Speaker 1: Call meeting of the Natick Planning Board to order at 7:03 PM I will notice that this is a hybrid meeting with remote participation to participate remotely, join via the browser. Speaker 2: That's what I was just looking for. Speaker 1: And the zoom link that is on the agenda. So recording. Pardon? I just gonna record recording in progress. Thank you. And to note the meeting begins
as it always does with public speak. Any individual may raise an issue that is not included in the agenda and it will be taken under advisement by the board. There will be no opportunity for debate during this portion of the meeting. The section of the agenda is limited to 15 minutes and any individual addressing the board during this section of the agenda shall be limited to five minutes. Are there any hands raised remotely for public speak? And are there, is there anyone here who wishes to speak under public speak? Okay, thank you very much. Then we'll proceed.
I'm actually gonna bring one agenda item forward and that is planning board business because one of our members may not be here for, and I want for the sake of the quorum to have everybody's vote on this. So, planning board business is a series of planning board. Minute meetings are, there are a couple of sets that are in here that are not, are not being considered or has that, was that? Speaker 3: Yeah, sorry. December 18th and December 4th.
Speaker 1: Okay, so those, those are removed from the list, which, I'm sorry, December 18th. The 18th and the fourth. Both in that first row. Okay. So, so with that, any questions from members about approval of the minutes? Okay, seeing none then I'll, I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes of November 6th, 2024. October 30th, October 9th, September 25th, September 11th, August 28th, July 31st.
July 17th, June 25th and fifth. May 22nd and eighth. April 11th and third, March 27th and 13th. February 28th and 14th. And January 31st and 17th, all 2024. So will someone make a motion to approve? Moved? Speaker 4: I'll second it. Great. Speaker 1: All of those in favor, Peter, Speaker 4: Not aye. Conclude your aye. Landry. Aye Speaker 1: Evans. Aye. Thank you very much. Yay.
Then that I, item is completed and now we can revert to what brings us here. Speaker 4: Yes. So the printed version of the agenda. Nope, Speaker 3: There's, I put the wrong one in. It's good. I've got a Okay, I got it stamped Speaker 1: In and I actually have both of them just Speaker 4: So the a and r plan is up then. Okay, got Speaker 3: It. Sorry. Okay. Speaker 1: Alright, so moving right along to the a and r plan. Amanda, go ahead. Yep. Introduce us. I Speaker 3: Just uploaded the new agenda. So we do have the applicant here with us tonight. So this is 27 Forest Avenue.
What currently is on the property today is two single family homes. The applicant proposes to divide the law into two, putting each of the homes on individual lots. This is a lesser used portion of the a and r process, but it is one of the options underneath the a and r. Since the two law or the two structures were built in the 1900, they predate subdivision control law and zoning bylaws within the town of Natick. So they are allowed, allowed to be divided to be separated on their own lots,
which would fall under section chapter 41, section 81 L at the very end. Which I did send everyone an email today. The applicant does understand that the two lots are nonconforming, but that is not the review of sub of this application. This is just Speaker 1: The division of the land. Speaker 3: Division of land. Yep. Speaker 1: Very good. Members of the board questions, comments on this? I know it's a relatively unusual, did you say Speaker 4: The applicant was here? Is here? Speaker 1: Yep. Yes. Mr. Connelley, if you'd like to come forward.
It is been so long. Speaker 5: My name is Michael Conley. I'm here to represent the applicant. Our engineer had a conflict in his schedule tonight, so he couldn't be here, but I'll be here to answer any questions if there are, if I happen to represent the applicant who it's the Christie family, one of which is my wife and her siblings. So Speaker 1: Thank you and thank you for declaring that. So is there anything that you would like to fill in? I know Amanda had gave us the framework. Speaker 5: Well initially this is part of an estate
that their parents' estate, they've owned the property since the mid seventies. It's been rented for all the years. Presently there's a tenant that's been in there for over 40 years. And so how it started out was the property, they talked about selling it and once they notified the tenants that they were gonna be putting it up a sale, there was some concern that, and they said, how can we stay? We wanna stay. And so we started looking into whether you condo wise things and, and so anyways, it, it came down to the a and r process seemed to be the cleanest way to do it.
I'm not saying that that tenant's gonna end up buying the property, but in, in, in the big picture it, it turned out that I think it's a good, probably gonna be two of the most recently priced houses in the town of Natick, I would think, for single family properties. So Speaker 1: Thank you. Now let me just go around the table and take questions from the board. Doug, Speaker 4: Just a quick que So how does access work? It's a shared driveway Speaker 5: And so there, there is a shared, shared driveway. We have access easement on the, on the plan. There was talk possibly of relocating pot of the driveway
to give number 27, a little bit more landscape area on the front there. So, and, and laying this out, we, we tried to hold the present day zoning requirements for setback and for for lot one, that's the what we did there. So, Speaker 1: Okay, Speaker 6: So the plan is to right now just keep the existing driveway how it is. Yes. But obviously for who knows in the future it looks like you have a, a bigger located, Speaker 5: We left enough land over here so that we would lay it out and still meet all the setbacks for a driveway. Yeah. So,
Speaker 6: So that way if something changes later on, if they want to put a driveway right more on one side they could, they could do that. But Speaker 5: Yes. Not the current plan. It's right now it's over the line. So, but there's an easement Speaker 6: And both those houses I think from your email, but they were what, 1900 or so? Right? So they've both been around for Speaker 3: Just a tad bit of time. Speaker 6: Oh, some neighborhoods in Natick. That's a, that's that's new. Speaker 1: That's a new house. Yeah. It Speaker 3: Made this process easier because it wasn't even getting close to any dates of like zoning or anything like that. So really predates it.
Speaker 1: Alright Peter, do you have any questions, comments? Speaker 7: No, I can't see a plan on it but no, from what I'm hearing, no questions. Speaker 3: Yeah, Speaker 1: So Speaker 4: I'll make a motion. Speaker 1: Alright, so Speaker 4: I move that the planning board endorsed the approval not required plan of land 27 and 2029 Forest staff dated January 6th, 2026 by Cornerstone Engineering Inc. Speaker 1: Alright, is there a second? Speaker 6: I'll second it. Speaker 1: Seconded by Alan. All of those in favor by roll call vote
Speaker 6: Ye Speaker 4: Landry. Aye. Speaker 6: Your aye Speaker 1: Evans. Aye. So is a four zero vote Pa painless as ever. Nice to see you again. Thank you very much. Speaker 3: Do not have the Mylar, 'cause I had them hold off just to make sure if there was any changes. Okay. Just 'cause Mylars are expensive to print. Speaker 1: Okay. So we'll be, we'll sign them later. Yep. Got it. Speaker 6: Thank you very much. Speaker 1: So, alright and now I think yes we're going on to 17 Church Street. So this is the, the kennel
and that we were talking about at our last meeting if you wanna come on up to the table. So do members of the board have questions, comments that have kind of crossed their paths since our public hearing? The last public hearing? Speaker 6: Only thing I have reading through some of the draft. I think unless I was looking at an older one at, there was a lot of references to 12 dogs and I think we were probably leaning towards eight during the last one. Okay. Speaker 3: I just, Speaker 6: And I think the hours, I think that we should discuss that. I think it have it, Speaker 3: Yes. Hammered out. So I, 'cause the application had 12 dogs,
I wasn't sure which way we were going on that. And then so that's why I just had that in there. And then yes the hours of operation was based off of the information provided but I didn't know which, why I highlighted it Speaker 6: 'cause No, that sounds good 'cause I also wasn't entirely sure like do we leave what was requested in the front but then at the end, you know what we were agreeing on I got, I wasn't too sure how it was gonna be formatted. Speaker 3: Sure. It's a question. So I guess the question comes down to is, is it eight dogs at a time maximum with a total of 12 dogs that she can have under?
Because there's two different things. So one, she could have a license for 12 dogs, but it doesn't mean that all 12 dogs are gonna be at the property at the same time, but it's just 12 dogs are under her care. Speaker 1: How can they be under her care? Speaker 3: And so what happens is, is each kennel has to actually have a license for each dog that attends. So therefore she could have 12 dogs licensed but only at one time have eight dogs.
So maybe like Monday, Tuesday, Wednesdays dogs one through eight come. And then on Friday Saturdays dogs nine through 12 come, although they're 12 dogs that she has on her like roll. It's just, is that make, I don't know if that makes any sense. Speaker 1: And And that that's clear to you? Speaker 8: Yes. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 8: Yeah, so typically I have with my schedule dogs who do as I, when I was doing the process, a core group. So the dogs who are with me pretty much Monday to Friday, some do two days a week, some do three days a week,
some do all five days a week. Some of like the three dogs or like the days where they might have three days, they might need to change it because snow storms or hurricanes or various like vet appointments going appointments, do they have to change their day and they wanna be able to try and keep the extra day. But usually the dogs are there what days our parents ask for. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. Speaker 6: I think it probably makes more, I don't know, I'm just thinking of it. Theoretically you could have a lot of clients 'cause some people might just show up on, you know, when they're going on vacation or whatever.
