Um, as a preliminary matter, this 49th chair of the new planning board, permit me to confirm that all members and presence participated on the agenda or present and can hear me. Um, playing board members, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Peter Bos will not be with us this evening.
Larry Murphy, >> present. >> Scott Ker will not be with us this evening. Steve Manion. >> Hi. >> Town staff, when I call your name, Martha Taylor. >> Yes. >> Special project.
>> Yeah. Here. >> Satie Woodward, assistant planner. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Good evening. March 18, 26 open meeting of the Newberry planning board is being conducted remotely consistent with
chapter 2 of the act 2025 which extends the governor's March 12, 2020 order suspending certain visions of the open meeting law GL C3A 20 until June 30th, 2027. For this
meeting, the new planning board is convening by video conference via Zoom as posted on the planning board's agenda. which can be found at the town's website. You may join us by going to http
semicolon zoom. us and entering meeting ID number 8327141 303056 and the passcode is 108790. or by calling in 1 19292056099
US and entering the meeting ID number and passcode when prompted. Please note that this meeting is being recorded and that attendees are participating participating by video or telephone conference. The meeting is also being broadcast live through local
access ch uh cable channel 9 and on zoom and at newvixite.comtnctv and the recording will be available on the new access YouTube channel. Meeting business ground rules. Before we turn to the first item on the agenda, we're
going to cover some ground rules for effective and clear conduct of our business and to ensure accurate meeting minutes. As chair, I'll introduce each speaker on the agenda. After speakers conclude their remarks, we'll go down the list of
board members, inviting each by name to provide any comment, questions, or motions. For all attendees, please remember to mute your audio when you are not speaking. On Zoom, use the mute button. And on the telephone, use uh star six to
toggle to mute and unmute. There will be an opportunity for public comment and questions during the public hearing. I'll see questions and comments from members of the public through the resume raised hand function. Video conference participants to raise your hand, hover
over the bottom of the Zoom window below the photo gallery and click on the image of the hand that appears. Please ensure that your name is fully and correctly displayed on the participant list. Telephone participants to raise your hand in a Zoom meeting. Hit star nine on
your phone keypad to raise your hand. Each participant will be called on to provide his or her name and address and then may ask their question or make their comment. Please do your best to keep your questions or comments uh to three minutes or less. Your hand will be
lowered when you have been given the floor for your question. I will afford the applicant or their representative the opportunity to reply. Should there be a written submitt of questions or concerns, they will be noted for the record. The applicant will
be afforded the opportunity to speak if the issues raised have not yet been addressed. And finally, each vote taken in this meeting will be conducted by roll call vote. Very good. Um, we'll go on to the first
item of the agenda this evening. Um, it's 7-13 M Street. Submission of form A and approval of not required plan for proposed lot line changes. Uh, Newbury assesses map R19-0-53B
and R19-0 53C. Owner and applicant Rome Realy LLC, 64 School Street, Marramac, Mass. Um, I'd like to welcome uh Robert Cormier
and attorney Phil Perry. Are you guys with us this evening? >> Yes. >> Yes. Good evening. This is Philip Perry speaking and and uh I also see the the icon for Rome
Realy LLC uh who I believe is uh is also in attendance. >> Yes, Robert Cormier of Rome Realy. >> Okay. Thank you, John. Um, if you would
like, would you uh please um explain the purpose of the ANR plan and why it's being submitted? >> Uh, yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Uh, again, my name is Philip Perry. I'm an attorney with an office at Perry and Perry, PC at Marramac Square, Marramac,
Mass. Uh, I'm here tonight on behalf of Rome Realy. Um we presented to you the the application and the plan showing uh the reconfiguration of two existing lots. Uh as you said uh the first lots
at 79 Main Street, the second lot is at 11 to13 Main Street. uh approximately uh a year or so ago uh before you you had endorsed an approval not required plan uh dividing the original contiguous lot
into four parcels. Um parcels three and four from that plan are what you have before you tonight and uh upon them they have since been built upon. Each each lot currently has a
substantially constructed two family residence. And uh the purpose of this plan is to uh modify the common interior boundary line between them. And and really the purposes for that were to
straighten out uh the lot line between the two buildings, straighten it out uh making it so that there'd be a a more uniform backyard for for both buildings and uh also to jog them towards the rear
of the property for purposes of uh creating better setbacks and distances for septic system reserve areas. Uh each of the lots maintains the minimum amount of frontage on Main Street required under the zoning bylaw. Each of the lots
uh also does uh contain uh the minimum amount of area required for a two family in this zone that is served by uh public water which each of them are. and uh care was taken to ensure that the
reconfigured lot lines here uh we have proper uh setbacks relative to any buildings and uh front, rear and side lot lines. Um the uh preparer of the plan did go into a a little bit of uh
detail on the plan as far as locating utilities to and from the uh uh the units as well as the existing septic systems and uh reserve areas. And uh we believe that uh because we have the
minimum amount of required frontage on Main Street, which is a public way, that the plan is endorsed to ANR approval. Okay. Thank you, Philip. Um, >> is it Do you have anything else?
>> Oh, good. >> Uh, no. I I'll defer to the board. If the board certainly has any comments, I'll be happy to answer them. >> All right. Thank you. Um, I'll turn to the board. Larry, do you have any questions for Bill? >> I was just curious. I see where you are. um
uh removing some of the more extreme property line uh what's the word I'm looking for? Um odd angles, I guess I might say. I just wondered why they were drawn that way in the first place. Uh good question. From what I
understand, um, uh, there wasn't a lot of area left over when the survey was conducted and and, uh, the overall area of the contiguous lot was was calculated and and the amount of frontage was, uh, was
determined. because of that um and at the time of the original endorsement uh septic systems had not been designed nor approved by the board of health. So the uh surveyor and the engineer at the time that the plan was
prepared they configured the lot lines this way trying to make their best educated guess as to uh how they'd be able to locate these. Of course, they didn't didn't have soil testing or or perk rates. And then uh once the the
lots were created and they they did do those things and they did design the plans, um uh this plan here really um really does a a better job, I guess, of of
being able to access things like the reserve areas out back. Um if uh if if there's anything to add to that, I'm I'm sure that uh Mr. Cormier can can chime in. >> No, no, that's you know, it's uh it was
a guess uh how the engineer did it. um he's no longer with us. So, I would love to ask him why he did it that way, but it it just it's not feasible for any of the people that will be occupying these houses. It it just looks a lot better.
Um it just looks a lot better for everybody um if the we straightened out that line. That's all I have. >> Thank you. That answers my question. I'm hearing a dog in the background. Is that >> Yes, I'm so sorry about that, but we
have uh we have two dogs and they're they're literally growling. >> Okay, if you if you don't mind muting, that would be great. It's just uh so everybody can hear what's going on. Thank you so much. All right. Um Larry,
are you are you good with questions or do you have any other Woody, thank you. That's all I had. >> Steve, do you have any questions for Bill of the >> Thank you. No, I do not. >> All right. And I don't have any questions either. That being said, uh
Satie and Martha, this is good to go. Otherwise, any concerns that you have? >> No. No concerns. >> Okay. Thank you. That being said, I'd entertain a motion to
endorse the AI plan entitled plan of land at 7-13 Main Street in Ubury, Massachusetts, surveyed by Rome Realy LLC by Atlantic Engineering and Survey Consultants, Inc. dated March 4th, 2026.
>> So move. >> Thank you, Larry. Thank you, Steve. Roll call vote. Larry, >> yes. >> Steve, >> yes. >> And I vote yes as well. Uh, thank you, Phil. And, um, we should have those
mileas right for you tomorrow. >> Okay. Uh, thank you very much. Uh, I anticipate someone will come down probably later in the morning as uh, we have some some amount of urgency. So, I'll get this down to the registry of deeds uh, once the endorse plan is
delivered to me. So, uh, thank you all for meeting tonight and considering this. >> Okay. Thank you. And I will do my best to have them signed by 10:00 a.m. So, >> Okay. Great. Thank you. >> All right. Have a good night. >> All right. Um, what time do we have
here? 7:13. Uh, meeting minutes. Um, has everyone had a chance to review the meeting minutes for March 4th, 2026?
