Uh, so we have a motion to open the meeting. >> Make a motion to open the public meeting of the zoning board of appeals. >> Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Beth, can you hear us? Okay.
>> Okay. >> Yes, I can. Thank you. >> Okay, we'll do a roll call. So, Cody >> Colobby Streer present. >> Robbie Usella. Yes. >> And Vicki Chaniki chair. Yes. Um, at this point I would like to
appoint Darlene Sodano as our um a full member for the purposes of this meeting. Oh, we forgot one of the uh applicants. Uh, so let's roll into the hearing. I think we're at Oh, we got another
minute. Uh, computer says 6:35. My watch says 6:34. We'll go by the computer >> and I get 6:35. >> Okay. Uh, we have a motion to open the hearing. Who has the legal notice? So, legal notice is here.
Darling, who's a clerk? Was it John Paige? Um, I was just looking on the at the names. I don't know who the clerk is. Says member member. I move to make Colby Street to the clerk.
>> Thank you. Second. >> Good job. >> Can I Can we do that, Beth? Without it being on the agenda. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Second. >> Second. >> All right. Roll call. Darling. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Robert Colby. >> Oh, yeah. Do I actually vote on this? >> Um, yes. >> Okay. And I'll also say yes. So, it's unanimous. So, do you have a copy of the legal notice? If not, I can pass one down to you. >> Get it on.
>> Yeah. Just know there is a typo, so you might want to just fix it as go. >> Sure. >> Uh it's supposed to be 2021 or 2020. The type. [Music] >> It's earlier in the um
if you read earlier in the notice, it's correct. >> Okay. All right. Ready? >> We're ready. >> Okay. In accordance with Mass General Law Chapter 4A, Section 9 in the Towns and Zoning bylaw, the Towns and Zoning Board of Appeals will hold a public
hearing on Wednesday, September 17th, 2025 at 6:35 p.m. at 272 Main Street to consider the application of Addison N for modifications to two special permits granted in 2009 in 2010. Uh, these
permits authorize the reconstruction of nine residential units pre-existing nonconforming use under town zoning law chapter 145 section 18 and 14565.
The applicant seeks to remove or amend condition number one of the 2009 permit which states the use shall comply with the definition of hotel motel in article 2 chapter 145 article five of the towns and zoning by bylaw. The applicant also
requests to move remove or amend condition number one of the 2010 permit which states the you use shall comply with the portion of the definition of hotel motel in article 2 chapter 145 article 5 of the town zoning
board which allows for the temporary lodging of persons. The applicant shall be allowed to reconstruct the cottages as they now stand, including kitchens. The subject property is located at 159 Brookline Road, map 38, block 9, lot
zero, within the outline commercial district and the aquafer aquifer overlay district and the link is provided there. >> Yep. Uh parties wishing to speak in support of or in opposition to the application may do so at the hearing or
in writing prior to the hearing. Copies of the application are available for review at town hall during business hours or by mailing a request for a digital copy to za at townsmma.gov. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> All right. Uh so we need to open the
hearing. So uh we have a motion to open the hearing. >> Second. I make a motion we open the hearing. >> You know, when someone reads the legal notice, we take that as a motion, but I get Okay. >> All right. So, we have a >> So moved. So moved. Uh roll call.
Darlene. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Robert. Yes. >> Y and myself makes it unanimous. So uh we've read the legal ad. Um I see the applicant is on the call. would you like to make
any comments or presentation um at this time? >> Um so I did provide Beth Faxton with a PowerPoint that has some related pictures in there if you guys want to take a look at that. Otherwise, I don't Okay, you have it. I see. Um if other if
there's not any questions, I mean, I don't I don't feel the need to comment because the uh the summary at the beginning kind of covered it, but um if people have questions, we can Okay. All right. So,
why don't we start the review then? Uh, do we have any questions for um Addison? So, I reviewed all the material that was supplied before I got here, and this is
in the outlying commercial district. >> I think the first thing we need to do is review the outline commercial district. What's what's allowed as a matter of right and what's allowed by special permit? Because if there's something I'm
not catching here, I don't see anything about multif family being allowed in this district. The um the hotel motel >> is >> is and cuz I'm looking why did we
specifically put in that that provision, you know, that condition it's got to be transient. So because hotel motel is allowed and >> multif family isn't wasn't. So am I missing something >> with that? >> That's a good to review then because I
did I also saw that as well when I looked there's a there was a table that I think Beth provided >> in the folder that went had like a table of what was in each >> allowed. Uh yeah. Oh great. I got screen sharing.
