001someone to be on one board and they're supposed to be on a different board. So, you should be on the CBA. Yeah, that would definitely need. Yeah. And we know Laura, so you be okay. Okay. Good evening everybody. Welcome to the Tuesday, June 3rd, 2025 meeting of the Lichfield Planning Board. Would you all please stand for the pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. All right. Roll call of members. Michael Cronto, chair. Jared Okonnell, vice chair. Jeremy Robbitai, secretary. Russell Blanchett, member. Letha Riley, member. Jesse, no, alternate. Okay, welcome everybody. And with us this evening, Jamon Koff and our circuit writer from NRPC and Joan McKibben
002is here who is our planning board assistant. Um the appointment of alternates. Uh Steve Ganon is not here this evening. He is our ex- official member. Um so um Jesse, would you no can we do that? No. We have two folks out here. Travis and Travis. Travis. Oh, that's right. Travis is not here. Would you be interested in voting in Travis's place? Yes. Okay. So, we'll make you a voting member tonight um to do that. Okay. Uh public input on non-aggenda items, items not on the agenda for this evening. Any public input on non-aggenda items from the public this evening? And seeing none, I will close public input on non-aggenda items and go to item one on the um agenda. I have Rick Charbano, Jim Petropolis, and Morgan Hollis to discuss proposed northern commercial mixeduse
003development near Morgan Road and Albuquerque. A purpose of this meeting is to get planning board input. And I see Mr. Hollis, Mr. Sharono, and Mr. Petropolis here this evening. So, why don't you guys come forward uh all of you to the table? Um, thank you for introduce yourselves. Bring your chair up. Save me some time. Yeah. I don't know who Mr. Tucker is. Oh, that's Travis. I mean no disrespect, but we'll get it when Good evening. Thank you. Uh, thank you for taking the time to listen to us tonight. I think you know we've got a development brewing. Uh Rick thought it'd be a good idea if we came in and said hello. Uh so the purpose of the meeting is really a show and tell, answer any questions you might have um and present
004a plan that yet it doesn't have a name yet, but we'll get there. Um and you know, I I know there's some newer members here. This is a plan and what you're seeing on the screen right now is actually presented in 2021. Uh Morgan, Rick and myself presented this plan and it kind of showed some of the CPI properties uh up in the north part of town. Um and what we did, Rick wanted to just present to the town that you know this is it's just a plan. It's it's nothing firmed up. But what he wanted to represent and I'm going to approach the screen if it's okay, Mr. Chairman, that's fine. was that there's Hidden Creek, there's the quarry here, CB Highway, Albuquerque app, that with these properties that he's accumulated over the years
005that there is a strategy to hopefully come in off of the Charles Bankhoff Highway with a with a back road to create opportunities for commercial properties in accordance with the NC zone. And then this was the property here that we're going to discuss this evening right here that we had identified uh as multif family even before it was allowed in the NC uh zoning district. So we had put this together back in in 21 came back in December of 24 uh and reintroduced it to the board as there was pending legislation about the multif family in the NC zone. So the site I just described is what we're really going to talk about and it's really that land between Hidden Creek Golf Course and the Charles Bank Croft Highway in the NC zone. Six parcels
006make up this assemblage. Eventually they'll be consolidated together to form one development. 26 1/2 acres. And Jay, if you want to scroll to the next slide and start kind of turn the orientation slightly, but we're starting to begin putting a plan together. Um, and if you're familiar with the land, it's mostly f flat. It's mostly open, sandy soils. We've got good utilities in Charles Bankraftoft Highway and in Albuquerque with municipal water, penetruck water. Um and so what's being proposed is uh in accordance with the zoning a mixeduse village development uh upon the property. It'll be designed in accordance with the recent zoning amendments that allow this type of project. So there's really two pieces to it. Let's start with the residential piece. What we're proposing is a similar project to Callaway Circle and to Rose
007Meadows, a townhouse development, 88 total units, 105 are allowed by zoning. So Rick's not happy with me, but um the way it's being laid out is kind of in keeping with the theme of the other two projects. Uh a lot of balance with open space, and I think you get that from the septic systems. You know, if we were in Nashville or Manchester with sanitary sewer, you end up getting five to six units per acre. Now, your zoning allows four, but we're we're slightly less than that in the resi portion of it. Combination of four, six, predominantly six, and eight unit buildings. Again, utilities all underground. They're mostly there in Albuquerque. Um there are garage units but not all the units have garage units. Okay. Uh probably the majority have the detached garage. And the
008way we've cited this is along the backs of the buildings and away from Albuquerque. Albuquerque enjoys that wonderful I call it Kentucky Derby fence and landscaping that uh Rick did illegally I might add. but um put in some wonderful trees there that look really well. Um and so you've got this wonderful streetscape along Albuquerque A. Now those units will actually front towards Albuquerque and we'll have parking and access to the units in the back along Albuquerque. So a little bit different twist, but it's all about the curb appeal on Albuquerque. Um, we have a road creating an intersection with Morgan Road, the Hidden Creek uh, access. So, we're creating a four-way intersection there where it used to be Morgan Road all the way out. That will not be it will be connected, but it'll be
009gated up at Morgan Road for life safety access. Okay. Um, and then we come back uh to the north end uh where we're going to connect back into uh the commercial part of the project. These are private roads uh throughout the development. The commercial component is essentially two two pad sites out front. I'll talk about the one at the corner of Albuquerque and Charles Bankraftoft first. That's the bigger of the two buildings. It's a one-story building measuring about 90,000 square ft. There is an equation for number of units to commercial in the um mixeduse village district. I believe it's 100 square feet per unit, right? Times 88 8800. We're at 9,000 in that particular building. It's a 60 foot deep building. Um, and it's intended to be a multi-tened use. your code wonderfully allows a
010number of very wellbalanced uses that could go into this zone from banks to restaurants to offices to um dance studios and workout fitness facilities and things like that. And so that's kind of the the vision there. Um we are showing a drive-thru in the back of the building which we'd like to discuss uh with you this evening. Uh and we've got parking in that part of the project for about 52 spaces. The second building is uh intended to be a daycare. Um and uh it's a 7,500 square foot building, one story. There'll be similar architecture on both. Rick is meeting with the architect tomorrow to start looking at uh the regulations uh and what they require and and so pen will be put to paper on architecture very soon. Um, we've got outdoor recreck space