And if so, um, do you have any, uh, questions or concerns or amendments on for the main events? >> Um, I've reviewed the Morty and they look fine to me. >> Okay, great. Uh, >> same here.
>> Okay, great. So, um, I would entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes for March 4th, 2026. Um, entertain a motion. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Steve. >> I'll second that.
>> All right. Thank you, Larry. Roll call vote. Larry, >> yes. >> Steve, >> yes. >> And I vote yes as well. So, that takes care of our meeting minutes. Um, I have 7:14 and we're going to move into
um public hearings. Um, I'm going to jump around a little bit on the public hearings, so bear with me for one second. Um, I have 7:14. I have 7:15. So, I'm going to jump around a little
bit. I'm going to go to um the first one for this evening. Public hearing continuence subdivision definitive subdivision application for 15 central street assesses map U1 lot 53
um for two lot subdivision applicant owner Michael Becker 15 Central Street uh Biffield LLC. Um we have gotten a request from the applicant to continue the public hearing
for this evening to uh uh April 1 meeting at 15 at uh at 7:15 via Zoom. So um they had some materials that um hadn't come in yet. So they um didn't
really have anything new for us this evening. They'd like a continuence. So, that being said, I would entertain a motion for the continuence of 15 Central Street. Uh, let me just get the verbage. 15
Central Street, assessment map, U1 53 um for 7 uh for April 1st at 7:15 via Zoom. >> Raised hand. Hi, I have a question. Um, I uh just
recently purchased 17 Church Street, which is the abuing lot to this uh proposed subdivision. Um, I just had a couple questions about it. >> Um, just I'm new to it. I mean, I knew going into behind >> I knew going buying into the house that there was a
>> I was thinking about this. I need >> Excuse me. Um, someone's um not muted and we can hear you and I'm trying to hear who's talking and if whoever's talking, could you please just state your name for the record? We know you're at 17. >> Okay, so this is Mike. This is Mike F
talking right now. Um, I recently just bought that house at 17 Church Street. Um, I'm just trying to get some information on the subdivision. Um, is basically I guess my first question would be, is this happening? Is this approved? Is there going to be a house
built here? >> Um well, we're in the process now. We opened the public hearing two weeks ago. Um actually, yes, we started the public hearing process two weeks ago. It's uh went through preliminary and now it's um
on to definitive subdivision and um there is time for public comment. Um, we had some public comment last meeting, so I suggest you look up our last meeting on the YouTube channel. Um, tonight it's a continuence, so there'll be no discussion of any of the details
of the project just because >> the applicants aren't here to respond. >> Yeah. >> So, okay, fairness to the applicant, but we are continuing this um public hearing for 15 Central Street to April 1st at
7:15. and I would encourage you to attend and ask your questions then if that's okay with you. >> No, that's fine. I'll all good. I just uh I I'll save them for then, I guess. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry. Just because
of the because we're not actually opening the public hearing tonight because the >> No problem. >> What would I search on YouTube to look up the last uh meeting? >> Um the last meeting date. Do you recall what the date was any?
>> Yeah, it was it was the March 4th meeting. Um and Mike, there's um the town of Newbury has a YouTube channel and then within that channel there's some playlists with different committees and boards organized into different lists. So you'll find the um Newberry
planning board list and it should be the most recent video. Um >> um actually it was February 18th meeting, >> wasn't it? >> It was a month ago. >> Yeah, I agree with
>> I I do not recall >> two weeks ago. It was February 18th. >> February 18th. Okay. >> Yep. There'll be a list of the planning board meetings there. And um we also have the agendas on our website. I I
can't pull up the date of that meeting right now. I apologize. >> Okay. All good. I will go find it and I will save my questions for April 1st. You said >> yes. April 1st at 7:15 via Zoom. And uh All right. Thank you. >> Thank you for everyone for your
patience. Um I will see you then. >> Yeah, that was going to comments for this evening. So thank you. And now I will entertain a motion to continue 15 Central Street to um April 1st at 7:15
via Zoom. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Steve. Do I have a second, Larry? You're muted. >> Yes, I second it. >> Yes. Thank you. Uh roll call vote. Larry, >> yes. >> Steve,
>> yes. Okay, we'll see 15 Street in April Crest. Thank you everyone. Next public hearing is um annual town meeting 2026 zoning amendment request from select board to increase the number
of zoning board members appeal zoning board of appeals members from 3 to five. Um, Larry, could you read the uh public hearing notice for this uh zoning amendment, please?
>> Yeah, I'd be glad to, Woody. Uh, this is a town of Newbury planning board public hearing notice, which was published in the Newbury Port Daily News on March 2nd and March 9th, 2026. To the residents of the town of Newbury and other interested persons, please
note that on Wednesday, March 18th, 2026 at 7:15 p.m., the Newberry planning board will hold a public hearing remotely via Zoom pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 48, Section 5, to consider a proposed amendment to the code of the town of
Newberry, chapter 97, zoning, as follows. to see if the town will vote to amend its zoning bylaw being chapter 97 of the uh town general legislation article 9 section 97-11B
entitled zoning board of appeals by amending subsection one entitled establishment to increase the number of zoning board of appeals members from 3 to five excuse me the text of this proposed amendment is on file with the town clerk
and in the planning office 12 Kent ways Sweet 210 Biffield, Mass. It may be viewed on the planning board's uh section of the town's website at https colon back slashback slashwww.newberry.gov
back1 backpropose-zoning- amendments. For more information or to obtain a copy of the proposed amendments, contact the planning office at 978-465862 extension 336 in accordance with chapter 2 of the acts
of 2025 which extends the governor's March 12, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law general laws chapter 38 section 20 until June 30th, 2027. This public meeting is being conducted remotely.
All persons interested or wishing to be heard relative to the proposed zoning amendments are invited to participate in the hearing remotely at the designated time uh from their computer, tablet or smartphone at https. Calling back
us. us backj271413056 or by telephone by calling 1- 1929-2056099 US and using meeting ID 832-71413056 passcode 108790 or may watch the meeting live on local accesscable channel 9 or at
www.tnctv.org or by Woody Knight, chair, Newbury Planning Board. >> Hey, thank you, Larry. And I'd like to welcome uh Eric Shron, chair of the ZBA. And um do you have any other members in
attendance from the ZBA this evening? >> Yes, we do. We have Mario Kavali, who's a member, and we have Joshua Walker, who's a uh associate member. >> Okay. So, would you guys like to open your open the meeting because >> Yes, we'd like to
um we'd like to open the meeting. I don't know if um in my uh race to get home here that I actually have the uh the meeting agenda, but um yeah, the planning board the Z sorry the
zoning board of appeals um here um March 18th at 7 24 um here on the Zoom meeting. Would like to open the meeting. I I don't have the full description um that Larry so
eloquently read in terms of the public uh announcement on Zoom. >> No, that's great. I think you're covered there, Eric, just because you have more than one member present. So, thank you. >> Yes. >> And um so then Martha, I understand you have some slides to
>> I do. I do. Just a just a few. So, I'll I'll give the floor to you and Eric and you guys can work through the slides here. We'll we'll >> Thank you. >> get get through this. Thank you. Thank you, Eric.