It seems to mostly make sense of how many are there at a time. Like if you were at a, you know, a commercial kennel, you know, it's how many cages they have. Theoretically they could have, you know, five times as many people that sometimes come. I think it's probably more important how many can be there at a time I think. But Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't, I didn't remember that that coming up in past. Speaker 3: So it hasn't hearings, it's kind of a, it's evolving. Okay. So that's just, we wanna make sure it's clear. Speaker 1: Is this something that is a state an issue with the state?
No, it's just what we are. Yeah. Okay. And of course working with the dog, yeah officer probably helps also with kind of familiarity that, that they're not kind of random dogs coming and going who may or may not have attributes to be of con concern. Speaker 8: And I've been in the business for so long, I'm now the point where I am very particular about who I bring. And so I always interview, I always make sure we do a meet and greet to make sure I like the dogs.
They like me, there are no issues. And the dogs who I have now, they've been friends for years. So like they all sort of know their place in roll call. Speaker 1: Other questions Alan? Speaker 6: I just wanted to make sure we're all on the same page as far as hours. Not so much. The hours of, I think the hours of drop off I think made a lot of sense. I think it was 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM drop off pickup. Seven 30. Okay. But then I think the letting them out in the backyard just because there was some neighbors that were concerned about the barking and noise I think except six 30 to 10.
And I wasn't sure if six 30 seemed a little early to be letting them out. 'cause that's not, oh they can't be out to go to the bathroom. But it's, they can't be out as a group or, Speaker 3: So it was more six 30, between 10 and six 30, sorry 10:00 PM and six 30. It was emergency bases or the dogs could go out individually. 'cause sometimes a younger dog needs to go out earlier so they should be able to go out by themselves and everything like that. But then as a pack they could start going out later. That was one thing. But the only thing I think that we had a question for the applicant was, is that the documentation had hours of operation
for the daycare was from eight to four. Yeah. Yeah. Are you sure? Speaker 8: It's usually eight to four. Usually I, I will leave my house around seven 15 to go pick up the dogs who are in other towns and I will usually take 'em for a walk somewhere in one of the towns and then bring them back to my house about 8 30, 8 45. And then usually I will bring them back home or start leaving my house at four to bring them back to their homes. Speaker 1: And I, I have to say I was surprised only
because I know a lot of people for whom that would not be enough between eight and four because they work in Boston or they have some, they have something else that's just regular that is out would be out outside of the, Speaker 8: Well a lot of my clients are usually, someone's usually home by like four 30 or five. And by the time that after I leave my house at four, I'll do my last walk with that group and then they'll usually get home between 4 45 and like five 30.
Speaker 1: Okay. So I, I guess my question was, I didn't wanna find you unnecessarily going, oh wait a second. I boxed myself in to four o'clock, but sometimes five o'clock is needed. Speaker 8: Yeah, I mean usually that's usually the last number of years. Four o'clock is my, Speaker 1: Your end time. My Speaker 8: My, I get tired. I love them but I get tired so yeah, usually four o'clock is usually my end time. Speaker 1: Peter, do you have questions? Speaker 9: Yes I did. Speaker 7: I read what is discussed about the additional
potential additional four dogs. There's, the way I read it, there is nothing that says there can't be an additional four dogs owned by the applicant. In which case we now have the potential for 16 dogs, 12 to 16 dogs on this, at this at any one time. Am I wrong on this? And if I'm not wrong, that seems like more than we've, than I recall us approving in the past. Speaker 8: Well for me personally, even though I love dogs
and I love everyone who I take care of, I do not plan on TA bringing in dogs for me to keep myself. I do not plan on owning any dogs at any point within the next however many years. Speaker 7: Well I I appreciate that and I wonder if, well it sounds as though I don't appreciate it, but I'm wondering should there be something written in there that just limited it unless this board is, is open to the possibility, the potential that this, this
is showing us for 16 dogs and that's, do we wanna say anything at all about how that might be limited? Speaker 1: Now bear in mind that number 12 that you were starting off with Right. What I understood was that that would only be eight at any point in time. Yeah. So Speaker 6: I think what the application I think came in for 12 and I think during our last meeting, I know Andy kind of floated the idea of maybe especially since there's been, you know, barking or, or noise issues and it's, again, this isn't in a huge meadow.
Yeah. There are neighbors at a pretty close by. Maybe we cap it at eight and then maybe we revisited in a year as well. Speaker 8: That's what I remember from the last meeting. So we would cap it at eight. I only had said 12 just for like that once off if, because I also have families who have multiple dogs. So in case if an emergency comes up, like something happens with the family, but I do have dogs who I can keep at their own homes who I can go and visit if need be. Speaker 1: So, but I think that that
that it was a reasonable request, especially because of concerns Yeah. From some of the neighbors. Speaker 3: So I can modify this, but just so you are aware, we do have mentioned that the applicant is able to have four personal dogs. Yeah. 'cause that is standard language that we've used elsewhere. It is condition five five. Speaker 1: So, oh, and is it worth, worth putting in language that says that the applicant has indicated there was no intent? Not really. There may not Speaker 3: Be it, it's not necessary in the sense
of findings are just what you support your conditions with and conditions are what is enforceable. So Speaker 1: Okay then Speaker 3: Do do. Yes. So with that, so we will change to serve a maximum of eight dogs. Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 3: So I will change that, where that occurs. Speaker 6: So it'll be eight dogs at a time, right? Not Speaker 1: Yes. Out, out of a pool of Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, yeah. You mean it's not how many clients you have, it's how many are actually there on site. Speaker 1: And then I think with that frame like that that, Speaker 6: And then I think just the hours, I think we wanna
Speaker 1: Make sure we're Speaker 3: In agreement. So Speaker 1: I well Speaker 3: The daycare, is that only Monday through Friday? That's Speaker 8: Typically only Monday through Friday because most families are home on weekends. Speaker 1: Yeah. So that is for non, that's non overnight boarding and is, and there is a limit on overnight boarding. The number of, Speaker 8: I usually would cap it at six. But again, like that's only in the event if like the two families I have who have multiple dogs Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 8: Would wanna stay together. But usually it's just one family here, one family there. And then over school vacations, I will have a couple families who have single dogs who would want their dogs to come and stay. Speaker 1: So, so the challenge there is you're not, it's not gonna be a regular thing, but it's an open question as to whether that becomes an, an issue to neighbors. Yep. I would probably say it would, it would be wise to start with a lower number Yep.
Show that it works Yep. Or doesn't and then we take it from there. Okay. Does that sound fair? Speaker 4: I mean just, I, Speaker 1: Yes, Speaker 4: It's a little arbitrary. I mean we, we don't have standards. Feels like we're just sort of throwing numbers around. I mean, again, I understand the concern in terms of the density, the number, but we really don't have standards. So, you know, I guess for me, I'm gonna trust in what you've said. I wish Andy, our our dog kennel whisperer was here Speaker 6: To, Speaker 4: To weigh in. But you know, you, we heard, I I was, I was part of the
last hearing, you know, your neighbors for the most part support what you do. And you know, I'm comfortable with it. I just, I I get uncomfortable wheeling and dealing in numbers when we really don't have standards around it. So, well Speaker 1: We do in in the def in the definitions for kennels and so forth. There is, there are some elements that that frame that. So I don't feel like it's fully Speaker 4: Well I know but you know, if you come in for 12 dogs and you're, you know, you're supported and you're gonna tell us you're gonna do a good job, who are we to say it's 11 or 10 or nine? So, well
Speaker 1: In, in this is this, we had testimony from, from, Speaker 4: I'm just my opinion, that's all. It's my opinion. I think we, I think we have, we don't have real standards around it. It feels like we only dealing, I'm gonna trust what the applicant has to say, Amanda, the, the numbering on the conditions at the, what I'm looking at here. Yeah, I Speaker 10: Kind Speaker 4: Of screwed up. So Speaker 3: Yeah, it jumps in and out. So I will, once we get everything nailed down, I will, I always go through and double check that. Okay. So I guess regarding all of that, since we do have two, but this is condition number, well what is first nine?
