Thank you, TAM. Good evening, everybody. My name is Andrew Shepard, chair of the Towns and Planning Board. I call this meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. I'd like to have a roll call of all the board members present. >> Sandy King is present. >> Carol Hawk is present. >> Rick King present. >> Robert Theion present
>> and Andrew Shepard present. Would you please join me in the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for
all. >> Like to thank all of our veterans, those who are currently serving here and abroad, their families, and those who contribute their time to public service. We owe them our gratitude. This meeting is being recorded and will be uploaded to the town's YouTube channel.
So 1.4 is to review and approve the meeting minutes from 61.6. Did anyone have a chance to look at them or any questions? >> I move to approve the meeting minutes for June 1st, 2026. >> I'll second it.
>> Motion second. Any discussion? >> All right. Roll call vote. S King I. >> Carol Hoses. Yes. >> King. Yes. Yes. >> And Andrew. Yes. Okay. Do we have a public hearing at 6:45 p.m.
We will skip 2.1 for now. We can go to 3.1, which would be to appoint a new planning board member representative to serve on the community preservation committee. I believe we actually have the chairman
in our midst. >> Yeah. Well, we had a meeting and Lance McN um realized that his term had been up on the board on this board and then he was appointed
by this board to be on the community preservation committee. >> Okay. >> So that was >> an oversight on everybody's part. So, um, we really need to have this committee planning board
appointed as a representative. >> Can you be the representative? >> I can't be I'm already chairman of that. >> He's already What are you the >> I'm from uh Cemeterian Parks. >> Oh, that's right. Okay. Um um we have
some meeting minutes of the uh community preservation committee in our folder if you had a chance to read them. Do we have interest in the committee in in being part of it? At one point I was interested and I don't mind doing it but I don't feel I
have a lot of free time and if somebody else was also interested I don't mind that either. >> I'm already on a lot of other things. I'm already MRPC and JTC for >> and then I'm on another board. >> What days do you meet? >> We meet the third Thursday of every
month and right now um it appears to be we're meeting at 6:00 in the evening. >> And once we start the finance committee meetings, we usually do Tuesdays and Thursdays.
>> I don't mind doing it. It's a pretty interesting. It's really nice to be involved with, you know, um >> because we'll probably what start the finance committee meetings sometimes
Tuesday. >> Yeah, we do Tuesdays and Thursday. >> Do we have to appoint a member of the planning board or can we is it one of those that you can appoint someone else who's representing the planning board? >> I did want to do that, but I don't know. I know it's a
>> I know when it was set up it was supposed to be from a member from every department. >> That's right. That's unique about this one because you're actually representing >> the town >> the needs of the board that you're representing. Yeah. >> Exactly.
So the idea, the concept was that the members of the of the preservation committee would report back to the different departments. And the idea was whatever the
departments needed, wanted to do, projects they wanted to do, which were not in their typical budget. that would be a place where the community preservation funds could be used.
Um, it's all pretty well explained on the website. Um, you know, throughout the town. >> Oh, >> when's the next meeting? Um, click here and wait for it. Uh yeah, it's got to be
August 20th, the next meeting. >> I'll do it. >> Okay, >> I'm out of my mind. Whatever. At least at least for the time being. If nobody else is if you want to do it, take it. Well, see once I start finance always
meets Tuesdays and Thursdays, so I couldn't do Thursday meetings. >> It's interesting to be involved with and um a lot of the work right now is not that heavy. We have to get some things
ready for the town meeting. >> Yeah. Um, and we're reviewing the application process so that that will be all. >> What you're doing now is the heavy lifting, trying to figure out, >> right? Once you once you have the administrative stuff set up, it's easy.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. I mean, I can I come back in three months? >> Yeah, you're right. >> Once you get the process, >> I will watch in your meetings and >> Yeah. All right. Move to nominate Cindy King as a representative to the planning
board to the community preservation committee. >> I move. >> So moved. >> So move. I'll second. >> Okay. >> Uh any discussion? >> Roll call vote. >> Carol Hoses. Yes. >> King, yes. Robin Ting, yes. Andrew
Shepard, yes. >> Yes. >> Welcome aboard. >> Oh god. We have we have a lot of active members that are carrying a lot of load. >> I I saw that
Maria >> I wouldn't be chairman if they couldn't happen that way. >> Okay. 3.2 is to meet Gerilyn Bodikas candidate for associate planning board member position. Welcome. Um so as you guys know I guess a good
segue is um Lance has stepped down or his term expired. So, we have an opening. Um Jerine put in uh for the position. We've got her um form for application and planning board. And I
think if we have any questions, I think um glad to have you. Thank you for being here. I myself I know we've talked about in the past sometimes the effectiveness of the position or trying to broaden the position. Um, and I don't know, you know, we certainly have our hands full
as of late, but certainly maybe we try to make sure we don't that doesn't fall off our to-do list. Open it up for, you know, Geraldine or any comments from >> Well, Geraldine used to be on the pling board. Yeah. When I when I first started on the plating board, I was the
associate member in five years. >> I know. Well, of course, you know, I'm new to the the planning board and just in my short time here, we discovered that we had a um a quorum problem with
people, you know, missing meetings or and then I was new and so I couldn't make decisions on some of the things that were already opened up. And one of the things that I learned anyway was the need for the associate member even though we can't just call you in for out
of out of the dugout when we need a vote. You have to attend all the meetings that are for any public hearing in which you're going to participate at any point. So >> well that was one of my points that I was going to say that I started off as the associate and I did attend every
meeting. So I was able to step into you know when they needed me and what they did at Lance was the chair at the time and what they did if someone was absent they appoint me for the evening that I did I did attend.
>> Are there any other nominations? Nope. Normally we have a lot of people banging down our door to join. But >> I'm sorry. >> Normally we have a lot of people banging down our door. >> I noticed and >> we're a tough crowd. >> I've learned that these people are
really tough. >> So you know >> and these lawyers in the corner are tough, too. It depends. >> I don't know if we need to vote or if we're just meeting you. Um >> I think we have to Well, we have to make
a recommendation. Yeah. I mean, the select board has to do. >> I think it I think it's up to the select board. >> So, I think we need to make a recommendation. >> A position posted, >> I believe. So, I think it was 45 days. >> So, you just Yeah. Usually, we make a
recommendation to the select board and then >> Right. Yeah, >> the select board that appoints it. >> So I move that we recommend Jerry Lindikas for the associate planning board member for the select board for appointment.
>> And I'll second motion second. Any discussion? >> Considerable all the applicants. >> Um all right, roll call vote. >> Cindy King, yes. Carol Hoses, yes. >> King, yes. Robert, yes. Yes.
>> Thank you. >> All right. >> When will >> Oh, boy. That is out of our hands. >> I know. So, should I I'm just going to start coming to the meeting just to be informed. Is that all right? >> I think that's >> I think that's meeting anyway.
>> I think the select open meeting. I'd like to ask >> the select board may very well meet before our next meeting anyway. They're just not they're being quiet about when they're posting. So you meet on the >> Mondays. Normally it's every other
Monday. >> Every other Monday >> of the month >> somewhat dependent on the volume of work that we have in front of us. >> Our next meeting is at 10. >> Right now we've got the 10th, August 10th, August 24th, September 14th, and
September 28th. >> Yeah, often hear that argument. >> Hey Henry A, we can hear you in the background. Thank you. Okay, >> I'll get the okay on the screen. >> All right,
so we've only got three minutes. Um, but 3.3 is to review the draft plan board application relevant to work in the flood plan overlay district. We had some
>> We're just approving the application. >> I'm not I'm not sure we'll get through all of this at this moment, but we can start um just a form. >> It's just a form. I think we're just approving a draft form that I'm assuming
Beth created. >> Beth, I don't know. I know there was an email between Beth and our building inspector about trying to have a process, >> a strong process that's interdep departmental. >> Okay. >> I don't know if it was just Beth that
put this together or if they both did. >> That's comprehensive. She's got a lot of references here. I think what I'd like to do or I don't have any immediate rejections or reactions to it, but I always like to try to be nimble as
best we can. And if we which isn't always smooth in a public setting, but if we try it, we put it out and we realize something's not working very well, then we we agree and reook at it and try to change it. >> Yeah. Since I don't know what I mean, I
haven't looked at followed through our bylaw to make sure that each box is checked. It looks nice, but I I I don't I didn't check the against the the >> If I'm not mistaken, if we don't approve it, it jeopardize
people's potential to get flood insurance. >> We've already approved the flood plan. Oh, so this is >> this is just the application that someone doing work within the flood the new flood plane. >> Oh, okay. >> We have to >> just a special permit application.
>> Okay. I'm sorry. >> I don't think there's anybody >> knocking on the door to fill this out. >> But it's like a little checklist. >> Do you want Do we want to approve it tentatively? Just say that. >> Right. >> Fine. And then pending any future edits,
we can come back and >> because until you actually >> just in case somebody comes in between. >> Well, yeah. And then after you use it a couple of times, you might find you need to tweak it. >> Almost always. >> So, yeah, pretty much always. >> Do you have any I'm sorry,
catch up. >> No, that's fine. I mean, yeah, I mean, we could approve it and it's always probably after it's used a few times, you're probably going to expect some tweaks to it, say, "I forgot something or this doesn't work or
>> something." But >> yeah, >> applicants will be complaining that >> we'll get good feedback. >> There's something conflicting or >> Yeah. >> they don't understand a question. >> We won't know till we actually get in there, I guess. >> Y
We're approach We're a minute over, but Brett, do you have any comments? >> I I actually didn't look at this. Okay. I didn't have time to look at this. >> Okay. Maybe um we'll jump right into our public hearing and then >> circle back to this one. >> All right. Okay.
