October 15, 2025. As a preliminary matter, this is Woody Knight, chair of the new planning board. Permit to permit me to confir uh confirm that all members in person anticipated on the agenda are present can hear me. Planning board members, when I call your name, respond in the affirmative. Peter
Pos, >> yes, sir. Larry Murphy, >> Scott Ker, but he'll be joining us soon, I'm sure. And uh Steve Andrew. >> Yes. >> Yes. Very good. And uh town staff, when
I call your name, Kristen Grubs. >> Yes. Hello. >> Um we don't have Satie with us tonight. >> Um I think she's joining shortly. >> Okay. Satie Wood will be joining us shortly. Um good evening. October 15, 2025 open
meeting of the new replanning board is being conducted remotely consistent 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 GLC
3A 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 83271413056 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 by video and or telephone conference. The meeting is also being broadcast live through local access
cable channel 9 and on Zoom and at https semicoltv.wicksite.comtnctv and the recording will be available on the new access YouTube channel. Meeting business ground rules. Before we turn the first item on the agenda,
permit me to cover some ground rules for effective and clear conduct of our business and to ensure that accurate meeting there's accurate meeting minutes. As chair, I'll introduce each speaker on the agenda. After speakers conclude their remarks, I'll go down the list of
board members, inviting each one by name to provide any comments, questions, or motions for all attendees except board members and staff. Please remember to mute your audio when you're not speaking. On Zoom, the mute but there's a mute button. And
on the phone, use star six to toggle to mute and star six to unmute. There will also be an opportunity for public comment and questions during the public hearing. After board members have spoken, I will afford the public an opportunity to comment and or ask
questions. I will seek questions and comments through the Zoom 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 a 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 9 to on your uh phone telephone keypad.
I will allow questions and comments from members of the public who have raised their hands in the order in which they have listed which is determined by the order in which people click on the raised hand function. Each participant will be called on to provide his or her name and
address and then may ask questions or make a comment. Please do your best to keep your comments at 3 minutes or less. Your hand will be lowered when you have been given the floor for your questions or comments.
I will afford the applicant and or his or her representative the opportunity to reply. I will then continue down the list of those in the raised hand column and again afford the applicant or representative an opportunity to speak. Should there be a
written submitt of questions of concerns there 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. Finally, each vote taken in this meeting will be conducted by roll call vote.
Okay. First thing on the agenda tonight, our planners report. Kristen, the floor is yours. >> Hi. Um, let's see. I have to get used to doing this first. Um we've been doing a lot of work on the
projects. Those are going well. Um there are a number of umformational uh webinars and other um notices about upcoming grants. Um, one of the ones I
wanted to mention was that the town of Newbury, um, some of you may know there's a program called Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness MVP program, which is, um, run by the state, started a number of years ago. And the first
round of planning for the MVP program, um, Newbury was one of the early towns to do MVP, the initial MVP planning. Um I think we did that project in um 2018.
So now the state has rolled out what they're calling MVP 2.0 and Newbury is actually um being requested to do that uh municipal vulnerability planning project this starting this winter. Um so
there's aformational webinar for the towns that um essentially the towns that did MVP one long the longest to go are now in the first round of towns who are being asked to do MVP 2.0. There are towns who um
completed MVP 2.0 last year. Um Newbury Port is in the middle of MVP 2.0. So we'll have some towns to learn from. Um but it is a sort of five-year planning project looking at climate resiliency
and other um municipal vulnerabilities to climate impacts and weather impacts. So it's similar to the hazard mitigation planning but um but a different uh sort of more outreach and engagement focused planning project. So, I just wanted to
flag that because it it wasn't really on my radar until recently that Newbury is um being asked to complete that later this fiscal year. So, I'll just keep you posted on that. Um and then I just wanted to ask Satie um attended
was able to attend a a planning work a training workshop today and I didn't know if you wanted to share a little about that. Um so yeah, I attended um the mass um
street design leadership training um and uh I think it's it's hosted by um KDson and Associates um and in partnership with MVPC and um I have a personal
interest in transportation planning um that I don't I don't know too much about it. So it was a really good workshop. Um a lot of people like myself new to the field. Um which was great to connect. Um and so a lot of the things we talked about were um
trying to balance um all the needs of different users that use our streets. and it it seemed to be a bit of like an urban focus, but um I think that they will dive into more of the rural uh the issues that rural towns face with their
um with their streets. So um it's a three session um training. Uh so today was the first session. Um and yeah, we talked about how land use affects the use of streets. Um and uh yeah, it was really really
cool workshop. So yeah. >> Awesome. Thank you. And I think um I know there's another member of the town staff who was hoping to attend um from the public works department. So, I don't
know if if you was able to attend today, but it it's certainly a partnership between planning and public works, thinking about how how streets that need to be maintained and kept up, but and safe and all the things that public works um you know regularly does for
community, but also thinking about ways that um they can be safe for, as Satie said, all users. So, something I'm still learning a lot about, too. So, That's our planners report. Thanks, Woody.
>> Okay, that's all you got. Thank you. Sounds interesting. And welcome, Satie. And uh, welcome, Scott. >> Okay, next item on the agenda. Um we have an appearance submission from
um 55 hour PS and drive submission for of forme and plan for approved not required new assesses map R20-0-75 owner Cricut Lane LLC applicant Walter
Ericson manager conveyance of backland which is the open space Um, welcome Walter Ericson. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Um, would you like to explain the purpose of the ANR plan and uh why it's
being submitted? >> Sure. >> So, we're developing that 40B project off of Pearson Drive. It's a um cluster subdivision of 24 single family homes. There's a portion of the the entire site
was approximately 16 1/2 acres and the back parcel was about 4 and a half acres that we wanted to save as open space and fish and game department uh has agreed to accept the land and combine it with the
Martin Burns wildlife area. So this form a plan will just lop off that back 4 and 1/2 acres and then we'll submit it to fishing game for the review and acceptance uh to combine it with the existing open
space that's there. >> Okay, thank you. Um does anyone from the planning board have any questions? Pete, Larry, Scott, or uh Steve? I have none.
>> No questions. Okay. Um I don't have any questions either. Kristen, do you have anything to add to this or No. >> Um no. I'm happy to share it if you'd like to. I offered to do that for Walter. But as you said, it's pretty
straightforward. It's the um back parcel behind a number of the homes on Pearson Drive. and um Dat and I have reviewed the plan and there have been several iterations of edits um and it's exciting to add to the um you know conservation
area for Martin Burns um so I think it's a pretty straightforward request. >> Okay, very good and it's good to go. So, I'd entertain a motion to endorse the ANR plan entitled the
village at Cricut Lane of Land Surveyed by Ranger Engineering Group Incorporated for Cricut Lane LLC. >> I move. >> Thank you, Scott. Do I have a second?
I can second. Thank you, Larry. >> Roll call vote. Peter, >> yes, sir. >> Larry, >> yes. >> Um, Steve, >> I. >> Scott, >> yes. >> And I vote yes as well. All right. Thank
you, Mr. Ericson. >> Thank you very much. >> Good to go. >> That brings us to uh 7:13. Has everyone going to jump ahead here for a quick sec? Has everyone had the uh opportunity to review the planning board
meeting minutes for October 1st, 2025? >> Uh I have >> seeing some nods. Yes, Larry. Thank you, Scott. Thank you. No. Are there any revisions or comments on the mean minutes?
Hearing none, I'd entertain a motion to accept the meeting minutes for October 1st, 2025. >> So move. So move. >> Thank you, Pete. And second, Larry. Thank you. Uh roll call vote. Peter,
>> yes. >> Larry, >> yes. Scott, >> yes. >> And Steve, >> yes. >> And I vote yes as well. So that gets our meeting minutes approved. >> Thank you very much.
And now uh we're on the verge of 7:15 here. It's 7:15. We have a public hearing. It's a continuence for 100 High Road Div uh definitive subdivision application for a two lot subdivision at 100 High
Road assesses map R34, lot 21. Property owner 100 High Road LLC. Applicant representative is Thomas Ney. And um on that note, I'm recused and I will turn that over to Pete. >> Thanks, Woody. Um welcome Tom and uh
good to see you here again this evening. Uh Tom, is there anything additional that you would like to present to the board this evening? >> No, not at all. >> Okay, thanks. Um Kristen, do we have any board about
>> um Pete, you blipped out for a minute there, but um were you asking me if I had anything to add? >> Yes. Yes, Adam. And I apologize for my glitches. >> That's okay. I just want to make sure I knew the question. Um uh so the board,
you know, reviewed the final draft at the last meeting. Um I also pursuant to that um discussion met with town council. She reviewed the decision in addition to the other um legal documents related to the subdivision approval and
um everything has been approved. She had a couple minor edits. Um really nothing substantive at all, but uh Tom and I had some back and forth to just clean everything up and finalize. Um and we um
have shared agreement that the decision is in a good form to be approved tonight. Happy to answer any questions. >> Great. Thanks, Kristen. Uh are there do the board members have any questions? Uh Larry, do you have any questions?