Awesome. Okay. Um would you what would you like on the screen? Anything? >> Can you put up the table >> the table that shows the permitted uses against the >> zone? Sure.
>> And that that sort of summarizes I think the words that Beth is that um Darlene is looking for. >> Okay. >> You're correct that um long-term housing is not allowed in outline commercial districts by default and that's what the the grid will show.
So then my question to you is how are you applying to change that condition if it's not allowed? >> Um well my understanding is that through a special permit it it can be allowed to to deviate from this default. And the
reason why we're applying is because this is been the use of this property going back to previous owners. So there's there's no change in the historic use of of the properties to make this amendment.
>> So what part of the special permit would list the things that are specially permitted are you applying under? >> Um you're asking what the line is that I'm looking to have amended. Is that do I understand? >> The whole of zoning is either it's
allowed as a matter of right. you go see the building inspector, he gives you a permit. Or if it's a specially permitted use, you come to the zoning board and then you tell us all the criteria, how you fit all the special permit criteria to say, okay, um, you know, what the use
is going to be or the structure is going to be, and I'm not seeing any of that. So, what would what would be the special permit criteria you're referring to for long-term rentals specifically?
>> So, I can't really see that. Um, >> oh, so >> I'm looking looking for it in here and I'm not >> So, here's um a message from our building commissioner. >> Yeah. So, here's >> probably is relevant in this case. So,
>> um, so the building inspector, I don't think he's Are you Is the building inspector on the Zoom? >> Just want to double check. >> No. >> Okay. So, he says, "Here's my determination of classification of these units." >> Yeah.
>> The units shall be reclassified as nonowner occupied cottage dwellings as defined by towns and bylaws. So I guess we need cottage dwellings, >> not apartment. >> Okay. Well, if we go to OCD,
I want to find it in here. So this is just the table. So in OCD, um dwelling sing uh single family. Yes. Dwelling two family. There's no ZBA in here. Apartment multif family structure. There's nothing in here. Accessory
apartment. Multif family development. Lodging or boarding house. Bed and breakfast. mixed use. There's nothing listed in here. >> So, what's the definition of cottage dwellings? >> Um,
>> I don't think there is any. >> The definition of cottage dwelling was created with the age restricted zoning bylaw a couple years ago. So, there is a definition for cottage dwelling. If you look in the definitions
1455, >> which is >> Are you able to see? >> I'll pull that up. >> Okay, thanks. >> I have it right I have it right here. A cottage dwelling is a detached one family dwelling that does not exceed
1,800 square ft of livable floor area, meaning the heated floor area of the building above finish grade, excluding non-dwelling areas such as attic space or a garage, >> which is what they have out there.
>> Yeah. None of them are bigger than >> they have nine units. Right. Right. Yeah. Classifies nonowner occupied cottage dwellings which could be considered it's like a single
family there's density there. >> So what do we got? >> Let's go to I got 14529 and that should be what I don't see this under here either. This property is located in the outline commercial district. Yeah,
>> this is the first place you go. >> So, OCD permitted uses, all municipal purposes, including the administration of government, fire and police stations, educational and religious uses, sale and rental of goods, merchandise and equipment, restaurants and other places
serving food and beverage, office clerical professional research services not primarily related to goods and merchandise. Detached single family dwellings. um such accessory uses as are customary
incidental to any of the above uses. Hotel Motel in operation prior to January 1970 provided the requirements of 14535, 14542 and 14565 are met and basically
that throws that into special permit criteria. Um, those are permitted by right. OCD uses allowed by special permit from the board of appeals. Athletic and recreational facilities excluding motorized vehicle
sports and recreational facilities. Commercial entertainment amusement facilities, motor vehicle service stations, motor vehicle sales, motor vehicle repair shops, whether ancillary to sales or not, storage and parking of goods and equipment. And then it lists
the hotel motel. Then number six, sales facility for boats, camper, trailer, farm equipment or construction equipment. So that leaves us with um okay, cottage dwelling, multi to me it's multif family. Cottage dwelling
just kind of to me defines what the multifamily >> would I be able to say something. >> But regardless of what that is, it's not in here. >> It's not allowed. So that's you got to do first.
