##VIDEO ID:https://videoplayer.telvue.com/player/994DtmGEsi0VDYK3jJI2BJ72GfgNIpU2/media/930350?autostart=false&showtabssearch=true&fullscreen=false## <v Speaker 1>Planning board meeting of January 29.</v> We'll open at about 7 0 3 and a couple of notes. This meeting is being recorded. This meeting is being broadcast on Pegasus. To comment or ask a question, use the raise your hand function. If you're on the phone, press star nine. An individual wishing to speak during public speak or during public hearing must display their first and last names on their screen before the microphone can be unmuted. To make changes in your name as it appears on the screen in zoom, click participants to open the participant's menu. Hover your cursor over your entry and click on more. Click on rename and type in your first and last name, public speak. It'll begin open with public speak. Any individual may raise an issue that is not included on the agenda and it will be taken under cons advisement by the board. There'll be no opportunity for debate during this portion of the meeting. This section of the agenda is limited to 15 minutes. Any in end and individual addressing the board during this section of the agenda shall be limited to five minutes. Are there any folks in the gallery here? No. And anyone? Amanda? I'm <v Speaker 2>Not seeing anybody.</v> <v Speaker 1>Nobody. I see. Raise your hand. Okay.</v> The one go right on to agenda item number two, development review, public hearings. These are legal notices published in the Metro West Newspaper First two 16 to two 18 South Main Street. <v Speaker 3>And this is just continued.</v> <v Speaker 1>That was,</v> <v Speaker 3>It's continued from its previous.</v> <v Speaker 1>Oh,</v> <v Speaker 3>It's not a new hearing.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay. It's not, well no, it's not.</v> Not a new hearing That would, okay. Amanda, is any update there that you can give us on that? <v Speaker 2>Yep. So we do the, have the applicant</v> and the applicant's attorney here. We did meet as a working group, I think it was last Monday to review the draft decision amendments were made. The changes were made within the addition and they were circulated both to the applicant and the members of the planning board. Copies are in the Google share drive. I think that everything is, we haven't received any other amendments since that was circulated. So I would say at this point the decision is ready for final review if Terry and Doug Field <v Speaker 1>Scan the board and see if anyone has</v> any comments on the decision. Andy, <v Speaker 4>No comments. No questions.</v> <v Speaker 1>Terry.</v> <v Speaker 3>I was part of the working group</v> and am satisfied with the decision. <v Speaker 4>Yeah, also part same appreciate, you know, all the input</v> and patience with the applicant here. And yeah, I think I we're feel pretty good about where we're <v Speaker 1>No question comments from me and Glen,</v> <v Speaker 5>I have no comments except to say that it sounded like Andy</v> and Terry's microphones are both turned <v Speaker 4>Off.</v> I got, I I hit the button. Sorry. <v Speaker 1>Thank you. Then we have</v> the to sign. <v Speaker 2>No, so there is a little bit of procedural items</v> that you do need to take care of. Oh, the original vote back on December 4th when the motion was made, it was motioned to approve the dec, sorry, the site plan of November 27th, 2024. We have received a revised site plan, which is what was previously reviewed and what is the basis of this decision. So therefore it would just need to amend the motion I guess. And all you are, all you're voting on is site plan review and a special permit for open space residential development as outlined on in the last page of the decision. <v Speaker 1>It's two individual votes</v> <v Speaker 6>Vote to approve, to approve the site plan.</v> <v Speaker 1>Then we have any motion.</v> <v Speaker 4>So I would suggest, I know that we tend to vote,</v> I don't know, it's like a, a step before a step when we say, you know, vote to, you know, make a motion or, or vote approval stop. I personally, I don't think we have to revote that. I mean if we, if we vote the decision as it's drafted, it has all the proper references in there of the proper, you know, plans for things that they <v Speaker 6>Incorporated</v> <v Speaker 4>In.</v> Yeah. So I feel comfortable of just simply making a motion to approve the special permit and the site plan approval. <v Speaker 1>That's</v> <v Speaker 6>The decision is presented. Yes.</v> <v Speaker 4>So now just one question second,</v> just well under discussion under our public hearing notice aquifer protection was mentioned. That is typically a separate decision and that was a point of conversation here. Right? So the, the aquifer protect the, the site is in the a PD it doesn't necessarily mean there's a special permit that goes along with it. There are design standards in the bylaw that apply, which, you know, we've, we all agree the the site plan conforms to the standards, but there's no permit for use. 'cause there's a whole section of what's permitted, what's not permitted. And none of the uses that this applicant is asking for is within the permit section of the A PD. <v Speaker 6>And I think is that, and that's in part</v> because of changes made in the a PD at town. The last town meeting. Yeah, yeah. Which, which widened the span of what was permitted versus requiring special permit. <v Speaker 1>Well,</v> <v Speaker 4>I'm in favor of fewer decisions</v> and, you know, fewer things to have to be filed and shepherded through. So if, if, if we can literally just say, you know, a vote to approve the decision as amended and that covers all that, that's, that's probably kind of a nice savings time, energy, paperwork, all that <v Speaker 1>Rest.</v> And that I think is what the motion was made and seconded. Is Andy <v Speaker 4>Making that motion?</v> No. You, you made the motion. Terry second. <v Speaker 1>She just made a,</v> <v Speaker 4>I'll make that as a motion</v> what I said before and <v Speaker 1>I seconded.</v> Second and discussion we've just had or any other, any further discussion? Aye for vote Doug? Aye. Terry? Aye. Andy? Aye. <v Speaker 6>When we have a member of the board Yes.</v> On the screen, do we have to say names? <v Speaker 1>Oh, last names?</v> <v Speaker 6>Sure. Let just last names.</v> <v Speaker 4>Let's do it again. Landry. Aye. Evans.</v> <v Speaker 1>Aye. Meyer Aye. Glen G Clear? Aye.</v> Aye. Alan Iye clear? Aye. No, Alan <v Speaker 6>Just smiles. Well,</v> <v Speaker 4>Let's, let's clarify this Sos hold on.</v> So, God, <v Speaker 2>This is a,</v> <v Speaker 4>Did Alan sit?</v> Okay, so it was Glen voting or is Alan voting? <v Speaker 2>So back on December 4th, Glen was not present.</v> So Alan voted okay on that original vote that kicked off the, so I don't really know, <v Speaker 4>Did Glen, Glen Glen's did do the Molen? Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>Did he file a mo He did file the mole.</v> He And we noted that in the decision. <v Speaker 4>Yeah. Okay then it's Glenn</v> <v Speaker 1>And it is Glen.</v> Okay, that's fine. Thank you. Anyway, Alan, <v Speaker 2>All, so I am updating the decision</v> with Glen's name just so everyone's aware. <v Speaker 1>Now that's a lot</v> <v Speaker 2>Amending, but</v> <v Speaker 1>Very little.</v> Yeah, but we did a job one the votes. <v Speaker 4>So I move.</v> So you, we, we voted to sign the decision, which we can do. And I will make a motion to close the public hearing. Second, and I have one bit of debate. I don't know if this is an appropriate question or not, but given the amount of infrastructure that is going into this project, the amount of earth and mountain and granite you guys have to move, do you, are you optimistic that this is a viable project to actually do all this work? Absolutely. Okay. That's my, that's my question. We're gonna miss you. <v Speaker 1>It sounded very convincing. Okay.</v> So much neutral. Then we'll go on that. We'll further, no further discussion and we'll go on a vote. <v Speaker 4>My mayor. Aye</v> <v Speaker 6>Evans aye.</v> <v Speaker 1>Mountain and</v> <v Speaker 4>Landry. Aye.</v> <v Speaker 1>Glen g Glader.</v> Glen g Glader. He's <v Speaker 5>Muted.</v> Sorry, GGL. I <v Speaker 1>Okay.</v> Made passed. I'll go get that off. I think that just about does it, do we have a, a signing sheet we can send? Yeah, <v Speaker 2>I just had to update it 'cause I originally had Alan.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay. Alright.</v> <v Speaker 2>So I'm printing it right now.</v> Go get it like two seconds. Thank you. <v Speaker 1>We can, we can sign it here, but we can go on to the next.</v> <v Speaker 2>I have to stamp</v> <v Speaker 5>Amanda if my,</v> sorry if my signature's not required. If, if my signature's not required, then you can just leave me off and, and have the other board members sign. I would be done tonight and <v Speaker 2>I need four.</v> It, I need four outta five. And if you're fine with that, I have four members right here. I just have to print it and then they can't take it tonight 'cause I have to stamp it with the clerk tomorrow. So, <v Speaker 6>So we'll, so he could, if if he,</v> if he needed to come in tomorrow, <v Speaker 1>Pick it up tomorrow.</v> <v Speaker 6>He needed to sign it tomorrow. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah. But we just need, but</v> we don't need to, we just need four. Yep. Okay. <v Speaker 7>Don't</v> <v Speaker 1>It'll be available for us</v> to sign tonight or tomorrow? <v Speaker 2>Tonight. Tonight. I just sent you to the printer.</v> <v Speaker 1>But you can't get it until tomorrow. That's</v> <v Speaker 7>Fine.</v> Tomorrow's fine. <v Speaker 2>No, he, so he can't get the decision until it's,</v> until the appeal period lapses. So what I have to do is I have to file the decision with the town clerk, with the planning board signature. This town clerk stamps it, which starts the appeal period. And then if at the end of the appeal period no appeals were made, then he can pick up a certified copy with the town clerk, take it to Cambridge and get it recorded. So 20 days. <v Speaker 1>I didn't have ever remember that from my</v> <v Speaker 2>Previous 'cause a andrs, you can just,</v> <v Speaker 1>That's why that's right.</v> Now are you guys straight on that? Yes. Right. <v Speaker 2>And I do send the applicant a copy of</v> what was stamped in just so they have record of it. <v Speaker 1>Okay. Thank you. Very good luck you guys. Good luck.</v> All right. Thank you. Thank you. So next 79 SP street board. Exactly. Continued from this is, yeah. Amanda, any updates, anything on this? <v Speaker 2>One second please. Sure. Is Paul Peter is Paul?</v> <v Speaker 7>Yeah. Supposed to be. Yep,</v> <v Speaker 2>He's here.</v> I just wanted to make sure it was part of your team. <v Speaker 7>It should be Mike.</v> I'm <v Speaker 2>Not Mike McKay.</v> <v Speaker 7>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 2>Sorry. So in terms</v> of an update, we did receive notice from legal counsel, which I did provide a copy of the email in your packet. It was just concurring with the building commissioner's determination. That was one of the items for the reason why we are continuously being continued was regarding the parking lot and its presence there. It was deemed that it was a preexisting non-conforming and that it would be treated that way. As outlined in the email, we do have revised site plans, which are in your packets. And we also had some revised architecturals the previous week. But I would turn it over to the applicant since we haven't really seen 'em for a while. <v Speaker 6>Can I just a very quick question,</v> and it's one that I'm just puzzled by. How is preexisting non-conforming defined or determined? Because if, and I'm not saying that that's the case with this project, but if someone there are zoning bylaws in place and someone says, oh, what the heck, I'm just gonna go ahead and do this anyway and pave that can't be preexisting non-conforming. It just means that somebody did something without a permit. Yes. <v Speaker 4>May I? Oh, absolutely. Okay.</v> And I don't mean to preempt any presentation by the applicant, but since Terry has brought the point up, and with all due respect, literally all due respect to Caris, okay. I don't know what the context was of the question she was asked or what the information she had. Okay. So I'm not gonna question the basis of what she, she wrote. However, The, this, this whole project is a bit of a mess from a legal standing point of view, from a process point of view all around. So to answer your, your question and I'll, I'll, I'll get to some other points here, but section six of the zoning act says if you have a pre-existing non-conforming use, you can extend or alter, you know, not in a substantial way, not in a way that you know is detrimental to the neighborhood based on the non-conformity. But the word pre is extremely important. And there's case law that says, and backs this up, the non-conformity in which you are trying to extend dates to a certain point when the zoning was put in place, <v Speaker 6>1960.</v> <v Speaker 4>Well, in this particular case,</v> and I'm, I I don't, I'm still foggy as to what the section six finding was all about to begin with. I think it's about parking. So the pre-existing non-conforming dates back to the conformity when that zoning was put in place. So let's take parking for example. In the residential district, zoning bylaw says 1976, that's when that was adopted in this town. No parking in a residential zone for commercial uses 1976. So if there was parking in the commercial district prior, preexisting prior to 1976, then that use is eligible for section six finding after 1976. No, it does not. It does not. So <v Speaker 6>That was my under, that</v> would would've been my understanding. <v Speaker 4>That is right. Yeah.</v> So procedurally, I honestly have no idea. So didn't the why this project went forward and asked for a section six finding, I don't know what it was for. I don't know how it's manifested in the decision. The decision we got handed by the zoning board of appeals is for a variance and it's a self-imposed variance. One that you came forward and said, we need to penetrate more into the side yard or, or rear yard for what's the hardship. So am I trying to litigate the zoning board of appeals? Not really, but I highly question, highly question. What was the basis of the ask? The decision itself is really problematic. Really problematic. It says it's a variance. It says it's a finding. It makes findings. It doesn't actually say the findings are given. It ends up with a variance that doesn't address parking. And it's for residential use. We're not talking about a residential use. It also goes on to say that the nonconformities are all applicable to the residential zone. We all know this lot is split, right? It's commercial and it's residential. None of the variance language nor the application actually says we're gonna do a commercial project. So here's the commercial nonconformities. So it's none of that is explained. I did some research, I went back and I, I would love this to be explained to me. Okay. But the deed on this property, going back to 1999 when it was parceled off, sold it had some conditions attached to it, right? And it said whoever's gonna own lot one, which is where this project is, right? And a section of the, of the, of the, of the site that's commercially zoned, you can only do six parking lot parking lots, parking spaces. Six. That's, that's what it says. Thanks. <v Speaker 8>But who, who said that</v> <v Speaker 4>It's in the deed</v> <v Speaker 8>From So that's a private restriction,</v> <v Speaker 4>Correct.</v> <v Speaker 8>Which those expire and then they</v> <v Speaker 4>Can't, when did it expire?</v> <v Speaker 5>Can you turn the microphone on please, sir?</v> <v Speaker 4>So it, it expire. How did it expire?</v> Because it, it's carried forward, but private <v Speaker 8>Restriction, they couldn't use surface zoning</v> by putting in a restriction. <v Speaker 4>It's carried forward three times in the chain of title.</v> Okay. Up until 2023. Understand? And it says, and I'll show you, thank God for Google Earth, because you can go back and you can see the progression of the site. Okay, 2001, no parking, some parking here. So this was, this was after the first one. Okay. 2001, 2008, still no expanded parking. 2010 we've got parking, expanded parking in the residential zone. And then we've got 2023 even more. Even more. None of the decisions if there ever were one by the zoning board of appeals are recorded in the registry of deeds. There is no evidence of any permitting for any of this parking anywhere. So I'm going, so I'll show you the chain of title, I'll show you the deeds. Every one of those ti those deeds carries forward the six parking space restriction with the caveat that the zoning board of appeals has to approve that there is zero evidence of it, nevermind the fact that it's not allowed in the zone. One of the conditions of the variance decision or whatever you want to call it, says the variance is contingent on planning board site plan approval. So here we are, our, are we going to, <v Speaker 1>Can we, okay,</v> <v Speaker 4>What are we doing with this?</v> <v Speaker 1>Well, at the moment I'd like the applicant to respond in,</v> in some way, I think to have you fellows to even have a brief discussion point by point. <v Speaker 8>I don't, I I don't, I'm not, I don't</v> <v Speaker 5>Believe his, the microphone is still not working.</v> <v Speaker 9>Is this, is this better? Yes, yes. Thank you.</v> Okay, sorry about that. Thank you. The, the, the site is, it exists now. It's a commercial use with parking that that's what's there right now. So if it's six parking spaces that it's limited to, again, typically with a commercial use the board zoning planning, whomever wants enough parking based on the zoning bylaw. So the, the, it's a square footage calculation. And you say if you have this much square footage for this type of commercial use, you need x number of parking spaces. A reduction of that is usually something requested by an applicant because they don't have the space to fit adequate parking. So I don't believe we have any issue reducing the parking. We've already done it once. I would probably, again, have to go back to zoning and make sure that they're okay if there's less parking at the commercial site. But it's a commercial use now with parking there. Now, it, it's a preexisting, it is <v Speaker 4>Not, it is not a preexisting non-con.</v> It's an existing non-conforming use. I'll grant you that. It is not the only a preexisting non-conforming use. <v Speaker 10>It's only preexisting. Well, that's not</v> what the building commissioner nor the town council says. <v Speaker 4>That's what that is what the zoning law says. Okay,</v> <v Speaker 10>Let's, but, but the zoning,</v> the chief zoning enforcement officer in the town, city of the Tom Natick disagrees with you. And so didn't the town council in their opinion. Now, again, I'm not an attorney, neither are <v Speaker 4>Who.</v> Can you identify yourself please and who you're representing? <v Speaker 10>My name is Paul Lia.</v> I'm with field resources, the land surveyor for this site. <v Speaker 4>Are you an attorney?</v> <v Speaker 10>You said no. Are you</v> <v Speaker 9>Alright</v> <v Speaker 4>Guys, are you an attorney, guys?</v> <v Speaker 10>No, I'm not. I'm a Lanor.</v> <v Speaker 9>Paul. Paul. Paul Paul, please. Okay,</v> <v Speaker 10>Well, I'm just saying I'm, now we're</v> going into personal character. Excuse, excuse <v Speaker 9>Me, Paul.</v> I I get it. No, no, I think <v Speaker 1>You're associate here who's an attorney is</v> taking the questioning. <v Speaker 4>I'll just say this, with this particular application,</v> we have never had a coherent presentation of this project. The legal basis of what they're asking for, why they're asking for it, and what are the justifications for it. We've never had a coherent presentation on it. It has been us this board asking the questions, digging into the research, pointing out the flaws along the way. And there are many, and let me finish. Okay, we can't <v Speaker 10>Speak.</v> <v Speaker 4>There are tons of flaws in this process.</v> There's a decision that's extremely flawed and one of the, one of the conditions of the decision says this board has to issue site plan approval. So here we are. Are we fulfilling the condition of the variance? Seems like we are, and I for 1:00 AM I I am not convinced that you have any legal standing to ask for what you're asking <v Speaker 9>Legal, standing to, to request it</v> or to be granted to request it. That that's what we, that that's what we're not, <v Speaker 4>We're not the zoning board.</v> <v Speaker 9>I know we went to the zoning board</v> and we applied for a section six finding and a variance. The section six finding was to demolish the existing structure and build a new one. And the section six finding is to determine whether or not the construction of a new building on that site that is a non-conforming site for that type of building is substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood the board <v Speaker 4>Found.</v> I think what what you're conflating, you're conflating, Doug, you're conflating non-conforming lots with non-conforming uses and structures. Okay. There's a big difference. <v Speaker 9>But I'm, I'm explaining</v> what the section six findings was for. And the building commissioner said we needed a six, section six finding for the demolition of the building. They determined that constructing the building, we were presenting a commercial building in a commercial zone in in the envelope we had was not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing commercial building in a commercial zone with no <v Speaker 6>Mention of what? Of parking</v> <v Speaker 4>Zero or the state</v> <v Speaker 6>Or the state of the parking that is located in the</v> <v Speaker 9>Residential zone.</v> Well, yeah. And, and I think it comes to the idea that we could essentially run a business there right now and continue to park cars there right now. That that is, that, that, that's happening like prior, prior to our purchase of the property too. This, we've owned it. We, my client has only owned it for about a year. So if there has been some issue that the town has not enforced for decades at this point, <v Speaker 11>A decade too.</v> I think Doug already went over that, that parking was constructed around 2008. <v Speaker 9>I thought there was a restriction in the deed</v> that the parking would be for no more than six and that was in 1999. No, <v Speaker 11>I'm just, you're talking about people actually parking</v> and there, I mean I'm looking at an image right now from 2001. There was no parking in the residential area. I'm just, just as far the <v Speaker 9>Decades No, I, no, I understand.