Good evening and welcome to the Tuesday, December 16th, 2025 meeting of the Norton Planning Board. The public is welcome to participate in person or remotely. We are here in person at the Norton Town Hall at 72 East Main Street in the Crane Room and you may also join
via the Zoom link as provided in the agenda. Please feel free to email questions to the board ahead of this meeting addressed to town staff as listed in the agenda. I will call this meeting to order. We have seven members tonight in person for the first time in
a long time. I would like to welcome Frank Hearns to the board. Thank you very much for stepping up. >> Thank you. >> Really need the help. >> Brian, would you like to pass down whatever bills you have and we'll talk about some minutes after. Um, we're going to take something out of order at
first. We're going to First item will be the covenant release for the Birch Lane Extension definitive plan one. We have to get this notorized while we're all in person. So, we're going to take care of that quickly. Is there anything you want to >> Yeah. So, thank you. Um, as you might recall, earlier this year, you approved
a two lot subdivision for duplexes on Birch Lane. Um, there was a covenant to ensure they didn't move forward until they've completed the water, sewer, and road work. I have confirmation from both the uh superintendent from water and
sewer and the highway department saying it's work is complete. So the applicant has asked if they can release the uh those lots. So that's what this covenant is. And behind me is Megan Harrap who is a notary and also the conservation commission's administrative assistant.
So she's kindly come over here and I promised her we'd get her out quickly. >> Want to talk about sports? >> Not at all. sign that I'll look at your ID. >> Um, thank you. >> Yes, please get your IDs out.
>> Where do I go? Right here. >> Yes. >> Here. You good? >> Yeah. No problem. Okay. >> And right here the same thing I did.
>> Full name signature >> full name. You didn't need my full legal name, right? >> Yeah. >> Okay, good. J Well, Jr. These are bills. Look at them if you have any questions.
>> No, too short. >> Oh, okay. That's good. >> Montreal. >> Never going to give you name. >> Just a good short name. >> If you ever have kids, it's a really considerate thing. >> We're calling you Joe Bop.
>> Works well in many parts of the South. >> Thank you very much. star. >> Switch around Bob Joe. >> Jim Joe here. >> I get a lot of JPs. >> Yes. >> Especially in Louisiana. >> He wasn't He wasn't >> Yeah, he wasn't born.
>> Yes. >> Well, Louisiana, a lot of specific. >> I'm sure Paul said it, but thank you again for being the notary for us tonight. >> Of course. >> Thank you. I think we have to talk about planning
board business now. that >> you aren't noticing. >> Yeah. >> Okay. It's not showing up. >> I disabled audio entirely. >> Oh, okay. >> And and video actually. >> What's the best way to present? Thank you so much.
>> If I don't, I have to mute it in like six places or it sounds like it did there. Thank you, Megan. >> You're very welcome. I'm just finish. >> Okay. Thanks, Megan. >> Welcome. >> Thank you. Yep. >> Next item on our agenda is special
permit SP32 for 376 Old Colony Road. The owner is Divine Five Properties. Steven Lasiva. The applicant is Irvy Patel. The applicant seeks approval for an electronic message center. Good evening.
>> Good evening, guys. How are you? >> Very good. Yourself? >> Good. Good. So, it's basically for more visibility purpose that um >> if you could get get the microphone just a little little higher. >> Okay. So, it's basically for the visibility purpose. This liquor store
has been open now for almost a uh we actually just finished one year over there and we think like the digital sign would definitely help us because if you see all these trees behind and the speed limit on that road is about 30. So
people can't see there's a liquor store until all the way they're there. But if we put this digital sign on top of it we would get a further visibility that would help the business. Good. Any members of the board have any questions?
And >> and if while uh we doing that, I'm going to have Paul pull up ourh criteria for approving this. Just real quick, when you say that is lit, is that lit internally or is that with spotlights on it? Where that was? >> Which one? >> When the sign was lit, the one we just
looked at, is that like there's light shining on it or is it lit one of those ones that's lit? >> No, it's just a message board. So, so when like if it's if we are putting a product on sale or anything, if we put that >> it's just it's just going to say let's say Tito's 175 $29.99. That's it.
>> So, it's just where it says 2x6 digital sign. The rest of that's already there. >> Yeah, it's already there. Yes. >> Okay. >> I apologize. >> Good. This is actually Is this a permit to correct the sign that's already there? Correct. >> Yeah, we are just adding on top of it.
That's it. I mean there's already an electronic sign at the location. So yeah, >> and you're aware of the guidelines about animations and all that stuff. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> So these are our criteria for approving a electronic message center and these
will be word for word in our approval if it >> Okay. Any other questions, comments, concern for the board right now? Is is there anyone on Zoom or in person that wishes to speak about this project? If you're on Zoom, please raise your
hand and we'll try to recognize you. I don't see anyone on Zoom. I don't see anyone rushing up to the microphone in person. Any other questions from the board, comments for the board, or pleasure of the board? >> Tim, >> motion to close the public hearing. >> Second.
>> We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All in favor? >> I >> opposed. >> Unanimous. Pleasure of the board. >> Motion to approve. Sign with the >> Rob. Does that motion include our conditions?
>> Yes. Yes. That's what I was trying to >> our our standard conditions and our um standards for electronic message centers. >> Correct. What we have here? >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I
>> I opposed. Abstain. >> Thank you guys. >> All set. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Good luck. >> Next item on our agenda is special permit SP33 and site plan approval SPR18 for 61 West Main Street. The owner
applicant is Corvo Properties. The applicant seeks approval for a four-story top of the shop building and rebuilding existing food and beverage retail store. Good evening. Good evening Jacobe 144 Bank Street representing the applicant.
