Planning Board Meeting: June 6, 2025

001[Music] Good evening. Welcome to the planning board meeting of uh June 3rd, 2025. This uh meeting is being recorded. Uh what's uh first we have on the agenda is the minutes of the 520 meeting. Motion to accept the minutes. Second. Joe's got it. Been moved and seconded to approve the minute the meeting minutes of 520. Any further discussion there? None. All those in favor? Opposed? Unanimous of five. Excuse me. Unanimous of four in favor, one abstension. Thank you. Okay, we got no 81 PS and we got another half a minute. Uh, do you want to know? Yeah. You want us continuence on uh agenda item four? You have a have it in writing. I think I must have given you my copy. Yeah. Uh oh, here it is. They want to continue or they want

002to withdraw without prejudice. Um, they'll be seeking a special per or the owner will be seeking a reduced parking special permit most likely in the near future. want a motion to accept a withdrawal without prejudice. Yeah. I don't know if we officially need to, but yeah, I don't know either. I'll make a motion. Second. Moved and seconded. We uh approve the withdrawal without prejudice for 206 East Main Street. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? I oppose. Unanimous of five. Thank you. Okay. Uh Larry, you want to read the uh thing for the uh public hearing? Public hearing. Milford Planning Board notice of public hearing on Tuesday, May 20th, 2025 in room 3 in Milford Town Hall, 52 Main Street. The Milford Planning Board will at the times designated conduct public hearings regarding

003the following uh application of JNR Milford Realy LLC for special permit to construct a 2600 foot bank building to include a drive-thru teller lane and associated parking at 55 Medway Street as shown on assessor's map 43 lot 62A and 62B 1.84 acres. It's in a CB zoning district. The full application and/or maps of the above items are available for public inspection at the office of planning and engineering town hall 52 main street at the follow during normal business hours. Uh interested parties may express their views at the above mentioned hearings per order of the milford planning board. Uh this was published in the daily news on the on May 6th and May 13th. And I'll remind everyone that the u uh case uh came up on May 20th and was continued uh until tonight at

004the request of applicants council. So here we are. Um okay, let me go ahead and read in the cover. Well, let's let them make the presentation and All right, take it away. Good evening. My name is David Burtoni. I am here on behalf of JNR Milford Realy LLC. With me is one of J&R's principles, Rocky Camp right behind me. Um Luke Dphano and Connor Bailey of Bowler Engineering uh and Steve Srauso of uh Brisbano Associates who did the traffic study and Richard P Richard Pila of Paramont part Paramount Partners. Uh J&R is the owner of 55 Medway Street. uh and the matters before you relate to that property. It's situated in the neighborhood commercial or CB zoning district contains about 80,000 square feet. It's situated on the southernly side of Medway Street, sort of midway

005between Veteran Memorial Drive and uh Burch Street. Um it most recently has been used as a restaurant. There was an Italian restaurant that was there that I can't for the life of me come up with the name of Victorious. Yeah, that's it. It was pretty good, too. Uh, most recently, it is the Alamo restaurant. Um, the site of the Alamo restaurant, which I believe closed in 2019. Since that time, it's been uh vacant. So, JNR is proposing to raise the existing structure and to construct an approximately 2600 square ft bank building with an associated drive through um ATM. Um and we are here this evening that will be occupied by Citizens Bank. And we're here this evening for site plan review and on the applicant's um application for a special permit pursuant to section 2.3

006of the zoning bylaw for the drive-thru ATM. And with that, I will turn you over to the engineers who can go through the site plan with you and review the results of the traffic study. Great. Thank you, David. Uh Mr. Chair, members of the board, for the record, Luke Dphano with Bowler. Uh, and what I'd like to do is briefly uh walk through the proposed plan. Uh, I'm sure you're all very familiar with the property. Uh, as mentioned, 55 Medway Street. The applicant is looking to, as noted, raise and rebuild the entire site. So, effectively, everything on the property today will be demolished and removed. And hopefully if approved, they'll be looking to redevelop the property with a roughly 2600 square foot citizens bank uh located effectively in the center of the site almost in

007the same spot as the current building. Uh the building would be serviced by 19 parking spots including two accessible parking spaces located in the northeast corner of the site. The other 17 spots would be located on the west side and then on the south side. As mentioned, the property will have a drive up ATM which is located right here. Uh along with that ATM, we have the ability to stack eight cars without any interference with any of the traffic circulation patterns around the property. And then there's also room for an additional two cars on the exit side. Not that we need it, it's just a nice convenience to have in case there's people looking to enter an exit. Uh less conflict. The site under the existing condition is served by one curb cut off of

008Medway Street. The applicant is proposing to reuse that curb cut. So, there's really no changes as to how you will access or exit the property from Medway Street. Uh, and that driveway, as you can see, is again located in the northeast corner of the property. Under the post developed condition, if approved, this site will result in about just under 2,000 square ft of additional green space. So, it's a big improvement over what's on site today. Uh not only will we providing more green space, but the green space provided will be healthy, vibrant, well-maintained. Uh if you've been to the site lately, a lot of the landscaping or green space that's there probably doesn't technically qualify as green space. So, uh as you can see from the rendering, it'll be a nice improvement. They're proposing over

00925 different types of trees, canopy, and evergreen. and then uh just under 70 additional plantings to help again make the site more aesthetically pleasing and to help provide uh some buffers to the surrounding neighborhood. The site would be serviced by all brand new underground utilities. And then one other major improvement over what you have there today revolves around storm water management. As I'm sure you're aware, there are some wetlands that exist off the southwest corner of the property. And under the existing condition, basically all the runoff from the site effectively is diverted into the wetland. It isn't pre-treated. It isn't checked under the proposed conditions. If you've had an opportunity to review the plan, the applicant is proposing to collect all of the runoff from the property in deep sump catch basins with oily water

010hoods. That runoff will then be directed into a storm water quality unit located here prior to being discharged back into the wetlands. So the post-developed condition results in more infiltration. It results in less runoff rate to the wetlands and it also results in clean runoff making its way to the wetlands versus what's there today because again under the existing condition there isn't any type of storm water management on the property. Uh, and with that, I'm certainly happy to answer any site related questions or I can turn it over to Steve with Bowman who can talk quickly about traffic. Okay. Yes. Is it okay if I sit here still or do you need any way? Okay. Just want to make sure everybody can hear me over. Anyway, you're comfortable. Uh, so as mentioned, my name is

011Steven Sir. I'm with Bowman Consulting. Uh, we put together the traffic study um, which was submitted in May of 2025. Um we put together the traffic study in in three separate sections. Uh the first one is just existing conditions going out there and and observing what existing traffic is like. Collecting data which we did in April of 2025 when schools were in session. Um so we made sure that uh the traffic data was um was accurate as to typical conditions. Um we also collected crash data um as per mass DOT standards um and uh looked at all the crash rates and everything at both uh Medway Road at Burch Street and Venice Street and Medway Road at uh Veterans Memorial. Um so we looked at those two intersections, one signalized, one unsalized. Uh the next

012was looking at a no build condition. Um so we coordinated with the town uh town engineering department and planning department. Um there were a few projects, background projects that we kind of incorporated into our study. 31 Beaver Street, um the Beaver Street 40 project. Um and then there's uh forgive me uh forgive me if I forget the name of the way project that's a bit south. Uh it's in its third phase of development now. Um but we incorporated all three of those project into our background scenario. Um just to make sure that we kind of understood what was going to happen in the future. Um and then lastly we looked at our build condition um and that includes some trip generation uh which we used the Institute of Transportation Engineers um which is the industry

013standard uh for a drive-through bank um and came up with an estimated uh 26 trips vehicle trip during AM peak hour and about 55 vehicle trips during the weekday PM peak hour. about one trip every two minutes probably during the AM and about one trip every minute during Excuse me one second sorry [Music] um we did not take any reductions for any non-vehicle trips to the site or anything like that um walking biking we just uh didn't think that would be uh a correct thing to do in this uh in this situation we also did not take credit for any pass by trips which are trips that are already on the roadway um and will see a site, see something, and want to just turn into it. So, those aren't new trips to the site.