</v> But I mean it, there had, there was parking prior to our purchase of it. Hmm. Let's just say that. And as it stands right now at, unless the building commissioner enforces differently than he's apparently done so far, he could run his business out of the existing structure right now. So the the reason we're here is because we would like to build a new building to run the business out of I that that is the app. That that's why we're <v Speaker 4>Here.</v> I understand what you're asking, but what I'm trying to convey to you is you have a legal chain of title that says a lot of different things. Can I, and you have a existing non-conformity unpermitted in my opinion, that you're asking for preexisting non-conforming relief under section six, which you are not. You just don't have standard to ask for it. And then you're being asked, we are being asked by this board in a condition of a variance to issue a site plan of review for a project that I don't think conforms to zoning <v Speaker 9>The project, doesn't conform to zoning.</v> Let, let him, and that that's why we went to the Z That's why we went to the ZBA. It, it is not a conforming site that, that's not a question. It well, I mean it's a que but it's not, it's not really an issue. It's non-conforming. And that's why we applied for the building permit. The building commissioner denies it indicates what we would need to get for relief from zoning in order to construct it. I think and, and if I may just with the chain of title again, private restrictions are private restrictions. They're, they are not always even enforceable and they do expire. I can, I don't wanna get off on a tangent, but there are restrictions, private restrictions in this town on titles you read where the race of people that are allowed to move into homes is restricted. Those are gone. Those aren't enforceable anyways. They're written in a deed. I couldn't write into a deed. I can, you can build whatever you want there. The zoning board or whomever would say you can't, it it, it's, it doesn't really, it's not as applicable. I <v Speaker 4>Guess it, it's carried forward three times again.</v> <v Speaker 9>And there's restrictions carried forward that say,</v> homes may only be sold to Caucasian to <v Speaker 4>People.</v> We're not talking about that. But we're talking about parking, we're <v Speaker 9>Talking about private restrictions. Yeah, we're</v> <v Speaker 6>Talking about parking.</v> That is still the zoning bylaw. <v Speaker 9>Oh, absolutely. Absolutely.</v> I but I'm saying the parking is, I <v Speaker 4>Personally think 2023, here it is. 2023</v> <v Speaker 6>Is when it</v> <v Speaker 4>How many, how many months ago was that?</v> <v Speaker 9>It was,</v> <v Speaker 4>And here it is,</v> the premises are conveyed together with the right to establish a parking area, asset forth and deed dated May 20th, 1999. And that says six parking spaces under a zoning board of appeals permit, which there is no evidence of. So explain to me how you are gonna say what you're asking for in a new project. A substantially larger building. Okay. With parking in a zone where it's not allowed and you're asking this board to approve that, <v Speaker 9>But the parking is already in.</v> <v Speaker 4>I understand. But it's an existing non-conforming.</v> And when you start to expand the building, you do not have the protection of a pre-existing nonconforming protection under section six of the zoning act. You don't, and whoever says you do are incorrect. <v Speaker 1>Alright, let, let me ask</v> <v Speaker 6>Who,</v> <v Speaker 1>Who would help to get this resolved?</v> I I can picture us going back and forth in here. <v Speaker 9>I I don't think there's any need to go back and forth.</v> I'm just, I was trying to, when I or suggested the town council opine on it and the building department opine on it, I thought that would be resolution enough. <v Speaker 6>I'm guessing they were not aware of some</v> of the documentation that's been discussed earlier tonight. <v Speaker 9>Which did you mean the deeds</v> <v Speaker 6>At the aerial photography?</v> <v Speaker 9>They may not have been, but</v> <v Speaker 6>The aerial photography demonstrates not with law,</v> but with with eyes that the law was, it, it's not a preexisting non-conforming use to, to the point. It's an existing non-conforming use. Preexisting means preexisting the law being on the books. That's 1976. <v Speaker 9>But how would've been paved then? Like how, how would do</v> <v Speaker 6>You know,</v> <v Speaker 9>People do think No,</v> I, I get it. I understand that <v Speaker 6>You could, have you asked the question</v> and I assume it wasn't rhetorical, you know, how is it, how is it not preexisting, preexisting has to preexist the zoning bylaw being in place? How is it paved? You know, I've seen people do that all the time. I have seen pe comp companies expand their parking lots without getting permits for it just because they didn't know. They didn't care. There are lots of reasons. It hap the fact that it happened does not mean it happened legally. And what that is, that is I think the sticking point that, and I would say, I mean, I cannot, I would welcome having a chance to, to go back to Caris with the documentation. I I don't find this satisfactory, especially with some of the aerial photography that you have that <v Speaker 4>Shows well, the decision itself is problematic.</v> And I would highly recommend that this whole thing be withdrawn and someone go back to the drawing board and figure out what exactly are the legal standings you have and the rights you think you have to develop this site the way that you've proposed. Because right now, you know, in my opinion, <v Speaker 1>Amanda, if, if we, we obviously rely on</v> town council on car's, and I can understand clearly if Caris, she wrote a notation on, on this, on the, but if it's on the question asked and all the documentation is not there and she wasn't charged with researching the project, then I can understand where her, what she has offered us is, as far as I'm concerned, it's void. It's, it's as, it doesn't, it's, it's not based on enough. How can we most appropriately, most easily, and most well appropriately bring to Caris this information here. And as far as I'm concerned, and certainly the applicant can argue the case if that's appropriate. I, I, I don't know. I just think we've gotta resolve it. And this, it's not gonna happen right now tonight. It just isn't gonna happen. So as I see it, either that or we'll take a vote and the and the vote, it wouldn't be right. It shouldn't be. <v Speaker 9>I, we, I I I had look</v> to continue if anything else, I don't think, beg pardon? I I think we'd continue. I I don't think I'm, I need a vote on this yet at all. So, alright. If possible, I mean, I still don't understand what resolution is going to be acceptable if we just started running the business right now. I mean that, that's at least to my opinion, an option that we have to just essentially run a business out of the existing site. And if that ends up being the board's preference, then, then that, I mean obviously that's the prerogative of the board. I I would just hope that the actual project itself would be considered As it's presented with the approvals from the zoning board based on the direction of the building commissioner and confirmed by town council. And it's essentially that this is the, this is the procedure. And I I understand if it's, if it's not convincing enough at this point, then it's not convincing enough at this point. I'm not gonna, well it's, and I fighting an arguing change my, I'm trying to away IAnd. I'm just, I do want to know what what would be satisfactory. Like, is is there something from someone to confirm that this is an appropriate project to be reviewed as far as what the plans show rather than how it got there? It does. I don't know if the zoning board would like to weigh in again or something that I, I don't know. But I also don't want to overstep and say I need something from this board or I need something from that board. I'm trying to establish what would be satisfactory to move forward and look at the actual project. <v Speaker 1>Yes. And</v> <v Speaker 4>We, we've had things like this happen</v> before in my short time on the board. We have received opinions from town council and the question has been raised, what, what question are, what question was given to town council? Okay. What documents were given to town council? Did, did town council know this, that, and the other thing? And under those, I mean, my inclination generally speaking is to take the advice of town council and I'd say eight outta 10 times I probably do. But we've had cases like this before where the question, the legitimate question has come up about what questions were posed, what documents were submitted, and it, it causes us maybe me to wonder like, well if they, if if town council had access to all of this and heard this argument, is it possible their opinion might change? It might be different. So the, I we, I will grant you that this is like meeting three of kicking this around and we haven't made much progress. So one option is to sort of form a working group with town council, present the information, try to get, you know, get an explanation. If, if not, then I suppose maybe town council can watch the meeting and see the, the information that came up. And then, but I, for, for, for a project like this, which boils down, as I said the first night we met, this feels like one of those encroachments into a residential neighborhood. This is the last commercial property as you head down speed street and head into a neighborhood. And maybe in the scheme of things it's no big deal. But I, I think things like this, in order for them to be IMP approved and for it to essentially be sort of like a new encroachment into a neighborhood, it it just ha it just has to, it, in my opinion, I I will vote for it if all the questions are answered. All of these, these, these issues that have been raised, have been, have been addressed. I'm, you know, I would probably reluctantly raise my hand. That's been my practice for a long time. But while these remain unanswered, I, I don't see any way that I can like tell my neighbors, Hey, you know what, it was kind of a 50 50, but yeah, we said yeah, and there's gonna be, you know, there's gonna be a new bigger building. You're gonna have to look after the rest of your lives. So my, my proposal is to figure out some way to resolve it. And frankly, if it does require a trip to ZBA to address these issues, the existing non-conformity, then I, you know, I, I'm not, I, I personally am not in a rush to get this decided. I'm in a rush. I, I'd be more interested in taking the time to get it right. Problem with the issue at hand. In my opinion with the zoning board, parking is a use, we do not allow use variances in this town. Full stop. So I think if visited the zoning board, it's up to you. You're the attorney, you can figure out the strategy with your client. I would highly recommend you familiar familiarize yourself with Mendez v Barnstable as a case law. I would highly recommend you scrub every word in the decision and get comfortable that you think this covers Variance, whatever else you want to achieve the use. It says residential use by the way, not commercial. The new residential structure shall be constructed. I think you gotta go back to the zoning board if you wanna fix that <v Speaker 1>Typo</v> <v Speaker 4>Who just</v> spoke, I don't know. Okay. So we don't give you variances in the town. So obviously the option is either, you know, take a vote on the decision tonight, which we can do or continue it with some kind of a plan. I'd like to have some, if we're gonna continue, I'd like withdraw. Yeah. Oh yeah, that's a third option. But, but like I said, if we are gonna continue, I'd like to know what the plan is. 'cause I don't wanna do this again in two weeks, you know? Yeah. <v Speaker 1>Is it appropriate for us to ask the town council review</v> as I, one of the suggestions that Andy made, I think is, is a good one gets everybody's voices heard. If she would've listened to the, to the, the meeting on tape? Mm, I think it would take beyond <v Speaker 12>That because there will</v> <v Speaker 6>Be, there'll be more questions to come out of that.</v> <v Speaker 1>But if we are prepared to take town council's response</v> to a complete question, I emphasize complete, which I don't believe she got from the sounds of it, then if she gives a complete an, an answer to a complete question, then this board has the best input as far as I'm concerned that we can get does that and take that. And that will be our response to the applicant. Wherever that takes you. I don't know. Is that Mr. <v Speaker 10>Chairman? Mr.</v> Chairman, just a, a question with regard to helping that happen best. <v Speaker 1>Oh, I'm sorry, I'm looking at the wrong screen.</v> <v Speaker 9>No, you're looking at the right screen. I think,</v> <v Speaker 10>Sorry,</v> <v Speaker 1>Go ahead.</v> <v Speaker 10>Just a quick question to help make that happen work best,</v> would the board like to craft the question They would like answered best that way. That way we can ensure that at the end of the question, when the town council reviews it thinks about what they want to say. Even if it's just you give bullet points right now and then we can in working with Amanda, <v Speaker 9>I, I'm sorry is sorry.</v> Is I guess just to, I think what he's asking is, is the crux of, is it a matter of fact question essentially as to whether or not the parking was a preexisting use? Is that the, the crux we <v Speaker 6>Know it was a, we know it was a preexisting use.</v> <v Speaker 9>Preexisting</v> <v Speaker 6>It, I mean it is not a conforming use.</v> <v Speaker 9>No, no. It's not a conforming use. Absolutely not.</v> But is is it a fact question rather than a legal question as to whether or not the parking meets the criteria of a preexisting non-conforming use in this, on this site? Not in general. <v Speaker 6>It's an, and I misspoke it's an existing</v> use, not preexisting. Preexisting implies <v Speaker 9>Preexisting the zoning before exactly this law was</v> <v Speaker 6>Put</v> <v Speaker 9>In place.</v> So that would be the fact question then. Right? Whether or not on this site has it been established that parking preexisting preexisting zoning, <v Speaker 6>Not just but from the sound of things not only existed</v> but has had significantly expanded very, very recently. So the, the, the non-conformity was worse. It was, are you, <v Speaker 9>Excuse me, I'm, I I'm saying from a zoning and,</v> and land use perspective, is, is it a fact question or is it a procedural? <v Speaker 13>If you can answer the question,</v> ask if you can answer the question. <v Speaker 1>Wait a minute, Doug, hang on please. I one please.</v> We are going to, I don't know what question you're asking us to formulate, to, to put together. No, <v Speaker 9>I'm just wondering what the que</v> <v Speaker 1>Whether it's a fact or not.</v> I am saying if we're going to ask any question of town council, if that's who we are looking for our decision, our, our the recommendation, then that question cannot just be as far as I'm concerned, written down. It's not, this information to me is part of the question based on <v Speaker 9>I understand and what, what, I don't mean to interrupt,</v> but what I'm, what I'm, what what Mr. Landry is showing are specific to this site. Correct? <v Speaker 4>Yeah. Can I help frame the question?</v> <v Speaker 1>Alright,</v> <v Speaker 4>So if you wanna get to a fact,</v> was there parking in the residential zoned portion of this lot? Hmm. Prior to June 22nd, 1976. <v Speaker 9>Okay. That, that, that's what I mean.</v> So that, that's the, and if there's a lot of ways to get to that, but if the building department and town council established that it was a preexisting non-conforming use, <v Speaker 6>Then we need to see, I think it would be helpful to see,</v> receive the evidence that <v Speaker 9>Shows that from who?</v> Like the pre pre, the pre a presentation of evidence in in what? Well, <v Speaker 4>I can I, and again,</v> I can show you aerial photographs nos why Im saying the prove it. So if you can tell me that I'm not, <v Speaker 9>I'm not here to, to be, I'm not trying to counterpoint.</v> I'm really not. I I don't have aerial photos or anything like that. So I'm not trying to do that. What I'm asking is if it is established that it is a pre-existing non-conforming use, is that sufficient for the board to review the plan as presented? <v Speaker 1>Only if the people who, to whom</v> that question is being asked have enough information. If we're not asking town council to go and document all of this themselves, then we have enough information here that should be able, by the sounds of it, should be able to come up with that answer. <v Speaker 6>And, and in that use</v> variances are not granted in Natick. That is a whole separate thing, but also something directly relevant. <v Speaker 4>Well, let me underscore that.</v> It's, it's patently not allowed. It's not like we don't do it as a matter of practice. No, I know it's not allowed. <v Speaker 6>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 1>I mean is it feasible</v> to get a working group? <v Speaker 2>I think at this time a working group</v> should be put on hold. <v Speaker 1>Okay. But I'm thinking</v> <v Speaker 2>With, I have meeting, I have meeting time</v> next week with Caris. So why don't we continue this to the 12th. I'll meet with Caris and we'll go from there. <v Speaker 4>Is there any confusion as to what the question is? No, I,</v> <v Speaker 2>I've given her everything that the ZBA had.</v> I've given her all this information. I did not have the aerial photos, but that was not really that information at that time. But the, <v Speaker 4>The deed information, I mean I got all here,</v> I have all the deeds, I have the, the full title. It seemed kind of crazy with all due respect to not have Doug in that meeting. I mean, Doug has done research, kind of identified the questions, led the charge. I mean to have, you know, town staff and carris meet maybe with the applicant and not to have the person there who's kind of driving the questions. I could see a scenario where like, okay, now we've got the answer. And Doug says, well actually you didn't address this issue. I mean, I'm not saying anybody's being a bad guy here. These are legitimate good faith questions well asked. So I, I agree <v Speaker 1>With Andy that</v> <v Speaker 4>The idea of not having, it's your</v> <v Speaker 1>Working group, Doug,</v> <v Speaker 4>In</v> <v Speaker 2>When it's one, it's not a working group,</v> <v Speaker 1>It's just okay titled incorrectly, not a working group.</v> But we're gonna put some heads together to come up with an answer. It should involve Doug and Karis at least if, if you client, if you're in for that. And Amanda, it can be, if it can be done, <v Speaker 2>I'm gonna have to put it at a different time.</v> I only have 30 minutes with her next <v Speaker 1>Week, like well before that 30 minutes. Can you,</v> <v Speaker 2>I have to get all the tell me stuff</v> and everything else in with that. So let me email her and get time with her. <v Speaker 1>Alright.</v> <v Speaker 4>I'm happy to participate.</v> It is my responsibility and duty as a board member to do that. But I've just gotta say part of my frustration with this project has been the lack of a coherent presentation enfor this board to do the heavy lifting. And quite honestly, we all have day jobs. Okay? And there are paid consultants by the applicant who work on behalf of the applicant to help frame this stuff. So, <v Speaker 1>Okay.</v> Can, that can be certainly something you would say given the opportunity, taking the opportunity, you'd say that to Caris so that she could look and see maybe is there some way that <v Speaker 4>This, I'd be happy to share whatever</v> information I have. That's all <v Speaker 1>I'm, that's I'm asking that</v> <v Speaker 4>That's yes.</v> And being and being a professional planner with 30 years of experience in zoning law, I'm happy to talk about case law. I'm happy to talk about the zoning act. I'm happy to talk about any of it from an interpretation standpoint. <v Speaker 1>Well, you would stand better chance of getting all</v> as much information as possible to car for her consideration and discussion than any of us as far as I, for me, <v Speaker 4>Happy to do it on behalf of the board.</v> <v Speaker 1>And so I would like that. I appreciate that.</v> We all appreciate that. I hope the applicant does. We're obviously at a log log ahead here. It, <v Speaker 4>It's, well unless it come, I hope it doesn't come up.</v> 'cause it's always tricky when a board may have a different interpretation from town staff and town council. It's really nice when we're all 100% on the same page and we're supporting one another. <v Speaker 1>But we know that's why, why that's not happening</v> <v Speaker 4>In a case like this, it's awkward</v> and sometimes there's a little pressure like, Hey Doug, what the hell drop it. Would you? And I I I, I'd like to say personally, I appreciate that these are good faith questions. There's no agenda here. And it's an awkward situation when we're kind of not on the same page. Particularly when we're receiving memos from the building commissioner and and town council sometimes that that is just like, okay, now we have to live with it. But, so thank you for participating. Thank you for the research. Thank you for going at this in a good faith clear reasoned manner and I I, I look forward to seeing if there's some consensus here, direction to go. So I, I support you in your, in your questioning. <v Speaker 1>Sorry,</v> <v Speaker 6>Just to say that this is not a unique instance</v> where town council has presented something and we have disagreed. I yeah. And so it, that it isn't that this is an exception in a million. Yeah, <v Speaker 1>I I'm not, I'm not saying</v> that we disagree with town council. I'm saying it's not what you say but how you say it. There was a question asked, but I may have. By the sounds of it, it was only a, a little fraction of a, of a, of a question. We didn't get the whole thing in there with all of the what's if, what ifs and all the rest. So I think we're, as far as I'm concerned this I think we're on the right track. We've got the right people putting their heads together and I believe this board will take whatever answer comes out of that session, that joint session and we'll take it and let you know what it is and where you go with it. I, I hope it works for you. Alright, so we <v Speaker 5>Will we continue to the 12th second.</v> <v Speaker 6>Wait, it's okay. Just a second.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay, we made and second to continue, or</v> <v Speaker 9>I'm sorry, just before the 12th, does it make more sense</v> to continue to the meeting following that it took a while for town council to issue this. So I know that there are probably people here for this meeting it sounds like about the, <v Speaker 5>At the request of the applicant.