Speaker 1: Open the planning board meeting of G Wednesday, March 25th, 2026 at 7 0 6 Speaker 2: March 11th. Speaker 1: I'm sorry, Speaker 2: Did you, I thought I heard the 25th. Oh, I was just asking if you were gonna touch fifth, Speaker 3: I'm sorry. Speaker 1: The meeting of the planning board on March 11th at seven oh seven. So call that order first order Speaker 3: Business is you have icon. Speaker 2: Get to stand all over again. Speaker 4: Thank you. This is Speaker 2: A rehearsal. You
Speaker 3: Don't have to start it over. Speaker 4: Oh, thank you. So the first order of business I'll call, I'll note is public speak. Any individual may raise an issue that's not included in the agenda and it will be taken under advisement by the board. There'll be no opportunity for debate during this portion of the meeting. The section of the agenda is limited to 15 minutes in any individual addressing the board during this section of the agenda shall be limited to five minutes. Are there, is there anyone present physically or online on that?
Alright, then I'll move on to the next order of business. And that is development and review. Public hearings. Continuing the public hearing for 6 25 Worcester Street. Speaker 3: So, no. Does it think George Richards's, attorney Richards is online? Speaker 4: Okay, thank you very much. No, no, no. Speaker 3: 19th draft. You're, look, you're reading the 25th. That's the wrong agenda. Oh, Speaker 4: I'm sorry. Speaker 3: Address though. 19th. Yep. Hold on. Speaker 4: May May The rest of the meeting not, not resemble this. Okay, so development and review. 19 Strathmore.
Continuing the public hearing from our previous meeting. Can you sit here please come forward in case if you have questions. And, and I understand Attorney Richards, the attorney for the applicant is present online Speaker 2: Right behind you. He's behind your Speaker 3: Shoulder. This is gonna kill me. So is he clicking talking? George, can you speak again? Speaker 4: It's a broken, it's all, it's very broken up. Speaker 5: Okay. How's that? Speaker 3: Ah, Speaker 4: Much. Perfect. Speaker 2: Good. Speaker 3: That better? Speaker 4: Yes sir. Speaker 5: Good. I can take my ear bud out. Good evening. My name's George Richards from South Na Law here in Natick.
My clients, as you can see, are present in person continuation from the hearing two weeks ago. And the notes that I had, there were five issues that were discussed and that the board was looking for some more information on. One was drainage, one was landscaping, one was lighting, one was the dumpster location. And the last was the connection, a hardscape connection to number 17 Strathmore. If I'm missing anything, please let me know. But we have a number of documents that we've uploaded. And Amanda, I apologize, I don't have access to my VPN.
So if you could just bring up the, the uploads in the order that we did 'em. I think the first one was the drainage letter. Speaker 3: Yep. Just let me jump over there. One second please. And it is in your packets Speaker 5: That we got a, a letter from a certified engineer that there's no drainage issues. I also talked to Bill McDowell. He indicated, you know, we need to have an independent person state that, but that he concurred that he's not aware of any drainage issues. If we look at the DPW letter, there's no mention of any drainage issues.
So he did not seem concerned. He, he has not raised the issue. But I know Andy and some of the others were looking for something at least to hang your hat on, that there's currently no drainage issues on site. And because we're not making any changes to the grading, we don't expect any changes in the drainage patterns or, you know, creation of any drainage issues. So that's the first document. The second document I believe was the showing a proposed connection to number 17,
which I know Doug had requested. And we have shown it on actually two different plans. And it's in the rear of the lot, more or less a connection to the dumpster, which we'll get to on number 17. But, so that we do have a proposed connection to the, to number 17, you have to scroll down a little bit. That would be, Speaker 3: Is it flat screen project? Speaker 5: Basically a paved crossover. I know you wanted hardscape over that will
allow us to bring the garbage or refuse from number 19 to the dumpster on 17. So I, I jumped ahead 'cause that's kind of the, the, the fifth issue. But I know that, and I know if you wanna go through these and I apologize if you wanna ask questions on each one or if you want me to go through 'em all and then you can ask questions Speaker 4: Unless keep going. Others feel otherwise I'd rather that they lay everything out and Speaker 5: We'll go through it. Great, Speaker 4: Thank you. Speaker 5: And so I believe the next
upload was just showing the existing front of, of the building without snow that shows it is grass landscaping but not much more. And there's some use et cetera that we're gonna, you know, clean up the whole yard. But I'm just showing you that we'll have another slide that will show the proposed flowerbed basically from that u all the way along the front of the building would be the proposal. But I just wanted to show you that's the existing
conditions, if you will. And I think the next slide shows the lighting on the front of the building, which is minimal. We have agreed to have timers installed, so the lights will go off a half hour after close of business. But that just so you can see that's the existing lighting on the front of the building and the, I guess it's the south side of the building.
The next slide shows hopefully the proposed landscaping that I discussed, which we will be installing across the entire frontage of the building that's not currently landscaped, basically a flower bed. So there you go. I, I guess we're proposing to actually take out that u on the right side and, and just have a a, a flower bed along the entire front of the building. It'll be approximately five to six feet wide. And the last slide, which I apologize was uploaded today is the,
basically the rev, the site plan showing the location of the front landscaping bed showing the location of the lighting, lighting on the building. And it also shows the, our proposal is to remove the dump dumpster from 19 as we discussed last time. And just use the connection between 17 and 19 to access the dumpster that is currently located on, on 17. And because
that gives you a better idea of the whole, why is yours got colored? No, that's actually the the first one. Yeah, the one I sent you today, Amanda. I know it's probably confusing but there we go. One of them Speaker 6: Was called highlighted this Speaker 3: Year. Yeah, that's actually the one that, I don't know why the color's not coming up. Speaker 5: Oh, Speaker 3: Okay. On my slide it's, Alan's got on his, it's, Speaker 5: So there, there was a, a color showing the flowered up front. It's not, I don't think that important and the, not a whole lot of color, little green,
little green color on the safe. But that's, that's essentially our, our presentation. It's probably sitting as Speaker 6: Far as what, yeah, Speaker 5: Happy to answer questions or if I missed anything to address those. Speaker 4: Alright, thank you Amanda, anything before I go to the rest of the board? Anything that you Speaker 3: Want to add? I think the only thing I know it wasn't addressed in the DP W'S comment letter is just the question of is the applicant just aware of the significant amount of flooding that occurs at the intersection of Strathmore and Mercier Road during or Dean road?