>> Uh so u as you said this is a property at 61 West Main Street. It's where the uh Honeydew Donuts is now and the proposal is to redevelop it and Paul maybe could bring up a a plan for us. Uh
so this is um a top-of-the-shop uh development which is a byite use in the village center core district. Uh the uh development has parking underneath on
the first floor. It has three floors above that of uh residential. There's uh about 4,400 square ft at the front, which is the proposed um retail. Uh
one of the things that I'd point out to you is that um in this district, four stories are allowed uh by right with a maximum height of 60 ft. This building is 45.5 ft. Of the 39 residential units,
uh 21 are onebedrooms, 18 are two bedrooms. We have applied for site plan review and two special permits. Uh the reason we need two special permits is that your
10% affordability requirement requires a special permit. Um I'm not sure why, but it does. And so uh therefore four of the units will have to meet the affordability requirements. In addition to that uh in the water resource
protection district which this property is in uh we are uh only allowed 15% lot coverage and we are proposing to go to 32.7% lot coverage.
Uh there is one issue that I spoke to the building inspector about today that I wanted to bring to your attention, which is that the drive-thru for the honeydew is not allowed in this district anymore. It is a pre-existing lawful
non-conforming use. We are proposing to take down the Honeydew building which is right smack dab in the middle of the property and to move it to the left edge of the property and I'm going to have the engineer talk about some tweaks
we've made to the plan as a result of of uh looking at that again. But I spoke to the building inspector today because 1751.5E seems to say that a nonconforming use
can be changed, extended, or altered only upon a finding by the permit granting authority that it's not substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming use. And the zoning board of appeals is that permit granting authority. But the section that
immediately follows it F says a non-conforming use may be expanded in size or scope of the activity within confines of the lot used therefore and to the extent permitted by the dimensional requirements for the district in which such non-conforming
use is located. So there seems to be a conflict between those two sections. And so in speaking with Mr. Bailey today uh he said to me, you know, he said, "It seems to me that F is what applies and that site plan review covers this
situation because we're just proposing to move it within the site. The building will actually be slightly smaller. Um but we are not changing the principal use, which is the honeydew donuts. We are not changing the nonconforming use
which is uh the drive-thru. Uh the alteration is to make it smaller. So we're not extending it. So he said to me, "Why don't you ask the planning board what their view is of that? Because if you believe that it's within
your jurisdiction, which I do and he does, then we would not have to file by Christmas Eve with the zoning board and have a hearing in the middle of January concerning this uh this property. So, before we go any further on anything
else, I was hoping we could get some feedback from the board as to your pleasure in trying to interpret the bylaw. Paul, do you want to just uh inform us in your conversations with Mr. Bailey? >> Sure. Um, you know, I'll first confirm
uh what what uh Jack was just saying, but but I've been talking with Ed on this and with the applicant, Mr. Rido, um cuz we knew that the drive-thru, if this were a new proposal, it would not be allowed. But this is a
non-conforming use. It's it's still active. And we looked at this. We had this, you know, we looked at E and that clearly says go to the ZBA. F doesn't indicate where it goes. And
our thought was let the let you all decide. Are you comfortable making this part of the decision here or do you want to defer it to to the um zoning board of appeals? As Ed and I talked, you know, we we kept saying this is an analogy. It's like
it's like pass interference in football, modern football. Um where you just go, really? Is this a >> ticky tick? >> Yeah, it's a tickytac call. Um as we see it, it's just a they're not making the you the the conformity more
non-conforming. It's just relocating it, which we believe both provisions ENF allow for. Um I'll chime in. Yeah, as far as I see it, like I think the key phrase here is substantially more detrimental, which I don't think it
is. >> Nope. >> Right. >> So therefore wouldn't need to go to the ZBA. >> I I think the alteration or even expansion in size or scope is covered by F. So yeah, I don't think it's it's not a non-conform. I mean, it's non-conforming, but it's continued. It's
not abandoned. >> Right. It's not that was our thought, but we just felt it was important for you all to make that call. if you didn't want to make that unilaterally. >> Mr. Chairman, could I >> Yes, Rob. >> And um yeah, I I actually because I see
how popular and how that drive-thru gets used by the town and everything. I would almost argue it would be detrimental to take it away from, but a lot of people would be upset at losing it. >> No, >> thank you. >> Well, no, I'm just giving an honest opinion, but >> yeah, >> Tim,
>> I'll be the the devil's advocate here. Just Mr. to Jacobia are is is the fact that this inongruity could potentially give an abuter or somebody with grounds potential standing to say that we didn't
follow proper procedure in this. Is that something that you're the applicant is comfortable with? Uh, we are one procedure that I could follow if you required me to is I could write a letter and request a ruling from the building inspector in writing which
in I know what his ruling would be was that it's within your jurisdiction under F. If that was the case, then someone would have to appeal that to the zoning board of appeals. Um, but we thought that that given the ambiguity here and the
building inspector's ruling that we were comfortable with going forward with site plan review by you to determine the layout of this property. >> We have any other questions from the board members? If not,
>> Mr. Chairman, so can we do we have the ability to settle this here if we approve this tonight? Is that >> what I want to do next is as long as we get all of our questions out regarding this exact subject, we'll take a vote on it. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Just on this just on whether we
believe >> So it'll be a straw vote on >> correct >> whether you believed it was within your jurisdiction. >> Correct. Any other questions from the board? So the chair would be looking for a vote, verbal vote on whether we believe
we should send this to the zoning board for a finding under 1.6E 6E or can we find that applying under F and non-conforming use may be expanded in size or scope of the activity within confines of the lot to the extent
permitted by the dimensional requirements for the district in which such non-conforming use is located. Um I'm fine with going forward under F. Um Rob, >> I'm fine with going forward under F.