</v> I modify my motion move to continue to the 26th. <v Speaker 1>I</v> <v Speaker 9>Just for the motion second benefit of the audience</v> and the people who may have question. I <v Speaker 1>Appreciate that it's, especially if you are not in there,</v> I mean we want to get it done 26th. I'll <v Speaker 4>Second</v> <v Speaker 6>Already seconded.</v> Okay. Whenever. Okay. <v Speaker 5>Later. Iye</v> <v Speaker 6>Evans. Iye.</v> <v Speaker 4>My Meyer. Aye Landry. Aye</v> <v Speaker 1>Not aye.</v> Thank you very much. Thank guys. Your patience and help. Alright. <v Speaker 6>Oh,</v> <v Speaker 2>I just need a second</v> to promote five Auburn Streets people. So if you just give me, <v Speaker 1>Oh yes,</v> <v Speaker 2>Two seconds.</v> We got quite a few. <v Speaker 1>I</v> <v Speaker 14>Was like, once she mentioned date of the zoning,</v> I'm like, oh I have Google Earth on my computer. I I love Google <v Speaker 7>Earth</v> <v Speaker 14>Now right now because</v> <v Speaker 7>Oh my god,</v> <v Speaker 14>I actually had for a while</v> because I was using accessible documents. Yeah. But recently they took it away from me. Documents. For those listening here, we're just on a technical pause be with you momentarily. <v Speaker 7>We're talking about the pleasures of Adobe.</v> <v Speaker 14>I'm sorry, what?</v> <v Speaker 5>Soft Peter.</v> It sounds like your microphone is off. <v Speaker 7>Oh</v> <v Speaker 14>No, I turned it off. Oh</v> <v Speaker 5>Then, then you shouldn't talk.</v> <v Speaker 7>Hmm?</v> You trying to promote somebody? What's <v Speaker 14>That?</v> You trying to promote somebody? <v Speaker 2>No, there's like seven people</v> and I'm, I don't know all of them. So I'm going between an email and Zoom 'cause my screen's so small but I'm not seeing Caitlin. Is Cliff gonna be present tonight? I'm not sure he <v Speaker 15>Is.</v> And it looks like he's been let <v Speaker 2>In.</v> Oh he has. Okay great. Great. There he is. <v Speaker 14>Yep,</v> <v Speaker 1>He's on the board.</v> <v Speaker 2>Lemme just do one final double check.</v> Does that look like everybody? <v Speaker 15>It does, yes. Thank you. Awesome.</v> <v Speaker 2>Alright, sorry about that.</v> <v Speaker 1>Would you like to make any kind of an intro to</v> what we've already heard a lot of? <v Speaker 2>Sure. So we did receive, just to give a quick update,</v> the zoning board of appeals had continued their public hearing that was scheduled for January to February 10th because we were waiting for reise plans. We received Reise plans, which are in your packets on January 23rd. The historic district is meeting tomorrow night to review these revised plans as well. And so this is what is presented in front of you. We do have McFarland Johnson who is the peer review for the town doing site civil and traffic engineering peer review for the the ZBA. We have not received their peer review letter yet. So other than that the project is kind of moving along but their entire team is here. So I think turn it over to them. I do have the presentation, I've downloaded it into your packets just so you can see it a little bit better. But just for the sake of presenting, it's always easier if they present just so they don't have to keep saying next. <v Speaker 1>Alright. Yes. Who would like to chair your group there?</v> <v Speaker 16>Yeah, I'll, I'll, I'll kick it off.</v> My name is Jennifer Gilbert. I'm permitting counsel for the Metro West Collaborative. I wanna thank you so much for your time. We were all, this group was before you at your last meeting. We did continue, like Amanda said. Amanda, thank you for the recap. We continued the ZBA hearing, we're going to the ZBA on February 10th. This is our second presentation. And I just wanna say there have been numerous, numerous revisions made based on your feedback both for the civil set and the architectural design of the new building. You had a lot of comments on both design of the new building and also the site plan. Most of those were taken to heart and the team has been busy making revisions to the plans based on that feedback. Like I said, it's our second visit. We're on a pretty strict time schedule as far as financing requirements and milestones for the project. So that we're hoping that after tonight's presentation of the revised plans, you'll see that the majority of the changes you requested have been incorporated into the plan and we're hoping that you can submit your advisory memo to the ZBA. And that's all for me. So let me turn it over to Cliff Bower, the architect and then you'll hear from the civil engineer as well. <v Speaker 17>I think we might want to start. Hi everybody man.</v> Good to see you all. I think we probably want to start with Caitlin though. <v Speaker 16>Sure. Caitlin.</v> <v Speaker 18>Yeah. I also will just say I just tried to share it</v> and it starts flipping through really quickly, so I will try again and hoping that just a glitch that doesn't happen. <v Speaker 16>That's Anna, one of the architects speaking just now.</v> But Caitlin Madden, the CEO wants to say some preliminary comments. Why don't you go ahead, Caitlin. <v Speaker 18>Yeah, you probably get this.</v> <v Speaker 15>Okay, sure. So good evening members of the board</v> and thank you again for having us here tonight. I'm just gonna very briefly give an overview of the project and the status before passing it off to our civil engineer and our architect to talk through the design updates that we've made to our proposal. I'm hoping that maybe Anna can get the presentation up on the screen. <v Speaker 18>Yes. Maybe, maybe Chelsea should try.</v> Which file are you trying to share? <v Speaker 2>I can share it if needed. It was just,</v> <v Speaker 18>For some reason it just started</v> playing like a s slideshow. So I i <v Speaker 5>Is it the one that starts presentation</v> or is it the one that starts five Auburn Street comp permit set <v Speaker 18>Presentation? Yep.</v> <v Speaker 2>And I can share it.</v> <v Speaker 5>Okay. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 2>Just bear with me a second. It's just loading.</v> There we go. There you go. <v Speaker 15>Okay. Thank you Amanda.</v> Sorry for the technical about that. Okay, next slide please. <v Speaker 2>Wrong way. Sorry. No,</v> I didn't know if there was like an automatic rather than going through like, you know what I mean, like a <v Speaker 15>Okay.</v> All right. So just very briefly, a reminder of the, the benefits of our proposal. So our proposal creates 100% affordable housing, 32 units de restricted in perpetuity. It also provides historic preservation of the Air Elliot School, not just, you know, we're not just keeping the building, we are preserving it in accordance with the strict standards at the Department of Interior standards for the rehabilitation of historic properties. Excuse me. We're also providing and maintaining open space on the site significantly the lawn at the corner of Elliot and Auburn Street to maintain the historic site lines of the historic school. And that part of the site is a, a significant portion of the site, excuse me. As far as sustainability, we're making efficien energy efficiency improvements for the existing building. And we are preserving pursuing passive house certification for the new construction building in addition to providing significant improvement of site storm water management to benefit the Charles River. As far as accessibility, we're also providing accessibility upgrades at the historic building and the new building will be fully accessible. Next slide please. So we have been in front of a, a number of, of groups regarding this project and in terms of public engagement following a competitive RFP process back in 2023, Metro West CD's proposal was chosen by the select board as the most advantageous reuse at the Elliot school property. And we signed a development agreement. Since then, we've had significant public engagement and input on the project, including open houses, select board meetings, zoning board hearings, presentations to the historic district commission and planning board in December. And again tonight, we have also received feedback through written comments and letters through the project eligibility letter process with the state comments from the National Park Service and Massachusetts Historical Commission, the Natick Conservation Commission, the Natick Affordable Housing Trust. And we have held a number of design town design review team meetings to ensure that the, the plans and as they advance, are in accordance with the feedback that we're receiving there. So tonight we're gonna be presenting updated architectural and site design plans, but I did wanna flag a couple of upcoming future meetings. Tomorrow night we are gonna be in front of the historic district commission, and then on February 10th we'll be back in front of the zoning board. But this is kind of the way that the sequencing of the meetings worked out. This is the first time we're presenting these updated plans, but we have a series of meetings coming up after tonight. Next slide please. So we've heard, I'm sorry, I'm recovering from an illness. We've heard a number of comments on site design, an interest in reviewing the extent of impervious surface on the site, an interest in reviewing the location of the trash enclosure, reviewing the site circulation, an interest in increasing the open space and planting areas on the site. An interest in reviewing the selection of tree species that we're calling for in our landscape plans and our site lighting design. And also taking a look at any options for adjustments that we can make on our site to improve emergency vehicle access for our neighbors on Auburn Street. As far as architectural building design, we have heard an interest in modification to the massing and the scale of the new construction building an interest or feedback that the architectural language of the previous design was not consistent with Auburn Street in the South Natick neighborhood. We've heard an interest in the strengthening the relationship of the new building to the Elliot school and an an interest in improved quality of open space between the buildings and also an interest in seeing some additional views of the new construction building from the public way. Next slide please. So just very briefly, the things that have not changed. So our building program remains the same as far as our sustainability goals, our accessibility goals, our affordability, our unit count and bedroom mix have not changed. And then tonight we're gonna be talking in more detail about what has changed. So we'll be showing some revised civil plans, some revised landscape plans and revised architectural plans. Next slide, please. Okay. And with that I will pass it to Dana from Merrill Engineers, our civil engineering firm. <v Speaker 19>Thank you very much, Caitlin. Good evening everyone.</v> My name is Dana Alveo with Maryland Engineers and Lance of airs. Just to give you a, a, a brief, a a brief overview of the site, just to get you back on onto the property. Number five is located on the southwest east side of Auburn Street at the intersection of Elliot Street with the Charles River located to the southeast or the right side of the page. As you you're looking at the plan now the site consists of approximately 2.84 acres and contains the historic Elliot School along with its parking play areas and associated site features. The existing topography on a lot is relatively flat within the existing developed area slopes from pretty consistently gen gently from Elliot Street down to a fence to the rear of the existing Elliot school, which is at the, the top of the slope that slopes more steeply down to the the Charles River. The existing site currently provides no stormwater treatment or recharge or runoff on site for any of the, the storm water coming from the existing roof runoff or the paved parking areas. Generally runoff just flows untreated directly towards the Charles River Overland. If we go to the, the next slide, please. This is just kind of a, a, an image of the previously submitted site plan that was presented on 12 18 24. This kind of shows the, the original site layout, the, the pavement, the the building mass is, is Caitlin. Kind of touched on. As we look at the proposed site plan, we'll see a, a reduction in overall asphalt as well as a reduction in the, the scale and the mass of the, the, the proposed building as well. Moving on to the next slide, this is the previously submitted landscape plan. This, this shows the trees that were originally presented on 1218. Rebecca will present some modifications and some increased in plant plantings around the buildings, et cetera, just after me. Oh, moving on to the next slide. This just kind of goes through the renderings that were presented on 1218 as well. It kind of shows the original mass of the proposed buildings next to the existing Elliot school. There's been a lot of work done to drastically reduce the mass and the, the layout and scale of the proposed building. So Cliff and Anna, we will, we'll get into some detail on that after, after Rebecca, but at this point we can move into the updated site plan. Since the last hearing, the site plans have been revised in an effort to try to address comments that have been received during the recent hearings, as well as other design comments made to this point by various town officials or neighbors, et cetera. One of the main things that we looked at was modifying the, the parking. We've changed it to angle parking. As you can see, this allows the drive aisle to be reduced from eight, from 24 feet down to 18 feet. It does reduce the overall number of parking, just the, the nature of angle parking is a little bit less efficient. That coupled with the fact that if you look to the bottom of the plan page, we've relocated the proposed dumpster area. It used to be at the end of the proposed fire department access. It's now located in what used to be two parking spaces. So we lose a couple spaces there and we lose a couple spaces with the angle parking. So we're now at a, a total of 41 spaces, which is still meeting the, the minimum criteria of of ITE parking calculations, which was presented by our, our traffic engineer, Scott Norton from Vanessa Associates. At the last hearing, the also the, the dumpsters will be provided a DA access from both buildings. The dumpster area and the fire department access area will be elevated on, on top of a, a sloped curbing. Those curving will be mountable for the, the, the, the fire department trucks to easily get up there. And it will also allow it easier access for, for residents of the, the proposed building with the majority of the, the residents will be. The surface treatment for the fire department access area has been changed. We've eliminated the asphalt in this area and this will now become previous pavers, which will get, be allowed to infiltrate all, all runoff from the, the pavers themselves right into the, the, the, the system below the, the, the, the, the, the surface itself, sorry, the dumpster area has, has also been set up. It's, it's been reduced in size. We have just gonna use rollout dumpsters at this point, which can be picked up by the, the trash company that, that they'll just have a little arm that, that comes out and can easily access the dumpsters and drop that into the, the, the truck. So there's no need to drive in the street anymore. So this allows us to reduce the size of that area. Additionally, pretreatment has been added to the two remaining. The, the bio retention areas, both one and two. We have added various pre-treatment to keep the, the stormwater management system in keeping with the new requirements of the aquifer protection district, new regulations. Additionally, the, the subsurface infiltration area and the, the, the bio retention area that was originally over by the, the fire department access will be removed as it's, it's no longer necessary. We've also proposed wheel stops for all parking spaces that are adjacent to curbing. Okay. As along with, you know, sidewalks and, and buildings itself, the curb a DI at both access entries into the site and exiting the site have been increased to allow easier emergency access vehicles or access for the, the emergency vehicles to exit and enter the site. A additionally, any emergency vehicles that are going down to number eight, Auburn Street can now back into the site. We've increased that, that curb radio even more so the, the emergency vehicle can now back into the site. So it can kind of do a, a three point turn and exit the site forward along Auburn Street. Now, we've also provided a d am ramps at, or we've actually, I'm sorry. We, we, we've actually provided detectable warning strips at all a DA ramps throughout the site. And we have shown a DA ramps in, in and warning strips out on Auburn Street at the, the two curb openings there as well. I think that covers all of, oh, I'm sorry. Lastly, the, the compact EV spaces to the south southwest of the existing Elliot school had been increased in size from 7.5 feet wide and 15 feet long to eight feet wide and 16 feet long as requested. Some comments that were received earlier. Overall, the, the reduction of the parking and drive aisle has been reduced by four feet and the sidewalk in front of the, the new building has been reduced by another foot. So this provides a, a lot more landscape area between the parking area and the new building. Overall, the, the production and asphalt on site from the original proposed site design to the, this new design has been reduced by 3,500 square feet and we have reduced the overall building mass and, and, and footprints as well. I think that covers everything from a site design. I can, I can hand it over to Rebecca to discuss the, the landscape revisions at at this point. <v Speaker 18>Great, thanks Dana. Sure. Scroll a little bit more.</v> I'm Rebecca Han. I'm the project landscape architect from RBLA design and thanks to all of this reduced building massing and the smaller parking footprint, we've definitely added some green space between the two buildings. We have now room for foundation planting beds all along the front of the new building and some improved screening of the new, the northeast end of that new building mass. You can see we're still maintaining street trees along Auburn Street, new Street trees on this plan, the kinda olive green circles along the west side are existing to remain and that lawn, as Caitlin mentioned, Elliot Street is all to stay. And then the darker or more brightly colored circles are new proposed trees. We are also keeping both of the site flag poles, oh, <v Speaker 6>Sorry.</v> Bear with me a second. Sorry. <v Speaker 18>No problem.</v> <v Speaker 15>Amanda, I think Anna has maybe resolved her</v> technical issues. Would you like for her to try to share again <v Speaker 6>If she wants to?</v> Yeah, that'd be great. 'cause my batteries, <v Speaker 18>Yeah, I can, I can share now.</v> So I'll bring up where Rebecca was. There we go. Great. Thank you. We've also added a lot more detail to these plans. I think in the original set it was just kind of a little bubbled area in front of each building. So I have added on the black and white drawings more detail to the plant schedule, the sizes and quantities of each plant and added individual plantings to the s rendered plan. I'm, so you can see better what we're doing. Where are <v Speaker 6>We?</v> Where are we on, on the slideshow? <v Speaker 18>Oh, so</v> <v Speaker 6>I'm just trying to find the list of,</v> of plantings, et <v Speaker 18>Cetera.</v> Oh, it's on the black and white set that was submitted separately. <v Speaker 6>Okay. So we don't have them here in this,</v> <v Speaker 18>It's not in this presentation.</v> No, <v Speaker 6>Sorry.</v> <v Speaker 18>Sorry. But just wanted to let you know</v> that there is more detail on the plants 'cause that was something that was requested. We also did change out a few plant species. There was some concern about some that would maybe be a bit messy near sidewalks or property lines. So those have been swapped out for less messy trees. Fortunately they all dropped something at some point, but still native species. But going more along the sweet gum and tulip tree things without like acorns as an the oak species might have. There was also a question about an existing path near the church to the west. It connects into the existing school lot. So we're removing that and you can see this darker green hedge along the side between the, where the little car is, there you go. So that planting strip serves two purposes. It reinforces that the pathway is no longer there and we'll also buffer the small Ballard lights that we have to illuminate that driveway. We did relocate the visitor bike racks that were on the plan. The one for the existing school was at the drop off, which we realized is not convenient to the door. So all of the bike racks will be between the two buildings each located at the near the building entries and the site lighting on the next slide has been updated. Next slide, Anna. Thank you. Unfortunately, cytometry is not a really attractive plan. This doesn't show you a lot. So in the next one we have these ISO lines that help reflect better where the light will fall. You see a couple small areas of spill those, they look more dramatic than they are. It's really 0.1, which is negligible and will be improved cut off with those plantings that I was pointing out earlier. And then on the south side there'll be a fence. We're proposing a solid board fence, so that will also cut that off. There's just not really a way to model that. And in the plan details, the black and white documents, there are new details for that fence screening and for the dumpster enclosure. Now that we've better located that and have more definition there. So those appear on the packet that you have offline. Happy to discuss anything in more detail, but then I think Cliff is going to talk, you walk you through the building changes, which are the most dramatic impact I think we have. <v Speaker 17>Hi everybody, I'm Cliff Bower.