Speaker 1: The meeting of the Natick Planning Board in order at 7 0 5. And I will start, wait by making the, those breathtaking statements. Sorry. And that is that this meeting is being recorded. It's being broadcast on Pegasus. For those of you following at home or not, not at town hall to comment or ask a question, use your raise your hand function. If you're on the phone, press star nine. An individual wishing to speak during public speak
or during a public hearing must display their first and last name on their screen before their microphone can be unmuted. To make changes in your name as it appears on the screen in Zoom, click on participants. To open the participants menu. Hover your C cursor over your entry and click on more. Click on rename and type in your first and last name. With that, we then move on to public speak. So an any individual may re raise an issue that is not in included on the agenda,
and it will be taken into a base into advisement by the board. There will be no opportunity for debate during this portion of the meeting. Any individual addressing the board during this section of the agenda shall be limited to five minutes. Is there anyone present here or online? Who wishes to speak in during public speak? Nobody Speaker 2: I see unless any hands. Speaker 1: Awesome. Alright, so I have now buried my, my agenda. So the first, the first business order
of business development review, public hearings, and that this is five lake continuation of the public hearing for five Lake Lake Shore Road, 2 0 8 North Main Street, two 12 North Main Street, two 14 North Main Street, two 18 North Main Street, and two 20 North Main Street. So welcome back. Before you pick up where we left off, before Speaker 2: You start, Peter just needs to announce that he's filed ruling. Speaker 1: Okay. Sorry. And just to make a note that Peter Nason,
who was absent at the public hear the last session of this public hearing has certified that he has viewed the full session that he missed and he signed a, a mullen form attesting to that. Good. Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair. So, good evening, Madam Chair. Oh nice. And nursing board. Catherine Garrahan from Biogen Dewey. And with me is Katie Snyder from National Development. And we're happy to be back with you tonight. Would you like just a couple updates or what, what would
Speaker 1: The board, I I expect it can be fairly minimal be because if anybody has been following along, there's not been a dramatic change I'm aware of. No. So, but just for anyone who happens to be tuned in the kind of 32nd? Speaker 3: Yes. Th I think I can do it in 30 seconds. Okay. There's an updated full set of plans incorporating the changes discussed that has been uploaded to the portal, the applicant. Speaker 4: Can you have one second? I don't know if I see like, new for tonight.
I just wanna make sure I'm looking at, the last stuff I have is from February 11th, so Speaker 1: I don't think, oh, that was the last time. That's, Speaker 3: That's the date. That's the stuff. Okay. That's the date. Yes. We just, you know, compiled all the, the sheets because some of them had been entered individually, so this is fully compiled set. There were some additional updates with the neighbors. All very positive. The applicant received the executed stormwater permit from the Conservation Commission. The miler was delivered for the a and r that you endorsed at the last meeting.
And we have reviewed with Ms. Loomis the updated decision. So that's all we have to update you with. Speaker 1: Very good. And I'm, I'm sorry, I know we had a few issues. So did the only reason this wasn't dealt with at our last meeting had nothing to do with the application, but rather with the quorum of planning board members that you needed for this to be heard and voted on. And now we're ready. I, I appear not to have any other questions that have been raised, but is there anyone with something to add?
Please say no. Alright, well let us go on. I Speaker 4: Can't, I can't, I can't find it. The, the up, the most updated stuff I have is the North main a and r review. Hello? But the Speaker 1: Correct because we did that after that, that one was taken. Speaker 4: So that's under A and R only. Right. Alright. So under tonight's Speaker 1: It's not, it's nothing new. It was what we were looking at before we did the a and r. Speaker 4: Alright, so, well I just want to have reference to the, the latest dating and I'm just trying to is so
that would be under like last meeting maybe Speaker 1: Actually. Yeah. And if you, if you go to the agenda, it goes through kind of everything. Speaker 2: If you wait one second, there was two folders. Yeah, yep, I see what you're saying. Okay. It is in the folder. It was just in the project folder. Let me just give you a shortcut for that one. Okay. If you just hit refresh, it should be in there. It should be the one North Main Street. There we go. ETAL. There we go. Oh, okay. Sorry. Okay. Speaker 1: So Peter, were you starting to say
Speaker 2: Something? Speaker 5: Yes, I was wondering at what point do we discuss some of the issues that were brought up or would that, were mentioned the last meeting that I wasn't there, but have now seen it about for instance, trash. Is that something that is up for discussion tonight? Speaker 6: If, if there's additional questions, happy to answer them. I think the latest plans incorporate the new, you know, com, the new location for the dumpster that we've included in the proposal. We have spoken to the closest neighbors as well
as I think an update to you all. I've spoken to the neighbor at One Lake Shore as well. They are understand the plan, they've seen it, we walked, talked her through it. So if there's any other questions, concerns, happy to answer them. But I think we found a good solution that met the Board of Health Desires as well as working within into the, you know, the site program and layout. Okay. Speaker 1: Peter, I don't, I don't, I don't know if you were watching at, at the time or that you could, you caught it when you were watching the recording that the board of health and
and health director had had very strong feelings about the, the site of trash location. But certainly Peter go ahead. What would, what are your, oops. Speaker 5: Well, my understanding is when the board, when the Board of Health reviews something like this and they see what, and I, I will, let me compliment you in the sense that I see the major change in the enclosed compactor and not compactor, but dumpster.
Yeah. And the fence around it and the fence around the property. I see all that. And that's clear evidence that with a little more study something has been done to improve my understanding is that when the Board of Health reviews it, they are reviewing what is presented to them. And that's my point here. I wanna know, I would like to know what alternatives might have been considered not presented. Obviously this is a presentation, but what other alternatives have been considered
by the people on the development team for trash disposal? Is there someone present tonight to, to be specific about what other alternatives were considered? Speaker 6: We, I mean we obviously had an original layout that used what I refer to as like the alcove attempt. Right. We tried to keep it cl close and tight to the building and in terms of alternatives, the Board of Health obviously provided feedback that not only were they concerned about bringing trash into the building as, as something they did not want us to consider,
but that its proximity to the building itself was too close and that they were concerned about the safety and just the, the trucks potentially bumping into the, to the, the building itself. So our alternative to that is to move the facility, move the dumpster location across, kind of across the way as shown on the screen. I know Amanda has it up now so we can refer to it. It's a tight site. I think we all know it's very tight over there and you know, we've done our best to kind of adequately screen pull it away. I know we've talked, there's a condition in here
to make sure that we're using, you know, the best technology available to us to kind of minimize any impacts. We're screening it. There are two six yard dumps, no, there's no compactor or composting. So it's, we've, we've tried to do the best we can to kind of put this in the right position, notify the adjacent neighbors of the layout. I think it's kind of the, the best program we can, we can come up with for, you know, what we're trying to build here. Speaker 7: Alright. Right. Thank you Speaker 6: Peter.
Speaker 5: It is, yes, it's clear that this is a significant change and from what I gather from Board of Health and Improvement over what was there, what I really CI want to come back to something, I guess it's, I I, I'm sorry if it sounds like it's beating the dead horse, but this is not the only facility that has significant trash needs and the trash needs vary too because eventually we're gonna have to deal with everything.
Kitchen, eat kitchen or food to oh to hazardous waste. Any number of things. Has any consideration, specific consideration been given to an inside loaded compactor which has picked up externally? Just similar to the way the dumpster is, it's being used by other facilities in town, comparable facilities. I just happened to drive around the, the corner to even CVS and they have it.
I, I believe, and from what I can understand from the Board of Health, having spoken with them, that there are benefits, significant benefits to having that type of facility, the tap, that type of trash disposal. And it eliminates things like out where it is now proposed fence around it. That fence typically it's a, a wooden fence if I'm not mistaken. There is no way that that fence is going to adequately keep vermin out.
Not no way at all. And that, that's only one of the things, I don't know whether there's a roof over this enclosure or you're counting on the top of the, the dumpster Speaker 6: On the, we're yeah, we're counting on the top of the dumpster. Right. It's a, you know, the container itself is contained with a plastic lid. Right. And the, and the access to put the trash in is typically on the side. They have sliders now. So they try to kind of keep the unit intact. And then the only thing I'll just add is that, you know,
we did talk quite a bit about this discussion with the operator with benchmark, our, our partner and operator. And they did remind me that these, this facility, while it's, you know, assisted living and memory care, it's, it's, it's very much a residential facility in creating residential style trash, like trash that you would create in your home. So I just wanted to kind of remind that it's, it is different than maybe some of the other more commercial grade facilities in terms of trash generation. So it's not as, as you know, certainly will generate trash as does all facilities and we understand that,
but it's not to the type of caliper as like a hospital or other type facility, skilled nursing, things like that. Speaker 5: Alright. Then setting, setting aside the specific differences of types of trash. I'm talking about the very fundamental concept, which is clearly available technology now of not leaving a trail from the building to the dumpster, which is inevitably going to happen when people are taking things to the dumpster and back. The, the maintenance of that, the operation of having to leave the building with trash at all times of the year
to go to the dumpster. There are issues there, which I can't believe wouldn't be far better served by a different method. It's involving, again, it's the best technology available that can be found, I believe that other folks are using and that just makes a lot of sense. I understand the board of health is happy with what you've done done because compared to what it was, it's an improvement. Speaker 6: Yep. Speaker 5: But I think unless I can understand
and I, I don't, I don't have to be the one to understand, but others might want to understand why wouldn't the other type of com the compactor loaded from the inside trash does not get out of the building at all. It's directly into the compactor and the compactor is picked up similar to a dumpster and, and there are different sizes. No, Speaker 6: Sorry, Speaker 5: Go ahead. Speaker 1: Am am I, am I correct in understanding that, that the Board of health had strong feelings about
some of the other arrangements that we're talking Speaker 6: About? That's right. I mean I think that the discussion around having that ability to go right from the door into the dumpster was our original design and that, you know, because of their concern about the, the trash being so close to the facility for a few reasons, that is why we've moved it across the way. It's not very far, it's not a long, it's not a very long walk. It might look further away than the original condition. But I'll just add, I mean these, these, this is, these are the homes, right? For the folks that will be living in our facility, obviously we have a neighborhood on the other side,
it's 24 7 managed facility 365, which is different than the, you know, condition today with the office. You know, they're different hours of operation. We'll have a fully operated, you know, 24 7 staffed facility. So in terms of technology, this is sort of the best, you know, program that we can. And then we've talked about it quite significantly compared it to, you know, benchmark has facilities all over the northeast and down all the way to dc This is kind of their standard protocols. I know there's always new technologies we can rely on,
but at this moment this just seems like the adequate approach to deal with the volume of, you know, trash that we anticipate having at our facility and having it proximate but not too far is also important. So being able to walk out that door and walk across the drive, you know, the 24 foot driveway there, it's not too, too far away. Speaker 5: Alright. I just, I want it, it's on the record now, I'm sure. I don't believe that this project has availed itself of a clear study of
an evaluation of different options including, and I have heard no specific comment, yay or nay for what I'm describing. I don't believe it's been thoroughly examined and I'm not sure what is used at, at your other facilities. You say they don't do that. Well maybe they should, but I'm talking about one right here in Natick. It's brand new. It's going to be brand new. It's still lines on paper that can be erased very easily. Modifications can be done. You've done it, you've already shown it
'cause a little bit of a valuation and you made a major change. I suggest that a little bit more evaluation and you might very well come up with a better solution all around from the staffing, from the cost operations and so on. I'm, I haven't heard anything about that alternative as to why it is not being used. Speaker 1: Was that alternative one that was considered or that that benchmark uses elsewhere? Speaker 6: I'm, I'm actually not entirely sure what the, so this is something that's a local use since at,
you mentioned CVS in Natick as is is I'm, I'm, I'm actually not sure what, where to go to look for the, this type of program or approach. Speaker 1: Peter are, are you aware of any kind of equivalent facility that uses that? That is somewhere in, Speaker 5: I, I have been told, I have not seen it, but I have been told that I believe two of the other facilities similar to this in Natick are using an entire inside compactor that's, I haven't seen it, I only drove
and saw the one at CVS. But it's that concept now. I believe, as I say, I've been told that that is available at other facilities in Speaker 6: Natick and that's an indoor compactor. Speaker 5: I'm sorry, Speaker 6: That's, sorry to interrupt, but is that an, you said that's an indoor compactor? Speaker 5: It's well if theor yes. It's an indoor loaded, the compactor may be out technically outside the building. The building line goes right through, let's say the loading of the okay of the
Speaker 6: And i of Speaker 5: The device. Speaker 6: My, my sense is those are more commercial oriented facilities. Is that, does that sound correct versus a residential Speaker 5: Facility? No, don't believe so. It's not a residential, it's not would be, wouldn't be residential, but it would be at an apartment building where there's a lot of trash here. I wouldn't put it in a single family home. Speaker 6: Right. Of course Speaker 5: I would like it. I I would, I feel it's appropriate at this stage for this project to look into it and come back Sure. And say we've looked into it and this is where we've seen it used and it is no good.
It isn't good for us because, or it is good, but let us know that it's been cons considered and I'm, I don't wanna beat it up anymore. Speaker 6: No, no, I, I appreciate the comments. I just, I'm trying to find a solution. 'cause we, we are, you know, of course we're eager to continue to move forward. We are excited about this program and the plan and I'm just trying to find a balance of doing some additional research but also continue to keep moving, hopefully move forward tonight with an approval and if there's an, an opportunity for us to continue evaluat. I mean we've, we've, we've worked on evaluations,
we looked at the inside, we've worked with board of health. I'm just trying to find the right potential path forward here and not let you know our trash protocols hold up the project if there's ability to, you know, allow us to look into this, but also continue to keep moving forward with the project. That would be very helpful to us. Speaker 1: Amanda, are, are you aware of some models that, Speaker 2: So I think, think what we have in the condition is adequate for what we are requiring because we are providing the location, sorry, the type
of dumpster where we said best practices can be changed. It doesn't have to keep a six yard. They could change it into a compactor or other better technology at a later date. Keeping it where it is. Looking at the project at one 19 East Central Street, which was formerly anthology, they do have the six yard dumpsters, but they have either a transformer or an area right next to the two six yards that may have a cardboard compactor. I am familiar with the cardboard compactors that they do have at CBS, which isn't very out,
but it's in the same exact space. So what they've designed would be able to be the, in what is located within this fenced in area can be modified. So the locations are actually what board of health has been requiring Speaker 1: What, what you now see at the CVS. Yes. Speaker 6: So is there ability for us to continue to, you know, evaluate strategies and keep, keep moving through the, you know, the special permit process, site plan review? I just, I would hate for this to hold us up if, if I,
and of course like, you know, if we can do something more efficient with our operations, we wanna do that all day long. It's not, it's not a question of that. It's just trying to find the right solution that keeps everyone feeling comfortable with the project. Speaker 5: If I may, in trying to find, as you put it, trying to find the best alternative from what I'm hearing from you or not hearing from you is what alternatives have been looked at and rejected and why. Speaker 6: So the, and Speaker 5: I I know that, I know that CVS has set it up, their large one is for cardboard,
it is for broken breaking down and card storing trash cardboard, and there's a dumpster there that is doing other kinds of trash, but their needs are not nearly what the, this type of need that will be at this facility. But Speaker 1: That based on, Speaker 5: I, I can't, no, I don't, I don't want to go and I don't think you want me to go any further in explaining what I don't understand about the details of this type of system. I just know from where I've worked, what I've seen
that it, it can work and it does work and it's new techno, it's newer technology, but it's been used, I can say there are restaurants that are along Newbury Street in Boston backing up to very, very costly apartments on Commonwealth Avenue. Some of those restaurants are now using that type of system because the people who were living in that area, when the restaurant was turning over and going to become a new restaurant, as they so often do,
it was requested and required Speaker 6: Right. Speaker 5: That they do it. So it just takes investigation. But I can't do that. I don't know all the answers. Alright. Speaker 1: No, thank you. I appreciate that Speaker 3: Madam Chair. Just, just to, you know, try to get to something that we can all feel good about. And you know, this, it's the, it's difficult. There's a slippery slope because there's always gonna be an nth degree of some aspect of a project that's new technology. And I don't think the board, you know, intends to
require every applicant to meet the nth degree of every aspect. You know, on the other hand, you know, they actually, you know, want, as Katie said, would want to have the best that they can provide, but there's business judgment, there's costs, there's, it's very difficult. But I don't know if the board would be comfortable with, you know, like a, a memo that explains the different options and why they choose what they are going to choose. You know, I do agree with, with Ms. Loomis that I think this language works.