>> All right. Um, let's see. Well, can you can you see that? I know you've got uh you're probably seeing my Here we go. Sorry. >> All right. Um so, as um as Larry read tonight, uh the planning board is
holding a public hearing um on a proposed zoning amendment regarding the ZBA membership. And this was referred to the planning board um from the select board. Um here are the planning board members. Woody Knight, Pete Pacos, Larry Murphy, Scott
Kinter, Steve Mansion, and Mary Stone, associate member, and Kristen Grubs, planning director, Satie Woodward, assistant planner, and me, special projects planner. Um, as we discussed at the public hearing on March 4th, um, the planning
board is usually the body that initiates zoning amendments, um, either housekeeping or based on, uh, uh, amendments proposed to accomplish goals that are in some of the long range planning or in response to case law or
changes in mass general law. But other bodies can also initiate zoning amendments. the select board, the ZBA, sometimes their citizens petitions. Um, but in any case, they must be submitted to the select board and then by the select board to the planning board for
public hearing. Um, so in in this case, the select board did vote to refer this particular zoning amendment to the planning board for for public hearing on February 24th. And this is specifically to increase the
membership of the zoning board of appeals from three members to five members at the request of the um zoning board of appeals um by a letter written to by the chair to the select board. Um
just a quick recap. Um Mass General law chapter 48 section 12 actually kind of enables the establishment of a zoning board of appeals and under state law um the ZBA members are appointed by the select board. Um it can consist of either three or five members. Uh the
term of one member expires each year. So you don't have multiple members leaving in any particular year. And associate ZBA members may may be appointed by the select board as well. and they can in the absence of um a zoning board member
the um the associate member can can act on the applications before um before the board. Our bylaw um which is in article 11 section 9711b um basically follows state law. It establishes a three member zoning board
of appeals. Um we have two zoning uh two associate members and they're appointed by the select board with a term of one member expiring each year. And um on this slide is a photograph of the the ZBA and I'll turn it over to Eric at
this point. >> Jump in. >> Yep, you can jump in. So the photo shows I think that was um three members, one associate and also Larry Murphy who is the planning board's
liaison to the zoning board of appeals. So do you want me to go on to the next slide? >> Yes. >> Okay. Oops. Everybody froze for a moment, so I missed your um entry there. Sorry about that, Martha. Thank you for setting up
the slides. Thank you to the planning board um for this process. Uh Eric Fon um I've been on the ZBA for um 12 plus years. I kind of forget now. And um it's
always been a three member board with the possibility of having two associates. And I think in those 13 years there may have been six months where we actually had two associates. And I'm glad to report that we do currently just uh within the last month now have two assocates.
Um and so what prompted this was the ZBA has um come across some some challenging and or more challenging applications dealing with Plum Island
and some of the applications are um becoming more uncharted territory. And so as we have a three-member board and any two members constitutes a quorum, there is no um
there is no uh discussion outside of the the the public meetings that we have. And so as that the the discussion um sometimes takes a while to explain to the board as well as to the applicants
as well as gain an understanding of of what we're doing with some uh unique um interpretations of our bylaws that are being presented to us and how we interpret them. So, in doing that, we'd like to reduce scheduling delays
by expanding the the um the board members so that we can have a quorum of three members and that it's easier to make sure that we're not missing meetings by by one person uh having an um an incident where they cannot make meeting.
Also, the um voting threshold right now, it's it's um three. It's a majority. It's got to be unanimous for everything. Um there are discussions, not that that um has impeded us to where we need to go, but some members would feel like
they'd either like to abstain or or maybe vote against it in terms of their uh opinion. Um it just gives us a broader range of of voices within the meeting. So improve uh continuity, more board me more members serving staggered
terms. it's easier to maintain experience of the members and have members help um ensure the consistency and we you know we're really trying to move applicants along in a in a proper manner and and not have to uh have
continuous delays because of missing members um that has happened from time to time. Also, I think a more diverse perspective with the increased numbers uh I think we would have a better um discussion and have more input from
varied viewpoints uh on the interpretation of the zoning matters. So um and also as a result of this I guess with with three people it sometimes seems or um perception is is that the
zoning board can be very um um matter of fact where one person who has a strong opinion sort of outweighs the other two and so if there are more voices on the board and and I think you know we sometimes look and I ask Larry
who's a great liaison to the zoning board how how the planning board works and how um matters are dealt with in terms of standard procedure uh in order to help understand how to guide the zoning board and and in what we're
doing. So this is this has been some time and I think I've been talking about this for two years and then finally decided to act on it. So, I'm appreciative of um of the planning board to consider this and
to send it to the select board as well. >> Okay. Thank you, Eric. Um Larry, do you have any questions for Eric? >> I have no questions. Nothing to add other than to say I fully support it. >> Thank you, Larry. Um Steve, do you have
any questions or comments? Yeah, I support it. But I've got one housekeeping question for Eric. >> Yes. >> With regard to super majorities, um, and a five member board, how would it work if um, one of the board members was
absent? Would it require a four to zero vote or >> So we or not? Well, if we have if if the five member board and two associates is are
present for the hearings and have uh um been part of the process all along, the associate member uh can step up so we can avoid some delays that way. if um if we so choose. I think it's it's if we
have a quorum um we can present to the applicant where we are and where where we might be going and um and discuss whether a continuence is is warranted or not. We have had people that um have asked for um
um a motion to be made uh even if there is some uncertainty and we certainly explain the options that might unfold however that may be and they're they're choosing schedule over um over the possibility of where where the um decision may fall.
So, I think, you know, at that point, we we try to be reasonable and we try to be very helpful to the residents that are submitting and and I think it's just a matter of process of asking them um where that importance is of schedule versus um maybe delaying in a month to
have more members involved in the in the motion or decision. >> Sure, that sounds good. The u importance of having associate members comes through loud and clear as well. And I think I can see the forest and the trees. So, thank you.
>> Thanks. Appreciate that. >> Okay. Very good. And I I support as well. I think it's a a good thing. And I really don't have any questions um other than if if this is passed, if this
does go through the process and ends up on the warrant and goes through town meeting. Um would the associate members get bumped up as the part of the five or would you they have to have be elected in? Do you know that? Uh I don't know
officially but my assumption is that the associate members would become members and that there the terms um I think I would go before the select board and make a recommendation that the two associate members get appointed as
members and that the we take the current um uh appointments and and let the slept board stagger them out to so that we're we're one every five years as opposed to the three years that we have now.
>> Okay. >> All right. Thank you, Eric. Um, if uh board members don't have any other questions, I will turn it over to the public. Uh, do we have any raised hands from the public? Any members of the public have any questions for every?
>> Um, I don't see any raised hands at the moment. >> Okay. If there is anyone and they're having trouble raising the hand, just speak up. Otherwise, we'll move on. Um, >> so with that said, no more additional
questions, Larry or Steve. Correct. >> Correct. >> All right. >> Sorry. >> I would entertain a motion then to um close the public hearing for this uh zoning amendment. I'll move
to close the public hearing. >> Second. >> Okay. Thank you, L. Thank you, Steve. Roll call vote. Uh Larry, >> yes. >> Steve. >> Yes. >> And I vote yes as well. Now, um I'd also
entertain another motion to recommend the zoning amendments and refer them to the select board and for consideration at the 2026 annual town meeting. I think so. Move.
>> Second. >> Thank you, Larry. Thank you, Steve. Uh, Larry, your vote. >> Yes. >> And Steve? >> Yes. >> And I vote yes as well. Um, thank you, Eric. Thank you everyone else
>> with with you tonight. I can't see you, but thank you everyone for the ZBA. And we'll see you at town meeting. >> Great. Appreciate that. Thank you very much. Thank you, Martha. Oh, >> you're welcome. Good to see you. >> Yes.
Bye, everybody. Yep. Have a good night, Derek. Thank you. Um, moving on to the next public hearing. It's a continuence 2-8 Old Point Road, level two site plan review. Uh the application is for an asbill
constructed changes to the improved site plan of record and a proposed new 40x40 pavilion structure at the sunset club at 2-8 Old Point Road assessment map U02-0-153A owner of the Cottages Commercial LLC
Vincent God manager and applicant representative uh Steven Sawyer from Millennial Engineering. Um I see Vince. Hi Vince, how are you? Um, you are muted by the way. >> Everything's going well. >> Yep. Uh, do you have any updates for the
board? >> Um, well, I saw a a recent draft um, a couple days ago. Um, and was told that there was still waiting on if there was any feedback from the town council. So,
I haven't heard back. So, I I don't know if uh Satie or Martha know if that's been received yet. >> Um >> Okay. >> Unfortunately, we have not received town council review yet. I believe it's
because it's town meeting season and she has a lot going on with um various towns um zoning amendments and things of that sort. So, um, we're still waiting to hear back, unfortunately.
