to do in terms of signage? and it's specific to fuel service stations or are they limited to just
that one sign and that's it plus the service station stuff that we're we're talking about. >> I think the 12 is that the whole >> I was reading is the one Yeah, the one freestanding sign is 12 feet tall that you know they usually have that has the one right
>> the the gas station sign and then the the um pricing and everything else. You got one sign that's 12 ft tall and then the top of it where the logo or whatever is is 24 is allowed to be 24 square ft.
>> Right. So, and and the building itself if there's sort of like a building >> that's separate. That's a service identification sign. >> Okay. Okay. So, so that so say the building's like 30 feet, you know, 30
feet long and do they still get like 30 square feet of signage? Cuz now we're doing the one the one >> what the one square foot per linear foot. That's the new that's the new um
>> you know, whatever multiplier. >> Um >> yeah, I'm just trying to I'm just trying to make sure I understand how that's going to work. You know, is it is it or is it just that one sign and that's it? Because they're being allowed to do a 12- foot sign and it's 24 square feet and that's all the signage they get.
>> No, because they need to put signage on pumps. They need to put, you know, service bay signage on. They they all those things need signage. They got numbers on the pumps. That's all part of the signage. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So they'd get a sign on their
building and then they would get another freestanding sign and then they would also get all their pump signs and >> Right. So yeah. So I'm just trying to understand I mean is that going to be like another 30 square feet on top of the 24 square feet that they're allowed
for the freeing sign? >> I assume that they would be able to get that >> or whatever whatever the number is. I I just this was never super clear to me. I just want to make sure I know because we're going to have we're potentially going to have something come back um for a gas station.
Hopefully not completely redone. So then I I think Liz to your point then we should probably strike that notwithstanding any contrary provision of this bylaw and instead it should read in addition to other signs
um allowed you know other allowed signs for businesses under this bylaw because I was reading it as as I think you just were that we're treating gas stations differently. They get this freestanding sign. They get these service identification signs. But now to go back
to our prior discussion, if this if this gas station is on a corner and it also has, you know, a building facade on two sides, it also is going to be allowed to get potentially two principal signs plus the
freestanding sign, >> right? >> Yeah. Like the Shell gas station, they're on three >> they're on three streets. So they would have three three buildings signs on three sides of their building and this
freestanding and everything on their awnings and windows. Yeah. So I like I like Caroline's suggestion which was to which was to limit limit the square footage for the service identification signs. So at
least you can kind of put that in a box. And then you've got your freestanding sign is is defined. So then the last piece would be is there more signage for the building itself and whether or not people want to do that. >> Do we want to show like should they show
on each side? >> They probably have requirements from their franchise or you know for signage on anyway. So, you know, >> and Shell is different than if you go to um Franny's Corner, >> right?
>> Which is more residential. >> That's why I That's why I separated out the residential >> from the business districts. >> Sure. >> Yeah. >> Because I that's so Yeah, John. So, think of So, that's
30 linear feet. So they could put on the front of the building a sign on and one other elevation actually on both of the elevations on either side of that building the shell sign >> if they if they wanted to but you know
they have to it's not just that sign that they're putting up they have signs over their service bay. So you know they have to take that all into consideration when they're using up their square footage. So that would come out of their 30. Say the building's 30 foot long. That would come out of their 30. So they
would have to >> It's the whole It's the whole sign package. That's >> okay. All right. That >> Yeah. As long as as long as people are comfortable with that. I I just I just It just wasn't clear to me. And And um
And yeah, and and I and I also like how it's at the discretion of the committee. gives you guys that ability to to make sure it looks good. >> And John, maybe a a question because when I was talking to Larry, one of the things he said is how do you handle um
you know sort of um oversight on this or you know just um well some of the gas stations they are told that they're allowed a certain amount of you know signs in certain locations. everything gets agreed to and then all of a sudden all these other additional signs.
>> So, how is um >> that's something that we'll need to talk about maybe is enforcement. >> Yeah. >> And because was like how does it get enforced because they just they put up whatever sometimes the gas stations will just put up whatever they want. >> They sort of feel like they're at a Yeah,
>> they've absolutely done that. And this is specifically just to clarify fuel service stations as opposed to just service stations. >> It's you have to sell fuel, >> not just like >> are there are there any
>> well like the down by food mark? >> Yeah. >> Milton Food Mart is a service station. It's not a fuel service station though. >> Central, >> right? He came before us for a special permit for that >> for that project. Yeah. There's no there's no fuel there. And then we sent
him off to this arm review committee. >> Okay. So this is for fuel service. Okay. >> All right. >> And then he covered his building with lots of other signs. >> There you go. >> So John, have you ever had to enforce
it? >> No, we we we're not enforcers. We're >> No, it doesn't fall under us. So to your question, >> we have a new great building inspector and we have an enforcement officer and
we're going to let them, you know, we'll have Liz is going to have conversations with them, you know, >> but he could levy a fine if he had to. >> Yep. That's >> warnings would be for I think there'll be a process, you know, give a warning, give a, you know, because unfortunately we've had a lapse in our building
department and coverage and they've been overextended. So, I don't give any fault. Um, and Michael White's amazing. Um, he's doing a great job. So, he's going to have to play catch-up on on all the stuff that's gone up just since Joe
Pond left. You know, it's it's really interesting how things can start to happen. So, um I think the staff will work, you know, nicely together and try to figure out a way, but but going forward, yeah, I
think there we should have maybe a process when that, you know, maybe the sign review committee can alert Liz, you know, this is not what we agreed to when you know, we see things, but um maybe some some sort of reporting.
