[Speaker 18] (0:48 - 1:18)
.

[Speaker 13] (1:37 - 2:48)
. . .

. . .

.

[Speaker 2] (2:56 - 3:24)
Thank you. We're going to call the January 13, 2025 meeting of the Planning Board to order. First on our agenda, we have application 24-01 by CenterCorp Retail Properties for a preliminary plan for a subdivision.

I believe at our last meeting we were going to discuss continuing that until the design hearing for the Swampscope Mall was completed. Is that the?

[Speaker 7] (3:25 - 3:33)
. .

[Speaker 2] (3:36 - 3:42)
And I believe Mr. Schutzer has his hand raised to speak as well.

[Speaker 7] (3:43 - 3:48)
I thought I was going to speak for him tonight. That's okay. Yeah.

[Speaker 9] (3:49 - 3:54)
Go ahead, Ken. You should be able to unmute yourself.

[Speaker 8] (3:59 - 4:01)
Have I been unmuted?

[Speaker 2] (4:12 - 4:13)
Hold on one second, Ken.

[Speaker 8] (4:14 - 4:15)
Okay, thank you very much.

[Speaker 2] (4:15 - 4:17)
Oh, I think we can hear you now.

[Speaker 8] (4:18 - 4:26)
It's a pleasure being virtually with you this evening. Mr. Rose, I believe you're going to speak.

[Speaker 2] (4:26 - 4:53)
Is the volume up? Thank you. Sorry, Ken, just a second.

Ken, do you want to try again?

[Speaker 8] (4:54 - 4:56)
Can you hear me now? Not yet.

[Speaker 2] (4:57 - 5:34)
The problem is on our side, so just hold on one more second, Ken. Ken, if you could try again. Can you hear me now?

[Speaker 8] (5:34 - 5:35)
There you go. Beautiful.

[Speaker 2] (5:35 - 5:37)
There we can. Thank you. Go ahead, Ken.

[Speaker 8] (5:37 - 6:00)
Well, thank you. I heard you had just called the first matter, which was the subdivision, and I think Mr. Rose was going to speak on that. I just wanted to make sure that I was virtually connected with you before the hearing actually started.

So I think Mr. Rose wanted to address the board on that matter, and I will withhold my comments until later.

[Speaker 7] (6:01 - 6:02)
Okay. All right, he did.

[Speaker 2] (6:02 - 6:06)
Thank you, Ken. All right, I think Mr. Rose already spoke to that.

[Speaker 8] (6:08 - 6:11)
What was his response? I'm sorry, I didn't hear it.

[Speaker 7] (6:11 - 6:23)
The response is we're going to work on the second petition in front of us, and when we have that accomplished, we'll take this back up and follow through with that.

[Speaker 2] (6:24 - 6:29)
Thank you. Is there a motion on application 24-01?

[Speaker 1] (6:30 - 6:35)
Motion to continue. Motion to continue. After this particular part of the project is approved.

[Speaker 2] (6:36 - 6:41)
So we want to motion that for until the next meeting, February.

[Speaker 1] (6:41 - 6:42)
We can do that, sure.

[Speaker 2] (6:43 - 7:15)
Second. Second. All right, all those in favor of continuing the preliminary subdivision plans for CenterCorp Retail Properties to our February meeting?

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

That application is continued. Next on our agenda is an application for a subdivision 24-02 by Darius Gregory for 0 Manson Road. It's my understanding that the applicant has requested a continuance on that as well?

They have, yes. Okay. And they've signed the waiver and everything?

They have. All right. Do we need to formally?

[Speaker 1] (7:15 - 7:25)
We do. I'm going to continue that petition, the number 24-02. That one to our next meeting.

[Speaker 2] (7:26 - 7:33)
Second. All right, all those in favor of continuing the 24-02 for 0 Manson Road to February? Aye.

[Speaker 13] (7:33 - 7:33)
Aye.

[Speaker 2] (7:34 - 8:57)
Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. All right, we have a motion to approve 24-18 by CentreCorp Retail, Inc., represented by Ken Schutzer for a design plan for 450 Paradise Road, the Swampscott Mall. Continued from last month's meeting. Just to start this at the outset before I hand this over to you, Ken, just to give those tuning in to this meeting a little bit of an understanding of where we are in the process for this. This public hearing was opened in December, where the applicant presented their application for this project, which was submitted under Zoning By-law Section 4.12.0.0, which Swampscott Town Meeting approved in the annual town meeting in 2023, which allowed for multifamily housing of units of eight units or greater in the B4 residential district by right, with a review process overseen by the planning board. So that is what we're here to do tonight with this application that was, like I said, opened in December for a public hearing and continue to tonight. So with that being said, I'll hand it over to the applicant to continue their presentation, note their updates, and then we'll go to board questions, continue with public comment and take it from there.

So with that, Mr. Schutzer, Andy, I'll hand it over to your team.

[Speaker 8] (8:58 - 11:47)
Thank you very much. For the record, Attorney Kenneth Schutzer, appearing before the board on behalf of Senate Corp Retail. You may recall, and I think you alluded to this, we last before the board on December the 4th, and at that time you had charged us with the responsibility of responding to certain questions that were still outstanding.

They were actually addressed in correspondence that was sent to you by Nidhi John from PCA, dated January the 6th. I'm just going to speak to them very, very briefly, allow the responses to be given both by Kelly and Van Ness and PCA. The first question that was raised was adding bus shelters with benches at the existing Essex Street and Paradise Road.

The second was to confirm the number of trees that have been added to reflect the 32 percent that was earlier provided to the board. The third was that you asked that a bike rack be located for use for the retail portion. The fourth is that you wanted us to show a contextual elevation along Loring and Essex Street, showing the existing residential development.

To the left, the fifth was showing some residential renderings for the design and the elevations that we had earlier presented. You want further detail. You want some information on the affordable units.

I prepared and I had tendered an AHR, which I'll be going into at the conclusion of the comments. The seventh was that you wanted to provide the town with a subdivision plan for approval. And the last was a question that had come up regarding energy issues.

Those have all been answered. I think that what you will and if the board so desires, those that are here that have responded to them, being Kelly Engineering Group, regarding any things that came up with DPW, fire, health and the building department questions and Vanessa responding to the comments from the police department. So I'll really leave it up to the chair how you wish us to go at this point, having been provided with the detailed written information.

But if there were further questions that you wanted to address to to each of the team members relative to their area of expertise, they're here both in person and virtually. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Speaker 2] (11:48 - 12:22)
Thanks, Ken. I think it would be helpful. Appreciate the thorough responses that your team did to the comments we received.

I think it would be helpful to, at a high level at least, have have the applicant team kind of go through some of the changes that were made to the plan since the last meeting. I think there were a few minor changes as well as address some of the issues that came up, not issues, some of the responses to the comments from the town regarding traffic. I believe water flow was another one.

Electrical utility locations, things of that nature.

[Speaker 6] (12:22 - 16:13)
Certainly, Garrett Horsfall. Yes, thank you. Garrett Horsfall with the Kelly Engineering Group.

So the plan changes overall were relatively minor in nature. As Attorney Schutzer noted, we did add the bus shelters and some speed humps slash bumps as recommended as part of the as responded to in some of these comments directly for the DPW. Those speed bumps were added in three locations adjacent to those 24 spaces as a traffic calming measure to address traffic safety issues that were raised with those spaces.

Again, we see these spaces as off-peak spaces for employees that would not be used as peak traffic flow times and the like. But additionally, the major changes, which bleed through a lot of the sheets of the plans, are conceptual lot lines that have been shown on the plans. And I'll just sort of walk you through C1 and C2, which are on the westerly side of the set.

C1 and C2, our goal or intent for that would be to submit those as an A&R plan upon approvals for this project. That would happen sooner than later. The subdivision will be a further down the road discussion.

Those lots are shown as C3 through C8 on the eastern side of the plan set. C1 and C2 would fully comply for frontage with setbacks, etc., for a lot area through the A&R process. There would be some setback relief needed associated with the lot line adjacent to Stop and Shop, just for the 20-foot side setback there.

But other than that, they fully conform to the dimensional standards in the zoning bylaw. And at a high level of the comments, a lot of these, many of these comments were actually already addressed as a part of the stamp plans that you have before you and that were submitted in December. Some of these were labeling, these comments, I believe, from DPW based on the draft set, I believe that was submitted in very early November.

So a lot of those have been addressed. Regarding the sewer flow capacity, we did run an analysis on that existing line. There appears to be ample capacity in that line today and more than 50 percent capacity available in that line with the introduction of this new apartment building into that line that's there today.

Water, we're not aware of any watery demand uses in the area, but we are proposing to connect that loop out to Essex Street, which will help pressures along that side and connect the loop into, see that they're tied into the main on Paradise Road. So we believe that'll actually be a help for water, particularly on Essex Street, where I believe DPW and engineering has expressed that there might be some pressure issues. So that connection to the loop will help to relieve any pressure issues on Essex Street and create the loop through this property as well.

Regarding the rest of the comments from engineering, again, I believe they're minor in nature, drafting that have been addressed adequately on these plans that you have before you. If there's any in particular you'd like to discuss, I'm glad to walk through any of those comments with you. Regarding the police, I think Van Asselt will address anything related to that, as they were all primarily traffic-related issues.

And fire, they really had no issues. Obviously, a lot of those are standard building department items that will be picked up as part of the building permit filing. And similar with building, the comments from the building department, a lot of those will be picked up as part of the building permit once the whole project team gets on board after the permit process.

And the last comment was health, providing closures, which all the dumpsters on the proposed plans have enclosures.

[Speaker 2] (16:14 - 16:20)
All right, thank you. On the engineering perspective, any questions from board members?

[Speaker 1] (16:23 - 16:24)
I don't.

[Speaker 2] (16:28 - 16:48)
I think that one of the other things that came up that you did a thorough job of addressing, your team did, was traffic. I think some of the responses to the very thoughtful comments from town staff that your team did, if someone from the traffic? Yes, I am.

[Speaker 10] (16:48 - 16:49)
Can everybody hear me in the room?

[Speaker 2] (16:49 - 16:55)
We can. You might be willing to kind of walk through some of your responses to town comments. I think that would be helpful.

[Speaker 10] (16:56 - 19:10)
Of course, absolutely. For the record, my name is Daniel. I'm a traffic engineer with Van Assen Associates, the traffic consultants for the project.

Just to kind of give a quick overview of Captain Joseph Cable's comments as they relate to the traffic study. There was a main emphasis on really two parts on traffic operations within the area, as well as safety, which are the two main focuses that we had as we were kind of going through the study and coming up with appropriate recommendations to address this project. And I spoke a little bit about these recommendations and our proposed mitigation at the previous meeting.

But just to kind of quickly rehash them, we're proposing to retime a majority of the signals within the study area based on our analysis. It appears that there may be a little bit of inefficiencies within them now that some recent retimings with new traffic counts can help to maybe improve the efficiency and improve operations within the study area at those signals, as well as in coordination with that, have a specific look at the yellow and all red times of the clearance times of the signals, which is the part of the traffic signal cycle that's most associated with safety. So making sure that they're not too long, not too small can help to reduce rear end crashes, which was the majority of the crashes that we saw at a lot of the study area. So these were great comments from the police captain.

As I said, these were essentially what we were looking as we were also conducting the study as well. And they kind of informed the recommendations that we had made. So I'm happy to, if there was a specific comment or response that anyone on the board wanted to kind of go through, I can talk in further detail for that.

[Speaker 2] (19:10 - 19:24)
I think it would be helpful, which you mentioned looking at some of the optimizing some of the yellow and red signal timings of the signals that are in the study area. Which signals specifically were in that study area?

[Speaker 10] (19:25 - 20:33)
So the study area that we had addressed was the four signals that kind of make up Vennon Square, Paradise at Loring, Loring at Vennon, Paradise at Vennon and Vennon at Salem. Then we also looked at the two signals on either side of the mall driveway, as well as the signal down by Whole Foods. Then based on our analysis, we found that there were some inefficiencies within the Vennon Square, all of those signals, as well as at Paradise at the mall driveway.

So those are the signals we are proposing to retime. And as a part of that, we will also look at the clearance intervals of all of those signals with a main emphasis on the one right at the front door to the project at the mall driveway, which was relatively recently reconstructed and has kind of been a focal point for safety as a part of the study, as well as within Mr. Cable's comments.

[Speaker 2] (20:34 - 20:55)
And could you just speak a little bit to what the outcome of kind of looking at those efficiencies are, like from a practical perspective, how does the light cycle change for me as somebody who drives through there on a daily basis? What is what you're going to do impact the safety of that or the traffic impact of that just from a layman's perspective?

[Speaker 10] (20:56 - 22:30)
Yeah, sure. Absolutely. So essentially, as we look at signals like this, which is not to get too technical, but we look at the volume to capacity ratio, essentially how many vehicles can go through a specific approach or go through the signal in general to what the capacity of that signal is.

So a lot of these signals and a lot of these movements have volumes of capacity to ratios of lower than one, essentially meaning that they can accommodate additional traffic. And there's a little bit of wiggle room within a lot of these signals to be able to accommodate that and to make small adjustments. I can't quantify it off the top of my head.

If you give me a little bit of time, I can kind of parse through the traffic study. Kind of one of the ending pages of the traffic study is essentially a review of our build mitigated condition with the retiming of those signals. But the idea is essentially to improve two things.

It's to improve average motorist delay for all vehicles approaching the intersection to reduce wait times at those signals, as well as to reduce vehicle queuing. They kind of go hand in hand. So the idea is if you're behind five, six vehicles now with the improvements and the improvements to efficiency, you're going to be behind four or five or fewer in the future.

[Speaker 2] (22:31 - 22:39)
Thank you. That's helpful for understanding. Any other questions from the board on traffic or.

[Speaker 14] (22:41 - 23:04)
Kind of on traffic in the DPW comments, they had a comment about the 24 parking spaces along the back, just saying that it might be unsafe to have people pulling out directly. And I was wondering if there's anything that could be done to, I don't know if you could angle those spaces so that folks are, you know, pulling out into the correct right of way or you're not concerned about it for some other reason.

[Speaker 6] (23:06 - 23:45)
So, yeah, so we added in the speed bumps. There is basically there's three of them to every hundred feet through here as traffic calming measures to slow down the motorists through this section. Really angling would not work just because it's a two way traffic flow in there.