So there 6:45 p.m. the continuation of public hearing zero C the road application for definitive subdivision approval and associated major storm water management permit like to introduce the board members.
>> Cindy King, Carol Hopsis, >> Brett K, >> Robert Theion, and Andrew Sher. Uh there's a public signing sheet somewhere circulating if you haven't had a chance here. >> Excellent. Everyone got it?
>> Okay. No, I think Thank you. >> Uh Cindy, did you have you have the legal ad you can read? >> Um I do not. I think >> I didn't bring my computer, so I don't even have access to it.
>> Do we need to read the legal ad again? Isn't this a continuation? >> It is a continuation. It's on my checklist, but I I guess I don't know technically. >> Oh, I think >> legal notice of public hearing planning board regarding SE road extension plan
corrupted date. I don't know. >> I think >> I don't have it. >> Let me pull it up. So this is the this is the original legal notice in accordance with NGL chapter 48 section 11 the subdivision control law NGL
chapter 41 section section 81K through 81 GG including section 81T towns and general bylaws chapter 85 chapter 175 article 5 the towns and zoning bylaw and the planning board subdivision rules and regulations. The
planning board will hold a public hearing on Monday, May 11th, 2026 at 6:45 p.m. in the select world chambers, Memorial Hall, 272 Main Street, Town, Mass. and via Zoom on two applications submitted by Belvadier Capital LLC for
approval of a definitive plan of a subdivision entitled definitive plan for Saver Road extension for a proposed three lot single family residential subdivision and roadway extension of 560 ft located at zero Sver road towns
assessor's map 23 block 4 lot zero parcel ID 23-4-0 zero and a major storm water management permit for the associated land disturbance activities and storm water management systems.
Um, additional information is available at the town parks and land use office. Zoom is posted zoom links are posted on the town website and we have subsequently continued this hearing. Okay, I think that's okay.
So, we have some um somewhat new information. We've received we have Wayne here in person along with council um I believe some neighbors. We've received the peer review, the third peer review
letter from Oil and Tanner and I think it's appropriate where we probably start there and maybe we invite Wayne to um or I guess we should we'll start with David. he wrote the letter and then we'll we'll
um David if you if you don't mind talking about your peer review letter. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um so yeah, I have my peerreview letter here that I sent uh towards the end of last week. Um the majority of the comments in there refer to
um waivers. There's several waivers that have been requested. Uh for the most part, we defer to the board on those waivers. says we agree with the majority of the waiverss and defer to the board. There are a few in there that should be included in the order of conditions
should the board decide to um accept them. And then there was I think one or two that we defer entirely to the board and other um other respective boards as far as making a decision one way or the other. And that just has to do with past experience where uh whether or not it's
an engineering decision or determination on our part. There are certain boards who like to weigh in like the highway department department um on specifically in this case the um exemption from testing every 200 ft within the road. We've had communities where regardless
of what the opinion is of either engineer for what's been done either side of the road, they still want to see um the testing done within the the roadway itself. And so, uh, commonly for us, we just defer that to the boards to determine. We just back up the input of
the of the, um, applicants, say, you know, we we recognize what they what they presented. Um, but leave it up to the board to determine whether or not they want to accept that or not. Uh, everything else, they uh, answered all the technical questions. They've
they've uh, addressed all our technical concerns and everything is satisfactory in that department. So things u minor minor edits to plans um inclusion of some comments by us and some comments by other boards with regards to things like pavement thickness
um and things of that nature. Um so all of those comments um from us have been addressed as well as other boards that we're aware of. >> Okay. All right. Thank you, David.
I think you can Oh, you know what? Let's get the peer or the comments from the other town departments and then we'll open up to you. Um, so you have those in front of you.
I got them right here. Okay. Um, we got this. See, the I think it was the second peer review um response letter was sent to the fire department, the highway department, and
the building commissioner for further input on the content of the response to the peer review letters and the revised plans. And this is some of the comments we received back. Um, an email from Robert Burside, our building commissioner on July 23rd said, "This
appears to be the same scenario configuration as was presented last July and approved by zoning. See attached determined later letter, the termination letter dated July 14th, 2025. I have no issue with the culde-sac turnaround and
the areas and frontage are sufficient for the RBT district building commission. And then he has his letter in there from July 14th. Um, this is also an email from Bob
Garside on July 23rd. He says, "I spoke with Captain Mike Grimley this morning and the fire department is okay with the design of the turnout as drawn. I am sure he will respond regarding the other issues." I don't believe they received a
response. And then the final one, this is from Jim Smith. I believe this is our highway superintendent. I believe this reiterates the comments he's already made. Highway superintendent binder course
thickness comment a 8.8 A 2.5 in previously trusted by highway as past practice. This should be the standard for this project. 2.5 in binder with 1.5 in wear course top layer. This is what highway department standard is. And we
do a full reclamation of the roadway of a when we do a full reclamation soil testing waiver along the proposed roadway. Comment six. It is my recommendation that the soil testing along the proposed roadway is conducted where the notes indicate that the
roadway may become a public way. Our roads are only as good as our base and any data that can be provided will only be beneficial in the future. I would request copies of the data testing to be sent to my email jithna.gov.
And three, any additional roadway or public way comments. I believe this was previously discussed, but I would like to see the pave and slip showing the tonnage in between course of or copies and be sent to my email. >> Okay, I'll go up to you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, yeah, I hearing Mr. Smith's comments and David's comments that's consistent, you know, typically with what vote becomes accepted as a public way and just just so the board knows, we requested a waiver because we didn't want to further
disrupt the activity back and forth to 50. Uh but again, we're only looking at half day testing and that will be posted to be. So with that, I wanted to give the board an update as to where we were with where we are with conservation. As
you know, we were going to meet with them next week. We did. Um that was on the 22nd. Um and as it turns out, they opened the public hearing and then they continue the public hearing. The reason they continue the public hearing is that one of the abundant.
Um during some dialogue I was having with the chair, they heard that not only was he not informed, but the mailing never went out to >> I'm sorry. >> The mailing never went out to them. >> So >> for the conservation >> before the conservation commission. So
typically, you know, on something like that, as I was having a dialogue with the chair, typically with something like that, you could, if the mailing had gone out and he had yet to receive it, one of the ways to address it if they wanted to proceed with the public hearing was to have the public hearing and then they
review the information after that. But because he it hadn't even run out, they chose to continue, which we so makes perfect sense. Um so with that said um as David had indicated we um we checked up all the boxes um that they had
requested the changes and so the plans are are at that are at that point. Um I did receive a couple letters that have gone out um to the town from number 38 and number 40. If it's okay I'd like to address
some of those just to kind of clear the air on some things. Um so I'm going to start with number 38. Number 38 uh had uh raised some comments about the process here. We're going through the defendive uh process and
that at one time SA road was a public way all the way through and chose to engage in the portion of the road. comment was also that you know you know perhaps we we revisit that section to see they had it become revert that that
decision reverse it. So not sure why they they went to the the private way at that time but from the client's perspective it would have been a home run. We wouldn't be here would have been 15 minutes with you folks with an ANR and we're done. Not not only that, but
the sub, you know, I've heard comments about the the storm water system being overd designed, not overd. It's designed in accordance with the local storm water model. Very stringent, I may add. Um, so they're designed in accordance with those standards. If I could have
designed a smaller system, I would have loved to have done that. Would have saved them a ton of money and some headaches and less clearing. But it is what it is. the regulations dictate that been doing this for over 40 years you know and over these 40 years the the
regulations have just expanded. So with that said number 38 Ted commented made a comment on that and like I said I I would love to be doing an ANR we would have finished this a long time ago and the building permits would be applied to
this point that's not the case. There was a question uh from number 40. Couple things that come up on number 40. Um, one of the things that come up. So before I get into that, I had met I had a conference call at the beginning of
this process. It was either before we filed the preliminary or just after filing the preliminary plan. I had a conference call with Jay Lee and Michael Si tonight. Part of that discussion was a 3/4t wide strip. they reference that.
Yeah. Based on what I read in the letter, I don't think there's a clear understanding of what's occurring here and that, you know, the letter kind of states that this is more complex than it needs to be. It's following the letter of the law. Um, so basically the 3/4t strip
because that's in play based on your regulations, something we prefer not doing. If it was something that the board would be willing to grant a waiver to, that' be wonderful, but I would caution the board in doing so. And again, I've sat on boards for 35 years now. You do that,
you set a precedent. That's not a good position for a board to be in setting a precedent. Okay? So in that particular case, unless I I would, you know, there's got to be some good reason for it that be justified, but other than that, um kind of a dangerous slope to go
down. So with that said, the 3/4 in strip, they had asked about access over the 3/4 in strip. I then said, well, let me talk to my client and see what they say. I spoke with David and I spoke with John Melo, and they John said, "Be happy to do that. We wouldn't have a problem
with it." So that that's still in play. That is an arrangement not between the planning board and the applicant. That's an arrangement between the property owner and the applicant. On our plan, I think there was some confusion about the
temporary easements. I'm going to throw a scenario. So, Belair Capital owns the property. When he's all said and done, he says, "You know what? I've got too much going on. I've got a guy that approached me, good developer. or he wants to buy the
property. Okay. So now the guy buys the property. If there are no easements on you, temporary easements for the benefit of the abuters, you come out on my property and I understand that there may be some prescriptive rights for them to access their property. But if there were
no easements on the property and they're on my property, I'm telling them to get off my property and I would have every right doing so. The temporary easements are for the benefit and those are located within the the layout of the proposed road. that is for the benefit
of those homeowners. So that if there's activity going on there, if somebody else owns it or even better yet, let's say the town doesn't accept it as a public way to remain a private way, they still if those easements as part of that process, we could coordinate with people
like Sean and rather than having a 3/4t wide ement, it's expanded out across the rideway so that they have access to pass and repass if they like. question came up um um by Jay Lee about the um you
know I'm not exactly sure what she was getting at perhaps thinking that I was looking to mislead the town of the board um with the location of the driveway in public safety German that was something I picked up on after oil tanners first
review to address that I said guys in house engineer I said hey listen you got this backwards I said drive look at the aerial maps Look at this. It comes through here. Meant to make that that change at that time. Never got to it. She called it out in this letter. When I
discussed with the segments the right to pass and repass, it was over that section of the easement. The the driveway that showed on our plan, which is the turnover of the uh uh fire apparatuses. So, I just wanted to clear the air on that that those easements
that are proposed are for the benefit of the abotics. They do nothing. these guys nothing. The only thing it does is it protects the abuters in the event that somebody else buys the land or if there's a homeowners association those and maybe this, you know, you could
condition in your decision that u those easements become and I'll defer a date on this one, but perhaps um they become a a permanent easement in the event that that road remains private. That's something that would be considered.
