##VIDEO ID:nmukomd0Cxo## good evening everyone my name is Laura shiff and I'd like to call the meet the planning board meeting of December 9th 20 2024 to order at 6:31 p.m. car H is pres Aran present Andrew pres pres Lance MCN pres thank you everyone would you please join me ofg of the United States of America indivisible [Music] andice to thank all of our and all those currently serving our country and all of our uh First Responders thank you the meeting is being recorded and will be uploaded to the town of towns and YouTube channel uh 1.4 chairman additions or deletions I'd like to um just state that our uh administrator Beth daon had uh a medical U issue this past week and uh she's stabilized and hopefully will be back with us soon we wish her well uh because of that we have a couple things that we're not doing tonight and that is the minutes of November 19 I meeting are to be moved to either December 23rd or the first meeting with is January 13th what is your pleasure and we don't know when they'll be ready be available in the 23rd at all okay and I won't be here physically on the 23rd I'll be remote you'll be remote as well I'll be here as long as there's no snow or ice or ice okay well we'll see what happens um okay that and then under uh well we'll go into work session when we go there I don't know I don't have the capability or maybe you will um number one see if there's any um correspondence in your we got one one okay F I just wanted to know if I was deleting that and then also can you find um for 3.1 the discussion on zoning amendments while doing that okay so those are the only changes that I would have and so we have a few minutes perhaps we can go right to well number one let's take care of if it's okay with the board um 4.1 yes let take that out1 the correspondence that's the correspondence and uh Andrew will do that y um so the first one that's in here is the the 18 Main Street decision from us as the towns and planning board the um so I won't read through that the next one we have lunenberg notices um let's see public hearing planning board will hold the lunenberg planning board will hold the hearing on December 9th today at 6:05 p.m. to hear and review applications for special permit and storm water management [Music] permit or PSG realy 281 LLC for the construction of a common driveway to serve three single family homes home lots as part of a proposed development of the site the location is 171 Arbor Street in Lunenburg there was also the notice of decision for uh 29 Main Street from the towns and planning board I believe that looks like it may be it yes that's it for correspondence okay thank you um and then whatever is in a portal for the uh receip from the mon CH the regional Planning Commission and other agencies which you have in the portal there's nothing in as copies here but I know that there have been emails sent out in references to Grants and I have talked to um and mention them to Nelson so that he talks to whoever in town is supposed to be doing the grant applications okay yeah I just heard last s say that there is some money for historic buildings oh okay uh for renovations and stuff like that and the town hall could do some repairs and I mentioned that to the historic commission that would be nice yeah um remember okay so number five Education and Training is there for your information as well as 5.2 the library okay so now let's go into the portal because we still have a few minutes on 3.1 the what do you see for the um we get two folders we get the 2022 warrant article for age restricted development bylaw that never went to vote and that's what we have in the that's what we have in front of you there the 2025 um s storm water management zoning amendments by mrpc okay why don't we talk about that one U okay so this includes the Adu site plan approval amendments and the annual town meeting warrant accessory apartment apartments in residential district text of bylaw from Joe Bo okay and you don't have that them I I don't are these I heard your reference before this is something I presume members have access to of a one Drive Port I don't have access public so so download and send them to you real quick ifema yeah would you I can do it Andrew it's easier' be great yeah okay I um I think I well I think I remember seeing the email and that he had sent um remember that you were on it Madam [Music] chairman um I just wanted to know uh aler the public that there's a webin a webinar on this ad accessory dwelling units um they're going to be at 10:00 tomorrow or 9:00 a.m. tomorrow 9:00 a.m. yes on the 10th on the 10th and another one on December 16th and it's a u for public awareness uh about the legislation um I do have I do have the web link but I don't know how to get it to you you have the web link y let me see maybe Andrew knows how to do this he's young he's young and he's fast it would take me a little bit to figure it [Music] out um here let me just click on this so what is it say the Adu draft regulations webinar and public comments and hearing is two webinars with the same content on December 10th at 9:00 a.m and December 16th at 11:00 a.m. the webinars will be an opportunity for you to learn about what is in the draft regulations way to send the link yeah so maybe um if we send the best when she gets back a forward just forward that email yeah we can do that so just forward the email you have it in an email yes yeah just forward the email to Beth you can forward it to me too I think I got an email because I know I planned on doing it tomorrow I plan on doing it tomorrow morning at 9: you're I've got best email up so you should have enough time you should have is that enough time for you to get information to um be and myself before meeting on the 17th so I don't know because I don't know what let me see I just saw Lance and Lance to sent me a third email so there's multiple emails so I'll see how comprehensive this is what I will say is um with respect to age restricted development um I don't need to perform too comprehensive review of that bylaw from 22 because I reviewed it back in22 when it was supposed to go to town man and then right um so it sounds like we've also got two other bylaws that you're referring to that access accessory dwelling units and Water Resource protection wasn't part of the S review minor language um what that wasn't anything big I sent I sent you four emails uh Adam right so I've got those so number one is the age restricted development bylaw and in fact my my initials are in the title so that's the version I reviewed in two years ago the second email is accessory departments in the residential district so I'll have to review that I haven't looked theti I haven't received it yet the third is site plan approval Amendment so I'll have to look how comprehensive those are when we met a couple of weeks ago the discussion was that he we'd undertake those amendments in two steps so I need to see how comprehensive this step is but I'll take a look and see if that's something that can be done for the upcoming town meeting and then the fourth email is a second version of the a tried development model it's called version two so I don't know what the difference between version one and version two is but I can compare the two okay determine what he must be offering us a choice I think um the only the only caveat and this actually ties in nicely with what Robert was just referring to um as it relates to the accessory dwelling units bylaw is that I I had warned a few months ago when there was some discussion about whether the town ought to immediately pursue an amendment of its bylaws to bring it into compliance with State Statute that some communities were doing that yeah but the risk was that we knew that there were forthcoming regulations from the state and we didn't know what they were going to say yet well we still don't know for sure except 24 hours ago they released the draft regulations they're about seven pages oh and that's why the webinars correct okay um so they're still in draft form so they're they're