It's, it's flexible that would allow a change if that is what the board, you know, encourages and the, the applicant is able to afford and, and make work. So, Speaker 6: And I think, you know, we, like I've said, we and I, and I know the comment I'm hearing is you want us to explore more options. I think the challenge is with this use, there is not an, you know, intensity, it's not a re restaurants create a lot of compost, waste that smelly trash, things like that.
This is more akin to a home. Of course there's more units in the, in this facility than compared to a single family home residence. But, you know, the, the feedback I've received in working closely with our operator, they don't feel like this is an intensive use for trash. It's not a large generator, you know, there's no hazard, there's no medical waste, there's no, there's none of those aspects happening. It's very much like bagged trash put in the containers and they're picked up three days a week.
Three times a week. So, you know, I think the challenge is because it's not as of intensive a use, it doesn't, you know, rise to maybe like CVSI, I don't know this, I'm speculating, but you know, I imagine that they have a lot of packaging and cardboard and recyclables. Again, things that we won't have in a similar condition here at our assisted living. So I'd obviously have to research that further. But everything we're hearing, based on all of the facilities we have in operation today, this is very much the standard of what they use. Two six yard con containers in a outdoor pen.
We, you know, utilize pest control. You know, we use our 24 7 staff to operate and keep the site clear and clean. So, I mean, this is typical, very typical and standard operation protocols. There is some language in the condition that says we will use our best efforts to look into and, and, and utilize technologies. I think in this case it was referring to the vehicles, but I perhaps we could suggest some added, like a couple words that says we'll look into additional strategies to be more sustainable with our trash and you know, perhaps look into more strategies
as we advance the design of the building more meaningfully prior to building permit. Andy, Speaker 4: You haven't had a chance to Yeah, different planning board members have different areas of concern that happens all the time. It, I think what it, it helps make a good board. I I am not as concerned about the trash issue as my buddy Pete is. These assisted living facilities are very close to the quality you'd find at a, at an upper class type hotel. It's, it's in the absolute interest of the business to maintain the property, the grounds, a calmness,
a professionalism, trash management is absolutely a part of that. We're, we're there to be a, a situation where I, you know, something happened and, you know, there were rats or whatever. It's inconceivable to me that you guys would, that that the management of this would ever let that go that far. So I, I just feel like while I encourage best practices, I'm finding composting is a pretty good program. I do it at my house and it's working pretty well. Recycling's a good thing to do. It's probably gonna help in the long run save you guys costs.
So you're gonna probably have an economic incentive to, to be as careful with those things as you can. So sometimes we can overstep a little bit in terms of what the planning board can require. And if there was something like absolutely specific, like we talk all the time about baffles on lights and or heights of, of poles. That is a concrete suggestion that we know is really important to be included when we, I find we get a little further out on the diving board trying to make suggestions about the actual practices of these things. And they're very well intended and they are important,
but I just trust that it's gonna be an absolute part of your business to maintain this as you are with regard to sounds and landscaping and, and all the things, right? You don't want any complaints. You want a very good reputation, you want five stars on Google. So all that goes into it. So I personally do not need a memo. I I I'm assuming that you're gonna be looking at these things just as part of a regular business practice. So IIII am personally ready to go and I would've been ready to go last week, last time we met if we could have, but we weren't able to. So I don't really have any further questions about that.
Speaker 1: Thank you Peter. Speaker 5: Yes, ma'am. Speaker 1: The idea of having, modifying the language in the decision to indicate that there's an effort to, to kind of continual, to have continuous improvement on for the facilities and whether it's vehicles or whether it is the technology for crushing or just moving trash,
is there language that we could incorporate so that you feel, I don't know, that something of the change that, that you're proposing, which certainly goes beyond what the, the health director felt. Would it be helpful for you or for us to set up something that you can hear from, from the health director about why he was positive about this? We're not trying to shortchange anything, but we are trying to move forward in, you know,
such a way that it is meeting the health standards that this town has to live up to every day. Speaker 5: This what is what we've used the term new technology, it's been around for years, so it's not new technology. However, in lieu of what, in view of what you've just asked or suggested. I don't want to be, and I don't want this, this project to be dependent on a major decision like trash disposal. I don't, and it's, I think and Andy's analogy with the light is perfect. It's right on, it's the same thing.
But I don't want this project to be dependent on my discussing with the board of health. I'm not qualified for it. But the proper people in this project development team who are making decisions like this, they're the people who should. And I think the only terminology or writing that would be satisfied to satisfying to me and anybody looking at this development process would be a statement that said, we examined this, these types of systems specifically,
and for these reasons we are using or we are not using such and such a system. Don't count on me because I don't know it and I'll and, and I'm stepping out now for the and to the pleasure of the board. Speaker 1: I'm, and actually it was, it's a here too, Alan is there he is. Oh, there, he's I'm here. Yes. Speaker 8: Sorry, apologize. Speaker 1: I haven't, I haven't given you a chance to speak. Sorry, Speaker 8: I don't have much to say. I, I've kind of in agreement with Andy. Trash was never really my major concern.
Especially this, this isn't a development where they're trying to just not do something. I think there's a disagreement about what the best to do is between Peter and board of health or the developer. So trash is not my issue. And if we wanna move forward, I'm, I'm okay with that. Speaker 1: So, so can you guys hear me, Peter? Yes. Got Speaker 8: It. Okay. Speaker 1: Thank you all. Sorry, Speaker 8: Were you jotting something down? Speaker 1: Is there, Speaker 6: I just had a, a thought 'cause I think we've, we've got a really
comprehensive decision. I think it's Speaker 1: 27 4 pages. Speaker 6: Pages. But there is one, as we mentioned. There's, there's a, a condition in here and I'll just read, if you don't mind me reading it out loud. Okay. What page you on please? I'm on page 21, condition 15. It's refer, this is the section on waste storage and removal item three. And this was incorporated as a result of our discussion around technologies associated with the backup alarms in, in, in which I think this is very helpful.
We, you know, I had mentioned we had spoke with an operator who has new technology. So we included this condition and the last sentence of that condition number three says, when technology is available, the applicant will use reasonable efforts to ensure the waste removal vehicles utilize backup cameras instead of audible backup alarms. My suggestion would be to say, and the most efficient and advanced technology for trash management on the site. So simple, but also compelling us to, you know,
when technology is available and I, and I I recognize the comment about there's technologies perhaps today that we need to explore, but compelling us to continue to enhance trash management as we continue through operation of the facility. Speaker 1: That, that would strike me as a very, and it's, it's reasonable, it is anticipatory. And going back, Peter, one of, one of the reasons too, to, to make the point, this is a special permit
and what it means is that there must be at least four of the five members of this board who vote favorably for this. One of our members has recused himself because of a professional matter. And so, so Peter, I I turn to it because it is, it it, if you choose not to not to vote favorably, then we, we have to kind of take this back to an earlier stage.
I would like to find a reasonable middle. And I think the language that, that, that you're citing is, I, we have worked with, with your company for a long time on any number of projects and I have known you to be a firm of your word for national development. Yep. And I, so I hope that when you say we will, we will do this, that you will. And I feel that that's, that has been the way you've operated Peter.
I don't know how much you may sense that or value that or have witnessed that in our, in our relations before. Are you willing to take the language that has been put forward and consider that for the change to, to kind of keep monitoring improvements in trash management? Peter, Speaker 5: I would caution one thing that this is the type of suggest
or change if it were to take place that is gonna require, if this project continues along on the basis that we've got on the plate on paper now, it's gonna involve a lot more the further along we go in terms of potential change. So my suggestion would be, take a week one your stu the people doing your studies, whoever is working on the team that would be involved in this, maybe take a week and investigate actual furnishing
of equipment, the companies that do this and see how well, if at all they can comply with what you are trying to get to make this operation work. And just after the week, send something in. And I for wanna be happy to look at it. It would only be to just be assure me that consideration was given to it. At this point, I am not convinced at all that any specific thought to this mechanism, this method has even been thought of. It's been what we've done in the past.
And that's, that's as far as you've gone Well, what we've done in the past. Speaker 1: Well, although I Speaker 5: Doesn't, that doesn't happen. It Speaker 1: Doesn't get Peter, I will say, I'll say I don't, it hasn't struck me that what's been said was because it's what we've done before. So let's do it again. I I don't get that at all because they were trying to come up with innovative models, some of which we turned down, as you'll recall. So they went back to the drawing board for about, about trash management and, and we went, we went,
Speaker 6: I mean the current feedback from the, from the board of health is to, to take the trash away from the interior of the building. So, you know, we've been guided to make the adjustment right, which we're showing in our current plan. And I'm not sure that if we go back to the board of health and suggest interior trash, and I understand there's other, but if we, if we bring that back, I'm not, I'm not sure we're gonna find Yeah. Progress in that direction for a residential facility. I know it may work in different commercial facilities, but I I I, my sense from the Board of Health
and the commentary that we've had with them is that they would look prefer for us to take the trash to the exterior in the location that we're, that we're in. And, and I'm, I'm not trying to be obstructionist on that, Speaker 4: Peter, I, I'm not sure I understand what the request is. Take a week and investigate other ways to get trash out of an assisted living building. I mean, what, let, let's say you had a magic wand. What would, what, what are you looking for? Or are you looking for them to do like a survey of trash techniques? No, I, I, I guess I don't understand what,
Speaker 5: What we hope to mean. Right? They, I am looking just for one specific thing and that is meet, talk with, and this is the right people doing it, talk with company or companies, maybe two, looking at other facilities here in Natick and see what is working and what is not. I would definitely include a facility here that might be using it in Natick. And I would also say a vendor, talk with a vendor
and be sure that you can put together what you need for this facility. Speaker 1: Ms. Garra has, it Speaker 5: Hasn't been done. So Speaker 3: Three, Speaker 5: I'm not looking for us to scrape the barrel for the, the, the latest technology that, that is far beyond what computers could even do. We didn't know about that years ago, Speaker 2: Madam Chair. So no, Speaker 5: This is very, very simple. Very simple. Speaker 3: So through Madam Chair, one, one concern I would have about that is, is this language can adopt over time. There's going to be maybe something now five years,
it might be something we can't foresee. So yes to, to go through that and delay now for something that's just in today's world doesn't really help in the long term. Where, where this language suggests that the board wants the applicant to keep improving over time. Speaker 1: I mean, I guess I was struck because the original proposal that was put put forward was the one that the applicant had had presented.
We said, well let's, let's see what the Board of Health has to say. And they, you know, came back and said, we think it's much more important to do it this way. I questioned going against that recommendation because that is in part what the job of the health department is. Amanda, was there something you had Yep. Speaker 2: Wanted to add? So I guess I understand what you're saying, but at this point we have delayed this project significantly when we were ready to vote last week,
but we didn't have enough people here. So what I'm requesting at this time, so we can get the appeal period going is to add a condition number four to exactly where the national development stated we should have it, but have it read differently. Number four, the applicant shall utilize the most efficient technology available for waste collection and management to ensure the best technology is in use prior to the issuance of an occup occupancy permit. The applicant shall submit a study showing alternative options Speaker 1: So that they, you could not get an occupancy
permit without it. Speaker 2: Correct. And so that would let them give them more time because we know things are changing. Things are changing at the state level. Also, they may work with their vendor in terms of getting compost, which is something actually Boston restaurants do use is compost. Not just straight throwing all the food waste into the trash. So there's a lot more to it than just that. But looking at other locations, these types of facilities have only used the six yard waste. They have not used the compactors associated with breaking down cardboards.
So I think for the purposes, as of right now, we're following exactly what the Board of Health is asked. We don't wanna have them go through a study right now and then exclude a bunch of studies that may advance and preclude them from using it in the future if it increases in Speaker 1: Peter, thank thank you Peter, to the proposal that the study be prepared and presented before an occupancy permit is issued. Would that satisfy that your your concerns?
Speaker 5: Yes, the I'd like to just hear the wording of what we would be deal what what'll be in the decision. And I offer you a real caution. It, it's not gonna work. If this thing goes, the project has developed too far, then you're not gonna be changing anything without a great deal of cost. So I'll I'll take your, I'll take your wording. It's the pleasure of the board. I mean, I've blurted out a hell of a lot more than I should have. Okay. So go for it.
And I'm only, well, I was gonna say one of, just one member of the board, but you're telling me there's a, I think I've been in this position before with other, with another project, but I think we were four, we were five then available and well go, go for it. Speaker 1: So I would say with, with that insertion of language to indicate that a, this a study, a thorough study on trash management and, and alternatives be produced
and received by the town before the CER certificate of occupancy can be issued. Speaker 6: And we could, if it, if it makes some sense to this board, we could include that as a condition of building permit because it's before, I mean, I'm happy to do it either way, but if, if to your point, if, if it's sooner in the process incorporated into to design, that's the time to do it. So if it makes some sense, Ms. Loomis, we could include, we could include the building permit component
and that at that point we would present the options, we'd present the study. And before a shovel is in the ground, we have confirmed our process and protocol is, you know, we've, we've studied the options and we've taken some time to do so. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 5: The earlier you can reach decision point, the better off Speaker 1: Of course. Right. So then to that with, with this to to be done before the building permit is issued, we have a, a motion to that effect. I don't Speaker 4: Think we've taken any, before Speaker 8: We do Terry, just the language thing.