Well, I mean, we're dealing with their council right now. I just had a conversation with you this afternoon. So, I mean, working towards coming to understand that ultimately for
>> y So, again, I mean, I I've done this for a long time. I'd like to work with the community, not against the community. Um, and that's what I think they're doing here. I mean, I could have not shown them here and they get the Scarsdale surprise at the end when
somebody owns it and they can't they can no longer pass and repass. Again, they may have prescriptive rights, but let's say they're in a situation where they need to sell the home and they go to close and all of a sudden this white elephant pops up in front of them that delays a closing that possibly loses the
sale. I think that way. That's how I look at it. So, it's only for their benefit. We have better. And I heard something again if I could. They're showing three lots, three houses, but we know something bigger is
coming in here. Nothing big. This is it. Three house lots. That's it. It's these darn rules and regulations that we have to follow. When I look at these rules and regulations from when I started, they've really expanded. They've
exploded. But considering some of the hack work that I've seen out there, we need them. We need clients don't like the hair. Doesn't cost a lot more money, but we need them. So, with that said, I I have nothing else to add unless we ask some questions.
>> Um, yeah, I think I think it's up to us now to have some questions and um review the documents and see, you know, applicability for the bylaws um and see where we're at. So, open it up to the board for for questions or
comments or >> Yeah. I just want to get back to that driveway. I just want to >> My engineer got fired. >> Oh, boy. Yeah. Don't get jokes in here because somebody's going to think it really happened. So,
I just want to be clear that the the driveway that is as it exists right now and probably has for years is going to be able to continue to be a driveway exactly where it is. And you're you're taking whatever actions you need to to
make all the deed deed rights so that when if and when this project moves forward and goes into future ownerships that it will be properly documented that that homeowner
doesn't have any concern. We don't have to re they don't have to revamp their driveway going across their front line. >> Yep. So, as David said, they've spoken with their council today. We're going to continue those conversations. Uh, and with that, we will we'll work with them to to address that. But again, like I
said, the temporary easements once the road gets should the road become accepted at the public way, then because there's no >> but if it if it remains private for whatever reason, the >> we would work.
But will there be something when when we're done? Let's just assume we're going to approve everything. Just assume that. But and if if the road whatever the road's going to be at that time is going to probably stay that way for a little while anyway.
If it stays private for say three years, I could be exaggerating, but I want to make sure that the homeowners at the with the driveway are protected. >> So through the chair if it's if it's for three years. So if I'm understanding
>> I'm just grabbing I just grabbed that time. If that exceeds any timelines, I'm sorry. >> So no. So the question if I understand the question if it remains private for three years and that then let's say in three years the owner of the road the private owner of the road goes to the
town and seeks acceptance that would be the only time that it would no longer be necessary to have the easements. Okay. So if it stays private for three years with the intent of going to have it accepted as a public way then those
easements get extinguished because now it's a public way and they have the right to pass and repath and again my client has also agreed to you know working with uh the statements and providing that access through 24
I don't know if that's answer the question David I think it's very important to note that the plan has a note regarding easement grants of easements to both 20 and 41.
So yeah, >> that's that's on the plan as submitted for approval. So ultimately uh it's in our interest as well to continue the
dialogue with the statements to come to a conclusion that council for each find find acceptable question. >> I I think so I I just want to make sure
for the for the for us as we're going forward. I don't want to have a something lingering and that we're not 100% sure about that everything's properly documented as we're going forward with this and that so that the public also feels sometimes I ask when
I'm in meetings of different boards. I like to ask a lot of questions not just for myself but for the so that the public can get some feel for the more information that's out there even if it's redundant um it it's helpful and then of course the abutters are are very concerned about this entire project so
>> more information is better than this >> that's how I feel >> the what is the length of the extension that's being requested for the >> center line that's 500 ft to the end I
think it's 560. >> So the extension is for an additional 560. >> Okay. >> And that accommodates the turn. >> And do we know the length of the road down?
>> 1970 ft. Something like that. 1970. I'm guessing it's in that range. Close to 100 ft. the turnaround out front in front of number 38 as well. Interesting to note one of the comments from oil caner was
to provide a turnout because one of the driveways the driveway to lot two is deep into the lot. So they raised a concern about fire safety. They said well we should provide a turnout on that
driveway if the apparatus has to go up the hill makes perfect sense. So we had gone in there provided at 500 ft in a turnout and then they would continue up to the house site. That turnout was 20 by 40. Um and there's a a little bump
out on the other side of the driveway. And we sized it based on the town's fire apparatus to go in back out and then make it. With that said, looking at the turnaround, and that's a three-point turn. So I look at it as the the fire
apparatus is there. They get another call but just address this call. So they've got to get out of dodge as quick as possible. They make that three-point turn. They're out. The existing driveway turnout on SA road I would guess is nowhere near
that meeting those dimensions. Not to mention the overhang of the body of the vehicle. Some fire trucks, believe it or not, from the wheels to the bumper is 11 ft. That's that's incredible. 11 ft. So, you need that swing clearance. You need
to be able to back out and have no trees in that area. If I recall based on what I saw out there, um that there's not the room to do that. So, with that said, my discussion with um Captain um you know, I did say with this turnaround, it allows you to go down, address a call,
come down, turn around, and head back. So they they appreciated that that it was a good turn. >> Okay. What else do we have for questions? >> Carol,
um, looking through our rules and rags, we require a minimum 50 foot right away on a private or public road. How do we address that? I didn't see anybody any of the engineers pick it up but
>> if I could so in your rules and regs is that specific to so typically when uh there's something and I'll take a look take a look again uh maybe that requires a waiver or going to 50 ft but typically we have the area to do
that to go to 50 ft um the existing width is a variable width on SA road so when following with that we went with 40 ft. Really didn't need more than the 40 ft for those improvements. So the 50 ft there really isn't anything to gain for that layout. A lot of times what you're
going to find is thoroughs in um through streets or 50 foot layout. Culacs and ways are typically narrowed down to 40 ft. Um and so we we did this based on the subdivision plan that was also approved
at the preliminary stage which set the stage for this. So when the planning board approved the preliminary plan in 22 we just picked it up and went from there. So that's basically I look at it like a cake in 2022 the cake was p put
on put on the the slab ready for for decorating. We have finished off the cake and put the candles on. So that's basically the defendant process of that. So that was approved as 40 foot layout back in uh 2022. >> Don't you only get 38 ft of furnish?
>> We don't 37 ft. I would advise us to go to the >> How would you get a 50ft rightway through 37 ft of furniture? >> You don't. How do you get 40 foot right? You don't. So the 40ft right away begins beyond that.
>> Okay. Another way to address it is, you know, if it was a town coming through there and they needed to widen their road, they would do a take. But this is a private entity. So if it was a town, I've been involved in in on my board where the town is done taking. This is not a town. The town
wanted to go through that whole road and meet the town standards and say we want to make this 50 foot rightway from the beginning of SA road all the way to the end would be taking. It' be a nightmare. It would be a nightmare. It' be just a total nightmare.
So to answer that question, like I said, a number of communities I'd have to and again I defer to the plan that the plan2 and I mean there's nothing we don't think we can really do about it, but I know the fire truck turning radius works
the I mean I see it middle of winter it's not going to be an 18 foot wide road anymore. That's another big concern of mine >> regardless of who plaus it. >> So, and that I hear a lot that I hear a lot. Um, so the town closet, you know,
maybe that's a discussion with the DPW. I I totally hear you. Totally. >> I mean, I know you meet the requirements. >> Oh, yeah. >> So, I hear you. >> I don't recruit that. If I did, I'd be lying. I'm fine.
I have uh I've looked at all the technical documents here and it's a very comprehensive program
and I think it's all been professionally created to meet all the needs of a subdivision. Um, however, there are other problems here
that are so concerning. So, here's a scenario as I see it. The applicant is requesting a lot be subdivided. That lot typically would have been one
lot. Um, so that introduces two more properties. Then the other things that bother me is I'm not sure.
This is an area I don't feel confident in as to what the town's intent was when they abandoned that roadway. All right. So there's some real legal
concerns here and I don't want to be making a decision that could have legal implications to the town to a butters or future homeowners.
So the things that come up that I don't have the capability of evaluating is the distinction the legal distinction between a discontinued road
versus an abandoned world. Apparently there are legal definitions associated with that. And then the question comes u about the ownership
of the pot that was discontinued or abandoned. So, um, and those are those are not subjects
that a site engineering consultant would be addressing for us. Um so that is a major concern and I don't know if
this board has any authority at all um giving an extension. um I don't think we have that authority to give an extension
and then even in the review from the consultants peer review um it clearly states the applicant intends for the road to be a public way in the future.