014Those are trips that are already on the roadway um and just kind of turn into the site and then turn back out in the same direction they were going. So, we did not take any credit for that. Um and as the last part of this build scenario is some capacity analysis and kind of just comparing it to the existing conditions um and those the no build conditions I was mentioning. Um and there is minimal impact to either of those intersections. Um I think in terms of overall delay per vehicle, there was a maximum of about 0.5 seconds uh per vehicle in delay uh com between existing conditions, what's out there today and the estimated proposed conditions. Um so there's a very minimal impact um uh from the site. And then lastly, we looked at the

015site distance uh coming into and out of the site. uh which we thought was a very important thing to do given again the overgrown vegetation and everything like that that is out there. Um sight distance along Medway Road is is great. Uh in both directions you can see the driveway. You can see uh you know about a/4 mile in both directions um which is uh plenty. Um and then looking out from the site driveway looking toward uh the left there is again plenty of sight distance. uh looking that way for a vehicle wanting to exit the site and then looking to the right um it currently does not meet the standards. However, after site design and clearing that huge tree um that is there and maintaining that vegetation which I know is kind of part

016of the the entire site development. Um again there will be plenty of sight distance looking now to the right uh towards the shopping plazas and everything. So again if you have any questions please uh feel free to let me know. And with that, I will turn it back over. Thank you. Pass up your B business card. I'm sorry. Your business card. You have a business card. So So with respect to the special permit application, um the use itself of Bank Financial Institution is permitted as of right in this zoning district. And um the use of drive-through ATMs and windows is pretty common with this use and consistent with other uses in the general vicinity throughout the town of Milford, throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. and I expect throughout the country. Um, it's permitted on a

017special permit basis pursuant to section 2.3 of the zoning bylaw. It's designed um in in compliance with all of the regulations uh in our bylaw uh including those relating to um off- streetet stacking. So, there isn't going to be any impact uh on traffic or traffic flow either on the site or off of the flight site. No impairment of pedestrian safety, no negative impact on the neighborhood, no negative impact on the health, safety, general welfare of the public. Okay, thank you. Larry, you want to read your letter? Yeah, I'll skip to the uh second paragraph u so it's not too repetitive. Uh the plans as presented are a result of consultant consultation with staff. The proposal provides for one two-way driveway on Medway Street utilizing the existing location. The site will provide 19 spaces. 14

018are required. Uh eight queuing spaces for the drive-thru are provided. Uh and also the two exiting u spaces in the queue are required in the bylaw and they have been require have been provided. U there's a 16 foot wide bypass lane on the original site plan as submitted u for safety purposes and the freestanding signs proposed along Medway Street. Um and a regulation stop signs provided at the exit lane at the driveway. All existing structures are going to be raised as they described. Uh they've already noted the traffic report and the drainage analysis. Uh the plans submitted for special perimeter approval are also sufficient for site plan review. All applicable zoning requirements appear to be met. Therefore, I recommend approval of the special permit and the site plan subject to relevant agency comments. Uh we

019did get a comment from the fire department. Uh uh their only concern was that the south and west sides of the building are not easily accessible uh by a fire engine and they requested that the bypass aisle be widened in those areas. Uh water department submitted comment letter. uh they wanted the existing 3/4 in uh water service terminated and abandoned at the main uh and the rest of their requirements are standard for new construction. So that's in essence a favorable report. Both of these were forwarded to the developer. So I'm assuming they've been addressed on the site plan. I had uh done a draft uh uh decision just uh for reference purposes primarily and to suggest possible uh uh conditions. Uh if you were of the mind to go ahead and act on it tonight

020uh the sewer, have you been to the sewer department? This I'm sorry. The sewer department. Have you been to the sewer department? We we've had initial conversations. We haven't started any formal application process at this point. We obviously wanted to make sure the project was moving forward. Uh but our initial discussions were such that there doesn't seem to be any issues that would preclude us from a sewer connection. I haven't heard anything from from John's. That's something you're going to have to Oh, absolutely. Well, you'll have to get it for us. For for us for approval. What specifically? a report a report and okay to put the we would have thought as part of the review we would have had a letter that indicated they have no concerns there's a connection to the site under

021the existing condition again we we'd be looking to make that better in our opinion so as as it affects as it affects this site if it does we need to know about it as part of your site plan so you need to you need to close off your discussion with them before you can close off your discussion with us Okay. Would your decision be made condition upon this? Um, Jana, you got to um I I don't really So, because this is going to be discharging into the wetlands, they're going to have to file a notice of intent. So, um I feel pretty comfortable. I the my only concern from a site plan review, I guess, uh with the drainage is um an a possible increase in the discharge to Medway Road. Um because you're lifting

022the site up, so the driveway is going to be pitched more towards the road. Um, so that's something that I'm I want to make sure that we're um not causing puddles in Medway Road. Um, I would I know it's an existing site, but I would like to see some sort of soil testing um just to see if we can do some some infiltration. Um, I know we're not going to get anywhere near what is required for a new site, but um, it's something that is coming anyway, and I would like to um, so I'd like to see some soil testing, but um, I don't that part of it I don't think would really affect the um, site plan. Um, for the fire department, I don't know. I I don't know if you changed the at

023the back um where the there was an there's two islands basically separating the um drive aisle from the um driveway. Yeah. That um basically he was to meet his um the fire department's comments. I think you need to just shorten it um and and have some more um striping, I guess, instead of the island. And I and I know that impacts from the I know you're trying to give us as much greenery as possible, but um his his comment trumps the greenery. Um and same thing for those two bumpouts in the southwest corner. Um, I would probably just pull those out. Um, yeah. Okay. No, the ones up on top. You're talking about the northwest corner. No, the south. No, the one he pointed the that one and the that one. Oh, the chokers. Yeah,

024I would probably pull those out just for um for fire department. Yeah, we and we did run just so the board is aware. We ran a fire truck template through the property. It's tight, but normally you submit that stuff. Well, again, this was part of the comment. We didn't know what other comments we were going to get. We wanted to make sure that we addressed as many as possible. But looking at it, knowing that there was a concern, we ran some fire truck templates through like we always do. And the truck can get through. when we know that if we can do it on a turning template, it can certainly do it in the field. But if there's a desire to, you know, narrow these down or even stripe these two areas here, I don't

025see that as a problem. It's a minimal impact to the green space. We'll still have more than what we have. Normally that's done and updated and submitted before the public hearing starts or at at worst bring the updated plans to the meeting. But I haven't heard anything back in all this time even with the continuence from anybody about addressing those two major comments. So I you know we we still haven't seen anything. the the fire chief did, you know, he he said, "Yeah, we could probably get through there, but obviously, you know, it's expensive when those trucks hit something. So, we want to just try and widen it out as as much as we can." So, I think in the case of those two, as long as I don't really think there's a big safety

026impact either from removing those. So, um, that would be that would definitely be my recommendation. You may want to you may want to discuss it with the fire chief. This is we have no issue. We we we're more than confident we can make it work. But this is something that should have been done ahead of time. You've had the letter from the fire chief in plenty of time. You should have got reached out to him probably taking care of this. It' be no problem whatsoever. It's it's that simple. like the again like the sewer. Yeah, you're going to do it later. But if you had gone to the sewer department and asked them, then you'd have all the answers and it would be a lot easier here draw. Can Can I ask I'm sorry. Can

027I ask one more question? The um the dumpster pad is pretty significant in size. I think bigger than I would have expected, I guess. Um, is there a reason for just generally for the wear on the asphalt? You got pretty big trucks coming in to remove the dumpster and having a concrete pad that they could sit on versus asphalt usually wears better. If there was a real desire to make it asphalt, we could, but it really becomes a long-term maint I I don't It doesn't matter to me that it's concrete. It's that it's I guess you're sticking out towards It's too big. The the other property. Why Why is it sticking? It's for access. That's We We needed to make sure the truck can access the dumpster. So, yeah, dumpster's not going to be that

028big. It's a small No, that's what I'm That's right. That's my That's my point is Yeah, but the pads for the truck to be on, right? But can't the can't you slide the whole thing 15 ft into the site? Well, again, if we we we had we had the dumpster in a couple of different locations and we found that it was very difficult for the trash truck to get to. So, what we did is we put it on a slight angle so he can come in, he can grab it, he can back in, and he can get out. So, there's a reason why we set it where we are. And if we start to It sounds like you want to move it kind of northwest on the property, which then pinches this area in here.

