welcome everybody to the Norton planning board's meeting of Tuesday March the 26th 2024 again this is a hybrid public meeting so members of the public are willome to participate remotely or in person in person we are in the community room in the nor Public Library to join online via the Zoom app please use the link available on the meeting agenda or meeting ID 638 9291 060 there's also a phone number available for those wishing to dial in direct the meeting will Al meeting will also be streamed live on nor cable access for those wishing to VI on television uh for future sessions please feel free to email questions to the board ahead of the meeting to Brian carmichel Town staff uh whose email addressing on the listed agenda so um with that I'll dive into our revised agenda just a couple of points here um there is an executive session posted at the end of the agenda um we will save that for the end so when we go through the rest of our agenda we will close the public session we'll ask everybody here joining us in the library to go and then we'll have a very short executive session as as need uh in terms of planning board business and policies um I also want to share that it does appear that we have uh we do have a planner signed on to join the town again starting uh April the 16th uh and that is Paul dppi rejoining the town of nor so the the ink is dry on that so I am comfortable saying it huray so welcome back Paul okay so uh we do not have any bills or warrants to approve at this time uh we did have a charity release from our last session which I believe everybody had signed so we're all set on that front uh we will have minutes to approve likely at our next session or in future sessions as Brian has gotten some assistance in working through some of that um so with all that out of the way uh we'll dive into the public hearing section of our agenda uh first item listed is site plan reviews 20110 201103 and special permit 19928 and 19935 that is for zero Mansfield Avenue uh it's continuation of a few different times we heard this application to build uh multif family buildings on zero Mansfield Avenue so uh thank you Mr jacobe for rejoining us and uh I'll let you give an introduction to any of the updates you'd like to speak to sure thank you for having me uh for the record Jack jaob 144 Bank Street adoro representing the applicant uh Dan Campbell was not feeling well he may be virtual um but uh we had hoped last night to close with the Conservation Commission but unfortunately horley Wht has not opined on the latest set of plans and so therefore we had to continue that to April 8th we are optimistic that they will Aline that they will agree with the changes danan made and so uh hopefully um we can conclude with you in somewhat of similar time frame okay uh so what we wanted to do tonight was to bring our traffic engineer with us he's here uh and uh you may remember that when we first fight the traffic report it was 72 units that included lot e now we're down to 60 units without lot e and so that was reviewed by your peer reviewer I think it was VHB who did it um and so um without me taking up more of your time Dan introduce yourself thank you uh for the record my name is Daniel lasva traffic engineer with vassan Associates um the last time I spoke for the board I believe it was October of last year and as Jack had alluded to we have made a couple uh revisions to the traffic study um at that October meeting there were comments by the board um that had said we should look at some additional developments along the Route 140 Corridor um there were I think three or four of those so we went back and we revised our uh analysis um after talking to Brian and the time of getting the details from those developments um then also as Jack had uh said uh we also reduced the um project from 72 units to 60 units um so those are kind of the two main uh updates to the traffic setting at the end of the day um there was kind of no change in the outcome um regardless of even the reduced number of units we still have the same uh mitigation package still proposing to retime a couple of the uh intersections where we had identified there were some uh existing capacity issues independent of the project um so kind of the high level nothing had uh uh changed with the update to the traffic study then we were thankful enough to receive the thoughtful uh peer review and comments from VHB um on February 1st um there letter um and they uh were mainly in agreement uh with the majority of things that we had proposed um as a part of the study uh there were just a few uh comments relating to clarifications about the proposed uh mitigation ensuring that we um look at uh the uh signal timings with a specific emphasis on safety at the 140 Route 123 inter c s um and then just making sure that lines of sight at the two proposed driveways uh not only met the minimum standards but can also be maintained without sight line easements which they can uh these site triangles which was one of the attachments of our response letter they're all within the public RightWay um meaning that they can be maintained without having to go onto other private property um and then their kind of last main comment was just making sure that delivery vehicles and fire trucks can enter both driveways can exit both driveways can circulate throughout the site um so as a part of our letter there was also some uh uh some autoturn analysis of those trucks as well which they can get in both driveways get out both driveways um and circulate throughout the site have you shown them to the fire department I believe the fire department has I don't know if you know for certain I'm pretty sure or if Dan Campbell is online um but I think they have looked at the plan the new and updated plans I don't have in my file a letter from the fire department um but uh is Dan with us or not with us he's not with us so um if we can hold that question and get that answer for you if you could uh just both with regards visen um I'm thinking it's level Divine Design groups response um saying that they intend to they don't intend to confirm with the fire department until just prior to construction um on both the access and circulation generally and then uh with respect to um snow um storage and I think we'd all probably prefer it if the fire department weighed off on it before we signed off on the site plan I understand entirely I will speak with Mr Campbell tomorrow thank you it's I mean it's normal it is usual to have the fire department at this stage to take a look at it and to submit the uh the truck turning plans perfect thank you good um and if there are any other specific questions that the board might have I know it's been a while so if you just kind of want me to run