It would actually probably lead to more traffic for people trying to not go in the right direction. But we did add those in. And again, we are these are going to be directed for, you know, the stop and shop, the people that are opening the store at 5 a.m. parking car over here that they're not interacting with the peak, the peak hour at 8 a.m. coming through there as well. Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (23:46 - 24:53)
I don't know if this is exactly where this belongs, but I think it might be. I know that there was a question about pedestrian, the sidewalk that is not that doesn't exist with currently or in the plan that's with the main street that's running through here, knowing it's a private street. But the question that I had around sidewalks is where you've got proposed building B over in lot C7 and C8.

Is there any thought about the pedestrians that are coming from across Paradise Road? That is just sort of an area that it looks like crosswalk added in that would both aim some of the traffic speed. If you're looking from the entrance off of Paradise Road on that side of the street, it's sort of there's very sort of roundabout pedestrian ways.

And I think it's sort of begging people to just walk across the parking lot in a way that might we might want to have a little thought on.

[Speaker 6] (24:57 - 25:02)
So I believe you're referring to right at the right away that the curb got there sort of continuing through or.

[Speaker 3] (25:03 - 26:11)
Well, if proposed building C is up at the front and it appears when I'm looking at this that the sidewalk coming at Paradise Road is sort of leading you over to proposed building C and then brings you over and then up the face of the existing main structure. But there is an area that looks like a direct route but doesn't really have pedestrian designed into it. Pedestrians designed into it that go from the service where you're coming in from Paradise Road over to proposed building B.

There's currently two sort of oval areas, but it's not everything else is sort of paved out as crosswalks. And it just seems like an area where traffic could be accelerating in and pedestrians would be tempted to cross. Yeah.

Maybe you can say it better. OK. Right here is the sidewalk in here, but there's there's one here and here.

But this building.

[Speaker 1] (26:12 - 26:17)
There's this area in here that's where you start to see in the middle of the parking lot.

[Speaker 3] (26:18 - 26:18)
Right.

[Speaker 1] (26:18 - 27:24)
And that's that's what sort of concerns me is to keep the. Can you help translate that? Yeah.

I'm trying to follow it too. OK. So we're talking about the sidewalk entry where the part where you actually move the sidewalk in because MassDOT was going to take out some trees and you left the trees there.

So if you're if you're standing in the middle of Paradise Road and you're facing Swampscott Mall, it would be the entrance corner on your right. I can point. So so what you're saying is if someone were to turn in, walk into the mall using that corner that they sort of are come to a dead stop and they're going to want to cut across the parking lot.

And what I was you know, what I think we're trying to get at in the plans is that there's an adequate sidewalk there that leads you to the pedestrian walkway, which is a little further up, closer to behind where the ATMs are now. And that essentially cuts from the sidewalk right in in front of Starbucks. Right.

[Speaker 7] (27:24 - 27:47)
Leads you on that way. Yeah. So you're saying we could have had this one in the middle.

[Speaker 3] (27:47 - 28:04)
My my my concern is with those two additional buildings being added, that those are going to be in people's path of wanting wanting to get here. Well, so if it's if it's sort of set up that way, it's almost like a sort of begging people to just walk it.

[Speaker 7] (28:04 - 28:22)
OK, but I don't think that you want to cut that off. Yeah. And you don't really want the people crossing.

Wait, you don't want them to. Right.

[Speaker 3] (28:23 - 29:15)
But when it comes to pedestrians, pedestrians are going to see the shortest path. So making the shortest path the safest path sometimes, because what ends up happening is if you're asking someone to walk an additional X amount of distance, they'll bypass it. And it's similar to like, you know, with with the cleaners, there's a crosswalk near where the cleaners is.

But most people don't walk the 50 feet down to to hook back. They just cross. That's at a location.

And I'm just I'm not saying that this is like a deal breaker. I just think it's something to consider that if if those were paved out, textured and looked that way, it would alert the drivers that there are going to be people crossing there because they are going to one way or the other. That's a that's that's a thought of it.

[Speaker 7] (29:15 - 29:16)
And I don't have.

[Speaker 5] (29:17 - 29:56)
Yes, that is that's a valid way to visually slow down traffic and make it a little bit more pedestrian friendly. I you're also going to I see. Yes, but I see Andy's point about it is busy.

Yeah, it was kind of. And this is why there is an existing to the north, as you pointed out, that existed and we were looking at completely strengthening that. I'm also thinking who is going to be coming down Paradise Road at that entry.

Versus looking at to the north and the south, you have two pedestrian connections, but adding a visual paver or something to just have. But Andy will not change anything.

[Speaker 7] (29:57 - 30:21)
No, but you have a visual. I'm just I'm not saying no. I'm just thinking you have the visual.

You have the change. It's on the same grade as the pavement making the change. But then you're going from island to two islands that you'd be eliminating trees from as well, because you either have to walk down that path for you or it's green.

[Speaker 3] (30:22 - 30:39)
Yeah. So that's no, that's that's that's a good point. The other question is the crosswalks at Paradise Road.

Are. They're located on both sides or one side of that entrance. It's not marked on the drawing.

[Speaker 1] (30:39 - 30:43)
Yeah, they're they go all the way around. What do you mean?

[Speaker 3] (30:48 - 30:53)
There's a crosswalk here. And there's not one.

[Speaker 7] (30:53 - 30:54)
I don't think there's one there.

[Speaker 1] (30:56 - 31:01)
Here, I can turn page C06 so you can see them all here.

[Speaker 3] (31:02 - 31:02)
C06?

[Speaker 1] (31:02 - 31:03)
Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (31:07 - 31:08)
Yes.

[Speaker 5] (31:14 - 31:22)
We have light poles. We have trees, two trees in each of those islands. No, I don't like them.

Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (31:23 - 31:50)
Yeah, that would it would be challenging to get it in there. Look, the C8 that I was looking at was devoid of that. So that's that's that's why that question came up.

Right. I actually think the light posts in the trees will dissuade. So I don't think it will be an issue because I think as you see that, that will tell you not to do it.

Sort of back that up.

[Speaker 7] (31:50 - 31:59)
Because if you eliminated the trees in the light post, you're going to accentuate the parking lot.

[Speaker 3] (31:59 - 32:04)
Yeah. We're trying to hide. Which is, which I think is, is, is absolutely valid, but it will also discourage that.

[Speaker 7] (32:04 - 32:05)
You're not going to look down a line.

[Speaker 3] (32:05 - 32:08)
Right. Exactly. It's, it's, boom.

[Speaker 1] (32:08 - 32:12)
Yeah. Good. I think it's going to look very clear where people on foot are supposed to go.

[Speaker 2] (32:22 - 32:28)
Marissa, can you bring up the contextual drawings? I think we're submitted as well.

[Speaker 9] (32:33 - 32:36)
The beginning of the plan? Yeah, they were ready.

[Speaker 2] (32:36 - 32:43)
I think this is page four of our packet, A22B.

[Speaker 5] (32:48 - 32:53)
Yeah, go on. Would you like us to address these?

[Speaker 2] (32:53 - 32:54)
Yeah, that would be helpful.

[Speaker 5] (32:54 - 33:26)
Last time. So I think last time this, this page, you had seen the, the top has not changed. That's just the view of that street.

But what we did is try to look at the building next door and see what that meant on their project. What we did is we looked at the survey and found a relative grade for that. And we went on site and took, this is just a basically a photo montage of what we saw on site as best as we could to get the heights.

And this kind of shows a true representation of what it would, what the new building would be in relation to existing.

[Speaker 2] (33:28 - 33:39)
And I think it also does a good job of indicating how much the parking is kind of going to be hidden in front of Stop and Shop behind that apartment building, which I wasn't quite as, this does a good job of accentuating.

[Speaker 5] (33:39 - 34:43)
And I think the topography works in our favor because already the parking is a little below. And there's a good robust tree line there between both, which we are maintaining, so that should help. And the bottom three images were, last time we didn't have anything for the residential.

Jerry, you made a good comment about not, elevations don't tell the true story. So we looked at three, intentionally these three views, because one is further away from the mall, from the retail, on what the backdrop is versus as you drive on further along Mall Road, seeing the residential. And the third one is a pedestrian entrance into the residential, just kind of tucked in to give it that presence and space.

It's a little hard to tell in this one at this scale, but everything that is past, you see two people walking into the pedestrian, that whole area, that whole enclave is raised. It's got cleavers, so it doesn't look like the rest of the mall and the parking, so it kind of differentiates itself.

[Speaker 3] (34:45 - 34:48)
I think these are really helpful to also understand the color blocking.

[Speaker 5] (34:48 - 34:48)
Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (34:49 - 35:08)
Because there's a plethora of buildings that have come up in the communities around us, that the color blocking is far less sophisticated than this. And it shows, it shows this off, that it's really emphasizing the architecture, instead of sort of creating a wallpaper on it.

[Speaker 5] (35:08 - 35:26)
No, and that was very intentional. Thank you. And it was intentional by the team to not only use, using the color blocking very intentionally, so the mass of the building should stand by itself and not let the materials dictate what it needs to be.

So there's a stepping to the corner to kind of smooth.

[Speaker 3] (35:27 - 36:17)
And it also helps keeping the scale feeling relevant to the rest of the, the rest of the development. So it's quite successful. I also think that the Loring Avenue and Essex Street elevation is really helpful to sort of understand that it's creating an edge that's, it's actually an improvement down there.

So you don't have the, the occupied space that's currently built, and then you're dropping into a parking lot to just sort of keep that going. And the fact that the trees are remaining, there's some really nice depth play that's happening there. And I think that that will be a benefit to that stretch of the street.

So that's a, that's a nice thing to discover.

[Speaker 7] (36:17 - 36:23)
That was PCA's primary motive from the beginning of its design to do that.

[Speaker 5] (36:23 - 36:38)
Yeah, that was the most, that was beautiful. When we came in the summer and looked at it, there was a beautiful edge to it. And you don't want to take away what is really well.

And you've got the bus shelter, the bus stop is right there at that corner. Which is great. Yeah, adding that shelter, it will help.

[Speaker 3] (36:38 - 36:56)
And I think that move is doing two things. It's, it's providing something to the community, but it's also enhancing the quality of the life of the people living there. You know, it's, it's screening in the winter where you've got that view out, you've got the open space of the cemetery.

I mean, these are, these are units that will feel really good to live in.

[Speaker 1] (36:57 - 37:33)
I think it's important to point out for people that maybe haven't had the opportunity to look at these plans as thoroughly as we have. That the building is not a solid block. That it, it looks, if you were a drone floating in from above, it looks like a letter S.

The way it curves around and there, so there's quite a bit of courtyard sort of depth in those open spaces and it, it gives it a nice, it gives it a nice feeling. And there is significant, you know, buffering off of Loring Ave, which is, I think you've taken full advantage of and that's, that's excellent.

[Speaker 2] (37:35 - 38:06)
Juror brought up trees and I, I think that's something I was hoping to touch on tonight. I know you are probably aware of a letter from our tree committee. And I'm sure someone is here tonight to speak to that as a public comment.

But they had brought up some thoughts on replacing some of the trees in the plan with potentially native species from our Swampscot tree list and wanted to bring that up for discussion tonight, if that's something you'd be open to looking into and working with them on. Perfect, the man to speak to. Is that something you can speak to?

[Speaker 11] (38:07 - 38:13)
Yeah, absolutely. Mike D'Angelo, landscape architect with MDLA. What was the specific question?

[Speaker 2] (38:13 - 38:36)
So, I know the letter from our friends on the tree committee here was just some suggestions about native species replacing some of the non-native species that were on the landscaping plan. I just wanted you to be able to speak to your thoughts on that and if you'd be willing to work with them and maybe find some commonality with some of the trees on our Swampscot tree list, native tree list too.

[Speaker 11] (38:36 - 38:45)
Absolutely, I think there, I think there's only maybe one or two that aren't native, but they're very hardy. But we're open to looking at the list and working with them.

[Speaker 2] (39:07 - 39:28)
One of the other points that was they had recommended us looking into and speaking with you about was looking to a fixed watering schedule beyond just the initial planting. I think something like two years, for the initial two years, following some sort of Department of Conservation recommendation from the state. Is that something you'd be open to doing as well?

[Speaker 11] (39:29 - 39:31)
As far as irrigation, is that something you'll commit to?

[Speaker 2] (39:32 - 39:50)
Just look into or potentially meet with the tree committee to discuss their recommendations. Yeah, no, just yeah, I think it would be, I think they would appreciate if you'd take, you know, just hear from them and you can have that conversation with them. Thank you.

[Speaker 3] (39:52 - 40:06)
I do have one quick tree question. In designing a project like this, as a landscape architect, is your, what sort of size tree is optimal for maturity?

[Speaker 11] (40:07 - 41:10)
So the guidelines in Swampscot, they ask for four to four and a half, which is actually pretty big. You typically, in municipalities, ask for three to three and a half. But you really don't want to go any bigger than four to four and a half.

It's, the larger the tree you plant, the harder for it is to kind of acclimate and survive that initial planting. But one of the things we do when we do a plant of this size is we make sure we have a lot of variety. You don't want to plant all one species like they used to.

So in case one gets, one doesn't do well or it's a disease, there's others there that could, that could survive. So we have a lot of diversity in the species. On the list, I think only one is not native.

But we really, we really strive to use, you know, species that are going to do well in this environment. Especially with the ground cover plantings in the islands. That's always a struggle in this environment.

So we choose species that could withstand snow, compaction, drought, salt. Really plants that could take a beating.

[Speaker 3] (41:11 - 41:21)
And I guess the, I'll ask it a little bit differently, but when you are looking in a parking lot situation, are you looking to create a canopy to try to bring temperatures down?

[Speaker 11] (41:21 - 41:22)
Absolutely, yeah.

[Speaker 3] (41:22 - 41:27)
And so forth. And then what height do you, what's a goal for a mature canopy height?

[Speaker 11] (41:27 - 41:40)
So day one, a tree of this size is going to be about 18 to 20 feet tall. But over time, as the tree matures, most of these trees will get, you know, 50 feet tall, 40 feet tall. Awesome.

Yeah.

[Speaker 5] (41:40 - 41:42)
Which is what the trees are at Essex.

[Speaker 11] (41:42 - 41:42)
Right.

[Speaker 7] (41:43 - 41:56)
Are you saying, though, that we should be planting, notwithstanding the bylaw and needing a waiver, that we should be planting three, three and a half's to survive better? Or mixing them? Or just, I just want to make sure in terms of each leaf.

[Speaker 11] (41:56 - 41:57)
The tree, a tree size.

[Speaker 7] (41:57 - 42:04)
We've had such a hard time over the years. I've replaced them three times over 20 years because of the root ball saturation.