>> Uh not on the I have a a comment on uh the uh uh homeowners trust, but uh I have no question about the decision. No. Okay. Thanks. Uh, do you have do you want to articulate your comment on the trust? >> I'm I'm working with just a couple of
typos unless they've been corrected since, but this is the declaration of trust, the Cypress Hollow Homeowners Trust. If you go to page four under termination and amendments, the third paragraph, um, there in two places, it uses the
term capital L Y1. I assume that was meant uh to read lot 1A. So someone again I'm I'm working off a marked up copy here so maybe it's it's been corrected. >> And in the notary attestation there was
also the the year with those typo on the year it says 2-25 instead of 2025 but otherwise that's all I had. >> Great. Thank you Larry. Um uh Steve, do you have any questions? >> No, I'm good. Thank you. Uh Scott, are
you uh do you have any questions? >> No questions. >> Okay. Uh that being the case, um I would entertain uh a motion to approve the definitive uh subdivision for 100 High Road. >> So move.
>> Uh thank you, Scott. And thank you, Steve, for a second. Uh roll call vote. Larry, >> yes. >> Thank you, Steve. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Scott. >> Yes. >> Thank you. and I vote yes as well. Uh you're all set uh Tom. Uh thanks very
much. And I'm going to turn this back over to Woody. >> Thank you. >> Okay. And thank you Tom for your participation and through the process and uh good luck with your project. >> Well, thank you Woody. If I just to could make a comment, it's been a wonderful experience. It's been
extremely um detailed and I I commend Kristen and your your board is lucky to have her. She's very um conscientious and thorough and it's been a pleasure to work with her. Um so I I appreciate all
of her efforts and I appreciate the attention the board has given this and enjoy the rest of your night. >> All right. Thank you, Todd. Have a good night. Okay, that brings us to our next public hearing. Uh it's a continuence for 34
central street level two site plan review application for Newbury Heights a 44 unit multif family development in the Newbury zoning bylaw section 97-4g MBTA communities multifamily overlay
district at 34 central street assesses map R19-0-9 on a Melody and Robert applicant Massachusetts housing opportunity Corporation LLC. I'd like to welcome um applicants Mike
and Mike Gyz and Jerry Welch, attorney Mark Babroski, uh engineer Christian Smith from Be Associates, and any others that may be here for this matter this evening, and I'd also like to welcome Tom Council
attorney, uh Jay Telman. Um do we have Mark? Yes, Mark. >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Good evening. Would you like to give us an update? >> Yes. Thank you. Mark Babrowski for Mhawk. My office is in conquered. And um
I'm hoping that tonight we can uh put a put an as put put this in motion uh as we head down the road. The uh first thing I have to announce is that Christian's unable to be here tonight. um he's had some minor medical matter
taken care of today and u he's out of uh he's out of the mix. Jerry Welch is here to I think guide you through the material that you've you've received and if Kristen and Jerry can collaborate on what exactly he needs to be put up on
the screen, I'll let them talk that through. >> Okay. Thank you, Mark. you know, while they're while they're doing that, um I would also indicate that we have no other formal presentation uh to give you this
evening. We do we are prepared to address several comments that Mr. Sirwatka made with regard to the last items in his review list and um we'll we'll deal with that when the time comes if the board thinks that that's important. Okay.
Um does uh Jay Telman do we have any updates from you? >> Um no no updates on on plans. I know that we've been uh we received a submitt and then there's been some additional information that we requested that I
believe the applicant is working on. Kristen probably has a better handle than I do on that, but things like uh we needed a more complete um autoturn analysis that would show the the secondary access. Um and then we did
receive some comments in a report from Joe and I think Kristen can can help with that as well. Other than that, um, I'm been focused on some of the procedural elements and how we get from here to a decision. It appears that we
have a little bit of a a template to do that in that the applicant has agreed to allow us until November 20th to file a decision which allows us, I think it maybe one or two opportunities
to review a draft that I'll work on with Kristen. Okay, great. Thank you, Jay. Kristen, do you have anything >> before I turn to the board? >> Um, >> I mean, I wonder I Yeah, so just to
repeat what's been said, um, the applicant revised the plans on October 8th. Those have been posted on the website, are available for everyone. Um we also since the last meeting received um a comment letter in response on the
architectural materials. Um and then um on October 8th the applicant submitted a response to the peer review comments from September Joe Surfka's early September comments.
So we have the um uh Beiel's engineering response to the September comments and then we also have Joe Surwaka's peer review of the October 8th um materials. So there's been a lot of work happening.
I just thank you for everyone involved. Um lot to manage. Um I um we also have received a a public comment so I can share that at when the time's right. Um,
but I wonder instead of me trying to summarize everything, I wonder if it makes sense to either if Jerry, if you'd like to make any comments about the most important things in your opinion or maybe Woody, that's a good idea to just
kind of go into questions from board members and then we can respond as needed if that makes sense. >> Um, Jerry, do you have any updates? Uh any anything you want to comment on before I ask the board for questions?
>> Well, I I have reviewed uh and I've uh gone back and forth with text messages while Christian was in had a little medical um thing going on today, but I have gone back and forth with him and I've gone back and forth with uh uh
Gavin and Sullivan. uh and they both have addressed uh all the comments in uh Joe Shawaka's uh list have been addressed and some of the things should be um uh for example there's a comment
regarding uh sprinkler water supply lines and some like uh steps and deck uh issues that uh need to be maybe be adjusted during
construction. So these are the things in in in residential construction that happen like on site coordination between the civil engineer and the architect. The civil engineer lays out the building. The building the grading in the building get done by the civil
engineer and then the architect adjusts like let's say deck stairs. They might be adjusted a little bit to match while we're actually out on site. But this doesn't get done in schematics. it gets done in the final uh architecture plans
that we submit to the building inspector and the sprinkler lines going into the building. We have to have an engineer do um mechanical engineering, plumbing and fire sprinkler plants. So we have the engineer actually comes up with the
final plans to do the sprinkler system. So that's all done during the building in uh the building permit process where we have to supply you know structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing plans to the building inspector. So all
these things that you know in the list are all fine and they'll be it says this should be coordinated between the um architect and the civil engineer. Well, that's done on that's done during the pro that process.
