Speaker 1: All right. Calling to order the meeting of the Natick Planning Board at 7:04 PM with, with a quorum of three members present. This meeting is being recorded and broadcast on Pegasus. To comment or ask a question, use the raise your hand function. If you are on a phone, press star nine. An individual wishing to speak during public speak or during a public hearing must display their first and last name on their screen before their microphone can be unmuted. To make changes to your on, to your name as it appears the screen in zoom, click on participants
to open the, open the participants menu. Hover your cursor over your entry and click on more. Click on rename and type your first and last name. We now move to public speak, which is always the first item on our agenda. Any individual may raise an issue that is not included on 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. Any individual addressing the board during this section of the agenda shall be limited to five minutes. Do we see any hands from remote attendees?
Okay. Seeing none, then a move forward with the next order of business, which is a lot release for 20 Algonquian Drive, MA 45 lot one 12. And I understand, Amanda, that this is an issue that goes back decades in terms of a, of a, a covenant that should have been released following the completion of a subdivision. Speaker 2: That is correct. So this has been in place. We did have the Covenant Form D, but again, never released as you just mentioned.
So basically there is a transaction that would be taking place, and they need this basically cleared similar to what we did right around March of last year for nine Algonquin. So there's quite a few up there, but then there were randomly some that were released. But this is, Speaker 3: So someone's waiting on a transaction, this Speaker 2: To be released. Yeah, there were supposed to close on Friday of last week, but we found out on Monday of last week, and we weren't meeting until this week. And I can't authorize that. So, Speaker 1: So, so the covenant that's before us is one
to sign that says that Yes. The, the requirements that were stated for the covenant to be released Yes. With the roadway has been met and there is one form to release the covenant, and then we are, we're proposing, and Amanda told me if I've got this right, that you're collectively voting that I will sign on behalf of the, Speaker 2: And Speaker 1: We do have the board because it requires wi being witnessed by a notary and which Amanda has many things she does, but that's not one of, Speaker 2: I could get it.
It just has to have been on the list, so I can't get up there. But there is one person, Chris Palino. Speaker 4: Delano, thank you. Yes. I actually represent the seller of Tony Algonquin Drive. And thank you so much to Amanda who was super helpful in getting us on the agenda here and trying to work out getting this released. And I'm sorry, when I was moved up to a panelist or whatever you want to call it, I, I cut out for a little bit so I, I didn't hear if there was any kind of resolution here, but I'm happy to work with the panel
to figure out a resolution on how we can get this released. Oh, we did actually go, Speaker 1: I believe, sorry. Go ahead. We'll be, I believe we'll be voting it momentarily. Speaker 4: Oh, thank you so much. And if there's anything I can do, I'm happy to, we actually did move forward with the sale last Friday, but obviously we do want this cleared up for the new buyers. I was gonna ask Speaker 5: You if you did that. Absolute. Okay, Speaker 1: Good. So that didn't hold it up. Just Speaker 5: One question, if I could correct. So is there any way to like just do a quick audit on the rest of these, in the rest of the Algonquin Drive area or not? Speaker 2: We could. I think it was more of just, Speaker 5: Do you have an intern, something that could do a little research and just see if
we actually released everything Speaker 1: We had. There was a, the map that you had that had the markups on ones that have been released, definitely more have been released than have not, Speaker 2: Yeah. So we can go through that and do it on a different agenda. I would do that, yeah. Okay. Yeah. Speaker 1: So, okay. So a motion to release the covenant for nine Algonquian Drive Nine, I'm sorry, 20 Algonquian drive. Speaker 5: Yes. Second. So moved Second. Speaker 1: Okay. Further discussion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. And those opposed nay silent.
So it is approved because I and Amanda, do I, so that the, do we need a form for the board to let me act on the board's behalf or can? May we? You have a form? Speaker 4: It's, Speaker 1: What's that? You have a Speaker 5: Sign it? No, Speaker 1: Sign it. Oh, to go ahead and sign it. Okay. Yeah, it's just a, I will hold off my signature then until tomorrow. So that, Speaker 5: Thank you. Speaker 1: I'll, I'll hold off. Speaker 5: Only you sign it. Only you sign it. Oh, you're right. On behalf of the board. That's fine. Yes. Right, because it's funded,
Speaker 1: Then I'll do, then I will do that tomorrow. And yes, because we have a notary in the Crown clerk's office, I believe. Speaker 2: Yes, we do. Yeah. Speaker 1: Alright, we'll set up a time tomorrow. Very good, then we will take care of that. Speaker 4: Thank you very much everyone, and thank you Amanda, you've been a great help. Speaker 6: Alright, good luck. Speaker 1: Alright, hold onto that. And then the next order of business is a continuation of the public hearing on 43 Cyprus Road, which is a continuation. And as I understand, we have a request from the applicant for that project to
continue without testimony. Speaker 2: Yep. And we do have Brian, sorry, attorney Brian Grossman here. He was here just in case there were any members of the public, but this was a request for continuance. So Speaker 1: Yes. Without, without testimony. So Speaker 7: Nothing to read you. I I mean I'd read it for Andy's not Speaker 1: Here. Do we want to read the attorney's letter? Speaker 2: It's, it's two pages. Speaker 1: Okay. We have received a letter to that effect. Speaker 2: It was a well written letter. It's just two pages. Speaker 1: Oh. And now you're just trying to butter up Brian.
So, alright, so that is continued and then the, the public hearing is continued. They, we have an extension for the review of the project till August 6th. Is that correct? Speaker 2: July 23rd? Speaker 1: No, no, Speaker 2: I'm sorry. Oh, extension to, yes, yes. August 6th. Yes. Sorry. Okay, sorry. Speaker 1: Okay, so motion to continue to July 23rd. Speaker 8: So moved. Speaker 1: And is there a second? Speaker 7: Oh, second then, sorry. Speaker 1: All those in favor to continue to July 23rd. Aye aye aye. Aye.
Alright then I am, it is continued to July 23rd. Very good. This is gonna be one of these meetings. Yeah, no, I take it back. 2025 fall town meeting work. We have two items before us regarding West Natick land use and zoning and then several, I think four or or five very specific town meeting zoning initiatives that you have mapped out. And which I think will help wrap up some of our longstanding march through the zoning bylaws.
Speaker 2: Yep. So in your packets tonight, you will find a, like a folder that's drafted 2025 fall town meeting in tonight's electronic folder. Okay. So within that there are a series of articles or potential articles for the planning board to consider. So if we could just kind of jump into that folder, that would be awesome. Some of these are basic cleanups, some of 'em are larger lifts, and then some are just needing to, I think at some point form a working group. The ones that I would, the big ones that I would like
to actually talk with you about is the one that's titled Nomen 5G flooding that one there. In terms of the work that we did at the spring town meeting, it does not appear that this article, yeah, I'm sorry, it's, it should be titled no numeral 5G flooding. They're all Speaker 1: Vg. No. Is this, is this the one that says flooding? So it's the second one down on the list. I see it as you have VG flooding. Yes. Roman numeral 5G. Yeah. Oh Roman, I'm, yes. Roman num five, 5G,
Speaker 2: It's, sorry, the date on it is 6 23 25 section. No numeral 5G. We got it lake in Speaker 5: Now I see it. Yeah. Thank you girl. Thank you. Speaker 2: I don't know what the G stands. Speaker 1: No, that's okay. We're each, each of us is having kind of one of the small evenings. Speaker 2: So let Speaker 5: Me Yes, sorry, Speaker 2: Jump outta that. Speaker 5: Yep. 5G. Speaker 2: Cool. Alright, let me, I Speaker 1: Just got, that's one that is, is actually striking. That's the, that entire section. Speaker 2: So it would be striking that section. What I, why I propose this is because we did do a lot of work at the
SPRINGTOWN meeting to update the floodplain maps. Yes, we did do a lot of work in terms of Basically just figuring this out. And so what I was proposing was just to delete this because it doesn't really actually make any sense to even have this in the bylaw anymore because we have such properties flood all the time. And so this is basically saying no land subject to seasonal or periodic flooding by fresh or surface water during heavy rain in such manner as
to eng endanger the health and or safety of the occupants shall be used for residential purposes unless the lands are improved to eliminate flooding. That's so many properties in Natick. We also have the stormwater management bylaw, we have the flood plain bylaw, we have the aquifer protection bylaw. So we have a lot of different methods, but this seems like it's basically excluding development on a lot of Speaker 1: Property. Well, and I would say it's not that there is even a consistent weather pattern that makes
what floods predictable. Speaker 2: Yeah. So the proposal for this would be just to delete it in its entirety and just put reserve because it is in the middle of section Noman normal Speaker 1: 5G. Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 2: Okay. So that is one of them. So Speaker 5: Just thank you. I mean these things just, you know, you scrub through a bylaw and then you run across these things and go, oh my god. Yeah. Lack of, I mean just lack of standard about flooding and just the way this is written, I don't know when it was. Do you know any, any idea when it was adopted?
Speaker 2: I don't know. I've gotta go back and do the research. My best guess would be probably like 74, Speaker 1: Something Speaker 5: Like that. Yeah. So it's time that gets Speaker 2: Moved. So I agree. The next one is a similar item Earth Speaker 1: Products. Speaker 2: This one is gonna be dated June 26th, 2025. And it is titled numeral five F. Yeah. Removal of earth products Speaker 1: I haven't is modified. 6 23 is Speaker 5: You said 6 26, you Speaker 2: Mean 6 0 6 23. Yeah, sorry. Okay.
Speaker 1: Yep. Speaker 2: And it's the Noman Rule five F removal of flood or removal of earth products. All right. So this one here, I need to look at it in its entirely, I'm gonna be talking with Claire about this, but I wanted to bring this up in the meantime. This has not been updated since 1974. It is understood that this was probably put into place. When was it Doug Pond was being used for fill and removal for the big dig. So there was quite, that was my understanding that it was being that Speaker 1: They stored, they they filled it,
Speaker 2: They took out material out of an area, maybe it was Speaker 1: A duck. Oh, they, they deepened. Oh the, maybe it's the area kind of across West Street Speaker 2: From Yeah, somewhere around there. Haven't fully got the whole thing, but all I know is there was extraction, if you read this in its entirety one, it's not the building inspector, it's the building commissioner. So that's just a minor fix, but it's the whole second paragraph. Preexisting use of premises for the excavation. Gravel pits of gravel. Like yeah, it, it doesn't really make, Speaker 1: Do we have any active gravel pits? No. Well there you go. Yeah. Speaker 2: So yeah, I don't even know if we need this.
It's in entirety. That's why I wanted to talk with Claire. But we definitely, I don't think need the entire second paragraph or the first sentence of the third. Speaker 1: Agreed. And it would be interesting if, as to whether she may imagine any scenario at which that might be. Yeah. Speaker 5: So, all right, so we don't have any grant gravel or sand pits anywhere in the town. No, no. Anywhere. Because let's make sure when we're reading stuff like this pre-existing use, we understand what that actually means.
Yep. It doesn't mean existing use. Right. It means it preexisting the zoning bylaws to the bylaw that prohibited that piece. So this is even kind of weirder if you think about it. Yeah, because this would, this would apply to standing gravel pits that had been existing at the time we prohibited them somewhere. Would that be the use table? Speaker 2: So I would need to go back and look at that. But that's where the only thing we could think of is when they were pulling materials from here to take to the big dig. So that is another one that I was gonna bring up.