The hours of operation for outdoor for proper care. The dogs. That is something that we used at 54 Highland and the only thing I would suggest is d it's one half hour between, it did say nine and 10, but it should be between eight 30 and 10. So we were trying to stagger those hours. Speaker 1: So there's time within the, the, the larger block that sounds really very reasonable. And it then it is consistent with another kennel that has been similarly licensed. Speaker 6: Sorry, where was this nine Speaker 3: Condition? Nine the first time. Speaker 10: The Speaker 4: Numbers are kind of
Speaker 10: Screwed up but you go Oh Speaker 6: That for sure. So, okay Speaker 3: With all that. Also, since the clients, do the clients ever drop their dogs off? Speaker 8: Very rarely do they ever drop them off. Speaker 3: I dunno if you need that in there anymore. Speaker 6: So. Well these could be essentially the overnight Yeah. Dogs. So this would be really starting at seven 30. They could be out in the morning. Yeah. Didn't I read somewhere maybe about at six 30 earlier.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was up on the finding part two, number eight. So we can put that as Speaker 6: Okay. So that's where I, where I read it. Okay. Well, okay, so seven 30, sorry, not that that's Speaker 3: As a dog owner, seven 30 is actually kind of late. Speaker 6: No, but they, they can go out with her. Yeah. So if they need to make a potty break or whatever, it's that they can't go out as a group before seven 30. So yeah. If they need to do their business and some dogs do.
Speaker 3: Okay, so we'll change seven 30 especially Speaker 6: Depending on how late they were at the night before. Yeah. But I think that's, I think a lot more reasonable. 'cause I think we're, we're hearing that some of it was at six 30 and it was kind of waking people up. So, Speaker 3: Alright, so between 10:00 PM and 7:30 AM they all be taken out individually or emergency basis Speaker 6: And this for the night. Does 10 seem reasonable to people or Speaker 1: At which, sorry, Speaker 6: Being out up until 10 o'clock, does
that seem like a good time or? Speaker 3: Well they're not gonna be out playing until 10 o'clock. Yeah. It's more of like, you might take two or three out at the same time, let them and them back in. Yeah. Most times dogs have already hopefully expended their energy before Speaker 6: You beach four. You hope so. But I think we just wanna make sure there's not flood lights and dogs running around late at night. So Speaker 10: Yeah. Speaker 1: So so does that feel like a, a kind of reasonable framework for that? Yeah. Board
members actually. Any members of the public here wishing to make comment. Speaker 6: I just have one more on right below it. Well I guess the second, are you, so we have 10 to seven still or does this need to change to be consistent with that? With zero or 10 or whatever it's gonna be right after nine, the next one dog shall remain inside. Speaker 3: Yep. So we'll change that to seven 30. Okay. And then drop off of dogs should be seven 30 up in the findings as well. Speaker 6: Yeah. Even though they don't, we really get dropped off but you know, just sometimes want the language in there. Right. So, Speaker 1: Okay.
So no other comments? None. Are we ready to vote? Very good. I will entertain a motion to approve the application. Speaker 6: I'll make a motion. I'm not too sure what I have to say, but I'll make a motion to approve the application for the dog kennel at 17 Church Street Speaker 1: In the hours and and Speaker 6: Condition of state. Yeah. With the hours that were agreed upon, even number dogs and eight dogs at a time. Alright, Speaker 1: Great.
And so you've made the motion second. I'll second it. Alright. Thank you Peter. Seconded twice. That's appropriate. Alright, so motion made and seconded. All of those in favor by roll call vote, Speaker 6: Including your aye Landry. Aye. Not Speaker 1: Aye. Evan's. Aye. So with it you you're, you're granted and yes, Speaker 3: With this one, since we don't have four people to sign it tonight and I've gotta update it, can the board grant you permission
to come in and sign it as the chair? Speaker 1: Just don't tell my cats. Speaker 6: I'll make a motion to grant the chairman Evans the permission to sign for the board. Second. I'll second it. Speaker 1: Alright. On that motion. All those in favor Speaker 6: Peter? Not aye. Okay. Land Aye. Aye. Speaker 1: Evans Masochistically. Why? Alright, motion Speaker 6: To close the public hearing. Second. Speaker 1: Okay. Motion to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye, but name Speaker 6: Not Landry. Aye. Aye. Speaker 1: Evan's. Aye. There it is. It's closed.
Good luck and wish you the best. Thank Speaker 8: You very much. Speaker 1: And if I say I I hope we don't see you back here. Speaker 6: It's Speaker 1: A good thing. It means a good thing. I Speaker 8: I love you guys but if you ever need a dog fix or if you need someone to take care of your cats, you know where I live. Speaker 6: I'm sure the cats would not want to be over there. Not so much, Speaker 1: Especially one of them. Alright, thank you very much. So that is closed and it is just after seven 30. Yeah. Have we heard, Speaker 3: Do you wanna text Andy? Speaker 1: Wait, let me check 'cause Speaker 3: Doug has to
Speaker 1: Yes. I'm just, I was looking because I think Andy had said at one point that he would let me know, I can't remember. Let me know when he was on his way. So I'm, I'm looking to see if any possibility, Speaker 6: Was he remote or was he gonna be Speaker 1: No, I think he was the impression he was coming here trying to find Speaker 6: A parking spot. He has a parking lot's full. Yeah, Speaker 3: I said Speaker 6: Multiple times mind. It's usually there's nobody there. Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah. So Speaker 6: Weird going in. Speaker 1: Alright, you Speaker 6: Wanna take a recess or Speaker 1: Lemme take a a a brief recess and see if we can round him up
or at least have some idea of when he will be here. So I'm putting us on recess at seven 30 or seven 30. Four seven. Is he still here? He is What he his Speaker 6: He was, he's Speaker 1: Still here. Okay. Okay, we can Speaker 6: Hear you. Speaker 1: So we're going on now to development review for five Lake Shore Road et al. Speaker 10: So Speaker 1: If you guys want to come on up,
let's start feeling like old home week old. I says you're gonna feel like old home week. Oh yeah. It's like old friends back. Alright. And, and all of my, the planning board members can hear and be and be heard Speaker 10: So Speaker 1: Very good. So let's pick up where we Speaker 11: It's me. It's this one. Speaker 10: Yeah, Speaker 11: I'll try to turn it off. Speaker 10: Just share this one. Speaker 1: Oh right. Always an adventure. Okay. Alright, Speaker 10: The, Speaker 1: So, so on the application for assisted living
north of Route nine, I turn it to the applicant team for a follow up on our last meeting. Speaker 11: Good evening Madam Chair and members of the board. For the record, I'm Catherine Garrahan of Bower and Dewey and I'm here with Katie Brit Snyder of national Development, Kristen Hook of Benchmark Senior living, Frank Holmes of Land for Civil Engineering and stormwater. And also with us is Michael Wicki for landscaping. And Anthony the Rito of the architectural team. Since the last time we were with you on January 14th,
if you wanted to go to that first slide. The Yes, thank you if it's visible, we submitted an updated site plan set to the portal which reflects discussions and feedback to date. The team had further conversations with the neighbors at four MCG Gun Co Road on January 16th regarding the modified grading plan, which is in the up updated site plan set and discussed property line screening and stormwater basin matters. With that neighbor, the applicant agreed
to preserve a specific tree requested by the neighbor, which is noted on the grading plan. We also met with the Lakeshore road neighbors in an arborist. We filed an a and r application to consolidate lots and to deal with a small boundary line correction. And that's scheduled for your next meeting. The team filed the storm water management permit. Speaker 12: Wanna put the button below the light, Speaker 11: The green stays on. Did stormwater management report to the portal? Other than that we've had some opportunity
to discuss a draft decision with the director. I'm aware of some corrections that we could discuss if, if the board wishes. And with that I'm gonna hand to Katie for more information on conversations with neighbors and other detail. Great, Speaker 13: Thank you. Thank you Kathy. Katie Snyder with national development. So we, we were busy for the last couple of weeks as Kathy mentioned, we, we were able to connect with the neighbor that participated in the hearing on the 14th and walk the property line. And as Kathy mentioned, we were able to kind of provide,
you know, a site walk and clarification around what the stormwater design looked like and the property line that's adjacent to for form gun go and our property. And I think it was a good discussion and we, like we mentioned, landed on there's a tree that we're gonna preserve and we've noted that on the updated drawings that are now in the portal. So beyond that, the other two things we felt like were our homework assignments, kind of leaving the last discussion that we wanted to make sure we circled back with the board and members of the public that may be interested. We wanted to ensure that we answered adequately all the
questions on the assisted livings trash operation. So I just wanna make sure there weren't any additional questions on that. I'm happy to go and review it again. But we did update the graphic in this view here, which might provide a, just a little bit more detail around how we intend to manage the trash. Again, it's on the west side of the building, it's not near our front door and it's essentially tucked into an alcove within the building. And then one thing that wasn't really clear in the last presentation that I just want you to focus on is
that there's a door from the inside of the facility that goes directly into the trash area. So why that's important as when trash is going outside, the person delivering the trash to that dumpster doesn't need to go around and open the bigger gates. It's a, you know, quicker, simpler movement. And those trash canisters containers are not compactors, they're just bins that roll with doors on the side. So I just thought that would be like a helpful description of how it's intended to be managed.