>> Okay. Thank you. I'll turn on the planning board. Pete, do you have any questions? >> I do. And this one um actually hopefully I won't get too glitchy here. Um this one has to do with a uh Joe Zo Walker's most recent reply uh to questions. And
one of the questions had to do with rock and ledge removal. And the re response was that that was discussed during one of the public hearings. Now Jerry, I appreciate you might not have been there for that meeting and Christian might have made the response, but I just want
to define what that response was or what the anticipate the anticipated result is. Uh and and if you're not able to do that, um uh Jerry, uh maybe uh uh Kristen can refresh for the board what
she recalls from the conversation. Are you able to to comment on that, Jerry? >> Yes, I do. I was there for that meeting. >> Okay. >> So, uh ledge ledge uh remove we didn't hit any ledge, by the way. We took 2530 deep hole test and we hit a lot of
boulders. So the B of course we have to do some hammering on the boulders and there may or may not be some ledge work done but uh this is all done ledge work has to be done according to guidelines that uh that are are used in
Massachusetts uh for for ledge all um we have to go uh use these guidelines that OSHA provides and they're all engineering guidelines that have to be complied with prior to
do any blasting. So that is what we would do. We would we would use the typical guidelines used in construction industry for that process. >> Okay. So what I what I recall was it would be 3 to five days of doing uh moving around uh rock and uh and uh
material then if it exceeded beyond that you would go into blasting. Is that what I recalled correctly? If blasting is required, we have to go around and do a survey of all the uh surrounding properties and make sure that we don't
disrupt any any properties that are abuing to us. So there's guidelines by the state of Massachusetts and the building code that we have to comply with. >> Right. Excellent. So I I I appreciate that and uh and sympathetic to to that. So uh the the option would be blasting
not hammering that. That's what I'm hearing from. So, so the large boulders uh there there are a lot of large boulders there. Those have to be cut hammered to make them into smaller pieces so that we could run them through a a crusher a rock crusher operation
where we would make our own gravel and our own stone for all the foundations. But it's very typical operation that happens all the time and there's all guidelines for that that we have to comply with. >> Right. So, what I'm trying to get a handle on is how long crushing would be
going on for because we've had projects where crushing and hammering has gone on a bit longer than what the community would like. So, that's where I'm trying to go with this conversation right now. >> I can't put a number on it, uh, Pete. I I don't know the because I don't know
how many boulders there are but um obviously we try to keep it to the minimum amount necessary uh to just um you know get the site work done >> right >> so the the the guidelines we would comply with um state and local
guidelines that we have to comply with uh to do that operation we would do and there's uh hours of operation you can only do it during Monday through Friday, it has to be done between 7:00 a.m. and you have a local bylaw that uh has
guidelines as to noise uh from that operation. >> Can I just amplify that, Mr. Chairman? >> Yes, you can. >> So, there are uh the board of fire prevention has regulations, not guidelines that are in the code of
Massachusetts. It's 527 uh CMR 1.0. 0 and following all the way up to CMR 13.15. And you can easily Google this. Uh it covers everything from the use of
explosives to transportation of materials, licenses, permits, checklists, inspections, uh and all other subjects that you might expect when somebody is intent upon blasting. Uh, so we'll follow those
protocols as spelled out in the CMR. >> Okay. Thank you, Mark. Pete, >> do you have any other comments or questions? >> No. No. So, uh, Mark, thank you very much and I appreciate that. Uh, I actually personally would be much more of a fan of blasting quicker, cleaner than somebody chipping at rocks for
months. Um, so, uh, I that's just kind of where I'm coming from, but that's all I have right now. Woody, thanks so much. that that's usually what it comes down to. I did a recent project in SUS, very ledgy location right off of Route One and at the end of the day they were
urged to switch to blasting. So, but we had an expert in the subject come one of the people in the business and we were actually blasting close to the one of the tentacle lines. You'd be surprised what kind of safety precautions they
take in those circumstances. Thank you, Mark. And thank you, Pete. Larry, do you have any questions or comments? >> Yeah, I do. Woody, just briefly, um, referring back to Joe Sword because October 12th, um, it sounds like you've had some, uh, conversation back and
forth with him already, uh, which is good. And the one thing that that did uh catch my eye though was on the third page um regarding the horizontal road layout information. And he talks about
uh uh minimum widths and uh uh um minimum uh sight distance for vehicles. And I just wonder can uh those concerns be met within the existing plan? Maybe the best thing to do, Mr.
Chairman, would be I'm I'm looking at a text that Christian sent today before he called it a day. And I'll I'll just read cleaning it up as I go, but the he says the horizontal road geometry should not be an issue as
this is a private road and the emergency response vehicles have been shown to be able to maneuver without issue. Furthermore, the fire department has reviewed this and had no problem with the design. those that's the wisdom of Christian u with regard to that subject.
>> Well, I I assume Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Woody. >> Okay. Scott, do you have any questions or comments? >> Um I was uh very interested in the um
you know the blasting. Um I've uh personally done a lot of it. Um Mark, I've done a lot of it on Route One. Um I've um tangled with those Tennessee gas lines um on a couple of
occasions and it's a um it's very very fussy. Uh if you think it's going to take a week or two, it takes two or 3 months. Um you know, that's on the blasting side. um whether you're blasting or you're hammering um rock is
um rocks very very difficult um but um I would only suggest um to the applicant that um I've recently heard um you know um on a job
in situate that uh they had big boulders um instead of hammering them, they just drilled them and used um expandable grout. Um and it um did an incredible job very very quickly uh really without
uh a lot of um um noise and um and um you know the hammering is terrible. Uh but uh you might want to consider that uh as well as um um drilling and using air. Um that's always worked in the
past. I mean, if you have, you know, 200 boulders out there the size of, you know, Volkswagens, um if they're not um really parked or really connected to the bedrock, um you might want to consider those. Um
but the bedrock, I'm with Pete. I mean, you know, we don't want uh um this operation, at least um the site work and the rock work um you know, to start and then 6 months later we're back in a meeting discussing it. Uh we prefer it
to be, you know, um going to say one and done, but um there's certainly going to be more shots uh if you do intend to blast, but that's um I just would like you to just be open-minded and consider some alternatives.
>> Uh we're certainly willing to accept a condition that uh the applicant will explore reasonable alternatives to hammering and and blasting. Um, I may perhaps town council and I can work on the wording of that.
>> Okay, very good, Mark. Thank you. Anything else, Scott? >> That's it. What do you >> Okay, thank you, Scott. Um, Steve, do you have any comments or questions? >> Uh, just one. Um, unless I missed it. I know Pete raised the question about uh
other wells being within 100 ft of the u proposed septic system and suggested a surveyor confirm where those offsite wells were. I don't recall seeing anything about that in the back and forth literature,
but do you know if that's underway or will be done? >> Do we have do we have any information on that? Yeah, I'll jump in here a little bit. Christian mentioned that he did look uh uh at the surrounding area and
he's pretty sure that there's the wells the the one well we did locate was in 103 feet of the property and he put a well radius on it and he the uh rest of the any abuing properties are way well over the 100 foot is what he uh
mentioned at the last meeting. I recall that. >> Right. I recall that too. But I thought there might have be a surveyor confirming it and that may be the role that Kristen took on as a putting on a surveying hat.
Any other questions or comments, Steve? >> No. >> Okay. Thank you, Steve. Um, I was interested in the rock as well and uh Pete Pete brought that up and thank you for your explanation and
to keep the noise at a minimum alternative solutions to other than hammer and rock would be great. Um, and Jay and Mark sounds like you guys will be working on maybe a condition for that and that would be great as well.
Um, and then Larry brought up Joe's and Joe's report the radius on the road. So, because it's a private road, I'm not sure if that works. I know it was on
show radar, but um if if fire and police feel that it's passable with their equipment, then so be it. Um, and other than that, I don't have any questions or comments right now. Um,
I'll circle back real quick. Uh, just a shake of the head is or raise your hand if you anyone on the platinum boat has any comments before I turn it over to public comment. Hearing none. Um, do we have any raised hands, Kristen?
Um, I'll give people a minute, but I don't I don't see anything yet. >> Okay. >> Um, >> while we wait while we wait for a potential raised hand, do we have any written comments?
>> Um, yes. Uh, Jacob Murray um of 15 Parker River Drive submitted um some comments by email today which have been shared with the board as well as with the applicant and posted on the um website.
Um he essentially reviewed um the back and forth with uh bills and peer review with Joe Surwaka and had it added a couple comments in red on the on the six pages.
Um I could Do you want me to kind of mention what they were Woody or >> Sure. Sure. because it came into >> Yeah. So, um
his first comment was uh that he finds it critical that at the moment the applicant is looking for approval of a site without a properly designed septic system. Um there's been a lot of back and forth. Uh, as we all know, um, Joe
Surwaka is wearing a board of health hat with this review as well. Um, and has expertise in septic design, so I know he and um, Beiel's associates have had a lot of back and forth. Um,
so I don't know, Mark or Jerry, if you have any followup, more recent followup from Christian on this. I I think it's our team's uh feeling that this matter is something that should be addressed when the application
goes into the board of health and Joe will be there obviously to guide them. But this this is something that I view as title five questions rather than site plan review questions. I mean to the extent that the septic system design is going to impact other aspects of the
site plan like storm water management u then there may need to be adjustments and we'll deal with that accordingly but right now we think that's something that needs to go through the board of health. >> I think that um that's you know I I
that's reasonable and I agree. Um I would say I feel like the concern of the planning board has been if it is approvable on the site as as the units are laid out and the site design is laid out assuring
that the septic design which is um you know fairly extensive for a development of this size >> is approvable at some point. you know, the the the devil in the details for sure is not for this planning board to get into, but um
that's been the concern. >> Well, there are various lanes here and we're we think that's not the planning board's lane as much as it is the board of health's lane. So, >> so let me comment on that just just briefly. You know, I I do I do agree
that it's that from the technical aspects of the system design that it's that it's more board of health and and I think we'd like to understand that the planning board if it's a go no-go issue. Joe nor uh anyone else has indicated
that it's a no-go issue that the site or the soils or anything else are completely incompatible. I think our condition on that is going to be that no work can start and obviously until you get a board of health approval and if the board of
health approval requires changes then you're going to have to apply for those changes. I mean that would be pretty standard. Um, but I I do think it's an appropriate area of inquiry, but only from more from a go no-go kind of is it
even generally suitable? And Joe hasn't indicated or nor has anyone else that the site is unsuitable for the septic system. So there's going to be a lot of work obviously to do at the board of health because it's not a generic, you
know, four bedroomedroom house system. But so let's hope the applicant has chosen the right site and won't have to come back to us if they have to move it.