And that was on the work schedule that was put together. The next one that we have, if you could go to limited, it's a folder by itself. It's called limited site plan Review. This one here in there you'll see two documents, one's A PDF, and that was the attorney general's basically review of when we redid site plan review. Okay. Everything was good, it was approved. However, she did not like the definition
for limited site plan review because it focused solely on daycares. And that was not the intent. It was to touch on all of the Dover uses, which was educational daycares, religious institutions. So if you open up the word doc, which is 6 25, 25 20, 25 section, 200 definitions, Speaker 5: Just, okay, Speaker 2: This would just be an update to that to help be consistent with what she was requesting. 'cause we were good in the actual noman numeral
six DD site plan review. It's just here, it conflicted. So it would basically just be removing what is struck and through and replaced with for educational, religious, and childcare uses protected under mass general law. Chapter 48, section three, the Dover Amendment much cleaner. Yeah. So that was just in response to the attorney general's request. No other amendments at this time for that. Okay, the next one, jump back out into the list of items, exclusionary, oh earth products.
So we got that. The next one to take a look at, and this is something that's come up multiple times and the question comes down to what do we do with it? This is in section no numeral five J inclusionary housing. So there's three items that kind of, I wanted. Two are clean up and one is just a big larger question. The first one in section one, purpose and intent, we would be deleting the Natick housing production plan because at this time it is going to expire, but we don't need it
Speaker 1: Because we are above 10%. Speaker 2: That is correct. So we can add it later, but it doesn't seem to make sense to reference a document that no longer is there. So we, and I feel like that because right before that it says section no neural five J in concert with Natick long range planning documents. And I actually need to delete that in that. And Speaker 1: So that takes in 2030, Speaker 2: It takes in 2030, but if we had a housing production plan or anything relative to that, it would be covered, cover it without having to, then the next one is in number two, applicability, no RAL three. This is actually something that's come up now twice.
Once while I've been here and once prior to me coming here, when one 19 East Central anthology came forward, this is what national development had come forward just a few months ago to ask about regarding the assisted living units. And do they count on the SHI? So what I was proposing to do is just provide that little bit of extra so they understand that those are exempt unless they're added to the SHI. So if those units are being added to our SHI like our numbers, then they will be counted
and they'll have to give affordable. But if they're not, then they don't count. Who Speaker 5: Decides that? Speaker 2: So that is re, sorry, the State Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities re goes office. Do Speaker 1: They ha, is there a standard as tar as far as what, when it something would be considered to be added to SHI? Speaker 2: Yes. So there's criteria that it falls under and it has to be like a full, I know a full living unit, but there was some other items. I'll get that information from KO and get it to you. So this is, this is a, just an introduction of ideas. Yeah.
So I'll get more information on that. The other one is a house housekeeping item. And I don't know if it's reason why we have two A, it's when I imported it, but we should not have two. Two As, but it's the one right below it. It should not no longer say Department of Housing and Community Economic Development. It should be executive office. And I changed that in a couple places if we're gonna make amendments. If not, then we'll deal with it later. Okay. So this is the big piece. Oh yeah. Speaker 5: Are we, so putting in the zoning bylaw a prog the local initiative program, yep. I mean that could go away.
I mean, how do we, how permanent is that program or how permanent has it been over the Speaker 2: Years? It's been in place for well over 15 years. It's pretty solid. That's the mechanism that the state uses to record all units. So it's a solid program. Everyone is used, basically everyone's using it because it does record your units in perpetuity. Unlike prior to that, they were only good for 30 years and then you would have to re-up it. Is Speaker 5: There a better way to reference it, I guess? Guess is what I'm asking? I mean, is there some statutory reference where, you know Yeah. Better to do, to do that than reference a, a program
that could change its name or Speaker 1: Although to be honest, if the program changed its name, we would just come, I go back and do that, but, Speaker 5: But it wouldn't have to if it's just a statutory reference that this program's based on just something to think about. Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I'll take a look at that. Yeah. So the next one is, if you go down to three nomen numeral two and nomen numeral three, my question comes down to is this has been a, there's a lot of discussions around this and sorry, Speaker 1: We are Speaker 2: Where now Noman numeral two Speaker 5: On the second page. Speaker 2: On the second page, yeah, Speaker 9: Sorry.
Speaker 2: It's under three a Noman numeral two. Okay. And it's the line that's struck in out, which is methods to satisfy affordability components. So the question comes down to is we have two options. We have creation of units on site and the fee in lieu, the fee in lieu never creates the number of units that you could create if they were created on site. However, it is an option to allow for units to be created elsewhere. You're just gonna get less. But the question comes down to is one proper management
of those fee and L funds? And two, is that something that the board wants to continue with with the fee? And LV and L is for only certain categories of housing and it's not for all. So if you're in Natick Center or the center gateway, you have to create the units on site because we're at 10% affordable. If you're requiring 10% affordable, you're never gonna get the amount with a fee in lieu. But then it's a question on the flip side is if you're in a cluster development where the houses may be bigger, but our open space residential development is looking to try to create the units 2200 square feet
or less in 25% over, that is still an opportunity for home ownership, which is a piece. So it's just a question of do we wanna continue with the fee in lieu option or should it just be a construction of the units on site? Speaker 1: I where I, oh, go Speaker 5: Ahead. Where does the, have we ever collected V and Speaker 2: Low? So you've collect, you've graystone Yeah, Nope. Wayside. Wayside and windy low. Speaker 1: Because that's kind of when at the time we were, we had put it in place and part of why we put it in place was
because there were very large residences going up. And it was actually someone at the Affordable Housing trust at the time who said, you know, this doesn't really seem like, you know, we could, we could, we could provide three separate units and for the, what we are gonna give away as one very expensive unit. And so what, what fee and Lew does is if you said, do we really want to have an affordable housing unit that is, you know, 3 30, 500 square feet
because it's consistent with the others in the at market rate in the development. And so I think having that to allow it is for exactly that type. I, I think that's relatively rare, but we've seen big houses go up here and the points of fair one, do you want to have a million dollar affordable unit that that's not priced at market, or do you want to take the fee in lieu and actually secure properties? And I, I, I think that's, that's enough of a possibility
to have the option open. I don't think we will use it much, but I, I think if we fail to do that, we're not actually benefiting the people who most need housing. If what if what we do is offer one, one enormous unit to one family, Speaker 2: Then the other question is like, either way is fine, but it's a question of you leave it in place, is there a better mechanism to put the funds back into use than the current process? What is the current process though? The funds are housing Speaker 1: Trust or Speaker 2: Okay, the funds go directly to the Affordable Housing trust for the creation of units.
But like we found out with this one, you have no jurisdiction on if they're used for pre-construction or anything. Like they just basically, Speaker 1: Unless we, we, unless we revise the wording so that it was clear that it wasn't simply a fee in lieu that what did that fee have to, what had does it have to be used for? And I, I think, yeah, we learned that with that, the issue of the last money from Graystone that you want, you want to be able, you don't want it
to be spent on studies and pre-construction something that's not going to necessarily generate new units. You want something that, that can, so how precise can our wording be to that end? Yeah, Speaker 2: And I can talk with cares on that one as well. Speaker 1: And you, I'm putting too much faith in le legalese to, to pin that down in a coherent Speaker 2: Way. Yeah, because that was just a question. It was more of like, where's the Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, construction costs keep going up. So the minute you put a dollar into a trust fund,
the next day it's 99 cents. You know, so having a a, a trust fund full of funds for affordable housing needs to be spent on affordable housing and it needs to be spent fairly quickly. Quickly. And so I guess can't force, you know, creating a unit somewhere. But there's a time element to this as well. Speaker 2: What's that? There's Speaker 5: A time element to having the money sitting there and being spent the way it should be spent. Speaker 2: There should be, but there isn't. So it could sit there for 10 to 15 years,
but usually, like when we would collect mitigation funds in like Lexington or Framingham, we put a two year, like the funds had to be used within two years or they'd be returned because they obviously weren't being used for the purpose that they were put in there for. So we can, let me look into that one and we'll move, we'll figure out that Speaker 1: It's always been an unhappy kind of middle ground for us. Yeah. But I un I understood when the Affordable Housing Trust made that point and kind of said, I, you know, we, we'd rather not have get locked into one, one gigantic unit in a, in a,
a neighborhood of gigantic units. We'd rather, we'd rather spend it and get more bang for each buck. Speaker 2: Alright. All right. So the next one is not in your packets and I'm gonna project it onto the screen. Okay. So we have a couple parcels that are randomly and I, I'm not saying they're just, but it kind of makes no sense. So this is Route nine, this area here, this pink right here. This is Scrub Oak, Oak Street, route nine here is the Speedway.
Yeah, this is eastbound. That's Westbound. Speaker 1: Yeah. Is that Giant Movers Trucks? Speaker 2: That is Giant. The one I've highlighted is Giant Movers, which is 2 0 6 Worcester. And then the ones right next to it, 1 92 and 1 92. And then they're all like, they're all like 1 92. There's an office building. These are zoned RSCI believe. And so the question comes down to is nothing can be done with these sites under current residential zoning, even though they are in the highway overlay district
that only expands the residential, basically it protects the residential use. It does not allow for the expansion. So there have been times where this parcel Gentle Movers, which is really not Gentle Movers, but Speaker 1: Has, it's a, it's a stationary billboard. Speaker 2: Yeah. Has approached the town with different uses, but the uses are not allowed because of it being residential. So the question comes down to is would the board consider sponsoring an article? I've looked into a couple options. One was to put it into one of our highway mixed use one, two, or three.
The problem with those is that one and two, or it's one and three have too large of a minimum lot area requirement. There's no way that these would be even, they basically non-conforming HM two you could actually do with a lot size. The problem is to get the uses that you would want like a restaurant or something of that nature. It has to be within, it has to be 200 feet from a residential zone. So therefore the property can't even do that because it abut it, it directly above residential.
So therefore commercial two would be a quick fix. But it's kind of like not the best because then there's other uses that could go in there that are not as appropriate. And the reason why I brought this one up before we go into the use regulation schedule is that is something that we are looking at, oops. We are looking at is the use regulation schedule specifically to the uses that are harder to define. If that makes any sense. I Speaker 1: Mean it, this, this, this is such a challenging site because it very directly abuts a residential neighborhood to the rear
and trying to understand what impacts whatever that use is, what impact and, and what or what buffer there is to offer to that neighborhood. Yeah. Speaker 2: So that's just one to think about. So the next one, Speaker 5: How so? 1 92? Yep. On the office building. Speaker 2: Yeah. Speaker 5: How was that permitted? Speaker 2: I'm not sure. At some point it could like, it could have been commercial, but then it's also, at a certain point this was very open space and they were like model homes throughout Route nine
for different, like develop residential developments. So I need to do more research into it. But this is a parcel that these two are parcels that kind of just, it doesn't really make sense why they were residential. Speaker 5: No, I agree. Speaker 1: I agree. Oh, why originally? Speaker 5: Well, I don't know if they were originally, Speaker 2: Well no, why they are now like, Speaker 5: Oh well it's, it's zoned, it's zoned Speaker 1: Residential. Yeah, because it never, it didn't change. I, this is a continuum of what's right behind them up to the south, which are residential. Yeah. But if Speaker 5: You look Speaker 1: At one, oh, the New England streets, Speaker 5: It's a, it's an office building, which, Speaker 1: Oh, I, yeah, Speaker 5: It's a fairly, I'm not going a while.