And I think we talked last time about just the operations, of course it will be, you know, during typical hours we're gonna make sure that we comply with the town's, you know, ordinance on when you're allowed to do those types of pickups. And, and then the only other notable that we mentioned last time is that we learned that some of these trash companies have new technology on their trucks that have cameras, which allowed them to not have the backup alarms. So we're gonna continue to work with the, those type of vendors to, to avoid the need
for any kind of backup alarm. Speaker 1: Do you anticipate that that's a, that that that's in place? Or are is it an still aspirational? It's, Speaker 13: It's, I wouldn't say that it's a hundred percent 'cause it's just relying on what technology's out there. It's a local vendor that you actually services our office building in Newton. So he could easily service this location. But it is a newer technology so I wouldn't, I wouldn't a hundred percent rely on it, but it's, we would, you know, be willing to like try to continue, I dunno if a condition makes sense
but we could say we could work towards that or attempt to, I just don't know how we would be committed to it. 'cause we, we'd be reliant on being OSHA compliant, you know, so. Speaker 1: Okay. And we can, I assume we can find language that, that we will make it aspirational or intent. Yeah, like intent Speaker 13: To fulfill Yeah. To the best of our abilities. We'll explore that something, you know, that we can 'cause it, it, it, it not only helps the neighborhood but it does help our residents as well. So we're kind of aligned in our desire for that anyways. You know, I Speaker 1: Can't tell you how many projects I've heard
for the planning board that have that commercial properties that have issues with backup alarms. Yeah. It's, it, it's the problem that I would have thought someone might have solved by now, Speaker 13: They've changed the tone a little bit. That like tonal sound that people say it's better or worse. I don't know but that this was a promising conversation but I don't wanna be reliant on one person that gave me a technology update from, I just would be worried that we wouldn't be able to achieve it. Speaker 14: It's not necessarily within your control because that's a rule that Speaker 1: It's Speaker 13: OSHA by other people. Right, right. So,
but it's, it does sound like there is a desire to obviously in the broader environment, not just this development to, to kind of come up with technologies that help resolve that issue. So we'll continue to pursue that Speaker 1: And that's is is there more there? Speaker 13: Well the only other topic, and I may lean on Anthony Vito with TAT to, to help with this, but we heard that from the, from the board members at the last hearing, just wanted to provide some additional information about
the mechanical rooftop plan and how we intend to adequately screen for and manage views of any equipment on that roof. And Anthony can walk through these materials in a little bit more detail but just to set the table. So, and as a reminder to everyone here at this point in our process, we don't have a detailed mechanical plan developed yet because we need to go through our detailed design phase to come up with the detailed plan. But we did take a step forward over the last two weeks. We reached out to our engineers and came up what feels like probably a close plan
that's shown up on the screen here. Okay. What we've done is highlighted the zones where the equipment would typically land and then we showed what we think will be a likely scenario for our equipment just to study it and see what it says or tells us from a sight line perspective. So we've cut a couple of sections through there. You can go to the next slide if I miss anything Anthony, you can jump in and it's a little hard to see on the screen here, but, so section A at the top relates to that red line you saw on the previous page.
It's really cutting a section through, I think that's number seven Lake shore if I remember wrong about that. I can't see that far. Yes, it's seven. Yeah, seven is on the top of the screen. And so what we did was we took the, that u that unit as proposed in the floor plan, looked at it in section and then just basically created sort of that angular dotted line to show what the sight lines would be. The other thing of note is that our building will have different roof line heights at different locations. So we have some articulation, we have some sections
of the facade that will be taller and then some that are lower. So this happens to be one of the lower sections. So maybe more of a worst case scenario if you can think of it that way from a sight line perspective. So it shows and it's, you kinda have to zoom in on it on this screen, but you can see the blue lines kind of go rise over the top of that unit. So in this layout they work, but like I had mentioned, we don't have our plan worked out yet. So we thought it might make the most sense to condition us so that it's clear that we are adequately screening
for the mechanical plans once we have the detailed design developed at the time that we submit building permit. Okay. Speaker 1: And the building permit would not be issued without, Speaker 13: We could do it that way. I don't even know if we included the language on building permit, but however makes the most sense. I think it's just helpful that we have sort of a clear, you know, parameter so that we achieve what the town and the neighbors are looking for. So we did include some draft language in the decision that we thought accommodated for that, given the unknown that we don't have everything sorted out.
Speaker 3: And you'd probably, sorry, you'd probably want that prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit so that they can actually construct the building to make sure That's Speaker 13: A good point. Speaker 1: Most definitely. Yep. Yeah Speaker 13: And we'd expect to be working with the building commissioner to make sure that we satisfy the condition along the way Speaker 1: And, and in part I think it's important not necessarily because of, you know, those who are here today, but if something were to happen, if the project were to be started and then sold that we wanna have enough of the pieces fully in place.
Yep. In terms of conditions and Speaker 13: No, it's a good way to do it. Just so that there's consistency. Yeah. In the expectation. Alright, Speaker 1: So, Speaker 13: So beyond, beyond those two, what I was calling homework assignments, this just shows when we had this visual in case it's helpful but this just gives us representation of what it's like if you were standing on that west elevation looking up what you would see And that's, that is our presentation. But happy to, I know we have a decision here that Kathy had mentioned there's a couple of potential comments or tweaks that were to be suggested,
but it's a lengthy document so yes, happy to review Speaker 1: Further. And Amanda, do you, is there anything that you want to getting before we dig into this? Speaker 3: No, I think we just need to be mindful of Mr. Meyer's time. Yes. So Speaker 15: No, no, I'm actually heading to town hall. Oh. So I'm on my way. Speaker 3: Oh, okay. Sorry. So no, I think there was just one thing that I do need to add in. I accidentally dropped off a waiver request. It was regarding the one tree and shrub requirement.
So I will put that in. It was in a previous edition. I'll put that in with the findings. So we'll update that. And then there was just an update to the parking count and then also some stormwater language amendments. But other than that, I think if we add the conditions regarding the rooftop mechanical plans to be provided prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit and then also the hours associated with the trash pickup and when if possible, to have the
no backup beepers or techno best technology to reduce nuisance associated with something. So we'll add those in there and then we'll have you take one more final look before you sign it. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 15: Terry, I've got one question, Speaker 1: Sir. Speaker 15: In past decisions or in the a LR, there has been language requiring like a survivability plan, like in the scenario where an assisted living goes out of business that it needs to be
convertible to something else. Is, is that still a requirement? And do we, have we addressed that in any manner? Speaker 3: So it is a requirement still. Sorry Andy, this is Amanda. So it is a requirement, but they are requesting a waiver, I believe from that item. It would, and the justification for that would be that a market analysis would need to be conducted at the time that the use was being basically taken away or going away to see what that use could be. But it would be expected that medical use
or another type of assisted living or residential facility would take its place. Speaker 11: It's, Speaker 1: It's, sorry. It's funny that when I was reading the draft decision, that was one of the things that caught my eye and my reaction was I can understand why the proposal is to have it removed because it may not be assisted living, but I could think of about half dozen other uses in a building of this kind of scale and composition that I, I understand why that's not an imperative or they're proposing that it's not an imperative.
Speaker 11: One thing I would add, Madam Chair, if I may, was I think it was the first meeting with you, we talked about the the parking requirement for nursing home use Yes. Would actually be lower than this use. So, so that's, you know, so that was part of our, when we asked you about the waiver request, we gave some information about what we thought the logical other uses that are allowed by Wright or special permit would be Speaker 15: All right. There was a time we were concerned.