Um so that's why I'm asking the applicant where in here C1 through six are you applying for? >> Well, it seemed to me that the definition of of the cottage uh dwelling
as described there was a detached single family home. And these are detached single family homes that have their own uh postal addresses and electric meters and and everything else. They're there.
It's not it's not like a multif family building. Um >> but you have a bunch of single families on one lot then. But that's not how it's ever been described. This was a single family home with hotel motel
on it. They've never been categorized as single family dwellings. Hence the reason for the condition on the previous decisions that they be used for transient so that it fits what's allowed in
zoning. So, I think what I'm Did you ask the building inspector for a determination of what's allowed and what's not allowed? Because when he writes that, he wants to see it conform, but he doesn't
say it's allowed. >> Yeah. >> He Well, in in the email, he says, "Here is my determination of classification for these units for the ZBA. Mhm. >> The unit shall be reclassified as nonowner occupied cottage dwellings as defined by towns and bylaw and
non-transient as defined by the international building code. >> So he's trying to say what he wants them classified as, but he doesn't go ahead and say whether >> it's permitted by you know what I mean.
>> Is that his latest? >> Help me help me get there. Um, excuse me, uh, chair. Um, I I just put up the building commissioner's determination letter on the screen for you.
>> Yeah, >> I can't see it. >> Uh, can you make it a little bigger? >> Oh, sure. >> I'm happy to read it if you'd like. >> Um, >> okay. Go ahead. Why don't you read it?
>> Okay. Addison New regarding 159 161 Brooklyn Street cabins. Addison, based on ZBA and building files, it appears that this property was granted a special permit in 2009 and 2010 for the rehab of
a total of nine cabins he attached. Both special permits specifically say state quote you shall comply with definition of hotel/moelqu. This definition is clear that use is temporary and no provisions for cooking
shall be in the individual sweets or unit. Both of these I understand are not the case today as you are using for long-term rentals. That being said, my determination is that you need to reapply to the ZBA for use as long-term
rental units in lie of the hotel/moel use which was directed in these decisions. And then whoever is agrieved by his owning interpretation, you know, the closing. >> Yeah. >> So that's what they have done. >> Yeah. I think that's the big issue here
is these are long-term rentals, whatever, and >> they need kitchens. That's the whole thing. Part of the part of the thing was you can't have kitchens, but now they're >> show me in the OC where it's specially
permitted. But what he's saying, he's classifying it as the the the only thing that could potentially be is the detach single family, >> but the building inspector doesn't
explicitly say that, >> right? So, do we need a deter a more specific determination? So maybe now we go to the definitions of the motel and then the cottage
whatever does he is there like a page >> he's saying shall be reclassified as nonowner occupied cottage dwellings as defined by towns and bylaw and non-transate 780 CMR 2021 building code
>> building code not towns and just Okay. So, do we have a definition in our code for cottage or whatever he's saying? >> There is an 145. >> Okay. That's >> right here.
>> Totally. Just read it. Yep. >> Detached one family dwelling that does not exceed 1,800 square ft, which is clearly the case with these guys. They don't exceed 1800 square feet.
[Music] So they are detached >> single family. >> Yep. >> They have addresses and did you say they have separate utilities? >> They pay >> Yep, they do. >> But they're they're being rental rented
out >> and they have kitchens. >> Yes. Yeah. >> All right. So, the cooking the whole thing >> parking everything. Yeah. >> And parking. >> Mail. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Oh, mail. >> Yeah. So, please bear with us. We We want to make sure we're, you know, our our job is to make sure we're adhering to the the code the town zoning code and that we do the right thing. >> Yeah. um in the end. So,
>> yep, no problem. >> The other thing um let me go look at the um the permit previous ones. [Music] So, the building inspector is saying
these units shall be reclassified as nonowner occupied cottage dwellings as defined by towns and bylaw. and nontransate. That's all he's basically saying. >> Well, he wants them he wants them to be
classified as to what they're being used as. >> Yeah. >> So, >> so he's saying nonowner occupied quote cottage dwellings defined by towns and bylaw and quote nontransate unquote
defined by the building code. So, But if the if they were to become transient occupied for less than 30 days like an Airbnb and and that kind of stuff that changes the >> then that changes that invalidates
>> that invalidates. So he's saying it's okay >> to be reclassified as nonowner occupied cottage dwellings. I get that, >> but I'm still not convinced it's allowed >> in the OCD >> as as
>> as it is to do an accessory dwelling. You're only allowed one unit. You're not allowed to put a whole bunch of single family dwellings on a lot. And I think all these current changes to our bylaw is making that a little cloudy. >> Yeah. >> But they've already
>> So, but but is an accessory unit the same as a cottage dwelling? I feel like those are entirely different things, right? When you think of cottages, you do think of many on one lot versus uh an accessory unit is usually one. That's the way I in my mind.