011uh for the daycare which is required by state law and uh parking for about 58 spaces. And um in doing a research on the daycare, this is a potential for a fairly significant number of occupant students per day and staff. And so you're probably wondering why would a daycare need 58 spaces? But you know there could be as many as 40 staff there. In the way daycarees work now, uh parents really are required to park the vehicle, bring their child into the facility versus the old drop off kind of portico which uh is a little outdated. Um the access on the Charles Bankraftoft is centered on the property. It will be a right in and right out only access. And you could see how it's connected back into the resi. I think one of the
012early comments I think emanated maybe from this board was the interconnectivity between uh access so vehicles don't have to go out on Albuquerque and then go into the center and vice versa. Uh I I should also mention we've got sidewalks throughout our project. There'll be sidewalk connectivity to the front as well. And Rick mentioned sidewalk along CB Highway. You've mentioned Yeah. Okay. Great. And so in summary, it's uh the second inning in terms of the design and permitting of this effort. Uh we thought coming here early would uh be able to incorporate any comments and thoughts you might have. Um we are on septic u usually one septic system per resi building much like Rose uh Meadows and much like Callawa. uh you know, storm water obviously will take advantage of those good soils that
013are out there for recharge. Um and that's that's really it. Uh we've got uh a lot of work to do between now and final plans, but uh we think this project has has good balance to it. So Rick, do you want to say a few words? Rick Charbano. So I mean part of the problem that we have we've been looking at what you guys are trying to make to come up with as far as what you want for regulation what you want to see the biggest heartburn that we have we believe is single parking single row of parking in front on a main road. The reason for that if you're going to have retail you've got to have places for people to park. They're not going to park in the back of the building and
014walk to the front of the building. If you have two or three people in a building, if there's one dominant, then they're going to take all the parking and the other people are going to go away. Then, you know, it you have to have parking. I mean, this you just have to have it. If you if you can't have it, then if we it it's not feasible because uh retail, you have to have parking to let people in. and they have to be at the front of the building um or where your entrance are going to be. You can't you don't want the back of the building facing 3A. That wouldn't look very very nice. Um so that those are things that we we got to kind of discuss. You get your your input on
015that because if you're hard on on one single row of parking, the project's not doable. A couple thoughts, Mr. chair, if I could, Jay, could you zoom in on that front uh front area of the site? Yes. So, I I certainly concur with Rick's uh Rick's need. And the reference that he's citing is under 190-15.3, and I'll read it for the record. Not more than a single row of parking may be located between the front facade of the building and the street. Additional parking areas uh must be located on the side of or the rear of the building. So, what we're seeing there in front of the 9,000 square foot building is 37 parking spaces, but we're we're respecting the 50 foot green strip, we're respecting that front yard setback along for a building setback
016for our parking as well. And uh the worry is with 37 spaces, 9,000 into that is about four spaces per thousand. we are showing 10 spaces in the back and that those would be really earmarked for employees that could park out back and then walk into that facility. Um so the worry is that if we were single loaded there um we would really only get about 16 or 17 spaces along the building frontage and we just don't think that that's enough parking. Um, we do recognize the need of appearance of not wanting to see a sea of asphalt in front of a building. We get that. Um, I think there's ways that we can um incorporate um some green in that parking space to find that balance. Um, there could be some very subtle burming
017in that 50 ft so that that eye projected doesn't see all the cars, but we do want them to see the building. Of course, you know, I think that's important. So, uh, just to reiterate what Rick said, the last thing we want to do, we don't want to make a mistake here. And if we build with not enough parking and we've got a a ghost of a building that we can't keep tenants because of parking, that's the last thing we want to do. You know, we already struggle in town to keep any kind of tenant in any of the build any of the retail buildings. Not that we have many, but there's a struggle. You know, you go over to on 102 those that little strip mall, you can't see it. So, they don't they
018don't stay in business. The rest couple of restaurants stays, but even the g the uh 7-Eleven or whatever it was at the be front of it. Now, it's just a they I think they just use it to to make food in there and truck it off someplace else. But, you know, so if we're going to have uh a coffee shop, if we're going to have a we we have to have parking and we just have to have enough parking, you know? I mean, go over to I I use Hot Rides a lot because I go there, but they don't have enough parking. So, people are parking all over the place, but everybody wants to go in between all the customers there, you know, the between everybody that's in there. Nope. There's parking in the back
019of the building, but no one's going to the back of the building, walking to the front. Just not gonna h it just it's not going to happen. And so that it becomes a problem. Then everybody's just going to park everywhere and on the grass and think places we don't want them to park. But that's what's going to happen. And we just don't want that. I mean, we want, you know, you might think I'm asking you guys to make a little movement on that for that for that reason. Well, we well go and look, you know, we'll come back in again, but go and look at different places and see where there's parking in the back. Look at a building like that and see if you can find it someplace where it's full and and works.
020It's hard enough to build commercial right now. Never mind with no parking, right? We often we often see regulations that speak to percentage open space in front parking fields, you know, uh usually it's about 10% in the front, 8% in the sides, and we see that in in in New Hampshire quite often, you know, so that would mean we would need to incorporate a couple islands, which we don't like doing. We don't like the snow maintenance of it, but um it it it does soften up the appearance and I think it's something that we would consider doing and and we're trying to we're also giving you more than the 100 square feet per unit in this in this project. Yeah. Okay. So, we're doing almost 16,000 square feet, which is almost double almost 200. Yeah.