I, I don't, maybe we just were kind of inexperienced 'cause we, they, they weren't specifically covered in our zoning bylaws. And I think there was concern that these were at risk of needing convertibility if, if this was like a long-term care facility. Those, those are sort of trending towards closing in Massachusetts. I mean you don't see a lot of applications for new, like nursing homes per, per se. Assisted living facilities are still being built. I think the market for them is strong. They're, they're sort of becoming our new nursing homes
and there are going to be regulations that are growing like as a result of the fire and Fall River. I, I guess what I'm trying to say bottom line is these don't look like uses that are going to go away. I would be shocked if this place was not here for the next 25, 30 years. I would just be very surprised. So I I I guess it's my long-winded way of saying that I, I, I'm comfortable with the waiver. I understood where it came from, the request to show that it could be converted to something else, but I I I think it's not a bad, it's not, it,
it's not a bad waiver in my opinion. I I think I could support him. Speaker 1: That's a good Did you, did you have something you wanted to say on Yeah, Speaker 6: I just have a question. Just the, there was a letter that just came out yesterday from the town engineer. Yes. And he had a few suggestions such as putting another catch base and at the, both the driveways. Are you guys gonna do that or is that even under this or is that gonna be, I know you guys have some other permits. Maybe you could also touch base on other permits that you guys still have to file. Speaker 16: No, Speaker 11: I need to get back to these, Speaker 16: You know, so Brent Holmes engineering civil engineer for the project.
So yeah, we, we did receive town engineers comments and, and we'd be happy to to talk with him about that. We do have the driveways pitched to one side. So to try to save, you know, putting in two catch basins, putting in one. But if that were, you know, an issue with the town engineer and, and he felt really strongly about it after we talk about how we have it graded, I think that, you know, we would do that Speaker 6: Just Speaker 17: It's under review with the store market. Speaker 16: Correct. Yeah. Speaker 6: Okay. So Speaker 1: That the town engineer's reviewing it now,
Speaker 6: Well that there's a letter in the packet from Bill and, and he recommended additional catch base on either driveway but just trying to be clear 'cause you know we're approving you playing with a certain date and you know there might be some additional modifications. Not that I'd be upset with that, but I just want to make sure just checking how everything, Speaker 3: So in conversations with Bill, he said that that would be an item that everything that was outlined in his letter would be something that he would work on it with them during the actual construction. 'cause this does have to get filed for building permits
but also as a condition we did reference compliance with the DPW letter. So therefore it would capture that in that. Okay. Just wanted make sure. And it may be modified 'cause I believe you need a storm water management permit. So one of two ways it's getting okay. Captured. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. Yes, Madam Speaker 11: Chair. We did have a small, some small edits that we wanted to, to raise it. That's Speaker 1: Oh by all means Speaker 11: If that's good. Okay, so the first is on page four of the decision, very small number four sub section one.
And it says a total of seven abutter. That should be lists in the plural. Speaker 1: Sorry, this is under statement of facts Speaker 11: Page four, statement of facts. Okay. Number one. Yep. The fourth line and seven abutter lists. There's an enormous number of abutters. So, so there are seven, seven lots, which is what will be consolidated when we do the a and r, but, so there's seven butter lists. So that's the first. The next was on, let's see page eight, number two, the site plan review.
So it's actually the number two under item one. So the new a LR facility will be three stories tall and it should say with a footprint of approximately 40,182. That that 40,000 is the footprint, not the total gross floor area. Okay. The volume. Yeah. And the next is on page. Speaker 13: Yeah, Speaker 11: 20 in two places. The Speaker 13: Just one, I'm just frantically scrolling to page 20.
Speaker 11: This will be, let's see, on number 10 off street parking, the reference to 23 land bank spaces should be changed to 20, which, and there were our 1, 2 2 references Speaker 13: And I think there was one other place that, Speaker 11: I think there was one other place that it was changed, which Speaker 13: We captured Speaker 11: But we missed. Yeah. But these two reference, Speaker 13: Okay. Speaker 11: And then the other thing I just wanted to point out to you, because we just discussed it, was the draft language we had suggested on under special provisions.
This is on page 22, number six. This was the provision that related to that site line. So, so this is what we had come up with. Mechanical equipment on the rooftop, which is visible from 50 feet away from the exterior face of the new building at typical pedestrian eye level shall be adequately screened if visible. So Speaker 13: Yes. Good. Speaker 6: How far away, I know you showed the graphic earlier with people's yards and whatever, how far away were those? Speaker 13: So the, we picked 50 mainly
because the setback we have for the RSA from the building face is 50 feet. There's varying distances. And actually I think one of our slides shows shows that, if you don't mind going to the Yep. I just wanna plan, I think there's some dimensions, so we're further away in some locations. But if you can visualize that section we were looking at before, the, the person standing looking up is about 50 feet. Okay, that's kind. So they're closer. They're within our property from the 50 feet point. From from most angles. Speaker 6: Yeah. But so 50 feet would be within your property, but
Speaker 13: It, it would be, so if, if there, if, if you feel like we need to step that back, we can certainly do that. It's up to the board. I just picked 50 'cause it related to the setback that we were working within. Speaker 6: Okay. But I, because in a way, if you look actually Speaker 13: If you go further back up Speaker 6: A little bit, we agree. No, we agree Speaker 13: Back down. Speaker 3: But you can just so you are, Speaker 13: You can see the distances. I think it just helps you give a sense. Like 50 feet isn't that far. So if it's more appropriate to step back, we'd be happy to do that as well. I mean I'm not, if you can hear me,
Speaker 6: I think it would be because I don't think where any of us are concerned about people seeing it from the driveway. Right, right Speaker 13: Side. Sure. Speaker 6: More about the neighbor seeing Speaker 13: Sure. So we could, we could double that. I mean a hundred feet would work. I don't know what, I'm just trying to find something measurable so that when we Yeah. Show you how we achieve it, it's, it's easy to, to sort of digest it. Speaker 3: Should it be 80 feet? Since this right here is 9 89 feet. Okay. And then that would be the back of that property line. Speaker 13: We have a lot of property, different property lines. Which makes it challenging too.
No, that, which is, which is good. But I mean 80 feet's fine. I mean we're open to it. I think we, you know, I, I think it's important to have a condition so that there's consistency. But we typically screen these anyways 'cause we don't wanna see that. We don't want them visible from approach, you know, front door experience. So, Speaker 3: Or even 90 feet because this is 89. This is 89. That's too closest. Just Speaker 6: Yeah. But then it means that somebody that is 120 feet away in their backyard can see it. You know, like the, Speaker 13: If you go to the section though, just, just
to point it out the angle. I, I totally agree. So that's a hundred feet to seven Lakeshore, or that's a hundred feet from the property. What is that? Total? Almost 200 feet. Speaker 6: Yes. That's about 81. 80. Speaker 13: Yep. And even from there, you're, you're not seeing those units. So if it Speaker 6: Well that's the plan is to not see current. Speaker 13: Yes. Yeah. Currently. So agree. It's, it's, there's not that many units on the roof. It's not too large of a facility from that perspective, but we know it's an important, you know, element.
So to get rights. There's obviously other, you know, there's gonna be trees and other things like in the way. So it's very well I think yeah. Subjective in a way. Well make Speaker 6: Sure it's, you know, we're not trying to screen it from a tree, but you don't see it. We're trying to make sure people Speaker 13: Right, of course in backyard aren't seeing it. Right. I Speaker 6: Think we can make sure the language, you know, reflects that properly. Speaker 1: Yeah. And can and perhaps specifically to include that intent. Speaker 6: Yeah, exactly. Exactly. Speaker 1: As opposed to simply having the number but to say Speaker 6: That it's gonna be an abutter from their property. Yeah. Direct abutter not, you know,
something down the street and, and I don't know what we've done in the past before I was on the board, if you had any choice language that seemed to work well Speaker 1: Offhand, I don't, Andy, Andy may have something else that sparks for him in terms of kind of institutional scale, Speaker 18: But I don't, here's Andy right now. Speaker 13: Ah, Speaker 6: There we go. Speaker 19: Hello. Speaker 1: And now entering from stage Speaker 13: Left Speaker 1: You for your Speaker 19: Flexibility. Speaker 1: Your timing is brilliant because Adam Alan was just saying,
we were talking about screening the Speaker 19: I was listening Speaker 1: Mechanicals. Fantastic. And he was saying, can you think of projects that the board has approved in those days before he joined us? Speaker 19: I can think of ones we've gotten wrong. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 19: Where we talk about it and talk about it and talk about it and talk about it. And there they appear. We, it sounds like we don't have final mechanical drawings yet, but we are talking about doing it before there's an occupancy permit. Sometimes that's too late though. Speaker 13: I, I prefer building permit because I think we have our, we know where the units are gonna be.