Should we say who they're presenting it to? Speaker 1: Yeah, I put it as a planning board at the planning. Oh, presenting it to the planning board. Submit it to the planning board. Speaker 4: Okay. Okay. So we haven't taken any votes, I don't believe. Excuse Speaker 1: Me. We have not Madam Chair Speaker 3: Has the hearing closed? Speaker 1: No. No. Okay. Okay. Speaker 4: We will usually do that after we take some votes. Okay. Alright. So this is an application for special permit assisted living residence, which includes site plan review. So I make a motion that we approve the special permit with the site plan that has the most recent revision date
of 2 11 26. Speaker 1: And you move that, Speaker 4: That is, so that is my motion. Speaker 1: And a second. Speaker 8: I'll second. Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Claudier. Okay. Motion made and seconded. Further discussion. Hearing none. All those in favor say aye. And, and with your name, Speaker 4: Meyer Aye. Speaker 1: Evans. Aye. Speaker 8: Vote. Your aye. Speaker 5: None say aye. Speaker 1: Very Speaker 4: Good. And then I make a motion that we approve the decision
with the addition of paragraph four under 15, waste storage and removal as was read. Speaker 1: Alright, that motion made. Is there a second? Speaker 5: Can I hear that again please? Speaker 1: I said is that the motion was made. Did you, you heard the motion? Speaker 5: I, I didn't, I didn't hear clearly the motion that Andy just made. Okay. Speaker 4: So the, the motion is to approve our decision as drafted. And we have copies of the draft with the addition of paragraph four under condition 15
labeled waste, storage and removal. And that language is the language that Ms. Loomis read to us. Speaker 5: Yes. Alright, fine. Thank you. Yes. Speaker 1: Okay. So that, so the motion's made and may I take that as a second, Peter? Speaker 5: Yes, you can take it as a second. Speaker 1: Thank you Speaker 4: Meyer. Aye Speaker 1: Peter? Speaker 5: Yeah. Oh, not tonight. Speaker 1: So Alan, Speaker 8: Who do your Aye Speaker 1: And Evan's. Aye. Speaker 4: And now I think we can make a motion to close the public hearing Speaker 2: Waivers. Speaker 4: Oh, the waivers are listed on the last page
and it's part of the decision. So that needs a separate notation. Usually Speaker 2: You do vote the waiver, the waivers, you could just say as outlined in attachment A of the decision. Speaker 4: Yeah. So as part of the decision I move, we approve the waivers listed on attachment A. Page 24. Speaker 1: Is there a second? Speaker 8: All second. Speaker 1: Thank you all. Alright, motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Roll call by, you know by name
Speaker 4: Meyer. Aye. Speaker 5: A Aye Speaker 8: Vote. Aye. Speaker 1: Evans. Aye. Speaker 4: And then I'll make a motion we close the public hearing. Thank Speaker 1: You. And I, I'll second, who's that? Alan, you second? Yep. Okay. Speaker 4: May Aye Speaker 5: Not sin. Aye. Speaker 1: Re Speaker 8: Re Aye Speaker 1: Evan's Aye. So that, that public hearing is now closed and then, and and now to work. Speaker 2: There's only two of you here. Do you wanna, have you authorized to sign the decision? Speaker 4: Yeah, we'll make a motion to let the chair sign the decision instead
of having all board members sign it. Speaker 1: Is there a second? Speaker 5: I'll second that. Speaker 1: Thank you Peter. Alright, on, on the motion to, for the chair, to sign for the board. Speaker 4: May or aye Speaker 1: Peter, Speaker 5: Not Speaker 8: Who your Aye. Speaker 1: And Evans. Aye. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Alright, Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Speaker 6: Thank you so much Speaker 1: And welcome, welcome back to Natick, to Awesome. To your firm in this project. Speaker 6: Thank you for your time. I appreciate the commentary
and dialogue. Thank you so much. Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker 3: We do have the a and r Mylar too, I think if, I don't know if that's, it's right there on your list for later tonight. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 8: We voted on that last time, but Speaker 4: We did go to, Speaker 1: Oh Speaker 8: Yeah, I believe so. Amanda, I can swing by tomorrow if you need my web signature on it. Speaker 2: What'd he say? Speaker 1: Signatures. Oh, signatures For the Mylar. We Speaker 2: Just need three signatures on the Mylar. Speaker 1: I can be one of them. Yep. Speaker 9: Frank, it's swing by tomorrow. Okay. If perfect. It's Speaker 1: Perfect. Thank you. Thank Speaker 9: You. Thank you Speaker 2: So much. And I'm gonna grab Doug.
Speaker 1: Oh great. Thank you. Doug should Speaker 9: Be right. Private booth. Soundproof booth. Speaker 1: All right. Good night. And we we're just waiting for our fifth member who was recused from the earlier discussion. Speaker 9: The other one is an A and R for forest amp. Speaker 1: Oh, that, Speaker 9: I don't see that. Speaker 1: Hmm. No, I don't, Speaker 9: I guess we'll have to figure out what Speaker 1: That's one. I don't Where do you, what number do you have? It is Speaker 9: 27 29 Forest Avenue. Honor, maybe that's for future agenda Speaker 1: Maybe. Yeah. Let's see. But that does not sound actually at all familiar,
so thank you. And I am guessing that most of you are here for the discussion of 6 25 Worcester Street. No, Speaker 9: We are for 19 Strathmore. Speaker 1: Okay. Which is next. Speaker 9: Yes. Speaker 1: And hello, Speaker 2: Welcome back, you the charger. Speaker 9: Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Speaker 1: Alright, so taking them in the, the order that appears in the agenda, the next public hearing is 19 Strathmore Road special permit, adult daycare facility, special permit site plan review. And this was opened at our last, I think at our last meeting
Speaker 9: Was there testimony Speaker 1: And there there was testimony the applicant was, was here. Okay. And has returned. Speaker 10: Okay. So I will need to catch up. Speaker 1: Yep. You just need to file the all rule prior to the vote of the project. Sorry, Speaker 10: I'll Speaker 1: Just, that's okay Mr. Richards. Unless you wanna Speaker 10: Open without me? Just Speaker 1: No. 'cause it's a special permit. You need four or do we have, wait now that, wait we, so we have, you Speaker 11: Only had three at the last meeting, which was enough to continue it to tonight. Right. And, and take testimony. Speaker 10: So did Peter also miss that meeting?
Yes. When the testimony was Speaker 1: Given, he, he was, he missed. Speaker 10: So he will have to also review. Speaker 11: So both of 'em will have to do that. Okay. Speaker 1: Yep. Apologies for that. Thank you. Speaker 11: No, no worries. Speaker 1: Alright, so Speaker 11: Good evening. George Richards, where we left from South Nat Law with me tonight are two of my very good clients, max and Anna, who have been clients of mine since 2009. When they applied for a adult daycare special permit over at 17 Strathmore, which is right next to this project. I didn't upload them to the portal,
but I can, there were, there are four previous decisions on 17 Strathmore that might give you some guidance as far as conditions on 19, originally we reported before, excuse me, appeared before the ZBA because there was no category for adult daycare. And they were the special permit granting authority in the industrial zone at that time. So we appeared before them, I think in 2010, 2009, 2010, 2017, 2014.
And then 2017 there's three decisions. All those decisions really just increased the number of clients and employees is what we were seeking. As demand has increased. And I guess the good news, this isn't a very exciting project, but the demand for adult daycare has been very strong and they have, are, are more or less outgrowing their space at 17. And so they're acquiring 19 strath more immediately next door, abutting next door to basically expand their operations. Speaker 1: And I think were, was it that these,
that the two operations will operate independent of one another broadly? Or are Speaker 11: They, there will will be some overlap. Yeah, there will be some overlap. Same owners, same management, same clientele. So perhaps someone might be at 17 one day and 19 the other. But they are, they have ability I think to have over a hundred clients in 17. But that's getting pretty crowded and they'd like to spread it out and allow people to use 19 as well. So I can provide,
I can upload those decisions I have tonight if you want to go through some of the conditions that they originally imposed the ZBA originally imposed. But just quickly, there's gonna be no work done outside. There's no anticipated grading any changes to the exterior of the building, to the landscaping, to the parking field. It's more or less a turnkey operation that they can purchase and begin using the space. You know, as soon as we get a special permit and site plan review. As a result, because we're not doing any work outside,
we requested waivers of the building elevation requirement and the drainage assessment, since again, there's gonna be no work done. Outside landscape will remain unchanged. They have a unique traffic or parking business plan and that is, they have six vans that they pick up their clients and drop them off every day. So there are not people driving to this site. Occasionally someone might drop off a family member, but for the most part the traffic is limited to the vans
that will probably do two shifts in the morning, two shifts in the afternoon. And so as a result of that, we also have requested a waiver of the parking or the traffic assessment. You may be familiar with the area. It's fairly quiet, industrial park area, not a lot of traffic at all. And with their method of transportation, we did go over this with Deputy Chief Anne, go ahead. Just, Speaker 1: Just brief interruption. Sorry. Yes. We don't appear to have received a site plan
for this time around. Speaker 11: I believe that is the site plan. There is one under site plan that's right up on the screen I believe right now. Yep. Speaker 2: We received site plans from the last meeting, but we had not received anything updated since the last meeting. So we only received what we have on the screen, which was in the packet for the first opening public hearing. But we didn't receive any new, Speaker 1: Did anything change from the, that o opening, public Speaker 11: Hearing? No. That's why we not upload a new say plan. Okay. Because there are no changes that we proposed
or have been asked to, to make. And you can see the 18 parking spaces there. The, the parking demand that we used in the past was for just day. There's no parking demand for adult daycare. So we use regular daycare, which is five space, one space for every five people. In this case, we're looking at least right now as just a permit for 50 clients and 10 employees, which would only require about 10 spaces. Not even eight or nine spaces. We have 18 spaces, which are
essentially gonna be for the employees. Speaker 1: And are you, are you land banking any of the Speaker 11: No. I mean we could, if you, you know, you could see on the Northeast Tilly side of the property that's all paved but not, not marked for parking so that we could add parking back there if we needed to and stripe 'em. But given our numbers and the current parking spaces provided, we don't have any plans to need additional parking. Okay. But, but we can if necessary. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. Speaker 11: Similar to the prior decision lighting will be in a timer
and turned off one hour after closing. So there'll be no light trespass right now there's a dumpster out front 'cause they have been emptying some of the in interior, but their plan is to use the dumpster at 17. There's a pad and a dumpster at 17. Their plan is to just use that and share that service and increase the pickup from once a week to twice a week. Okay. Speaker 1: But there's no, but there's no physical expansion of the, Speaker 11: No, no physical expansion of the, of 17. There's, you can see on here, there's a concrete pad for the HVAC,
but as of now we don't propose putting the dumpster on site. The other question that I guess, oh, so Lieutenant, Lieutenant, I keep calling him. Lieutenant Za, chief Deputy Chief Za commented that as long as there's a, a diagram that we uploaded with traffic coming in on the left side of the building and out on the right and dropping off the clients in the rear. And Lieutenant Loza just said as long as the drop off is on the passenger side, he was happy with that.
Okay. Fire suppression system. In the prior decision, there was a clause basically saying that if the fire department requires a fire dep suppression system, they will install one. As of now, they do not require one at 17. Correct. Speaker 12: In 17 we had, sorry, we didn't, we had to when Speaker 11: Oh, you want to come up and just speak into the mic? Yeah. Or over there. I'm sorry. Speaker 1: I introduce yourself please. Yeah. Speaker 12: I'm Anna. We are the owners of the adult day health center at 17th Strathmore. And so we've been there for quite a while, since 2009. And we came to the board couple times
to increase the capacity as the client demand was growing. So I think when we came to increase from 15 to 8 84, I think clients, that's when the requirement for sprinkler was kind of asked to do. And we installed the suppression system there right before we got the permit to operate as a 40 84 clients. So if, if there's a need, I don't, I think like a requirement for, from the fire department if, if it's like certain amount of, I think it's square footage or certain amount of clients.
So at 15 we did not require to have a suppression system. Again, if we have to, we'll do that. But, Speaker 11: But we're fine with the condition that that states, if the fire department requires that we will install a fire depression system. Speaker 12: And we had just recently, we, you know, I think the two weeks ago, one week ago, we had somebody to come in and check all the fire equipment, the lights and all that stuff. So there wasn't a question about suppression systems. So just to note it. Speaker 11: Perfect. Yeah. Thank you. There's a couple of the other conditions that we, just one
Speaker 1: Quick sec. Yeah. Amanda, do I do we typically, I think, I know that we go back and forth where some applicants will go and work directly with the fire department about seeing that they're meeting on all needs, but sometimes we've also deferred to the design review team. Is that the Speaker 2: DRT Speaker 1: Or the DRT? Yeah, Speaker 2: So the fire department is part of that and they would be working independently with the fire department to make sure that those, all those tests and everything are conducted in the installation of fire sprinkler or, and
or like smoke detectors, carbon monoxide MS detectors. Speaker 1: Great, thank you. Speaker 11: Yeah, Tonya did participate in that and that'll be an ongoing process with the fire department. Good, thank you. So no exterior, the hours of operation, we had gotten permits for eight, 8:00 AM to 2:00 PM with employees allowed to stay till five to clean up, et cetera. They're typically outta there by three 30 or four. But th that was one of the conditions
and we, we did come back and get approval to go on Sunday. Demands so high that, so it's basically Monday through Sunday, eight to two with everybody outta there by 5:00 PM The, again requirement that all clients shall be transported to and from the site and company vans, we agreed to contact a private ambulance service to service the facility if required. So to not exhaust 10 and needed resources, no food preparation.
There's a service kitchen if you will, but they have breakfast and lunch catered by a, by a local catering company. And so that there'll be no on onsite food preparation timers. We talked about, I don't know where this came from, this decision, in no way grants permission now in the future to install the swimming pool. So I I that could be a deal breaker. But if you want to put that, continue to have that condition in there. I don't know where it came from. Hours of operation. That sounded all Speaker 1: Familiar Speaker 12: But, but there's a building that somewhere
Nixon had the pool, that's why Speaker 11: Maybe there's a pool. Yeah. Had a facility nearby. I don't know. Yeah. But we are not gonna have a swimming pool. Okay. Talk about liability for adult. Take care. Speaker 1: I'm happy to strike any said reference. Speaker 11: So those are essentially the conditions that were in, the prior decisions and that we've discussed with the town. I'm not sure if I'm missing anything, Amanda. If anything else that came up in the meeting, I'm pretty sure we have letters on the board of health, which also indicate, oh, one thing I wanted to correct on the board of health letter, which is dated
February 2nd from Michael Boudreaux, number four, they indicated it's a, we know it's in an A PD, they said the project will increase the impervious surface area. Therefore it's recommendation that the install mitigation runoff. As I indicated before, we are not adding any impervious area. Okay. So that was the only comment in the board of health letter that didn't seem to apply. Okay. Speaker 1: Amanda? Speaker 2: Yeah, I guess the things that we were actually,
I thought we were waiting on for this was that there was a request for the board to review the drainage because this is the one time that we could actually re-review the site in addition to reviewing the landscaping and the lighting plan. So the applicant was gonna provide that information. 'cause I thought since they were coming in for site plan review, the board had highlighted they wanted to look at drainage, landscaping and lighting to make sure everything is in good working order and to do an update. Speaker 1: I, I think, as I recall, yeah, it was that notion, not
that the reserve request being made to, to expand or approve, but for our own kind of, well baby check to just to, to have a, a kind of a, a walkthrough and a review of the site to make sure that drainage was, was still functioning and working as needed and and so forth. Speaker 2: And I thought it was from multiple members 'cause I had it in my notes, but I could have, Speaker 4: I was gonna bring up landscaping. Yeah, I mean this is the one time, I mean, I appreciate that, that the, the testimony has been it's fine and it might be fine.
I don't know what's there. I'm just looking at like a two dimensional top view and it says lawn. So I, we just, this is the time to just verify that the landscaping is in good order. You know, there's it, it helps your business. But, but mostly it's for us just to, it's the one time we get to check on lighting, landscaping that the drainage is working properly. So I, it, it's more just like we, we just need to verify those facts. Speaker 11: You can look at the, you probably have looked at the Google maps. I mean, it's a nice looking building. It is gut landscaping, it's gut used. Nothing crazy.