>> Got it. So, um, I seem to be the case that everybody wanted to see those comments, so it probably just makes the most sense to maybe just push this to the next meeting um, till we get those comments. >> Okay. Um,
thank you, Vince. Um, there were a few minor changes. Did you want to go through those, Satie? Um, yeah, I can. Um, >> y >> they're mostly Kristen's edits, so I apologize if I can't um answer any nitty-gritty questions, but I
can definitely present the um draft to >> the meeting. >> Yep. I think there are just few minor changes, V, so we'll just them for the record. >> Yep. No, I already looked through them and they they looked good to me. So, let's definitely go through them.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Everyone can see this. Okay. >> Yep. >> All righty. >> So, there were some edits to the procedural history after receiving some more information from the
um inspectional services admin and from the conservation agent. So, um there was just more detail added here in this in this section. Um and
um and you said you reviewed all these Vincent. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> I went through them all. >> Okay, great. Um so the first edit is um specifying in 2003 the applicant then sought a
building permit to construct a timber frame structure on the property and to approve asbuilt conditions. um an additional metal container to be used as a merchandise shack and other changes to the approved site plan. On October 5th, 2023, the building commissioner denied the permit based on
new break zoning code 97-4D-4, requiring a refiling with the zoning board for a modification to the original special permit approval. The letter also stated the need to file with the planning board for a modification of the site plan approval and with the
conservation commission. And um she also added um modification here and a new site a new order of conditions was approved by the conservation commission and issued on November 12th, 2024. The scope of the work on the approved project included
the removal quote the removal of a boat landscape feature, the permitting of an 8x20 temp structure known as the mobile merge container, and the completion of the installation of previously approved plantings in alternative locations. end quote. After the issuance of the
order of conditions, the applicant requested an amendment to this new permit to include the construction of a 40 footx 40 foot open pavilion structure. After review, the amendment was approved with a final plan revision date of July 11th, 2025. Um, and some minor edits here.
Um um I will change this date to when the hearing closes um if it is not closed this evening. Um during the planning board review in August 2025, it was determined that the applicant's application to the planning
board for the pavilion differed from what was approved by the zoning board. The application The applicant therefore um this is a bit unclear which will be fixed. Um the applicant therefore submitted a request to the zoning board
of appeals. >> Oh did sorry I thought I heard someone say something. Um the applicant therefore submitted a request to the zoning board of appeals for approval of a special permit minor modification to the design of the
pavilion previously approved. specifically uh to enclose the two gable ends of the structure. The ZBA voted to approve the change as a minor modification on January 15th, 2026. Um I believe that's all the edits for
that section. Um and that I believe is everything that has been edited since the last meeting. Um besides some minor um wording changes here and there. Um,
okay. Yes. So, this, um, item J has some more significant edits. Um, I don't know if you all want me to keep reading them out. Is that working for everyone?
>> I know that they're good. Um there um and if Vince is happy with the changes and he's he's all then I would just note just slow down towards the end and we'll note that there have been a few more minor changes most of them clerical and
then others um just uh some homework things so >> that were noted by Kristen is all I saw from this point on but >> yes >> um what page are you I can't see.
>> Uh I am on page seven. >> Okay. Yep. >> Um >> Woody, could I make a comment if it's appropriate? >> Yeah, I was just about to ask uh Larry and then you to uh if you had any questions. Um go ahead, Steve.
>> Okay. Um plan in the event of flooding. Um, I guess I would ask for the consideration of a date of when the plan will be submitted to whom. Maybe the fire department, the police department,
whatever. But it, as I read it right now, there's no deadline to produce a plan. And I'd ask the board and Vince to consider coming up with a agreeable date to get it down on paper. >> Um,
I can I can answer at least. Um right now we've we've actually started that we already have the uh we're trying we're building a list of as many people instead of just having one or two people just have a list of people in case you know some people are on vacation or whatnot. Um the language that was added
says that we need to have a plan um with the building inspector on file uh as a condition. So, it's my understanding that in order to close out this this planning board once everything is constructed and done, we will need to
have had um the plan with the the building inspector uh in his hands in order to to kind of close this out. So, that that is the plan to have it done then. >> Likely way before then, but it is a
requirement in order to kind of close things out. >> Sure. That sounds good. Okay. Anything else, Steve? >> Not on that section. When we get to it, I may have a couple of others. >> Okay.
Um, if you want to continue, uh, Satie, we have what, two more pages here. So, is there anything else substantial on there? And I don't know. >> Um, >> there's this added condition. Um, >> okay.
Except as specially modified herein, the terms and conditions of the April 28th, 21 2021 site plan decision recorded July 20th, 2021 at book 40098, page 538 are ratified and affirmed and shall remain in full force in effect.
Um, and then I believe the next page is just the signature page. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Then Woody, I do have a question. U >> Yes. when you ready. Um,
number one, I I find it a bit frustrating. I'm repeating something that some of the residents on Plum Island have said to me, but they're reluctant to send something in in written form. Um, they asked me to bring it up during the meeting and I don't know if it's
appropriate or not for me to bring up something that hasn't been formally submitted by a resident and I'm anxious to hear an opinion on whether I uh should bring up a verbally expressed concern or not.
Um, I did get your email on this earlier and uh I if they're not willing to identify themselves, um, I would rather not hear their comments, Steve. Um, if it's a comment from you, then that's fine. But, um, that's kind of how this
all works. If they're written submitted, we'd like to see their, you know, their name and we've always required in the past name and where they live. So, um, it's kind of a mood point, but if it was, like I said, if it was a comment
from you, it would be one thing, but an anonymous comments, I'm not going to entertain. >> Yeah. Well, let me try this. I'm not neither here nor there, but I'd rather just put out a concern I've heard and does resonate with me a little bit. Uh,
and it's really to give Vince a heads up rather than, you know, waiting two more weeks to bring it up. But um the uh pavilion itself, you know, it's going to be a source for people gathering, perhaps even a band. But in any event, do you have any plans to put speakers
say on the post out there in the pavilion? U Vince, and since that could have sound implications, that's the context in which I'm asking. And I don't you're hearing this for the
first time from me, but I don't know that you haven't or wouldn't be expected to have an answer right now, but I thought I'd let you know it's something that um I'll be thinking about pending any written comments from uh residents.
I should emphasize written comments do not seem to be forthcoming, which I find personally frustrating as well. >> Okay. Uh, Vince, do you have a response to that speakers? >> Uh, I I would have to talk to the to the
operators. I know there are speakers at the like where the sales are that just provide just general, you know, music like you would hear at any restaurant that that you're inside.
Um uh but um I I don't know whether they plan on extending that to the pavilion area or or not. Um but it is my understanding that that type of of you know music like that is something that
falls under the the the license that they have for the entertainment license and whether they can have that or not. I believe that's something they would have to address with that board if they if they wanted that. Yeah, that was that was my understanding
as well. That's that's more of an entertainment license issue issue. So, uh thank you for that comment. >> Uh anything else, Steve? >> No, thank you. What do you Thank you, Vince. >> And Larry, do you have any questions for Vince? >> No questions.
>> The uh the changes, they look okay to me. Um uh I am uh anxious to or uh I think it's important we get town council's review though before making any taking a final vote. >> Yep. I I agree with you there. Um all
right. Before I move on with anything else, I just want to make sure there's no public comment at this time. We don't have raised hands. Correct. >> I do not see any at the moment. No. >> Okay. Thank you. And um is Martha or Sadi you don't have any other comments
at this time correct? >> No. >> No. Um just that we can close the public hearing but that would still allow the
um planning board to discuss and make their final uh decision um within 25 days. But well, the the decision would have to be filed and everything within 25 days. Um, but that's that's an option
for the board if they want to, you know, try to move the process along. >> Yep. So, in 25 days, it it has to be followed with the clerk. And that being said, thank you, Satie. Um, with that being said, if uh I'd entertain a motion
to close a public hearing and that way we could still discuss the um if there are any changes made by council when council finally gets it back to us after their review. Um so if that's something
you would like to do, Larry or Steve, u I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearing. We'll move to close the public hearing. Woody. >> Okay. Do I have a second? >> Well, I'll I'll second that.