So that's not a given. There's no guarantee. So I don't know how we can even act on this. We don't have any legal position to to
you know to me this all subject to town meeting approval. We've already discussed about the quality of of the uh the road construction. Um >> if I may. >> Yes.
Um, so again, the the you are correct that you can't vote on it being a uh turning into a public way. That does have to go to town hearing. The the point of the private way versus public way is again to reiterate what Wayne said, it was going to be a private way.
Um, there would have been an ANR and we'd be done. Um the intent for it to be a public way uh comes with it the caveats that obviously and with what the highway department stated is there's certain rules that definitely apply if it's the intentions to become a public
way because if if it doesn't meet those requirements there's no chance it will ever be a public way if you know if it's not doesn't have the right um pavement that they're looking for if it doesn't have the right inspections that they're looking for and several other criteria. And so that's why we addressed it within
our comments was that if it's going to be a private way, there's some things that automatically we can we can let them go on because they don't intend on seeking um application for a public way in the future. But because they are going to seek that, then we make sure
that uh all the strings that need to be attached with that for the town's benefit are attached. So, yes, you're correct that you you this board is not voting on whether or not this is going to become a public way. However, this board um has assisted in making sure
that when the time comes and they want to apply to become a public way, all those caveats are in place for that. Conversely, whether or not you approved it, um if the the road could still be denied from becoming a public way for one reason or
another, um you know, there could be some other thing that comes in in the future where they say, "No, we don't we don't want to accept the road uh for whatever reason and it could it could retain being a private way uh in perpetuity." So, um long and the short
of it is yes. Um the the only reason for that for the mention of the public versus private in this case was for that. And if I may for a moment, I did look back um at the garage engineering um waiver request form from 2021. And at
that time the public the rightway of the road was 40 ft and the the board granted that waiver um under condition um looks like 14. Let me see if I can share my screen.
>> U Tam, I'm okay with David getting permissions to share his screen if those have not been shared with me. >> Thank you. Okay. So, here we have the um
that's not what I wanted to do. Here we have the uh waiver request from November 12th of 2021, grad engineering. And this is on page four,
item number 14 to wave the requirement of the proposed rideway being no less than 40 feet wide. The proposed rightaway is intended to be variable width variable in width between 35 ft and 37 ft following the previous abandoned rightway and bounded by existing stone walls. The board votes
voted as follows. Um ultimately granting the waiver as you can see here. So at that time the rightway was 40 ft and that waiver was granted. Um, I could look continue to look and see if there are other um,
changes, but we did look through the past history of the project in our review to ensure that any question marks like this that came up had been previously addressed. As Wayne said, we wanted to make sure that um, you know, the stage had properly been set and
waiverss had been granted or denied in the past. Um, we did find other similar ones here. there are waiverss with regards to the trees that weren't granted then that they are reapplying for with further information now. And so we did go through the history to make sure that um again if there are any
questions as far as rules and regulations bylaws that um we felt weren't addressed that they were addressed previously and didn't need to become uh rehashed now. >> Thank you David. I did see uh >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to
address Mr. comments about you know right now you didn't do this you need to have money lot out there you don't have them what you have >> very >> so the the property out there >> yes >> your comment was that you know you're
looking at a subdivision road to create three lots could have that versus the one lot that's out there >> you don't have a lot what you have is a parcel there's a difference between a parcel and a lot >> okay so this parcel does not have the
minimum required frontage. It has the minimum required frontage under Mass General law but not under the local zoning. >> So with that has more than enough area, not enough frontage. So when the abuters were told by their real estate agents who were looking for their 6% commission
in making this sale, they said, you know, this is this is this lot isn't this property isn't buildable. As a buildable lot, that was not misleading. that was correct as a buildable lot and that was at the time where the the
public road had become abandoned. It had become abandoned and the easement was there to serve number 50. So what the the real estate brokers conveyed to them was not not a lot. It wasn't a buildable lot. That's correct. The way to make it
a building lot is to create the frontage, which is the the why we're here with you folks, is to create a road to create the frontage to create lots. I could have gotten a fourth lot in here. >> I chose not to do that. So, with that said, we could have gone
with either so that there were options. So, if you wanted to develop this property, you could go to the board and you could the CBA and you say, "Listen, I've got a piece of property out here. Um, I I'd like to develop it as a buildable lot and they and well, what's
your hardship? Demonstrate to me the one of the three hardships. It's not soils. You have soils out here. It's not topography, but is it lot shape? That's a determination to be made by the building inspector by the town. But if that were the case, there'd be granting variances all over town. So again, that
sets a precedent. So with that said, the property as is not a buildable lot by zoning. Okay? Once we create the subdivision road which creates the lots, then you then you have it. The alternative is like I said, we could we
could have done one to four lots. But when you look at these things, you need to look at the economic viability. when you get whacked with regulations like this townhouse gas stormwater regulations um which came into effect after we had filed and after you guys had contracted
with Dave Wayne that's why you'd come back on a $5,000 extra that was because the regulations had changed after effect but again I am not faulting the town I don't fault anybody for the changes in regulations society has put us in this position this is what we need to do so
with that said we are this is why we're here tonight. So, when the board acts on the plan, you're acting not to look at a private, you know, approve private road, a public road. You're you're voting to approve a road to create frontages for
the lots. Okay. If I look at at number 40, um, which is located, their frontage is actually down on Gilchrist. Okay. Gilchrist has a situation where they have what's referred to illusurary frontage. is all wetlands that in many
towns you need to access your lot under zoning. You need to access your lot through its frontage. If there's a luxury frontage, you don't have a lot. Towns and doesn't have that requirement in so when the sequins had to get access to their lot, they had to come in up at
at C. So that's kind of where where we are with that. again to create a uh the lot to make this property buildable, you need to go in there with with that approach. The alternative is the state route which is can be
unpleasant for the abuters and we're not going that way. We're not going that way. I think everybody knows what that is. We're not going down that road. They the property owner doesn't want to do that. He wants to maintain the character of the area and that's why he's only looking at three lots. I mentioned four lots. He said, "Let's leave it at
three." Said, "Okay." I would have gone for the four. I'm being honest with you. Four. I would have gone for the four. He said, "No, keep it with the three." Okay. >> Hey, I want to limit some of the chatter we're hearing.
You still chatter. Just keep a little bit lower. Have did we get any input from the zoning board on this proposal? >> Uh I'm pretty sure we had referral comments I thought from the zoning board
back in April or whatever it was and I thought it was no comment. >> No comment. >> Yeah, I believe I just read the things that I believe they said no comment. >> Mr. chair didn't apply for the ZA they don't have jurisdiction over this
applying strictly but for the planning board just to piggy back on Wayne's comments you know the the whole issue is in terms of build out or access ingress and egress to the property and the whole submitt of the plan that is designed and
engineered by Wayne is to be exactly to town specifications of what's required for roadway away from the town to meet that that issue. So, so it's it's being designed, you know, again, if the town chooses to accept, at least we'll have
the capacity to request, but that's all it would be would be a request and that's the town yes or no. If they don't, then we still have the roadway that's providing the safe ingress and regresses require them, you know, by the planning for it. And um you know in
I think there should be notice in terms of some of the movement in the com Massachusetts for instance Wayne made reference to again the uh a variance that the question of hardship
two weeks ago governor he just signed in an emergency basis changing the standing for hardship that it's no longer hardship confined to the land. It's hardship that is now
discretionary to the CBA subject to the the personal position of the applicant. Huge change. Huge change. >> Yeah. And and and for a reason. The reason is that they're trying to,
you know, encourage building of residential houses in Chicago, Massachusetts. This is a beautiful site. These beautiful homes. This is a situation where you got the uh
you know the common by the buildings properly zone for this. This is what the town envisioned when you when you create zones within the town is to give the indication to the owner of that property
within within any specific zone as to what the intended use of that property should be and this is the intended use. This is the allowed use within that zone. Uh so it's a situation where you know we feel you know very confident
about this that this is a excellent plan and uh ask just staying on the line of the board questions or comments are well let's Robert you had a few minutes >> do you want to continue with the road
question or going to get the road question That was one of the concerns I had. And then the other one was the extension of the existing road. So the bylaws have a issue with the amount of
the extension of the road and the issue of a dead end road versus not. So, these were all legal things that if they're not fully understood and
addressed could lead to problems um with the board, with the town, with the butters and prospective owners. So my position is
and then this all is subject to um having the town approve an extension to allow this subdivision. >> No, >> I don't think so.
>> No. >> No. >> Is it going to be a private road? No, it doesn't have to approve it. It can be a private road question seems like it's on the same. >> Yeah, I think mine is more comments than than questions. I think um I think you
know this road thing is somewhere in the same vicinity as that my driveway question that I think that this gets that the road quest the road issues gets is just as confusing as the driveway question. >> Right. And I think the I mean I understand and I I'm satisfied with what
you guys have proposed and has been approved by our highway department, our fire department and our engineer our tenor I believe. Um but that it's it never has to the builders or the
developers owners don't ever have to make it satisfied for a public road. They've taken the extra steps to go to the higher standard of what a public road requires, which is better for whoever's going to live there. And
they'll have deci they'll make their own decisions on whether or not it's adequate. But the going to the higher standard of meeting this the measurements or the all the values for a public road um even if it's remains a
private road is going to be be better for everyone and and they didn't have to do that. They could have said no we're going to go private and that's we're just going to keep it that way and we wouldn't talk be talking about a lot of the depth of the materials or the width of the road.
it would be a completely different presentation and there's nothing in our rules that would require them to make it adequate to a public way. They're offering this and we don't have we have no jurisdiction on whether or not it's a
private road or a public road going forward. um where it because they're proposing that we're discussing making sure that okay if that's what you want we're gonna we're pushing to meet those standards >> regardless of what's going to happen because that's what they're proposing
and then it would be Tom meeting is not going to approve this subdivision we are and then but Tom meeting would only come into play at whatever point in the future if ever that the everything is
all every all the eyes get dotted and all the tees get crossed and everything is complete with without issues which I'd love to see that first but that it will be prepared to go to town meeting for acceptance which is in
the benefit of for the benefit of not only the new residents in that area because they don't have to get along with each other and say okay how are we going to who's going to hire the who's plowing us out if if something if the potholes get enormous, who's going to
pay for it? You know, they can if making it a public way, I think as a homeowner, please don't live on a private road. But um but those questions would go to town meeting once everything is met and that the road is still in the same condition.
