Well, folks, I have 7 o'clock, so we'll get started. And today is April 1st, 2026. As a preliminary matter, this 49th chair of the new planning board, permit me to confirm that all members and persons anticipated on the agenda are present
and can hear me. Planning board members, when I call your name, please respond in the affirmative. Peter Pos. Yes, sir. >> Larry Murphy >> here. >> Scott Ker. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. >> And Steve Benjamin.
>> I >> very good. Town staff Kristen GR planning director. >> Yes. >> Um Martha Taylor, special projects planner. I don't know if Martha's attending or not tonight. And Sadi would
go ahead. I just letting you know you're correct. She won't be attending tonight. >> Okay, great. She's she's been very busy with us lately, so she deserves a med. Satie Woodward, assistant planner >> here.
>> Very good. Uh, good evening. April 1st, 2026. Open meeting of the ny plating 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 3820 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 sloom. us and entering meeting ID number 83271413056. The passcodes 108790
or by calling in 1 1929-2056099 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 to local access channel cable channel 9 on Zoom in at newetv.wicksite.com slashtnctv and the recording will be available on the new access YouTube channel.
Meeting bit excuse me meeting business ground rules. Before we turn on the first item on the agenda, permit me 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, I will go down the list board members inviting each by name to provide any comments, questions, or motions. For all attendees, please remember to mute your audio when you are not speaking. On Zoom to use the mute button
and on your telephone if you call in, use star six to toggle mute and unmute. There will be an opportunity for public comment and questions during the public hearings. I will seek questions and comments from the members of the public through the raised hand function.
Excuse me. Video conference participants to raise a 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
participants list. Telephone participants to raise your hand on a Zoom meeting. Hit star9 on your telephone keypad. Each participant will be called on to provide his or her name and address and then may ask a question or make a
comment. Please do your best to keep your comments 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 and or their representatives 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. So that brings us uh to the first item on the agenda. Um leazison and meeting reports. We have uh CBA. Um that would be Larry. Larry, do you have anything to report? Just briefly,
Woody, uh the ZBA, as you know, normally meets on the third Thursday of the month, but because of scheduling conflicts, they're meeting uh actually on the third Wednesday of the month, so two two weeks from tonight, uh in person. Uh the only thing on the agenda
I know of so far is a continued public hearing on 15 Central Street, uh Sunset Drive, excuse me. Um, that's a a special permit to take down an existing dwelling and and erect a new dwelling in its place. Um, so that's about all I have
for tonight. >> Okay. Thank you, Larry. Uh, conservation commission. Um, we've been meeting once a month and our meeting will be next Tuesday. So, we haven't had an update. We'll have an update at our next
meeting. Um MVPC s do you have anything to report? >> Yeah. So um the last planners meeting um Kristen was out but I attended um they
gave some various presentations on um grant opportunities available to municipalities in m Massachusetts including um the onetop for growth uh grant application portal. Um And they're I think the from what I understand the
grant cycle is kind of open right now. They're accepting um expressions of interest and then the deadlines for many grants are um early summer. So um good to know lots of good information. So
yeah. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Um, moving on to the next item on the agenda, meeting minutes. Has everyone had a chance to uh review the meeting minutes for March
18th, 2026? And are there any uh corrections or concerns with the meeting minutes? >> Um, I've seen them, Woody, and and they look fine to me as drafted. >> Okay.
Everyone else satisfied with the meeting minutes? See some nods, right? >> Well, uh, Woody, I I reviewed them. I wasn't at the last meeting, so um >> Okay. >> Just to know.
>> Very good. Thank you, Scott. Um, well, then I would entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes for March 18, 2026. So move. Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Thank you. Uh, roll call vote. >> Pete, >> I'll be abstaining. I wasn't present. >> Yep. Correct. Uh, Larry. >> Uh, yes. >> Um, Scott, you're abstaining as well.
>> No. Um, I was there that meeting, so I would say yes. >> Oh, okay. Thank you. Um, Steve, >> yes. >> And I vote yes as well. So that takes care of the uh meeting minutes.
Um, I have 708. So we have a few minutes. Uh, do we want to jump ahead on the agenda? And um, do we have uh anything from Kristen or Sadi for a planners report this evening? Um, I I just got back yesterday, so I
don't have any updates other than getting up to speed on what we're discussing tonight. >> Well, I I just just going back to the meeting minutes. I think we voted on the 18th. Um, even though it was a two meeting u
motion or maybe it was a I think it was a two meeting motion. Um, I think Pete abstained from the 18th and I would be abstaining from the next one. I'm not sure if we need to um
um do two motions. Just just a question um for meeting minutes. Uh Satie, do did we have one set of meeting minutes or do we have two? I thought it was just the
minutes from the last meeting on the 18th. Um, >> okay. So, it's just from the last So, from the 18th, >> I believe. So, at least that's all I had planned into the into this meeting. Um, >> okay. Sorry about that. Um, having a
hard time hearing. So, I would abstain from the 18th. >> Okay. We'll note that for the record for the meeting, man. Okay. Sie. >> Yes. Got it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Sorry. >> Yeah, >> no worries. >> Yeah, no worries, Scott. Does uh you had
me wondering if I missed a set of meeting minutes. So, >> okay. >> And with no planners report and Larry doesn't have his dad jokes book, if the members of the public, we'll just hold on for a few minutes. We'll get our first public hearing uh underway at
7:15. >> Um I have a couple little things I can report on. Um, >> okay. That would be great. >> Yeah. Um, so I've been keeping you all updated on the um Boston Road to uh
Boston Road Route One intersection um improvement project. Um, and we were we had been waiting for a while on um the MO board to take a vote on whether or not to award the funding and
they voted to award Newbury this funding. So um there will be some probably some you know like organizing with um MVPC about um a match and all
that. But um hopefully that um we can you know begin the process of getting a design study going. Um and yeah so that's it's kind of exciting. Um and then um
the Waste Watchers workshop series has been Can everyone hear me? Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um the next the third and final workshop uh in the Waste Watchers series is on um next Wednesday. So, myself um a
member of the select board and our health agent will be in attendance um just figuring out some long-term plans for reducing waste in Newberry. So, um that's exciting as well. And that's all I have to report for today.
>> Okay. Thank you, Satie. Hey, Woody. May I ask a question of Satie? >> Yes. Go right ahead, Steve. We have about three minutes. >> I'll be quick. Uh, Satie, the waste watchers, does that get into the the trash going to the transfer station? Is that recall?
>> Yeah, that's that's a part of it. Yeah. Um, >> okay. Well, again, I uh hope you all consider the um you know, the high cost of recycled materials nowadays where it's a it's no longer a cash cow and it cost
money. So, that perhaps limiting the recycling facility to Newbury residents would be in the town's financial interest. I may have said this before, but I'm just going to reiterate that I think we ought to think about that.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. Um the date of town meeting just so anyone that may be watching we could remind them of the date of the town meeting.
Is that May 5th? It is Tuesday, May 5th, 700 p.m. in the Triton Auditorium. Um, what else? I did attend the select
board meeting last night when they reviewed the warrant articles. Um, there are several citizen petitions that have come in. Um and I think the um select
board took votes on each of the articles relative to supporting them. Um so I think the next steps leading up to town meeting are a FINCOM meeting where they review the articles um primarily the financial ones. I'm not sure they
generally um spend too much time on the zoning amendments, but just vote that it's the will of the people in terms of the zoning amendments that the planning board has been working on. So, all of that, I believe, gets wrapped up and the
select board generally signs the warrant um at their second meeting this month, which I believe is April 14th. and then all the materials will be posted with the town clerk and available for everybody. But yes, Tuesday, May 5th.
>> Very good. Thank you for that, Kristen. >> I have 7:15. So, we'll get into our first public hearing this evening. Um it is uh definitive subdivision plan 15 central street assesses map U1 lot 53
for a two lot subdivision applicant owner Mike Becker 15 Central Street Bfield LLC. Uh welcome Mike and whoever may be with you. >> Good evening Woody. >> Yep. >> And members of the board.
Yep. And uh we went on a sidewalk March 4th and I'll let you I'll let you get started and then we'll we'll talk about the sidewalk. Sorry. >> Um I'm here this evening with my partner Carissitas, the uh project engineer,
civil engineer Jack Sullivan, and the project surveyor uh Paul Pinocchio. And uh with that, I will turn it over to Jack to uh discuss the revisions based on the feedback from the peer reviewer. >> Great. Thanks, Mike. Uh hi board
members. My name is Jack Sullivan. I'm the project engineer. Um Paul, if you're on that, we could display the he was going to share the plans if that if we can do so. >> I requested to share. I need permission to share.
>> Hello Kristen, you're muted. >> Satie, are you host? Are you able to see a way for him to share? >> Can't hear you, Satie. Sorry.
Okay. Give me one second. Sorry. Okay. Paul, are you able to share now? >> Yes. >> Okay. Awesome. >> Okay. Okay. So, this is um sheet one of the U subdivision plan, which is
basically showing the um area around the site. What's in black is the um site itself. We did add a notation on here that the property is located in the um um zone two um to a water supply. So,
that's uh the only change on sheet uh sheet one. Um sheet two is the existing conditions plan. There was no changes to this plan um since the original submitt. Uh sheet three is basically showing the
by right plan which is just showing the roadway coming in with the culdeac. Sheet four is the proposed um subdivision plan. Again there were no changes to this plan. And sheet five is our proposed um subdivision site plan.
>> Yep. I can take I can take it from there, Paul. On sheet five. Okay. >> Um so the the big change to sheet five um our previous design for the roadway, we were utilizing uh porous pavement. Uh since the site's within a zone two of
the water supply, the peer review um felt that was not the best choice for storm storm water management for this site. um in re view reviewing D policy, it can be used, but the it's restricted and it's it it was a bit cumbersome. So, I
redesigned the drainage. I actually think with this design, it's a better design now for storm water management. I added a trench drain um right at the uh beginning of our roadway um just off of Church Street and water will come down
that roadway beed with a trench drain. It'll convey to a deep sump hooded manhole and then from there it will convey out to a rain garden. So it's really a low impact design. Um the
challenge on this site um was just getting water from that trench drain to a lower point on the site. But I can do this all by gravity. It's not a a pump system. by re by locating the rain garden where we show on this plan. Now,
um it'll all be gravity fed. Um I have some pre-treatment before the storm water gets to the rain garden. There's a a level spreader um which is basically just a rip wrap apron. Um so any total suspended solids would be removed prior
to going to the rain garden. And the rain garden is basically uh the board probably knows, but in case there's members of the public listening as well, it's it's basically a um a smaller scale uh type detention pond with plantings.
