Planning Board (April 30th, 2026)

001Good evening everyone and welcome to the Ashlin Planning Board meeting of Thursday, April 30th, 2026. A reminder that the meeting is being broadcast and recorded. Um I will call the meeting to order at 7:17 and first item on our agenda as always is the chair clerk's report. Um, I have not seen um I'm a little bit behind um after being gone. Um I have not seen too many emails come in. I believe something came in today, but I didn't get a chance to review it. Is is that right? There was a um I think it was about it was a resident in one of the areas of a project, but I I didn't get a chance to really read it. >> Anyway, um it's known that it did come in. >> Yes. It did come

002in, but um >> okay. This morning um but uh >> and I think Melissa responded to it, right? >> Somebody responded to it. >> I Yeah, I don't I think I received it. Maybe I received Melissa's response, but anyway, it's kind of acknowledge at this point that it was received and we will all have a chance to review it before our next before our next meeting. Um, but that's the only um [snorts] it's been a long time since our last meeting, but it might may have been it may have been the only emails that have come up. Does anyone have any other memory of anything that has come up that I might have missed? Okay. All right. Next on our agenda is um time for public comment. There's any public comment in the room or

003online, [snorts] now is your chance. Okay, thank you Mark. Good evening 119 Main Street. It's been a pretty good amount of time since I came to to one of the meetings. So, and I'm just asking two questions is um one is about the housing in this town. Has there been any progress with this state about the housing author authorities with the state house to um bylaws against Ash and other towns? Are there reasons to talk about developments? >> I'm dealing with [snorts and clears throat] housing. I'm talking about the the Massachusetts state law about housing and how it's taking over the communities all 350 communities on the so that state house can override have overrides town bylaws. >> You mean you mean about in 40 >> 40s? Gotcha. >> Yeah. 40 bees and how how

004how bylaws in the in the this town and zone in and planning board and all that how is this favoring the developers to trump over them. Has there been any talk about among the boards to try to get more even playing field? Um, not that I'm aware of. And I I'm imagining until until the housing shortage in the state and across the United States is kind of mediated a bit. I doubt there'll be too much um changes on that. I do want to say that maybe a year and a half ago, the select board and planning board, I believe had a joint session to talk about housing in general. And my hope would be at some point after our housing production plan is done and spile with the state and I don't know exactly where

005that is in status. It may be a good idea at some point as the implementation committee for the comprehensive plan starts to work on the comprehensive plan. I'm sure this board together with the select board will come back to ideas of housing and implementing both the housing production plan and the comprehensive plan. So I don't know Mark if what you're asking is what are we doing to sort of address the housing crisis? I would say those are some of the things we have done recently. comprehensive plan, housing production plan, and I'm confident we'll have to do more as we implement both. >> Yeah, that's true. There was that uh housing meeting. I think it was longer ago than that because I think it pre it was before the the comprehensive plan. But um but now

006that the comprehensive plan is complete and the housing production plan is almost complete. I'm not sure about that date that date either. We seem to have all the tools we should need to talk more about housing and how to, you know, how we can create it and hopefully control it in a way that's good for Ashland. And [clears throat] the followup question is is basically until things can work out better and even are the planning board because you're here. Are your hands still tied because of that reason? >> Are our hands tied? because the state is is using the the U state housing authority and and shortage of housing. They're using that and saying towns towns going to have to kind of converge, but they go by our the state our regulations, not the towns.

007Is this board's tied to that? Well, I guess as always, the board needs to follow both the local Ashlin bylaws when they apply and state law when it applies. So, we are bound by both of those factors. Think sometimes people think that the planning board can just reject things out of hand and and and we we can't do that. We have to follow the bylaws and and the state laws. Um so um are we bound by those things? Sure. Of course we are because they're the laws >> and the bylaws of this town is being in some points are being overrun by the state laws. >> Yeah. The state law trumps the local bylaws in some cases. >> So basically the hands and the only term I know how to say it is the boards

008are tied to the state law. their hands are tied by the state law and using the bylaw. The state can sue Trump over them. >> No answer. >> I I'm I'm not quite sure what you were restating. I'm just restate I'm just re saying that this >> the state law should be more compromised with the bylaw of this town each town instead of saying they're they're they're doing state housing bylaws and not opening it up and being compromised and having the state law bylaws work together and doesn't seem like they are working together. Well, you know, it's hard to solve big problems, you know, um they they don't always work together, you know, um to try to solve problems across the state. Um yeah, ideally, yeah, they they work closely together. Um, so there there

009are things that are hard obviously like the 40B. Those are those are hard for us to um to to work with and other things other laws that are passed by the state such as the ADU bylaw. I think we were all very happy about like to to implement that and we had planned to do that anyway. So it wasn't very hard. So um they're not all egregious, you know. So, >> and we got the one example in this town that's still going on that is not in the planning board's um circle of opinions that's at the conservation. That's the 20 that's the 40 60 mil bill. And so that's what I'm trying to see if if it can be worked together and not have the same giant step over everything in the town and and

010work and work together. The state doesn't want to do that and develop is going to go with the state. It seems like a two against one to get things done in the correct phrases. Thank you. >> Thanks, Mark. All right. I assume there's no other comments online. Um so seeing none, we will go on to public meetings. Uh first on our agenda is um well one item under that agenda um heading is 37 James Road as an ANR. Um >> yes. Is that you, George going to So, there was a first a first ANR on this property that we looked at a few weeks ago, whatever that was, right? >> Yes, it is. [cough] All right. So, we have a uh two parcels of land that Mr. uh Wheeler has uh interest in. One of

011them you saw last week as a small lot out on uh 137 Pawn Street. It's at the bottom corner of that now being cut into two little pieces you can see there. And then the remainder of the land, a larger parcel about 15 acres that has access um from uh Pawn Street and also from James Road. And uh the first little piece that you looked at a couple weeks ago was the uh the plan an ANR of existing condition for that 137 and another one for 123 pond which uh basically froze zoning. This plan tonight with it showing five lots and some backland uh creates ANR lots and they are um as of right ANR lots because of the street frontage that exists there. You can see on James there's a house that um is

012empty but it is a house that was indeed occupied shortly. The um plan calls for five lots that will reinforce our financing with the bank um for acquisition uh and uh permitting of the remainder of the for the entirety of the property as we go forward. We're putting in uh plan under the Pawn Street mixeduse overlay district. Um but in the interim, this creates a uh much more robust financing package for Mr. wheeler. So, the five lots are on existing streets and some access left to the rear of the property. Uh, in case anytime a subdivision that would be different than our proposal that's coming forward would be happy to ask answer any questions or respond to any comments. So, I'm sorry. We're was in communication with our other member who's trying to um come

013in uh online. So, I I missed some of this. So, you're creating that one, but two, three, four, and five. And those are their two residential standard lots. the the house on James Street, that large lot on the top of the plan, that's a lot. And then there will be another lot to the right of that, as you can see, that little square is an existing house of some other ownership. But then to the right of that, that sort of L-shaped uh lot, that would be a new lot. And then along um Pawn Street, there would be three potential lots where um the existing house that uh was bought, that little 30,000 square foot piece, um we'll have the house torn down. It's condemned anyway. And would provide with some land in the back, enough

014frontage and area for those two lots. And then just north of that, there could be a road into the back in the future possibly. And then that final fifth lot. So that tells me that not that it's relevant to this discussion, but it tells me that the project that was being looked at and came before the board several times is probably changing dramatically. >> No, this has no effect on it. This is simply a financing package enhancement. a single lot which was the first appraisal came in because of the lot that he acquired on Pawn Street. And looking at that valuation in our appraisal, we said, "Okay, five lots that would be approvable would create a much more robust financing package for Mr. Wheeler." >> Okay. Not That's something not not in my wheelhouse. Not

015not in my wheelhouse. I understand. Does someone else have a business sense that can explain this to me? Because I >> understand what what are the original I I I can see what you're trying to design up here, but what what are they currently right now? >> Currently, there is >> is it can you see my cursor? >> Yeah. >> Coming down here. This this right now is see this dotted line. >> Oh, sorry, Mackie. So, correct, George. So, the lot line comes here currently cuts across this stone wall. This dotted line is the existing lot line. Now coming AC across this way up here. This is the existing lot here. Right. >> Well, >> and this this as well, sorry, comes all the way up to here. So this this larger outline here up

016to this dotted line is the existing frontage. So they're adding this lot >> and they're taking this slot and cutting it into making it bigger but cutting it into two at the same time. So this is existing right now with this dotted line. So currently this is the existing frontage here up until this and this ement is existing there. >> So this whole piece this whole section here >> is one property right now. >> This piece right here is already its own lot right here right now. Let me show you. Let me >> if you look at the drawing on the on the table >> it's here the site plan. That's what was the whole lot. >> Could you imagine that closer to us? >> So, it's one big lot that's being divided. >> That's