They're gonna plant some flowers in front and put a couple benches for out front. But so do you just want a landscape plan showing the existing conditions? Because they really don't plan on, unless you want to recommend it Speaker 1: Actually would probably be worth a visit. Speaker 4: Yeah, I didn't look up any Google images. I I was just, I just said last time, this is the time. We just wanna verify what, what shaped the landscaping's in. So if it's, you know, if you wanna provide photos, are there any, you know, I don't know, overgrown invasives or, or you know, anything like that, that's an issue.
Speaker 1: Because I think you want something too that can be pinned to a specific date time. So you're not looking at how great it was 10 years ago. Speaker 4: Yeah, no, I, I, I think we want an update and, you know, do, do you need a formal landscape architect? I, I don't, I don't know. Speaker 11: So we could probably do a land, a landscaping lighting plan that's combined. Yeah, go ahead. Speaker 12: Yeah, I just wanted to, yeah, I just wanted to bring to the tension. I don't know if anybody drove by like was seeing the 17th Strathmore. They, when we, you know, started, they, it was, you know, pretty in a sad looking place. So I don't know if anybody's seen it.
Now we have a very good landscaping contractor. We did the irrigation. We, you know, planted, we replanted the grass. We did a lot of flowers like roses. And we want the place to look good because the, you know, what we are doing is, it's a business for people, you know, Speaker 1: You know, and, and, and I appreciate it and you would be surprised how many people you'd say, don't you want your, you know, project to look good? And then you go, oh, apparently not. I, so it's not, it's not personal. Yeah. On, on how you may do it. But yeah, people sometimes, Speaker 12: Yeah, you're right.
But what I'm skip on the, the, what I'm trying to say that, you know, our business is for people to make their life like a happier Yeah. And we, you know, we have o other centers too and everything, everywhere we go, we just plant things. We make it so much better than it is. So we have very nice green landscape. We trim the trees because the, the the, they're very long, you know, tall trees, I don't know what the name of the trees, but we call these people who do the trimming and we keep it very tidy. So the place 19th, it's been vacant for a while, but it has a nice strip of the green grass in the front.
But because it's been vacant, they weren't taking care of it maybe. But obviously, you know, we wouldn't bring the people to the something that looking not satisfying so we'll with strive always to make it look a nice and taking care of and attract the attention of people. And we had few people come in and saying, oh, thank you so much for making it look so, so nice. 'cause the flowers, they seasonal and they always grow, you know, here and there. That makes enjoyable for everybody. Not just for our clients, for our neighbors, for everyone. So there's not much that we can do in the back because there's a fence and there are trees in the back on the sides, probably not
that much either because there's a very thin stripe of trees. But the front is a good, good amount of, so the, he's trying to get the pictures of the front. So the front is where the actual lawn is. And I think once cut nicely and, you know, receded and some more plants, flowers meaning more because there's a grass and there's some bushes. I think it's, it's gonna look very nice because the building itself, the previous owners, they renovated. So it looks nice. But, you know, it's, it doesn't take too much to make it look good.
And as I said, we have a good company that does a very good job of the Speaker 2: Landscape. Speaker 4: And you've got a good attorney who used to be on this board. He, he knows what needs to be Speaker 10: Submitted. So Speaker 4: We just need, we just need to have those documents. Speaker 2: Okay. Speaker 12: That's not a problem. Speaker 2: And welcome back. We missed you. Thank you. Speaker 10: So I just, a few things and apologies Mr. Richards, if we, we back up a little bit, but Speaker 2: No, no worries. Speaker 10: And this is a, I should know this, but why are we doing site plan review? What is the actual part of the bylaw in the special permit that we're seeking?
Speaker 2: So this specific reason why they're in front of you is a special permit for the adult daycare. So it does use, it's the use, it's the use, a change of use from office, any triggers, site plan review, change of use from, from office to adult daycare is Speaker 10: Okay. Speaker 2: Yeah, Speaker 12: We just wanted to show a couple pictures that way. How? But it's in the fall. So Speaker 2: 19. It's 19. Okay. Speaker 12: Sorry, sorry. A Speaker 2: So Speaker 10: Yeah, change of use triggered by the special by the use requested under the special permit triggers site plan review. Speaker 2: Yes. Speaker 10: Alright.
Couple things. You mentioned that it's the same, you have the same owner, 19 and 17, and there might be a reason for staff or for, you know, patrons to move between the two facilities. There's no way to do that on the street. I mean, I would not want to see people, especially in the snowbanks or whatever, people walking on the street do this. So, you know, can you provide a connection, actual paved connection, you know, in that park, in that slavery space Speaker 12: There?
Well, I'll, I'll, no, I'll answer to that question. Okay. Because I don't think that was presented a little bit correctly because even though it's like the own, the same owner and you know, maybe same company, but they will be a clients who can attend only that one center. So it's not gonna be walking around between two centers. What the plan is, because we have, as George said, we have a capacity in 17 for a hundred clients, which we never came up to that capacity. And I don't, we don't want that because it's kind of hard to handle safely that many people in one building. So for the safety reason, for other different reasons,
we kind of wanted to stay under 80, like 84, our license from DPH 'cause we get the license from DPH other than what the city gives us. So whenever increased that capacity, we decided, look, 84 is, you know, a good number. There are peaks when, you know, for some reasons people, you know, wanna drop off the elderly. But the 19 Strathmore is gonna be, some clients relocated permanently. They're not gonna be attending both centers. That's not the plan. So it's a plan to have a new clients and new people be participants of that program at 19.
So there will be no traffic going back and forth. Well, Speaker 10: I mean, there, there could be staff, there could be maintenance people, there could be reasons to travel pedestrian between the two. I would not want to encourage that to happen on Strathmore Road where there's no sidewalks And you know, and God forbid you have to get in the car to go 50 feet to the next door. So I would highly, highly suggest showing something on the plan that is a hardscaped connection between the two. That is, that would facilitate a pedestrian connection between the two sites. It's real simple, not a big ask.
Secondly, I think we have a, we've probably beaten the death trash pickup and this board, can we do it again? So, you know, I see I'm looking at Google Earth and I know this site and there's the trash comp, there's the, the, the bin. Yep. Speaker 1: I actually remember, I I I remember when that Speaker 10: Came up. Yeah. Originally. Does anybody think that's aesthetically pleasing to be confronted with a Speaker 12: Trash? The current dumps Speaker 10: Drive front? Speaker 12: Yeah, I wanna explain that too because, you know, it's in the, in the fall,
in the winter it's hard to, not to say it's hard, it's, you have to rely on the snow plowing companies to have trucks to go in there in the morning when you know, it's easier to have it in the front for certain amount of time and period. And then it has pad we have in the back. So that's it's original place. So it's gonna go back in the spring. Excellent. That's what we do it just for the convenience. We moved it for the temporary time. Temporary. Yeah. Because I don't know if you've seen how the,
the plowing gives us a a lot of trouble because the snow all plowed right in front of the building and to go to the back, 'cause we have our buses park in the back, it's kind of complicates things. So it would give ourself a little bit, you know, space for not to have trucks to go in the, but that will be removed this spring. Yeah, it, it goes back to its pad. Stay Speaker 10: There permanently. Yeah. Or move back to where it's, Speaker 12: Unless no, nowhere else that's, that's its place. But if, let's say for the winter, that's what we do. If we know we, we will be recommended not to do that, then we'll just find another way to have truck
to go in there and pick up from the site. Speaker 1: That's it. Andy, anything? Nope. Thank you. So Alan. Speaker 8: Alan? Sure. Speaker 1: Alan, I hope to apologize because I have, you're not always on the screen. Speaker 8: Yeah, okay, no problem. It's no problem. Forget Speaker 1: About you. Yes, Speaker 8: I don't have much, but as far I just kind of want to, I guess pile on as far as the trash, the dumpster where it is. I not only should it be moved to the back, it should remain in the back. I did drive out there and of course that was the first thing you see, not only ugly,
I think it might impact the ability for somebody coming out of the driveway to be able to see, look up and down the street, the sight line. Now obviously it's vacant now, so it doesn't matter that much, but it won't be. So I think the, just make sure the dumpster is moved back. Stays back what? Back there. I'll, I agree with Doug's comment about the sidewalk. I left sidewalk, so, but, and then as I mentioned the last one, last one, my kid went to next generation. So I've kind of seen the, the site operating at 19. It definitely has never seen like it's a very
intense use over there. I guess one question I had was the, what doorway will they be using to get in the building? Is that around the front or around the back? Speaker 12: We anticipate in the back probably even though like you knows some pe people kind of drop in front of the door. It's easier, but the main drop off will be in the back, which is the Okay. Clinic. Speaker 8: No, overall I didn't really find too many. I I, if you have any information as far as we mentioned drainage tough to, obviously very tough to look right now.
Even when I drove out there, obviously, you know, it was only two feet of snow rather than three feet. Yeah. You know, I'm, I'm, I don't know if you have looked in the past, you know, hopefully the parking lot's not flooding or anything like that. If so, obviously you'd want to take care of now before you're open. Speaker 12: Yeah, well the parking lot, the, the 19th is more elevated than 17th. So we never seen it's flooded or any problems with that. We did, however, call the company last week, I think it's, who was it? Joe and Sons Plumbing. So they came out, but they said they need, they need
the snow to be lowered down somehow. So they couldn't do anything. But the, it's in our best interest too to make sure everything's working. 'cause once you start operating, you obviously don't want any problem with people, you know, attending seven days a week. That would be the, the first thing that we, you know, need to make sure that everything works properly. So we'll be working, working on that too. Speaker 5: No more questions from you. Speaker 1: Thank you. So Doug, I'm gathering that you want to make sure there's hardscape connecting the two corridors. What else do we have as dumpster? Peter? The the dumpster.
The dumpster. Well, Peter location and Peter, oh, I'm sorry. Speaker 12: I forgot about Peter. Speaker 1: I'm losing people. Sorry Peter, your, your comments please. Speaker 5: Sure. I know what, I won't talk about the, we I do, I just reiterate the need for the physical connection between the two properties and for a variety of reasons. Also, I'm not sure whether we maybe need a vehicular connection, therefore I'm not sure what,
but it seems a bit difficult to rely on going out into the street for any connection, any need to get from one building to another. That's all. Thank you. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. Speaker 5: Surprise. Speaker 1: So then, so then if, if, am I reading right to think that hardscape presumably hardscape would connect? We want that as a condition. Speaker 10: I would lean that way. I think, you know, updated plan for what Andy was talking about, just kind of verifying even if it's how that look, you know,
flower planting area or something. Something on a plan that we, Speaker 1: I'm to look at it, a site plan that you can, no one expects it to look great in the middle of the winter. Site plans don't lie. Yeah, I mean site site plans are where different materials. It's the building right here and trims. And so, I mean, you Speaker 10: Might be able to do something. Speaker 4: I I'm certain people will take advantage of some kind of a pathway between the buildings. Yes. Speaker 12: I I just wanna say like, not necessarily they would wanna be back and forth into different buildings because each building has its staff and you know, it's director and you know, social worker, whatever,
whoever's, how about you? Speaker 4: You might wanna go back and forth. Speaker 12: I, but I would, I mean I don't see like what would be the reason for that I really don't see Speaker 5: Was the trash, excuse me, was the trash from both buildings going to one compactor. Speaker 12: That's what we're planning. Or Speaker 5: 1 1 1 dumpster. Speaker 12: Yeah. Yes. We don't add Speaker 5: The dumpster and how we get that trash over that, Speaker 12: Sorry, from one that, that's, that's through the par parking lot in the back. So it's in the connecting corner. If you see it on the, on the, on the scale, it's kind of,
you have to go in the back of the building so you don't have to go on the road and cross anything because the dumpsters in the back of the lot and they connect it from the back. So you don't need to go in the front. So you just kind of go in the corner of your building and it's, the dumpster's gonna be right there. Speaker 11: But you can make a little path right here. Speaker 12: Path path to two trees Speaker 1: And a path that, that is hard pave. Yeah. Yeah. Hard pavement. Speaker 11: I mean we could take a look at it. Speaker 12: Yeah, no, it's, it's, you don't have to go anywhere. Look from both sides, from both centers. They would come and just drop the trash in the same dumpster. There's no road involved and there's nothing. It's just a, a little strip of the trees planted.
Speaker 10: Yes. I would just say procedurally Peter, you and I need to watch the last hearing on Pegasus and file the, the Mullen affidavit before we Speaker 1: Or Speaker 10: Can vote before we're able to vote. Speaker 4: Well I would argue that we, so Speaker 10: Let's make sure we do Speaker 4: That covered everything. And that, I mean, I'm not sure you do because I think, I think what you heard tonight is, was the full presentation. Speaker 1: No, it it is. But because there were, because Speaker 11: It opened. Speaker 1: Yes, it opened Speaker 11: The hearing opened
Speaker 1: And had a hearing two weeks ago. Speaker 11: So even if there's not much there, I think they have to review it and say I signed the affidavit saying I reviewed it to in order to vote. Yeah. Speaker 10: I mean there's limited, you know, there's limited Speaker 5: Was some was something seven the 11th we, if I saw the entire show, I I still missed something. I gotta go back and do another report. Another mullen. Speaker 10: You tell me. I mean, I, Speaker 11: Unless you already did, but unless Speaker 10: You already did. I don't Speaker 11: Know Peter, I was not here, but Speaker 5: I did, I I filed one today for the last meeting. Speaker 1: For, for the whole meeting. Speaker 5: For the
entire meeting. Oh, okay. Speaker 1: So that would've included. Speaker 11: So that would include this? Yes. Okay. And Speaker 1: That's just meeting. Okay, so it's just you. Speaker 10: Yeah. So you can vote now there Speaker 1: Are four of us Speaker 10: Four if you want to or Okay. Speaker 11: I'm just trying to get a handle on whether you want a, a drainage assessment, a full drainage assessment, which is gonna take a little time, particularly this time of year as well as landscaping. We can show, try to show the existing conditions Speaker 1: And by just by labeling and marking the plant, planting beds and Okay. And landscaping. Okay. So we we're not expecting it to look marvelous in the middle
of the winter, but we want to know that there is something living, breathing that's going to come back in the spring. Speaker 12: Yeah, it will look marvelous. We'll make sure of that. Speaker 10: Yeah. Speaker 2: So Peter's good. Speaker 1: Yeah. Okay, so there are, there are four of us who can vote. So with that I'll entertain a motion, a positive made motion or a positive made motion for the, Speaker 4: Were we gonna get the site plan plan Speaker 1: Special permit and with a, a conditioned on Yeah. Speaker 4: Subject to receipt of Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 4: Well we have avoided that.
I mean, it's like submit it. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 4: I mean if, Speaker 1: If you, if you wanna make sure that, that it has come in and it, it gives us what we need. Speaker 4: I, I just, I I reserve that subject to receipt of, I don't know. I mean it's a fairly important thing that we're asking. I mean, not trying to be difficult, but this is our, our first official time we can meet on this and you know, George, this is what gets submitted with a special permit. Speaker 11: Well that's why we asked for waivers because it's, as Doug pointed out,
and I feel the same way that's trying to do safely plea review for this reason's kind of ridiculous. It was office space, it was used, it, it's first, not first class office space, but you know, the building's in good shape. It's been there for a long time and we're not doing any changes. So that's Speaker 4: Why we requested I'm not a subject to receipt of a guy. I don't know. Yeah, Speaker 10: I I'm, I'm, I'm in your court and I think it, it would be prudent. Just give us a quick Speaker 4: Plan. Speaker 11: Okay. We'll button it up. Yep. Yeah. Speaker 4: I I don't think it'll be a long additional meeting and I, and I, I don't mean to be intrusive here.