awaiting feedback from the public a public Comon period under state law whenever regulations are promulgated before they're finalized um but that should give us some guidance as to what we think the state is going to do um so I can take a look at that and then compare it to to what um mrpc is proposing uh and make sure that the two J um I think that uh just this Thursday they did announce at the mrpc meeting that um air shirely and two of they mentioned four towns around us peil peil have all approved their Adu bylaw already even though you know we had just discussed what you just said okay um all right so now we've got that uh 3.1 done for the moment okay because they've just been sent to Adam and we'll see what he has to say basically what's in there is what we discussed two weeks ago okay all right very good and we are fast approaching I do not um do a signing sheet and uh everybody will have to sign in for the public hearing back yeah please just everyone who's here please sign in except the board members okay okay um 2.1 here is at 6:45 p.m. one Depot Street Extension applications for age restricted development site plan review special permit minor storm water management permit I'd like the uh board members to introduce themselves please ter H is present Teran present Andrew Shephard present Lance MCN present La she present good evening everyone um don't have to okay so I am inviting you up to make your presentation I'm assuming you're with uh Dillis anday yes Greg Roy GRE Roy okay um welcome and again I need to have everybody sign are you here for the public hearing now public I just K the plan board meeting itself I I don't know any specifics well welcome the public the hearing for this is one Depot Street Extension did you sign in no okay you have to sign in everybody I just thought I yeah we welcome all our residents should I present from I'm prepared to present from an easel formally or doesn't seem like we have a lot of people in the room so I could also just do it from the table here whatever you guys want whatever you want and I mean if it works for everybody here fine is that okay we just do from the table nor thank you great now'll I'll be brief here okay we ready to go again my name is Greg Roy with Ds Roy I appreciate your time this evening I'll try to be um as I can but I'm here representing the applicants Kevin Smith and Ken Tully who are here I think a lot of lot of you if not all of you know them um and we are presenting uh this evening a project for an over 55 development at one Depot Street as you read um we had previously submitted plans uh depicting a six-unit project um in a duplex configuration we're proposing three duplex um units so a total of six units um we have uh now gone through some one iteration of of Staff comments and town Department comments um we've also the applicants have also been for the zoning board of appeals uh for the for the uh to seek some relief on the project so we did do um just uh late last week issued revised plans um addressing many of the the comments that we received most significantly I think was the density uh we reduced the density from six units down to five units so um and that was really a formula that you have um um only allowing four units per acre for duplex uh in in your bylaw so um that was the significant uh change that we made um but I just want to give you a brief um a brief overview of the site um give you the sort of the lay of the land so to speak um we have Depot Street here of course um in this Depot Street Extension that extends uh right here we're proposing to access the site off of Depot uh Street Extension which is a private way um we would extend the uh I'll call it a driveway because it's really um the doesn't really rise to the level of a road uh in this case but we would extend the driveway into the site and access uh the the units through that um through that driveway access um each of the units would have um a garage uh one garage Bay and then a parking space outside of the um of the garage and then we've also included some additional uh visitor parking uh right here as you enter the site uh so we have some other PL talking off this particular plan we have some other plans that document um the parking in a little bit more um uh detailed detailed way thank you um we um have have done soil testing for the uh for the proposed septic systems on the site we're proposing to do three separate uh sepc areas one for each of the buildings uh those are shown here on this plan um soil testing has been done uh for those uh that'll of course be permitted by your Board of Health um so we that'll be a separate permanent track um and we're also proposing a connection to the uh to the public water um system one of the comments we received was from the the water district um wanting us to show separate and distinct water services to each building this plan revision did um did change that uh did make that change so we're showing one Water Service here and then two Water Services uh one here and then one up that would come up in there um it's a separate water services to each building um and then I think the other thing that we we should actually let me just I have a question on this yeah you're showing this is one unit one but it's still the size of these two units so is that mistake fixed that no we we I don't know if you want to address that what I had asked Greg to do was when I was here at one point Bob Bob had mentioned that uh you know he thought the density appeared to be too tight so we we decided to bring it down to one unit the reason I left the box that size is is to give me a little bit of flexibility when I position this when I position the single unit if if it it would be in this building envelope okay and that's kind of customary I think Bob probably agree that you know in a lot of cases it'll just show a building envelope this case we just left the this the size but it would be one unit it may go this way yeah may put a little twist in it it just gives us some latitude to try to put it in there where it's going to look the nicest right and it might correct but it might it might not be it might be shape slightly different than one one side of this right okay so we just we thought as a placeholder that we keep it um we um one of the things we did under this can I make a suggest on that topic one of the things that is disturbing is they set back on five and four so I'm just suggesting maybe if this was the one unit we could avoid that you have the same here though you have the same here you have the same set back on this side I mean obviously this is going to come forwards of that um I just think uh you got a house here somewhere somewhere over here well we have set back problems here and here um so part of the thing that I'm seeing is happening here is there's like a preconceptual design to be applied basically throughout the complex um when site parameters probably will need to have um alteration alter alterite altering the physical footprint of the unit to comply um and so my thought is if this was one and it's the same size as two of those in these two locations there may be another building footprint prototype that would avoid the setback issue do everybody understand what I'm saying I'm a little I'm a little confused I know what he's getting that we could make this one comply to the to the logic setback is that you kind get move this I'm saying that's one's fine with's no there's no right this one's asking for a lot of relief and this was asking for Relief MH so the applicant has agreed to reduce the number of un right yeah which is us right so um so there was a preconceived prototype unit that was here so that works very well here so I'm saying in these two areas Maybe by all altering this prototype unit position wise or modifying this footprint uh we could eliminate the tissue well we could certainly eliminate the tissue here we could there's no reason we've got a footprint right twice as size fixed without issue this one here I'm not sure that we could tweak it enough