017what he owns. That's not one lot. >> It was. Now, it's getting >> This was >> This is it how it is right now. >> Little section right here. This one whole lot that it currently is right now. This is it right now >> in the in the condemned house. Is that is where >> that's right now and the fence around it. So that corner piece is still not a part not a part of the not a part of this plan. It's not a part of it's >> part of the plan. >> It is part of the plan. >> This is that lot right now. So, I guess the confusion is how are we if it's a different owner, how are we how are we talking about including that in our discussion today if it's

018owned by someone else? >> Because Mr. Wheeler owns under pendulum the lot at 137 with the condemned house and he has an equitable interest by his purchase and sale agreement on the remaining 14 acres. So, he has the ability to propose a for uh the ANR plan. Can you put that in because >> Can you put it in? >> I'm a little foggy because of the cold that I have, but I'm not I'm just not So, so this lot right here, right, you're saying is owned by a different entity? Pendulum the same the same ent the same person owns the two entities. No >> pendulum is that little lot. >> Yep. >> He acquired that about 6 months or a year ago on the principal. >> Okay. So, and then um the whole other as

019outlined on here is owned by >> by VNP. >> Okay. So, the corner part is owned. The rest of it is in negotiations, >> but we're we're we're trying to close on it. This is part of finance and close on. >> Okay. So, my question is how do we um how do we make changes to a piece of land this a piece of land that is >> you don't have permission from >> not Yeah. not not owned by the same >> but in the process of >> Yeah. I I does that I've never I I don't think we've ever dealt with that before and that's why I'm really confused. >> It doesn't matter. >> No, it doesn't. >> No, you and I could uh agree to swap corners of our land. I'll take a piece

020of yours in the front, you take a piece of mine in the back. It happens a lot. >> But is everyone Is everyone involved who currently own this land present? like may >> they have given Mr. um Wheeler in the purchase and sale agreement the permission to go forward with all the permitting necessary for that such as the plan you've already seen back a year ago. >> So So is our decision on this contingent upon the land being owned by one entity? No, >> no, but you would want permission from the landowner before you approved anything on their property. >> Yeah. This is what this is what I don't understand. I feel like I'm cutting up somebody else's property who isn't here, you know. >> Well, I I don't understand how that works. If if

021you follow it, that plan is meaningless at the registry of deeds in so far as those lots are concerned until such time as there's a deed that sells, for example, lot one or lot two or lot five. Plans do not transfer ownership rights. They only show where things could be. So that plan can be recorded. It may never ever be used. and until a deed um transfers either the totality of it for the 200 units or the back land or the lots. It it just sits there as a ANR that has value only in so far as it has a um recognized ANR plan. So saying in two weeks, could I just as an example at our next meeting, could I present on this same piece of land a different plan? >> Could you what?

022>> Could could I plan for a different plan for this land and present something and put that as an ANR and it just sits there? >> Not without my authority. property. >> So, is that in writing somewhere else that there's an that this has been done with the owner's authority? It is. >> It's in the agreement. Yes. That's the first thing because you have to go for permitting. You have to go for conservation, wetland delineations, mass highway, curb cuts, >> right? But you see why that's strange for us. Like, well, how do I know that that these people have agreed? I'm I'm not doubting. I'm just trying to understand the process. You understand, right? How do I know that these people are okay with you guys being here? Like I I don't like how do

023I know that? That's what seems strange to me. >> Madam Chair, if I may, typically a form A requires signatures from all owners of record. >> But we have that >> we only have signatures from one owner of record, not all. >> But he he has the equitable interest in law. But we have no proof of >> You don't bring Do you have the like do you have the >> the paperwork on you like in an email or do you have like it saying that this exists that the sale is contingent on you, you know, getting all the permits and approvals and everything of that nature? I'm sure you do, right? >> Right. I think we can discuss this, you know, as as it is obviously and with all the normal questions. That's just the

024one piece I'm it just it feels really strange and I it's just not my area of expertise. So I just understand >> other owner of record be willing to sign an ANR application. >> The original application for the units back a year ago would have had that That wouldn't have been in reference. Would that have referenced this layout? >> It would have referenced the owner BNP, >> right? But can we get would they sign the ANR to support this? >> They gave Bruce [snorts] and me permission to apply for any and all permits for a project. We have a wetland permit. but we hadn't it hasn't come before the board only informally. >> Yeah. >> Um >> never came formally in >> Yeah. We never received an actual application. So informally, you know, people can

025talk about it. >> Yeah. It was just held in obeyance. >> Yeah. But when we asking for a signature on this Then that's a little different. The whole application in >> the 200 I forget the number but 200 units had the complete package with all the applications um documents narratives wetland [snorts] delineation >> right >> it was there I think we need to take those papers out Because right now in this context it doesn't make sense. >> It sounds to me [clears throat] it sounds to me like the application may not be complete. That's kind of my gut. >> Well, it it was also a different application because you didn't own >> that that piece of property, right? That four and five are going on to back then, right? So, it's >> No, we didn't.

026No. >> Right. So, it's a different one now, right? It would be a >> well it was the VNP property the 14 acres that is the one that's in question. >> I'm thinking maybe our next step is to explore with with count with legal counsel town council just to confirm that because I think we have a we're having a gut instinct that something isn't quite right and that we're missing some key details document signatures to confirm that we can actually act. So my gut to respect the application and also our doubts is that this should go to legal to kind of clear that this application is actually complete. I that's my two cents. >> No, I agree. That's where I'm sitting too. It's just like I said, it just feels uh >> we need a

027little guidance from you Jasmine because I think the board is a bit perplexed as to whether we have jurisdiction to actually view this as a complete application for an ANR. >> I would also recommend putting it to council, but in my experience, you need all signatures of all owners. >> That would make the application incomplete, in which case seems like we at this prematurely. >> That's what I'm hearing. >> No, no, that's that said, which I agree with. But in the application, >> just um Jasmine, in your review of this, um is there any does the does the divide dividing of the properties follow all the bylaws? >> It does. The larger lot obviously doesn't meet the rule of 22, but it's not a buildable lot. So that not being a buildable that is part

028of what makes it not a buildable lot is that it doesn't meet the rule of 22. So you would be allowed to approve this plan as it >> because it's labeled and that's partial A. >> Exactly. >> Because it's labeled not a buildable lot because it doesn't have the frontage. So it's you can't just put a single family house there and call it >> exactly >> call it day. Okay. So it's labeled appropriately. Um, and the um the house back here is that um is that uh conforming? Does that sit back from the property line? Because we can't create that's existing, >> right? >> In its existing condition, it's pre-existing non-conforming. It's also condemned. So, it has to come down. >> Yeah. No, it but but I I think it's just that also it's like

029it's a non it's not considered a building lot. I know in the past when we've had a structure along a property line um that was non-conforming, we're not allowed to create a non-conforming lot, right? >> Well, there's an exe an exemption for that under 81L, but that's we're not going there. >> Yeah. So, it may not be it may not be applicable here, but I know I know in the past we haven't been allowed to create to create a lot that's non-conforming. >> We did have to have a special note on a drawing. >> There are certain circumstances that could happen, but others that it won't. >> I'm just trying to see what's on here that besides this question of ownership >> that we need to maybe get well, you know, while we're asking town

030council that let's ask her all the questions that we have, right? And ask them all at one time. So, um, so and the the street, which I the little, um, access way, which is kind of a paper street as you call it. Um, that would be because it's a non-conforming lot, that's fine, too. >> Right. So, you're just allowed to access the pass on to, >> right? Okay. All right. She had a question. I was wondering uh why lots three and four don't touch. Like why the why the space in between lots three and four? >> That's the access way to to get to parallel A, isn't it? >> Yeah. If if you if you look at that on uh the lot on my right, I think it's three, there is an easement that's being

031preserved in that so that in the future if a road were to go back into that back land, that lot would give up that land and have its frontage on the new road where now it has its frontage uh requisite frontage on Pawn street. So the strip plus that easement would constitute a 50-ft strip for a future road going into the back. Is the intention to to extend James Road down that 30 foot wide utility easement? >> Could we Is that the question? >> Yeah. Would Could you Would you Is that your thoughts or >> not our intention? >> Not your intention. Just wondering. >> Well, it's also 40 ft and your subdivision requires 50. And doing the zoning change to these five lots compared to the current thing would help you with your financing,