Um it's only 2 ft deep. There's an emergency overflow, but under my storm drain calculations, the two 10 and 25 year storm event are fully contained. And 95% of the 100red-year storm, which
is almost a 9-in storm event over 24 hours, is contained with this rain garden. And it's a nice it's actually a nice landscape feature as well as a drainage feature. Um so, um that was our major change. Um we did receive the peer
review comments late this afternoon. Um I did have time to review them, um quickly. I don't know if we'll read them into the record or not, but um it sounds like we're very close with our design um to what the peer review comments came
back. Um by eliminating the por pavement that really eliminated one of the big hurdles for the storm water. Um there was a question on sewage loading on the lots. So the the new lot with the duplex
is a 60,000 foot lot. Since it's in a zone two, but under title five, you can only have six bedrooms maximum. And where the existing house is, that's a 48 a little over 48,000 square foot lot. That can have four bedrooms max. So that
could be noted. Um, a future septic design is going to have to go to the board of health and they're the ones who would review that design, but we could we could give the loading requirements pretty easily. Um the third comment was um that we need
some soil testing done where the rain garden was located which we know um we did have a soil evaluator out um we did a series of about 10 test holes all over the site but we did not do them in the area of the rain garden. I let Mr. Becker know that that would be needed
and that was a comment. um we have no problem with that, but the the soils on site were consistent, but we would we would need to verify that um the groundwater table and soil types are similar to what we've seen so far on this site. Uh there was a comment as
well that the existing and proposed tree lines should be shown. We haven't done that at this point, but that could easily be a condition, I think. And there was um a comment that the top and bottom of retaining wall grades on each side of the roadway coming in off of
Central Street should be added. That's pretty easy to do. It wasn't done, but again, um if the board uh tonight feels that could be a a condition, that's fine. If if they feel we need to come back and have one more final set of plans, we're we're fine with that as
well. But to us, it seems like we're on the home stretch. Um, I know you guys did a sitewalk. So, I think at this time I'll turn it back to the board to get some feedback on the sitewalk and um, some of the comments I made. If you have any questions, I'll gladly try to answer
them. >> Okay. Thank you, Jack. Um, so turning to the planning board, I guess. Uh, Pete, do you have any questions or comments >> um >> on what's been said on our sitewalk?
No, but I'd like to um if we could uh I'd like to hear from staff because I know that they've been talking with uh uh MVPC and then after maybe those comments we can comment more on our sidewalk concerns. >> Okay. Okay. Sounds good.
Um Chris and where where are we with uh I was at at that sitewalk as well. Um, where are we with um, MVPC as far as them determining what's going on with
the intersection? >> Yeah, I can speak to that a little bit. Um, I got in touch with them today. They haven't sent the sketches yet, but we met with them on site um on the street on Church Street uh to discuss some
possible transportation um changes to that intersection. Um, and um, Kristen, I don't know if if you think if you'd advise that I go into detail just yet since we don't have the sketches, but um,
>> uh, >> well, I just I think it would be helpful that since the planning board sitewalk was our first discussion about the intersection, I feel like it would be helpful to um, review any observations
made then following the public comments. ments at the last hearing. Um, essentially, you know, what I think has been raised is there are some concerns about safety in terms of pedestrian or other non-motorized use of that area.
So, that's the question that we are talking with the transportation team at the Marramac Valley Planning Commission about is any ideas related to improvements there. And we also talked with Mike and Teresa and the applicant on the site visit about some of those
questions. >> Okay, Woody, >> go ahead, Pete. >> Okay, then I'll I'll make my comments. You know, we did the sidewalk and I'm very grateful that we were able to do the sidewalk. Um, and the concerns that I had, you know, was the uh the traffic
flow coming off uh uh off the central street onto uh onto Church Street um because it kind of moves quickly. As we were standing there, there were a lot of cars that came kind of at us and so that prompted a you know a query should
should we, you know, ask MVPC for some input and that's why I was curious as to what MVPCC had to say. So personal concern is I have some concerns with uh the speed of uh traffic coming off uh uh Central Street onto Church Street and what
safety measures should be made to address that. So those were my observations from the sidewalk and that's why I asked the question. Thanks. >> Okay, Larry, do you have any questions or comments? >> Uh just about the rain garden. Uh how how would you provide for maintenance at
the rain garden? Um, you're muted, Jack. Sorry. >> Yeah, I just realized that. Thank you. Thank you for letting me know. I was talking to myself. Um, there will be an operation and maintenance plan provided for the rain garden. It's it would it's
typical to uh landscape beds. Um, there's weeding that has to be done. If if plants die, they'd have to be replaced. Um there's mulch that that's put in there. Um it's, you know, once in a while you have to remulch. So, and
also that level spreader um would have to be cleaned of any I wouldn't expect much silt, but any leaves or branch buildup or things like that you'd have to take care of just to make sure that the operation stays consistent. But we will provide an operation maintenance
plan for the for the entire drainage system. Not only the rain garden, but the trench drain and the uh manholes. And um you know, typically they're inspected two or three times a year. >> Okay. So would there be a homeowners association
responsible for the maintenance? >> Mike, you can feel that, but I would think so because the roadway isn't just for the duplex lot. There's also parking for the um single family home. So that'll be shared. So I would think there'd be some sort of you know
for maintenance of that road for plowing um and then you could add the drainage operation maintenance to that as well. Yes, there was there was >> we could just um >> Okay. Well, I think that answers my
question. Thank you. >> Yep. Mike, you were having some problems there by the audio. Um All right. Thank you, Larry. Um, Scott, do you have any questions or
comments on the observation from the sidewalk or anything else there? >> I have no questions. >> Okay, Steve, do you have any questions or comments? >> I can't see Steve. >> Steve, you're muted, too. Sorry.
>> Thank you, Kristen. Steve, we still can't hear you. You're muted. There you go. >> Try try again. I do not have any questions. If anyone from the public has some comments, perhaps they will hear weigh in as well. Thank you.
>> Yep. Okay, we'll get to that, Steve. Thank you. Um my observations from the sitewalk were that the uh the length of line of sight to the proposed edge of the driveway kind of short
and cars came whipping into Church Street. Um so that's what triggered the FBPC as was already stated. My other concern is there's a substantial hill there. I mean, I know there's a retaining wall
on one side proposed on the subdivision uh roadway. Um my concern really is that that's your roadway will become a hidden drive um the way church streets can make
it now. So all of a sudden there's a car there as you turn on the church street. So I'm I'm anticipating and eager to see what MVPC comes up with for a solution there. And
from the sidewalk with them, I joined Sadi for the sidewalk for that and they had some suggestions and they were going to draw things up. Um, I mean it it would be a matter of turning into Church Street a little a little more of a 90
degree or not not a 90 degree but not at the angle that you turn in Church Street now and it would vastly improve the line of sight there and um as you turn on to Church Street. So,
I'm real I'd like to see what they come up with. And it would also help with slowing people down as they turn onto Church Street. So, um those are all observations I made on the sidewalk and or two sidewalks, I
should say, and I would really like to see what they come up with. Um does any of the plating board members or staff have anything else to say before I turn to public comment? hear nothing. >> Yeah. Well, sorry, Woody. It's Kristen.
Excuse me for interrupting. Um, just um Satie and I have had some preliminary conversations with MVPC. So maybe Satie, it's worthwhile just mentioning a few of the things that were discussed with Brendan. We are still waiting for, you
know, some design concepts of potential improvements to consider, but um maybe it's worth just mentioning a couple things that have been talked about so far. >> Yeah, sure. I can do that. Um can you hear me? Okay. Is it? Okay. Um
yeah, so it seems like the easiest possible or just like you know the one that makes the most sense. Um the option is to kind of what Woody was just describing is kind of teeing off Church Street against
Central Street and um instead of uh you know an acute angle there, it would be more of a a perpendicular turn, a right turn onto Church Street. Um and we would square off the um
the like corners of the intersection there and um make it narrower so that it is you know it encourages cars to slow down um entering Church Street and placing some um structures on either side of the entrance there. Um there was
also um in conversation with MPPPC the idea was brought up um and with the planning board chair and vice chair um the idea to deadend the
um entrance to Church Street and have cars only enter from the other side. Um and then that would, you know, make it so that just the residents of Church Street are the ones traveling on that
road. Um there the ideas are still very much, you know, in discussion. So, um but there's there's a there's a couple different things that we've discussed. Um and it'll be good to have a visual visual of different options.
Can you send us a uh >> Sorry, Woody. Satie, would it be possible that you could send uh us and the design team the the possible options? I I love all those options, by the way. >> Yeah. Yeah, I can definitely um forward
those to you once we receive them from MPPPC. For sure. >> Great. Um, and after Sat's comments, I'd like to further comment. Um, um, as time's gone on here, I'm not a
fan of closing Church Street. Um, I think more people use Church Street than we we and we we would know. Um, so and by being there quite a few times
now, I think that with the appropriate angle there, it would slow cause down quite a bit and it would all be take place on town property. It wouldn't it wouldn't entail um
going into either side of the road there. Um, also the in the front of that existing house that's there now just as uh some sort of a a planting bed, something that encroach the right
away would would help. But like I said, I I really would like to see what MVPC comes up with because leaving the road would open would be a great option. That whole neighborhood's gone through some uh reconfiguration of traffic patterns.
Well, years ago, over 10 years ago, and a few streets in that in the downtown area, village of Biffyfield was configured one way. Church Street was one of them. It used to be two-way. And at the other end of Church Street, I
think it contin to be Church Street after you go through the stop sign. Um the end of Moody Street and the other end of Church Street were both reconfigured so that you came out to Central Street and Main Street, you come
in this example, you came out to Main Street in more 90° angles so that your line of sights were better looking both ways whereas before they came out at acute angles like this. So, I just wanted to mention that for the public
and for the applicants to look at that Moody Street, you can still kind of tell where they've planted grass and reconfigured uh the end of Moody and the other end of church. So, I just wanted to mention that. Um, now Jack, if you
could please uh pull the map down so we can so I can see the thing if you don't mind. Stop share screen. Um, now I'll turn it over to public comment. Um, do we have any raised hands
this time? >> Um, yes. You have plent of the public. Um, >> Steve, Steve, go ahead. I'll start with the planning board member first. Sorry, >> Woody. I share your concerns about deadend streets. Uh certainly where I
live, I'm well aware of how plowing presents some interesting challenges when you have a dead-end street as well. So I think the reservations that you voiced are well founded. Thank you. >> Yep. Thank you, Stephen. It was at first
it seemed like a great idea, but I know they've caused problems in the past with plowing, with emergency response, with um just overall. So I believe I I know church streets use more than it's it's
not just a simple quiet street on all the sidewalks I've been there. Multiple cars have gone by us while we were standing there. So they use it to cut through and they don't so they don't go all the way down to the post office. Like I said, it's always reconfigured in the past to make things safer and the
traffic flow to go through easier. So all right. Now I'll turn to the public. Um, raise hand. Press raise hand. Say you press. >> Yep. Uh, Melissa. >> Hi. Um, thank you for saying Oh, my name is
Melissa Gasper. My husband Larry is here to three Johnson Lane >> where our home is right behind the gas station which is next door to this property. Um, thank you for talking about how the street is busier than it
might at first seem. It is a cut through to West Newbury and other sections. And from living here and going in and out, I mean, people fly down that road and sometimes don't even see the stop sign.
