Speaker 1: The, to order the meeting of the Natick Planning Board at 7 0 7. Okay. Okay. Thank you. So this meeting is being recorded and it's being broadcast on Pegasus. To comment or ask a question, use the raise your hand feature. 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 the screen before their microphone can be unmuted. To make different, to make changes in your name as it appears on the screen in Zoom, click on participants.
To open the participants menu. Hover your cursor over your entry and click on more. Click on rename and type in your first and last name. So with that taken care of, the first order of business is public speak. Any individual may raise an issue that's not included on the agenda and it will be taken up under advisement by the board. There'll be no opportunity for debate during this portion of the meeting, and any individual addressing the board during this section of the agenda shall be limited to five minutes. Is there anyone who is here for public speak? Yes sir. If you wanna come to the microphone
and identify yourself and your address. And you have five minutes. Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you and I appreciate the board's time. My name is Louis Franchi. I am president of the Natick Crossing Corp and the Franci Management Company, both based here in Natick. My family owns and manages multiple properties here in Natick and we've been a long standing taxpayer here in the, in the area. One of the properties that we own is the native crossing and that which is at 2 51 West Central Street adjacent
to the MBTA station rail station. I'm here to provide comment and ask for feedback regarding the West central, the West Natick, west Central Natick corridor zoning efforts. In 19. In 2019, I met with the planning department to discuss potential zoning rezoning of the property for residential use. Presently it's office and retail. I was given positive feedback at this time, however, I was told that it would have to be done through a,
a special meeting or a hoop overlay, covid delayed further momentum. And then in early 2022, my team again met with the town planner and town administrator and again, we received very positive feedback. In fact, we were given the impression through that meeting and emails that the rezoning warrant was gonna be placed on the spring 2023 town meeting. This came and went again and I approached the planning department in late 2023.
This time I partnered with a well-respected national develop multi-family developer. Our plan is to create a first rate transit oriented development. Again, the positive feedback and indication that the warrant would be on the 2024 spring meeting was told to us. At that point, I held off on any, extending any leases in the building, anticipating that this would be coming up in the spring meeting. Time passed. And I know that there were multiple
obstacles to overcome in order to have the zone re the area rezoned. And we were told that this was going to be brought up again in the 2024 fall meeting. Based on and based on the new MBTA mandate, we understood there was a process involved and and call and it seemed like the opportunity was promising. Very promising. We are now three years since those initial conversations. The process has obviously been delayed as there have been several other priorities that the town
has to focus on. We understand that I'm here tonight to understand the board's view and on the West Central's corridor rezoning. And if there's any commitment to move forward for the 2025 fall meeting, our team cannot wait another five, five months in limbo only to have the process further delayed or a zoning amendment drafted with without some stakeholders input to assist to create a viable redevelopment opportunity. As of may, first, the property will be completely vacant.
This is unfortunate for all of us. The site redeveloped as a multifamily is the best and highest use. We are at the point where we need to know whether there is a clear path forward to rezone for the fall meeting, or I must pivot and continue to seek tax based tax abatement based on the property's current value valuation. My hope is that the board can provide some feedback for me tonight so I can understand the level of commitment, if there is any, to move forward with the rezoning efforts
and then what next steps are required that I can, so I can plan accordingly. I appreciate your time and feedback on this matter. Sincere Lewis Franchi. Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Franchi. I'm afraid that public speak does not allow us to engage in debate. It is, it is required by law that we cannot respond since it is not an item posted on the agenda. If you would like to come before us to schedule a time when you can come before us and we can get the item on the agenda for discussion,
we would be happy to have that conversation. Speaker 2: I think we've been trying to get ourselves in front of the board, but it, it continuously gets delayed or postponed for some reason. I'm not sure. Okay. How, how, what's the process that's involved in order to have this done so that we can at least get some feedback? Because it's, we have been very pa you know, patient and understanding what's going on. And truly, I understand there's a, a, a mountain of paperwork and process involved. However, we, we have been led to believe multiple times
throughout the three year process to that this is something very positive for the town and it just sits there. And now I'm, and and again, it's, it is, it is not good for the town either. 'cause you're gonna lose tax money from that building sitting empty and it's gonna Speaker 1: Be an Speaker 2: Eyesore. Speaker 1: I, I appreciate what you're saying. So Speaker 2: How do I do a go about doing that, ma'am? Speaker 1: Check in with the community and Economic development office and see about scheduling to have an item on our,
on an upcoming agenda. Speaker 2: Just come into the office here and, and ask Speaker 1: Or, or phone. Speaker 3: We can ask right now though. I mean, let's put it on the next agenda. Let's talk. I mean we Speaker 1: Start No, you know what I'd like to, I know what I know, what I have heard today, I we can't consider or comment on it. I just wanna have that, that conversation first, but keep it open. It Speaker 3: Does. It's not but the record will show We've had a conversation about rezoning that area. Speaker 1: Yes. We've had an introduction to it. And let's, we can't talk substantively. I'm not, Speaker 3: Okay. I'm talking about an agenda item. So I, I support
as one board member putting it on an immediate agenda. Speaker 1: We cannot, we, we cannot have any opportunity for debate. So I Speaker 3: I don't feel like I'm debating, I'm just, I'm, I'm not debating, I'm not talking any substance. I'm just saying I agree that I think it would be a good idea to have an agenda item in formal discussion, however we wanna call it. Okay. And let's talk about Speaker 1: It. You're on the record for Speaker 2: That then is, I know you're going to the town meeting soon, so I mean it's not gonna obviously be until sometime in May. Is that correct? Or Speaker 1: Was it We have, we have, you know what, I will speak with Ms. Loomis and see what we have coming up that