>> We're in agreement with that, Chay. Thank you. Anything else in the written >> um so U Mr. Murray um also questioned what we've already talked about related
to the roadway layout um and how it's um distinct uh there's some differences between the town's subdivision regulations chapter 117 than how the private road is laid out for this project. Um however this project is not
a subdivision it's a site plan review. Um so we've already I think talked a little bit about that. Um he uh Mr. Murray question whether review has been completed by the fire department which is certainly something
the board has been interested in. Um, I have had conversations since the uh October 8th plans came in. Um, and the applicant, as I think has been said, is redoing the um fire turning
radius. I forget what sheet number, maybe 18 or 18A on the on the plan set. Um, we're expecting the applicant to submit uh that fire turning radius for the one-way exit onto Central Court.
That and out Central Court onto Central Street. Completing that radius analysis um is in the works and that will be reviewed by the fire department once the town receives it.
um as well as anything else related to fire code like sprinklers and that kind of thing. >> The only thing about getting the um the auto turn analysis uh updated is if we close the hearing tonight,
obviously that's going to be a post-p permit condition in terms of that that review. Um and I'm assuming the autoturn analysis will check out. But if it doesn't, obviously we run into issues that we'll have to work on with with the
decision on that. But hopefully it checks out. >> Yeah, I think the the hope is where we are able to get written comments from the fire chief um and fire department review. um we don't have those yet um
but we are waiting on that training analysis. So um there was a comment uh which Jerry already addressed about the deck stairs and the slope and um sort of how the
architecture and engineering plans um fit together. Um, I think that's reasonable to say there may be some, you know, minor modifications needed on site during construction. And
see, um, and we talked about blasting um, already, which was a comment Mr. Murray made as well, concern about the neighbors who will be affected by the by the blasting.
So those are all the written comments and again that that complete submission is on the town website under the public comments. >> Right. Thank you and thank you Mr. Mayor for your written comment. Um
does anyone on the planning board have any additional questions? We had no raised hands. Correct. >> No raised hands. Um >> okay. I just had a couple other things that I have thought of that the board
may want to um discuss. Uh Mike and Jerry came in and met with me last week, which I appreciated when the plans were submitted. One of the things they offered was um or we discussed briefly the affordable units for the project. Um
the applicant has proposed that four units uh four of the two-bedroom units be affordable. Um I that same night had the opportunity to attend an information session for the
Cricut Lane um 40B development that's under construction right now and heard from um from Walter Ericson, the developer you um who was on the agenda earlier this evening as well as the um housing
authority um project manager. How uh how much in demand are are units of more than two bedrooms, three and four bedroomedroom units are very rare in the sort of affordable lottery um market, if
you will, and what's available across the state. So, I just wanted to share that Mike and Jerry offered the board if you wanted to consider a different arrangement, whether it for two-bedroom units or something else that could be discussed tonight.
>> What are your thoughts? Anyone have any thoughts on that? >> So, what do you try? >> Yep. You know, I think uh having the flexibility to have a three-bedroom affordable unit would be wonderful. To have the flexibility of having
two-bedroom units are wonderful. And maybe we have one one, two twos, and one three. I mean, that way we're kind of giving a a cross um opportunity for all types of units with this type of a approach.
>> I don't know if that's something the applicant would consider. I I think that sounds very reasonable. Just I hope I'm speaking correctly for my client, but that sounds like a perfect compromise. >> Jerry Chief,
>> yeah, we uh we met uh we we are giving you the option. You you can uh the planning board if that's what your wishes are, then we have no problem with that. We can spread the units out as whatever mix you want.
>> Very good. Um I I agree with what Pete said. It would be nice to have a a variety one one bedroom uh two two bedrooms and a threebedroom. So if that's doable and you guys agree to that, that'd be great. If anyone has
any if anyone else in the board has any comments on that, please speak up. Yes, Pete's suggestion would keep the u number of bedrooms the same so that the number of people that could be accommodated would um equal out.
Sounds good. >> Okay. >> It also corresponds with kind of the state um preferences now to make sure it's you know this in a slightly different permitting form, but the state is looking for more family units. You know,
10 years ago, maybe 15 years ago, towns were doing their best to cram it all down to one and two-bedroom units to avoid family units. But I think the we're thinking a little differently given the housing shortage these days. So, having a
smattering of um three-bedroom units definitely serves a a bit of a goal and getting a family in there. >> Very good. Thank you. >> My last um my last uh category, Woody,
is just to um water supply. I think this is a similar conversation to um septic, but I wanted to just give the uh I at the previous planning board hearing, we discussed um
the interest in receiving something in writing from Biffield Water District about the status of their review and approval of water supply for the project. And I just um I know what was submitted was that the flow test was sufficient um but I didn't know if there
was any other update on that topic from the applicant. >> Um well the con right the uh flow test was uh came out great. We have um the uh capacity, the volume and the pressure is
fine uh in the street in Central Street. It's a 8 inch pipe. It's the the as Christian said, it's the biggest pipe in town. So, the water department wants us to uh dig a test hole and investigate the uh pipe the um condition of the pipe
that's out in front of Central Street. So, uh, we we will do that and then, uh, post permit we can dig up the street and find out they might want us to replace some of the pipe out in front of our site, but the capac but the volume and
the pressure is fine right now. We don't know what we'll find when we dig the street up. There might be the pipe might be fine. It might need to be replaced. Uh but we don't know that yet until we go out in the middle of Central Street
and dig it up. We'll be looking to obviously we don't know all of the infrastructure concerns regarding the water district what they may do nor do we control that. So, I think our condition is going to cover
pretty much any of eventuality with that. And we're going to make it subject to whatever the water district requires in terms of infrastructure or repair, maintenance, design, replacement, any of that stuff. So, we just have to make
sure that we cover that ground. But pretty standard post-p permit condition, I think. >> Thank you, Jay. Um, does any planning board members have any other questions or comments?
>> Uh, yeah. What do I do? And I I don't mean to >> beat a dead horse on this, but going back to the um horizontal road layout, I I I'm I'm satisfied with the uh with the answers we've received uh regarding the
center line radius and uh and all of that. But Joe um ends by saying and I'll quote uh more importantly perhaps the minimum sight distance on horizontal curves is 200 feet which is critical to drivers
recognizing hazards in the roadway. The board may want the engineer to address whether sight distance has been addressed andor reviewed by the town's traffic consultant. I don't know. Did we get an answer to that point? >> Right. If these these if these are
roadways sight distance is a lot lower than what you would find on a public way. It's it's the 85th percentile of speed after observing it for some period of time and then uh assigning a distance
based on that and also grade. Those are the two components in sight distance. So you're you're you're unlikely to have people whipping through the internal driveway system of of condom of a townhouse complex.
>> Yeah, that's my next question. Are you going to have posted speed signs? >> Um if if the board wants that as a condition, then we're happy to agree. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Okay.
Any other questions from anyone? in the budding board. Kristen, any other comments you have? >> No. >> No. >> Um Jay, do you have any comments or any additional comments or questions for Mark or Jerry?
>> No. You know, Mark and I've um stayed in contact about the you know where where the status is. I think the where we're heading now, assuming that there's a closure of the hearing, is that I will work with Kristen to prepare a draft.
There's a a bunch of conditions. The board's discussed a bunch of them tonight. Obviously, we've already talked at length about the conditions regarding the single access or the two access um uh approach and you know, so we're going
to have to talk about that during deliberation. I have a good sense where the board wants to be on that based upon where the board um what the board has discussed previously as well as what u Mr. Misho
has presented in terms of um his opinion on the attributes of the second access and then the the rest of that is the mechanics. So, I think I have a good feel for how to start my drafting here. And I know that Kristen and Satie are
are going to help out to fill in some of the details and and give me some of the benefit of what the board has done in the past on other projects. So, our boilerplate matches up. Other than that, I think, you know, it's going to be, you
know, a pretty robust um uh deliberation session the next time we get together on this. Okay. All right. Thank you, Jay. So, I'll turn to the board again. What What are your wishes? Um if there's no other comments and if anyone has any
comments, please speak up. But otherwise, what are your wishes? Um would you like to continue or close this public hearing? >> Uh Woody, if I could. >> Yes, go right ahead. >> You know, I think it would be appropriate to continue the hearing. We haven't heard back from fire and I think
it's very important that we have their input. I think while we're drafting this uh decision, I think it's important to keep our ability to continue to have a conversation open. So, I would encourage us to continue uh to have this open until we have our draft all buttoned up. That would be my personal feeling.