032right? Is it how because it looks like it's more valuable when it's has the ability to be five buildable lots. >> Yeah. >> Right. Okay. Just trying to understand the whole that I understood. >> Yeah. No, that I got I was just just confirming. Um, and I wasn't here a year and a half ago when you presented or when you unofficially presented the plan for the 200, you know,ish units or so. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. Um, is that on lot one and two? Is that where that's going? >> It's onish. >> Well, >> so, so it does go into parcel A. That is not >> Yeah. >> Sorry. Yes. >> 216 units. >> Yep. >> It is. It was kind of a L shape or U-shaped >> over the playground in the center. >>

033Oh, okay. Thanks. I just wasn't here, so I didn't know what it looked like. building. >> So adding that property to the front that has the on Pond Street that allows for a bigger building to go there or just a little bit easier for traffic access type things. >> It expands the frontage and makes more attractive escape and uh andale and commercial opportunity. >> You mean that building wouldn't wasn't wasn't good for the look of the uh of the buildings behind it. Is that what you're saying? >> Nice structure. I mean, it it does have a nice structure. It's they they left it. But on its own, the original design was I think lovely, but >> I got you. I was just okay sarcastic. >> So it it does significantly increase our our front agent

034streetscape and retail appeal um uh which is part of the mixed use requirement. And so that's that's why we were interested in in the suggestion uh by a number of people that we interacted with that it would be [clears throat] advantageous to the design of it. >> Okay. I also wasn't here a year and a half ago, but I think I'm finally starting to understand. So this plot plan is basically for the bank to say it could be five pieces of property. >> Exactly. But your plan is not to ever make it five pieces necessarily >> prior to having the development approved and and so for the financial structure um to to simplify the financing and uh uh complete that process. Um this makes the appraisal work better uh and and thus the ifies the

035financing of it. >> Great. So, as far as I'm concerned, um it's just confirming with Lisa that there's no issues about forming a non-conforming lot, which I don't think there are, but we did. >> I did check with town council on that, Madam Chair, and she did say there was no issue being a non-conforming law. >> Okay. And then I think the second thing is just the it's just the ownership. Like I said, it's it's hard for me to till I hear from town council that it's okay for me to sign off on dividing a property that isn't owned by the people presenting it. That's a little weird. I need someone to tell me that that's okay, that I can put my name on that and or or what we need to do, what what

036we need to have to show us that it's okay for us to put our name on that. That that's what's confusing. I'm sure that's just a question for town council and and then that'll be the answer. So, >> so assuming that they gave us that, is everybody like this isn't me officially asking, but like we feel like we're okay with the five lots so that I >> I mean, correct me if I'm wrong. Um, but that's part of the approval not required is that if it meets all the requirements, >> we just >> our approval isn't required except we have to sign off on it for some weird reason. >> Okay, cool. Just wanted to make sure it was >> Yeah. >> All good. >> Yeah. Plan complies and so >> Yeah. >> Thank you.

037So >> So when's the next meeting? >> Two weeks. >> All right. Give me just one moment. It will be the second week. >> Yeah. >> It is two weeks because this is the odd week. We pushed it. We're not supposed >> May 14th. >> Yeah. >> Would you be able to have town council do response back? >> Absolutely. So if we can get on the agenda for the 14th um then uh gives everyone time to communicate with town council and get comfort that um this complies it doesn't create any problems that would be >> yeah it's mostly like I said just knowing um if there needs to be some kind of documentation or sign off or or whatever before we before we sign off on it. Um, that's all. >> So, do you want

038a motion to continue this to two weeks out? >> Uh, yes, please. >> I have a motion that we continue the 37 James Road ANR um to was it May 14th. >> I'll second that. >> All right. Roll call vote. >> Meta Tesmani. I >> Pier. >> Um, >> Dino I. >> Okay, there we go. All right. And Trisha Kendall I. So we will continue that and we will see you on the 14th. >> Wonderful. >> Great. >> Thank you. >> Boy, always a challenging question here. You think you know it all and then something new. >> We're in for a meeting. >> All right. Thank you for your time. >> All right. Thank you. Thanks, George. All right, so next on our agenda, um, under public hearings, uh, is the design commute design review

039committee bylaw amendment. Um, so this is a public this this is um our bylaw that is going to town meeting next week and we're required to have a public hearing to discuss it with the public. We might have a few people here. I'm not sure. So, um, Jasmine, just what's the process? Do we just need to do >> we just have to >> read it in or what? >> I have to read the public hearing notice into the record. Okay. and then we I can share the bylaw with you and discuss it if you'd like. >> All right, sounds good. Thank you. >> In accordance with the pro provisions of Mass General Law Chapter 48, section 5, the Ashlin Planning Board will hold a public hearing on Thursday, April 30th, 2026 at 7:15 p.m. on

040proposed amendments to the Ashlin zoning bylaws. The changes are being proposed to one amend the existing design review committee bylaw to allow and encourage more public participation. The hearing will be held in person in Ashlin Town Hall in the select board hearing room second floor and remote participation is available via Zoom video conferencing platform. The proposed zoning amendments will be to the following sections of the Ashlin zoning bylaws under chapter 282 a section 9.6 design plan review. The proposed zoning amendments are available at the town clerk's office by appointment during regular town hall hours or on the Ashland planning department website through the following link. Parties wishing to be heard on this matter should submit comments to the planning board ahead of time or appear at the time and place indicated above. For more information

041or to submit comments, please contact Melissa Adams at town hall. Okay. So um so you have the so we'll bring the draft up and basically the background for um anyone who's online and um anyone listening at home is that basically what this is doing is that uh currently and I don't remember for how many years the planning board has had a design review committee I want to say it was at least 15 years something like that um that the design review committee was formed. This is a committee of um I think typically five members. There's three there's two alternates and it sits underneath the planning board. The planning board um appoints the members of the design review committee. And the D design review committee is um a group that reports that looks at the design

042of projects under certain that meet certain qualifications and then reports back to the planning board um about the changes they have requested. Um, often the planning board a asks the design review committee to look at certain things um, in particular according to the bylaws and um, so and and uh, through that um, the design review committee can really focus on design elements of these projects. um leaving the planning board free to you that we don't have to spend as much time on that otherwise we tend to have some very very long meetings. Um and I think it's especially helpful at times when when the planning board has very few or no designers sitting on that board to look at it in a design sense um versus a policy sense. So, um, but we've been having

043trouble at least in the seven years I have been on the board in um finding people to to sit on that on that committee who have the kind of expertise that's recommended in the bylaw. Um it because it it takes a lot of time. There are a lot of meetings. It's a big commitment. It's been a three-year commitment and it's been hard to establish a relationship between that committee and um the planning board that hasn't that has been smooth and allows the planning board to get the information it needs to make decisions. So, um the the thought here is to um change the makeup of this board a little bit. Um so that instead of having um a board with a permanent board with five members plus two alternates um that have a each that

044that have a um three-year commitment that instead we look at forming ad hoc committees per project so that when we get a new project in that needs a design review, we create an ad hoc group just for that project. This would be three to five members. And so the time commitment is much smaller for those professionals. They can just focus on on one um one building, one project. And then at the end of their at the end of looking at that project, that committee is disbanded. Sorry. [cough] Hence the mask. Um, so that's what the wording and is is trying to do to to form that group in a different way. I might need to have someone else take over. So I think Trisha did a a full description of the barlaw itself. I I

045would say the best way to think about it is I think the word ad hoc is used in the language I almost think of it closer to pdeium or per project basis but the language ad hoc is sufficient to capture the theme of it because I think when we originally discussed it may have been one of my random ideas that stuck. Um the concept was let's create a roster of talent that we can rely upon to pull for projects. I think the one thing I will throw out there is I believe we addressed this three. Okay, we did by size. Good. Uh it's three members, right? Or five. >> Actually, what did we change that to? Can we clear that up? >> I think we change. >> No, we had changed it to three to

046five actually. Let's make sure that's clear because >> Yeah, >> that looks confusing. >> So, this is supposed to be three and not >> five and not three. >> It's supposed to be 325. >> I'm glad I cleared that up. >> Yeah, we talked about that last time because we talked that some projects >> might be a small project, but other projects say the YMCA maybe maybe five people would want to participate. >> Exactly. So once that's addressed that this now captures planning board's intentions as to what we're trying to do. We're trying to create a um a committee that we can not overwhelm rely upon from time to time and maybe create consistency on the roster itself in some way. Um that would be the end of my summary. >> Your summary's good. I

047just had a question about it after I didn't know if they were >> I think we start with questions first on the board and then eventually we open it up for public comment. >> Yeah. The only one I um I love the idea by the way because I haven't had a design review thing and I think it'd be cool to have somebody give us some their insights. Um, I was just wondering if we didn't get three, like what if there was just two people who loved the project and wanted to talk about it and wanted to look at it, would we just say no or >> it would not be? Yeah, we would say no. But I mean technically in theory this technically this planning board at any time can create an ad hoc committee.