[Speaker 11] (42:04 - 42:08)
Yeah, I mean, the larger the tree, the harder it is for it to establish.

[Speaker 7] (42:08 - 42:10)
This is the last time for me.

[Speaker 3] (42:16 - 42:23)
Has there ever been an override of the size tree that's required?

[Speaker 1] (42:23 - 42:44)
Not to my knowledge, but we can certainly, you know, make any exceptions that we want. I don't think it's something that we couldn't make an exception to, depending on, you know, if it's in the best interest of the health of the trees and the ability to find the best trees, and the best species, and the best mix.

[Speaker 3] (42:45 - 42:56)
I would hope our guidelines are best practice, not arbitrary. So, if they're good to be challenged, especially with documented research.

[Speaker 1] (42:56 - 43:15)
I think everybody wants the trees to survive. That's the bottom line. You want them to be viable and not to see 10% of them die off in the first year and a half.

So, whatever's going to get us there the best is, you know, clearly makes the most sense.

[Speaker 7] (43:17 - 43:23)
That would be the same with the irrigation. If the irrigation is going to get us there, then we're going to have to do it.

[Speaker 2] (43:31 - 43:41)
It's kind of the specifics I have, at least at this time, I'm sure. Maybe questions on a variety of topics from other board members. Feel free to.

[Speaker 1] (43:45 - 44:23)
Certainly, you've met, you know, we met all the specific questions that we asked the first time. So, thank you very much for doing such a good job with that, and also for addressing all the comments we got from the various boards and departments. I read through all those responses also, and I think they're very thorough and well said.

Do you want to talk about, you know, a couple of other issues as well? For example, I think there were some things brought up by open space and sustainability, the energy.

[Speaker 2] (44:24 - 44:27)
Yes, I was thinking we might do public comment.

[Speaker 1] (44:27 - 44:27)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (44:28 - 44:32)
Unless the board has any other questions before we move into those.

[Speaker 1] (44:32 - 44:33)
That's probably a good idea.

[Speaker 2] (44:36 - 44:56)
All right. So, at this point, we will open it up to the public for public comment. If you have a comment, please stand up to the microphone and introduce yourself and your address.

And if you are online and would like to raise your hand to indicate you'd like to speak, I can call on you as well. So, if there's anybody in the room tonight, please feel free to head up to the microphone.

[Speaker 15] (44:59 - 44:59)
I'm sorry.

[Speaker 2] (45:00 - 45:03)
The microphone's right over here. No problem.

[Speaker 15] (45:23 - 45:25)
Hi. Can you hear me?

[Speaker 13] (45:25 - 45:25)
Yes.

[Speaker 15] (45:25 - 46:17)
Hi. I'm Diana Eddowes, Swampscot resident and 55 Kensington Lane, and I'm also a member of the Swampscot Renewable Energy Committee. And sorry we didn't get written comments in the first round, but we'd like to know what your plans for solar are here.

Obviously, there's a lot of opportunity with the new building, with the existing retail space, the canopies on the parking lot. So, we'd just like to know what your preliminary plans are for solar and whether, you know, it's owning solar as part of the property owner or being able to lease out the roofs to a solar developer for community solar. It'll meet a lot of our climate action goals as a town.

It could help with energy bills for lower income people in town. So, yeah, love to hear what you have planned, at least at this stage.

[Speaker 2] (46:18 - 46:24)
Thank you. Yeah, feel free.

[Speaker 5] (46:24 - 46:27)
I was going to ask you whether should we wait for all the questions?

[Speaker 2] (46:27 - 46:38)
I think you should wait to have all the public comments in so you can address them in full. I see, I believe that's Tony Bandewitz, I believe.

[Speaker 4] (46:43 - 46:45)
Can you unmute me?

[Speaker 2] (46:45 - 46:47)
We can hear you. Okay.

[Speaker 4] (46:48 - 53:36)
I'm Tony Bandewitz, 34 Bayview Drive. I'm a member of the Open Space Committee, and that's why I'm here. I'm here to talk a little bit about the letter that went in today.

Sorry, it's just coming in under the deadline. But pretty much we're supporting the tree committee, but we had a few other comments that we wanted to present. But overall, I just want to say that, you know, I think this is a great project.

And the comments we have, you know, are basically designed to help sustainability both from an environmental, but also from an economic standpoint, save money standpoint. So starting with the landscaping plan, we fully support the tree committee's comments, but would love if there was some way to ensure an even longer than two years maintenance program to make sure that the trees, you know, stay healthy. I think with the change that most of them will be native will help ensure that they'll live, but it would be good if there was some sort of long-term maintenance program to ensure that, especially if we're going to be dealing with droughts like we did this past summer.

We also, in addition to trees, we really recommend substituting as many native plants as possible. And it wasn't attached to the letter, but we will send it to you. There is a list of alternative plants, native plants that can be used that will provide.

And in addition to open space, speaking to this, the local nonprofit, the Swampscot Conservancy has a member who is very in tune with native plants, and she'd be more than happy to discuss those, I'm sure. And the main point of the native plants is that they really do save money as well as ensure, you know, a better environment. So with respect to the heat sink that the parking lot can result in, we also would recommend that the planners look into the possibility of this new heat reflective pavement.

I think Cool Seal is one of the names for this type of paving. It increased the reflectability of the asphalt and thus reduces the heat temperatures by a significant amount. And it's applied like any other pavement top or sealer and last two to three times longer.

So we would recommend that this be looked into as a way to help with the issue of parking lots and the heat that is generated off of them. In fact, we would urge the town itself to look into this for whenever it's doing paving in certain areas. With respect to lighting, I wasn't sure.

We did review the lighting plan, but can you talk to whether or not that's consistent with the dark sky certifications that are given out and is somehow implemented in a way that is protected of the wildlife migration? Because all we saw were the plans. I'm not sure if there's something more with respect to the lighting.

Snow disposal. In the past, there's been an issue. I know the Conservation Commission has had an issue with snow being disposed of, if not directly into the wetlands on the property or near the property, at least close enough to it that it can cause a problem.

And so I know that in the stormwater management plan, there is a proposal that there will be a snow disposal plan created. So we would be interested in making sure that that does happen. And to that end, we would also recommend to the town that they come up with a town-wide snow removal plan.

That's consistent with the DEP has some guidance out there, and we're happy to work again with both the town and the planners, in this case, on the snow disposal. And I'm sure the Conservation Commission would, too. With respect to the transportation plan, there was a proposal for encouraging alternate modes of transportation and a whole laundry list there of items.

And we'd be interested in knowing if the intent is to have those implemented. For instance, having a transportation coordinator, having welcome packets, having pickup drop-off areas, et cetera, et cetera. There was a bulleted list of items, which sounded great, and it would be really good if they were implemented.

So I wasn't sure what the plan for that was. And finally, although we had no specific recommendations, we feel that it would be good wherever possible if green infrastructure could be considered, whether it's rain gardens or other. I know that the stormwater plan is a vast improvement over what's happening currently with stormwater, but it would help if added green infrastructure was considered.

So this is all in our letter, which was, as I said, submitted today. And members of the open space are more than happy to discuss these. I am aware that a notice of intent was filed, I believe, this week with the Conservation Commission.

And I'm sure the Commission, especially since I'm on that committee, too, will have some questions relating to these same issues. So they'd be happy to discuss these, too. Well, that's it in a nutshell.

[Speaker 2] (53:37 - 53:42)
Thank you, Tony. Are there any other members of the public that wish to comment tonight?

[Speaker 12] (53:50 - 55:22)
Martha Schmidt, 105 Rockland Street, Precinct 4. Also chair of the Renewable Energy Committee and the Climate Action and Resilience Committee. And I just wanted to second what Diana said about solar.

So we really would like to encourage this development to add solar panels on the new building and also consider solar for existing buildings as well. Kind of a rough estimate that we've done is installing the rooftop solar on the stop-and-shop building and the residential building can generate enough power for about 150 homes. And if solar canopies were also added, that could potentially generate power for another 200 homes.

Also, solar right now is one of the least expensive forms of energy, levelized over time, as compared to fossil fuel and other forms of energy. So it could result in reduced electricity costs for tenants, for residents, and also potentially for the town. And if the cost of solar is economically not viable for the developer, perhaps there are other options, such as leasing the equipment or making rooftops available for community solar projects.

And I guess we would like a chance to meet with the development team to discuss some of these ideas in the future at another time. So thank you.

[Speaker 2] (55:23 - 55:36)
Thank you, Martha. Are there any other members of the public in person tonight who would like to comment? Is there anybody else online who would like to make a public comment this evening?

[Speaker 9] (55:43 - 55:44)
Is George Potts.

[Speaker 2] (55:49 - 55:51)
George, you should be able to unmute yourself.

[Speaker 16] (55:54 - 55:54)
Hi.

[Speaker 2] (55:55 - 55:56)
Go ahead.

[Speaker 16] (55:56 - 56:45)
Can you hear me now? Yep. Yeah, the wetlands in the corner along the road, I saw that you guys were going to be using that to do a collection of water so it doesn't go in the parking lot and then go back into the wasteland.

Has there been any consideration of turning that into more of a park with, you know, using the water that's there as a way to keep wetlands, but also use some of the land to create like paths or benches or that kind of thing? Yeah. And I'd be willing to volunteer and get grants for any type of construction so it wouldn't impact the property, but I'd still need permission from the property owner to get the grants.

[Speaker 2] (56:49 - 57:15)
Thank you, George. Any other members of the public online who want to make a comment and raise their hand? All right.

I think we can close public comment for the evening and hand it back over to the applicant to address some of the comments that may have come up tonight, if you'd like.

[Speaker 5] (57:16 - 58:29)
Awesome. Thank you. A lot of good points, and there's a lot of content in Tony's comment.

I think we'll dive deeper into the latter. But to start, there was a question about Nidhi John, PCA architect. Just get that out of the way.

Solar on the roof. We always, this project is LEED gold certifiable. We are looking to build it for today's building, better than today's building codes.

It's stringent now because you have the specialized code in town that you've adopted. It actually lends to a very good building envelope, so we're excited to work on that. On projects, we always look at what we do is further down the road.

We look at the options for solar. We engage with a solar company and look at when we lay out, for example, in a long building like this, there's pipes that come from the lower floor, so we pay very close attention to it to maximize solar on a building. So we'll do a study.

We don't have that information yet. But that's something we do on every project, to maximize and see what we can do for solar potential. So does that answer your solar question?

[Speaker 15] (58:29 - 58:37)
Can you just say existing buildings, whether it's part of the LEED phase, and are they getting the roofs so that they can be more solar ready?

[Speaker 5] (58:40 - 58:43)
So the existing buildings, the roof is staying.

[Speaker 7] (58:43 - 59:18)
The roof is brand new. It's less than two years old. That roof was built in 1972 with 40-foot spans, and I don't think it could support another sock on it.

So, I mean, it's just too complicated to touch. You know, the old, this is old. This isn't like we're building a new building.

We're just redoing the face of that existing building, nothing more. I don't mean to be a naysayer on that, but I'm happy to, you know.

[Speaker 5] (59:18 - 59:20)
I can speak to the new roof, not the old roof.

[Speaker 7] (59:21 - 59:24)
I don't think there was any sun in 1970s.

[Speaker 5] (59:26 - 59:47)
No, but we will explore that for the new roof's portions. Now I have a whole list of questions that are nicely listed here that we will dig deeper. One was the open space committee's comments and the tree committees, and I think, Mike, if you have any specific comments that you want to address now regarding the trees, the native.

[Speaker 11] (59:47 - 1:00:04)
Sure. I just looked at the comments here in the letter. I think they mostly pertain to the evergreen trees, which they do provide a few substitutes for the evergreen trees.

There's only a handful of evergreen trees over in that buffer along Essex. We could absolutely look at swapping those to native.

[Speaker 1] (1:00:05 - 1:00:07)
I think that's in Norway Spruce or something.

[Speaker 11] (1:00:07 - 1:00:27)
Yeah. Evergreens are tricky. There's not that many natives besides from White Pine and Eastern Red Cedar, just not great trees.

That's why we tend to not use natives for evergreens. However, we can find some substitutes. There's not a lot of them.

Okay. And then the perennials, easy swap out, so.

[Speaker 17] (1:00:27 - 1:00:27)
Okay.

[Speaker 5] (1:00:28 - 1:00:28)
Great.

[Speaker 11] (1:00:29 - 1:00:29)
Thank you.

[Speaker 5] (1:00:29 - 1:00:41)
And we can definitely engage with the committee to flush these out. Great. And the open space.

The open spaces. So the open space we are looking at, trying to remember the specific question about the open space.

[Speaker 2] (1:00:41 - 1:00:44)
I think dark sky, the lighting is dark sky compliant.

[Speaker 5] (1:00:44 - 1:01:26)
Yes, absolutely. So we have an early photometric that we had submitted. We do definitely take that seriously as part of a very environmentally friendly development.

Everything will be dark sky compliant. And we will look at how it doesn't cross the property line, and we will do a detailed study of that to confirm that. And we look at light levels pretty seriously.

Holistically around the same. Heat reflective pavement, absolutely. Something we would really want to do that.

So we will look into the paving material that Tony was talking about for sure. Snow disposal plan, I think they just wanted more clarification on how it gets implemented. Andy's got the control?

[Speaker 7] (1:01:27 - 1:01:50)
Yeah. I mean, right now it's stop and shop in the wild west. You know, with that part of the snow removal closest to the wetlands, we'll be under the handle of the apartment building, not stop and shop.

So we'll have a little more control over it. And if we have to take the snow away, you know, we'll take the snow away. Because we're going to have to be very judicious with our parking spaces.

[Speaker 5] (1:01:53 - 1:02:32)
There was an overall comment about looking at making the green infrastructure more robust and better. But it's a rain garden, it's a swale. We could look at all that holistically on site.

Because the residential portion has some of these areas that have the opportunity for green. Existing retail has a lot of parking, so it's limited in its opportunity. But whatever we are doing on the residential side, absolutely.

We'd like to explore options. We'll work together on it. Great.

And the wetlands was an interesting idea. I looked at Andy as George was talking about that concept.

[Speaker 7] (1:02:32 - 1:02:34)
Sure, knock yourself out.

[Speaker 5] (1:02:36 - 1:02:40)
We intentionally stayed away from doing anything to that.

[Speaker 7] (1:02:40 - 1:02:43)
He wants to jump in. I don't want to touch it. I want to be near it.

[Speaker 1] (1:02:44 - 1:02:47)
Is that something that you're meeting with CONCOM about anyway?