Thanks. >> Yep. And it seems like a reasonable statement, Pete. Uh it does give us the ability to go back and forth about it. And um >> I think the issue there is one of timing though, Woody. Um, I'm not disagreeing
with what Pete is saying one bit. I think there there's always common sense in sewing up all of the facts that that we can, but we're technically at the end of tonight, I believe, of the time period under your bylaw. the applicant
has given an extension to deliver a decision to um November 20th um which would give us the time to do some drafting and deliberation. So if you wanted to continue the public hearing I I think the applicant would
have to acquies to that. So I I don't that would be up to Mark and his client. Otherwise, I I would recommend to avoid um uh potential for constructive approval or giving us too little time closure tonight of the hearing. But I
think it's somewhat up to the applicant as to where they want to be on this. You know, the the more information that's still out there means more conditions and more whatifs in that decision. So, it really comes down to the applicant's preference on how they want to deal with
that in a way. Otherwise, as council, I would recommend that if they're unwilling to continue the public hearing that we close it and then we'll just have to deliberate the best we can with the information we have. >> Okay. Thank you, Jay. So, then I'll turn
to Mark. Mark and Jerry, um, would you be willing to continue this public hearing to our next meeting? >> Not a month out. No, we're we were waiting for the fire chief the last meeting and we don't have anything from
him and it's been 30 days. So that just is, you know, why would I why would I be optimistic that we're going to have something in 30 days? If the board wanted a week to get the fire chief's opinion and they had another meeting scheduled at which they could receive
that, I probably would agree with that. But otherwise, this is where we are. This this has been very thoroughly examined and I'm sympathetic to the fact that the fire chief hasn't responded to your satisfaction, but that's not our doing.
>> But we also don't have all of the information, Mark, right? There's no autoturn analysis yet on the secondary roadway >> in fairness to to round out that issue. I'm not I don't want to get
argumentative with you, but and I I don't know the the fire chief particularly well, but it is true that there's a gap in the information. The plans have a single sheet that shows the
secondary access and no autoturn analysis, which is crucial for the fire department's analysis with respect to the secondary axis. It's it's kind of difficult for me to know um how would well I I suppose we could handle
that through Durk instead of Christian but I I don't know Durk's timetable that or or Christian's timetable depending upon who would be responding to that. >> We did make that request um that Thursday after the plans were submitted
Wednesday and I was told it's it's underway. So, I think the work is underway, but I'm not sure the status. >> Maybe Mike or Jerry could weigh in here to give us a more complete picture. >> I I don't
>> um >> Thank you, Jerry. >> As far as um I think we have enough information to close the public hearing. Um, and the fire department could be uh, you know, their input could be part of a
condition. I would think, Mark, uh, >> well, but but attorney Terman is saying that we need to give him something in order for him to have an opinion and they don't have it yet. And I don't know what what happened with regardular
topic. I assume that it would be done by Jeff Durk or Christian Smith. You tell me. I >> think either either is capable of doing it. >> It's a computer program.
>> I thought they both looked at it. Uh I thought they both looked at the alternative crossing the wetland one-way street access and they both both the traffic uh engineers uh agreed that that was you know we had a safe way to do it
the first time and and then the alternative B plan is also safer. So by saying that the alternative plan is safer than the original plan, um can't
we assume that that that they have turning radiuses? I mean, can't that be it seems to be a very simple thing to um maybe condition Mark um because we're conditioning that the uh board we're conditioning that the
conservation commission approves that wetland crossing. So, can't that be part of that? >> What is the exact product that you're waiting for at the fire department, Mr. Chairman? they were waiting for architecturally
stamped um with the autoad turning radius um layout of option B for the road and that's what the holdup's been is that he doesn't have that information to review and if I've misspoken on that please speak up Chris
>> all right I'm going to disappear for a minute um Jerry will hold down the fort while I do >> and I I think there's also the the concern with regards to having the structure of the uh roadway being able to uh accommodate the apparatus the
department has and I think that's a safety issue from the from you know a structural component uh from the fire department. So I think there are these couple things that the needed some more information on and I don't think that they have received it yet and I don't want to speak for anyone else but that's kind of my my take of what I'm getting
from conversations. There was the weight capacity issue with respect to the covert as well that they were doing. So, it wasn't just auto turn. >> As I said, I'm going to disappear and I'll be right back. >> Okay. Apologies.
>> No worries, Mark. >> Well, weighing in on the weight capacity. I've done we've I just finished a wetland crossing with a 36 inch blocks culvert and it's designed it's always designed to uh the capacity
is designed for you know tractor trailers to to tractor trailers or fire equipment or whatever vehicle might go over pass over that. So, you know, we we get those designed by an engineer from SHA
concrete and um 36inch box cover is all designed with rebar and it's all in reinforced and you know you can big you could drive the biggest truck that's allowed on a public way to drive over it. So that's just a normal
>> um you know requirement when you do engineering wise when you provide a box coververt underneath a roadway or a driveway. So >> and that's that's understandable Jerry and that's common sense too but the fire
chief wants this information especially with the weight so that he does have proper review. He just he can't he has to have the information to do his review. >> So Jerry, do I do I understand? >> Go ahead, Pete.
>> Jerry, do I understand that that what that's what you're calling out is this box covered as you've designed because I don't I don't remember seeing that in the plans and that might have been my oversight. >> Yes, it's a bark. It originally was a a round cover that was uh originally Bees
put a round cover in. However, under t under um D guidelines for wetlands crossing, they require a box cover with no bottom on it so that the uh apparently is for so that the critters can get go through from one side to the
other, which is uh so they want the a bottom that is not concrete. They want a bottom that is uh part of the original soil conditions so that the uh it's more like a stream bottom instead of a
concrete bottom which would you would have when you put in a uh a circular culvert. >> So are these construction details in the October 8th plans or will these be in the plan submitted as part of the NOI
submittal? Yes, actually they actually changed it from the environmental uh uh Moren Herald um had that change from a regular culvert to a box culvert so it would meet D
guidelines for a for a stream crossing. So that's already in there. >> It it's in the plans the planning board. >> It's in the existing plans right now. >> Okay. So, it'll be in the plan that we submit notice of intent for the wetland crossing. It's that'll be in there.
>> Okay. >> So, for clarification, it's in the wetland plan crossing, but it's not in ours yet because we still we still had the wrong cover. >> No, it's in yours. It's No, they changed. No, it's revised. In the last set that was revised, it has the box
cover in there. >> Okay. I I think that's what the chief needs to see is the most recent revised plans >> that's already in there and we submitted it to planning board last Wednesday. So the chief should have it because we submitted it to planning board. So I'm
I'm guessing that uh Kristen Kristen, did you forward it over to the chief by the >> Yes, but I'm asking where on the plan set that is shown. >> Yeah, >> it's a note on the plan. And it shows a
box cover going underneath the roadway. >> Uh Chris, >> but does it give the weight capacity? I think that was the question the chief wants. >> Well, there's there's the weight capacity. There's the attorney. Um and right Kristen,
can you share um that plan with the note? >> Yeah, good idea, Scott. >> Thank you, Scott. Um, so this is this is the Can you all see
this? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, this is the plan set submitted October 8th. Um the uh sheet 18A
I'll enlarge it when we get there. Um, so this is the sheet that shows the exit across the wetland. And what I see
that you've been referring to, Jerry, is probably right here. >> Two foot wide by one foot high open bottom cover. Yes, open bottom cover. That's so the critters can get through there without having concrete on their toes.