021So, we can take one of those buildings out and make some more parking, but is that right? I I can speak to it from a professional experience and that mo most towns have gone to this type of regulation. I like to call it a planner's vogue. It's in vogue. Um, and that's on the basis that you don't want to drive by and have see a parking field. Uh, and that makes some sense. Uh although frankly you one row parking versus two is not a great deal of difference in most people's minds but I can tell you from real experience three separate towns are cities that I've done projects in in the last three years. They've uh pushed hard uh didn't get any money built the projects and they are exactly as Rick has said your
022your endcap units um might be a restaurant uh it might be a convenience store something that's a go-to the rest and so everyone pulls in to park there. The rest um try to park in the back but you can't have a front door and a back door. you have to have for security a front door and not another front door. You're only going to have one front door. So, if everybody has to park in the back to come in, they literally have to walk around. And that is really the problem that we're talking about. And so, these these recently built buildings, there's one that we were just chatting about that's been built a long time in Nashville if you're familiar with that Jim was mentioning it that there there's not adequate parking on that. There's
023a double row of parking, but it's not enough. Uh, and that's Lac Careta down on Danny Webster Highway. And that's always been a problem because you get your good anchor tenant. They all park in the front. No, no parking anywhere else. There's a new one out in Ammer Street in Asha. It's got a big anchor tenant. They're having a struggle to fill other infill units because the first question they ask, "Where are my people going to park?" Oh, in the back. Because we have plenty of parking in the back. Well, how do they get in? So now we're working with that project on a front door and the back side. But what do you do on the front side? So if you go there for a nail salon, for example, which is a typical infill,
024you arrive at the nail salon, you drive up, and maybe it's in the day, so the restaurant's not busy. You park in front, there's no front door there. You got to go around back to get in the front door. And it's become a real leasing problem. There's another community uh about your size that has a similar planning board regulation in their mixed juice zone uh for the same reason. All good reasons. It has not worked and it's half fill and it's been three years and they just can't find tenants. Um again, not woe is on the developer, but woe is on the town because they're missing the opportunity for what the town wants, which is a commercial center, smallcale commercial center. U same token you don't want it to look like a strip mall but
025you kind of have to go with what the market requires. You can re what my clients are doing is requiring all their parking of their employees to the rear and offsite, but it still doesn't uh one one row parking and in this case, what did we say? 16 spaces up front. Uh that'd be enough for one tenant in there that maybe maybe two less popular tenants, but it's not. Uh and what's happened is people automatically gravitate to the front with a single row of parking. You have people park there waiting to grab a spot when it opens up. This happens to be a a um non-drive coffee shop and so everybody arrives at the same time and everybody is just like waiting till someone backs out because they know that's bottle open up. Not the
026best situation to have. So I think if you give some reality to it, uh we would appreciate it. And you know, this being the first one, we want it to be successful so that we can build the other ones because you know, the the rest of the property we have, if if if we can't rent this, we can't we can't build more commercial space. We just got to leave it the way it is, you know. So, so we got to we got to come up with a landscaping plan, um, a different look of the building to to to break that up. you know, something that everybody's happy with as far as what that's going to look like. Um, you know, um, as I said before when I came, I I like the barn look. I
027want it to look like a barn, but um, we can do all that. That part's easy, but the parking is we have to get the customers in and out. The other thing, Mr. Chairman, I I'll bring your attention to we are representing a drive-thru. Um, and Jay, correct me if I'm wrong, but it it looks like what passed in January, restaurants, not including uh drive-thru services. So, we probably need a little bit of zoning there for that. Uh, that would be a zoning board matter, but we just think it's proper planning. It gives flexibility. It doesn't mean it has to be food. It could be a bank. Uh, it could be something else with a drive-thru piece to it. Um, but I wanted to bring that to your attention as well. Do you folks have
028because we've been looking at um supplemental design guidelines for the mixeduse village development alternative? Yes. Okay. Um, so yeah. Um and I know that Jay has been working on that uh with us and um we've have been having discussions about that. So I just want to make sure that you want to do this double. Right. So as a starting point you can see here I took the document I highlighted all the things that we we want to try to include garages behind the buildings and tried to hide them from the public ways as as best we could. Um was certainly one of them promotion of the sidewalk communities. Uh there'll be quite a bit of sidewalk here, not only interconnectivity between units, but also getting people uh to that to that front uh commercial space.
029Um we know the architecture is a piece of it. Uh the 50oot set back from the rightway, which we've observed. Um you know, open space in the new zoning is only 20%, I'm going to venture to say will be probably north of 50%, you know, for open space on the total project. Um, so, uh, we tried our best, Mr. Chairman, to to knock off a bunch of these, but until we really scrub through it with Jay and and Joan and Lou, you never know what I missed. You know, and I and I'll go back to the same thing. It drive-thrus. Do you guys, any of you guys drive through a drive-thru or do you always get out of your car and walk in? I always get out of my car and walk in. It depends.
030You take a look at the You look at the line. Yeah, exactly. Well, I think for the first 10 years of their life, I avoided anything without a drive-thru. You never unbuckle them. Exactly. I mean, it just, you know, when you have kids, you're not going to leave your kids in the car, and you're not going to pack them all up to go in the car to get a coffee. You you're going to go place as a drive-thru. So, it is it is critical. I know some people don't like them, but you know, I just just ask yourself, what are you guys going to do? You know, and if we're going to make something successful, we we have to have if it's going to be, you can't say. So, Jay, um I'm going to kind
031of put you on the spot here. Our parking regulations, right, as as of now, um that's just been referenced. I mean, I know that we're sort of going to be looking at at at parking um as we go through the workshop. Um, in terms of what is being proposed here, um, would there be an opportunity to if they needed the parking to request waiverss or do you think that we're going to need to um, modify it somehow? Well, these would be regulations. They'd be part of the site plan regulations. So, of course, they could request um a waiver. Um I guess the question though is we're still drafting these if if the you know really it's kind of the will of the board. Do you feel strongly about the single row of parking? Um are
032you okay with the double row of parking? Um but just in terms of the draft, the language is on page three um top of the page and it's not more than a single row of parking may be located between the front facade of the building and the street. Okay. Um does anybody have any questions um for the tonight? I I'll just also add that um in our existing um parking regulations um under section 1214 off streetet parking, we do have an interior green space requirement. Um starting at parking lots of um 6,000 ft or more and it ranges from it's it's not very ownorous. It ranges from uh 5% to up to 10% of interior green space depending on the size of the parking lot. So when you say interior, do you mean breaking up
033within the parking? Yes. Okay. So for instance, that retail that's 9,000 square foot on the corner. I mean that parking lot's bigger than the 9,000 square foot. Right. So, so what you're saying is the way the right the way the guidelines read would be some of those spaces would have to be islands and that's under our existing regulations. So, it would be but it's it's 5%. So, yes, typically that's what you'd wind up doing is putting in an island or something to break up the parking lot field. Yeah. Okay. So, 5% is two spaces, 10% is four spaces, right? And sometimes those uh there are waiver requests. Again, my experience in other places because plowing cars going over the little islands that are there. So sometimes there's a trade-off. If you're not going to put
034it inside, you can put it outside somewhere. And um we we would want some feedback when we come back in with a design on how you feel about this particular space and maybe others as we come forward. Okay. You know, in the 50 foot setback, maybe it's plant some bigger trees, you know, something to break it up. I'm not against it. just between winter maintenance uh snow plow when there's an island in the middle gets through all the snow ends up on that island and then that gets wiped out and it and it'll make a lot bigger if you put an island in the middle of it. So then we have to make it bigger, right? So I think Mr. Trouble's idea of having a little burm there continue to cut every fence across the
035front of it. Maybe put some small trees there. I think that would help mask up the building so you can still see it as you're driving by, right? But have some, you know, landscape it. I mean, you know, it's no different. I think if you look at our shop up, you know, across from uh the garage where everybody goes, the I mean, we cut down all the trees in front of that, but that's what we planted back. And there's plenty of pavement in front of that building, but it doesn't it doesn't look ugly. No, it's all it's all very clean. So that looks that looks very, you know, it just, you know, with a with a smoke guy. Yeah. He focus goes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You know, so it's just planting the right trees and
036making making it look look good. Mhm. Sprinkler system so that the grass stays green. You know, things that we have that we'll do. A rain garden or something to to add some more depth. We need some rain gardens for our drainage anyway. I don't know if there'll be any in that front piece. Yeah, I I I like that idea. Okay, because the alternative is you got to shut the building up there. Well, if anybody wants a visual of say corner could look um I there's a property in London area on Route 102. Um there's a salon there. There's superw walk on the end and it has almost exactly what you have here with a very extensive setback. In this case, I think it's like 40 to 50 feet or so. Um, two rows of parking.