through once again the high level overview of the traffic study or anything like that let me know I'm more than happy to I think that might be good just to BR I'm sure if you want to pull it up again I may you had it up a second ago um just to go through the um I know that all of the volumes are based on calculations from the it in terms of how many trips are expected during peak hours um and I understand that you're not responsible for the mess that is the intersection of 140 and 123 in that intersection um but doesn't understand any impact on that intersection the intersection with the Reservoir Street um since it's already kind of a funky intersection and then from the just kind of overall kind of perspective um because it's a an area that has a lot of traffic problems already so kind of even if you're not the the cause of that it's there's a there's something to be said for the argument and I'm not saying I'm making it that why would you put more things where there's already a problem yep so just in terms of quantifying the impact that you see yep not a problem I can certainly go through and and do that not to kind of put you on the spot um but actually putting up the traffic study it's putting up the traffic study itself is fine but it's a relatively long document I won't make you flip through to find uh specific pages but if you want to looks like that sure that' be great um so uh just in general like I said we had updated the traffic study um all the counts that we used were conducted in March of 2023 while uh schools specifically Wheaten were in regular session um just to make sure that we had uh had a counter for the normal uh traffic ons within that area um uh based on other counts in the area we found that uh volumes in March are about 5% above average month conditions which is what Mass do um guidelines say that we should be uh designing and running outward analysis for um but to just kind of provide a conservative estimate to evaluate the project we did not reduce those volumes we kind of left them at that uh elevated uh position um we looked at three or two different interceptions depending on how you count it um the the root 140 that's fine that'll work um so the root 140 reservoir uh Street intersection which I think is just kind of off page up to the north uh which is an unsignalized intersection then we looked at the two signalized intersections in close proximity to each other um down where 140 hits 123 um and we found that uh Mansfield I have itself carries about 10,000 a little over 10,000 vehicles on an average day with around 750 to 850 during the commuter peak hours so those are when most people are going to and from work where the roadway sees its heaviest volume of vehicles um we then projected those volumes s years in into the future taking into account uh the the background developments that the board had made comments about um as well as just kind of bumping up the numbers um relative uh to to account for traffic growth in the area for developments that are not proposed that are not before the town yet um just to kind of establish a no build condition um we then estimated trips for the project itself using statistics published by The Institute of Transportation Engineers or the it um which has many many data sites especially for uh multif family residential projects such as this um just to estimate how many trips it's going to generate uh we found that on an average day he was about 460 vehicle trips over the course of 24 hours and that is a one-way trip um so a vehicle that leaves uh for work in the morning and comes back in the evening counts as two trips so it's not 640 Vehicles it's really 230 Vehicles one entering one exiting over the course of the day with around 40 to 50 during those uh commuter Peaks 40 to 50 trips so once again 20 to 25 vehicles that either uh enter or exit the project site um and then when you kind of look at just the large amount of vehicles that 140 processes on a daily basis the 460 over the course of 24 hours or 40 to 50 during the uh peak hours is not going to be a um an increase in traffic that is going to be readily apparent to an average motorist um and just daily fluctuations on the roadway uh will uh cover a certain portion of that um then we added those to the build volumes to make our build volumes ran our analysis and compared those just to uh see what the impact of the project is um and we found that it was an that it was Quantified as an increase in vehicle queueing up up to four or five vehicles so that essentially means if you are stopped waiting at a light there's six seven vehicles in front of you now there is when this project goes in going to be oh I forgot the numbers I said 11 or 12 um vehicles in front of you then so then that formed the basis of our recommendations for our mitigation which was to rtime those two signalized intersections um and with that retiming we found that we were able to take uh operations and the capacity of those intersections and actually uh improve them such that they're better than the no build conditions um those future conditions without the impact of the project so you were able to reduce motor delays and vehicle queuing by more than uh the impact of the project um going back towards existing conditions actually now um essentially mitigating the impact of the project at those intersections um and then we found at uh Reservoir Street um it it was only an increase in vehicle cubing of up to one or two vehicles I believe um which is very uh consistent with UNS signalized side stets along the 140 Corridor or anywhere else in the Commonwealth um and then we just had recommendations kind of mainly that uh VHB had also pointed out in their peer review letter making sure site distances were acceptable making sure that fire trucks could get in and out of the site so on and so forth um so now that everyone's eyes are glazed over as I talk about traffic for 10 minutes um and there's anything else specific I'd be more than happy to answer any questions um and to avoid putting words into uh vhp's mouth we think that we are close to wrapping up the peerreview process um we just I believe submitted the letter on Friday um so I don't know if they've had time to review it we we haven't received any uh anything from them but but we are uh anticipating that the letter is going to come back clean that all the boxes have been checked so on and so forth as it relates to traffic I two questions fres one first um you just mentioned the the total volume in out of the site you said that at peak hours it was 20 to 20 20 25 at each end is that correct Vehicles yeah uh 40 specifically 41 trips during the morning and 46 trips during the evening and that was 80 but the total volume in and on the