048We can request we can do that right now. We don't need the design review committee for us to create some other committee. >> Okay. >> And we don't need a bylaw to do it either. >> I don't think >> so. >> I think right now if we had a special project where we were like this is a unique project. We need to pull some people together and Mark volunteered and we were like yes Mark go do it. >> I think we could bless Mark to go do it and item without a bylaw. That help? >> Yeah it does. I just so this is more to kind of make it official >> YouTube. You're just here. So >> So we're doing this more to just make it official as a as a mechanism. >> It feels

049like not feels like this is a very specific thing. This is the the design review committee. It must be three to five. So if only two of them are open, we're going to have to fill the third seat. We're not going to be able to use them to grab two. This is written as we're defining what the design review committee is. We expect three to five to be available for an EDM ad hoc project. If we need two, we're going to have to find some other way to do it. Not through design review. >> Got it. Thanks. >> But it doesn't mean we can't have a conversation now about editing it to two to five if you want. I'm just saying that that was not our intent. I think >> and um I I think

050this does not preclude members of the planning board sitting in those seats as a subcommittee because basically this is a subcommittee of the planning board >> in theory but I think you'd have to be appointed to be a designer review member >> right for the for the duration of that. I'm not saying that's what we want to do, but if we need I in fact I think that's not what we want to do, but if needed to make up the three to have three voices, >> you know, but >> as long as they would be I mean, we would still need to appoint the person by application, but yeah, in theory, we could follow that and one of us could file the application, >> but also it's not there's nothing in here also that says

051that um >> you know, so we're we're looking for people with um with professional experience, but it says where possible. So, it could be just someone that wants to participate in the conversation. So, I would hope for short durations we would be able to build those seats. So, so maybe we can take public if there's any public comment um online. Is that going to be a I I think when we talked about this last time, I believe that was the only change changing from >> We had to wait until today to do it because this is your public hearing. So, I couldn't have changed it, altered it, voted on it. >> Oh, okay. Because this is the draft that went out when you posted it. So, this is what we had to discuss. So, now

052with this change, you can vote to approve it with this amendment. And then this we'll send this amendment to the town clerk and this is what goes to town meeting. >> Okay. Got it. >> So >> if you choose to approve it. >> Yes. So let's make sure we open it then up to is there any uh anyone that may have come on come on to >> Nobody's raised their hand. >> No hands raised. >> Okay. Have to have one public comment on our bylaw. >> Yeah. I was just waiting to see if anybody online was going to be coming on. But Mark 119 Main Street again to form this committee ad hoc or as a as a group. You still need a forum a quorum. Yes or no? >> Yes. This would be a

053public um public committee. What? >> Right. So it would have the same regulations about posting um posting meetings and having meeting minutes that other committees would. >> And by doing ad hoc is that is there is there a slight difference between that and a and a and a quorum or ad hoc or not? >> Um no I think ad hoc is about how the committee is formed and a quorum is a quorum. >> Yep. And uh what's the minimum what would be the minimum number ad hoc or quorum? What's the minimum number of ad hoc? >> Three. We we're saying three to five. So three would be a minimum. >> Okay. And um yes, it was you you were appointing the design committee some years ago that you two were working hand sometimes. Yes. Sometimes

054no. on for special projects. Is this is the design committee that is is are they is there still a design committee formed >> at the current time? There's no design review committee. >> Well, the committee like exists. There's just no members on the committee, right? Doesn't >> That's right. >> Yeah. The the physical thing exists, right? There's just no members. >> The bylaw exists, but there's no members on it. Okay. I just want to make sure. >> So, does that mean that um the chairman chairman Rooney left too? >> Also, this is actually no >> there are no members on the on the committee at this the current time. >> So, this is actually a um a reach out to form >> a reach out to for >> this is an attempt to start new.

055>> Yes. Yes. Thank you. Um just looking at that staring at that we are calling it design plan review on line one then we call it form design review in the next parah then we call it design review committee is there a way we can consistent with the naming here not sure where that design plan review I'm guessing it the section that it's under it's under the section design plan review design plan review committee >> okay and what is form design review is conducted >> the first line >> so form is the form of this bylaw so that stays as it is and then design review committee design review is conducted by a committee so this falls under design review in chapter 282 so this committee is a is a subsection under design review that's

056why it's numbered that way. So design plan review is the process and the committee is the committee that's being formed under that process. So we're not we're actually talking about two different things. So when you're saying design plan review, we're talking about the process of the design plan review. And when we say committee, we're talking about the committee. Too many things in one paragraph. This was written by council. So I would be very cautious if any edits we make. I would >> I think what's so in this >> and it's this is exactly how it's written now. The only thing that's being changed is what's crossed out and underlined. So this is existing language. So this language >> I mean nothing stopping us if it is a opportunity to clean up and ask for >>

057approval. I don't think it's stopping us from doing that. have town meeting on May 6th. So you have to make any changes you would need to make tonight. >> Yes. So hold on. >> You wouldn't be able to have the town council review any other changes that you make. >> So um are you talking about um Deepa the paragraph under 9.6.2 that paragraph. So it talks about it says design review instead of design plan review right >> it says form design review is conducted by a committee. Whereas >> the way you keep saying it, it's like you make it sound like it's three words together. It's form period. Right. That like stops it >> just like under that it says applicability and authority period. So this is how the sections are broken down. This is

058how it's written in the entirety of the bylaw. All of the bylaws, not just this. >> Oh, it's very similar to the applicability and authority talking about. >> Yeah, it's a subheading >> that a sub. >> And then what is design plan review? That's the name of the title of the bylaw. That's that's what this is titled under under section 22. This is under 9.6. >> I've always thought the plan sounded a little funny in design plan review because we never say that. But I think at the time it was site plan review and design plan review. >> And it might be something we want to change at that at some point. But um here we're just trying to I've always thought it sounded a little funny myself, but here >> yeah, [snorts] >> as

059JZ has been saying, we're just trying to >> Yeah. As a designer, plan plan review is different. Form is different. Threedimensional, >> right? Is it just me? >> [laughter] >> Anyway, I mean if architects look at this, >> it gives a very bad impression of the town. Okay. >> Yeah, I see. I see that. So that form, you were looking at that form as an architectural term versus a legal term or a not not even a legal term, a heading say >> because planned review is different. Form is different. >> Yeah. So form forum means how the committee is going to be organized. >> Yeah. >> Um I think it it reads okay. Thankfully most people who are going to read it are not architects. No offense to [laughter] >> and again this is consistent

060>> the rest of ours need >> yes >> you need to run the entire bylaw through cha >> it may not be >> make it >> try different you know different requests make it sound like an architect now try comedian but I think we're good to go >> okay so we're good to go with that just that the change from of three to five members and otherwise otherwise we're good to go >> and I'd just like to use this opportunity to just when we are doing such changes we should use that opportunity to clean up not as an opportunity to say this is what was there it doesn't make sense because now we are putting our names on these things so I think I I don't think it's a very positive attitude to say this

061is what it is. This is what it is. So I feel like this is probably the third bylaw that we have cleaned up so far in the five and a half years I've been here. I would love to use these opportunities to really clean up as much as we can irrespective of time constraints. So um this is fine for today but it's just that I don't think that idea of um accepting things as is is okay at least for me. >> Yeah. I mean, I think it's just um you know, if there's something that um we can do at the moment that you think makes a difference, we can do that. Like I I mean I don't know if it's appropriate to sub to put in >> design plan review where it says for >>

062this is okay. I mean for now it's okay because I also as a professional read other towns documents. So, it talks a lot about the quality of work that we do and being a planning mode member, I feel like these are opportunities for us to do our small share of things. >> Um, >> it's just hard. >> Yeah, it's just hard because we've had this in front of us before. True. >> And we didn't make those changes then. >> Agreed. >> So, now we're, you know, it's a hard time to do it. >> I mean, here's what I'll say. I think it's a it's it's a unique solution to a problem and it's phrased in a way that is not ambiguous and makes the point and then it has some words or terms that might

063be slightly off but at the heart of it it's solid in my opinion and it's pretty simple it's a simple concept >> so I wouldn't want us to over overink to perfection something that's fairly good in action And it may once we test it out a little bit for several years, it may need some adjustment as a new system. So I I do think it might be helpful for us once it passes, assuming it passes, you know, to create a advertisement and try to get actual applications. >> Yeah. I mean, I think if and when this passes, I mean, I will be reaching out to my whole list of registered architects, landscape architects, engineers that are here in town to see if they'll be willing to be on that list, you know, so that when

064we can build that, you know, build that um roster, as you called it, you know, of people that we might want to give a a call to >> when we have projects come before us. >> I I I was just going to say, you know, I can see there's a lot of critique of our board sometimes due to misunderstandings of what we do in town. I can see something like this being a positive communication tool with the public of, hey, do you want to help the planning board? And I definitely think it's awesome that Trisha has done a lot of recruiting. I I I for one would would recommend an open public way to share it and say, "Hey, we have an actual deadline. We want applicants in this round. We want to make a

065big deal out of it because we need we need support." Um, but either way, we can discuss that. I think it might be good to have an agenda item in our future conversation once this passes to figure out how to use it. >> Yep, definitely. >> Okay. Think about it. It's got engineers, landscape architects, and business people. You know, having this go to our business community and um would be great too. Any other comments on the bylaw? Okay. So, that said, um >> I'll make a motion. >> Please. I'll make a motion to approve the bylaw to move it forward to town meeting as discussed relative to the amendments discussed which I believe was the three to five member one. >> Uh sec. Is there a second? >> Second >> and a roll call vote.