Yes, >> I'm a yes. Bridget. >> Yes, >> Frank. >> Yes, Steve. >> I'm comfortable. >> Eric, >> I'm good with F. >> Thank you. So, we will not apply to the
zoning board of appeals and we will uh stay here. >> Uh >> yeah, >> just uh because I I'm trying not to steal my engineer and architect's thunder. Um I'll let them come up. Uh there are a number of issues that Paul raised in a memo to us and that we want
to some of them we can address tonight. Some of them we'll have to address at the next meeting, but we do have things like elevations and building materials and other things that we can we can show you. >> Uh we are in front of the conservation commission that is they didn't have a
meeting last week. So, uh, their next meeting is until January 12th and, uh, they are, uh, looking at the notice of intent because there's some wetlands at the back end of the property and also the storm water. I understand that
they're fairly comfortable with moving forward, but they wanted to make sure that this board didn't require any changes to the plan that would impact what they're analyzing. So, just wanted you to be aware of the fact that we'll need to continue this uh and
maybe your next meeting or your second next meeting depending on what the schedule is just to make sure that um we're all operating from the same set of plans. >> So, it'll be either January 6th or January 20th, the next two. And I'm thinking that maybe we should look at the 20th because
um the conservation well maybe we should come back on the 6th with answers to the other questions and then we can tell the conservation commission how much progress we've made with you. So I'm going to suggest the sixth. >> And Paul, how are we looking for the
sixth? >> Getting busy. Um >> Weaten Place is tenatively scheduled. That's the 21 unit subdivision. >> Yeah. Brayu Lane, Zero Sturdy, and then Zero Mansfield is coming back that night, too.
>> Uh, Zero Mansfield, my project. Um, because we haven't been to the conservation commission yet. The only thing we were going to come in to talk to you about was if we had made progress with the sewer commissioners, and I emailed the uh our engineer on that
today, and they're hoping to meet with them next week. So, if we have something to tell you, we will, but we may well be asking for that one to be continued to the 20th simply because uh we haven't had a chance to get with conservation yet. And of course, one of the big
issues was the location of the parking area in front of the building or behind it. So, uh that's an update on that one. >> So, you'll prefer the six for now when we get to it. >> I prefer the sixth for this one. And I'm thinking that we may have a brief
presentation on the other one on the 6th, but we may end up going over to the 20th depending on what progress we make with the sewer commissioners. >> Very good. Uh, so I'm going to, um, sit down at this point and I'm going to ask Eric to
come up, introduce himself, and to take you through the project, uh, and show you what he has designed, including our thoughts on the drive-thru for the honeydew. >> Yes. Yes. Uh, good evening everyone. Uh,
for the record, Eric Das, registered professional engineer with Strongpoint Engineering. Um, I will say I won't say that Jack stole my thunder, but I will say he did a good part of my job for me tonight. So, I do appreciate that. Thank you. Um, Paul, if we can bring that plan back up, that would be great.
>> Oh, just great. Thank you. Uh, can you scroll just pan up a little bit? Is this Oh, well, while we're doing that. Yeah, perfect. So, while we're doing that, obviously, this is sort of an introductory meeting and as as Jack
said, we do have a few items that we need to kind of button up um regarding Paul's review letter and things like that. So, I'll keep this sort of high level for the time being. Um, as you can see in obviously this is the site of the existing Honeydew Donuts with which you
are all very familiar. The buildable area of the site is really kind of defined by the existence of wetland uh resource areas to the left side of the site and um and page north and route 123 um on page south. So that really kind of
defines where we are. As Jack said, we are in front of the conservation commission right now. Uh the project has been thoroughly reviewed by Pat Brennan on their behalf. Um and he we have a clean bill of health from Pat. Um Jack is right. The conservation commission is
generally very happy with the project, but as they always are, they're cautious and they want to make sure that they're approving the same thing that you folks are. So we've continued until that point. Um one of the things that I wanted to highlight in particular is the groundwater protection overlay district,
the special permit that's required. So as you know any development that renders more than 15% of the lot is to be impervious surface requires a special permit. In this case the existing site is at 26.2% impervious. So it's already
over that threshold. We're in proposing to increase to 32.7% impervious which is if you do the math that's 6.5% more impervious than what is there now. A good portion of our newly proposed
imperous area is coming from rooftop. Um when the good news is that rooftop is generally clean. Uh the other point to make in this case is that the existing site storm water management consists solely of a series of I think it's either five or six infiltrating catch
basins. The runoff enters the catch basin goes straight into the ground. It's all well and good, but it doesn't provide for any water quality treatment. Um when we're talking about a groundwater protection district, we generally want to make sure that the water that's getting there is clean. So the what we proposed from a storm water
perspective uh far eclipses the state and local standard requirements for peak rate attenuation of storm water uh groundwater recharge and groundwater quality. So it means we're getting a lot more clean water into the ground a than
what goes there now and b even more than what the standards require us to do. So that's just a very a positive note about the the special permit requirements. Uh I think any way that you slice it from that point of view, you can look at this
design from a storm water perspective as a a betterment to the site. Um aside from that, um all of the things that Jack said are correct. We're relocating the Honeydew donuts. We have ground level parking within the building. Our parking study is still being finalized,
but after consultation with our traffic engineers, we've modeled our traffic count after what is required in your MBTA uh overlay district and we came up with a requirement for a total of 83 parking stalls and that's what we provided. Um preliminary conversation
with our traffic team suggest that that's adequate if not more than adequate. So, we don't anticipate any significant changes in that regard. Um obviously as well this is a DOT owned road so curb cuts and things of that nature they will have the final say. Um
just one other note on the drive-thru in the general layout is that you'll see on that that plan in front of you is sort of a redline markup of the driveway uh the drive-through lane around the honeydew. We kind of took a look at this yesterday and as we were preparing for
this meeting and I think we all agreed that having the drive-through lane at an angle to the building was a little awkward. So, we just squared that up. Um, and that's something that we will formalize and incorporate into the plans moving forward. Aside from that, we provided a full landscape plan. Uh, we did provide a full lighting plan um that