My husband and I have seen that a few times that people just forget it's a four-way stop or they're not used to it or they don't see it. Um it's a heavily traffked road and um but thank you. It seems like you
do understand that. But also, have you do you have a plan about where those mailboxes are going to go that are because it being a one-way road, the postal delivery truck can only go
down that road one way. So, all the mail mailboxes have to be on the right hand side. >> Yes. Right where the driveway is. >> Yep. Um, did we discuss that on the sidewalk? And I'll let the applicant
respond to that if they if they will, please. >> Um, Mike Becker, are you frozen right now? >> Uh, no, I'm here. Um, so, uh, we discussed on the sitewalk was I think we'd have to move those about five feet
to the left. Uh, Paul, do you want to you want to weigh in on that? Is there five feet there? >> Yes. Um, we talked about moving the um the two meal boxes to the just to the left of the utility pole that's out
there now. So, you're talking about five feet of moving those mail boxes that are there to the other side of the utility pole. >> Okay. And there's enough room. >> Yes. I'm not picturing that there was enough five feet was enough there, but
okay. Um, I did have another question, but it wasn't about the road or the traffic, so should I wait for other comments? >> No, go right ahead. Go right ahead. Um, I would just like to ask the
planners and builders if they have confidence that they are going to be able to build this structure even with the ledge that is pervasive on that property. I mean, we've seen
neighbors have to deal with ledge. It took months and months and months of hammer drilling, chemicals, everything. Um, have you tested like do you have confidence you're going to
actually be able to build this where you have it? >> We've done test fits at the property uh 8 plus feet deep in in the area where the the duplex is. Uh, so I'm not so concerned with that. I'm sure there'll
be some hammering where the ledge is, where the uh road is coming out to the front. I have extensive experience with ledge. Uh I don't think it's going to be a problem. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> All right. Thank you, Melissa. Any other raised hands from the public? >> Um there is u Mike F. >> Okay, Mike F. Um just your name and full name and address for the record and uh your questions and comments, please. Hi,
uh, Mike Fabiano. I just recently purchased 17 Church Street. Um, I moved in recently. Um, fully aware that there was going to be, you know, this proposed subdivision. Um, I definitely have a list of things that I, well, I wasn't there for the last meeting. This is the
first time joining. Um, the first thing I like to talk about would be that the road that we were first discussing. Um, I think it's a great idea getting some um opinions from the the outside company. Um, but I do like that idea of
deadending that street. Um, I know snow load is a concern, but even just pulling down it this afternoon, you can there's definitely a lot of room there to store snow in my opinion. But like you guys said, we'll wait back to hear from for from their review. But I do agree with that. I think dead ending is a fantastic
idea. I think that will satisfy definitely the surrounding neighbors including myself. Um, as far as the duplex um, and the building itself, um, one of my concerns is of course
screening and you know this structure that's going to be built on top of this ledge and it's basically going to be towering over my backyard now. Um, so I know, well, correct me if I'm wrong, I'm pretty sure the height restriction for
buildings is 35 ft. Um, you know, you can add another 10 to 15 feet depending on exactly where this house is going to be put on top of this ledge. I mean, I know the ledge kind of slopes down towards the back of the property there, but I'm just very concerned about the
height of it, the location of it to my property line, and any possible ways of screening this with leaving trees, adding plantings and a plant wall. I'm not I'm not asking, you know, to plant abites down the front to back of the property. I'm I'm not asking for that at
all. I'm just thinking we can talk about something, agree to a screening method for my property. Um, would someone like to answer that? And it would also be nice if maybe you popped up a map and so you could show Mike where the house location is going
to be. So with his first time attendance, it would be great for him to see where that is in location to his property next door. >> Is call still appearing? I believe he's uh do they still have
sharing access? Kristen Satie >> should but Jack if you'd like to share I can um >> Satie if you can have Paul if you can enable him he he has the plans. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Thank you.
>> And Mr. Chairman what what was the butter's Mike's address again? >> 17 Street. >> Yep. Uh, what sheet do we like to see? This is the roadway coming in. So, this is number 17. I believe his house is right
here. And the proposed duplex be back up in this area here. >> Paul, can you pull the seat with the uh topography? >> Yes. So, this one here is the existing conditions plan. So, there's a large hill here. His
house is over in this area right here. And again, the proposed duplex is back in this area right here. >> There is a pretty large boulder to the immediate right of this house that would
screen the house from the road. Uh maybe not the uh the duplex, but as you can see, there's pretty significant topography uh from where we're proposing to put the house down the hill uh in the looks like
76. >> Yeah. elevation versus the height of the uh >> if I could I just um >> I can't really it's between 76 and 80
two 80 uh elevation for the uh proposed duplex and the ledge is at it looks like >> I don't know Paul can you zoom in on that? >> I'm trying to do that now. Yeah, >> sorry. Yeah, the ledge is up around elevation
90. Let's just say an average 90. >> Yeah. So, ballpark 10 ft higher than the the ground elevation of the front of the building. >> Correct. >> Of the duplex. >> Yeah. >> So, and then the ledge outcropping is
I've been out there. I'm going to say it's 8 to 10 feet tall on top of that. >> The big boulder. >> Yep. I see that. >> So there'll there'll be some screening provided by that. We have no intention of removing any trees to the left of
that ledge boulder between there and the retaining wall that's shown on the plan. So from the perspective of screening, uh I don't know exactly where your house is based on this plan, but it seems like there will be a pretty good amount of screening with it's pretty dense foliage
now uh that exists. pine trees and other trees that Paul, do you have the tree planted? >> Um, yes. Hold on. >> So, the top of that ledge is basically in line with the back of my house and then from your plans here where the
proposed duplex is going, it basically, you know, from pretty much like you open up my back door, you'll just bam, you'll see this big duplex there. Um, so I guess another question too might help kind of answer would be what's exactly the setback from the property lines is where the start of this duplex is going
to be because I don't I don't know if I see or if maybe I miss it in whatever you submitted if you had setbacks. We're well outside of the setbacks. >> Okay. Well, >> yeah, this is a good plan to see the trees and the foliage if you want to go
over that first and then uh we'll go over the distance on the setbacks. But as you can see, there's a lot of trees around that uh around that ledge outcropping. Uh and anything that's from the ledge to the left, uh we won't remove. uh some of
them that are kind of sloping down the hill where the house is going to be will get removed. Uh but that they look to be redundant relative to what you're looking through like this four 8 10 in 18 20 in trees before you'd even get to
the ones that we're going to remove which would be in front of the shed. >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm not I'm not too concerned with the ones that close to the ledge. It's def there's definitely a a good from the back side of the ledge towards I my shed's not really on there.
Essentially your shed and then my shed are pretty close to each other. So I've just been looking to hopefully work with you on some extra screening between the back side of the ledge towards my shed. Not looking, like I said, I'm not looking to put up a big wall there or anything. I'm just looking to work with you.
>> Yeah. If you want to pass along your contact info to Satie or Kristen, um happy give you a call. We'll take a walk and discuss, >> you know, what stuff we can add in addition to what trees we can preserve in there. >> Yep.
>> That would be great. >> The location uh plan where you can show the the setbacks. >> Yeah, Paul, confirm. I I have the side minimum sideyard set back being 25 ft. >> Yeah, we're greater than we're well over
25 ft. >> You have a ballpark figureish on the left side. It looks to be 40 or 50. On the right side, I think we're around 30. That's ballpark. Is this a setback for the roadway or is
this a setback for the duplex that you're trying to figure out right now? I >> I think he's asking how close it's going to be outline. Do I have that correct? Is that the question? >> Yeah, correct. >> Okay, thank you. >> The road is uh 36 ft just looking at the
scale. Um >> so it looks to be more than that. Just eyeballing it. >> The road doesn't bother me because like you said, there's that big ledge sticking up there and there's some pretty good screening with that. And I believe you guys are cutting in about
what five feet downish I think was said maybe. Correct me if I'm wrong. >> Yes. something like that. I'm just using that for uh >> you know scale. >> Yeah. Yeah. Like the front the the road screening I mean there is I mean with lights coming in and turning in that is
an issue that I have also but I mean it's kind of is what it is. You have to leave as many trees as you can with that. Um, and then from the end of the your proposed road there, is there going to be a driveway that connects to the duplex or is that like a walking area or
>> Oh, that'll be there'll be driveway. There'll be a driveway for each unit. >> Okay. So, then that would be a concern I have with uh lights turning and you know, essentially you could have at least four cars there. Quite a bit of traffic coming in and out. So, I mean,
we got I have bedrooms on that side of my house. So there's definitely a screening concern I have on that side. >> Your house >> in addition with the with the >> where that retaining wall ends. >> Sorry, repeat. >> The retaining wall that runs along the
left side, is that approximately the back of your house? >> Yes. Is >> um Did you have any other questions, Mike? >> I'm sorry. I know I kind of took the took the floor. back in a pause.
>> No, but are you do you have any other questions other than what you've stated so far? >> Um, >> screening concerns really is the major thing that I've heard here. >> Yeah, the screen concern I I can't really I won't talk about the road the entrance to Chair Street just because
it's it's in further review it appears. >> Um, and I and another concern >> Sorry. >> No, go ahead. Go ahead. Um and just another concern that I had too is this is much more future thinking. Um is just
you know this is you know say this you know this all happens and then down the road you know a fear of mine is you know an ADU coming up in this place. So then you your two family turns into a three family and then your single family out there could turn into a two family. So
that's a fear I have is that you know these ADUs you know down the road you could just have this pop up and and now what now we got you know triple the traffic there. >> I can take that Mr. chairman with I mean
ADUs, yeah, they they will pop up, but in Newberry where you're on septic and we're in a zone 2 water supply, we're limited on bedroom count. And as I stated earlier, for for the duplex lot, we're a little over 60,000 square ft. You're allowed one bedroom for every
10,000 square feet of land area. And we've already um said this will be three bedrooms per unit, so six bedrooms. So th this lot wouldn't support a future ADU unless sewage ever became available, but as long as it's on septic, no.
>> Okay. >> All right. All right. Thank you, Mike. And Mike and Mike, I would encourage uh Mike contact uh >> Kristen Sadi and give your contact information. I encourage the two mics to have a discussion. >> Thank you. before the next meeting. That
would be great. So that your concern concerns can be met. So Mike Becka seemed open to that. >> Thank you for comment. >> Yep. Um any other raised hands, Kristen?