Sorry, when Dean, yeah. Major snow storm or storm events happen. Speaker 5: Yeah, since they, since they've been located 17, I can let max address that but yeah, they're well aware of that. When I talked to Bill McDowell, he clearly indicated that was not related to this property and there was nothing that we could be yeah. Responsible for in that regard. But that he was aware of that drainage issue but nothing in this area. Yep. Speaker 3: I guess it was more of just making sure that they have an operation if this water does come up to that area so
that they could get people in and out to both properties. It's just, that's all I wanted to make sure is 'cause I know that there's been times where you can't fully pass through because there's amount of water on the roadway, which is again not an issue of the property, it's just access an issue of accessing the property. Speaker 7: I don't remember having that big of a problem if it's some kind of water anyway, we have driveway this big huge Speaker 8: No no I Amanda's talking about the front of the building, not there. Not on the property. Speaker 7: Yeah. Speaker 8: But Speaker 7: If it's happened, you cannot go in. You can use, I
Speaker 8: Remember that issue Speaker 7: Parking lot and we have two more access doors so it's not there because it's more elevated area on the side and in the back of this building, especially this 19 street more, if you see it's higher, more elevated. Yeah. More elevated and it's anyway, no driveway and no building will be suffered. This kind of issue. Speaker 6: Yeah, I think your drive or your driver's able to communicate with each other anyways. Oh yeah, yeah. We do have that because it doesn't happen often. But I think if you continue up to the driveway
that's actually closest to you rather than the intersection kind of behind LA Fitness, that's the one where actually Oh okay. Yeah. One time it was flooded so bad as somebody new decided to try to go through and they totaled their car. Speaker 8: I remember that. Yeah, I remember that exactly. Speaker 6: I cut through the LA fitness parking lot that day. But I, I think that's just being able to communicate with each other. If somebody sees that they can make sure that nobody else goes that way. Yeah, okay. Speaker 8: Just not driving straight through we Yeah. Take, I know totally the car, Speaker 7: Some crazy driver can go and just, Speaker 8: Oh yeah. One of the drivers parked I think
and some damage to the car. I remember that. Alright, so on on the, the issues presented on the slides, Doug, Speaker 9: I just, George the plan shows a proposed sidewalk across the frontage. Is that, is that what you intend or not? The plan shows it. Speaker 5: If you could pull it up. I, there's an existing sidewalk in front of the property. Aren't there maxing in Speaker 8: It? No, there isn't. There's no sidewalk. There isn't. Just proposing it from 17th. Look, Speaker 9: There's a, so you show the connection.
Thank you. I appreciate that. The connection in the back for access between the two sites, but then the, the plan shows a proposed sidewalk on site. Speaker 7: Yep. Speaker 9: Do you intend to, does that part of what you intend to do? Yep. Okay, thank you. Because the rendering of the landscaping does not show that. Yeah. So just, okay. Okay. Speaker 5: We are committed to do Speaker 9: That. Okay. Okay. Speaker 8: Alright, Speaker 9: Thank you. Anything else? Speaker 8: Yeah, Alan, anything? Speaker 6: Just, I guess it's more just very small questions. The landscaping, are those gonna be like bushes,
like flowering bushes, just little flowers or anything particularly kind of vision Speaker 8: There? We, we pretty much know with, spoke with the landscape company and they did the, you know, I think AI or whatever they used. So just to, we, we normally use like a lot of rose bushes. Okay. So they kind of fill in and they from May to, you know, October and they stay nice and you know, flowery. So you know, there's a lot of colors. So that's what they're proposing and that's what we like too. Yeah, it look good. It looks good. Yeah, I think so. Speaker 6: And I was happy to see the sidewalk. My only other thing was for the lighting that they,
you said the front of the building, although I guess it's facing apartment along. Speaker 8: I think Richard didn't upload, like there's few of them. We took pictures from all the sites we drove there at night just to see how the lighting is. And all sites have like, there's two in the back, two on the side two, one in the front and one on the side. So the floodlights and I, I think the downward lights. Speaker 6: Okay. They are pointing downward down downward. Yeah. So they're not gonna be going into the Speaker 8: So they don't Yeah, Speaker 6: The neighbors. Okay. That was my concern. Especially after, you know, the volleyball place that they were flooding into the neighbors. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
So they're not gonna go into the neighbors. I think those are my, Speaker 2: Okay. Speaker 8: Very good. Peter, Speaker 2: Do we have any topographical plan for this lot that would show, for instance, specifically where the sidewalk is going relative to the lot line and has the town. Speaker 5: I think that shows that that plan showed the well sidewalk relative to the lot line Speaker 8: Relative Speaker 2: To, sorry Speaker 8: George. It's Speaker 2: Yeah, Speaker 6: It's kind of schematic. Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a schematic. But wouldn't that be a pertinent
to mention that the town would want to know where is the, the private this lot sidewalk relative to the lot line, some snow removal fishing the street. Speaker 5: Yeah, clearly, really part of it. If the permit would be to build that would be to work with the engineering department in that regard. Speaker 2: But we don't need that on joy. We joy, we don't need that on a question. We don't need that on a submission to lo if you're putting in a new sidewalk beginning and the end of the sidewalk and it's location relative to the street,
I would think that'd be a dimensional issue. Speaker 8: Can I answer that question? I think, you know, once it's approved and it's okay saying like, you know, this is fine that if you guys decide, you know, generally that it's good to have a sidewalk, then we'll go through the permitting process and you know, then the architect or engineer, whoever they develop, you know, what inches, how many inches is gonna be, how wide I think it should be when, you know, when there's like a driveway, it needs to have like a handicap, you know, a DA dimensions. So it's something somewhat standard I think.