will not get in the tanglement of town meeting. Speaker 3: We meet during, we meet during town meeting. I mean we are, we don't shut down during town meeting. So we, we have, I'm sure we can find some time to discuss this us. Speaker 2: I appreciate it. So I'll stop, I'll stop. I'll stop in tomorrow and and find out what's available. Speaker 1: Yeah. Or again you can, you can come in person. You can come, you can, I Speaker 2: Prefer to call. I'm only down the street on Central Street. Thank you so much. Thank. Appreciate it. Speaker 3: Very Speaker 1: Good. Alright, so the second item on the agenda after public speak is
just looking from the right car copy. And that is zero text circle. Yep. George, Richard wants, do you have something to read? Speaker 3: He wants to continue it to April 16th so he can finalize lighting details with specs in a photometric plan. So I, I move we continue to April 16th second. Speaker 1: Okay. Moved and seconded. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? It is unanimous to continue to April 16th. The next order of business is, are we going now Amanda to 43 Cyprus. Okay. And you have a, you
Speaker 3: Wanna open and then continue it? Yes, please. Okay. On Wednesday, April 9th, 2025, the planning board will hold a hybrid meeting in the diot meeting room. Sorry, Speaker 1: Did it say 29? Speaker 3: What's that? Speaker 1: I thought you said 29th. Speaker 3: 29th. No, tonight April 9th. Oh, okay. Sorry. 2025. Okay. Sorry. We're gonna hold a hybrid meeting at the Diot meeting room at 13 East Central Street in person and over zoom to view an application for Morrell Construction for a definitive subdivision as shown on plans title 43 Cypress definitive subdivision plan. The project includes a creation of four buildable lots,
the transfer of land, the construction of a new roadway, and the installation of associated infrastructure and landscaping. The properties are located at 43 Cypress Road and 57 Evergreen Road. A copy of the application can be reviewed in the CED office. A virtual meeting link will be located on the posted agenda per order. Na planning board Peter SSON chair or Terry Evans chair. Speaker 1: So very good. Thank you. And I Do you have a, a letter from, from the applicant? Speaker 3: I don't. Speaker 1: Amanda, do we have a document on that? Speaker 4: No, no, it was just a email that was not printed
because it had information on it. Speaker 1: Alright, so and the, that email said Speaker 4: That they would like to request a continuance to the May meeting that was like Speaker 1: Okay to May 7th. Yep. Alright, very good. So are Speaker 3: You guys here for this? Yes Speaker 2: We are. Speaker 3: Well this does happen sometimes, so I apologize for that. Speaker 1: It was a late postponement by the applicant and so understanding that, so the next meeting, the meeting this is being continued to is Wednesday, May 7th.
And so mark your calendars, I apologize for not being able to send notice to you. We were in kind of the same situation ourselves of getting, getting Can Speaker 5: I send the document while I'm here or Speaker 1: We generally, because we've just opened the hearing, we haven't taken testimony. Hold onto it or if you want, you can email it to the planning board at planning@natickma.org. Cut that. So if you wanted, if you'd like to do it that way or, or bring it back with you next time. Alright. Can Speaker 6: I ask one question? Of course. So the applicant, can they continue to delay? When do they like have to show up?
Speaker 1: Well they, if if they have something that they're working on, presumably they're not doing it well no, they're, if if we have a sense that someone is indefinitely postponing something, we can take issue with it then, but it's, it's my understanding that they're just trying to make some progress before they, they go forward with the, the presentation of the plans. I I, that's my understanding. So it, it's, it's relatively rare that there is an applicant who is looking to delay not, it does happen sometimes, but not always.
Speaker 5: You don't republish this. So we didn't, they're not gonna send out new postcards. Speaker 1: They will not send out new postcards. So, so do check that and we also will have it posted on the calendar, which is in the agenda center of the town website if you want posted Speaker 5: Neighborhood people didn't show up today on know. Speaker 1: No, because it was, it was done at literally kind of the 11th hour. I think they were hoping to present and realize they couldn't. I I don't want 'em stand in their place. Speaker 3: Well one thing you can do we've done in the past is if there's one person who might be like a representative who's
willing to sort of spread the word, that person can contact Amanda Loomis at the at town hall and just asked to be like sort of, you know, notified of any, you know, upcoming meetings, et cetera. And then maybe whoever that person could spread the word and just let everybody know. But we've done that before. It's been pretty effective. Just making sure everybody's within the loop so they can all get any updates. Speaker 1: I think we had a very late posting 'cause because when Ms. Loomis got the information, so she made a late posting of a change in the agenda today.
But there's not a reason why you would've thought to go back and look for that. And that that's one of the challenges when, when an applicant is, is late making, making changes or, or seeking to postpone. Thank you. So thank you very much and, and I, I appreciate the fact that you came out and we will take up this conversation on the seventh, so thank Speaker 7: You. So I'll move will continue to May 7th. Speaker 8: Motion and Speaker 1: Seconded. Alright, motion made and seconded to May 7th. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? Alright, so we will see you on, on the seventh. If for some reason you cannot be here in person,
you can appear on through the zoom link. Speaker 5: Great. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 1: Sorry. Thank you. Thank you very Speaker 5: Much. Speaker 1: Alright Amanda, we're talking about inclusionary housing and fee in lieu for affordable housing. Ask Speaker 8: This. Speaker 4: Mr. Trs is here. Speaker 1: Yes, Speaker 4: Steven. Sorry. Excuse Speaker 1: Me. Mr. Luke. Mr. Luke. Alright. And it, it's been so long. So anyway, so welcome. We're here to talk about two subdivisions that have
affordable housing requirements and a fee in lieu. I understand. So Amanda, do you, do you wanna start on this? Speaker 4: Yeah, I can. So what we have in front of us tonight, you guys saw this is a request to have the applicant applicant pay the fee in lie, which is required underneath their special permits. One of 'em was for the Wayside project, which was a smaller project that was off of Rockland, right next to Graystone. So you do have in your packets letters that were from September 26th, 2023
and November 22nd, 2024 with some information which outlines the amount in of the payments. This money gets paid to the town, which is directly deposited with the Natick affordable housing trust for the creation of affordable units. Speaker 1: Alright, thank you very much. So, so do, do we take them? We don't take them simultaneously? We're gonna start with wayside Speaker 4: Yeah. Speaker 1: To them in kind of in the order. All right. Yes, Mr. Stevens. Sure. Welcome back. Speaker 8: I'm Juan, right? Speaker 1: You are
Speaker 8: Wayside. So we have the, the, that project was 12 units. That was sort of the previous bylaw, two generations. Speaker 1: Okay, Speaker 8: Thank you. Speaker 7: Sorry. So we are talking about the Wayside project, which is off of Wayside Court, which is off in Rockland Wayside Road out of Rockland. Yes. And that was sort of two generations ago of the open space bylaw, which then had a mandatory inclusionary housing provision.