I just, I I just feel like this is our one shot to really, I mean I take in good faith everything you say, but this is just the one time we have to review it, make sure it's right because we may, we may, we may may not see it for another 18 years, which I hope is the case unless you grow and take over the next building. But Speaker 1: I was just thinking you and I were both on this board the last time. Yeah. Speaker 4: The last. So I hopefully we're not in another 18 years. But anyway, I'm sorry. I just, I just feel like that's just the, that just protects people and just throwing to do it. Speaker 1: Okay. So, so then with, with that
and with an understanding of what it is that we need documented, shall we continue this to March 11th? Speaker 2: I would refer Can you have something ready by March 11th? Speaker 12: Oh, we definitely will because we need it, you know, the sooner the better. Okay. 'cause time is kind of important for us. Speaker 4: Alright. Curve ball. I won't be here March 11th. So with that, I don't want to, to, I do not want to screw things up. You'll have four votes without me. Yes. But, but I won't be here March 11th, so I don't want to, Speaker 1: But yeah. But we, we will be and 'cause you will have had a chance. I would've, I Speaker 4: Would've. If if you'll watch it then I promise I'll,
Speaker 11: And hopefully you will be seeing the uploaded plan and you can whatever, make whatever comments. Yeah, Speaker 4: I'm sure it's gonna be totally fine. Speaker 1: And I would, I would have to say, thinking back on when I was first on this board and some of the things that people would produce and you're just going, what I see on the ground looks nothing. Well, like what Speaker 4: That has Speaker 1: Happened. Yeah. So we, we will, we will want to be able to have it so that we can have a quick drive by or just to see it. So I'm, I'm more or less saying don't, don't give it to us the day before.
Speaker 11: No, I understand. Our meeting, we always try to upload it by Friday. I figured you knew Friday before, so I know that doesn't get, 'cause it's only 10 days, but we'll do our best to do so. Yeah. If we have to ask for continuance, we will. But I think we can try to get it done by then. Speaker 1: I'm Speaker 12: Guessing that the only concern of mine would be the, you know, again, the company who does the sewage, is that the part of the deal that we need to submit something? 'cause they won't be able until the snows? Speaker 11: No, it's more just drainage as far as Yeah. Site, site drainage. The offsite drainage off the building. Yeah. And that there's no flooding
or drainage issues on site. Speaker 1: So, and the good news is it's supposed to be 40 degrees in within the, the Speaker 12: Next week. Yeah. Okay. Speaker 11: Melt a couple inches. Speaker 1: Alright, so continue to March 11th. Speaker 4: So moved. Second. Second. Speaker 1: And any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say aye. Speaker 4: Aye. Aye. My aye. Speaker 1: Evans Aye. Speaker 4: Landry aye. Speaker 5: A So aye. Speaker 4: Aye. Speaker 1: Thank you very much. And that is, Speaker 11: And I, yeah, I, there was no one here last time. I don't believe. I assume there's no one here as far
as the putters or other interested parties. Speaker 1: I, I would guess that, is there anyone here for this public hearing? And I, I know several of the people who are here who I know are not. 'cause we have one more hearing, so, Speaker 11: Okay. I just wanna be sure. Okay. Thank Speaker 1: You. Okay. Speaker 12: Thank you for your time. Alright, Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker 11: Thank you. Speaker 4: Public Speaker 1: Notice. Yes. Speaker 4: The NA planning board on Wednesday, February 25th, 2026 at 7:00 PM will hold a hybrid public hearing in the Delo meeting room 13 East Central Street
Natick to review the application of Boston Capital Investment Group LLC property 6 25 Worcester Street application, updated application for special permit for car wash and detailing center and site plan review in addition to compliance with the highway corridor overlay district of the Natting zoning bylaws, project redevelopment of the property for use as a car wash and associated site improvements, project number PB 26 2. A copy of the application can be reviewed in the community and economic development office and Natick OpenGov website.
A copy of the planning board meeting agenda can be found at the Tom's website per order of the Natick planning board. Terry Evans chair. Speaker 1: Alright, welcome. And thank you for your patience to those of you who have been waiting either in here or in the lobby. So Speaker 2: Quick question. So Chris Alvin, I've tried to promote him a couple times and he's not accepting it. Speaker 13: For the record, I'm Jonathan Silverstein. Yes, Chris Hin is my colleague. I'm with the firm of Blackman, Browski Haverty and Silverstein in Concord.
And I will be handling the presentation Oh, okay. On behalf of the applicant. Okay, great. Speaker 2: Promoting you right now. Great. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 2: Is there anyone else online that's with your Speaker 13: Team? I don't believe so. Speaker 1: So for those of you who may not have been in the room when, when we were starting tonight, what we'll do for the public hearing is have a presentation from the applicants. The board will raise questions, we will then turn to members of the public who may have questions and can continue it in that fashion.
And what I will say is that we, we ask if you have something to say, do not say four or five times what someone else has said before you, you know, we, we want to, to get input. We don't want, we don't want to have kind of a, a stretched out kind of screed. So, so with that you've kind, you've introduced yourselves, but please give us an overview of the project.
Speaker 13: I'll do that and I I should mention that with me is Haleem Tuba, who's the project engineer, and he'll be the one to walk the board through the plans. Okay. But with your permission, could I share the, my screen to put some Wonderful, Speaker 2: Just let me know if it's not letting you share it should, Speaker 1: Hopefully Speaker 13: Saying I need to send a request. Should I send it? Speaker 2: Yep, you can send the request. Oh, there we go. You should be able to do it now. It was like an update with Zoom for some reason. Speaker 9: Perfect. Speaker 13: Let's see. Might take me, here we go. Okay, so just to orient the board,
I'm sure you're all familiar with the location of the site. It's on Route nine. This is the site here and it is in an area of Route nine as many areas of Route nine are. That's highly commercial to the east is the Audi dealer. Going further West is the Panera bread. The staples across the street is the Apple Hill campus for some reason. And not being privy to the zoning decisions made when Districting was taking place.
This site is one of a handful of sites in this area that the zoning district splits the existing building in half. That's not the case for much of the commercial two district along Route nine, but it is the case for this property for that reason, the existing building is bisected by the zoning district line and the existing building actually extends into the residential zoned portion of the site. The entire site just about, except
for a little grass area in the back is paved. There are parking spaces and loading areas as well as a dumpster enclosure all in the back of the, of the property. So you can see the, the dumpster enclosure here loading. The commercial operations historically have extended very far into the residential portion of the site and very close to the property line. The existing conditions in terms of
the Zoning, the propo, the existing site coverage is, or building coverage rather, is about 21%. Their existing rear setback is 37 feet. And as I noted, there's, there are a number of parking spaces behind that as well as a dumpster. And the proposal is to substantially decrease impervious lock coverage, more than double the rear setback from 37 to over 78 feet and substantially increase landscaped area on the site.
This is the proposed building as it will be viewed from the street. I want to, and again, Helene will walk the board more specifically through the, the plans. But the requirement is for a 10 foot landscaped buffer adjacent to residential, we're proposing a 40 foot landscaped buffer and there is a fire lane within the residential portion that would only be used in the case of emergency. And we've proposed some employee parking
spaces in that area. Again, this is substantially less non-conforming than what exists today. And we don't have to have those employee parking spaces there. We just thought it made sense where we have much more parking that is required under zoning. And the fact is that no one comes to a parking to a car wash to, to park. The only reason for anyone to park would be to use the vacuums. There's no store inside, there's no waiting area. There's no reason for a customer to park at the site unless they're there to vacuum their car.
So we do think that we have more than ample parking. And if the decision is made not to have the employee parking in back, we can do without that. Again, we think this is su you know, it, it's a lot less parking, a lot less impervious coverage and no portion of the building, the entire building has been pulled out of the residential zone. And as I said, the rear setback has been more than doubled. I know that noise might be an issue of discussion, so I wanna just address that up front.
As you can see, the building is designed with bump outs it's rear so that there's automatic sound attenuation. Any noise coming out of the actual facility is gonna be directed towards Route nine and not towards the one residence behind us. In addition, we're proposing an eight foot tall acoustical fence as well as the landscape buffer. And as I said, we're gonna be close to 80 feet from the property line.
The blowers will be more than 90 feet from the property line and inside. I'll also note that there is, and we'll get the board, the spec specs on this. There is a specific blower designed to be quieter than traditional and we're willing to offer up as a condition of approval that we would use that blower blower rather than the standard blower used at most of our sites. Again, we'll get you the specs on that so
that you can see that. But we are more than happy to do that. So between the sound attenuation, from the design of the building, the eight foot acoustical fence, the landscaping use of the choir to blower and the fact that we're on Route nine, we're quite confident that we're gonna be able to ensure that there are no unreasonable sound impacts to the residential neighbor and back. I also do wanna just so to orient the board, show you that this, this is the current rear property line.
This is the, sorry, the property behind us. You can see that they have a number of storage buildings on the property line that are, would further serve to attenuate any potential sound. But this is a rundown five or six foot stockade fence. As I said, we're gonna use an eight foot acoustical fence and you know, this is just some more pictures of the property on the other side of the boundary.
So we're quite confident that there won't be any noise impacts back there and that everything we're proposing as compared to having a dumpster in back significant amounts of parking and impervious area loading zones is going to be substantially less detrimental to that property than the existing condition. And of course we are commercially zoned. And I I should also mention the applicant has owned this property for about two years, has engaged two separate national marketing firms
to try to find tenant for the existing building. It's a beautiful building. The intent was not originally to knock it down there and, and he can describe for you, there has been zero interest. There was at 1.1 potential tenant restoration hardware that fell through. There just isn't a lot of market right now for retail use in, you know, buildings of this kind. I don't think that's really relevant to the application,
but I did think it was important to mention to the board. So I, I'll rest there. I'm happy to answer any questions the board might have about my remarks or I'm happy to turn it over to Helene so he can walk you through the, the plans. Speaker 1: Actually, do members have questions now or do we wanna wait to after the, the wrap? Speaker 13: I'd say keep rolling. Speaker 1: Okay, great. Speaker 13: Please. All right, your turn. Thank you Madam Chair for the record. My name is Hal Tuba. I'm a consulting engineer
with offices at one 12 State Road in Dartmouth, Massachusetts. Just to give you a background, I've been working with my clients here at the applicant for the past 20 years. They own and operate about 50 locations, car washes and through the commonwealth of Massachusetts. And I've been involved with every single facility. I'm familiar with the project, familiar with the design, familiar with this setting. We understand this setting, we understand this is a special permit. We understand it's a special setting
because the neighbor's in the back and we've dealt with that before in several communities where we have car washes in the back of residential, a resident. So we've taken extra measures to make sure that this, this project won't impact the, the the neighbors. And prior to this filing this application, we had two pre-application meetings with several of the, and I guess it's required anyways with the different departments from the town. We met with, we took notes
and we, we, we sat down with, with several departments and they had some comments and we tweaked the design two, three times to come up with this design. And there was concerns about traffic circulation, about stacking, about, you know, noise. And, and, and so what you see here is, is kind of joint venture with, with the town, basically. But again, we understand the, the, the complexity. We understand the, the setting of this project. But if we don't mind, I don't have access if you want go to the site layout, but, so this is a, a redevelopment
of an existing commercial site as attorney Silverstein indicated that this site, this site is about one point acre, 1.1 acre, and three quarters of the site falls within the commercial two zoning district. The, the, the, the portion to the south, which about route nine, the, the back is residential. It's about 25% of the property. Currently the most of the site is covered with impervious surfaces. The parking and the loading is all within the
residential in the back. And the building there is there now it's about 10,000 square foot building per footprint. It's a two story building. So if you add the square footage, it's a 20 20,000 square foot building. My client would like to, would well, will propose to demol the existing building and build a 5,500 square foot car wash with two automatic bays. Small office for the attendant, the utility room, and the the rest is all for the e equipment.
There's no retail on site. There'll be no, you know, strictly it's an automated car wash. I'm sure you're familiar with probably other car washes in the town or maybe some of the prestige. But basically you, you drive into this site with, if you look at the site plan, currently there are two existing driveways off of Route nine. And they're both full, full driveways. It means it's entering and exiting. You can come in and leave from the site. And that was another concern when we sat down with the,
with the fire and, and, and the planning. And so what we did with the site, we restricted the floor to one way and right turn and right turn out only. And if you look at the traffic circulation around the, the, the building is counterclockwise. So you come in, you turn around these two pay stations with two stacking lanes and you turn around, you enter the building from the west side and you exit from the east side. There are 19, we propose 18 vacuum spaces in the front
between the landscape area and the building. And there's six parking spaces in the back for employees. And those parking spaces, as we mentioned before, are located within the residential. I believe one of the comments from the building commissioner that he doesn't think this is allowed. But again, this is an existing non-conforming where the entire residential portion of the, the, the, the, the site is being used for commercial activities. But again, if this is a problem as attorney Silverstein
indicated, we will be, we'll try to pull those parking out of there. So the the, I wanna quickly go over, so we're not, we're not requesting any relief from zoning as far as setback dimensional setbacks, any lot coverage, parking, lighting, all the proposed lighting will be in compliance with zoning. And I have submitted a lighting plan with this, with the, with with the package that shows all the lighting will be on site and no spillage of light to adjacent streets
or adjacent properties. The currently, all the runoff, all the runoff is collected by a closed drainage system through a series of catch basins and from the back and then it, it flows through the northern property with an easement, then it connects to easterly to the wheeler lane. With the proposed improvement on stormwater, we would be collecting all the stormwater from site, treating it with the BMPs. You know, this is required as in compliance
with DEP stormwater management and the town of inate requirements. We would collect the roof runoff and direct it to an onsite infiltration system to d to improve on, on the, on the runoff volume from the site. So by doing this, we would be increasing, decreasing the runoff from the site by 35% for the two year storm and 50 and and 20% for the a hundred year storm.
The, the runoff from the roof, which is clean water, will promote ground recharge. The, the traffic circulation, as I have indicated is improved by restricting the, the, the, the flow from the two existing driveway two right to an end right turn out only access if fire access is provided either from the site, in case the site is congested. That was also suggested by, by the fire, I believe the,
the, the fire deputy chief at the time the meeting to look at the wheeler lane and see whether we can, we can use Wheeler Lane to access the site. So we did, we did provide the option and they're both on the plans that, on that were submitted. The noise that was a big issue. And again, I don't wanna repeat what attorney Silverstein said, but yes, we do have the bump out in the building that's gonna buffer most of, most of the noise from the building. And also we do have the, the acoustical fence,
which is eight foot high for the vacuums. What we have, oh, we have the motors of the vacuum all wrapped up in an eight foot, a tall fence with two inch form installation on the inside that would muffle the sound. And again, my client is here, he went yesterday, he went to some of his facilities and he has a decibel reading device that he took the video and he can demonstrate to the, to the, to to the, if needed
to the planning board that we will be below at the 70 decibels that it's the standard for the state and whatever this the, if the town of of Natick has any zoning on decibels, we will be more than happy to have a condition that we will be either at or below the level that it's required. Other than that, I think basically this is the, the overview of the site and I'll be glad to, and again, we tried to sit down with the neighbor prior to this meeting I to get some feedback
and you know, we did get some feedback but we tried to accommodate whatever they concerns they had. But unfortunately, and I know they're here tonight and I understand they live next to the project and I understand that we understand that and we are making every effort to make this as painful as possible and I'll be happy to painless. I think you mean painless, not painless. Painless. Thank you. Thank you. And I'll be happy to answer any questions and if I could just quickly pick up on a, a couple things.