But once it's okay then, we'll when we're putting it in, obviously we have to have a, a drawing and, and the, you know, Speaker 2: Approved by Speaker 8: CT approved and bid the getting the permit. Is it the permit? I think we have to get right, but why building permit would we not take care of that? Yeah. First that's what the architect said. That's how it works. I mean, I'm not a professional. It is a standard sidewalk. I don't know. You can, I don't know anybody who can make it like two feet when it should be like five feet or something like that. Yeah, but they didn't put it here so it's,
Speaker 5: Well it's gonna be consistent with 17. Yeah. And Bill didn't have any concerns about it, but that did not come up last time. So I'm sorry we did not address that tonight. Speaker 8: I Speaker 9: Mean, I just, if I could just, for, for this project and for anyone who's listening or any future applicants, think a month from now there might be a different person sitting where Terry's sitting maybe where else applications before this board are going to be thorough? They're going to be complete
and we're gonna look at things that we vote on what they are. That's my opinion. I would rather not have decisions. And I think Andy, if he was here would probably say the same thing contingent upon engineering doing something or contingent upon a plan being submitted. If our rules and regs are not clear about what's to be submitted, we need to make them clear. I mean I've been on this board four year, four and a half years. You know, there's a, there's a different standard between applicants.
You know, some come in with professional engineered plans like they should, some don't what the scale of project, what the line is, you know, is are we going to die on the hill on this one? Probably not in my opinion. But we need to be way more diligent and way more consistent about what we want to see as a complete application. 'cause I really don't wanna spend this board's time continuing hearings for additional information. Let's get it right the first time and let's make sure that applications are complete,
including engineered drawings. That's what a site plan is. So I said little squeeze over. Speaker 4: No, no, I appreciate it. And I think, I think the points made by several of you are that you don't put the kind of cart before the horse. And so you show property lines, you show, you show the scale. It's, it's not meant to be a drawing exercise. It's meant to be something that is legally Speaker 9: Enforceable. I mean, if it was a, if it, if it's, it was simply just a special permit, but this is a, this is a special permit with site plan review.
And so we, we, there should be a standard about what that should be and what that should show. Speaker 2: I think once you determine that you're going to, to make a change to the site Speaker 7: Outside of the building line, we did not chose it. You recommended it. We, we'll better not do it at all. But you ask about it, you know, so if you, but you Speaker 8: Didn't recommend last time to have it like a, and you know what you, what you're saying set now. It wasn't proposed last time. You just said like you want to, you know, propose the sidewalk.
So that's what we thought. We do have a plan done by by engineer it the previous one of the plot, the whole site. It just doesn't show. We just didn't realize it needs to be done. If it was, you know, said last time, obviously we would, we spend time doing this really quick and you know, kind of using extra people to, to get this thing done. If we knew that we would obviously, you know, it doesn't take too long or too much. It's not, it wouldn't, it wouldn't be a problem Speaker 7: Because we have good relationship with our engineer. With our architect. And if you tell
Speaker 8: Us best here for short period Speaker 7: Of time, you know, we can just put on this drawing. He will put it professionally, wideness, whatever it must be. But it's not issue. Issue. You know, if you told us before, of course we would do it today, you have it, but what you ask, we already did. Now you rose another question. You know, and we can go for it because we don't need this pathway. I don't know who, who told just go from this building to another. They not obligated go from this building to other building. A lot of people there going just on the driveway.
Not our people other, but for us, you asking for drive for pathway and we will go for it. If you ask us not to do it, just we will not do it. And no problem. Speaker 8: It's not a necessity. A necessity for us because it's a separate buildings. They have separate, you know, companies, they have separate clients and they would be going into their own buildings. They don't need that path. So we're doing it more for this town. Yeah. If town wants it, we ready to invest and just do what you need. It's just the, Speaker 7: If you ask friends, we can put friends, but we did what you asking, Speaker 4: I think what we're saying is as much a question
of pedestrian safety. Speaker 8: Yeah, pedestrian safety. If you don't require us to have a sidewalk installed, we don't need it. We are just doing it for your, I don't know how to, for Speaker 7: Your proposal, if you decide you agree, they'll go from the defined, you know, where we have done Speaker 8: Down person week at a time please. And regarding the safety of the pedestrians, there was no sidewalk. So for our clients, we don't need the sidewalk. Where Speaker 7: Was there Speaker 8: Can pay attention. Can I just talk about that? And then, you know, we have, we drive people into that lot in the parking,
they unload, they go in. So we, we don't, we don't need that. But again, it's your right to tell us do this. Yes. And we'll do that. Mr. Richards, can I ask you a Speaker 5: Question, Doug? I understand what you're saying completely. And in the future we will Yeah. Endeavor to do so. Speaker 9: Purpose, yeah, I'm sorry. Purpose Speaker 5: Of this hearing. I, I would suggest that you could put in language that the sidewalk be installed in compliance with all local, state and federal regulations and approved by TPW. Unless you want us to engineer a plan, we've come back, we're is gonna take some time.
Speaker 9: I mean, I, I'm okay personally. I'm not speaking for the board. I'm okay with that approach. Like I said, I'm not gonna die on this hill on this one. Okay. That, that I think that that's a, that's a good way to do it. Maybe, maybe an as-built or something afterwards if we could think about that. But there's gonna have to be a plan. Some, you're gonna have to get a contractor to build it and they're gonna have to build it from a plan. So whatever that plan is, you know, get it approved by bill under a condition that you know of approval
and do it that way, I'm okay with that. Speaker 7: We can do it, don't worry. And Bill knows about it. Okay. Speaker 4: And that's then I assume we want to have that in hand prior to the vote on the project? Speaker 9: No, I, I would suggest it's a condition of approval. Say yeah. Okay. Yeah. Speaker 6: So can I, and I think this could be part of the decision, not necessarily the plan, but I think I would just like to throw in the comment about having a grass buffer between the sidewalk and the road. I mean it's kind of just sketched that way. We're feasible.