037It is a two-story building, but nevertheless, it's not even as a two-story building, it's set so far back and there's there is no rise really. It's pretty it's pretty level or at road rate and you it really is softened by a few large trees that are at the edge of the parking lot there. And frankly, I think it provides shade for some of those parking spots as well. And it it it's not unseammly. It's I mean it it's very attractive um because of that distance, you know. And both those buildings are very well maintained. Yeah. Yeah. And I think as you get further down to this second building and you round the bend a little bit on the highway, as you approach Morgan Road, there's a there's a rise there. And I don't know if
038you're intending on We're going to flatten We're going to flatten flatten that out. Okay. Um we we we have to be seen. Sure. Sure. And it'll it'll be um uh it'll be even wider as you can see from your your setback because of the bend in the road. Yeah. So um you won't notice it as much really. You know, it's interesting. I was just driving to town hall and I passed a number of commercial projects on the Charles Bankraftoft Highway and they all have these big huge curb cuts. They're fully paved to the road and boom, they're right there. Now, that is extremely convenient for somebody going in and out. Um, we won't get away with that. No, but I mean that's the trade-off. You moving the Absolutely. Absolutely. You know that. Absolutely. Um, in
039so many way these projects are about balance and I I think having septic, you know, if if you've been to Rose Meadows, it's extremely successful. I think it looks great and to have those units with so much space in between them, it's it's pretty rare for a multif family project. It's because they're on septic and you get you get a feel of a very country project there. So, so and then when when we get to the the main road, which is Morgan Road or whatever we're going to call that going through the project, again, we're facing the units that are facing that are going to be the same as Albuquerque. They're going to the front of the building and you'll go in the back of the building. So, you know, I know there was some
040talk about having some green space in the front of the building, but we're going to have a big green space in the front of the building. A 50ft setback. That's Is that 50? No. What do we have? But it is along Albuquerque. That's 50 ft. 50 feet on Albuquerque on Morgan Road. What's that? 20 ft. Yeah. But but again, there'll be a green space with just a sidewalk. So when you're driving by, you're looking at No cars, no parking. No car. No parking. Yeah. you know, but then the the the road the we're calling it a driveway that goes between the commercial all the way down the the again, they're going in the back of the buildings, but we can't put too much green space between the parking because we have a bulkhead. We have
041other things to deal with to get that in. But all our green space is in front of the building that everybody driving by is going to see. Speaking about traffic real quick guys on the main entrance to Alberta will be there. I mean sorry the main entrance to Charles Bank bro you said the right in right out that plan to be signage controlled. You can actually put a state and put a median in. Yeah we put a median be an island. Yeah. Yeah. What the do? Yeah it's going to have left there. It would be absolutely miserable. D would the DOT is going to require we're going to have to do a little turning lane also. There'll be some work on the on 3A. Yeah. a little access and del coming in and out. Y
042for safety the daycare that'll get really backed up. So we're hoping that will be then if everything goes as I have planned, I think everybody will be very happy who's going to actually operate the Yeah. the daycare. Okay. Have you looked into a side parking lot? Um cuz the building's only 150 ft long. So to access a side parking lot. Yes. The parking lot to the side of the building. Again, you're making people going there. You're making people walk then. Yeah. So on the on the retail on the on sheet south, actually the north side of the retail, we're budgeting some space for a patio in case that is coffee and somebody wants to go sit outside. Now, on the other side, you know, you'll see a little bit of a green area there. Um,
043we had originally some parking spaces there, but I took them off because I think the promotion of the right in and the right out is is going to um I think be active and I never like to have people backing out into uh you know, a street like that. So, we eliminated those. We do have parking on the south side of the playground area uh for the daycare. Um yeah, because the Yeah, I the perception is important and it's unfortunate how lazy people can be. Um the length of the parking lots in a typical uh commercial zone like in Hudson for example, the parking lot is over 200 feet. It's over 300 feet from the building. And if it because of perception, it doesn't feel like as far as having to walk around a tiny
044building because this is tiny in comparison to these buildings over here. Well, also too with parking in the rear and having a drive-thru back there, that's not a very safe way to have it anyway. So employees I can see, but you would you wouldn't want customers walking through a drive-thru. But I've seen them like in G Town in Manchester, like a Duncan one had a drive-thru. You parked, you blocked in by the drive-thru. It was miserable. Like I ideally you would put the part the drive-thru businesses in commercial plots that are not affiliated with or not associated with the residential. Um, and then have non drive-thru businesses in the attached one. We don't have a drive-thru right here. That's what's currently the end right here. Right there. Yeah. I don't think I understood that. They
045can put like if you look at the document that they have on this, there's this is commercial as they proposed it, but they also have parcel F and B. are also intended to be drive-thru. Yeah. Oh, in the Well, if you go back to the Right. So, to be truthful, um we had identified some drive-thru uses uh north of Albuquerque on the Charles Bankraftoft um before this got permitted at the town meeting vote. And then we started noodling with this. We kind of liked it and said, "Okay, you know, it works." Now, that's not to say you couldn't do a a bank on the other side. Um, yeah, I I I think we'd be lucky to get a nice drive-thru endcap user there. That would be I think really good to have. We think this
046is the corner of Albuquerque and Charles Bankraftoft. Um, we think it's a fantastic spot. Now, we may show this to somebody. They might not like it, but they might see that and say, "Well, we want to be out on the other side of Albuquerque." Well, that's great. Has good biz for Rick, you know. So, um, they're pretty savvy. All those end users, you know, especially the Nationals, they know what they're doing and what they want. Don't traffic count. Yeah. If you don't have traffic count, they're not coming. Yeah. You know, the extreme visibility of that location on that corner is every car on both those roads is driving by there. So yeah, and if you if if you're going to have the trap, if you're going to have even a small mom and pop operation,
047they need people they need people. They need it easy for people to stop. So if you're competing with a Dunkin Donuts, are you going to are they going to go to the Dunkin Donuts? Are they going to go M drive through? They can drive through. They're going to Dunkin Donuts. They're not going to Mar P's bakery because they can't drive through. I mean, it just the way it is. It's what we've all created, you know, and as as I said, you know, I go to Hotrise all the time in this group. Some of you do, too. But they're building right next door, and they're going to have a drive-thru. You know, that's why they're doing it, so they can have a drive-thru. Well, where this drive-thru is positioned too, it provides for enough queuing really.
048Um, from what I can tell, right, that it gets tricky when you start to be out onto the road, right? Um, yeah, this isn't a McDonald's site. This is not This isn't probably, but but just even I'm sure you've all gone to press. Look at the business they do with their drive-thru. Yeah. I mean, there's people waiting out there all the time. That outside of parking lots is have a drive-through maze at that place. It's unbelievable. That I think that's terrible because everything's too narrow. It's way too narrow. Way too And then the employees walking across the park deliver food. It's ridiculous. Yeah. If if something intense as that expressed interest here, we'd have to change it. Yeah. We would have to change the plan. Yeah. Yeah. They wouldn't go with it either. No. Yeah.