And the provision as outlined was a payment, a fee in lieu for the newly created units. That was a 12 unit project. There were two existing houses that came down. So there are 10 units essentially that the fee is calculated against. Oh Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 7: And some of those were happened to be three bedroom units and some of those happened to be four bedroom units. We, the first letter of September 23 we sent in was for the first five of six and then subsequently a year later, roughly a year later,
we had finished the last six. So at this point we are here to pay that fee wherever that fee gets directed, if it's to town coffers or to wherever it may be. The calculation this generation of the bylaw, which was once again a couple years ago, was 15% of the then affordable price of an affordable unit. So therefore we take our formula that we would, we were selling 40 B units and we work with our housing consultants
and we attach that taking the then current interest rates on a 30 year mortgage, all for MHPS guidelines for determining the value, the sale price, potential sale price of a house, and then of a, an affordable three bedroom or an affordable four bedroom. And then 15% is due for each and every new unit created. And that's where the formula is derived from. So it's about $333,000 collectively for the wayside project, which will pay for that entire 12 unit, the first phase there.
Speaker 1: Alright, thank you very much. Questions from members of the board? Questions or comments? Andy? Speaker 3: This is based on 2023 prices, 2024 prices. Today's prices, what Speaker 7: It is, is we wrote the letter, so we did it based upon the September letter, if you will. So if Speaker 1: The September of 23. Speaker 7: Yeah. So if you look at the back, it's got a date of August 4th, 2023. Interest rates are slightly higher, which technically lowers the value. So we use a rate of 7.48%. Technically we're supposed to use about a 0.25 rate that's higher.
The 30 year average rate plus a quarter point is the MHP standards. We use the 2023 mass housing income ratios, the 80% ratios at that point. And you sort of work backwards to derive a sales price for the unit. Not much has changed because even though as the interest rate goes down, some of the insurance costs have gone up. So we get, every year we get the mass income rates go up, but then some of the other expenses go up. So it's, every time I run the formula,
it always ends up kind of back at the same number. Speaker 3: Well, I don't have any argument with how the numbers are derived. I I I don't, I I have no critique with any of that. You know, it seems, it seems like it kind of passes the, the reasonable test. Amanda, what's the actual mechanism for, I, I don't, I don't, it doesn't seem that we have to take any action tonight. But let's just say, let's just say everything's copacetic. What, what's the actual mechanism for $333,750? What, what happens next? Speaker 4: So basically the numbers just have to be approved
and then the applicant would then deposit the funds with the town that directly gets deposited into the na affordable housing trust fund, which then they used for the creation of affordable housing at their discretion. Speaker 3: So these accounts basically exist. It's just a, it's, this is, this is just a kind, a standard path to follow. Yeah. Okay. Speaker 1: Alright. Peter, any questions, comments? No, no questions. And Amanda, anything that you'd like to add? Alright, so the specific figure is on this is the $333,750.
Speaker 7: Yeah, the Speaker 1: Collective, I'm looking on the, the letter from, yeah, three three the 22nd. Speaker 7: 3 7 50 for Speaker 1: We second. Okay, very good. So a motion to approve this amount as payment in lieu for the affordable housing component of the wayside condominium. Speaker 3: So moved. Speaker 1: Is there a second? Okay. Speaker 3: And when do we think this happens Speaker 7: Right now? Anytime. Okay. Speaker 3: Well how about, let's have that happen by the end of the month, let's say. Speaker 1: Perfect. Alright. Speaker 3: As the add addendum.
So by the end of, by by May 1st, 2025. Perfect. Speaker 1: Great. Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? It is unanimous. Thank you. So, and then we're going to talk through the Windy Lowe project. Speaker 7: Yes. Windy Lowe was similar. There is no open space that was just lot reconfiguration based upon the, the payment, the inclusionary housing payment, 22 lots total in the project. There were two existing houses in the project. So there's a net of 20 at this time.