>> Um there is Joyce. A couple. >> Okay, Joyce. Um your name and address for the record and your questions, comments, please. >> Okay. Can you can you hear me now? Okay. um
>> 8 Johnson Lane. Uh we abut the gas station in the back. So we look across to um the property. Uh what I have a question for is
one of the plans shows a big turn around. It looks like um and I what couldn't tell from where the duplex was whether this turn around you're going to have is going to
go around the building. If so, how many trees are going to be removed? Um and because I couldn't find one that showed both the duplex and this rotary and maybe you're not having it. That's
what my question is. Could you >> I can take that. That's the uh the by right plan. We have no intention of putting that there, but we're required to show what could be installed by right. >> Oh, so that right there you're not at the moment planning on having.
>> We were not ever planning on having that will not be done. >> Oh, that that Thank you. because I was afraid of all the trees that might have to come down and where we're so close. Um, thank you very much. >> Okay, you're all set with questions,
Joyce. >> Um, that's all I had. Thank you. >> All right, thank you for your participation. Um, next raised hand, Kristen Oadi. >> Yeah. Um, Tom Rogers. >> All right, Tom. Name and address for the
record and your questions or comments, please, sir. Yes, it is Tom Rogers and my wife Patricia at 15 Church uh two doors down. We we uh are abuing
the back of the property in question. Uh first of all, I I I I just got into this Zoom on my phone. I'm down in Texas. I was in a car. I did catch most of what you said, but um I just wanted
to comment on the driveway. Number one, uh I appreciate uh that you've got that drainage system uh considered there because that would have been a huge problem for me because all that water coming down the hill ends up in my property. Um it's already washing it out
um even the way it is. Um, so I appreciate that that uh you've got that little sprinkler garden back there. But the other uh point of the safety issue with the driveway there is the fact that uh we have been trying to close off that
intersection with uh Central Street for years uh due to the safety concerns. The the traffic whips around that corner. They actually did make it into a 90 degree turn, but it it just by people driving cutting the corner, they've made
it into almost a straight run now. Uh and that probably continue to happen at some point in the future. Um I appreciate your uh concerns about the plowing, but as Mike said, uh there's plenty of room there to store snow. Um
so that's got to be considered as a viable option. And also the the the traffic coming down there is really detrimental to the people living in the church on the other side of Church Street. Uh they have little kids, grandchildren running
around there and uh it's a really unsafe situation. Uh if you want to see how many cars come down that road, you can look at my security camera uh footage and you can see that there's a a large number of
cars coming down the street. Maybe uh 10% uh five to 10% of the cars that come down the street. There's uh I there's that many going up the street the wrong way on the one way. So, and stop sign
>> and and they they blow through the stop sign like it's not even there. I've got all that video footage if you'd like to see that. >> Um but but as far as that uh closing off Church Street, I think I'd like to be involved in a further conversation
there. Uh then the second point is getting to Mike's uh comments on, you know, having that the new house back there. It's, you know, where I used to look at where I look at woods now and for the last 40
years. I'm going to be staring at a two family house, which hey, I mean, you know, you have the right to develop a property. I get that. But the least number of trees that can be cut down and the most uh, you know, trees that can provide
cover would be beneficial to everybody there. So, I think that that's That's the two things I had to say. >> Okay. >> So, yeah, I'm done.
>> Okay. Thank you, Tom. Thank you for your comments. And, um, if it's possible, you're at you're at uh 19 Church Street, >> 15 Church. 15 Church, right on the corner of Church and Downfall.
>> So, uh, you know, the stop sign's right in front of our house. Uh, I can show you how people don't stop at the stop sign. I can show you how people go the wrong way up the oneway street all the time.
Uh, cutting it for, you know, so Okay. Well, >> okay. If Mike Becca can reach out to Tom, too. when do you reach out to Mike at 17? That would be great as well. You guys
can >> bash it all out together. Block the property line and look at trees >> because you both share a property line with us with this lot. So, >> happy to have the involvement and the discussion. Uh, pass your pass your info
info along to the planning department. I will reach out to you. will reach out to Mike and uh we can walk the site and discuss what to do for screening. >> Yep. That Thank you. That'd be very helpful for their concerns. >> And thank you Tom for your comments and
uh questions. >> Thank you. >> Um any other public uh comment any other raised hands? >> Um I think that's it unless Mike did you have another question or >> Yeah. Yeah, I just want to I just want
to say again, I think that >> deadending Chair Street is a fantastic idea. I know a couple of the members were had concerns about the snow and and there it's there's plenty of room at that. And when you connect those dots between the corner of the house and the
end of the street there, there's there's a ton of space. Even a year like this that we have for snow, I definitely think it could accommodate for holding all that snow there. Um, and I really really hope that that option is considered. >> I think it's a pretty I think it's a
pretty fair compromise for, you know, a subdivision and satisfying all the neighbors. I think that's a pretty good compromise right there and and the safety and in handling a safety issue. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, members, do you have any other questions
or comments after everything we've just heard? >> Woody, if I could and could we drop the screen? Um, >> yes. >> Yes, please, Jack. I think Jack or >> Great. So, Woody, this is probably more directed towards um Kristen and Sadi.
Uh, so if there were to be any roadway modifications, would that be coming out of the applicants uh expense or would that be a town expense just for public knowledge? Um, I think in different parallel projects that I've seen, it's gone
forward in different ways. Um, as those of you on the board know, we just permitted um a multif family property on the other end of Central Street um on the other side of 95 and there was a
similar reconfiguration of well similar discussion about the intersection nearby and how making it more teed off would would solve some of the safety concerns. Um and that was ended up being a condition of that approval site plan
approval um and was a responsibility of the applicant. Obviously the town is involved because the select board has you know jurisdiction over roads um with input from the department of public works. So it was a process to sort of
have those conversations and you know have that discussion with the applicant. Um but it was a condition of the project that the applicant was responsible for. Um I think in other cases the town has you know adjusted
um as we heard earlier this neighborhood in Biffield has had some look at safety improvements over the years and this was before my time. So I don't know how any of those changes um were made historically but I can definitely look
into that. Right. Thank you. Anyone else for the planning board have any more comments, questions based on what we heard? >> What he ju just to reiterate what what Kristen touched on, it's important to remember that the issue of dead ending
Church Street is a select board decision. It's nothing that this board has the authority to mandate. >> Thank you, Larry. Okay. Um, other than that, I don't have any other questions or comments myself. And
hearing none, and no more raised hands, >> Woody, sorry, sorry to interrupt you. Um, I had a phone call from Annabutter um or a neighbor nearby. Um, I think um,
his name is Gary Scobert. I apologize. I don't have his address. um he gave it to me. I just don't have it in front of me at the moment. Um but he had a question about trees um in the back of the property. Um I don't believe he's present, but he
he expressed concern um about >> he's on Johnson Lane. >> Okay. Yeah. Um yeah, he was he was wondering about because I I think he he would be concerned if a lot of trees were going
to be taken down. um on the back of the back side of the property. So I I I believe it came up last time, but just to just to reiterate is what is the plan for the trees like behind the the dup the proposed duplex? >> I think one of the comments in the peer
review is to show the existing versus the proposed tree line. So let we'll add that specifically the proposed tree line just so everyone can see where the limit of cutting will be. I I think that'll clear we've had a lot of comments tonight on that. I think it would be
good to show that limit and then it's on a plan and everyone can see it and we can talk through it. >> Great. >> Okay. Thank you. And it would be helpful too with approximate house location and approximate driveway configuration because we're there's some confusion too
is people are thinking there's going to be a a subdivision loop there and there isn't. So that would be helpful for next meeting. >> Sure. >> Thank you. Um, so with all that said, if
no one else has any questions from the planning board staff or raised hands, I'd entertain a motion to continue this public hearing for 15 Central Street uh 15 Central Street to uh April 15th, 7:15
via Zoom. >> You have a motion. >> Thank you, Pete. Do I have a second? >> Second. Thank you, Larry. Roll call vote. Pete, >> yes. >> Larry, >> yes.
>> Scott, >> yes. >> Steve, >> yes. >> And yes, as well. All right. Thank you everyone. And uh we'll see you on the 15th. And uh good discussion. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Have a good night. Uh, next order of
business, old business, decision review for 2-8 Old Point Road, level two site plan review as built constructed changes to an approved site plan of record in a proposed new 40x40 pavilion at the Sunset Club at 2-8 Oldpoint Road
assesses map U02-0-153A. owner applicant the cottages commercial LLC Vincent code uh manager welcome Vince and I don't know if Steve's with you Steve so is with you tonight or not but >> no
don't think he was needed and I think he's still tied up in something in new report um >> well uh I guess the latest update is that it appears the uh town council had a chance to review the the document Um,
and I had a chance to review it. Looked like, you know, pretty standard legal language that that looked fine to me. So, um, don't know if the board had any comments on it, but uh, everything looked good to
me. >> Okay. Thank you, Vince. Um, and Sadie, if you want to pop up pop that up. Does anyone from the planning board? >> You've all had a chance to review now. uh town council's reviews. Is there any
questions on the on the decision the decision changes based on Lisa Me's review? >> Woody, uh I'll have a few as we move through it or I can go through them up front.
>> Okay. Um, do you want to Satie, do you want to go to the point where where Lisa's changes were? >> Yes. >> This is very minor reference change. >> Um, just some minor language here.
Okay. And this was I think Steve, you commented on this in the past. Um just more specificity surrounding the um the emergency flooding plan. Um just
specifying that it should be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit for the pavilion. >> Okay. >> Right. >> Right. >> And then >> and if I may, Woody, uh that's really addresses the concern and I think it's a good one to keep.
>> Okay. >> The other concerns I had voiced have to do in general about visual impairment and I can address them quickly if you like. It's under conditions of approval
with H and I being the conditions that I would point to. >> Okay. Um I notice under H which is lighting
there's um a mention of um uh where is it and what I'm trying to do is recommend that we make H and I consistent with one another. uh condition I talks about no flags, signals, kites or banners being hung from the pavilion. I think that's a
good idea, but it seems to me that that might also be something applicable to the illuminated sign that you see as you come on to the island and that similarly the illuminated sign is there but there should not be any additional uh flags,
banners, kites or whatever allowed on that illuminated sign just as we would not allow them on the pavilion itself. >> Okay. I believe we addressed this in the past. Uh
if Vince would like to speak to that, I I believe this has all been addressed in the past that the sign goes off at the end of business and that you weren't going to hang flags and other banners and such off the sign. Correct.
>> The the sign has always had a a a flag stand on it. Um, I I provided I guess there was a discussion that happened with with town council uh that I wasn't a part of uh a couple months ago regarding this issue. And I provided some pictures that go back to the '7s
that I got from the Miro showing there's the the the flag holder that's on this uh sign is the same one that's been there for for decades. Uh, and there's always been a flag that's kind of hung there, whether it said, you know, oil
change or open or whatever it is said. So, um, that's something that's been pre-existing and it's not something that we added. And, um, it's pretty consistent with pretty much every other business if you go down the island that has some kind of a flag pole to put
whether it's an open sign or something welcoming people. And I and I I know there's been a discussion with town council and my understanding that came out of that from the building inspector was that everything was fine.