When it when that happens, the whoever is responsible at the time, which might be the either the property owners, depending what happens to the developers, the developers are if they're still in play, they would be responsible for making sure the road still passes muster. Correct. That that
it's still it's and our highway superintendent would say, "Yep, it's still good. It still meets the standard for public way. We don't need any extra work done on this. It meets exactly." And then the town meeting would be making the determination including with
it the voters who live on that street on whether or not gee is it going to be a public way or not. And I I'm only throwing this out there a little bit that I'm it's an assumption. I don't know if it's even fair for me to say it,
but I'm going to say it anyway that this might be even in the benefit of the current residents of Sea Road. this work being done that the town's not going to maintain this new culde-sac better than the rest of the road. I keep hearing about how bad SEA Road, what condition
it's in. I'm going to get down there before next time. I I was not part of the site visit when it first happened, but um I'm hearing that SAR roads into deployable condition and this may be to the benefit of the current residents of
Sver Road to help our highway department getting more involved down there. I share that settlement, but the abundance don't. >> I know. I know. That's why I >> qualified my statement. >> So, I'm I'm glad you cleared that up,
Cindy. Um because I wanted the whole audience to understand what this is all about. Um so from my perspective
all the technical requirements have been provided and are acceptable and would qualify for a subdivision in my view.
Um and so as far as I'm concerned, the applicant has met those requirements. Um and has again I agree um
with everybody bearing mind here, this is currently a parcel that will be converted to three lots. any other developer could come up with other configurations or lot projections
based upon what he thought would be most beneficial for him. So um from my perspective everything that's been presented here has met the standards that we have for a
subdivision. the question of private road versus um a public road uh is not anything that we can address. Um,
so I did want clarification on that and I wanted to be comfortable that whatever action this board would take uh would not subject to any um any legal
exposures to anybody. >> Okay. Thank you, Robert. I think um I think Wayne may have a few more comments, but I want to hear more from Brett and Carol. >> My only my only comments were whatever
this latest July 13th wheel or um there's a few places where it said that the comments weren't addressed or not entirely addressed. >> July 13th or 23rd? >> 13th. Was there a new one? >> Yeah, we have a 23rd. >> Okay.
You have a 23rd one. >> Yeah. I'll just look and see if they didn't. >> Oh, okay. >> Yes. >> Well, I'll ask Beth to send you one. >> Thank you.
>> Brett, you had some >> Yeah, I have two two more on this. So I don't believe an 18t wide road qualifies for chapter 90 money. So maintenance of that road will be the burden will be on the taxpayers. We'll never get any state funding for the existing SA road and
proposed new SEA road. So that will burden of maintaining that will be by the taxpayers >> if it becomes a public road. >> If it becomes a public road um and my other question was for David. David, um,
you looked it up so easy on the last question I had. Did the previous board also grant a waiver? I mean, I believe our minimum road width is 22 ft. Did they did they grant a waiver for an 18 foot wide road?
>> I believe they did. Uh, let me check. and uh you can discuss other matters while I'm taking a a look at that. >> Sorry to put you on the spot. I want to make sure all the boxes are checked. >> That's okay. I'll >> comment
if I could chair. David had raised a comment that and I'm just paraphrasing here. It was in your second peerreview letter, you raised the question about the 18t wide road and whether or not the design
still satisfied the fire department because I believe yes in that 2022 decision the fire department had weighed in favorably to the 18t road provided that um there was adequate clearance 20 ft.
What I mean by the clearance is the body clearance. So typically in fire trucks are between the from wheel to wheel. Outside of the tread to outside of the tread are 8 to 9 foot wide, mostly around the 8 to 8 and 1/2t wide. So with
that said, um I reached back out to the fire department and addressed it with two comments I think David raised on that brought to the attention of the fire department. Um, and one of them was the width. And the fire department stated that they supported the 18 foot
wide width. Um, and that we demonstrated on the plans with the turning maneuvers. Um, but they would not support an 18 foot wide width if there was granite curving. And the reason they wouldn't support that is the damage that it does to the
tires. I know DPWs feel the same way on their plows. They get banged up pretty pretty badly. So that I can't recall the comment, but I know David uh you raised it and referenced it in um >> yes, that's that's correct. Uh Wayne and
uh Brett, to answer your question, yes, I found it. Yes, it was granted. Uh let me share my screen again. So request uh waiver request number 18 to allow the construction of an 18t wide roadway surface in lie of the required
16 ft. I don't know why it says 16 should have been 26. Um but it was it was 26 was the required the board uh voted um and granted the waiver and as Wayne stated the waiver request previously was
um had to do with clearance for the the fire truck and so they needed to demonstrate as Wayne stated that there was clearance for something less than 20 ft. 20 ft looks like was the minimum that the fire department wanted unless they could clear 18. They proved they could clear
18 and 18 was granted. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Carol, I guess we'll continue. You know, I had a chance before the meeting. I drove down SE road um just to look at it and think through it as we've gone
through our stuff. Um, you know, I I'm I'm sympathetic to to a lot of the concerns we've heard. I mean, it's a rough road. >> We've got a we got a lot of roads in town that are also rough roads. Um, you know, looking at the overhanging trees,
the tighter stone walls. I don't >> can't even turn around. You know, it I would like to ask highway. I I know at one point there was a a plan in town or a proposal in town to have a schedule of roads to which when they'll get worked
on, paved and upgraded. I don't think that exists. I don't I'm pretty sure that was not did not go through, but >> well, they haven't ch >> Yeah. I mean, I I'd be interested in just asking the highway, not necessarily contingent on anything here, but you
know, what what type of plans they have or or do have or don't have for for work on SE road. >> Well, I think you're correct though. If there's no state funding to assist, nothing's going to happen. >> State funding for a road back.
>> Is it 20? Is it 22 or 24? Do you know off the top of your head? >> I'm sorry. for chapter no for chapter 90 money >> it's either 22 or 24 I'm not sure >> typic so I I serve on my chair my board of sewer commissions
and I deal with budgets all the time similar to these types of situations um and what I find and I understand you go from town to town and mostly your budget is consumed by the school budget which is in department
heads it irritates department heads, we set up when I get elected, set up an enterprise fund and we have our own money. What we do with that, so if we have a situation like that, um we have the the road looked at um put it out to bid for design. If it's less less than
if it's over 10,000, it's less than 5,000 or less than 10,000, um then we we can reach out to one consultant and then have them look at at the rogue. Um and then we go for low interest loans. We do it still as a department even with our
uh >> as a sewer department. >> As a sewer department. Yep. >> You had sewer. >> Oh yeah. Yeah. We have 85 lines as a sewer. So we we go for low interest loans we have a uh because of our being a sewer department. We can go for SRF
funding which is a state funding mechanism as well. Um but a lot of the times we go below interest loans. That's how we get it done. It hurts, but better at low interest than than doing nothing.
>> If I may, I took a quick look and it doesn't seem that roadway with is a requirement. The requirements have to be that the road is accepted public way, maintained by the municipality, and included in the municipality's local road inventory used by Massdot. So going
back to um the chairman's comment, I think the first step is to check with the highway department and confirm um the list of roads that are that they have that they maintain that are that
are associated with what mass dot has um and go from there. >> I think the highways prioritize based on travel. I'm going to make an assumption that zero road is not heavily traveled. >> Travel complaints probably, right?
>> Yeah. You know, you know, roads that I mean, we've seen many roads that get paved multiple times, you know, like Dudley Road gets done a lot and very took a long time for somebody to fix that one, >> right? >> And but there's a number of roads that
we know get done repeatedly, but >> some that haven't been done in 40 years, right? So, but it's based on how much traffic is utilizing those roads and the needs of not just unfortunately a dead end road. Um,
the squeaky wheel >> you had a chance to look it over a little bit more. Do you have any more thoughts or questions? >> No, I'm good. >> That no problem with this. >> Do we need to address all the conditions tonight? Well, I I think so in we we had
a number of new letters from from abutters and concerned citizens. Um I I don't think and don't recommend that we read them into the record like we did the last time, but we've had them in our folder. We've had a chance to read them and then we'll have them >> uh for public comment as well. Um
>> and then um I think we need to consider um well, we've talked broadly about certain things. I don't I don't think we've necessarily checked where every board member is at and such, but we need to consider that we have a deadline a statuto deadline of uh the next meeting,
the 10th of August that we were granted an extension for. Um if we think we need more time or not, there's a litany or there's a number of exemptions that have been requested that we have to go through waivers waiverss
>> um >> and explore. there's there's no uh no draft decision and any form has been put together. Um but I think those are the things that we need to think about as a board next. But I think what I'd like to do first is um we'll acknowledge the I
believe the three three new letters that we've received and then open it up for public questions and comment. So, we've received a uh it was an a lot and deselectletes uh letter. I think it
was dated the 22nd of July. We have a Cyclman letter from the 27th of July and we have a MEDA letter from the 27th of July as well. So we'd like to open it up now uh and with the intention of
limiting redundancies for >> Excuse me. >> Excuse me. I'm sorry about that. Um I believe there's also a letter from 50 Rich Cohen and somebody else might have a hard copy of it. I know he wasn't able
to come tonight, but he had concerns regarding his driveway at the end and his um utilities. >> Let me let me see. >> You should have received it last night. I think he had said >> it came in last night.