site was 600 I think you said 460 over the course of the whole deck he reversed numbers at one point in what he was saying in May 460 into 640 so that's what you okay the the ratio seemed a little bit um off with the 40 to the 600 yes okay I apologize for that yes 460 460 and 80 and 40 of those on each end are in the peak hours and the remaining 380 are not in the peak hours correct according to it calculations everything okay um and I think we touched on this when you first presented but just in terms of you talk about re signalizing the intersections and going through that just in terms of how that process works um in terms of how it is actually executed and I know that's a coordin with the state correct y so we'd have to go forward and apply for a Mot permit then work kind of with them to come up with the signal timings and then the actual uh implementation there so it isn't just a um a town permit or anything like that we you need to go from from what I understand what I remember recall is that you apply for a perment for the state the state makes you do all the work and then makes you do everything else and then they check the box on there basically essentially yes you said it not me yeah and and I assume that you would include a condition that we make that application and undertake those steps if you should deem to approve the project I think that it would be silly of us not to take advantage of the potential for any improvements to traffic flow in that area um and I'm not sure if you wanted to note that down and um got it yes one of our board members has a Tracker going of all of the potential conditions that we would discuss as a board so that's what I'm just making sure that we we capture them as I often tell clients traffic is issue one two and three there no four and then drainage and other things come in five and six so traffic is always is the key in every hearing I ever go to yes she always makes it real interesting for me keeps you busy um so traffic engine here any additional questions that anybody has based on the summary based on the report traffic looks fine the report looked good okay are those permits from the state hard to come Byer is it just you're doing all the leg work so they can stamp it they are thrilled to have a private party come in and yes and take care of it they there are literally tens of thousands of intersections that the Commonwealth controls they do not have the staff to do any of this stuff so every time a project is proposed they take advantage of the fact that we pledge to you that we're going to do certain things I I did see a hand raise from from Peter yes yes I live I live not too far from there at 157 and I go by that intersection couple of times and it can get busy during the morning and it can get busy in the afternoon so you're doing a good job with the traffic study keep up the good work thank you very much I have a question I um I made an exception for Peter try comments at the end I'll wait I know he's not going to run away I'm sorry I did I was surprised by that so all no no it's okay I guess I give Peter a bit too much latitude [Laughter] sometimes okay if there are no other questions on traffic or is there it sorry it is site plan which I have a feeling is probably Dan Campbell there was a question with regards to providing delivery vehicle um a dedicated parking spot um and the response from Level design was um to the extent that one would provide Ed it's unlikely it would be used by a mail truck or other delivery service provider and while I agree with you I'm wondering if we should at least make the effort and put signage up to that extent I'm thinking specifically not necessarily us PS but more about you've got 60 units and those people are going to order from Amazon and Amazon is going to send every single package in a different van um so I'm kind of thinking you know after dinner everybody's at home parking lot's full you know the Amazon driver is just going to either block people double Park prevent access I'm not saying we need to provide one you know right outside the door close to the front doors of each building um to at least attempt something orally might be a nice idea um that's just a thought I don't know whether anybody agree that sounds reasonable yeah it's frequently done in these projects the Amazon drivers frequently ignore them uh but the way they do these buildings generally is there's a package delivery room right inside the front door and then when you go in uh to uh your uh go into your apartment you have a code that you can punch in to get in to get into the delivery room to get your particular package and also frequently they have a a system whereby when the Amazon person um puts it in there they then send a code that goes up to your apartment so if you go into your apartment you see on the screen that that you have a package down there so they try and they try and make it quick in and out for the Amazon driver but I absolutely agree with you but we can certainly uh put a hatched delivery area um we have a space on the site to do that I I think it just might help with the flow and you know not irritating the I not that I I get you can't you can lead a horse to water um but let's at least try and make the effort and make it easier for the the residents that are there I've got a note okay thank you any addition questions for traffic engineer at this time okay uh one other quick update that I forgot to give you is that we're making progress on the sewer line uh had a meeting last Friday that thankfully I didn't have to attend uh but uh uh Dan is making great progress with the design Engineers uh on getting exactly what the uh sewer department wants uh for the uh for the line and um uh and of course the most important thing to our our client is that it's financially doable and that is also uh looking very favorable right now so uh because we could not possibly build the buildings without the sewer so uh it looks like uh things are moving uh quickly and in the right direction on that front Okay so that is what we have for tonight um I was just going to ask I know that you and um Our Town Council have had some conversations about the affordable housing regulations I won't uh do you want me to address that you can address it to whatever degree you feel necessary other than I think that we would tend to listen to Town Council as the interpretation of our bylaws uh I I fully understand that um and I I will say however that I was surprised um in the first instance the opinion letters that I write and ones that I see are addressed to the full planning board not to Tim uh and secondly they're signed by the firm but uh perhaps things had to be done fairly quickly because of the meeting coming up and so the