We know what the building is in plan and I think it's everyone's happier going into a c of o time knowing, being less surprised, not Speaker 1: Waiting for occupancy. Speaker 13: It's more difficult to add them later. So it would be better off to make sure that our feet are held to the fire at building permit. Yeah, and I think, I mean, I was just looking at the section again and knowing that we're really solving for, in my opinion, the, the lake shore neighborhood as the closest neighbors. Maybe we just use the furthest away a butter as just a 200
to 250 feet just to be safe about it. I mean that's, we, we don't have to use feet, but it does help kind of indicate, it gives a data point that we can work within. Speaker 1: I I think that's reasonable. And then it's there to back up the intention, Speaker 13: The intent. Yep. So we could change that to two 50. If that, if, if that feels reasonable Speaker 19: And the idea is not seen from 250 feet Speaker 13: Or if it's, if the unit, if the unit is seen, then we will provide screening Speaker 1: Those, Speaker 13: You know, vertical mechanical screens
that screen the unit from view helps Speaker 1: Improve it. Speaker 19: Are these handlers or are these more like the individual air pump type things? They're, Speaker 13: I'm Speaker 1: Gonna look at heat pump. Speaker 19: Heat Speaker 13: Pump. They're like the heat pump. They're not, this isn't like a lab facility where you have like lots of Speaker 1: Major units Speaker 19: Because those are typically quieter than Yep. The big air handle where we used to concern ourselves about what direction the vent was for, what the sound is with, with the heat pumps these days, those are like fans and they're not, but you know, the lovely drawings that we always see at this time are often marred are wrong
by the presence of, you know, six, eight feet of mechanicals. I'm sure Peter has a comment on that. Yeah. And sometimes it ruins the aesthetic of the whole thing. And we that, like I said, we have seen that many times where they're not mentioned. So we are thinking prior to building permit, if they are seen from 250 feet, they must be screened. I mean, as long as there's a catch. Yeah. You know, we don't want to just like miss it. Yeah. Speaker 14: And, and we want some kind of upper limit too, because Speaker 7: Somebody from well down the street, Speaker 13: Well there's different angles and heights.
Right. So it just, it helps us find a reasonable, you know, way to, to achieve it. Speaker 7: Draw out the line on a Speaker 13: Plant. Right. Exactly. So that's reasonable. Peter. Speaker 7: Yes. Thank you. Couple of things relative to what has been said already, the higher parapets around the building Yep. According to the plan are only pretty much a doors or some, some individuals pieces around the architecture. And those higher, there, there's so much low roof
that is exposed, exposing equipment high, a few high parapets aren't enough. There are numerous examples in Natick and around in the cities of enclosures for equipment that is not necessarily at all at the, say, at the building line, but is relative to the size of the equipment and comes in close to the equipment to enclose it. And they're designed in such a way to allow substantial
and adequate mechanical equipment maintenance and also air handling, air circulation around them. They're designed to be enclosures for mechanical equipment on the roof. And I employ you to use, do some research on that. We we're approaching this from little pinpoint viewpoints around the, around the building. 200 feet, 300 feet, 50 feet. That's where we're, we're just, I think we're not focused on the reality of
what can be done instead of fooling around with inches here relative to the rooftop. That's, that's all. I do have other comments, but we, we can go back to them. It's when we have a go around again or whatever, unless you up to the chair, the trash. Is that open for discussion now? Speaker 1: Sure. Or do you want me to wait? Okay. Yep. Yeah, Speaker 13: Happy to Speaker 1: Address that. No, we can go ahead. Speaker 7: Okay. Speaker 1: And I'm, and I'm building on here's another, Speaker 7: Yeah, here's an example. We, we did talk about no backup alarms in the truck.
Oh, well that's, that's great. I mean that's, that's really future thinking, thinking. It's interesting and discouraging really that we haven't in technology being what it is. We haven't this project has not considered, at least that we've, that I've known about what technology can do with trash removal. We was still taking the garbage out to the back of the building and leaving it. Speaker 1: Peter, there was, were, were you here for, there was a conversation about 20 minutes ago talking about
how trash removal is being treated and how I Speaker 7: Heard the, I heard all the discussion of the door from the inside. That's, that's not, that's not gonna do it. That, that fence around the inside of the, the outside that looks like it's four to five feet according to the dimension above it. It's, it's just masking. It is, it's just hiding these little things. There are, the technology allows for the use of loading dumpsters, compactors.
They would be compactors from the inside and the only thing that they would be from the outside is the pickup and the pickup to have just screened doors. I don't know why the, the enclosure can't be complete. Speaker 1: It, it's, it's my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, that this is not going to be a compacting facility. Speaker 13: We will not have compacting, there'll be two, six yard rolling dumpsters, basically. Okay. And the
Speaker 7: Large garbage cans. Speaker 13: Yeah, exactly. That they're, you know, they, the trucks help pull them out and, you know, dump them and then put them back within the, within the trash enclosure. Speaker 7: Well, the only person that won't, the only thing that won't recognize too well the fact that you've got a nice little four foot or five foot fence. There are the vermin that will be attracted to these garbage enclosures. And that's why some of this technology has come about where restaurants are in alleys and, and they're doing it so that they don't have these, the vermin problems.
I, I don't know why it can't be completely enclosed, can have its proper ventilation. It can be aesthetically part of the, the architecture of the building, but just the technology alone does, allows for better than just taking the garbage out and putting it in the can and taking the can away. It, I just think this building and every building, especially of this magnitude and this function should be a, a little more carefully thought out. Speaker 13: Thank you. Totally. Yep. I appreciate the comments. I do think just from an operator perspective,
the concern about fully enclosing it or bringing the trash to the interior of the facility rises a lot of concern for the operator. I know we would also need to potentially add cooling and treat that area differently if it's enclosed. We've done it in some of our other facilities. It hasn't gone well. So we, I think our compromise here was to find an alcove, really bring it tight to the building away from the property line. Make it feel like it's pretty much in the building, but for it not being in the building. So enclosing it, screening it,
but if we bring it in the building, it's an operational challenge for the, the future facility operator just bringing trash into the building. We'd prefer to have it outside where it's ventilated with the outside air, but again, keep keeping it close to the building. We think it's a nice compromise and balances the site wall. Speaker 7: Then may I ask the, how does the door from the inside into the garbage area, the, the trash area? That would be the means, as was said, I believe that of trash coming into the trash receptacles and not have to be outside.
So we've just, I I think we've just contradicted ourselves here. We're bringing the trash in from wherever it's coming in the building, all to one point. And the only difference between using that, you're gonna use that door instead of using the one that goes outside. They, they're both the same. The trash is coming all to that one point. Now what do you do with it? It, Speaker 13: It just, if that's what I'm, yeah, the, the door that's adjacent to the trash canisters themselves just avoids the person bringing the trash outside, having to go to the gate and opening the gate. They're big, they're heavy. So there's a convenience factor there
and just, it reduces nuisance, I think noise. And you hear these gates open and close. So we were avoiding that. So we're just using an interior door to bring the trash out. Speaker 6: So they're still getting out of the building. Speaker 13: It's an the bin. Exactly. But it's, it's almost inc I mean, it, there's an overhang above, so you can sort of, it's hard, maybe hard to tell with the elevation. But the area, if you look back at this drawing, I dunno if you could pull that up. The, the, the second floor above is actually over that trash enclosure area. It's not inside the building, but it's over it and that, that dimension, the four eight is just showing
that opening of the open air space that's created and then the gate is in front of it and below the building. So it's outside, but it's enclosed. And again, it's, you know, really insular and close to the building versus I think the previous facilities in the office building in the, in the former liquor store had dumpsters that were remote from the building and away and closer to the property line. And that's where there was nuisance and complaints that we had heard from the neighborhood about, you know, trash getting out. This will be close to the building and managed by the 24 hour, you know, operator that we'll have in the facility.
Speaker 7: Yeah, maybe a relatively small point, but just that roof line that you're talking about out there, somebody's gonna have to clear the snow off that. So it's because up against the windows when it does collect, but I just think that that's, well, okay, I've said enough. It's, it's, it's, so Speaker 19: We, Speaker 7: We just haven't, we haven't faced up to what's available. I know what's available and it's not gonna be necessarily a BA burden to your staff, to your operation. Speaker 1: Amanda, is this anything that, that you think
we should explore further? Speaker 3: I think, you know, this is gonna be a board of health items, so therefore I almost say if you would like to, we can just add a condition that prior to occu or prior to permit permitting, the applicant shall work with the board of health and the building commissioner to make sure that trash facilities meets regular code. And then also they provides them an opportunity to explore alternative options. Speaker 1: So Speaker 3: If, if that works, 'cause Speaker 13: Make, we're happy to do that. Speaker 19: Are those actually proposed mechanicals in the upper left and right?