Obviously there's a tree I see there so I don't want to kill any trees. But, but I think with that, and then of course Bill signing off, I think, you know that I'd be okay with that. Speaker 5: I would think we'd wanna make it consistent with 17. I'm not sure if there's a grass strip between the sidewalk. No, Speaker 6: The pro, I don't want it to be consistent with 17. 'cause 17 it looks like where it should be a sidewalk is really cars are pulling over, at least according to street view. People are pulling over to a widened section, George. And I really don't want that.
'cause that's almost more reason for the buffer is you're right. Is we don't want cars on that, on the, in the opposite direction. There's actually a building that you'll see a little segment that might almost be too extreme. 'cause it looks like that's seven or eight feet back. So you know it's gonna have to fit. Right. So, you know, you're gonna have to tie into something on either side. But I think, you know, buffers are great. So I think if we can build in a buffer that that would be good. It's less likely to have cars parking on it is, Speaker 5: Yeah. We should be able to do that. Speaker 4: Yes. Peter Speaker 2: Is a buffer.
Does a buffer fall into the category of state law and state local and Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean those kind of are no brainer almost. Right? That should meet all Well that, that's not required. No. So, so buffer is not required. You could build it without it. I Speaker 2: Understand that. But if we want the buffer and we just say that it, the sidewalk, et cetera should just be falling through the local state and federal regulations and a buffer is not in there, then it will be anything that comes about the engineer is not gonna know what we want
to tie into an adjacent yard adjacent lot. Speaker 6: Yeah. So I think we should say in there Speaker 3: That's Amanda. Is there something that's absolutely the plan doesn't coincide with the trees on site and the telephone poles? Speaker 6: Well, even more, I think the telephone poles, I think we're gonna have to go behind them even more. Even for the buffer, right? Because otherwise the telephone pole will literally be in the middle of the sidewalk. There is at least one tree Speaker 3: And there's sign three trees. Speaker 6: Yeah. Well I think one looks pretty far. That sign could be more, I mean
that, that's a temporary sign. Think that's four lease or whatever. Right? Right. Speaker 3: But this architectural plan does not taken consideration the trees, the telephone poles Speaker 6: Or Speaker 3: Even the fact that the sidewalk does not even exist on 17 because there's a large space between on 17 that doesn't exist. There's a dumpster in one area and then there's trees. So Speaker 6: Yeah. So Speaker 3: That's why. But we just received this plan today. Yes. And yesterday afternoon. So it, so it has not, hasn't been time to review. DPW has not even had time to review this. So it's, Speaker 6: Yeah.
So like, just for construction purposes, you could have a sidewalk meander a little bit. It's fine. Can almost be charming or whatever. Speaker 3: Not, not in, no one wants a meandering sidewalk 'cause of snowplow removals. Yeah, Speaker 6: True, true. Snowplow will be clear. Speaker 9: Thank you. Maybe I'll throw this in here. The plan shows the sidewalk. I, I notice it for the first time tonight. Speaker 2: It Speaker 9: Wasn't there, it wasn't there before. I don't really care if there's one or not. What I do care is that the connection between the two sites, as you show, 'cause you're gonna accommodate the dumpster, that is a practical thing to do. If the, if the architect rendered the plan,
the conceptual plan with a sidewalk on it, because that's what they do get the feeling you really don't want to build it. I get the feeling that we don't really care if you build it. So just, Speaker 3: That's Speaker 6: Great. I I would, so Speaker 2: All I care about is if we're gonna show a sidewalk. Speaker 6: Sidewalk, I Speaker 2: Agree. And I take objection to the fact that you're even calling this an architectural plan. This is a schematic, a sketch of an idea. Correct. And it does not. And, and that that is not Yes, of course. It's not final stuff in this board since I've been working, I'm all familiar, only familiar with more comprehensive.
We call it that planning. There are certain details that we just need to have to make this thing to know this thing is gonna work. It's not working in a vacuum. There are other properties adjacent to you. We're concerned about those two. That's why we're concerned, for instance, in lighting. Yeah. But these are concerns of ours that you just, you, you, you're not just doing this all by it's lonesome in the north 40. It just doesn't happen that way. Speaker 8: But because other properties don't have the sidewalks, I think we can just get away with not having one and not causing all these, you know, extra time
and work if we don't have to do it. Right. Speaker 2: I mean, I, Speaker 6: Unless I'm speaking for myself. Yes. I, I'll probably always advocate for a sidewalk in any development that kind of comes up because, you know, if you don't build it in front of your thing, how is the next person gonna build one? And it doesn't connect to anything. So I, I know it's not gonna really connect to a whole lot someday it will, you know, it, that whole area, it kind of boggles my mind that it was built without a sidewalk to begin with. So I think it would be a good thing. Obviously it's piecemeal. It's on private property too, Alan. Speaker 2: It's not in the right of way.