I guess that when it was built looks like a late seventies vintage, 1980s vintage building and I don't think the zoning wasn't any older than that. Right. So somehow they got a commercial site plan permit to build that building. Yeah. Speaker 2: But it could have been right around the same time that Scrub AUB came in as well Scrub. Speaker 5: But Scrub AUB is in the proper zone. Speaker 2: It's in commercial. Yeah. Speaker 5: Yeah. So I don't know, I'd like to see something done with these two parcels for sure. Speaker 1: Okay. Develop makes sense. Well it's, it's interesting. It's in a challenging location
because it's, it's a very shallow lot depth. Yeah. Speaker 5: I mean you have the same situation on the westbound side too. Speaker 1: And, and I think part of why I was asking but with the neighborhood is, is any part of the solution something that has among its components the opportunity for some sort of buffer with the residential neighborhood? Speaker 2: It's difficult because the, there's two residential houses that come right up to the edge of the rear of the site. It's at the top of a hill. So it is a develop a developable site. So you don't wanna take away the right to develop. It's not like the site that's on the opposite side
that's in a swamp. Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 5: Yeah. Speaker 2: So, so that was just something for you to consider. Speaker 1: It would be, it would be helpful with this too to start a conversation with with the neighborhood. Speaker 2: And we did have, the other reason why was one day during public speak we had a person come in that lived on one of those residential streets asking to look at that. So. Alright, the next one I would like you to actually open up is the youth regulations schedule.
And so this, I have the entire use regulation schedule just in case we wanna look at the entire thing. But right now we are down to our last three sections of the use regulations schedule. And with that being said, there are things, this is, I have to say the harder of the three. So if you go down to use header G, motor vehicle related sales and service. Speaker 1: Hmm. Speaker 2: So the goal is still to remove defining language and put it into the definition section. Bring us into compliance with mass general law and case law,
but then also to make sure that we're either one using the correct terms. But two bring us up to current times. So the question on this one really comes down to is it feels like we have the same types of uses said three different ways, but just a little bit differently. So the first one, G one we have sales room for motor vehicles, trailers, boats, farm equipment, machinery with no repair services excluding used car. But then if you go to G two, G two is limited sales room for motor vehicles.
Which that one is the for Tesla. Speaker 1: Yeah, I was just gonna say that was the Speaker 2: Tesla. So that one, the only thing I would like to amend with that is just making it consistent. So the definition actually uses capitals all the way through. So that was a capitalization and then we'll get into the permitting section after. But then you go to G three sail rooms for motor vehicles, trailers, boats, farms, implements or machinery with repair services and storage including used car lot. Speaker 1: Well that's the only difference with one. Speaker 2: Yeah. So I guess the question comes down to is even if you sell new cars,
you sell used cars. So why are we differentiating between the two? Like shouldn't it just be The same kind of thing? The next one is G four and G five. So this one repair garage for motor vehicles was G four, G five was a facility exclusively for, or whose principal activity is for changing oil or related lubrication services or motor vehicles. And I totally get that because that would be like a Valvoline or a Jiffy Luv or something like that.
But to clean this up, I would propose to have vehicle repair shops major, which is the full service while the vehicle repair shop minor is just that limited services either like Hogan tires kind of situation. And I'm not promoting any businesses, it's just examples Speaker 1: But No, but car a tire, Speaker 2: Like a tire repair Speaker 1: Or sales Speaker 2: Yeah. Kind of thing. So that would be the major minor. We no longer would need the two asterisks for car wash because we worked on the aquifer protection districts. We get to delete those two use
or sorry, footers that if you go down to GAA, this is one that was added because it was allowed in the lc district but it didn't fit nicely into the other one. But it seems like we actually can take care of that. The storage and parking and motor vehicles with no provisions for operations, incidental to the servicing of vehicles. I think it kind of fits somewhere else. It just doesn't fit into that one. It's Speaker 5: Storage and motor vehicles. So it's like, you know, Bernardi wants to have an offsite
area to park their, there was inventory Speaker 1: Or there was something off of Oak Street Speaker 5: That was Wellesley Mazda Parks, their, Speaker 1: It was very, it was very, it was very controversial. Speaker 2: So if we're going to do that, if we could just figure out a term Speaker 5: With no permission, Speaker 2: But then the question comes down to is does it fit under G eight commercial parking lot or garage? And we actually don't really need filling or service station anymore because that's elsewhere. Speaker 5: No, the storage and parking and motor vehicles is not necessarily commercial. Commercial parking lot means you're getting a fee. Someone's parking there, you're paying a fee to park there. It's a commercial parking lot.
But back to the, well Speaker 1: We, and that's and that we have elsewhere, the commercial parking Speaker 5: Lot. I assume Amanda, that the major and minor, could we combine them without causing too much flexibility I guess? Oh, I mean so what if Jiffy Lube wants to go in, Speaker 2: They're the exact same. Like, so that's the other thing. They are exactly the same. I didn't touch the permitting for those ones. And they're exactly the same, right? C two and industrial two are both special permits
and then it's not allowed anywhere else. Right. So it's like you could kind of just, just have a vehicle repair shop and Speaker 5: We define it. Do we, so this has to be defined somewhere, right? Speaker 2: Yeah. So we're gonna add a definition for it. Speaker 1: Yeah. Definition for for Speaker 5: Vehicle repair shop. Yeah. Okay. Speaker 2: But we could get rid of the major minor or Speaker 5: Vehicle repair and maintenance shop. Yeah. Speaker 1: Yes. Which could cover oil changes. It could oil change Speaker 5: Place, it could be a tire repair place, it could be something like that. You know, automotive, Speaker 1: Minor automotive Speaker 5: Or just combine them just like,
'cause it's the same permit regime, it's special permit in those two districts. So. Yep. I don't think we have to have two. Speaker 2: I don't, I don't think so. So we could actually delete G five. Yeah. Speaker 5: And then define, define vehicle repair and maintenance. Speaker 1: All right. And I'll say, just going briefly on on that notion of the storage of vehicles by say an auto dealer and that that kind of was real problematic when that was happening up in the
industrial park in East Natick. Oh, Speaker 9: Because Speaker 1: Doing that they, they had and that, so, and it was, it was problematic 'cause that was not what they were expecting for, I mean the industrial park has business but having a sea of cars waiting to get shipped somewhere else is, and that may have then ultimately gone away. Speaker 2: So the next question comes down to is G eight and I guess this is a preference of the board. So you have commercial parking lot or a parking garage,
but then you also have filling and service station and it kind of always feels like those are two separate things. Like you could have a parking lot without a gas station, but then does gas station go stay in this category or do we put it up into retail? Like these are my Speaker 5: Good question. Speaker 2: These are my questions of like, and I Speaker 5: Think that makes sense to me. Putting it into a retail. Yeah. Right. I mean commercial parking lot or parking garage and filling our service station. That's bizarre. Why would we have those? Speaker 1: No, although picture, picture
that being a charging station as it may later go on. Speaker 5: But commercial parking lot or parking lot means you are charging people to park there. Someone's going there for that use. I'm going to park on this site and pay somebody money to park there. Yeah. And then filming our surface station, like that's part of it doesn't fit. It does not fit. Speaker 1: So it's a, it's in effect a commercial. Not quite, it's two Speaker 5: Things. Public parking lot, right? No it's not a public parking lot. It's a commercial parking lot. Yeah. And I don't can do we have any anywhere Speaker 2: Kind of, it depends on how you look at it. Speaker 5: Aside from town, Speaker 2: If you go up to
what is Flutie Pass on the Framingham side and Speaker 1: Oh for the, Speaker 2: It's like a Triangle Express. Yeah. So that is a commercial. That's true. We don't have many of them. But that's, that is a commercial. Yeah, Speaker 5: I'd be in favor of like separating them. Those are completely different things. Okay. And I would say long term filling our service station is a retail use. Speaker 2: And is there a difference between filling and a, what is a service station? Is a service station. Like the repair That's Speaker 5: An old, yeah. So let's call it what it is. It's a, it's a garage. A gas station? No filling a service
Speaker 2: Station. So can we call it a gas station? And then 'cause isn't a service station the same thing as vehicle repair and maintenance service station Speaker 5: Is like mobile on Route 27. Here's North Main Street. What about if the gas station, it's a gas station with service or, or the old shell over by stop and shop. That's a service station and a filling station. So that's, Speaker 2: That's fine. Wouldn't, wouldn't you kind of just use the vehicle repair and maintenance and then gas station lines, you would just do both? They're both allowed. Speaker 5: It's got a retail store with Speaker 1: It. Separate them.
Speaker 2: But with, because if you had a retail, yeah, like if you had a retail store, you would use the retail and the gas station. You can combine them together as long as they're both used. Speaker 5: Yeah. Speaker 2: But Service station is a repair station. Speaker 5: You go and get your sticker and they'll do some minor repairs to it. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yes. Speaker 1: What's what, when does it shift into something else? Speaker 5: South Street. Speaker 1: South. South. A south, Speaker 5: Sorry. South Ave. Yeah. I mean those are, to me those are Speaker 1: Garages. Vehicle Speaker 5: Repair. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1: Okay. For and for, I know, I know more people who use those services because then they take the train into Boston and they come out and get the car. Speaker 2: The next one is more of just a question, like when you get a chance just to look over the permitting stuff, but G nine autobody, smoldering or soldering, sorry, soldering. Soldering or welding shop. We don't really have any of those in the commercial two. Speaker 1: Oh. What I can think of is coaching carriage, which is not, is that, that's not C two is it? No, Speaker 2: Like when I run up and down like RU route nine,
I don't physically run up Route nine but I, I don't see an A repair like auto body like, 'cause auto body is like more crash and like Speaker 5: Yeah. Again South Ave. What are those? What? What district are those in? Speaker 2: I actually think they're industrial one. Speaker 1: Oh is that, is that industrial Speaker 2: One? But I think we just changed it to dm. Speaker 1: I think so. Speaker 2: I think they're in dm. So it's just something to think about. So we have that. Then if you continue down the next use that we have that, these are our last ones for this H.
So it's transportation, communication and utilities. So one of my questions that we just spoke about was the commercial parking lot. Should that be under transportation H rather than vehicle sales? Yes. Okay. Speaker 5: Yes. Speaker 2: And so with this one here, I have to do a little bit more research because of the wireless communications facilities, there was like some regulations that were amended recently, like 2000 to make sure that it was like allowed by, right. If it's uncertain types of land and it could be regulated differently if
it was on private lands. But my one big question comes down to is H, we originally had a private land area be u to be used solely for landing, taking off storage of privately owned airplanes and helicopters. My understanding, can you say H one? H one, sorry. My understanding was is that if you were having an airplane or a helicopter, you actually had to have a private restricted land area, which is A-P-R-L-A-S. And it's all regulated. Like you have to go to special regulation. It's not just town regulation. So the question comes down to is do we call it what it is
and defer them to where they need to go. And then also more of like my own knowledge, why were we allowing airplanes and helicopters to be landing in the RG and the rss? Like Speaker 1: You know, the only, the only helicopter pad I remember is was the one, oh God, it by from the old Carling Brewery Speaker 5: From Path Works that well Was it? Was it, what was Boston Scientific? Speaker 1: Thank you. That's what it was. Speaker 2: Right. But that's up in the commercial. It's not, yeah.
And then the other question was, how come for hospitals you don't allow it? It was no, Speaker 1: And I think it was the ID that I'm guessing and that this I, it wasn't, I think predates us. It would be the I the idea of that someone just kind of said we only want this in in commercial business. I don't know. Leonard Speaker 5: Would be, you have to have a, you have to have a MedFlight is gonna fly somebody in. Well but Speaker 1: Not just that. But I mean yeah, this language is older than Speaker 5: Dirt. Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah. But I mean now they didn't have a helipad at at Leonard Morse.