[Speaker 7] (1:02:48 - 1:02:51)
No, CONCOM is singularly for the 24th Space Station.

[Speaker 6] (1:02:51 - 1:03:22)
Yeah, so the NOI is filed here in the two weeks of Tuesday. The new work in the buffer zone here, everything is either existing primarily. The only new work of these 24 new spaces, which is porous pavements, we have taken that into consideration as part of that filing and the design of these spaces.

But the rest of this is already existing, developed in the buffer zone. And as Tony noted, the stormwater management system is a substantial upgrade to what's there today.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:23 - 1:03:23)
Thanks.

[Speaker 6] (1:03:24 - 1:03:26)
Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:29 - 1:03:33)
So kind of an open mind about the wetlands corner.

[Speaker 7] (1:03:34 - 1:03:34)
Sure.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:38 - 1:03:45)
Was that part of the stop-and-shop lot? Which lot does that belong to?

[Speaker 7] (1:03:45 - 1:03:50)
Well, now it's stop-and-shop because everything from home goods is stop-and-shop.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:50 - 1:03:51)
What's going to happen after they leave?

[Speaker 7] (1:03:51 - 1:03:53)
Subdivided, it's still stop-and-shop slots.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:53 - 1:03:56)
It is, okay. Okay, just curious.

[Speaker 2] (1:03:59 - 1:04:29)
Any other comments from board members that addressed a lot of the public comments we had received from other committees in writing? So thank you for thorough responses. Okay.

If there's no other comments, I think we might want to either go through design guidelines.

[Speaker 1] (1:04:29 - 1:04:29)
I think so.

[Speaker 2] (1:04:30 - 1:05:35)
As part of the approval criteria in 4.12.0.0, either conditional or plan approval, we have to, in writing, provide any waivers for aspects of the design guidelines that we feel are not met. And we have the ability to waive them. But we need to recognize that in any decision, conditional or not, that we might make.

I think it might behoove us to just go through the subsection headers, just to, if we get to that point. Because I believe we have this meeting and we're on a timeline for approval here for the bylaw. So I think it might behoove us to just go through this and evaluate.

Site design guidelines feature outdoor open spaces and community amenities. Strengthen connection between buildings, landscapes, and places. I would think that is definitely met.

[Speaker 1] (1:05:35 - 1:05:35)
Yes.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:36 - 1:05:57)
Especially buildings A and B, the new buildings. Connect network of open spaces and amenities by creating more than one outdoor open space that is connected as part of a network of new and existing spaces. Again, I think that's met, especially through that pocket park, the raised...

[Speaker 1] (1:05:57 - 1:05:59)
Hierarchy pattern, use of all the spaces.

[Speaker 2] (1:06:00 - 1:06:00)
Right.

[Speaker 1] (1:06:00 - 1:06:07)
Relate to the surrounding open space, outdoor seating and dining. All of that has been addressed.

[Speaker 2] (1:06:09 - 1:06:36)
Strategically integrate new building placement to define the outdoor spaces, define internal streets, conceal parking, and circulate frontage. Not only the new buildings A, B, and C, but the apartment, proposed apartment complex, did a great job of hiding that. The stop and shop was the Bertucci's parking.

All kind of on that interior. Right. Public access points.

[Speaker 1] (1:06:37 - 1:07:37)
And I think the new residential building has a very livable feel to it for being a large building in essentially a commercial parking lot. Whereas it has this connection to... It feels nestled into the stop and shop as opposed to jammed up against it.

Because it feels like the space that connects it is deliberate. And there's some space to move around. It creates sort of a more intimate, if you will, entryway where there's nice space to move.

As Nitya had mentioned, there's a lot of greenery there. The surface is a different surface from the parking lot. So I think all of that, they've just really done a great job in taking what could have been just a big log of a building and making it not that at all.

So I'm really pleased with the way that came out.

[Speaker 3] (1:07:39 - 1:08:06)
Agreed. I would also add that I think having a background for the setting of this. It's really nice to see these buildings inserted.

And to really start having space created instead of sort of a view corridor that's adjacent to buildings. Where there's moments that your eye rests and sort of puts the there there.

[Speaker 1] (1:08:06 - 1:08:26)
I think it just activates the space. Right now it's just this kind of wasteland of the four goodwill guys out there all by themselves. It's fun to utilize without any doubt.

So I think this is a great addition there.

[Speaker 2] (1:08:27 - 1:08:40)
Agreed. Aligning the orientation and setbacks of new buildings. I think we kind of just touched on that holistically.

And integrate and minimize the presence of parking.

[Speaker 1] (1:08:44 - 1:09:11)
We're dealing with an existing mall. So in terms of the new building, without a doubt that has been accomplished. And I think certainly with the added greenery and the tree canopy around the existing parking lot.

And the sidewalk being thrown out into the parking lot with even more landscaping. And then the park in the center, it certainly is done.

[Speaker 2] (1:09:12 - 1:09:15)
Right. It definitely divides up the parking into segments too.

[Speaker 1] (1:09:15 - 1:09:16)
It breaks it up more.

[Speaker 2] (1:09:20 - 1:09:44)
Future continuous sidewalks and crosswalks. I think we meet that pretty effectively. Integrate traffic calming and emphasize safety.

I think they spoke about that pretty concisely earlier. Conceal unappealing functions and service areas. The new rear entryway there for the trucks I think accomplishes that goal.

[Speaker 1] (1:09:45 - 1:09:48)
It takes a lot of those trucks out of the parking lot, which is great.

[Speaker 2] (1:09:48 - 1:10:02)
Right. Integrate bike lanes, storage, and amenities. Multi-use path, allocated sidewalk space, et cetera.

[Speaker 1] (1:10:02 - 1:10:06)
So we do have, there were at least four points of bike storage that I noticed.

[Speaker 12] (1:10:07 - 1:10:08)
That was in the supplementary.

[Speaker 1] (1:10:08 - 1:10:23)
Right. Okay. So that's in there.

The storage in the residential building, feature landscape. So yeah, the landscape, you know, defining the outdoor spaces of the feature landscape I think you can.

[Speaker 2] (1:10:24 - 1:10:25)
Yeah, I think that's obvious.

[Speaker 1] (1:10:25 - 1:10:26)
That's obvious.

[Speaker 2] (1:10:26 - 1:11:03)
Yep. Screen less attractive areas with landscape. Conceal service areas with landscaping.

Reduce the scale and visual impact of parking with landscape. I mean, given that this is a redevelopment, I think this does it as well as can be hoped. And then in addition to kind of that new neighborhood-like section almost, which does it very well with the new construction area.

Preserve existing trees. I believe there's 100 new trees, 100 trees being preserved on site. Is that right?

And then 86 new ones or something.

[Speaker 5] (1:11:03 - 1:11:05)
Yeah, there's a net of 68 total that we're adding in.

[Speaker 1] (1:11:05 - 1:11:09)
Right. But that didn't even include the dead ones, right?

[Speaker 5] (1:11:10 - 1:11:12)
Yeah, we didn't include the dead ones, so. Right. Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:11:14 - 1:11:25)
Integrate dark sky compliant lighting. We've done that. Yeah, we've talked about that.

Integrate street furniture, permanent street furniture, including light fixtures, benches, bike racks, trash, recycling receptacles, et cetera.

[Speaker 17] (1:11:25 - 1:11:26)
Right.

[Speaker 2] (1:11:27 - 1:11:50)
And there's, I know some of the plans have the benches, public art, I think, or art displays or something throughout much of the sidewalk in that pocket park area. Integrating lighting with landscapes, pedestrian-scale lighting into the pedestrian circulation system and outdoor open spaces.

[Speaker 5] (1:11:58 - 1:11:59)
Right.

[Speaker 2] (1:12:00 - 1:12:01)
The bollards are lit, right?

[Speaker 5] (1:12:01 - 1:12:07)
And then they kept myriad lights in between buildings A and B to activate different spaces.

[Speaker 2] (1:12:08 - 1:12:10)
Were there string lights that he said?

[Speaker 5] (1:12:10 - 1:12:11)
Yeah. Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:12:11 - 1:12:12)
Between the, in that pocket park?

[Speaker 1] (1:12:12 - 1:12:15)
Yeah. Yes. Okay.

Between new buildings.

[Speaker 2] (1:12:15 - 1:12:16)
Yeah. Nice.

[Speaker 1] (1:12:16 - 1:12:20)
Very friendly, the string lights. Yeah. Very inviting.

[Speaker 2] (1:12:22 - 1:12:57)
Scale and shape of buildings, create continuity in height and scale, reduce perceived height in the bulk of the larger buildings by extruding building massing. Jared did a much better job than I could ever describing how you guys did that earlier. So, I think we meet that.

Character and height of the ground floor provide generous ground floor and new structures to enhance connection between interior and exterior spaces and strengthen sense of place and community. I think that is well-defined on some of the renderings.

[Speaker 13] (1:12:58 - 1:12:58)
Mm-hmm.

[Speaker 5] (1:12:59 - 1:13:02)
The original presentation had the bollards for the elevations. Right.

[Speaker 1] (1:13:02 - 1:13:03)
Right.

[Speaker 5] (1:13:03 - 1:13:04)
We have that.

[Speaker 2] (1:13:04 - 1:13:04)
Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:13:05 - 1:13:09)
And I didn't bring that one with me, but it does indeed have that.

[Speaker 2] (1:13:09 - 1:13:17)
Right. In this view toward entry on A2-2B, kind of shows the pedestrians walking into the entrance to the apartment building.

[Speaker 13] (1:13:18 - 1:13:18)
Mm-hmm.

[Speaker 2] (1:13:18 - 1:13:27)
Really emphasizes the big, beautiful glass. Yes. Almost looks like a double entryway, a double height entryway.

So, that's really nice.

[Speaker 1] (1:13:27 - 1:13:35)
And we did say the mock-ups of the storefronts that were as seen from the park area.

[Speaker 2] (1:13:35 - 1:13:36)
Right. Right.

[Speaker 1] (1:13:36 - 1:13:43)
And as you said, the comparisons like the refacing of Chipotle and the refacing of Starbucks and so forth.

[Speaker 5] (1:13:44 - 1:13:47)
I have a printed copy of that in case you want to see it.

[Speaker 1] (1:13:47 - 1:13:49)
Yeah. I recall it.

[Speaker 2] (1:13:49 - 1:13:50)
Nope. You're all good.

[Speaker 1] (1:13:50 - 1:13:56)
I don't feel like I need to see it. If you want to put it on the screen for any reason. Sure.

I don't know if it's...

[Speaker 2] (1:13:56 - 1:13:57)
It's a nice picture.

[Speaker 1] (1:13:58 - 1:14:05)
I guess we'll throw it on there. And there may be people watching that may want to see it that haven't looked online.

[Speaker 2] (1:14:05 - 1:14:26)
I recall from that image there's a nice kind of inconsistency in a good way of the heights between the very... The gap was one height and then it went kind of a little lower between the buildings. And then it went up again.

Yeah. A lot of visual interest in kind of the different heights of some of the larger tenants there.

[Speaker 1] (1:14:30 - 1:14:30)
Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (1:14:31 - 1:14:31)
That's great.

[Speaker 1] (1:14:32 - 1:14:35)
Yeah. Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:14:37 - 1:14:49)
Let's see. General character and architectural style. Building design should create a sense of place and community throughout the shared design features with common themes.

I think that's self-explanatory here.

[Speaker 1] (1:14:49 - 1:15:17)
I also like the palette that was selected for the buildings. Not just the residential structure with sort of that wood slate look to it. But the...

And I'm not... I don't know if I'm saying it the correct way. But also the cladding materials for the refacing and for the new retail buildings, which I think are very complimentary.

And they really give you kind of a fresh, bright feel. You know, it's new. It's exciting.

It looks so much nicer.

[Speaker 2] (1:15:18 - 1:15:24)
But it gave it some like warmth. Right? It wasn't like...

You know, I see some buildings. It's like, oh, that was just like a Lego that somebody just dropped there.

[Speaker 1] (1:15:24 - 1:15:24)
Right.

[Speaker 2] (1:15:24 - 1:15:25)
It's like characters.

[Speaker 1] (1:15:25 - 1:15:26)
It's great.

[Speaker 2] (1:15:26 - 1:15:58)
Very nicely done. Character of upper floors provide variation to themes from the ground floor. I think we talked about that before with some of Jer's comments.

Placement of building entries to strengthen building orientation to activate outdoor open spaces. Internal circulation of streets with building entries that are a primary feature in building facade. Between the new pocket park buildings, the apartment building, and their existing buildings.

But because of the sidewalk.

[Speaker 1] (1:15:59 - 1:16:04)
Yeah. The sidewalk extension in front of the existing buildings, I think, does a lot.

[Speaker 2] (1:16:04 - 1:16:04)
I do too.

[Speaker 1] (1:16:04 - 1:16:26)
It really does. And it's remarkable. I mean, just kind of pulling up to those parking spaces and having that experience.

You know, I think we've all been to other malls and shopping areas where it is designed like that. And it just feels completely different. So, I love the wider sidewalks in front of those buildings.

And I think the tenants will be really happy with that too.

[Speaker 3] (1:16:28 - 1:16:34)
I also think it creates a safer zone just because you're not adjacent to traffic.

[Speaker 1] (1:16:35 - 1:16:35)
Right.

[Speaker 3] (1:16:36 - 1:16:37)
To moving traffic.

[Speaker 1] (1:16:38 - 1:16:38)
Agreed.

[Speaker 2] (1:16:41 - 1:16:56)
Site sustainability. Integrating sustainable design features into site design. Reducing environmental impact and decreasing dependence on fossil fuels.

I think this will be the first LEED certifiable gold building in Swanstown. Is that right? The other project that's going up now?

[Speaker 1] (1:16:57 - 1:16:57)
On place?

[Speaker 2] (1:16:58 - 1:16:58)
Yeah.

[Speaker 9] (1:16:58 - 1:17:00)
I don't believe. I don't think so.

[Speaker 2] (1:17:00 - 1:17:02)
I thought it was maybe silver.

[Speaker 9] (1:17:02 - 1:17:05)
I think it might be silver, but I'm not sure. Right. Yeah, it's definitely not gold.

[Speaker 2] (1:17:05 - 1:17:07)
So, that's a first.

[Speaker 9] (1:17:07 - 1:17:08)
Yeah. Okay.

[Speaker 1] (1:17:09 - 1:17:21)
I'm very happy with that. And thank you for your comments on just being willing to examine all the opportunities for other sustainable features.