049No, but I'm just saying. But they but there's an there's the other side of the the equation. Okay. They're very successful at their drive-thru because the mom with her two babies in the car doesn't want to leave the kid to go get what she wants. And I don't blame her. I mean, I know when I had to go to the store with my two kids when they were babies, it kind of stunk. You load them all up to go in the car. And now if you leave them in the car, you're going to get arrested. I get to make phone calls with my food being made. So it's a great driver for me. So so whatever you know those are things we have to look at. I mean I'm not uh I thought we could
050do it without it. We would think we can. So, um I guess this kind of segue well segus in, but um the second item on tonight's agenda is the presentation regarding um the guidelines for the Northern Commercial Mixuse Village District. Um and I think what we're going to be talking about tonight is off- streetet parking and um loading if my understanding is correct, Jay. Um a few things. Yeah. So I don't know if you guys want to stick around for that because this may you know the dis we can continue the discussion. It's a workshop so you're welcome to to join us this evening um in talking about that. And um what I'll do is I'll let Jay um at this time go forward maybe and make his presentation. If you guys have questions um
051certainly we can discuss them. So, just just want to make one more note on this because I do see Morgan Road as a road. Um, but you do have a driveway coming in off of um Albuquerque for the commercial building. So, that would need a waiver, too. Say that again. You've got a driveway coming off of um Albuquerque for the commercial building. So, that would need a waiver also. Okay. And then Yeah. Well, I mean, we can go back to the road, but we the that committee didn't like that, but we're just trying to accommodate what everybody wants, right? And I guess I have one question. Is it economically viable to have a smaller buildings with uh parking around the smaller buildings? Um, no, probably not. Yeah, it it it adds a significant cost to
052the structure uh because now you got more exterior pieces to it and everything else and it it becomes inefficient, you know. So again, I like that word balance. I'm trying to balance the efficiency with open space with function with and again as I said earlier we just don't want to make a mistake and do something that's like oh man why do we do that so and end up with vacant buildings that's the last thing we want to do. Yep. And uh how close is this project to the uh septic capability of the site? Not that close. Yeah. I mean, the New Hampshire dees uh are quite high for loading for a site. Um and so we're well with beneath those those thresholds. We've got a preliminary layout of the resi. We got a preliminary layout
053of the commercial. Anything with the commercial. If you do have coffee in there, it's a little different on septic. Uh it's hot coffee going down there. So, um but it's a good it's good sandy. It's a perfect site for septic actually. So, would it be um viable to have a reasonable size restaurant in that commercial uh building as proposed? We'd love to have one restaurant in there. One tenant. One tenant. You know, it's likely that type of tenant like a T-Bones. You've seen how successful they are in Hudson. You know, they have 150 parking spaces. So, it's a it's a big operation. Um, I think Rick's vision, I don't want to put words into his mouth, but you know, those uses that a town of this size that the dance the workout place, the dance
054studio, the nail, those, you may have those already. I I don't know, but you may not have them in a new building. and and so um Morgan and I involved in a project in Nshawa that they tear down some junky buildings and and put a new retail building in there and the tenant activity was was very surprising. It was very active. A lot of people even though they're already on the street want to be in a new building. So are there any design aspects of the new building that um was desirable? Well, if you know Rick, he likes agriculture looking. He likes barn looking. He likes New England looking. And um he's meeting with the architect tomorrow. And now in the resi, we're sticking to the blueprint of what we've got at Rose, which very
055attractive. Um we just don't know what we're going to do for sighting yet. Oh, on the resi, but on the front, Rick. Um you're excited about that? I mean, it could Yeah. Yeah. I think flipping the, you know, going back to that, flipping the buildings around and facing Albuquerque is going to look fantastic. I wish I would have, if I would have thought of it earlier, I would have done some of the units at Rose Meadow that way to be honest with you. On the question about the uh square footage and one restaurant, what I see in my experience uh right now is leasing of max 3,00 to 3,200 square ft. And that's just doing the economy. Nobody wants to get in there 9,000 square footer and then find out the traffic is down to
056a 3,000 square foot area. So, uh, you see some reserving options if it doesn't rent out next door or the space opens up, but for the most part, you're chopping these things up. And yeah, um, so that'll be about a third of this. That's that's a max that I've been seeing. Yeah. 2200. Thank you guys. So, Jay, if you want to, we'll go into the next. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, thanks. May I have this? Yes. Thank you. [Music] Sorry. J. Okay. All right. I understand. Paper if anybody wants it. Good. So, there's really only a few items on here. Um, for those who've seen this before, this is our third version. The first version, um, let's say the first round of changes are shown in red. The second round of
057changes are in blue and the third route of changes are in green. I'm going to run out soon, but color coding everything. Have to go to yellow. So, red, blue, green. Okay. Oh, yeah. Yeah, there's red. Um, so first change as I lose my voice. Um, one of the things we wanted to insert was just the reference because we've talked about it a few times that we have existing building design guidelines. Uh, those are in section 123. So, I just stuck in here a reference. So, no confusion. those govern um as well as what's in here. What's in here is supplemental to what we already have. Moving on down, very small change. Also on page one, we just out of the last meeting, utilities should be placed underground period. Not where feasible comes comment. And
058then really I think the only other change um is down on page five where we just added a little bit more to the landscaping. Um so we have an existing section on landscaping in the cyclone regulations section 120.8. Um it actually requires what I think we didn't want which is planting evergreens in a wall. Um so this language just says you know notwithstanding that section um landscaping use as screening should be naturalistic in appearance have a mixture of trees shrubs deciduous deciduous and um evergreen. So that is it. Those are all the changes that I can recall that came out of our last meeting. Obviously we were talking earlier today about the um parking requirement. So again, that's really um at the pleasure of the board. Um if you want to keep the single row
059or you want to go to the double row um and that is right now again as we referenced what page am I on? Page three uh number five right above the image. So that's where that language is. So I guess unless there's questions about the other changes or there's other changes people are looking for that seems to be um the point that was raised today of greatest concern. It could stay the same. It could become not more than a double row. Um or it could go away all together. Anybody have any questions? I do. Yeah, of course. So, I mean, just because what's before us now doesn't necessarily and and we may be okay with that doesn't wouldn't this if we kept these guidelines, it basically forces someone to come before us and tell us
060why they need something different. Correct? So, I have no problem with that. I'd personally rather have this guide and they work to achieve that. And if they can't, they come in, they talk to us. I mean, I suppose some could read it and be turned off and say you're making it development different uh difficult, but on the flip side, they'll see that there were exceptions made and um for various reasons if if that's the case. Um I I don't think there's too many things in here that are that stringent. I don't I just I'm saying is I don't know that I'd want to remove it or alter it. Yeah. I think the way it's drafted now is pretty good for more of professional buildings. Don't have a whole lot of retail sales. General Yeah. But
061the retail I think we may have to adjust our verbiage on this to make it more feasible. That's a good point for anyone to use this. But professional wise because there's more than enough parking these days. Yeah. Since co um would you make that clarification inside here like professional office? That makes sense. And maybe add um Does that make sense? Make that distinction. At that point, it can discourage uses that need more parking. But if we allow or it could cause people, the developers to just cater it to its specific use when it comes to the planning phase. The uses change over time. Yeah. Exactly. So it's harder to regulate that if we do that. That is the point. Could you repeat that, Jay? Jeremy Jeremy had a comment. Could you repeat that? Um yes.