to get it and still get everything in you know um so and still get everything so yeah I guess we're looking for a little bit of relief yeah we certainly are so you know the iere the biologist tonight of course don't have it memorized but I think the the section uh the section in your general requirements that requires the 30 foot setback in the in the over 55 development portion of the bylaw does allow you aboard some flexibility there so it says summarizing structur shall be set 30 30 feet from the lot line unless the planning board determines um that another setb is appropriate essentially so you do have flexibility there I I I'm sure we do yeah we do is there a variant that can be granted well I don't even think variance Kevin I think the planning board could make a finding that it that it you know that the way and maybe we need to strike a little bit of a compromise here if but we can talk about that but I think my point is the planning board has the ability under your under your bylaw for that flexibility don't they don't have to get it VAR they can just make a finding minut and I'm not saying that you're going to I'm just saying that you could no but I understand the developers needs yeah and um so in looking at this and what could be done there's a lot of possibilities that could be done but then when you do it look at it from an economic standpoint and how you practically can provide it and make it financially feasible and those things uh they add more burden to the project so for example if you just take the square footages of these Footprints they could be collected in different number of ways um to deliver the same number of units um however if you took one of these and put it here you'd have a three multif family unit and the code requirements and the construction cost would be far higher right so um so I understand that and why this is an objective to me I'm just saying this square footage that was here um with modifications to this footprint because it obviously is double it's the square footage of a size of one I agree that the code could be met well we wouldn't have to do it on both is what you're saying I'm sorry we could we could we could tweak this so that we wouldn't we could come further into compliance I think by changing the footprint profile you should be able to achieve everything you need yeah but I don't think we can get that if you're I I don't know how that we can get the there's no way you're sliding this thing over there and the problem that we're having is that you're trying to deal you got you got to get you got to get everything to work work exactly I know and what it doesn't work is these problems here so I'm suggesting and I'm not your architect or whatever here um changing the footprint of these buildings all right the profile of them should allow you to be able to get two here and maybe one there but that's not my job you know but uh but if you went down to four units no no it's not a matter of reducing the units I think I think five units is can be achieved here okay um I'm just saying what's being see originally I thought it was 15 ft would but I we were rules it was 15t and that's what it was based on originally well which it meets it meets that it we don't derogate from theine no we're within the detriment I know that it it's not what the bylaw says but what is you said it was detrimental here what is detrial where well first of all the town when it prepared this bylaw establish requirements for it so we have a plan before us that doesn't deliver that so it's from my perspective the town gave relief for this kind of application from its regular bylaw and so they put parameters on that and now we have a project that doesn't meet those parameters and I'm discussing with the applicant that there may be other alternatives for them to do other than sticking with a fixed unit profile so in other words the P plans in the shape of the building could probably be altered to a minimize if there's any impact or even eliminate and then there'd be no issue we can eliminate it for sure here I don't if or if we keep it if we keep it right here on the on the 30 foot setback as a single single unit turned it yeah there's no problem here but can we slide everything this way uh 10 ft as far as the access the access this is the original access this is the existing driveway the existing driveway is right here today so in terms of in terms of starting a project like this um you obviously start with the parameters you have and see how many units you can get out of this and you you've made progress you went from six to five but even though six to five it's just in number it's not in actual structure I think you understand what I'm addressing here I I understand what you're saying I guess we were hopeful that you know that we could we could talk with the with the board I think it's the applicants opinion and again you don't have to agree with that um that this layout I I think we could probably make this a lot more rectangular if you will we could probably H let me just but I'm just well no hold on I think I think that there's a way we could probably do it to your point I we just think that this layout is going to allow for a much for a little bit more aesthetic well let's just let's just talk in terms of square footage here all right the fact that this went from two to one gives us S Plus of square footage okay so that means we have more to play with if you and I'm suggesting and I don't know the answer but an approach would be appreciate com to take a preformed profile that you already have and turn it in a Direction that's parallel to the property line the setback line okay now you had Surplus place here maybe you can two separate ones I right so these two separate ones two separate individual two single two single may have a different square footage okay but there's no reason you can't deliver that that I said robertt I hear what you're say my only concern my only concern is aesthetic aesthetically it just looks so nice but you know what I guess it is what it is you know we it was our goal to build something in there that and we cut it down a unit because as we did the math originally the original card I think showed those 1.51 we had the thing designed at six units when the survey final survey come back it came back at 1 Point 8 never gave it a thought left it as it was that became a question for Bob at our previous meeting and and Bob says I just can't get on board with it I understood you know it's four units to the acre that's simple mathematics so we dropped that one unit off didn't change the Box line thought we could we could kind of tweak this thing a little bit so it's going to aesthetically look nice in the we're right in the center of town how many feet how many feet are we talking about from the property we have it about 15 just over 15 feet almost 16 I I I don't want this corner I don't want to be challenging what you're saying here but the Aesthetics here if I'm looking that from Depot Street I'm seeing just large masses of wall here I'm not looking at the front of these buildings at all so I I have a hard time with that discussion but um so and they are quite a ways from the building or the street so just from my perspective I think just taking one of these I I can't be designing it for you but there's enough square footage here that one unit could go in a different orientation to the road that extra square foot that's existing here the other unit could be used it's going to be the same square footage that you have here but probably by repositioning them well then now you're putting it into a dra drainage area well no the drainage area was developed after the buildings were sighted okay so well it's done all the yeah it's done all okay so it's planned all the together right so you stop with what you want and you find out what you need to get there and um so obviously um it would seem very preliminary in the site analysis that you would try to achieve the setback requirements right away if that means changing the building