029Doesn't allow the truck to reverse maneuver. It needs to then get out and make the turn to exit the property. Okay, perfect. And it's, if you look, it's surrounded by sense to me now. So, it'll be screened as well. I Yes. I wasn't thinking about the backing out part. That makes sense. Thank you. Uh, any comments from the members of the board? I just had I had a couple. Um, I don't I don't know that we got anything changed from them. The the wall design that was submitted is not adequate for approval. I mean, that's a that's just a standard detail out of their out of their catalog. You need to you need to have a designed wall. We've run into issues before where people have gone out and designed them. Then all of a

030sudden, it's like, oh, we can't do this. And we have an approved site plan that you can't actually do. So, we don't allow that anymore. So we actually need to have es the only time that we that we've ever waved that is if somebody were putting in a cast and placed wall that's not what you're putting in in here. So the especially when you have guide rail above it too that that'll run into additional issues. So that wall needs to be designed. It's about the we want to make sure that there's enough space. So the width of the wall and that you can put the guard rail if you're putting the guardrail on top of the wall. That's all that all needs to be part of the design. That's that's the stuff that we're looking

031for um to make sure that we're not going to lose space on the site. The the other thing was when I was going through it, um the pavement um I was I was looking at it and you had a call out for your pavement and then your detail calls out and I forget the words right now and with what we have today I can't really see them as light pavement or heavy pavement which doesn't reference either of the pavements that you called out for for the actual site and it was somewhat confusing to me really what I want to see for your pavement detail your cross-section is meeting the town standard and that's the only detail that should be on there because otherwise we get into issues of somebody's going to go out there and

032say, "Oh, I have this detail. I'll do it to this." And that's not the detail that's acceptable. So, um the the pavement detail needs to be cleaned up. I I don't think there's anything wrong with it. You just need to call it out correctly and only have one so that we're not we're not between one or the other. It says light duty and heavy duty and has different Yeah, we generally show both. This is all in my It will all be light duty based on the geotech report, but we can compare that. I'm sure we already did. You need to compare it to the towns. I'm sure we already did, but I'll make certain again that that's not an issue. Well, and and as I'm saying, I don't want to see both. I want to

033see the one that you're using. That's fine. We we sometimes use both. We might even be using You could be using both if it's not if it's not a travel area and it's defined that way. I have no problem with that. But in in any of the travel areas, I want to make sure that it's defined per the town standard or greater and and that that's clear. Got it. Um, and the only other thing I had was, and we had talked about it, but I just want to make sure as we go downstream, we talked about the landscaping is that whatever you're using for landscaping to make sure that that landscaping uh, as it relates to the entrance and exit driveway uh, is landscaping that will remain at at at a low height so that

034we don't affect the uh, sight triangle as we move forward as those things grow. Those are the only comments that I have. Anyone else? Yeah, just quickly um I guess to your point and then also that freestanding sign and just whether that's going to affect any sight lines and if that was taken into consideration in the traffic study for so if I'm exiting and I'm looking left um and is it I'm not sure they can you know yeah this is the sign here so you'd be up you'd be able to look right in front of that you wouldn't have any impaction that's impact or you can see how we set back the landscaping as well for that exact reason. So that when you're up here, you have a clear line of sight uh to the

035west when you're exiting. Uh and then also just when I'm looking at the property in general, just you know um you know there's there's lots of windows uh and then the down lighting. So just the the overall lighting effects that it's going to have within the neighborhood and across the street and and if any consideration or uh any type of um kind of studies have been done there. Right. I don't I don't want to get calls from the neighborhood that they're, you know, they're they're trying to sleep at 12:00 at night and in the middle of a football field on Friday night with the bank. It's not going to be open late. Uh most of the time it'll be closed probably before it gets dark out and most of the lights will be dark around

036the building. And then as far as exterior lighting, we've only proposed two freestanding yard lights. And then the building will have six wall packs. So that those eight lights that we're using will provide all the light we need. It results in zero trespass on any of the property lines. So it's a lighting plan designed to do what we want, which is put light where we need it and not onto any neighborhood or right of way. So the Yeah. The citizens sign across the top is a it's a non-lit sign. Uh that I'd have to I don't know if you know if it'll be illuminated or not. Well, it's interior illuminated if it is. Right. The uh next to the L L 2011. It's hard to read it to scale, but okay. You got the full

037scale. Yeah. Right. They did the lighting plan, right? Yeah. And that that's all the zeros are good. Yeah. Um, so that like I said, it just it's just being mindful. I I generally like this idea. I think it's a good use for the spot. I'm just trying to be mindful for the for the neighborhood. Um, to ensure that again that it looks beautiful with all the windows, but if that's going to be lit up 24/7, that it's just not a uh, you know, it's not a light a light nuisance to the neighbors across the street, right? like to eventually hear from some of the neighbors I think are here too. Uh I just did receive a call and uh I sympathize the last time when they built the other bank further down they tore down

038a restaurant and the houses were infested with mice. And this one here is the same thing. And I seen it happen here when they tore down Archer Rubber. they got invested terribly. So, uh, something's got to be done. We can't, again, it's not in our purview to to do anything like that, but something should be done to uh eliminate this problem before you do the demolition. I did speak with the building inspector and that is something that's already telling me they've already done pest control. Ice control we can provide Larry or the board okay documentation. Yeah the board of health actually has this abatement. Yeah the board of health and uh building commission if you can provide that when you get your building permit your demo permit you can uh do that. Absolutely. Okay. This

039being a public hearing we got people in the audience. Anybody? Yes. Yes sir. Now, could you first of all, can you state your name, your address, and any communication will go through the chair? Great. Joseph Chair Mckley, I'm the trustee for the property at 61 Midway Road. We share a common border with the with the proposed project. That's our that's our home there off to the uh off to the right hand side. Uh 26 Wooden Hope is my uh is my address. So, um we've been here before, right? We've talked about uh things going on with this with this uh property. Um the first thing, if you could could you just show the um the traffic flow to the uh to the drive-thru. I wasn't standing up here when you first did it. Yeah. So,

040it's basically on this plan, it will be a counterclockwise circulation. So, you'd enter the site. Yep. You'd head south, take a right into the main portion of the site, go counterclockwise around the building. The ATM is here, and then you'd exit and make your way out. Okay. Thank you. Um, as far as the elevation is concerned, I mean, the yellow right now is built on a a bunch of ledge, right? It's a fairly high. Is there um are you going to blast that and is it going to be lowered? Is it going to be raised? What is the elevation of the of the building itself? Well, the reason we have the driveway the way we did is because we wanted to keep the building up. So, we really didn't have to deal with ledge at

041all. We know we were involved in the former development that was proposed here. We know there's ledge. So, the reason for the driveway being as it is is it allows us to keep the building finished floor up. So, we're really not messing with the ledge. And what is the height of the building itself? It looks tall. Yeah. What the overall building is? I'm going to guess it's probably in the 12 to 14 ft not counting the tower which might be in the it's less than what is the anomal significantly less yeah the building that's there is a twotory building today with a be this one's going to be much lower right the the concern that the concern my family has the same is the same all the time it's um the screening between between two

042properties right not all opposed to the uh to the development of the property. Think it's a it's a great use for the property, but we're hoping that we can um maximize the amount of the mature trees that are still there that they don't get taken down. And we're wondering what the what your screening plan is to be able to augment that with either fences, evergreens, etc. Um it's a rental property on the side. So, you know, obviously we're looking for maximum amount of screening between the two properties for minimum impact. Yeah. So again, we have the benefit of having been involved in the prior development. This you're going to have a much denser uh screening of existing mature trees between the two properties. So I think you're probably not going to be able to see

043the building even though it's up a little bit higher. The mature trees that are there are going to be significantly higher than the building itself. Uh we do propose some trees to help screen and then as I said around the dumpster you're going to have our variety that will fully screen the trash enclosure which is by far the nearest quote unquote structure to your property and these trees are going to remain corre all this is existing to remain. So you've got a pretty nice existing buffer to stay and will that be augmented? Okay, one at a time he's speaking. Excuse me. Will the will the existing trees be augmented with uh additional evergreens or something along that? They will be where they're taking down some of the existing trees which is around the dumpster area.

044That's where you're going to be putting Yeah, we had two different options. One was to kind of cut back some of the existing vegetation and plant, you know, normally you would plant arborites 8 ft high to provide a hedro again because we knew that was a sensitive issue with the last design. We felt it was better to leave as much of the existing mature vegetation that's there. It's much higher. It provides a much denser screen. So that's what we did. We didn't want to cut that back just to provide a row of uh you know evergreens or a hedro. So, I think what you have, as you can see from the renderings, it' be light years ahead of what was part of the previous development, it should provide adequate screening to the existing property. What

045about the idea of putting a fence along that along the the driveway or along the edge of between the driveway and the in the existing trees that are there north of the north of the dumpster? Yeah. Along here to to kind of augment the um augment these trees over here. I see there's some fencing or I understand there's everybody's around around here, but you're just supposed to be some Well, they're not going to be able to put fencing very close to the street because it'll become a line of sight issue. Yeah, I was thinking back here. So, what would be the I mean, we could we could certainly discuss, but I don't I don't think it's going to provide any type of additional screening beyond what you have with the existing vegetation. The this is

046a picture from the top, right? And you're correct. You're seeing the the canopy of the trees when they're when they're when they're falling out, right? But the the trees themselves, they tend to be a little bit lollipops, right underneath. So it's it's thinner on the top. It's very it's nice and thick up on up on the top when the when the trees are all wed out, but on the bottom it really isn't. That's why the understory. That's why that's why I'm making a point where if you could add either either fencing or ideally some form of evergreens along along the edge of that, that'd be great. But as far as the rest of it is concerned, we can take you guys you guys can certainly take a look too, but I I can go out