>> Well, I' I'd like to discuss that. Uh Woody, >> okay. >> Or we take the vote. >> To me, uh it just seems cleaner to keep it open. That gives Vince more time to respond to something that may come up March, excuse me, in April. And I don't
think it impedes our ability to have a final vote on April pending comments from town council. It my bias therefore is to keep it open rather than close the public hearing at this time. But I'd be interested in seeing if I've promoted
any reaction from you all under discussion of the motion. I I have no comment. Um well, actually, normally I I I would agree with that comment, but I I think we've we've had a pretty thorough vetting of of uh the issues on this
application. >> Yeah, I agree as well. >> Okay. um without any prejudice or something, I'll probably vote just under discussion still. I'll probably vote no, but I certainly understand and appreciate your
point of view, Woody and Larry. >> Okay, so motion and I I made a second if that is allowable. Roll call vote Larry
>> to close a public hearing. Um, Steve, >> no. >> And I vote yes to close a public hearing. Um, >> Martha, for clarification, we would need three votes to close a public hearing.
>> Um, that's a good question. >> Well, we'll determine if the public is closed or not. >> Um, my my research was that it's just a simple majority on the planning board unless it's a major zoning. Well, it is. I mean, it would be three out three out
of five since there only three members here tonight. Um, >> I'm not sure on that one either. So, >> well, in >> Yeah, in the interest of harmony, I'm willing to change my vote to yes.
>> Okay. >> If that'll help move the process along in a way that >> So, we have three yeses to close the public hearing. So, the public hearing's closed and just note that Satie and um we will put you on the agenda for
um Oh, no. I'd entertain a motion. Uh no, excuse me. I apologize. I miss I'm misspoken. Um we'll put you on the agenda for April 1st, Vince, and we will I'm sure we will have town council
review by then. And if there's any minor changes, we can discuss it as a board and we will move on from there. >> I appreciate that >> to go in like like Satie stated this 24 25 days from today for uh to be followed
with the clerk. So the process is started >> and uh thank you for your cooperation. >> All right. Have a good night. >> Just go right ahead. As a matter of procedure, you don't need a motion to
continue this to April 1st. >> We just the public hearing. >> Yeah, the hearing is closed. >> All right, I got you. >> Yep. So, no. Thanks, Larry, for that. But no, we just closed the public hearing, but we will have the vote on April 1st because we waiting on council
review. All right, that said and now um that's conclusion of our public hearings for this evening. Um as we stated earlier, we continuing 15 uh Central Street
uh with subdivision um to April 1st by request of the applicant. There's a one on here that didn't hear me state that earlier that say just reiterating again so everyone knows. Um
all right bear with me for one second. The next item for on the agenda is under new business. It's the modication request for subdivision approval for Cypress Hollow subdivision at 100
high assesses map R34 lot 21 uh lot 1A PE um no excuse me I'm reading and it's very small lot 1A property owners Neil
Swain applicants representative John Moore U the Bren Cameron Group Inc. to allow the new owner of lot 1A to use Cypress Hollow Road for driveway access to the
barn in to a new house. Um I recuse from this so I'm going to turn this over to Larry and Larry you can go from here. >> Thank you Woody. Uh do we have the applicant present or someone on behalf of the applicant? >> Yes. Good evening. For the record, John
Mren from the MREN Cameron Group. Uh, may I share my screen? >> Please. >> Yes, I will make you co-host. >> All right. You should be able to share now. I think you should all be able to see
the plan. >> Yes, we can see. >> Perfect. So, again, for the record, John Mourin from the Men Cameron Group. We're here tonight representing Neil Swain for a minor modification request for the subdivision known as Cypress Hollow. Uh,
some of you may recall back in the fall of 2025, you approved a subdivision plan for the redevelopment of 100 High Street. The property was subdivided into three lots. Uh, lots 1A included the
existing house in the barn, which you see here. The outline in red is the actual property limits of lot 1A that was created under that subdivision. Then we had lots two and three that were being serviced by the Cypress Road uh
subdivision roadway. At that time during the approval process, we had mentioned to the board that um the owner of the subdivision was willing to uh entertain access off of
Cypress Hollow for the barn. At that time, uh, one of the planning board members actually recommended that he include lot 1A in the homeowner trust, which was decided to be done. That was a good
idea. So, the owner at the time, Mr. Nevi, decided to include 1A uh, having the ability to uh, join the trust for the homeowner association in case they wanted to use Cypress Hollow.
So again, lot 1A was sold to Neil Swain. Mr. Swain would like to raise the existing dwelling, which is located uh on the bottom of your screen. It's kind of dashed in an orange. And he'd like to build a new dwelling
that will access off of Cypress Hollow. He also wants to make minor repairs and improvements to the barn and also access off of Cypress Hollow. You may remember as part of the subdivision approval, we had a swale running down the a grass
swale running down the shoulder of the road. We're actually pushing that grass swale out slightly in order to give us room to grade between the roadway and the proposed dwelling and grade to get the driveway in for the barn.
What we've done is we've designed a swale carries the same water that was coming across before. We've got the same 12-in size culvert under the driveway for the barn, which eventually goes to the culvert that was un approved under
the subdivision plan, which eventually makes its way to the sediment for bay and the drainage basin. The way the subdivision was graded, there's not a lot of additional water going to the drainage basin. You can see the swale right in the front. There's a
high spot right just um south north is straight up the page. So south of the swale we've got a high spot. So the majority of the runoff from lot 1A being redeveloped is still coming across lot two which is what was
happening on the original subdivision plan. So here is the original subdivision plan here that was approved by the planning board. All the runoff from lot 1A was coming along to develop lot two. We had to raise the location of
the proposed dwelling. What that did is it just pushes the runoff around the the side of the dwelling and then out back. And that's the way the drainage model was modeled. And under the proposed redevelopment, the majority of the runoff is still
going to lot two. The house is still designed the exact same way. So the runoff goes around the structure. It does not drain uh to the house. You know, again, as I pointed out with the subdivision plan, the actual house location is raised up. This is lowered
so the water actually runs around the the structure. It doesn't run to it. That culvert that I mentioned to you that we flow to is right in this location. proposed drainage pipe over to a sediment for bay and then to an
infiltration basin here. Uh the raising of the existing dwelling and the removal of the pavement out front. All this pavement will be removed. The area will be lomemed and seated. With regards to sanitary systems, we are
proposing to tie into the existing septic tank. We are requiring that the existing septic tank be inspected to make sure it's in still uh good working order. You may recall during the subdivision approval, the existing leeching facility on W lot 1A was
inspected a little over a year ago, I believe, and it passed to title 5. So, and nobody has actually lived in this house since then. So, the leeching facility is still in good shape. We anticipate that the septic tank will also be in good shape, but we did put a note on the plan that it should be
reinspected and if it needs to be replaced, it'll be replaced with a 1500gallon tank. Uh utilities to the proposed dwelling are all going to come from the existing utilities going to the existing house. So, we'll be intercepting the existing
water line and gas line, bringing it over to the house. the overhead electric that currently comes off this pole will be doing underground services from that pole for data and um electric over to the proposed dwelling.
Um again, we'll be paving a slight driveway out here to get from Cypress Hollow to the proposed dwelling. And we'll be putting a driveway in for the barn as well. And again, we're proposing a culvert underneath the driveway for
the barn that will carry runoff from the swale to the location that gets it over to the drainage basin. Uh the redesign of lot one results in approximately 600 square ft more of imperous coverage. Uh so in the grand
scheme of things with the size of this project, um that will not have any impact on the drainage system or the abuing property. uh your consultant did have a chance to review the drainage, I mean the design
plan. He had a couple comments. I'll just run through those. >> Can I interrupt you for a sec? >> Can I interrupt you for a second here? I um this is all useful information, but I do want to point out we only have two
members present who are eligible to vote on this. So, we're not going to be able to take a vote tonight. Um uh and I just wanted to point that out. Uh the um um the real question here for the board
is whether or not this is a a minor or major modification. And just for members of the public who who might be listening in, a major modification would require a much more formal hearing uh notice to a butters newspaper uh advertising etc.
um where a minor modification can be done at a relatively informally at at a meeting such as this. Um to me the issue between major and minor modification comes down to whether or not there's any
substantial um uh uh uh impact of any of these changes on the drainage. And that's something that we we will need a quorum of the board uh present to take a vote on. So again, this is all useful information. I
speaking for myself, uh I like what the applicant is trying to do here. Uh but I don't think we have the information um we need right now in in any event to make a determination uh uh versus major
or or minor modification. And um uh I I am very interested in your response to Joe SEA's uh letter and um uh I'll I'll just um leave it at that for now, but with the understanding that this is
going to have to be continued to a further date. Um and I'm going to ask Steve Manion if if uh Steve, is there anything you want to add to this? No, except to concur about how we will undoubtedly have to uh continue this so
we can have a three people that can vote and make a quorum. Yeah. So, John, if you want to get into your response to uh to Joe Setka's uh letter of of March 13th, now that's fine. I'll give you the time to do it.