footprint and profile that's what you do I I understand what you're saying I will say that we did do B A couple of other layouts you know when we looked that together with the applicants you know this is really what they wanted to do from an aesthetic site layout standpoint I understand that it doesn't that that it we are asking for aief on that well you're putting us in the position well we are and I understand that and you may not be you know at the end of the day in a position to approve that but it was the applicant's um desire to um try and convince you because they felt that it was you know it was you know in the best interest of Aesthetics and I understanding Aesthetics in my opinion is perfect I think it goes with what the intent was when they brought this on was and I I stand firm by this that was supposed to be in the downtown Center sidewalk walking distance to the center of town and all the town Services what they've permitted so far is not any of the above in town so hear what you're saying but I'm just I I feel like we might be splitting hairs I mean I do get the point of the bot I do get that they're asking for Relief and certainly you know them making the effort to just reduce it down a a whole unit for them as the developer I mean that's a pretty significant on their end no the initial site planine was very ambitious to begin with it had all these problems plus to the density question sure I mean you could stuff 10 pounds into a five pound sack and I mean I'm I'm sure they could you know figure out a magic way I I don't know we don't have a problem we can tweet this in a different uh a different cottage style configuration um we can do that we just can't I don't see how we can do it over here Lance do you have any comments and reference to the plan um uh you know I mean the applicant has put together a um a plan um and they're asking us for some relief relief in terms of the setback and I think given the importance of 55 plus developments in in towns in I'm certainly uh um would like to move forward Carol yeah I like the location for the 55 and older dwelling um my only concern is if we start giving relief now we setting a precedence and are we going to give relief to everybody body else and then what's the point of the bylaw I mean if we're not going to follow our bylaws then we either need to change them or do something that's change um just a minute Aon did you have anything you wanted to add to the public hearing on one Depot Street I'm sorry did you see me yes hi sorry everybody that I'm late um I don't have anything to add other than uh the staff comments that were provided previously the last meeting because I don't I don't have any for tonight corre I gave my comments previously okay thank you um did you have any comments from the public no okay sorry I put everything I would just like to say in reference to the plan um we have to remember that right across the street from this if you're head-on are storage bins it's a storage facility so as far as I can understand wanting to keep it looking at other homes versus the storage facility makes a lot more sense on a buyer's end uh than because of the stepb I just my comment on that my my opinion is I don't have any problem with the location and disuse in that location I we've made as a community a provision for this kind of application and then at that time we' established the standards for it so what I see here here is an encroachment on the standards in two different areas and I also see that investing more time in studying the profiles of these units that they can avoid a lot of this or at least minimize it and so I what I see here is a force building prototype that's being applied in all five units and that's where they want to stop um when I think there are other options available they can do it so part of it is economics okay and I understand that too um so the economics um is obviously better when you can repeat the same footprint over and over however in this instance it's obvious the footprint that they use as a prototype doesn't fit the site and it does in some instances and like I say it could in this instance and possibly if these are separated I don't know that and um but but it's a matter of I think that's what the initial problem here is that these two areas should be reviewed with a different footprint and we certainly can come a lot closer to what we asked for as I as I sit here and and look at these plans I guess one thing that we could we can do a little bit of work on on this bu this one here we're just G to put we're just going to put it inside that line that's it's going to be within that building envelope it's gonna be on that 30 foot line that gives us a few feet maybe to this move move this around slide this out reconfigure this Bob would would you be happy if we could go to 22 feet we we can make it we can make it in all the corners and we're going to look for a little bit of relief on that one corner of that building on that one unit it be that one unit right there be happy whatever whatever improvements we can look at to make this less an issue Sugg I get what you're saying I think we can p this we've got a little bit of space to work with town on the other we can I think I I just don't know how we can get to the 30 I'm I'm looking at something just like this that buffer is would be somebody's property versus the storage facility okay nobody's okay I'm not going to worry about the drugs that could help street so forget the predetermined driveway and everything else but that obviously help one here go another one over there give you all five this is more like a rather than now you're GNA have a single single single double I don't know a little bit of relief know if you give us a little bit of relief meet the partway I think we make this all happen you know can we reconfigure these buildings probably can but I'm not sure they be Rec reconfigure it enough cuz there're small Footprints as you know to try to get a garage living area two bedrooms in still all the common area the common areas and and everything and everything the problem okay we're trying to we're trying to but it's not our job to find the remedy no yeah but I guess what we're asking for is would you give us some relief on this I I don't want to be obstructive I want to be creative and help I [Music] really I don't want to dictate what you should be doing here and um but I'm pointing out some options for you to consider so rather than just being limited to this profile I'm sure that works fine here and youve built it 100 times and you know what your cost is going to be and I know the economics of that however in this particular situation that program doesn't work so one option may be to not try to force these this prototype in these three units and the way that may be done is a new prototype for the remaining three units I'm not going to suggest that and I do know when I suggested that to you that's more expensive to deliver okay um the minute I suggest this to you that is still more expensive deliver than what you had hoped to and that that's a reality and it's all feasibility in term of a developer goes but um and I think this board has in the past and still wants to provide whatever relief we think is reasonable but we need to see where demonstration that this is the best the devel could suggest or work with you know and um so I you know I hate to be the one presenting this but then on the other side representing the community and what we to do would you would you be opposed if we if we change this and and be able to approve it on a sideline relief of 22 feet instead of let me let me just put this in more generic terms okay let's just say we took 10t off the back of this building okay and put the 10 feet on this side I'm done can use the same approach to this if it doesn't work doesn't with a layout we can't make it work it doesn't work for you with the layout of this balloon what you're telling me that you want to use this plan everywhere and it doesn't work we should seen that but they're using a popular