Speaker 2: So I'll keep working on that one. H two, which is the next one down. We'll this is a little bit strain. Yeah. Speaker 5: Do we even need it? Do we even need it as a land use category? If Speaker 2: Peter wanted a airplane at his house. Right. Speaker 5: But yeah, but if it's gonna be regulated by Mass Aeronautic commission or FFAA. Yeah. I mean nobody wants a helipad in their middle of their neighborhood. I understand that. But Speaker 1: But it's governed, it would be governed by the P-R-L-A-S as as P-R-L-A-S. Speaker 2: It would be governed on, yeah, as a PR RLAS.
Speaker 1: So if that is already covered there, why would we need to toss something else? Speaker 2: Yeah. I'm not sure. It seems like Speaker 1: Some Speaker 2: Research on that one. A hospital will be exempt from it Speaker 1: Presumably, but Yeah. But I don think, I don't think, I certainly can't recall Leonard of Morse ever making use. Speaker 2: No, but I think if they had to, they they Speaker 1: Would've done it. They could Speaker 2: Figure it Speaker 1: Out as an emergency course. Speaker 2: Yeah. So that's one that just to continue to look at. 'cause it's just kind of like, it didn't make any sense why you're allowing it in the residential. Yeah, but then
Speaker 1: That's weird. Yeah, that's very weird. Sorry. Speaker 2: So those were ones there H two, this is a little bit, I'm not really understanding why we need it, but H two off street parking as here and after permitted, I am not sure what that means. So can we just replace it with commercial parking lot? Speaker 1: I can't think of another of an instance Speaker 2: Because if it's just in general off street parking for like a two family
or what is in nomen numeral five DI don't think we need to call that out in the use regulation schedule. Great. Yeah, because like it's also accessory two. Yeah. Speaker 1: So you don't need to No. Speaker 2: Okay. The next few H, so H four, H five, I think we could, they're all the same permitting. So I guess the question comes down to is can we just merge the two and we then direct them to nomen numeral three H, which is all about wireless communication facility.
But then we keep under H six, we clarify, it's just to keep 'em together. We keep H six, which is wireless communications facility. And that's indoors. Speaker 1: So sorry, you're talking about merge four and five. Speaker 2: Yep. Speaker 1: And then have six. Speaker 2: Just keep six. But I would just take indoor and put it comma indoor just so we could, when the definitions are together, yes. But they're not separated. So we have those. And then H seven, I think that the term is called telecommunications equipment facility.
And you could take all of that extra language and put it into the definitions. Speaker 1: And this is talking about like the Comcast, Verizon building on 1 35. Yeah, Speaker 2: Yeah. It just doesn't seem like we need all the definition language. And then with all that, we can actually remove three more endnotes or footnotes, whatever these are at this point. Yeah. Okay. This is another one. This is one that we were looking at for the SPRINGTOWN meeting. But this is K. Where are we? K, sorry. K. So there's two options that we can do.
So we can divide this up and have it K and have a new header be called light manufacturing uses. And then create a new used header category and have it be industrial uses. Or we can keep it all together either way. Totally. Cool. So this one here was K one is really just making it consistent with everywhere else. Whenever we've had a size over and under, we've always called it over and under. And in this case it was very strange because we have the permitting,
but then if it's over, there was an A, so it should be nothing on the line of what it's describing. And then it should be really a first, but I didn't wanna mix it all up so you couldn't see. So it'd be a under 5,000 square feet. And then we'd get the permitting and then B over 5,000 square feet and then delete what's in the text line. And in that we can also decrease the length of it because it's provided that no more than 5,000 square, it's clarifying it. The next two are kind of where we got held up at the spring,
which was wholesale bakery slash food production facility. And what I would call a non-residential wholesale or a wholesale non-residential commercial kitchen. So that would be, if you were going to allow it in the zoning, the residential zoning districts, it would be a non-residential. So it can't be in a home. And if you were going to do a home commercial kitchen, you would actually go put that up in the accessory uses up top in B. And so that's where, if you go up to B, the use header B, you'll see that it is a residential commercial kitchen.
I don't know if that's the best way to do it. And it's, I don't even know if it, you want a residential commercial kitchen in a residential neighborhood. So, so those are items to look at. Again, we continued the footnote, which is the same footnote we've had the entire time where you see the the two next to the permitting. That's just a certain size can't be exceed. 'cause we didn't want certain uses to dominate the entire. All right. So the next one is really, actually, sorry, the next two, which is K two or K two A. We're gonna delete K two A. 'cause that was just brought in.
When we merge the two, we'll put the SP up into the K two 'cause that's what it is. We have to delete another footnote. And this would be called specialty craft fabrication. And then we would take the extra language and put it in the definitions. How Speaker 1: Is that defined? Since craft can be very widely interpreted. Yeah, Speaker 2: I, my bylaws not on me right now, but if you look in your bylaw, it's there. I know Speaker 1: I Oh my, my new one. That's right Speaker 2: In the new one. Yeah. But it's not, that definition I do know is not
as great as the definition for creative production. Speaker 10: It's a long definition. Speaker 2: But please read the definition for creative production Speaker 1: Creation. Production manufacture, distribution, publishing, rehearsal performance, broadcast selling or teaching of visual arts, performing arts, applied arts, literature, heritage media, music. I remember this one. Information technology, communications media or digital content and applications or the invention design, prototyping, fabrication, assembly and packaging of ideas, concepts, theories
or parts as intermediate production materials for further processing or as consumer goods for sale. And I can tell you who wrote that. Speaker 2: What does it not include? Speaker 1: That this was, this was Ted wrote this. We will not be surprised. Speaker 2: So Speaker 1: Because we, we did say the same thing. What, what doesn't it cover? 'cause it, the wording of this seems, Speaker 2: Yeah. So that's why I think that we take a look at specialty craft fabrication, but then we also create an artisan and creative enterprise slash workshop
and then creative production. And then we have makerspace. So we actually divide it out into the different categories, which is what I propose. And then continuing down light manufacturing, removing all that definition, putting it into a definition. The next three were one, sorry, the next one is really, or the next two are really feeding off of what we did in J. So it's biotech manufacturing and pharmaceuticals. And then manufacturing of renewable and alternative energy. 'cause previously we had the research and development and the laboratories, but we didn't have manufacturing.
Speaker 1: Sorry, are you merging that biotech manufacturing and pharmaceuticals with K is, that's part of K four. Speaker 2: Well it, it was a question of does it stay in K or does it go to J because it is manufacturing separate use dairy. Speaker 5: Separate uses. Speaker 1: Yeah. No, but just it's not numbered. Yeah. The way, the way it's listed here, they fall under K four. Speaker 2: Oh it wouldn't, it would be a new one. I just haven't remember 'cause I was moving things so much that I gave up. Okay. But it's just, Speaker 1: Did that one, I didn't want that one. Get Speaker 5: Lost manufacturing of renewable or I mean is there, what does that mean? Does that mean generation of the energy? Speaker 2: So the reason why that one's in there,
just like we ever asked about the one in J, it's in there for the greener communities. Speaker 5: Right? But manufacturing, what does that mean? Making of solar panels or does that mean generation of the energy? Like putting in a solar field? Speaker 2: I gotta look as your definition in your bylaw. Yeah. Speaker 1: What would you like for Speaker 2: Manufacturing of renewable or alternative energy? You Speaker 1: Don't think that'll be in Speaker 2: Here? I don't know the definition off the top of my head. Speaker 1: I can't imagine it's in here. Speaker 2: So we can continue and we'll do more research on that one. Then. Craft brewer or craft beverage establishment, if you wanted to add that.
That's another one that a lot of communities do have in their, by Speaker 1: The way, I do have renewable or alternative energy research and development facilities. There is Speaker 2: A definition. Is anything about manufacturing Speaker 1: Development is the closest you get. Yeah. Speaker 5: And it's fine. I'm just asking if, are we trying to regulate solar, you know, solar arrays. Solar fields? Is that what that means? Speaker 2: No use. Speaker 1: No, we have, we have the regulation of like solar fields. Certainly placement of them. Yeah. Already in the bylaws. Yeah. Speaker 2: Yeah. Let me talk to Jillian on that one. Speaker 1: They do talk, there's, there is an entry here called renewable or alternative energy,
which says the following renewable or or alternative energy generation activities, products or technologies. Colon, solar, both PV and thermal wind, biomass power conversion or thermal technologies including r and d related to and manufacture of blah blah, blah. So, and it's, and going on to ultralow emissions, high efficiency wood pellet boilers, low impact hydro and so forth. So it went to page I
22 of the new packet. Speaker 2: So we'll figure that one out. The, so here's my next question is, and this is kind of more of, Speaker 1: And I took it to mean the Speaker 2: Separating the more clean manufacturing or light manufacturing with the more intensive. So what I was wondering is if the board wanted to actually create a new use header and these are more industrial uses. So we would take the ones that I show as deleted in what is K now and putting 'em into a new NI don't like the numbering of this.
If we do do it. 'cause I don't want it to go K. And then goes L for M two uses M for other uses. And then N industrial uses, I want this one up and under. But for the purposes of just this, I just left it. Yeah, just so it was, so what industrial uses would be is like warehouses, 3000 square feet or less commercial mover with associated storage facilities, wholesale storage, municipal waste facility, private waste facility, junk yards. And then you'll see N six N six is based off
of the previous one. Which is why I am going to this last to then go to West Natick is because do we need a line that says sand and gravel pits are no. Speaker 1: Well and is, if it is something it's not. But if something's not listed as a use, that it's not allowed. Is that by deficient denied? Correct. Correct. Speaker 2: Okay. Yes. Speaker 1: So, so no, we don't need that. No, we don't need it. Speaker 2: Okay, great. It was more of a just Speaker 5: Same for junkyards. Speaker 1: I could see something there Speaker 5: Have, it's all, no, Speaker 1: So Speaker 5: It's all Ns across the board. Speaker 1: That's true. Anything that is is N Yeah.
And junkyards are the only one where I kind kind of can picture somebody. 'cause I've seen them built up and collected in many places in my life. And I think that would be the, the one of those that I would, I would say should remain just to make the point. Speaker 9: No. Speaker 2: Okay. Speaker 5: Warehouses. Excluding retail warehouses. Speaker 2: And I don't even know if we need to, I left the excluding Speaker 5: Where does a, where does a last mile facility of an Amazon or something like that? Speaker 2: Well that's like, that was my other question is do we actually exclude retail warehouses?
'cause I'm not a hundred percent what a retail warehouse Speaker 1: Like is BJs could call itself if they're not here now, but as a retail warehouse. Speaker 2: But does that fall under, don't we have like a retail wholesaler or something like that? Higher up? I thought Speaker 1: We have the ancillary use of having a retail tucked away. Speaker 2: Yeah. But in something else at one point, yes. BJ's is a wholesaler in terms of its title, but it's actually just a retail establishment establishment. Speaker 5: It's not, yeah, you're not, you're not going in there necessarily to buy product to then resell it.
Either do something with it or resell it. Right. You go buy something in wholesale flowers, fish. Yeah. Right. Because Speaker 2: It's not, it's Speaker 5: A retail store. Speaker 2: Yeah, Speaker 5: It's wholesale club, but it's a retail store Yeah. That you and I can go into and buy. So I'm just, you know, it's a, it's a question. And we, I run into this all over the state. Okay. It we're doing distribution facility, you know, Charlton or wherever. Grafton. We just did one. What is that? Is it a warehouse? Yeah, it's a warehouse.