>> Uh he said uh >> I think we only >> email was just sent and that was um today. >> Yeah. I think I would hope those in the room understand that we don't necessarily if you send it the day of.
It's not a guarantee that it's going to get into the folder amongst everything that's going on. Um, you know, we're still we're we're still uh this is still ongoing and happy to I know last time we read in John's letter uh that was a that was an error on our
part for not getting it in when he did get it in in time. I don't know what the good time is, but I if he sent it in today, I know we'll have the budget. Um, but let's, you know, public comment. I know we have people here. Um, a couple first, you mentioned about the
town abandoned. The town abandoned the road explicitly because he doesn't want houses being built at the end of this long narrow road. That's why they they banned the road at the driveway of the last house at the time.
That's because Chopper wrote up as far as it could after Lunberg abandons then wanted to abandon it as as make it as short as they possibly could specifically because they don't want houses way down at hand. That's why they did it. I looked it up. Town has voted
to abandon roads before at least it doesn't. It never never public never happened. I couldn't even find in the entire state. So I agree. I think there's a big
and then uh the other thing that if you weren't great that's the big danger. If you grant a bunch of waiverss to allow and subdivision rules clearly show that a single road going down into a property,
it's not a subdivision. You have to have multiple ways in those rooms rules. You know, you got to have two ways in and out. You know, every road has to intersect with another specifically a single road going in is not a subdivision. If you grant wakers while here
every 6 and >> one John's John one problem as a member of this board that that I have A lot of these waivers have already been granted. Previous board granted waivers and he
looked them up tonight. >> Yeah, but previous board denied tonight. >> Those waivers have been granted for this project. >> Yeah, but that was >> the previous board denied this project >> twice.
Twice >> through the chair. preliminary participation in >> unfortunately was prior to this board. I know. I understand that. But I said I wasn't meeting
that. >> We were actually told by that. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. So, let's continue with public comment. Um basically there have been a lot of variances
already. And what about you know that big big variance about where the town explicitly state how long a road can be. I've heard
a lot of variances here, but I haven't heard that explicit one about being a variance on the town bylaw where it clearly says a loan cannot be longer than x amount and any extension
would exceed that x amount. My other concern is also this is not a well-maintained loan to begin with. We don't know will ever be a public road and if it does we don't know it'll be
that well maintain current. Um it's kind of a nightmare scenario for any property owner. Uh whatever kind of turn they make. Um,
you know, they can make the fanciest turnarounds for the fire trucks, but it's already way way down the road. And we're talking a private road where
we don't know when we call public road when you know u and the maintenance one if we added three more houses this could really be I don't know like for the town
fire trucks would not be able to maneuver very easily and and properties. >> Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Can I have the name of the identify to grant variances? There were no variances granted. There were no
variances requested again that's what I thank you John I was about to explain so basically what they are waiverss and variances totally >> um >> so let's I'm going to keep going with public comment I I appreciate where
you're at Bobby from 38 um I just want to understand correctly that it sounds like what I'm hearing tonight is that despite the fact that the town voted publicly to abandon
discontin whatever the right terminology is the industry of the road many years ago we are considering extending it another 560 ft despite that public vote does so my question again which was in
my letter does that not have to go back to the town because we are now doing something in reverse of what the town publicly voted for to bring up your point of legal issues. I'm I'm questioning that also, but my my
understanding is that would apply if the town was going to accept it as an extension. What I'm understanding now is the applicant is proposing that
as a private extension. So, Robert, I don't want to go I want Well, no, I don't necessarily I think have an issue with what you said or how you said it, but um council has and I recognize council is of the applicant and not necessarily independent council, but
under judicial ethics and authority. take this just uh you know in terms of the distinction between the town not maintaining area of roadway um you know in terms of being responsible for maintenance sub pl
things of that sort distinction between that and suggestion that the town actually took this land that you know it was never underre
of the town to uh basically take away the rights of the individual owner to that property and that owner has invested in the property. So there's I'd suggest that there's a distinction to be
made here that this property was never taken from the owner of the land and Bel was now the successor and interest to the property and we utilize that property consistent with the bylaws and
consistent with the laws of the com Massachusetts I don't think Well, if they can't lose, they win. That's the >> If I'm gonna I appreciate the back and forth. I I want to make sure we don't
have the uh the goal of the planning board is not to have a group ruhaha and all I'll all thinking. Um, you know, I don't know if I'll do it any justice or make it worse, but you know, you have an individual who's a private property owner who has this parcel on
it. It's previously, you know, whether by realators or whatnot that or assessor's database been listed as undevelopable in the sense that it doesn't directly have a certain level of frontage. the owner, call it creative,
call it smart, I'm not sure, or has just found a way to utilize the land based on the laws as they've been written, whether state or locally, saying that if they're going to take the property they own and create a private way, then they'll have access. If, you know, we as the planning board are able to look at
this and say that, you know, we think this is a benefit to the town. And I don't see it or I'm not sure I believe it that it it is reversing or necessarily uh degrading the abandonment of the road
or that section of road. You know, in a way that that would be a decision by the town at town meeting in terms of the public way. You know what if and I understand I think John has probably made the point the most about the precedent of people putting private
roads in any property in town which I you know in a either you could call it a doomsday if you don't want housing or you could call it a maybe a great adventure if you do love housing everywhere. Technically, if you have the amount of
property, you you could probably put in a private road if the land and everything and you want to put in the dirt and soils and whatnot. So, I'm I'm not trying to ramble here. I'm just trying to synthesize what I'm hearing from different places and how I'm looking at it or understanding it. But I
thank you for your comment. I I'd like to continue with public comment if we have anyone else here on the floor or if we have anyone uh online as well. I see I see the semans. >> Yeah. M Michael Seikman from Siver Road. I I just have three points clarification
in response to Wayne's Wayne's comments if I may. Uh first, regarding the missing driveway, I I believe I heard and I apologize if I misheard this that Wayne indicated that was a recent discovery or pointing out by us. Uh that was first raised in Jelene's letter of
June 8th. And and the reason it's important is not because um of of the access issue per se. I I'll talk about that and we appreciate the planning board members concern about that. But your bylaws, the towns and subdivision bylaws, the requirements for the
subdivision legally 17513C4 says errors, misrepresentations, omissions, or missing information in the subdivision plan shall be grounds for denial. So, I understand the chair was talking about whether you think this is
in the public interest of of the town. I I am a lawyer. I'm not a real estate lawyer, but I understand how the law works. I understand there may be an overall public interest requirement of the law. That that's the bylaw. That's one of the requirements of a subdivision plan to be approved by this board. I'm
not aware of the waiver. That's one reason why that matters because you can pick take your pick. Error, misrepresentation, omission, or misleading information. That that's one of those. and I'm not aware that has been revised, nor am I aware that there's been a waiver granted. The
second point, again, we appreciate the the board's concern about the access issue. Wayne mentioned discussions we had that was on March 26, that was 4 months ago. We we would have been quite happy if this was resolved then. I frankly, I think they would be happy in
a lot of ways. It would be off the table if they had just granted an issue, an easement back four months ago. you wouldn't be having the discussions wrapped up on 40 Sver roads access per se. Matter of fact, we first heard about this issue when the developer 6 years ago sent a letter saying, "Hey, we'd
like to develop this property and by the way, you don't have access legally to Sver Road. Maybe we can come to a resolution." For 6 years, we've been trying to resolve this issue and we don't have resolution. Just like now we hear they'd like to resolve it. It never gets resolved.
Um, I understand. I've heard they want to disclaim the actions of the previous developer and say arms length, oh yeah, no, we just bought foreclosed the property. We have nothing to do with them. But I will point out Wayne has pointed to their preliminary plan as the cake that was already baked that they
built upon. The peer reviewer has referred to that preliminary approval at least twice, maybe three times. One of the board members has pointed to that preliminary approval as binding on this. So the idea that the previous threats from six years ago don't matter is is
kind of farical. Again, we've been trying to resolve this for six years. An easement would have resolved this. Just granted, we wouldn't be talking about this. And finally, the reason why that matters is not because the unjustness of my
mother-in-law not having legal access to this house that was built 40 years ago and the town approved. It's because again your own law towns and subdivision 17516B15 says you cannot make streets in a
subdivision to provide frontage or access to land that is not part of the subdivision in a manner that would allow new ANR lots. We believe that if they did grant the subdivision and again they keep telling us they grant if they did grant easement. They keep telling us
they'll grant an easement but they keep not doing it. Matter of fact, sometimes they say conditional upon approval of the subdivision at the end when everything's all done. If they did do that, that would grant access to land not part of the subdivision. 40 Sver Road is not part of the subdivision. It
would then allow new ANR lot on 40 Sver Road. In other words, if they did this, 40 Sver Road would be able as of right ANR to make additional lots within 40 Sver Road and that is prohibited under your law. So that that may very well be
why they're doing that. So it's multiple reasons why we believe your law, your own subdivision law, not a feeling that this is not in the character of the neighborhood or we believed it was undevelopable or that's not the rural nature of the neighborhood, but actual
requirements of your own bylaws are violated by this plan. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh do we have anybody else online that would like to comment? Heidi. See Heidi's hand.