is compliant with all of the lighting standards of the town. It is dark sky compliant. Uh, zero foot candles at the property line, LED, uh, village style lighting mounted at 16t height. So, those are really the finer points of the site plan at this point. Um, I can
either, and Mr. Jim, and I'll go your direction. I'm glad to either turn it over to Tony Donado, who is our architect, or I can field any site related questions now. Um, whatever your preference is. >> Yeah, we'll get some site questions out right now. Could we just Paul, um, for everyone watching, it's kind of hard to
see on the screen and I believe you can see it on the plan. It shows the existing location of Honeydew. Paul, I don't know if you could just put your cursor around it just so anyone online could kind of see where the existing Honeydew building is. Yeah, it's sort of >> it's kind of really light on that plan,
but you can see it. We can see it on Zoom. I can see it. But >> so just so everyone knows in the existing curb cuts, are they remaining or are they moving or how does that line up? >> So, they're going to be shifted slightly. Um, as it shows right now, what I'll call the main curb cut coming
into the site is going to be shifted to page left by say 25 ft from the center. Um the second curb cut is exit only for the drive-thru. That is also shifted to page left uh by probably 20 ft. Um but
that one is also narrowed. Um it's it's pretty wide in the existing condition and we've got it at 12 ft coming out. >> So that's a single lane drive through. >> That's a single lane drive-thru. That's correct. Uh we did think about an escape route, which is often times what people talk about on drive-throughs. Um, if
you're queuing into the drive-thru, you basically have until you get to the order board before you're committed in this case. So, if you look on the plan between Yep. Right where Paul where the 12T dimension is, uh, right by the kind
of patio is where the order board would sit. So, you're not committed until you get to that order board. And from a retailer perspective, once you order, they don't really want you pulling out anyway. Um, we just got a >> Sure. >> Could you go to the microphone so they
can hear you online, please? >> You came up just short of the orderboard. Um, and you said, "Oh my god, there's eight cars in line. I don't want to be in this line." You can simply take a right-hand turn and go up and go around that center uh area and get back out from the main entrance. So, we
looked at that and said, you know, rather than trying to make the an escape lane uh in the where the drive-thru is, you you have a choice to make, which is when you get within a car or two of the orderboard, you can take a right and a
right and a right and go straight out. No problem. >> I have a question in my notes, and I I didn't go back and look. Has the fire department signed off on this design? This >> Not yet. They've recently sent over their uh truck specs and asked us to run the truck turning analysis. We've taken a preliminary, excuse me, a preliminary
look at it. Uh we don't have concerns. We just need to finalize it. >> So, we'll just need something at least in our system. They sign off on that before they're >> Yes, absolutely. >> That uh checks off my few questions. I'll go to the other members of the board for questions.
>> I just I didn't I hear that Paul had put forth a number of questions that got answered as well. Paul supplies a uh >> memo >> that we all get a memo >> and they they usually do precon premeating hearings between >> okay >> several members of town staff so they
address all tickytac questions before we even see it is the goal >> so these will be in the documents I already read there's not something new >> correct >> they're in there right now >> yes I'm good >> questions from the board yes Frank
>> does the garage require a gas and oil water separator. >> It will. Yes. And that will connect to the uh municipal sewer system. >> Okay. How often is that going to be maintained? >> Uh in the operations and maintenance plan, I I believe we call those is to be inspected quarterly. Um but certainly
they're equipped with floats and things like that too. If there's if there's an issue, there's an alarm that will sound and tell them what needs to be done. >> So, it's a tight tank or is it going to the sewer? >> Uh it'll go to a sewer, but if it backs up beyond a certain point, we get notified about it. if it's it's if it's in danger of an imminent over overflow
or something like that. >> And that's all governed by plumbing code. That's nothing governed by our >> That is correct. Yes, it's all plumbing code. >> Bridget, thought you were going to say something. >> I was thinking about it. Um >> Steve, before Yeah. >> You want to get your thought, Steve?
>> Uh specific to the site plan or overall about the project? >> Let's go specific to the site plan so we can see the rest of the project first. >> I'm good for now. Thank you. >> Maybe about the parking. The parking. So, there's 83 spots that you're providing. That's what I'm reading, right?
>> That is correct. Yes. Okay. Yes. >> Um, couple things that have come up previously. Um, do we have any EV spots dedicated, called out? >> That was actually one of Paul's comments. Um, we have not identified them yet, but we discussed that yesterday. We'll be adding those
>> for the next plan. >> Yes. >> Um, we have snow storage labeled on this plan. We so loaded question. We have snow storage shown in those hatched areas that you see in like in for example in the middle of the landscape island. I just neglected to actually
label them. So they're there. I just need to add a label. >> I'm sure Concom will be appreciative. >> Yeah, they will. >> That one's on me. >> Any Tim? Um you mentioned the updating also updating storm water management the
existing site. Um obviously Pat Brennan looked at it but from how much of the old system is kind of remaining how much is being ripped replaced brand new? >> The entirety of the old system is coming out. Everything is going to be brand new.
>> Okay. Um changing gears entirely on that for you but still for you. uh the curb cut curb cuts you said they're going through DOT is that something that we're trying to align with the properties across the street
>> uh as much as we can do DOT does does prefer that. Uh so a couple of things we're trying to do is not you know a align with the properties across the street but b not really change them any more than we have to from the existing traffic patterns. Um so we will be you know addressing that. One thing, as I'm
sure you know with DOT, is that we cannot actually apply to them until we are fully approved by the town, which can sometimes be problematic, but we do what we can to minimize that. >> We cannot change the state as much as we uh >> and Tim, just to interrupt you for a second, Paul, you've had meetings with
the school department. Do you want to talk about any of those? >> Right. And in fact, last week, um, Anthony and I sat down with a couple reps from the school department, uh, for them to talk about the traffic issues and the alignment of the driveway. So, um, uh, they presented, you know, the
the issues just like they did with 77 West Main, the hours of the peak hours in the morning and afternoon. So, um, that'll be reflected in an upcoming traffic study, which we also then will have to get a peer reviewer to look at.