>> Okay. Any Thank you, Vince. Anything else, Steve? >> Well, right. But but I'll note that uh the concern I had was having uh flags coming out of that existing flag standard, and I didn't realize it had been there for that long. But anyway, uh
they the flag itself would extend into what I call the public space of the roadway and sidewalk or if there were a sidewalk. So I thought that um in my mind that was part of the visual impairment, a potential vis visual impairment that I was concerned about
>> and continue. >> Anything else, Steve? No, that's uh basically it all comes down to concerns about visual impairment and those three items I'm flagging for the board. And with that, I'm done. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Uh Satie, anything else? We're on page seven. So, anything else beyond in this decision council review? Um, just specifying no occupancy permit for the pavilion shall issue until the applicant has fulfilled all conditions of approval of
this permit. >> I believe I believe that's everything. >> All right. Thank you, Satie. >> Um, any any questions from any anyone from the planning board? Further questions?
Um, any anything from town staff at this time? All right. >> Um, sorry. Uh, >> go ahead. >> I think that I know Steve, you had brought some things up to the board um
before this meeting. Um, I apologize. I can't remember them off the top of my head, but were those resolved? the the height of the pavilion. I think we confirmed that it won't be higher than 22 feet um
as shown in the um the sketches. Um and then I forget I apologize I forget the other thing that you had mentioned. >> No, I think um thank you for remembering the height issue. I call Vince submitted um or had a conversation with Kristen
that the height is 22 feet and I'm fine with well I'm fine with that sort of and that we're specifying a number but I thought that just as was we talk about a 40x 40 foot pavilion the third dimension should be added as a condition meaning
up to 22 feet as proposed. >> Okay. So I would suggest that when we talk about the just add the phrase the 40x 40x 22t high pavilion will yada yada. >> Okay. >> Uh aren't aren't usually the plans
attached as a portion of this or wouldn't that be my understanding that that would be something that would just be a an attachment with the with the plans? >> I I believe so Vince. Yes. >> Okay.
I would think that would address it. >> I know we've addressed the hype already in the past meeting. So, >> and it's it's also it's in the ZBA decision anyway. >> Yeah, it's it's memorialized in that as well. So,
>> all right. Any other Thank you, Larry. Any other questions? Hearing none. I'd entertain a motion to approve the level tight uh level two site plan review decision for 2-8 Old
Point Road as amended by Lisa me. >> I'll make that motion. >> Thank you, Larry. Do I have a second? >> Uh I heard Scott and saw Peter's mouth, so I'll take Scott. Thank you, Scott. Uh, roll call vote. Pete,
>> speaking for Scott, yes. >> Larry, >> yes. >> Uh, Scott, >> speaking for P, yes. >> Thank you. And Steve, >> no.
>> Okay. And I vote yes as well. Um, thank you, Vince, and good luck with your project and good luck with everything. >> Thank you very much. >> Have a good night. You too. >> Uh, moving on to the agenda. Uh, discussion. Kar construction request to
close out site plan review application at 84 Boston Road assesses map R36-0-2A. Owner Sled Road LLC applicant KN&R Construction Company. Um, do we have Kevin Whitney with us this evening?
>> Yes, I'm here. >> All right. Thank you, Kevin. Um Satie, do you have a letter from um K&R for from Kevin for closeout? >> I will pull it up so we can go through
it. >> Thank you. Right. Okay. Um, so we received this letter last week from uh I think it was last week um from Kevin.
Um this black text I believe is from the um Millennium Certified um letter. Um and this is the list of um proposed modifications to what was
approved. Um so the first um modification is DMH1 was not installed. Um I don't know if you um Kevin want to
explain um this this modification. >> So while we started the site work there and our our previous engineer of record there was Chris York. He has since he he left Millennium during the project. Uh
but we we hit quite a bit of ledge in the rear of the project. So he suggested some slight grading changes and that allowed us to eliminate CB3 and with the elimination of CB3 DMH1 was no longer required either. Um
you know just as as uh TJ took over our project. He he stated in the letter that um based on the way the site was graded, it was his opinion that removal of the catch basin was acceptable. Okay,
>> next. >> Um, and it seems like that second one is is similar >> described. Um, all right. Um, next is the location of the dumpster is different than the approved location and
the dumpster is not on a concrete pad or within a six foot high fence. And you've written um the location of the dumpster per plan was poor planning on our part. It's at the far end of the property and not convenient for pickup. The current location is not visible from the street. Um and you've said if this is a major
issue, we'll discontinue use and um simply take our small amount of trash to the transport transfer station on a weekly basis. Um and the next one, additional pavement was added to the left access drive and behind the back left of the building.
We've written it's we've decided it would be cleaner and easier for maintenance if the asphalt pavement connected from one driveway to the next entrance. This does not change the impervious area or the green space. The proposed gravel surface still drain to the catch basins just as the current
paved area does. Um the gates at either site entrance were not installed. Um the applicant has determined they do not need a gate for their business operations. We've determined that the gates in the plan were not in practical in a practical location and are not needed.
Um the tuminous curve was curb was installed instead of sloped granite curb. Um the bulk of this project was done during the time of material shortage after COVID cost of granite curb tripled. Installing the granite curb would have been an extreme burden.
Uh the patuminous curb performs the same function as granite and is in kind to what is used at adjacent properties in the area such as Newbury storage and the town transfer station. Um parking lot striping has been installed uh but the handicap spark parking space has not been painted.
Handicap spot has been painted and we've received the picture from you as well. Um the business sign was not installed. We've determined sign is not needed for your business operation. Holding tank was installed beside behind the building to handle any flow from the building's floor drains. The tank was
installed for interior floor drains. Inspection was performed by plumbing inspector. A portion of the pavement for the access drive along the western property line is over the lot line. This pavement is in the area of the access easement and the owner, Bill D. Francesco, has been made aware and is okay with it. Um, and then
at our request, you've added information about the tree buffer, um, and the lighting on the property as well. So, those are all of the proposed modifications. Um, >> good.
>> And I think, yeah, we had um me and Kristen had discussed beforehand um that we wanted to just clarify that tonight's discussion will just be about um these modifications that we've outlined here.
Um and we will be going through the approval of the modifications, going through the process, voting on the modifications before or discussing the asbuilt so that um any changes can be made in the meantime. Um and just to
clarify, if we want to vote on each individually, we can. We can, you know, wait to um we can wait until we're all on the same page about everyone before and then go on them all together or group them.
Um it's up to the board how we want to um go about this. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh Pete, do you have any questions or comments based on what we've heard? So, I just want to understand we're going to go through the list we just went through to make
comments on that before we talk about the asbuilt situation. Is that right? >> Yes. I I apologize if in Kristen's absence I was confusing things a little bit, but um she went over it with me in
detail and um we do have to go through the modifications first and then the asbuilt. >> Right. So the modification about the because I was getting a little confused as we were going through towards the end about the pavement for the uh easement. Can we just go through that one? Yeah.
One more time. >> Uh is it this one here? >> A portion of the pavement for the access driveway. Then I have faces. I don't I can't see anything more of that. Let me see if I can minimize the faces on my computer. Okay. A portion of the pavement of the access driveway along the western FL is
over the lot line. This pavement is in the area of the access easement. Okay. So the pavement extends into the into the easement. Is am I understanding that correctly?
>> So the the the the portion that we're talking about, Pete, is my driveway, the southern driveway. Um the there's about 10 inches of pavement le less than a foot that goes over the property line
within that easement area. Um I don't it doesn't seem to be a major issue. I I've discussed it with Bill D. Francisco. He's okay. He views it as an improvement to his property. >> Um and it's the area that he was using
as a access easement anyways. >> Okay, cool. Uh, and then as far as the dumpster goes, so you the dumpster you want to put in a different location. Is it going to be on on a on a cement slab as well? >> It's currently on asphalt pavement.
>> Okay. And I think the reason we went was cement so it wouldn't eat into the asphalt. Is that why? >> Um, >> I don't I I don't personally know why it was specked out as concrete. Um, it's pretty common that you know, it's just a
very small dumpster. It's a little fouryard. It's not a big giant thing. >> Okay, great. Those are my questions. Thanks, >> Mhm. >> Larry. >> Well, as I'm reading this correspondence, and correct me if I'm
wrong, this stuff is it's describing what's on the ground now. Correct. Uh yes, this was the the the the letter that that the um the engineer Millennium Engineering put together of items that that were not within the the original
plans um alterations, modifications, and um Kristen and Satie recommended that I that I give explanation for each item. I I mean some of it frankly looks
my gut reaction some of it's pretty benign like where you going to put your dumpster you know um whether or not you're going to have a gate or a sign uh others you know have to do with a drainage etc. But if if uh maybe of more
significance, but if it's what's there now, I don't know why we just don't go to an asbuilt plan and have a peer reviewer look at it and get his input. >> We we have submitted the as plan that has been submitted as well. >> You have? Okay.
>> Yes. >> All right. Um just to maybe help answer the question um that you know the plan does not um it's focused on you know the
streets the roadway the um utilities the drainage all those things will you know were represented in the asbelt plan and will be given a final review um by peer review but there some of these
other things, lighting, um, tree buffer. It seemed as though the board was interested in having a chance to discuss those with Kevin. So that was that was why at least I was thinking this work to have a two-phase. So you have an
opportunity to review that all the conditions of the decision have been met and then the final close out is the final review of the asphalt plan. >> Have all the decisions been met? The Have
>> have all the decisions been met? >> Well, that's the discussion right now is for you to review these updates from Kevin and determine if you are satisfied. I I understood there were questions about the lighting, so I thought that
would be something that could be discussed tonight. Um Kevin, maybe can you give a little update on that? >> So, uh the the lighting was all installed. We um I supplied Sadi with um um some uh manufacturers information,
cut sheets on the lights that were installed. I at the time we were not able to get the exact brand and model that was uh speced in our plans. We've got the same brand and it's a very similar model. Uh it's actually less
Newman's uh than than what was in my plans. Um I highlighted them in yellow. I don't have access to pull my plans up to show you the lighting plan, but they are in the record anyways. Um, but these are
actually a lower lumen uh uh amount and it was recommended by the supplier as a uh as a equivalent to uh what was in the plan. I reviewed the decision earlier today
and the original decision and they're not th those aren't downward facing shielded lights. They they protrude into the
Greenbell parking lot. And I believe I can see three fixtures on the Green Bell parking lot side of the building from the bridge on A Street. I I don't believe it's self storage. I believe it's your building. I can see
those lights from a mile away in a straight line through the gap and the two hills at the top. And uh I don't I don't see how with the lighting, I think you need a downward faces
lighting as proposed. It's my opinion. Well, we could we could still shield them if there's an issue. I would imagine >> they because they fell onto the roadway and uh onto Green Bell and into the woods.