plan that the buyers or inhabitants would like to see not necessarily it's still going to be designed for Aged housing yeah so it doesn't necessarily have to be that plan no so you're Al at this point you're going to send us back to the drawing board for because now we're not going to be able to move forwards with this for a while is there any way that the the board would consider an approval ofin within the within say a 22 foot off the sideline setback and give us an 8 foot relief of an area that's 8 by 40 um I'm only one member of the no I I recognize that I think that this plan that they have now versus the other one that we approved on pitchburg road um which doesn't face the road which I think was one of their hardships there but they're only doing two per building because people like end units they don't want and they're having you discuss with squ road we have approved it based on what we understood and appreciated at the time since it's been built since it's been built another prototype plan that's forced on a site we see that the parking but they're not doing custom homes Robert you're saying a forced plan um they're not doing custom home don't tell me this is the only adult living plan in the world it's not this is not a bad plan that you're talking about I see a lot of homes I've made my point okay thank you thank you anyone else um you know I I haven't spoken to Too Much I mean I think they're going to need some relief in some form I am I do think that we take as the planning board a detailed look at each individual submission that we get and that each situation is different I do feel like this one with its location in the center of town by the towns and House restaurant by the uh the storage facility Qui Department ambulance sure you know I I'm okay with the relief that they're asking for and and I'm okay with because of the location that's not every place in town we're not setting a huge I don't have to agree we you can all agree to disagree thank you if you could do the 22 Fe well the they're okay with that yeah so um I'm going to request that you bring us back your highest invest Let's Pretend We're making a deal okay if you're asking for some relief and um please bring us back what you would like you would be able to live for live with but not but still making it look nice not facing the storage facilities they didn't have to face the to house that that's kind of why I'm looking at this if you'd be willing to approve this plan with number four building set ahead or redesign so that we carry this a 22 foot offset to the property line uh in the building stay in this configuration it's like Bob had mentioned earlier you know you can you can we can we can do this or something to one of these units and maybe get things to to work and and and keep this line somehow set one this there's got to be something I agree with Bob on that I I that there's there's got to be a way to get closer to that I just don't know how that we can get to the third if if if we get some kind of relief not 30t if there if there's a number right now you're at 16 15 and 30 that we got if say the number is 22 or 23t we if it's a matter we got to pick up six feet off this corner we can twist this thing pull this forward a little bit shift this a little bit we we have to be careful what we shifting here natural heritage with it's a little bit complicated site if this was a normal building it would be 15t set back anyway it wouldn't be having this discussion it could be a 66500 foot house in the center of town that that's that's true so if you just did a by right building here you could put a 15t inline and it could be bigger than that building so having said that um do you think you could have something back to us for our next meeting absolutely which is the 23rd absolutely wow Merry Christmas there's no way there's no way that the board would would uh approve the the site plan based on a 22t setback on that sideline everything else stays the same that stays within the parameters sure would look at whatever you want to present yeah but I think what you say we don't want to spend a whole lot of time and effort and money to redesign you're still at 30t you know you're only 23t so was a whole lot of time you know we've got the all storm water design the the common the common space design the trash pads designed the stop signs designed the drainage everything is storm water everything is done the septics are designed the only thing that we've got is this little issue right here if you know say buildings must be you know we'll approve the plan based with the based on the um the site plan is in building number four needs to set at 22 no buildings no building four or five can't be any closer than 22 feet to the sideline that gives that picks up 8 ft from from uh the minimum if it was a 15t set back it gives us a little bit of relief right here on that only that I and I think and I agree with Bob we can play with this a little bit and and you know like I say widen this building maybe four feet somehow and get things to tweak leave these two buildings the same or leave these two sites the same we comply with this yeah well this one would in the right side would not building number one will comply to the 30 foot building on the building number one unit would com number one unit would comply to the 30 foot set back and the other two would be 22 and there would be a 22 for bit no one because because it's really it's only one unit that and and and we're still getting it we we're still getting it a little closer that way we can at least plan on moving forwards here now we're going to waste another 2 weeks and and then 20 days for AAL and everything else I'm just trying to Mad chair yes SAR um if it would be helpful I'm happy to work with the applicants and when Beth uh comes back to work to try to make sure that all of the um parameters are met within their plans and so that they come back with the the latest and greatest and hopefully it will fall within um all the proper zoning requirements as um as well as it can before it comes back to the board all right Aaron I appreciate the assist and I'm open to a motion um move to I imagine we'll debate this but to approve the plan as submitted with a subject to a 202 20 22 foot left line setback 22 foot left line setback on building number buildings number four and five as presented in the plan and and building number one will comply with the 30 foot Al it's not show yeah but it's the the the Box envelope is still on this one is then we didn't move it so amend the motion in building one will be in compliance with the bylaw sets there a second I'll I'll second that okay Lance thank you any further discussion um that you haven't said already H that you haven't said already no thank you yes is is that a v to approve with the with the condition you didn't close the public hearing yet oh do I vote after I close the public hearing yes close the public hearing first and then oh I'm sorry I get corrected all the time okay thank you than okay I'll take a motion to well we've heard from everyone here so you want me to amend my motion I feel I've slighted any one you're going to I move to close the public hearing and then approve the plans as submitted with the 22 foot setback on buildings four and five and building one will be in compliance with the original bylaw is there a second to close the public hearing I'll second I'll second closing the public hearing okay we got a few of them um I need a roll call vote you want to do just closing the just closing the public hearing I need a roll call vote Lance do you want to start online um yes um close I vote Yes Andrew yes car yes private hearing yes La sh yes now the public hearing is closed now I'll entertain a motion in reference to the permit sent uh before us the one Depot wrote uh I move as mentioned earlier to approve the plan as written buildings four and five uh subject to a 23 foot setback and then 22 22 foot set back and then building one um comply with the bylaw as it is written can I second yes