email choice I think that may have been the the route there especially because it was in response to a uh a please give me a response email for myself so I will take uh I will take ownership of the of the the format of it okay as to the substance um I have to say I completely disagree with Town Council the you she changed the words it says inexistence as of that date in October 20 years ago and it doesn't say inexistence beginning from uh at the end of her opinion though she kicked it back to you and said it's it's up to you to decide what it means um and so I would suggest to you that it may be fairly obvious what was intended but it is them what was written um in my opinion I would initiate through your process to change this for clarity and and um I will say separate of this the town is currently going through a zoning recodification process okay and you might want to put that on their radar screen that the language is suspect yes and but uh the other thing she said which which I found unusual was that that section has two sections one applies to division of land and the other applies to multif family and the section that applies to the division of land had language in it that made it clear that it applied Pro prospectively rather than as to things that existed as of that dat and there is a contrary to what Town Council said the rules of statutory construction say that if in the same areas you use differing language that's because you intended differing results and that's probably something you've heard before um not specifically but it makes sense um from the from a contextual language basis I would agree that that tends to make sense so for those I mean frankly I think she tortured the English language I don't know how else to say it and in existence as of October 8th 2003 or whatever the date was says to me that it had to be existing on that day as of doesn't mean beginning from uh there is no dictionary that I've ever seen that she says there's is a dictionary but there's no dictionary that says as of means beginning from so um you will have to make a decision and whatever your decision is uh there will be consequences one way or another um and uh but I think that um I mean I'm an advocate I'm here representing my client advocating for my client I don't expect you to take my word Over Town Council but I do expect you to at least in your deliberations think through the things we're saying and make a careful and reason decision which I'm sure is what you do every time but lawyers like to say those things so uh but we I I just completely disagree with her and um I was quite surprised to see what she said and the way she said said it um but again in the first instance it's up to you and depending on what you say there may be consequences um if if I I was going to just to from a a procedural standpoint you have not presented anything in terms of meeting this section of the bylaw in your in what you've provided to us from a decision standpoint uh in terms of procedure if we were to include a condition um assuming that whatever takes place after this takes place afterwards that a um applicant to either meet that or provide payment in MO rather than it being a an unaddressed item I I would fully expect you to address it in your decision and then if you decide the way Town Council suggested then my client has a decision to make yes uh and I don't want to commit to anything yeah um clients often surprise me uh and uh sometimes they make decisions that I you know I fully agree with and other times they don't you know and and and I don't want to raise the Spectre of appeal but you also have to understand that from my Cent's perspective if they file an appeal and it goes through the court process it delays starting construction of the project significantly and so there are balancing factors on the economics that always take place yes understood and so um well I might advocate for one position or another I'm only an advocate I'm not the decision maker Tim I had a I had a I had a manager once said business would be so much simpler if it wasn't for the customers I enjoyed that one so much I reuse it every chance I yes yes I understand uh my secretary often says if all the clients were reasonable and rational we wouldn't have jobs so s similar idea yes steeve you had a question just yeah to address sort of the affordable housing thing in town um I don't know which town meeting but it was the last couple Town meetings one of them uh we had reached our quota in town on whether we want to require build Builders to build affordable housing because we've already meet uh met what we've been required it's it's just a requirement that means that we don't we don't have to approve 40ps essentially but the town voted very much in favor of continuing to keep that requirement on Builders even even if we meet the quota so well it's that's done from a procedural standpoint because as new houses get built it's potential that the threshold percentage drops below that 10% so it's in our best interest to maintain once we've hit the 10% to maintain the 10% I agree but I'm just saying that's what we as a town we all sort of we agreed that we want to continue having affordable housing so um if I could also just offer and Tim could correct me I I don't think we've had another applicant who has interpreted our bylaws in this way in the 21 years they've been written would that be accurate I can only speak for the time that I've been on the board I don't recall one but I think as Mr jaob has said we all have we can all read the words in front of us we can all see what Town Council has provided um it's on us to interpret what we feel the bylaw is asking so yeah okay okay um anything else you was just address tonight uh I think that there were a couple of checking the Box items with the site plan but um just given the the nature of continu with conservation and everything else I think just in terms of there was La you said there was one thing where it was said to be the lighting and Landscaping plan has a stamp on it that says uh it to be updated prior to construction but it's part of the site plan rev you yeah I would understand why that Legend is there because okay um every special permit I've ever seen says you build in accordance with the plans you filed with us right that does make it simpler yes okay perfect that's it so so after the public speaks we will ask you to continue this to your next meeting uh hopefully we will have finished with conservation by that okay thank you um we did have yes please thank you chyl you're 169 reservo Street um so quickly I'll take it in the same order um with the traffic I was just curious if volumes on Reservoir Street were looked at as far as far as what it will look