It's a concern of mine for sure. >> All All of my lights are on switches as well. We do not need to operate them um overnight if if that's an issue. They could be shut off at night. I guess my response is to that is will
they I mean I don't know how we agree to change that now with the decision that we original decision that we have. Um, also the I mean it
I've noted that you've said before in the past that you get security cameras and um I don't know how that works in the dark, but so be it. I'm not the guest you have in your property lit at night with all that instructor equipment
there, but the spill over and the fact that that not downward facing is a problem with me and the fact that you can see the individual fixtures from the bridge on H Street is a real concern. I know there's a glow in the sky and
there's moisture in the air and snow from the facility behind you, but the I can actually see the fixtures from the bridge. >> Mhm. >> So, that's a concern of mine. Um,
do have do we have any more questions from planning board members? Um, Scott, I guess you're next. Um so what we have here is um it's a um really an applicant requesting
modification um changes to the planning board. Is that is that what's in front of us Kristen? >> Yes. As a process of closing out I I thought it would be helpful to have a discussion about things that have been
modified since the original decision. um which was four years ago at this point. Um but I think yeah. Yes. >> So >> if there's any chance to like make sure
that what is um built is consistent to the degree that the plan is comfortable and then I think we can move to the official review of the aspelt plan. >> Um okay appreciate that. Um but I think
looking at this project and then maybe projects moving forward um possibly using this project as a lessons learned um you know would it be better for an applicant prior to making
modifications or taking liberties um um for example doing batuminous curving instead of granite um and a number of other things that the applicant did uh in lie of what was um what they were supposed to do. Um is it
more um appropriate for the for an applicant to come before the board ask for a modification prior to actually doing the work? >> Yes, >> I can help you with that. Uh Scott, it's
actually letter O in the uh in the application. And one of our things is no modifications to approved site plan shall be made without prior approval of the planning board for the mod modification to be submitted to the board in writing and shall be in most cases bump bump. I'm losing my cursor
here. Uh uh subject to the same submitt review and hearing procedure. So yes, here's the frustration, Scott. We we we signed off on this project in 21. It is now 26. And so there was one extension that I know of. I don't know if there was a
second extension after that. I asked that question earlier and I couldn't get an answer. Um so I don't know if there's an second extension or if this application is expired. I haven't had that question answered yet. Kevin, was there a second extension? >> I thought we did do a second extension. >> So no, it's a yes or no. You either know
you did or you didn't. >> Well, no. I thought we did last year. That was my understanding. >> So in 25 we did an extension. I mean we we'll check it but so those another extension of 25. Okay. So yeah. So Scott nothing should be changed until an applicant comes before and says hey this
is what I want to do. So you're right. It's and it's already in in our in our agreement in our decision. >> Okay. So um I have been out there. I did look at the I think we did a sitewalk
out there and um we did look at um I think we looked at some plannings. We looked at the um was it an access or a gate that was supposed to be installed or
maybe a little help from you guys? I mean, was that one of the conditions >> we that we were looking at a vehicle parked on the easement where there was supposed to be a gate when we were doing the sidewalk for the closing out of uh self storage, Scott?
>> Yes, >> that's that's that's how I remember it. So, >> and there was pre- buffer at that time. >> Yeah. And the plantings um are they what um was originally Mr. Whitney? Were they uh actually what you
installed um per what was originally planned >> there? There was not an actual planting plan in place in my decision for that area. I believe in the decision I had to submit a planting plan to the to the
planning director for for review and that was we we did do that and now that the plantings are in place. Okay, >> that was my understanding and that's how we we handled that with with Kristen. >> Correct, Kristen?
>> Yes. >> I I I'll tell you I have an objection to this. I'm looking at Jay. It says, "A tree buffer at least 10 feet deep consisting of native species compatible with the existing woodland trees shall be planted along the northwest property
boundary to replace trees that were removed for the temporary construction of the access road between Boston Road and Newbury self storage site. So I'll just re a lot of the board members would hear the site was cleared before we even did our our first sitewalk. So a natural
corridor was taken away. Now I don't think a small burm with a couple trees on it and I think three trees is the number if I if I heard right in any way would would compare it to if it's 10 just say 10 ft deep. It's almost 85 90
ft. 900 square ft of what used to be a thick forest is in any way appropriate with a burm and a couple trees on it. Doesn't make sense. It's not what the intent was. It should not be allowed. And I am really, really bothered by it
to tell you the truth. >> Well, the reason why we did a burm, Pete, is because it's all ledge out there and we had to burm up soils so that we could have planting material for the trees. >> Kevin, was was there a wooded lot there before you started?
>> Yes, it was wooded. And the trees have more than 10 feet of spacing between them. >> Okay. So if there was woods before, >> I I I don't really care what you created to the site. What you need to do is reestablish what was there. And creating
the burn and putting three trees. Three, right? >> No, more than three. I believe I believe there's five. >> Five. >> If you if you look up the tree specs though, you do not plant these trees that tight together. It's just not how these trees get planted. I submitted all
the information to Chris. Kevin, let me explain to you. Five trees in 900 square ft is not much. >> I submitted all the information to Kristen. >> I understand that. I understand that. I'm clarifying to you what this decision
was and what this board was. And if I need to have a side conversation with the with the planning director who wasn't here at the time, who didn't understand the depth of our concerns, I can have that off offline conversation. But I'm going to tell you here in public that I'm not happy with this. I'm I'm
sorry that you're unhappy with it. With within the stipulation, it didn't have a certain amount of trees. It just it just says a tree buffer 10 10 feet wide. I believe >> at least at least 10 ft deep.
>> When you see depth, so you want me to have a tree trees that are planted with 20 feet of spacing cannot have 10 feet of spacing. It's just not how the growth works of the tree. Mixed mixed variety is what it's what it says. >> And I did do a variety.
>> Okay. So, >> I do not have the documentation. >> We can sit we can sit here and argue with one another. I don't want to do that. >> No, me neither. >> I'm expressing my frustration to you right now. Leave it at that. >> Mhm. >> Scott, do you have any other
>> Yeah. So, I mean those are really my comments. I think um this is uh you know hopefully it's an extraordinary um you know type of situation. Hopefully we can um um get better uh as a town um and as
a board um to um really um govern this uh a little better. Uh but you know I did see the trees uh Kevin and uh whether they were three or five um there were little trees
and um you know the burm wasn't uh 10t uh really in depth and um there were trees there before uh and whether they were uh surface rooted or you know all the top soil had been stripped off the
off the ledge um you know it's um it's h fairly easy to put a 10T foot um um you know burm in depth, you know, at about 14 to 16 ft in in um um I guess depth
and width and then depth and um you know bottom to uh to top. I think uh I think we could have could have done better there. Uh but having said that and uh I'm a little frustrated too. Um
um yeah, so that's all I have to say. >> Mhm. >> Thank you, Scott. Um Steve, do you have any questions or comments? I know this project was before you were on the board, but you've had >> Exactly.
>> Yep. I found myself reacting to the term better governance governance that uh Scott used. I may have trouble pronouncing it, but I think you know what I'm getting at. I think that this project is perhaps another example of many projects where the town has not
exercised good governance from the get-go, but rather has waited until we have gone far down a slippery slope and then we're trying to make amends when we're sliding down the slope at the same time as making a new decision. Maybe this is something uh that the board as a
whole might want to talk about in a workshop sometime about what we can do to avoid starting down slippery slopes and end up with better governance. Thank you. >> Thank you, Steve. Um, I respect what
everyone said and you know I the trees were intention this isn't to be accusational but at the time the trees were because of the clear cutting and to be a wildlife corridor. The lighting, we've been on lighting since self storage went
in because of the glow in the sky and night doc compliance. Um protruding light on neighbor properties. You know, a shielded light is what it says in the decision. Downward-f facing shielding light. Um
I I remember you came back to us at a meeting for uh a modification from hard curb to soft curb and then um I believe that discussion ended with getting rid of the piles of rock that were on the property or on self- storage
property and come back and he never came back. Um and then here we are today. So, not to get argumentative or anything, I've just pointed some things out, observations in the past that have gone on. um when it comes to gates out front
and stuff the the discussion items modifications discussion items and we can do that as a board we can go through some of the things one by one but I think maybe best now Kristen you're you want to move on to
asbuilt design now or where where we >> um I think it would be helpful if the board gives Kevin some guidance on anything that remains a concern. Um, it
sounds to me as though the recommendation is, but I, you know, I think the full board um should do a straw poll or something about the lighting. Um Kevin's described that it's a lesser lumens than what was in the
decision, but we also have heard that the decision as we as Woody just said required um building mounted shielded and designed at direct light downward. And I don't I I think probably they need to be
shielded. That that's what I'm hearing. But I think that would be helpful to give clear direction to Kevin about that particular issue. >> Yeah, I think I think the two issues that I've heard um most that are most
frustrating to some of the board members here are the lighting um and then the um really the planting. So, um, you know, there's other things, um, I think other liberties, other changes that have been
made that I think, um, speaking for myself that I could live with. Uh but and I wasn't around, you know, at the original um you know, approval. But I do think um the lighting and um and just
the buffer um if that could be revisited. And I'm actually happy to meet, you know, you out there, Kevin, >> uh walk around and spend some time uh and get to know you a bit and uh and try to come to a solution.
um happy to do that on a Friday afternoon or a Saturday. Uh but I think those would be the two issues that I think I've heard um you know uh tonight that are of the most concern.
>> I appreciate it, Scott. Um I' I'd welcome I'd welcome that. >> Very good. So we I mean is everyone in agreement that the lighting and the um TR are the two major issues with the stroke wall be
>> not not entirely Woody. I mean they're also talking about eliminating a catch basin and talking about uh um overflow from interior floor drains. I mean that's we need the review on issues like that.
I I can't answer those questions. >> Oh, the >> Y >> may I ask just a moment? >> The the floor drain holding tank that is for the interior floor drains in the building. >> It it's any any any water drainage off a
truck in the building is captured in a tight tank which is not draining to the drainage system. It's similar to a septic tank that's sealed. Um, and that >> again that may be the short answer. I'm just saying it's
>> it's above my uh level of expertise. >> Yeah, I'm assum I'm I'm assuming that >> um there would be as built and um Joe would satka would be uh reviewing that
um and >> well that's what I asked for at the at the outset of this discussion. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. That's I would assume that right Kristen? >> Yes. Yes, we have said that several times. We have the asbuilt and it will
be in front of Joe, but I was um thinking it would be helpful to have this discussion in case there was anything else that were was a concern outside of those items that will be re reviewed by the asbelt.