When we wrote this letter, we had sold, so the, the third house if you will, there was obviously my house, then we sold a house and then this represents the third house. We just closed one yesterday, which is the fourth house. And we're closing one in a couple weeks will be the fifth house. So we owe, right now we owe 43,750 for the house it closed. And we owe that two more times in this month. So technically if we were gonna keep moving forward without a coming back, we would be paying $43,750
for each single family that we sell the so. Okay Speaker 1: Amanda, so for the, for the kind of the point of payment when the, the, the new building is occupied, do we want to wait until everything is sold and, and then go forward? Or are we doing it in effect as projects are occupied? As properties are occupied? Speaker 4: It would be once occupancy is granted, but if you want to approve it now and then with a condition that, Speaker 1: Okay, so we could be, we can submitted vote to approve
Speaker 4: The number. Speaker 1: The number, yep. Speaker 9: Will the number change at l if let's say the last property sold, will the formula have changed at all? Speaker 7: What's gonna happen is very short. The soon we're going to get the new area, media incomes are gonna go up, which will slightly change the formula. If long-term interest rates go down, that'll slightly change the formula. My suggestion might be that it's a, it's good for a certain period, like three to six months and then it, it, we could re
our schedule now is we're not gonna have another, we couldn't have another closing till the fall anyhow. So we could write this as a chapter for six months and then say come back. If the number substantially changes, Speaker 1: We could do that. Or could we say to actually have a clause that says, you know, at the time that, that the property closes or the, the hits occupancy that the figure at that time, any preference as to whether we make a short term. Speaker 4: It's gonna be non like minor in terms of the amount. So, Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 9: It just sounds as Speaker 1: Though, so we do,
we can do it in the, do it as a short term and then if we need to adjust Speaker 4: Three months, do the one that are ready now. Yeah. And then do the fall ones. Speaker 1: In the fall. Speaker 9: That's what I was gonna suggest. What is done now we can fix the number. I, I wouldn't want anybody coming out of the woodwork and looking at the formula and say, oh, you made a mistake this way. This is what the formula is at this moment in your property. So collect it or take the funds at this time for that and come back in six months or whatever. Speaker 1: So right now there is the one unit Speaker 7: One closed two are closing
and the next two closed, one closed bef. Oh, Speaker 1: That's right. Okay. Speaker 7: Yesterday, the second one closed yesterday. Well Speaker 3: Let's just talk about the ones that have certificates of occupancy because it's not really a closing issue. It's a, it's a, Speaker 7: It would just be two then and then there'll be one in another couple of weeks. So we could fix the number through the end of August. Speaker 1: And the fin and the final number in total will be how many 20 Speaker 7: Units total. Okay. Speaker 3: And it's roughly how much per per unit? 43. Speaker 7: It's right now it's 43. And my guess that number will be a little higher. Presuming long-term rates come down
and with the new median air income will go up when they reset it for 2025. Speaker 3: So three would be roughly $129,000? Speaker 7: Correct. Yeah. Okay. Speaker 1: Alright. So do we wanna do this then for the two that are completed, understanding that, that there'll be another, it's Speaker 7: A trip back. So even if you want to put it through the, you know, maybe, how about June 30th? That's sort of half the year then. Speaker 1: Well, and that's about two and a half months. So Speaker 7: Yeah. And then if you need in the fall,
Speaker 3: You probably don't have to come back. I'm thinking a letter or a memo saying we can, Speaker 7: I mean I can send a letter right to Amanda and if she reviews it, that's, if she has the authority to review it. If the number changes, that's fine with me too. So, yeah. Speaker 1: Alright, so then this will be a vote to approve the fee in lieu for the two units or to, for all units being completed by June 30th. June 30th. 30th, 2025. Alright Speaker 3: Second. So the payment would then be due at the end of June or do you want to I can, Speaker 1: I would say, well, I, I can say with payment
to be received by July 15th. Speaker 7: That's fine. Well Speaker 3: Let me just raise this because this, this ties in with the financing package for five Auburn Street, which is a very high profile project. And the last zoning board meeting they had the notion of project viability was raised because they're kind of horse trading for units. They proposed 32, I think the ZBA said 28 or 29 and the developer said straight up, like if it's 28
or 29, this is not financially viable. And so they asked for a pro forma to be, you know, drafted to see what, what the numbers are assuming. So, you know, the, tonight we just voted 333 to be transferred within, you know, within, by the end of the month to affordable housing. This number would either be 43 times two or 43 times three. But it's still not $600,000. So what I'm, what I'm, what I would like to it and, and that's not a question that we have to review 'cause we're advisory, but the issue has been raised about
the financial viability of five Auburn Street. So I want to be sure that the zoning board knows about this, the select board, you know, that that monies that have been committed that weren't like literally in pocket, you know, does that affect the financial viability? Could, can they use this $333,000 once they receive it and deposit it as part of that project because that's about half of what they committed to. So I just, I just want there to be full discussion and make sure that the ZBA as they review this, that's part
of the pro forma. 'cause I mean it sounded like this thing was razor tight and of course it's a 32 unit affordable project. You know, presumably there are no, you know, there are no margins in this. This is done either at cost or just barely above. So living without $600,000 or $300,000 can be a big issue. So how do we make sure that all the people reviewing that know this Speaker 1: Or does does, Speaker 3: And a follow up question, yeah. Is 129,000 better than getting 86,000 tonight? You know, I mean, does, does that $43,000 make a difference? Is that money that they need to make this thing viable
or, you know, I-I-I-I-I don't want to just sort of say, oh yeah, we'll we'll wait for it in August and suddenly we, we, you know, throw that project into, you know, a, you know, a chaos because we're, the short money Speaker 1: Is, is this, this will be designate designated, presumably the same way into the affordable housing trust fund. Yeah. Okay. So is it, and is it there that they designate it to be the what project? This, this may be kind of passed on to? Yes. Okay. So, so
Speaker 3: It, it still sounds to me like it's not $600,000, which was promised. And again, not my monkey, not my circus, but it is their monkey, it is their circus and they are looking at the financial viability. And if we are not, I mean, I don't know how long it's gonna take this fine company to sell all their houses. Could it be three years? Could it be seven years? Could it be 15 years? I don't know. But you can't spend that money and give it to the, to five Auburn Street unless you receive it from the developer. And at this pace, the 600,000 isn't gonna be paid in full for presumably for quite some time.