</v> I'm a principal at Davis Square Architects. I'm here with Anna R. Scott who is invited to jump in if she perceives that I'm leaving out any important information. But I, I'm gonna go back a little bit and just repeat some of what Jennifer talked about earlier about what we heard in the changes. And I think this image speaks to a lot of that. I think one of the, the nicest points from this perspective is really seeing the change in the courtyard space. It is a broader courtyard, gives us opportunities for landscaping both closer to the street as well as a meaningful planting strip along the, the rear part of the building, which is a pretty big change. And, and you already heard from Dana about introducing different paving materials that certainly help with stormwater management and as well as I think the aesthetics of the site. So as far as the, again, what Jennifer mentioned that we heard about massing and scale, I think the, strictly speaking massing, I think you can see what we've done is we've put a small piece closer to the street, which is the piece that's the most impactful to the neighborhood. A bigger piece in the back. And there's a very big break between the two buildings and you'll see more of that in some of the images that you're going to see in a video that we have. I think the, as far as the language of the building itself, obviously the, probably the most prominent thing from this view is switching to a sloped roof aesthetic and putting our top floor units within the roof space as opposed to a flat roof building that we got pretty consistent, less than favorable reaction to in the past. As far as other language issues, we've taken cues both from very close by smaller homes, but also some of the bigger developments that are close by including the Riverbend school that I think taught us some lessons about incorporating some flat roof areas for mechanical and pv, but using the rest of the massing of the building to really only present sloped roofs in the most prominent views. We are still talking about using the clapboards, we are introducing smaller bay element as you see on the front of the building from this view there. The comments as far as the relationship of this, of our building to the existing building, I think some of the big points are of the sloped roof obviously is a, a big one. The two piece massing is taken directly from the Elliot school that does have two pieces to it that are connected by an open passageway. We've introduced a pergola in our building and a really drastic reduction in the, in the footprint of the center piece, which is where the primary entry to the building will be colors. I think all of you know that there are a lot of white clapboard buildings in South Natick and we've picked up on that idea and we've introduced a lot of detail. It's not quite so easy to see in this image, but window trim is reflecting a lot of what we see as very common in the neighborhood. And again, as reflective of some of what we've learned, some, some of the newer developments in the neighborhood, not just the historic as far as the buildings having dialogue with each other. We'll get to that shortly. I think that's more evident in some of the building elevations and, and I think much clearer once we get to the last images that we're looking at. So if we go to the next image, you'll see just as a reminder where we were compared to with where we are now. And I would like to point out a couple of points that the front piece in the, in the revised design is significantly narrower than before. It's at least eight feet narrower than what we were showing before. The setback from the street is the same as what it was, but it's a, a much smaller piece that, as you've heard earlier, did open up a lot more usable space in the courtyard. The, I would point out that our, the neighbor's home, you know, because we did want this piece, the front piece to really relate closely to the scale of the homes on the street, which we believe it does. Our new elevation is about 40 feet wide that you're seeing here. And the home directly across the street from us is about 38 feet. And I think that's really evident when you look at the site plans, the Dana show, where you get a good view of the information that we have about the scale of the homes across the street. I think we can go to the next image. Yeah. And so these are the elevations that's cleared. On the left is the Auburn Street elevation. There you can see a little more clearly the pergola that is in the piece that divides the two front and back pieces. You get a peak on the left hand side of the east elevation where we've preserved a, a flat roof area, which is in the least impactful part of the building and largely disguised from sloped roofs. That's the riverside of the building. The west elevation is the revised clan of where the access aisle is that you saw used to have a dumpster in that area. We heard very clearly some concerns about bad location for the dumpster at which we completely agreed with getting it away from unit windows. Not having trash trucks approaching close to the side of the building made a tremendous amount of sense to all of us in that west elevation. You get a good view of the mechanical screening. The roof does have a parapet that does actually most of the screening. These are elevation views, they're not street views. So the parapet actually does do most of the effective screening that isn't, that isn't accomplished by the slope roof. We, we only intend to put up additional screening, probably only, I'm guessing at this point we haven't designed the mechanical systems, but at this point we're thinking it probably would be required to screen the ERV, which is the biggest piece of equipment on the rooftop that provides fresh air to all of the units. The rest of the, of the roof area that isn't occupied by the ERV and heat pumps for the building would be occupied by photovoltaic panels. We can look at the next two elevations. The north elevation is a courtyard elevation. You know, I, again, it's, I think the big move is pretty clear where we introduced units into the roofscape as opposed to having a separate third, you know, very distinct third floor of the building. You can start to see here some of the relationships that we were talking about between the existing Elliot school, the school building in particular, and this building. I think the window patterning and large kind of bay systems that you see in the right hand building are of reflective of exactly the same id idea in the, in the historic building. And you'll see that better once we run through the video that we have for you. The south elevation is the river side elevation. I do want to point out that this is, again, this is an architectural elevation. It's not a perspectival view. The river itself are are actually, and you'll see that when you look closely at the civil plans, the vegetative wetland that you get to on the river side of the building before you actually get to the water is about 12 to 14 feet lower than the grade you're seeing here. So just to kind of put it in perspective, what the view from the river might be, it is significantly lower than what you're seeing here as our, our floor level from the south elevation. And I think that next, I I would like to give you a quick drive through. I think imagine you're on a, a little motor scooter 'cause it's a little faster than most of us walk, but, and I'll emphasize this as conceptual, that doesn't mean this isn't what we intend to do. It is what we intend to do, but it's a rendering. It's not based on construction documents, which of course haven't been developed at this point, but we think it's pretty close to what, what we actually can build. So Anna, if you wouldn't mind playing that and there may be, I may make few comments as, as we run it. <v Speaker 18>Oh, okay. So I think I have</v> to switch the program that I am. Yes. All right. <v Speaker 17>And, and actually, you know what, can, can you pause it?</v> <v Speaker 18>I can would that.</v> <v Speaker 17>I can, okay. Sorry.</v> Maybe back it up and I'll just, because I want them, we are moving fast enough. You might miss some things. So from here you see the, obviously the original school building to the right rights, the auditorium and tucked in between is what you would see of our new building between the two of them. And I think we can run again, maybe pause for a second. I wanna point out that this is all the trees are show, show are being shown fully leafed out. That is actually a function of the software we're using to create this animation. So when you get closer to the building, we actually eliminated a couple trees just so that you could see the front of the, of the new proposed building. There's that connector piece. By the way, I'm sure you've all seen that the connector piece of the two historic buildings. <v Speaker 18>I can, I'll just leave it playing.</v> <v Speaker 17>And there's a tripartite window wall that I was referring</v> to in the existing building with a it's pattern of windows and rather pronounced trim, kind of a robust trim in that building. And there's our new planting strip that we were able to achieve through the angle parking. And that I think is the best view of the, where you see the split of the two buildings that we think does a lot for the project, both with scale mitigation and just creating interest of within the massing of the building itself. And I think you do see a little bit of more of the articulation in those three bays of ganged windows in the rear, in the rear building. But that I think is the end of the video. Right. And yes, I don't think you want to go in the building. We could, but not right now. I don't <v Speaker 18>It wouldn't. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 17>Yeah, it's, we haven't put all the finishes in yet.</v> But anyway, that's, that's where we're at with this. And I, I appreciate that many of the changes we made came from your participation as well as all the many other parties who've weighed in and helped us work through this process. So I think give it back to Caitlyn. I think Caitlyn, if you've got any wrap up comments? <v Speaker 15>Yeah, no, I, I think we're just ready for any questions</v> or comments from the board. <v Speaker 1>Okay. Why don't we start at this end. Andy, thank</v> <v Speaker 7>You.</v> <v Speaker 4>Thank you. And thank you for addressing some of our,</v> some of our many, most, quite a few of our concerns. Appreciate you coming back. We've had other 40 B projects that haven't, so I, I do really appreciate the fact that the whole team is there, that a video's here that you are coming back to the planning board, which is an advisory board in this. So thank you, thank you, thank you. And thank you for changing the roof on the back building and the changes that you made there. I really just have two quick questions. Does it have to be white slash gray? I, I, I'm no architect. I don't pretend to be one, but I I'm still trying to think about integrating the two buildings. I dunno if it'd be possible to have the finish on the building be closer to that ish color. I don't know. Other board members might not think that's a big deal, but I was curious about that. My main concern is this is still a non-public transportation site. At our last meeting, the best we could get is that there was gonna be an effort to reach out to the M-W-R-T-A to maybe establish a route. I think the folks who live here are gonna need cars. I don't know if there's a restriction how many cars they can have, but if there are 41 spots and 32 units and everybody has one car, then that leaves about nine spots for guests. And I just don't know if that is going to be enough. I appreciate that the building massing is smaller and that we've reduced things, but I just really don't want to create a situation where something's happening and we need say like 48 parking spots and we have 41 and people park on Auburn Street. And so I just think that's to be avoided. My o my only other outstanding question was the notion of some kind of a public transportation kiosk where people might be able to wait for the bus. I don't see it in this, so maybe that wasn't feasible. But those are my three questions. Thank you. <v Speaker 17>Thank you Terry.</v> <v Speaker 6>Thank you very much. And I'll echo Annie's, Andy's, thanks</v> for picking up on, I think I was, I was one of the ones who was talking about the finding a way to have the, the scale and massing of the building have something to do with the existing building. So I welcome that. And I, and I take Andy's point on the idea of it trying perhaps to, to have more in common in terms of the finish than, than it does. That said, as I understand, although not in every rendering the roof line, that is all kind of almost the roof itself is like a brick gray. Is that, is that correct? <v Speaker 17>The the roof material itself</v> <v Speaker 6>Yes. Is,</v> <v Speaker 17>That's what we're showing now.</v> And the reason is that we wanted to match the slate roof on the historic building. <v Speaker 6>Okay. So it's likely to be something of a,</v> a medium to dark gray <v Speaker 17>Probably.</v> Yeah, we would get, we're really hoping for a good match actually. <v Speaker 6>So we will, we will wish that with you.</v> <v Speaker 17>Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 6>And I had a question on snow,</v> snow removal and storage for, for the site. Do we have a location for snow storage? It's, that's identified. <v Speaker 19>We do,</v> <v Speaker 17>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 19>Yep. There's several locations throughout the site that,</v> that we do show snowstorms. One being on the town green in the front of the existing school area. The Elliot school one is to the rear of the, of the southwest I believe, of the Elliot school. And the last is kind of along Auburn Street to the northeast of the proposed building. <v Speaker 6>Okay. I, okay.</v> 'cause I know that I think the town when they plow Auburn Street simply pushes the snow forward to the end of Auburn. We left <v Speaker 18>Room for that.</v> We heard that at our last meeting, so we've left room for that as well. <v Speaker 6>Just want, just wanted to make sure that was,</v> that was still in the plans. And I have questions about screening of rooftop mechanicals just to understand what the screening will look like because some of, some of the most kind of ambitious and lovely projects have a failure of coming up with a screening strategy that makes it not look cumbersome. So I'm just eager to see a rendering of what that, what that's proposed to look like. Yeah, <v Speaker 17>Yeah.</v> Can I, I I, I don't want to cut off the rest of the board. I do wanna make one correction. I think the rendering that we showed is actually showing red roof shingles, not slate color shingles. We still are very much interested in your comments and I, you know, as far as body, you know, paint is a superficial thing and we're all ears on color selections. I just wanted to put that out there. Ray, as far as the mechanical screening, the, we haven't designed it yet. We don't think we need a lot of it. Most of the equipment that we're putting up there will be screened by the parapet. What we typically do is very detailed view angle studies once we have a better notion of what the mechanical equipment actually is. As I said, we have one piece that's rather large, that being the ERV unit, the, the fresh air unit, but we're sensitive to that as well. We wanted to have an integrated look with the building and not look like a snow fence on top of the building. <v Speaker 6>Thank you. You obviously have been seen some</v> of those buildings that look like they have some fences on the top of the many. <v Speaker 17>I know, I have many. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>So, and I think that is, that is all for me right now.</v> I do appreciate the points that were picked up and I had made, I know the references to across the street at the River Bend School and appreciate the, the kind of shift of the, kind of how the site feels that, that the new building actually looks like it, it might play well with the existing building. So I thank you. Okay. <v Speaker 17>Thank</v> <v Speaker 4>You Doug. Yep. Yep. Thank you.</v> And I would echo the, the praise I guess for hearing our comments and taking it into account. Very pleased to see the sort of the dumpster issue taken care of there and it looks like a much, much more inviting area. Previous P is is is a great idea there. So thank you for hearing us on that and considering that three questions, I guess one for Dana, maybe a couple for Rebecca, the rendering, one of them showed streetlights on the front of the, of the site. And I'm looking, and you can verify this somebody, but there's only one off a pole right now near the, one of the, the drives off Auburn Street. So is, is there a necessity for, for multiple streetlights out there? <v Speaker 18>We are not proposing new streetlights on Auburn. Okay.</v> Based on our photos, it looked like there's one existing Cobra head near the driveway and another near the intersection of Auburn. Yeah. So Anna's beautiful rendering with that giant, but I said, what is that? We verified It's there, it's just, just it's a Cobra head there. Yeah. And then we believe there's another Cobra head that shows up in some of our pictures up near the intersection of Elliot and Auburn Street. Okay, <v Speaker 4>Okay.</v> Yeah, it looked like I, it was the video or something that showed two along that stretch. So it just would, would, yeah. <v Speaker 18>So then inside the site we have</v> the poles will be only 16 feet high at the most at the tallest. Yep. <v Speaker 4>Okay. And will they be baffled?</v> <v Speaker 18>They'll have all the fully sealed</v> and cutoff optics, all the bells and whistles, all dark sky. Yes, all dark sky compliant. And then this photometry, the is lines are reflecting that. So we haven't, this doesn't show any physical shields on it yet, but it does have all the house side optics so that everything will spill where we want it to with more control. Okay. <v Speaker 4>Sticking with you Rebecca, the guardrail</v> along the, what, what direction is that? The southern edge of the, of the new building? What's the material there? <v Speaker 18>So I think right now we're looking at like an ornamental</v> aluminum type of fence, ornamental metal kind of compliment the existing building. It shows up a little bit, I think Anna and your renderings and elevations? Yes. Is it that one? Yeah. <v Speaker 4>To protect the wells I guess on the</v> lower level, is that what it's for? Yes. Okay. <v Speaker 18>Yeah. Yeah. You can see it a little bit in the rendering.</v> Yeah. Yeah. So I think that wall will be, there's an existing drop off there so that Davis square is working on enhancing that wall and we'll put that guardrail on top. So kind <v Speaker 4>Of like a</v> <v Speaker 18>And protect that</v> without blocking light, wrought <v Speaker 4>Iron decorative kind of protective.</v> Yes. Okay. Okay. Yep. I was picturing a mass DOT not <v Speaker 18>Like a hard or something.</v> <v Speaker 4>No,</v> <v Speaker 18>No. Okay. I know guardrail is kind of a funny word</v> for it, but yes, it'll just be a railing, like a black metal railing. <v Speaker 4>Okay. Just curious. And then I guess last question,</v> you know, I know this is not, you know, a a one of the, I guess higher end luxury type projects that we see, but any sort of outdoor programming for residents, you know, any, any available space for fire pit or something, you know, out there? Other social spaces? Yeah, social spaces, you know, other than the front lawn, is there any, any thought about incorporating that or any, any space to do that? <v Speaker 18>Definitely and I think I'm really excited</v> that we got all this space back, especially on that kind of northeast side that you can see. We have a lot more lawn area and the plant beds. We do also have that plaza area at the existing building right now. This just kind of shown us pavement, I think until we know more about where our utilities are landing, you know, we'd love to green that up as well, but leaving them right now really flexible and open to programming as we lease up, you know, find out what our tenant mix might look like more. Is it seniors, is it families? But I think too, this raising the fire lane and making the permeable pavers, I think that was a big win from my perspective. So I think that as another kind of public gathering space, it can be an event space or just a, you know, play space. You could bring out chairs, you could have any kind of movable furniture could be in there as long as it can be taken out if there's an emergency. So I think that gives us three distinct spaces that can really be flexible. And then, you know, we maybe as we look into this and really get into the nitty gritty of tenanting, we can add some green space or, you know, shade structure, different types of elements like that. I don't think that we are really considering a fire table or something like that at this point, but I think more along the lines of, you know, movable seating, movable furniture and flexible activities like that really end up on a lot of my projects. <v Speaker 17>Okay. I I, I wanted to add to that too, that</v> I think Rebecca got that. All right. But one aspect of this project that's actually kind of unusual, particularly for one that is of this scale is we have a lot of interior common space for the residents. You know, we're preserving the entire auditorium building and not fully programming it for office space or bike storage. We have a lot of common space in there as well. <v Speaker 4>Thank you</v> <v Speaker 20>Helen.</v> <v Speaker 11>Sure. A few kind of technical then kind of broader ones,</v> the two driveways, I was actually wondering if you can make those into more of a, kind of extend the, extend the sidewalk across the driveway to make it more of a driveway detail. Right now it's more of a, a roadway intersection with another roadway. So for instance, if you looked, I guess five pleasant nearby has this, but also more closer to Natick center where, you know, pedestrians will kind of continue on the sidewalk and then drivers are crossing the sidewalk rather than pedestrians having to go across the driveway. I don't know if that makes, it makes much sense. What, I mean the, I guess number two is, I noticed there's a number of areas where we have a four feet, four foot wide sidewalk within the site. I would recommend five feet for those <v Speaker 6>Spoken like a traffic engineer.</v> <v Speaker 11>Well, four feet is pretty narrow, especially, you know,</v> kind of close to close to a building. So I think a lot of it's five feet, but there's some instance with four. <v Speaker 19>Yeah, I'm sorry, I just wanted to point out, so, so</v> what we were, we're struggling with, there is a little bit of room, you know, space for the, the bio retention area, then providing the, the additional pretreatment for that system. So with that in mind, we, we've kind of shrunk it down as you want, as you mentioned, the down four feet, we're thinking it's maybe a, a little bit of a, a less traveled way in that area. So we thought it might be okay, but it also gives us a little more room to make the, the stormwater slopes a little less steep and, you know, hopefully it, it disappear into the yard itself and not look so much like a, a stormwater feature. <v Speaker 11>How about, well, and I, that one,</v> there is another sidewalk really close by. I was almost wondering about if you put something in the middle and combine the two, but there's also another segment kind of near the transformer looks kind of narrow. So I, I'm guessing there's probably other locations that are four feet on the other side of the driveway by the transformer. Just mirror that looks awfully narrow as well. <v Speaker 19>I I can double check the, the intention was was five feet.</v> Okay. That was, there was just the one spot there. As I mentioned. We try to reduce that a little bit just to save some room there and, and keep slopes, you know, at a minimum I think they're, they're four to one in that area. <v Speaker 11>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 17>C can I add a, a quick comment?