>> Okay. I I I I guess we've identified those then as the lighting and the planting out. I mean they're not mentioned in this correspondence here. >> They are mentioned in that correspondence. They are. >> Yes. >> Where >> the the that document that Satie was
just sharing. >> Yeah. Did I miss him? >> Do you want to put it back up again, Satie? >> I It's at the end. Um sorry. While they're putting that up, Larry, the original decision was also sent out
today. I didn't know if you got a chance to see that. >> I did. I I have it. What do you Thank you. >> Yep. >> And Scott, thank you. >> He does mention at the end the um the lighting. So, if if the lighting is a major issue,
I would imagine that I could I could install a shield on uh uh where necessary and uh to modify the current lights to eliminate um like like Woody mentioned, he could see the lights from down the road, you know, but because
basically we put a shield on it that makes it so the light cannot go straight out, but it's just directed downward. >> Yeah. And just to clarify, I can see them through the gap in the two hills, across the marsh, across the railroad tracks, on the bridge on Hay Street.
>> Okay. >> Not Boston Road. Just to clarify, that's and there's three fixtures. I believe they're the three westerly fixtures, uh, excuse me, easterly fixtures that face an overspill onto the green belt parking
lot for the Devil's Den area next your butter. >> I I could do that if that helps resolve an issue with the board. >> Yep. Well, it it's still noted, but now as the conversation's gone on, too.
Basically, we're at a situation where the your asbuilt if it is complete I I wasn't understood that was wasn't under the understanding that it was complete but that the aselt needs to go off to peer review and then we should we shall meet again. So,
>> okay, >> really think that's where we're at just to be honest with you. >> It it was my understanding that Joe already had it a while ago. I I didn't know that he hadn't reviewed cuz he did meet on site for for a sitewalk at one point with me.
>> Okay, that's that's good to know. Um I don't recall seeing a a review from Joe. >> We have not received a letter from Joe on this, but we have had the aselt >> for a while.
Unless someone dis a board member disagrees with me, I think that's our next step in this process is to get the peer review going, see what the concerns are that Joe Joe finds and go from there. Um, we also need to determine if
your application is expired or not and see when the last extension was granted. Um I also don't believe you have an occupancy or a temporary occupancy permit. So that needs to be addressed as well and that can't be addressed till we
the asbelts reviewed and um other than that I think there was one more thing but I can't think of it right now. >> Did conservation start from this >> did conserv Oh no it hasn't gone through
the conservation. It hasn't been signed off by conservation. I do recall you before conservation at some point last year, June or I don't even know when it was >> there was conversation from TJ of the um added pavement area um elimination of a
storm drain, but I don't think you actually closed out with conservation. So >> that's another step in this process, too. It was my understanding Conscom said that they were okay verbally and they were waiting for close out on on your end
because TJ did attend that meeting as well uh for on my behalf. >> Okay. So that we'll have to clarify that. I don't I don't know if there was a close out or not and >> Okay. I I would ask staff to
speak to Mason and figure out if conservation has closed out. I thought they had, but then I heard that they hadn't. So, and I don't know if they have or not. Now, I've there's been all the other stuff as well. It'd be nice to know if conservation's closed out. So, I
guess >> my understanding is they're not, but I will I will confirm again with Mason tomorrow. I I talked with Mason about it on Monday and he said that they have not closed out this project yet.
>> Okay. So, that's where we're at with that as well. So, um I guess we should try and get the aselt we'll get the aselt reviewed by Joe. which should have been set out already and we'll get that
back and we'll get you on the agenda and get you to a closeout point and address the issues at hand if and I encourage you to go through the decision and look at some of the things like the lighting and you can address those yourself as
time goes on and shield them and help the process move along. So, >> okay, >> as opposed to coming back to another meeting and having another discussion and leaving again and it going on forever. So, I you know, I encourage you to pick some of the things that you can
now that you know that have been concerns of the board and some of the things that you'd like a modification for. We can discuss and have a a vote at later date and get you closed out, Kevin. I'd like to see you closed out. >> Okay. Thank you. I would as well. I will
uh we'll jump on the lighting right away. That's that's something we can uh definitely take care of. >> All right. >> Um I would Can I Woody I'm sorry. Can I make a com a couple comments about things that are being discussed as well? And I know Steve has his hand up.
>> Okay. Yes. And yes, I can't see Steve's raised hand. My head's in the way. But >> Yep. >> That's okay. Steve, do you go first? >> Sure. Um, as I listen to this discussion for a project that I wasn't involved in, and I find myself thinking that, gee,
you know, the board is picking off a couple things that are of particular concern to them. And I find myself thinking that, gee, if I were a member of the public, I might have an issue that's of particular concern, but the board didn't raise it. So I come back to thinking about good governance again and
say that the board shouldn't be picking and choosing items from a prior decision to say well this is important and this is important. The whole thing is important in my mind and we should be looking at the entire decision. This is not to, you know, single out Kevin and
his project, but just to say it's illustrative of how the board needs to be systematic and seeing that it's terms and conditions are met and indeed in some cases, not just rely upon the con or some other board to be making
decisions. We need to see that we get what we want and then if we're not getting it, take charge and not just pick and choose among those items. Well, thank you, Steve. Thank you, Steve. And a peerreview letter will
spell out a lot of the things because Joe will review the original decision and file file back with a report of the things he sees. Then that'll give us the information we need and we can go through the things from there and figure it out from there. So,
thank you, Steve, for that statement. Um, go ahead Kristen. You can say something. Um, I just wanted to say respond that the question about whether there has been extensions was raised this afternoon and I did have a few
minutes before the meeting to do some research. I thought I'd update the board during the meeting. Um the full board and there was um an extension in 2023 that extended through 2025. There was and then and that was before my time,
but I found that information um and there was an extension request last summer and that was approved. I have not yet found the minutes from that meeting, but this board approved an extension last summer. Um and Kevin has been in
touch with me over the months since then about these issues. Um you know take responsibility for good government's governance as has been addressed tonight. But um I will say that the authority in the condition about the
tree buffer was given to the planning director. My working with Kevin on that this fall I did consult with Woody. We had several site visits out there. Um Joe Surwaka was out there. Mason, the conservation agent, was out there. It
was a wooded site originally. Um at the time we were having the discussion about what a tree buffer could look like. Um it was determined that we did our best shot at creating something that would actually grow and and be a viable set of
trees. There was no expectation that this was replicating what was there before, but it it was the condition as I read it put the authority in my hands and I worked with consultants to come to the decision that it seemed like the
best we could get. Um, but I'm certainly happy to have other input on that and I regret that I didn't do that in November when we were having those discussions earlier. Um, but we did have a site visit out there and I did consult with the planning board chair and the conservation agent um, and also a
landscape person who understood what the soils were out there. So, that's a little background on that. I apologize to not um, update the board more on that at that point in time. >> Okay. There's um, also a condition there
about $1,000 on that topic, Kristen. uh about a $1,000 contribution to the town's tree fund. Has that been made? >> Yes, it has. >> Okay. >> All of the other conditions have been met. Um I the one question outside of
the final asbuilt review that I had was related to the lighting and we've talked about that tonight. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you Kristen. Thank you very um so next steps get the aselt peer review make sure the as belt's complete
and we will um put you on a future agenda Kevin so okay keep this rolling >> and just please stay in contact with staff so that we can >> get you on an agenda. >> Yes I'll do that. >> Sie Satie do you have your ra hand
raised or is it an accident? >> Um I sorry I just wanted just for my own understanding. Um, do we still have to vote on the modifications before the ASB bill happens, Kristen?
>> No, I I believe we we don't have to vote on the modifications you had up tonight. We'll get the ASBell. We'll get Joe Schwakis bear review and we'll >> we'll get through it from that from that point on get it back on the agenda and
then we'll go through what is actually on the ground and what was proposed. So we'll get through all that at a later date. Uh Kevin, thank you and have a good night. All right. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Talk to you soon. Yep.
>> Thank you. Bye. >> All right. Next item on the agenda as we approach nine o'clock. Um, new business 170 Orchard Street request to change water supply from Biffield
Water District to private wells. Cesus map R20-0-43A owner Michael J. Pedero, excuse me if I said that wrong. Fields Reality Trust and the applicant is uh Michael McNiff.
Good evening. This is Bob Griffin from Griffin Engineering and to my left there he is Michael McNiff. >> So uh >> hello our Zoom connection works again. Um so this is a pretty simple request
but um and construction as you may know is is underway. I'm going to share my screen if I if that's okay. Yep. Um, oops. I need a Okay, there we go.
And hopefully you can see the site plan with some blue circles on it. Can you see that? >> It's loading. Yep, there it is. Okay. So, um, this is the proposed plan, and I'll flip just flip back to the originally approved plan. The originally
approved plan had a 8- in water mane coming in from, uh, Orchard Street about 800 ft with a hydrant, two hydrants on the main. There's an existing hydrant out here in Orchard Street already. And the proposal is simply to replace those with individual private wells on the
four lots. Uh this will obviously save some construction costs, but it actually improves the uh fire protection on the houses. These houses will also be built with sprinklers. Uh that was not part of the original plan. Uh and so we've Mr.
McNiff has been to the fire department. We've showed them the uh proposal and they're satisfied. I think they think it's an improvement too because of the improved fire protection. It also removes a concern we had about potential stagnant water in the very long water
man. Uh so I think we'll you'll actually have a chance of getting better quality water as a result of this change. Uh but uh and the fire department also I think recently reviewed the turning radiuses and the trucks. We had provided some information on that a couple years ago,
but I don't think it had uh the current fire chief was aware of it. So, we we refreshed that uh issue as well, and I think we're all set with that. So, um be happy to address any questions you have. I can I've got more plans from the original approved set if you'd like to look at any of those and um be happy to
address your questions. >> Okay. Thank you, Bob. Um I'll start with Pete. Pete, do you have any questions or comments? >> Sure. Hey, Bob and uh uh Mike, it's good to see you and I'm glad the train's not going by at 7:30. The bad news is you're
here later in the day. Um So, uh, hey, could we drop drop the screen for a sec because I I love to talk face to face. >> Yeah. >> Just for a sec. >> So, um, um, you know, I'm I'm I'm a safety guy and and I'm a big believer in
safety stuff. Um, and, um, I didn't understand the conversation that you had with fire because all that we have is a a very short email. So, I'm not sure what their comments were, hydrant versus sprinkler. Um, but I
don't know if you're aware, you know, just I don't know, a couple weeks ago, 13th of March, we had a really devastating fire here in town and water supply was a big issue and we actually had five fire departments show up here and we still had a total loss of uh of
of the property. Now, we're talking about sprinkling something. And I'm going to give you like worst case scenario. Worst case scenario, there's a power failure and there's a fire. So, will all of these homes have backup generators? And if they will have backup generators, because you know that would
be necessary, would those be propane based? So I tease me along with the conversation so I can understand why the sprinkler which is not on on a municipal water service is going to be on a well which is going to be requiring electricity that I'm going to tell you
let's just say it goes out and there's a catastrophic event. What's going to be the safety feature in that? Because otherwise the fire department has to go all the way down this road with a truck that has 750 gallons of water, then call for a tanker, and then call for another
truck. And you can start to see the congestion. And I mean, we just played it out two and a half weeks ago. So, make me feel comfortable that this makes more sense. And if it does make more sense, what's going to be the backup to make sure the sprinklers work?