Speaker 6: Actually there was a question I was gonna ask George. Or is that road up Natick road? Or is that, do we know anything about? Speaker 2: Pretty Speaker 5: Sure it's a public way. Yeah, it's an accepted Speaker 4: Way. Oh, Amanda, I take it that I believe it's public, it's public way. Speaker 6: Yeah. Speaker 2: Okay. There's gotta be a property line there. Speaker 6: Well, I think there, there are. So yeah. So Speaker 2: Then don't show the sidewalk. I mean if we're going to just forget about the sidewalk, I think it's an, it's the right thing to do as the sidewalk. I agree with you there. But if we're gonna show it as far as this sketch is concerned and we're gonna approve something, then I want
to see it approved as to plan, as it should be done as it's going to be done. It's the right way. You'll wanna see it. I'm sure you, if we're gonna put a sidewalk on the front, then somebody's gonna dig up the lawn to do it. You're gonna wanna see it in the right place. Speaker 8: So I think, here's the argument. If you guys want us to place the sidewalk, we don't have any problem with that. There are licensed engineers, there are licensed architects, whoever do do that, they're gonna make that work. Before we place anything, we have to get the permission from the city and show them that drawing with all the details,
as you said, the, as the all laws apply, which we agree to do that it just, we don't wanna hold, you know, the whole process because of that. And because, you know, we're gonna be showing you coming back again and showing you how it's gonna be placed. We cannot, we not people who place the sidewalks, but there are professionals who do that. They have to do the plan. They have to propose it to the city, city has to approve it. And you know, engineer, building inspector, whoever. It's not something that we can, you know, Speaker 7: It's another issue, you know?
Right. Hold on. Talking about get Speaker 8: It just business our time. You know, that's kind of, you know, very important here. So we can move on with the project. We've been there for what, seven, 16 years. Okay. We never had any issues with the city or any problems that we created. So whatever you guys decide that we need to do, we are happy to do that. But we just saying, you know, because there are no sidewalks in other places. Maybe it's a good idea to have one. Maybe it's not. I don't know. But if you, if your decision would be okay, you get the, you know, permission,
but you have to put the sidewalk. We will do it. It just the technical side of it. I think there are professionals who Speaker 6: I No, I, I agree it, I mean I viewing this as what it is. I mean this is a reuse of an existing building. If this was a big new development, obviously it'd be different. We'd want everything to be really engineered before we moved on. I think I, I'm, I'm fine with what Doug had suggested as far as language. Now that I think about it, looking at the obstacles, I would probably maybe take, not include the comment about the buffer.
Just because the, let's see how they fit it in, you know. Well we won't see it, but, so as DPW is fine with it, then Speaker 7: We can just go with previous, when we come here without the any side work, it was without side work. That's what I said. 19 59, 50, 60 years. And now you're asking for side work. When we propose it, you not now talking about how it should be. You know, you just determine if you want this side work or not. If you want it, just tell us and we will submit your qualified engineer,
building inspector, whatever will be done. Don't repeat I, but but not just spend time. You know's what Explain that. It's, I'll make a motion I don't use, Speaker 9: I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion. Okay. Let's just, Speaker 7: Everybody Speaker 9: Just take a deep breath. We're gonna make a motion. We're gonna make, I'm saying we're gonna make a motion. Motion and this is a motion to approve. I'm gonna make a motion to approve the application for Speaker 7: 19 in English. You know, but English is not Speaker 9: Motion to approve the application for 19 Strathmore road application for special permit adult daycare facility
with the references and site plan review subject to conditions that an engineered plan of a sidewalk as proposed on the site plan a zero submitted, be delivered to the town engineer and adequate buffer to the maximum extent practical be shown on that plan and constructed as approved. And the dumpster shown on that plan, AO be located in the, in the location that it's shown
and not on lot 19. Yep. Speaker 4: Alright. Thank you. Motion made. Seconded. I second Seconded by Alan Discussion. Peter? Speaker 2: No, no discussion. No. Speaker 4: Okay. Speaker 2: It's not worth it. Speaker 4: Very good then on the motion. As made and seconded by roll call vote. Actually no. 'cause we're all here, right? We're all here. So by vote. Hand vote. All those in favor? Aye. Speaker 9: Aye. Speaker 4: All opposed? And there we
Speaker 2: Are. You're free to go. Speaker 8: Well thank you very much. Thank you Speaker 2: Very much. Thank you Speaker 8: So much. And we can assure you that we can do whatever makes it better. I understand that, thank you. Never gonna try to make it look worse. So thank you very much for your time. Best of luck. Appreciate thank, Speaker 4: Thank you. Speaker 9: Thank Speaker 8: You everyone have a great night. Thanks. Alright. Speaker 3: So how do you handle the dec the decision? Do you want to have just Terry sign the decision? Speaker 4: Yes. And let me just, can we get a motion for that? Can I take a motion? Do Speaker 9: We need a motion for that? Speaker 2: Close the, Speaker 9: We don't need a motion for that. Speaker 2: We haven't. Speaker 4: Yeah. Okay. So a motion to Speaker 3: Have. Yeah. 'cause you've had having everyone sign it. Speaker 4: And then after this I'll be, then I'll,
after this I'll make the motion to close the public hearing Speaker 9: A motion that Terry signs the decision as drafted by CED Speaker 2: Second. Speaker 4: Aye. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Motion to close the public hearing. Speaker 2: Motion. Second. Speaker 9: Aye. Speaker 4: Aye. In favor. Okay. Aye. Speaker 2: Aye. Speaker 4: Very good. And then we'll can, Speaker 3: Can we, just so you're aware, when you vote the dec, when you vote the decision Yes. The public hearing actually automatically closes and you don't have to vote to close the public hearing. Oh good.
Speaker 4: I did not know. Thank you. Speaker 2: Can we discuss this at, we are not free to discuss this at all. Couple of comments amongst the board alone. Speaker 4: I, I would not because we have, we've just let the applicants Speaker 2: Not about the applicant, not about the project. Speaker 4: Oh. Just discussion. On Speaker 2: Discussion. Discussion as to how we get applicants to come in here and architects who prepare a plan for us to review, let 'em come in with the correct information. Speaker 9: I mean it's on the agenda and it's planning
board rules and regulations. So let's talk about it. Speaker 4: So Speaker 2: Let's talk about it again, Speaker 9: Mr. Speaker 4: That's true. 'cause we're coming to that. Yeah. That part of the agenda. Yeah. And Speaker 2: These people will put Speaker 4: In and, and actually if I could do this only because I owe Amanda because at our last meeting I managed to adjourn before I had had the minutes voted on. And I feel guilt. I've felt guilty ever since. If I can just get a quick vote on that and then we come back to rules and regulations, Speaker 3: We can, the only thing is we do not have minutes for February 26th, 2025.