[Speaker 2] (1:17:23 - 1:17:32)
Building sustainability. Sustainable design features should integrate into the building design to reduce environmental impact of the development, support high-performing and healthy buildings, and decrease dependence on fossil fuels.

[Speaker 5] (1:17:34 - 1:17:36)
This is an all-electric building. Yeah. Yay.

[Speaker 3] (1:17:38 - 1:17:48)
I did have one question on the sustainability. Was there any consideration for creating canopy, like covered parking, out in the parking lots with solar structures?

[Speaker 5] (1:17:49 - 1:17:51)
No, we didn't explore that. In the existing retail parking lot.

[Speaker 3] (1:17:51 - 1:18:05)
In the existing retail parking lot. Just I know it's been done a few places, and it looks like something that could be added later, but it's been successful in a number of projects I've been around, which I was just curious if it was in the mix when you were looking.

[Speaker 5] (1:18:05 - 1:18:11)
That is a very interesting idea. One thing we did look at is visual, because those structures are so tall, they actually block.

[Speaker 3] (1:18:12 - 1:18:13)
They block long-distance views.

[Speaker 5] (1:18:13 - 1:18:14)
Especially for all the tenants.

[Speaker 7] (1:18:17 - 1:18:25)
We resisted them in another project in framing them vehemently. I'd like this to look really good.

[Speaker 3] (1:18:26 - 1:18:26)
Yeah.

[Speaker 7] (1:18:26 - 1:18:28)
Maybe it's not as sustainable.

[Speaker 3] (1:18:28 - 1:18:46)
Sometimes the topography works with them. There's an REI in Framingham that I think they were really successful getting those in there. Then dealing with the actual heat gain in the parking lot, it's quite useful.

Again, I just was curious if it was in the mix.

[Speaker 7] (1:18:46 - 1:18:54)
It's bad enough they have the cart corrals in the middle of the thing. Now we're going to make them older and bigger brothers and sisters.

[Speaker 2] (1:18:57 - 1:19:01)
When I see solar canopies, I always think of that REI used to live over there.

[Speaker 1] (1:19:02 - 1:19:05)
It kind of goes with their whole vibe, right? Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (1:19:05 - 1:19:07)
I think that was new construction when they put that in.

[Speaker 3] (1:19:07 - 1:19:39)
There's an architect out of MIT whose business is built around creating these structures. I initially was really taken aback. I was like, wow, that's an interesting thing.

He gets into the details on these things in a way. They're very utilitarian, but with exquisite minimalist detailing. It's been very impressive to see.

Initially, you look at it and go, oh. Then you start looking at how all of the connections are made and everything. He's found a way to really design them, which is nice.

[Speaker 7] (1:19:40 - 1:19:56)
I'm not committing. I'm just for fun saying the location for that canopy would be those 24 spaces. It doesn't interrupt the landscaping and the naturalness that you're trying to create around it, but you have another structure over it.

[Speaker 1] (1:19:56 - 1:19:57)
That's interesting.

[Speaker 7] (1:19:57 - 1:19:58)
There you go.

[Speaker 5] (1:20:00 - 1:20:02)
We'll add that to the solar study.

[Speaker 1] (1:20:02 - 1:20:08)
It would actually be a way to make them more like, look, there's something here.

[Speaker 7] (1:20:09 - 1:20:12)
No, I'm not saying that we wouldn't look at it.

[Speaker 3] (1:20:12 - 1:20:31)
The other place I've seen them, as I've seen them in large parking lots, used for farmer's markets and so forth, where they're a shading device. It's sort of cool. We don't close down on Sundays, but in places where there are parking lots that are shifted over to usage like that.

[Speaker 2] (1:20:35 - 1:20:43)
Site sustainability. Integrating sustainable design features into the site design to reduce environmental impact for development and decrease dependence on fossil fuels.

[Speaker 1] (1:20:45 - 1:20:56)
I think we talked about that. Electric vehicle charging stations, which I know we have. Cohesion, building sustainability.

We've talked about all that. What's that?

[Speaker 2] (1:20:56 - 1:21:02)
Reducing the heat island effect. I know we're putting a parking waiver, so we are kind of doing that through that.

[Speaker 1] (1:21:02 - 1:21:03)
Right.

[Speaker 2] (1:21:03 - 1:21:05)
And the ton of new trees.

[Speaker 1] (1:21:05 - 1:21:08)
Right. Nidhi also mentioned about...

[Speaker 2] (1:21:08 - 1:21:10)
Regional materials, regional planters.

[Speaker 1] (1:21:11 - 1:21:15)
That coating, the cool... That coating on the asphalt.

[Speaker 2] (1:21:16 - 1:21:34)
And then building sustainability. We've already touched on that with the LEED certifiable gold. Right.

And then next, section six. Affordability. Inclusionary housing regulations.

So 16... Is that right? 16 new units and then...

Seven. Seven?

[Speaker 1] (1:21:35 - 1:21:35)
Sixteen.

[Speaker 2] (1:21:35 - 1:21:40)
And a fee in lieu for the 17. Oh, and a fee for the .3. Okay, perfect.

[Speaker 1] (1:21:41 - 1:21:44)
So that's what you worked out with affordable housing trust?

[Speaker 7] (1:21:44 - 1:21:46)
Okay. That's what it is.

[Speaker 1] (1:21:46 - 1:21:47)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:21:47 - 1:21:49)
That was the updated application or narrative.

[Speaker 7] (1:21:49 - 1:21:52)
That was in the supplemental. What's the fee?

[Speaker 1] (1:21:52 - 1:21:54)
And you have the application for the...

[Speaker 7] (1:21:54 - 1:21:55)
Is it the same fee as it was before?

[Speaker 1] (1:21:55 - 1:21:55)
Pardon me?

[Speaker 7] (1:21:56 - 1:21:59)
Is it the same fee that it was for White Court?

[Speaker 2] (1:22:00 - 1:22:02)
I can't imagine it's changed in the last few years.

[Speaker 1] (1:22:02 - 1:22:03)
I couldn't tell you.

[Speaker 7] (1:22:03 - 1:22:03)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:22:06 - 1:22:07)
Ken, do you know?

[Speaker 7] (1:22:07 - 1:22:08)
Ken, do we know what the fee was?

[Speaker 8] (1:22:10 - 1:22:53)
I do not know what the fee was, but I do... I was just wanting to check to make sure that you've all had an opportunity to review the affordable housing restriction that was created and drafted both by myself as well as KP Law. And we will be submitting that.

There is some information that still has to be included in the exhibit, which will be included once we have some detailed information with regard to the exact size of each of the units in the number of bedrooms. But that will be included in the application. And we would ask you to adopt that with the condition that there will be some additional information that will be submitted before any occupancy permit is sought.

[Speaker 2] (1:22:54 - 1:23:14)
I believe somewhere in 4.12 somewhere, Affordable Housing Trust has to approve of something. So I think it would be my recommendation that any action this board might take, whether tonight or at our next meeting, be conditional on that section with Affordable Housing Trust approving that. What you just described.

[Speaker 8] (1:23:15 - 1:23:51)
I can tell you this, that initially, Kim and I were working on the affordable housing restriction. Unfortunately, the town of Swanstead had never yet prepared and had available for us a specific restriction. I am convinced based upon my discussion with Kim, but ultimately it will be her committee that will be signing off on it.

Because, you know, if you look at the affordable housing restriction form application itself, they are a party to it and they will be signing off on it.

[Speaker 9] (1:23:52 - 1:24:04)
We didn't have one for Elm Place. We do have one for Elm Place. It was modeled.

This one was sort of modeled after that one, but we had to change it because Elm Place was 40B and this is inclusionary zoning. All right.

[Speaker 1] (1:24:05 - 1:24:06)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:24:07 - 1:24:12)
But whatever action we would take would be conditional on their acceptance of that affordable housing restriction.

[Speaker 1] (1:24:13 - 1:24:17)
I'm fine. I was just curious. Okay.

[Speaker 2] (1:24:17 - 1:24:27)
And that's it. That's our design guidelines. I did not note any of the sections that the applicant was needed a waiver on.

[Speaker 1] (1:24:28 - 1:25:36)
No, I think that we'll probably get to that as we go through the bylaw. If we can, you know, sort of permitted uses, obviously we are, there is no issue there. Dimensional requirements, you know, I think that what we talked about was because the subdivision, the ANR, is going to come out.

After this, any requirement or any necessity for dimensional relief, you know, would be certainly, we couldn't really address that, I think, until we have looked at how much is going to be subdivided. However, I shouldn't say that too soon because I think we do have to look at it as one lot, actually. You know, I do think we look at it as one lot, so I don't know if we actually need, I don't know that we would need relief.

[Speaker 2] (1:25:37 - 1:25:43)
I don't think they need, I'm looking at their application to see if there's any dimensional relief.

[Speaker 1] (1:25:43 - 1:26:21)
The only thing we were looking at was the space between the residential structure and stop and shop. The setback might be less, but I would say the way it's nestled into that building is more of an, it's so much more of an advantage than a disadvantage that I don't have an issue with that at all. And in terms of frontage, I mean, you know, once we have the ANR, that frontage is a non-issue.

Were there any other dimensional, pieces of dimensional relief you were looking at?

[Speaker 6] (1:26:23 - 1:26:31)
So there were two waivers for parking, and they're sort of a formality because of an existing lot line.

[Speaker 13] (1:26:31 - 1:26:32)
Right.

[Speaker 6] (1:26:32 - 1:26:39)
The side and rear associated with the 24 spaces, those are new spaces that the lot line would be bisecting.

[Speaker 1] (1:26:40 - 1:26:40)
Okay.

[Speaker 6] (1:26:40 - 1:26:49)
It's an existing lot line that as, this occurs all throughout the site, but, you know, side and rear setbacks just because of the nature of the lot line.

[Speaker 1] (1:26:49 - 1:26:51)
Oh, so we're looking at the parking spaces.

[Speaker 6] (1:26:51 - 1:26:53)
Only because it's on an internal lot line.

[Speaker 1] (1:26:53 - 1:26:53)
Right.

[Speaker 6] (1:26:53 - 1:26:54)
Correct. Okay.

[Speaker 1] (1:26:54 - 1:26:54)
Yeah.

[Speaker 6] (1:26:54 - 1:27:01)
That's a formality. And the other waiver, really not dimensional, was the parking waiver, which I think you alluded to previously.

[Speaker 2] (1:27:01 - 1:27:05)
Right. And that was something like 60 units or something?

[Speaker 7] (1:27:06 - 1:27:33)
Yeah, but we need it to be an additional 25 spaces because we need the flexibility. It bounces back and forth depending upon how much food we have at the end of the day. And I don't want to make a deal and have to come back to say, oh, I need three more spaces changed.

So essentially we're looking for approximately 100 extra seats total.

[Speaker 1] (1:27:34 - 1:27:45)
So it's my understanding that the prospective tenants in some of these places are going to be essentially restaurants that are going to be operating in each or in evening hours. Is that right?

[Speaker 7] (1:27:45 - 1:27:48)
Well, no, right from the morning all day.

[Speaker 1] (1:27:48 - 1:29:31)
But we do have some evenings, some during the day and so forth. So my feeling is we have the parking for the residential is addressed. Okay.

We're talking about the additional parking for each of the businesses in the lot. And my feeling is that all these businesses operate at staggered times. Everyone doesn't drive in at 9 in the morning and stay there all day.

And we just keep adding and adding and then everyone drives out at 10 at night. I mean, it's just not how parking in a mall goes. I mean, I'm not a parking expert.

I'm talking real-life experience. We've all seen what goes on here and when there are heavier demand times and then it just disappears. And then there's more cars and then it disappears.

I mean, I don't think it makes sense that you have to plan for the, you know, where in other words, where we would look at a parking waiver as a problem. I just don't see that in this case. I don't see it as a problem.

It's my opinion. And, you know, I look at it as there's ample parking there. And, you know, the nature of the mixed uses in this spot is a staggered use.

I mean, it's coming and going all the time. So I don't see conflict. I don't see it as, you know, it's not all residential.

It's always been ample parking in this area. And I think that, you know, what we're trading off to have the flexibility to do makes perfect sense.

[Speaker 7] (1:29:31 - 1:29:54)
It says in the zoning bylaw that if you have different uses, this is all the same uses that is just, this is just a strict calculation of the zoning bylaw. It doesn't say like the building, the second building, which is a breakfast place, which closed at 1 o'clock. I need those spaces for the Bertucci space that's going to be open at 9 o'clock at night.

[Speaker 1] (1:29:54 - 1:30:00)
So I think that's really our job. But it's just a mathematical statement. To figure out what makes the most sense for this.

[Speaker 2] (1:30:00 - 1:30:30)
I don't really have any concerns about parking here. In fact, I have a last minute, like, stop and shop trip on Christmas Eve that drove me nuts. And I was like, oh, we're going to have to do a parking waiver.

Let me look how busy it is for all the other people who are slow at preparing Christmas meals. And so there's no concerns. Unlike the busiest shopping day I feel like of the year.

So my question, though, was the, so theoretically you should have 895 parking spaces. You're asking for a waiver for 833 on the application.

[Speaker 7] (1:30:30 - 1:30:34)
And now I'm asking for 25 more spaces, waiver.

[Speaker 2] (1:30:34 - 1:30:38)
Okay. We could have 100 altogether. 808.

[Speaker 7] (1:30:38 - 1:30:44)
Yeah, I mean, just for the calculation that on the seat calculation. You do each one.

[Speaker 17] (1:30:44 - 1:30:44)
Right.

[Speaker 7] (1:30:44 - 1:30:57)
I want the flexibility. We're talking with different tenants. I have two tenants for this front building.

One wants to put 150 seats in. One wants to put 120 seats in. Same building, same square footage.

You know, so.

[Speaker 2] (1:30:57 - 1:31:06)
So the waiver would be for 808 with those, including that additional 25 that you're asking for. 833 minus 25.

[Speaker 7] (1:31:07 - 1:31:08)
Wasn't it going the other way? Yeah.

[Speaker 6] (1:31:09 - 1:31:18)
It would be, so the additional, we would be requiring 820, no, 920. And providing 833.

[Speaker 13] (1:31:18 - 1:31:20)
I see what you're saying. Right. Right.

[Speaker 6] (1:31:20 - 1:31:28)
Got you. Got it. Oh, okay.

Perfect. That bumps it up to 87. 87 would be the waiver request.

[Speaker 2] (1:31:29 - 1:31:36)
Got it. But the total number of parking spaces you're proposing doesn't change. Just what the required amount is.

Correct. Got it. I was adding the 25 on the other side.