047and anybody else. Uh vegetation just see if Dave I should mention you did have a letter from Cornerstone at Milford. Oh yes. Was a favorable comment was dated May 20th, 2025 uh from Nicole Leone, the executive director. And that's been distributed to everyone in your packet. Yep. I put it there somewhere. Yeah. Cler Stone is supportive of the applicant. Yeah. With this. So again, anyone else in the audience have any comments? Any additional comments from the board? What's the pleasure of the board? I have no problem with uh really with the with the things that are outstanding to close public hearing um and approve the special permit, but the site plan um we need to address the comments that you know that we've brought up. I Well, it's helpful to them that I mean that's

048really what they they've got a few more steps. Yes. Because they won't do nothing. Well, you could you could phrase it in a manner of uh the special permit as you say and then clarify that the site plan uh would be approved subject to so make the conditional approval connected to the site plan portion and not not the entire special permit. Um if you like just more work for me, but I'll figure it out. Yeah. I mean, I I don't I don't think there's anything that's going to change the special permit. I mean, the site plan is what what would be an issue. Correct. Yeah. Because the special perish is for the drive-thru aspect of it. And then from what it sounds like, and myself included, I have no concerns from the drive-thru, but right,

049there's been multiple concerns on the finalization of the site plan. So, Mr. Junior, excuse me, Mike J's brother. I live at two Polmer Street. Uh, in regards to the fence, the only thought was when the cars come around through the drive-in in the winter time at night when there is no foliage, that would prevent the lights from shining on the on on our house. That that would be if there was a vinyl fence there, not anywhere near the street, but just when they come around the corner, more like towards the where the dumpster is, where the dumpster pad is all up a little bit further. Yeah. Are we That's all that's the only thing I can pick. Going to be surrounded by Abravites. Yeah, the town engineer is going to go out and take a

050look as to how thick that vest chasing is or not and report back to us as part of the site plan. So, if there's an issue, then she'll report back. But that's fine. Other than that, that's fine. I mean, there as they exit the drive-thru, it's behind it's actually behind the house. So, there's only a small section that as they turn would be reflecting in towards the house. And she can take a look at that when she goes out there. Now, we're going to close the public hearing, but not approve the site plan, right? That's what that's okay. Well, you could approve the site plan with conditions. No. No, you can, but we won't. Or at least I won't. So, we have to continue. Okay. So, continue the site plan. Continue the site plan. The

051public the public hearing is on the drive-thru, which nobody has a problem with whatsoever. So, we could we'll close the public hearing and continue the site plan until uh again they got the fire department, the sewer department, uh something with they're going to have they're going to have to it might take you a little while to come up with an engineered plan engineered plan for the walls and everything. They're probably going to have to run some testing. Well, you're going to have to do testing anyways for for Liz for the drainage. Well, your next meeting is the 17th of this month and then you typically only meet once next month, right? Yes. So, so that's going to be uh is it the 15th? Yeah, July 15th. What? If I may though, a couple of questions.

052just one relative to the test pits because I'm not certain even if we do test pits we're going to be able to do any type of additional infiltration knowing what we know about the soils and well as you talked about the ledge um I I certainly I guess I didn't know the site as well and didn't realize the ledge um but so we we would ask that we would be able to do that as a confirmatory testing when they start construction because anything is going to be a benefit benefit. So, whatever we can add, that'll be something we can discuss at that point. And then as far as the retaining wall is concerned, we're confident the wall can work. It's a segmental block wall, but the problem is we we design, you're asking the applicant

053to spend a fair amount of money for a wall design that yes, we're confident as engineers is already going to work. We're not. We we're the ones that have to to give that we we've had we've had this before where in fact the wall wasn't and then we're in what do we do now? So we didn't want to be in that situation. Okay. I would argue that's the applicant's risk. But we can certainly work on getting you what you need. Well, you've almost got a special permit approved. So you're kind of arguing the wrong point. I think at that point the board is the board is at a point where they're ready to make a motion. Somebody is I think to close the public hearing approve the special permit with some list of of conditions

054made the motion and use the word motion and then continue the site plan to June 16th or July 15th. So I would let them do that. Well, and that's why I was asking because it's going to impact when we continue the hearing, too. It's not a hearing. The hearing is going to be closed. It'll it'll affect when we appear before the board again. Well, you can talk about that after they close the hearing and give you a special permit. They seem to be bound and determined not to get a special permit approval. I don't understand that. No, I don't think they are, Larry. That's not what they Well, no. question. Our question to you is knowing that you're going to have to do the design for the retaining wall, knowing that in order to do

055that, you're going to have to go out and do some testing. I don't know that you're going to have a design to us in two weeks that we can that the town engineer has any time to review or not review. So that's why to me the continuing the site plan to our July meeting makes more sense than trying to do this in two weeks. That's I agree. That's what I was getting. I agree 100%. Okay. And and just for the mechanics of that, we would be submitting documents, plans to you or we need to be back here. No part is part of the as part of the package is the site plan review. You'd submit you'd submit those as design and yeah, you have to revise that has because the wall isn't part of the

056drive-thru. So it that can be submitted as soon as you guys get it. Yeah. Yeah, that's all. I just wanted to make sure we had the time to get you what you're looking for. And the sewer board, too. Yeah, you need to go to the sewer board meeting. Just make sure on your checklist, please. How you adjust it, you should go once you adjust it or prior to adjusting it to go talk to the fire chief and get that straightened out and change that as he he's happy with and then get another letter from him that says, "Yeah, this is fine." before the next meeting, which I think, you know, if you're in July, that shouldn't be a problem. Great. Okay. M you seconded. Uh I'm seconding Joe's motion. Been moved and seconded to close

057the public hearing and approve the uh special permit. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? I opposed. Unanimous of five. So I assume that's based on the suggested decision. You you approved a special permit. Yes. subject to the Yes. draft. Yes. Thanks. Just checking. Of course. Of course. Joe said that. You dismissed it. Yes. And now with the motion to continue the the hearing, not the public hearing, the hearing on uh the site site plan review. Yep. Yeah. So moved. Move. Second to uh continue the site plan review until July 15th. 15. We're going to five. Only meet once in July. Yes, that works. Well, I give you time to Yeah, absolutely. Yep. I I just I will not be at that meeting, but as long as four of you, it's not a

058super majority. I know. That's why I just wanted to make sure there wasn't two more people in the same predicament. No. So, did you get a vote? Any further discussion on the continuence? Hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? Unanimous five. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, moving right along. Let's see. Mr. Chair, I'm just going to run and get a quick drink of water. Go ahead. Just make sure when you're out of the other trying to get in a fence, maybe cut down more vegetation than putting the fence in. I'll take agenda item three. Yeah, we just wait for the lighting. She just went for a quick lighting isn't going to be an issue because when they come around the corner, it's going to be at the arborites in the dumpster

059pad, right? And by the time they get past that, it's going to be facing across the street. There's no need for a fence, but I'll look at it. But I don't think there's any need for a fence. [Applause] Thank you. Good night, D. Don't forget your bag purse. Yes. [Music] Be the first time. Got some miles on it, huh? Yeah. We're going to retire together. There you go. Okay. You want to just read the thing? Might be back. Yeah. Site plan review. Um James, it's supposed to be an M, not an N. James Latinsky, 10 Christina Road. The applicant requests site plan approval to construct a groundmounted solar installation on the.34 acre subject property. Smallcale solar energy systems are permitted in zoning bylaw section 3.1 whoops 3.15.1 via site plan review only. Um the u

060solar small scale solar requirements are attached in the next page. Um, specifically, the proposed 3Tx 22 ft solar installation will be located along the south side of the existing single family dwelling will consist of three ground mounted solar panels located uh 38 ft from the front property line and located ranging from 15 12 to 17.1 ft from the side or the south property line. Um I mentioned in my report that no system plans or specs have been provided. He has since sent some in. Um site plan is submitted does not indicate the name plate capacity of the system which he has since also provided since it can't exceed 25 kilowatt uh DC does not specify the height and we submit information to provide that. Uh all other applicable zoning requirements appear to be met. Therefore

061recommen recommend approval subject 12 and agency comments. Um third page in the water department was the only agency that responded and they have no problems. Um and you can see on the various site plans where the installation is and what it looks like. [Music] Um, I [Applause] [Music] think I don't remember. Did I get it in your packet? Jim had sent over an email. Yes, you sent. Yeah. So the email Yeah. the email cover sheet has the um uh the height uh which is a little over 51 in is well under the 72 limit. Um so and it's um 24,000 watts which is less than the 3 kilowatt. So it would appear that it would be in compliance. He has some additional information there in terms of the individual panel dimensions and there's some graphics

062in terms of what some of the bracketing looks like the framing for the panel or for the rack that the panels are mounted on and also the tie down to the winters. So, it all appears to be in order in spite of the fact that I only got the rest of this today. So, I'd recommend approval as submitted. Any comments from the board? Couple um one is when you look at the the overall layout, is is that shed in the conforming to setbacks uh on the property, but obviously it's not in our purview, but just make mention of that. Um, and then the other is just as far as what exactly is needed for um for the foundation. I guess I' I'd look to the towards the town engineer and is that something that that