March 12th, 2025. March 26th, 2025 or March 25th. 2026. We have all the other ones that were in the packet. Speaker 9: I'm sorry, the last one was Mark the Speaker 3: What it was. Speaker 4: Yeah. Run through the what's Speaker 3: Not. So we do not have February 26th of 25. March 12th of 25. March 26th of 25. And February 25th of 26th. Okay. Okay. All the other ones you do. Speaker 4: Alright, so on on the motion to approve the remaining sets of minutes as shown. All those favor
Speaker 6: Just to yes to question. I think I know the answer to this. I was an associate member for some of those. Does that have any bearing on me? Voting Speaker 4: Not for minutes. Okay. Speaker 9: You're up Speaker 4: Minutes sir. Not kind of non, you're good. Non-substantive but needed. Alright, so the motion made second. Seconded. All those in favor? Speaker 6: Aye. Aye. Aye. Speaker 4: Good. Thank you. Now I, now I don't have to feel guilty. So rules and regulations. Doug, Speaker 9: I Peter I would just say, you know, one of the things that has been on, you know, this board's mind for a while is to update the rules and regs.
I think Amanda 2001 or something might be the, Speaker 4: That's Speaker 9: The last one. The last time that we've updated the subdivision rules and regs. Yep. Yes. One I think so. I think thousand one. Yeah. Good practice. You know, good practice is to have a way more comprehensive set of rules and regs. So we'll do, and what I would propose is three things that we have sort of a three section set of regs, general planning, board rules and regs, how we are constituted, how we run our meetings, how we vote, that kind of thing.
Like, you know, procedural kinds of things. Then we should have a part two, which would be a special permit, rules and regulations, how we deal with special permits, insight plan review again. And that, that could be what we would wanna see in plans. What, what would constitute a complete application. Right. Engineer, drawings, architectural, whatever. We can decide what that can be, but put it in the regs. And then the third one would be subdivision, right? Which is, you know, typically Speaker 4: And the subdivision one is even older. Re Speaker 9: Yeah, I mean that's when you go to a city of your town
that hast updated their stuff and while that's what you see, it's the subdivision rules and regs. But planning boards really have to have more comprehensive than that. Including how they issue special permits and site plan reviews. So that's what I envision. And I think we should spend some time talking about what we wanna see for applications, what constitutes a complete application, what the information that that's supporting those applications are and making sure that it doesn't get past the counter and into, onto agenda until somebody in the CED office says it's complete. Speaker 4: You, you have, I know you've been working on a framework
for this, how do you want to proceed? And I do have a few. Speaker 9: I Yeah, I mean I think if you have Speaker 4: Time I, sorry to be so deliber Speaker 9: Amanda, what do you, what do you think circulate and discuss? We can do a first pass at the first part of it. Yeah. We can circulate it. And Speaker 3: Why don't we have it set on the agenda. We will take, I'll get them out and then we will have it on the agenda for the 25th. Yeah. Speaker 9: A we, Speaker 2: I have it. We discussed quite for quite some time that we were going to improve that path from
the applicant coming to the desk to the work coming to here. I think we've discussed that. Yes. And I thought that there were decisions that were made at that time that maybe we could work from and elaborate on something of that issue. But I've never seen anything like this before. Come into this board. Speaker 3: That's correct. So Speaker 2: What you, so I was, I guess I was assuming, Speaker 9: Remember incorrectly, remember the dentist over our Middlesex Ave, right? That one about two years ago. I mean that was like same thing, you know, it was like that literally was like a hand sketch.
Speaker 3: So we have discussed Yeah and we discussed it when we were updating the site plan review, special permit of actually getting those documents. However, we never went the, we focused on getting it approved at town meeting, but we did not finish the exercise, which was actually putting together the checklist. So we have the outline but we never filled, filled it in. So that's now what we are focusing on, which is also part of the reason why we were not bringing anything to the spring town meeting. Speaker 2: So that's obviously a starting point. Yeah. Speaker 3: And we've updated like two of the applications,
like the approval not required application, although our subdivision rules and regs have not been updated, we were able to update the application to request more information to make it more specific. And then the same thing that we were doing that with a signed bylaw, which was approved for the downtown mixed use. So applicants can go specific into that. The idea would be ideally, so each section is very specific. You either have it or you don't. And then we might get through the exercise of putting together the rules and regs and decide that we go back to what we were talking about when we approved sub our site
plan review, which was major versus minor. 'cause we had that. But we said let's wait at that time we're gonna just do site plan review and then we'll come back. So this would be also that time because there are projects that are, you really just need to do more of an administrative review. Whereas other projects need, Speaker 6: Yeah, for instance, the kennel sometimes it's like, I don't need something crazy engineered. Just want to know where the vents, you know, where's other things we need. Speaker 3: You may decide to get rid of home occupation dog kennels. Speaker 9: I would second that motion.
Speaker 6: I'm just using them as an example. Speaker 3: So, so, so how do we want, where do we want to start? So why don't I finish up my review of yours. We'll get that circulated and I'll dig up and then we will get that circulated and we'll have it on the agenda for the 25th. Sorry, I felt like Speaker 9: You think we can, there's a Speaker 6: Lot of, there's a lot of, well there is a couple things that'll probably take a while on. Speaker 3: Actually you know what? Yeah. Just the two projects alone are pretty Speaker 9: Ty. Yeah. That's gonna take up Speaker 2: Why don't we, is this something that has to be posted?
Speaker 3: So not at this stage. Speaker 2: I'm looking for a separate group, which even if it's more than two or three people, I mean, you know something, we wouldn't do it on an application to have more than two people. It's a a Yeah, I like Speaker 9: The idea. Speaker 2: Can we have this without affecting open open Speaker 9: We only have to do, we only have to have a public hearing to adopt the rules and rights. Yeah. So I, I like that idea of, of doing it as a working group. Yeah. Amanda maybe circulate whatever state you want it to be and circulate it to everybody. Ask for ask for comment. But let's convene.