like once those apartments are all in there and I don't know if that was covered in there stud or not can answer that the the volumes of Reservoir Street Rel to the apartments there are the apartments by McDonald's or both they did include the new development by McDonald's as part of the we assume it's built and all the cars there are on the road so I think it's good that it was it was over Braden I just personally if I live there coming home if I didn't need to stop at the bank or prot F I would take Reservoir Street it's a nicer ride and when you get to the end of it you don't have to cross a lane to get into the lot you just come around the end and go in it would be the to me that would be the way that people that that's how I would access it and I'm also thinking in there xinity events there'll be more people having to go down there in order to avoid 140 um okay Etc so I I was just curious if that was even a part of the traffic if anyone looked to see if there was would be an effect on those of the new building okay 16 new understood okay there any additional questions that you had that we can not regarding the traffic okay okay so the lighting plan I was curious if the and I'm sorry to make any repeat results I wasn't here for all this I was wondering if the lighting for the Lots were attached to the buildings or if they were on holes and if they were holes in the lot at what height and my last concern um has to do with the storm water drainage and design um I hope that you all had a chance to take a look at the photos that I forwarded taking Sunday morning on Reservoir Street all that water as a result of three new homes that obviously were not were inadequately or have an inadequate storm water drainage design so my concern really is that the town is still looking at events the number of rain events and the amount of the volume of ring we're getting with each as an that we had as the outlier event when that's not the case we have to be more conservative that's a small area wedge between Reservoir and Route 140 there's no place for this water to go but it's going to go water wins always so I'm really concerned that if that's happening with these three homes now you've got the what 16 structure subdivision going in on one side which I still maintain should have access from 140 not reservo Street as a in part to help lesson what's you know that kind of flooding and then the two two build units on the other side and make sure that that's actually looked at and the design is more conservative and maybe this is the Conservation Commission not the planning board but I'm throwing it out there anyway because I believe do a look at at that stuff tooo stor war is always something that crosses both both boards yes um the peer reviewer in this case so their engineer has done all their work the idea that the storm water bylaw says you have to keep as much water on your site as there was before you put a shovel in the ground so no increase in water leaving the site yeah which is why you got photos obviously failed um and that's just three yeah well we should talk about how there's no storm water report requirement for just a single family home to be built that's the depending on the size of the disturbance there's not a requirement for anybody to look at it I understand so again my concern was more that this type this the volume and number of events in the water coming in is considered routine not as whether we caught up or if I could speak to one more thing uh the other development down Reservoir couldn't have access from 140 because the road would have to cross hundreds and hundreds of feet of deep Wetland yeah but they've already made it their their they've already said that it's their intention they can't put a road across ACR it it'll never happen I hope just is very very deep well but I know it's their intention and you know with is a will is off in the way so that uh a design of that project has already been before the board and rejected so it's on them to come up with something better otherwise I think they know what the result would be and again I understand Bo's not here to tell people what to build they're here to tell people how to build what they what they want and if they can't they can't if they shouldn't they shouldn't it's a lot of development for small area and I just it's I just don't have a good I don't I'm not optimistic that we aren't going to be dealing with a lot of water issues going forward regardless but with this development I don't see how we can do if we don't really get smart about how we're letting people do things thank you um so I think um if you know mind just coming up just speak to the traffic aspects of that just from a um yeah I think the short answer was yes the tra res was study but expert so from a I can visualize it in my head but the idea is that the behavior of you residents at the site rather than itum they come from 495 down 140 um that they might choose to leave 140 and go onto Reservoir and then just hook around at the end and go in rather than go all the way down it's probably probably adds maybe two or 3/10 of a mile maybe a bit more I'm going to Ballpark that probably be wrong but um so we did the answer is yes we did look at traffic on Reservoir Street we did also specifically model vehicles making that exact turn coming down Reservoir Street taking the right heading north on 140 then going into the project site um we estimated about 13% of of traffic would be coming down and making that movement rather than just coming down 140 and going in um but that was um that was part of the study okay thank you and with regard to the height of the polls I don't have that information and Dan isn't with us but I have a note to make sure that we get the answer to that uh and then just to follow up on the storm water issues um what the chairman said is 100% accurate um and that's why the town does not rely solely on our engineering but has it peer-reviewed um and then the other thing to remember is that because there are wetlands here we can neither starve nor drown the wetlands so in addition to keeping all of our water on site and infiltrating as much as possible we also have to take into account the volume and rate that water gets into the wetlands so all of those things are part of the uh drainage report all of those things are PE review yeah and obviously the the rain events in the past U few weeks have been significant for a lot of areas so um and what seems to be even worse is that the ground is soaked and so there's nowhere for it to go uh and uh you know I remember about a year and a half ago before it started rain when we get drought so it's uh it's uh hard to to um to understand um but uh I uh went to the noron country club on Sunday