</v> Just be, because you, you mentioned the transformer, I did wanna point out that we're showing multiple transformer locations here because we haven't nailed that down with utility yet. <v Speaker 11>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 17>I just wanna put that out there</v> and then maybe ask for a little bit of a clarification. Were, were you talking about potentially adding raised crosswalks at the, at the two driveway entries <v Speaker 11>Business?</v> So if, if you were to just kind of, I guess look at Google Street view, if you look downtown Dunking Donuts, bill's, pizza, those areas where the sidewalk continues. So drivers mostly the material is gonna be concrete across the driveway and as far as rays, it's gonna kind of depend on your, your slopes that you're dealing with, you know, potentially it's raised, but definitely you would not come down to the driveway. You know, you come down a couple inches but not the full six inches. Yeah. It just kind of makes it a more continuous path for pedestrians. <v Speaker 17>Yeah, we can, we can look at that.</v> We'll take that under advisement for sure. <v Speaker 11>So I'm guessing the, there's a really wide radius</v> that is on the right side of the exit right by, yeah. So now that is for the emergency vehicles to back end. Is that so so that, that, that radius was based off of that, right? <v Speaker 19>That's correct. We, we bumped that one up</v> to a radius of 30 feet. Okay. So that allows the emergency vehicle to back end and then, you know, leave driving forward. <v Speaker 11>Okay. Is there, maybe you guys can kind</v> of talk about what are their TDM or transportation demand management. Is there any besides bicycle, which is great that you guys are incorporating that, is there anything else that is planned for this project? <v Speaker 16>So we had a traffic consultant look at that</v> and we're actually working with Amanda to get the peer review and discuss that at the ZBA. So I'm sure that the peer reviewer will have some more suggestions on at our February 10th hearing. <v Speaker 11>Okay, great. And I guess the last question I, I guess more</v> of a question, it's to make sure I'm clear also so everybody else is clear as far as our role here it is and what our purview is. So obviously we're looking at the site plan, we do, I don't know who was best to answer this, but number of units, bigger picture things, are any of those in our pure purview or is it really just wanna be clear? <v Speaker 6>I I don't believe so.</v> I think it's, it, it's much more on the scale of understanding, you know, is is there sufficient parking? Is that, you know, to really look at the site plan. <v Speaker 11>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 6>And then to produce a memo back to the</v> ZBA with our kind of recommendations or, or <v Speaker 11>Comments.</v> I'm ki I'm kind of asking that just so that it's, it's obvious so that way if people are wondering, hey, why aren't they commenting on number units or, or whether or not this is should be built at all, we're <v Speaker 6>Not, because we're not the permitting authority that we,</v> we do, we are not the comprehensive permit authority for it. But, but under state law we have to, we are among the boards consult consulted and considered for comments and we've done that with other 40 B projects before most recently I think Clover at, at Clover project proposed at Cloverleaf. <v Speaker 11>Okay. Thank</v> <v Speaker 6>You. Not actually in the end get,</v> get completed, but, <v Speaker 11>And I, I applaud all the work that you've done.</v> I think this plan has significantly improved from, from the last one looks really significant improvement. Thank you. Thank you Glenn. <v Speaker 5>Thank you. I will try not to repeat</v> what other people have said except to say thank you for modifying the plans so much better than the first plan that we saw. Taking a look at the planting plan, I'm sorry for my voice, I'm just getting over that same umcor that, that you have Caitlin. So the, the planting plan suggests a plant list looks great. I'm not a big fan of arbor variety. That's a me problem. You don't have a lot of them getting planted. So it's no big deal. The other plants are really nice, a great selection of, of native plants, excuse me, that are not red maple, which is very much over planted in town nowadays. The one thing I would've loved to have seen, and at this point it's probably too late for me to see, is that in the plan that you guys have been showing, there's sentences that say existing tree to remain, but it doesn't say what the existing tree is. So there's really not a great way of knowing what the final landscaping mix is going to be based on what's already there and what you're gonna put in. I do love what you're gonna put in and I'm not, probably would never suggest that you take out anything that's already there, unless of course they're invasive, in which case you should take them out. But I don't know what they are, so I can't possibly comment on that. The only other things, when you put the mechanicals on the roof, we have come to learn that there is a, an end of a mechanical that is noisier than the other end. And if you could try and make sure that the mechanicals are situated on the roof so that the noisier end is pointing away from the other residences in the area so that they don't have to deal with fan noise when, when the mechanicals kick on or if you could not only visually screen, but if you're gonna have to point a noisy end in a direction, maybe you could put in some sort of sound screen as well if it doesn't make things look horrible. As far as the light on site. I kind of interrupted while Doug was asking that question. South Natick is really one of the few places in Natick where you can still go and see a dark sky. And I think that the residents of Natick, not just South Natick, all of the residents of Natick would benefit to having that stay that way. I don't live especially close to the mall, it's three miles or so away from me, but my sky is is over lit by the mall. And so if we can keep South Natick dark at night, I think that that would be great. There's a lot of, obviously a lot of wildlife, wildlife sanctuaries there and everybody would benefit from that. So I do appreciate you already said Jude, that everything was gonna be dark sky. I heard that. I'm not, I'm not asking the question again. I appreciate it and, and anything more you can do to keep the light shining down for the people who need it and not shining up for the people who don't, that would be great. That includes, you said there were flagpoles down there. If there's lighting on the flagpoles, then that should not be uplighting. Even if it is already uplighting. If they have to be lit at night, then you can put the downlights up at the top of the poles. But I personally would prefer that they just not be lit at night and people bring the flags in. And finally, as far as the designer of the building, the whiteness of the building, I am, I am a lay person in the biggest way when it comes to that kind of stuff. When I first looked at the new proposal, I said, wow, that building looks so much better than that block that they had there before. Wouldn't it look cool if the chimney that's on the old building on the very front edge of the old building was replicated on the new building? But honestly, when I imagined that with the building being white, I didn't think it would look very good. I only thought it would look re better if the buildings were brick. But I don't know if there's any way to, to put up a false, any sort of false chimney like that in the design of the building just to make it look like an older building than it is. I I do like the design that you've got now. Much better than the original design. Those are my only comments. Thank you. <v Speaker 1>I do Amanda do you have any? Nothing.</v> Okay, I had a couple of thoughts here. It was already mentioned and I want to impress upon the importance, the line of sight of mechanicals that are gonna be on the roof and how far, where, where they can be seen by or from, excuse me, that to study that in 3D is, is gonna be a real benefit to when you get them located or locate them according to what is seen from let's say a 45 degree angle from the edge of the roof so that you know what your, what your parrots are gonna parapets are gonna cover and what they're not. There's also a grill of some type, some shown up on those, some of these elevations and I'm not sure exactly what it is or where it is, but it's a little bit foreign in terms of the design of the building. I think you've done a, an admirable job in revising your previous, well let's put it this way. I think this is more or less the appropriate start from the beginning. What might have been the beginning and not seen that other previous submission. But that said, on the north elevation you've got an example of what is rather typical on dormers. And that is that on the north elevation on the, I guess it would be the east side, the dormer does not go all the way to the edge of the building. There's a roof that goes up, the main part of the roof goes up the side. But if you look at the elevation on the south elevation just below that, the dormer does not do that. The dormer comes out even with the second and first floor and it doesn't anywhere else in you've set them back appropriately. I might add it is, I believe inappropriate in terms of trying to be somewhat consistent and also in keeping with what would typically be done. That third floor on the south elevation, I believe should be held back so that you get some roof line down in front of it between the third floor and the second floor. You just look at the, to the left of it, I mean to the right of it on that same elevation or on the entire north elevation, you'll know it, you know exactly what I'm referring to. Let's see, I would, if I, if I could tweak it a little bit, I'd ask you to take the main pitch of the main roofs roofs and increase the angle of that roof line a little bit more in keeping with the older building, the existing historic building and maybe the dormers, the dormer roofs do not by any means have to go all the way to the ridge line. They don't on part of your building on, well if you're looking at that north elevation, the west side of it doesn't go to the roof line, the ridge line, but the right side does. So I think we ought to be consistent. I'd prefer it not go to the ridge now going down to the site. Well, alright. Okay. I'll start from the, the, the functions of the both of these buildings are for residents and I know that you mentioned last meeting that the historic building was not required to be a DA or his or re a DA re accessed. Well you've done a few things on the site to be very convenient. Not, it's not, let's forget about the terminology. A DA let's say people who have difficulty getting around, they're not necessarily disabled but they are not walking as, as conveniently and comfortably as a lot of people. You've got paths, ramps that are very much com in keeping with those people. You've even gone to the extent in the new building of putting in, I guess a chairlift to go from the ground grade to the center level. The sec I guess the second level up, I dunno which, whether you're calling that a second floor or not, but that's, I'm not sure why you did that. I I realize that the floor level is not, well not very comfortable with the grade, but they've been using that building that way for years without a, a lift to go half a flight. You could put stairs in or there are probably stairs in some way to get into this building right now. To get into the old building right now, there's a way, but you've chosen to do the right thing to make it a little more accessible to get into the building. But you've only made it accessible to one level. The center level, the remaining floor, the second, the top floor and the lo the bottom floor are dependent on stairs. Now I don't know how what the demographics have been are proving to be the kind of people that have been living there that are gonna be living there. But I'll tell you, carrying bags, shopping bags, moving furniture, even the accessibility to those two top floors is dismal. It doesn't exist as far as I'm concerned. The stairs at each end are fire required, exit required and they're there. But I think this building is absolutely short in inaccessibility leave logical accessibility for the two, the two floors that are not lifted, access the top floor and the lower level. And I think you've got an awful lot of, two thirds of this building as far as I'm concerned, are are very, very difficult to use. They're going to be very difficult to even rent if you have to rent 'em, give 'em away. I really believe there should be an elevator put in that building. And I, for one, could not even agree to give my, oh my blessings if you will. I okay to say, gee, shoot, go ahead. We've got all your, all the dots, all your eyes dotted and the t's crossed. No, I can't say that because you haven't got access, any reasonable access to the top floor and the lower level for anyone other than somebody who's really good on stairs. That'll, that's it for, for now for me. I don't think, if I'm not mistaken, we don't get another bite at this apple. So that's is anyone, did I miss anyone else here? Anyone here in the audience who would like to have offer any comments on this? And and does anyone on the online or in Zoom see any hands? No hands. Alright then are we just writing a memo to ZBA? So <v Speaker 16>Yeah, we're looking, we,</v> we really appreciate all these comments and are so grateful for the feedback we got at the first meeting and we, we are hoping that this board can put all of these additional comments that we heard this evening into a memo to the ZBA for their consideration when we go back to them on February 10th. That would be really helpful. <v Speaker 1>Okay. I'm sure we can do that, Amanda.</v> <v Speaker 16>Thank you. I can</v> <v Speaker 2>Draft and I can circulate.</v> <v Speaker 1>Alright, now I think you said you have a ZBA on</v> February 10th did you say? We, <v Speaker 16>We do, yes.</v> <v Speaker 1>I don't know what, we don't</v> <v Speaker 2>Need to again until the 12th, but based on all these</v> comments I've, I can put together a letter and circulate to the board members. Alright, <v Speaker 16>Thank you. Very good. Thank you Amanda.</v> <v Speaker 1>Very good then with, if that's the extent of it,</v> then we can, <v Speaker 16>Yeah, just thanks again for all your time</v> and all your thoughtful comments. We really appreciate it. <v Speaker 1>Okay. And you folks, do you folks have any questions from</v> of us at the moment while we're here <v Speaker 16>And I, I don't anyone else on the team</v> have questions for the board? <v Speaker 17>I don't think so, no. But thanks for me as well.</v> We really appreciate it. It's helped us a lot. <v Speaker 1>Okay, great. Thank you again. Have a</v> <v Speaker 16>Good, have a good evening.</v> <v Speaker 1>Thank you. You too. Thank you. Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 16>Good night. Thanks</v> <v Speaker 17>Night. Bye Everybody make</v> <v Speaker 2>Amendments to the plans.</v> Have him send 'em to you. But I'll send them. <v Speaker 21>Yeah. Make that comment. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay.</v> I written meeting public hearings. Meeting hearings, the town meeting. Public hearings. Yeah, town meeting. Amen. Men's zoning bylaws. The body and art, body art establishment, right? Yeah. Can see a familiar face there. <v Speaker 22>Oh, hi everyone.</v> I just wanna, yeah, I just wanna say thank you for your time this evening and just allowing me to speak. I, I really appreciate it. My, my mine should be pretty, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I'm <v Speaker 1>Sorry.</v> No, it's my fault. Amanda, did you have anything? <v Speaker 2>Yeah, 'cause I thought at this point we were really kind</v> of trying to think about which way we were gonna go. So I know everyone can't see the screen from where you're sitting. So I did put out a paper packet for you. It's got the staple on there. Yes. Perfect. Yep. This information is also in your packet. So one of the reasons why I didn't want the board to vote at the last meeting was one, we had two options. Two, we needed to do a little bit more research into what we were trying to achieve. We have a common goal which is to expand permanent makeup throughout different parts of Natick. And so lemme just put this on full screen. So what I am actually looking at is shifting away from option two. And I say that because in conversations with the board of health, there is a very big difference in what they review versus what we have in our zoning bylaw. So one of the things that I did ask the board of health director Mike, was what is the definition that the board of health goes by for body art? You do have that in your packets tonight. I think that in reviewing the definition for body art, it would make sense for the board to actually amend the definition that exists in section 200 to align it with the Board of Health's definition. The definition isn't much different. But one of the big things where it actually caused me to pause was the fact that it calls out cosmetic tattooing. And when you have a word that's defining another term, it's kind of push you at pause. So in the definition for the board of health, they do not include permanent cosmetics, permanent makeup, micro-pigmentation, microblading, they only call it. <v Speaker 4>Is that what we're looking at, Amanda?</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah. Okay. It's right there. It's on your, thank you.</v> <v Speaker 4>I'll clarify. That's the board of help definition. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 2>I've in the mark like stricken through</v> and Got it. Yep. Marked up. So you, <v Speaker 4>You've taken what was proposed before</v> <v Speaker 2>Super our existing</v> <v Speaker 4>Super propose the board of health.</v> Yep. Definition here. Okay. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. So that's what's existing today with the amendment.</v> So what we would be doing is just aligning it with the Board of Health's regulations. And so with that being said, in talking with the board of health or sorry, health department cosmetic type toing, it doesn't matter what you call it, it's still going through the same procedure. So you can call it permanent makeup cos permanent cosmetics, micro-pigmentation, it's feet breaks, the skin creates bloodborne pathogens. So they review it the same way as body art. But when we call cosmetic tattooing and we use the word tattooing and then we're trying to take cosmetic tattooing out of the same definition of tattoo it, it's kind of strange. So the other item that would be is to actually look at the use regulation schedule, and we're gonna go through this in a second, is we were talking about actually putting permanent makeup or cosmetic tattooing in with the personal services. In reviewing what exists today, it would actually make sense to align it with the Board of Health, direct Board of Health, but expanding body art establishments to commercial two, industrial one, industrial two and potentially the center gateway. And I'm gonna go, I'll show you why. The other item that I want to bring your attention to is we were told that the only places that you could do body art establishments was at 1400 Worcester Road, route nine and the downtown mixed use street, however, oh street, sorry. However, that is the only site that's been permitted by the planning board when you actually read the footnote in four permanent makeup or cosmetic tattoos, et cetera, is actually allowed in the entire regional corridor overlay district as long as the entire parcel is in the RC overlay district. So that means Natick Mall, home Depot, MathWorks, et cetera. And so that is what is on the bottom of the screen. That should have been labeled three. I apologize. So it reads, body art establishments shall be allowed only on parcels of land situated when the regional corridor RC overlay district and the downtown mixed use DM zoning district upon grant of a special permit by the planning board acting as a special permit granting authority. This use is prohibited on all parcels, which are not located totally within the RC overlay district or the DM district. And specifically prohibited, prohibited on the premises zoned highway mixed use three, which is where Jordan's furniture is located, even if said, hm, three premises are overlaid in the RC overlay district. So with that being said, what I did here was I looked at, and this is on the next slide, slide of your documents is looked at the locations where the RC is presently allowed. And this is from the zoning map. The RC is actually the overlay district that is hashed in red. So you can see we have Jordan's furniture in this navy blue that does not allow for body art establishments, but it actually includes all this area right here along Worcester Street. It does not include a large portion of Sherwood Plaza because Sherwood Plaza is half inside and half out. This is where Abby Labs is located. But the two wings that are, sorry, LA Fitness, the two wings that come down. So therefore it dis includes the part portion of Sherwood Plaza that includes Dick's Sporting Goods, Barnes and Noble, and that kind of portion. It does include where the Town Fair Tire is, the Towns fire department, but it actually includes the Container Store, Ben and Jerry's, the entire Natick Mall, the Avenue and the hotel that's there. MathWorks, which is in the blue. Then you have the FedEx and Home Depot and then Chrysler Roads. The residential developments on that, it does not include where Exponent is because Exponent is actually not located in the RCO related district. It also goes up to TJX 'cause TJX is in the rc. The next piece is looking at the downtown mixed use. So it's allowed in the entire dm, which is everything in green. Those are the two places where body art establishments are presently allowed today. So the, again, it's allowed in the entire RC overlay district as long as the entire parcel's in it. And the only site that it's allowed at specifically today is at 1400 Worcester Street because they got a special permit from the planning board. So looking at that, we take a look at where it's allowed currently, so downtown mixed use and the entire Golden Triangle area. However, if we go with the option one, we would be expanding it to describe what one was again. So option one was just taking expanding body art establishments to the commercial two district. That would be it. If we deleted the footnote, that would remove A TJX, a portion of the Natick Mall, a Home Depot and a couple math work, sorry, avenue and those locations. But you would keep in where like the Crown Plaza is all the way over to the Framingham Natick municipal line portion of the Natick Mall. And then you would bring in nine and 27 intersection. The area where it's, gosh, is it pine or oak? That's by Dairy Queen. It's right by Dairy Queen. Yes, exactly. Sorry. And then you would travel along Route nine. It does break every once in a while because residential does intrude into a couple places. Then down on 1 35 West Central Street there is a good portion where it is C two. So it would pull into that. It would also pull in the intersection where, sorry, Sherwood or Speed Street and Pond Street intersect. And then it would retain the downtown mixed use. But then it would expand down to where like Hogan Tire is over to, I think it's like Town line Liquors. And then it would include a couple locations in South Natick. 