My suggestion, however, would be that you respond in writing before the next uh uh uh meeting date. Uh and I don't know when we're going to get you on. Um but my suggestion would be that you respond to writing and then let him give him an opportunity to review it and get
back to us with any further comments that he might have. >> All right. I appreciate that. Um, I was under the understanding that we wouldn't take a vote anyway because I knew you had three members on the board tonight and I knew one of them had to he recused himself at the beginning of this
hearing. I appreciate you giving me time to present uh what we submitted. Um, what I'll do is I'll rough I'll go quickly over the comments from Joe and then I'll give it back to you guys and if you can provide me with any input on
your feelings on this uh that would be great and already based on your comments I will work on a response um to Joe's comment written response prior to the next hearing. But you know just I'll just cover Joe's comments quickly. The
first comment was about um mass DOT work in the rightway associated with the um redevelopment of this lot. Would it be part of the subdivision? The answer to that is no. Uh none of the work associated with lot
1A has anything to do with the roadway work for mass DOT. So, we don't want to get those two permits um intertwined together. The utility companies have to deal with DOT on their own anyway. So, uh, Mr. Swain will have to deal with
DOT with regards to the removal of the pavement and the lman seating, which I'm anticipating that DOT is not going to require a major permit application for the removal of pavement. Uh, Joe had brought up a comment and
he's 100% correct. When we did the topography for the subdivision, we weren't doing anything on the back of this property. So, we didn't need to get topography all down here where the existing leeching facility is. So, we
didn't need to uh we don't have any existing grades down in here. What we did do is we looked at available uh LAR elevations that's available on Mass GIS to verify that we do have the ability to regrade this without grading over the
leech bed. We do show grades coming across the back because the way this house is designed, it's a garage attached with a walkout basement on the back side. So, we were just showing that the grades are coming down the back side of the basement or the back side of the
foundation. all these grades will tail off and they won't be filling over the leech field. The board of health is going to be looking for a plan showing that information as well and I believe Joe pointed that out, but I didn't think
it was necessary for this application. And then his last point was with regards to drainage. We don't feel that the additional drainage going to the pond is going to have any impact. Um, based on the fact that the board's looking for a
written response, we'll probably do some additional drainage calculations that we can submit uh that Joe can review and then that the board can review as well. Um, at this point in time, I just asked if the two members uh that are available if they have any additional comments
that they'd like to add, that'd be great. And then I'd request to continue to your next hearing. >> No, that that's fine. um John and uh I think a written response including some additional drainage calculations would
be very helpful. Um I don't think uh uh we this is not a public hearing so I don't believe we need a motion to continue to a date specific. I just suggest that that you you know get that paperwork in, let Joe take a look at it
and then work with staff to see what's the the best available next date for you to come before the board. Uh Steve, anything you might want to add? >> No, that sounds like a good plan, Larry. >> Okay, thank you. So, um uh John, thank
you for the presentation. the information has all been very helpful and uh uh again as I said earlier uh I I my I mean I'm favorably inclined towards this but we just have to satisfy ourselves that this is a minor rather
than a major modification >> right do you happen to have the next couple planning board dates >> yes so the next date is April 1st and the one after that is the 15th So, and
the due date for any new materials is always the week before. So, for the April 1st meeting, it'll be next Wednesday, March 25th at noon. >> Great. I appreciate that. >> Yeah. Oh, and I see Neil, you have a
hand raised. >> Yeah. I I just wanted to uh I guess in addition to the the written response and looking at some drainage calcs, I want to make sure we're doing everything we can to be proactive about this. Is there any other information that we should try and prepare between now and then?
>> Um >> um speaking just for myself, I I think it's really just some input from our peer peer reviewer that we're looking for. At least that's what I'm looking for anyway. I can't speak for the other members of the board, but I mean I I I know I'm repeating myself.
I I appreciate what you're doing. I like what you're doing. Um uh I don't I don't want to um say that I've made a decision on minor versus major because we really do need that information at least in the file, preferably in writing, but uh
we'll try to move you along as as fast as we can. I'm sure you're anxious to get going. >> I just just want to make sure I'm uh playing by the right set of rules. So we'll make sure that we uh work it out with Joe and end up with something definitive. >> I I think that's
>> Go ahead, Sandy. If Joe uh lets us know that you will need more information, I'll uh forward that on to you guys whenever feedback. >> Thank you very much. >> Appreciate that. >> Yeah. So, work with staff on the next
next hearing date and we'll see you soon. I hope >> we'll do. Have a good night. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, Woody, I'll hand it back to you. >> Okay. Thank Thank you, Larry. Okay. And unfortunately, we have a couple playing
road members that just couldn't make it to our meeting tonight. So, um, we we'll entertain any anything with 100 high on a future agenda most likely have a So, on to the next
item of business. Um, that's all for new business. Sold business is a request for extension of subdivision approval and common driveway special permit Colin Tony Cross and five lot subdivision 108 Main Street. Applicant John Colin Tony
Triple Q Inc. Um is do we have John with us this evening? >> Good evening. John Colin Tony for the record. Yes, I am here. Thank you. Um >> okay, go right ahead. Okay. Um, just
want to thank the board for having us again. Um, we did the uh the site um our second uh uh site meeting of or site
walk um you know pre-construction meeting. Sort of our second pre-construction meeting. I think it went uh you know pretty well. Um and um we did the schedule uh as you requested as well. Uh not sure if there's any
questions on that. Peer review uh looked at the schedule. I just got a copy of the letter uh today. Um I agree with what he says. It is an aggressive uh schedule and that's what we're trying to, you know, do. We want to get through
this. It's been way too long. We agree with the board on that and um and his points about national grid in regard to the electric and the gas are very good points as well. Um I do have a good relationship with the gas side of things
um because we've done that at 51 West Main Street and we've done that um in Georgetown 51 West Main Street and we had a subdivision in Damis recently as well and most recently uh Washington Street project in Ipsswitch. So, the gas
department, for lack of better terms, the National Grid knows about this already. Um, and has given us, uh, the, you know, the paperwork to start. National Grid Electric knew about this a long time ago. Um, and, you know, we're reconvening with them. But I would agree
with peerreview that, you know, those are usually the things that can delay you a little bit because it takes a little bit longer. But I think we got a a good handle and as I mentioned the gas a better handle than the electric but u I think we'll be you know we'll be fine.