and uh played nine holes walking and I have to say it was wet was going to say do you need new shoes yes uh I hope my shoes are drying out on the porch right now we'll see got to play golf in March that's true you got to play golf in March yeah oh yeah addtion isn't a pretty thin J no but we we don't have get to play golf in March okay EXC me I just have one question ask clarification on the traffic set um so that 13% trips from the those buildings when you said you looked at other places did that include development up on um Elm Street at elmond Cross by the water that that was that was another project that was that was included in there and the subdivision as well thank you very much did you want not to put you on the spot um Jim chav 56 Mansfield Avenue um so by understand this will be continued yes um so this is not the time for a summation uh you were happy you were a shortest gender and I'd like to help you by not be laboring the point um one quick thing the next one will be longer so huh the next video will be longer so there's always one the just a quick point it doesn't seem to affect it anything but do you realize you advertised this meeting at the media center originally yes and that was yeah and I realized that I scheduled for the library fixed that agenda okay there is a revised gender online already oh I couldn't find it same P I made it so it's okay yeah just a just a point not a complaint um just just a couple of quick things then one when this project was first proposed the ask was 6.54 times the permitted density without a special permit um with the elimination of that one lot the ask has now gone up to 10 times the density um you got to remember that piece of land is still in play for the future especially with a sewer line it's not going to just lie fallow um I believe part of that is due to the conservations requirement that you stay as far away from the wetlands as you can they couldn't keep that lot in play because that's the place to get further away from the wet l so that that lot had to be taken out of play for this um this project but what it has done is increased the density from 6.54 to 10 times the ask um the other thing is conservation has said a few times to me when I've talked to John that their strongest wish is that the density be reduced that it's just too dense and I just wanted to remind you that you are there only the Conservation Commission is is powerless you are their only Aid in that regard and how's that stop there okay thank you sir okay any additional questions that don't think we have any additional comments here so what would the date be of the next meeting the date of our next meeting will be the nth we have the nth and the 23d is that what we have yeah the 9th we we're on for the E the conom so hopefully we can here on the 9th and tell you that they have closed their hearing okay so our request is to continue okay anything further and anything and I'll say before we do that is there anything else that we want to ask the applicant in terms of materials or questions to answer I guess I get one uh again I I mentioned it and we sort of casually went over it but public access to the wetlands is there a way we can make sure nobody gets thrown out for walking through the area behind there uh I know you're not like you don't want like parties or anything like that but I also just want to make sure that the section of woods that I don't know for the last 100 years everybody's been walking through there's a whole network of trails in there that at least a portion of that is is maintained in some way for the area we're not going to touch the wetlands sure so those Trails will be as they are um and we are not proposing a supplemental parking lot or something if that is what you're asking no just just I I just want to make sure like that it would be expected that sometimes some people are going to walk through the woods I I fully would expect that if they do that now they'll continue to do it it's human nature is pretty predictable in that regard so uh what I think I said last time is we're not going to be taking license plates in the parking lot and calling the police because you happen to park in one of our parking spaces and take a walk and so I can't say anything more than that but I can tell you that that's you know we intend to be a good neighbor um so we have a request for continuance to our next meeting of April the 9th is there anything further prior all right motion to continue spr 201100 12103 and SP 19928 and 19935 to e second thank you Eric and J is there anything further okay all in favor of continuing please say I I opposed extensions okay see you thank you the next item on our agenda is 300 South Washington Street with an update on SP 20381 [Music] and-3 uh and I do believe I see Mr Diaz on the zoom call here yes Mr chair so thank you for joining us um I will open to you just to provide an update on um what has transpired since we saw you last absolutely um just for the record Eric D registered professional engineer with strong point engineering representing the applicant at 300 South Washington um if I can share my screen is probably the best way that I can sort of walk the board through through the changes that we've made and what we had last talked about so I'm going to bring that up and I'm going to bring up this plan this is the plan that we had looked at the last time we were here um if you recall we had come before you a few months ago several months ago probably back in August and where the request were a parking reduction um and it appears from some comments that we got the last time we were there we might have gone too far um we had proposed 17 stalls based on what we had determined for usage of a a building of this nature um and the general consensus from the board was how about you get us to about 30 um so we took another look at that the other thing we did uh is we took a look at the architecture in the front of the building um so just to update and go this way this is a IED plan um we were able to get to 30 parking spaces there's a line missing here but we added one stall here and we added 12 stalls on this side um the idea would be that we would probably do employee parking on this side and this would be sort of overflow for that poor guy that just sucking in the helping his buddy's move he could park his car here and the uh people loading and unloading through the main entrance would go this way um so with that we provide ided a a walkway along the building we extended the walkway that ended over here at our utility room all the way across and we did add another entrance in this location here just to dress up sort of the front of the building um and I do have the architectural plans with me so this is the