It's a last mile facility. Where do those fit in here? Do we want them in the bylaw? Speaker 2: And is that the same as FedEx? Is that a warehouse? Because it's technically packaged distribution, but it's, it's distribution. Speaker 5: Okay. Right. Speaker 2: But then could Amazon distribution be classified as that? Speaker 1: So it's a fine line. Yeah. Speaker 5: Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 2: Because is Amazon distribution center the same as a FedEx? Speaker 5: I mean, in general terms, Speaker 2: High level. Yeah.
Speaker 5: 'cause you'll Yes. Speaker 2: But then they are actually taking product. It's storing it for then distribution. Right. Speaker 5: FedEx is a package processing facility. They come in already in envelopes and they're just being Speaker 2: Dis distributed. Speaker 5: Amazon is product in the warehouse being picked, then packaged and then delivered. But it's not retail. Speaker 2: Yeah. Okay. And then private waste facility,
that's something that we've had. But Speaker 1: What is a, an example of a private waste facility? Like a dump, Speaker 2: A private dump. Yeah. Okay. Do we need that? Like Speaker 1: If we do not list it Speaker 2: And it's not there and it's not Speaker 1: There Speaker 2: And then we can also delete quite a few footnotes. And the only thing is at FinCon last in the spring, they did ask if there was a way that we could have it be where it's large chunks of reserved that it be like C through E reserved rather than C reserved,
D reserved, E reserved. Just for the purpose of not having it go for six years. Speaker 1: Makes that makes sense to me. Me too. Speaker 2: They're all reserved. 'cause they're, so this would be it for all of the sections of the use regulation schedule. There would be one more in the spring of amending the use regulation schedule. And that is going to be more like just housekeeping, where it's taking footnotes and deciding if we're gonna have 'em B, A or B or sorry, A or a num.
Like letters or numbers. Yeah. But also making sure that it's in the proper order that we want it in and that everything is reading the correct way we want it. So it's a final review. So that's what we have for that one. Speaker 1: And we specialize in that. Speaker 2: What's Speaker 1: That? I said we specialize in that. Speaker 2: Another one that is not in the, in the bylaw or in here is just noman numeral H signs and advertising devices. It's not in your packets. Speaker 1: And why wouldn't, I mean it's, isn't that covered under the sign bylaw?
Speaker 2: Oh, this is actually the signed bylaw. So Natick Center Associates is looking to see if they can amend the Natick center section of the bylaw to allow for alternative signs or additional signs for various uses. So that's what they were looking at. I recommend that a working group be established to better understand what they're looking for, to make sure it's consistent. Because they are looking for like sandwich boards. But sandwich boards may not be appropriate in all other parts of the community. So if you open it at one, you gotta be careful of
how it's one regulated and two, what it is. So Speaker 1: There there is, in a hundred years ago, when I first joined the planning board, I worked on a Speaker 2: We have it. Okay. We have that. It's just really long. Speaker 1: Yeah. What you, what was it? What was Speaker 2: It? It was more like reregulate. It was a bylaw, like Speaker 1: A regulation. Speaker 5: Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 2: It would, you would honestly, I would take parts of it and put it into the bylaw than reference it as regulations. 'cause it was a lot of good material in it. It's just, I think it was like 15 pages. Yeah,
Speaker 1: It was, it was, it was long. And, but yeah, there, there are things I wouldn't recommend taking and plugging it in. Yeah. But the construct of some of it Speaker 5: Is, is the intent to have more control over design and consistency of well design, Speaker 1: Not to avoid clutter. Yeah. Is one. And to not have a kind of a sign competition. Yeah. Speaker 2: Yeah. So the big things were san the big, the reason why this got brought up was because of sandwich boards. Because sandwich boards are currently not allowed. But some of the businesses,
especially when they're on the second floor Speaker 1: Or a side street Speaker 2: Or a side street, no one knows that they're there. So it's how do you bring attention to businesses that are not there? And also, but this is also a landowner thing as well because like with the Clark's block, if you are not familiar that you have to go to two summer street to get in, you'll go and try every single door and it nothing tells you to go to two summer street. And then there's no on the outside. No. Like directory saying where to go. So. Speaker 5: And what about facade signs?
Just, you know, regular signs on hanging over. Speaker 2: Well that's the other question is, is that, do you want to keep them flat to the building as they currently are? Or do you want them like more of like a blade projected sign, which are actually easier for drivers and pedestrians? Isn't Speaker 7: That why you're suggesting a, a working group? Because they could have utter chaos. Absolutely. If the signs aren't regulated well regulated thoroughly. Yeah. Speaker 5: Yeah. Speaker 1: And also, I mean, for some consistency with, for larger businesses, you cannot have every
business of every size with a, with a projecting sign. Speaker 2: Yeah. So I would like to have a working group. 'cause I think that it's opportunity, but also if you don't regulate it, it will Speaker 5: Turn the key. I don't know, Tara, if there's something you looked at previously, and Amanda, I think I mentioned this to you before, just something to think about. I'm not advocating it, but something to look at is signed bylaws that are not in the zoning bylaw. Yep. Right. They are general bylaws, which allows more enfor, more ability to enforce
if it's a general bylaw and things like amortization, like if there's a design, you know, a certain design you want and you having it off the zoning bylaw allows for amortization. Okay. And you can achieve consistency a lot more quickly that way, I guess. So something to think about. Speaker 2: Well, no, it would be good. I've never actually worked anywhere where the signed bylaws been in the zoning bylaw. It's always been in the general. Speaker 1: Right. Okay. Right. Speaker 2: So that might be an opportunity to actually, but even with when the signed bylaws in the general
and the planning board had jurisdiction, sure. You could create design guidelines, just like an example would be Shopper's World. There's design guidelines specifically on everything on that. So you could still do those or you could have the design review board. Speaker 5: Yes. Speaker 2: Take that on you, Speaker 1: You my and my Bone to pick with with Shopper's World is that you, when they went through the big overhaul, if I am walking from business A and I'm trying to, to get to business CI have to go out and stand in the middle of the street or in the middle of the driveway
because there are no signs You can see it. That you can look forward and say, oh, Marshalls is there. It is, it it is absolutely maddening. Speaker 2: That's a self-created problem for them because the, they're the bylaw actually does allow 'em to create blade signs. They just don't because we, even the planning board in the premium camp said the same thing and they asked them every time you come in with blade signs. So, Speaker 1: So hopefully Speaker 2: Someone will Speaker 1: Listen talk, talk about like biting off your nose to bite your face. It's like, okay. And, and it, it did.
I I, I'm not the only person I've seen standing in the middle of the street going like, which boat? Oh, it's right there. Yeah. Speaker 2: Yeah. Speaker 1: And they used to, because they did use to have signage that Oh yeah. That Speaker 5: Hung down. Yeah. Right. Yeah. You knew where you Yeah, guess Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 2: No, Speaker 5: The old shoppers world. The old, Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 2: The other when it was the other way. When it was the Speaker 5: Other. When it was the spaceship. Speaker 1: Yeah. Cool. Speaker 2: All right. So the last one that we have is the West Natick. So in your, in your packets tonight, there is a copy of that as well. I think I might have emailed this one out. So cool.
Alright, so this one here, we're looking at it. Looking at it, looking at it continues to evolve. Speaker 1: Sorry. And we're looking at this one in our folders. Yep. Under Speaker 5: Section three N three N Speaker 2: Corridor. Speaker 1: Sorry. Speaker 2: And we could actually call it three L now because we got rid of outdoor or indoor recreation, Speaker 1: But, got it. Speaker 2: All right. So wait, Speaker 1: Is this is neighborhood corridor? Yep. Could you knock out one of the os? So it's corridor, not corridor. Oh hmm.
Section three N Neighborhood corridor. Oh, that's in the Speaker 2: Title. Oh, in the, okay. Yeah. Yes, sorry. Oh geez. I was looking through the document. I'm like how No, it's in Speaker 1: The title. Okay. No, Speaker 2: It's in the title. I'll fix it after. Okay. So what this is is this is actually built out of the, what we call transect subdistricts. So we have T five all the way through T one. I'm not un having anyone fully understand all of these yet. The big items are going to be T fives. Wait. So Speaker 1: Can backing up one overall purpose. Speaker 2: Overall purpose is to allow for a consistent corridor
that creates a pedestrian and neighborhood setting along a major commercial corridor. Because we do have walkers, runners, bikers that travel for both recreation and transportation purposes. But then we also have people cutting north to south to get from the south side to the north side and the north side to the south side. We have pockets of residential spread throughout the commercial corridor. But it seems like that they have been planned just by being put there. We also have quite a few areas where common landowners own a lot of parcels
but have different uses on each of the parcels. So it provides an opportunity for assemblage. It then also allows, if you go in this direction, by creating sub-districts within the district, we avoid an overlay district. So we don't have layers on top of layers. But what it allows you to do is to kind of transition and flow through the corridor at various scales. There there's also a provision in here that allows you to do transitions. So you may go from a high density to a, from a T five, which is high density to a mid, which is a T four.
But for a certain area you could actually allow for the higher density on the lower parcel to allow for that transition. So it's not such an abrupt. Also with this being said, and this may not stay in here 'cause this might be a bigger piece than what we need to take on at this time is T two everything on the north side of the tracks, which is a residential zoning district in their rs, a lot of 'em are potentially non-conforming for some minor piece. The question is, is can we actually use the T two as an opportunity to pull those into conformity
Speaker 5: On the north side of the tracks Speaker 2: On the north side of the tracks. So it's the single family zoning district. So you could actually amend their intensity regulations. We would still leave at single family. We wouldn't be changing the use. We would just be fixing the intensity regulation schedule to allow for those uses or those properties to be conforming. So is it the like setbacks of them or It's setbacks at site size? Yeah, lot size. Yeah. So it would allow for them to be conforming. So we aren't seeing as many different uses.
It kind of also grabs into the other big project that we're not taking on right now, which is how do we manage all these residential zoning districts because they're non-conforming, which increases the number of variances or section six findings. Yes. But yet they can't do anything about it because they might just be lot size. So that's one piece there. So therefore the overall goal is this consistency to allow for redevelopment of the 1 35 corridor in concert with Natick 2030, which does call out areas of this
and also good planning practice using form-based code. But the Natick way Speaker 5: In the, in the extent of the corridor, the geographic extent is what Speaker 2: The geo, so you would go from the Natick Framingham municipal line. So we would be looking at that junkyard. Yep. You would also be looking at the south side of 1 35 in that area. Area because it is a lot of one and two families. Predominantly two families. This is south side, south side of 1 35. Yeah. Okay. Speaker 5: So from the Framingham line going east now. Yep. Okay, Speaker 2: Let me, I can just pull up a map.
So if you look at, and I've been building a table for all of this as well. So we can actually look at every single little piece. But when we're looking at the, that area before you start going up the hill, there's multi being eastbound. Eastbound, if you're on the Framingham Natick municipal line. Yep. And you're looking east past Wendy's. Past Wendy's. So you have these commercial uses on your left you have these residential uses on your right. However, on your right you have a landowner who owns quite a few of those parcels.
There was like maybe an auto repair, there's a garage there. But they own a big chunk of those. So this is an opportunity to allow for creating the entrance to Natick to kind of be more appropriate. That would not be at the same density though, as the other areas. So what you would see is on the east side, sorry, lemme just pull the map. Speaker 11: Okay, Speaker 2: So right here, here's the Framingham Natick municipal line. And if you look at basically where it says Tamarack Road,
so if you took Tamc Road and took it down to 1 35, that's where the hill peaks. So junkyard medical building, Wendy's, those would actually be T four. So those are your connectors allowing for commercial development and or residential on the south side of 1 35, which is the Framingham Natick municipal line all the way up to the Natick, I think it's Natick Gardens or what is the residential piece on the Cedar Gardens?