>> I'm tending to need um some legal input >> probably. Yeah. to make sure that we are clear on what the definition of this >> if you say oh yeah whether it's a cottage dwelling or not it's still
single family right it's a smaller >> and you're going to you do this you're going to allow anybody to put multiple dwellings on one lot >> um Well, this already a special permit,
>> but if we're doing it as a special permit, then that's a it's a special case. It won't >> Yeah, >> but are you worried about setting a precedent so someone else >> and anybody in OCD could come in and put
multiple dwellings on a lot and I'm not seeing it. I think I need clarification from town council of what if that fits in the specially permitted criteria of OCD.
Okay. Can I make a suggestion that you um chair please just read the um referral comments before you continue or whatever you're going to do. >> Yeah. Do we have are they printed out? >> Yeah, they're in your folder.
>> All right. Thank you. All right. So, let's read those into the record. [Music] Yes. And I'm not finding it. Sorry. Just give me a sec. My paper here.
This is for the planning boards. That's something else. >> Looking for the comments. >> I'm looking for the Yeah, the Did I hand them off to someone? >> They were under the um building commissioner's comment. >> I got it now. All right.
>> Have them right here if you need. >> All right. So for the record uh as far as uh referral notice from the conservation commission uh the comment is the property at says
of property of 159 Brookline Street is with within an aquifer protection district overlay. The property is in an area of critical environmental concern and ACEC. There is a wetland 100 foot buffer and
possibly a 200 foot riverfront resource area on property as well. So that was from conservation commission. Um of course these are existing and they were already able to put a step in. Um,
next we have from the board of selectmen, we trust zoning will do the correct thing. Lot of direction. Highway superintendent was no comment. Does not see it change. And the board of
health had no comment. >> Thank you. Okay. So, um it sounds like um if there are it sounds like we want to continue the hearing to get some feedback. >> If Yeah. If if if you're going to
redefine this as a cottage dwelling, it doesn't say cottage dwellings are allowed. >> Would you um >> I thought that I thought that it it does though. I mean, isn't this list that we're looking at or was you're telling me cottage dwelling was not one of the
things that is by default under OCD? >> I don't see it in there. >> Saw it. Okay. >> Oh, um, >> where is scrolling allowed? >> Uh, good question. >> Madam Chair, would you consider uh
taking public comment? you have quite a few people here from the public before you decide to continue or whatever you decide. >> Let's uh get the comment into um public comment into the record before we do a continue. Um
>> can I how can I tell who I don't think that is there anybody in the room that has a comment? >> So I'm Kieran. I'm the staff member from the land use department affordable housing. Um there is an affordability sort of aspect though not criteria for
that for those folks staying over there. Just think that's important to acknowledge in terms of how you define what it becomes and what it means to those folks that are residing there. >> Y um
let's see we've got good number of people. Uh Laura, um Laura, I see your hand is up, but would you like to um provide a comment? >> See if I can. Okay. >> And you could uh state your full name.
>> Yeah, just a minute. Shiff, >> uh 28 Barker Hill Road. >> I um couple of things. I heard it's stated that
this is um the cottages are already 55 and over. What was the 55 and over reference? I heard it earlier. >> Um oh that was part of um the 55 and
older zoning laws is where cottage dwellings came in. remember I think you referenced that senior housing there was >> and you said that was two years ago Beth >> uh whenever that bylaw was passed I think it was two years ago but that
definition was entered into the zoning bylaw as a a component of that bylaw the age restricted development. >> Okay. So are they are the cottages being used as age restricted
when you say that there is a component of financial and I'm sorry I forgot who said that what is that component? >> Um we're just taking comments. >> I'm trying to I'm trying to find out.
I'm I'm in favor of the housing. I don't want to see them lose the nine units or or for nine families to be not families, but I mean they're that small. Uh for the housing to be lost in towns in for any reason. But I'm trying to get the
whole picture and and I I think I agree with uh Darlene Sedano that we should have a legal opinion as to just what we can do. We are not against housing. >> Right. >> Sure. >> Okay. because we're lacking in housing.