'cause there are some C two down there. That is, if you only expand it to the C two zoning district, keeping it in the DM district. The other option is to align body art establishments with what personal services are and actually expanding that to the C two, industrial one, industrial two and the gateway. So what I've done here is kept everything in the red circles is what is highlighting for the C two. And then everything that is in the purple boxes is everything in industrial one or industrial two or center gateway. So really the big areas that you would be pulling in, if you pulled in industrial one and two and the CG are an area to the north, on North Main Street above the dm, the center gateway that's on East Central Street. The East Natick Tech park. And then you would keep in, which is already existing today, the Natick Mall, TJX Home Depot in that area. And then you would be pulling in the retainer of Sherwood Plaza and also Strathmore Mercier and that dean. And then there is a little parcel of land right at the end. I forget it's hm, brown. <v Speaker 6>Oh, HP Brown</v> <v Speaker 2>Something. Yeah, yeah. Oh,</v> <v Speaker 6>Over in West Natick.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah. But again, and</v> <v Speaker 6>The PCD district,</v> <v Speaker 2>So these are the options. Lower</v> <v Speaker 6>Little tiny Southwest. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yep. Yeah. So those are the options.</v> Again, we weren't looking at Jordan's because that's HM three, it's not allowed today, it's not allowed tomorrow. It's one use. So we weren't really looking at that. So based on the comments that I had, my discussions with the Board of Health I, or sorry, the Health department, I did send them an email. I have not gotten a response back basically outlining all of this information, just making sure it is correct in aligns with what they were asking as well. But this is a summary of what I did ask and have had conversations with 'em. Again, it's, they are not against, and I don't wanna speak for them, but against expanding it, it's just they view permanent makeup the same as body art. So it's what the board kind of has to look at when they're thinking that way. <v Speaker 6>I, I have to say that the idea of ensuring that</v> how when we're looking at use districts that we're aligning with things that are under the purview of the Board of Health or others, you know, it makes so much sense to adopt comparable definitions. So I think the idea of aligning that is, is a very kind of practical and appropriate thing to do and following. Then what it allows, I think is, is pretty comprehensive. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. And the fact that</v> body art establishments have been allowed in the entire Natick Mall area and we've only got one kind of goes to show like it's not flooding the area. Also, if we pull in the Board of Health's definition, it also does, one thing that I think that would be important is it doesn't include implants under the skin, which shall be performed in a, shall not be performed in a body art establishment because that is a completely different medical item. But we're currently not calling that out. It's medical. <v Speaker 22>Can I ask one thing?</v> So one thing in regards to the health department, I think one thing that they do have wrong, and I think it should probably the health department should probably should take a look at it, is it's not permanent. It's semi-permanent. So I think I, I think just in that regards, I think it does need to be expanded because there needs to be a distinct, I think, distinction between permanent and semi-permanent. So I, I I I, 'cause I don't, because this is, these are semi-permanent and not permanent. So I, I think there needs to be a home for semi-permanent, which I don't know if it exists right now <v Speaker 1>From the health department point of view.</v> Is there a distinction? I mean, the process of doing it, it <v Speaker 22>Well, semi-permanent, it fades.</v> <v Speaker 1>I realize that it's not,</v> but the process of getting the ink going through the skin, <v Speaker 22>I, I, yeah.</v> So I, I wish I brought Brooke 'cause she's the aesthetician and I, I I'm the accountant that owns the salon. So I I I don't want, I do apologize. I I, I didn't, I probably should have asked her to come with me tonight. So I need to have her speak on this. But it's, what is used in aesthetics is completely different that is used in tattooing. But I would need her to speak on that because I, I'm, I'm not an esthetician and I would just be, would, would be speaking as an somebody who isn't an expert. <v Speaker 1>Okay, thank you. But Doug,</v> <v Speaker 6>But from what I'm, what I'm hearing from,</v> from your conversations with the health director is that whatever it is called, it is collectively considered body art by By the health. By the health. Correct. <v Speaker 22>And I'm just saying, I think,</v> I think it would be really good for the health department to reassess and do a distinct difference between permanent and semi-permanent. Because why? Well, it's completely different. Semi-permanent. Is it, it fades. It, it starts to fade like within, within two years it's, it, it, it just fades out. So <v Speaker 2>The board of health,</v> <v Speaker 22>You don't have to have it removed.</v> <v Speaker 2>The board of health doesn't look at whether it stays</v> forever or fades away. It's the fact that it breaks the skin is what they're looking at in blood board and pathogens. So both do the same thing relative to the procedure. It, it, they're not looking at it in terms of permanent versus semi-permanent. 'cause they're just not even a body tar tattoo fades over time and you have to get it touched up. So that's kind of, they're just looking at the actual physical procedure in it breaking the skin. <v Speaker 1>That was, that was what I was asking before,</v> but I don't know whether, I doubt it might be worth it for the health department to understand if there's a different tool. <v Speaker 22>Yeah, so</v> <v Speaker 1>Actual mechanism used into</v> Correct. It might <v Speaker 22>Make, make a difference.</v> It is completely different. 'cause like okay, like with micro cha, it's more like in, it's more like breaking like the skin, like as far as micro channeling, breaking it versus like <v Speaker 1>If you think you don't understand that,</v> I understand it even less so. Standby. No <v Speaker 22>Worries.</v> Sorry. <v Speaker 4>So man, just state it one more time.</v> The on the use schedule. Yeah. You said it's trying to, I, I understand the aligning the definition, which makes perfect sense. Yeah. Then you said the, hold on, I'll get there. C two, this the proposed option, right? Yep. Is that aligning with what other use you said? <v Speaker 2>So I was trying to align it, I was trying to kind of merge</v> where we were last week. If you look at the use table personal service, which is F seven. Okay. Got, and I don't think it's in there. If you need mine, you can. Yep. Personal service <v Speaker 4>Allows,</v> <v Speaker 2>Right?</v> Yep. So you can see it's currently allow F seven is, is allowed in the PCD, which I wasn't proposing. 'cause the PCD is really kind of its own animal, but it is allowed in the dm, the C two, the industrial one, industrial two <v Speaker 6>CG</v> <v Speaker 2>In the cg.</v> It's allowed in the HM one and the HM two and then it's allowed in the lc. I wasn't proposing the lc because we would be, that's West Natick that we're gonna Yep. So it was more just the uses there. <v Speaker 4>No, that's mixed. Yep. I'm good. And for that</v> <v Speaker 2>Explanation, the other thing that in my conversations was</v> that there's nothing mandating that a cosmetic tattoo has to be done in a salon. So therefore it could be at a standalone location. So that was like, it, it why it could expand to further locations than just commercial two. But if you'd like, because my, my conversations were with the health department were today, and so if you'd like, I can have them be here for the 12th if we wanna put it on early and Mike or Jess could be here from the health department. Maybe that would help. Just so you can better understand. 'cause like, I I, <v Speaker 1>Well something, it just makes sense.</v> Yeah. Do we want to un do we have to understand the, the technicalities of it in order to make a judgment here? Yeah. <v Speaker 2>Because</v> <v Speaker 6>You're saying that they treat the whole host of</v> things as body art just for the purpose of a, an a a a <v Speaker 4>A license,</v> <v Speaker 6>A collection</v> <v Speaker 2>Of that is my understanding.</v> Except for I do not physically go out there and inspect things. So I don't know if there's differences in there. So again, we're well ahead of schedule. Yeah. And we're not saying no, it's just to get the correct information. It also helps the public and it also helps when we go to fin com and everything that the health, <v Speaker 1>I think then</v> <v Speaker 2>If we just put this on the twelfth's</v> <v Speaker 1>Possible, that the health department has not encountered</v> this type of work in the <v Speaker 22>Past.</v> Correct. So this is, so the spot, oh, <v Speaker 1>Sorry if they haven't, this may be another one</v> of those situations where we might be asking a question and not asking the complete question. <v Speaker 2>They have actually,</v> they've permitted a location in Natick Center and then they also have to regularly inspect 1400 <v Speaker 1>The same out that we're talking about.</v> Well, in any case, you say we're ahead of schedule. Yeah. <v Speaker 2>The warrant hasn't even opened.</v> <v Speaker 1>Why? If we allow half time, half an hour,</v> <v Speaker 4>I, I I, I'm happy to do this the right way, as always,</v> I just wanna keep our eye on the prize, which is, there was a competitive disadvantage as witnessed by the gentleman that his customers had to go somewhere else 'cause they couldn't get these services done. So <v Speaker 22>We're, we're sending them to</v> Jelen and Wellesley right now. <v Speaker 4>Right. Which is in Wellesley, which is</v> not a Natick, not a natick. I think we can agree on that. <v Speaker 1>The other side of the</v> <v Speaker 4>Tracks. So as we expand,</v> if we adopt a, a, a body art definition that includes these services, no problem. As we expand our use regulation schedule, my only concern is, are we leaving out a spot where one day there may be a salon that wishes to use, you know, bo these body art practices and they come back to the planning board and say, I am located in the lc district and I can't do this. And now my customers are going back to Framingham. So while we're at it, I, I, I think we've en I I realize there may have been some tattooing prejudice in years past, and you think of, you know, drunken sailors in San Francisco and all that stuff. I think we're kind of past that. Maybe I, maybe I'm the only one that thinks of drunk sailors in San Francisco. But anyway, I think we're past that. And I just think that if we're, if we're addressing a competitive disadvantage type situation, I don't think you personally, well I know I'm not gonna become an expert in any of these things, but I just wanna make sure that some salon that opens in a different part of town will enjoy the same competitive advantages that everybody else does. So should we, should we consider, you know, expanding where, where they're allowed by special permit? <v Speaker 22>And, and one thing I wanted to just add on,</v> 'cause that that's, that that's sort of what I prepared for today. What Andy, what Andrew's touching on right now. And so what I, and so I I I, I, I was gonna do, I was gonna, I was gonna prepare something on why I thought option two would be better. But now with what the health department is saying, it makes sense why option one is at the forefront. But the reason I wanted to just address option two is, is no if, if the, if, if we do move forward with option two, you know, it will kill the competitive disadvantage that every salon, every spa is having except 1400 Worcester and a Natick center. And, and what if there's a spa that is just, that is not, that's at a commercial location that isn't in this, that's what in this belt. Correct. Then they're gonna be at a competitive disadvantage and we're gonna be back here all over again just with a different company. And the spa industry, this is where it's moving towards and it's gonna become that much more present. 'cause these old spa services are disappearing. And this is where the spa industry is, is going towards. And, and while I was on not too long ago, I just, Amanda, I sent you an email. And so with that email, with the email I sent you, it's four pages and it's from the, it's from the state of Massachusetts for the board of cosmetology, barbering and aesthetics. And this falls under aesthetics and it's a very cumbersome checklist within in and, and just one little snippet just that I'll just read from the four pa just from the four pages, is no person shall operate a cosmetology salon, manicuring salon or aesthetic salon without first obtaining from the board of license to operate such a salon. And then there's a four page checklist on every single thing that has to be done regarding licensure of the spa, operation of the spa, equipment and hygiene procedures and protocols in, in, in ethical advertising and pricing and all that. And I think with these four pages, I think this is something that the, probably the health department would love to see as well. 'cause I think, I think that would just help everyone. 'cause it's not just, it's not, I, I I really believe that the state of Massachusetts does a phenomenal job policing salons and spas, med spas, nail salons. And I think understanding what the state does in conjunction with what the town does, I think that will also help people get a lot more comfortable. Which would with, with with whatever direction this goes in. <v Speaker 1>Okay. If everyone is comfortable with it,</v> since we are ahead of schedule on this particular project and it's been suggested to have board of health rep come here and enlighten us all. Maybe if that's agreeable with the board, then to tell Amanda that, to make that invitation, extend that invitation to board health. Yep. <v Speaker 23>This is what he was just, sorry. Oh,</v> <v Speaker 22>Sorry I sent that so late, Amanda.</v> I just really didn't think about it until we started talking about all this. I love CMRs. <v Speaker 1>Yeah. If anybody is taking notes on this meeting,</v> it should be noted that drunken glad I'll send it to you. Sailor, not one word. Thank you, Amanda. Two words could be conceivably independent <v Speaker 6>Or or three drunk and sailor.</v> Sorry. Glad I brought that up. Yeah, <v Speaker 2>Glenn, I just sent that</v> to you via email just so you have it. <v Speaker 1>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>Glenn seems to have dropped off,</v> <v Speaker 1>Shall we,</v> Glenn full. <v Speaker 4>Do we need to continue?</v> <v Speaker 6>It's a public hearing, so,</v> <v Speaker 4>And we do need to continue this,</v> <v Speaker 6>Which would be to the 12th.</v> <v Speaker 1>Well, before we do that,</v> the gentleman in the back Oh yeah, sorry. Are you a part of any input on this particular subject? <v Speaker 24>No sir. I'm actually observing</v> to understand the implications for town meeting, voting in the future. <v Speaker 6>A future town moderator.</v> <v Speaker 24>I'm your future time moderator.</v> <v Speaker 1>Oh, nice to meet you.</v> My address. Mike's <v Speaker 24>See me a lot.</v> Just <v Speaker 6>I'm thinking,</v> <v Speaker 2>Did anyone hear from Glen?</v> He appeared to have dropped off. Oh, sorry. Oh, I just noticed it. It's very <v Speaker 4>Unceremonious.</v> <v Speaker 2>He usually tells us when he's</v> <v Speaker 1>Right.</v> He does. <v Speaker 4>So I'll make a motion to continue, motion</v> <v Speaker 1>To continue this</v> <v Speaker 4>Hearing on article.</v> <v Speaker 6>And then it doesn't have a number yet. It</v> <v Speaker 4>Doesn't have a number.</v> Right. So the body art establishment proposed bylaw to February 12th. <v Speaker 6>Second.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay. Awesome. Andy.</v> Aye. Terry. Aye. <v Speaker 6>Evans O Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 1>Aye, aye. Well there's no one offsite.</v> So if it's, I'm not sure if I even have a vote here or not, then not. It's an aye. <v Speaker 22>Thank you. I really appreciate it.</v> And I just have one question. Should I have an aesthetician with me on the 12th? Sorry, should I have an esthetician with me on the 12th? Are they <v Speaker 4>Gonna do a live demonstration?</v> <v Speaker 22>We could do that. Well,</v> <v Speaker 4>You know, if the board of health is gonna be here,</v> it might be good an esthetic. You guys might have that conversation on that level and really get very specific about what these services are. And if the, if the health department is comfortable that that all fits under the basket of body art definition, then I think we're good to go. <v Speaker 22>Awesome. And might be useful.</v> And even maybe I could do this too, 'cause I have a meeting tomorrow with Jelen. So Jelen, who we're referring to right now, they also are an accredited teaching academy that teaches us too. Maybe I'll see if she can come, 'cause Noah could talk better about it than someone who runs the academy. So I'll try to get her Thank you. I appreciate it. <v Speaker 1>Oh, and thank you for enlighten us with</v> what actually happens at these places. <v Speaker 22>My pleasure. I just, yeah, I, I know this will be great</v> for the future of the spa industry in Natick, but I, I, I'm just, I'm learning, I'm, I'm learning this. I've never, I've, this is, this is all new to me and I just thank you. Thank you for everything. I really appreciate it. <v Speaker 1>Thank you very much. Thank you.</v> <v Speaker 22>Well have a good night. I know, I know. It's late.</v> <v Speaker 1>See you soon. Bye</v> <v Speaker 4>Everyone. Thank you. Thank</v> <v Speaker 1>You.</v> Use regulations, zoning bylaws, use regulation schedule. Amanda, do you have any? <v Speaker 2>So with that one, I need</v> a little clarification and I don't know if it's something where members want to just review and get back to me or what you would like to do. So with this one, we are expanding a few of the uses and it was, there was a couple uses that we kind of had discussions about, which were commercial kitchens and also those ones. So I don't know if the board wants to have that conversation when the board of health gets here, because that is also something that, like with a couple of the items, it was really, what are the inspections? What are the, like other procedures that tackle around it. So we could just continue that to the 12th as well. How, <v Speaker 4>How ahead of schedule are we on</v> <v Speaker 2>That?</v> So the warrant hasn't opened, that isn't open until February. The, I think it's the third week in February. We would have this on the 12th. So we would have that meeting before the warrant even opens. So <v Speaker 6>Warrant opens on the,</v> <v Speaker 2>I think it's like the third week in February.</v> Yeah. Usually. Right. <v Speaker 6>I'll ask a credible source.</v> <v Speaker 2>Do you know someone One? I least one. Just one.</v> <v Speaker 4>Yes. I, I would just myself</v> and probably just lack of time. I would feel more comfortable with me spending. I would like to spend more time with this. Yeah. And sort of mark it up, comment, edit, then do it here. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. That's what, so I was thinking maybe we could ex</v> and our agenda on the 12th is light. Yeah, it is <v Speaker 1>Light. Oh crap.</v> <v Speaker 4>I, I will not be here on the 12th.</v> <v Speaker 2>Oh.</v> <v Speaker 4>So,</v> <v Speaker 1>Well how about when we have the meeting?</v> You wanna discuss it? Can't see. <v Speaker 2>Well, we could put it on the 12th</v> because we've already voted, I think to sponsor. So we would just submit the warrant article and then we could put it for a full discussion on the 26th. So that would give you some time, <v Speaker 4>I'll, I'll promise</v> to give you some comments before the 12th. <v Speaker 2>Great. But we'll still have, if we put it,</v> if we could continue it to the 12th, that would be great because there are some items that we could ask the health director on that would be helpful. <v Speaker 6>Is it a novel concept?</v> Two boards that working together on an area of common interest? Yeah, it'll never catch <v Speaker 1>On.</v> Yeah. We for we motion on continuing 12th. 12th. <v Speaker 6>I think. Do, do we</v> <v Speaker 1>Was that motion</v> or it's just saying I won't be here. <v Speaker 4>No, we will make the motion to the 12th. Yeah. So moved.</v> <v Speaker 1>So moved. Seconded Andy. Aye</v> <v Speaker 6>Aye,</v> <v Speaker 4>Aye. Aye.</v> <v Speaker 1>No, you here</v> <v Speaker 4>Might as well.</v> <v Speaker 1>Okay. Planning board business.</v> Excuse me, I, your gentlemen can in anything, in what in particular are anything that we can West Central's free. <v Speaker 4>What's the next, the next item. Oh, okay. Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 1>The next, oh, west Natick.</v> West Natick zoning and land use, huh? Right Amanda? Yep. <v Speaker 2>All right, so in your packets</v> you're gonna have a couple documents. One of the documents that is in your packets is actually one of the work products only work product we got from the consultant. So what we are looking at here is a series of maps looking at the West Natick or West Central Street kind of cord right here. There's, if you look in the project folder, or sorry, the meeting folder for tonight. Yep. It should be under West Central. Oh there <v Speaker 4>Is. Thank you. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yep. And I think it's</v> <v Speaker 4>The West Ntic Maps. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 1>Zoning. Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 2>I think so. It's a PDF. Yep. Yep. Great.</v> So what it is, is there's a series of maps that kind of just wanna walk you through. So you can see where the Framingham Natick municipal line, which is, sorry, very close. <v Speaker 4>I'm sorry. I've been a peeing in the neck tonight.</v> So let's just be clear, we're not talking about spring town meeting with this or are we <v Speaker 2>Potentially, okay.</v> So, okay. Potentially, and it may be a talent administrator or calling a special within the ME annual. Okay. So, yep, that's so yeah, <v Speaker 4>Go ahead. