[Music] Red.
Good evening and welcome to the 37th meeting of fiscal year 2025 for the Milton Planning Board. At this time, I would like to now call the meeting to order and begin by with the our introduction of the U. Planning Board
and our staff. Um here tonight we have with us Cheryl Tagayas, secretary, Sean Fehee, member, Mag Yfield, member, Jim Davis, member, and Meredith Hall serving as chair. Um we have with us on Zoom Julia is on vacation. Um so Cheyenne if
you can introduce yourself. Cheyenne Frasio, assistant director of planning. Great. Thank you so much and welcome um everyone here tonight. Um so moving to the administrative items. We have um two sets of minutes that came in um for
approval. Um I don't know if everybody had a chance to read those edits. Um, they were for the 27th of March and the 7th of April. I haven't read them yet. You haven't? They just came in late this afternoon. Okay. So, they're very minor.
If you like a couple of words. Do you happen to have them? Yes, I do. Yes. If you um Yeah. Do you want to just um Yeah. I'm sorry. I'm having trouble logging into the one drive, but I can look up the email where I sent them. Okay. Forward.
Sure. I just had one while you're going through that, I just had one comment. I'm fine with both of those. On the April 7th, um where it says Shiloh Theren uh an out of town real estate developer, she was act she's actually uh
was an agent representing them. So that's a good catch. Not a developer. And then uh switch that to agent. So that's very small. And then on the March 27th um under where we were discussing parameters for a hypothetical adjacent
community scenario model which is the second to last paragraph um that should have been Mr. Gaya said that she believed the 10% plan was ready to submit to the public that was final after that that you saying that that was ready and and that discussion was
continued to April 7th. So instead of 25, that was 10. Okay. Those are the only two things I had. I'm fine with those. Okay. Fine with me. So, um, is there a motion, unless you want to still look for what you're No, no. I found what I had sent. So, that's
fine. I'll make a motion to approve the March 27th and the April. Wait, Sean, you were not here for one of them, so we should do them separately. Mhm. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve the March 27th meeting minutes as amended um tonight in our meeting. Second. All in
favor? I I don't abstain. I from that one. Great. And then I'll make a motion to approve the April 7th minutes as amended at our meeting tonight. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? I. Great. Thank you so much.
Um okay so next uh the next discussion of next meeting dates um we have a meeting scheduled which is a Wednesday but it's the 30th um following the elections and that's just for a reorganization meeting but we do have on
that um MBTA community discussion as well to follow up um so that will be included as the only real items and then of course we move to town meeting the following week which it starts with Monday the 5th, 6th, and hopefully not
further than that. But and then do we meet on the 8th of May? Did we? We had tentatively discussed meeting on the 8th of May. So I would maybe hold it a placeholder for that if you can. I can I'll just be a little bit late for that one. Okay. And um and on the 30th um
that is fully remote. They didn't have a room for us. So just to make note that it's a fully remote meeting. Okay. Okay. And now we can go to Cheyenne for your staff update. Um, I do not have any current updates
other than we are working on getting our Mtown meeting articles um, finalized up today and sent in. Great. Which All right. Um, so with that we have we can move to our citizen speak. if there's
anyone on Zoom or in the public which w which wishes to speak um you'll have an opportunity also um if something is on the agenda to speak later on that but if you anyone would like to join us um at this time feel free any hands up Cheyenne yes we have
one person on Zoom um Brian okay welcome Brian Evening. Can you hear me? Yes. Welcome. Okay. Good evening. Brian Furs. Uh, Precinct 10. Uh, one address is 6:30 Brushill Road in Milton. Um,
thanks for taking my comments. I'm actually calling in from vacation and will not be able to be on later. So, I was hoping I could quickly um put a question out for the board to be answered during the uh scheduled MBTA
discussion. Um I had submitted a uh alternative map scenario through the chair and just was wondering if anything had been done with that. Uh I know there's been a couple of other requests by town citizens for uh studies by UTL
and examinations of different um alternatives. We that was shared um with the board just to comment just to let you know Brian um we were at the time trying to narrow that corridor um on Elliot Street. So we did not move forward with
that. Thank you. I'm sorry. Was that an answer to me? Yes. Could you hear? Um, we did we it was shared with the board, but at the time we were moving forward with narrowing um that Elliot Street corridor, so we did not add on
additional land area, but we didn't discuss it at a meeting. I don't know that we ever discussed it. Yeah. No, it was shared to us by email, but we didn't discuss it at a meeting. Yeah. Yeah. And and the reason I sent the plan, and not trying to discuss this with the board, but the reason I sent the plan is uh
because it was an attempt to narrow the Elliott Street Quarter. It pulled all of the um all of the area back to just the first parcel. So um anyway, that thank you for Thank you for giving me your answer. That's great. Thank you.
Okay, anyone else on Zoom? Cheyenne? No other hands raised. Okay, great. Um thank you. So um we can now open um we have uh we continue the public hearing for the zoning articles uh the accessory
dwelling units and the site plan approval. Um is there anyone who wishes to speak on any of those? Um those will be on the Maytown meeting. Um they've been voted and approved by the warrant committee and are in the current warrant. But if anyone has a comment on those um we're happy to do that before
we close the public hearing. Any hands up? Cheyenne on Zoom. No hands on Zoom. Okay. So, with that, if I could have a motion to close the public hearing um for both the accessory
dwelling units and the site plan approval. I'll make a motion to close the public hearing for both accessory dwelling units and site plan approval zoning articles. Sec. Is there a second? Second. All in
favor? All right. Okay. So now um it is past 7:15 exactly. Um so we now can invite the team for the site plan approval for two Elliot Street to join us at table here.
Good evening and welcome back. Good evening. Good evening. Good evening. Nice to be back. Good. Um, thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board. Ned Corkran for the record, uh, an attorney at 26 High Street, and I'm joined by JD Wild and Dan Carrian,
who are the proponents of an exciting new, uh, market uh, plan for um, the redevelopment of the old uh, Bank of America building at the corner of Adams and Elliott. It really is an elegant
response to the historic nature of the building uh and a revitalization uh of the area. We're going to start with an Yep, we got it. So, we'll start with a with the we'll call it the sizzle. Uh Dan Carrian, who you know from Steel and
Ry um uh has is going to be the basically the the brains behind the inside of the building. and the inside of the building is really uh really a special u thing and then JD will take over and talk about the outside uh process and close with with questions
that uh the board and others may have. So thank you. Great. Awesome. Thank you Ned for the introduction. Thanks to the board for hearing us tonight. Um so yeah we have uh the slides um up here on the screen. This first slide uh just to sort
of reorient um we talked about this a few months back but the building is situated at 2 Elliot which is facing uh Elliot Street on the corner of Adams and Elliot uh the old Bank of America building. Um and this image here just sort of depicts uh what our vision is
for bringing this building back to life. Um the the description here um we've just sort of described out a little bit you know what our vision is for this building uh to bring it back but Milton Village stands as a charming walkable enclave nestled along the Neponit River
blending small town warmth with urban convenience um a notable landmark the building at two Elliot Street contributes to the village's character and vitality anchoring it anchoring its role as both a historic and evolving hub
Um but this idea of two Elliot Street um sort of being the anchor uh or the hub for Milton Village uh is really exciting to us. Uh next slide. One more. Um so this would just like to
introduce um our vision of the successful execution of this market um as well as the name. So, 2 Pence Market, uh, the old bank at 2 Elliot Street has been brought back to life with purpose and pride as 2 Pence Market. It once again serves as a cornerstone of the
Milton community, as a coffee shop, a neighborhood grocery, and a daily hangout. Walk through our doors and you'll feel it immediately. Everything here is thoughtfully made and worth coming back for. Your visit feels like a discovery, your first visit feels like a discovery, your second like a welcome
return, and every visit after that like home. at 2 Pence Market, you're not a customer, you're a neighbor. Uh so this idea of um basically building uh this market that meets the moment, this this you know revitalizing this
building in a way that is there for the community to to serve the community, serve the needs of the community at any time of day, any day of the week. Um, so meeting the moment is uh something that we've talked about quite a bit where you're commuting to work in the morning,
you can grab a coffee or a bagel, you're coming out of the gym or 60 Adam Street, um you can grab a smoothie or coldressed juice, there's there's uh beautiful produce, um there's a floral market, there's prepared meals. Um in the
evening we're we're planning to have a full ice cream operation as well. Uh which we think will be, you know, just one more reason to use this property and this area as a gathering place. And you know, one of the things we've noticed is obviously so hectic down there in the morning. In the evening, you have all
these beautiful buildings. You have the river. Um everything's well lit and it's very quiet there at night. So, this idea of having the the trellis patio and terrace area lit up outside at night and a little ice cream operation going on is is pretty exciting to us as well. Um,
some of the branding you can see here, we're just really looking to use the building um as inspiration. And, you know, one of the things we've talked so much about is we didn't come up with this idea to build a market and then walk around looking for the building to
put it in this building. uh trying to figure out, you know, as a Milton resident and owner of Steel and Ry and JD owns these buildings uh down in the village. The idea was sort of looking at this building and saying what would be the best use for the community, what would be the best, you know, asset for
the village and the people that live here. So, this idea of of restoring this building back and putting something into it that would really serve the community well is the idea and that's what meeting the moment is. Next slide. Um this we loved. We we found um this uh
original sort of marketing pamphlet for Blue Hill Bank and Trust Company which was the first um occupant of the building and um the idea of utilizing this in some of our historic you know some of the branding but using some historic inspiration. This is just an
example of a little cafe that's done something similar. But I think you can expect to see that building um as we've as we clean up and restore the exterior to utilize that. Uh next slide. Um I won't go too deep into every
product that we're going to sell, but uh the idea of this being a great place to grab a bit of produce, some grass-fed beef, local pantry staples, um some freshly prepared things like bagels or juices or smoothies. um prepared meals,
flowers, all of those things. Uh next slide, please. Um this I'd love to just do a a quick 30 second walk through because I think this really informs um how the inside of this building can be brought back to life.
You know, as the bank obviously um just kind of a big hollow space. Um that the idea here which we're most excited about is reactivating that front center entrance. Um such a beautiful grand entrance and it's been um sort of
barricaded with um rod iron railings for as long as I can remember. So reactivating that as you enter up through that that front entryway there would be um floral filling the outside vestibule and inside produce straight
ahead. And as you walk left around that center island of produce display, you see a small seating area with a few tables and a few chairs uh surrounding the existing fireplace. Um continuing past that would be the counter service area where you
could order a coffee or a juice or a bagel. Um there'll be some cold cases there with prepared meals, uh pre-built salads with proteins and things like that for lunch items. Um, behind that counter is the existing vault area. And
that area is where we're uh proposing a little miniature uh wine, spirits, and uh beer section to the market kind of tucked away, but um you know, not not a hugely extensive selection, but just a very specific
selection. local beers, um a small selection of spirits that we think are really wellmade, handcrafted things, um and then a nice selection of wines, things that were pair nicely with prepared meals, but also serve as a a simple way to run in and grab a gift for dinner at your neighbor's house or
something like that. Um and then finally, as you uh to the right side of the screen, you'll see a counter area. We're expecting or we're planning for uh a mini ice cream parlor to operate out of that section and then a few registers by the uh second door and probably a
flow where the majority of the traffic will flow in through the center and out through that right side. So nice circular pattern inside. Next slide please. I think the next few slides just sort of walk through uh our vision for what most of the products will be. So we don't
have to spend too much time on that. But floral next slide. Uh definitely fresh produce. Uh we work at Steel and Ry with lots of local farms. So whenever possible and in season we'll be using uh local New
England farms. Uh next slide. Um definitely prepackaged foods, cold storage, um fresh beverages, things like that. Next slide. Uh pantry staples. Next
slide. And of course, uh wine, spirits, and beer. And next slide. Um this is this is an area uh to the right side of the building where there is already an existing window. We're imagining opening that up for a pickup
section. Um so if you order products inside, you're able to pick them up out there which would be adjacent to the terrace area. Next slide, please. And I think that's pretty much it for the the food and beverage uh portion of it and just sort of our
vision for what the market will be in the community. head over to JD. You guys mind if I stand up towards the screen? No, just Yeah, take the microphone with you. Yeah, great. So, what you're looking at um in this current slide is the existing conditions. And what I want to do is I
want to direct your attention to the perimeter of the building. Um it's it's pretty bare and kind of vacant right now. It's really got no life to it. So, like I presented in the last time in our goal for this for this presentation is to really display kind of how we're intending to activate it. Next slide,
please. So, this is the existing conditions front of the building. Um, and I think this picture does a really good job kind of showing the condition of the bank. Uh, it feels cold, feels unapproachable, it feels empty, feels like it's been vacant for decades. Um, so our goal,
like Dan said, is to activate this front staircase here and really kind of make this pop. So, when you're standing at that intersection, the first thing you see when you come to Milton Village is uh this building. and it it sets the tone for the rest of the village. Next slide, please. So, what I'm going to do in the
next couple of slides is lay out specifically how we intend to activate this exterior space. I'm going to start with the front facade and then we're going to work our way to the left pergola and then we'll work our way to this corner. Uh I think it's easiest to break it down in those three sections. Next slide,
please. So, this is a a rendering of of what we're proposing for the exterior to start to look like. Uh the things I want to point out are we're going to bring in new doors, which I'll I'll lay out on the next slide. Uh that was very important to us. Um right now they're aluminum storefront doors. Again, it feels very cold, feels very uh very much
like a bank. We want to activate those doors similar to steel and Ry how that has that really grand kind of front entrance. Uh we are proposing to paint the existing windows black, leave the trim white, leave all the trim white. With everything being white, it just feels a little dated. It needs a little bit um dichotomy and distinction between
the trim and the windows. We are proposing to add this pergola which I'll cover in a separate slide but for the purpose of this I just really want to draw your attention to what we're going to do to activate this front. And if you go to the next slide please. So this is our inspiration for the doors. Um this is really what we're
targeting right here. Each of these different images kind of pulls a different feature but um uh I have a an artist who does um hand stencil gold lettering similar to this like you see in in Back Bay. Uh open glass. There'll be black doors. the door at the side and
the door at the front will match. Uh, but again, the goal is to make it feel like a like a much higherend establishment, a much warmer, much more welcoming approach. Next slide, please. So, the next area I'm going to kind of walk you through is this uh patio area. Next slide,
please. So, this is the existing conditions. Again, it it it feels almost awkward. It almost feels like it's like an awkward piece of public land that's just kind of sitting out there by itself. Um, so our goal is to activate it. Uh this is the takeout window that Dan was just talking about. It's an existing window. We are going to widen
it a little bit. And the goal there um one of the things I I've talked to Dan a lot about is as a consumer going into Steel and Ry um it's hard to get in and get out of there and especially when there's a backedup line for the bakery. So the goal will be to be efficient in how people flow through this space. So if there's Uber Eats or if there's um uh
somebody who's sitting on the patio waiting for the order, they don't have to sit inside and they don't have to bottleneck the whole operation. They can come sit outside. Next slide, please. So, this is what we're proposing. Again, if you notice, uh, this is a service window. Now, if you notice, this is a newer door. It's not the aluminum
storefront. We've added some really attractive sconces at at the entrances. And then this is a pergola structure that will span over the existing grass area. Um, we've brought in some beastro lights, a bunch of native plantings. Um, if you go next slide, I'll I'll kind of
lay out what the pergola is going to look like. So, one of the things you're going to notice in our presentation tonight that differs from when we were before this board um last year was that uh initially there's a the red mulch area just beyond this area. And initially we had shown what's possible
there for activation. When Dan and I really started to dig in here and figured out how we want to execute on this, we decided to really put a lot more emphasis on the pergola area and spend some more money on the pergola itself and remove that for a later phase. So that what we proposed before is not part of this project. That next
the upper area So what that allows us to do is really invest in this pergola. So initially we had talked about maybe doing a woodframe pergola. But um I think Dan's interest is to really activate that patio for as many months of the year as possible. So um this is an aluminum pergola with a matte black
powder coat finish. It has a louvered roof so it becomes watertight. So if it does rain you can close it on a beautiful day. It can stay open. It also has mechanical sides so when it does become cold with heat lamps we can lower the sides. It's it's aesthetically pleasing. it maintains well. Uh they're
very consistent in restaurant uses. Um so, you know, the goal was just to really kind of show you what it's going to look like. And this is these are all very good representations of a restaurant setting. Next slide, please. So, this is again another view if you're looking in. This is the
pergola underneath. We're going to address it with some plantings, which I'll go over with some beastro lighting, some patio tables. Um the next thing I'm going to go over is the uh the pvious pavers that we're going to use for the floor. Uh, next slide, please. So, uh, we're going to use a a
red, uh, permeable patio paver that'll look just like a brick. Uh, it's going to be done in a herring bone pattern with a nice border. Uh, this image is meant to reflect what an aerial would look like. Um, for those of you who aren't familiar, permeable pavers allow storm water drainage to go through the
mortar joints of the pavers themselves, uh, which allows us to kind of minimize any major obstructions and have more usable patio space. Next slide, please. This is a vantage uh looking back. It kind of ties it all together and just let you know what it would look like if you were sitting in the patio looking
out at um Elliott Street. Next slide. And then this is just kind of a reiteration of what we went over. So the the design elements we're bringing to this pergola area is uh integrated concrete planters. Uh some of the existing concrete we're going to reuse and turn those into planters. We're
going to hang vines from the pergola, make it feel uh very warm. um very intentional, very very much like a bookstore, cafe, local place to have a cup of coffee, the pergola structure we went over. And then um you know, from a design aesthetic, we're really trying to tie in the black in the copper. So the
building right now has existing copper flashing. Um we're going to maintain all the copper details and then anything we do for an exposed metal is going to carry that. So we're really trying to simplify the exterior pallet. So, it's going to be red brick, white trim, black on the windows, black on the pergola,
black on the planters, and then copper for all the flashing. So, very simple, uh, but timeless. Next slide, please. So, the next area I'd like to draw your attention to is the front corner. It's a very important corner because it's the intersection. Again, it's it's if you're coming from Doorchester, it's the first thing you
see. If you're sitting at the stoplight, from pretty much any direction, you stare at it. So, um, it's always been one of my least favorite parts of the existing building. It just feels very unintentional. The building's oriented to Elliot Street. It just feels like that left side's always been neglected. Next slide,
please. So again, I think this is a perfect representation of it. This is what it feels like right now. Feels very cold. Um, feels very unintentional. It doesn't feel like this is an intended vantage point. Next slide, please. And here's what we're proposing. Um, looking to activate in a few
different ways. Um, one of which is we're we're adding decorative copper sconces all around the perimeter here to give it that old kind of timeless historic look. We're adding uh we're getting rid of the black rod iron railing and we're adding a a a black planter system here as well with an
evergreen hedge to kind of create some privacy and a buffer between the seating. We are proposing the same uh red permeable patio pavers for this patio area as well. And these will predominantly be a series of tube tops. Um, and then some attractive ivy and vines growing up uh the side of the
building. Next slide, please. So, this is a good example of of uh how using planters can create a visual divide without actually having to build a wall. Um, very similar to this. Uh, we're proposing a um an ink berry
holly and evergreen shrub. Um, it's relatively hardy. It's native on the perimeter. Uh it'll look very similar to this with a matte black powder coated to match the pergola on the other side. This is a representation of of kind of the growing the ivy, the vine that we're talking about doing up the side of the
building. Uh next slide, please. This is a planting schedule uh that we're anticipating for all the planters on the site. Um from a focus standpoint, our goal was really to bring in native seasonal interest, pollinator friendly things that are low maintenance. Uh we did bring in some
winter interest uh with the ink berry, bear berry and some switchgrass to provide structure and evergreen appeal in the colder months. Some pollinator support uh plant these are all planter friendly. Um and then there's a layering approach somewhat thoughtful in the sense that the taller grasses and the shrubs will be in the center the back
and the cascading plants like the creeping flocks will be towards the edges. Um I think that's it for that slide. Next slide please. Um, this is just a uh an example and just kind of refreshing uh this board on on what's possible in the parking lot in
the future. Uh, I'm sure most of you are familiar that Wararf Park, the project that's being done there. Uh, we would love some sort of collaboration so that this could be an addition to the farmers market. This could be something that Dan puts on with his team that supports that. There's just a lot of opportunity to shut down parking in that parking lot
and have that be part of stuff we do down in the village. So, this is just an example of what's possible. Next slide, please. So, now I'm I'm going to uh somewhat just breeze through the interior where our design theme was. So, our theme is a refurbished bank. So, um
we're trying to incorporate a lot of the existing components, but also bring in a little bit more modern of a feel. So, this slide's just meant to reflect all the different textures and colors that we use in our design. Next slide, please. So, these are inspiration images. Um you know, it it it has a
grand feel already, but it's very dark. Um it doesn't, you know, if you notice that a lot of the bright and the aerial finishes in here kind of bring it to life. A lot of greenery. Um you know, not French beasty, not taté, but more of a a historic kind of neutral palette.