066>> Annoti I got IO. >> And Trisha Kendall. All right. Great. So town meeting is uh th Wednesday Thursday. Wednesday. >> Wednesday the 6th. So, be there. Be square. >> I also think it is the last article on there, so you can probably make your summary pretty short and it'll probably >> I'm going to have slides and dog and pony show and all kinds of stuff. >> Last. Wow, we're dead last. Oh, nice. Okay. All right. >> All the action will be like four amendments before that. So, yeah. There are four warrant articles, but >> uh next on our agenda is 240 to 260 Pleasant Street. >> Who do we have? >> Wayne Bell. >> Okay. [cough] >> Evening, Madam Chair, members of the board, Wayne Bell Design Collaborative here on behalf of um Metro

067West Christian Academy. Um I have a couple of the partners in crime uh joining us as well. Um, so I think where we left off the last time, um, unless I was misreading the board, um, I I think that the general consensus was that we have responded satisfactorily to the peerreview comments uh, presented by GCG and it seems like we're past the engineering issues. Um and I think the only and then we got into the uh further discussion on the synthetic turf. Um and the the board had asked um us to take a look at a little bit more information um on the on the on the product um that's uh being considered and um you know look at I guess you know one of the concerns was uh you know the levels of PAS

068uh in the project. So, we had forwarded the the board um um through um Jasmine um I think it was last week, Jasmine, we had sent you some information that uh our client had collected from Smart Turf. Um if you'd like, we can and and to be honest with you folks, um I hated chemistry in school. I hated chemistry. And when I opened up a few of these documents, it was riddled with chemistry. I'm not going to pretend to be a chemistry genius. Uh so I'd prefer not going through the particulars and pretty much go on the summaries presented uh by Smart Turf uh and the test results. So with that, um uh I don't know Jasmine if you'd like me to share my screen with what I have um or if you folks want

069to share your screen as we go through it. I think quite honestly, Madam Chair, I think that this portion of the presentation from our side uh is going to be brief. Um, and we're looking to let the documents speak for themselves. >> That's correct. >> So, with that said, yeah, knowing how much I like to talk, so I I do appreciate that. So, uh, so with that said, uh, uh, Jasmine, would you like me to share the screen or how would you want to >> all set if you would like that we can follow along while you speak? >> Okay, that's, uh, let's see if I remember how to do that. Share. There we go. Thank you. You folks can see my screen. Uh, so move a couple things. >> There we go. >> So,

070there we go. >> All righty. So you folks saw this document before this was presented at the last meeting and it was basically the smart turf uh system um which you know I've done a little bit of uh review on this and looking at the number of fields um out there in in the US that still use um a rubber type surf turf system. There's still quite a few out there. Although it did say that um there is a changeover in uh turfs to about a thousand turfs per year across the US. Um I tried to find out how many of those uh turfs were going from the full rubber system to this hybrid type system and really couldn't find anything on that. So um but this is basically what you're looking at the last

071time uh we spoke. And again, it's a polyethylene polyropylene type uh uh product with cat just joined me. Come on. Boo. Um so, uh so and that's the product and and with this one, like I said, there's an infill and we went through that at the last meeting and it's comprised of uh a number of natural um materials, coconut fiber, the uh as as part of the organics, cork uh and the like. So the the the question was well how much of that is you know in terms of percentage um and then the infill uh is a combination of silica and and this material uh and so it does reduce the amount of uh the rubber uh infill content uh to I think where we had it was around 30 to 50% or something. So,

072with that, um, the applicant had reached out to Smart Turf, um, to get, uh, the PAS, uh, safety statement, and if you folks have had a chance to review it, um, I really don't need to get into the nuts and bolts on it. Um, but, uh, excuse me, my little guy. Um so uh so looking at the um the letter basically states that you know they confidently say that uh the artificial grass products are independently tested and show non-detectable levels of PAS at 100 parts per trillion uh and present no danger on our to to the users or the environment. Now, interestingly, if you folks uh recall um at the last meeting, um Roger Martin uh who represents the the landscape company had indicated, which is true, and we know this that you know, as

073as we advance through the years, things are becoming uh more environmentally friendly, things are much better uh designed than they were years ago. And so, this letter came out in 2023. So I am sure there is more data out there between 23 and 26 that further supports this. Um they did get uh the PAS report, the test report. This is basically a summary. I could get into the others but again not a big fan of chemistry. Um so at the end of the day um we're looking at the test report um that was performed EPA uh testing um or methods of testing. Um and what they find found was they had now I could tell you I'm gonna I could give you give it a shot as to what these this means. So these chemicals

074which which are part of PAS were non-detectable uh to less one less than uh 100 parts per trillion. Um they're components uh of PAS and looking up online what the heck this actually meant. Um this PP FOA is uh a synthetic highly persistent like again forever chemical part of PAS group uh used since the 1940s um to make a number of things non-stick coatings waterproof things um and uh it is present in nearly 98% of the US population having detectable levels in their blood. Um the other one was uh P Foss uh again a a component of of P fast and again another synthetic uh forever chemical um developed since that uh that time. Um and so that's basically what looking at the results of this for that type of product versus the other components

075going into this the silica and and uh and you know the fibers and the natural fibers and such. Um with this being 30 to 50% as we understand uh from the last meeting of uh the composition um again it's about as good as as it is out there um for the product and this is what like I said this is what they're targeting they understand the sensitivity uh of the town and naturally so um and uh so that's why they're looking at um again uh this product um more so than than anything else. Um uh and again it's it's this is where everything's headed. Um so why fight the system? Um so that's basically it long and short. Again I would get into this fun stuff here but uh it's it yeah it gets a

076little too intense for me quite honestly. >> I think the cover page was adequate to explain. >> Thank you. Much much appreciated. >> At least it was for me. Yeah. Speak for everybody. Thank you. So, so with that, um, you know, like I said, I think we had the other areas covered. We presented this this information uh to the board. Um, again, we're not sure exactly how much more we can do um to satisfy the concerns of the board. I think the documentation presented uh pretty much speaks for itself. Um, so with that said, I I would like to open up questions to the board and I'm going to I'll tell you I'm going to do my best to respond to this. It's not my area of expertise, but whatever I know uh I will

077respond. It's interesting before I go here. I saw a can't recall if it was on the national news, but there was a a new clothing company that was actually using products and the question came up about PAS and they were using products to to make their clothes and I know my understanding I mean I'm I'm not I don't make clothing so but I understand that there are a lot of clothing out there that have pas in it and I guess the the levels of of the plastic or whatever they were using was higher than normal. Um, which I just found pretty interesting and it came you know within a week after that that last meeting that we had. But that's just a sidebar. But again, Madam Chair, any questions uh by the board? We'll entertain

078uh trying to answer it to the best of our ability. >> Uh any questions from the board? Um, so just to just to confirm from our discussion last time that on the um the fill um the fill descriptions that we reviewed, one was a hybrid infill and one was the TPE infill. This this project would be looking at the hybrid infill. >> Correct, Madam Chair. >> Okay. [snorts] And I assume much of that is based just on on cost versus the TP system. >> Well, yeah, I think so. I think so. I think it's based on cost and I think it's obviously a much better alternative to what many fields out there uh still have um for that. You know, it's interesting because when Roger had had commented about how much things have changed over

079the last five years, um I just go back to a couple of the the fields that were constructed for the local high school in my town and the middle school. Um and it's it it is that rubber, you know, it's interesting. I I see that I saw it go down. Um and like I said, and that was five, seven years ago, 10 years ago for the high school. Um which I find interesting. and how much things have evolved. So again, I think there's it's it's twofold, Madam Chair. I think cost is obviously a factor and then secondly, I think it's this is the way things are going. Um and then again, certainly the the input from the board um is certainly a factor as well. I mean, we ideally we'd like to come out of

080this with an approval. Um, and I think that, you know, what my my experience is, you need to work with boards and commissions to get things approved. You know, don't buck it. Don't buck the trend. Um, so you work with them. We get things done. So, yeah. So, that's basically the the the preference is the infill, the hybrid infill. >> All right. I think I think as you um thank you for providing that um information and uh uh education I guess I should say. >> Um so um I think we did go through last time everything in the all the questions that remained that would be you know put into conditions um conditions in in an approval. Um, are there any further where do people stand on the artificial turf as appropriate for the site?