before it seconded so you're you're voting on three permits so you voted to approve the plan but you're not you're not voting to approve a plan you're voting to issue two special permits and to issue a storm water permit so that's what the motion has to be the plan accompanies those permits but you need to vote to Grant the permit you can make one motion to Grant all three or you can make three separate motions I don't care but you should specify that it's a special permit for age restricted development it's a s plan special permit and it's a storm water permit because all three of those applications are pending before you effectively at the same time okay all right how's this try this sorry um just so how this move to approve the permits before us subject to the conditions expressed period or you okay I'll read them all board um I move that the board approves the age restricted development permit the site plan review permit and the special permit subject to the conditions expressed the storm and the storm water there you go did you have all that for the minutes Aron and there's a second Lance MCN seconds okay thank you um any further discussion hearing none I'll take a roll call vote car say yes Lance mcnell yes Andrew Shephard yes Robert thean opposed okay Laura shiff yes it does pass right thank you everyone thank you appreciate your time thank you for your assistance I think we've done everything thank you folks thank you we need more Age Senior Citizen stuff oh you could have said that oh all this okay see thank you too can can I ask you since we're not meeting anyone can I ask you a question to do with the meeting yesterday the mon um that way I had with the mono I forget the name of the agency um it was um Regional Planning Commission I think so I think that's what that was I tried um well there's a few of them uh it was going talk about the town designation and different things like that um there was a um a meeting and it was just basically a copy of the agenda I went because I tried clicking on the link and then I tried typing it in it wouldn't do it cuz I would would have watched it via the link so I just want to avoid that happening like I want to be able to watch a meeting if it's going on somewhere it was um was itose it Karen I think Karen chapie was there yeah okay um I don't care where where did you see the link it was from the agenda that was like was a photoc copy it was on the um the town website and it was on the planning board agend uh the mon meeting agenda and it said had big long link but it was just like a picture you can't click on a picture so I me I thought it was going to be a link at first I tried clicking on it and then I typed it all in manually it was a big long one it didn't work oh I don't I don't do very well with our website so I can't instruct anybody on it but yeah it wasn't it it somehow didn't connect to where I needed to go so I just wanted to avoid that happening to anybody and people that tried to do that and I want everybody have access to what's going on maybe you could pass that along to Nelson and uh whoever is doing the website sure it also might be that um I'm not I'm not sure which meeting specifically you're referring to but a lot of times on the calendar um you can actually click on the meeting and it will bring you to the direct link that's how I very often get into the meetings um on the calendar itself yes yeah yeah I so that might be a helpful um shortcut if you want to try that in the future yeah I'll give it a shot I just was disappointed because I was going to look at it and watch it and I'm like oh I can't do it I I would mention at this time that if you're interested in any of the boards we have volunteer forms on the website or you can get one at the uh town clerk's office and uh I know that we have lot of openings at the town so inv the coner Community preservation act what's thinking about that well there is an at large member that will be it'll be um noticed I'm not sure if the notice is up yet for it but you can stop certainly stop at the ton Crook's office and she could help you okay it sounds good um but anyways getting back to how the the designation of the town I wasn't sure what that meant see couldn't see the meeting so I was like does that mean like from rural to something else I mean I was confused about the designation I was just I was just like I was looking at the different projects available for um on the agenda so that was one of them that was on there for the for nrpc for the M original planning commiss probably talking about grants they do a lot with grant money and different projects for different cities and towns there's 23 cities and towns that belong to monachus Regional Planning Commission not just towns in and they work in doing things that perhaps many towns can use the efforts they do that's why regionalized to catch to get get up to speed I guess I can get the minutes of the meeting sure anybody else have anything to bring up no um okay so I don't think we have I don't think we have a public hearing for the 25th so we'll see what happens you're going to be remote I would be remote you won't be here I will I check my schedule I can be here I'll be here this next meeting that you guys are gonna hold is the 23rd and so people can come to it because you're GNA be here or it work like yeah I think anyone or it'll be remote I mean yeah I don't mind the house yeah yeah one could come and maybe didn't watch I'll be here and I I'll be there with you Andrew okay all right otherwise I'll remote if I have computer I won be here and I won't be here and Patrick might be I don't know okay it's gonna be a good Mee anything else um Adam that you wanted to bring to our attention while here I just have a question about bylaws how often are bylaws like changed for specific housing developments or individual houses is it usual to change adap it's not but they should be bylaws are like a living document they can be changed every six months if we wanted to because I heard two other opinions stating why do we have bylaw so I'm just a little confused about the process like I said I'm new to this the planning board is here for for approving developments and in some cases like was brought out this evening we need age we need some age restricted development and there are certain Parcels that are good for it and certain Parcels that aren't which don't apply to the whole town so we sit here trying to judge what would be the best thing for the town what is the purpose of amending the byw this case I mean what was the problem with it I maybe I should address this set what's the setback I don't understand the terminology proper property lines here here is the way I see this the PRI the bylaws are all a product of town meetings Okay so the town at a town meeting at whatever date established the zoning districts throughout the community okay all right and then as things evolved they made certain Provisions for different types of things so a special permit says even though it's owned for this we will allow this okay then it goes on to say if we allow that these are what the requirements would be to be approved okay so on this particular thing this applicant is requesting a special permit for a special use building profile which is for age housing uh or what is it is that the right word age restricted housing okay so what that means at the time the town meeting voted for the standards for that okay that's what they would say okay if they can do that then we'll have it happen Okay so we have an applicant here that not only wants the special permit he wants to us to reduce the standards that the town said that they would accept Okay so I see that and I recognize that it's a problem it's not what the town expected a yes but but Robert Robert let's let's be clear let's be clear that bylaws I have the form right now you can speak after I'm done so I wanted to at least show a movement in the direction to minimize the amount of relief they W weren't want and show them how that might be achieved I personally think that