>> Yep. Hi. Um, thank you. Um, >> last name. >> I just I I wanted to ask a question to kind of clarify. Um, because I I'm not sure I'm I'm following. Um, back to the waivers. Are you guys applying previously approved waivers from a
different project to this project? I would say no in the sense that there so there's a few things going on this as many here know this has come before the board I think in 2020 uh >> 2022 I think
>> was two the denial or was two the pre-app >> two two was the preliminary plan >> so there's a preliminary plan that the board has approved to which I believe conditions were granted then and that those are relevant now But times prior
where this has come before those are not applicable. I mean they're generally related but >> right okay >> not you know before us right now. >> Can we have the the last name of Heidi and do you mind sharing your last name? >> Oh sorry Heidi Ash.
>> Very nice. Thank you. >> Address >> uh Heidi. Would you be willing to share your address with Wayne? He's a nice guy. >> Sorry. 85 Wildwood Road and that's in Lunenburgg. >> Got it. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Y anybody else on there that we can't see? >> If I could make a comment. >> Sure. >> So, I'm attorney attorney Stephanie Melo. Uh my brother attorney John Melo has been at these meetings before. We manage the day-to-day operations of
Belvadier Capital uh who are the current owners, we took it at foreclosure auction. So just from I mean really just reading this letter and listening to everyone's comments, the main
the main business of Belvadier Capital, we develop properties, but our main business is giving loans. So, this property was taken at foreclosure auction because the previous land owner, the previous developer didn't pay his
bills. Um, I'm also reading in this letter that he threatened an elderly woman that he was going to date off her driveway when her husband who was dying from pancreatic cancer uh needed to get to his appointments. Um, so we don't do that. That's not something that we would
do. We're not portfolio developers. We're community members. I grew up in Drakit. I live down the road in Dunstable. My brother John grew up in L. He lives in Drakit. The owners of Belvier Capitol live in L. They run nonprofit organizations, build buildings
at Soul. They're not the kind of people that are described in this letter. Well, it was the previous developer who's being described in this letter. That's not who we are. So comments about, oh well, you're asking for three lots, but
we know there's going to be more. It just it doesn't First, that doesn't make any sense, but second, we're not we're looking to build beautiful homes to make the neighborhood more beautiful. We've gone above and
beyond to make sure that the roadway fits all of these regulations that it doesn't need to fit. we could have fit more lots in order to maximize our profit and we didn't because we didn't think it would benefit the neighborhood. I just want to make sure that the people
in this room are are aware of all of that and they see all of that because it seems like the and there's a lot of talk about, oh, it's taken six years to do this, it's taken six years to do that. the number of years it's taken are irrelevant because the previous developer could have owned the lot for a
hundred years and if we just came in the other day we can't do anything to change what the previous developer did for 100 years. So I just wanted to introduce myself so that everyone could put a face to this boogeyman that you think is
trying to invade your neighborhood because I promise that's not what we're trying to do. >> Thank you. Okay, I believe we've we've had substantial public comment and I don't see any other hands or any interest in speaking at the
moment. Um, so what's next for us as the planning board is to I think evaluate the uh waiverss that have been requested or and and work through that to see if we we reach
agreement as a board on on what that could look like and whether it moves forward or not. So I'm not sure. Um, maybe, maybe not in our next meeting, but I I I truly have no idea. So, I'd
like to ask the applicant for another extension. Um, where's my list? You know, let's just say till September 14th, that would be applicable. And you know, we'll work through as a
board to make sure that we are satisfied to to our best, to the town's best, even the neighbors best, and hope to have a decision by then. >> Mr. Chairman, so would be the next
hearing would be September 14th. >> No, I would Nope. I would say just our statutory deadline to to make a decision. Um, you know, right now it's August 10th, which we have a meeting scheduled. We have one meeting scheduled for August 24th and then a last meeting
for September 14th. My hope we would have a decision before that. But instead of asking you every meeting for an extension, I'd rather go to the 14th and then uh hope to have a decision for you prior to that. >> Okay.
>> Last time we just got an email signed off. I'm gonna ask >> yest. >> So, will we have everything we need on a tent in order to go through? >> Um, that would be my hope. I mean, we
have a completed peer review. Uh I'm I'm gonna ask Beth to reach out to the uh highway department specifically on um well either chapter 90 or just you know what plans does the highway department have forever road if they
have any uh to work on it or and whatnot. >> Can I just discuss one thing? >> Sure. Um yeah the >> can we have a legal review? We we did at last meeting um
>> we talked about asking town council and I asked Beth to reach out to town council >> right >> so one of the >> they have been reached out to >> one of the topics would be previous waiverss
how binding they may be >> I was going to bring that up that's a >> say what >> I was going to bring that up too that's >> I mean it was a preliminary preinary plan, >> but it was a different plan, right? It wasn't a formal plan. >> It was a preliminary plan,
>> right? >> It's that's what I think we need to find out, right? >> Were the waiverss granted on the preliminary plan? Do they carry over to this plan? >> So, I I have no problem. >> No problem asking. Um, what I have been
told is given the recent uh, well, I don't know if it's recent budget crunches of the town, but the there's not a lot of budget left for town council and with the >> not there is no >> no budget. >> Well, no, we're in a new fiscal year. So,
>> this is a new fiscal year that just started 27 days ago. >> I'm just trying I'm just trying to relay to you guys what I've been told. I have put in the request for the former meeting, but with the lawsuits from the town clerk on the town, um been told there's not a lot of free time or money
for the town council. >> I think we should be able to get this is a very significant >> Sure. >> project and of great great significance to the community and the others in particular. >> Sure. >> I mean, I
>> I think we need an answer. I think we need Tom council to give us >> just on the waiver. >> I think he I mean whatever I mean this is my understanding is Adam's specialty area is this kind of stuff. So I I think
for him to give us >> it should take long to figure that out. I mean his I I'm not sure what to call it. His guidance, his >> opinion on what the the things that are that he can see as the the bumps in the
road that maybe we are not seeing, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Sure. Okay. So >> or satisfy us the things that we already are nervous about. >> Well, we're representing the entire community. >> Yeah. This will one way or the other this is
going to this needs to to be addressed. This is what are you the third owners? >> I'm sure over the duration of history. >> Okay. Probably longer. But I mean since this the road was abandoned but I mean I mean this has come to one planning board
or another. I think that to get council's opinion could have an impact on whatever the future might hold as well. Not just >> don't disagree, >> you know. I mean, it's just I can't I would not be happy if the select board
said we can't use town council for something like this. This is >> not okay. >> Okay. I'd like to entertain a motion to continue the public hearing to the date of August 10th. >> So, I'll second it.
>> Second roll call. I say yes. >> Yes. right there. Yes, shepherd. Yes. >> Um, great. Let's do 6:45. >> I don't know if there's anything else
scheduled for that day. So, if that does change, I'm going to ask that to make you let you know. >> Okay. >> And we'll have that posted on our agenda. just want >> we'll send we're going to send that over.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you everybody. >> Nice seeing you in person. >> Correct. >> Thank you. >> Thank you guys. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Yeah. >> Enjoy your evening. Did anyone ever tell you you kind of look like John McCain? >> Doesn't he kind of have a John McCain thing? >> Yeah, >> just failing too short. Let's get a little bit. You see his run for president? >> Yeah, >> you're right.
>> He can't anymore. >> It's really tough for John to do that these days. >> Have a good night, folks. >> Good night. Thank you. >> Okay, that puts us >> Thank you. Thank you. Have a good night. So, we were at uh 3.3, which is the
flood plane overlay district application. >> Um I know there was a lot of free time at the last public hearing this past few minutes ago. So, did anyone think more diligently about this? >> Take it back and review it. >> Yeah, I I
>> the next meeting or or someone suggested I try it. I just >> I've never done one of these. know how you trying to undo something we did. You know what I mean? It certainly makes it tough and as we saw with the
you know one thing that we already had before us and approved like we change the rules after we realize it's not really working and then it does make it difficult for for they who come in in the in the very beginning and >> I know that >> whether it's easements on something or
who knows but >> um so I'm okay with I don't mind waiting you know defer to the board we're good >> I'm fine whatever >> all right So, we'll make we'll just take action >> next meeting. >> Uh yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Think a little bit more about it. Um 3.4
draft decision on Wheeler Road three-wheeler. Um says it needs Brett or Robert's decision signatures. Obviously, I'm not partaking in >> Yep. It needs everybody's except me and you. >> Yep. >> Um so, we could sign it now.
>> Yes. Um, so I move Well, what is the review planning board? >> Did you guys already vote to approve it? >> No, we need to do that. >> Okay. >> Um, I think we approved it last week. Did >> we Sorry. Last meeting. Yeah. >> Okay. Well, this is the
>> You should just need to sign I think we need >> to review to make sure that it's what you want to sign. I mean, we approved, but this is the actual decision, >> right? Was was not prepared. So, okay. Um, I'm going to be abstaining from this any
I abstained from the whole project, so I probably should abstain from this, too. But this needs the three of you to sign it. >> We're going to turn it over to Vice Chair Carol. And >> if it meets your Oh, what you voted what
you think you voted for, then Beth would appreciate a signature so that we can get to the appropriate places. >> Maybe uh maybe you guys can just look that over at your leisure. Um
maybe it's worth I don't think 3.5 is review draft planning board decision on zero s road. I don't think we have one. I think that was >> I was wondering about that. I I did I did ask Beth after our last meeting just because we've come up with a there's
been a number of conditions and stuff that have come up over time and I asked her if she could start putting them together. >> Yeah. >> Um just for discussion points, not for um you know making a decision one way or another. >> Did you sign it or >> I'll sign it? I don't know if you I read
that part. I guess I'm good with that. >> I just want to make sure you're good with that. Yeah, she probably put she might have put that on there just to so that we could >> follow up with it to keep the conversation going and >> by some strange miracle that we >> a lot of boards are doing that now. It's
the only way we can keep you need to put things on there, you know, open. Y >> um so we might as well while um Brett and then Robert will be reading maybe Cindy we do our notices from abuing town >> okay >> town decisions or those um this is an
older one um this is the announcement the first one I have is the announcement the posting the legal notice for the conservation commission to do the zero s road hearing which they tried to have but had to redo on July 22nd so that's one of Uh, we have a legal advertisement from
Shirley ZBA that they're going to have a public hearing on at 7 p.m. on August 10th. >> Um, for a variance for minimum sideyard setback 15 ft and installation of a
carport to the detached garage at 35 Benjamin Road. Shirley um Shirley GBA um also had a decision for a variance of Napoli and own
irrevocable trust on what? Oh, the owners are in Littleton. Sorry. um but for property at 64 Walker Road. Um they had a public hearing on July 13th at 7 p.m. and they made a decision
and it looks like I think they approved it. I thought I found that. Oh y uh the bearings granted will be subjected to the so they've approved whatever that was the frontage change of frontage
not a ton of ash fee notice of decision short and sweet this is a main street map 10 partial 2.2 the applicant had asked for variance to frontage and law and this application was denied
Son of Lunberg, notice of decision 171 Archer Arbor Arbor Street, special permit metification. That one was approved. And
they also had a notice of decision 934 Mass for modification of a shared driveway special permit and that was also approved. And that's it.