062What I was saying was in my opinion the way it's written now is very very good for professional space, right? Um a lawyer lawyer's office, CPA, whatever else, right? But retail space I think your um suggestion is much more practical uh use of space. So I think defining between the two might be a way around this. So I think the concern of Jared was well what if you start with a retail then you flip to a office commercial. Right. Right. Kind of defeats purpose. Right. Keep in mind though, you know, this is, if I'm not mistaken, right, this is commercial zone land. We could come in with metal buildings everywhere on 30 acres, right? Right up to 50 ft. So, so we're aware of that, you know, so we're well aware. Don't don't take that
063wrong. It just I've been waiting a long time to do it this way and I still want to do it this way and and I'm telling you, as I've said every time, the problem, you know, that's why and you guys have been very good about having an open discussion and that's why we're having it and I want your input. But, you know, again, I say any one of you go someplace where there's only one row of parking and you're going to go park in the back of the building or you going to drive by, especially when you have 10. Now, we only have we're going to have a small amount, but are you going to what are you going to do? You know, I mean, just personally yourself, what are you doing? I'm leaving here
064tonight feeling encouraged. I think you heard our our comments and I think if we do a good job presenting that front of our site which is so important to you that I think you'll give us due consideration on the double roller park. Yeah. What I found in my own personal uses is professional buildings that have a front and a back entrance due to having common interior space. I'll park back then all the time, but that's not what we're talking about here. So we're talking more of a retail space. You want everyone in the front of the building having one entrance. So, I think it's two totally different things, but this section is specifically for layout requirements for non-residential buildings of which retail is a part. Correct. Right. As are professional offices. Yep. So, I don't
065know. Is there wiggle room enough with what we have, I guess, is the question. Or do we feel compelled to further clarify? I mean, you know, you go down the road of further clarifying and I I do think the challenge is that challenge of what have the use changes in the building. So, how Yeah. Which is why I'm inclined to say, let's make this double row, not single row. And what's really pushing me towards that is the photograph beneath this paragraph that shows a single row of parking by the buildings. And I just keep thinking to myself, where would where would customers park? Where would I park if I wanted to visit this this uh building? And that's predominantly office. Yeah. Right. But even if it's office, there's going to be staff in there. There's
066there's going to be other patrons in there. Yeah. A single road doesn't seem sufficient. I'm looking at um a measure like I I measured a commercial zone in Lexington, which is definitely a different type of town where I had to park in the back of a building and there's no parking in front of the building and the building is right up against the road there. I think the main advantage is they have a little bit more um demand that might encourage people to be willing to walk around the building. Uh the building is basically the same size as the one that would be proposed here. Um but yeah, I the big the only thing that makes that makes it so that we might want to loosen up is the fact that it's harder to get
067viable commercial businesses in Lichfield. because like the center of Lexington, Massachusetts is uh much denser and many more customers than Lichfield. All of those buildings seem to front onto the street. There's there's no parking in front unless it's on very limited on the street, right? Yeah, as you can see, there's a lot. Thank you. Good night. Behind the building. So, I mean, so maybe this this item should read something along the lines of every effort should be made so that not more than one more than a single row d like what you already have here. But it at least it it speaks to, you know, we're really looking for you to try, right? You know, we could put that that way that is single rows encouraged. What does that mean? No more. We encourage it,
068but we don't have the hard and fast rule. Yeah. It's just that it's it's not required. You're sending the signal. Yeah. if that's what you prefer. But it's not a requirement. These are guidelines. They're guidelines anyway. These aren't I mean these aren't hard and fast requirements. So So in that spirit it's like yeah and is it otherwise a double double triple quadruple? Who knows? That's the question parking lot bus terminal all of a sudden who knows. on what it is and where it's located. Is it's it's balancing economic feasibility to um the design because theoretically you can have smaller buildings where you can have parking more surrounding the buildings but it's less economically viable. Um and in some cases side parking is more easier to fit than others. Um, you know, one more point here
069that there are no other parcels that this is going to happen on other than this one parcel at the Northern Commercial District. There are a few other theoretical parcels that it can happen to. But there could be tear downs. Who knows? Yeah. like currently 5 acres. Currently there there is the lot um but uh at uh what if you're going to do a mixed use has to be 5 acres. There's one uh off of St. Francis Way that own by the Kobes again. You're not even going to see it. It's not even going to be you're not even going to see it from 3A pass me down the hill. Yeah. And everything else is a tear down. Mhm. And consolidating houses. Yeah. And that one, even the KBY one, it would probably be e more
070economically viable to remove the houses for visibility. So, I guess my only point is this is what we're zoning for right at this this one lot. This is what this is for. This one lot in north. But right now, we're not tearing nothing down. We're not we're not doing anything to to do that. We have to be careful as a planning board. We don't want to do spot zoning. We don't want to be one parcel is is encompassing all of our plan. But so all I'm getting as if you if if if there's a problem with the dual parking, you can change the regulations down the road if it really becomes a everybody. Well, I think Letha's suggestion is probably the best way to go about this as far as it's ambiguous. We suggest one
071thing, but it's not really nothing hardens fast about it. Fast, right? And when we think about too long term, you know, this right now is for the northern end of town, right? At some point this might also be modeled down the southern end of town, correct? I mean, we we thought at some point it's possible, right? And I think it would be, you know, looking to the future, I would think it would be confusing um to see mixed use development in two areas of town that is slightly different. So that's why, you know, I I feel it's more important that we think through these things and not have one, as you suggest, not have one project necessarily dictate something. So that we do have something that's a little bit okay. It might be general and
072a little bit deliberately vague and ambiguous, but I would hope that that would encourage some conversation. Yeah. I think it shows our intention at least we'd like to have. Yeah. So, how about not more than a single row of parking um located between the front facade of the building and the street is preferred. Parking areas located to the side or rear of the building are encouraged. Yeah, pretty good. Leaves it open enough. Yeah. Yeah, that does leave it open to a big wall of parking uh or big field of parking. Uh you know, I always as a lawyer, I look to what's the intent of a regulation because that's when you have to challenge a regulation. If we came to this board, asked you to waiver, you said thumbs down, you don't have a hardship,