Speaker 13: That's a good question. Speaker 19: Are they, they're Speaker 20: Shown in the, in the distance on the roof just Speaker 19: As a diagram right now. But I think it makes the argument for screening. Speaker 20: Well that's it, it's an orthogonal view. So you see everything. Speaker 19: Right. I I understand not from a Yeah, you're standing like 15 feet in the air. Yeah, but also that the cutaway is that not gray elements and I I I'm just thinking if you were 200 feet away, you'll see those really clearly. Yes. Well it it's gonna be based on your, should I go up to the leg turn
Speaker 1: Please? Thank you. Yeah. Speaker 19: Hi Anthony. Vito, the architectural team. We're the architect for the project. So Speaker 21: Amanda, can we look at the site section just one more time? And I think I can probably answer Peter's comment about the three dimensional aspect of the trash area, but the, the viewing perspective in the, if you look at the first diagram, the first site section, we've drawn an arrow from the first floor of the house, right? You can see it at roughly five and a half feet, right? The eye, the the level of someone's eyes, right? Looking out directly across in a straight line,
not at an angle, but perpendicular to the building. And so that arrow as you can, as you follow it to the building, it clips the top of the parapet, right? That's where you'd be looking to see the equipment. And then the equipment will be placed somewhere in the center of the building, right? We do, we're gonna locate it, the equipment, mechanical equipment central to the building to minimize the runs and maximize the efficiency for the, for the units themselves. So, and that equipment, as you had said earlier, Andy, I think you had said six to eight feet.
And once we go through the engineering part of this guys, we'll model the equipment and we'll set a view basically in a, in a model from the adjacent property, whether it's their backyard or from the back of their property. The only way to really simulate that would be to model it and take a view perspective looking up, right? But this, this particular diagram shows your, just your sight line is just to the top of the equipment, which you can see with the arrows that point out.
Mechanical rooftop equipment. It looks like you, you know, but the orthogonal view that we were looking at just a minute ago, everything is flattened. So it's a, it's a, it's not how we actually see things. So that's, that's the point of clarification on the trash. Real quick, Amanda, can we look at the floor plan? Because I think, Peter, you made a comment about snow collecting and I think it's our intention here that that space, that trash space is actually under the second floor of the building. So as you're looking at this, you see the two compact
or trash bins, if you will, right to the left and right. You see dash, a dash line shade line one, there's a door swinging in, right? That's the access. And the other is a wall that's full height. The first floor of the building is 13 feet. So the fence enclosure is actually going to be, if you subtract five feet from 13 feet, you get about eight feet. That fence with the gate is about eight feet, but it's, it's undercover of the building above. So the second and third floor are extend
over the top of that. And so if we were gonna draw this for you, show you in section, that element, that trash area is really, I think Katie did a good job of describing, it's part of the building, but it's outside. It's not part of the condition space. And Peter, you had said basically you want a room, a trash room that is part of the condition space, not part of the outside. So it's maybe the semantics. I think we're probably saying the same thing. You're looking for a trash room that has ventilation
where you we're providing the ventilation by the opening that is above the fence. So it's still internal to the building. It's not x the, the trash area, like a lot of times, right? The trash is a, a outdoor space, an outdoor bin. This is actually internal to the building and intended to look like part of the architecture. Granted that the fence design is not a architectural element, but it would be done in a way that's consistent with the ar the building architecture. So by a condition, trash space versus what we have, which is really technically an outdoor trash area,
is something that, as we said earlier, we're gonna have to explore that. I think our operator probably has a preference as well. So hope that explains the diagrams anyway in a little bit of detail. Speaker 1: Thank you. Yes. Peter, do you have any further questions on that point? Speaker 7: Just one, one point comes to mind quickly. A fairly new building on route nine, about a quarter of a mile west of the intersection of 27, go right around the corner. It's a new building. And you look at that building, it's got enclosures around the equipment on the roof
and very easily seen, but not as, they don't look as unfinished. Now maybe that design is, can be different, but a little modified, but in some way. But that's one example of locally where you can do that. And an example of where it's not done and miserably. So is the Littler School, perfect example of how really we, we blew it there. Speaker 13: Which school is that? Which school? I just didn't hear little Speaker 1: Je. Oh, VJO Elementary. Okay. Okay. Speaker 19: Those Speaker 7: Very easily seen from almost,
anyway, the mechanicals. That Speaker 6: Was probably out. That was a long time ago. Yes. Speaker 19: And those are, those are modular. Speaker 7: Not, well, not that long ago. Oh, the modular portion. I was a newbie. Speaker 19: We tried Speaker 6: Okay. The modular portion. I was thinking that the actual school I think was constructed in like 1960s. Yeah, Speaker 19: No, the modular ones, I mean we tried, we, we asked them to screen them. They with the modulars, that never happened. Speaker 1: So, okay. Speaker 7: Take a look. The, the, the trash, you've still got an outside trash. And I've said it before, there's, it can be done elsewhere. Restaurants, you, I've done it, done it in Boston.
They have indoor trash and outdoor pickup. So it can be done smaller places than, than this, this facility. But I hate to see any kind of a healthcare facility especially have to do this, have to stay with the, this nature, this Well technology or lack of, Speaker 13: Yeah, I think I just know that from speaking with our operator, they're concerned. They're concerned is bringing that trash inside is not their preference for the same health reasons.
They don't, they don't want, you know, the, I think there's benefits to having it outside just like it's typically done. And I think, and I, and I and I a hundred percent appreciate the, the comment, but I think there's, there's concern from the operator that we partner with that they do, they prefer not to have, they strongly prefer not to have trash inside the facility. Speaker 7: Well, and I don't understand what the door to why, why even mention the door from the inside of the building into the trash. It's Speaker 13: Just why, Speaker 7: What I mean the trash is have to come to that point. Speaker 13: Sure. It's, it's more so to avoid using that taller gate.
It's a convenience for the person bringing the trash out, but it also avoids the sounds you would ultimately hear from a gate opening and closing. So it's just to, to say that it's a convenient location, there won't be a lot of nuisance noise or sounds coming across from the trash area. Which we know we had heard from our neighbors that the prior use of the f of the area had tr dumpsters that were remote. They didn't like that trash kind of moved away from the building. So this is a 24 7 operated facility, you know, with staff at all times.
So it's a very different outcome than what's been out there to date. And this is sort of in our minds the closest we could get to kind of meeting your needs with having it feel like it's part of the building and close and inside and, and maintained but not bringing it into the facility itself, into the condition space like Anthony mentioned. Speaker 7: No one last, one last comment. I've spent my most of my career working with hospitals 24 7 operation and a lot of trash and generated and it's not always taken care of by taking it out
to the back and putting it in the temperature it's inside on some of them I would investigate some of the newer hospitals and what they might be doing. Okay. Thank you again. And I quit. Yep. Speaker 1: I know. Thank you Peter. I'm Speaker 7: Taking it up of the tape Speaker 1: And I realize that on, on some of this there, there is post both aesthetic and then there's kind of health and safety. It, I don't know Amanda if we had feedback from the director of health. Speaker 3: No, that's why I was just saying we would defer to them. Okay. To help just kind of do any final sign offs 'cause they are part of the building permit process as well.
And then just one thing to touch on, the applicant had done a prior project prior to me getting here, which is over at the interchange where Natick Mall is and everything like that. And they do have similar rooftop mechanical equipment which is not visible from Route nine Speed Street or any of the surrounding areas because of those placements. So it would be assumed that the applicant would do a similar type of design here. 'cause you cannot see it from the avenue. Speaker 1: Yeah, and no, I, I was thinking of as soon as, as soon as that came up I was like, oh wait a second. Yes, we were here for that.
So to, to kind of show an example of Speaker 3: I can I have it actually right now. I can show you Speaker 1: And then, then I can show you other buildings up put up less carefully. Speaker 3: So what you're seeing is the other project, I'm assuming that these are the mechanical equipment in the center of the building and then also on the hotel as well. And then if you actually get dropped into a very different point, it'd be helpful if I
actually dropped it in a better location. You actually, at no point when you're riding around these streets, you cannot see the rooftop mechanicals. So it would be assumed that you would, you also can't see it from this far away either. So, Speaker 13: So well what, you know, it's, it, it is important for us to advance the design, the mechanical design. And it feels like a minute ago we did the avenue together, but it's been 10 years and technology has advanced significantly. The code has changed how we, how we treat buildings
and cool them and heat them has changed. So it, you know, it's a good, we will achieve the same goal, but it is interesting that the mechanical design will be different when we look at this building compared to even 10 years ago. Yeah. So Speaker 1: That, that does, that does not surprise me. But I'm kind of amazed that that has been 10 years. Yes, Speaker 13: I know. Speaker 1: So, so do we want to try to work through this and come up with, with a, that that proposal this seems like something we want to put to bed.