So somebody particularly I'm thinking the zoning board of appeals needs to know all about this. And I just wanna make sure, how do we do that? Do, do we? Speaker 4: Yeah. So everyone is well aware of this monies were committed without actually having the funds. So therefore it is not the responsibility of the developer that's in front of us to fund a commitment that was made without funds in hand. So the practice should never have been to commit funds that we do not have. So therefore committing funds that were not in hand,
they need to be very upfront with Metro West Collaborative, Speaker 1: They being the afford affordable housing trust, Speaker 4: The ZBA is aware, but the Metro West Collaborative has requested that these funds be used for pre-development costs. Speaker 3: Yeah. So they need the money. Speaker 4: They need the money. However, there is still question that remains in terms of the contract as to whether, what happens if the project doesn't go forward and the funds are spent. Speaker 3: Oh God, yeah, you right, exactly. I I remember when we had affordable housing money
for down payments, the whole idea was to retrieve it, to be able to maintain, I mean those, those funds can't just be buried into, you know, pre-construction costs and then oh, it's gone. Speaker 1: And is there any op option other than having these applied to pre-construction costs for that very reason? Speaker 4: That would be a question for the Affordable Housing Trust and their finances. Speaker 9: Can I ask a question? Speaker 1: Yes. It, Speaker 9: It sounds as though all of a sudden five Auburn is, is on the table and we're talking about that and relating that to this project. And something just doesn't sound right
that this project is in any way, shape or form being affected by five Auburn. Any things that happen with five, the, the two different Speaker 3: Things. Correct. The, the dots only go one way. The, the developer is living up to their commitment. The planning board is living up to its commitment. I think the error was the, the trust fund committed the dollars they didn't have that they were go, that they plan on receiving. I understand that. And but the reason I'm raising it is because of the last zoning board meeting, the discussion about the financial viability of the project
was front and center where they weren't really, I mean they were, there's always horse trading about the number of units. Okay. But there, the, the, the testimony was, you know, if you reduce our units by two or three, this is a no go. Speaker 9: But once again, that is what happened relative to five Auburn. Yes. There all kinds of controversy or con conflicts or whatever it is for five Auburn. Why is this project in any way, shape or form being affected? The, why Speaker 1: Did it even come up? Because the, because the fee
and lie is meant to create affordable housing. Okay. So it is with that connection that is what five Auburn is intended to do. Speaker 9: Supposing these two private Auburn and this project were a year apart, two years apart, they, they, they didn't come up this close to one another Speaker 1: Then that it would be to the affordable housing trust to, to determine what it would be spent on to create affordable housing. But I think the, the point that both Andy and I think Amanda made, which is that money funds,
funds were committed that were not in hand funds were committed by the affordable housing trust four Speaker 9: Five Auburn. Speaker 1: Yes. Yes. Right. Okay. That, that and for money that they did not have in hand. And Speaker 9: Where would that go if this project doesn't, didn't happen at all? What would Speaker 1: Happen? It would, it would go into their, their funds into their account that is meant to be spent on developing affordable housing. Speaker 9: So now we're counting on the monies that for this project to go toward satisfying some financial issues for five Well,
Speaker 3: Well money, money was committed and I will say committed in good faith. They, they saw our decision, they ran the numbers. They said we're gonna get $600,000. We can contribute that to this affordable housing project. Speaker 9: That 600 was based on this project. Speaker 3: It was based on this project. The, the, the, the multiple errors. One was I don't think a quasi-public town board can commit money unless they physically have it in their pocket sense. The second thing is the developer doesn't have any kind of a stopwatch or clock ticking them. They, they are, they are free to develop as they please.
Right. And they're full. I I take it that they're fully willing to, to meet the commitment that they made to this board. They just get to have their own timeframe. Yeah. So the, and the reason I'm just raising this tonight is, again, it's not in front of us. We are only advisory, but the notion of financial viability has been raised as a very important one. And I, and I I'm not gonna reveal any confidences, but you know, you run into people in town and you have conversations and it's, it's my feeling that the folks on the ZBA do not know that the 600,000 is not forthcoming. I think there's some question about that. That is why I want to be crystal clear
that the money is forthcoming, but there is no timeframe. It's certainly not gonna be available. I don't know, like sign the decision on some night and then, you know, get the check the next morning. That is not gonna happen. And if this thing is kind of razor's edge in terms of financially viable, all parties just need to know that and proceed for it. And the secondary issue about this money being spent on pre-construction costs Yes. Which is not retrievable Yeah. I think is completely unacceptable. That would be a violation of everything that the affordable housing trust fund is trying to do.
The idea of burning money. Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 3: Including like 600,000 precious dollars of affordable housing money having it just, just say, oh yeah, well, you know, we, that's gone. I I to me, I, if I were on that board, I would find that to, we have to do something else. 'cause that's just, you have to protect those funds. So Speaker 1: Can we, can we stipulate that it cannot be spent on pre-construction? You know, can Speaker 3: We, can we, I mean what the hell? I I certainly don't think it should be, but can we, I mean the, the affordable housing trust fund should,
but I don't know if the planning board can, but I'd be glad to, even if the motion doesn't stick, I'd be Speaker 1: Glad to. 'cause I don't wanna lose that money. That to your point, if if yeah, if it, if it fails and the money was spent on pre-construction, you got nothing left. Right. And I, I I think that that's not something I'm comfortable. Speaker 3: Oh that would make me sick to my stomach. Yeah. So whether it be a finding a motion, a vote, I will vote for it. I do, I really know that that's legally binding, that we can kind of shepherd that money that way. I don't know if we can, but we can,
we can let our feelings be known that Speaker 1: Way. Well, and and even with the an, an explanation in the decision, which is that not to be applied to pre-construction operations because of the obligation, this board has to see that those funds are used for the securing Yeah. Speaker 3: The creation. Yes. Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. And I think that, and so I I would add that as the caveat. Speaker 3: Alright. I, i I complete Would we have that, would,
would we have that as a kind of a separate motion or do we wanna attach it to the 3 33 or to this Speaker 1: I would attach it to, to this. I don't, I don't think the 3 33 is looking at, they, they're, they're looking at spending any of the 3 33 on this or it's, Speaker 4: Whatever they get is Speaker 3: What's, I have a v they they're gonna, I mean I, I don't, I dunno how much money they have. My guess is they don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars. Maybe they do the trust fund, I don't know. But my guess is the three 30 three's gonna go towards this and the one 20 nine's gonna go towards it and then they're gonna scramble to come up with the rest.
Speaker 1: They, they can go towards it. But in neither instance should it be for pre-construction operations. Yeah, I I think it, it's the only way that we can protect the money that being absolutely applied to the successful completion of affordable housing. Speaker 3: I totally agree. I to I I'm totally comfortable with however we wanna do that. So back to our question, if we say, you know, end of July the check's written in August, they would be for three properties that have certificate of occupancy, which would be three times 43,000.