063just the building department will have to inspect? I'm assuming. Right. So, um I mean obviously we're just looking at the site plan, the offset, but we also as as we talked about in the last um individuals that were here, we had some concerns with the the wall. So, do we have any concerns that there's no details as far as the um pilings that would hold this down? No. No. The wall is reason we have it is the room, right? There's nothing room to put the wall in. That's Yeah. I'm just using it as an example. Yeah. No, it's it's far enough. It's it's far enough. I think it's far enough from the house. I can't imagine that the the foundation would force it to move like closer to the lot line. So, um I'm I

064have no problem with that. Right. Yeah. I just more of like is it a is it a 10in diameter or is it a 24 in diameter? Like what scale scope that's it'll almost certainly be within the uh footprint or not much beyond the footprint of the actual panels. Um I do so this is this is a relatively small um array. So, I'm not as concerned with this, but um are they going to leave it grass underneath? Are you know what that cuz that Well, well, not whatever cuz it matters to me from a drainage perspective. Um it seems to be sloped towards the road. It's got to be sloped. No, the panels have to be sloped to the neighbor's property, but it's panels are probably four wide. They might be 8 ft long. So, it's

0658 ft. They'll be sloped cuz that I'm sure they're sloping them towards towards the south face. So, they're going to they're going to be in like like this. Okay. And the house is going to be here. Correct. Then it is going to it it it could potentially grass, right? But it could potentially, you know, what I I just it's something I guess I would I would prefer to see I would prefer to see um either like crush stone or something at the at the edge of the drip line just to um to help um infiltrate what what runoff you're going to get and um and make sure it's Not heading over to the neighbors. 15 be the grass. Just my recommendation, Mr. Chair. Yeah, I don't have an issue with the way it is. Huh?

066I don't I I think it's fine. I don't see a problem. Well, I I mean, if the array were bigger, maybe maybe to some extent, but the other problem is that it's it's a maintenance nightmare that no one's ever going to keep up with. So, if we really think it's an issue, then it's it's going to show up whether we require it or not because no one's going to keep the How do you mow beneath the Oh, beneath the panels is a different story. I mean, I don't know there to keep it clean. I might put stone there, but you're not going to get any any infiltration through there. The drip line you can mow to because you're going to be up 4t below the drip line, right? But if you're if you're going to

067have not grass underneath the panels because I don't I don't know how I it doesn't make any sense to me that you would have grass there. Extending whatever surface you have an extra it's going to start working its way in is what's going to happen and it's going to end up being at the edge of the panel is where the grass is going to end up coming into no matter what we do is what I'm saying. And Liz, going back to your, you know, the drip line concern, are you afraid of or afraid or concerned with just consistent erosion in that spot and then whatever sort of cascading effects from there? It's a it's a it concentrates a flow, right? Um, and it does so just as just as if you were having um a

068roof like for a house or a shed or and and again this is very small so I'm not it it's more like a shed which I would I wouldn't bring up I guess typically about a shed and needing to you know have um crushed stone or gutters or whatever mentioned something uh we could have found out from the applicant. But you didn't comment. So either you the only comment we got was from the water department. We appreciate the comments now. My deepest apologies. Um can I on that though? Liz, sorry to bur on this. So would it be best as we move forward and and to set a precedent when we get there? I know it's obviously not within the bylaws or the building code to say, "Hey, we want crushed stone underneath extending 1

069ft beyond all drip edges." So, it was supposed to go into it was it was due to go into the bylaws at this last town meeting, but we have um we have to basically rewrite our bylaws um to meet some storm water requirements or for the MS4. And so rather than changing it to then, you know, revamp the whole thing, I just took it out. It wasn't it wasn't part of the zoning and site plan bylaws. It was part of the general storm storm water. Okay. And that got complicated as Liz said. So So it's going to it's not something you need to worry about because in October it's going to be part of the storm water bylaws and it will apply to this situation. So, I will do we have an opportunity with this

070one to get ahead of it? No, I I don't think it's I don't think honestly this one is so small that I'm really not worried about it. Fair enough. Okay. It's the pleasure of the board. Quest make approve the site plan as submitted. Second. Moved and second we approve the site plan. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor I opposed unanimous of five. Okay. Okay. You already 13 Cape 13 Cape Road. Uh 31 Bever Street. 31 Beaver. 31 Beaver Street. Oh. Oh, excuse me. Yeah. Yeah. My check mark. 31 Daver Milford Realy LLC. Applicant requests amended site plan approval to construct a commercial building and associated parking on the 8.9 acre subject property. It's in an ID zoning district. Specifically, the proposed 35,040 ft commercial building will be utilized for indoor recreation purposes.

071Total of 140 off- streetet parking spaces are being provided. However, specific employment estimates have not been provided. The facility will be connected to town water and will utilize an on-site septic system in l of connecting to the town sewer. Parking and circulation are appropriate for the proposed use with drive aisles and fire lanes designed to accommodate equipment and truck turning. Also, a complete storm water report has been submitted with site plan. Uh, also attached uh is the access segment that the town has granted uh over the triangular portion uh that connects this property to driveway to Beaver Street. um town meeting approved that back in uh 102422. All other applicable zoning and site plan requirements appear to be met. I recommend approval subject to relevant agency comments after several pages of the easement document. We

072finally get back to fire department had um um some suggestions about the hydrant and the guard rail. I believe that's been addressed. Yes. Uh the uh water department has their fairly standard laundry list of specific requirements for this site uh and uh pipe size. I believe those if they weren't already called out on the plan, it's been amended to reflect that as well. Uh and that was it. Take it away. Thank you. Um, Michael Hasset here from Gary and Houndline representing the applicant Milford Realy Development LLC. Um, as Larry mentioned, um, little history on the project. It was first approved as a site plan on April 4th, 2023. It was then amended August 6, 2024. Um, and this is as um, various tenants have agreed and then backed out um, looking to looking to take

073residence on the site. Um so it has an active order of conditions with the conservation commission. Um it is going to be serviced by town water and a private septic system. Um the layout compared to the original remains largely the same in terms of the limit of work. So the limit of work um remains substantively the ch the same. No changes there. Um the retaining wall layout has not been revised. um in the general pavement configuration and grading and drainage are all u remain the same. So what what really changed is there used to be an approximately uh 52,000t building that extended down into where this parking area is shown now. Um the current tenant which is Slick City which um as he says is an indoor amusement you know action park like most trampoline

074parks with slides and um other you know physical recreation uses um is looking to take tenants uh here and so um we reconfigured this area. This was open pavement to uh sustain the maneuverability of tractor trailers. That's no longer needed. And so um 140 passenger vehicle parking spaces are proposed. Um we have handicap spaces in the center aisle here. Main entrance is right here. Um all the grades in the parking lot are between 1 to 3% flat. Um this basin is un unchanged. Um there's a wetland replication portion of the project that remains unchanged. Um, you know, I think you know the total impervious area on the site has gone down. It was 2.85 acres total impervious. That's been reduced to 2.49. Um, and I think you know right now we have a placeholder septic

075on the site. Um, if you want me to dig it out on camera, but it's basically under this parking lot here. Um right now it's sized for um approximately 3,500 gallons per day. Um obviously that will still need to go through permitting with the board of health. Um some additional soil testing. Um but that's really the extent of the changes. Um and I'll turn it over to the board for any questions. I think the site plan babe is on sheet six and the reduced size plans that are in fact it may be the last page. um shows where the location is or next to the last page. Um it's in the area Mike had indicated. Yeah. This is a 35,000 foot building. Yes. Okay. Now, uh the water you got a a water line coming

076in for the fire suppression. Yes. Okay. I just I think they may have I'm looking through their memo again. I thought they addressed that. Call Mike. Yeah. So, we have Sorry. It might not be on that section. The water man comes through. It's on sheet six of the of the site set. So, the water man comes in here across the wetland crossing. All of this stays the same. There were no changes at the crossing. What size water mean? I don't recall the top would be I believe um probably 8 in would be what we start using service. Yeah, they got a hydrant in inside the property. Yes. So, okay, that's Yeah, there's two hydrants. There's a hydrant here. This is the one he was talking about in the fire department in the guardrail, the gap

077in the guard there. Um and then we have another one here and he is asking us to relocated to one of the islands. Yeah. Um and we're happy to do that. [Music] Okay. Any comments from the board? I'll just shoot the the the hydrant that Yep. the the hydrant. You're you've got it between a gap and the guardrail there. Y he he suggested that we could relocate it across the street into this area here. We have that identified with no storage right now. Um but if it were the pleasure of the board for us to move it over on this side, we would have no objection to that. I mean, it's a low-speed area, but it's not a good place to have hydrants with gaps in the guardrail is not a great thing. I mean,