So, this is Yes. You know, I reviewed these plans and showed this page with the fire chief today and he was going back to discuss with his deputy chief and his um his other colleague who reviews plans. Um,
so I can point that out. To Jay's point, it doesn't it doesn't answer the question um of the weight. Um, this plan, which is the next page, is what we asked last
Thursday to be uh redrawn to include that one-way exit road we were just talking about, which comes across here and comes out to Central Court. So, this is the um this was done by your traffic
consultant. It includes the original access turning radius. This is what we're looking for for the one-way exit and for central court for the realignment and the intersection
with central street for the fire trucks. is approved. >> So, it's kind of a merging of these two pages is what we've requested. Well, could we ask uh could we we have
to go to the conservation commission to get permission across the wetland and um I mean to revise all the plans to show a wetland crossing when the conservation commission could possibly not agree with a wetland crossing seems to be excessive
engineering work. Could we make that um a condition that once the conservation commission approves the wetland crossing that we will obviously update all the plans to show that one way in and out of
the of the site? I'm just thinking that to you know speed up um the process a little bit. Well, I think part of that problem, and I respect what your request is, but I think what part of the problem is is the fire chief didn't want to review it
without the information. So, that's what we've been laying for is the fire chief's review and he's been laying for the information. So, >> yeah. So, it's it's classic chicken chicken and the egg here, right?
and um the fire department uh I think in my mind and uh as a resident uh and a board member I think it's um I think it's appropriate uh to provide the data um really on weight and and
turning um you know to the uh uh to the appropriate um folks that are going to be um you keeping this place safe. Um that's the
fire chief. So I don't know um Jerry what the cost would be. Um you know we certainly don't want you know really you or any other applicant to uh expend
um you know money that um or good money after bad. But, uh, is this a, um, a a large cost to you? >> Um, it's not necessarily the cost. It's
more a timing issue. Um, so if the board, I mean, we're we're going to acquies to whatever the board, you know, would like to do, obviously. um we're not sure that conservation will
approve this. So to, you know, add it um to all the plans and then if we if the the conservation commission doesn't approve it, then we just did all that work um and um for not. So it's more of
a timing thing uh for us. If if I could, Jerry, the option B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B that we've been talking about is actually the planning board's option A. So, our feeling is this is what we would like to see and
then go to go to conservation. If they say no that it can't, they'll have it all engineered, they'll be able to take a look at it, they'll see what it's about, then you could come back to us and say, "Hey, listen, it doesn't fly with them." But from our perspective,
>> we lost Pete for a minute there. >> Oh, we're coming from and so that's why we're that's why we're asking for this. >> Well, Pete Pete, we lost you about 30 seconds ago. >> So, >> it's it's it's probably best that you lose me. [Laughter]
I I would disagree to that, but um I think you were saying um at the time we lost you that um >> I guess I lost you. >> Okay. So, if I can and if if the if the
stars will stay aligned and the satellites will be where they're supposed to be, the option B is actually the pling board's option A. This is what we would like to see from a safety standpoint. We've heard from the traffic consultants that this is not just a you know an acceptable uh intersection
design. It's an ideal intersection design. So our feeling is this thing this thing should be engineered. It should go to conservation as an engineered plan. They can look at it. They can understand where we're coming from and it's a complete package. If cons if it fails with conservation and
they see it all engineered and it fails, then you can come to us and say it failed. But our feeling is this is a safety issue. This is in the best interest of of the community and this is where the planning board would like to go. >> I think we've already agreed to that. I'm back, Mr. >> Beautiful.
>> Hey, you're back. I'll be quiet. >> So, um I Good news on one front. The AutoCAD has already been done by Vaness and I think we can get you some paperwork on that quickly or Joe some paperwork quickly. Um, and then I asked
Kristen Christian to phone in to discuss the carrying capacity of the roadway because it got really complicated really fast. He he he was telling me what's under the road and I you know I so I he's Kristen if you can monitor I gave
him the number of the u I think it was the New York phone in number on the agenda. I gave him the 9292056099 number. Um, yeah, I mean it should show up as someone dialing into the
Zoom. Um, I'll double check the number. >> Yeah. 1 19292056099 [Music] US New York. >> Yeah, that's the number I gave him. It looked like the easiest one for him to use for the call in. >> Yeah. No, I just thought I'd pull it up
so that you had the right number. So, assuming that he calls in and explains this to your satisfaction, what I'd like to suggest is that we get the AutoCAD information over to the um to to Joe. I would assume you're going to have Joe
look at it. >> Well, Joe and the fire chief is the one. >> Okay, fine. But I mean we is there any real need that we have to go out another 30 days to get that done? >> I don't believe it would be 30 days, Mark. Um I think it would our next
meeting is November 5th. Correct, Kristen? >> Yes, that's what's scheduled. >> That gives us three weeks, everyone. Three weeks. We'll have review from fire chief and we will
reconvene on the 5th is what I think the wishes of the board are. >> It looks like um Christian just came in. >> Okay, great. >> I'm assuming a 603 number. Um
Woody, what does he push to unmute himself? Um, it's it's uh star it's either star six or star nine. I'm looking it up right now. Give me just >> Oh, there we go. I think I think we got him. Christian, are you with us?
>> Yes, Kristen, I am. >> Thank you. Welcome. >> Thank you. So, Christian, I've just explained that Vanessa has done the uh AutoCAD analysis and that we can expect to deliver that
shortly, but you you wowed me into oblivion by the explanation of the carrying capacity. Could you do better now now that you're here? >> Oh, sure. Yeah. So I mean as far as the um as the carrying capacity of the
roadway, you know that that particular exit drive that is going to cross the wetland is going to have the exact same crosssection. In other words, the same level and compaction of bank run gravel,
crush stone as well as pavement as every other street in town. and certainly uh the identical uh cross-section of the proposed road for the development. Um the fact that you know we're we're crossing a wetland. Yes, I understand
that. But we are also providing at the wetland crossing over the stream channel proper a a three-sided box culvert which will be set on concrete footings on either side of of that crossing. So that
it's going to have the identical, you know, loading capacity and carrying capac capacity of the uh of the rest of the road in the subdivision. >> Does does that answer your question, Mr. Chairman? >> It does. It's um I think it's a matter
of it's not specified specifically on the plan as such for the fire chief if I'm correct, if I spoke correctly. >> Okay. Okay. Well, that that's easily dealt with. I mean, we can uh we can explain that to the fire chief. But
yeah, even though this is a single, you know, lane access, so to speak, it is going to be constructed just like the rest of the road. And where we are crossing the um you know, the the little uh intermittent stream bed, as I say,
that's going to be a clear span bottomless box. So, a three-sided culvert, which the two vertical ends that sit on the ground will be seated on uh concrete footings, as is, you know, typical construction for that type of a
crossing. Um, and I can I can certainly uh have that conversation with the uh with the fire chief tomorrow if he's available. Do we Kristen, he he needs it on paper. He needs it in writing, right?
>> Well, it's it may just be a matter of adding the not a note to the plan sheet. >> Okay. >> Exactly. >> And and what do if I could ask if I could try to ask a question without breaking up? Hello, Christian. I hope you're doing well. >> Yes, >> I think I'm doing as as well as can be
expected, Peter. >> Okay. All right. So, if you could just clarify me for me, um, and this, and this is why I think we need to have the weighin of the fire chief on these plans. Um, your roadways are 20 ft wide.
Is that correct? >> The the one-way accesses are 20t wide. Correct. The roadways inside the so the roadways within this uh development are they 20
20 ft wide or 22 feet wide? >> 22 beyond the split. >> Okay. So >> in other words where where the intersection of the oneway out exit and the oneway in entrance beyond that connection beyond that intersection uh
they are 22 feet. >> Okay. that might have to have there might be some comment coming back from fire. So I think it's important that that we actually have a complete review by fire on these plans as they are now. Uh our
chief was out, our chief is back. Our chief met with uh uh our planner today and is going to be taken to his department uh tomorrow. So I think uh until we have that um uh our review done, I think it's in everyone's best
interest to at least keep this uh discussion open until our next meeting. That would be my day. >> My recommendation. >> Go back. Yeah. Go back. >> Yeah. And I mean essentially, Mr. Okay. Because the um the road cross-section,
the standard uh pavement cross-section that we depict on the plans on the detail sheet uh you know specifies the standard town cross-section and there is there is not a single linear foot of that road that would not be built with
that cross-section. Uh so you know I'm I'm happy to have the conversation. We have reviewed this not with the chief specifically um but with uh and I'm not going to remember his name off the top of my head uh particularly a few hours out of
anesthesia but um anyway we we have reviewed that whole thing in fact it was uh it was with that gentleman in the in the fire department um who we went through you know the the hydrant specification and the hydrant spacing and and all of that detail as well. And
I believe they reviewed the original um turning plan from from Vanesse uh prior to contemplating the uh the exiton lane across the uh wetland. But that's that's fine. We we will certainly follow up uh with the
chief tomorrow uh understanding that he is back in the office and uh we will we will do our best to make contact, find out exactly what it is he's looking for and provide him with that information. Wonderful. Thank you. >> So, if Mr. Chairman, if I might.