081Really don't want to see it. You know, what where opinions on on this? >> I think it's probably appropriate for the site. I mean, turf uh standard grass really can't hold up to any amount of play. It is always mud eventually or just dust. Yeah, >> I think Paul Montesino is speaking. >> Oh, Paul, are you >> No, no, I got the mic open. I I'll shut >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Make sure we make sure you make yourself heard when you want to be heard there. Can forget that you're out there in cyerspace. So I I think for me this is a case of um yeah, you know, getting an education on it, but also um you know, the high school has a turf field, the middle school has a tier a turf

082field, and here's an an opportunity for you know, basically they're asking for the same things we do as a town, right? So um um obviously always trying to look at the safest products product we can get. Um, but it's also and and I don't know what's on our uh our fields, but they're they're older, so they're probably not as it's probably not as good as what what this is. Um, so this is probably better than what we have now. Um, and so, um, yeah. So, I I I think that's I think it's a I think it's a a fair use, you know, for it, but wondering what other members think. It's good for me. I'm good to go. >> Good. Okay. So, I mean, this is kind of our last chance for comments here. I

083mean, not that we're voting on, but we would be looking for then Jasmine start putting together an an approval document um that allows the turf the turf field um that goes through the other things that we talked about last time. Um spells out uh no loading area. Um there's something about the lighting. There's a few things that that are in here um that so that we would make sure those are in the decision. So things that are called out by GCG was just a handful of things. Um and then we do typically unless asked by the applicant, we do typically just leave things leave the public hearing open until we're actually ready to vote because it just ties our hands that we can't physically look at anything else if if um if something comes in

084or someone wants to contribute something at the last minute. So, um, but for the for the applicant's sake, can we take an informal vote >> on on this so they kind of understand where things are heading. You can change your vote next time if you want. Um, because we're not looking at the not looking at the actual approval document. Um, but so this is definitely informal. Um, so I will ask for a informal vote starting with EEPA. Objection. >> Yeah, >> I would agree. >> Same with me. >> Same here. I would agree. >> Angel, >> I agree. >> I want to hear your say. Yes. And I as well. So, so we are um so we will not we will not close the public hearing, but we will um um ask JZ to start

085to put together an approval document with the conditions that are that are um specified with GCG and including um the allowance of the turf field and we will have that uh on is is will you be able to have that on the 14th? >> Yes. Yeah, on the 14th so that we can review it at that time and um and take a formal vote. How does that sound? >> That sounds great. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, >> awesome. >> For >> so before we break away, there's been a lot of deliberation on this, especially with the the fields. Um, I have served my community um on boards and commissions uh I want to say 35 years, 30 35 years now. Um, it is thankless as you all know. Um, but I do appreciate I believe

086that boards and commissions need to do do their job, need to understand the the material presented to them, need to understand the regulations and the bylaws. Um, unfortunately I do represent clients where I go to towns and they're quite honestly clueless. Um, I do appreciate the makeup of your board. Um, and the questions that were asked. I do appreciate also the questions that were asked about um, this field. And again, admittedly, I know nothing much about this, but I do appreciate you folks allowing us to present the the information from professionals and people in the industry to uh to better inform you and to better uh satisfy your your your hunger for more information. So again, thank you very much. >> Thanks. Thanks for those comments. We do try to educate ourselves where we need

087to be educated and take those opportunities. So, we appreciate your willingness to help us out with that. >> Well, thank you very much, folks. And so, we will uh look forward to seeing you on the 14th. >> All right. Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. Take care. Have a good night. >> You, too. >> All right. >> Do we need a motion to continue? >> Yes, we do need a motion to continue. >> I'll make a motion or you go. No, you're you're getting into it today. You go. I uh motion that we continue the 240 to 260 Pleasant Street site plan review till May 14th. >> May 14th. >> I'll second that. >> And a roll call vote. >> Boing. Good day. >> Hannah Tesmanitzki. I >> got I. >> Um and Trisha Kendall

088I. So that'll be continued to the 14th. Um I'm sorry to do this folks, but just to backtrack a little bit to this bylaw. I found my copy from last >> here. And we had made one other small change on here. It said um uh >> so why don't we reopen the public hearing? >> All right. >> Right. Just for a motion to >> Okay. >> So I'll make a motion to reopen the public hearing. I think we need a motion if we closed it. >> There was a public meeting >> or a public meeting. >> Public hearing. So you a motion to open the public hearing. >> I'll make a motion to open the public hearing. >> Um do we need to vote on it or is it just reopen? You have to vote

089and then you have to vote to modify >> amend it. >> Can I do it in one motion? >> No, because you have to open it and then she has to >> That's fine. So open. So motion one is I'm making a motion to open the public record on the design review committee bylaw. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Roll call vote. >> I Trisha Kendall. >> Yep. Paulino I sorry >> and Trisha Kendall I >> and then I'll make a second motion to amend the bylaw as we had just discussed it >> amended again >> well do we have to >> you have to ask have say what the amendment is >> yes so basically the >> motion is yeah do you want to make the motion >> yes okay so I'm

090gonna explain it first that in our last time we had said um that the text says and the planning board will appoint a new ad hoc committee for the next application. We had changed that to say we'll appoint a new ad hoc committee for the next application because how do you appoint before you even get the next application? >> We're not going to appoint until we get an application. >> So, it's just changing before to four. >> Was that what was that what was on the screen? >> I just changed it as she was speaking. So, previously it did say before right here it says four and I just changed it. >> I found my my notes that were stuck [snorts] in there. So, so if that's good with everybody, um I will make a

091motion that we approve the bylaw with now the second change incorporated in. >> I'll second that. >> Second roll call vote. >> That's you again, Anna. >> Um Anna Tminuski, >> Scott, Paulino, I >> and Trisha Kendall I. So there, that's done, right? Okay. Thank you. I'll try not to find anything else in my notes. Um, next on our agenda, do >> we have to close it? >> Uh, and open it to the public again or not? It was open. Never mind. >> It was already open. So, you would close it again. >> Public hearing again. >> Close it. I'll make a motion to close the public hearing on design on review committee bylaw amendment. >> Second. >> And I say I >> can. Okay. >> We're getting good at this. Almost. >> Open close.

092Open. Close. Open. Close. Okay. All right. So, next on our agenda is 55 Tiltton. Do we have people here from Tilt? >> We do. We have Katie Pritchard who from Bills and Thomas who is the peer review. Um, so she did just send her report I believe yesterday or today. I believe it was yesterday. I forget. I'm sorry. My days are blending. So, you've just received the report within the last 24 hours. I doubt anybody on the board has had an opportunity to review it. And Vat is here to give an overview of it. We also have the applicant John Dudley online as well. Um, so we can at least get an overview of what the review was, where what she's found on the site and what we're going to be looking to discuss next

093meeting if that pleases the board. as I am still kind of officially off that I am going to step out and turn the chair over to >> So just so I understand we're just kind of >> allowing an update and then continuing >> if that's your decision because I I assumed you hadn't had the opportunity to review the memo that had just >> Okay. I guess for me, I go back to prior conversations we had as a board before we do anything where I I for one think it's somewhat wasteful to do these kinds of updates that we're not prepared for. Um, so I don't have a problem doing it because the applicant is here. But I do kind of want to state a concern that that creates a precedent for how we do business

094and then everybody's time is somewhat wasted because I don't know how value add it is to have these kinds of check-ins that then don't lead to anything. So I don't I personally don't have a problem doing that if that's what the board feels like. But I just wanted to reiterate that because I think we've discussed this many times. Deepa has brought it forward that we as a board don't want to be doing that. A continuence is far better than coming in for an update that doesn't mean anything until we actually review everything. So not to be this has nothing to do with this applicant. I think it's more of how we do business as a board. >> I think in this case it's the peer reviewers giving us the update. So that's probably >> on

095us >> good information for us, right? Because it'll spare some >> potential confusion. not looked at it at all. >> I I don't know what the if the applicant would have more to add, but I think hearing the peer review is >> Yeah, as long as we're all okay with that because I know there was strong discussion about last minute things. >> Okay. >> So, do we what what do we need to do, Jasmine, as far as opening the hearing? Do you want to >> So, it's already open. So, you don't need to open this public hearing. Um, so it's just if how you would choose to move forward if you would like to open it up to our peer reviewer first. >> Yes, please. Let's start with the peer review and then the applicant.