this was done solely because they have another plan they've used everywhere else over and over and you look at the drawings and who prepared the plans Advanced house plans it's not even an architect all right all right so they want to use this because they built it a thousand times they don't have to pay for an architect every time okay and then Force this on a site and it doesn't work with we're Chris all we're not supposed to be discussing this it's already after the public hearing sorry so we're not Lori I just wanted to make the point to the woman's questions that we have bylaw bylaws and there's parts of bylaws that the planning board has no leeway on okay and there are parts of the bylaws that the town provides the planning board to have leeway on and that was the that was my only point Thank You Lance I appreciate that um I had one other thank you both app thanks for coming I'm gonna uh think Adam had anything else did anybody else see the question about the um storm water drain um maintenance no M there was a comment that was for explaining everything very interesting it was where Aon Aaron uh Patrick yes had a question um question about the storm water maintenance and was that um so the the question that me but it looked funky to him because he had been in a community where he had an experience with a community drain that's as far as I got yes so um the comment from Patrick says I have a comment regarding the long-term maintenance of the infiltration Basin is the intent that the maintenance is passed on to Future residents or to does the town have easement for such things um the plan said to be determined when I lived in Alabama we had a very large Basin and poorly designed Water Management within the neighborhood so it wasn't as effective as it could be plus the Basin was a huge isore at nearly 20 feet deep our T Our Town maintained easement for mowing and upkeep they didn't take great care of it this one is much smaller so less of a concern do you want to just mention that comment to uh cuz I probably should have passed it along to them uh just to the engineer and uh see what they say back so just so that we have a comment to give back to Patrick or if there's a concern okay I appreciate that can I come that no that's okay can I comment on that private private propert private oh this surface before you know you know as far as the maintenance of these things and who has rights to go and and uh to correct things that are a problem in the past when that kind of stuff is surfaced on different applications um and my experience with some other communities here is one remedy to take of that is to have a bond provided with the applicant so that the work the corrective work or the maintenance work would be guaranteed um and I experienced that with a solar windfarm situation um and so um the community was concerned what happened if they don't main maintain the windmills and and and or if there's problems as a result of it the remedy was for the um the applicant or the person doing the work had to provide a bond yeah so in an event something happened there the funds were available whether was to the the owner of the whatever the project was or the community um I just wondered if we could have a policy like that that would eliminate concerns about um you know a project that's 30 years old and you know uh we don't even have the records of what are readily available and what the terms were um so um I I'm just tossing it out as a concept um the last few few years have been my only I don't even remember when Lance was on did we have storm water drain um permits then because it's more yes yes we did though so and and we do have on on projects uh we do have in many cases where applicants do have to postpone okay yeah on developments velopments not specifically to the storm water management well Storm Water Management they have to they have to have reports anyway INSP and then it's every quarter and then it's like every year right that's to the town the question is not so much the reports so the inspections are conducted okay it's when a problem occurs that becomes a problem is how to enforce the corrective work oh okay understood understood I I don't know that we've had any failures in our tenure on we haven't had failures we've had complaints though um I don't remember I don't remember um do you know anything about that like when something say a storm water drain it goes defective or fails well I do so I mean different communities um approach this from different perspectives um one perspective is that communities want to be um closely involved in the oversight of these projects in perpetuity um and want to require as a condition of permit issuance that projects to your point be bonded or some form of sh be provided to um provide the town with a financial Source in the event that the storm water management system is not maintained or requires repairs that are not undertaken the community then has the ability to after issuing typically a demand to the property owner or to the property owners if it's for sale development with multiple owners that might form a homeowners association or Condominium Association if they refuse to comply then the town would have access access to the money necessary to do the work um other communities say that's a lot of paperwork for every project that we approve we're now going to have to accept the bond and we're gonna have to monitor and we're GNA have to enforce um what you do have in your storm water rules and regulations and this is something that was recently amended uh is this provision that requires the grant of a license and previously said it need to be an easement and that was challenging because for the town to accept easement interests the town has to go to town meeting in each instance and so I had discussions with Beth about a year and a half ago about well how do we remedy this and the answer was well you modify it so that it need not be an easement it can be licensed so you have a provision that says unless waved uh by The Authority well this is actually the old language unless Way by The Authority storm water management easement shall be granted to the town I'm fairly certain you voted on the amendment it's just not showing up on EOD so maybe it hasn't been Incorporated I think it now says licenses so that gives you the right of Entry so now you have a right entry by way of a license to perform necessary repair so if you get a call from yeah that H because of what I thought and I thought it was an easement we were try we were going for okay so we discussed the easement yes and I was happy with the remedy for that yeah so that gets you halfway there because now you have access a right of access you can the repair but who's who's funding that repair the answer you are the taxpayers are the of so we didn't do that no it's fine I'm just telling you that this is you've got in your I'm talking in a vacuum I'm not talking about any specific project I'm just saying that moving forward if you were to issue a storm water permit tomorrow and four years from now you find that let's say it's a rental development and the the owner operator of the development is not maintaining the storm water management system it's an absentee landlord they're not doing what they're supposed to do you have a right of Entry or you're supposed to have obtained a license at the time of Permitting you have a license a right of Entry to gain access to the property to perform the repairs yourself in response to complaints that the town might be getting from the residents the problem is you're funding those those repairs and that that deferred maintenance as a town because you're doing the work through your DPW or otherwise and so I think Robert's point is is there a mechanism to require some sort of bonding or shity be provided the answer is yes you can require those sorts of things your your rules and regulations don't currently require it it' be wise to incorporate into your rules and regulations if you intend to do it I think that's you're on more solid