Yeah. So you would go, you would not be doing cedar gardens like the PCD would be, but this neighborhood right here would be zoned T three. T three allows for townhouses to family, which is already existing. But we would be taking the intensity regulation schedule to create those as conforming lots 'cause of a lot of them are not, this is what's now PCD? No, this is actually zoned, I think it's R three. Oh okay. Sorry. Yeah. Let me just pull up an online map for a second. So it's this area that's zoned red would be T three.
So we're taking general residential and making it into that. We'd be taking this limited commercial and making that T four. Then when you go up to the peak of the hill, these are all this red on the north side of the 1 35. That is all two family and three families. However, conformity of lots, we wouldn't wanna see high tall buildings at these locations because 'cause they're tower. Yeah. And because they would be like on the backside, the tracks are there, but they're not big. So what we would do is be creating this as T three as well,
which allows for the two family, three families. And the height is very consistent with what's out there now. So it'd be keeping the height but just making those lots conforming. The big thing with those parcels, if you're on 1 35, is they would be required to maintain the streetscape. So extending of any sidewalks or min, like multi-use paths. But then also they would be incorporating street trees along their property frontages so it's not right on the street. So and and they have enough setback there. We would not at this time be touching anything in the green,
which is the PCD 'cause that's a different project in its entirety. So then we have right here, which is NA crossing, here is the train station, here is the parking garage. And then we have Boin Lane and then we have a couple other parcels. What would we, what we would be doing is taking, because the hill basically cuts right at Natick crossings. We would be taking NATO crossings, which is the commercial. We would be taking the MAs dot parking lot 'cause there are actually some conversations with them on potential reuse of that LE site as well.
Taking the Verizon, no Comcast, sorry, building in the rear of 2 47 and the recently approved learning experience. And then also quite a few of these parcels. And that would be T five higher density allow for taller buildings pulling everything closer to the street, but then also doing a reverse effect of the back, doing step downs in the back. So the people in along the other, on the north side of the tracks don't get back, don't feel like they're completely hovered, but also allowing for the parking
to go on the rear and to the sides. So it's looking at those things as you get away from na, the from the train station and a few parcels down, you would then transition back into T four, which are the connectors, which still allows for residential, it allows for different types of uses. It allows for multifamily or mixed use buildings, but it's at a smaller scale than T five. 'cause you're doing a step down that would be focusing here. The difficulty we do find is right in this little bit
of area, which is on the south side, I think it's called Homer Street or Home Street Homer. And it's because there's townhouses there. So what we would be doing is taking those townhouses and putting 'em in T three because might as well be consistent with the exact use, which is townhomes would be allowed in T three as you continue along and you start to approach Mill Street. Mill Street would then become a T five. 'cause T five is where you have your major corridor or your nodes. So we would take those parcels and make them T five. However, with the caveat which, which parcels, I'm sorry.
So it would be like Cohen's and Obie Hill. Yeah. The one piece that we would not change into T five though is the towns parcel at 180 1 central. That's where the cobblers, we would actually create that. It's a T one, which is parks and open space. Sorry, where Speaker 1: Where is that? That's the memorial. Henry Wilson. Oh, okay. Oh, cobblers. Yeah, that's what we, yeah, yeah. Speaker 2: So that would be the same thing on Mill Street. So we'd be creating the T fives. Then as you continue along, it would then drop back down into T four. And in this area we don't have to worry
as much about the residentials to the north or the south because there's such large setbacks, but there's also wetlands. So that's our bigger constraint in these parcels. Then you would cross mills or Speed Street. Speed street would be the same thing. We would do T five. And then as you continue out, it would be T four. And again in the T four, which is where the, there's like a Dunking Donuts, there's kids strong, there's auto repair, there's the veterinarians, and then you get out to the dog park and the, I think it's the American leg, that would all be T four as well because you're transitioning back out to the site.
So, and you also don't have to worry about residents because that's where the army lab, or not the Army labs, the National Guard, national Guards. So, so with all that being said, what the draft is in your bi, in your package tonight goes through the purpose and intent. It goes through kind of the same outline that we've been using for the DM or the center gateway, which is very simple, quick and easy to understand. The difference with this one is, is where we're pulling in more of the form. So we do call out things that have to be specific
to the T one, T two, T three, T four, T five. Each of the, each of those do have their own titles just so people can also refer to 'em rather than T one, T 2, 2 3 Speaker 1: The thing like the the things like neighborhood Speaker 2: Districts and Yeah, yeah, exactly. And so yeah, so we would then, yeah 'cause they're neighborhood, so it's one neighborhood center that's a T five 'cause we're trying to create that higher density area of concentration. Then you have neighborhood connector, those are the corridor connectors between the different centers.
But then you have neighborhood residential and those are the townhouses and like the two and three FAMs. And then if we do move forward with the T two, that would be neighborhood single residential. 'cause it's remaining single family residential. And then T one is conservation open space. We may not need T one, but it was just to help offset visually to show that there was consideration for open space. With all of this, we are gonna have to build out the use regulation schedule
to add into another few lines, which is fine. We have to actually pull the intensity regulation and either put it into this new section or what we can do is actually put the intensity regulation for this right underneath B. So we would have all the intensity regulation schedules in four B, so it'd be like four B, four B, C, or four C, something like that. So it was all there. 'cause we don't need them in this section. It's just the format doesn't meet the same because of the way we're allowing for setbacks
but also the transitions. So with all that, the draft I think is ready for like actual like review, which means that rescheduling my original schedule to actually have the public better understand, to have something to understand that it's not the final. Speaker 1: So do we have the, that schedule? Speaker 2: So no, I have to update that schedule. Okay. And the reason why I say that is because with the update of this, 'cause I was gonna wait, but now that we have this,
it's easier for people to understand where we're going if we actually have a template rather than having them come in and be like, oh I want this, I want that. Speaker 1: And it's, I mean it's It's a coherent whole that you're presenting. Speaker 2: Exactly. And so the reason why I also put T two at the end, and we don't need T one if we don't need it, is that we may find, okay, we're not there with the single fam stuff yet and just focus on the 1 35 corridor and you can add T two after. Speaker 1: And that doesn't, and I think with T one wearing my open space hat on,
but just the idea that that is, it is an environmental justice neighborhood it that does have severe shortcomings in Speaker 2: Yeah. And so with it in the designs, each of the tees have different design requirements except for the single fam and the neighborhood residential, which is T two, T three. But T four and T five are creating more of like frontages that are inviting and open. But then also providing an opportunity to create like pocket parks if they don't need all the parking that's surface parking.
And then also creating park or if there are residentials having open space available to the residents of those parcels. 'cause that's also important when you're allowing increased density. Speaker 1: Does it make sense to do any sort of land banking in places like that where you want to you, you hope that you're not gonna need all the parking and so Speaker 2: They Yeah, they can. Whenever I've done land banking, it's more of like in the, the actual decision rather than the bylaws because it's more of a conversation and it's an agreement. Like if you're gonna, you approve it and then they can land
bank it and they just send you a letter. But it is good. I've seen it actually where they've land banked it and used it for like CrossFit space, which is actually pretty cool. Speaker 5: So stepping back on the big picture here. Yep. Amanda, I mean so a form-based code approach is I think really interesting and it's hard to get the concepts across what, so a question, a linear corridor like this, right? Yep. It's pretty linear. Is the research
is the best practice telling us that form-based code approach is gonna achieve what we want to achieve with the shape, the length of this corridor, the multiple parcels we're getting at like yeah. Speaker 2: And that's why we are the Speaker 5: Scale is this is this approach we're taking hopefully gonna achieve the scale of what we want to see here Speaker 2: Of Yeah, I think so. 'cause that's why it's not fully form-based code. It's more of like a hybrid between what we were doing with the center gateway
and like what they do with that, with the different transects. But it's not fully traditional foreign based code. But you could definitely, because you're trying to create those concentration concentrations on those keynote nodes. Yeah. And then allowing for those connectors. So Speaker 5: Is there enough in what's being proposed or let me suggest this, it it, is it better that we are incentivizing assemblage versus lot by lot incremental development here?
Speaker 2: Yeah. You want to incentivize retaining of the large lots or incentivizing assemblage Speaker 5: Is is that's part of this. Speaker 2: Yeah. And then another piece that we would want to talk about is if you had, and this is what they actually did in the Newton Needham tech park, where if you actually have two lots and you put like say you have a lot, I have a lot. If you put your open space requirement on the lot line and I put my open space requirement on the lot line, you could actually decrease the amount of open space because we've combined our open space to actually create a bigger open space than
what it would've been normally decreasing it elsewhere. And that is something that we could also incentivize here because we are trying to incentivize that also the rear alleyways or connectors between the parcels. So you don't have to go out to all the different parcels. Some parcels are not gonna be able to do that just because Bowden lane's there, mill street's there and sp street's there. But Right. Speaker 5: And if I'm an individual property owner Yep. On a small, a smaller lot in this corridor and I I just wanna develop my lot. Yep.
Speaker 2: You can totally do that. Speaker 5: You can do that. I know Speaker 2: You Speaker 5: Talking about what incentivizes you to do something Speaker 2: More Speaker 5: Collaborative. Yeah. And I guess, you know, if, if there's multiple landowners there who just don't wanna play ball with each other, but now we have zoning in place that says you can do these particular things on your lot, what is that gonna achieve in terms of a, you know, a density, what's it, what's it gonna Speaker 2: Achieve? Yeah, well it's got built in density bonuses as well. So if you can get more in there, but we can take a look at that where we either allow for higher density if you have a certain size lot
and a lower density, kinda what we did with the center gateway where we did 7,000 and 10,000 really try to encourage the assemblage 'cause that is the goal to assemble Speaker 5: In our, the underlying zoning, existing zoning. And now we're gonna come in with this, how is that gonna work from a, from a conformity standpoint, Speaker 2: We would delete the underlying zoning in its entirety. So Speaker 5: These lots would then be Speaker 2: Zoned into the very, it would be zoned series wouldd neighborhood corridor. But then it would be zoned subbed out into the various Ts.
Speaker 5: Are they gonna be non-conforming? Speaker 2: No. So that's why I was building the table to make sure that we have as many parcels conforming as possible. I think right now I only have like one or two and they're not the big parcels on 1 35. Okay. They're the parcels that are like in between kind of more when you are on the Framingham Nat municipal line. Okay. Speaker 5: Okay. Speaker 2: So it's those ones and then it's tricky on the north side of the tracks. But like I said, we don't have to do that right now. Speaker 5: Okay. Speaker 2: So that's kind
of where it's at. Speaker 1: Exciting. Speaker 5: It is and it's centered around West A station. I mean that's kind of the goal Speaker 2: Here. Yeah. Speaker 5: Yeah. Speaker 2: Westlake station and then, because even with Mill Street and SP Street, mill Street is kind of constraint because of the topography in that one. Yeah. But then SP street intersection, that's even more constrained 'cause you basically have water on two of the corners. You have CVS, which has got the topography issues and then you have Roche brothers, but there's also water.