Um, but I understand wanting to uh issue the correct decision um and have that written for for everyone's benefit, >> right? >> So that nobody is hurt by this. But if there are other components that the
zoning should know about like income, is it income related? Is it age restricted? because all those things would play into um perhaps a higher benefit.
>> So that that's all I wanted to mention. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. That's those are excellent points. Uh do we have any other comments from the audience on Zoom? >> Okay. Uh do we have a motion to continue the
hearing? So, we're going to we need to make a motion. We can just get a a legal opinion from town council. >> Yeah. >> As to what he sees as a as in specially permitted uses. And then I don't know
the first thing that comes to mind if he says no, you're right. You know, there's no there's no place for these cottage or whatever that that um that term is. Maybe it's something that we bring to the planning board for a public hearing,
bring it to town meeting >> and and change the bylaw. >> I mean, nobody's against housing. >> Um, but >> just in this case, it's an existing >> clearly. What I see is they were given a permit and they were told to use it in for transient and they're not
>> right. >> So, they're breaking the premise of the permit they were given. It's it was always or it's been housing for >> 20 years, >> whatever it is. >> Yeah. >> For us >> changing
>> changing the criteria. >> So, >> yeah. So, yeah. >> Not that anyone's against it, but just because we like something, if it's not allowed, >> that's that's the crappy part of zoning. We might like it, but if it's not allowed, >> yeah, >> that's comes first.
>> And the other thing that does disallows it either So that's >> yeah prohibited uses if it's not specifically in here as permitted or specially permitted it's prohibited. So you have to read the prohibited uses.
>> So I I understand that by default it's not allowed but I thought that my understanding was that the special permit could be used to just in this case make an exception. Is that a misunderstanding of the use of special permits? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. It still has to fit in the bylaw unless you want to go for a variance and that's different story. So it has to fit. >> Um the other thing I noticed is there um the special permits I guess by default they expire in two years and I didn't
see a date where it said this is good for until ownership changes or until this event or so we would need to do a new special permit anyway. >> Um so we might as well get it right. So, I guess I'm also confused because this this application's been, you know,
refined over the course of months with the building inspector's input and he was recommending not a new special permit, but just the revision of these previous two and I guess so is he confused too on on what this is >> perhaps? >> I'm not seeing in his determination
any verbiage that's addressing the concern that I have. So either he overlooked it or didn't look at it with that regard or that's why I want to get kind of an opinion from town council. If town council can go in there
and pull something out of that that we can work with awesome. >> But um if not, we have to find another or help you try to find another way. Find >> Yeah. Our goal is to find a solution that is legally correct. >> Um
>> Yeah. Yeah. So, >> within the bounds of that book there, >> so for continuation dates, um I don't know, Kobe, when is the next conservation commission meeting?
>> It's next week, next Wednesday. >> What's a good time frame to give town council to respond? We should >> I think we could probably I'm guessing two weeks turnaround, but you know, we have town meeting coming up and everything. I don't think it'll be that
long, but um so maybe October 1st, do you think the Wednesday or October 8th? >> Let's I should far as I know October 1st is okay. [Music]
Okay. Any for everybody else? >> Yes. And come on. >> Yeah, I'm out of town when >> Hey, calendar. >> It's my wife. Tell me when I'm when I'm
not here. >> Yeah, I'm I'm free on the first. >> We're around on the first, right? >> Yeah. So before you make the motion, just make sure you have a certain time and certain date.
>> Right. So it's uh October 1st 63. >> Yeah. >> The hearing to 6:35. >> Yep. >> Right. Okay. Someone want to make a motion? >> I make a motion we continue this hearing till October 1st at 6:35.
>> Have a second. >> Second. >> Colobby. >> Uh Kobe Sh. Yes, >> Robert. >> Yes. >> Charlene, >> yes. >> And Vicki will say yes as well. >> All right. So, sorry for delaying a decision. Yeah, we're not, you don't
need to, you know, it's not like we're saying this not going to happen. We just want to find the right way to make it work. >> Okay. Understood. >> Get more information instead of denying it. >> Yeah. Yeah. I'd rather continue it and Yeah. and work it out.