Next slide, please. Um these are the different components. Um we've got some existing chandeliers that we're intending to refurbish. We've got some old bank picture lights we're going to refurbish. We're going to up upcycle some of the deposit boxes, neutral paint tones, warm
wood accents. uh warm um uh leathered quartzite for the countertop. Um uh pendants for countertop lighting. Next slide, please. Uh when you walk in the front door uh right now, um one of the things
that Dan and I have spent a lot of time talking about is really making that feel grand. And I I always imagined it kind of being like an old AMP where you walk in, there's a tile inlay right at the mouth of the entrance there. So this slide is just meant to reflect kind of what it can feel like when you step into a space and immediately are are kind of
overwhelmed with design intent. Next slide, please. Uh carry the inspiration through the bathrooms. Again, classy, clean, kind of timeless. Next slide, please. And then this is the the last slide of the deck, but we actually the
the image that Dan had shared earlier um when we were moving some of the components of the vault, I actually found that behind the vault. So, it was the original marketing material from when the bank first opened. I found a deposit slip from 1929 when the bank first opened in fully intact, a mint
condition in that envelope. Um, and I sent it to Dan immediately. I said, "What what stands out to me about this image is that if it almost feels like you're going to an opera house. It feels so grand and it feels like it was designed with so much intent to be this extraordinary building and it doesn't feel like that anymore." So, um I found
in one of the uh historical references for the village that the architect had said that his design intent was to be reminiscent of aristocratic New England structures built for public service and prosperous towns. And I just wanted to close with saying that um like Dan had mentioned that we didn't just say we want to put a market, let's find a
building. We actually designed the exterior and the interior, right? So the the concept itself gives life back to the building and fulfills the original design intent of the building and then a lot of our exterior design improvements as well. So, it's a combination of the two that bring it together. And that's
the end of our presentation. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much. That's really incredible and an amazing amount of thought and detail that you've put into this presentation. Um, questions from the board. I just have one. JD, could
you go back and bring up the image that um shows the the uh area enclosed the um the pergola? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sean, if you could go back, please. This one. Yeah. So, where where's the
best uh uh point to it enclosed? What does it look like? Uh so, it retracts. So, it it retracts up. So, uh part of the reason why this frame is so thick. It's similar to um integrated blinds in a house. Sure. You have to build a pretty thick structure for it to
retract. So, it actually retracts up into there so you can't see it and then it comes down. Is it clear? Uh, no. It Well, you can choose different finishes. But, um, this one would be a a very, um, it's not clear. It's it's like a very light mesh. So, it's got it's almost got like a screen like in your window finish, okay? Where it comes down to
where you can see through it just like a screen in your window. Okay. But at the same time, it's got small enough holes as to where it can actually maintain. Okay. Uh, temperature. Okay. So, it's mostly a barrier to keep out rain, rain, mosquitoes, bugs. Uh, and if you do have heat in there, just like
heat lamps, it's not meant to be warm where you can sleep in there, but it's warm enough to take the edge off so you can enjoy the space in a colder month. Okay, great. Yeah. Is that intended to be attached to the building or detached from it? Um, it doesn't have to be. We were thinking
that we wanted to span over the handicap ramp because I think it feels more complete. So, uh, it could be done in two ways where it could post down right in front of the building itself or ledger to the building itself. Um, as of right now, we're exploring ledgering to the building just to avoid more unnecessary posts.
Um, that was that was where we're headed with the design. And on the street side, there's there is a retaining wall there now, right? Otherwise, yeah, if you go back one slide, Trey, uh, excuse me, one more slide. Yeah, this is what's there now. Again, it's it's kind of we plan to repoint all
that red brick. So, that'll stay though, right? That'll stay. Okay. Nice. Great. That's That's actually beautiful work. It just needs some love. Maggie, you're Thank you. Yep. Quick question for us. So, on the Adam Street side, do you think you'll have the depth
from the sidewalk to the building to do the I mean, I love the planters. Like, it's really slick. Yep. Uh but then to do seating, I'm not seeing a dimension on here. So, this this slide is actually really helpful for you. So you see the thickness. It's almost 2 ft thick. The planter would sit on the top of this
granite stone. Um I know I get that. I'm talking down on the other side. The other corner. It has the same retaining the same with the same cap. Yep. Okay. If you go to the right, Cheyenne a few slides. I think there's a existing. Keep going. Keep going, please.
Few more. I think it's on the next corner. Yeah, right here. So see how it's got the same detail. All right. So So this railing would be removed and the planters would sit on the top of the wall. Okay. And then beyond that, you do have space to be seating. Oh, we do. If
you go back one slide. Okay. I don't know if there's a measurement on here, but this is um you know, I think it's about eight eight in the widest part. I want to say it's almost 8 to 10 feet. It gets a little thinner. Yeah. So you have room for a fouroot walking path and like I said, a two top up against the building. Great. And JD, one more
question on that perglay area. How how far down do you have to take that grade to get because that grade rises with um So what we're doing is we're cutting Oh, I'm sorry. Is this I didn't realize there's a touch screen. This is an accessible landing here. So we're
bringing the walking grade down to this accessible landing. So in the lowest point it's coming down about 2 and 1/2 ft. In the furthest point, it's coming down about 6 ft. But this retaining wall right here, actually this ramp slopes up, this retaining wall comes down. So
it's already built down to that depth. So we're leaving all of this retaining wall and then we're just reinforcing this wall. Great. So So when you take out the deepest part that the bottom of that wall might not be deep enough as it is right now. So we did test fits on
this on the brick wall. The brick wall definitely is not. So we are intending to shore that wall. Got it. Um, these two walls again because it's it's hard to see from this elevation, but because the ramp goes up and this wall is like this, it already the ramp is actually lower than the greater the patio will
be. So, I it would be hard for me to do a test bit without digging up that entire No, I understand that. But we're pretty confident that we have the depth that we need with the walls. That's great. Retaining that wall would be nice. Yeah. Yeah, I agree. Thanks. Yep. So, I have a I have a few questions, but
I u first want to say I love the concept. Um I love the um activation on this corner. I'm I'm really excited to see some more activity in Milton Village. Um it's a great building and what you're looking to do, you know, is
great. So, I just have a few kind of operational kind of questions really and maybe some for a little bit more um information. Um, is there exhaust associated, I'm sure, with the kitchen and the basement. Is that going to run straight up through the building or is
there and and through that center? Well, Yep. That's a good question. It won't run straight up through the building. It will run up the uh come out the back of the building. Yeah, I believe on the parking lot side there's a there's a flat roof at JD can explain it better, I'm sure. There's a flat roof like right
here which is on the back side of the building. So, all mechanicals, everything's going to vent through that roof. It's all going to be on that roof. On that roof, there is a twoft parapit. So, most of the mechanicals, everything is submerged from the street level. So, when you're looking up plus the ter parapit, there'll be very little exposed
above it. So that um I think it would be helpful to have a roof plan which shows you know where the equipment is going to be um just so that we know we have it documented you know so when you're going into construction and so that we're just
all clear how the exhaust is being handled because um you know that's an an important feature um especially if you're going to want to activate all sides of the building. Um, and then there's a couple of things that were noted in the narrative that I
didn't see on the plans. Like you you mentioned you're going to have bike um racks. I didn't see those on the plan. Yep. So like if you could put those on the plan, you know, show us how many you're going to have. Um and then also you um mentioned that you were going to
be doing a lot of composting. So is that going to be held outside and is it near the dumpster just you know where that's going to go? Um, and then I really would like to see some the elevations that kind of show, you know, the building elevations would show the things that you were talking
about like u so that we can see the heights, the relative heights to things. Um, like signage, where will the signage go? Um, how what the mounting height of the light fixtures are relative to the windows. Just a little more detail about how you're going to do that.
Conceptually it all looks good but um you know having it um documented on the elevations I think would be helpful. Um and then uh things of operational side deliveries you intend to do that in the parking
lot. Yes. So there's two there are two entrances. Um there's there's an entrance on the Adam Street side that goes directly into the basement. So that's accessed sort of adjacent to the back parking lot entrance. So we would imagine vehicles,
you know, we could direct vehicles to park in the back lot and load in there. Um, and there's also uh ramp entrance. Is it is it fully ramped to go into the street level from the back parking lot as well? Um, but yeah. Do you see that as being um large enough for the
vehicles that you anticipate making deliveries here? Do you do you think you're going to need vehicles that would park in the street or park in the parking spaces? I'm just thinking like the loading zone at Steel and Ry. Mhm. Yeah. Our our vision was that vehicles would would pull in unload pull back
into the lot straight in probably blocking the lot off, unload, and then move out from there. You know, the deliveries would be relatively quick. Um, I don't think that we would need a full loading zone, but uh certainly something we could address, I think, in the future if it seemed like it was an
issue, but knowing that we have have the parking lot area accessible in the back and that's where both of the um delivery entrances would be, I think that's probably where we would start would be directing all deliveries to to back into that lot
um sort of along the curb line that is adjacent to the to the citizens ATM. Okay. And then um your hours of operation, we're planning 6:30 a.m. open
um with loosely probably a 9:00 p.m. close. And then is that 7 days a week? 7 days a week. And then how about um that outdoor seating area? Is that open the same hours?
Yes. And the the beer, wine, and spirits, do you anticipate that those can be consumed on site or those to take out? That would be uh off- premise retail. Off- premise. Okay. Um and then the Uber Eats. I'm a little
concerned about that location of the pickup and the intersection. Yeah. You know, I think you all know that street and that intersection is challenging. people come down and want to make that turn to the right.
Um, have you thought about whether you would want to approach the town about those parking spaces right in front? Whether those could be a limited 15minute or, you know, kind of a pickup drop off and any other thing that could help like I'm just kind of concerned
about how that congestion is going to build at the intersection there if there's extensive Uber or takeout, pick up, drop off, where people are going to go. Double parking. Exactly. Yeah. Um, we we could certainly consider it. I think we could also, you know, we could potentially earmark a spot in the back
as well, um, if necessary, rather than than changing street signs on the street, but um, is probably for the bank, right? People running in. Yeah. Okay. And then, um, the other thing that that helpful, I think, is that High Street is one way
up, right? Um, so there's no conflict of traffic coming down High Street and entering into the flow that's on Adam Street. You know, my office is halfway up the hill, right? It's um it's it's strictly one way up and that's where a lot of people who would run into the bank would park
on that high street while they and run into the gym and run into uh Wait, so on that point, do you think your customers will need longer than 15 minutes parking? I think some would for sure, but I think, you know, for Uber Eats or people that have ordered ahead and are
running to pick something up, I think those 15-minute spots would be great. One one thing we we we do believe about parking is that not every person that's coming to the market is driving to Adams and Elliot parking and going in. I think you're in the gym, you've already, you know, you've parked, you've gone to the
gym and then you're you're popping in or you're heading down to jump on the trolley and you pop into the market or you're at the post office, you're using the village for something else and the market is is part of your trip. So, I don't think, you know, I think a a pretty significant number of visits that
we'll get daily, they're in the village for something else already. You know, I think between higher ground 60s and muscle and flow, I think we'll see lots of traffic from those spots. Um, so people who have come down, parked somewhere else, gone in for a class, and
then they're they're coming out and hopefully hit the market on the way out before they go to their vehicle. Yeah. You don't anticipate the 15minute um needing to change to a longer period of time. Actually didn't realize it was there. I think it'd be really helpful. Yeah. And I just had one other question
coming. Um, the location of the beverage cases seem to be in front of the windows on the Elliot Street side. Is is that the case? Nope. They're they'll be actually set into um set into the walls like so on the left and the right when you enter in there is a there's a I
don't mention maybe a sixft stretch of space before you reach the first window. Okay. So there's so there's nothing blocking the windows then. That was really that would be bad design. The cooler actually drops down. So it's a full standup cooler in a six foot space and that drops down underneath the
window. All right. Yeah, it just it was hard to tell from the plan how tall those are because there's it's showing refrigeration sections there on the plan. The window. Yeah. Okay. I don't think the landlord would be window. Well, just have to ask. All
right. Um Yeah, those are my questions. And on the hours of operation, um, is that pretty standard for, um, commercial in the our commercial districts, 6:30 to 9? I don't know the answer to that.
Yeah, I don't I don't know. There there's a you know, there's a town bylaw um time, but I don't know the answer. I don't know, for example, when Dunkin Donuts opens in East Milton. Yeah. So, I think Dunkin Donuts in East Mil, they I think they have a permit for 5:30. Mhm.
So, my understanding that we I don't think we actually have hours of operation in the commercial district, we'll say, which I kind of found a little bit odd. Well, the gym is open early, right? Muscle and Yeah, we open at uh 5:00 a.m. Yeah. That's Yeah. And
that's under the purview of the of the select board as the licensing board is, you know, time. They they'll have to grant the liquor license. Um it's it is a liquor license for not for consumption on the premises. The town still has I think two licenses available to give
out. You know we have a we separately have a history of having to apply for oneoffs for um liquor license for consumption on premises. Obviously steel and ry is one of those. Um, but I think you know as you as you say Steel and Ry
is a come in, sit down, you're there for an hour, hour and a half. Um, unless you're just going in to buy bread, but otherwise you're there. And so your need for parking for a longer period of time is there. This is a different strikes me as a much different concept.
And I'm not against the 6:30 start time. I just sort of was wondering what the um the general time was. Um cuz I would think that perhaps you might need earlier if Muscle and Flows open at 5
and 6:30. I I think a lot of people could be on the road if they're driving into Boston. Um they so I don't I'm not you know it comes down to your staff too but um so I don't know if um um I was
just wondering what the the bylaw was. I didn't think we had one. So I think coffee break is open at 6:00. Yeah, I'm guessing. But I know they're open steel and I opens at 7. They're open before that. So, and then um when you close at
9 um will the pergola patio area or your patio areas be open to the public for people to hang out in after hours? I think once we've closed the building, we we'll probably, you know, have that area
closed as lights are off and things like that because it looks like it'd be a good place for kids to Yeah, there'd be an insurance risk associated with that. So, they'd have to really pay attention to their insurance requirements. Yeah. And if like if you lived at Milton Hill
House, you know, you might see people kind of hanging around after hours. So, I don't know if you had like a gate or something you were planning on closing. Yeah, we could certainly add a, you know, at least a simple chain and signage that it's closed or opened. Um,
so I think once once we've closed and cleaned up for the night, we certainly want the property empty. Yeah. Lights would want to be off unless they were on a on a trigger for um motion detection, but you'd want lights off after a certain period of
time. And you know, we do prov do provide that the lighting will be dark sky compliant. Um so, and then when your um pergola sides are down, are you still allowed to have your heat lights, heat lamps inside
going? I mean, is that a fire code thing? Uh that would be a question for the fire department. I I'm not aware of any restriction as long as it's not an open flame like they have infrared heaters and that can change those requirements. So I think if you would have an open flame it would probably
change that. Yeah. Um but we'd be looking to leverage infrared and other sorts of more efficient technologies. Okay. I've got a quickie. the um space behind the pergola and uh on the high street side, it just says um proposed lowmaintenance plantings and
landscaping. I mean, is that just going to be kind of wild flowersowers or? Yes, right now. Yeah, right now it's just a red mulch bed. We were just going to carry some of our plantings that we had around so it was consistent and just not have it just be a dead mulch bed, just have low-level plantings in there. So,
nothing crazy, but it's not like a butterfly sanctuary or anything. We just wanted to have um like a nice clean presentation. So, and is that the same elevation as High Street or the same elevation as the pergola? And could you use that space is what I'm getting at. So, in our initial proposal when we came before this board, uh we were intended
to use that space. Uh and I think there is once this is up and running, it's developing cash flow. We've proven the concept to the town and uh you know, we we think we're probably coming back at some point. We just when we were talking through how to execute on this the pergola the way we wanted to do it became an expense expensive investment.