Yeah. Right there as well. Almost Speaker 1: On actually three of the clusters. Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah. Looking at, yeah, Speaker 2: There's Speaker 1: Somebody who passes through there all the time. Speaker 5: Yeah. The half mile radius, right. Of a typical walk shed of a, of a transit station, it goes basically to Mill Street. Right? So you we've got almost all of that district, that corridor. Yeah. Within that and you know, federal programs that promote TOD development and things like that all sort of use that half mile radius as the one of the criteria. So I hope
that landowners in this area are educated about some of those tools that they could use to finance their projects because that's squarely, it's defacto eligible. Any, any site within a half mile of West Annex Station or Natick Center is defacto eligible to seek these financing pro for for vertical development, for transit oriented development eligible. Not approved. Yeah. But eligible to, you know, seek it.
So yeah, Speaker 2: I, and that was the other goal is to make sure like, 'cause if you are on the north side of 1 35 right now, there's not really a sidewalk but there's a large pedestrian. But then it's like, do you actually need two exact sidewalks or could we do kind of like what they did in Watertown in other communities where you do the multi-use path where it's more bike, where it's a wider sidewalk but it's more of a pavement. And so you can go in and out on that way, Speaker 5: That's Speaker 2: Platform. But then again you have the pinch point at Speed Street and 1 3 5. Speaker 5: So what, what is the MBTA thinking about
their parking lot? Speaker 2: There's questions of, if there could be some collaboration. Actually they had reached out just recently. Speaker 1: Do you know what they're doing elsewhere or they're doing, are they doing something elsewhere at other stations, other towns? Speaker 2: They're looking at other stations as well. Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah. So trying to get a sense of what they're looking for visually. Speaker 2: Yeah. I think there's a lot of things. 'cause even with the off convers off topic, but the plaza, the plazas on or not the plazas, the rest stops on the various town,
like state owned ones. Those are also under consideration. Yeah. Speaker 5: Every administration does this from Governor King on up. Hey, we've got state land, we've got properties around train stations and let's, you know, we've got this huge inventory of land, we have this housing crisis, whatever, let's, Speaker 9: You Speaker 5: Know, and just look, I, I deal with it Mass, DOT all the time in, in NBTA. They're great people, great intentions to do things. It just takes forever. And some of the RFP processes that, that happen
for development, right? So West Natick would be a great co-development, right? Sometimes life is too short for developers to go through the process. Alewife station in, in Cambridge right now, that was a highly publicized RFP for partnering with the MBTA to basically demolish that entire station, rebuild it and have mixed use. That's great. But that's a 15 or 20 year partnership. And Just the reality is developers are not in
a 15 or 20 year game. They have capital they have to deploy now and they want a return in seven to 10 years. So matching the reality of how development happens and a process to procure, you know, a public piece of land for development that we, this state just does not, we just don't get it. It's done differently elsewhere. I'm not saying that's better or whatever. I'm just telling you it's, it's much quicker in other places than trying to do it here in Massachusetts. We just have not figured out the procurement
and how to match up those timelines. And that's why you see not a lot happening around public assets like this that could really be beneficial for transit oriented development and transit ridership. But again, well-intentioned intentioned. So Speaker 2: Yeah. Speaker 1: So, so next, next steps, next steps Speaker 2: In taking this forward. Next steps is short, short Speaker 1: Of, Speaker 2: So as of right now we would only have I think two meetings or public hearings on the July 23rd meeting. And if we reserve the rest of that time to continue
to work on these in terms of like before we advertise, that would be great to Speaker 1: Have one of those hearings be the January 23rd or so. July 23rd. Speaker 2: So no, have, have July 23rd be the working, another working group like this. So let me go back and informalize more and then commence the public outreach process for the West Natick effort. But I want one more of like these kind of meetings before we have the actual public hearings. Speaker 1: Especially since we're, we're showing Speaker 2: A couple of Speaker 1: Faces Speaker 2: That would be helpful. But so keeping the 23rd light
with only the two, the two projects. Speaker 5: So we got August 13th and I Speaker 1: Think I'm, I'm very happy to do that. Okay. Because, and it, what we're doing with the other parts of the, of the zoning bylaws that feels pretty much can Speaker 2: Yep. With all that being said, yeah we have aug or sorry, July 23rd, July 30th I think it was August is August two in a Speaker 1: Row. Yeah. Because we don't have anything until July 23rd. Okay. Speaker 2: Yeah. Speaker 5: But two in a row. The 23rd and the 30th. Yes. Okay. Three in a row. No, wait a minute. What am I doing?
Speaker 1: And then August 11th, Speaker 5: No, the 13th. 13th 13th. Yeah. August 13th. Okay. Sorry. Speaker 2: Yeah. August 13th and then we wouldn't meet again until the TW August 27th. So the goal would be on the 23rd to do a final one of these if that's okay. And then the 30th kind of get rolling. Speaker 1: 'cause that's really, do you want, is that one, would that be a, the first public hearing? Speaker 2: No, I wouldn't put the first public hearing until August 3rd. Third, sorry. 13th. Okay. But I just want at least one more public, one more meeting
where we're like this to finalize it and then we can request that. And then, Speaker 9: Because Speaker 2: A few of these we can I think knock out very quickly like the flood. Speaker 5: So how does this match up with the warrant opening? And Speaker 2: So what actually might happen, and this is a request for Jamie is one so we can ensure that we have enough time is to call the special within the annual specifically for this or any zoning articles that we need that I almost feel like it would be a better option just Speaker 1: So definitely. Okay. Speaker 2: Okay. So the timing for the warrant on that would be different.
Yeah. Would give us more time. But I still want to keep moving things forward Speaker 5: And I'm just, I think that's off off. I'm just, I'm looking ahead into September. We have a Thursday meeting on the 25th. Is that still correct or, or kind of off a Speaker 1: Wednesday that Yes, because of I think high holidays. Speaker 2: Yeah, we had a high Holli, I forget which one it is. Speaker 1: Yeah, Speaker 5: Yeah. Okay. Just making sure that's right in my calendar. Speaker 2: Yeah. Speaker 5: 10th and the 25th. Yeah. Yep. Okay. Speaker 2: Oh it's Rosh Hashanah was on the 22nd through the 24th of September.
So that's why we we're meeting Thursday on that week. Yep. Speaker 5: And Amanda, are there visuals that we're developing? Speaker 2: We're gonna be developing 'em. Yeah. I have to send it over to Rich because my GIS is what I call the light edition. I can't do anything Speaker 1: That light. Speaker 2: Yeah. And so Rich has been putting things together for me. So you know, you'll have visuals, you'll have quite a bit of stuff. So Speaker 10: Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 1: That's, this is this, I think this is really exciting. Speaker 2: Yeah. Speaker 1: And just using playing kind of, or cooperating with the topography of the area is something
that feels very radical and yet very reasonable because you respond to topography whether you realize it or not. Speaker 2: Yeah. And if this, like if this works the way we want it to work and it's the way it's planned to work, like it actually, we could take it to the other side of the center gateway on the east central side. Yes. Because that side also has commercial corridors, but that would be a later. Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 9: Cool. Speaker 10: Alright, Speaker 2: So I, that's all I have for that right now. Speaker 1: At some point you and I should sit down
and I know there have been several things we've talked about putting together working groups for Speaker 2: Yeah. We could have a working group even like just getting one together now or like Speaker 1: For, for Speaker 2: West Natick, but also the use regulation schedule. Okay. That'd be greatly appreciated. Just so we're not pushing up against the deadline. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 2: And we can wait till the next meeting on the 23rd if you wanted to wait till then to figure out who wants to be on the working group. Unless it's, yeah. Speaker 1: Good. And again it, I'm, I think what I'll probably do is make sure that I'll encourage
Andy and Alan to review the this, because I think more than anything I wanna make sure that they're, they feel like up to speed about the concepts that are being proposed, Speaker 2: Which is great. Speaker 1: So Speaker 2: Cool. Speaker 1: So one for that and one for the other bylaws and yeah, and I, I can talk with folks about that. Cool. And see if, see if we can get those named at the next meeting. Speaker 2: Awesome. So I do have other things but they're not on Zoom. Speaker 12: Yes, I I know you are. I feel, I
Speaker 1: Feel the laser. Okay. Speaker 2: So can we just move on to the next topic? Speaker 1: What's that Speaker 2: Next topic? Planning board, planning board meeting committee reports, assignments, Speaker 1: Lots of things happening I'm sure Speaker 2: As always. So few quick real kind of exciting things. So committee preservation committee has now opened up their CPA funding request applications, which that would make a project eligible for consideration for funding at the fall 2025 town meeting. It does require review and recommendation by the CPC to receive funding, but
before that they actually have to go through the letter of interest, which we've actually we're on our fifth letter of interest, we had our fifth meeting today, which is actually really great. And so real quick, if anyone is actually interested or just bored and have nothing to do, the CPC has a website and so it goes right through. It's Speaker 1: With, it's within the, the town website. Speaker 2: Yep. So it's got all the reports. So it's got the full report, it has the full report, or sorry, the report minus the appendix and then just the appendix. If you feel like just taking out those notification,
that letter of interests are always open, it's ongoing rolling, but the CPEC funding request application has just opened and it closes, I think it's like August 8th. So if you're interested in filing an LOI, you would just click here, it would take you to the portal. Or once you've got your LOI report, you can actually click into here. But what this does is it takes you directly into OpenGov. That's always fun. Then if you're jumping back, hopefully that, yeah, cool. It goes through the process. These all pop out, you can actually see them better. And if you're actually interested in seeing LOI reports,
what you would do is actually go right here and all of the reports for LOI are here. So every project that goes through the LOI process does get this thorough report and it tells you exactly what you need, what you need to do, items for you to be considering when you're fully developing your whole entire project. Then cool, it goes through and this is an area that is of great importance to an applicant. This has the checklist so it mirrors the application so they can actually just pull it down and better understand what is being requested of them. The same thing for the LOI.
So it goes through the checklist, it tells you everything you need to know so you can kind of go through that. And then it goes for the categories as well. Then it goes and it provides everybody with the general and the different category evaluation forms. And then here is the fall 2025 funding timeline. If you're bored and want to know about that, that's pretty cool. And then the CPCs information and then what is eligible, what's not. So Speaker 5: Eligible, eligible applicants are who Speaker 2: So eligible, Speaker 1: It's not the applicants themselves. But you mean what sorts of projects? Speaker 5: Well applicants, Speaker 2: Yeah. So who's,
Speaker 5: Who's filling out the L oi? Who's, yeah, Speaker 2: Yeah, so who, there's a wide variety. So it can be a government to entity municipality, you can be a nonprofit that specializes in the category that you're looking at or it can be a private organization but you have to, there's certain criteria and then we do call that out in the plan and also in the CPC application. But we are consistent with master law chapter 44 B, which is what we use for those. And then if you, this is a table which it kind of tells you what kind of projects are actually eligible underneath the different categories.