073you know, there's no we're not giving you relief. The reg is the rag. I always have to if I want to challenge it, go to what's the intent of the regulation. So the intent of your regulation is you don't want that sea of asphalt and theoretically you don't want it right off the road all pavement. So you might want to think if you're going to establish a regulation, what's the purpose here? And and in this case, just in this case alone, but it might apply overall. It's um we don't want to see that double field of parking within 20 ft of Charles Braftoft. U which we're not sure, but more importantly, we don't want to just see it that close with no buffering. So maybe maybe you could say if you're stuck on this double
074row single row thing, you could say double row is permitted provided that there's a landscaping between the parking and the public because that's not required. You have a landscape plan, but it's not required. Jay, I don't believe not necessarily. No, you you um can't put parking within the front setback, right? So presumably there would be some landscaping, but it doesn't specifically say. Although it's it's really two factors, though. It's it is the visual, but it's also that the district is intended to encourage walkability and fields of parking are not very walkable. A double row is not a big deal necessarily, but your typical shopping center parking lot is not a walkable environment, right? Yeah. So again, we're proposing a 50-foot setback, which you could move the bill everything closer and b the parking can be
075in the setback, but we're going with a 50ft setback with a double row. So we have more room. We have a 50ft area. The landscape, which is better aligned with the intention of what we're trying to achieve. Yeah. I'm trying to get there. You're trying to get You're listening to us. Maybe it's you can have a double row if you have a 50ft set back from the rightway between the parking and the rightway. And that's what we're showing you is a 50ft setback without parking. Does that make feasible sense, Jay? Well, not not just applying here, but in general, you could uh I think the way we got to propose now is it's not a requirement. It just says it's preferred just, right? It's preferred, right? Yeah. With with two rows, you can have parking
076on each side of the street. Once you go beyond two, that's when you end up with the double just double row combos that definitely make it a big sea of asphalt. Okay. So, right. So, I'm not I'm not So, when you say preferred is one row, but if we're showing two rows, it doesn't that's okay. Yeah, technically. Yeah. Okay. Okay. It would be this is a discussion on the guidelines that we want to see overall. Um, and you know, we know there's going to be there are going to be exceptions, for lack of a better term, or or designs that are are fit the intent to right Mr. House's point that you know I we're trying to wrap our arms around something that is reflects what we want to see in the mixeduse village as
077a whole but provide enough wiggle room and flexibility so that developers can come up with solutions that fit our needs um and fit within the scope of your financial feasibility. for you and I can have a double row. I'm perfectly happy. Yeah. I think just removing the words may and must out of those. Yeah. Because that that makes it hard on you or makes it hard on the applicant language. We will but I think so because I want to see nice things on 3A. I think to having the setback for the parking lot is for every and for the future for everybody and that's why we're showing a 50 foot because I think that's what the gaming should be right up against. It depends on the style of the development. If it's a if it's
078a development off of a major road like you have, you want a setback between the major. Anything else in the northern commercial district on 3A would the rest of the land I have that all the butts 3A or across the street if people bought all the houses and decided to develop that again I think that I think we need that 50oot setback. Yeah. If we instead have the um a more internal cluster of commercial, it is different in that situation. If you look at the materials that we used to uh inspire some of this, it's a a lot of them are probably a more dense type of neighborhood in general where you'll have roads going through where you have businesses pretty close by on both sides of the road probably with a single row of
079parking on each side of that road with parking on the sides and back. But yeah, it's harder to make that viable in Lichfield. And when you're talking about internal, that that's easier to do and the front when you're facing if if you're going to if someone's going to come forward with just an internal development like that, okay, whatever how they they can do it. But if we're going to have commercial, and I think for Lichfield, if you're going to have commercial, has to face Albuquerque, has to face 3A. Yeah. And if that's the case, I think we need to have I'm asking you to go with the biggest setback because I I like I I I think it's a much better parking lot of 3A. I think it definitely much better having that step back
080based on what what our town people want based on the surveys we did with the economic development committee also. So they all want to keep that farm town feel. So step back, you know, that's one way to accomplish it, I guess. Yeah. If we want to differentiate, we can say set if there's more than one row of parking, you need a bigger setback because it wouldn't look bad to have a single row of parking. That that won't look bad close to the main road probably because it's just it's tiny. That's not a bad ide. So um we already we already say that under existing regulations parking area shall be located to the side of rear proposed principal structures and may not be located within 50 ft of any public rightway or within side of rear
081set. So we already have that. So that's already a requirement. But if they didn't put parking in the front, put a building in the front, they could be within 50 ft. Basically building can't be building can't be. Am I talking about the I'm saying that that you spoke the parking you didn't speak to the building itself. So the building could be close to the road, couldn't it? No. No. Parking can't be within 50 ft. That's right. Yeah. Okay. Should be. Okay. Yeah. It can only be close to internal roads, not the external. Although driveways can be. Yeah. Yeah. I think Yeah. Yeah. All right. So, are we going to go with just only should or preferred? Good night. Good night, guys. Okay. Have a good evening. It's up to you guys. Yeah, it's the will
082of the board. So, what do you guys want to I think the preferred language is probably better just to show on intent more, right? Yeah. Spell out the intent. And if a developer provides plans that don't align perfectly with the intent, at least they understand what the intent was and it's up to them to justify what that plan is for our approval. Like he did tonight, right? Okay. Okay. With that, I think that makes sense. Okay. All right. Can make that change. One more change. Which color you going with? One more change. You could send it to public hearing if you wish with that amendment. Well, um, let's or you could wait. Let's wait and do the change. I was gonna say and I have a couple of pictures for you. I didn't Oh, send
083them to me. So, it might help. I don't know. You know, I would have to look at this next time. You know, it would be helpful if we did have some sort of a visual of I I mean, I know they showed the plans and what that looks like in in the sketch, but if we actually had something visual to look at in terms of the examples that were presented tonight, some of the things that you guys had um supposedly do, Rose Meadows, Rose Meadows, whatever. Um, and to take a look at those, I think that would be helpful. Yeah, just to me, I'm a visual person, so I can look at a plan and yeah, looks I know what the the building is going to be and all that, but yeah. Uh, truly, yeah,
084get me what you can by the end of the week and I can always drive around Rose Meadows, take some pictures, and, you know, we can do a presentation on it. Yeah, it's looking good. All right, I'll do that. And um parking I held off because we're still waiting. Um the Senate um passed an amendment um the House bill. Um this is specifically on the residential parking requirement and I don't know what that is, but there's a committee of conference hasn't been scheduled yet. So within the next couple of weeks, we'll know what it looks like. Okay. Yeah. So, we'll bring hopefully maybe the next time we'll have that too. We'll have the parking ones as well. Sounds good. Right. And like interestingly um we didn't get a any um time spent talking about this