[Speaker 1] (1:31:37 - 1:31:57)
You know, historically, Vinton Square has had excessive parking in both. I mean, I don't just mean you. I mean, both sides.

There's a lot of parking. And, you know, there certainly has been, you know, we're taking up a lot of land with the building. But that has parking underneath.

And I think this is.

[Speaker 2] (1:31:57 - 1:31:59)
I've never seen that parking lot full.

[Speaker 1] (1:31:59 - 1:32:00)
No. I just don't know.

[Speaker 2] (1:32:00 - 1:32:04)
And if it is full with restaurant tenants, that's a great thing for the food and beverage tax revenue.

[Speaker 1] (1:32:04 - 1:32:11)
That's a great thing. If we have to, you know, drive around for 30 seconds to look for a spot, I literally will get out of my car and clap.

[Speaker 2] (1:32:11 - 1:32:20)
Everybody does it on Humphrey Street. They can do it in Vinton Square. But I don't see that as ever happening.

Okay. So those are the only.

[Speaker 1] (1:32:20 - 1:32:28)
I mean, does anybody else? I don't know. What's the other members of the.

I mean, okay. Obviously, we have our opinions.

[Speaker 6] (1:32:28 - 1:32:57)
So the only other waivers we just want to just clarify on are any additional future setback waivers relative to the subdivision in A&R. I believe just because of the way the zoning bylaws written that through the permit process that we're in currently, this gives you the board the authority to waive that. We just want to make sure that further down the road that that's sort of still honored if we come in.

And I'm sure that our attorney may craft a decision that way. But we do want to make the board aware of that.

[Speaker 1] (1:32:57 - 1:33:03)
As long as we don't see buildings moving, which I don't. I'm assuming we're not going to see any buildings moving around.

[Speaker 7] (1:33:03 - 1:33:04)
No, this is just a paper vehicle for financing.

[Speaker 1] (1:33:04 - 1:33:08)
Right. I understand that. Yeah.

And I think that's a good point to make.

[Speaker 7] (1:33:08 - 1:33:24)
Well, it's. But for that, it was a variance at the time. There were no.

We would never have the stop and shop bill because we hadn't got that zero lot line. Same thing. At the time, no financing, two mortgages were easier to get than one big one.

Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:33:25 - 1:33:37)
Yeah. So I don't have a problem with that. I don't know if anyone else does in terms of understanding that the A&R and future subdivision could create further.

[Speaker 2] (1:33:37 - 1:33:38)
Waivers needed.

[Speaker 1] (1:33:38 - 1:33:44)
Deficiencies and dimensional relief. Like there might be a parking spot that now is sitting on a lot line.

[Speaker 2] (1:33:44 - 1:33:44)
Exactly.

[Speaker 1] (1:33:45 - 1:33:48)
Okay. So that's what we're talking about in terms of out of bounds.

[Speaker 2] (1:33:49 - 1:33:55)
But just to clarify, for some of our public attendees that are still online, that's on paper only since they're all the same lot owners.

[Speaker 1] (1:33:55 - 1:34:05)
Right. Nothing is actually going to change, which is, again, they'd be dividing up the lot for, as Mr. Rose mentioned, financing purposes.

[Speaker 2] (1:34:08 - 1:34:28)
Got it. So in sum, it's the waiver needed for rear yard setback for those parking spots on the back, the 25 rear and side yard. And then a parking waiver for the parking spaces needed.

The loading waiver for the loading zone.

[Speaker 6] (1:34:30 - 1:34:36)
So we put if needed, but it's by the building inspector. It's more to cover ourselves.

[Speaker 13] (1:34:37 - 1:34:38)
Yeah.

[Speaker 6] (1:34:38 - 1:34:50)
Since the building inspector, I think, hasn't commented on his department letter. Yeah. I didn't see that.

I don't think it would be necessary at this point. In our opinion, there is sufficient loading here.

[Speaker 1] (1:34:51 - 1:34:54)
I think it might have been under the building department. I'm not sure who commented.

[Speaker 6] (1:34:54 - 1:34:55)
Yeah. Max did.

[Speaker 1] (1:34:55 - 1:35:01)
Oh, Max did. Okay. That's right.

I read his comments.

[Speaker 2] (1:35:01 - 1:35:05)
Yeah. His standout was the rogue shopping carts that I know you're already addressing with your tenants.

[Speaker 1] (1:35:07 - 1:35:09)
That happens everywhere you go.

[Speaker 2] (1:35:09 - 1:35:13)
And then the side yard and rear yard setbacks for those 24 parking spots in the back.

[Speaker 1] (1:35:14 - 1:35:20)
They should put like a little magnetic, like a little homing thing on it. They just roll back.

[Speaker 2] (1:35:20 - 1:35:26)
Home Depot has those in San Juan. Well, they don't roll back, but like the wheels lock. The wheels lock.

[Speaker 3] (1:35:26 - 1:35:38)
If you take them off properly. And they're really fun when they malfunction. In California, that would happen often.

And sometimes it happened in the store. And the wheels on the cart just lock. And you've got a grocery cart full of food.

[Speaker 2] (1:35:39 - 1:35:47)
Okay. So it would be, in terms of waivers on paper, that's what I'm seeing we need. No waivers on the design guidelines.

[Speaker 1] (1:35:47 - 1:35:59)
No. Nothing. I think we're, I mean, do we want to vote separately on design guidelines?

Because compliance with the design guidelines is part of compliance with the bylaw. So if we want to, you know, just.

[Speaker 2] (1:36:01 - 1:36:09)
Someone wants to make a motion to note the application meets design guidelines as developed by the planning board. I think that would be a good thing to have on the record.

[Speaker 1] (1:36:10 - 1:36:25)
Okay. I'm happy to make that motion. That the board finds that it would be a finding as well.

But the board finds that the application complies with the Vinton Square design guidelines in full.

[Speaker 2] (1:36:27 - 1:36:30)
Second. All right. All those in favor?

[Speaker 1] (1:36:30 - 1:36:30)
Aye.

[Speaker 2] (1:36:31 - 1:36:33)
Aye. All right. Great.

[Speaker 1] (1:36:34 - 1:37:52)
Okay. So parking, fractional and noise, stormwater, we addressed all this stuff. Inclusionary housing, administration.

Pre-op review we did. Procedure. Okay.

So in terms of the, we talked about how to address that. So I guess what we want to do, and then the affordable housing trust and the application. Okay.

So when do we, so essentially where we're at right now is we want to be able to, to, to vote to approve. There's not, there's not a special permit involved here. It's just approving the application.

And approving it that it's in compliance with the design guidelines, which we said. And that it, that it complies with the zoning bylaw. And I think what we want to do, because we have some contingencies and so forth.

And things that are still to be worked out. We could make a list of findings. And in those findings, we can include whatever contingencies might need to be addressed.

And then we can, I think we are in a position where we can vote on this.

[Speaker 2] (1:37:53 - 1:38:01)
Yeah. I mean, I don't see any changes to the plan impacting our, our review of this project.

[Speaker 1] (1:38:01 - 1:38:02)
I don't.

[Speaker 2] (1:38:02 - 1:38:11)
So I don't personally see the need to, unless the board feels differently, to continue this past tonight. Unless the board feels differently.

[Speaker 1] (1:38:12 - 1:38:23)
I don't either. I think we just need to go through and make all the findings. And any other.

I want to make sure we're not talking over anybody. Okay.

[Speaker 3] (1:38:25 - 1:38:26)
Seldom I'm talked over.

[Speaker 1] (1:38:30 - 1:38:48)
True. Okay. So let's see.

So some of the findings would have to do. Why don't we could just go through the bylaw and then we can talk about all the considerations that are going to be made towards any of the other comments that we have.

[Speaker 2] (1:38:48 - 1:38:49)
Agreed.

[Speaker 1] (1:38:50 - 1:39:05)
All right. So let's see. So we could go through it the same way we went through the other.

If you want to just, you know, the fact that there's, you know, I would almost want to pick out anything within 412.

[Speaker 2] (1:39:05 - 1:39:06)
Right.

[Speaker 1] (1:39:06 - 1:39:16)
But I think, you know, what we might want to do is look through here and say, is there anything that we think is right that we don't agree with? I think stands out that we'd need to have a specific.

[Speaker 2] (1:39:19 - 1:39:26)
You're thinking in terms of going this through 41210 or through the whole bylaw. I don't know if there are anything else in the bylaw that we really.

[Speaker 1] (1:39:27 - 1:40:27)
I think we will meet a dimension of requirements. Requirements. Parking.

Fractional units. Noise. I don't think we have an issue.

The stormwater has been addressed. The off-street parking, loading and handling has been addressed. The inclusionary housing will be a contingency that will get in there just in terms of that being sorted out.

Administration. We know. See, this is the part of the redevelopment area shall include all of the swamps.

Good. This is parcels. 79 1790 79 F and 1710 B as the same.

Maybe combined or subdivided. I don't know. Regardless of whether such lot.

Our common ownership or control and shall be deemed to be a single development lot. Solely for the purposes of determining whether a project meets the density dimensional. Landscaping and parking requirements.

So we can look at it. As one. As one lot.

[Speaker 2] (1:40:28 - 1:40:31)
I just want to know before we get too far into the bylaw here, Ken, did you have a.

[Speaker 8] (1:40:33 - 1:41:06)
Thought I was just going to ask. I was just going to ask that maybe you can vote tonight. With the contingencies or conditions that you've outlined.

And obviously the occupancy permit. For the project clearly will not be able to be issued until those conditions have been met. But that would not preclude you from voting on this evening.

And as I raised my hand earlier, you apparently have subscribed to that, that concept. And that's what you were just about to do. And I was going to just thank you for that.

[Speaker 1] (1:41:06 - 1:41:06)
Okay.

[Speaker 8] (1:41:06 - 1:41:07)
Thanks.

[Speaker 1] (1:41:08 - 1:41:09)
All right. So.

[Speaker 2] (1:41:11 - 1:41:19)
Okay. So I guess we should go through every section. Like you had mentioned.

I think so. Starting with purpose for 12, 1, 0 purpose.

[Speaker 1] (1:41:19 - 1:41:23)
Yep. We find that the purpose has been met. So, yeah.

[Speaker 2] (1:41:24 - 1:41:31)
Right. Hard production of variety housing size for vibrant neighborhoods. Locate housing with walking distance.

Public transit town centers for economic development.

[Speaker 13] (1:41:32 - 1:41:32)
Yep.

[Speaker 2] (1:41:32 - 1:41:43)
Serve open space in a community by locating housing within or adjacent to developed areas and infrastructure. Providing investment in public transit and pedestrian and bike friendly infrastructure. Increasing the municipal tax base.

[Speaker 1] (1:41:43 - 1:42:00)
Okay. So I think that. That we want to do is have a finding that section.

4, 1, 2, 0, 0 regulations pertaining section. you know 1.0 through 1.6 we find that all of those conditions have been met.

[Speaker 13] (1:42:02 - 1:42:03)
Yep. Okay.

[Speaker 1] (1:42:03 - 1:42:08)
And then we go scope and authority that's that has also been met.

[Speaker 13] (1:42:08 - 1:42:08)
Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (1:42:08 - 1:43:07)
And multifamily residential for definitions that's not something that's permitted uses. Affirmative uses or uses that has been met. We go to dimensional requirements here so we can make a finding that there there will be dimensional waivers needed some dimensional waivers needed and they we you know so you know based on you know our current knowledge of what those will be in terms of some setbacks and existing setbacks and and then some potential additional waivers for setbacks that may be needed once we see the A&R subdivision plans that we as our understanding at this point is that we do not see any issues with granting those specific waivers.

[Speaker 2] (1:43:08 - 1:43:09)
Agreed.

[Speaker 1] (1:43:09 - 1:43:20)
But they will be we will get a list of those when we do when we do the A&R and the subdivision. Okay. So we can just have it for the record.

[Speaker 7] (1:43:21 - 1:43:22)
Do that for the next meeting.

[Speaker 1] (1:43:22 - 1:43:42)
Okay. So that would take care of that. The parking requirements we've also discussed the need for waivers for 100 parking spaces and there is currently no objection by this board for granting that waiver but we would we need those in writing as well.

[Speaker 13] (1:43:43 - 1:43:44)
Right with the updated count.

[Speaker 1] (1:43:44 - 1:50:28)
Right a list of well I think what we'd like to see with the submission of the A&R and the subdivision would just be if you could attach the list of waivers you're requesting and then we can just make an addendum to the decision and just say that it's not a special permit so we just say you can sign off on that. Is that agreeable to everybody? Does that sound reasonable?

Okay. Fractional units that's something that you're gonna be you're working at with the Affordable Housing Trust that issue will be you know you're requesting that you build 16 affordable units and that the fractional one the 0.3 becomes a fee-in-loop which that we are we trust that that will be settled and negotiated with the Affordable Housing Trust and whatever it is will be worked out with them. Okay so and then nothing on application nothing on pre-application.