Um I I asked for three-year extension only because uh didn't want to have to bottom the board to come back or whatever. And what I mean by that is um you know when we talk
three years, we're we're talking about all the lots done, the house is done, the house is sold, uh you know, the whole the whole shebang. Um so I I don't want anyone to think that it's three years to to put in the street, etc.,
etc. That's that's not the case. Um so our formal request was March 30th, 2029 uh to make it three years from when you did the temporary extension at the last meeting that were uh with you. Um so
that's how we came up with that that time frame. Uh so I if there's any questions um be glad to answer. >> Okay. Thank you, John. Um I'll turn to Larry. Larry, do you have any questions
for John? >> Where if if either for John or uh Sadi, where are we with the form D covenant? Does that a sign and up to date? >> Um I don't know if I have received it
yet. Um, if you do you have it, John, or do you do you have you sent it to Kristen? Maybe >> what you're talking about. Just so I I'm not confused and I understand it's what
we had to do last time that which took the attorney forever and we filed it just before the last meeting which was crazy. You're talking about that type of form, correct? >> It's the security. >> Yeah. Can can I jump in here? >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Yeah. So, I mean, my understanding, John, is that you you did file um the the former form D, which is your form of performance guarantee for the project, but it had the old had an old
date, which has now expired. So, there would be need there would need to be a new form D that would be um filled out, >> right? We agree. We agree with you, but we're under the impression that we'd have to
wait for tonight to see what date it gets extended to to be able to do that form D properly. Unless we misunderstand that, I I apologize, but that's that's what we thought, >> right? No, no, I think I think that's correct. So, but it seems like we're
kind of talking about two dates because the form D is is really to secure the construction of the roadway and installation of the municipal services. So, you know, that would be some some date before the 3 years that you're talking about. You know, whether that would be based on your schedule, say a
year from now, so maybe, you know, March 30th, 2027 for the form form D. So, it's it's kind of two two extensions. It seems that you're looking at one one related to the form D which is really specifically for the roadway.
>> Well, that's that's why we did the three years just to make it simple so we wouldn't have to be coming back for anything at all to bother the board. Um >> but I think the form the form D basically um you know covers both
the ability to build on the lots and also to sell the sell the lots >> right well it's no different than the form D that we did originally even though it took so long to to file uh you know it was one and I may say this wrong
not legally but it was one form D the whole shebang, you know what I mean? So that's what we thought this would be as well. >> So you would be coming back within that three period three-year period at certain points to get lots released
presumably so that you could actually build on them and sell them >> for sure. But but the first step of this would be to get a road in there with a tripartate agreement because as we all know without that we don't have
anything. We wouldn't have any lots to be able to sell, >> right? Well, so I mean so it's your your choice as the as the developer on the the form of performance guarantee. So I I think the original assumption that it was the the form D, but you've just
mentioned a tripartite agreement. So is that something that you're considering? >> Well, we've used the tripartite in our other projects and it works very well and it's uh it's nice and smooth with the banks and stuff. Um so that's that's what I think we would
do as we move forward. And uh I've always used through this whole project that we were going to do a a tripate. Um the the the form D to me is making sure that it's recorded on our
performance with the planning board in regard to the date. So at some point you would you would propose to basically ask the board to release the lots and then replace it with a tripartite agreement for the value of any work remaining on the
roadway. >> What we usually do is once the roadway is done when I say done to to the point that it's drivable you can get to all the lots etc. We we would set up a tripate with the
planning board approving it and we would have um dollar amounts per what is left to be done to finalize the the
project at the very end. >> Right. Right. Right. So you would you would submit a schedule of values. >> Correct. Thank you. >> Right. And at that point that would that would essentially replace the the form form D. You would ask for that to be released and it would be replaced by the
tripartite agreement, right? Because we can't, you know, this is my understanding from my my past experience. We can't have a lot to build a house on and unless the town is protected that uh you
know John Colton Tony goes south and is never seen again and and now there's no money secured for the town to be able to finish the road for these you know one or two lots that are there. Right. So, so the town needs to be
protected. And then usually uh as things progress, we may come in to the planning board and say, let's say this trip started at 600,000. I'm just making that up. We may come in and say, okay, this this and this, as you can
see, is done. It's been inspected. We'd like to bring the tripate agreement down to 300,000 because, you know, these categories have been completed. uh that you know cost 300,000 >> right so you'd be asking for partial
release as it goes along really >> right yeah >> right so I think the question is but your your your intention is to start with the form D and then that gets converted to the tripartite agreement at some point when you want to be able to sell the lots get building permits and stuff like that
>> correct because it's in in our past experience and our view it's impossible to do a tripate now because there's you know, there's nothing there's nothing there. >> Well, you you could I mean, we have had developers start out with a tripartite agreement and they, you know, they come
in with an estimate of all the work that needs to be done. That's reviewed by Joe. Everybody's agree in agreement on that. So, that's a 100% of the work and then you would come in and that would be signed by the bank and the board and and you and um and then you would come in
for partial releases as the work goes on. But again, the form of performance guarantee is is your choice as the developer. >> Yeah. >> Well, as you described it very better than I did, you know, the the form D and then we would be going to the to the
tripartate if that's okay with the board. That was that was the plan, >> right? And that's that's frequently the way it's done. So then the question goes back to your original request is setting you know setting setting an appropriate date for that tripartite
agreement and if it's if you're planning to convert or I'm sorry for the form D if you're planning to convert it to a tripartite agreement at some point you know it probably may not make sense to to have the end date on the on the form
D be that three years. I don't you know I'm I'm not sure. I'm just kind of >> I'll I'll I'll tell you I'm not comfortable with three years. Um I mean th this this uh approval is is five years old and frankly the the site's a mess and people have been looking at
that for five years. Um my thinking right now is I would be okay with a one-year extension and if you need more time to sell the lots you can come back but um I want to see that road done and not in three years. It's you got to put it in the
front burner. >> Well, it is is in it. It is in the front burner. I don't want I think it is. I mean, look at our um the schedule that we gave you. It's pretty it's pretty aggressive. >> Um you know, but I explained to you why we're doing the three years. But if if
you want to cut that down and be realistic, you know, we should really go with two years based on what you've explained to me on the form D and then the tripate. Um, and as your peer review brought up, you just never know what you run into
with National Grid. Um, as I've already explained, I think we have a very good handle on the gas. It's the electric that makes me a little bit nervous. Uh, but I I you know, they've been notified a long time ago, so I think we'll be okay, but I I don't want to run into a
problem. Um, you know, weather can always play a role. I think we're going to be fine because we're going into the spring and we got all summer and we got the fall. So, and our schedule is pretty aggressive. Um
>> well that's why I suggested given those factors that's why I suggested one year for completion of the infrastructure. I mean it's well I I would request formally of the board if if you're not going to look at
the three years to be two years um because I I I don't want to run into problems. The board is very fair, don't get me wrong, but I don't want to want to run into problems if we're having trouble with one of the utilities or something and we need more time and then
we have to come back take, you know, to try to extend past the year. And um so I I would, you know, we we've come in with three years. I explain why. If you don't want to do the three years, you know, I would formally request two years then.
>> Um I I would agree with what Larry said. Uh it would be we've seen your timeline. It's been the site's been torn up five years. I I feel that if we did a form D like you your
attentions are we gave you a date for uh March 31st 1st 27. You can revisit it. Then the road should be done. The utilities should be done. the form D should be satisfied and you could
revisit and get an extension from there for another year and maybe more. We're missing a few board members tonight as well, but um a year a year and a half. I I very reluctant to give three years just off the bat with a three-year end
date. It would be great to revisit this in a year and uh convert it to a tripod at that time along with an extension for another year to go about the rest of the subdivision. That way the infrastructure
would be it. >> Well, obviously if the board is only giving us a year, we're going to take it. But I just want to have the board I I hope the board realizes that this subdivision isn't going to be done in a year. Like
there's no way we're going to have five 1acre lots built and everything else. So I just want to be upfront with with the board. So if you're looking if you're looking in the year for the road to to be done, for lack of better terms, um
you know that obviously that's very possible. You can see that with our schedule, but I'd be lying to you if I didn't say we're going to be coming back to you, you know, before the year is up to get an extension because there's no way that we're going to have the five houses built.
>> No. And that's fine. And that's understandable. I think the other two members that are present here today understand that. Um, and with we've paid attention to your we asked for it and we paid attention to your timeline and
schedule for what the work that needs to be done. So, also being stated by you that we're going to go into a tripod agreement. So, it would be the time to do that as well. and we we'll just simply grab an extension for another year at at
ex at the end of next March if that's fine with you. >> Yes. >> No, I I mean that that's good and I appreciate that and I'm hoping that we come back to you before the year is up for the tripe. Um, so
>> even better and then we could even entertain a discussion then to extend it for a year at that point beyond the March 31st of next year. But with the way things have gone, it's it's kind of a way to ensure that this is on the
front your front burner and u that things are satisfied here with a form D. So if that makes sense to the rest of the board and I see your hand, Steve, so go ahead. Yeah, I agree with uh what Larry and you
have said uh Woody. Uh I can't support anything greater than a year. I think when to keep it on the front burner means you need to turn on the heat and given that this has been around for 5 years and apparently there are issues with you know what the site looks like.