>> Thank you. Um, thank you. Thank you. >> That's the mall. >> Not too many this time. >> So, we have Oh, let me just I think there was some Okay. We asked for the exception.
Um, I think we covered everything. I think so. Next meeting August 10th. Yep. August 24th. Oh, September 4th and September 28th. Sorry. >> Should I um I was thinking it wasn't on
here, but we have 4.2 communications. I don't know if that counts. >> Is that part of what you >> um >> or you have something else you want to add? >> Yeah. I mean, I had attended the clean energy presentation that was in Mayor. >> Oh, I was wonder
it's not but it's in the information that came from that presentation is in the packet. It was to everyone and the significance of of the clean energy is regarding um clean energy which includes wind, solar and
battery storage. The battery storage to me seems to be the most significant. >> Oh yeah. that these are uh we have a requirement effective October 1st that we must accept consolidated permits. >> We have to accept >> Yeah, we have we don't have to approve
them. No, we have to. But if if a developer or I don't call them a developer, but an applicant wants to do um wants to do one of these projects um in Townsen then and they it's up to them. they have the right to ask for a
consolidated permit and we can't say oh no we don't do those after October 1st we must do those and we have and a consolidated permit involves the planning board conservation and ZBA so it would have to be have gone through
all three boards has one permit application and we have 12 months to approve or disapprove or it's automatically approved and then they have the right to appeal to the state anyway and this is just for certain size projects larger projects
over I think it's 25 something megawws or something then they they go to the state directly they don't come through us and the state makes a decision without us >> you know what the size project these are this isn't like a homeowner putting battery storage >> this is not for homeowners this is for major projects
>> what is the battery storage >> batteries and electricity >> it's a ground mounted this is only about groundmounted solar Not housemounted. >> Okay. >> If you have these projects like like what's on >> just a solar farm out there in West M. >> Yeah, that one. >> Yeah.
>> Similar to one of those. The ground mounted solar projects um is what this is referring to as well as wind farms. >> Um I don't know if we have any place. Maybe we do. I don't know. But and if you have one of those, then you're going to want to you don't want to just have
it just raw use. You want to store the energy and it's more and more important. I mean I the present that the present I can give you the education on it the battery the generating facility I got it. >> Yeah so that it can be used a lot of
stuff >> and that is the big that's what I see as the biggest thing that is is happening and >> it's going to be a mess few of them. So what it is is it stores extra power during the day and it allows it to produce the same amount of power
overnight. Right. >> And not just overnight. I mean these projects are >> I mean for much longer period. >> The one we did was wasn't a huge >> I mean that makes sense. >> Yeah. >> But these are you know your major like um I'm not quite I'm not familiar how
the what unit does around here but is that a substation that's over by the old water department? >> Yes. >> Okay. So what one thing that they explained at at this presentation is that and the state people who gave this presentation but that a substation could
ask for would want to place a a battery storage unit if if we for places that have a substation if there's a place to put it. And so that's, you know, something that, you know, I thought like, okay, the more and more popular these kind of things come that we do, we
are not out of the woods as far as, oh, we're not going to get that. No, we could very well get that. And it's more and more popular and there's more and more incentives and and the technology is >> coming >> much better. I mean it's already much
improved than you know and there's they gave a really if you go through some of the slides and I think if Bethle if well Andrew if it can get on the >> if it can get on agenda next you know on one of the future I can go over a little bit more
>> but the thing that we have to do >> they they said we don't it's not required that a town has to do a new bylaw but that's kind of the gist of we kind of do looking at what we have we only have solar We only have a solar bylaw. We don't have a clean energy bylaw. >> No. Be a nice DTA
>> and Well, you got the first. >> Well, we do have a clean energy >> committee. >> Well, then but that's not No, they don't have anything to do with this. >> Okay. >> This is zoning and permitting. >> And they do need to have regulations. Yes.
>> And and this is not this is old news. This has been coming up for about a year now. This is not something that is just getting hit. It's just I just got the emails and stuff and it's like oh my god I haven't heard anybody talk about >> they have a committee that help prepare
those bylaws >> in the packet in the packet are samples >> recommended samples for each of the things that you could use and um that's on council I mean and again zoning is Adam's
>> thing so when it gets down to actually publishing ing bylaws, I think. But I I looking at the at the sample bylaws that are online. >> If you look at those, I mean, >> they seem pretty >> much >> they're pretty boilerplate and you can
fill in the blank. I mean, we need to review them. We don't want to just say, "Oh, yeah, this is fine, right?" >> But we need to I think that whole section needs to be looked at by all of us. >> So, this is on the agenda. I I don't see an issue with having it as an agenda item. I think this is probably more
relevant than us working on the marijuana bylaws. >> Um, and I don't uh at least my goal with that was to have more community participation with that and I don't we haven't had a lot yet and that's totally fine. Um, but I I think we can talk to
that get it on agenda item and look through it and see what we can do. I'm not I am not worried. Uh, nothing against the state, but they have plenty of things they tell us we need to get done. And if it's not done, I get if we get an application, you know, something we'd have a different set of rules, but
I think we just take it uh as we can and do a thoughtful job. >> So, please do look at the the presentation that are in it. That's everything that they downloaded to me after after the presentation. I just got it and I sent it to Beth and get this up on the website >> and uh so do the you know couple
PowerPoint a couple and a copy of the law is in there and a couple other things and so it's really >> it's really straightforward. Thank you, Cindy. And thank you for >> Yeah. Thank you. I did see that. I started reading it, but it didn't get too far. >> Okay. I'd like to entertain a motion. >> I got I got one little new business. I
think going forward we should look at one projects going forward. >> Yeah. >> Any private or public road. >> We need to look at systems. We We must have something in place because like Ryan Road has one.
>> Yeah. Um, but like the project in front of us now, like three houses, no water supply, you know, I think we need to revisit our bylaws and see where that triggers because it may only be three houses, but if your
one's the if your house is the one on fire, you really won't have >> Do we have anything addressing? >> We we must because there I know a few projects that do have them, but there are 15 houses. >> Okay. Because I know my father talking about that when he built his house up in
Maine and they don't have, you know, it's all private wells and he offered to put in a sister on his property for the fire department. >> Yeah. >> And the town wouldn't let him. >> Um what what's a pug, Andrew? Um
Laura Woods has pawns. >> Yeah. >> You know, they fire ponds. So some >> Okay. >> You know, that would be You know, I guess it would be suitable, but a sister string is guaranteed. A pond is not guaranteed. So, I mean, how
does the board feel about that? I mean, you're going to call it a private road or you're going to call it a road back when um Chief Hermy, he was the guy, he's the guy that made those things. He would not. >> Yeah,
>> he he's he that was and even some people were like, well, this a little bit over stuff, but he want that's what he wanted on these developments for the fire protection. Um, so that's that's really whether or not it's in a
bylaw or not, I don't know, but that but he was the one that insisted on that in order to provide the access. >> I guess I guess it could have come from one of his comments. Maybe maybe that's how they were put in. Maybe we don't have anything. I've never seen anything in the bylaw. >> I don't think that was Chief Hermy.
>> It could be. Maybe it was like maybe gave us comments and said, "Hey, you want to go forward? You need a 30,000 gallon system." >> Maybe it's something we consider adding to the >> I think we should really. I mean, >> I think so, too. >> I don't think it's a bad idea >> being a developer. Like I know it's a
cost to the developer, but >> but I also know moving into building a brand new house in a development where we did where it's all private well and the house across the we were like the seven houses just doing the house across the street and caught on fire. Didn't
really know anything. We just moved in the whole fire department to call with their little pumper truck and basically my cousin actually be on call firefighter but they come with a little spray truck and they basically say all
we're here is to keep the other property from running down because your house is just going to burn down because we don't have enough water to I mean they literally come with a truck with water, >> right? Oh yeah, we have one. That's we do the same thing and you know
>> and major major fires you see that all the time that you know >> they let they just identify the line and say we can't save those houses but we can save these. Yeah, that's basically >> I think there's interest in the interest looking into it, right? Like we'll check
the by alarm, see if there is anything like I've never seen anything. >> Yeah. Nothing that I've ever read. >> I was I was just thinking about it with with this project that we have in front of us now that like like we we kind of should have something, you know, like if it's going to be called a private road
or a public road like it should be. >> Yeah. Especially those places, you know, on >> you couldn't do it on a common driveway. I mean, that wouldn't be real like it would be. Yeah. But >> okay. Should we entertain a motion to journ? >> Yes. >> Yes. So moved.
>> So moved. Second. >> Second. >> All those in favor?