Okay. Um, and I had two more here. Paul, I guess one of the questions that was I think brought up by both um, Mr. Jacobe and the engineer here was talking about the impervious coverage compared to what's
required under the special permit. >> Is 32% or 33% I forget off the top of my head. Is that in line with other things that we've done in this water resource zone or is that >> Oh, it's probably less than some areas
where it's entirely >> in terms of like newer permits. Not necessarily stuff that's been there forever cuz we can't uh >> I would say it's in line certainly with the the recent approvals at 10 and 77 West Main. >> Okay. >> And um >> well, in fact, well 77 or 10 West Main
was a reduction because it was almost 100% impervious. Yeah. >> So, it's a little less than that, but yeah, this is in line with it. I mean, the good thing about this type of development when you have top of the shop is it's vertical rather than horizontal. So,
you're actually reducing the impervious. You have the ability to reduce the impervious cover. >> Okay. >> And yeah, this one is a is currently a bit a little bit less than what uh they're proposing. >> Okay. >> And just one um if I if I may just add
to that. So the the general criteria when looking at these type of things is all about can you get the water back in the ground and can you clean it, right? Because it's in the water protection overlay district. We don't want to starve the aquifer and we don't want to pollute the aquifer. So there it's a
much more subjective bar than some other special permits typically are. >> Is it a zone three? No zone. >> Zone three. Zone two, >> I believe. >> Three. No, it's zone three. It's three. three, excuse me, >> three, which feeds into the area that feeds into the well. >> Yes.
>> Um, >> and for whatever it's worth, if we weren't in this overlay district, the requirement would be 75% lot coverage. So, we're significantly less than that requirement. >> Yeah. Um, and the only thing I had in my
notes here, I don't know if we just had an electronic message center special permit before you. Is that something that you planned for the site? Is that something that if you were looking to do, we would go concurrently? >> Uh, you know, I I don't think that that's something that we've really
discussed at this point. Uh, certainly something that we can look at and if there's an imminent plan, we can add it to this application and if not, we'll have to come back if it comes up. >> Not that we don't like seeing you. Sure. >> We like to be efficient though.
>> I'm Anthony Rito. I'm the applicant. I'd rather not do an electronic sign, but I'm going to talk to the franchisee. See what they say. I'm not a big fan of them. So, we'll see. >> That's fine. >> You have residents there. They won't like it. >> Yeah, that's the >> Yeah. >> Rob, did you have a question?
>> Um, I did. Could you scroll up so I can see the rest of the parking? >> Scroll up. >> I just want to see >> what it is. I thought they said 80 spaces and this doesn't look like 80 to me. >> There's some underneath the building. I think >> there's approximately 26 I think under the building. >> Yeah. >> Is that right? Okay. Yes. And the way
that this program typically works is that the stalls in the building will be reserved for tenants. >> Uh you see that kind of dog lab to the back there that will likely be reserved for tenants. Um and then you know we we try to keep the tenant spaces out of the area of the other people who may be
using commercial. >> Fair enough. The the answer was there was more spaces than I was. >> Sure. >> Yeah. >> It's something we've been talking about more and more. Um has been a spot. Is there a spot dedicated to um delivery, short-term delivery? Um >> not necessarily Amazon or anything that
they would use, but food delivery, etc. at the front of the building. Do we have anything dedicated for that? >> Sure. In fact, that was one of Paul's comments, and we had discussed that yesterday. We're going to dedicate um a space right at the if you see where the main building is where it says says
stair elevator on the side that doesn't have the handicap parking. We're going to dedicate a space over there for that. >> Right. >> With signage, you know, >> Uber >> Uber 10-minute max walking or something like that. Yeah. >> Do we have any other site plan related
questions from the board? If not, we will continue with their presentation. >> Okay, >> we're good with the site for now. >> All right, I'm going to turn it over to the project architect, Tony Donado. >> Hi, for the record, my name is Tony Donado with AD Architect, and I'm the uh
architect for this project. Um very simply, um the project is uh predominantly residential with a retail component, street facing retail component. Um it's what's called podium construction. We're
assuming that it's going to be um standard woodframe construction over um a podium, a concrete and steel base. Um we've got a total of 39 units. Um a nearly 50/50 blend of one and two bedrooms. I believe there's 18 two beds
and 21 one beds. Of course, we will have the required ADA accessible units as well. Um, and there are some affordability requirements as well and we we will meet those. Um, so regarding the building itself, I
don't know if you want to call up either the floor plans and we can get a general idea of the floor plans. >> Oh, should be the floor plans. Do we not have a floor plan? >> I >> That's okay. We can
>> Okay, >> we can skip over to the to the materials and exterior. Okay, that's fine. >> I can look for it. >> So, this is a representation of what the exterior of the building would look like. Um uh in this particular case it
is it it is only um three stories and the parking is is is below from this from this particular view. Um this is not exactly our project but it is a we're using it as a as a very similar example. Um same sort of materials. It's
a combination of uh cement fiber siding in three different colors. We've got um uh a lot of uh variation of the roofs. We've got um exterior uh porches for each of the units. Um and at the retail
base, we have we have a brick water table throughout the building setting the base. And then we call out the retail and entrance areas with more brick and composite panel to try and give more emphasis to those retail and ground floor spaces. And like I said,
we're using a combination of um different colors on the siding, different exposures on the siding, different textures to just to kind of give some um >> to give some variety to the extent of the building. And again, although this is not exactly a rendering of our
project, it is a very similar concept. Um we've we've developed a couple of these now and um we like to work with with what works and build on it and refine it. Um
we uh we we do have the architectural okay the floor plan. Sorry. >> No, no problem. No problem. So um the area that you see in pink if you if you pan the drawing up a little bit that is the ground floor retail.
Um sorry the other way down. Pan down. So the retail is uh street facing and um the the yellow would be circulation space. So we have the entrance to the residential and then the parking garage entrance is a little further up on the
lot. So we're really wrapping the the front of this building, the street facing portion of this building is going to be very pedestrian oriented and retail oriented. And then as you move up into the building, it's really just circulation, stair cores, some common
area, and then the um the units which which wrap the building. We have units facing in all directions so that we're getting windowing in all directions and really interesting on all sides.
Um so I think that's pretty much it. If there are any questions on the architecture, >> what's that? >> Oh, yeah. It >> Yeah. Yeah. Sure. You said you want to talk about the site lighting.
>> Yeah, I can I can touch base on. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And also, we should bring up the landscaping plan we didn't touch on. >> Yeah, sure. >> Sure. >> Uh Paul, if you have the full I I think the lighting plan is its own drawing, but the landscape plan is in the in the set.