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>Alright, so here is the Natick Framingham municipal line.</v> As you can see, it's close to the edge of the paper on what would be your left hand side? That is the junkyard that's in Natick. Everyone thinks it's in Framingham, but it's not. You could travel up, you have the medical building, you have the Wendy's as you traverse up. And then what you'll start to see is the peak of the building. And then you drop down to another yellow. Everything in yellow has 200 feet or more of frontage. And that means just the linear frontage along West Central Street, <v Speaker 4>Each lot shown in the yellow has at least 200 feet.</v> <v Speaker 2>Feet at least 200 feet. Yep.</v> Anything in white is, has no frontage. We do have four parcels that are in this area with no frontage and they're either called half or rear. And so we'll get to that in a minute. Anything. I know the feeling. What's that? So <v Speaker 4>I know the feeling</v> <v Speaker 2>Anything in like this teal color</v> is between 102 hundred feet of frontage. So these are lots that are pretty significant in size. So then as we continue down the next, sorry, <v Speaker 4>Golden lane is not a public way</v> for that, that white parcel. But there's a bridge. So you probably <v Speaker 2>It's a roadway.</v> <v Speaker 4>Yeah. You're saying frontage though, isn't</v> that legal frontage for that? <v Speaker 2>I don't really know how they classified it</v> because the frontage for that white parcel, which is 2 47 R, there's no way to actually get up on it because of the topography change. So technically it is frontage, but <v Speaker 4>So So the address is West Central? Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>Okay. 2 47 R West Central R. Okay,</v> <v Speaker 4>Got it. Yep.</v> <v Speaker 6>And sorry, and the zoning is variable</v> or I mean I know it's PCD and lc. <v Speaker 2>So in that, that's actually lc.</v> So it does vary along here. Everything which is, sorry I should look here. This area here, most of that is PCD. And then as we travel on West Central Street, it goes from limited commercial, commercial, limited commercial, commercial. So it kind of jumps in and out of the two. Alright. The next one, this one right here looks at conformity by frontage. So if it's white, it's conforming. If it's in this yellow color, it is not no frontage on a principal street or if it's like a teal color, it's not conforming under current zoning. <v Speaker 1>Gentlemen, gentlemen, gentlemen,</v> there's a picture bag if you wanna see the screen back there. It might, Ashley, looking at the, oh you can see that one? Yeah. Okay. Sorry. <v Speaker 4>So 200 feet's required</v> <v Speaker 2>Depending on the zoning district. Oh,</v> <v Speaker 4>Okay. Because,</v> <v Speaker 2>Okay, that's the hard thing is</v> 'cause it does jump between commercial two and limited commercial and they have different But <v Speaker 4>Before, before the district,</v> these are in, they're nonconforming. Correct. Okay. Yep. <v Speaker 2>So if you go to the next map,</v> which has like a salmon colored, this is the length in feet of the building's front setback. So if it is in the darker red color, that means that they're between 50 and 80 feet set back from the roadway. If it's in the middle color, which is like a salmony orange, that's between 30 and 50 feet. And then like the khaki color is between zero and 30. And then if it's in white, there was not a building to actually assess because the white, the white one that is right on the north side of the word central, that's the parking lot. And then on the south side that's different. <v Speaker 6>Is that the park? The, that's the MPT I</v> <v Speaker 2>Parking. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>By, by the way, I, I believe</v> that the warrant is closing on February 20th. <v Speaker 2>28th.</v> <v Speaker 6>20th. Oh.</v> <v Speaker 2>So we're still good.</v> <v Speaker 6>We, we won't,</v> we'll only have one meeting between now and then. <v Speaker 2>So then if you continue along conformity of the setback.</v> So if it is in a red color, non-conforming, if it's in white, it is conforming. So you can see there's quite a few of the parcels under their current zoning that are not conforming. However, I'm not sure why the parking lot for the MBTA was identified as nonconforming. 'cause there's nothing there for <v Speaker 11>Setback does.</v> Sorry, does this mean that there we have a larger setback requirement that those have 'cause <v Speaker 2>Yeah,</v> <v Speaker 11>Some of 'em are, are pretty</v> decent setback already. Yeah, <v Speaker 2>There's a very large setback, which is actually</v> what we're gonna try to take advantage of to pull the buildings closer to West Central Street and pull 'em away from the tracks on the rear side, which is then pulling it away from the residentials that are over the side. 'cause in a different slide deck I have, you'll see between, it varies between an 80 foot rear lot line to the residential line, which is the distance between railroad tracks to a little over a hundred feet. Which seems like a lot, but it's really not when you think about it. <v Speaker 11>And do you know what the re generally,</v> what is the requirement for a setback along these parcels? <v Speaker 2>So it depends on the zoning district front</v> stepback, do you mean from the tracks? No, <v Speaker 11>No, no.</v> The front stepback from the road. <v Speaker 2>So it depends. I can pull that out in a second.</v> <v Speaker 11>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>Continuing down.</v> This one is the square footage of a lot. A lot of these lots are greater than one acre. So you can see it's in this light yellow color, which a lot of 'em are between like one and three acres. I have an analysis on that as well. The light brown, or sorry, the dark brown is less than 12,000 square feet. And then the orange colors between 12,000 and 40,000. It should be noted that a couple of these parcels, especially where this dark brown one is and this khaki, or sorry, this orange color, one of those is actually owned by Stonegate and it's the parking lot for the Stonegate office building. So therefore when you look at it individually, yes it does not have conforming, but when you look at it as they're a whole and then they're owned by, they're under common ownership. Common ownership. Exactly. The one that is not under common ownership though it should be noted is when here's Bowden Lane, the 2 47 front, which is where we actually permitted the daycare. Yeah, daycare. The old dive shop that is not under common ownership with the rear, which is Comcast. Comcast, <v Speaker 25>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 2>Continuing down this looks at conforming lot size.</v> So again, these are large parcels and that is an advantage because when you are looking at rezoning or looking for development, a lot of the time people are trying to assemble. And in this case a lot of the lots are already assembled. One of the big things that will be kind of noted is there is really no assemblage for a couple of these parcels, specifically like the MB here spot lane, the MBT parking lot. And when you're saying here I'm I I might keep my head. Oh sorry. Hard time seeing. So do see the big, we looking at, see the big, the big T, the middle of the plan. Yep. So that's Boden Lane. Yep. If you look on the west of that Boden lane, that's where the parking lot for the MBTA commuter rail is. Yep. And then you continue over and it's the commercial lot and that's the The L Shape crossing. Ated crossing, yeah. So that one there wouldn't be an assemblage, but that one I think is 2.96 acres. So it is a large parcel in itself. But on the other side there is sometimes opportunity kind of like where the Planet Fitness is and the tire location where they actually do share a parking space. So that's an option. <v Speaker 4>Is that the, go back for a sec. Yeah.</v> Is that the, the Wendy's non-conforming right there? Yeah. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. They're conforming</v> <v Speaker 4>What's to the left of that?</v> <v Speaker 2>To the, that's the medical. Oh,</v> the medical building there partners. <v Speaker 4>Yeah. Okay. Why is that? Non-conforming size.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah. I forget what zoning district that one is in.</v> Then we go into this other one where it goes into lock coverage. You can see that certain ones that are darker are between 75 and 90% lock coverage. So that doesn't mean it's the building, it means building and the parking. So a lot of these parcels that are on the north side are between 75 and 94% fully covered. Which again, the T stop, the T parking lot makes no sense because it's like a hundred percent covered. So just looking at that and then this tells us conforming versus non-conforming for the lock coverage. So a lot of these are actually non-conforming for lock coverage. <v Speaker 4>Meaning over</v> <v Speaker 2>Yep. They're over what is</v> <v Speaker 4>Overly pervious.</v> Yeah. And overly impervious <v Speaker 2>Only. Impervious</v> <v Speaker 4>Overly.</v> Yep. <v Speaker 2>Then we look at the building footprint</v> and that's kind of different than what we just looked at, which was the entire, so this is a building footprint. There's only one that it is between 30 and 49%. And basically all of 'em, except for a few on the south side of West Central are conforming in terms of building coverage. So not lot coverage but yes. Building coverage. And that is that slide deck. So what I've been working on is another slide. So in your packets tonight there is a draft for what I call the neighborhood corridor. And when we're looking at the neighborhood corridor, it's looking at the entire stretch between the Na Framingham municipal line all the way up to the dog park. So we are including Mill Street and SP Street. However, as we've discussed before, this is not gonna be a one spot zone. It's going to change as you traverse up West Central in some parts of West Central, it's only gonna be looking at the north side of West Central. Other parts it's gonna be looking at the south side of West Central. So what you will find in this draft, and let me just go about to that section, Is what I call T one through T five. <v Speaker 4>What, what file are we in?</v> <v Speaker 2>We are in, if you go into the</v> West Natick zoning bylaw, it's gonna be January 27th, 2025 draft section three. <v Speaker 4>It's the, it's the word document. Yeah.</v> Is it the word document or the, <v Speaker 2>Sorry, it's that.</v> Is that the first one? The the word oh 1 27 20 25. Yep. Draft section three N. Yep. Which I read. Got it. So it should be a word document. Yep. So, and I'll share my screen just 'cause help. Alright. Okay. Dare I ask what a transect. So I'm gonna explain all that for you. Okay, so there are two things that we can look at right now. We know that this street is not gonna be a one size zoning throughout the entire. We also do know that form-based code is a little bit different because it looks at things individually, but it does also work with the built environment. So it doesn't have to be called T one, T two, T three. So it's transect subdistricts. So we're looking at an entire subdistrict. So an entire district. Okay. What it would be called is the neighborhood corridor. The entire thing. The entire thing would be called corridor. Within that you would have higher density all the way down to no density. And when we say that, so a T five, which would be the neighborhood center, these are what we call the nodes, where you would want to see the most amount of density. We would have dimensional standards specifically for that because those are areas that can hold more bulk height scale. Then transect, subdistrict four, T four. I'm sorry, what is, what is a transect? A transect. It's a length, it's a long line. It's a form-based code term. <v Speaker 4>Yeah. It's a, it's hard to get your head around it.</v> It is, it's a term of art in form-based codes. Okay. And like Amanda said, it's sort of a, <v Speaker 2>But what does it represent?</v> It represents the entire length. So because we're looking at a linear length, it looks at a length of each section. So it doesn't look at it as a bulk. It looks at it along a roadway in one direct In in on one plane. Yeah, one plane. Yep. And so I'll have to, I'll get a visual to explain that. Okay. So, but the T five is where you would have your high density then think of that as your node. Then your connectors to those nodes would be the T four, the neighborhood connector, the T three is the residential. And that's where you could have two families, three families, townhouses. And so what a T three would be is if you are actually driving from Wendy's down to the crossing parcel where you have those two family, three families on the hill, that would be where your neighborhood or D three neighborhood residential would be. <v Speaker 6>And why are, I mean I don't mean to sound silly,</v> but why number them? Why not name them? <v Speaker 2>We can name them,</v> <v Speaker 6>But just</v> because I think for the average person like me Yeah. To to understand that that would make it more a little more accessible. <v Speaker 2>Yep, absolutely. And these are all things that we can do.</v> And then T two, which is a neighborhood, single family residential, we're not looking at this one today. But what it would be is when you look across the tracks on the north side of the tracks, because a lot of the single families on the north side of the tracks are actually pre-existing non-conforming because of dimensionals. This would be an opportunity to allow them to remain single family but to become conforming. <v Speaker 6>But where does that boundary end with?</v> So with the first road that, <v Speaker 2>So that's something we would look at.</v> This is not, that would not be a town meeting. Now that would be a future after you get everything along West Central established, it's working on what we were working on with math, the model with MathWorks. So it's just an option. Then you would have the last one, which is the conservation open space. And this is where you would have no development, it would be preserved for open space. And I'll show you an example of that. So this first, it <v Speaker 6>Would be zoned to that.</v> That would be the only thing there. Wow. Yep. <v Speaker 2>Okay. You'll see. So what we would be focusing on</v> at the upcoming town meeting would be the neighborhood center. So we would be looking at, <v Speaker 4>What do you mean focus on?</v> <v Speaker 2>So we would not be doing the,</v> <v Speaker 4>Are we presenting this?</v> <v Speaker 6>We we're not presenting this in spring.</v> <v Speaker 2>So we would</v> <v Speaker 4>Are you suggesting we pre, we present</v> what you're this entire document? Yes. Which is gonna establish the neighborhood corridor. <v Speaker 2>Yes. But you would not populate T four, T three or T two.</v> You are just setting it up. <v Speaker 6>I, I mean just</v> because it's not that far away. Right. <v Speaker 2>So</v> <v Speaker 6>This is the sort of thing that I think you really</v> want to help people work through. And I feel like Springtown meeting is kind of just around the corner. <v Speaker 4>I am going to say all,</v> I don't mean to interrupt you Amanda. Yeah. This is, I fully endorsed this. Where we're going with this form-based code is a great thing and it's a great tool to, you know, have maximum flexibility and not a whole lot of prescription. But you know, design standards are everything with it. Yep. They're definitely concepts that are challenging to explain. Yes. And I think we would do well to be patient on this and, and take our time with it and not put the burden on you to explain it. There are, like I said at the last meeting, there are lots of resources out there that, that do this the, the Center for Zoning <v Speaker 2>Studies.</v> Yeah. And I've been looking at those to like reach out to them and everything. So, and <v Speaker 4>There's also some history which is, this was,</v> this zone was looked at what, 10, 12 years ago. And it quickly became a story about how there were gonna be 3,800 new units in Natick and, and it really just kind of got outta hand and the rumors kind of swept through the town meeting. So I, and I think people are justifiably or or or not just apprehensive about changes that happen like too fast with too many technical terms and we are throwing some serious technical terms. Yes. So I think visuals help. I think public meetings with easels and drawings on boards take, take the scare out of it. Yeah. <v Speaker 6>And for people to, to understand what the implications are</v> and probably for, for scale in particular, that's one of the things the beauties of of form based. I know. Yeah. But it's, yeah, it's a new language. <v Speaker 2>Yeah, totally. And so like, just to kind of go through it,</v> so then you would have your intensity regulations and your scale, which are specific to each of the transects. So you're breaking each one down. So it would be, here's neighborhood corridor and you have each underneath that then you continue down and you would set design standards because each transect is going to have a different look, feel how you want it to jive. Then continuing down, you would also wanna establish findings for those to help with setting the expectations for the development. Then you could offer a density bonus. And then number eight is our standard boiler plate language of construing zoning. So what I then would jump to, and I think this is in this Yes. The, is this one in there? Yep. Okay, perfect. So if you could open up the other, I think it's the PDF <v Speaker 4>1 28, 20 25 West Ne Neighbor,</v> west Natick Neighborhood corridor. <v Speaker 6>Neighborhood corridor.</v> <v Speaker 2>So drinks, beer, the area looking at,</v> and why I focus on T one and T five is because this would be an area where you could establish that center, <v Speaker 4>That node,</v> <v Speaker 2>That central node. That's correct.</v> <v Speaker 6>Because there is enough</v> flexibility on either side to accommodate what's not just east west traffic. <v Speaker 2>Exactly. And it's,</v> <v Speaker 4>You know, it's a density</v> and it's a, it's near the train station, the, the actual stop the platform. Right. So, <v Speaker 2>So it tends to be a little</v> <v Speaker 4>More</v> <v Speaker 2>In your slideshow</v> or in your deck you'll see here is a native crossing here, it's the L-shaped building kind of. And then as you continue east, it is the, you can see the solar canopy for the train and then you'll see Boden Lane, which is very difficult to see. And then as you continue along, you have the former dive shop, then you have the, oh gosh, the distribution, then you have Comcast and then you have Stone Gate. I wouldn't at this time take T five any further past the stone gate building because if you look directly across, which is right where the stone gate building is, you have two single family home lots. And so I wanted to be mindful of those two. So across from that is the, I think it's like the School of Rock. There's a rock building in there and then there's a tire place and then there's Planet Fitness. That's different. Those would be more of what you would call the connectors. So looking at this, you can see that the area that we're talking about is currently zoned limited commercial lc. We're not gonna get rid of the entire lc all at once because lc continues, it stops, it goes to C two, then it goes to, so we would be doing it incrementally. We also always have to be mindful that lc exists in that teeny tiny place up on North Main Street. <v Speaker 6>And, and I will say the el, the hi of the history</v> of the lc district, it was created and proposed by a developer. So it's, it's probably maybe one of the few things in our zoning bylaws that it the only zoning district that was in effect created by Yeah, for, for development by a developer. <v Speaker 2>So that is just the zoning district.</v> And then you've got the PCD, which is on the south side of west central. You have the R RG residential general and then to the north. I think it's RSAI could be wrong though if yes, on the next slide you'll see if you're looking at it on your screens, I did add in at the wetlands buffer. And the reason why this is gonna become important is because one, I don't wanna get into a taking situation that is key for this next part. <v Speaker 6>And isn't there a, there is a stream that crosses</v> 1 35 that wanders its way through the neighborhood north of the tracks. Yeah. Where there are occasional flooding issues. Yep. <v Speaker 2>I think it's right around here.</v> Which is the reason for that separation between the stone gate parcel Yeah. And the Comcast building. Yeah. So be mindful of that. Just remember there's wetlands right there. So why we were looking at T five and T one at the same time is because we could actually, everything on the north side would be identified as T five neighborhood center while the area that's identified as wetlands, because you can't develop it anyway, it would be put into T one conservation or open space. And so that's what it would end up looking like. The yellow would be what we call T one. And everything in purple would be T five, the neighborhood center. So therefore what would happen is you could actually allow for more density as you pull the buildings closer to the street, allowing for a larger separation from the neighborhood residential on the north side, again between the edge of the property to a residential property crossing the tracks. Right In this location behind the crossing it's 80 feet and as you head eastbound it goes up to about 110 feet. So spacing, which what I mean is the back of a residential na house lot to one of these commercial lots is between 80 and 110 feet of track area. <v Speaker 6>So with the yellow in the plan being the conservation</v> land, virtually all of it is wet. Correct. So it doesn't allow for, it does allow for conservation but not recreation necessarily <v Speaker 2>Necessarily.</v> It may allow for recreation, it would have to go through the conservation. And so, but <v Speaker 6>When we're, I'm just, when we're designing</v> the, the districts. <v Speaker 2>Yep. So when you're designing the district, yeah,</v> it would allow for open space and actually allow for trails. So those are the items that it could be in there. It could also allow for buildings that are amenity to, so it wasn't precluding all development, it just wasn't allowing the same kind of development. <v Speaker 6>Well, and and I was actually thinking</v> of it from the reverse, which is the idea of, and and I I realize it depends on how, how the, the plan develops. But that if you wanted to have open space elsewhere and there is a deficit of open space in, in that area that we had, we then have to make sure that it's T one designated is if we use the kind of a form-based code, how easily there was a building and you said let's tear down the building and turn it into rec recreation space. Yep. It then it is a matter of rezoning it to accomplish that or <v Speaker 2>No, you could just do it regardless.