>> Okay. So, um I'm not an expert in fire suppression systems, but I have seen residential, you know, remote buildings with, uh tanks in the basement to hold the water and uh battery backup for the pump that pumps the sprinkler system, uh
which I think is is intended to uh provide the function of the generator that you described. Um, so I I don't know exactly what all of the equipment is that goes into each of these houses, but uh I do believe that what's being proposed meets the code and obviously meets, you know, your your fire
department's okay with it. Um, we can probably get more information on the on the backup power question because I just wasn't ready for that. >> Yeah. No, and and truly, if this hadn't happened a couple weeks ago, it probably wouldn't be as hot on my radar screen, but it is. And so, you know, we can talk
about it. So whatever the backup is, you know, batteries don't last very long, you know, on things because motors take >> no but I don't think these fire I don't think the fire suppression systems are intended to, you know, run for hours either. I think they run for, you know, a particular period of time and the
tank's empty, the or the well's empty, whatever, you know. So I I think there is a there's a time period that that sprinkler system is intended to operate for. So I don't think it has to run forever. So >> I think the tanks are 300 gallon tanks. >> 300 gallons.
>> I'm sorry Pete. >> Yeah. Yeah. So a truck rolls up with between 500 and 750 gallons of water in it and that's what it has to use. So would the fire hydrants be remaining at the end of Orchard? Would those stay or were you going to be moving those? >> There there's an existing fire hydrant
on orchard tree right now and that would remain there. >> Okay. So if there were a catastrophic event, they'd have to run lines. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> From that one from that one fire hydrant, >> right? >> The one fire hydrant.
>> Yep. >> The houses are separated quite a bit. I don't know the density of that fire that you talked about. Not that that's a a great answer, but I think that's one. And I know we've been putting at least 100 in Winnham. We put in the tanks. Uh they preferred that. And actually, we
may have been putting in two 300galon tanks. They're about if you had them, they're they're about the size of oil tanks. I think in Winnham we were putting two of them in there. Okay. >> And the battery back up on the well is a pretty common um battery system that they're using now.
>> Okay. I I appreciate the clarification. Look forward to learning more. >> Thank you. Larry, do you have any questions or comments? >> I I mean I don't um I'm just looking at the um March 25th email from Keith Grant
from the fire department. Uh this is uh he he says I'm trying to catch up. I have not seen the revised plans only talked about hydrants versus sprinklers but doesn't say much more about that. And then he goes on the revised layout
the turnaround hammerhead. I assume he's talking about the hammerhead at the end of the common driveway >> does not appear to accommodate our apparatus uh per many sites the code of mass regs. Um, is the hammerhead the same
configuration that we approved initially? >> Yeah, I I can show it to you. But the the in response to his email, I sent him a copy of the um swept path analysis that we did when we submitted the subdivision application, which shows
that the fire truck, the Newberry fire truck, the largest truck, can make it around the culde-sac and can also do a three-point turn at the end of the driveway. There's been no changes to the layout of of anything really since uh since the project was approved by the planning board.
>> Okay. And and tell me again why you you you can't lay the water lines. >> So again there's uh there's the issue of uh cost. There's the issue of availability of
materials. We're having trouble getting cement line ductal iron pipe at the moment. Um, there's the issue of improved fire protection through the sprinkler systems. There's the issue of stagnant water in the long water man with only four houses on it. Um,
there's uh it does allow us also to keep the corn field in the back beyond the u the culde-sac for an extra year. Since we're not cutting through there to install a water mane, we probably won't install
that driveway this year. Um, you know, the the culde-sac and the the connection to Orchard Street will be paved later this year, but we'll limit the work this year probably to that section if we don't have to install the water man.
>> Well, if I could interject one thing, Larry, the the fire chief uh and the fire prevention, Mr. Evans and uh um Keith. There's a subsequent emails that are out. I don't know if you got him Kristen or not, where um uh Keith said
that he has received the plans and he's good with that. Mr. Evans said he was good with it, but he knew he couldn't make the decision. I don't know if you have that email, Kristen, where he said he knows it's a planning board decision, but he's good with it either way.
One of the things, you know, in addition to having trouble getting this material, if you've been out there, we do have the roadway roughed with the culdeac in, we've been trying to keep it maintained uh to the best of our ability. I I think we're it's been brought up with Chris
and the number of times we go out there, I think. So, we're staying upon the cleanliness of it. But in our discussions with Green Belt is that and I talked to Mr. Heric, they would like to go out and keep as much agricultural as we can. If we could keep the wells and just focus on this year on the first
two houses because we won't get into those next houses till next year. They'll be able to go in, which is good for me to and the green belt to keep the agricultural going um and keeping the access out there for them because it it looks better when it's with the corn and
and mow rather than the weeds that are going to develop if we don't touch it for a couple of years. Uh so so really it allows us to finish that culde-sac get in there with the the the water and worry about the two houses out there and do the agricultural and the water preservation. So it's a it's something
we can hope we can do. >> Great. Well, I mean I' I'd feel a lot better about this if we had a very very clear uh statement that that this was an improvement in fire safety and I'm not seeing that just yet.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Right. Thank you, Larry. Scott, do you have any questions or comments? >> Um, did you say there was um shortages in duct tile? >> There is definitely some problems in
getting ductal pipe. >> Yeah. I mean, do you ever consider plastic? Uh, we have approved on this plan ductal pipe and I assume it was something the water district wanted. >> Okay. Um I
>> we are approved from the Biffield water. >> Yeah. I mean um it's um Yes. So I mean I mean it's it's it's it's far it's it's a far better um
really outcome. Um, I think it's proven, you know, a a non automatic sprinkler system, you know, off a municipal water supply, um, is clearly, um, really best. Um, you know, from a well, um, you know,
it's been done. It works, but, uh, it's not ideal. So, uh, I guess either way, I think I'm not as concerned as Larry on the, um, really fire safety. I don't think,
um, it is, um, you know, automatic sprinklers, uh, and single family homes. Um, I don't think it's a requirement, but from the code, right? >> No. as as approved, we have obviously
the public water line with hydrants and no sprinklers. >> Yeah. So, I do think uh seems to me like it's it's it's it's an enhancement. Uh but I think there's um there's some questions here that um we've heard, you
know, power goes out. I mean, if those can be answered, um I I think um you'd probably get um um some support there. But uh other than that, I don't have any questions. Any other questions? >> Okay.
>> All right. Thank >> uh and thanks for thanks for your patience tonight. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Um Steve, do you have any questions? >> Thank you, Scott. Well, I think we've already noted that um talking to the fire chief is appropriate and probably talking to him
in 2026 after the major fire that Pete described might also be appropriate and give us some good input and so that's what I would recommend doing. >> Okay. Thank you, Steve. Um I kind of agree
with everything the board said. Um I I'm not against having wells there. Um sprinkler systems are there to be the first respondent to till the truck gets there. So know they're made
to run for that first 10 minutes of response time. So that's you know they're helpful and I can see why the fire department required that. So, a little clarification for that would be great u from the department, you know, saying that they're satisfied with that.
And I believe the hammerheads are the same. So, that's fine. It's when you get this truck stacked like they did on Fruit Street. Um, and they all run out of water and no one can get out. And then you're calling DPW to get sand and
salt on the ground because people are falling down because there's ice on the ground from water from putting the fire out. You know, there's multiple concerns. So, the power goes out. A little faith and stats on the on the system, sprinkler system would be great
to satisfy my concerns there because if the sprinkler is going to run till the fire department gets there, that would be very helpful. And I understand there is a hydrant up front on Orchard Street, but that requires running some lines. So, um I think that's pretty much everything
covered. I don't as long as you guys understand what you need. >> Well, right. So, we'll get some more information to address the question about the power supply and the backup power supply and we'll try to get something a statement more explicit from
the fire department. Um, when is the next meeting? >> Um, I believe it's on the 14th or the 15th. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> 15th. >> Yep. 15.
>> So, materials would be due by Wednesday next week. >> Okay. We'll see if we can get it pulled up pulled together by then. >> Um I I do have something I don't think I've heard talked about yet is the um uh
the D regulations and title five regulations around septic and wells. Could you talk about that, >> Bob or Michael? Because I my understanding is you haven't um submitted septic plans yet and there
are specific regulations around nitrogen loading. >> So um uh the nitrogen loading requirements are basically you know four bedrooms per acre. These are all you know 1 acre lots or 1.1 acre lots and we have a lot of
unused acreage. We got 13 acres that's going to agriculture. So there's there's no issues on being able to satisfy the fourbedroom per acre I don't think on this you know this tract of land. Um there are setbacks from wells to uh
leeching field. It's I think 50 feet under title five and um and it's less than >> I think it's 100 might be 100 feet. >> Yeah, it's 100. >> That's right. I'm getting my irrigation wells and my drinking water wells mixed up. But anyways, but the well locations
that I put on the plan that I sent you uh is at least 100 feet from all the leeching fields. I did check that as part of the process and I also checked the neighboring properties to make sure there was no leeching fields on those properties that would interfere with the well locations that I picked.
>> So, has that all been reviewed by the board of health or the health agent? the locations of the the subjects on the abuing properties and identification of the the buffer required. >> Uh it it hasn't it would be what at the
time that we apply for a well permit. So this you know obviously we're not applying to the board of health for a well permit at this time. We're just asking for the planning board to approve the change from a water main to private wells. >> We know where the septics are going because of the perks that are out there.
So, I don't think the locations of the septics are going to change at all. We're not We can't put them in the front of the houses. We have them shown on this plan. Is lot four shown. I don't see it. Oh, it is. I'm sorry. Yeah. All four septics have to go in that area because that's the places we got the
perks and that was measured. That's why the wells were more than 100 ft away. We sent the information to the board of health, but we didn't get a response at this point. Okay.
>> Okay. I Yeah, my what I understood was she hadn't received the plans yet. So, I'll I'll check in with Okay. >> But sounds like you've sent them. >> Well, I'll send them again and I'll ask her to just look at that question. So,
>> all right. Yeah. Yep. That would be great because if they they had some approval there too for before the next meeting that will be helpful for the board. >> Anything else Kristen? >> No. >> Okay. Well, thank you Bob and thank you
Mike and uh >> later on the next agenda if the >> Thanks for your time. >> Good night. >> Have a good All right, that's the end of the business for this evening. Uh unless anyone from staff has anything to say.
Um I entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Nobody wants to go home. I'll move to adjourn. >> So that's the problem. >> Second motion to adjurnn and second. Thank you, Larry. Thank you, Scott. Uh roll call vote. Lar uh Pete. Larry.
Scott. Steve. >> Yes. >> You all have a good night >> and uh we'll see you at the next meeting. Thank you for your patience this evening.