Okay. So, that is the lighting plan for the site. Um, I think really the big takeaway from this is you can see the models of the um the village style headlamps that we're going to have in the detail uh near the title block. Um those are all mounted at the required 16
ft maximum height. Um, we have them interspersed throughout the property. There's probably close to a dozen of them. Uh, we are zero foot candles at the property line. We are dark sky compliant. Um, LED, high efficiency, all
of the good stuff. Uh, we also have the ability on these to dim them uh toward the evening. Uh, what we don't want to do is leave this place lit up for residential use all night. Uh, excuse me, for commercial use all night. Right. these the commercial uses will close at some point and the place does not need
to be as bright. So we have the ability to dim them on a timer uh to the required minimum for security lighting which I believe if I recall is one foot candle. Um so we can adjust these and be efficient and make it kind of blend in a little bit better. Um and then aside
from that if we go to the landscape plan um there will be some revision to the landscape plan based on some of Paul's comments. Um, and we'll I'll hold to just a minute while we pull that up. >> Is that part of the full plan? >> That was part of the full plan set. Yeah, it was toward the end of the set.
>> Okay, it's coming. Uh, right before the detail sheets. I think it's number six. This looks right to me. Yes, that is the landscape plan. Um, so without getting into all of the details,
we we've interspersed some some trees throughout where we can. Uh, a lot of ground cover, a lot of uh shrub um and and we try to add some color uh in the front along the street frontage. Uh certainly I think we want to make an effort based on some of Paul's comments
to add a little bit more along the building front along the face of the buildings um to get some color in there. um closer to the building and things like that. We've also opted because we're on route 123, we need to provide some sort of a screen along the
frontage. So, we've opted with a hedge, a continuous hedge along the frontage in that location uh to satisfy that requirement. >> Anyone have any plans uh questions specific to lighting or landscaping plan while we have uh Mr. Das up here? I was
just wondering is there going to be any fencing or anything on the right side because I know there's another business on the other on the other property to the right >> on the right property line. Um I don't think there's a current plan for that but if if there's a need I think that's something that we can probably take a
look at. >> Mr. Chair, >> I had a question actually earlier that I just remembered it's off of that. Um Paul or you or someone uh do you know how close it is to that other building like I don't know
>> um if you go to a different sheet I think if you go to sheet C2 I don't think I have an exact dimension but it shows the building >> um so you can >> Oh yeah I see I see that. Okay. Yes. So just guesstimating from that it's that building's probably
>> 15 to 20 ft from the property boundary. >> Okay. So, we've probably got 30 feet or so between the two buildings. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And that building actually has no it does it it turns its back on this site. So,
>> um it's a blank wall back there. >> Well, it's side. People still go in the front of Boss and Cream. >> I'm not criticizing it. >> No, it's it's not it's certainly not. >> It has a lot of It has its, you know, >> Yes. >> on the frontage. It It's works great.
>> So, open up to the board. Any >> questions on the project for the entirety? I know Steve, you've got one in the >> in the queue here. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, I got the big one. Um, now I've talked to Paul about this and I've mentioned it for other projects in this district overall.
This is a top-of-the- project and there's a precedent here. Our zoning use table says that multif family is not permitted as a use in this district. There are residential uses that are
permitted in this district like a fraternity or a tourist home or a bed and breakfast but specifically single family homes, duplexes, multifamilies, nursing homes are not permitted.
One of the precedents of this if we if we say that top of the shop means that any form of residential can be on the top that means throughout the entire village center core and the village commercial
any type of residential can go on the top of any building going forward and without uh any limit to how many units. If there were a large property that were bought, let's say um bog iron or something like that or even
a couple properties in a row were bought, there would would be nothing to stop this board from preventing that developer from putting one, 200, 500 units under this precedent. Secondly,
there is nothing that defines what kind of residential use goes on top or what kind of non-residential use goes on the bottom. So, we're proposing retail on the bottom, but can a gas station go on the bottom? Because a top of the shop is allowed by right and a non-residential
use is allowed on the bottom. What kind? What defines what kind goes on the bottom? And is that the same mechanism that defines what can go on the top? So, I know personally speaking from when this zone was created, when the VCC was created, I was on the subcommittee and
we completely intended for the top floors, as I've said before, to be residential. Um, whether it's a mistake in the how it was written, mistake in the bylaw, as we have many. Um, it's on a long list to correct, but I do believe it was 100% the intent, and I believe
that's what the presentation at town meeting um intended and or showed. Um Tim, you were on the board at the time. Am I misspeaking or misremembering? >> No, I think that was the intention, but I think we've we've discussed I think
with Steve that this is not clear as written as we went through the whole recotification process that we know how that went. >> Could I go one step further? Cuz I I wanted to do my research and correct myself if I'm wrong. I wanted to see what you guys actually said in those past meetings and in the the town
meeting, the pre the presentation that Paul made. The word multif family was not mentioned once in the presentation that Paul presented, but it did say single families and duplexes are not allowed specifically. It also said gas stations are not allowed. It did explain
some stuff. It did not mention the words multif family >> in any of our meetings. It may be in the meetings but not in the presentation. But in the language that was passed at town meeting, it explicitly says that multif family is not permitted. And that
is what the town residents read and voted for. >> But again, if we are to assume, and I get the intention, we do want several units on top of a business. That's great. I get that. but unlimited amounts
of units. If somebody comes in and builds a small thing, they just put a little 2500 square ft store on the bottom, they can now squeeze in a,000 units by right. The only thing having this meeting happen
right now is that they're in a special wetland district. This is a very important precedent that we are setting here >> and which we've already done with another project. we've already approved in >> I voted no on that. >> I know but I'm saying the board has
already approved another project >> and this one's getting bigger and is it going to get bigger and is it going to spread through the entire village commercial because that's also top of the shop by right >> correct any land owner can propose anything um but they still have to abide
by setbacks and heights and widths and >> parking and storm water. So, I mean, I'd be careful to say it's unlimited. That is not the case as you know. I mean, it's there are these other factors. I mean, our other than the uh MBTA zoning,
our bylaw does not include any density. And that's what we were working off of when we did village center core. So, um the other thing with village center core is we kept saying throughout the process was top of the shop is a is a new use that we have here. It allows
residential above the first floor. What we were trying to do with village center core was to exclude simply residential uses uh solely residential uses because we were really trying to jumpstart commercial development in this area. And
again 5 years ago were we thinking top of the shop was going to become what we're seeing right now. I wish I were that smart. But I have to say I'm happy because when I see these projects I go this is exactly what we were thinking when we did it. And even in the case of
the density issue, village commercial which probably has larger h definitely has larger parcels to it other than the one extra floor also does not have uh a specific dwelling units per acre.