</v> Like there's nothing saying that you can't tear your building down <v Speaker 6>And put up to</v> <v Speaker 2>Create a or something of that nature.</v> It's just these are the parcels that have no basically value in terms of use. Another parcel that we know we could enter into this is where the, why am I drawing a blank on the cobbler shoe? <v Speaker 6>No. Oh, the Henry Wilson shoe.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yes. That would be another one that you could use</v> as a T one because it creates a trails. The other one is the underline the utility line. <v Speaker 6>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 2>So it helps also indicate we want to use this</v> for recreation or trails or something of that nature. But <v Speaker 6>It, but it doesn't preclude other land that is in a,</v> a district that's more dense. Yeah. Being, <v Speaker 4>I mean I I I understand that I just,</v> the market responses to this, right? I mean if you, if you, if there's no value in it Right. And we prescribe uses that are passive recreate <v Speaker 2>And you don't have to, no one's</v> <v Speaker 4>Going, there's no market response to that zoning.</v> Right. It is what it is. It's gonna be what it is. Right. So I don't know, I mean I need a little more time to Yeah, <v Speaker 2>No, absolutely.</v> No, it's something to think about and it's like you don't have to like, there's a lot of 'em that if we're gonna like go with this direction, you don't have to zone for conservation or open space because it is what it is. It was also just to show a visual in terms of there's really along this entire purple stretch, there's no development opportunity at this time because of the wetlands being along the entire frontage. So again, this is why you could actually use this one as your initial to help create that additional density. <v Speaker 6>And, and it's funny 'cause the in in West Natick</v> that stretch of the kind of open space and and wetlands across from Nadick crossing creates such a visual breathing room. Yep. I I, every time I go down there, I think that it is, it's not commercially attractive but it is incredibly important. Yeah. For a kind of a breathing space in that part of town. <v Speaker 2>And that was like the reason</v> as well is like this area can, the parcels on the north side of West Central can hold more density or larger bulk. Yeah. Because you have the open space so you don't feel like you're in between two large like canyon. Yeah. Yeah. And again, the goal would be to pull the buildings closer to the frontage, activate the street frontage with like a multimodal path or a larger sidewalk to accommodate that. Because this, the other flip side of this is west central. As east central is, yes it's home in the marathon route, but there are people biking, walking, traversing on it all times of the day. They're also going across from West Natick village to the train station. So there's a lot of path on this north side as if you remember when we did the permitting for the daycare, there's actually not a lot of sidewalks if any. There's a lot of desired paths. All the sidewalks are on the south side, but all of the uses that you would be wanting to go to are on the north side, but the crosswalks are far and few in between. So you're put the grocery store down to speak. Yeah. So it'd be creating that pedestrian corridor and that would be something that we would want for any type of development to also help with is establishing that pedestrian corridor. So parking would need to be side or rear to also again help separate the ve the <v Speaker 6>Residents.</v> So they're not meeting a parking lot as the first thing that they see of the commercial district. Yeah. <v Speaker 2>Yep. Exactly. And then one of the things like</v> what they did in the Newton Needham tech park where TripAdvisor is, is that if you basically, if you have two parcels that are abutting and you can actually combine your open spaces, you can actually have more density on your built portion because you are creating more open space than just your little pit. Little bit you're creating double the amount of open space that's usable between the two. And they did a nice job on that one. I think national development did that project right along the Charles River on, I think it's a street, could be B Street. So <v Speaker 11>Now kind of a back to a bigger picture question.</v> Will this ultimately be a, an overlay district or this will be new zoning. <v Speaker 2>New zoning that would remove the underlying zoning</v> district because one, we're creating a new district, an overlay district really is more intended for specific uses. And this because the zoning is needing an update. It would make more sense if you wanted to do specific uses. We could do that, but <v Speaker 11>Okay.</v> No, but that even more reason to take our <v Speaker 2>Time and make sure, and this is something</v> that was already thought of Natick 2030, this was in that. So this is not because of MBTA, we did take the pressure off of 'cause of MBTA, but it, it's not just, hey, let's do this because of MBTA. It's, it was well thought out before. <v Speaker 6>And is, is there a thought that</v> if you're moving the buildings forward closer to the street parking, tucked away behind, does it give you any opportunities if I say on the safe side of the, the fence along the rail line for there to be a kind of, what I'd say called a backyard bike corridor? <v Speaker 2>It there could be some yes and some no.</v> Because of the way Boden Lane, the bridge is built, I don't think there's any play in adding any space in there. I'd have to go back out there and look 'cause I was out there last when they were doing the Comcast but from Boden lane headed eastbound. Yes. 'cause a lot of those parcels are open and it also lends those parcels do lend for the reduction of curb cuts in the front and connection by parking lots in the rear if you did it that way as well. <v Speaker 4>Yeah. And I, I, I think this is really exciting.</v> I mean it just for us, for, you know, focusing on the visuals, let's say first right? That's what form-based code's all about, right? Yep. It's like how you visualize density and how you visualize the transitions along a corridor. Yep. So I like the, I like the transect idea kind of, you know, radiating out less dense. That makes sense. I just, you know, again, it's, it's, it's new. I would not want to go forward with a bylaw that has holes in it that says we're gonna come back later. I, that's just seems kind of scary. <v Speaker 2>And you mean like not holes in it</v> in terms of what we're presenting? Not 'cause we would not, we could not come forward to one town meeting with the entire Framingham Natick municipal line all the way to the <v Speaker 4>Explain why.</v> I mean, well in terms in ma in the map or in the bylaw, <v Speaker 2>In the text, in the map.</v> <v Speaker 4>That's fine. Okay, I get that. Yeah. Okay.</v> But the text, yeah, I think it has to be holistic. I think people need to understand it. Yes. <v Speaker 2>Okay. And I only say in the map</v> because there are parts where you're like, you can argue it two ways. It's when you get to SP Street, when you get to Mill Street, like yes, those are usually an intersection is a node, but then there's not much the Mill Street one. There's not much you can do because of the high tension wires <v Speaker 6>Which Okay, so down up where you turn off to go to</v> Mill Kennedy, no. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Yep.</v> So that's like, it should be a node, but then it's like, is it a connector because of the way Yeah, <v Speaker 11>We only have a couple large parcels there.</v> You have kind of one where the, right on the corner there where there's a convenience store and where <v Speaker 2>Yeah.</v> And then you got the wetlands that directly Yeah. Come right up to it. And then across the street you have a, I think it's like a three family small car. Yeah. And then you have the nursing home. But then once you get it past that, when you get to K, 'cause Ms. Cohen's right there in Oby Hill, but the high tension wires cut right through a good chunk of those. <v Speaker 4>Question Oh, on the</v> town meeting quorum or town meeting? Majority multifamily. So is it gonna fall into that category? <v Speaker 2>I believe</v> <v Speaker 4>Majority, not a two thirds.</v> <v Speaker 2>I believe it still falls under the simple majority</v> because it is creating housing. Got it. <v Speaker 4>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>If we weren't doing it</v> and it was a straight just commercial, then it would not Yeah. <v Speaker 4>And that applies to the map amendments</v> as well? Text? I think so, <v Speaker 2>Yeah.</v> Because then we did the amendments for Yeah, it covered for everything. Even though we far exceeded that, I mean, <v Speaker 6>I think this is, it's an, it will be an exciting</v> and kind of collective learning exercise for everybody because I think people come to think of zoning in a very traditional way. And so to, to try to help everybody kind of see what, what makes this tick and what makes it work <v Speaker 2>And this, it's, it would be a unique form-based code.</v> It would not be a traditional, but I don't think we've ever seen a traditional buy the book form-based code. Because if you look at each one, they've tailored it to their community's needs and they've tailored it to the situation because like in this one, we're not doing infill. So it's a little bit different than what Saratoga Springs did. And then, like, the Kington Kingston was a little bit different 'cause they had like different parcels, but then they were adding two. So each one is different. And that's the cool thing about it, is that you can tailor it to your community. <v Speaker 4>There were, I mean, as I said, I was on the jury</v> for the form base code awards for last year. They just got announced in Kingston, New York got the award. 'cause a, they did an amazing, amazing outreach job in sort of communication job. And the bylaw was really readable, really understandable, really simple. There were others, I won't name the names. We had communities from Canada and, and from out in Florida, Oregon, North Dakota. And some of 'em were so unbelievably complicated. And that's, that's entirely not the point of, of form-based codes. It got really prescriptive. So I would err on the side of making it easy. Yeah, readable. Organized. <v Speaker 2>And the one thing understandable thing with Kingston,</v> I believe they did the entire community and we were not looking at <v Speaker 4>It.</v> Wasn't it was it targeted? An infill, a lot of infill around the city. So <v Speaker 2>It was, it is cool though, like the graphics,</v> they did what's really nice. <v Speaker 6>But it's funny 'cause in a way, metaphorically,</v> it's a little like looking at a, a target where with, with the least dense on the outside and kind of working its way into more <v Speaker 2>Dense. So yeah, like this, this</v> <v Speaker 6>One I'm trying to think</v> <v Speaker 4>Of.</v> It's not Euclidean. No. Okay. It's not so it's not no let's separate uses and it's really <v Speaker 6>No, but</v> <v Speaker 4>It's, it's organic. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>But it's create it's, it's making it that kind of,</v> the sense of, of of density. <v Speaker 4>It's somewhat use agnostic. Yes.</v> So that's how New England, but it's, it's <v Speaker 6>Grew up.</v> Yeah. So, but it's really, it's really kind of shape and form and uses. <v Speaker 4>I'm, it's not agnostic, but,</v> <v Speaker 6>Well, no, but, but I, I think it'll be a,</v> a learning exercise and I think to get people to transition away from, but can you have a restaurant here and you go like, you know, or, or, and to understand that that's not, that's not what people respond to in their environments. So <v Speaker 2>That's what I have.</v> I'd like to keep these on the, keep it on the agenda so that the board is kind of <v Speaker 6>Continuously working on it.</v> And I would, if we ever want to have even a short, a short session or meeting that focuses just on this, almost like a workshop for those of us on the board who have spent less time with form-based zoning. It's just because I'm, I think it's something I want to be able to, that to be conversant in. Cool. <v Speaker 4>And maybe Amanda as a resource as this goes forward,</v> web resource, something on a webpage. Maybe you can put resource information like, like a center for zoning, you know, and just educational resources. You can kind of put links on if you can kind of click around and learn about it on their own. <v Speaker 2>Is it, not to think of too far ahead,</v> but if like this does, well on this side, it's the same thing on the other side from the Wellesley line to the center gateway. It's like, <v Speaker 6>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 1>All set next all set.</v> Sidewalk, sidewalk mitigation fund. We want our to hear from them or, well, it's, sorry, I don't think so. Well this is <v Speaker 6>This.</v> Yeah. This is just our, this isn't, it's not a hearing. <v Speaker 1>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>Okay.</v> So this one I'm still doing research into, but we have approximately $216,000 in a sidewalk stabilization fund. It has been sitting there. This is monies that the planning board had collected over the years from projects for the creation or maintenance of sidewalks, <v Speaker 6>Including the one</v> that still hasn't gotten built on the north side of S Speed Street northbound. <v Speaker 1>You say maintenance of the be or extension of</v> <v Speaker 6>What? Along</v> <v Speaker 1>Specifically c you say the construction of</v> <v Speaker 6>They gave us an easement</v> <v Speaker 11>CL relief did, yeah.</v> <v Speaker 6>Back, back when they, they were doing work</v> and we negotiated an easement from them along the northbound side of the beetle back. And I think they actually contributed funds to the sidewalk fund. And it's a long story. A previous community development director who I will not name did, didn't get it. The easement registered, the, a later community economic development director did, I believe. And and I, I have found that to be in incredibly important because it is surprising how many people walk along the north side of that part of the beetle back. <v Speaker 2>Yeah. So with that being said, one, one</v> of the things it was in the Natick 2030 was, and then we continuously ask is how, what is prioritized for sidewalks? So like, when we're going for grants, where are we at? What are we supposed to be doing in terms of bicycling and everything like that. So the question was could we use like a hundred thousand of that for a bicycle and pedestrian plan to create that kind of prioritization list that DPW would then take? <v Speaker 6>I, I would. So, you know, and, and it's,</v> and obviously it's, it's, it's whatever, whatever we we make of it. But that has been identified, that was identified as a, as a priority and a great opportunity at the time because it was the pro, because of the proximity of pedestrians and relatively high speed traffic. And I would, so, and I'm, I am sure, well, I'd like to think that the, it would not take up all of the monies in the sidewalk fund, but I would, I'd feel very strongly that we should fund that, especially as there was money from the developer that went into that fund kind of as a make, make nice for, for us to get, get this done. <v Speaker 11>Okay. You're talking about a sidewalk plan,</v> <v Speaker 2>A bicycle and pedestrian plan</v> that would establish a prioritization of like what sidewalks or where bicycle lanes should be imp like implemented <v Speaker 11>In.</v> But I think that the, the town I think has a, a complete streets prioritization plan, right? What a complete street priorit <v Speaker 2>Prioritization plan.</v> Yeah. But that we would need something a, a little bit more that would look into like the golden triangle, west Natick. Like how can we connect all these things. Like, I forget what year it came out in like 2023. They had done a study on Route nine, Harford Street, that whole end speed street. It was MAs dot and they put together a plan. So it would be a matter of implementing some of those two. <v Speaker 11>Okay. Well I was just thinking</v> that there has been some work done between that and then I know the town with the DPW does have, in addition to their, their roadway inventory, they've been collecting information on sidewalks. So I think some of that information is probably already available. Okay. <v Speaker 4>I'm, I'm with Terry. I,</v> I'd rather spend the money on building sidewalks. Okay. And if there's any left, they can go into the planning fund. But I think we owe it to people to use that hard, hard earned money for sidewalks. <v Speaker 6>And I, I'll note in the comparison that there were monies</v> from MathWorks that were supposed to go fix the, the intersection at Walnut and Bacon and all those other little streets that come together up there. Got it. Did get that. And it took I think 10 years Oh yeah. For them to, for them to do what they finally ended up doing. And I, and I'm, I I believe in the importance of planning this is, this is an a need that was identified so long ago and that has not been, <v Speaker 11>Those were actually separate though.</v> I think the town, the DPW handled, they dealt with the intersection itself and that because the MathWorks ultimately built the, the new turn signal, it was really taking traffic away from <v Speaker 6>Allman Banking. I was on the board then.</v> <v Speaker 11>Yeah. But,</v> but the DPW actually did the, the work themselves. <v Speaker 6>Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 4>Well maybe some of the a hundred million dollars</v> that the state is gonna spend on the Route nine modified diverging interchange might be better suited for. <v Speaker 6>But, but I'll just take, I'll just take the sidewalk.</v> The sidewalk funds some of the sidewalk funds that were deposited. <v Speaker 4>I think our modified reverse diamond,</v> DNA helix is the priority. It's a great, great, great use of very scarce funds to create infrastructure triple what they can't already maintain. So, <v Speaker 2>So I will</v> <v Speaker 4>Work until, and it's heading our way</v> <v Speaker 6>On</v> <v Speaker 2>Putting together that, 'cause either way</v> to use the funds, I think we have to have an appropriated. So I'll work with Bill to get that list together and see where we can go to actually <v Speaker 4>Construct, while you're asking him any other funds,</v> any other passbooks that are no longer tap. I mean, I think that there's money pocketed everywhere <v Speaker 2>There is. So</v> <v Speaker 4>Not everywhere.</v> But anyway, I, I'd love a full accounting of what's where, what we've forgotten about. <v Speaker 2>So Yeah. That I have requested to do that</v> because between that and also any monies that we had taken in for like peer reviews or something like that, that should go back. So I was just kind of waiting, <v Speaker 6>I hate to say it, has it been a habit that it didn't,</v> that I, that things didn't, <v Speaker 4>Nevermind.</v> And your guess is as mine. But, and if we're looking for planning money, I mean have, so have you scoured the Mass Leads Act at all? Anything in there? Any nuggets? We <v Speaker 2>Defer to Morgan on that one.</v> <v Speaker 4>Yeah. Have 'em have 'em look</v> and see if there's any other, because <v Speaker 2>There's been a couple that have come up recently.</v> Yeah. So, and <v Speaker 4>Dare I say there are U-S-D-O-T, federal grants,</v> innovation grants, things like that. As far as the sidewalk that are probably immune from certain executive orders as <v Speaker 1>Far as the sidewalks are concerned.</v> Take a look at those. Do we, this is for, we are focusing, supposed to be focusing on the construction of new sidewalks that we need. Does anyone, we have an I Any idea roughly It'll vary what the cost per foot for half mile per what of sidewalks? So we have an idea of the amount of money we have and what, what, what's it gonna cover for <v Speaker 6>What it's worth, bill McDowell from time</v> to time would run a cal, like with when there was something like this coming up or with, before Bill with Mark and they'd say, this is what put a sidewalk costs, well <v Speaker 4>16,000 isn't gonna go a whole but you, you can let,</v> <v Speaker 6>You can let us, you know, if we'd actually built it Oh,</v> say 10 years ago Yeah. It wouldn't have cost so much. Yeah. <v Speaker 1>Yeah. We didn't have that money though, did we?</v> <v Speaker 2>I'll, I'll ask Bill's been around for a while.</v> If we can get a rough estimate it money, unless Alan knows. <v Speaker 6>Yes.</v> <v Speaker 4>He'd be right up to date with it.</v> <v Speaker 2>Yeah. Bailey</v> <v Speaker 4>Alan is right.</v> I mean the, the Complete Streets inventory. Just, just the general, you know, should had auditing, audit, kind of prioritization that has to go on for, you know, for programming. I'm sure there's plenty of information. Yep. So, <v Speaker 2>So cool.</v> We'll take care of that. That was just money that we found. Well, fine. Jamie knew where it was. The next one. Potential 2025 Spring annual town meeting zoning articles. So good news is that the FEMA maps are in, and so Claire, bill McDowell have been working to update the flood floodplain bylaw to be in compliance with fema. A copy of that is in your folders tonight. So I didn't know if that was an opportunity, whether it be on for this town meeting or not, to just request the select board to refer to the planning board for the purpose of holding public hearings. And conservation may be the sponsor of it, unless the planning board does. It would just be to request the select board, refer it back, <v Speaker 6>Or to accept the maps.</v> <v Speaker 2>So we have to update the zoning bylaw.</v> So this would just be to ask the select board to refer that article to the planning board for the purpose of public hearing. I'm not saying the planning board sponsor it. Conservation might sponsor it. It's just <v Speaker 6>To get that for the, the flood</v> <v Speaker 4>Map.</v> Is it, it's just, it's referencing of the new map. Is that all that we're doing? <v Speaker 2>It's the new maps.</v> We also in the bylaw have to designate a point of contact for fema. Okay. Which we were gonna do the town manager. And there was some just other updates. It's all based off the model bylaw. Okay. And then we had the consultant, I think for the hazardous mitigation plan, take a look at it as well. But it's, it mirrors the model bylaw. There was that one. And then I think that's all we have for tonight. <v Speaker 6>That's all.</v> <v Speaker 1>Well</v> <v Speaker 2>I did rewrite section one,</v> but I don't, we're not there yet today. Yeah. <v Speaker 6>Okay.</v> <v Speaker 2>We're good. And it's already 10 30. Yeah.</v> <v Speaker 1>Next.</v> <v Speaker 4>Move to</v> <v Speaker 6>Adjourn.</v> Second. <v Speaker 1>All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye.</v>