Well, we did that already with the nail the nails >> company nail business, >> right? >> Yeah. I mean, it's it's like anything. It probably needs to be followed up on because I know the conversation I had was somebody was somebody was sent out
to to, you know, have a discussion about the fact that it's, you know, that the sign wasn't allowed. Um, and on page 16, there's a, you know, there's a there's a pretty, you know, cool reinforcement section in this. So, with
the fines, you know, spelled out. So, >> should >> again, that has to be equally >> consistent >> consistent. That's what I So, everyone should note letters. >> Um, page 17 there's um first there's a
typo. Just a run on stability. What page? >> 17 stuff. >> Yeah, that needs a space. >> Yeah. >> Back to fuel service stations for a
moment and and acknowledge that. >> Yeah. Um because I put something on said and and I still don't think that the language is capturing it. So fuel service stations are going to be all of the other signs
that a business would be allowed and if it is as experts saying if they've got 30 30 linear of a facade there's you know 30 square feet of a sign that they'd be allowed. So, they're
gonna get But then I thought I heard John say, "Yeah, the 24 square feet comes out of that." >> Yes. >> Which would then Okay. So, they're not getting 30 square feet of signage based
on their facade plus a 24 square foot freestanding sign. >> Yes. >> Yeah. the the one primary freestanding sign can be 12 ft tall and the logo at the top can be 24 square ft. Then on the
building it's whatever the computation is for the building square footage is is separate and additional. >> So they could have 54 square feet. >> Correct. >> Okay. So it is it can do
>> if you think about a 10 by five that's not a lot considering a gas station. >> But then out of that 30 that's on the building we back out the service station signs and the inspection signs or that's additional to the 30.
>> I would think any um anything that's statemandated would be additional to the 30. Correct. >> State. Okay. >> Okay. >> Yeah. because almost like almost like a traffic sort of like a safety traffic whatever
like you wouldn't it's not like they're trying to sell you something. It's more of a it's it's more to do with safety public safety. >> Is that kind of the idea behind that why it doesn't come out of the come out of their total? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Because that's a certain size sign
that they they need to have and so it's not like they can make it smaller to to save on square footage. That's the sign that they're required to have. >> But if they wanted signage on like the canopy over top and like put the Shell logo, that would come out of the 30.
>> Yes. Guess that's what the Shell station did. They did a They did all the tables and they calculated everything and they >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Does that read like that? Carol
>> I'm sorry, John. I'm sorry. >> No, >> I was just asking if that was going back. >> Oh, I'm sorry, John. Go ahead. >> No, I just wanted to make sure that that we were understanding >> is here >> that somebody could potentially get 54
square feet of signage. I just wanted to be clear about that. So, that's all. >> So, Carolyn will put that language to >> right. Just going back to to I guess I a statemandated sign or not, but the uh
lottery signs, those are all I would call that an LED digital display. >> I would too. >> I don't see how you prohibit those. >> I think you can,
but they they're not statemandated, >> are they? So like the 71 on Randolph A. That's the that's got the sign in there. >> Sorry. >> I'm trying to look it up on my phone and something popped up. >> So are they allowed to have that sign
there? >> I think they're required to. Are they? >> They're selling lottery tickets. >> I think you're selling lottery tickets. You need to put that in the window. >> Yeah. >> Really? With the um like with the whatever $1 million or
>> the sign that >> money back from it. Yep. >> Town gifts. >> All right. So maybe we can't. Yeah. Maybe that's under those state required signs. Then I didn't know that that were >> trying to think if I've ever been into a store that sells lottery that doesn't
have that sign up. >> Like what about the um what about roosters? Well, you know what? They just changed to the the LED that I think we're now seeing that and noticing them because now they're >> Yeah, but are they required? I wonder if the state mandates you have to put that
sign in that window and light that up. >> That's a pretty bold move of the state to sell lottery tickets to get us all addicted, but that's a different story. >> No, I wonder if that's >> Caroline, do you have lottery signs in your windows and hanging them?
I think I know that I know you're required to have a sign. I don't know that they have to be neon or illuminated, however. Um, and I was trying to look it up, too, and I haven't haven't come across an answer just yet.