They, they, I'm, I'm, I'm just hearing the voice of the trust fund saying get the money now 'cause we're gonna, 'cause I, I think, you know, so the money that we are technically we can ask for now would be two times 43,000. 'cause you said that the third one you're getting your in three or four weeks or so. So I don't know, I don't know what's best to try to get more money later or get less money now Speaker 1: I would go ahead and make it for the three. Speaker 3: Okay. Then we have to wait a little bit 'cause we have to literally wait till you get your certificate. Speaker 7: But if you're waiting for the, if, if the money's going towards the project at at construction
inception, then it doesn't really matter Anyhow. Speaker 3: And we're, we're arguing that it should, Speaker 7: I would greatly considering I drive by the new armory every day and it's seven years in and it hasn't changed. I'll block has not changed on that property in seven years. I can tell you what might happen down to five Auburn and I'd hate to see my $950,000 and I'm gonna give the town over the next three years. Speaker 1: Go. And we would and we would hate to see that even more. Yeah. Speaker 7: Yeah. So please condition it upon the, I'd rather see re repaint Cedar Gardens than, Speaker 1: Than go to Preconstruction an Speaker 7: Engineer for a failed time digging,
Speaker 3: Digging somewhere that doesn't lead to any housing. Speaker 1: So, Speaker 3: Alright, so I suppose then the motion should be to approve the payment of three houses that have received certificate of occupancy at Windermere estate. So it'd be three times $43,000, which necessarily means it would be about another month's time or so. Speaker 7: Yeah, May 15th is fine. Speaker 3: Alright. So let's say by May 15th. By May 15th, and let's stipulate the Almighty Planning Board stipulates that, that these funds are for the creation of affordable housing
and not for pre-construction type costs. Which may not be, what's the word? Returnable or Oh Speaker 1: Real. Yes. It it may not be, they may not be the units. There may not be realized. Yeah, yeah. Is there a second? I'll second it as Speaker 3: Stated. I dunno what I said, but maybe it's on the video. Speaker 1: It's a good thing there's video. So, okay. All those in favor say aye Aye. Aye. All opposed. Speaker 3: Yeah. I don't want there to be any misunderstanding that there's a problem on your side of the desk.
No, no, I understand. You guys have fully committed, I I think we had some overenthusiastic people on our side of the desk and normally it probably wouldn't be such a big issue, but that thing down there really needs very careful consideration to all the pennies. And I think it's very, you know, now that we've taken these votes and we have these decisions, could you let your counterparts know to let the ZBA know sort of in a form of a memo or a letter that, you know, we voted this and we really don't want the money to be used on pre-construction. Just, I really just want them to be fully aware of this issue if possible. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Speaker 1: Alright, so next Speaker 3: Up,
Speaker 1: That's all she wrote. Pause again. Thank you. I think, I think we're gonna, we're yes, we're sticking with you, Speaker 10: But we need, Speaker 1: Let me just check with our fourth member. Speaker 9: Nice job up the street. Thank you. Very, very nice. Speaker 7: Love it. Speaker 9: It should be Speaker 7: Hope for another, Speaker 9: A guide for anyone who's doing some of this, some of the stuff around here. Speaker 11: Are you available? Okay. Yes. We, we, we are down to that part of the agenda. Speaker 10: Okay, thank you. Speaker 1: Sorry, just a note of explanation. These require a, a four person vote for a special permit
and our fourth member is in another meeting and is kind of trying, trying to do this between the two of them. So I apologize for the delay and actually Speaker 3: Any idea how long he'll be 'cause we can, Speaker 1: He's just coming over. Speaker 9: Yeah. Alright, Speaker 10: There Speaker 1: He is. So, oh, the other thing is we want a motion to No we just didn't have a Yes, did, did it. This had a public hearing. Yeah. Oh we need to, no we didn't for when we need to open it so Well Speaker 3: Yeah, but the inclusionary housing wasn't a public, that Speaker 1: Was the public hearing. We're Speaker 3: Gonna close that. Okay. Okay. Yes. So for 99 East Central Street on Wednesday,
April 9th at seven, the planning board will hold a hybrid meeting in the OT meeting room and virtually via Zoom. The applicant has applied for a special permit for signs and advertising devices and the applicant proposed to install a new sign. The property is located at 99 East Central Street. Assessor's map 44 lot two 70 and is located within the center Gateway zoning district. A copy of the application can be reviewed at the CED office on the virtual meeting link will be posted on the agenda per order. A Natick planning board. Peter Nason chair or Terry Evans chair.
Speaker 1: Alright, thank you Mr. Stevens. Thank you. It, it's really been so long. Speaker 7: This is our, our new office building next to this, the community center. And under the zoning, there's no exterior sign permitted, if you will not on the building from our reading. So building department has provision to request if it's a deemed appropriate, that he can ask for a special permit review. So what we tried to do was obviously copy the format of the senior center and the format of the castle courtyard next to us
and Morris Tavern. Everyone's using the Speaker 4: Keep one Speaker 7: OI call it the New Hampshire granite. Our posts are essentially the same size of the senior center, six by six. We did include a picture of the community center, senior center sign 'cause we're smaller in width and smaller in height than that one. The castle courtyard is much wider, but shorter. We didn't take the dimensions of Morris Tavern, but it's quite, it's, it's bigger than ours. So that's about it. We have the 99 up there, I believe those are seven inch letters on the 99.