I think it's time to um say turn on the gas as well as getting it done. So, I am will not support anything greater than a one-year plan. >> And um I guess it would also be one
thing too if the five years has gone by here and the site was undisturbed, but the site's been disturbed for the five years and or how however long it's been. It's been a long time. So, um that being said, um
I would um entertain a motion to I just got to get the verbiage correct here. I would entertain a um a motion to approve the request for an extension to
March 30th, 2027 for subdivision approval and common driveway special permit for Colin Tony Crossson, the five lot subdivision at 108 Main
and to authorize uh staff to work with applicant and town council to complete all necessary legal and administrative steps. >> And so >> oh was that we finished what? Sorry.
>> Yes. Yeah. Basically the last thing I stated in that motion was the form D. So and I second. Okay. Uh roll call vote. Larry. >> Yes. Um, Steve, >> yes.
>> And I vote yes as well. John, um, good luck with everything and, um, we'll look forward to seeing you in a year. And, um, if you have any questions or anything to do, uh, just contact Kristen
or Sadi and we'll get any answers you need for the form D and get everything roll. >> So, >> thank you very much. I appre appreciate the uh the board's time and uh want to really thank the planning department uh with their help on uh going through the process.
>> Okay. And Martha, did you >> Yeah, just to confirm, so the date on the form D um will be the March u March 30th, 2027. And then that will need to um include a
description of the mortgages and um be fully executed and filed with the registry and then a form needs to be a copy that needs to be provided to the board. >> Yeah. Ma Mar Martha, will you will will
you guys email over to me like you did last time and then we take it from there so we have your language? >> Um, yeah, we can we can work Yeah, we can work with that. I think it'll probably be about the same same as it was before, but sort Sadi and I will
coordinate on that. >> All right. Thank you so much. Thank you everyone. >> All right. Thank you, John, and good luck with everything. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Have a good night. Okay, that ends old business. Um I
believe that's it except for uh liaison meeting reports. Uh we'll start with ZBA, Larry. >> Yeah, ZBA is is meeting tomorrow night for their regular monthly meeting. They have one public hearing uh on the
agenda. It's for 15 Sunset Drive to um uh take down the existing dwelling and build a new one in its place. And that's all I have for you. >> All right. Thank you. Um conservation, we have not met since our last meeting
and we meet on um I believe it's the second t uh no it'll be the first Tuesday in April but it'll be after our next um planning board meeting. So I'll have more uh in more on conservation in two
meetings. So, uh, we we switched to once a month for the winner here. So, um, I believe that it will be our next meeting will be April 6th. It's the first Tuesday of April. Uh, MVPC, do you have anything to report, Satie, or is that
kind of in Kristen's wheelhouse? Um, it is Chris Kristen is the commissioner, but uh there has not been a an MVPC planners meeting since our last meeting. Um, >> okay.
>> Thank you. And I will roll that right into if Martha or Satie has anything for our plans report this evening. >> Any updates or anything? >> I have a couple short things, but Martha, do you have anything? I have
just a couple short things um as well. So, draw stars. Who goes first? >> Yeah, >> I can I can go first just to get my >> Oh, what? >> Rock, paper, scissors. >> I'll get my my rambly report out of the
way first here. Um >> Okay, great. >> So, the um myself and a member of the select board attended the second of three Wastist Watchers workshops. Um
and the planning department um is working with the health agent in Newbury to try to find a person to fill a recycling coordinator position um which would be funded solely through the recycling dividends program. Um
so the next workshop um from ACES is uh in midappril so I will have more to report after that as well. Um, another item that happened recently was the Plum Island Turnpike uh Public
meeting. Um there will soon be a report available to the public on the um feasibility study that was conducted by Tai and Bond in partnership with Newberry and um Newberry Port and uh MPPPC
and um so yeah that was a good meeting a goodformational meeting. Um and then my final item to report is that next um week there is a
meeting with the MO board um with MVPC to discuss um federal funding awards for um transportation projects. And we did apply for the Boston Road um Route 1 intersection um to receive funding. So,
um, we're hoping that that will turn out in our favor. And, uh, that is all I have to report for now. >> I hope that's favorable as well. >> Yes. >> I have a personal interest. >> Uh, Steve, did you have a question?
>> Yeah, just a comment in that I urge my fellow members to pay careful attention to what was in the feasibility study report out that Tyen Bond did. Uh unfortunately there wasn't room for questions and answers during the
presentation that they made and I know I have a lot but so much of the project uh I could say 90% but it might be 85% of it is all on land within Newbury and I think Newbury residents including the
planning board needs to pay careful attention to what Tyen Bond is doing. The emphasis on the project as I see it uh and again this is an FYI seems to focus largely on improving
bicycle access to the resident to the residential island known as Plum Island. There's not very much emphasis on getting access to the federal wildlife refuge which is the whole purpose of the grant. So >> um >> with that in mind you might take a look
at it. >> Yes. Um yeah, the the grant is for access for all modes of transportation to the federal lands. Um and it's not
it's not um determined if it's only phase one of a three-phase process. So we're not 100% you know we don't know if we'll be pursuing the subsequent phases but this is >> the end of the phase one
>> and again the meeting was recorded so it's would soon be available for everyone to look at it only lasted about an hour but what I found particularly telling was the introductory remarks made by the new report planning director where he basically said yeah we want to
b I'll paraphrase to say yeah we want get this through so that we improved bicycle access to Plum Island. And that was his statement. And to me, that says something about what Newbury report's goal is for a project that is largely in
Newbury. And I think we ought to be sensitive to it as a uh an outfit concerned about, you know, planning within the town. Um I mean a simple one is that the uh another simple one to look at is how ty and bonds the
consultant seem to be favoring uh a preferred option of having a roundabout at the crossroads with sunset old point and the plum island turnpike and that's a pretty substantial change in u the way things work. So anyway take
a look at it is my recommendation. >> Yes the >> go ahead. I was going to say and thank you Steve for announcing that it's recorded because you that's a question I had. So >> yes, the recording will soon be
available on the project page on the planning section of the town website as well as the finished report. Um hopefully by midappril the report will be available for the public. >> Right. Um, and one other comment, uh, is
that you may want to pay careful attention to how in several instances there were crosswalks proposed on the Plum Island turnpike, and that should be interesting, unless we lower the speed limit on the turnpike down to 25 miles an hour from its
current 40. So, there's a lot of uh, nuggets to look at. >> Thank you, Steve. And um say you have sad math, you had some updates. >> Yeah. Um basically an update on on the
warrant. So I I've put all the um all the proposed zoning amendments into the warrant for town meeting and that will be reviewed by the the FINCOM and the select board next Tuesday, the 24th at their at their meeting. So I will plan
to be there if there are any questions that come up. Um I don't know if anybody else is planning to be but in in the process of doing that I did did catch a few a few blanks um that uh need to be filled in. Most of them
were one of them was section reference but there was one we had a blank for dollar value for 3-in caliber trees to replace trees that are removed for a solar project. So, in looking at the um
range of what an installed 3-in caliper tree is, um I'm suggesting a thousand $1,000 to put in for that. So, um hoping that that sounds okay with everybody
and uh other than that, Cton Town Council's reviewing the warrant and um and I think under the current schedule um the select board is still scheduled to approve and sign it on April 14th. >> Martha, can you check in with a tree
warden and see if uh $1,000 for whatever seems at least reasonable. >> I I can I did did some research on it, but yes, I can do that. >> Yeah. And uh that was also a recommendation I found council, right?
>> Yes. That Yeah, that we need to have a number in there. >> Yep. Okay. Very good. Anything else, Martha or Si? >> No. >> No. Larry, you you good? Good.
>> All right. I'd entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second that motion. >> Thank you. Thank you, Steve. Thank you, Larry. Uh Larry, Steve, and myself. I vote yes. >> Yes.
>> And I wish our other planning board members that were unable to make it with us this evening well. And um hope to see them