ground and simply calling it a new policy that we have where you start requiring this but even as a policy you could make it a condition of approval of permits plenty boards do it often I'm sure you do too know you probably haven't have all that many subdivisions over the years no but some communities have subdivisions have a new one every six months or every three months and it's a fairly typical requirement of a subdivision approval that they're they're be a form of bond now usually those are short-term bonds those are for the term of construction so during the term of construction something happens the final code is in place in the roadway and potholes start to form there's a fund that the town can access to perform those repairs and complete the subdivision otherwise the residents who buy houses early on the subdivision suffer when the subdivision is not ultimately completed um longer term bonds are less common I see them a lot in in the the solar energy and the wind energy um Arenas because the sample solar photovoltaic installation bylaw that the Comm issue they usually a similar one for for wind farms had decommissioning bonds and the idea would be that okay you put up a solar facility the usual life of solar panels is about 30 years so great you permit all this green energy they look great today they're generating green energy and then in 30 years or worse in 18 years when the technology becomes uh outdated the developer walks away because it's not profitable anymore now you have a field of solar panels and what are you going to do about it you've got to pay to remove them all so the decommissioning bond gives you the money to remove them if they refuse to restore the site to its natural condition when they're done with it so that's fairly typical with solar um less typical but it does exist in the wind context for take down turbines Erin can you try to find out for uh who in town keeps records of the bonds that we hold against whatever developments or or anything really I'm sure the list isn't you know like really long but just find out um uh any development or any project or just specific to planning board that have been issued no anything that has an active Bond okay I think and we can discuss it a little further well a lot of stuff happens uh and not foreseen you know and so if an emergency Ares let's just say that there's a private road way to a subdivision the town of towns and isn't responsible for the road and um something happens we have a a 100-year flood or something and the roads all damaged and all our citizens can't get to their homes it's a private road so uh and the P people that originally did the sub division don't even exist anymore the corporation doesn't exist and now the town has to help its citizens and we have the burden of fixing that road when to only learn to find that it was improperly built in the beginning and it wasn't maintained and all this could have been prevented um so that that those situations are happening more frequently now and I it just occurred to me when we were talking about this where we're trying to protect the community with the inspections and making sure they're maintained and all this stuff but what happens when the original applicant's not available anymore and uh yeah so well so I think you have to be careful about taking this sort of to the to the extreme to the N degree right because that example of a subdivision getss built let's say it's a subdivision it's built in 1982 it has you know it's a large subdivision probably not something you get in towns very often but let's let's say it's you know 12 different roadways with 250 homes large subdivision okay built in 1982 you're going to require a bond that you're going to hold in perpetuity well first of all bonds are renewed annually so whe the developer owns the project if it's a all those roadways that bond to repair those roadways there be like a two3 million bond to repair roadways and infrastructure so they get they get a $3 million or $2 million Bond You' got to pay 2 to 3% of the face value of that Bond on an annual basis to keep that Bond active that's fine when the developer is is building it out that's fine that's why you require these typically during the construction phase but even if you look at the subdivision control Law chapter 41 section 81u it talks about the types of shies and it talks about a sh being held until infrastructure and roadways are completed so the idea is that you should never be in a position where 20 years later you're saying oh these were never these roads were never constructed correctly in the first instance well you should know that before you release the construction Bond you should the idea the process is the roadways get built you send your engineer out the engineer confirmed they've been built the town standards and then you release the bond if 20 years later they have not been maintained in the ensuing 20 years and potholes form or sink holes form or the roads are flooding and they're private roadways well that's on the owners of the lots that own a private roadway I mean that's the that's that's the risk you take when you buy into a development in the roadway in which your house is your house lot's located has been accepted as a public way I can actually give you a real example because I was doing the U cleaning of files in the land use office on my senior tax right on things and I came across because I live in timbery par and I'm going cleaning out the files it was actually 20 years after the development the town was the town I guess the residents were complaining to the town there is a place where you go over a stream and the banks are kind of deep and it's wooded and there's a stream that goes underneath well there's no like guard rails or fencing there it but it's overgrown so 20 years after the development the town's folks went to the town and said we want fencing the town went to Hicks back in hick 20 years later I think he was probably dead by then and said you need to come back and put in fencing and they said no we don't no we don't no we don't and there's no fening there to this thing but that actually in was development we've had in town ever ever ever was Tim believe and the wisest thing to do is just be I I see this historically it was a problem it's becoming less of a problem even in smaller municipalities but that is allowing for the creation of subdivisions um you can't determine as a planning board whether the roads remain private or become public that's a town meeting function you can express a preference your approval but you can't you can't declare them public you can't require them to remain private in perpetuity that's they the residents have the right to file a citizen petition and bring it to town meeting to have the roads accepted as public what you can do is you can ensure that if the development remains private that there's some form of a homeowners association that gets created that is adequately funded that is responsible for the maintenance of the roadways if you don't do that then you then you have residents knocking at the door 15 years later because live on private roadways um the roadways aren't being maintained the way that they want or there's not sufficient guard rails or they have issues with flooding or with potholes or sink holes or whatnot and it's not the town's problem because it's not the town's roadway except the residents think it think it is or think it should be it gets messy we see this over and over yeah I I appreciate your perspective on that because it was just a than wondering if that could be done or is it advantageous to do and it appears it's not it's a balance in some circumstances it is but the idea of a a bond in perpetuity is a real cost on the develop which I wasn't aware right okay with that it's almost 8 o'clock I'll entertain a motion to adjourn we have no unless somebody has other business to bring before okay uh and attend a motion to adjourn so move seconded okay moved and seconded are there any um objections hearing none we are adjourned