elevation of the front of the building there were some comments last time that you know from this point over it's all pretty un form and maybe looks a little Bland so we asked our architect to take a little look at that and they came up with this um so they've added some different colored paneling uh just to kind of break it up a little bit uh some different treatments with bricks an awning over a door here and some glass up above um and you know that will help dress things up certainly from South Washington which is where I would say the least of our tra will see the building the most of the traffic that's going to see the building is going to be from 495 and that's why on in this back corner here and over here and over here the corners they face northward um on 495 those do have glass in them uh to prevent uh you know present a nice uh storefront basically um so it'll be very attractive from the highway as well I think I've seen that on other storage buildings as well where they have the the stairways you can see through the windows or or something just to get a peek in yeah exactly yeah sometimes you can put like faux um you know uh unit doors and stuff in there just so you have a sense of what you're looking at um so the only other update that I can offer is this change really did very little to our site design um outside of that I'm just going to scroll through a little bit we had to add one more road to the subservice infiltration system that is here um and that is gone from 21 to 28 Chambers um the reason that I bring that up is simply that this has been submitted to the Conservation Commission for a notice of intent um it has not been heard yet uh I believe we're opening that meeting on April 8th um and as obviously this board knows that concom does carry and hold the storm water bylaw um permit uh but we are very confident with the design the design meets and exceeds all of the state and local requirements um so to the extent that there are comments related to storm water my expectation is they would be very minor in nature nothing that would you know reinvent the wheel here so to speak um so that is really it um as far as what we have for updates at this time I'm glad to go in your direction for me Mr J okay so thank you for for adding the spots I think that gets us closer to what we were what we all kind of agreed in our past session we thought would be a good fit um I'll turn to members here to ask if there are any further questions that they have um based on the updates that you provided today not a question but a comment uh I just want to say thank you for the facade work it's it's a great great example of what more people in town should be doing with their buildings so great thank you okay I see you about to ask a question Laura so just go I was just wondering if they were looking are you looking for a decision tonight from us well I'll defer to the board um we do have an application for site plan review plus two special params in front of you um that I believe what we the board may have been thinking at the last meeting and not to put words in their mouth but my interpretation was they kind of wanted to see these improvements and what they did um and perhaps here what the concom has to say as far as storm water is concerned um certainly if this board wanted to they could condition a vote on concom being satisfied and issuing the storm water permit but I'm going to go in this case at the Comfort level of the board I I don't need to push for anything specific here so as much as I would love to wrap it up and take it off your agenda I'll leave it up to you folks okay um but in general you would be comfortable if we were to close the public hearing and and proceed line yes I would okay I always ask that question bluntly when you're not done with other boards in terms of uh we don't think they're going to reinvent the wheel but if for some reason we decide we want Square Wheels then you'd be back for us for the modification that is that is true in a case like this I I really couldn't imagine what would change substantially that would alter sort of the intent of a site plan approval or a special permit here and like you just said if if the completely unexpected happen we'd be back under a modification application okay um yes I I would say in many cases the board often takes the the route of when do you think we'll be done with conservation let's try and wrap it up at roughly the same point um I'm not sure if um if you're aware Norton does have a town election at the end of April um April 20 and we do have two board members that would be um whose spots would be up for election at that point um so I think my if I'm going to put my finger on the scale I think I would my preference speak for myself would be that it may make sense to try and close us out prior to that date I would feel comfortable with the adjustments that they've made of passing a conditioning tonight just as long as conf conservation gives the storm water approval on the 8th my only question about asking whether they were ready is I didn't know whether it's a site plan review do we need a Landscape and Lighting plan because I don't see that in here and I also don't see where they intend to put Snow storage which I think should be on the site plan unless I've missed it if I may through the chair address that sure please um with regard to snow storage we had originally intended to put it in this location where these 12 extra stalls are um obviously we can't do that at this point and the other thing we can't do is push it to the opposite side into the storm water basin or closer to the wedland so what we've kind of been forced to do is add some requirement notation to the plan that says that I'm I'm paraphrasing here but basically the snow needs to be pushed to the edges of the pavement to the maximum extent practicable and when the site if and when the site runs out of snow storage capacity it needs to be trucked off site in according with all state and local regulation um unfortunately with a bit of a a tight sight and a good good amount of storm water mitigation we are running out of room for you know excessive amounts of snow storage okay uh and with regard to a lighting and Landscape plan I I forgive me um that we did not include that in the plan set just yet um we had not also requested a waiver for it so again certainly the the board could condition that we provide one in accord with the regulations and the bylaw requirements or the board could wait until we are able to provide that okay thank you yeah depending on volumes I could also see that the pragmatist in me feels like a couple of those spots on the left hand side of the site might get used as uh snow storage in some cases um it it's possible