078they it becomes a blunt. It becomes a a blunt end, which isn't the greatest thing in the world. Um, I mean, if we can avoid it, I just assume avoid it and that way you don't have the gap in the guardrail. If you can put it on the other side, to me, it makes more sense. I I don't believe the applicant is in under any um particular attachment to that location. I do note that the project is under construction under its um previous approval. So I don't know the status of the water man that might already be in with the hydrant. I don't know exactly where that's been left. Um but um if if if it's not in I'm I'm sure he'd be happy to relocate it as discussed. It would just be cleaner. I

079mean like I said it's a low speed area so it's not critical but it's not the best. It's on the exiting side at least. Yeah. Yeah. It's not It's not on the inside. It's on the inside. It'd be It'd be kind of tough to If it's done, but I understand the concern. There's no sense in putting fittings in. Yeah. They're not necessary at this time once it's once it's built. So, okay. So, I'll I'll double check that and if it's already built, then we'll leave it at is as is. And then um if it's not in, then I can work with Liz to facilitate its relocation. No comments. I'm good. Um, no. I just noticed that the fire and water departments both had some fairly extensive comments. Well, fire not so much. A couple a

080couple of um requested modifications and the water department had quite a number of comments. Not just there. Well, installation things. It's got nothing to do with us. We we've tried for years to get them to stop sending us that stuff and they refused. I got them to stop for a while, then they just starts over. Now they're back at it. Um, but the fire department did request relocation of a hydrant and adding more fire lane signs. Do we need to see those modifications on a plan before we talked about the fire? No, it's fine. Um, we don't object to any of the fire department's requests. So if if if it was the board's pleasure to include that as a condition of approval, you know, I can work with Liz to place the signs and or

081and the fire department to place the signs and make sure the hydrants are to their satisfaction. [Applause] The the only concern I would have is the increase obviously of traffic because of the change of use. Now um any studies or can we ask for a study to be done on that? Uh I at this time I don't believe an updated uh trip generation was prepared. Um I what I will tell you is that the previous applicant included this as part of their traffic study. Um this was one of the the um items that I knew was coming in front of us to be changed. So when they did their study um you mean the bank building? Yeah, the bank building. they uh incorporated this change um into their projections. Um why would they do that?

082Because they're required to well anything they know about anything that anything the town's aware of they have to in any um changes to surrounding sites they're required to include as part of their even pending ones. Yeah. Yeah. The only traffic time at the at that on that road for heavy traffic is at 3:30 when waters gets out. Other than that, yeah, there's no uh Yeah, but you're going to have people coming from out of town. These these are Yeah, but they're all going to come down Birch Street thing and go around. Yeah, for now. Yeah. Which may lead to my next question then. Yeah. So, if I'm exiting, if I look at that curb cutting, it allows for you to to naturally go to a right-hand turn out. Obviously, there's going to be a sign

083on that corner and a sign across the street. Are we concerned that that curb cut kind of flows towards allowing for a right-hand turn? And does anything different need to be there? So, you know, no, because you got to have you're allowing for the left hand turn, right, for them to get in to get in. I realize you got a straight shot. Yeah. To get them to get them out. So, yeah. I just worry, you know, to Joe's point, you're going to have out oftowners in here and that. So, that sign signage better be very explicit of no right-hand turn currently. I honestly you're going to have less of an issue in that case because people are going to want to take the left to go to the highway. They're not going to want to

084come back out and go all the way around. and and that that radius too may be important for um fire equipment maneuverability. Yep. And that's it 100%. That's why I I bring it up as there are some negative effects as far as Yeah. fire, you know, the a fire truck maneuvering in, but in the same token, I I worry about someone not from the town taking a right-hand turn out of there on a dark rainy night and just not paying attention to the interim situation. We don't know how how long interim is. I can Yeah, I can. Right. That's the other thing too is I was I was inferring from the discussion that it might be no longer one way in at some point in the future. Right. Um and if that's the case then,

085you know, you'd be putting in a narrow radius that would then be you have to change it. You have to replace it. We're actually we're have we're doing we're starting the design. Well, my my question is how it is now, right? like I I I'm not part of the conversation of of of the future in a sense of making that a two-way road. So that's why I bring that up now and to ensure we're hiring a design engineer this week. Almost as we speak, right? Excellent. No further questions here. It's the pleasure of the board. Make a motion to uh approve the amended site plan for 31 Bieber Street. Subject to service to the fire department. I'll second that if someone didn't. Okay. Been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in

086favor. Unanimous of five. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Moving right along. Now we go to Cape Road. Now we go to Cape Road. Amendment site plan campers NRV 13 Cape Road map 52 lots 257 and 186D to the commercial C zone. Uh the applicant requests site plan approval for a change of use on the subject property. The proposal is to change the former used car sales and service use to a new and used RV dealership. Uh the new vehicle dealerships are allowed as of right in the commercial C district. Uh 56 off- streetet parking spaces are to be provided. Uh 51 are calculated to be required. There are no additions to the building being proposed and no additional areas to be paved. All other applicable zoning requirements appear to be met except for

087the landscaping buffer. uh required by section uh 3.4.4 D1. Uh the display lot paving extends uninterrupted to the back of the curb along Cape Road. My brother-in-law lives in that area. Also, the existing freestanding sign is designated for relocation. However, no proposed new location is shown on the site plan. Uh therefore I recommend approval subject to relevant comments and subject to provision of a 10- foot wide landscape buffer along the Cape Road frontage. Uh we got comments from the fire department. Uh he had uh made notes about the propane tank uh and setbacks to it. Uh the capacity of the tank wasn't shown. Uh details were not provided regarding vehicle protection for the tank. and he's recommending the additional elimination of parking spaces immediately abuing the tank's location on the east and the west sides.

088Uh the property has a flammable storage license which will require an amendment uh to add the propane storage. Uh the water department um had no conflicts uh in their review and those are the only two reviews we received. Uh I got one question before we start. Why is this before us? Change of use site plan. Yeah, it's change of use. It's not a change of use. Sales kind of vehicle sales or vehicle sales. Uh we do have some restriping that's going to be going on over here as well. Um so at least we're uh trying to go through the effort here for uh for the town. Um I mean to a certain extent you get the change of the change for the propane tanks and stuff which wasn't part of a vehicle. Okay. Go ahead,

089John. I'm for the record, John Federico with Gur Helman. And uh tonight, I also have with me Greg with Campers and RV um in case there's any specific questions there on that side. Um but uh we have taken a look at the comments um in particular to the fire department comments. We have no issues um with having uh no stalls adjacent to the propane tank. Um, in terms of the propane tank itself, um, Campers World typically does put a fence um with a gate and a lock around their propane area. So, there will be some type of uh protection there, but again, we have no issues with um having the extra stalls relocated someplace else. Um, as far as the um license goes, um I don't believe we have any issues with that. I'm just

090not sure who the license is through. if that's um through you folks. Good luck with Okay. Um so we'll definitely make sure that we do take appropriate action on that end. Um as far as a couple of the other comments go, um with regards to the uh sign uh location, um we have confirmed that we will utilize the existing sign location. So I'll make sure that we do have a revised plan uh back to the board. Um just removing that note on there. Also showing those uh relocated stalls up near the propane tank. Um, we've also added in um a dumpster detail um that is in the vicinity of that um propane tank just to make sure that we do have adequate onsite there. And um regarding the uh landscaping environment, um we didn't outright

091ignore anything there. Um with it already being existing site fully paved, um we did want to try to improve um to an extent. Um so we were going to be offering up um planters that would have a minimum of two trees in each planter um along each of the existing light posts that are there. Um so from my count I believe that was five that we had shown along the front edge of the property. Um but uh in terms of um any reasons for uh why we didn't want to go with the full 10t um in terms of the uh display area that we have there, we wanted to make sure that we had some flexibility with being able to get some of these potentially larger vehicles or anything with a possible trailer involved um

092from ripping up um any of the proposed landscaping that's there. We didn't want to also have any issues with the um site distance or any um the site triangles as well. Um so by at least uh trying to avoid that right now, we were going to try to keep everything at a a minimum there and keep it as open as possible as it's currently standing. I would say that you're probably going to want to have ballards around the propane tank in addition to the fence. Yeah. Um, as far as it goes, that won't be any sort of problem or anything. Um, and then if if you did put in the 10-ft landscaping, that would push those spaces back and require relocation of that fence basically, right? Uh as of right now, um I don't have

093the specific dimension for it, but I do know when we were initially, uh doing a turn movement, there was a little bit on the tight side in between the existing fence and where those stalls were proposed to be. Well, the site plan that uh that John's drawn um has the parking on their property. So my comment about the landscaping buffer would technically be in the rideway, not on their property at all. So there's 15 feet of pavement from the back of the curb to their property line. And that's where John has the parking uh stall striped and the display area striped. So he's got it all properly located in terms of where those are in relation to the property line. So my thinking was that typically a sidewalk's 5T. So from the curb back the