Let's convene a separate working group that we can, I think Speaker 3: This says it should Speaker 9: We have build it all together, have another meeting that discusses it and then do a public hearing to, Speaker 2: And we're free of the restraints at least immediately of having the rest of the world come and yeah, join us. Speaker 3: Do you have Speaker 2: No, I like the rest of the world Speaker 3: Rather than a working group. I always click that wrong one rather than a have it be a working group but kind of have it like with a select word like the retreat where that's the only thing Yes. On an agenda could do. Yes. Yes. If that makes sense. That would Speaker 2: Keep us focused. Definitely the only thing and after maybe we initially review the outline
or whatever it is that exists, focus in on one facet of that outline at a time. Otherwise we'll spread all over the Speaker 3: Place. Yeah, there's, I think the parts one and part two are gonna be much more efficiently put together. Whereas part three is a little bit more intrinsic because you need work with DPW, the fire department because of the site circulation on the, and also there are amendments that need to happen regarding the center gateway, downtown excuse, and the west central corridor Speaker 4: Because of the proximity to Speaker 3: Proximity.
And then also transportation logistics that we said that we were gonna build out the actual rules and regs. And there are specific things that projects need from the planning board's perspective compared to what the bylaws says. Example Example would be. So an example would be the way that the average finished grade is measured because if you are on a corner lot, then what happens is, is that you have to take shots from multiple sides and then the building actually decreases in height. Where if you're in the center gateway,
your building is now significantly decreased. If you are built on a slope, there are two properties that would significantly impact. And that would be something that we would put in the rules and regs as to how that is determined. Because that is specific to the, Speaker 9: And we can do that within, Speaker 4: It's got its unique kind of top Speaker 3: Graphic. Yes, you can do that in the regs. Okay. And that would be something that's specific to the center gateway because nowhere else does it happen. Speaker 9: That makes sense. Yeah. Speaker 3: So we could do that. Yeah. And then there are just other things that we would need
to review as well. Speaker 9: And mentally I would like to get this done like by June or something like that. Yeah, I mean if we can do it that quickly, that would be good. Speaker 3: So Speaker 4: What I you, the piece that I looked at is a great base, I gotta say so yeah, or I think we're on the right track. Okay. Speaker 9: So, Speaker 4: Alright. And my apologies, I will get you that. Speaker 2: We're going to, we're going to circulate, Amanda's gonna circulate the initial, maybe the outline and maybe a work set outline. Yep. Speaker 9: Okay. Yep. I like that idea
Speaker 2: Because I'm not here the 25th, but that's what I, it'll be good about having a little separate working. Speaker 9: Good reading. Wherever you're gonna be on your 65th anniversary Speaker 2: Doesn't sleep. Speaker 4: Alright. I know. I see. We have one member of the public in the audience. Just stop by to say hello Speaker 10: Stopping by, say hello Actually kind of started the conversation. It was on developing in the cg there's two extremely prominent properties now Speaker 9: I know what mean. Speaker 10: Yeah. And we're having some conflicts in trying to, like the non-residential use is greatly spelled out in the
West central, but it is not in the central gateway. So it's causing the building inspector some discussions in his head about what is appropriate, what's not appropriate. And the developers now have to, don't wanna bring a plan to you that isn't matching the language. And we're trying to work with the language as it stands. So that's, and I know that's happening. This property, the wrenches for sale and they're having the same discussions and on that one. So that's all is end the dovetail is because of the center gateway
Speaker 4: And I, and I just wanna be, I'm sorry. Careful. I'm sorry. No, only because it's not posted on our agenda. I guess no specifics then I just don't wanna get too far into it. And Speaker 3: That Speaker 10: How that place to parking requirements. Yeah. How that definition use. Yeah. And I did not realize that MBTA zoning technically precludes assigning parking spaces to commercial use if you want to use a mix. This is a general discussion, not a specific discussion, but my reading of 73 says
you can have a mixed use qualify in your MBTA zone, which then you cannot make mandatory commercial parking relative to that project. So right now our bylaw say that, so I just, and I know we probably haven't gotten to that yet, but that's something we need to, I think look at. Speaker 4: Yeah. Okay. Speaker 3: So Speaker 4: We have anything else. Speaker 3: And then also the fee schedule. This would all so include the fee schedule. The fee schedule would not be, and Speaker 4: You, you have done a, yeah, Speaker 3: A very full, full draft.
Yeah, we've been kind of waiting on it. 'cause we are gonna, so it gets referenced in the, in the rules and regs, but we do not put the physical fee schedule in the rules and regs because we don't want to have to, every time we amend the fee schedule hold a public hearing. So it's just referenced and then it, it's a separate document. So I guess my question was, we're meeting on April 8th, do you want to have that be specifically a meeting just for this and not take any projects or? Speaker 9: No, I think, Speaker 3: Do you wanna call this different meeting? Speaker 9: Hey, I think we would be, to Peter's point, I think we'd,
we could have a working group to just get together. Let's, let's, you know, over a couple of weeks, whatever. We'll figure this out. Put Speaker 4: So then let's presented, put Speaker 9: A good draft together that's been polished and yeah. And then maybe at some point in late April or May. Okay, so you talked, we, we see a full draft of it here and then the public hearing after that. Speaker 4: Now on which, which on which, which part of it? The whole Speaker 9: Thing. The the whole thing. The whole thing. Okay. Yeah, yeah. Let's do it. Speaker 4: And we wanna do this April. Speaker 3: Well we, we don't have this If we're having a working group, we don't have to wait until April Speaker 4: Know. But to be bringing it back.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we can shoot for the April 29th meeting. Yeah. Speaker 4: Okay, Speaker 3: Good. But who are the two members? Not me. Speaker 2: All of us? No, no. You're talking about this working group. The structure of it. I think there's expertise in everyone here that we It doesn't, you're use it all. I don't think we need to appoint one or two. Speaker 4: But I think Peter, I think what we're trying to do is there, there are two who are working to develop it. It will then be presented back to the full board.