One is we've, we've proposed some planting back along this landscape strip. We completely open to additional plantings. If, if that would be of interest. Again, just to reiterate, we added the fire lane off of Wheeler at the request of the fire department. We think it's a good idea, it's never gonna be needed, but we understand that and there's a similar locked gate across wheeler to the, the property on the other side
and we're happy to provide that as requested, but I just wanted to make clear that's, you know, this is not a building that poses a substantial fire risk and we think there's great fire access within the site. So I just wanted to note that, but we're happy to provide it. Speaker 1: Thank you. Okay, what, what we'll be doing now, I'll be asking for comments, questions from board members. After that's done, we'll take questions from the public including those coming from on online
and I'll try to do a feed so that everybody gets a say, but you'll need to be just a bit patient because there are a lot of you here. So I, I'll start actually, Doug, welcome back Speaker 10: Starting off with me, okay. Okay. Thank you for the presentation. I think you hit on the basics of it. I think traffic's gonna be the issue and access and queuing and all those, all those fun topics. You've got a board here that consists of someone who help write the access permit regulations for mass DOT.
You've got a certified PE traffic engineer as a board member. You've got one sitting in the audience that I can see right now. Big time spotlight on this for that reason. You know, your access plan is what it is. It's close to Wheeler Avenue. There's gonna be, I have questions about queuing and operations, serious ones. I mean we've see what happens at scrub ub, we see the queuing at scrub ub that's gonna have to be addressed in, in this one. I'd like to know more about sort of the throughput of
the system you have here. You said it's 31 cars or queuing for 31 vehicles. What does that represent? Is that a peak hour? Could, could that actually happen? What is the throughput capacity of, of the, of the system here That, that would help, I think address some of the, some of the issues there. Speaker 13: Do you want me to answer that or are you just not yet Speaker 10: Fair enough. Trip generation mass. UT. So you are, it's state highway and you know, I think as at least I'm interpreting the plan here, that easterly driveway you're keeping as is,
are you doing anything geometrical to either of those driveways? Speaker 13: You mean shifting the driveways, shifting Speaker 10: Narrowing, curb, curb modifications, anything? Speaker 13: Well we, we did narrow the, the, the way the driveway is designed, it's kind of forcing people to make that right turn. And we need that with, for the, for the fire apparatus. If you look at the fire apparatus. Speaker 10: Yeah, I'm asking a specific question though. Are you Speaker 13: Some modification? Yes. Speaker 10: Modifications to the dr. Okay, so you will need mass utility. Speaker 13: Absolutely. Speaker 10: So, so that,
that raises a question about scope of review of this project. If you're gonna be touching state highway and you're going to be generating traffic of a certain threshold, it's not just, hey here's a, here's a modification to a permit. It could implicate MEbA review. Speaker 13: It could on this project. I doubt it. But again, I mean we all know Speaker 10: I'm not raising it traffic as a scare tactic. I'm just saying Speaker 13: I it Speaker 10: Won't is a possibility. And so the existing use or the previous use, how long has that been vacant? Speaker 13: The building? Speaker 10: Yes.
Speaker 13: Two years. Okay. Around under two years. Speaker 10: Okay. That'll come into play in terms of what can be credited for existing trips and against new trips. So bear that in mind. The emergency access, the fire access, I mean Wheeler Lane. I'm not sure why that's necessary up there. I understand it's for fire safety Wheeler Lane is a really sub substandard roadway. Let's just say it's it's inadequate width, it's inadequate construction
and you're gonna be proposing a fire access, albeit to fire access. I would question the need for doing that. All due respect to our life safety professionals in, in town, there's a utility pole somewhere in the vicinity of that driveway. Is there not existing? On Wheeler. On wheeler, yeah. Right. So so are you gonna move that pole to accommodate the driveway? Speaker 13: Yeah, if we need to. But I, I believe the, the we, we showed the, the template
what the access, you know, according to the, to the, to the town. And I believe you have a peer review on this one too. You understand? So I don't see a utility pole. Speaker 10: Keep, keep turning. It's Speaker 13: Not Speaker 10: Keep turning. Speaker 13: Keep Speaker 10: It shows it on your, this one here? Nope. It shows it on your existing conditions plan. Keep turning. You passed it. No, it's, it's there. It's on your Oh, Speaker 13: Right here. Speaker 10: Yeah. As Speaker 13: I say Speaker 10: Trees. Yeah. So just double check that please. Speaker 13: Yeah, Speaker 10: I see it and you know, let's figure out what's on it and what might be required in moving it.
I I assume you're gonna connect off of that pole. You're not gonna underground any utilities here. What's Speaker 13: New? Util will be underground. You will be underground? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. New utilities will be underground. So I, Speaker 10: I, for me, I'd like to know what's on that poll, who's it servicing and what would undergrounding look like and who's gonna, who that's gonna impact. Speaker 13: And again, we will defer to the board regarding that access, where willing to provide it and do what's required to provide it. Because we were asked to but Speaker 10: Understood Speaker 13: We agree that we don't really think it's necessary particularly
for this use, particularly given the access, but, Speaker 10: Yep. Yeah, that's for now those are my quick thoughts and comments. Okay. Yeah. Thank you Peter. Speaker 5: One, just one question. The small addition on the east side of the building, what is that for Speaker 13: This Speaker 5: Out there? Speaker 13: This bump out here? No, to the east to the other side. Speaker 5: On the east side. The Speaker 13: Other end. East The other end. Yeah, Speaker 5: It looks like there's a door there. And is that a vehicular entrance of some kind? Speaker 13: That's so, oh, go ahead. No, this is the equipment room.
That's why there's, there's a larger door there that you have to bring equipment if you need to change 'em. If you look at the floor layout, I do have a floor layout on, on the, on the set that would show, that's the equipment room. So. Speaker 5: Okay. And so that's all that, that's strip of space inside is equipment. Speaker 13: It's all equipment, right? That that whole side is either equipment or utilities that this, but on the west side there's a very small office for the attendant with one bathroom. That's all
Speaker 5: Right. And do you get deliveries of any kind with any degree of frequency? We Speaker 13: Don't, no. Speaker 14: We get, we get soap once a month Speaker 13: Just so you can hear it for the record, there's a delivery of soap one once a month. Speaker 5: Okay. No other further, no further questions. Thank you. Okay, thank Speaker 10: You Al. Alan? Speaker 8: Yeah, I have a few before and I'm gonna talk about traffic but before I do, I just have a question. Are there any other sites that might be good for something like this? We're gonna be talking about sound and,
and you know, that type of stuff. Any other locations nearby that kind of run similarly? At least similar technology. Yeah, you know, if we wanted, we buy down the hill, Speaker 14: Party city down there is perfect for a car wash right next to the, Speaker 10: I go I don't think that's the question. The Speaker 8: Question is No, no, no. I mean like in existing is there an existing prestige car wash if I wanna go by to go how loud is this really in reality rather than just a number of decimals? Speaker 1: Can we just, before you answer that, I just wanna say please ask members of the public to hold comments until
we're not gonna try to make this a ping pong match. I apologize. Alright, thank you. So, Speaker 13: So as I mentioned, we're offering to use much quieter technology than is used in most of or all of the other locations. And the other locations also I don't believe are designed with these bump outs. There are many other locations that my client operates, but I don't think they would be representative. They Speaker 8: Would not. Okay. Speaker 13: So I mean we we're happy to give you location, other locations but they won't be representative of, of
what we're proposing here. Speaker 8: Okay, that's fine. In terms of what now as far as Speaker 13: The, the noise generated from the blowers? Speaker 8: Well the existing ones do you think are louder than this one would be correct. Hopefully. Yeah. Speaker 13: And again, we're, we're willing to accept conditions that would cap increases in ambient noise at the property line with, you know, along the lines of what DEP establishes a standard so that, you know, there would be an enforceable standard
that we're held to in addition to using the quieter technology. Speaker 8: Okay. Now as far as traffic, so just kind of wanna lay out some expectations I think moving forward so that way we're not, you know, talking about the same thing, you know, next meeting without having this move forward. I took a look at the, at the traffic impact assessment that was included and I think a lot of that is going to have to be be redone or, or modified. I think the trip generation on that seems to be about half as much as the ITE 12 edition gives for results.
I know of course it weren't really calculations included with that. There was just the, the raw number. There was a mention about, you know, existing free speech car washes. But again no data to kind of back that up. I don't know if, if it was looked at with the 11th edition of ITE which had very little data, the 12th actually has a good amount of data for automated car washes. And like I said the numbers were considerably higher than was in that traffic assessment. So I think we will need a formal traffic impact study that will have to, again you based off of IPE,
if you have good data, you're gonna really have to document it from prestige to show why we should be using that rather than than IPE data. Especially when the car wash, you know, yeah you can take it in September, it's gonna be pretty quiet but you know if anybody's going by ex by the scrub it up or even if you're not trying to go to scrub it up, you've been going on route nine any of these weeks, any of these days that's not currently snowing you, you'll see how a busy balance that kind of goes into another thing
as far as the, I think you mentioned that 31 cars is stack on site. I don't know if that's really accurate either. 'cause I was just kind of measuring the plan and it looks like you maybe have about 375 feet, which that's about 15 vehicles length now obviously some areas of that are double wide where you could stack additional vehicles but it's not, it doesn't look like it's two lanes the entire way. So I think we'll kinda want some updated information as far as exactly how many cars can stack be realistic. You know, it's usually about 25 feet per vehicle.
I've seen people sometimes try to cram it to something that is, it's just not reality. So I think we'll want information as far as accurate information as far as how many cars can, can realistically stack. And then I think Duggan also mentioned how many is likely to need to stack. I think we'll want information on that when we're also talking a traffic study. We're gonna have to look at some intersections on either side. You know, definitely weather field. I'm not sure exactly how far we, we need to go because of the interchanges gonna be under construction, but, but we're gonna want a full formal traffic
impact study for them. And I think that really kind of covers my initial, I guess comment. I'll be happy to hear what other people have to say. Yes, Speaker 4: You want me to jump in? So Yes, please. Well, in full disclosure, my heart did not go a flutter when I first saw the application for a car wash on Route nine I, other than the fact that it might offset some of the use we see with the problems of the scrub aub, which, which it might. So it, it, it sort of begs the question to me as we consider the, the kind of zoning process we went through
for other parts of town, you know, what, what this corridor might be ripe for. 'cause it, it really is, you know, the economic engine of natick and, but we're not there yet. We're dealing with the existing zoning that we have. First of all, I do appreciate your demonstrated sensitivity to the neighbors. We support you in that. And I, I think the fact that what you've, what you've initially proposed here has larger buffers that are needed, otherwise acoustic fences and so forth. That that is, that is the, the right instinct and we, we definitely support you in that.
I am not a hundred percent sure that eight foot fences are allowed. I think so. I I thought like six foot high, the acoustic ready Speaker 2: Six Yeah it's six foot. Anything above a six we need a structural permit. Speaker 4: Yeah. Speaker 13: Which we'd be prepared to obtain. Speaker 4: Okay. I mean it might be a good use for it, it really might be a good use that, that extra two feet of an acoustic deadening nature might be something we, we want to consider. But, but there's a bit of an extra step for that. I don't know exactly what an arch vacuum is. I don't know if it comes with the kind of like flyaway covers that we see in other car washes
or whether it literally is just the structure, how, how loud those are. And I appreciate those are on the route nine side of the building. I just don't know much about arch or arc vacuums and I'd like to know if that comes with any additional flags or tents or coverage. We kind of ran into that before at another car wash in town and it was kind of, it was kind of a, a, a visual explosion when they put all this stuff in. So I just wanna know what it's really gonna look like. 'cause believe it or not, we do kind of try to keep the clutter down on, on route nine if possible.
I don't believe that there is any parking, any parking allowed in a residential zone to support a commercial use. So I realize that you weren't necessarily sure you needed those, but we have tackled that before and we, even the notion of land banking it, you know, sort of planning for it, but not building it, I'm not even sure that's allowed. I I am, I'm not sure that we could, that we are even in the, in the position to waive parking in a residentially zoned area for commercial use. Speaker 13: Just from a legal perspective, my view would be
that I think it's pretty clear there's substantially more both commercial parking and commercial structure within the residential area. And so we are continuing the non-conformity and substantially decreasing it. And so that could be permitted again, though, we're, we're, we're showing it. We don't think it's a hundred percent necessary. We think it's substantially less nonconforming
than the existing structure in parking areas, but we're, that's not the hill we're gonna die on. So yeah, Speaker 4: It didn't sound mission critical. Put a star next to that. 'cause we definitely have tackled that in the past and there were, I felt that we didn't have much flexibility. Well, I agree and I think, go ahead. So that's something to put a star next to the building itself, I think is appropriate looking, I I'm always curious about the ability to see building mechanicals. This thing will need a lot of power and a lot of venting, presumably.
I don't know. So anything that's gonna be on the roof. And I, and I realize that where this is, you're, we're gonna be sort of looking up at it from route nine, but I don't know what the neighbors will see. And so, so we just wanna be careful that we have a beautiful looking building, but then the day it's actually finished, you look up and you see various vents, you know, I, I know there's new technology with all this stuff, but those, you know, whatever we can do to, to use those vents or, or mechanicals on the roof to, to try to hide them,
buffer them, screen them and make them as, as, as quiet as possible, we're gonna support that. And then on the traffic, you know, when we went through the process to permit the Natick Mall, we, we knew that you can't really design a project for like the three Saturdays after Thanksgiving. The, the requirement for the roadways and it, it just so out of whack versus daily life that we just knew, even, even when it was a newly permanented thing, that, you know, on a Saturday after Thanksgiving there's gonna be traffic
and that's why there are police officers and out there all, all the time. And it, it's just a reality that you get more traffic on those particular days and through, you know, the, the, the holiday season for this, I think we need to be, we need to view this from the standpoint of what does it look like on its busiest day. We just had all this snow the next sunny day. Like I, I dunno if the weather's gonna be Saturday, but if the weather is clear and nice people are going to go wash their cars and the demand is massive
and it, you know, obviously we, we have issues with another car wash in town. I, I think we can't really allow a scenario when we have one of those days and it backs up into route nine. I mean, that is, that, that is a scenario that I don't think we can just be sanguine about. Like, oh, well that's gonna happen four or five Saturdays a year. 'cause if that happens, I realize people are going uphill sort of in this direction and I don't really expect people are gonna like, you know, just like demolition derby smash into each other. But if we, I don't know if,
if Saturday morning at 10:00 AM on one of those sunny mornings after a snowstorm and all these people show up, the potential of having it back up into route nine is a real concern. So I think we have to sort of plan for those types of days. I I don't think we can just be like, well it'll be fine. We'll figure it out. I mean, we, I think we have to be real serious about it. I I do appreciate that you went out to the marketplace and you didn't get a lot of feedback or, or offers to, to, to continue with the kind of quiet furniture shopping, which, you know, we've sort of enjoyed in that spot. I, I know this is gonna be a more active spot,
but I I I just think we, with, with the various pros we have and the other people on the board, we're gonna, that is an issue that we just have to be certain that it works even on a real busy day. And we have to be certain that, you know, people living nearby it aren't gonna be tortured by its existence. You know, there's gotta be a way we figure out that it can, it can coexist. So that is my list. Thank you. Speaker 1: Alright, thank you. So Peter, Speaker 4: I think Peter spoke Peter, what? Oh, I'm sorry. I very impactful. Speaker 1: So no, I,
I look at this parcel in a lot of ways as a, as a victim of neglect because it has been underutilized. It has kind of been a, a mishmash of things. I wanna back up and just explain the, the boundary where you see that runs right through the middle of the parcel that where you have part of half the upper half is residentially zoned and then the southern half is, is commercial C two,
I think commercial two. And that wasn't by accident at the time that o others long gone were, were working to lay out zoning. The concept was to take these deep lots on route nine and in effect create a buffer by leaving the residential zone where it was so that you would kind of have a buffer for, for the residents that were going to be backing up onto whatever is on route nine. So it was, it was, it was designed as a, as a buffer.