>> Yes. Go ahead, Mark. >> It sounds like we can move very quickly to provide two pieces of paper to whatever people on your team you think need to look at them, whether it's Joe or the fire chief. I I we are facing
some deadlines of our own here. So that the closure of this and a decision filed with the town clerk really needs to take place with a month that starts with an N, not with a D. That deadline and if we
can work that out to make it happen, like shortening the space between the meetings and not waiting for them to look at two pieces of paper until November 5th or 6th or whatever you said the next meeting date was, that would help a lot. But we're we're up against a
crunch because Thanksgiving is the 27th, 28th is Friday, 29th is Saturday, and the 30th is Sunday. So that means that, you know, we're already into December if we've lost that week. May I suggest that
we hunt for a date where the uh the board might just get together? How long is it going to take to receive Joseph Watka's final report and the chief's blessing? It shouldn't. I'm I'm confident that our people have done the
job right. >> You So, you'd like to uh you'd like for us to meet before November 5th, our next >> I'd like you to file your decision with the town clerk before I'm not you. We can work it out any way you want, but I'd like you to file your decision with the town clerk before November 30th. And
since the 30th is a Sunday, that really kind of cuts it back a little bit, especially with the holiday week before that. >> And I'm being completely frank with you, we we are up against it here. So,
>> well, if we meet November 5th and close the public hearing on November 5th, we we would already Kristen, we would already be and Jay, if you would too, please. We'd already be working on a
decision. Correct. In the meantime, between now and the 5th, I >> think we can certainly frame it out and we have an idea of the big ticket items that we have to work in through conditions. Obviously,
we're going to need a lot of board input on some of the finer details, but I think we could I'm pretty confident that we could still get something done um that's that suits the board's needs provided the board can find the time to
deliberate in November. I think you had a November 19th as well. Is that right, Kristen? >> Yes. And it's just I I I know different towns can handle public hearings differently, but this this would be very
if we if the board keeps the public hearing open, if this project if the hearing stays open, we can certainly start drafting the decision and come to that November 5th meeting with, you know, a draft to begin reviewing as
well as having had the new input. um once the revised plans are received from Joe from the fire chief. So I >> think also assuming that we the public, you know, the the record the public
record stays open through the 5th and we do some of our deliberation perhaps then or but then we further deliberate with a full draft on the 19th and in real time we could add, subtract,
amend provisions and that and get it cleaned up within a day or two afterwards. have Woody sign it and get it get it filed. I think we could still meet that assuming that we carve out time on both the 5th and the 19th for
the board. >> Why don't I give you Jay in a revised letter uh file with the town clerk by the 24th, which is a Monday? >> I think that I think that's fine. >> All right. So Kristen U supersede the
letter that I gave you already with a new letter that I will submit tomorrow extending the deadline to file with the town clerk by Monday the 24th of November. >> Okay. >> And then we can all start cooking on Tuesday.
>> Mark >> Mark. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Mark. So, with all that said, and thank you everyone. Um, unless someone else has something to
say, please speak up. I would entertain a motion to continue. Uh, 34th Central Street, public hearing to November 5th, 7:15 via Zoom. >> So moved. >> Thank you, Scott. And do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Thank you. Um, roll call vote. Peter, >> yes. >> Larry, >> yes. >> Scott, >> yes. Yes. >> Steve, >> yes.
>> And I vote yes as well. And uh, thank you, Mark. Thank you, Jerry. And Christian, thank you for componing in and get well. >> Thank you all. >> We'll see you all on the 5th. All right. Moving on in the agenda. Next item on the agenda I believe is old
business. We have a seaggate open space subdivision 105 high road request to close out final approval of asbelt plan and release of performance guarantee
funds um assesses map R48 lot 49. Who do we have? Do we have anyone for this matter? Oh, I see someone now. >> Um, we have attorney. >> Yes. >> Good. Yes. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Matthew Gaines for the applicant here.
Steve Sawyer is here as well, as is Maggie Diro. >> Um, I think that the ag What's that? >> Welcome everyone. >> Oh, thank you. I think the agenda item kind of speaks for itself. Most importantly, obviously, is the the release of the remaining performance guarantee funds. I'm not I don't have
that exact number off the top of my head because I know obviously it's gone down over time. So, I've kind of lost track of how much is remaining. But long story short, um the project is complete. Everything is done. Um if you remember, we were actually before you I think not
that long ago to get the sign off on the conservation restriction. Uh that's been approved by both the conservation commission and the board of selectmen. I'm just waiting for signatures to come in my office, but everything is completely done on this project and we're looking to get out of here, so to
speak. >> Okay, Kristen, have we had any um additional peerreview comments? >> Um, yep. as um as is required. Uh the
asbuilt plan and the engineers um certification letter was um transmitted to peer review. Um so Joe Swaka um submitted some comments which I've shared um
have to find them. I was just trying to find the balance on the escrow but I haven't come up with that yet. Um, there were a couple comments um that Joe had. Um, I've shared these with the applicant as well. Um,
let me grab it. Um, the board, let's see. I've received an asbellet plan for Sega Condominium repaired by North Point survey and a copy of the engineering certification letter. dated October 9th by Steven
Sawyer PE. I have conducted a site visit, compare the asbuilt plans to the approved plans, and offer the following comments. Um, the board may want to receive a letter from the applicant's landscape team stating that the site has
been landscaped in conformance with the approved landscape plan. Number two, copies of storm water inspection and maintenance forms to date should be submitted for review and records as would be typical. Number three, the infiltration basin is
overgrown >> and does not appear to have been mowed as required. The engineer applicant should address this. And number four, the manhole cover on the valve tank at the primary septic field is not bolted down or cemented in place. This should
be addressed. If you have any questions concerning the review, please contact me, Joe Surwaka. >> Um, Steve Soya, do you do you have any comments on that or >> Excuse me. Yeah. So, I didn't actually
on our on M for the infiltration base and I was looking through that. It didn't say that it should be mowed, but it's a good idea. I think I think it was somewhere else in the open space um open space that that basin should be mowed. So, that does need to be mowed, which I believe Maggie's getting that scheduled
to have someone mow it. I think at this point it's um and then as far as that uh the cover um the frame the frame and cover um that that can just be grouted in um easily grouted in
frame the the frame and cover is so heavy it's not going anywhere. Um but uh there's no reason why it can't be grouted on. >> Okay. >> Does any of the board members have any questions?
Larry, Pete, Scott, Steve. Okay, so would Kristen, we would like to see these things completed before we close this out.
>> Um, I mean, that's up to the board. I it sounds as though a couple of them are pretty minor and they're saying they're going to take care of that. Um the question about the landscape plan.
Um would that be how what what would it take I guess Maggie, >> Matt, Steve to provide that as an asbelt a component of the asbelt? >> I I don't you know Maggie can speak for the landscape. I don't know who it is, but I don't, you know, obviously
engineers, people like that are obviously in the industry of issuing opinion letters. My experience, landscapers are not. Um, I think that's kind of an odd request for a landscaper to issue an opinion letter that it's been landscaped in conformance with the
landscape plan. I I don't, you know, we can ask, I guess, if he'll give us one sentence that says, "Yes, I landscaped in conformance with the landscape plan." if that would really make the town happy. >> I I mean in some cases the asbel plan
shows the landscaping but it sounds like it perhaps didn't. In this case >> it was it wasn't required to show it. That's not typical to show the planting on an asbuilt plant. Typically it's grading utilities um storm water.
>> Was there was there a landscape architect um here Maggie? Um, originally, uh, Tom Miner, Steve, you'd probably remember the company, uh, did the planting plan for my dad.