There are eight inch letters on the track and they're four inch letters on development. And it's, so it's assigned material, solid material is carbs, PVC or carb PVC. Speaker 1: Okay. Very good questions from members. Actually let me, if I can just say one very quick thing. Mr. Stevens made reference to the fact that there are no not standing signs permitted in the center gateway or downtown mixed use. There's language in the sign by law in section five H under administration E four
that says the special permit granting authority may grant a special permit for a sign not complying with the provisions of this bylaw. If it determines that the particular sign will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the section will not be injurious to the neighborhood in which such sign or signs are to be located, nor to traffic and safety conditions therein nor otherwise detrimental to the public safety and welfare. So that's, that's what this special permit is based on. And with this questions from members of the board, Andy, is
Speaker 9: There any lighting involved in this? Speaker 7: We do have a ground post like an uplight on it. Speaker 9: Uplight, I Speaker 7: Mean, not a top light, but a sort of from the, you know, a landscape light if you will. Yeah. Speaker 1: Was that reviewed by the building commissioner? I just wanna make sure that there's not gonna be glare into passing traffic. Speaker 4: Not sure. I'm not sure if that did, but the one thing that should be noticed, a little bit difficult to see, but any uplight would actually be shielded by the stone wall that is along East Central Street.
So it would help block any light glare on the ground, the ground around. So Speaker 1: Peter, does that give you your answer? Speaker 9: Not really. It's shielded from in one, from one direction. Is that correct? Speaker 4: No, the stone wall actually kind of wraps. So what you can see is the stone wall runs along East Central Street, which is, it goes east Central Street, sidewalk, the stone wall. And then when you're approaching it from the east headed west, there is a series of landscaping that will help buffer it that way
and the stonewall would buffer it the other way. So it really kind of controls what's there Speaker 9: Probably. And I am sure the side, the, the lumens of the light, just as it's all designed for this height, it's only what, 50 twoish. It's not going to, shouldn't go. Speaker 7: And we're not open. We're really, I mean we're not gonna, if if anyone has an issue, we have no problem adjusting it or, or putting hoods on it because we're, we're not a retail business. So it's, we're not looking for a lot of illumination. It's mostly in the winter evenings.
But we can make Speaker 9: Sure that I have no further questions. Speaker 1: Thank you Andy? Speaker 3: Yes, I'm good with the sign. My only question is, I think the front yard setback is fine. I think it looks, looks like 13 feet, eight inches is seven feet. Is that compliant with the side yard setback? 7.7 feet. Since this is a new sign, I really just want to get this just to be fully compliant. No waivers. The other thing is, I, I can hear the voice of Glen g Glader in my head when we start talking about an uplight. Speaker 9: Yeah. Talk sky. Speaker 3: Yep. He, he's not attending the meeting,
but I can tell he's like scratching. He's like, ah. So I, and I, and I've been going to the senior center on Monday nights and like last night or Tuesday, Monday night on a cold, rainy night. I'm telling you it is, it, that is not a great place for any additional lighting. There's plenty of street lighting and glare and, and all kinds of stuff. So I mean, I guess what I'm wondering is how completely essential it is to have a light particularly, I mean if you, if there has to be sort of one that's clipped on it, that that goes down, I guess that would be alright. But I,
I don't think this board has approved an uplight in 15 years. Not that I'm aware of. No, but I but I was just a little, I I just, this is new and the sign looks great. That's not the problem. I just wanna make sure it's just fully compliant with regard to location heights. No problem. Square footage is no problem. I just wanna make sure the location doesn't require a waiver. Speaker 4: So the side setback is 12 feet on the side Speaker 1: And that is setback at the seven in seven foot seven Speaker 4: Center gateway. But does signage actually follow dimensional?
Speaker 3: Well the, the, the setback from the front of the roadway always did. Speaker 4: It meets the front setback. Right. Speaker 1: We can, if we consider that as I was reading the, the section, it's not disadvantageous that it is in keeping with the in harmony, the rest of the signs around it. Well Speaker 3: We could probably waive 10%. So instead of 12 we get down to like 11, 10 and a half. Well the Speaker 1: Thing, but the thing with the special permit is that it more or less says if it doesn't qualify as long as it kind of aligns with other signs
and looks appropriate in its location. But the point about the light rains. Speaker 3: Okay, there were some other depictions that kind of showed its location and I don't, I don't mean to be Joe hard ass about this. I just, I if it moved a couple feet okay. Towards the steps, I don't know. That probably wouldn't be the end of the, I don't imagine it make much of a substantive difference. I mean did you put it there for like a super specific reason? Is it Speaker 7: No, it's just the center and I had put a electric outlet there, but that's, that's fine.
Speaker 3: You know what, I did see electric outlet Yeah. When I was down. Speaker 7: That's fine. We can move it. Is there a setback for a sign? Speaker 3: A front yard Front Speaker 4: But not side? It Speaker 7: Can't be side because Speaker 1: That would, Speaker 7: I'm thinking about every sign I ever know in town would be a violation. Yeah, Speaker 1: Yeah. No, no, but and it's, it's designed so it's not distracting to passing traffic and Speaker 4: It meets the side front setback. Sorry. Yeah, Speaker 3: The front yeah, yeah, yeah. Seats. I, a lot of times we end up swallowing these things because we get things that become more compliant and so you sort of support them given
that this is brand new. I just wanna make sure that like, that we don't have any waivers. But if, if the side yard is not a, a consideration, then I have no problem having it located there. And like I said, the sign looks great. I think I'd just like to figure out a little bit more about what is going on with the light. Speaker 7: Okay. Speaker 1: How weed to it are you? Sorry? How, how wedded are you to the light? Speaker 7: I'm not that wedded to it. I mean I wouldn't let, I could, how about if we did approval for the sign without the light and if I want the light, I'll put one up there and say look at it and then I'll ask for a waiver or bring that back in as a request.
I don't, Speaker 1: And I think if it does come back, we probably will need to see something that actually shows any what the, what the light spillover is. Speaker 3: We, yeah, we would, we would sometimes ask for like a cut sheets. I am sure there's a way to baffle this thing so that it literally just illuminates. But I'm, I'm happy I I'm, I I would be happy to vote approval time for the sign without lighting and then if decided that's, let's just, that I think it'll be fine. Go and we would need more information about how it's baffled and, and what these fixtures are and all that stuff. And I, I think it could still work, but we'd probably just take another look at that and then that might have like a,
a one year lighting review just to Okay, so Speaker 1: Yeah, here's the challenge. Yeah, the fourth vote has just been called pretty, he's, he's virtually in Wellesley because he has a matter before the Wellesley Planning board. Speaker 3: Well, I, I'm just guessing we could, you want to take a break for five minutes and see when we can get him back or Speaker 1: Let us, let's let us do that and I'll say we'll we will reconvene at how about eight 15 if that's okay? So it's about 8 0 5 now. Speaker 7: I probably should mention it here, but the senior center does have a, an uplight on it.