096please. >> Good evening, chair people or I don't know if I did that right. >> You're fine. Don't worry. >> Okay. So, we had several comments on the project. Uh some highlights are we were concerned about the loss of parking on the adjacent parcel. It looks like parking for the property at 55 Tilton A is now on the abuing parcel and the abuing parcel is also losing spaces. So, we were concerned about where the balance was in that. There was also some storm water runoff from the proposed pavement on the adjacent parcel that wasn't being conveyed to any storm water treatment. um any treatment units. And we also wanted to verify that the conversion of the site, majority of the site from lawn and pvious to largely impervious wasn't going to impact the groundwater. Um

097as it is part of the Nyanza loom. Uh the applicant submitted a letter from the LSP licensed site professional um for environmental reasons. They don't want to infiltrate and they can't really go down into groundwater to install things. However, by converting everything from pvious to impervious that in it in and of itself does impact groundwater. So we think there needs to be a balance of doing some low impact development ideas that won't go down into the groundwater that we need to stay out of but doesn't impact the ground doesn't change the groundwater as much. So those were the highle items that we flagged. There were others, but I assume the board does not want to hear every item right now. >> I don't think so. I think it would be a value ad for us

098as a board at the next meeting to go through item by item, which is what we normally do. >> Okay. >> Um, unless the board disagrees. >> That's fine. >> Okay. So, thank you. And is the applicant there to make a comment. Is George in the room? >> He is not on. He left. >> Oh, you left. That's great. Um, sure. I'll just say hi. The I I just jumped on tonight because I got that peer review that you guys got I don't know, four hours ago. So, I thought instead of just continuing it would it'd be good just to give you guys an update. So, whatever you'd like to cover, we're happy to cover. And our plan was George got that. George is going to prepare the response and we'll get to work on

099it. So, that's that. >> Sounds like we need a continuence. >> Yeah, that'd be great. >> Is there a motion for a continuence until the 14th? >> Second. >> Someone has to actually make the motion, but I appreciate how quick that was. >> Uh, I'm looking at you, Scott. You're getting so good at it. Come on. You got this. >> I motion to continue 55 kilnav special permit and site review. >> Are we doing till May 14th? >> Yes, >> we are. >> John, does that is that appropriate? Do you think you'll be prepared for a response by May 14th? >> Yeah, we should be good. Y >> thank you >> to May 14th. >> And is there a second? >> Second that. >> And a roll call vote. >> Anna Tesmani. I >> Angel

100Cassadian I. And that is now moved. >> Great. Do we want to bring our chair back? >> Great. >> Thank you. >> No. Let's see. So, what we have left planning board task list, housing production plan, comprehensive plan, implementation committee. I don't think there's are there any updates on any of those? >> The housing production plan. >> Okay. >> So, >> great. Okay. >> Awesome. Um, I will confess I got kicked out of my town email and so I need to log back on and I don't know if I have an update from um from Yolanda on the comprehensive plan. However, I believe she's still out on vacation and when she returns we will be having hopefully the joint meeting to address the appointment of the implementation committee. It got lost in the shuffle for

101me as to whether we posted for it. I know we drafted something, whether we had a deadline on the town website, whether we have any applicants. All of that is sort of unclear to me. I'm hoping when she's back, we can regroup. That's my update. >> I know she was looking to get through town meeting, which is next week. So, should be back on top. >> Hopefully, I'll get access to my email and email her and we'll go from there. >> Okay. I I think I need your help. >> I can certain I'll reach out tomorrow. >> Awesome. >> Okay. All right. Reports. Um anything from the preservation committee? The CPC met um Tuesday to approve the value in which we are going to offer to buy that piece of property in the town forest.

102What I thought was going to be a very quick meeting turned into quite a interesting meeting. uh the owner showed up and um you know a lot more information was coming out um because the in the warrant article that's going to be presented it does say that we're trying to acquire the property through any method and it lists eminent domain as a possibility which I think kind of brings up a different kind of feeling to it than just a straight out purchase. So there's some back and forth that went with that and uh we gave the go-ahhead on the value that they could negotiate up to and I think the I don't want to speak for the finance committee but I think they [cough] are going to support it with a caveat that's in there

103so you'll hear that come out at the uh at the meeting on Wednesday. >> What's the number on that one? >> Um the there's multiple appraisals done. The higher of the two that the town did was 845,000. >> And where is it sitting in the town? >> It's like >> docket. >> Oh, it's um >> like before or after the big event. >> Oh, it's after the event. Yeah. So, >> it'll Yeah. So, it goes like I think there's two pretty quick there's like the reports, there's two pretty quick warn articles things. There's the one that everybody wants to talk about with the override. Then there's another one that should be pretty quick about moving money around in the town budgets. And then it goes into I think two different things from the CPC. One

104is the second one is this the town forest purchase. The first one is making bond payments that we have to do anyway. Um and then think I might be missing one. And then our planning one. >> Yeah. I mean, I'll and I'm al also going to be speaking on the one um for the secondary suite in-law apartment. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Um though it's not really in the planning board. >> Yeah, that one's the ninth one and then >> presenting the 10th one. >> Okay. >> All right. >> I would have really excited to listen to our full presentations on those at that point in the evening >> if they're still in the room. >> You know who the dieards are when >> Yeah. >> All right. Metro West. Anything with that, Steph? Did

105they meet at all? >> Um, they did. They did. And I missed that meeting. The timing has been changing every month. It's been very hard to keep track of. >> Hard to schedule. >> Yeah. >> And Yolanda was out too, I suppose. So, >> yeah, it was Wednesdays, it became Thursday, then it became out. >> All right. So, and nothing for comprehensive plan obviously. >> Yep. Um all right planning updates anything um we you already said about housing production plan any updates on the 40bs or any or any or the shi any >> no updates the 55 west under >> and do we know anything about u shi if because the one the one project is completely approved, right? From high school. >> Yes. And that would get you safe harbor, but that doesn't that

106doesn't get you into that doesn't get your SHI above 10%. >> No. No. But but but I was wondering about the Safe Harbor. >> Yes, you would get into Safe Harbor, but we're still waiting for confirmation. >> No way. Okay. Um All right, then. Uh oh, the fee schedule. Did you >> Yes, I had that really briefly. So this is essentially we're just asking if we can update our fees. Currently the way the fees are written now we only charge for we charge the abut butters list but we only charge up to sorry thank you. We have a fee right now for a butters list but we only charge up to $50 for an abuter. So the way abutters work is that you have to notify every abuer within 300 ft of the property when

107an application comes in. you have to notify the abuing towns and then you also have to send out the decision once the decision is rendered. So typically $50 doesn't actually cover that cost and recently we did have not for this board but for another board an applicant that came forward that had 500 abutters and that does happen. So the town has just been absorbing this cost and in addition to that we don't charge anything for legal ads. The town absorbs all of that cost and it's anywhere from $180 to $250 per legal ad per application. And this is the first community I've been in that doesn't charge their applicants for these fees. So I recommend updating the fee schedule so that way the applicants are paying for their butter fees and their legal ads versus

108the town >> and and we get to approve this. >> Yes. This is within your authority. This does not have to go to town meeting. This is within your authority to update your fees. >> So um the is what you're showing in yellow. >> That's what's proposed >> proposed. So, >> the existing says butter a butters list up to $50 is what it is and nothing for legal ad is what the current fee schedule looks like. >> I'm um yeah, I'm I'm okay with that. But yeah, this is the process and you kind of need to pay for part of the process. Um I do think there should if there isn't already, you can let me know. Um if there isn't already, I do think there should be some kind of um caveat about that

109you can apply for a waiver to that or >> we don't recommend that for these fees because then the town absorbs it. So, we recommend that you can request a waiver from your application fee, but these fees should be paid regardless. This is the first community I've been in. This is the first town anyone has heard of doesn't charge the applicants for their >> understood. But, um, for instance, um, I'm thinking of a homeowner that might, you know, could be on a, you know, >> it's the board's perview. whatever you choose to do. >> Could be it could be on a fixed income. It could be a but could be right next door to um uh one of these large apartment buildings and just by sheer luck, you know, or and then and then they

110have all those abutters, >> right? Where um >> you Well, I don't know. Do you have to send it to every renter that's in the apartment complex or just the building? the idea that that one person would be doing a special permit or a site plan, what would constitute that they would have to do that for their I mean it's it's up to the board if you want to be a it's up to you if you want a but list if you're if you have a >> if you're if you're um doing an addition that goes well I guess that would be you don't need to notify to do an addition >> that would be zoning what you do if you do if you go over the property line the setback line but that would