Um you've heard me say it before but complexity is the enemy of execution. We really wanted to slim this down and get it open and running. Um prove what we're capable of doing and then if we find that there's a need for expansion we would come back before this board for that approval. Fair enough. And then the the seven spots in the back they'll be
open. I mean, they'll be accessible to your customers seven days a week, unless you do the outdoor concept of the food trucks. Uh, correct. Special occasion. Yeah, if there was a special occasion, we'd probably close it down for that occasion, but otherwise, it's open. Great. Thank you. One question. Oh,
sorry. And also, have you um had a neighborhood um kind of um neighborhood over there to get their um input or concerns or approval? Not yet. One more question. Um, by the way, I
think it's a fantastic project. Uh, great to revitalize just an awesome building like you said, and I do agree with you. When you drive up, you come through the village, it is the first thing you see. So, it's going to be terrific. Do you do you um do you have a path forward, a timeline that you could share with us? And and if you don't,
it's understandable, but if you do, uh, we currently don't have a building commissioner. So, the uh I submitted the building permit. Uh I think last time I was before this board I think I mentioned that my goal is by year end to uh we submitted our full building permit by the end of the year. Um it has not been reviewed yet because of the uh lack
of commercial support at the building department. So So JD you have a full set of construction drawings that you have submitted for permit. We have. Okay. So I was hoping to move them in parallel. My intent was to I assume there's a round of comments coming back from the building department go before this board. Um so depending on this I think
we're close on the building permit. I don't you know we hired a code consultant. And I don't think it's a heavy review um on the plans. Um as far as construction itself, I'm always going to be aggressive on my timelines and be optimistic. You know, I think it's a a six-month lift for us. Um I think, you
know, by year end is entirely possible. Great. So, great. We hope so, too. I'm always going to be optimistic and aggressive. There is a there is a u a basic construction phasing plan that's outlined briefly in section 2.7 of the narrative you know demolition and site
prep months one and two interior renovation mechanical installations months two and three exterior improvements months four to five final finishing inspections etc opening months 6 to 8 so somewhere in an eight plus or minus month time frame great thank you
fantastic So, do you go ahead, Cheryl? I had um you'd mentioned bike racks. Um I'm happy to add one uh specifically to the plan. Uh there are two right there on the sidewalk as well. There's those U-shaped style ones that are right on Adam Street, right on the um Adam Street
side, right by the parking lot. So, we were hoping that the combination of those plus a small one on site uh would be sufficient for, you know, six to eight bikes. Um, as far as mechanical plan for the roof, um, the MEPs do have a, uh, roof diagram. It's certainly not
an architect's, you know, roof plan, but it does show, uh, the makeup air unit. It does show some of the ventilation, uh, on the roof. So, um, there was some thought put into trying to get everything on there because it is the most hidden spot. The rest of the roof, because of the gable, there's really no opportunity to put any mechanicals on
it. So, you're talking about the upper roof, the highest portion of the roof, uh the lower flat roof on the parking lot side of the building and and the equipment is not going to be taller than the parapit. Uh I can't guarantee that. I would say
the equipment probably is taller than the parapit. Um I think in most situations, you hope that the parapit in the in the vantage point kind of takes some of the sting out of seeing it. There's unfortunately no other place to we've we thought about this pretty extensively. The old bank had like the condensers on the handicap. It was the
first thing you saw when you walked in. That's off the table. So, we're trying to consolidate it all to there. Um, you know, there's options we could do. We could add screening um to that. Um, you know, there's there's many things we can do once we get it up there, but that is the most desirable area to put them
because it really won't be noticeable to the public. Yeah. You have different elevations that you'll perspectives, you know, if you're out looking from high street or if you're, you know, more of an uphill versus a downhill hill view also.
So, it's it would be nice, excuse me, to at least know what I I imagine you if the mechan if you file for the building permit, the mechanical engineer knows this the size of that piece of equipment. It'd be nice to have an understanding if it should be or could
be need to be screened. Um, so it's just uh and when I'm walking down from my office, you're going to see it. I'm not going to want to see it, you know. Uh, I mean, we could commit to that's an easy lift on our part. We could commit to
screening right now. It's, you know, I'd be happy to. Okay. But that's that's it. Just that lower roof. That's the only place any equipment's going. The exhaust as well. Uh, yeah. Yep. And are you going to be doing frying in
the kitchen? Um, the reason I'm asking this, like if you ever walk by like on a sidewalk and you've got a kitchen exhaust and you've got grease coming down and and like you're uncomfortable walking by that, you know, from that that kitchen, the
air coming out of it, the greasy air coming out of it, the whatever could be on the sidewalk. So it's just like the proximity of it to the sidewalk to the public realm. I'm just trying to make sure we understand it in advance. That's all understood. Totally. Yeah. And this won't be a mushroom horizontally off the
building. This will be on on the on the flat roof section above. Okay. That's approximately 12 to 15 ft in the air after it comes through the roof. Okay. And it's all at the back of the building in the parking lot. Correct. Yep. You're not near the sidewalk. I thought it was towards the front. No, it's towards the park.
All right. Let me look at that. Front roof is a is the gable slate. I think it's slate. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Gold roof. Understood. But there's a small portion, right? Yeah. There's a flat portion uh above the vault area where the bathrooms are on. That's a
small flat area. All the more reason for this roof plan that we don't have. Right there. Right. Rear activation images shows it the shows the fire escape and the flat roof doesn't show a parapit wall
but uh yeah the roof is lower than the the top. Y I think some screening would get it done. Would you have any problem with the historical commission doing exterior like adding a couple of feet or
something to that wall? I'd prefer to avoid Right. Right. I mean to go to a board that doesn't have jurisdiction. We could ask for comments though if they had any but I think everything that you're doing is can I can say would be
very much supported um and preserving this building. Um so I have just a couple questions while you look that up if that's you're looking. Um so you I I love that you're the copper flashing you're going to maintain. Um, I didn't hear and you maybe you said it,
but the slate roof will be retained as well. It will be retained. Yep. Great. And some of the, you know, I think the most iconic feature of that building are the Chip andale roof. You know, as you're coming in, you're going to be able to preserve that railing or or replace it to look like it does
currently. Yeah. We would have already started on the paint, but it's been pretty cold and rainy outside, so we wanted to jump on that. Unfortunately, the weather hasn't cooperated. So, right. And the front entry is so the the woodwork, the architectural detail on that front entry is incredible. And
you're going to be able to preserve that, strip that down, and have that repainted. Uh you're talking about on the exterior. Yeah. Yeah. The frame with the ornate top, which is um gorgeous. And the um I like to hear the cap granite you're going to preserve on the
top of the brick buildings. And the steps going up to it are also that same granite. Granite. Those are going to stay. So, how do you treat the um because it has rail it has holes drilled into those steps um in the granite. Y do you usually just fill the holes with
mortar and you fill you can't flip the flip the step over or do anything with just I I wouldn't. So, it's a clean No, usually when you like if you move a railing the hole is generally an inch, inch and a half. You can do color match mortar so you can really spend some time trying to get a salt and pepper finish
on it. Okay. But often times it it you really don't notice it. Okay. So you I trust you know what you're doing with that. So just sometimes you don't want to see those holes when you brand new steps. I think they'd be pretty obvious if you cut them and removed them, but because they're weathered and they have a lot of character, I think they already have distress to them. Yeah. Yeah. No, I
would agree. Um that's great. And I love the front door entrance. Um what you were talking about, especially the artists that you have the black with the gold doing some gold leafing. I was thinking it might be nice to sort of um reflect that in your signage. So, I know you have it looks like white on the
sign, but maybe you do a black with a gold leaf on your signage to to really um to work with that front door and give it a real branding as in that floor that you're talking about doing a tile entryway with some, you know, the initials of
the SNR, whatever. I don't know what you're going to do, but it's it's I love that. Um I love that concept. Um I was also asking about oh re um and the other architectural thing is the
corells along the the upper um molding th that you'll be able to store in. I know some of the ones that are missing were the ones that you're missing. Yeah. I occasionally see one on the ground. I want to pick up and save um because it's so beautiful. Our intent is to preserve and protect everything that's there that's capable. If anything's rotted,
we'll replace it in guide. That's that's great. Um, and so one more. Um, so repointing, as you probably could see in certain areas, and I think on your pictures, there's really good repointing of brick and there's really bad repointing where it looks white and it looks, you know, you see all this, you
know, on stone walls, it's the same way. But I'm sure you have somebody who knows how to to blend it in so it looks like the mortar was matches the rest of the mortar on the building. Y and I'm sure you're probably across the street, you're going to maybe eventually, you
know, have to look at that as well. So that's great to have a good a good um mason on that. Um will you have a generator? Probably not training on it. Okay. I didn't know if you felt like you needed one because that was just another piece of equipment I thought of. If that um
but if you don't that's that's fine. Um the um so in front of the building um I know we talked about the bike racks but um one of the things that we try to look at is improving the streetscape. You know
whenever a new project's done some of the pictures that the front tree I can't tell if it was half dead or half alive. Half dead. That's what I I thought it looked like. At least half dead. So, if if you could, and this is something I also would love to see um doing sort of
a a private public partnership, but um when new developments come in, we've asked with the other um with overlay zoning in the lower mills that when um you know, trees are planted that a tree guard is put in place, which not only it
helps to protect the trees, it keeps car doors from banging into the trees, it keeps dogs that are being locked. Um, I know dogs that, you know, just love to stop and utilize the tree. So, um, tree guards just add an extra level of that black detail that I think would look
really nice. I know you only have just one on the side and one in the front, but it would be great if you could add a tree uh nice tree guards. Um, and a new if you do a new tree there. And I I think it would be subject to getting approval from the town obviously. Sure. Yeah, we were going to we've talked
about it. we would approach the town and see what they want to do. But if they wanted us to pay for the tree, I mean, they'd be happy to. It's not Yeah. And they may pay for the tree. And if you then um because there is a there's a budget for trees, so they may replace it. But if you could add a a detailed tree guard, I think that would be that
would be really nice. Um but Meredith, they might only pay for a smaller tree. I think they would prefer you pay for a tree and they plant it for you. Yeah. Yeah, you don't sometimes you don't know what you get. So, you might want to choose that. That's that's true. You might want to get something that And
you might want a tree that's more fig up, you know, a little bit more narrow than a wider canopy that you have to um prune. Do they give you say I' I've never worked. Do they give you say what tree goes in there or You can make a request. They do have they have some
options of what the trees they usually order. Um, we've been requesting or I've been um a Princeton elm actually which is a really hearty um street tree and it will emulate what the old elms used to look like in that area and they they
grow quickly and it will actually grow up above um and give a nice shade um but not obstruct. And so that's what you're seeing sort of going in on Adam Street. So it would it would reflect that too. They do have some other options, some, you know, um I think more flowering
trees. They have a few different natives that you could look at. Those are flowering trees right now. Yeah, the pears that are up there, those those have been more prone to disease resistance. So, you'll see some that are dead up there. Some some that look great. The one to the right to when you're looking at the bank to the left
looks really healthy and looks really good. That's done well. But some of the ones that you that as you go up the hill um and the town has been because they you worry about the watering they've been planting really small like um overly small trees that that really
don't look good for many years. So you might want to do something just independently with a larger caliber tree. The pears are the state is looking at outlying pear trees as invasive. So um they might not be able to be planted.
So that I wouldn't count on uh planting a pair. Yeah. But that would be really, you know, that that whole front entry is going to be um really special. And then I love um the lanterns that you were doing. I love
sort of um sort of like the look of like a gaslight district. I think down there could be really cool. I know um one of the one of the on Central Avenue across from 36 Central there's actually a woman who redid a really charming house and
did actual real gas lights that run. I don't know if that's ever possible. It could be spectacular as you come in that would be on a limited timer and actually have a real gas sort of a bevello gas lantern look just but I don't know if
that um it may be plum it may be historically they may have been gas lights when the building was originally built but but I love that at least you're trying to make that copper lantern look. So, I would love to see a, you know, a speck of what that is, the
size, like Cheryl was saying, you know, um, the height of where that would be mounted, but, um, it looks like it's tying into maybe where those currently lights are. In the, um, lighting schedule, I did give a spec, uh, of the actual fixture that we were anticipating. Um, it is an electric one.
Um, so we would have two options. One would be um we could put flicker bulbs in them which look like gas lamps. But I'm I'm not opposed to the idea of gas lamps. What I would ask is that if it's possible to maybe do an oversized version of the same fixture and a gas function at the two entrances. Yeah. So
that it's specific to the entrances just cuz we do have a fair amount of them just for energy efficiency. I think that would be incredible. And we can distinguish them by doing a larger version at the main entrance. Exactly. They have really big. I think that would just be really make a statement and and make it
really really special. So that fixture does come in a gas version of the same fixture. And I would love to see that. Maybe you might start something down there where it becomes a gas light, you know, the gaslight district. Sure. Something really cool um for Milton Village. Um I
think that was all that I I think that is all that I had. um for questions. Cheryl, do you want to go? Cheryl, do you have a question? Go ahead. Um what's your strategy on on signage? Um have you thought through how
you're gonna brand with your signage? We've actually just just started that conversation, so we expect to be back before before the board with, you know, in conjunction with the sign review committee and all that. Okay. Um but probably don't have anything ready at
this time to present. Sounds good. So I I was just looking at the Sorry, Sean, are you done? Yeah, I am. Yeah. Okay. Um just looking again at the Google Street View. Um one thing um JD, when you were talking about that how the corner of Elliot and Adams presents itself, I've always felt that
it's not a very pedestrian friendly corner with the concrete right up to the corner. And then if you add these solid planters, you're going to make it more solid for the pedestrian. And I'm wondering if you can have some other way, some alternating between railing
and planters so that it doesn't feel so um you know, Adam Street is pretty inhospitable to pedestrians in several places because of the walls and I feel like this is going to add to it versus uh so, you know, maybe you can take a
look at that when you're over there again. um at least at the corner, you know, think about how that would increase that sort of it's already a very narrow space, too. You have the transformer there and then you've got
the street signal light post and the ramps and you you have very little room for the pedestrians to sort of walk around the corner. So, I I just kind of feel like it's not going to be as on the street side as friendly as it is going to be on the patio side of it.
that that thinking about it as often as I walk through there. It's really just it's almost just a step that corner is there to step across to the other side of Adam Street. There's almost no use of that side of Adam Street until you get
up beyond the citizens bank. But that's what our overlay is hoping to to to you know not have it be inhospitable for pedestrians, right? because you want um to improvements to the to the condition that's there, right? And and what you're doing is going to be an
improvement. I'm just concerned about this the actual intersection right there at the corner. I do see what you're say. I do see what you're saying because a lot of times when you see the planters, you see them from the on the ground where you're looking down on them where this you'll be they're elevated. Yeah,
they're they're elevated, but you're looking down on them where this because they're up higher and the sidewalk's a little bit lower. It might be a different perspective where it does look like I think it'd be helpful to do a section through there so that you actually have the dimensions on there
and eye level height versus like where that plant starts or mock it up with something in the field. But maybe what I think what you're saying is do do a section, do a planter. Do a section, do a planter. So
you have some open so it's not just a solid planter, but you you break it up and have a rail maybe in between the planters to give some of that. Or even if there's a way for the planter, the plant materials to drape down, just something to make it feel less um solid,
I guess. And I think they will the plantings he's going to do will drape down, but in the winter time, right? True. You don't have that. Well, in this photo, it looks like there's a big um mechanical. That's the transformer. That's the transformer for the lights. It's pretty wide right there. Yeah, this
site plane actually shows it does widen on that corner. You can see it's kind of got a red block here, but you see this outline right here. Yeah, it gets very wide. It actually does get really wide. The transformers right there. So this this actual area is really wide. Even with the tree box right here, there's
still a good clearance in here. I mean, I park here when I take my kids to kids boxing and we walk this way. And you know, the sidewalk is even with someone on a stroller, it's really this intersection which is obviously outside of our control. This is the chaotic part is when you go across this, there's just a lot of people moving fast.
So maybe that's something at the end of your project that you can actually do a mockup and and you because I trust both of your taste in doing this, but maybe you put a you know put some planters up, see what how it feels on on the site at the time and
um can do just do a test on your on your own to see what you how you feel about it. Sure. It's a great idea. Yeah. And just make sure the planters [Music] um you know are as attractive as the building. Yeah. Um because there are a
lot of planters that definitely look like plastic. They're plastic. I think one of the things that makes this this team kind of unique is that we're both Milton residents. Um you
know, I'm obviously heavily invested down in the village. Dan's a local operator, so he cares a lot about representing his brand and kind of being a local. We're not out. We're fully aligned, I think, as a as a community to see this. Um, and no one's disappearing,
right? Like I'm down there every single day. If I'm looking at plastic planners, I'm like, damn, we got to get rid of those plastic planners. You know, like there's we're not it's not a private equity firm starting a restaurant and it's a bunch of managers and no one's there. Everybody from Dan's team to my team is just intimately involved with this project. So, um, we're also open to
that open collaboration that, you know, if it does look great, but someone's got a better idea, we're open to, um, kind of pivoting in the field as well. One more question, JD. The area where the pergola is going to go right now, that's a grass area, correct? When you
get to the end of the grass area, and if you were to be going down High Street, it looks like there's a is a is there a red brick area there now? It's mulch. It's mulch. That's mulch. It's really bad mulch. Yeah, it's really bad. It's really It's bright red. It's bright red. It looks like brick. It's mulch. Will
will will that be will that area be used the mulch area? Uh so in the uh initial presentation that we made to this board, we talked about activating that space as part of patio. That is no longer part of this. We're just going to landscape that area. Okay. With similar plantings. I understand. Okay. For now. And then
again, if we need it for expansion or we feel like it's appropriate in the business, you'll come back. I understand. Okay. Terrific. Thank you. Okay, I think that's anything. See if there's public comments. Yeah, if there's anyone here um or on Zoom who would like to um ask any questions or
make any comments to this project, please feel free. Any hands up, Cheyenne, on this? Um nobody on Zoom. You're on mute. No hands on Zoom. No hands on Zoom.