I don't know. You tell me. Probably three years ago at this point. >> Three or four years. Three or four years ago. >> That would be Tom Miner from Hawk Hawk Design down the Cape. >> Hawk Design. There it is. Um, yeah, he didn't actually implement the landscaping. Obviously, I had a
different landscapecape crew actually on the field, but um uh yeah, I I don't know when the last time Tom's actually been down. >> Yeah, he may have he may have done the landscape design
>> um you know, for um really the application and the ultimate approval. And um >> you know it's not a terribly large site. So, um, he probably never just speaking
maybe never made his way up, but it would typically go and and the board should probably think through this um, moving into the future about the really the relationship of the designers, landscape, architect, um, you know, on
future um, just signoffs on um, you know, did they meet the intent of the plan and you know, do they believe um um like a letter that we're asking or I just heard that we were thinking the landscaper could provide um I think a
landscape architect in the past at least in my experience um would be the provider of something like that and Steve in your experience is that right >> typically the design the landscape designer would provide the certifications
>> um I don't it's not it's Funny. I don't as far as the affidavits and things like that when you do when I do large projects, I've never seen it's always it's funny. It's um I've never seen him ask a land. It's I've never seen them require the landscaper to private
provide an affidavit. >> Um Okay. >> Yeah. >> So, uh what do we want to do here? Um I guess >> yeah I also don't think there's anything in the performance guarantee I2 you know
a certification on the landscape plan so what that's worth. >> Yeah I' I've been I've been down you know two or three times over the past couple of months and um even took a walk back down there. It's um you know it's
it's very nice. Um you know some of the landscape or the bushes um that um I was actually um you know potentially you know was going to mention have been replaced
um which is um which is nice to see. It's proactive. Um so um again not sure what we want to um guess. >> Yeah I sorry just one other comment. I
was just pulled up the original permit from however many years ago when this was permitted 2021. It does talk about post construction plans being provided, but again it doesn't mention a landscape plan and it says that it would be um certified by a professional engineer
who's obviously Steve and a land surveyor who was North Point Survey. So there's no mention of needing that final landscape plan in the permit. Um, I was just looking at the bond
estimate that outlined the remaining work to be completed. Um, and there's there was a line item for open space landscaping. >> There was $3,878 still in that. It said it was 90%
complete. I don't know if anyone remembers what the 10% >> unc. That was back in the spring or something. I think we were talking about that and I know we did complete it because there was a big discussion about like the last certificate of occupancy or something tied to that and that we
did all of that. We cleared that hurdle. >> Yeah, that was for the um in near the trail, the reclamation area out back and Tom Hughes is over the moon and how well it's grown in. He said he's never seen anything quite like how well it's grown.
So, he's really happy with it. Would you since some of the items that um that Joe mentioned kind of relate to you know the mowing the maintenance of the infrastructure? Could you just kind
of explain for the benefit of the board what happens after the closeout? Like who's going to be responsible for those kind of ongoing maintenance things and how's that going to work? >> Yeah. So I I can answer that. So, right
now, Maggie is still um the sole kind of trustee of the condo association that's established here. But once this is all kind of closed out that, you know, as typical in a condo, the developer will quote unquote transition control to the owners. There'll be a board of uh condo
trustees elected, a three member board, and then obviously they will be, you know, from the from the 10 owners there, they'll elect three of them who will be running the show. And the condo association will be in charge for everything going forward as is typical in a condominium.
>> That would be the maintenance on the open space as well. >> Correct. Yep. Yep. And that's all under the conservation restriction. Yep. money are we holding, Kristen? Did you find that number? >> Yeah. Uh I believe Well, so this was um
in November when we returned a chunk of the performance bond, $26,374. And that has gained a little bit of interest over time which I don't have that number in front of me.
>> Okay. Still >> what are the wishes of the board on this matter? Do we do we want to wait on return the funds or do we want to make a motion to return the funds?
>> With the hopes of this stuff getting done. >> Go ahead, Larry. I was I was thinking uh I mean uh would a a motion to release the funds conditioned upon the applicant
submitting to the planning department u proof of satisfaction of the the the uh items specified in Joe's workers's October 14th letter. If I may, I would only ask that we don't include on that
the letter from the landscape plan because I just don't think that can happen. But I think the only I think we be more specific and we've referenced the the mowing of the infiltration basin that Maggie agreed to do in the securing of this manhole cover. I think those are
the only two items that need to be done. >> What about the storm water inspection and maintenance forms? Yeah, Steve, what are those available? >> Yeah, so that's um Yeah, so as part of the as part of the on&m or the storm
water, there's a maintenance program and I believe Ben um I know I know prior at the end of the you know once the roadway was buttoned up and everything's cleaned up, they went through and cleaned all the structures as typical. Um, so we're
kind of transitioning from a construction to a post construction um post construction maintenance which eventually that will be part of the homeowners association. Um I believe Ben Ben has done um inspections over
basically over the period of the construction and also beyond that um there was weekly Maggie spent a lot of money as part of the SWIP um which was part of the erosion controls and storm water. Tom Hughes did
weekly inspections um as part of the SWIP program and he can provide you know all the you know for two years he was inspecting the site weekly um which included the storm water controls i.e. the infiltration basin and such. I think between what Tom has for the
SWIP inspections and what Ben Ben probably can um I don't know if he wrote down the inspection report of what he did, but I know that it was done so he can prepare a reporter for what was done to to hand this over. So we can provide those to the board.
>> So these documents exist? >> Yes. >> Okay. And uh he says they should be submitted for review and records. And I assume he means the record. Not sure who's supposed to review them, him or us. Him or the planning board.
>> Um, >> yeah, I just I didn't have a chance to review those materials. I don't know if it's regularly sort of the storm water permitting authority that you know the
order of conditions maybe has conditions about submitting those kinds of maintenance and ongoing inspection forms. >> Yeah, I'm I'm just scrolling through the um on M plan. It does talk about, you know,
how all these things need to be inspected, you know, periodically depending on what it is. I'm not seeing anything that says that, you know, these forms are required to be submitted though, but I'm just kind of quickly skimming right now. >> Yeah, I don't believe there's any
requirement in that that it says it's required to be submitted to the board, but yeah, >> it's just an ongoing requirement. This is um I truthfully I haven't seen this requirement closing out a project. Um this is a new this is a new one that
I've seen for as far as uh closing out projects. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And again I don't see that as part of the permit either that those be submitted. >> Okay. So the underlining things here are the the basin being mowed,
the manual being fastened down, whether it's grout or bolted >> and there's one other item and not not including the landscape
and not including what we just discussed last. >> No, there's nothing else in Joe's letter. Okay. Well, let's do this. I would entertain a motion to approve the close out of Seagate Open Space Subdivision at 105
Brew and to return the to the applicant. All funds held in performance guarantee, excuse me, excuse me, the performance guarantee account for this project, including interest in in the payer review escro
account after all invoices have been paid a after um what's the word I'm looking for? Um after the basin, the
sediment basin has been mowed and the manhole has been fastened to Joe's satisfaction. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. So, that was your motion. No. I need a
second. >> Motion. Take it as a motion. Yes. Second. >> All right. I'll second. >> Thank you. Sorry. >> Thank you, Larry. >> Roll. >> Pete. >> Yes. >> Larry, >> yes. >> Scott, >> yes.
>> Steve, >> yes. >> And I vote yes as well. Thank you, Maggie. Thank you, Mr. G. Thank you, Steve. >> Thank you very much, Maggie. >> Thank you. >> Go ahead. >> Um, quick question. um just for my own
bookkeeping and um who to send what to. Do you do you want me to send you pictures or do you want me to you know that storm water basin and the you know the sewer cap when it's put on? Do you do you want photos? Do you want me to send those to Kristen or um do you need
Joe to go back out and reinspect? How do you how do you want to do that? >> Kristen, what would be best? Um, sounds like a good idea to send me some photos and I can share them with Joe >> by email. >> All right. Okay, that sounds good. Just
want to check. >> Yeah, thank you. >> Yeah, >> thank you. And thank you, Maggie. Thank you, Mr. >> Thank you. >> Thanks everyone. >> Good night. >> Have a great night. >> Thanks. Bye. Bye. >> Yep. Have a good night. We did meeting
minutes and the last thing on the agenda is liaison reports and meeting reports. We have ZBA Larry. >> Yeah, I don't actually don't have anything to report tonight, Woody. Uh from my last report, um the ZBA's regular meeting was actually scheduled
for tomorrow night, but they uh couple of the members had scheduling conflict, so it's going to be renoticed for a different date. I'm not sure when just yet. >> Okay. Thank you, Larry. Um, conservation commission, we met last week. Um, the
only thing on the agenda that pertained to us was 34 Central Street and they asked for a continue. So, I'm sure they'll be on our next agenda. MVPC Kristen Oadi. >> Um, we haven't met. The commissioner MVPC commissioner meeting is tomorrow
and um I updated the board on the planners meeting at our last meeting. So no news. >> Okay. Okay. So we'll hear a report on that meeting tomorrow next at our next meeting. >> Yep. >> I have nothing else on the agenda.
Identicate a motion to adjurnn unless anyone has anything to say. Move >> to adjurnn. Do I have a second? Second. Very good, Larry. Scott.
Um, roll call vote. Pete, Larry, >> Steve, >> Scott, and I vote yes as well. Everyone, have a good night. And >> thank you everyone. >> Thank you. Take care. Thank you.