>> Well, it doesn't have a a dwelling units per acre, but just several years ago, the village commercial and a couple of our other districts also had increasing lot sizes. when you added more units where I think the village commercial it went from 18,000 to 26 to 30
something,000 like just to get up to three units we needed 30,000 square ft or more >> right >> so there was an increasing it's just in the last several years that we've decided that there's no >> limitations here >> well and and again the >> the precedent here is that the entire
village center corps and the village commercial is now as many units as anybody can put on top, they are allowed to do as long as they put some some non-residential use. Doesn't have to be commercial, but a non-residential use
>> on the bottom or even their own HOA room, an office for their own HOA could be a non-residential use on the bottom. >> Mhm. It could. >> So, unlimited units above and their own HOA office on the bottom. >> Well,
I would say you have to look at what's in front of us and not speculate. I'm not spe that is exactly what this ruling is and I think it's important. I I what is in front of us in my opinion whether it was intended or not is is not
allowed in the district. >> I just to say as one of the developers of this this was exactly what we were hoping for. And I can specifically remember with pictures during some of the meetings of some of the newer buildings at the time at on Mansfield
Center um that have top of the shop and maybe the ones near the train station. I'm trying to remember the we had a bunch of different examples from a bunch of different surrounding towns of top of the shop and how different towns were treating it. And I I know we referenced
or looked at other towns bylaws um at the time. I'm I'm sure none of our bylaws are perfect and as this one is subpar as not subpar but needs work as they all do. Um which I think is on the long list of work that we need to
accomplish at some point again. >> Um Mr. Chair, can I address that? >> Yes. >> So um I just to echo what Paul said, there are limits here uh four stories and 60 ft. Um, and there are also limits
uh when you're in an overlay district. So, those things would apply and I would respectfully suggest that no one could put 500 or 1,000 units and still be below 60 ft and four stories. But more importantly, the issue of precedent is
one that is um I could tell you I've looked at this extensively. You might ask town council if you need to, but in zoning there is no such thing as precedent. Every project stands on its own merits and it
is within your discretion to determine whether the project meets the standards that you have to apply. So if you approve 39 units here, it doesn't mean you have to approve 40 units somewhere else anywhere else in the district. it.
Every project stands on its own and I would never stand here on another project and say, "Well, you approve this one, so you have to prove that one." Because that is not the law. >> You might try it, though. >> You would try it for sure.
>> Someone had to say it. It's your job. I I realize that I'm an advocate and I realize paid to do what I do. But I also think there's something called credibility and I hope that I have some measure of that before this board. So uh unless there are other questions, that's
what we had for tonight. >> I am good with my questions. Any member of the board have any other questions regarding anything else on this project for tonight? This again is going to be continued. So whatever questions come up in the meantime, we can either email them to Paul or save them to the next meeting. preferably email them ahead of
time if we come up with something um and give the applicant a chance to respond is the preferable way of doing it. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I think just a general comment to what Mr. Jacobe mentioned earlier about the building commissioner. Uh
you can do what you will. My recommendation would be to get the CYA letter from the building commissioner in writing so you have it in your back pocket and uh we can include it as part of our package. >> I will draft something in the morning.
>> One second. I'm sorry. >> Jump right on. >> Question Paul just the site plan. The one with the uh red drive-thru. >> Okay. I just had a question for the board. Yeah, if you could screw up. So, part of the reason we shrunk that drive-thru was
because obviously you can if you ever go to the drive-thru in Handeo, it's kind of makes you want to go fast when you go by that drivethru. It's a nice angle to jump right on the road. So, that's why we wanted to straighten it and narrow it a little bit to help with the school. Uh, the other part was I was looking at
this last night and we talked about the um that building and the parking and something I wanted to do that I wanted to run by you folks before we did it was the actual honeydew building. You see where the um seating area is to the right of it. >> Mhm. >> I wanted to take the building and slide
it all the way to the right more. Get rid of the seating on the side and put it all along the front. And wanted to know what you folks thought about that before we did it. When we do that, what it might do is pull that drive-thru back and almost land right in the middle of the existing
drive-thru, but straight. Does that make sense? >> I mean, I did. >> I'll try it again. >> I I completely I understand what you're saying. >> Just 100%. >> So, you basically rotate the patio 90 degrees in front of the building and use
the extra space to >> shift the drive-thru to the right. the whole. >> So, take the building where it is right now. >> Yeah. >> Slide it to the right, which would eliminate that seating area >> and then all the seating would be in the front of the structure >> and by moving that building to the
right, picture that drive-thru following it to the right and then it'll line up almost where the drive-thru is now, >> the exit, I'm sorry, the curb cut is now. >> So, it would kind of ease up a little bit with DOT. I'm hoping if we can line it up straight. Uh, also, um, it gets it
gets the, uh, the order window a little bit, um, closer to the back and, um, makes all the seating in front. So, when you're driving by, you can see >> I think you're going to want to have the conversation with the fire department first. >> Also, making sure they don't want to get a >> engine through that turning lane if you
have to do anything there. That does make your possibility of the having a bailout lane. Yep. >> If they require it. So, I would definitely before you change anything, >> run it by the fire department would be my opinion, but I don't have an >> opinion either way of leaving it like this or moving it as you're saying. It
definitely would make it easier for you with DOT though. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Yeah. Outside of fire, I would just say from an operation standpoint, is that something that the franchisee would like or not? I'm not sure if putting seating right next
to 123 is >> most. Are people gonna want to sit there if it's right there? That's where it is now, right? It's in front of >> But it's set back, >> but it's set back now. So, >> and we were gonna do the same thing on the right side. So, I guess I'll talk to
them kind of extend that. Um, typically with fire, if it's that close to the We'll discuss with fire. >> Yeah. No, I think they're the driving factor. I'm just thinking, would I want to sit there right next to the road or would I prefer to sit a little bit further back? And >> I agree. >> Depends if I want to actually hear the
person I'm with. I guess >> I think 123 is better ambience than 140 though. >> Yes. >> Uh we do have one question for Paul. What would the time frame be to submit materials for the January 6th meeting?