But it just, it's, it is two Speaker 2: Who are working well. What's this outline that's going to be circulated for review and comment by others. Well, Speaker 4: And I would take it as kind of, when I think of this for review and comment, I'm thinking of something much more robust. It's not just thumbs up, thumbs down. Everybody gets a chance Speaker 3: To, why don't we do it this, why don't we do it this way? Can we on the, oh, you're not here on the 25th? No. Okay, nevermind. I was gonna say, can we meet like 30 minutes prior to we get together as a group
to review kind of what the draft is and everything like that. Have conversations. Then there's a breakout group and then we come like do it that way because maybe the first meeting does need to happen with everybody and then we go from there. But if you're not here on the 25th, is there a different day? And it doesn't always have to be between are the only, Speaker 4: Are you the only one? Yours gone? There's not here Speaker 9: On 20 Speaker 3: Meeting. We could post it as a meeting, but it doesn't have to be at seven o'clock. Right. We could do it in the day. We could do it in the evening. We can do it like what works for everybody else. We would just post it as a regular meeting. You don't have to have it at seven.
'cause board of health meets at what? Speaker 4: And we could do it as, we could use a doodle doodle poll and figure out who has, what availability looks like. Speaker 9: What day would Speaker 4: You, if that works for? I Speaker 2: Think we could do a virtual a Speaker 9: Friday or something. Speaker 2: Yeah, that's fine. Speaker 9: Yeah. Yeah. So like a Friday morning or something? Speaker 2: Usually. Usually Friday morning pretty Speaker 4: Good. Do you have a date in mind? Speaker 9: No, I'm just in general. Friday mornings would be good. Speaker 3: The only Friday morning, I'm not this week. Yeah. But if everyone's available next Friday morning. Speaker 2: What, what are we, I'm sorry I missed that decision. What, what's being decided over here?
Speaker 4: Oh, talking about to have a meeting for us all to meet Speaker 2: Together. No, that's what I, I'm hearing a decision made. I hadn't heard what the discussion was. Speaker 3: Oh, we were trying to just figure out if there was a day that everyone was able to meet, to get together, to review, like, to discuss this. Okay. And on the, when is, when are you here? On the 20th. Speaker 9: Friday the 20th. Peter, are you around in the morning? Speaker 2: I, my schedule is filled with virtually nothing. But no, that's the, I just have something from nine 30 to 10.
The 10 o'clock you're talking? We do 10 15. 'cause sometimes it March 22nd did you say? Speaker 9: No, the 20th. 20th. Friday the 20th. Oh, the Speaker 2: 20th. Yeah. Speaker 9: 10 o'clock, 10 30, something like that. Yeah, Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. Okay. Speaker 3: 10 o'clock or 10 30. Which I, Speaker 2: Let's if you could at least do 10, 15. 'cause I have something scheduled till 10. And sometimes, Speaker 4: And then that way you get to breathing. Speaker 2: Keep going Speaker 6: A little Speaker 4: Bit to breath. And where Speaker 6: Would, here no, virtually you do virtual, you can do virtually, but I'll be, we can do it here. Speaker 3: Okay. I can reserve this room if you'd like. And we can do virtual verse. And prior to the 20 in person or we can do it all virtual, it doesn't matter.
You guys let me know. I can set up the logistics. Decide. Speaker 4: So Speaker 6: You decide, Speaker 4: Don't care what time I'm, I'm a, I'm a big fan of three. I'm a big fan of meeting in person because you can tell a whole lot more by some of this body language and everything else. Speaker 6: You know, I might even be able to just kind of come here, take my other meeting virtually. Oh, that's a virtual meeting anyway, Speaker 4: So, so this is the 20th? The 20th. 20th, yeah. 10 15. Yeah, it, well it depends. Are you going under that principle that you get 10, you 10 o'clock, then you have a chance.
Speaker 6: Yeah. Yeah. So it's supposed to finish at 10 and you know how they go sometime. Yeah. So if you give me till 10, if we don't talk till 10 15 and I'll be good. Speaker 4: And we, if someone, if wants to appear virtually or can only appear virtually, we can, we can accommodate that. But I'd like to encourage as many of us as possible. Yeah, Speaker 6: I think I'll, I maybe I'll just be here and then again I'll just, if that's the case, we Speaker 4: Can appear to the other one. We could start a little earlier. Speaker 6: That'd be good. Yeah. Yeah, you're right. If I'm available, you see me? But Speaker 4: Do you wanna have a think and Speaker 6: No, no, let's schedule. Speaker 4: Okay. So would we say, do
Speaker 3: You want me to post? How about I post it for 10 o'clock? Yeah, Speaker 4: Sounds good. Yeah, Speaker 3: We can show up and then we won't start until 10 15. But then if you are out early, then we can start at 10. And if you're, Speaker 6: That's here. Speaker 4: Yeah. Speaker 3: Yeah. And if you're, we got, we don't have to start until 10 15. Sounds good. But you can't start earlier then. Speaker 6: Then it's posted. Yeah. Yes. Speaker 4: Okay. Sounds good. Very good. Thank you. Anything else? And Speaker 3: I can put you that room out there if Speaker 4: You'd like. No. Anything else? Anyone wants to dis discuss or are we not the most done for the evening? I'll Speaker 6: Motion to adjourn. Speaker 4: Motion to adjourn.
Speaker 6: Second. Are you looking for a Speaker 4: Vote? Yes, but I think yes. I think Doug made motion. You seconded Iye. It all works out. Speaker 6: Aye a Speaker 4: Aye. Hey, we stand adjourned at 8 0 5. All right.