Nothing there nothing under stormwater we've agreed and looked at all the stormwater management you also create parking loading and landscaping we have you know noted the comments from building department we see no issues with that the inclusionary housing we've addressed that that's also under the same as 41270 those that essentially will go together administration we can adopt with the file administration rules relative the application requirements and context so we can make a note of all this and make sure the town clerk has it so right if you also know what we're expecting what additional information we're expecting pre-application review we've done application procedures have been done we have a letter from Marissa and we have reviewed all the plans myself that everything that was submitted to date is complete all the reports and everything we've requested has been submitted so that that is another finding we can make evidence that the development complies with design guidelines that's number seven under 412 12-2 which we've also voted on already these we don't have to discuss that on a provisional that's already gone public hearing we're on the second one now satisfaction okay prior to granting of any plan approval the applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the swamps but affordable housing trust at the method by which such affordable rents or affordable purchase prices are computed shall be consistent with state and federal guidelines so that would be you know our finding there would be that that is the contingency that we're putting forward with the developer and the affordable housing trust okay so that I'm just going to put in as a contingency plan approval decision they will make a decision on the application for plan approval majority vote so our findings included the basis for the findings so I think you you know Marissa you'll have a you'll have the recorded copy of everything that we're saying here we get you know so we can kind of transcribe all of that and then you know I'm happy to go over and prove with you to make sure that we get everything correct in terms of the findings including our basics shall be shall be shall be stated so we will we'll get that we'll get that to you decision by the approving including detailed reasons therefore shall be filed with town clerk copy the decisions that we mailed to applicant okay effective date of 20 days will we know about the appeal period okay so criteria is the approving authority shall approve the development project upon finding that it complies with the requirements of section of this section 4.12 point 0.0 including without limitation that such development project complies with the design guidelines which we said it does and with the definitions of the design guidelines which we voted that it does so we may impose conditions as necessary to ensure compliance so what I think the approving authority may at its discretion authorize waivers so we know that okay so I think what we need to do here is that we need to make all of the findings as we just discussed and also include findings of from the comments that we had received which we discussed and these were either you know agreements that you made in terms of you know replacing for the most part the native plants for the for the non-natives just the the things that we've discussed that we are assuming you will be able to that you either said yes we're definitely going to do that or you know I want to acknowledge that we've discussed all of the issues that came up in public comment and comments from the boards so that will be included as well so I think once we get a draft we're gonna have to really go over it and and just make sure that we really flesh out all of the answers and provide totally of our you know the reasoning behind everything so that sounds reasonable to everyone I don't want to sort of gloss over anything but it clearly we can't write all of this now but essentially that you know which has been recorded outlines what the findings that we will be making and the fact that we will be you know that will have contingencies for waivers which we don't anticipate any issues with and with the affordable housing trust issues which we also don't think we're gonna have any issues with and with the understanding that we'll be receiving I don't know how soon you think you want to you're gonna be back

[Speaker 7] (1:50:28 - 1:50:34)
with the ANR we'll be back next month next month okay now that we've got that

[Speaker 1] (1:50:34 - 1:50:43)
out of the way so I think emotion would be helpful just one comment the only

[Speaker 9] (1:50:43 - 1:50:52)
other condition that I might add which is standard is just to comply with all staff department requirements not you know the I&I fee anything else by fire

[Speaker 1] (1:50:52 - 1:52:18)
building health right so I love the I&I fee is a good thing to mention I don't know whether that's you know been discussed already and you know we have an I&I fee for every bedroom right okay so that I can we can also make a note of here and as far as the staff comments of course they are in compliance however I would say that there were a few conditions with the with the with the recommendations that were made by it's a detective cable or answer cable regarding some of the sidewalks that may have been listed as criteria for or contingencies that I don't know that we have agreed to to do that that we don't think it's in the that we've agreed that the that particular sidewalk right and the safety issues have been addressed right in it at a different location I don't want to dismiss his you know very thorough and well you know well thought out comments at all but I think we want to make that distinction so the police department's aware that that has been addressed right in a different part of the plan okay I agree my thing was more

[Speaker 9] (1:52:18 - 1:52:21)
so just like the standard sort of routine stuff that they call like still

[Speaker 1] (1:52:21 - 1:52:44)
there was it was he was very specific and it was incredibly thorough and I just don't want there to be any misinterpretation that if we're being appreciated because that's not not the case at all okay so if that's you know all right then based upon what the only other thing that I think you had

[Speaker 2] (1:52:44 - 1:53:02)
mentioned the willingness to sit down with the tree folks to discuss some tree alternatives yes I think we had talked about that one of the findings that as well as was the folks on the Energy Committee just to hear their thoughts so I think that would be helpful and appreciative if someone from the team

[Speaker 1] (1:53:02 - 1:53:18)
might be able to we can once we get it wrapped together we can fill in all these things and then we can yeah for the public I just want to make sure that was and I just want to make sure we cover all those details so the sooner we can get a draft the better obviously in the meantime based upon the vote we

[Speaker 2] (1:53:18 - 1:53:23)
took to do we have to close the public hearing before we take a vote I think we

[Speaker 1] (1:53:23 - 1:53:28)
do I think so yep yeah so is there right yeah I guess we didn't we didn't close

[Speaker 2] (1:53:28 - 1:53:37)
public comment right okay so just for formality public hearing second all right all those in favor public hearing closed and so I'd like to make a motion

[Speaker 1] (1:53:37 - 1:55:27)
to approve what is it called what is it called plan approval 24-8 application says site plan review but this is not no no it's a plan review approval that is right thank you mr.

Schmitzer plan review for the redevelopment for 450 Paradise Road as presented let's say I guess that the application date was November 19th okay so 600 no okay this is I just want to make sure I have the correct we don't have an application number I suppose 24-18 oh here it is right in front of my face 2418 for approval of multifamily development of redevelopment of the swamp scut mall area based upon the findings outlined by through this meeting tonight between the development team and the planning board and incorporating comments from the public and from town boards and committees and our own approval our acknowledgment that all of the criteria in the Venice Square design guidelines have been met I make a motion that we approve the plans as as presented this evening with the understanding that we will be reviewing additional plans subdivision and a and R there's second

[Speaker 2] (1:55:29 - 1:55:30)
all those in favor

[Speaker 1] (1:55:35 - 1:56:16)
thank you very much so we our work now is to get this get this big letter together for you so we want to be able to yeah that'll be fun thought all the eyes and cross all the T's but I'm thrilled and I think you've done an amazing job on this I'm very excited it's something that I've if you couldn't tell I've been incredibly supportive of for a very long time and give you a lot of credit mr.

Rose so this is a big leap and your team you've chosen you know outstanding so thank you I can't wait to see it happen me too yeah can't wait

[Speaker 3] (1:56:16 - 1:56:47)
to hear about some new tenants we're excited I'd like to add that it's it's really wonderful to see that property this size that attention to how to move it forward can have a really large impact on the community size so in a lot of environments a property this size or this kind of square footage would be many people that would have to coordinate to to bring this up and I think we're very fortunate that you own it we got the vision to do this we've

[Speaker 7] (1:56:47 - 1:56:51)
talked about we are very lucky to stop the job coming up for sale which we

[Speaker 1] (1:56:51 - 1:57:29)
chased for 20 years everything came down planets aligned okay we'll see you next next month so thank you again talk about thanks Ken yeah so Marissa I think

[Speaker 2] (1:57:29 - 1:57:51)
I was watching it was like 836 to 850 or so it was like the timestamps that we went through everything yeah so plus or minus like two minutes on that but that is the part of the recording that we went through everything the design standards were before that design guidelines were before that but agreed

[Speaker 1] (1:57:51 - 1:58:16)
yeah I just want me there's a lot of stuff that we talked about you know that maybe we're gonna look at this this is a right I'm concerned about the police thing because I just I mean you put that in there as criteria and I just wanted to clarify that I hear you yeah you know I want to make sure that is but

[Speaker 2] (1:58:16 - 1:58:38)
appreciate you calling that out we want to make sure they get the I and I I wanted the I and I see in there and I didn't have it we want to make sure we're all buttoned up on the front yeah exactly exactly did we you probably sent minutes around

[Speaker 9] (1:59:00 - 1:59:24)
you when did you I'm sorry I just need to find the meeting minutes are you able

[Speaker 2] (1:59:24 - 1:59:29)
to put it on this screen oh thank you I read through it this afternoon I just

[Speaker 1] (1:59:29 - 2:00:19)
want to give another good night yeah and I pull up on my phone or is it I was

[Speaker 3] (2:00:19 - 2:00:22)
going to but I think I think these might be it might be easier to read on

[Speaker 1] (2:00:22 - 2:00:39)
okay yeah I don't know I think on my my my eyes but nothing jumped at me when I actually I can read yeah okay whatever that my glasses head you can do a

[Speaker 2] (2:00:39 - 2:01:01)
dramatic reading for us yeah get my stage voice on sure it's very good yeah maybe at one of the new tenants in Finnan Square it's an exciting thing

[Speaker 3] (2:01:05 - 2:01:14)
yeah it's exciting to realize how quickly this could come to be yeah well

[Speaker 1] (2:01:14 - 2:01:19)
I think it's gonna it will take a while certainly to take a while but you say I

[Speaker 2] (2:01:19 - 2:01:34)
think the timeline at the last meeting you walk through was like phased over three years or something from really start to finish yeah which first writing for a project this size is considering they have to stop construction for four months for holidays Stephen that's pretty good time yeah that's true

[Speaker 3] (2:01:40 - 2:01:53)
I'm excited it's interesting to be seeing the amount of construction in Revere mm-hmm just the speed that these do get because of the it was in

[Speaker 2] (2:01:53 - 2:02:15)
Athens yeah yeah it was interesting from a zoning perspective I think Revere has like a Revere Beach waterfront master plan like separate from their city master plan they have a one for that whole neighborhood which is just interesting to see from the first condo I looked at to buy in my life I was like 22 was on Revere Beach now I drive by it all the time like that was $60,000 15

[Speaker 1] (2:02:15 - 2:02:55)
years ago it's not that price anymore yeah shocks me is that the you know the road that goes whatever that road is called I don't even know that goes right behind it through Revere you know but the marsh on either side they're not one of not one of sevens one thing but one it is one a right or short just marsh on both sides I mean the waves are sloshing over in storms I just I have a hard time believing that they they don't get any pushback and in building right on the beach there I just don't get it and none of them have basements I mean they're

[Speaker 3] (2:02:55 - 2:03:28)
all up on stilts right it's just so they're they're a very specific building type yeah right and you know in in looking at it there is a Thai restaurant called seize the day at least the day you go in there ever it's good food yeah if you go in there ever when it's stormy and you walk across their floor water comes up oh yeah inside the restaurants Wow yeah interesting yeah that's a click down floor that that they they get enough you know enough

[Speaker 1] (2:03:28 - 2:03:43)
water crosses the waterfront so they must have been knockout panels on the bottom I couldn't live in a building like that nope all right okay oh we have

[Speaker 2] (2:03:43 - 2:03:45)
them yep we have them up there we go

[Speaker 1] (2:03:52 - 2:04:02)
yeah if you could blow that oh thank you much better I'm getting a little glare

[Speaker 17] (2:04:02 - 2:04:06)
but I can read around it I think you can scroll down a little bit keep going

[Speaker 14] (2:04:09 - 2:04:19)
yep yep there's just a typo more so it should say in ground floor garage it

[Speaker 1] (2:04:19 - 2:04:24)
says and she was thinking about

[Speaker 17] (2:04:27 - 2:04:53)
Angie's ground okay option of putting up we'll talk about it after okay

[Speaker 13] (2:04:53 - 2:05:35)
mm-hmm keep going okay is there any more you move forward keep going oh yeah okay

[Speaker 1] (2:05:35 - 2:05:40)
very good that was it so looks good your motion to approve the minutes from

[Speaker 3] (2:05:40 - 2:05:59)
December second all right all those in favor December 2nd December 4th I was just seconding the motion I wasn't I wasn't correcting the date I should have

[Speaker 2] (2:05:59 - 2:06:41)
said me too only other thing that I wanted to mention any you know business not reasonably forcing by the board I spoke for the select board last week about our zoning bylaws potential zoning bylaws for 2025 and some longer term ones that we had discussed you know the short-term rental and signage bylaw for next year and the ones for this year there are no complaints they're in full support of those initiatives so at this point we should kind of dive into the details of those leave the FEMA gave us the approved flood maps so I know Marissa's work Merce and Marsy have worked with DCR to get some draft language worked on

[Speaker 1] (2:06:41 - 2:08:37)
I know I think you've discussed with the committee some of that was Tony so just modifying that bylaws so that essentially what it will kind of in a nutshell but what it would look like is that the coastal overlay district the coastal flood area overlay district would essentially be subsumed by the wetlands our new web it wouldn't be necessarily wet wetland so much as the hazard okay whatever they call it I can't even think of the flood hazard or I'm sorry I can't even think of the exact thing it's not it would differ is right but it because a coastal flood area is does come under the flooding hazard area regardless of where it is at all and there's there are new guidelines that we have to comply with and essentially the the most important part about rewriting the bylaw is a to comply with you know what we're supposed to be saying in these bylaws to incorporate the new maps and also to to to get all the language we're not using we're using all different language the state uses some terms we use a variety of different terms we have hazard areas we have coastal flood areas we have floodplain areas and we need to use a common language agreed and it needs to be what the state uses and so we need to modify our bylaw makes perfect sense so anyway the maps might as well just do it at one time right right which can stay a separate section but and it but she still needs to update some language in that bylaw because that's out of sync with what the state's doing too so they

[Speaker 9] (2:08:37 - 2:08:54)
think continue right right relations except for like make minor linguistic

[Speaker 2] (2:08:54 - 2:09:04)
adjustments but right my understanding was just a streamlined consistent language throughout any of the impact zones I guess at the bylaw because plus

[Speaker 9] (2:09:04 - 2:09:10)
the majority of the jurisdiction for the wetlands is Hong Kong right so the few

[Speaker 2] (2:09:10 - 2:09:48)
other areas obviously that we have to kind of start working on Airbnb which that goes into effect on February 80 years 80 years I'm sorry 80 years yeah Airbnb 80 80 years goes into effect in February so we'll just have to have some conversations amongst our board here about the short-term rental aspect but there are one or two other minor aspects of local control they were allowed to exert but that's the that's the crux of that's the biggest one and then site

[Speaker 1] (2:09:48 - 2:10:45)
plan yeah yeah site plan I feel very strongly that's based upon the multiple what I would my words here failures that we've had with developments that have not required site plan you know bring us to a point where we need to we need to have a site plan for for everything everything that gets built if you've taken down a building and putting up a building of any size if you have a brand new lot and you're redeveloping it and the buildings 2,000 square feet we need a site plan I think one thing that we can discuss as a board is whether we want to put a limit on is it site plan special permit or do we want to just you know up to a certain size or do we just want to do site plan approval up to a so do we want to make that the cutoff but at some point it's just it's forcing

[Speaker 3] (2:10:45 - 2:10:54)
it to get reviewed so this is specific to any new building that is not addition

[Speaker 1] (2:10:54 - 2:10:58)
well the addition the site plans for addition I think we're going to keep the

[Speaker 2] (2:10:58 - 2:11:06)
same I think that makes there any is there any discussion I don't think it should be changed I'm just going to be my opinion okay so I don't think that

[Speaker 3] (2:11:06 - 2:12:45)
that the square footage I think it's appropriate yeah so I'm gonna I'm gonna push back from a different perspective on that the site plan I might process the site plan as being something that is responsive to the neighbors and I think that the square footage of the building is arbitrary in relationship to the impact that a building can have on a community because the if there is a lot that's developed if it is in a community that has smaller lots and smaller houses it's still having the same direct impact that a building of a larger footprint where there are larger lots and larger houses so just from an equity standpoint I think that we should be protecting the residents of Swampstack whoever they are and I don't I think there's an arbitrariness to the square footage I find that also in in in many other areas not necessarily this but you know the fact that a non-architect can design a house up to 5,000 square feet and over 5,000 square feet you need to be a registered architect exactly because because ugly and dangerous exists under 5,000 so you know we we should want to protect so that's that's the reason I would say I think it I think it is a really reasonable thing to eliminate this