um and again you know the way I'm viewing these is sort of backup spaces for lack of a better word um I we did kind of talk at the last time that we met um that really the it data for this dictates somewhere between six and 10 spaces needed um so I do think that we have more spaces than we need and to the extent that we open up in a time frame this before the winter which is very likely and we can determine what that is maybe some of those spaces do get dedicated to to orig okay um and in terms of the the landscaping and lighting plan aspects of this um is that something that members feel is something that we could condition or something that we would want to see prior to closing public heing I mean conditions fine it's it's in the industrial park next to the highway there's no houses I'm fine with it too if I could just ask to just make sure the Landscaping plan doesn't have any uh plantings that yeah deer and rabbit proof plantings please cool absolutely the they do like all of the arbores around Norton I've got a in my backyard they have not survived very well either so I feel you pay okay but yeah I agree with Steve given that it's an industrial okay there's a billboard right there so we would so I'm hearing General um assertions that we are good to close the public hearing um yes this is before us for both a site plan and a special permit so the site the special permit would need five yes votes to proceed um we do have one member who is not here this evening so we have an option to um close the P to continue which is option a option b would be to close the public hearing and vote at a later date um and option three would be to close the public hearing and vote all this evening um with the understanding if we feel like we need Ellen's vote to in One Direction or another maybe option b makes more sense I'm good with C they've done what we've asked with the parking spaces with the facade and cleaning everything up I as long as we condition with uh con con and do uh the landscap and lighting I'm fine okay and Mr di just to summarize the waivers that you requested are for parking and what other waivers have been requested uh it's actually a special permit for a parking reduction um and it's a special permit for an industrial building over 10,000 square ft it's just so I I think that's technically two separate special permits I would defer to Brian on that we have one special permit but just two motions okay sure okay so those are the two um motions that we would need to make as it relates to the wave to relief for this applicant and then we would be looking for a condition of the storm water landscaping and laying and is there anything further that we need to ask for um at this point um and this is the point in the discussion Mr D where I always say it is on the applicant to request any relief that they need so if there's anything else that you need from a proce from a relief standpoint from this board let us know yes sir uh we've done a pretty thorough review and to my knowledge the only relief we're looking for are those two special departments okay so if there's any further disc questions for the applicant go for it if there's not then I look for a motion to close the public hearing motion to close the public hearing second okay we have a motion and second thank you Eric and Jim is there any further discussion on the motion to close the public hearing okay all in favor of closing the public hearing please say I I all opposed extensions okay the public hearing is now closed is there any further action anybody would like to take in regards to the decision or in terms of tabling a vote to Future session it was like two motions is it a or b well a is two motions tonight right um yes so like motion to approve uh special permit uh 20381 in regards to building over 10,000 ft 10,000 sare ft and the reduction in parking and reduction parking okay second do we have to put the conditions in right now with that motion I was going and that motion to approve the special permit is with the conditions that we've discussed in that they get a storm water permit from conservation and they submit a landscaping and lighting plan prior to construction some seconded okay is there any further discussion on the motion again this is to approve the special permit with conditions okay all in favor please say I all opposed extensions okay so that is the special permit do we have an additional action on these site plans uh motion to to approve the safe plan review three sp-3 spr sp-3 and with uh again the same conditions for storm water landscaping and lighting the same conditions y okay second and we have a second thank you Eric and Steve is there any further discussion on the motion to approve the special the site plan review the site plan okay again all in favor please say I I all opposed extensions okay the application has been approved with conditions and we will work on getting a decision issued in the coming days that's great thank you all very much for your time and your help with this I appreciate it thank you very much thanks everyone okay the last item on the public hearing section of our agenda is a continuation of spr-1 for zero West Main Street uh this was an application for 218 room boarding houses the applicant is seeking to withdraw without prejudice um they are not at the meeting this evening um and we have and we received a a letter saying that they'd like to withdraw so we would need a motion to accept the withdrawal with Prejudice motion to accept the withdrawal without prejudice do I have seconded okay any further discussion on the motion to withdraw okay all in favor please say I I all opposed extensions okay that application is withdrawn okay so with that posted um we will close the public section of our agenda and the board we will move into a short executive session again this is related to and I just closed it of course uh I have to go through the whole uh short executive session related pursuant to Mass General Law chapter 30A 21 A3 just strategy related to pending litigation not as cond capital Partners see versus Town North planning board um we are I'm declaring that we discussing the matter in open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the litigating position of the board um so a vote we would need a vote to go into executive session uh it is possible votes may occur after which the board will not return to the Open Session and then we will adjourn so I need a motion so move and second thank you Jim and Eric is there any further discussion okay hearing none all in favor of moving to Executive session when the board will not return please say I I all opposed extensions thank you very much everybody that concludes the public session of our agenda this evening