If you talk to legal, um, will they need to be in touch with us or, uh, will we hear from anybody before that meeting or >> I'll I'll get in touch with you and, uh, I'll let you know what he says. I can forward that to you before the meeting so you can prepare. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> You're welcome. You're welcome. >> All right. So, let's move on. Our next exciting in uh is the planning board mandatory referral on the citizens petition zoning amendment proposal. So this isn't a vote. This is a discussion
of what response we would like to provide back to the planning board as part of that. Did everyone get a chance to review the petition? >> Yes, >> I didn't. >> Would you like a few minutes to take a
look at it? Let's see. is happy to describe it too if you like. >> You want to describe it? >> Yeah, you can read it and describe it. But it's um there are two parcels that are owned and over >> sort of um the overwatch of the towns and affordable housing trust. They're up
on Blood Road in West. They're adjacent and budding to one another. the towns and affordable housing trust has a goal of looking to put um some type of housing product up there as you know whether it be a 55 plus affordable
housing whatever you know it's like five buildings 20 units total um similar to what you're seeing in other communities now where it's trying to find avenues for housing for folks as a goal of the towns of housing affordable trust um the citizens petition is looking to remove
the ability to do that within those two parcels. So, they're essentially trying to downzone the two parcels from their current status to not that status that makes it eligible for housing. >> What's the zoning? Do you know RA? >> It's RA.
>> Yeah, top of my head, I think it's RA. It's just suitable for housing. Um, I don't know in specificity the top of my head. That's maybe it up. >> So, under what premise would you be looking to do that project? Not a 40b, but something the other affordable. You're not sure yet?
>> Yeah. I mean, we're so far off from like that type of consideration and it's really the trust that will make that call. I'm just the administer administrator from the man's office. So, >> do you um who So, the trust owns it the property now. >> Correct. >> All right. So, Alex. Okay. So, this is not
>> So, the trust owns that those two parcels? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. So, >> they don't any other parcels. I mean they own others in town but not >> Yeah. But just those two. >> Those two. >> So now there's a citizen's petition to not >> put housing. Yeah.
>> No. Be single. It would remain >> Oh, just remain single family. >> Yeah. Well, it's either >> Yeah. It's almost like you know putting a restriction like I'll use conservation restriction as an analogy for it >> to restrict housing from going there.
>> I don't have any comment on that. It's I don't know the zoning board, our job, we're a reactionary board. We react to petitions >> and I don't know sometimes I don't feel the need to comment on something like
that. >> Understand? >> Almost feels like like sounds like spot zoning in a way. It seemed kind of random that okay these two parcels endowed suddenly citizens petition and you can't do
>> I mean I'd rather see some characteristic >> allow that to >> anything that they'd be looking to do would have to come before multiple boards and have all kinds of process anyways. So >> just to go ahead and just say no to
exclude parcels, I don't even know. >> There's two there at least two >> things where it's either going to the planning board or it's going to come to us as an ABA. So there are safeguards >> um to make sure that they fall within the parameters that are here.
>> But um >> I didn't see any kind of reasoning explaining why these should be um excluded either. There wasn't a narrative offered for that at all. So >> there was not. >> Yeah. If they wanted us to understand
>> what the purpose is, then they should have offered something. >> It is a petition, you know, citizen position. They, you know, it's, you know, it's their right to put it forth to town meeting. >> Yeah. >> Um, so we can what we would like to
respond. We could do no comment. We can >> I don't know if anyone else I I just don't I don't have a comment. >> Yeah, I think no comment. Yeah, I think that's appropriate. >> All right, Beth, you have our >> No comment. >> No comment.
>> No comment. Okay. No comment. >> All right. All right. Next on the agenda, the MBTA community's multifamily overlay bylaw amendment and its relationship to the special town meeting. Uh do we have um we have
someone on the call who's going to give us a little more more information? >> So good evening everybody. I'm Joseph Bole from the Monachus Regional Planning Commission. I have been working as the planning board's consultant in uh the
town's response to the MBTA communities act and um for the past two years actually and uh we have uh finalized a proposal a war a warrant article for town meeting.