094first 5T obviously you leave that uh as the asphalt crummy sidewalk that's out there now. And then from that point back 10 ft that gets you to the property line uh where John has everything striped properly. Uh so it's that 10 ft of asphalt that could be removed and some kind of landscaping put in there and obviously it's easy to meet clear sight distance uh with that type of an arrangement because everybody else has been doing it all over town. So that's that's where I was coming from with that because it doesn't affect the usable area that you know that that he has to display the vehicles. Yeah, that's c that's certainly more that's certainly a more reasonable expectation I think. Um because I think what he's what he's showing u I mean the only

095the only thing from a practical standpoint and it it I'm not sure whether they might want to address it but from a tip from a technical zoning standpoint they probably don't need to. But there's no place for a customer who isn't driving an RV to go there to park their car unless they go all the way into the site and around the building and park over with the staff. So, you might want to put some thought into not having every square inch of parking. These are parking spaces. So, we do have I believe it's eight or 11 spaces 11. Okay. I'm sorry. Yep. 11 as well. Um, so we do have something we're going to have a heavy load of people coming in like you would with say a car dealership. So, um, just to

096at least meet the parking requirements, we were, um, utilizing some of the existing striping that's already out there for it. Um, but, um, again, we can work with the board on any particular constraints you might be looking for there. Frank's ready to go over there. Oh yeah. I knew exactly who you were talking about. So you got one customer who can barely wait to get there. No. So the my whole thing with the landscaping was that everything that John shown is appropriate to the site. His use of the site staying on his own property, which is more than I could say about the previous car dealership. He was out parking right up against the curb. Uh but nonetheless, the area is there to accommodate leaving a 5-ft sidewalk or even a 6ft sidewalk and do

097a 9 or 10 foot landscaping strip. And it doesn't all have to be solid plant materials. And certainly you can't do that and maintain clear sight distance at the driveway anyway, but there's room there to accommodate that. So that's why I made the suggestion. Doesn't affect the operation. Um the the the owner of the company, his concern there was that with these RVs with some of them, you know, starting anywhere from 16 going up to 44 ft. And because you have to move them with a tractor, now your total movement could be 60 65 ft. So all of a sudden, if we don't have even that wiggle room to manage the RVs, especially when it comes to plowing and stuff like that, that that actual 10 ft of space that we now have to But

098that's highway right away. That's Well, it's we're not going to park up against it, but what I'm But you're still we're still going to plow that area, right? I mean, we're still going to have that area 10 ft between us that we'd be plowing and at that point maneuvering it. it still might maneuver into that area before we put them in the final parking spot uh just based on the length of the units. Now, having said that, we still want to do something with the property where we have some trees and we have some sort of buffer there. Um, and what we're hoping for is something that we could actually move if we need to. And that's why we were talking about planters and things like that where we could actually if we had to

099move them out of the way if we needed to for plowing and access and things like that but to have them there for for making the cycle nice. I I know another concern you've brought up in the past is that you remove pavement you have to dig out an awful lot to then get it to be a plantable growable. Yeah. I mean, I'm not sure. I 10 ft you probably could get enough to to have something that's plantable. The plant is I mean, unless you're going to spend a lot of money, you're going to you're going to have dirt and nothing else. You're not going to have trees in there. I can tell you right now, there's no way you're going to grow anything that's going to last past a year. It it's it's a

100waste of your time and money to be totally honest. Y I mean, you know, we've had people come before us and stuff and and and stuff like that, but you know, it it doesn't do you or us any good really. Um you know, if you're going to put planters in, my my suggestion would be forget the idea of putting planters with trees, small plantings, you know, flowers, things like that that you put in and annually you might have a shot at it, but to to to put in trees is is a waste of time. Um I mean the Larry's idea certainly would be it serves two purposes be because I know why Larry had mentioned it is is exactly the reason he had mentioned before where the previous people had effectively parked in the rightway

101the state rightaway and without having anything there that's what we end up you know getting as much as we you know oh we're not going to do that and you know week after they they've got their occupancy permit it's like gez I wonder why that pass so far out. Uh, you know, it happens to you. I'm not going to blame anybody or whatever. Somebody goes out there, you know, the the the car jockey that's out there doesn't know that he's supposed to stop at the line that's there. He goes out to the end of the pavement. Um, it sort of is one way that we can control making sure people don't do that. Um, again, I I you know, I like the idea that Larry had. I don't know that trees are the proper thing,

102but but some sort of greenery in that area would actually I think would would improve your site and make it look a lot better, too. So, um you know, I think it's something to think about. But I in terms of the planters, uh again, if you wanted to put planters, I I wouldn't require there'd be trees in them because I just don't think they're going to survive. Skip the planters and just plant trees. Well, they don't really have a place to plant them. That's the thing. require a ton of removing pavement. Yeah, I was going to talk about the planters, too. It's exactly what Joe said. So, I did get his remarks. Second remarks. Certainly same just to chime in. Yeah, agree with the planners. I could understand. Yeah. Not wanting trees back there because

103you're going to have someone that's that's backing up and they're going to back right over those trees. you know, you when you're trying to maneuver a 40 foot travel trailer uh in between the other trailers that have already been parked there, you know, putting putting trees along that zone is as nice as they may look are going to get plowed over by by someone in inadvertently too. Um and then also I think trees are also going to be a detriment to the showcase of your product. I think yeah, you know, putting out planters with nice flowers that are low setting or is a better use and it will look better along that property. So yeah, just maintain them too. Yes. No, we I mean generally we uh we have 35 dealerships and we do a

104good job trying to keep them looking nice. I have no I understand the situation there. I have no problem uh approving it subject to uh having them address the fire department's comments and then uh taking a look with Liz in terms of what they can do to try to maximize uh some green space on the site based on the comments that they've heard tonight and see what they come back with. But at least that gets them at least a little bit forward. Have a motion. Yes. Second. looking looking at the site and the comment of the the long trailers, which I understand, but the last the last pocketing the last five or six parking spaces or seven parking spaces from the railroad to the building, you could back your trailer down. the the long ones

105there and the shorter the shorter ones in front of the building. Put that 10 foot back planting area in. I don't see a problem there. So you're you're still the distance between the front of the building and the road with parking RVs, you're still going to have even with a 15t RV, which is going to be our shortest one with a 12T span to 15t span on a tractor with a bucket, you're still going to end up with 30 ft of movement trying to move in there. What's the distance from the uh I believe our front setback um is 30 ft as it stands right now. Yeah. on the rightway. Ah, yes. Yes. Yeah. I think part of the problem is is the perceptual problem of it's paved right now out to the street. So,

106you know, the the specific dimensions that we're talking about are uh to an invisible property line. You're trying to make it not invisible anymore. I mean, if you if you did it if you did it with a curb at that point on the property line, you you'd end up with a two or three foot overhang that depending on how you did your could still be green. You could put you could put bushes or something in front of that three-foot, I believe, and still have enough room that you could have some sort of plantings along there, but you'd have an overhang that that takes up part of your part of your dimension that you that you gave us, cuz you're you're going to you you you can you'd be able to push the vehicle forward to

107the curb and move it out if you needed that extra space cuz you got the front overhang of the vehicle that would be available to you for moving. Let me just try to picture. So I get what you're saying. It's it's the only thing that that because of the way that when you move these RVs too is it may be 30 ft in length that you have for the tractor and the RV, but the way that they're in space together, you can't pull out and start turning right away either, or else you're just going to crash into the other RV because of the swing on it. So you might have a 30-ft rig. That's if you have the smallest travel trailer on the on the property. You probably still have to pull out a good

10810 to 15 feet before you even swing it so they don't hit the RVs on either side. So it it's it's really a logistic issue of moving the units around that we're going to run into if we tighten up that space at all. And when we looked at the property, it was already a concern when we looked at the property saying, geez, is is this front even going to be usable for us based on the amount of space we have to maneuver the trailers? Um, and that's where we're just concerned that it's it's going to render the front end useless for us if if you know or we're going to have to have them angled at such a that it's going to be so limited on what you can show and the aesthetics of that

109is terrible, too. What's the I don't have a plan that's big enough to easily read. So, what's the length of the frontage uh that's paved from that north edge to the south edge? Um approximately 4T. So, it's 100 pointed out on the thing from where to where? So, uh, going from this edge here, uh, all the way through what we have to there is 120 point here, that's about 420 ft. 420. Yes. So, the the most constricted is what's in front of the building. So, if you look at all the rest of the site southeast of the building, uh you might have to move the fence back, but you've got unrestricted space there to do all kinds of turning. Uh the most restricted space is immediately in front of the building. So, that might not