So we probably just match what they, I don't know if that was brought forward Speaker 1: And those don't always, didn't always tend to come before us. Yeah. The talent that might have been part Speaker 7: Of a bigger plan. Speaker 1: So wait, so just so, so let us stand Okay. Adjourned or a recessed and we will reconvene at eight 15. Got it. Thank you. From recess and I apologize for the long delay. We have someone who has two obligations to fulfill municipal obligations to fulfill this evening. So because there are only three of us for a special permit,
we need a super majority of the board for votes. I'm gonna ask for a motion to continue this public hearing to next Wednesday the 16th second. Okay. May it seconded. May seconded. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Very good. We'll we'll see you back next week. Sorry guys. But thank you for a much quicker visit, I promise. Patience. And actually I think I will then do the same. Lemme Speaker 4: Just promote the panelists for the other one just so they're Speaker 1: Okay. So they can come in and introduce themselves. But probably guess we
Speaker 3: Gotta read it. Speaker 1: I would encourage them not to to I I'm guessing they'll, they'll understand. Speaker 4: Well they've been hearing, I'm assuming 'cause they've been on the attendee side. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 4: And now they're over. Speaker 12: Hi. Good evening. See me. Sorry about that. Speaker 1: Hi, we just, I, one, just one second. We just have to read the public hearing notice Speaker 3: On Wednesday, April 9th, 7:00 PM the planning board will hold a hybrid meeting in the Edward Delo meeting room located at 13 East Central Street Natick in person and virtually via Zoom to review the application of the learning experience. The applicant has applied for a special permit for signs
and advertising devices the applicant proposes to install new signage. The property is located at 2 47 West Central Street. Assessor's map 40 lot 58 a and is located within the limited commercial zoning district. A copy of the application can be reviewed in the community and economic development office and on the website, the virtual meeting link will be located on the posted agenda per order. Natick planning board. Peter Tson chair. Terry Evans chair. Speaker 1: Good, thank you very much. And I'm sorry for the, the delay, we still do not have the fourth member who is, we we're required to have a super majority
to vote on special permits. So we'll need to keep kind of what's being said limited because we cannot take a vote. 'cause we do not have our full compliment. We had hoped one of them has been pulled away on other business that he is now doing on a Zoom call. So I will just so I start by offering you the apology that I think we, we will probably end up having to continue this to next Wednesday. This is actually, it's the last order of business on our agenda. And so I'm kind of Yep. Running outta runway. Speaker 12: Understood. Yeah, I've been following along.
So I, I I understand these things happen out of our control, so I understand. I I don't know if you want me to talk about it at all now or we just wanna wait until next week. Speaker 1: He'll have to hear it. It's, Alan will have to hear it at some point. Doug will be back next week. So if you, Speaker 12: We just have a pretty, I mean it, we're, we're here for, basically we're not complying with the, with the overall sign height. So we're just looking for an oversight sign. Permission for an oversight sign on the building. Speaker 1: Yeah, I think, I think we'll want, we, we don't often have end up reviewing signs
because they, they stay within the framework. I imagine that we'll have plenty of questions for you. So if we can do that, take up that and I will see if I can, maybe we can make it the first order of business. Amanda, do you think we could do that, that one or these two? The trask and that Yeah, it's absolutely, it's, it's a, it's on us that we're, that we're inconveniencing them. Yeah. So if, if you wouldn't mind, I think we would prefer to continue this to next Wednesday and take it up there.
Okay. We had, we do have the materials that you have provided and, and then our fourth, our fourth and probably our fifth member will also be back with us next week. Speaker 12: Okay. Speaker 1: So I thank you very much for your patience. Speaker 12: All right. Very good. Thank you for your time. Thank Speaker 3: Move to continue to April 16th. Second. Speaker 1: Okay. Moved and seconded to continue to the 16th. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Very good. We stand continued. Thank you. Thank you very much and we'll see you next week. Speaker 12: Thank you. Speaker 1: Alright, Amanda for planning board business, do we have anything on committee assignment reports?
The only thing that we update on CPC. Yeah. CPC. Speaker 4: So the CPC has opened their public hearing for, which Speaker 1: Is the Community preservation committee. Speaker 4: Yep. Has opened their public hearing for the plan. We are just finalizing the revisions to the plan, which will then be further reviewed on April 15th. So we are getting close to being able to open what is called the letter of interest, which is the start of the entire application process. I believe the expectations was either May 1st or May 15th for that with the expectations to go for the first round of funding
for the fall town meeting of 2025. Speaker 1: It has been, and Amanda has, has been remarkable in, in the ground that you've covered in the last several weeks since Olivia's departure. So we are in, in very good condition and I understand that you've been working on edits to kind of tighten it up at, which I also appreciate Speaker 4: Yeah. It's been knocked down from like quite a few pages just by reorganizing. Speaker 1: Thank you. Anything El else? Speaker 3: Do we still need somebody for the Natick affordable housing trust designee?
Yes. 'cause somebody approached me about it and I said maybe what that person should do is send a letter to the planning board. Speaker 1: That sounds good. Speaker 3: Saying they're interested in being the designee and, and Speaker 1: What their credentials are or experiences. Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 3: Okay. That would be great. So I'll, I'll follow up with that person, see if they are interested in moving forward. Speaker 1: Okay. Terrific. Thank you. Anything else? Speaker 3: Not from me. Alright. Speaker 1: In which case I'll entertain motion to adjourn. Thank you. Second. Okay. All those in favor of adjournment say aye. Aye. Aye. We stand adjourned at 8 43. Thank you.