The proposal would create an overlay zoning district over a portion of the southern outlying commercial district on Route 13. Within that uh overlay district as required by the MBTA communities act,
multif family housing up to a density of 15 units an acre would be allowed by right. Um it would likely multif family housing uh projects would uh almost certainly all still trigger site plan
approval uh review. And so the bylaw directs uh the um the site plan approval to the new site plan approval section that was adopted uh uh at the beginning of the year for
accessory dwelling units. You currently have a site plan review special permit in your zoning. It's a special permit. Uh you cannot have a special permit requirement for multif
family zoning in the uh uh under the MBTA communities act. It has to be allowed by right but you can have site plan site plan review site plan approval. Um, so
there is, so there's this second site plan approval that now exists in your zoning that isn't a special permit and multif family projects in this district would be reviewed by the planning board under that. Uh, the uh a map of the
district has I I see has been shared. Like I said, it is over the drawn over a portion of the outlying commercial district on Route 13 um just north of the Lunenburgg Town line.
Uh as you can see the shape of the district was drawn to encompass mostly the back part of the district away from Route 13 in order to uh preserve the maximum develop the maximum development
potential uh maximum commercial development potential along Route 13 where it is highly desirable rather than have it you know the best commercial land uh be developed for uh residential. There is a tail as you can see that goes
out to route 13 and that is so that access to make sure that uh access will be provided from route 13 and the uh frontage on old city road will not be what the entirety of the district's
development depends on for its access. Now, the requirement under the state law is that you adopt a zoning district that allows multif family zoning up to 15 units an acre and that the district be
large enough that at that density you hit the town's required number. The number is 178 units. And so this works out to uh about 12.2 acres. you are also allowed
to allow other uses in that district. And so what we talked about at the at the planning board was providing for a second ramp for developers. Yes, they are allowed to develop it with multifamily housing. However, bylaw also
provides for uh single and two family housing on small lots. There's a couple of reasons this was done. The first is it was deemed more desirable by the planning board that the
uh property if it does get uh built for housing include more neighborhood type uh you know houses, single family houses, even two family houses as opposed to the big multifamily campus sty multi-acre multif
family campus style development with big driveway and parking lots in the interior and things like that the second reason is because there isn't sewer and water at this site. It would be dependent upon uh
uh dependent upon wells and whatnot. And so in order to provide for the realistic opportunity for the development of some housing here uh providing providing options for some
underlying uh for for some housing development that isn't going to depend entirely on uh there being municipal sewer there was deemed desirable. Um
uh at this at this point you've seen you've seen the bylaw, you've seen the district. Uh are there any questions? >> What happens if town meeting doesn't pass it? >> Okay. If town meeting doesn't pass it uh by December 31st of this year, then the
town will be considered non-compliant under the MBTA Communities Act. Uh that comes with some pretty severe consequences for the town including uh you will no longer qualify for a lot of uh grant funding that the community has been using and depending on you will
further you'll be put you know in in consideration for um competitive grants you'll be put to the bottom of the pile. Um there are a and there are other potential um yeah that includes by the way it came
up came to my attention that uh the the town's um PAS grants may be endangered. Uh the uh was was it the Yeah. Yeah. Was that it was the town's water water commissioner who was discussing that last time. Um that's a
$4 million grant. >> Just if I can jump in. So I'm also your grant writer. >> Yeah. >> Um in the past I did a few years worth of research on the total grants that the town has received. It's right around $2 million. >> And that does not include $4 million
that the water department is also going to get. If on January 1st of 2026, no longer eligible. Like it's the door is shut for like Mass Works, something like Kids Country, which we just got a new playground for.
>> What's the $2 million for? >> It was a total of like NVP grants, uh, Council on Aging, Cultural Council. >> So, it's not just a >> highway fire department. The
>> ones that really worry me in the short term is fire department gear. fire and fire department equipment. There's always more applications than um than resources and non-compliant communities that were going that were expected to receive funds had their uh grants
rescended and those grants redirected to compliant communities for replacing their fire department turnout gear. In the longer term, the um I worry about the nuclear bomb being the school building assistance program
>> that the next uh those are typically those are competitive grant proposals and I'm guessing that your community is probably in the 60 to 70% uh reimbursement coverage category for that. So that that next time that the town requires a school that could that
could be in the tens of millions of dollars. We've just built one, >> right? Right. So, like I said, that's longer term >> effect. Okay. So, let me ask you a question. How many communities um have said no >> to this? >> So, well,
>> what's our ratio? >> Basically, there there are four prominent there there are about four that have dug in their heels and and fought it and said no. And I think the passage I think we're up to we're over a 100red
that's passed. I want to say it's somewhere in the 110 range. I don't have the number complet ex exactly in my head. Um the ones that have fought it um have all lost the uh >> Milton.