Speaker 6: Well we can maybe, maybe we could put in, we talked about earlier about the board of health and working with the board of health. Speaker 3: So I think Speaker 1: We'll get there both, both issues on it from a health perspective but also from an aesthetic. And Speaker 3: So what we can do is regarding the draft decision, which we do have just a few comments additional from the applicant. So what we would do is update it with those comments. It was regarding stormwater. There was one waiver that was missed but it was in the application package. So we'll put that in with the finding support and then we'll amend it also with the comments
that were stated here. But then we will add a condition regarding the waste removal operations in terms of the beeping and also the hours in addition to the applicant working with the board of health and the building commissioner to explore alternative options to potentially further enclose or leave the trash where it is. Then also we will add a, just a prior to the issuance of a building permit, a review for the rooftop mechanical equipment views
to make sure that those are adequately Speaker 1: And that makes so much sense in terms of timing. Speaker 3: Just I think that's all I had in there. Speaker 22: I think that's, Speaker 3: And then we'll have just one final like review of the numbers and everything like that because sometimes we're hates life. Speaker 1: Yes. So, alright, so do we want to get to work on these, I was calling calling sore thumbs, but the kind of the things that are sticking out to, to address Oh, to get together what? To, to, to deal with what the
building commissioner, what the health director and others kind of find to fill in the, to fill in the gaps or is what you're saying? We can do you, we can begin the Speaker 3: Condition. Speaker 1: We're almost there, but do we want to try to get, I think we need to want to get the rest of the language or do you feel that we have enough of a framework Speaker 3: To I think you have enough of a framework and I also just basically taking what I just said and finessing it into like condition language. Okay. Which seems very doable.
So I could just do that if the board wanted to, you know, vote subject to conditions or as amended here and then we'll finish that up and then again have you sign it and we'll do one final review before Speaker 19: Does their a and r factor into this at all? 'cause we're gonna meet again next week when or next time for their a and r. Speaker 3: So I don't believe the a and r actually has any bearing on this application. It was more the a and r was a cleanup of past practices that just never was circled and finalized.
Speaker 19: Well I'm just proposing there's a fair list of amendments or changes to the decision. Yeah, I can't keep 'em all in my head. I just, I just wonder if it might be good to amend it, update and read it through one more time since we're gonna meet again in, in two weeks presumably to do their a and r vote. It then Speaker 1: I would, that would be my preference. I just feel like there, there nothing is gonna change radically, but I don't want things to drop Speaker 3: Or or miss. So I think that there's a scheduling item
first for the applicants. Yes. So I don't think the 11th is even possible. And so also if we review it, like, because you, if they, if the board allows you, which we've done in other projects to allow you as the chair to do a final review to ensure that it is compliant. Speaker 19: I'm not a big fan of dragging things down, but it, it's, it's a fair list of things that we are proposing to put into the decision that are different from what we read. You know, I just, I just think it's good practice to, you know, type it, read it, review it, make, you know, see if there are any changes.
I, you know, I'm not, I'm definitely not trying to slow things down 'cause I, I think generally this has been a very fast project based on how well you guys have managed it. But I just think it's just good practice to, to not keep it all in your head. And even, even if we left it on Terry, like you read it and sign it, I mean that's really not Speaker 1: Well and I, I would not want to sign it before having gotten feedback from everybody else. However, I would, I would like to see us push out of the, well there are a few things that we're going
to resolve here and I'd like to get that list just a little shorter. Speaker 11: So Speaker 1: What, what is, you said that there's a date issue so Speaker 11: Well there, there is a conflict that I can't come but you know, that the surveyor was coming for the a and r plan because you know, as said, it really doesn't affect the whole project. Right. But so, but I, if I could, I just to make sure I'm hearing this right, but there's really two kind of new add-on conditions or tweaking and the others were all really typos, right?
Most Yeah. You know, large some wording on the trash and wording on the rooftop, right? Were that, is that Yep. Substantively the only two Speaker 3: And then just adding the Yeah, the trash of yeah. Removal of like the best interest of Yeah. Removing the beeping noise Yeah. Speaker 11: If possible. But everything else was really a typo. Like, you know, fix the 20 versus 23 or, Speaker 6: And I think working with the town engineer, you know, regarding storm water and Speaker 13: I mean we as the, as make Speaker 6: Bill happy basically.
Speaker 13: Yeah. And we, and we, just based on the commentary, I think we feel comfortable. I mean I don't wanna rush anybody. I'm not, I just know people from the neighborhood have come out and they just being thoughtful of people's time. I, I think we feel comfortable with the conditions but I, there's no rush on my, I'm gonna be back on the 11th. But I mean I think if, if people are comfortable with we're, we're comfortable with the conditions as discussed in this meeting. So Speaker 1: I I I would say that I would not anticipate if things have moved forward a pace as they have up to this point that there would be anything keeping us from
kind of having a final decision. Understanding still that things may change. But I think this is, it's enough of a chunk in some very concentrated areas of, of concern to resolve before we go forward. I don't have any concern that this is, this, somehow this won't happen. It's just enough of the kind of significant areas of concern to, just to nail it down. It doesn't say something may not change should technologies
or something else change. But I, I'd like to get us as far down the path as we can get. Speaker 3: So Speaker 19: I'm not seeing any bombs from left field on, on this. I, I think, I think the list is quite manageable. Yeah. Speaker 3: One thing, okay, not trying to push this, but it's also, so I, one item is the condition under six, which was already in here, which was mechanical equipment on the rooftop, which is visible from 50 feet away from the exterior of the building. I think we add on there the applicant shall submit to the planning board for final review
and approval the elevation views of the rooftop mechanical equipment prior to the issuance of a building permit. So that would allow the board to approve those elevations. Speaker 19: But I don't think we're at 50 feet Speaker 3: And so I I think we actually removed the 50 feet, sorry, Speaker 19: The file open. But, or maybe I do on one of these many things Speaker 3: And then the applicant shall work with the Speaker 19: Can We can, let's just do this offline. Okay. This is no time to Yeah. Draft the decision. Okay.
I, I know we don't have a lot to do, but it's just not the, it it is just better to, I mean appreciate the effort to type it down. We can review it and, and then you get a good clean look at it. Speaker 1: Peter, thoughts? Yeah. Is that okay? Is that okay for you? Speaker 13: Yeah, Speaker 10: Go ahead. Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 13: Sorry. I wasn't sure you were looking at me or him. No, that, that's absolutely fine. I just wanna make sure that I come prepared for the next meeting. I think we're focused, I just wanna be clear, we're focused on the decision language and otherwise in good shape, I just, yes, I'll save our consultants, the, the trip if that is appropriate and feels okay.
Yes. So this is more of an administrative just clean up and get confirmed on our language. Speaker 1: We have to, to kind of tie down the last things that are still sure floating. Sure. Speaker 6: Do we have any hands raised or any members of the public or anything? Speaker 1: I think so. Amanda are, do we have any Speaker 6: Shoot, we got our hand right there. Oh, I was Speaker 1: Just Oh, oh actually I was just gonna see if, so there's nobody online. We have one person online but they're associated with the applicant. Okay. Joseph? I tried to promote them but they didn't want Yes, please. And the, you know, name address. Sure. Speaker 23: Thank you. I'll be brief. Pam Barrows.
I live at 11 Lake Shore Road. I just wanted to note again our support, Katie, Marie, and Frank have been wonderful. The whole team, very responsive to the neighborhood's concerns. Super, super responsive. So we're very appreciative. It's a huge relief. My mother-in-law lives at number seven, so we're kind of the home's most impacted but we don't have a single complaint. So thank you so much for all your time and thoughtfulness. I just wanted the record to reflect that. Thank Speaker 1: You. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none then are we continuing to the 11th. Alright.
A motion to continue to, the Speaker 6: Motion to continue to the 11th. Second. Second. Speaker 1: Alright. By roll call vote. Peter, I pointing, I'm pointing to where your screen is. Speaker 6: I see the screen. Oma, you're on five of 'em here, Peter. So you're a staff. It's like a sports bar. So my iye Speaker 1: Peter said I, I Speaker 6: Include your aye Speaker 1: Evan's. Aye. Alright. Alright. Speaker 13: I will. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Meet we, we won't, we won't torture anybody in your absence.
Next meeting promise. Thank. Thank you. Thank you. Further. I think that's it 'cause we don't have Doug, so. Alright, so a I'll move to adjourn. Speaker 6: I'll second. I always vote. Yes sir. Speaker 1: Okay. All those in favor? Aye Evans? Aye do Speaker 6: And aye Dear. Aye. Speaker 1: Awesome. I.