I have been shocked over the course of years when I would look at it and go, they, they can't pave that. You know, I, I see the, the incremental creation of parking lots where I would bet money there have has had been no necessarily consistent permitting process. But in the end, one of the things that I was startled by was the fact that any
of that happened at all. If you go to the zoning bylaw and it's section five J except as herein our as hereinafter provided no land in a residential district shall be used for off street parking accessory to or to service a structure or use or use in a commercial industrial highway planned use or highway mixed use district. I read that just as it says that it, it was intended to create a buffer.
Now the incremental paving of the northern side of, of this rather large parcel, I would argue that there was a point, at least up to the boundary of, of the zoning districts when it might have been in inappropriate, it might have been a little unnerving or unsettling. I read this and I say, no, it's, it is, it is, it's, it is what it is. It says what it is. The fact that you have seen the incremental, I don't wanna say abuse
'cause that's, that's too strong, but the incremental treatment of land that was specifically de designated for residential properties and to see it turned into this, it's deeply disturbing. I think it makes so much sense to have the southern half of the lot as it rightly is commercial C two zoning. But I, I have to question this continued encroachment on what was clearly designated as as residential property.
And I, I don't mean to say, well that's, that's it. Let's shut everything down. But I have a hard time understanding what we intend if, if we do not mean what we said in that phrase, then I, I have to figure out what we do need. So I will, I will leave, I will leave it at Speaker 13: That. Can, can I just very quickly speak to that? Okay. Later in the bylaw it specifically says that that doesn't apply to continuation or extension of nonconformity. So that being said, are proposing,
our plan shows six parking spaces in the residential portion and we've already said we're willing to take it out. Speaker 1: Six, six parking spaces aren't the problem. Speaker 13: So no portion of the use is in the residential zone other than those, the entire Speaker 1: Park lane. Speaker 13: So I will say fire lane is not a use thought. We, we could not show that as a fire lane and the fire department would have every, every right to drive over there. If we were using that for customer access, employee access, any portion of the operations, I'd agree with you that would be part of the use.
Showing a fire lane is not respectfully, that's not part of the use that's not impacting the residences. And it, I mean, and comparing it to what's there now, which I, I mean i, I have no basis to say that what's there now is unlawful. It sounds like perhaps you do, it certainly wasn't anything we did, but it's the existing situation and we're left with a parcel with a building that's bisected by a zoning line. The lot is bisected by a zoning line.
We have a building that is unmarketable and we're trying tens of thousands of dollars a month in carrying costs and we're trying to find a beneficial use for it. So, you know, I don't think a fire lane that goes through the residential portion is an adverse impact that is contrary to the idea of a buffer. Speaker 10: Okay, thank you. Could I, did you Yes. Yeah. Just add some commentary on that. I guess the parking issue in the piece
of the bylaw that the chairman chairwoman cited, you know, this is something that I think we need, and I know this is not a hill you're gonna die on, but I feel the need to sort of say this, not just for for this application, but others that might come before us and reaching back just only a few months to a couple of applications that came before us on this particular issue, preexisting nonconformities are not nonconformities forever. Okay. So if the, if the site does not conform,
it doesn't mean you can continue the non-conformity. It means if that non-conformity pre-existed, the instance when the bylaw changed to create the conformity. Yeah, you've got it right. But I believe that was 1976. So if you can prove that this site was configured the way it is before 1976, I think you're entitled to that argument. But if it's not, you're not. Secondly the fire lane, I appreciate what you said, you know, is it a use, I don't know, but functionally you're gonna come off of route nine.
You're gonna drive in a lane, you know, I don't know how you're demarcating what's, you know, what's the fire lane in those six spaces? But cars are gonna drift over there. They're gonna try to jump the queue, they're gonna use that portion of the site operationally and practically they will use it. So it's not gonna be Fire lane don't use, it's gonna be a paved area that's available for vehicles to drive over, which is part of the use and operation of your site.
So I think long and hard about, about that issue. Speaker 13: Again, we added the fire lane at the fire department's request. We can put in mountable curbs, we can put in Bos, we can make it very clear and not possible for customers to use it. We can make it, you know, grass crete, that doesn't look like it's, I mean there are all sorts of ways to address that. All we're trying to do is address the public safety concerns of the fire department. Which again, I don't think a car wash is a building
that's likely to catch fire in the first place. But we were asked to do this, so we did it. And I'll go back and look at aerial imagery to see what's there in terms of the pavement from the standpoint of the building that it, that is bisected by the property line, the zoning line state law says that if it's been there 10 years, it's considered lawfully preexisting nonconforming. And that I'm certain is the case. So at a minimum, the structure itself, which we're taking far out, we're more than doubling the rear setback.
I don't, I we'll do, we'll accommodate any requests of the board. If the board doesn't want a fire lane there or a fire access off wheeler, we'll take them off. We think it's safe without it. But Speaker 10: Is Wheeler Lane public? May I, is it a town road? Speaker 13: It's it is not. I don't believe it's Speaker 10: A private way. Speaker 2: It's, it's not a private way. It's an unexpected Speaker 1: Way Speaker 10: And it, it's, it's not one way. Right. It's two ways. It's Speaker 2: Two ways. But it looks like it's one way. Yes. Speaker 1: Yeah. So I know there are a number of people, members of the public who are here who will have questions.
Amanda, are there folks online? Speaker 2: So there are people online. You would have one person. Oh, actually that's Alan that Oh. Appears to have jumped off. Speaker 1: Alright. What I'll Speaker 2: Do, there are people who are online, but I'm not sure if they wanna speak. So you just have to ask. They, Speaker 1: Okay. So let me, let me do halfway across then I'll do any, anybody online and then we'll go to the second half. So, and do you, no, you don't, you're not. Okay. Is there anyone in this section who wants to speak?
No. Okay. So let's see if the, the first Speaker 2: Personal line. So there is an Amber and I apologize if I missed anyone's name. Patalia Ella Bat. Okay. Amber Batalla. Bat Bat Patalia. Sorry. Direct to butter. So they just have to unmute. Yep. And they're virtual. Speaker 1: Yeah, I I know it's, it's funny 'cause you're, you're looking where there isn't really a person. So is she signing in? Speaker 2: I, I believe Amber, can you hear us? And can you speak?
Speaker 15: Are you able to hear me? Perfect. Speaker 1: Thank you. Yes. Okay, great. Just your name and address. Speaker 15: My name's Amber Talia and I live at four Wheeler Lane. I'm the direct abutter, I'm the direct abutter to the property at 6 25. Worcester and I have been living at the property with my husband for 10 years. And when we met with the group at Prestige, the question was posed to us during the meetup. What did you think? Purchasing a home next to Route nine. And I feel that I can confidently say
that if there had been a car wash next to my property at the time of purchase, I would not have chosen it for my home. We asked the group if they would want to be living next to their car wash endeavor and the response given by Ronan was if I had to. And I believe that that's why we are here tonight, because I don't have to. And I didn't have a huge vote of confidence with Ronan's answer when the question was asked. As the direct abutters, my husband and I have serious concerns about this project.
Moving in the downgrade of the size of the building, we'll stop the blockage of sound. We're concerned about an influx of strangers that will essentially be in our backyard and we have a privately owned road that is actively falling apart. The road cannot handle an extra influx of cars every day. And we have serious concerns about the traffic and the access to our home. And This was brought up earlier, but anybody who knows this neighborhood
and Route Nine also knows that anytime between Thanksgiving and Christmas, the road can be backed up all the way to Wheeler Lane from traffic from the mall. And then the most important concern of my young child and my family. This neighborhood is a community of families with young kids, older kids out playing and gathering with friends and family. And I'm wondering how I'll be able to enjoy my property with my family while being out in my backyard with fans and vacuums going all day from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM with strangers trying to use my driveway as a spot to turn
around to get access to a car wash. And with cars zooming down my road while I'm trying to hang out in the front yard with my son. As the applicants brought up earlier, the storage bins in our yard do not stop any of the sound from Route nine. We hear everything and my husband and I have gone to visit Prestige car wash washes and witnessed the design in the traffic in other areas for ourselves. We stayed for an hour and at one point we saw 30 cars go through in 20 minutes and that was just one specific timeframe.
And we're also privy to the knowledge that prestigious building a car wash within five miles from our home in Framingham. And I would encourage the committee to research other towns and Reddit threads on the ethics and operations of these car washes to see if this would be a good fit for our town. Please consider our pleas and concerns and help us keep the integrity of our neighborhood and community. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you Amanda. Is there anyone else online As of right now, they don't have any hands up. Okay. So then coming across to the, across the aisle,
gentleman with the ski cap on. Yep. Just go up to the mic and at the mic just need your name and address. Sure. And nobody interrupts while someone's speaking at the podium. Speaker 16: Thank you very much. My name's Mike McGuire. I live at Five Wheeler Lane. I've lived there my entire life. My parents owned the house that I currently live in. I'm now raising my own family there. I appreciate the points that you guys all brought up. It's the majority of our concerns as well. A few points. Scrubber dub always has a cop out there on the weekend controlling those, those points. The traffic flow.
Although we, we can certainly expect that it will go beyond Wheeler Lane. We can also certainly expect that people that miss that people need to take right hand turns after that. So they need to get into the left lane, get back into the right lane to take those turns for other businesses in Weathersfield Road, which is a highly trafficked road. So certainly there'll be a traffic pattern that bypasses the site, turns on Weathersfield, turns down Hampshire and barrel barrels around the corner. Backup Wheeler Lane to re-hit it.
And certainly they would use that fire lane if it was available to them. Those are points that I wanted to reiterate to this board. Also, the trick with the landscaping and the buffer zone. They're gonna show you pictures of nice, big, full trees. Staggered big, long grass. The reality is, is what they'll probably end up doing is putting in little baby trees. It'll be 20 years before they're big enough to do anything at all. Another thing in regards to noise and buffering, if they do permit for this eight foot fence, there's a row of a hundred year old pine trees that support birds of prey.
Red tail hawks. Our our town mascot crows. They, they feed off the bunnies. They're part of the ecosystem that's been there forever. I'm telling you, I live there forever. I've seen flying squirrels in these trees. They're gonna have to cut all those down and put this new fancy fence up. It, it's no good for our, our our town. We, we love our neighborhood. I'm very, I'm getting more and more nervous, more worked up. We've been through this before. These guys don't care about our quality of life. Our children, our, the property value of our house. This gentleman I appre, they did, they they invited us up.
I appreciate that he hasn't been able to rent his place out. This is commercial real estate. We're talking about two years out. They've done this 50 times. Not one example of a successful story. They're pros at this. They know what to do. They'll have all the answers. Just I implore you to, to, to to weigh our feelings, our families and and our homes. That that's it. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you. Next. Anyone else wishing to speak? Speaker 16: Hi. Excuse me. Matt Ba I live at 11 Hampshire Drive.
I have four points I wanna make. They all touch on things that have been brought up, but I think they do provide a little bit of nuance. I ask in diligence. So obviously I'm here to share four specific concerns about this project and to respectfully ask the board to take a very careful look at its potential impacts both in the surrounding neighborhood and the businesses in traffic. On Route nine and the Weathers Field Plaza this afternoon, I've submitted electronically letters of opposition to this proposal from several of those businesses that believe they'll be adversely impacted as,
as Mike suggested by this proposal, Toto Dance and Fitness. They believe they're gonna get caught off 'cause they're just like a driveway away. Also, Strand's Hair Studio welcome Asian Market, all in the Weathersfield Plazas. I have those here, but again, I've submitted them electronically. First point, just to drill down a little bit on the traffic being a major concern, the report that the proposers submitted suggests to me relatively low peak hour traffic as a board member noted. But the project is designed with two wash tunnels, which suggests a much higher volume
of cars is actually expected. If only modest traffic is expected. It's reasonable for the board to ask why two tunnels are necessary from everyday experience. It's common to see car washes become extremely busy, especially on weekends, sometimes requiring police details to manage traffic. This raises the question of whether the traffic report reflects realistic expectations or simply what the site can handle on paper to maximize the likelihood of approval. I urge the board to approach these projections with caution and to consider hiring an independent traffic consultant to review the applicant's study and provide an an objective assessment.
I think an objective third party hired by the board is especially important in light of what happened with the Prestige Car Wash and Waltham. A special permit was granted based on information submitted by the applicant after opening prestige was cited for repeated violations of several aspects of its special permit. This might indicate reasonably that discrepancies between the reports it submitted and the reality of operation existed. I also submitted this afternoon electronically, but I have it here to the board, an article detailing these citations as well as other issues that arose during the re permitting process that Walham had to go
through with prestige. Another consul concern that's been brought up is noise. Just to drill down on that a little bit. The project includes two car wash tunnels and vacuum stations very close to homes. This has been noted, it's very hard to believe that the constant sound of dryers, blowers, vacuums, car doors, idling vehicles and music will not carry into nearby yards and houses despite the proposed mitigation measures. Weekends and early mornings are typically the busiest times for car washes and those are also the times when residents most value peace and quiet. The noise report submitted by the applicant appears
to be based on projections rather than real world measurements. I would strongly encourage the board to require independent sound testing from a similar operating facility before relying on the applicant's conclusions. Third point, Car washes of this size are not typically located on grades that allow runoff to flow down and potentially freeze in the winter or undivided highways with no clear exit lanes for safe entry and exit. These concerns are compounded by the fact that Wheeler Lane is less than two car lengths from the
entrance to the proposed car wash. Despite what the proposal the proposer put in its report backups onto Route nine seem highly likely and the existence of Wheeler Lane means there are no reasonable mitigation options. Additionally, it seems highly likely that cut through traffic will significantly impact the neighborhood turning Wheeler Lane in particular into a cut through for drivers who don't want to get on Route nine or who simply can't access the car wash because the line is too long. So Wheeler becomes a waiting area. One additional point, but for my final one, and this is just something that was brought up, I think you know, sort of brilliantly by a board member,
if this project does reduce volume at scrub aub, which may be perceived initially as beneficial for the town, it can actually produce two less profitable businesses and DEC with decreased s ability to maintain their properties. And if car washes go under it's very, it's very hard to fill. It's not sort of a fungible property like most retail is. It's only valuable to another car wash, but another car wash won't want it because it has improved profitable. I feel like this project risk creating two areas of blight in addition to Starbucks and per king Wendy's party, city, et cetera.