So there are technically three buckets, which is open space protection and outdoor recreation are one bucket community and affordable housing is another bucket. And a historic preservation is a third bucket. However, in the term for the purposes of evaluating a project, we didn't want a project that was creating a park with like play structures in more impervious service to be Jeff, like be basically be discounted in terms of open space protection. So we look at them separately, but they're still coming outta one bucket. And Speaker 5: What are we seeing for proposals? Yeah,
Speaker 2: So L lo i one was the fence around the bacon library down in South Natick. So it would be a complete restoration of the fence. So that would be one that was $290,000 request. Again, the LOI process is not an approval, it's just to help you get ready. Speaker 1: It, it's the, yeah, the check to make sure that it's going through and yes, that what you're proposing is in fact eligible Speaker 2: Within the C and it also like it's staff so we're helping you like hey, don't forget you have to go through the board of health and get
these permits and stuff like that. The second one was also on the break bacon library, but it was an interior and that was to basically reopen up the mezzanine in the interior, remove walls and then repair or actually replace the HVAC system to allow for that to be completely opened up and restored. So that was one part. And Speaker 1: I was just gonna say, and, and one of the challenges because when, when staff are reviewing the, the LOI that's, that's put before them. I know the question came up about accessibility. Speaker 2: Yeah. So that is a big thing
with the CPC in throughout the plan is accessibility, not just like handicap accessibility, but like accessibility. How can you get there? Is the only way to get there a pair of stairs like or do you have to dr like trying to figure out all different types of accessibility. The third one is actually at the Morris Institute Library. In the older portion it was internal woodworking, woodworking work being restored and then also the pitches in the eaves restoration and then also slate roofing. So that's another one. The one
that we reviewed this morning was for seven Pleasant Street, which is also down in South Natick. It's the park. There's three parks that kind of looking at. The cool thing with that one is that it basically has been using MVP money up to this point and they're looking at it from a spillway. So once the spillway goes out, the river may change shape. So they're trying to be mindful of that. So what they needed money for was for the actual planning and design work. And then they would be actually going for MVP funding to actually do the construction.
So this is just like, there's a lot of different projects. So, oh, and then we received another one which we haven't reviewed, which was for affordable housing. So we're kind of getting in there three buckets. Speaker 1: Sounds like. Yeah. What Amanda has done, or actually the whole team has done is taken those of us who are on the, the CPC and I guess a pair at a time getting to going through the LOI process so that we're understanding and learning and it as well and, and offering our feedback. So yeah. Speaker 2: Yeah, it's kind of trying to pair like expertise
with the project or, Speaker 1: And it's funny, the the, the possibilities are just astounding. And I, and I knew what the CPA could do, but it kind of going through these, these first projects Yeah, just opens your eyes because you're sitting there going like, yes, when you have a laundry list of the all the things you have to get done and spend money on and there's no room for, you know, the things that enrich a community and I'm just, I'm, I am thrilled. Yeah. Good stuff really.
Speaker 2: So that's one. In terms of MAPC or mw, Speaker 1: Can I just say we, we would, we will, would be up someplace without a paddle if it weren't for Speaker 7: How the priorities Speaker 1: And I, I, I can't say that strongly enough. Speaker 7: How are the priorities determined for those projects that are on this list that we're talking about? Speaker 1: People is making the case as you make the case to some degree for the, for your own, for your priority. If you are the, the proposer, you have
to make the case not only that you fit within the parameters of whatever's required for this sort of project, but why, why it matters, what the differences are that it would make. And they, they have to, they have to make that case in the actual application. Yeah. Speaker 7: Okay. And then Speaker 1: This is kind of the first step where we make sure that everything kind of measures and fits. Right? Well, Speaker 7: We're talking like just now we have what, four or five projects you've, Speaker 1: So, so what will happen is those, say for example all five projects are, are approved
or, or are recommended for favorable action by the the CPC, they then go to town meeting. Oh and town meeting votes. Oh good. If the CPC does not vote in favor of a given project, it cannot proceed to town meeting. Yeah. That's a merit base. Speaker 7: Okay, that's fine. That's, that's fine. And when town meeting gets them the town meeting, they're presented a town meeting individually with whatever supporting. And are there parameters that say to town meeting, well now be careful of approving that one
because there's another one coming down the road that's really important also. And do we have a funding level at which we can't go beyond? I mean, how is it determined that if the first three get approved? Speaker 2: Well, so Speaker 7: What happens to four and five who maybe with four and five alphabetically on the list? I don't understand. I don't, Speaker 2: Yeah. So that's actually a really good question because we only have so much money and we have the three buckets, 10%, 10%, 10%. And so part of the LOI process is actually helping us gauge how much funding is requested. So also during the LOI process we can ask,
you know, is this a multi-phase? Like this morning we asked like, okay, so you're doing this, but where's the money coming for the actual construction? And they already had a plan for the actual construction. They just needed this a hun I think it was like $110,000 to finish the design work. But if we have a project that comes in, if that project had come in and said, Hey, we're asking for 110 now, but we actually are gonna come back later for the, the actual design and construction work, we would wanna know what that is. So then when the CPC, 'cause they develop a budget every year as they can say,
we're only gonna spend the three buckets or we're gonna spend all of it, or we're gonna just based on what we get, they can actually start forecasting. So this town meeting is hard to forecast because we don't have a base. But now that we have the lois coming in that's actually helping inform what's gonna be coming down the pipeline. The other thing is there's nothing stopping a project for coming into the CPC and letting them know, Hey, we have this large project, we are gonna be phasing it out. Like to approach them to help budget it. Like there can be those conversations,
it just can't be conversations outside the public meeting with Speaker 1: Members. And, and one of the things that, that I love already is that when you go to the website, you, the, the transparency there in seeing, you know, you, you as a member of the public are seeing everything that is, that is presented and and proposed Speaker 7: As, as you said, one of the people Speaker 1: Can start thinking Speaker 7: Earlier, the first one of the more significant factors of a presentation is gonna be the cost. Yep. 'cause we only have X number of dollars when someone submits a cost
for its approval. What, what do we have for, oh, keeping within that cost or how, how is the cost determined? It can be determined like a dozen different ways. One, you can just pull it outta the air and the other, you can get it estimated. Speaker 2: So they have to submit during the CPC an actual formal budget, which would be cost estimate. And also they have to prove that the project can be completed with the funding that they are ask they are asking for. 'cause we don't wanna see them come in and not be able to complete the project. The other thing is, if they come in
and say I need $2.5 million, the CPC can say, well we don't have $2.5 million. What is your timelines? And it may be like, oh well we really need this for design work. Okay, well we can fund this. And then they can actually budget it out over five years or how many, many years it is. They can also, the CPC can reduce. So if you come in and say I need, you know, $5 million, they can say, well we only have 1 million and you didn't look at any other categories or any other places for funding. We'll give you this, but Speaker 1: It could be a phasing strategy
or it could be more modest than what was originally Speaker 7: Proposed. I think there, there are a number of factors that are come into play in the determining the validity of a project based on its dollars on the dollar estimate. Has to, Speaker 2: And that's, we also asked, or Speaker 7: Is it, how, how are they held to that? If there's a variable, are they still in line if they get further along the line and the price changes? Yep. Speaker 2: Well they would wanna build in contingencies, but we also have, it would be basically figuring out how we're gonna pay it out. They also give us timelines, regular check-ins
during the actual constructions, the scope of work. There's a lot. They also have to give us a, basically a risk mitigation plan and a communications plan in addition to all the other documents that they need to provide for us. So it's, it's not a light lift to go through the process, but it's also you need to be serious about actually wanting to Yeah, Speaker 7: Wanting to, well some of the projects could be really simple. The fence around the library. Yeah. Well and okay. But that's one, probably one, one vendor and that's it more than likely. But some of the more complex projects are going to,
and you're saying, you know, give us, I assume is just, I think you said give us the timeline in which the project would be completed and maybe the phasing of the monies. Speaker 2: Yeah, well we would, the CPC is the one that determines who, how the money is distributed. So the applicant can come in and say, oh, I need it all up front. Well, that's probably not gonna happen because you can use all the money. The project goes, there's no checks and balances. So like that's what we're trying to figure out and we have to work with our procurement
officer and stuff. Is it a Speaker 7: Reimbursement because the, the checks and balances, you know, the project is going to, somebody's gonna go into a lot of time in in developing the, the project and the cost, their estimated cost. And then someone else, by the sounds of it, is gonna review that and say, no, we can't do that. And you, you can do this. We'll give you that and do this. So somebody else is telling 'em how the good project is gonna be done. Speaker 2: It's not that, it's not telling 'em how to do the project. It's telling them if the amount of money is not available, then they are saying, we only have this much money, we can only give this much money.
'cause they can't make a promise of money that they don't have. Speaker 7: So you may come back the project that you applicant come back and show us how it's phased. Yeah. So maybe we can only, Speaker 2: And they can phase it during that process where they know. So it's, it's a base. Speaker 7: Just don't wanna see us get into a rabbit hole of one person telling another how the project is gonna be done. And no, and Speaker 1: If one, one of the things too is that when we talk about what, where the money will be spent, there are projects and there are projects. So yeah, it may be the acquisition of a parcel of land, right. For open space. Yeah. Well some of they're simple.
One price one, it may be because under, under the kind of historic history section, it can be artifacts and historic documents. So the, I think what I am becoming astonished with is the, the bandwidth of the what can be, what can be covered with CCP CPA funds. And I, I find that tremendous because it, it is, it may be a restoration of something, it may be something as simple as an acquisition.
Not that they're necessarily always simple, but, but it's, it's, it is a remarkable power for good best wish I can think to describe. Speaker 2: Yeah, Speaker 7: Well the whole idea of it sounds terrific. Speaker 2: And this first one's unfortunately, unfortunately is a learning. Yeah. So it's an abbreviated, but Right. Okay. You can't, you can't learn until you actually try it. So it's like absolutely. Let's get it going and we'll fix it. So, but for MAPC or Metro West Regional Collaborative, we have a meeting tomorrow morning, we are working on the work plan.
We did ask them to introduce quite a few more items that would be helpful to Natick. One is the work on the I 90 corridor that we have been working on with Eric Hove. It is Ashland, Framingham Natick, Wellesley and Watertown looking at priority development areas and priority preservation areas within the area, within that whole entire corridor. What, Speaker 5: What's the extent of the corridor, Speaker 2: The entire town. Yeah. I don't know. So try to put that on the work plan. The other thing is, is that they've been working on
a communications plan. So hopefully that comes out as well. So they're looking at that. And then Mark Dresen retired. Yes. So we do have a different person retired. Speaker 1: Who is the new director? Speaker 2: Lizzie. Izzy. Lizzie. Lizzie. Is it Warren? Speaker 5: Wyant? Speaker 2: Wyatt. Wyatt. Speaker 1: W-I-N-A-N-T. Speaker 2: She Speaker 5: YANT. Okay. Speaker 1: She was, Speaker 2: That's, Speaker 5: Yeah. And you should also know he's probably gonna get embarrassed when I say this public, but it's public. But Adam, what my good friend Adam Pletz, who lives on North Main Street, is the new housing director at MAPC.
Speaker 2: Oh, nice. Speaker 5: So we've got a local, local MAPC guide on housing. Cool. Sitting Speaker 7: Right up on Main Street. So, sorry, Adam, that's, that's Speaker 1: Terrific. And if I can say something just briefly as, as we're kind of wrapping up, we are, I would personally like to extend 85th birthday. Congratulations. Oh God. Speaker 7: Wow. Speaker 1: To the co my colleague to my right. Speaker 7: Wow. Monday. Monday. Monday. Yep. Which, this coming Monday, the 30th. I like to tell people when they ask me, when's your birthday? I like to say It's June 31st. Yes. Yeah.
Let them walk away and worry about them. But it's the 30th. Wow. So it's, congratulations. So Speaker 1: Congratulations. Oh, Speaker 7: You said, I just trying to keep it going. Good. Speaker 1: Doing a fine job. Speaker 7: Nancy's my plugger. She's, she's a fighter and she's hitting 80, 82. Speaker 1: Oh, a spring chicken. Yeah, Speaker 7: Yeah, yeah. Right. Speaker 1: If you are okay. Entertain a motion to adjourn. Yes. Speaker 7: So motion to adjourn a second. Speaker 1: All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. And we stand adjourn. Nine 12 at nine 12.