111be >> right that's a different that's an application here's the In some ways, it's news to us. We had this power. Great. We have the jurisdiction. In theory, the public can come to us and complain. If people complain, if this is becomes unreasonable, then we can edit it just like everything else. To me, this seems reasonable, especially if our planner is recommending it based on experience with other towns. Sounds like a great savings to the town. Let's save us some money. >> I was also, well, where do these numbers come from? two per a butter and plus $7.80. I almost thought those were lower than what I was expecting you to put on there. So, >> so it's $2 per a butter because we do out certified cards, which is 50 cents. So, we have

112to notify them of the application and then we have to notify them of the decision. So, that's a um I'm sorry, it's above 50 cents. I forget what it is per but that's about what it breaks out to to send out the notification for the card and then the notification of the decision. It breaks out to about $2 per a butter and then the $7.80 80 cents is that's what it costs to notify the surrounding towns of the application and send them the decisions. >> But there's a human that has to do this I'm assuming. Right. >> We do that and we don't charge you for our time because we're here regardless. So we don't charge you any hourly rate. We're simply just charging you the physical cost. But yes, to your point, there are

113times that sometimes Melissa spends two or three hours putting together a butter notifications, but that's part of our job description. So we really couldn't it wouldn't really be recommended to charge for our time because it's literally part of what we do. It's included in our job description, but I certainly think we should be charging the fee of the services instead of the town absorbing that cost. >> So, this is just reflective of this strictly just the mail and the supplies, paper, envelopes, things like that, >> postcards, technically Jasmine, how much did the town absorb last year? >> I go I don't have that fee off the top of my head, but I could get it to you. I know that just recently we just absorbed over $1,200 in fees just in the last two months.

114>> Gotcha. Okay. I was just curious. I'm not trying to just curious. >> So these are planning department fees. So that includes um things that would go in front of his zoning board of appeals. >> No, they have their own. They voted separately. >> Okay. >> They already voted on their department fees. So this is strictly for the planning board applications. >> Okay. which are a different generally a different scale than zone board field applications. >> Yeah. So I I don't I think anybody coming that would be requiring a special permit from us probably wouldn't be in that scenario, right, with the fixed income necessarily to do the work. >> Yeah. >> To create whatever they're, you know, changing on the, you know, to come in front of us, right? Would this would not be

115would this be um changes to uh um scenic roads? Yeah, I'm going to I need to take a tree down. >> You don't on scenic roads. I don't Yeah, I mean the fee would anybody that needs in a butters list, this fee would apply for and it would apply for a public hearing notice. But again, that was um you know, NSAR or the electric company or whoever is who's paying for that. So, I don't think that you'd be very concerned with cutting that deal on >> Yeah. No, I'm just I'm trying to explain I'm try um because because I agree with this in in in in theory. I'm trying to understand the case of um you know where there is someone that that gets hit kind of with a a large fee um inappropriately. I

116think that's more would be more common on zoning board of appeals because I there have been cases where people live next door to a large comp you know apartment complex. >> There's a caveat up there that says may be waved at the board's discretion if change is deemed. So, we can just add that if that eases everybody's mind. There's no issue. >> I mean, we could add a little footnote that says that >> I would keep it consistent exactly with what's already here about >> Yeah, exactly. Exactly that. Yeah, just add that >> and just add that to both of those sections and that would address that and it would have to come to the board. This isn't it's the board's discretion, not department. >> Yeah, I'm less concerned with newspaper ad because those get

117run once or twice. I don't know how how much are newspaper ads. >> That's actually the more expensive one. >> Oh, >> so that those are $180 to $250. So that's where most of our cost comes. It's very rare that we have a butters that actually go over $100 to $200. That's a pretty rare instance. What's more costly is the legalized. very comfortable if those are on there because like I because I think there are residents that could be in a situation where they cannot afford that and we're making their government process a lot harder than it should be. Um so I I it would be very very rare when those are waved but it gives us the power to do so if we need to. >> Absolutely. >> So do we just need a

118motion to approve this updated pricing list? >> That's it. Is everything else on there you feel good? >> That's consistent with what's in other communities. So, I did look at the surrounding towns to see what we're charging for those types of reviews and that is very consistent. And those fees um I don't know who who set those fees, but they probably at one point did confer with an engineer about what those costs typically looked like, but that is consistent with what I've seen in our surrounding likes towns. >> Thanks. All right. So I make >> motion to approve the updated [snorts] action planning department fees as listed. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second that. >> Roll vote. >> Janet Tesmanitki. I >> and Trisha Kendall I. So that is approved. Now we're on

119to the ever exciting meeting minutes. Do we are there two dates here? We do need to go through >> 26 of them. >> Which one are we doing first? 26. Line 52 should be Mr. >> This is going from Mr. to Ms. or Ms. to Mr. Is everyone done with the 26? >> I can make a motion if >> I'll make a motion to approve the March 26 minutes as is. >> Well, as as amended [clears throat] >> as amended. Sorry. >> Second that >> roll vote. >> Anna Tesmani I >> got your eye. >> I'll say I Paulino, but I cannot see them. [laughter] >> Trisha, >> I'll take I'll take your word for it. >> All right, fair enough. So now we're on April 9th. um 967 it could be a I don't

120know if somebody else thinks otherwise but the town's peer review engineer to get the shy done phasing so they do not have to put up so much money immediately up front either one or the other >> right versus having those both Yep. >> Just take off the up front. Yeah. Just >> what was that phrasing from that? >> What was it? >> Like you you're you're saying to take out one of those words, right? >> Yeah. But I mean, is that how they phrased it though? >> I don't >> like I'm not disagreeing with you like it's seems repetitive, but I'm not >> they might have, but these aren't transcripts. They're they should it should be clear. So, >> that is repetitive. um the public hearings for 30. There are some of these um decisions.

121Do we really need to note that in the minutes? >> I'm sorry, where are you? Um so line 73 >> 78 there are some of those discussions that we had. Not sure if we typically add them to the minutes >> on this day. I don't think we we already discussed them at a the different one the month meeting before. >> Yeah. But we don't add it to the minutes. It looks like we've specifically pulled out three out of the position and listed here. So I don't know the reasoning. I don't understand the reasoning behind it. >> I'm sorry. What line number you >> um 73 74 78 79 >> the one which is italicized. >> Oh okay. I mean sometimes we get specific. >> I mean it's too specific out of a decision that three

122sections. [cough] I'm just I'm not sure how how would you modify it? >> Well, I do we need them. >> You would just take out the sentence language would be changed to include. >> Am I looking at the right? >> So, this was about our decision process. So, If you were to start to list it, should we not list every line that we discussed on that decision? So, I want I'm I'm just asking if we really need those three paragraphs at all. I'm assuming that is what we discussed, you know, because they're pretty thorough with the notes and we probably didn't. We were at this point we were really wrapping things up because we voted to close the public hearing. we voted on it. So these three paragraphs are probably the end of what we

123discussed for for the YMCA before we voted. So it's probably not that some things were left out. This is probably the totality of the discussion that day. >> Are we saying that we only talked about three items in that discussion? I don't think so. >> No, on on that on that day the previous the 26 we did all that huge discussion. >> Yeah, >> tons of things. I think on this one it was pretty quick. >> Yeah, because we were about on the meeting before we were about I was about ready to close the public hearing and they said, "Oh, oh no, we'd rather you not close the public hearing." So, we left it open. So, we were done discussing and then we we left it open and there was this little bit of discussion

124which I think was pretty short. I think they were kind of in and out that day. Um, >> okay. If that's a memory that I mean I remember it that way, but that's okay. I think on the 26th we talked like crazy over lots of things. We went back and I mean could we review the footage before we prove this? Is that like a possibility? Not tonight, but Well, we can we can ask Jasmine to to look and see if that is really the summary of what was covered through the YMCA that day. And if >> I can review it, Laura does our meeting. So, I'll ask >> and if it seems that this is really just if it's an accurate summary of that, that it was very short the time we discussed, then great.

125But if it's like, wow, there was a lot more material there, then Jasmine can let us know and we can revisit it. >> I just know my memory is about 25% accurate usually. So I remember something one way, she remembers it a different way. I want to make sure that >> Yeah. Right. [snorts] >> I remember that we that we were going to close the public hearing because we were done. >> Yeah. >> Um and then a few things kind of came up. And it is it possible to approve these pending you confirming or is it do we just wait? >> Yeah. All right. Well, then we can uh we have kind of reviewed it tonight, but we can wait for the we can wait to actually vote on it till till next time. And

126that's we are at the end of our >> So, we're not going to approve the minutes. >> We're going to wait and confirm that. >> Okay. of that discuss a motion to close >> unless there's any anything else anyone statements anyone has. >> I will make a motion to adjourn at 9:16 p.m. >> Is there a second? >> Second >> and a roll co vote. >> Anna Tesmaniski I >> Scott I >> Angel Kazad and I and Trisha Kendall I thank you everybody.