Okay, great. Well, I think this looks great. I did have one last question. Did you say before you had to go to the ZBA on No, not that we're aware of. No, you don't. Okay, good. That's why I just wanted to We have to go to the select board for licensing. We have to go to the sign review committee for approval
of the signs. Um, I think that's it. Right. That's great. So, you'll come back with a signage plan as part of maybe as as you think about you're part of that process as you know, right? Um you're the initial step I think in the sign review process and I just would say
a non-illuminated sign. Um for anyone who knows me, but but that's I think that's great. Um, so I think we um can make a motion to move um continue the public hearing until Do you
have a date that you were thinking Ned for? I think well it it's maybe ambitious but you you were talking about a May 8th date. Um have you that would be our what your next um regularly scheduled meeting would be. We have
because we have town meeting but we don't know. Um, so we do have it as a folder that the town meeting goes Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. Yeah. The ETH is Thursday. You guys might be exhausted and not want to meet on the ETH. Um, but you know, some as soon
after that 13th. It would be the following. It's not the 8th. It would be the 15th. That week we had it on the 13th. Oh, the 13th. We did Tuesday the 13th. Okay. And that would give us some time to get some of these um deliverables
um ready and available so that you know those are filed and you have a chance to review it before and I'll have a draft of a of a site plan approval decision available for the board to review as well. Okay. So
um so a 705 will that work on the for the 13th of May? Great. Okay. Can I have a motion to continue the public hearing to Tuesday, May 13th at 7:05? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Second. All
in favor? I. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you guys. [Music] Okay. So, um, we may have Anthony Lurin, um, on Zoom, but I think he's going to, um,
hold off on his presentation for now, um, given that following his comments, the sense of the board was that that, um, community rail station was was, uh, not likely to be included in any of
our plans. So, um, I talked to Anthony and he said he's going to hold off on the presentation for this evening, but of course, um, he can jump in any time if he wants to raise his hand. Um, so we can now move to our general discussion
of MBTA communities and welcome um, if the Tutil is here with us, I believe this evening. Um, Zoe is logging on now. Okay. She's not used to us being this early.
Yeah, that's great. Okay, great. So, where we last left off. So, can I sure can I just ask Zoe? Zoe, um I trust that you're feeling better since you're with us tonight, but I was wondering whether you whether you felt well enough
to to um have heard the comments at the public forum. uh last week. Um I did not, but I did get caught up um by talking to the rest of my team. Okay. So, Okay, great. All right, great. Thank you.
Please feel free to um chime in with anything that um you know, we want to kind of talk through together in terms of potential revisions. Um, I have some some revisions to show you today based on some of what was related to us, but happy to discuss other things that we
may not have fully addressed with the analysis today. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, so just maybe just um just to first um because we did have an email that also came in asking for um looking
at the adjacent uh the 10% plan and I just I wanted to address um Mr. DHY's comments on that when when I looked through that and I I know I talked to Cheyenne. She had run that sort of
substituting the tier one Elliot Street corridor um for the more narrow Elliot Street corridor, the two Granite AB and the 7-Eleven Randolph Avenue. and it it ended up with 465 units on um within
that within that Elliot Street corridor, which seemed really heavy. And then I when I saw the um actually the way that would the way that would play out would be sort of it would be spreading household units all throughout
the Elliot Street corridor, but you'd have one neighbor who was zoned, the two more neighbors that weren't zoned, then another neighbor that would be zoned. And so it was sort of spotty in the way it was zoned and it seemed that might be difficult um for that for that neighborhood. So my impression was to um
to maintain what we had um which still would be a commuter rail um commuter line um plan because it would include the Blue Hills station. It would sort of be going back to what our the adjacent in the in the minutes when you said I
think we all agree on this plan the 10% plan. It would be it would be maintaining that is sort of what we would be thinking that we might put um as our 10% plan together. So can I can I just um Yeah. Do you want to make a comment? I do have concerns about um
process. Um, you know, we've had when Tim Zerinsky was working with us and working with UTIL in 2023, he had um set a I guess it's a a way of working that what UTIL would be asked to work on
would come out of the planning board discussion and it would be a joint request of the planning board to ask UTIL to study something. And we I know we've had some requests come from indiv individual board members in between meetings um which again is not following
that procedure. But this one was ask a resident making a direct request to ask a study from UTIL without dis a discussion at the planning board. And I I want to just be on the record of
objecting to that uh because no other resident we would be we could potentially have dozens and dozens of residents asking uh for our consultants to to look at particular modifications to what we've been working on and any of that should come directly through the
planning board as a channel. So I just wanted to make sure I'm on the record saying that. Now, having said that too, I because of our time frame, that's why I've been trying to make it so we can be prepared to discuss it at our so um because of the time frame crunch and the
concerns that we heard at the forum about the increase in the zone capacity in the Elliot Street corridor, I did send ahead to all of to you via Cheyenne um and then left it to Cheyenne whether it would be forwarded to you. So I I
just want to be clear about that. Okay. Yep. No, I think so. That's how that pharma district was was researched by UTIL you asked the chair to send it to them. You lost me there. No, I you you all saw the that I sent I saw the email.
Yeah, I understand. I asked to send it out to to all the members. So all the members had a chance to review it. That was like yesterday morning and then we got it. But I don't know if I don't know if Util's done anything with that. I'm not sure. But um but that's just going
to us not UTR. Oh, so that it was just to Yeah, it was just to to us. But we can the draft presentation I think. Um I swear I saw an email where it was like there's a new zone that was from Cheryl. It was it was a suggestion that I said I
wanted to discuss tonight. Oh, good. At our meeting that that's good. And I just wanted to give you a heads up because we're short on time to May when we have to submit and I left it to Cheyenne and to Meredith whether they would send it to you, you know, as well in advance of
tonight. So they did send it. Um, but I just wanted to, you know, be right be clear about how this came to be because I had wanted to I've questioned how this, you know, we're we're instructing you till I just want to be clear that I had made this correct. I appreciate
that. Yes, that's all. So, Cheyenne, could you just pull up just because I I just want to be clear and make sure that what what what we were thinking previously for a 10% plan would be what we were still um looking at, which is
and or uh Zoe, either one. It was the hypothetical adjacent um plan. Yes. So we have um I can pull up if the helpful proposal reference map we have
of the previous you know what was shown at the public forum and I can also give you a visual of what it would look like to look at tier one and just look at the parcels that are included in tier one of the Elliot Street quarter if that's what would be helpful right now. Which one
would you like? That would be great if you could just show um the one that we had the hypothetical that we had previously discussed. And if anybody wants to see the alternative, we can do that too.
Um, so I just have a timeline for reference if you want to go back to it. Um, and then this is just the same slides that we had at public forum. Um so this is the the hypothetical adjacent community targets that we would be um looking at. Uh this is also the
shorthand folks have been using around 10%. This is will be a 10% plan. Um this was um premised on removing the the Milton Street uh the Milton Station districts, the Granite South district
and the East Milton Square district. Um and then a reduction of the Elliot Street corridor to focus just on the parcels that front on Elliot Street. Um and uh would result in um this is sort
of the the summary of that that scenario that was presented at the the public forum. Um so you can see here that it gets you to 1,01 units um relative to the 985 that would be required to meet um the projected um target for this um
scenario and then you get to um 15 units per acre um and you meet all the other key targets and that uses Grand North Matipan station 7-1ven Randle Bath Paper Mill the Elliot Street corridor in that reduced form and the Blue Hills Parkway
corridor. Thank you, Zoe. So, did anyone have any com because this is what we had had, right? So, can we just show the maps again? Um, yeah. Yeah, because I think I was looking it was just 25 what Zoe just
uh referenced. Okay, that one. Oh, go back one more, Zoe. Back where you were the previous one. Yeah, stay there. Stay there for a moment. So, Cheryl, um, that map does not include what you had sent to us. It doesn't include the 123, but
it does include this area still over here, right? Well, what I sent was for the 25% plan, but what you can notice here is in in this the same area is
removed sort of in the middle. Maybe Zoe, you can point to that. Right. Right there. So, it And we can talk about that when we get to the 20 to that discussion. But because she had this map out, I just thought I would show that here. And what's I I just I missed what what was
the area that you that Zoe just indicated. Can you circle that again? This right here. Yeah. Seeing the So that area is sort of if you think about it, you know, conceptually, there's the parcels at front on Elliot Street and then because of the station area here, we had pulled also some parcels that
were within sort of a a walkshed of that station. Yeah. Um, so what Cheryl had raised is this is an area where potentially we could um kind of shave the Elliot Street quarter down a little bit um and get some uh you know reduce the overall number of units that were
showing in the Elliot Street quarter as a whole. Um and that might enable us to kind of distribute units a little bit more throughout the town. um and that this is the sort of the geography that stands out as as a a portion of the Elliot Street corridor that could be um
reduced or removed. So that idea was for a 25% plan reduction. But I'm just pointing out that Sean here it's consistent with what was pulled out for in this particular scenario. And it's important to remember
this because this is I think when we get to the 25% one of the things that I'm most concerned about is the entire Cliff neighborhood is included in in our 25% plan. But I just want to make a note of that and well the plan that Brian Fur
sent you know removed the part of Cliff Road and Norway uh rather than than this this section here. So just if you wanted to discuss that, you know, as an alternative place, the the thing when we got to that is what I was thinking is
the easiest way to do an sort of apples to apples swap is to have the lot sizes um be similar in the in the two different places. So in the new district, the lot sizes would be similar to the ones taken out so that it's it's more comparable swaps. Yeah. Because if
you have different lot sizes, then your your your densities and everything are not going to align. Mhm. So, thank you. So, this is this was where we were that we agreed if if we were submitting the a 10% plan. So, okay. Just wanted to
review that before. Okay. Thank you, Zoe. Um, that was that was great. And thank you the Matthew did a great job at the forum. I we should really say thank you to your team and I thought he did a great job sort of walking everybody through and making something that's very
complicated and complex. He really sort of was able to explain it um nicely. Glad to hear that. Yeah, I was I was very thankful to him for jumping in on my Yeah, we were sorry to hear that you were so sick. Um glad you're with us tonight.
twice. All right. So, we can now if we want to um move to sort of where we were and then Cheryl's suggestions. Yep. Can't do. So, um this is the the 25% plan. Um the for the rapid transit
community designation, same standards of 15 units per acre, but the unit capacity is much higher at 24,461. Um and then the other um sort of parameters remain pretty similar. Um this is what we showed at the public
forum. Um we and kind of internally before kind of hearing um from the planning board regarding the sort of idea that Cheryl just me made mention of um we also took kind of a closer look at some of these and thought about um in particular you'll notice here that um
the Blue Hills Parkway corridor in order to kind of hit our numbers overall. That was one of the places where we we were able to make up the units that we needed to get to to reach this sort of overall picture of getting just above 400 261
units and 15.71 um density in this case. Um, but as we're looking closer at it, we really, you know, we know that for for a while now, we've been trying to maintain par between Elliot Street corridor tier 1, which is those smallest lot sizes within
the Elliot Street Quarter, and the rule set that we're applying to Blue Hill Parkway corridor because there's a lot of common ground in terms of the pattern that exists in those neighborhoods currently. And so, we wanted to treat them in a similar way. So we we wanted
to present to you a way of um restoring that parody between the Elliot Street Quarter Tier 1 um which is at.5 and 6,000 square ft minimum lot size um and re regaining the same numbers for the
Blue Hills Parkway quarter. So bringing that down to 0.5 F instead of 0.55 which is what we had it at for the public forum and similarly bringing it up to a 6,000t minimum lot size versus the 5,000 that we were showing for the public
forum. So that's that's sort of the agenda that we were we were trying to look at, you know, how could we accommodate that and the places that we saw an opportunity to do so um was in the Milton Station district um and in Randolph a access road to create some
alignment in the rule sets that were applying in those places um and basically shift there's a 56 unit differential that we need to be able to find in some other districts in order to regain those numbers for Blue Hills parkway corridor in terms of the zoning
parameters that are being applied there. Um, so I wanted to kind of offer this to the planning board and then we we I can also show you the analysis we've done relative to the Cheryl's suggestion around um the Elliot Street Quarter. But I wanted to at first just see how these
adjustments feel um and if there are um if it is if you share the priority of maintaining that parody between Elliot Street and Blue Hills Parkway corridor um and if you feel like the places we found those units are the right places to find them.
Well, I certainly um believe that we should make the keep that parody uh between the Blue Hills Parkway and the Elliot Street corridor. Um and I I'm comfortable with where the way
you've distributed those. I think that I think the parody is important too. Um what what's the what's the downside to the parody? I mean I think the upside would be that everyone would feel that
there was equitable criteria. Right. Right. And the thing about the parkway, it also has single and two families, which is what we have on the Elliot Street quarter. So the housing stock, so why treat one differently than the other? Is the ratio similar? the ratio
of single family the ratio of of two families to single family or is it I don't know what do you think Zoe um we did an analysis a little while back of a much larger geography of the housing stock that is sort of you know
if you go um west from the Blue Hills Parkway um alignment uh and there was a lot more multifamily small multif family duplexes three units in that fabric but I don't know for the just the geography of the Blue Hills Parkway corridor
itself if there's a similar level of multif family in that location. Um, I could certainly take a look at that and kind of pull out numbers, but my sense is that broadly speaking, it the co the parkway corridor I think is more in alignment with the mix of um, you know,
single family and um, small multif family that you see in the Elliot Street corridor, whereas the smaller parcels that are further to the west, there's more of a presence of the small um, two and three unit um, developments. One thing I'm going to point out about the parkway is that there are two at least
two churches if not a third um within that district there's the Kder building which is as we know is the childcare facility now and there's those commercial properties at the intersection with Brook so it's different in that regard um but the single families that and two
families that are there also have a similar time frame in which they were built sim similar architectural character and so Um, the other thing I would say is I think there's at least one or two or three three families next to the church between the church and the
commercial buildings at that intersection with Brook. Um, so this doesn't have the Parkway does not have the three unit or four unit cap. It has a density cap. Mhm. So making the lot size 6,000
minimum that's par, but it's not par necessarily 100% otherwise. Right. Um that's correct. And I would also just note that one of the one of the other physical pattern differences is that Blue Hills Parkway has a larger front
setback. And so that's also you can see that represented in the minimum open space percentage because that pattern is very pronounced and consistent across the corridor. Um and so we felt it was important to recognize that not just in the setbacks but also in the open space
percentage as a way of preserving that pattern and and on the parkway we just have to remember it is a DCR road and it's a way through a park. So, I appreciate the increase in the minimum open space. Mhm.
So, that's why I wouldn't want to go um you know, a lot higher. Um so, I think I think we all said last time that we should try and take some capacity off the Parkway. And so, I I think um this goes from 235 to
179. So, it's that 56 if I'm Mhm. a 56 unit differential that we're um removing from the Blue Hills Parkway corridor by virtue of making those changes in the zoning parameters. And then we've um made alterations in the zoning
parameters. The ones that you see in red are the ones that have changed um in the Milton Station districts and in um Randall Access Road to regain those 56 units in those three other districts.
So it's across all three we're gaining 56 in those other districts. So it goes, you know, go go go back to um the Randalf a and the access road when we spoke last time, you know, we
were kind of hovering around a total of 80 and now it's up to 102. That's correct. So I have a problem with that. Um, and I understand the numbers have to
go somewhere and 40 of those are a 40B, correct? Yep. So, those are already those we know will be built, right? So, Yum. Yeah. part of I I know this was this is something I was thinking that would be one of the ones that you know we should
discuss as a group but I think just to give you a picture into the logic we were using um we were looking at you know 7-Eleven Randolph A is right across the street from the Randolph A and Access Road District we had that inputed at um 21 units per acre and five point4
F and so what we did is we basically took those parameters that we we had plugged in for 7-Eleven Randolph and applied them to the lots that we're considering across the street. So that those two districts which have very similar characteristics in terms of
their location and the kinds of development that occur there so that there's a a matching of those parameters. Um that being said, it does mean that there's 20 additional units that are possible within the Randolph Aan Access Road District. So that's not a a you know that's that is an impact
that is worth discussing. Um, but that's kind of the logic that we were using to to get to that number, but it's still less than half the zone the density of the Madapan station, the Milton station east and west and the bridge. So again,
all of the um larger districts or the higher density districts that are within the uh half mile are at 45 to 47 to 51 at Granite AB North. So this is less than
half of that still at 21. So it seems to me, but the likelihood of it being built is pretty high at Randolph. That's what bothers me about it. And there's it's um not close to any subway. That's another thing.
Um and you know, again, it's the deadliest road on inter down the street from the deadliest intersection. we already have, you know, 40Bs there. There's a likelihood of two more
developments coming at the corner of um Randolph and um uh Reeddale on, you know, within the next, you know, year or two. So we're putting a lot of activity on the lower
end of Randolph fav where it does not meet you know uh transit oriented development but we said with we've been consistent since day one I think of this is that we've had when HLC gave the
opportunity to put half of the zone capacity outside of the half a mile that there was a lot of resident interest in having taking advantage of that and spreading some of the zone capacity out. We've shifted a lot of more zone
capacity into the LA Street corridor. We've taken everything out of East Milton. It's got to go somewhere and no more of it should go in the Elliot Street corridor. And we've studied other locations and they've been ruled out. And I think Randolph A for all the time
we keep coming back to because it works. There's a bus line. It's a four-lane roadway. There are some amenities there. Not none, but well, Nukems, Eagle, there are some. They're not great walking dis great walking conditions. I agree.
However, it's just too much to um to put into an area which is a two-lane winding road, which is a lot different character, and we heard residents speak about that um at numerous planning board meetings and at the public forum. So, I'm all for keeping the Randolph A sites
in and at this density. Yeah. And to keep it simple, I'm not for it. I I think it's it's not even comparable in terms of amenities. I mean, no, no one feels comfortable walking Randolph A. No one does. The speed on that road
is too high. And you know, and most people aren't walking. I mean, I I I I like everything that exists as a business on Rand, but I don't really consider it the kind of amenity that, you know, people want to be able to walk to, you know, um you know, walking to
walking over to uh a food store, you know, or to the uh to what's available down in um down on Central uh is the kind of amenities that I think people like. uh you know Randolph AB is changing
immensely. You know I I understand what you're saying that you know this idea that half of it be dispersed around the town but just look at what's happening in Randolph AB and what's going to continue to happen. You mentioned what what's likely going to come you know for a proposal for even more development up
by um uh up at the intersection of Pleasant um and uh uh but it's changed immensely. Well, I would say then we're back to East Milton Square because we have all the
walkable amenities right there within the square and it would be I think there was 300 and some units swapped out there. This would be 232. So maybe there's some dimensional requirement or shift that could happen
there and get the 232 in East Milton Square. I don't think you can do it. I mean, you get 92 units under construction right now. So that counts. That counts towards the 232. Yeah, it's uh East Milton is going to be it'll be intolerable with traffic. It already is.