>> Well, they'd have to get shut off anyway, wouldn't they? during our hours, which I'm I don't think they actually get shut off. >> As long as doesn't set a precedent for another business to say, "Hey, I want my flashing open sign because this guy's
got his flashing lottery sign." >> That would be my problem with it. >> So, if it is mandated by the state, we should write something in the bylaw that states that's only there because it's mandated. But >> we do have something that says that >> those are exempt if it's a state.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah, there's language in there. Especially like a something for the savage as well. >> And yeah. >> Yes, we do. >> Yeah. >> First one.
>> Yeah. Federal, state, or local government. >> A question. Yeah. Do they mandate that? >> I'd be surprised if they mandate that sign, that specific blanking sign. signs containing an official announcement. Get your get your scratch
tickets here, >> right? >> J say hello. >> Yeah, maybe we'll we'll research that. Yeah, I I have come up that they do require their lottery agents to display
authorized materials to promote the lottery games, but I haven't come up with whether or not that includes like an illuminated keynote sign yet, >> but if it's required, it's exempt under the bio. >> Exactly.
>> All right. Yeah, they have a whole CMR on state lottery commission. Yeah, probably buried in there someplace. >> Has somebody lived in Milton who worked on the lottery commission? >> We do.
>> Yeah, I thought somebody's here. >> All right, I think that was everything. Um Caroline, thank you again just for you know and John and everybody who's been working on this. Um
do we want just to have Caroline to send out a final just draft um the I there's a tenative date um to go before the warrant committee on on this bylaw um which is March 9th. So, anyone who wants
to join me um we talked about I don't know Carolyn if you would want to be there for that or you know um we can talk to Liz we'll work through Liz um who um may or may not be there. It's going to be on Zoom as well, so you could
attend on Zoom. And it's at 7 o'clock um before the warrant committee, but it would be great if you could be there, but if you have another >> I was going to say um I will actually be away with my daughter that that week. So
I I could she would not be happy if I hopped on a Zoom. >> No. No. Understood. Understood. No, this is this is great. Um, you've gotten us into >> We don't typically have town council go to warrant committee meetings. >> No, no. I Yeah, it's it's not necessary,
but she's just been so good with some of these questions and but Liz will be there, you know, and anyone else from the board. Um, just let Liz know if you can make it that night so we can post a meeting if it's more than, you know, two of us. So,
>> you want me to just send them a message to say that I've reviewed it? That would be great, Kathleen. Um, just so Yes, you can. Um, send it to Jay Funley. >> Yeah. Okay. >> I think Larry Johnson, who's a warrant committee member, who's also on the sign
review committee, is on this call as well, so he's also just taken some notes and and be he'll be reporting back to the warrant committee. So, he can also convey it. But that would be great. Um, because that will be a question. It's important that you've had a chance to
review it, Kathleen. >> Yeah, >> I'll send them a note. >> Okay. >> Positive one. >> Does the war me at seven? >> It's at 7 o'clock. >> And I'll have we'll confirm that, but
we're holding we've been asked to hold that date. So >> they were supposed to meet on the 23rd and there was a huge snowstorm and so a lot of things got cancelled and pushed pushed out a little bit. So
>> I'll have a revised report no later than Monday. >> Oh, this is good. >> Okay, so thank you. Um and I think that wraps up our agenda for tonight unless there's something else. Well, we didn't talk
about the comment letter for the Blue Hills Parkway project. >> Um, and I I know the timeline for the comments is coming to the deadline before our next meeting. So, >> so we can talk about that real quick >> and we'll just say thank you and good
night Caroline. Appreciate it. You don't need to stay on. >> Thank you. Good night. Kathleen, thank you and Larry. Thank you. Okay. >> Yeah, I thought that was a really good letter. Um, I know Cheryl sent some
comments which Liz picked up. So, I mean, some of it I I guess now that we saw the presentation, we see that there it's on their radar, but I don't think it hurts to reinforce it. So, and I think it shows that our interest even to DCR that we submit a letter. So,
I I would like to submit it. And yeah, >> I don't think even if we even if there's more that we would might want to say, I don't think there's anything there'll be other opportunities. I think it's important to demonstrate at this time period our support. So, I'd make a
motion to um submit this letter. And I think if you're fine with it, um, Meredith, to have Liz be the signator on the on the letter on our behalf. >> Yes. >> Does it get into the figure 8
intersection or just the Parkway? >> She said she asked us to support that as well. >> They're not This is not studying that. So that's why >> that's why I'm just wondering >> did we
>> she had mentioned something about if we want to get that addressed >> comment about yeah the configuration between Brook Road and the bridge to the north. >> It's not part it's not part of the study area but very important. >> It was included in Liz's letter.
>> Yeah it I I included that comment from from Cheryl. >> Right. Um and um so yeah, it does address that, but it is outside of this area as far as as far as I understand >> for these improvements. >> Just good to let them know that it's on
our radar. >> Yeah, I'll second. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor? >> I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. So move >> second. >> Second.
>> All in favor? Thank you all.