>> Usually the week before >> the Thursday before at the bare minimum >> the Thursday before >> which would be a holiday >> uh which is >> January 1st. >> You want to do New Year's Eve. It would be more like the 30th, I think. >> Um, I'm just looking at my
professionals. Can you can you get stuff in by the 31st? >> I mean, if you don't, we'll just ask for ask >> for continuing. >> Yeah, we'll just put it on for the six for now. If we can't get you can't get we just wanted to make sure that we, you know, we didn't get stuff to you the day
before and you say, "Oh my god, we didn't have enough time to look at it." >> Right. And if you did, we wouldn't be shy of saying we just got this and we haven't had time to digest it and we have to continue anyway. Okay. So, >> our request is to continue to the 6th of January. >> All right. We if any other questions from the board, if not, we're going to
go to questions and comments from the members of the public. >> Good. >> So, if there's anyone in person or online that would like to speak about this project, please online on the Zoom app, please raise your digital hand. And I'll see if anyone is running to the microphone in person, which there isn't.
And I am not seeing anyone online wishing make a comment at this time. If there's no other questions for from the board members, the chair would entertain a motion to continue to January 6th. >> Motion to continue to January 6th.
>> Second. >> We have a >> We all gave the Zoom meeting another like five seconds and then >> it's a delay. We have a motion by Rob and a second by Tim to continue SP33 and SPR18 for 61 West Main Street to January
6. How do we vote? >> I I >> I opposed. >> I >> abstensions continue. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. You as well. >> Happy holidays. >> Happy new year as well.
>> Bye. >> That's right. We don't see you guys till next year. back to the top of our agenda. We have some uh minutes problems to clean up andor minutes to approve. I'm going to I already told Brian I'm sorry I didn't even open the email. Didn't even look at it. Okay. >> Um if anybody else everybody else wants
to vote on it. Brian, do you want to explain the problem we're having? I know Tim chimed in on one point, I believe. So currently the town clerk's office had told me that the minutes were incomplete
on the website and so I just wanted to confirm with everybody that the minutes that are missing are approved and if so can we approve them now in case I don't remember the date or I didn't do it at all in which case they would need to be
voted upon. Yeah, >> there may >> I think for the ones that were from that missing block, I think I had shared at least documentation that we had gone through them like six at a time over a period of four or five meetings.
Um and that those should be included in the records of those meetings. >> Okay. >> Um >> do we just need them signed? >> We need them signed and we need the date for when they were approved. >> Okay. Yeah. I mean, if if we want to
take them as if we want to vote on them and again, it doesn't hurt us to double vote on something. >> Definitely doesn't. >> But I mean, >> I know we did it cuz I had I I overachieved and did like a whole spreadsheet to like, okay, let's do
these. Yeah, that's what the that's what all these minutes are. >> Um, >> and those are the only ones outstanding that we're talking about right now. Do we have additional ones that you've completed? >> We have additional. They recorded up to a few from Nicole's era of being in my
position. So, we do have a few years. >> So, like I said, I didn't even look at it. If the rest of the board would like to vote on it tonight, we can. If not, we can put this off to the next meeting and just make sure we look at it for the next meeting and we'll be expected to vote on it the next meeting. >> Mr. Chairman.
>> Yes, Rob. of the two that came today. Um, ones that came today, um, I actually recognized them as ones we have reviewed and approved before. I was even able to find my own personal notes on them. If that helps,
I believe you. >> There were ones today. >> There was a couple came in email. >> I didn't see any today. >> I have the ones from Friday. >> Excuse me. >> Okay. >> I don't have my emails today. Okay, that's fine. >> Nine email accounts. >> That's what today. Did I miss something?
>> I also Yeah, >> um >> the ones Rob read. >> I mean, I reviewed the ones that I was a part of, but I'm also okay just voting next time, so doesn't matter. >> So, Brian, you want to just send us a reminder email with the next packet or make it with the next packet? I
>> How far in advance for the next packet though? soon as possible. >> It's tomorrow or is that too soon? >> Can we list it as a specific agenda item? >> Yes. >> That way when we're looking at the
agenda, we'll very clearly know that this is something that we need to >> spell out the exact just like in the email, the exact meetings you want us to look at, put it on the agenda, then we can't forget it, overlook it, put it off anymore. >> Well, if we do, then we have no excuse,
right? That's really the Yeah. No. But all all the ones in that set I know we did do. But if we're going to do it again, we can do it again. >> Well, if we can confirm, and we will that that there are some that you've already voted on. I think it's just us.
For whatever reason, there wasn't a signature. I think for those we can confirm the date it was done. We would just need to get a signature and we'll have to see when those meetings were to see who signs it. >> And if it's just as easy, we can revote it. Mhm. Sure.
>> If you don't want to do that leg work, >> Frank, you're sure getting off easy. >> Do Do you have where I had I think reattached that spreadsheet like a few weeks ago. Do you have that or do you want me to resend it? >> You can resend it, Tim. >> Okay.
I know one of the dates I think we the meeting took too long and we put it off to the next meeting, but it's pretty close. >> Other than the minutes, any other business needs to come before us tonight. Other than that, the chair would definitely entertain a motion. >> Motion to adjurnn.
>> Second. >> We have a motion to adjourn and a second. All in favor? >> I I oppos. >> Thank you very much. We adjourn to January 6th.