And you add those 90 units in there plus the 440 project. Um and I think we're back to A. Yeah. I I you know, the the intent from the very beginning was to put development on transit and the transit is the trolley. That is the that
is the the transit that is most likely to be what's in the commut. You all have advocated that the sub that the trolley is not a subway and that we should be looking at commuter rail and now you've taken everything away from the commuter rail except Blue Hill app,
Blue Hills Parkway rather. Um this wasn't what was presented to the public at the forum last week that you now want to put everything in the L3 quarter on a 25% plan. I I not sure who you is. Is is you I
members of this board have stated that the trolley is not a subway and that we need to be compliant with commuter rail, right? Put all of the zone capacity in the Elliot Street quarter is counter. I don't think that's what you're saying. I don't think that's
necessarily what you're saying, but um you have to have a swap for the the Randolph fabric. I think we should put a pin in this um and come back to this because I think this just goes to show what we go around with is we're trying to put a square peg in a round hole and
we're being asked to do something that Milton just does not have the land and the districts to do. I we've come up with more districts than any other community that Matthew and Zoe have worked with in JT and they've we've looked at every combination possible and
turned over every and examined every lot. So, we're I hear what you're saying and I hear what all of you are saying. Um but maybe for time sake we just we should go and if there's anything else. Um, yeah,
I can present the, um, we also did an analysis um, sort of not exactly what um, Cheryl described, but very close. Um, and I can show you what that looks like. Um, and we've combined it with this set of recommendations. So, what we did is we
we treated this what what you're seeing on the screen now as a new like baseline. And then from there, we made adjustments to the Elliot Street corridor to shift units away from the Elliot Street corner and add some units in the commuter rail station area,
specifically the Fairmount one. So um this is the markup that um Cheryl had um shared with us um to kind of illustrate the idea that she um sort of had put together based on the public comment that was received. Um so you can see the markup here. what we we've taken the
geography that you're seeing on the right, which is um to orient you, this is near the Fairmount Station area. Um this is sort of the slightly smaller parcels that um are a more direct match for the parcel sizes that you um can
observe in the Elliot Street corridor um outlined in blue on the right. And then on the left, the red markup is um a suggested uh approach to um shaving the Elliott Street Quartrer down a little bit um in response to that public
comment. Um so what we did is um we took a focused area here close to the valley road um stop and applied the the sort of rule of you know we will only include parcels
that front on Elliot Street. In other words, they have a you know a part of their lot line is is on Elliot Street. um all parcels that don't have that um are removed if it's south of Elliot Street. Um we left this um set of
parcels in because from a kind of if you zoom out a larger planning logic um I don't think we can defend a choice to exclude a specific subset of these parcels um because they share so many traits with the parcels that are immediately adjacent to them. whereas
this is a clear rule that we can have um we can represent very clearly and argue for with a specific planning logic. Um so that's why we um move forward with that. And what we did is we took those out but we kept all the same rules for Elliot Street and then we applied those
same rules to the new um district that is in the Fairmount Station area. Um so this is a summary of that. Um just for the sake of space and fitting everything on the same slide um the if you can imagine this Fairmont Station district
itself has three tiers just like Elliot Street corridor um that has the same exact rules that you're seeing for Elliot Street corridor. Um but we're just reporting them in aggregate so that you can see this all on one slide. Um so all those Elliot Street corridor um
numbers are maintained um with the num the FS the units per lot and the minimum lot size rules that we've been working with um since uh the end of 2024. Um and then Blue Hills Parkway corridor is maintained at the same um.5
F 6,000 square foot minimum lot size as Elliott Street corridor tier one. Um and then we were able to with the same rule set as Elliot Street corridor get to 185 units um in this new Fairmont Station
district. Um and that comes to a density across the whole district of 11.8. Um and if you filter that through um to the the overall um numbers, you get to 2524. So, a little bit of a surplus of
units relative to the four um 2461 that you need to reach. Um and then density is at 15.3. So, again, a little bit of a margin above the 15 units per acre that you need to reach. So, there's a little bit of room to play here um in terms of,
you know, shaving off a few units here or there. For instance, maybe we could um you know, bring Randle Access Road back down a little bit in this case. Um so that's kind of a the you take the two ideas the ideas that sort of um UTIL had
brought forward around restoring parody between Elliot Street and Blue Hills and then you add that in with the ideas around shaving down Elliot Street corridor and adding a new Fairmount Station district. This is where you land with that.
Okay. Any comments? So I do have um a sense of what how I'm curious how you picked this area or I mean obviously Fairmont but well how I picked it um was
um just trying to take when looking at Fairmont if you go to that back to that slide um where I had marked it up I was looking as Zoe said um at lot size at seemed comparable
to the lot sizes in the Elliot Street corridor. So, there are some here that are larger and I thought that that would not help our numbers properly because it would drop our density down. But, if we could swap
um comparable size lots, that's still within the general boundary of the Fairmont one. So that the orange and the blue lines, but if you what's just off of this image is the paper mill site. So the paper mill site is just um towards
the top of that image on the right. It's essentially right here. That's the access drive to get to it. So I thought connecting sort of the districts that way um and and just picking up the comparablesiz lots and seeing how many
that would be. Um and that's and then finding a comparable section of the Elliot Street corridor. It seemed to me um that what they had what UTIL had pulled out for the adjacent community um you know had this area roughly this area
from what I could tell. So that was a a good place to start. But the idea really was just to take into consideration the the comments from folks from the Elliot Street corridor about the concern for
the increased density um and seeing if we couldn't add a district at Fairmont. So you're proposing both um both inside the blue and inside the orange? Both? No, just inside the blue. Just inside
the blue. No orange. Those are what? the no orange. I mean, yeah, the no orange. The orange one goes away. It was just for reference to compare the two. And Zoe, can you blow up uh and just increase the size of the I'd like to take a close look at the Elliot Street
area that we're peeling off? Can you? Yeah. Um, so I'll Do you want to see the the markup that Cheryl had shared or the what we ultimately ended up removing? I think there's Yeah, what you ended up removing, please. Yeah. So this is the Elliot Street corridor
here. Um and then you can kind of see, you know, this is one parcel depth that we're grabbing. And then anytime you get to that second parcel, a parcel that does not front on Elliot, that is removed south of Elliot Street corridor. Um this triangle parcel is maintained in
order to kind of keep that continuity. Um, and uh, you can see that that it's a very consistent parcel depth for kind of the remainder of this section there. So, my only my only comment on this is
um, Valley Road and um, Avalon Road have a lot of two families on them that currently exist. Um, Oak Road really doesn't, but um, so Zoe, did you think that there's another part of the Elliot Street corridor that
would be an alternative to this to get a removal of approximately the same number? Um, I didn't look into that in greater detail. Um, I think if you were to kind of take this, if you if I zoom back out again,
um, the, you know, if you look at the the shape of the Elliot Street corridor, the logic in most cases is we're just taking that first parcel. So, you can see that's the logic all the way through here, all the way through here. In some cases, we've taken a second parcel where it turns the corner and is consistent
with the um the sort of depth of a parcel next to it to sort of maintain that sort of um a similar form. Um and then we're carrying that in this scenario all the way across here. Um the only place where we break that logic is
where we get close to central app. Um and that I think is um a reasonable logic because this has you know an existing concentration of amenities. It's a very logical place to have small multif family units. Um and so I would
argue for retention of that from a broader planning perspective in terms of where it's agree um best to retain multif family and and and zone for multif family. Um I think as we go kind of in this direction right um this part
of you know where the access to the Blue Hills commuter rail station the Matapan station and Capen Street all converge that has a very rich transit access. So while it has fewer amenities um in terms of like commercial hubs, I think there
is also an argument to be made for you know these these this area having increased um capacity for multif family um that and given the size of these and the rule sets we have. I think this is a place where you are more likely to see the solution of two duplexes, a a
retention of whatever um home exists in the front and maybe an addition of a rear um uh like two unit um essentially uh presenting as if it was a a large garage in the rear of a lot. So, I think there's a kind of a a typology of
development that makes sense for this neighborhood um that's possible to achieve without tear downs. um selectively as property owners want to pursue it. Um so I think I'm I'm comfortable with this
as the area that is chosen to remove because it has when you look at that big picture of like the level of transit access that's argues for the Blue Hills Parkway and Matapan Capen Street um neighborhoods a
level of amenities at Central A. I think those both argue for those two poles of the corridor having multifamily zoning. Um, and I think the argument is a little weaker in the middle because there isn't as much of a concentration of those amenities. Um, and you don't have um the
same level of of transit um access with fewer options. But where are you referring to that you don't have that this this area in the center where we we've removed parcels? I you know I think it's absolutely you know there's as you as you had pointed
out there's existing multif family there um but in terms of where to encourage increased development I think from a planning perspective thinking about where I would put multif family housing I would put it in places that have many transit options rich access to the
commercial hub that exists just over the line on on Boston side um and access to those commercial amenities um you know on the you know within in the town of Milton for Central A. Um, so I would
just kind of argue for like a barbell approach making sense from a a big picture planning perspective. Can I just also mention one other thing? You know, we had um the way that we had increased the zone capacity
in this area was by lowering the minimum lot size and um allowing four units on parcels 10,000 square ft or larger, right? But what that also allowed for
was a slightly lesser density at other districts, right? So that was the tradeoff. So not needing to have a district that was going to have buildings or a district like Granad South, right? Because we heard a lot of people's concerns about a district of
that scale. And so the idea was to use the same land area and be able to get a little bit more density within that land area so that we don't need quite as much to make up in some other district. Right. So, Zoe, I don't know if I've said that in a way that makes sense to
you or I'm trying to help uh people who might be watching understand the logic because if we just went with everything we have right now and if we went back and raised the minimum lot size now, we'd be looking at shifting our density outside of the 15 units an acre with the
with the other um districts that we have. Is that right? Yes, that's that's correct. The essentially the one of the tensions that you know Milton has had since the beginning of us you know starting to explore this with you is that in order
to meet your acreage and contiguity um and station area obligations there is really just about no way that we found that's a viable approach that does not include the Elliot Street corridor in some capacity. And so once that is at
play, it's the Elliot Street Quarter has throughout our entire planning process been the lowest density set of districts or you know the tiers within it. They're the lowest density across all of the zone all of the zoned areas. And that
means that in order to carry that low density district, you need other districts that are at a higher density to get it all to average out to at least 15. And so what you're describing, Cheryl, is correct in that by getting Elliot, the Elliot
Street Quarter, to be a little bit denser, as dense as is comfortable and viable, that enables us to zone in other areas of town in a way that does not kind of blow those density numbers out of the water. we can bring them a little bit more in line with the patterns and
the expectations in those areas because we've gained a little bit in Elliot Street Quarter and so we're not carrying such a um a drag on our density numbers for the rest of the town. But at this point, if we said instead of removing parcels, we said, "Okay, we're going to
raise the minimum lot size now," then we'd be looking at needing to add density on the other sites that we have. Right. Correct. Yes. If you if if you have a lower density in the Elliot Street corridor, um it's not just a matter of making up the same number of
units, you have to make up the density, and that generally results in zoning for more units overall than what you would have to zone for otherwise. In other words, you you have to go well above the 2461 units that are required of you because the
density you're not Oh, we lost Zoe. We just lost the sound, Zoe. The last H. That's strange. So, what I'm hearing is a lot. You're back. Okay, you're back. Okay, we just muted from We have two-way communications. Success.
Yeah. So that's that is why that I had suggested a way to remove some of the zone capacity in the LA street quarter is not to change the minimum lot size or the number of units on the larger parcels but to remove parcels um so that
we don't have to increase the density on the other districts. But we can swap it out for a district that has the same exact parameters that's within walking distance of the commuter rail. What about looking at
um to the left of Blue Hill Parkway? I feel like we discussed this at one point like the Brush Hill Road, Blue Hill Lav, Austin. Yep. We did look into that. Um at the time we we looked at a a larger geography kind of essentially the a
wedge um kind of from Blue Hills Parkway through to Brushville Road. Um the challenge there was that um like Elliot Street but even more so um the lot sizes are quite small and so basically unless
you go down to 5,000 square foot lots and allow three units on 5,000t lots um so many parcels are excluded that your density numbers are extremely low because um essentially the the vast the majority of the parcels in that area you
you would not be allowing ing development. Um so that's kind of it it essentially was an an issue of parcel size that um unless the board is willing to zone for um a higher density on smaller lot
sizes, that area of town just does not make sense to zone because you're not going to get to three units per lot on enough parcels um to be able to carry a density that can contribute um meaningfully to your overall compliance. So again, I do feel
like that area of town has a lot of two families. I So I was just going to say that I drove around today. I spent a lot of time in my car driving through all of the Belchure Circle neighborhood and through these through this neighborhood and I was thinking that same thing because although they're small lots, the
structures are quite large and so they could accommodate um and many of them are already at two families. So I think they could accommodate. So, I think I I would be curious for the board, but I would be willing to go lower on the lot
size and maybe this is another subd district, but include that area where we do have two family large build large structures on very small lots, but that could accommodate um three units. I believe
I will just say that to date we have not we have maintained an open space percentage of 40%. And we have consistently not gone below 6,000 square ft as a minimum lot size.