085the uh the front uh yard area. So, yeah, it didn't come up again. So, I guess they're not protesting too hard on 25%. I was actually trying to eyeball that on their example. Um, it looked as though I was going to say we decided last time that what is present at those other communities equals the 25%. Based on our rough calculations or they could push it back a little bit and need it, you know. And as we spoke with um Mr. Sharonau last time that realization I think was made that that square footage wasn't as grand as you would think when you say a figure like 25%. It's 10 ft. Yeah, cuz I think that's what we said about 10 ft. So if I'm I'm zooming in on this plan right now, it looks like
086they are set back a little more from that sidewalk. Have a little bit more green space. It looks like they I mean realistically they have so much land, right? I they you know that shouldn't be an issue, but if that sidewalk is at least 4 feet Yeah. and width, they're probably there with this concept. And I love that sidewalk that's um between the improvements and Albuquerque. I didn't realize that was going to be there. walk. It's so many wonderful walking paths, you know. Um it comes right in line with the the path that's already that leads up to that already. And I got a question for you legal wise because he's flipping all these houses around address wise will there be there'll be addressed on the back side? I assume correct? That's really a fire
087department question, but my guess because that's what we front, right? So if you front is actually the back, that's where that has to come into play because that's where the access is coming from. So I'd have to think that they're they're going to name that drive and um address the houses off of that addresses be on that. He said that the last time he was here. I was going to verify what front is going to be then because that's what it's mainly just going to be visually that's the front, right? Not really. Right. Okay. Right. open. And one thing to comment on is if you look at this, if you view it from within the um open space as displayed in the big field there or as displayed from the parking lot, all you're going
088to see are the parking structures. Yeah, that is going to be the dominant view from that angle inside the community. Right. Right. But yeah, but that will include from the commercial area. Um Yep. give some neighborhood kids something to play wall ball against. Yeah, that'd be a great little play area there. Yeah. And some of these are gonna, and we kind of mentioned it last time, but these bigger structures are going to fall under our design rags, right? So, they're either going to have to get a waiver or screen them, put in some landscaping, something. I think it's coming together. Yeah, I think it's coming together. I agree. is this issue obviously with double parking but sounds like it's kind of congealing a little bit. So it's an iterative process until J runs out of
089colors. That's it. I'm sorry. Until you run out of colors. Until I run out of colors. All right. Go back to one. Anything else about uh work session this evening? That's it so far. Okay. So, we'll be revisiting again. So, we will. All right. Um, moving on to committee reports. Any reports from any committees? Um, Jeremy, do you have anything about economic development? Nothing major because we were uh we didn't meet corn to actually have a meeting. Uh, however, we were informed that the board of selectman extended our charge till end of the year. So, we will have another meeting coming up end of this month, which would be Hold on one second, guys. It would be the 25th of June in this very room at 6:30 p.m. Okay. All right. uh capital improvement committee
090uh meeting was cancelled given um we didn't have much to discuss at this point but I suspect next time when we meet um we will have um folks coming before the the committee. Um the conservation commission meets this Thursday here in town hall at 6:30. Uh Laura Marramck local visit the local Marramck local river advisory committee uh is meeting June 5th uh at 7 in Nshawa city hall. Um they have to elect a new chair uh Fran Murphy step down and members to step up. So we'll see what happens with that. Um anything from NRPCJ? Uh nothing new. Our next meeting will be I should double check before I misspe. Uh next meeting will be on the 18th. Okay. That's a full commission meeting. Full commission. Very good. It's also the annual meeting. Got it.
091Okay. Thank you. All right. Um moving on to minutes. Minutes. Approval of minutes of May 20th, 2025. Did anybody have an opportunity to take a look at those? Have any questions, amendments, anything they want to talk about? I have a question on page five, paragraph on the top. One, two, three, four. I count one, two, three, four. In bold, it says 49. Fourth paragraph. I don't remember having this conversation. I don't know like if I was asleep during that or it says there was discussion about potential red versus the height of existing structures to 49 ft. Yeah, 49 ft is a very exact I'm trying to remember like I'm scratching my head going so this looks like the parking something maybe like less than probably less length of the buildings. It's probably length. We talked
092about discussed in the next paragraph where they say the board examined the relevant section of the design guidelines noting the applicants are required to incorporate architectural fe features to reduce visual massing for nonresidential facads of 50 feet or more in length. So if I go back to the 49 that's less than 50 feet but what are we trying to say there? Should we just remove that because nobody seems to probably the whole paragraph. I think I'd strike that. Yeah, the whole paragraph. Well, the rest of the paragraph is okay. I mean, that's accurate, but it was just that first sentence with the 49 ft. And I'm even if it's not height, even if it's sentence one and two width, I'm not sure that it makes any sense. So, would everybody be okay if we took
093that out? Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. Yeah, cuz I don't know what that means either. The phantom. So, strike sentence one and sentence two in paragraph four. One, two, three, four, five, five. Just sentence one. Just sentence one. Oh, the second one ties into one though. It's It's only sort of a sentence though. It's lowercase W. So, it's there even though see the periods. So, 49 ft period than which could improve. So, it ties into the first sentence. Oh, okay. I saw that as a comma. Yeah. Oh, okay. So, strike the sent strike everything between there and functionality. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. No, that's fine. Yeah. Catch. What What exactly is the thing that was pointed out? From there was discussion. I'm sorry. Yes. From there was discussion all the way down to functionality gets
094gets stricken. Yeah. That that's the first sentence, right? Yeah, that is a com. It's very very small on my screen. Yep. So, yeah. So, normally uh Joan takes notes on the revisions that we do. Yeah. She may be watching the meeting. So, um she usually does if it'll be on the tape. It'll be on the tape. So, yeah, I think you made it pretty clear now on that one. Other than that, I had nothing else. Okay. Anybody have anything else? I didn't notice anything that was I didn't either inact like was enough to change. Okay. Well, I'll entertain a motion. If that's the case, I'll entertain a motion um to approve these minutes as amended. So moved. I have a motion by Do I have a second? I will second them. Second by Jeremy. Okay.
095Um any further discussion? All right. All those um approval of the meeting minutes for May 20th, 2025, please signify by saying I. I I. Those opposed, abstained. Okay. Motion passes. 1 2 3 4 0. Okay. Thank you. All right. Um any other business this evening? Jay, do you have anything? I do not. Does anybody have anything? I do not. Okay. All right. Well, I I certainly don't have anything. Um I think um with that in mind, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. I would like to adjourn. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. All right. Jeremy's going to make would like to make a motion to adjurnn. Would someone like to second that motion? Second. Second by shared. Any further discussion? All right. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying I. I.
096Those opposed abstain. Motion passes 600.