Final point, the surrounding neighborhood has been here for generations. A large high volume car wash is very different from the character of the residential area. The special permit process exists specifically so the board can decide whether a project truly fits its surroundings, not just whether it meets minimum or even bolstered technical requirements. In fact, the car wash with special permit application was recently denied in Marlborough in June of 2025. Two are denied in one in 2023 Methuen and another in 2024. All were denied based on traffic
and safety risks as well as concerns about oversaturation and quality of life issues that special permits specifically enable oversight bodies to consider for the good of the town. They represent the businesses that are there and the residents who call it home. For these reasons, I respectfully ask the planning board to either deny the application outright or at a minimum obtain independent review by qualified consultants including traffic and noise experts working for the board before making any decision at all. Thank you so much for your time. Speaker 1: Thank you. Anyone else please
Speaker 17: Just like to use the microphone manual Speaker 1: Chair. I I do. Speaker 17: I'm getting old. I can't get there real quick. Speaker 1: Oh, we're not going anywhere. Speaker 17: I will try to be brief. My name is Franklin Chang, C-H-I-N-G 25 Ranger Road in Natick. I am a resident of the town. My wife has been with me. This will be our 51st anniversary coming up in one year. We moved to Natick 50 years ago and I have been a town meeting member in precinct two back in the old days when Susan Soff and Ricky Ricky got me on the
Natick Neighborhood bus. Forget Ricky's name, ball ball. Anyway already. However, I have also been a registered professional civil civil engineer in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and 17 other states. And I was looking at my pro professional engineers stamp and it only has four numbers instead of five that are on the current reports here. My comments will be very specific in terms of two items. Number one is the site plan. And when I first noted reviewed the site plan that I noticed
that there are several con conflicts, particularly in the area of the vacuums where you have a very narrow, relatively narrow lane of two-way traffic pointed out that go between the two bays of the, of the, of the vacuums. One point of potential conflict that really concerned me was the fact that you have at the entrance coming from the so-called fire lane where
and the employee's area coming down, the people did not go into the, into the, the, the car wash itself that actually had the opportunity to bypass. And that is very close to the exit proposal on Route nine that Member Landry talked about earlier. The potential for backup at that intersection increases with the number of conflict points of two-way traffics backing in and out of the DR of the vacuums as well
as potential backup from any congestion that happens back onto Route nine as people are exiting the site. There are other issues involved and I'll quickly talk about those two is the first one is the traffic impact study. This traffic impact study that was submitted to the town is more of a trip generation study that cites data from 45 of the existing units of the, of people that are proposing this car wash. No reference to where or how much those particular
trip generation numbers came from in terms of the surrounding sites, the surrounding roadways, et cetera. So that puts into concern of the accuracy of the actual trip generation Numbers referring also to the Institute of Traffic Engineers, the ITE Trip Generation manual, which we all used as a, as a basis for our determination in terms of essentially influence traffic versus generated traffic pass
by versus people going directly and specifically to go to the car wash alone. The statistics that were cited in the traffic report trip generation report used the ITE trip generation rate were, in fact there were other rates they used their own technical data, unsighted and unknown. I think that the traffic report's biggest issue is not doing any terms of existing counts. I would ask the civil engineer if, if, if he in fact did any traffic counts
along Route nine in this particular area or even accessed any of the d, the old DPW numbers that would've given given us an indication of the level of traffic, particularly given that car washes have peak hours of afternoon traffic, virtually very little in the morning and the afternoon traffic at this particular site happens to be the westbound lane of Route nine. And that westbound lane, as we all know with the commuter traffic that happens in the evening hours
is nor is very, very heavy and congested versus other areas other times of the day. The other peak that happens with car washes is on Saturdays and Sundays, particularly in the mid noon times. There's no mention of any counts or any trip generation rates of those numbers as well. More importantly, no capacity calculations were done along the intersection of Route nine and Wheeler Road along Weathersfield Road and Route Nine. And one of the things that I found interesting was
that there was not one mention of the effects of the biggest of high highway construction project we've had in Natick since either the Beetle back or Natick Mall, et cetera. Then that's the reconstruction of the bridge of Route nine and 27, which is also a concern site plan traffic study. The third one was just something that was brought up by board Member Meyer that talked about the waste disposal or water I believe it was, was Andrew, that
Natick Natick's water system is not based on the MWRI deli, MWRA delivery. Our water is based on local wells and you see that one of the wells, in fact right on Route nine as you go along down on the eastbound side, the wastewater disposal. He, they talked about water from runoff as a concern and how they're gonna handle it, but there was no mention of anything at least that I saw in terms of the wastewater
disposal from the site as well. Knowing that the town has well water almost in these, the same aquifer that the, the water runoff would essentially go to, that would be a concern as well. I just wanna say and try to be quick here because people are, they'd like to get back to their families. I wanna emphasize first of all that these are my personal observations from the information that I've gathered from the planning board. Many people also will know our family and how long we've been parts of Natick
through my wife Charlie Ching, who was at the Natick Library for over 27 years. And I am here tonight to respond to some of the residents that I've known in with by being the town warden for elections at Precinct four and Precinct five, which include parts of these neighborhoods. And someone, some of my wife's friends came to her and asked me to at least review this. I am not here being paid by anybody. I'm here to make my wife of 51 years happy And
I am, I'm, I'm, I enjoy doing it, but I would be happy to participate and contribute comments if in fact the client decides to go ahead with the other issues, the permits that are required for curb cut changes, et cetera that require traffic impact studies versus trip generation analysis that just says we don't, we don't think there's gonna be a backup to place the consideration for all of that. In terms of the regional aspect. I believe it's something the board needs to take advantage of. So thank you very much.
Speaker 9: Alright, thank you. Bingo. I didn't believe you wanted to go. I was let to go. Really? Speaker 18: That's a tough act to follow. Hi, I amt fondness. I'm from seven Hampshire Drive and thank you to the board members and all of your questions that you asked and to, they obviously heard our concerns when we met with them previously and tried to address it. I'll try to be extremely concise because everything I'm saying pretty much has already been discussed. I wanted to still speak though, just
because my major concern and reason for being here instead of tucking my kids in tonight is for the health and safety of our neighbors and our community. Ultimately the traffic flow is something that I do not feel confident that would be able to be addressed. We have lived it when that area of Route nine used to flood and people would take Wheeler and take Hamshire and so forth. So we've seen that and the impact it had on our community on those days. Also worried about the young children in our neighborhood and the idling of cars, the pollution, the chemicals and the water table. And as Mike had talked about was the wildlife nearby also,
there's some things that when we are thinking about traffic with the right hand lane and the timing of the day are the bus routes for the elementary school and for the middle school and that cannot be rerouted and have to go up that way. So those are some major of my concerns when I think about health and safety in our neighborhood. I also really urge there has to be a fire lane and I really urge though that Wheeler Lane is not used. It's a a not passable road and you really cannot have two cars going down there.
I have tried to go down there. I don't know if any of the board members have, and typically if you're going down and another car is coming, you have to pull all the way over close to the fence and wave to your neighbor and let them go by and so forth. It's, it's a challenge obviously with the police need for scrub dub and so forth. It's obviously things that you have already talked about as a concern and ultimately I urge this committee when you took these positions, you, you know, you have made a real impact on adhering to the zone and the bylaws, but also to think about our community
and our community needs and I thank you for taking our neighborhood and our community and our schools and the buses safety into consideration. Thank you. Okay, Speaker 9: Thank you. Speaker 3: So it seems, oh yes, Hi. Thank you so much. I will be very brief. Most of what I prepared to say has already been said, so I need just have redundancy. I will not do that. However, my name is Nancy Mortali. I am here tonight with my husband Mel. We live on number 10 Wheeler Lane, so directly next to the abuts. So we are the next house in, so we pretty much see
and hear everything that they do. Again, we talked a little bit about how Wheeler Lane is impassable. We purchased our home in 1976, so pretty soon we'll be there. 50 years. We raised our family there. Our boys all still live in Natick and they're raising their family's in Natick as well. Wheeler Lane is was mentioned before, is in such disrepair, it's really not a possible road right now. And because I've lived there for so long and in fact I worked at Ethan Allen for a number of years, which is the building we're talking about. And I can tell you back then people were cutting through Hampshire, up to Wheeler to get in and,
and in some cases would actually park at Ethan Allen and walk to other stores because it was just easier than getting on Route nine. I would also ask that if you haven't been in our neighborhood, if you would please take a ride through. We take pride in our neighborhood. We are a close knit community. We have a number of young family, small children. Cars go flying down. They can't fly a wheeler as as frequently as they are, as as fast as they would like to because it's in such disrepair to be honest with you. But please, please take a ride just so you can see
our neighborhood, how close knit we are and what nice care we take of our, our yards and, and consider our neighbors and of all the, again, small children and, and pets and whatever that are, we used to be able to, you know, the kids would go out and play basketball and, and street hockey and whatever that is coming to an end. It is just, we used to have so much green space, little by little it's disappearing. And again, I I would ask you please to, to just take a ride through our neighborhood. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker 4: I will make this short 'cause everybody else said everything else that I wanted to say, but I'm Paul Batal Junior live at Four Wheeler Lane. I'm the butter one of the abutters I was born and brought up in this town. Still live here fortunately, but all I wanna say is I think living next to a car wash, if my, my house wouldn't be at home anymore, especially on the weekends. That busy peak, you know, times. That's huge concern of mine among other concerns that they said. I appreciate you taking a look at everything and thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you. Is there anyone else and no one else online.
What else? Okay, sounds like about both of us or all of us have some homework to do in terms of kind of the impacts for, for the applicant in terms of looking at the impacts of, of noise to, we'll talk about kind of looking through trip traffic and trip generation on the enc incre, the encroachment of the development of the, of the lot to the south
of the residential zone. For us as a, as a as board members, we'll end up looking at requesting traffic impact traffic studies and also to, to make sure that we understand the sequence with the zoning bylaws saying what it does of when the kind of encroachment or the, the commercialization of the southern part of the parcel took place so that we understand what has happened mysteriously or,
or what has happened through legitimate permits. 'cause I think that at some point that parcel will get developed, it'll get developed as a, a commercial opportunity. I understand it has, as it as it stands now, has not had shown much luck in finding a tenant or a buyer. But that, that is a second subject. The first one is keeping a residential neighborhood that is tucked next to
a commercial neighborhood or commercial development without having it overtake that, that cluster, that that residential cluster. I keep, I was thinking as I was listening to folks that I'm gonna have this long list to put together things that we have homework to do on and trying to find out the sequence of how, how the property evolved into its current state and on whose watch. So right now I think I would
and I would turn to the applicant to the a well I'm echoing anyway, so we will look at what we, oops, Speaker 10: Let's mute everybody. Yep. Yeah, good. Speaker 1: Okay. So, you know, we have, we have our work to do on the kind of legal side of, of this. What does the bylaw say? When, when, when did it say it and when were the, when has the property changed and evolved to its current state? I think whatever is discovered or
or imp implemented going through, I think we have to be careful. We want to balance our, our, our comm commercial business in on Route nine. But we also want to maintain the residential neighborhood that has grown, grown up just to the north and east of it. So I, we will have a chance to talk with the applicants. I know Amanda will be talking separately about what materials we're going to be looking for from, from you
as applicants and how we can, when I say take something forward, this is, this will move in some direction. I, we, we want to have land that is prop properly used that does not adversely affect quality of life, but rather the reverse and see what we can do together and perhaps come up with something to mediate the, the aspirations and concerns of, of the owners, both of commercial property
and residential property. I appreciate so many of you turning out these meetings. The first one is posted. We're going to, I'm going to ask that we continue the public hearing for several weeks so that we have a chance to start putting together a framework. It's not a, a simple process given the, the kind of competing areas of interest. So I wanna make sure that everyone gets a, a fair shot to, to state their case and to provide the research on which our decision will have to be based.
And then I'm thinking if I start there and we do it for two weeks, Speaker 10: I, I would, Speaker 1: I i Speaker 10: I would say beyond that in my opinion. Okay. I would just say the homework is this is, this is the outline of the homework, right? You know, it's a statement. It reads like a list of conditions. It's not really an analysis. So I think a robust traffic impacts statement or study analysis conforming to the mass DOT requirements,
it's not gonna be huge, it's not 50 intersections, but it's more than one and the methodology's laid out, we can see that in, in, it's all of its detail. Utility impacts water usage. What is the capacity of the town to provide the water? That would be a useful piece of information. Wastewater generation, where's it going, what's the impact? All of that. And I think this is, this is the roadmap here. You know, much more robust analysis. Not, I don't think a statement of aspirational things is,
is gonna cut it in terms of analysis. We wanna see the details, we wanna see the data, you know, in terms of the zoning question, again, I'm gonna beat that one to, to death here. But you know, end of the day you've said if you'll do it whatever's, you know, necessary to make it conform again, preexisting non-conforming is the standard. The 10 year rule under section seven is not preexisting, non-conforming. That is enforceability not preexisting, non-conforming Speaker 13: That changed a few years ago. It's pre-existing nonconforming under section six, not seven
Speaker 10: Is what is Speaker 13: A structure that's been in existence for 10 years is considered preexisting nonconforming. Speaker 10: I be the differ with you on that. Speaker 13: The statute was amended several years ago to, Speaker 10: It does not make, it does not make anything. So if a, if a building was permitted lawfully and it ends up because of zoning changes, non-conforming section six or whatever it is, does not confer pre-existing non-conforming status. That is only to enforcement action.
So if your neighbor built something violating a setback and you don't object for 10 years, then it's, then it's good. But a open, notorious, permitted existing building does not get the benefit of that. I would, I would. So that's where I stand on that. Okay. So anyway, I think this is the, this is the roadmap. Let's make this a really serious attempt at understanding the analysis, the impacts. And that's not gonna be two weeks, that's gonna be a month Speaker 1: At least.
So March 25th would be the next. Speaker 10: So I'd move to continue the hearing until March one. Speaker 13: Just can, can I real quickly just read from section seven of the act, if real property has been improved with the erection of a structure and no action to enforces taken within 10 years, quote, then the structure shall be deemed for zoning pur purposes to be legally non-conforming structures subject to section six and any local zoning ordinance or bylaw relating to nonconforming structures. That was the language added several years ago. Speaker 10: Yep. And I, I think your interpretation's off on
that. Sorry. Speaker 1: So, okay. Alright. Speaker 10: I'll second the motion to continue. Alright. Speaker 1: Okay. On the motion to continue to March 25th, Speaker 10: Meyer. Aye Speaker 1: Peter, not, Speaker 9: Not sun a Speaker 10: Landry Aye. Speaker 1: Alan, Speaker 10: Including Aye Speaker 1: And Evan's. Aye. So we are continuing this to March 25th. If you have any, have questions you or, or opinions that you want us to have planning at Natick, where is it?
Planning, planning board at Natick. Speaker 2: Just email a loomis@natickma.com. No. Okay. Don't org. Sorry. Speaker 1: So Speaker 2: Need a do org. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 9: Thank you. Speaker 1: So thank, thank you very much. Thank Speaker 10: You. Speaker 1: Oh, and I should say I am adjourning the meeting at 10 15. Speaker 10: Wait, what? Speaker 9: What was, Speaker 2: Oh, I thought you were gonna vote the minutes at least. Speaker 10: It's okay. Vote. What do you need? Vote on that. So Speaker 2: It's fine. We can just, we can just do 'em next time there and there. Speaker 10: You want a motion to chair? I vote. I move We adjourn. Second. Speaker 9: Okay. Motion to Speaker 10: Adjourn May. Aye.
Speaker 9: Peter, Speaker 2: You actually don't need to do a roll call to adjourn. Speaker 9: Yeah. Speaker 10: Aye, I've never voted not to adjourn Speaker 9: To do that. Aye, Speaker 10: It's a non debatable motion that is, sorry. Speaker 9: Kept you off so late.