Um you are correct that the development pattern in much of that area is tighter. There is um there are a lot of buildings that are sitting on quite small lots. there is very little open space on those lots. Um
and so in order to allow for three units on the lots because if you don't get to three units it does not contribute towards your compliance numbers. Um duplex isn't enough. um you would be
um looking at conversions of existing duplexes to three-unit buildings on parcels that cannot accommodate 40% open space. Um, so it's I think I think it's a bit of a a values
question back to the board of you know if you're okay with that kind of development in that location, why is that not acceptable along Elliot Street? Because there's a many properties along Elliot Street that have a similar building type. Those smaller
5,000 foot lots are also present all throughout Elliot Street quarter. are just not every lot, but they're distributed all throughout and many of them do have duplexes on them already. So, it's not they aren't so different
and so I think it it's a little bit um yeah, we would want to be cons. Do you do you know um what is the typical open space area that currently exists? because I think we would want to
um look at what what actually currently exists. Um are are you all opposed to having a district that's within a half mile of the commuter rail station at Fairmont? No, I just think it's unnecessary to tear up a whole another neighborhood. It's it's by the letter of
the law within a half mile of the commuter rail station. Just like I understand just like the Blue Hills Parkway. It's tearing up a whole another neighborhood. It's just put different from the Blue Hills Parkway neighborhood. Why is the Blue Hills Parkway Exactly? Why is the Parkway
sacrificial and and not saying it's sacrificial or why is the Elliott Street sacrificial and why instead of Fairmont have been looking at the Blue Hills area for all this time since inception almost? I asked Tim before Tim left to look at this area and they have looked
at it and they've come back with reasons why it wasn't recommended. Can I just maybe go back to the Fairmont then because just in driving around and I think this was um mentioned in another commuter station is it's not direct access to it's
although with it's within a half mile it's right but you but all the you can walk to the fair amount you can't walk through the but you have to walk around you're not going to walk through those backyards directly when you drive through you don't it's very difficult to get access directly to the to the I've
spoken to people who live on Smith Street who say that they walk but how far is it? Is it within is it half a mile walking distance or half mile? The same criteria as any other of these. So you Okay. So is is it safe to walk down to the lab and get to Madipan station
like we've talked about? It's pretty safe to go from Valley Road to Valley Road Tock. You're not willing to consider the the concerns of people who spoke at the forum on the LA Street Quarter. You're only interested in hearing from the
people who spoke who live near the commuter rail stations, are you? Because No, Cheryl. I'm actually interested. You're not talking about any place except along the Elliot Street corridor. I think I think um I think the concerns of every neighbor, every neighborhood is
uh is relevant. I think the Elliott Street neighbors concerns are relevant. um just as much as the folks in East Milton on Granite A, the folks over in um uh the two gentlemen that were talking about, you know, their concerns with Reedville, they all are. You know,
when Matt Latell spoke last week and he did a great job presenting, um that point that he made, uh it I think it's such a relevant point. He said that we have 14 districts and he happened to say more districts than any other town that UTI
has worked for. That is an indicator of how inapplicable 25% is to the town of Milton. That's that's what that's indicative of. It's impossible. We're we're making so many people um you know struggle with this because no one's
going to be happy. No one. I I you know I hear you Cheryl and Fairmont. I I don't you know I can I can see some some reasoning where Fairmont's relative but you know we we're trying to make similar arguments. We're saying I think Zoe said
earlier that that area that's in orange up there um is not proximate to amenities. It's not that far away. I mean if femant is proximate then so is that you know I mean some of these arguments you just you can't say that
you know um that that is um I think that's that's valley I think it's oak I'm trying to figure out what streets those are but Avalon Avalon you can't say that those are too far away but that neighborhood on Fairmont isn't too far
away I mean some of these just to briefly clarify I'm not arguing that all I'm saying is that if going to remove parcels from Elliot Street Quartrer, those are the parcels that have the least. If you combine transit access and commercial amenity access, those are the parcels that have the least of those two
qualities. But if you compare it to Fairmont as you're describing, you're right. It doesn't compare. This has direct walkable access to the Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. I totally to I totally see that. And you know, and that distinction, Zoe, on on the sacrifice of
this area, it's really small. I mean, it's not that much further away. You know, I I stand by, you know, this is just a belief I have. The half mile, regardless of what town it is in in and what it is to a ferry terminal, a bus
station, that's just a that's just a measure. It's not the limit of how far people will walk. People will walk a mile. You know, you'll walk 3/4 of a mile. So, I I don't get too wrapped up in it's more than a half mile distance to wherever you're going to go. They never that was not what they had in
mind. They just picked a a a they just picked a um a distance and that was it. So I I you know I don't I don't for a moment think that people are only going to walk a half mile to get to transit. That's not really I think you know a criteria that we should really think
about. Um, but I guess back to my point, it's just so hard to come up with a 25% plan that that, you know, someone is not going to feel that they were disadvantaged no matter where it is. Um,
so I I I don't like any of it, you know. I, you know, it's we're in a really tough spot. A really tough spot, you know, and and there were things that, you know, would would be more preferable to you. There are things that would be more preferable to Jim. There are things that would be
more preferable to Maggie. There's things that are more preferable to me. And the same with Meredith. And you know, we're in a we're in a box. We're in a box. But we're left with a few weeks left before we have to submit something to
town meeting. Yeah. Um and um you know, I think we've looked at so many districts. I think Zoe and team have run us through so many and and and a lot of them we found that didn't meet the requirements whether it was because it was too much land area it dropped the
density down or it was so much land area that it raised the amount of zone capacity much higher than we're required to. So I think you know it's useful to to come back or think a little bit about how we have arrived at where we are and
um you know if there's some way to accommodate some of the concerns that we heard with this 25% plan. I mean otherwise um you know we don't have too much time to to have wholesale changes. I mean, I
I kind of see this as a a refinement, but maybe Zoe, do you see this as more than a refinement? Um, I think, frankly, we've been we've been working on refinements um I would
say since 2023. Um, but I am going to pull back up the analysis that we did for the Blue Hills area um long time ago. I think this was like probably six months into our work
together and now we're kind of um approaching the two-year mark. So, I'm going to pull that up so that people can see there's a there is a specific dimensional technical reason why we ultimately decided not to move forward with it um in conversation with
you all. Um, and I agree this this there are this is a challenging um the the interaction of where your transit area is and the patterns that you have in those areas is challenging. And I think that we are collectively
getting to a place that is a really good plan for Milton to be able to meet that 25% in a way that is aligning as closely as possible with where you can actually support that kind of multif family housing and and keep in
line as much as possible with the patterns that you have. So this is the geography we've studied before. Um it included um this was in complement with the Blue Hills Parkway corridor which is its own district with with its own parameters. Um so you can see that as
kind of a cutout here. That's the kind of the imprint of the Blue Hills Parkway corridor that we have retained as a district that does have um is contributing to your overall compliance picture. Um we then with this geography
specifically looked at um the parcel sizes and you can see here that this is where the 5,000 square foot line is. So even if we were to go down to 5,000 ft and say we allow development on 5,000
ft, you can build three units on 5,000 ft². we would be excluding I don't know the exact number here because I I don't have the it listed but visually you can see it's approaching half we would still be excluding half of the parcels in the
Blue Hills Parkway corridor area geography that I was just showing the the sort of fanning out um to the west from the Blue Hills Parkway corridor which means that even if you set the 5,000t minimum lot size which would be the lowest minimum lot size
that we have studied for the entire duration of this effort together, you would still have struggles meeting even the densities that we're showing in Elliot Street corridor because so many parcels would still be excluded and would not be developable under these rules. Um, and so that's why it just at
a at a parcel level is not well aligned with what you are being required to do by the state. um it's not able to contribute in the way that you need. It has a great pattern currently that is very dense. It
functions well. It's a mix mixture of duplex and triplex um and single family. But it doesn't mean that just because that pattern's there already does not mean that that pattern aligns with the future development that you want to allow under
this set of regulations that is being required by the state. It just doesn't line up right. Well, what if what if we included this with a 5,000 minimum lot size and we could offset some of Elliot
Street. You would need to find another district. you would need to add density to other districts outside of the Elliot Street corridor to make up for swapping an Elliot Street corridor area, let's say,
for a lower density Blue Hills area because it will it will end up being lower density because of the number of lots that are excluded. Even if it's three units for, you know, Yep. because this this graph here. So in in for the Elliot Street corridor, there are very
few parcels that are less than 5,000 square ft, but there are many that are about 5,000. But what you're seeing here is that for Blue Hills Parkway corridor, the majority of parcels
are under that number. So it's it's 5,000 even is not enough to capture the majority of the parcels that you need to capture. You need to go even lower than that. So I think it's maybe Zoe helpful to remember that that land area counts
even though you get no zone capacity out of it. So that's part of why the um density is dropping. Density denominator, right? It drives it up. Zoe, is Zoe are are your columns uh what's the increment? Is it 500 ft or is
it Yep. 500 square feet. So each each like vertical bucket that you're seeing is a 500 as a rate is a 500 square foot increment. Sure. So it changes dramatically if you went to 4,500 square f feet, right? Yes. Yeah.
But again, I would just say that that's if we're if we have said that 6,000 square ft is the floor for Elliot Street corridor. Yeah. You can't build three units on something that is less than 6,000 square ft. Mhm.
I don't think the argument holds water that the rules should be different for the Blue Hills area. Mhm. And I would just um mention that that's an area which has our highest level of socioeconomic and racial diversity as
well as more uh renters um than owners. And I think we have to be mindful of uh of that when making these decisions. See, and that's the very reason why we should do it because we're giving them
an economic opportunity. That's that's what I've been saying. So you can look at um you know 7-Eleven Randolph Fav or to Granite A. I don't I
mean I disagree with your logic a little bit Zoe because um those buildings at two granite is completely different than Elliott. So in certain districts the um the rule set does
change and I I believe that we should be giving our own residents an opportunity and not giving it to an outside developer. And we know what has also
changed is the ADU bylaw. So now these residents in this neighborhood will be able to put in an ADU and it will become dense. It'll become more dense than what it is. The one thing I would say is that
when we looked at how you could fit a three-unit building and three parking spaces, um you're not going to you might have zero open space if you keep ratcheting down below 5,000 square feet. And and I
I personally don't think that's if and I agree with Zoe that if if it the Ellie Street corridor uh if we set parameters there where it's single families and two families and so
forth why are we going to say in another place having a minimum open space is not a requirement. Open space is important for every one of these. I I'm a huge I'm a huge but I just don't think it's going to fit. See, we did these test fits
before and it doesn't fit. What I what I do here what would be a concern is is the parking situation on parking and open space. And open space, but what I I guess I'm just looking at consistency with the type of housing stock that already exists. Yes. So that
you're utilizing already existing multifamilies and they tend to be very large. That's why I was just curious on maybe what the open space what a typical open space and I'm sure you could take sort of a a street and get an average of what currently exists there Zoe. I don't
know um if you can do that and sort of I think we've done that in other locations but but to look at what what kind of open space um not that because we already existing there
um as 30% open space or 20%. I don't know exactly what's there. I do worry about parking a study. This is not of the Blue Hills um uh area that we were just looking at, but this was a study that we did um back in 2023 um for the
Elliot Street corridor looking at the 5,000t lots. Um so this shows you what's possible on a 5,000t lot. And you can see that at one parking space per unit um the only and and maintaining
um setbacks that are consistent with um you know the current built patterns [Music] um almost the entirety of the parcel is setback parking or building. There's not really a yard to
discuss. Um and this is a pattern that is present you know already to some extent um you know in both the Elliot Street corridor and um the Blue Hills area um the open space does drop a little bit below um the 40% not by a lot
um but a little bit um and you can see that there's really you know it's it's tight site planning and um much of the you know you know in Blue Hill in the Blue Hills area. Um the setbacks we're showing here are consistent with what is
present for um uh the sort of the norms in the Elliot Street corridor area that we were looking at. Um I can't vouch for whether that is analogous in the the Blue Hills Parkway area because we did not look at that level of detail there.
Um but I do just you know this is this is it does drop below the 40%. Um, and this is extremely efficient site planning on a regular site. Most sites are regular and will not be able to accommodate this perfect geometry. So, I
just I it's it will start to eat into the open space numbers. Um, it may be consistent with some of the development that that is there now. And I I I struggle to come up with an argument for why
that is not viable on the Elliot Street corridor and is viable in the Blue Hills area. I think this is appropriate. I think this is possible and appropriate in both locations, but I'm not comfortable saying it is appropriate in one location
and not the other. Yeah. So, so Elliot Street, so I know along right on Elliot Street, I agree with you, but when you go off of Elliot Street on either side, you have a lot more typically you would have properties with a lot more open
space, which typically which exists now. So, in just thinking about, you know, we talked about we don't we don't want to see a tear down. We, you know, we're trying to find ways to to see this um sort of fit in where it with
existing sort of character of the the neighborhoods. There is a lot more open space. I I understand right on Elliot Street there's some large buildings right on um on very tight lots, but when you go off of that, it's very very
different. So to say the all Elliot Street corridor, it's there's a lot more open space. I think what natural she's demonstrating is that even on a 5,000 square foot lot, it's to get the three parking spaces and the and that's just a
footprint of 1,000 square feet. I think I'm looking right now on Austin Street, for example, which runs between Blue Hills Parkway and Blue Hill A. There's some lots that are 38 feet wide, 50 feet wide. So like there is
these lots that are 38 ft wide have a shared driveway between two lots. Um, and so when you're you're looking at, you know, like a 30,000 square foot parcel, for example, um, the,
you know, I I I think, um, if you spent time, as you said, you were looking at, you know, there's some even on um, Brushill Road that are there's one that's 21t wide and 34 feet wide. Um it it's just you're not going to
have opportunities with those for sure. You know, we've looked at these before. I thought we were getting close to deciding what we were going to submit. It seems like we're just going back and and triggered with with the change of the Elliot Street corridor. I think we were thinking Well, I thought
how we can I'm thinking how we can take off Elliot Street corridor and find another location. Do you not like adding station then? This isn't bad to go back and look at this because it's so long since we looked at it. I think Zoe Zoe, you know, did something here that was appropriate. U we're talking about size
a lot. We should go back and look at it. It's very helpful to go back and look at this now. Um it it's uh yeah, I don't know. I I'm still, you know, I'm not I don't know which is better. And I'm not I'm not saying I'm opposed to Fairmont at all. And I'm not
even I'm not saying I'm opposed to taking that section out of Elliot Street, but I I think as we get closer to having to make a decision, it's good to go back and re-evaluate some of the things that we've looked at in the past. You know, and Maggie made a point earlier that I I I think that, you know, there'll be some people that have a
5,000t lot that'll be disappointed that 6,000 ft was the smallest was the smallest lot. they will be disadvantaged because their their property value, you know, because of a thousand square foot change that we we set it at 6,000 square feet. You're a guy that works in that
world, you'd probably love to have the 6,000 foot lot so you could redevelop it. You know, I So, I don't I don't see it as, you know, I I have to look at it as it it increases the value of property if you happen to be included within this
area. Um, it it certainly is. It certainly is. It's not I don't see it as that much of a disadvantage. Now, there might be some people that live on a 6,000 foot lot and say, "You know what? I don't care about the value of my property. I love it the way it is, and I hope none of my neighbors change any of this." But there will be some that are
sitting on 6,000 ft or 10,000 ft or whatever dimension that can be redeveloped, and they're going to be very happy because it's a it's an opportunity to change and increase the value of their property. That is only a result of the MBTA Communities Act. All right. So, we've heard from many people
who are very concerned about changes in their neighborhoods and dropping it even to 5,000 we know is in going to be even a higher increase in the zone capacity that we know people already have concerns about. So, I'm concerned about
us talking about parameters that we have already said for a very long time that we've moved past because I feel like we're just going around in circles so that we will not have a compliant plan anywhere close to being ready for We're not doing that. We're not doing that. I
mean, what whatever your thoughts on on what I say, you can have whatever thoughts you have. That's not the reason I'm talking about this. You know, we're trying to get settled on a plan. I don't think it's wrong to have this conversation, to have this discussion, to look at these. Um, it's not I I know
where we have to be and uh and this is helpful to me and hopefully it's helpful to the residents that we're still talking about, we're still considering these things as as we have to make our final decisions. So, Zoe, how much time do you need to get to get us to a place in I think it's
uh two weeks that we have to we have yeah mid. So, um right now we're working towards the town meeting on the 16th in June. um which means having at least a month of
warrant period um which backs up to um just by numbers to May 16th. It may for functional reasons need to be a little bit before that based on the meeting schedule of planning board and select board. Um so that warrant needs to include not
just the numbers that we're looking at but the actual zoning it needs to the zoning needs to be written. Right now, the zoning that you have is the zoning that was written for the 2023 warrant. Um, you need some time, the staff, the town staff needs some time to be able to
update that zoning framework to be sufficiently resolved, you know, polished, cross-referenced zoning um that can go before the town for a town meeting. So, we cannot keep tweaking numbers right up until the end
because we do have to allow time for the zoning itself to be drafted and reviewed as a written document. Um, so, um, and Nick Nick did send that out to us today, the template that was used basically
it's the using the same template that Tim had used, but just putting in the new districts and plugging in the So, so Zoe, your schedule here, we had uh pencled in our a meeting next week for the 30th. Was that one that your Yeah.
or your team is unavailable for? Let me take a look. Um, right now I do not have an evening commitment on the 30th and it looks like Matthew does not either. So I think we would be able to join you. Yeah, that would be great. We have it already on
the agenda for discussion for MBTA. So what's the reason? Can I just I just want to get an understanding. But I just want to allow time for people who might be who want to speak who are I just want to get an understanding of what time we really have and what they can get done and how much more they can look at
because we can talk about hypotheticals but if they can't if we don't have enough time I think we need to use the time that we have to the best that we can. So Zoe, so I think we need, you know, um, for most revisions, we're going to need three days for us to work
through all the details, make sure that we haven't, you know, missed a formula in a cell, that kind of thing. Um, and that lines up roughly with, you know, we can we can move at a faster pace than like meeting every like, so let's say we we
we meet with you like once a week. we can turn around revisions in that time frame, but um we can turn around two cycles of revisions in that time frame potentially. Um but we do need to at some point like
pencils down so that it can convert to drafting the zoning. And so I think my like there's no hard rule line in the sand about where that is, but I would say that next week we need to get to clarity on like we can do some
final tweaks that are like very clear prescribed tweaks. Um not like exploring multiple options like we want to do this just follow through on it. Um, but I think next week should be the cut off of exploring hypothetical
alternatives and alter and like tradeoffs between districts. I think we need to get to a point where we're we have like one last request and we go ahead and make that we implement that change. So,
the you've said that you think based on what you your two years of working on this, you think the the Blue Hills um Parkway area is going to drive the density down such that you have to increase the density in the other districts. So, are folks comfortable
with increasing before they go do this, are you comfortable are we comfortable with increasing the density in any of the other districts in order to include the Blue Hills Parkway? Which which um what which parkway area are you talking
about now? The triplex that you Yeah. I guess I would be just curious to know h how many how many what density level we would have to increase those to like how far are we just talking a slight incremental or is it a a real dramatic
increase? Um and and how much effort is that Zoe to to determine? So, could you do the two scenarios like the scenario that I s I suggested run that through a little bit more in the the Fairmont and to do the Blue Hills Parkway as an
alternative to it and with for next week and the goal is just to alleviate Eastville um sorry, Elliott Street from Oak Valley and Avalon. Just take this little parcel out. That's why we're going through this whole exercise. is to decrease some of the zone capacity there
without having to increase it on the other districts. So, it's a swap. The idea is to swap it in land area out without having to do an increased density somewhere. I understand that. And the drive was I'm still trying to figure out where the drive came from
because we all felt that there's too much on Elliot Street or you felt that it was so you we heard comments we heard comments at the public hearing from people and we received an email at least one email from a resident. I received that email in the Elliot Street corridor. Yeah. Who's concerned about
the increased zone capacity in the Elliot Street corridor. So, uh, and at least one person at the meeting last week, we received another email, a comment about spreading some of it out, someone who lives on Capen Street. Actually, two people may spread it out a little bit further. So, they
wanted some spread out before him say that it was a great plan and they they liked what we've done and they liked our work and they appreciated it. So, I'm just I would just be curious to see if we're not going to go if we're worried about running out of time and now we're looking at new districts. I'm just wondering what's the gain here.
That's all I'm just And that's it. I just I I sort of thought it was good before. So, and also um to someone's point about staying with the 6,000 square foot
um lot size. That suggestion came from Elliot Street residents. Now perhaps the residents over on the Blue Hill Austin, they're comfortable with the
4,000 because if you looked at Zoe's um bar graph there, it um it was really it was the 5,000 then 45 then 4,000. We would capture a lot in the four if we reduced it to 4,000. Well, so we we
would have no time to ask them what they think about it or if they if they hear about this and come to the next meeting and we get five residents that say they want it and five res say they don't. What do we do? I'm going to jump in real quick just to address because I do have some analysis that we did back in 2023
on the Blue Hills um area. Uh it was analyzing the geography we were looking at before. Um but that is two family fabric. That is not Oops. Sound.
Sorry, Zoe. We lost you at 2,000 fabric. Oh, we still lost two family fabric. What does that mean? Three% of the parcels. Oh, wait. We just got you back. Sorry. You're going to have to repeat the whole thing. We Sorry. Can you hear me now? Yes. You
We lost you at two family fabric. Fabric. Okay. Okay. So, the the Blue Hills area that the triangle area that we're looking at here, this is two family fabric. The development density that you're seeing on those parcels and the
size of those parcels is driven by the fact that they were they were subdivided in order to build two families. That is clear because in when you look at the parcel counts of the 565 parcels analyzed in this
area, seven of those are three families. That's 1% of the parcels. 191 are two families. That's 34% of the parcel. 339 are single family. That's 60% of the parcels. So
yes, there is multif family here. Yes, the pattern is tighter, but that does not mean that it is ready for three family units at this level of density on this size of parcels with this consistency of that small parcel size. That is very different from what we've
been looking at elsewhere. And so it's I don't think it's just a matter of what residents in that area are comfortable with. I think it is a matter of thinking about whether allowing three units on parcels
of this scale consistently across a whole area that has that small parcel fabric does not have the same diversity of par of parcel size that we see elsewhere on Elliot Street
corridor. If that's something that that that increase in density, which is basically saying a a third increase across lots of small parcels, each of which has very limited open space, very few amenities, I don't think
that is I don't think you need to ask residents about that. I don't think that is strong planning logic. So, we can ask a question. the the the numbers that you just referenced, that's the entire area that you're showing on the screen right now. Correct. Would you mind would you
mind just going back over those numbers again so everybody hears hears that? Not only us, but the um the public. Yep. So, looking at the parcels that we're seeing on the screen right now, that's 565 parcels. Of those parcels, seven of them have three family units currently.