110be the place you want to pack with RVs. Uh in fact, that might be where you want to move some of the visitor parking to open up the side even more. that uh it just seems like from a layout standpoint it it's kind of shooting you in the foot to to try to but I would assume they want they want the RVs out front Lar would say if if if it's very important for the the board to have the the landscape I guess my recommendation sort of along or my thought would be require the 10-ft landscaping just on that one side where They do have a little bit more room and not in front of the building. Yeah, I don't have a problem with that. That's why I said, you know, kind of all of

111that in the right way. None of it's so that it is all in the state right away. So, yeah, that that would be an alternative way to approach it. Yeah, just a little bit of a compromise if it was important. Well, as I said, I mean, I think the motion was was, you know, do sit sit with you and come up with what is what is available that we can do some sort of landscaping to show some sort of landscaping on here. If in front of the building doesn't work at all, I you know, I'd like to see some effort made to to do something in here. I just don't want that to be contingent on the approval side of things. I I I'm feel like what they're proposing and and understanding what they're trying

112to accomplish have creating any type of green space out front is just going to be a detriment to how they're going to need to maneuver their their product. And it's not in it's not in our purview to tell them how they're going to run their business and how they're going to station. It is in a certain sense because they're they're constructing their business on public property. They're just displaying. Well, no. They're saying they need to they need to use that in order to return the vehicles in order to do it. So, we do have some purview on it if we wanted to. And in and the assumption that you can use public property is an assumption is a leap that shouldn't is it an easement or is it they were on the previous the previous

113owners multiple owners have paid had paved into the state right away. Okay. Never got approved. never never did anything. Then it showed up on plan. So that's how we got to where we are. Right. But they're not saying they're going to park on that. No. No. They're saying they're only going to move on it. So they're they're conducting business on on an area that normally not there in order to conduct business. So I'm there's plenty of other places around town where there is. Are we really concerned with with a travel trailer that's going to be conducting business on on a 10-ft swath of payment for less than 10 minutes? No. Uh, no. I'm not that concerned with I'm just saying that I I believe that us asking to put some level of landscaping on the

114site is certainly reasonable. It's reasonable to ask. I just don't want it to be contingent on the full approval of the site plan. No, I don't think the motion the motion went that way. I don't Okay, that's why I just want to make sure the motion kind of left it up to Liz to figure out what fit the applicant. That's why I just if they can't come to a compromise, I just don't Well, if they if I can't come to a compromise with them, then they can come back here and say she's being unreasonable. Whatever. Be clear. Exactly. Push it hard. So, having said that, I know you will. So, you got a motion in a second. Is y ready? Yeah. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? I opposed. five. Thank you.

115I appreciate it. Thank you guys. Oh, do you have a do you have a card with you? Uh I may have one of my Okay, we got uh 21 Madden Avenue for zoning uh referral. Yep. 51 Madden, Map 40, block 17, lot 19. Um it's a variance request. Uh the applicant requested variance to allow for the construction of a 28x 36 detached twostory garage on the subject property which they swear up and down is not going to have an ADU upstairs but it doesn't matter anymore. Uh the existing shed and pool are to be removed. Uh specifically the proposal is to uh construct the shed within construct the uh garage uh within the rear yard setback. The adjacent parcel had originally been reserved for future subdivision and street. However, since it was never completed, that

116would have otherwise what would have otherwise been a required front yard along that street is now just a sideyard. Uh but it also reverts the easterly yard now in question uh to being a rear yard rather than a sideyard and that's why they need the variance. Uh so I recommend favorable report forward to the ZBA. Uh I tried to blow up the section of the plan uh that more clearly showed u the setbacks. But the the first plan uh gives a more overall layout. shows why there's roundings on that uh uh that area that Oh, thank you. that u goes to the back lot. And then I included an aerial that that kind of shows it again as well. So, um it's unlikely that that's going to be a subdivision. Uh there's extensive wetlands on

117this property, uh which is why it was never developed. So I recommend favorable to ZBA if any of that makes any sense. Pleasure of the board. Recommend favorable report to the ZBA. Make a motion. Excuse the motion to Yeah. moved and seconded to send a favorable report to the ZBA. Let me just add that with that with that uh just to include um you know favorable with with the um emphasis on no water and sewer uh connections to be done to that dwelling. You can't you can't do that an ad an ADU, right? I just want to prevent that ADU. They're saying it's not. So again, if if they can do an ADU by law, they could come to come back to us. I realize that, right? They have to come back. No, they don't

118have No, they don't anymore. But the attorney general said site plans are so um if they wanted if they attorney general didn't approve this, uh zoning bylaw change, not all of it. Right. It it approved part approved part of it, but the site plan approval part is is gone. But they still need a special permit or varying certain nothing. They just go to the building commissioner. No kidding. This this proposal needs a variance because they want to have the building setting cockeyed on the lot. If they straighten the building out, they wouldn't need a variance and they and it so they would just be able to build it by right and if they wanted to have an ADU up there, they could build it right off the bat. Well, they'd need the building permit to

119do it. They could just do it. to get the building permit. The building department is going to be working with in particular the water department and the sewer department to make sure that the those are being covered covered. So it was never really in your purview anyway, but this but it's being addressed is I guess my point. If we can add just again from my side, if we could add some verb just saying because on their application it says that they're not going to have water sewer. So my vote and my if I'm going to vote for the favorable recommendation is going to include saying from our side they can CBA doesn't have to listen to us but I would like for our recommendation have no water reser in it. That's all you you guys

120can shoot me down. I just want to make that up. Motion I will amend my motion to not effect. And does Joe's second still stand? Yes. Your I'm sorry the other Joe. Pardon me. been moved and seconded to uh send a favorable with the comments on the sewer and water. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? I opposed. Anything else to come before the board? Yes. I just I just want to clarify. So now ADUs just go straight to the building department. No permits needed. No site plan. The zoning bylaw that's been updated. But can I just finish my question? Right. So no no approvals needed by this board or the ZBA just straight to building department. Right. Wow. Not necessarily. It depends on the situation. If you have a situation like this

121where the building placement requires a variance, then you need to go get a variance. But that has nothing requires no approval. The ADU use correct. The standards for the ADU, all of them got approved but for three. And if you look at the updated bylaw that I emailed everybody, in fact I emailed it to you twice because we discovered a a major uh formatting change that just occurred by magic, I guess. Um so you got a new version that has all the formatting corrected. The uh the section for the ADU uh has reserved for future use in the places that the that the AG didn't like the language. And the first one was site plan review. So because she didn't like the way our bylaw talks about site plans, she wouldn't approve that section, but

122she proved all the rest of it. But for a couple other points, and when you'll see those in brackets that say reserved for future use, the formatting of the section that got amended is the same. It's just the part that she didn't like was removed and replaced with reserved for future use because the town council may want specific to us because of the way our bylaw was. Basically, I thought the original law said that you could you could request site plan review. Well, I I'll forward you her lengthy u email review of it, uh multi-page review of it, but it's because site plans you can require changes or if they aren't met in theory, you could deny a site plan. So, she didn't like that. Why why why did they write the law to begin

123with that way? No, but you look at but you look at the rules that the state came up with after the law passed and they didn't follow the law either. They made stuff up and made it even worse. So, go figure. And now the AG is using that bogus set of rules as if it's more authoritative than the law itself. So, you know, they're just making it up as well. I mean, the whole thing was made up as one anyways. I think if we had had a sep like if we had had a reference to a separate site plan review uh procedure or rules governing it for the ADU that wasn't why the site plan could be approved or not approved if it was li because it the the only thing it could be reviewed

124under was a commercial site plan review right so that required such a a substantial So, um I think I think that might have helped, but maybe it I don't know that it would have made the difference, but I I definitely think that was a big problem is it was it was uh overreaching to apply a commercial basically site plan review to Well, but her specific point was that in theory the board could deny it and and she didn't she said it can't have any denial accompanied with it. Well, why would you have a a site plan review if they if they're setting it in the middle of the street like Yeah, exactly. Because we've had people put put things in in property they don't even own for God's sakes. If you have a lot on

125the street, you go to the building commissioner, you get a building permit. If you have a garage, a house in a garage, you want to make an ADU, you go to the building commissioner. You don't have to come here for sale. You don't have to come for any lot that's existing on the side of the street. You don't So there's no reason to come for an ADU. Well, I'll I'll send everybody the email, but but check in the new bylaw. That's that's the I sent the PDF out and it has the new section and it has all the other stuff that you recommended and town meeting adopted. But you'll see the three points is reserved for future use. That's all the stuff she didn't like. So, I think the town council is going to come

126back and try to fill in those spaces uh maybe at the fall town meeting and we'll see what the new town planner says about that. We're good. Motion move to adjourn. Second. We move the second to adjourn. All those in fa uh any discussion? All those in favor I opposed. Unanimously applied. Good night. Thank you for our book.