>> Milton was that's the name I'm trying to think of. Milton tried to get itself tried to claim that it didn't apply to it and that it shouldn't be required to and it uh to comply and tried to get and as a fallback tried to get itself recategorized. That did not work in
court. There was an attempt to categorize this as an unfunded mandate and that was um that failed before the attorney general and before the courts. Um, oh, uh, and the, oh, west of Worcester,
Warren or something, uh, has declared has declared that they have no intention of complying, but their compliance date isn't until, uh, December 31st. So, there is nothing to happen until they are actually not compliant.
>> But, I have to tell you, they talked about my thing briefly >> and they say there's no explanation for no comment right now. Wait till Monday. I can do all my explaining then somebody that needs to mute you guys want to mute.
>> Hello. >> Okay. >> Uh madam chair. >> Yes. >> This is Laura Shiffren. I'm gonna speak now as a selectman. Um uh Nelson today sent me because I asked the same
question. Um the most recent one to comply is Westminster and that was last night. Um right now there are only I think it's I just counted them 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 or 12 communities that have not yet voted it in. Most of the communities have complied. they've got conditional compliance uh uh compliance um zoning has been adopted and or needs
some review. Uh we're lucky maybe Joe can speak to this about the fact that we have already been pre-reed. Maybe Joe you can me that mention that. Um but we will lose a lot of money. The water department comment came up last
night and I hadn't known that myself. We have received millions of dollars for the PAS and our water department. Um, as as well as the 2.5 that Kieran uh has
the list for that's on the map that Beth had up before on the screen. Um, we we need to pass it. We don't have the funds to fight it. Um, and as Joe
mentioned, four towns have fought it, but they lost. The state is ruling in favor, the courts are ruling in favor of the state. And so, we're going to lose a lot if we don't. And we don't even know when it's
ever going to be developed. You just need the zoning to allow it. And we have done that. When I say we, I was on planning. We have done that to the furthest part of town that it could be and the closest to the MBTA.
So, um, as Joe stated, it's almost two years that we've been looking at this. We looked at six or more in the beginning areas, narrowed down to three, selected another, was not approved, and however,
this was our favorite, if you will. um in planning as to location as to leaving commercial opportunities there and as to having a development that's not going to be seen by the road.
>> So thank you very much chairman chair. So what's being asked of us? Are we being asked for comment or or is it justformational? >> Has nothing to do with us really. >> Is it justformational? I just want to make sure we're not being expected to do >> this isformational. But you did have a
referral form sent to you, but the board did not meet. So I I did send around an email. I don't know if you ever reviewed it at that time asking for comments and I didn't receive any from any board members. So >> Okay. Yeah. I think it's the same. It's
just we're reactionary and on I think on a personal level a lot of us are >> town meetingers. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Cool. >> Okay. Oh, thank you for the information. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> You are welcome. Uh were there any specific questions about the text about the district?
>> Would any Nope. >> Like you said, it's been around for two years, so we're >> good to go. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Nice to meet you all. Have a good night. >> Thanks. >> So, that brings us to any
correspondence. Uh Beth, is there anything we need to react to in the correspondence meeting? No, I don't think there's anything you need to react to. Um, mostlyformational. There's a public hearing notice. There's what else? I I printed everything out
there. I think I printed out a copy of the warrant for special town meeting for your review. Um, there's a couple of printouts, but no action items, justformational. Um, the safety action plan has just been
re released for public comment. Um it would be great if you could at least read the executive summary and um just share in that that planning process. Townsen has received um we were
participating with MRPC um in that planning process. I was on a visac committee um to help create the plan and it's um it's a I think it's come together pretty well. It's a pretty good product, but it's only as good as the people that are living and driving
through and using public transportation in the community. So, any feedback now would be great while the public comment period is open. I believe it's open till October 10th. So, even if you just read the executive summary, uh Townsen did opt in. Uh thank thank you, Select
Board. Um so, there are specific projects in that plan that address problem areas in town. Uh so anything you want to add would be welcome. Thanks. >> All right. And with that I we've completed our agenda.
>> Okay. >> Then we have a motion to uh close the meeting. >> Move to adjourn. >> Have a second. >> Second. >> Yes. >> Robert, >> yes. >> Charlene, >> yes. >> Vicki, yes. Thank you all. Thank you all on the calls. We'll see everyone October
1st.