That's 1%. This is I should say this is using the state parcel data, so there might be some discrepancies. um two families there are 191 parcels that's 34% of the parcels
339 that's 60% of the parcels are single family currently. So this is a a mixture of predominantly single family homes with many two family homes about a third and just a handful of three units. And we
would be talking about zoning that would enable all of these parcels to go to three units. That's a that's a big change in an area that doesn't have a lot of infrastructure to support it. Yeah. where you're talking about a solution
that would require less than 40% open space on all of those parcels. And and those numbers that you referred to, those 565 is that can you go back to the graph that uh where you show the columns and it's indicative of the of the um
square footage. So is the is the 565 all of them all the way down to the smallest parcel? Yes. So that's all of the parcels. So 47 of those parcels are less than 5,000 ft.
47 are less than 5,000 sorry 47%. Oh 47%. Okay. So that's what you're seeing on this graph, right? Like visually you can see that the m that almost half are below 5,000. So the the actual number is 47%. Okay. Are below 5,000.
So before we um make a decision with you, maybe it is a good idea to get some public comment if anybody would like to but and just before we do that just as a comment we we only have seven three families because our zoning does not allow
so this whole initiative is to change our zoning but um again I think what the point the larger point is the lot sizes are were designed for what's there whereas in
other places the lot sizes have a little more room for growth That's what I understood from what Zoe was saying. Zoe, what is the um what is the the size? There's 191 two families. What what is the predominant square foot lot size for the two families?
Do you know that that would require a little bit of Excel formula magic that I can't effectively do while multitasking, but I can get you that answer subsequently. So if you take one parcel on um Belvore this what was this 9-11
Belvore. Yeah. Um it's 170 acres. And Jim, what did you say the house size? It was 2800. 2800 point what? 2886 on 17 acres. Okay. That that's uh I mean
that's got to be 5700 feet something like that. It's try that. Uh.17.17 divided by what was your 20 2886 2886 that's.17 acres is
7,45 square ft. Wow. Yeah. And that's a two family. It's a two family. Yeah. And it's as to Merida's point, it's a big Yeah. It's a big two family. Yeah. That's That's a That's a decent sized lot, too. If you look at the map around it, I mean, it's
typical of all the lot sizes around us, right? Maybe a little bigger, but not by much. Okay, Zoe, that was helpful um data. Do you have you done that um same study with the number of parcels on the Elliot Street corridor?
Like how many two families, how many single family that we ran this analysis, but the geography was different. the what we were looking at for the Elliot Street corridor at that time. I can't be sure that it's the same as the geography that we're looking at now. Okay. Um but I do have that would be just interesting
too just to have that um for the Elliot Street. Yeah. So the I mean again with the caveat that the geography most likely does not line up with what we're looking at, right? Um for the Elliot Street corridor now, but um it is
in that general area. Um so that was looking at 517 parcels. Um and of that 82% were single family, 13% were two family and 1% were
three family. So, a similar number of three family units across the two areas, but um the Elliot Street corridor does have proportionally more single family versus two family um 82 versus 13,
whereas for uh 82% versus 13% whereas the Blue Hills area that we had studied at the time was um 60% single family versus 34% two family. So, I think that's the the difference that I think all of you intuitively are picking up on
between the two fabrics is the difference between a single family fabric that has some two families and a two family fabric that has many single families. Yeah, that's what I'm struggling with. I'm trying to Yeah. But I also and I think that's that's valid.
That is it is a real difference. I grew up in a two family neighborhood where everything the the lots were absolutely for that and they fit tightly. Um and it was great. Yeah. That's good. and three units on that same parcel would not have felt the same. It would have that's a
obviously that's true everywhere, but they were already maxed out for what was possible to do on those parcels without having you know um solar shadow impacts that made the open space that was on those parcels less valuable um without
having you know bulk that wasn't allowable under the zoning envelope. So it they were they were at the limit. They they fit well, but you couldn't build them again with our current building code. You couldn't you couldn't make those units again in that density, right? And
so adding another unit wouldn't just be a function of like fitting it in to what's there. You would have to do it to current code. You'd have to use current dimensions. You have to address, you know, things that were never part of the design of those buildings that make it
harder to to design that compactly. And I I think it it would be difficult to achieve the kind of pattern that is working right now while fitting another unit on those parcels.
Great. Well, I actually think you could do it. It would just be smaller units, right? Instead of having I'm not without Matthew here. I can't speak to the details, but I I know that many two families that we have
currently, you can't build them again that compactly. You can build incredible two families, but it would be a tear down. Something we've talked a lot about um not wanting to do that. when you when you're that boxed in on the parcel and you have to conform to modern building
codes, um it is hard to solve for those differences and not tear down the property that you're working with. Having a little bit of extra wiggle room with the parcel area
enables you to solve those in more genius ways that can still preserve the buildings that are there today that people value and want to maintain. And as an architect, I would agree with that that um the building codes uh when once you
start a major renovation, you're required to bring everything up to code. So your stairs get larger, you your number of stairs for three units, etc. And my thought always was it would be better to do an addition uh to be able
to get a third unit or or two additional units rather than trying to have to bring the existing building up to code. So, uh, it's one of the reasons I always thought it would be better and nicer to be able to do a standalone building and not have to have it be one building with
three units in it or two buildings with two units in it each. Um, but that's not the way the zoning allows it to be. But yeah, I mean, if you based this on doing a standalone building, you wouldn't get anything built, right? Like on a 6,000 foot lot.
Well, that's what in the Elliot Street quarter, the parcels that are eligible for the zoning rules that we've developed are larger parcels that do have some wiggle room and that have ways of adding units that does not inherently require a tear down. Not saying that
people won't maybe choose for other reasons, but their hands won't be forced by the building code and the constraints of their parcel. It will be a choice if they pursue a tear down. But uh well what I'm saying is could you fit a second building on a 2,00 on a
6,000 foot lot? Probably not. But you could on a 10 or a 15. But you could do an addition. You can do an addition. Addition on these in the problem with that is when you do more than 50% of the value of the building, you make an improvement, you have to bring the whole building up to code, right? Well, if
you're doing demoing the inside walls and you're and you're padding everything out to 2x6 so you can get it the R value. If you're doing it, if you're doing your addition, let's say it's a separate unit with a firewall in between, it's not the same. So, it depends on the configuration that you're going to have, right? So, it's not the
same. Meaning, you don't have to bring the whole rest of the building up to code. You wouldn't have to if you're not still triggers that that it depends on how big the building is, etc. All right. If you built a small unit. Yeah. Okay. I get it. All right. So, this is great. Um
I think we will reconvene on this on and we realize our timeline. Well, I think we but I want to hear from the public. Um but I I just want to if I I agree with you about hearing from the public, but I do think we need to to give some direction to what we'd like for you to
do work on in the next week. So after we hear from the public just to I would like to look at the tribal what it would offset from it two years ago. Um so if we could just look at what we what we we would offset in the Elliot
Street corridor to do this. We realize there's trade-offs and do you want to look at this geography as drawn here? This is I believe um Maggie this is this is the product of the conversation that you had brought up earlier. um about
looking into this area. But I I think this if we if we want to revisit it, I think we should revisit it with an eye to the specific geography that we want to consider if this is it or not. Um right and at what densities because I
think this included the yoga studio and Brook Road. So what I would say we also wanted to see redeveloped. Is there a way that you could you see where it says I think it's um the the parcels that are to the east of Blue Hills Parkway. I think where the
um uh Tucker Elementary School is is where the Blue Hills Parkway district ends. Um so I believe it comes down to West Street. Just check that that's I'm remembering that correctly. Um and I know there's kind of see it in the
imprint here, right? that that's you can see the the geometry there that that's where the the current Blue Hills Parkway corridor district. Go back to that map. There's a lot of uh neighbor concern I know in that neighborhood about the traffic on Oak
Street um related to the school and safety there. So in term I would think that anything that you were going to look at would have to be north of there and none of that area south of Oak.
Yeah. So Oak is at um Tucker. Um and maybe even you do Brook Road north of Brook Road. Yeah. So just that I thought we looked at a smaller and the biggest one is um the old temple, right?
That's the temple. Um um a blue hav with the two big squares. Correct. So I think it would be sort of Baptist. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry, I'm dating myself. I attended second grade there when Tucker
was being renovated. But um so I I would agree on losing some parcels on Blue Hill Parkway. Well, what do you think about using Brook Road as the divider? um Brook Road North. I mean, I think that
would be good. It would It's a shame we can't go street by street based on lot size until we get to what we're looking for, right? Which I still were looking for just what 200 units off of Elliot Street is 185 to 200 185 off of Elliot Street is why we're doing this.
So, if you could go street by I know it's an impossible ask for Zoe, but if if we go street by street until we get there, because it looks like the northern parcels are way bigger than the southern parcels in this giant triangle.
I've also wondered about expanding the the parkway district to pick up Laurel Road and West Street, those that area to the east of the Parkway. Maybe that's an alternative alternative to doing but those are small parcels too I imagine Zoe.
So this would be option one would be this like triangle here and option two would be as it as its own district with its own rules and an option two would be this area as an
expansion to the rule set that we already have for the Blue Hills Parkway. and then I still think we should have the option with the Fairmont station. Yeah, I I wouldn't pursue Fairmont personally. No offense, but I just don't
think it's makes sense to go pushing into yet another neighborhood that's untouched. And I wasn't supporting this, so we'll go with what we each other don't support. All right, Zoe on the record. when when you're if you were to include all of this or most of this, I'm
wondering if you could offset that with the Elliot Street corridor, bringing the um western or if you're looking at Elliot Street above where you had blacked out on the on the 10% adjacent
community plan, if you could exclude those parcels, um- which would be north. Um, now I'm looking at the um north of Elliot Street, but you have the Capen Street station there. I know, but it's you're it's all single family. No, there's two
families on Capen. Not maybe one or two. We wrote that, too, just to confirm, but all neighborhood necessarily the best if you want to leave in Capen Street. But I think um yeah, everything pretty if you can
look at what you blacked out just out of curiosity keeping um the just the first row of homes along Elliot Street if that area that triplex area offsets that and even maybe that other blackened
that area that was blackened along Elliot Street. That's a lot of area. But so is that I just don't know if that's going to work. Yeah. So, I don't know how much of that you can you could swap out with the Blue
Hills triplex, but I just would be curious to see how that might Okay, so basically um so we talked about two different um geographies in the Blue Hills area and
then the intent would be to see if That would be enough to allow a reduction in the Elliot Street corridor that aligns with this map.
Correct. As an analysis. No, I I don't agree with that. I think you need to leave the This is too much. You're going to be shifting way too much. Well, maybe we don't. But yeah, not this map. This isn't This isn't the one. Go back to the one. I I think I think the target maybe
at least part of it or at least the northern the top area maybe not the bottom you're swap yeah I don't think you want to remove anything near the central a area no it's not central a it's um Elliot Street it would be Norway
um Norway cliff you basically you want to remove this yes Norway cliff well maybe not all that Allen Circle of Allen Circle also Okay. I I don't just I would You have one of the trolley stations here. You're removing the entire
catchment area of that trolley station. So I guess that's where the struggle is. Elliot Street is people are saying please take pressure off Elliot Street. So Meredith is suggesting to take pressure off Elliot Street and I think it just a walkable section of Elliot
Street. So that's why it's I just I think this is just an uncharacter I think this is our peeps. This is an entire cliff neighborhood. Um, that would be altered significantly. Well, maybe you take it over to I don't think it should peel off as
far to the right. So, the lower the lower areas that you were trying to take off are more those do have characteristics. Two, that's where the two families are. There are singles in there, too. There are singles in there, too. I don't know why I'm with
you on that one. That the Valley Road Avalon. I would leave that in there. I don't know why. Yeah. Leave Valley Road and Avalon in but take out the Norway Cliff Avalon or Allen Circle. Um just so I'm clear that the
the reason that I'm hearing to take this area out is because currently it has larger lot single family. Correct. Okay. Um and all single family. Yeah, but more I'm I would be concerned about
Yeah, I think I understand that it might be a more dramatic change and I think if there's any single family in Milton that makes sense to be
considered for additional units that are sensitive that are contextual. this is a place that makes sense for that because it has a pre premium transit access to multiple
stations. So I I I I hear you on this being a geography, but I I understand. Yeah, I think like the I realize that the committee is the board is divided on whether you want to see a
level of housing production coming out of this. And I think that these the homeowners in these locations, if that's also part of the concern that that there, you know, homeowners that may not want to have um
multifamily, I think this area has valid planning reasons why that should be an option for those owners and they don't need to act on it. if they value their single family as it is, they don't need to actualize that potential.
Yeah. But those are all pretty those are all pretty big lots and I think if you take those out it will help the density denominator. I mean a lot of them especially around cliff are very big. I just as an exercise if we could just
take a look at it I I think it would be what is it do we want it to be? Is it is it a tighter one here? I heard some folks saying that. Or is it this whole area? I think the tighter one,
you know, I think I think that you want to keep caping in valley. I think the I'm going to keep I keep caping in valley. I think I'm going to um we did get a letter from a Capen Street resident who was concerned. I'm going to um you know come back to the ones that
have larger lots are more able to take an addition and the ones that are smaller. If you make everything the smaller lots, you're going to incentivize tear downs. And so, just be mindful of that because you're just like Zoe said, you have a lot
less flexibility in how you're going to be able to do the units because if you you're hemmed in. And on something where you have a little more land, you actually have more options. And so, those could be added more sensitively. You could have look take a look at the architecture and see the best place to
add it. But when you're you're hemmed in, you have you're tight, you only have one option for how you can do it, then you may not like the architectural result that you get out of it. So by trying to take out all of the parcels
that have more flexibility, I think it's a mistake. But you also have to consider as that assemblage is possible as well. And you could have multiple large lots taken out and you're still going to have a limit to what you can put on a a
larger lot unless you have a way to subdivide it. I just don't it just has the potential I think to Yeah, I would look at Norway Cliff and then the the the culde-sac there. The rules for Elliot Street corridor would not be advantageous for lot
assembly, especially for the large lots because you would not get any more units by merging lots. Mhm. you would reduce the unit capacity of each lot because you would be limited to four units regardless of the lot size you
have. So if you increase the lot size, you can still only produce four units. The number of units is going to be the biggest driver. And how many ADUs can be added? One per lot. One per lot. So again, merging would be a disadvantage. You
would get one unit. Yeah. if you if you kept the lot separate, you could fit four units on each lot under this zoning. And then I don't yet know the details of how this would interact with the the ADU ordinance that you um have
put forward, but let's say it's one unit per lot. That would mean each of them can carry five units, four units under the zoning and the the fifth ADU if that's how it works. If you merge those two lots, you can produce five total. So you go from 10 across two lots to
five on one lot. So there's it will not be economically advantageous to merge large lots. It will potentially be economically advantageous to merge small lots that do not get you to the three units.
Mhm. So that would be an argument for focusing on large loss, but it might bring it might to Jim's point affect the density denominator because of the it will because of the land area. Yes, that is that is true. These larger lots are
are the two things that are hurting your density in Elliot Street are lots that are below the minimum lot size and lots that are well above the density of four units per lot. that would be advantageous. So, you're
correct that that reducing large lots would help with the density numbers, but you're also focusing specifically on large lots, but you're also reducing the zone capacity. Um, so like right now, the amount of
zone capacity that you're going to get for a larger land area could be um less, right? because you and now will we have the right amount of minimum land area within the half mile I guess is another question but
well if we we'll just we'll look at it for next week no one's making a final decision right now so um so I'm just going I'm going to do a final so the I think the last drawing that I had of this was this area being eliminated on it'll come up in a second no I think you
leave in Cait Street and you just go south of the tea So just um clear that this here and and then would you Yeah. Grab just that side. Yes. And up.
Yeah. Or you could leave everything on Caping Street if you wanted to. I know I'm making it a little small, but it looks, you know, carving carving these both leave both sides. That's just me speaking. It's not the whole board. That's just that's just me. I agree.
So leave both sides of Capen Street and then everything. Everything to the south and west of Capen, right? That is not fronting Elliot gets removed. Right. Okay. Okay. And and above Yeah. up to the
So I can't tell what road color that maybe will come through better. Let me clear this on the other side of the tracks. to the T-Rex. No, right to the Why wouldn't you do Why wouldn't you stop it at Why are we stopping? Why are
you going moving up above? Okay, so this is the what I I guess we wouldn't. Yeah, just in that area then. Yeah, that's fine. It's this I'm sorry. I know these colors are That's good. That's That's good. Um,
yeah, I don't think that's going to be 185 to 200 units, but we'll see. Well, could we look at Milton Village again? I'm just thinking the Verizon building. Put a little more over there. We don't have the Verizon building in. So, we should
probably put that in, right? That's a huge opportunity. Then that's going into that whole the building district. Okay. But single. Yeah, I get it. Just just saying. Um that's like all right. I
I'm just thinking if we can offset and we'll see with the triplex. It might not work, you know, it might not make sense, but Okay. So, I think I I have my marchman search. I have the the swap that we've already shown, which is moving removing
this area um near the um that's the second to that drawing. Um, so we have a version of reducing the Elliot Street Quarter that is removing this geography. We have a version of reducing the Elliot Street corridor that's
removing the geography we just talked about along Cliff Road, Norway Road. Um and we have two areas in the Blue Hills um area that we're going to look at as potential additions and we're seeing
those as swaps. So it that would be like a I guess there's like something like six like variations of combinations of those two things and the Fairmont. Yes, we have the Fairmont. So that the the basically we'd have these two two
Elliot Street options and then three options for what gets swapped in for one or other of those two. Okay. So that's a total of six options that we'd be showing of different combinations. That's great.
Okay. And then do we have any interest in looking at our institutions for different um districts or is that just crazy at this point like Milton Academy or Curry College or anything like that since the guidelines have been changed? I It's okay. I'm just throwing it out
there. I get it. I'm just I think it Well, I can't say but the Milton Academy land area is so large. I think we it would be like a fuller village. Yeah. But you wouldn't have the whole you wouldn't have to do the whole Milton Academy land area.
Right across the street from me is a great parcel that goes down at Brook Road and that also abuts their nine units of sort of major housing. Um I'd be willing to put it in my backyard. I mean I would no problem putting it right there. Just saying just
to just when the torture we're putting ourselves through and all the residents through now with this you might want to look at that or 501 Randolph AB is is a great parcel known by Milton Academy which is this vacant house ripe for a tear down. It's on four or five it's on
five or six acres. Yeah. That had a fire in it. Um um what actually you know what that's actually a very good point. Um the 501 if we were going to do anything. They have a demolition application in and I don't know what they're going to do with it but that are going to be
administration or or dorm. Where is 501? It's 501. It's a very historic old home had a fire across from Gun. Okay. Sure. Sure. It's after the after the fields, right? You go past the fields acreage. Yeah. Yeah. And to Jim's
point that's eight acres 8.24. Yeah. along Brook Road. They It's already multifamily for their house. Really? There's a lot of There's a tremendous amount of history. Well, that opens up a whole new Yeah. And but it's being torn down. So 501 That would be the one lot that I
would say 501's being torn down. Mhm. That would be the one if if that could help us in some way. They changed those they changed those guidelines for a reason. Take advantage of it. I would I would look at that lot. I'd look at that
501 especially if it's 8 acres. So Zoe, can you look at that 501 Randolph AB? Let me just pull it up. And that would be as another alternative to swap in for a reduction in Elliot Street. That's the
the goal. Or just see whatever we what can we put there. Just see how many units we can put there. and a reduction for the ones at um up on um 728 Randolph Fev. You're talking about swap or reduction.
Well, reduction. There's already 40 there. Yeah, just a reduction. A reduction. We're looking for 20 at least, right? Yeah. So, there's 80 to get to 80 total. Yeah. Well, no more than 80. And how many units would you be
comfortable with showing on the 501 Randolph app site? I don't know. You have to do at least 15 units an acre there. 8* 8 120 is what it would be the math, right? It's how many acres? 8.24.
I drive by all the time. So 8.24. Yeah. 8. Yeah. What's that? 123.6 of just direct multiplication of the 8.24 * 15. Okay. Is that I think if if we if you're not
comfortable with it at that number of units, I don't think it's helping us. All right. 123. I think we would I don't have a problem with it, but Is that a Is that a Milton Milton Academy permit to tear it down? Yeah,
they have a demo and the two years is is up. They applied two years ago for it. It's an old mansion. It would cost hundreds of thousands. So, I guess the question becomes what what is uh it what 120 units is it replacing? Right. I
mean, it could replace the 120 units in the LA Street corridor. which I without any of the other without any of the other changes we've talked about except I mean except for those two small swap outs in the other street quarter it 100 off of Elliot Street and
20 off of Randolph A in which case I still think we need more than possibly more than 100 off of the Elliot Street quarter maybe a small portion of the parkway or that area around the Blue Hill Parkway the smaller the parkways expansion
I mean So 348 Center Street is right across the street from me. It's 3.6 acres and then 336 Center. Let's just keep it at the Randolph A and not do too many more. I think whatever you want to if we I'm just thinking time wise. It's it's all I'm just thinking. I mean are
we going for time or we're going for the best plan for Milton? You know, nobody likes 2461. We run out of time. I mean I Please either you're going to try and get what it looks like or you're not. If if if town meeting is not the goal, then
we have tons of time. But town meeting is your only chance to meet the state's requirements. All right. Is it a is it a big lift though when we take like an 8 acre parcel and and just apply it? Doesn't
feel like it is a big lift in terms of like the analysis we'd have to do. Yeah. No, no, we could that's totally doable. I'm just saying, you know, it big picture, either we're accepting this timeline or we're not and either we're working within it
or we're not. There's there isn't Well, I think we have more time. Before you go on, Zoe, I think we know the timeline. We're going to work within it. And and we might be asking more of you, Teal, than than is fair, but um I'm just curious, what were you asking, Jim, in addition to 501? What was your other ask
off road? uh 348 Center Street, right across the street from my house, which goes down to Brook Road. Is it a single parcel? It is a single parcel. So, it's a large Well, I think I had a hard time finding out the finding the address. No, 348 center is a single parcel and then
336 Center starts on center and goes down to Brook and picks up about nine units of Milton Academy administrative housing or something. It's those contemporary looking Yeah. Yeah. So, that's another 6 acres. Now, this might be too much, but that's two parcels that we could put together and not worry
about the spot zoning issue with just one parcel. Um, and see what happens there, too. It's way close. It's right across from Fon. There's a bus station right in the corner of Center and Brook. I mean, with us being able to look at
institutions now, it it it's to me it's a game changer. Mhm. And we just got this new these new guidelines what, last week? So to say we're out of time is okay, we're out of time on guidelines that make huge changes for Milton that we just got a week ago, you know. So,
but we might not need it if because we need the contiguity up here in the land area up here. So, we can't take too much off, but well, we're doing the whole I like the idea where you have a vacant a building that's being demolished, Jim,
at verse as compared to these other one these other locations. So, Well, these might not be demolished. I mean, there's tons of land on this on these parcels. I see. Well, especially if they're going to be able to add to some of their um
housing like along Brook Road. It's a perfect spot for it. I think that's a good spot for some expens that seems very dense. I know. No, it's a lot in that area. It's perfect. It's a lot. Yeah. I would to be just one um note on the institutional
land. It's similar to the public land. So right now um you know it isn't a given that you it is admissible as developable. Um if you can demonstrate that there is an intention you know to
bring it to um you know uh market available housing production. So not just like institutional housing for that institution but housing that is publicly available to the market
then you can override the fact that institutional land is is basically so we might not be able to use it then it's not like a given that it's is admissible it still has the same level of scrutiny that for instance granite
south had so well how are you expected to demonstrate that you need a letter from the Milton Academy folks. So the um I haven't because we haven't yet had a a client that's is looking into this particular parameter. I haven't done extensive research on it
but to provide an example for the granite out of South. Um some of the options you have to make it admissible were having it being in a housing production plan. Um, so already designated as a place that the town had identified as um, a site for future
housing production or have the owner of the land demonstrate their intentions, their plans to bring it to to dispose of it for public use for housing. But that was the old guidelines. I thought they changed the guidelines. That that's always been
way to override the institutional one. So there there was a a bypass opportunity for publicly owned land to demonstrate in this way that it was in fact intended to be used for future housing production. There was not a similar
um option made available for institutional land. So the revision extended a similar level of discretion to be able to demonstrate that institutional land was in fact intended for future market housing. I see. Okay. Would it be
helpful to demonstrate that um the institutional land their h the housing that they're producing the children who live in those housing would be attending Milton public
schools. It would it's different. I don't believe so. It would be say like Fump on Academy. I understand maybe the hesitant to to uh zone for HLC to accept Fmpon because
there's no housing there. Kids aren't going to be there. But at Milton Academy, the housing actually has kids in it who the Milton public school system educates, but we don't they don't know what they're going to do with it yet. So it could be dorms, housing
students who could be dorms, could be administrative, might not be housing. You you think it's a I haven't heard. It's up to I think the trustees have to decide. But all right. So maybe we should not look at that then. Yeah. Don't waste the time.
Yeah. If I don't think that would be likely to be approved, but it was a good thought. It was a good thought. Dead end. All right. Okay. We're back to where we were um with those last
six tweaks. So I think with just the addition was 501 Randolph A that was if I remember correctly that that is not institutional land or it is institutional land. It is. It is. You don't want to keep that? You don't want to look at that? I mean we could try for it. I mean I think we should try. Yeah.
All right. Keep just that one. Just that one. The 501. We can Yeah. see if it's, you know, their parameters have become so restrictive on Milton. They have to accept some they got to give a little bit of relief. You know, we got relief down at Two Granite A. You know, maybe
we can get some relief up there. Okay. I think we have to try it. It might allow us to take some pressure off some of the neighborhoods that that already are being asked to have too much zoned into them. Okay. Yeah. All right. Worth pursuing. All right. So we we'll keep
501 in and and the other six tweaks and that will be very helpful for our meeting on the 30th. Sounds good. I think with that I can um if it's helpful I can stay for public comment. Um yeah, thank you Zoe. That's
good. Um if there's anyone who would like to speak from the public here or if there's anyone Cheyenne um if anyone raises their hand on Zoom. Um I don't see anyone on Zoom. Okay. All
right. So I think we're good for tonight. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Sorry. Yes. If you can just come to the microphone. Yeah. And state your name and for the record. You should just take a second. Yes.
Um Tom Dy Milton resident um I came to make some comment as it relates to the 10%. Okay. I'm not not what's been discussed tonight. So I could do that some other time if that's better for the planning board. Um I think the sooner we
hear any comment, Meredith, the better off we are. Yeah. All right. Um so let me just provide this. Hold on a second. This is a copy of what I sent to you. This is uh April 21, 2025. Each one of you, I emailed this to you. It's
two pages. The first page is the uh fully compliant applicable adjacent community rail station proximity based multif family zoning plan that provides 10% multif family zoning
capacity as u requested in terms of that kind of capacity and that kind of plan is just the design select board. So, I'd like to um provide this copy so that it's a matter of record for great this meeting.
I provided it to you seven or so days in advance so that you might each have an opportunity to uh look at it if you choose uh so that I could come tonight and ask that you know put this in the record and I'll give you a very short summary of the relationship. Yeah.
Great. Yes. Um I have a question because it is 10:30 and we still do have um to talk a little bit about the zoning language. We want to get voted next week and there's like a discussion minute we're going to um do like a little timer to try and get
out before 11. Yes. Oh, this this isn't going to take this from my perspective, this will take a few minutes only because the purpose of providing it was that that way the planning board would have a bit of an up, you know, a bit of a look at it in advance opportunity.
Um, and what uh it does is a fully compliant adjacent community plan that essentially looks at a couple of aspects. One is the commuter rail station base plan uh with Blue Hills Carter unit capacity 235 units on 16.6
acres. Matapin station unit capacity 183 units on 5.1 acres. So therefore that total is 418 units and as we know 15 units per acre for the 37 12 acres leads
to 563 units. So consequently, a plan that is uh predicated on the adjacency to the commuter rail uh and those adjacent acres uh then uh would require some capacity elsewhere. And
what this does is then look at the regulations 72081A 0% must be located within 5.5 miles. If the uh and it's Milton has less than 100 acres of developable land within half mile of commuter rail
stations. Consequently, there is the opportunity to uh provide additional units and I have an extra Oh, sorry. Thanks. Um my computer died. That's right. There's the opportunity.
And so what I did was to look there for uh both at section 3A's 563 unit capacity and Milton's total 10% that would be 500 sorry 985 units capacity goal and that could be accomplished by
adding and of course you spend hours and hours on this and so I'm just using one um sort of element Elliott Street Cart to tier one 485 units 47 acres and I I thought it would be worth looking at the paper mill site recognizing as it says
below that that would itself require a negotiation with the state concerning it right uh or alternative to alternative to the LA street guard at tier one uh you know you could be be looking as uh
as has been mentioned seven you know 7-Eleven to granted a some aspects like that so uh that's really the number of it that would then one way or another come to uh 1,59 units which might be more than the
uh required number for an adjacent community based uh family. So that's the point of it to sort of get that uh out there so that your expert and your own capabilities would uh you know have that
to look at. Great. And I will uh Cheyenne, we can um add this. I can um send you a copy of this so you have it um or uh to add to um to post and add to the public record.
Sounds good. Great. Quick question for you. Okay. So, the plan that was presented tonight, the 10% plan based on the adjacent community was actually 187 units at the Blue Hill at Blue Hills corridor and then Matapan station was still 183 which gets us to 370. That's
still okay, right? Because it's still more than half the units and then we can make up the rest of it somewhere else. If we if we slightly tweak this, it's okay. Yes. All right. That's my understanding and obviously can double check that but
that's right and then Elliot Street you would then vary it as you yeah talking about good enough okay great thank you we have a hand okay great
thank you okay hi it's um Kathleen O'Donnell precinct 71 12 Builder Welcome. Welcome, Kathleen. And I just had a question about why why we would be sending one resident's plan to UTIL but
not other residents plans. I understand Brian Furs, who's a former member of the planning board, submitted some of details about changing the plan. And I just sort of wonder why one person's got picked and not another. Why wouldn't we
be sending everyone? This was this was regarding a 10% plan um that it was just something that we could analyze and um evaluate but there was not it was not that
um it was part of you know what we were looking at anyway as an adjacent plan. So it didn't really differ that much. It was just sort of an alternative to what we already had. Thank you. Um, but I have another follow-up question which is that I understand that this title on
this thing says that it's fully compliant, but we don't know that. I know that there has been the ability to provide to ask HLC to sort of weigh in on proposals. So, is is there a plan to
send a a non-compliant 10% plan to HLC to see if they're going to buy it? I mean, it's kind of like wondering why we would be spending time, money, and you know, Util's time on something that we know won't fly at all with HLC. Well, it's something the select board
asked us to study um and and we may once we have um a plan submit it and um for review to see what the comments from HLC I said I I just don't understand why we would be spending util asking UTIL to
spend you know all this time and effort on on looking at a plan that we don't know that it's ever going to work. Well, we don't we don't know. Well, as I I had said recently, um we're looking at every alternative and until we either either
have a plan that's submitted, um uh we should look at every alternative and UTIL works for us and they've um they've done a great job of looking at anything we've asked them to do. So, so that Oh, I'm not questioning the the work that UTIL has done and I appreciate the fact
that you're investigating all of this. I'm just sensitive to the fact that we have like no time left. Your sensitivity is understood. Thank you. So I also So I didn't mean to be cut off like that. Um sorry and and I'm and I'm being quite
sincere. We understand your sensitivity. We have it too. Thank you. I Yeah. So I'd like to u build off the question Brian raised earlier and Kathleen just reminded us about is that
uh Brian first sent a plan uh a map. um we haven't discussed it and we've discussed uh other people's suggestions, other residents suggestions. Um and so I I think we should discuss that map and it's getting late now, but I think we
should discuss it at our meeting next week. I would be happy to do that and we should send that map to Zoe to look at, not necessarily to study, but to have an idea what it is and maybe if she's got any immediate reactions to it. Yeah, I would be happy to do that. Who has that map? I sent it to everyone. Everyone
will do. I missed it. I'll have to look at it a month ago. We'll resend it. Yep. I missed it. Well, I would be happy to do that and um and meant no disrespect to Brian. So, I would be absolutely happy to to do that and include that.
All right. I have a question. I know that on the 30th we're having um Zoe and Matthew come back. Are we going to have a final plan to get done? because we did mention we needed to do the the zoning language and the week after that's going
to be town meeting and with people in and out of the office we kind of have to consider yeah we have other workloads absolutely and that's why I think that meeting on the 8th um may be necessary so do we need to ask
whether uh util can attend the meeting on the eth could you tenatively keep the um the eighth open Zoe take a look to join us. That would be the next meeting following our town meeting. I'm seeing a potential conflict
for Matthew. I should be able to join. Um I will just say that at that point [Music] um I think as as Cheyenne was pointing out, they they do need some time to
draft the zoning. So, I think there's kind of a handoff that happens there between our team and um the town staff to finish out the writing of the zoning. Um and so, while I'm happy to come on the ETH, I do think that if we are still considering analysis on the ETH, that
requires my participation, that does give the town staff very limited amount of time to get to a full article and go through any necessary review cycles. Yeah. Okay. I guess I was just thinking we're going we've asked for a lot of
things to be studied for next week and whether where there's any kind of follow followup sort of final followup that needs to happen from from that but it's well it's understood in terms of the time frame. Yeah, we'll we'll
hold it and I I just would um urge us all to try to get to an answer on the 30th so that town staff has some time with the zoning. Yeah. So, I have a question just from a process. So, it's um zoning of course is all legal language. So, does
Peter Melo have a hand in writing it to help take the uh load off of town staff? Just write it. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. No, Nick. Nick, we have a template for that zoning language. Um what what I would ask for everybody to do is to look over
that template because the question is um our site plan um there's a site plan portion within embedded in that and there's also design guidelines. I the question the design guidelines I think should definitely stay what we had in
there be uh previously in the 2023 but the question is do we want to break out the site plan separate and we will I think for now we should keep it in because we don't know that our site plan approval is going to be finalized at Maytown meeting we're expecting that it
would be but in the event it it isn't I think we should keep the site plan language in as is but everyone should look look it over and um yeah, I think the biggest thing I agree with you, but I I think that if site plan approval bylaw passes, then we definitely need to
pull it out. It would be definitely too confusing. So, I think and we will have we will know that in advance of that basic deadline. So, that just to be thinking about that. That's um I think what Nick was wanting us to to think about. But but other than that, it's
sort of plugging in the districts and and the parameters and the parameters. And Zoe, uh, who would be producing the map that would need to accomp or the maps that would need to accompany the zoning? I believe that would be us. We produced it for the 2023 plan. Okay.
Um, so that would we would, you know, it's it's maps that we've been showing, but we sort of add the, you know, formal sort of title and legend that would be required for it to serve in that function. I've had somebody ask or a couple of people ask, "How do I know if
my property is in or not in one of these districts?" So, will we have a parcel list? Um, so people can see as as we get as we narrow down or as we at least the final what we decide on to submit.
Yeah, that's easy enough for us to generate. It's already um embedded in for the compliance modeling that we have to do for each district. Um requires us listing out um all of the parcels that are included in each of those districts. So it' be easy enough to generate once the all of the districts have stabilized. Do they list by parial
number, Zoe, or by parial number and street address? Um they include street address. Good. Um so it should be uh searchable for folks that are looking for a property in the way that they tend to interact with their property rather than as a personal number. Exactly. That's exactly why I
asked. Thank you. Great. All right. Um so now we um yeah, we we'll now be going into an executive session. So I think we're um we're good on this and we'll see everybody on the 30th.
Thank you, Zoe. Thank you, Zoe. And you can say, this should be very brief. Five minutes. We have We're going into an executive session. So, if you could Oops. disconnect. We have to make a motion to do that,
right? Yes. So, yes, I will now Yes. Before we do, Yes. Thank you. I will now make a motion to go into executive session for approval of executive session minutes um for the dates of March 13th and March
27th. Thank you. Good evening. [Music]
Hey, it rip it. [Music]