[Speaker 1] (2:12:45 - 2:13:03)
do you mean for all brand-new construction because I'm just talking about additions oh you're talking about a dish in terms of the 800 square foot you know yeah I think a marble head they do 500 square feet

[Speaker 3] (2:13:03 - 2:13:12)
really yeah I mean 800 square feet is 20 by 40 right yeah but it's 8 well 800

[Speaker 2] (2:13:12 - 2:13:17)
square feet at one time or collectively within the past five yeah within five

[Speaker 9] (2:13:17 - 2:13:26)
years so if you decide you're gonna do an addition of 200 square foot whatever edition and then this year and then three years later right at a 700 square

[Speaker 2] (2:13:26 - 2:13:32)
foot so it's total 800 square feet over five calendar years which is a good size

[Speaker 3] (2:13:32 - 2:13:38)
I mean look I it's like it's huge yeah I mean I mean as an addition yeah it's

[Speaker 1] (2:13:38 - 2:15:24)
huge you know we could say 500 square feet and do a Marblehead does and their rationale was that that's that's much more you know in and I'm just telling you what you know this was quite a while ago and I discussed it with yeah when we first talked about changing site plan a hundred years ago but it was just based upon the fact that you know 500 square feet seemed to be you know a very reasonable like that's a little room you're gonna add on it's a small bedroom it's just this and that it's not it was less likely to be you know it's still a for them it was still you know a big amount of you know a big addition especially in the old town section but you know it they found that that was kind of a number that they were comfortable with in terms of you know not requiring a special permit whether we we cry the special permit or not my concern is that it goes through site plan so we can talk about whether or not you want to say okay it's a special permit when it goes over X amount of square feet that's a discussion I think we should have but I think any new construction like that has to go through site plan it's just I mean it's just safety it has to do with with you know cutting down trees it has to do with landscaping and extending driveways and it has to do with blocking other people's views and it has to do with you know so many things that will not just impact that lot but impact everyone around them yeah and nine times out of ten it's just not an issue but there's there are gonna be those times when it really is yeah I would say

[Speaker 3] (2:15:24 - 2:15:32)
because this is a public meeting and because I would benefit from it too is the difference between what is the difference between a site plan review

[Speaker 1] (2:15:32 - 2:15:58)
and a site plan special permit well I'd say special permit is a much more you go through the same steps you look at it but the site plan review is not you make recommendations and you say you know they're not binding but it does go through review and so in other words if they're gonna you know okay I mean

[Speaker 9] (2:15:58 - 2:16:12)
just I could be I'm sorry I could be wrong but I thought that when we amended the bylaw was it two years ago we changed it from site plan review to special permit we eliminated the review entirely the only sort of review aspect we kept was design review maybe for Humphrey Street well that's what I'm

[Speaker 1] (2:16:12 - 2:16:59)
suggesting that if this if some people have an issue with it being binding for a small house which I personally don't I'm just I'm bringing this up for discussion amongst ourselves to say you know is that something that you know we could bring back in that sense or we'll say and this is what that means in this regard I mean I think it should be binding I mean yeah it's it's a lot you know putting up a big and a great big house you know is it's a lot and there you know I just think of a couple come to mind immediately there are you know blasting multiple trees that were taken down unnatural slopes that ran right into a neighbor's property that created drainage problems immediately I mean it

[Speaker 2] (2:16:59 - 2:17:11)
just and we're talking about single well one or two family residential structures that's really the part of the file that we're talking about so it's not like imposing this requirement is infringing on the housing our housing

[Speaker 1] (2:17:11 - 2:17:23)
production abilities especially to when you know we have so little virgin land

[Speaker 9] (2:17:23 - 2:17:58)
left if I need that that in of itself I think any construction of marginally if you were building a 200 square foot shed like you're putting something on land where there was no where previously there was no structure and then otherwise when we're you know demoing and rebuilding we're typically adding greater density right right it's it's very rare that we see a tear down and rebuild from single-family back to single family the last one I can think Puritan but that was also a coastal flood overlay zone so you know that should have come to site plan review for that element well I would I would say I

[Speaker 3] (2:17:58 - 2:19:02)
think that I think that we are at a time here that there was a lot of development mid-century and into the 60s and 70s where there are buildings that we will be moving into replacing because they aren't meeting current needs so the value of the property isn't the value of the house that's the value of the location so I think we will see more of the of the types of things that you're talking about we're tearing down a single-family house and we're putting back a single-family house because I think there's some housing stock that it's life expectancy it was built at a time where we had moved into like a 35 year life expectancy on buildings sadly and I think we've improved a little bit since then actually but you know in the 70s and 80s the construction methods were not for long-term interesting just that house that just came down on

[Speaker 1] (2:19:02 - 2:19:36)
Puritan Road that was on the beach plans we approved watch that was built around 1980 I think early 80s it was just classic whatever I mean that came down quick oh my god beautiful new window basically it was it was like I don't know if it's plywood I don't know what that thing was made out of three-day demo but it was gone I mean gone I mean I drove past it one day it was like the trucks you know the loaders were there literally the next day I'm like oh my

[Speaker 3] (2:19:36 - 2:19:41)
god it's it's gone it's amazing what you can do was stick yeah do either you guys

[Speaker 14] (2:19:41 - 2:20:04)
have issues with no I don't have instructions out of it I think I would be more in favor of it not being binding but I would like to get folks in front of us if they're doing something new in terms of additions I I don't know if we're hearing particular complaints but I would prefer to keep that as is addition wise yeah I think if people have their houses they should be able to

[Speaker 2] (2:20:04 - 2:20:16)
make reasonable reasonable changes yeah so your thought is new construction site plan review or special permit plan review site plan review for new

[Speaker 14] (2:20:16 - 2:20:21)
construction addition is under what is it right now 3,000 square feet yeah

[Speaker 2] (2:20:24 - 2:20:34)
under is it under 3,000 3,000 square feet or it's over for a new build yeah under 3,000 space we buy right unless dimensional or zoning stuff is needed

[Speaker 1] (2:20:34 - 2:20:43)
and in the past year we've had a couple of applications for you know two thousand nine hundred and nine we'll see this is this is the right that's the one that I

[Speaker 3] (2:20:43 - 2:21:24)
was actually speaking to is I I think that that dimensional is arbitrary is arbitrary because of the undersized lots in this community and you know realistically most most of places that there are size their size I don't know I think I think the role of planning committee should be for or planning board should be to you know be ensuring the quality of life and safety for all residents of the town so I do think bringing that square footage requirement down or eliminating it you know if there's new construction there's a site

[Speaker 1] (2:21:24 - 2:21:30)
plan review yeah I think we should have site plan special permit for new

[Speaker 2] (2:21:30 - 2:21:56)
construction I think I agree as well but I think it would be helpful if is it's are you able to kind of aggregate some data for us for how many site plan special permits we've given for new construction the last five years and how many new builds application or tear down a new build application we've got in the last five years for houses of any size we don't well we don't get them

[Speaker 1] (2:21:56 - 2:22:00)
they just go to the building right can you pull that in a building right but

[Speaker 2] (2:22:00 - 2:22:04)
they should they'll have a copy of I don't know I mean this stuff that I've

[Speaker 1] (2:22:04 - 2:22:16)
seen go through that has just shocked me be honest I mean I could I could tell you three left the top of my head right now but I'm not going to how many site

[Speaker 9] (2:22:16 - 2:22:21)
plans for new construction in the last five year and how many if possible how

[Speaker 2] (2:22:21 - 2:22:25)
many just building permits for new construction in the same span yeah I

[Speaker 1] (2:22:26 - 2:22:41)
think that would be helpful for at least giving us some context I also

[Speaker 3] (2:22:41 - 2:23:46)
think that's a good discussion to have townwide part of the reason we success fully were able to vote through for historic districts was in reaction to just the ability to tear it down right look something new up and really the conversation we had around what sort of protections a historic district brought in really had to do the fact that the entire Olmstead district any house by right could have been torn down and replaced with anything as long as it met the setback requirements right and that really stung some people when they started really thinking neighborhoods three street by street house by house a neighborhood by neighborhood within micro neighborhood by neighborhood within the Olmstead district so that sort of opportunity does protect property owners and residents throughout the town if there is a system that isn't as easy as an over-the-counter yeah so I think having that information for a

[Speaker 2] (2:23:46 - 2:23:51)
meeting next month having a couple lines on the agenda as well the visit this in

[Speaker 1] (2:23:51 - 2:25:12)
greater detail would be helpful yeah the other you know piece of this is and you know we can't you know bylaw our way out of this but you know over the past several years even we've had constant turnover of building inspectors and now we don't even have one and we have you know a building well we have a building inspector I guess part-time who's we don't have a commissioner and it's just you know we never have a a fulsome staff in that position that is can monitor anything and stuff I mean it was you know acknowledged quite openly that a lot of stuff fell through the cracks and that's you know not me making that up I mean it just did because of you know workload so there's you know I think there's a lot of reasons why you know as elected officials we have to look at that and decide you know how is this what's best for the town right now I mean how are we managing these things and on a staffing level it's we're not able to keep up right now right so I'm not saying that we have to step in and be staffed but I am saying that I think it makes these kinds of regulations you know all the more important to pay attention to right yeah certainly be

[Speaker 3] (2:25:12 - 2:25:33)
great to have some more oversight agreed and I would even say from the historic district staying on top of that has been very difficult because there's been a lot of permits as you know that have gone out that shouldn't have gone out and then trying to trying to circle back and enforce the bylaw that's been

[Speaker 2] (2:25:33 - 2:25:43)
violated is yeah really hard yeah hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube yeah yep so next month if we could just make sure to have those bylaw items on

[Speaker 1] (2:25:43 - 2:25:56)
the agenda I have a couple of very lousy drafts but I can make them better drafts and I'll do that and I think we should just be ready next month I think some of

[Speaker 2] (2:25:56 - 2:26:04)
that data will be helpful but you know what square footage we want to trigger for additions yeah it sounds like we're mostly in favor of any new build I said

[Speaker 1] (2:26:04 - 2:26:24)
I don't know Lexington look at other towns where they you know are paying attention to what's being built I mean and look at towns that are I mean I think that we should you know we should be kind of seeing what appear to be best practices and maybe what works and and what doesn't I think it'd be important

[Speaker 3] (2:26:24 - 2:26:32)
though for us to think about towns that are comparable because Lexington isn't a comparable and that's true they have a lot of space they've got a lot of

[Speaker 2] (2:26:32 - 2:26:36)
space but you're maybe you're right about minfields or there's other regional

[Speaker 3] (2:26:36 - 2:27:10)
towns we can use for comparables yeah it's actually a little hard well because it's one that's very unique it's very unique in its tiny footprint yep and the degree to which it's built out yeah you know so it is it is it's a little bit hard because you if you look to the density you're looking at much larger right you're not finding comparable cities you know and if you're looking at like sort of maybe lifestyle similar they tend to have more land yeah and then

[Speaker 9] (2:27:10 - 2:27:24)
by my if we maybe by March we would probably want to have like a like we did last year an informal community yeah yes meeting great idea ahead of the public hearing that will ultimately have to have for town meeting agreed and I think

[Speaker 1] (2:27:27 - 2:27:37)
yeah god we got a got ahead of that one we did that we ever get approved from the Attorney General yet we did yeah we did when did that happen oh when did

[Speaker 9] (2:27:37 - 2:27:48)
Margie and I go to the October yeah I also feel that that looking at these we

[Speaker 3] (2:27:48 - 2:28:13)
can make we can make a better route for a building inspector through looking at this and yeah and really making a more attractive position yeah yeah because I do think that that would it would be nice if we could be attractive

[Speaker 9] (2:28:20 - 2:28:24)
yeah yeah yeah no they're they're definitely something to be said for a

[Speaker 1] (2:28:24 - 2:28:39)
line I get a permit for you know yeah why I'm 2900 square foot house online right bingo I mean it's scary so yeah so did we approve the minutes we did we

[Speaker 9] (2:28:39 - 2:28:46)
did we did so I just have one or that was it right for I think that was it and

[Speaker 2] (2:28:46 - 2:28:54)
then the 2026 signage and Airbnb which we get to later one plug on behalf of

[Speaker 9] (2:28:54 - 2:29:52)
Margie speaking of subdivisions and an ours so in anticipation of the Pine Street housing development the affordable housing development with preference for veterans so the that parcel of land right now is the former warehouse that's since been demoed that's 12 to 24 Pine Street and then just around the corner on New Ocean Street we have and then 8 Pine Street we have the VFW at 8 Pine Street and then we have the dispensary at 12 14 or 14 16 New Ocean Street so right now the dispensary and the VFW are on one law yeah and then the where the former warehouse is on a separate lot the town is looking to do an A&R to merge the A&R and subdivide so subdivide the dispensary and make that a separate lot and then merge the VFW and the need to

[Speaker 1] (2:29:52 - 2:29:55)
subdivide the dispensary the whole thing can be an A&R yeah okay

[Speaker 9] (2:29:57 - 2:30:02)
definitely okay it doesn't so just like getting rid of a parcel and making it

[Speaker 1] (2:30:02 - 2:30:27)
its own doesn't yeah as long as it has enough frontage that's all it looks at okay does it have frontage on a street and a story yeah you don't want to put it into non-compliance and it has all you need is you have a few parking spots here anyway so you're gonna be fine with that setback the other setbacks are built in right you're not moving the building right just an A&R great that that's a lot less complicated the other two lots you can combine that's like

[Speaker 9] (2:30:27 - 2:30:44)
that's easy enough yeah yeah okay great so then that'll be forthcoming that's very easy okay great I think probably she says okay so we'll see I would anticipate it maybe for the March meeting okay so have there been any plan

[Speaker 2] (2:30:44 - 2:30:56)
submitted for February site plan or anything nope nope so our agenda is just bylaws at this point bylaws and then the subdivision for this

[Speaker 9] (2:30:56 - 2:31:30)
okay so and then assuming I received materials for the Manson Road subdivision but and I when they came and met with myself and Gino Chris Lucas was there I I let them know I said you know if construction starts a brand new house I I made them aware of the bylaw as it is right now and the changes that might

[Speaker 1] (2:31:30 - 2:31:51)
come and if we you know if we get if we write it we write a draft and it gets accepted by the select board then it's it is de facto in effect even if we haven't brought it down to town meeting yet okay so if there's some kind of little tricky thing in there but you can you can ask town council but she'll

[Speaker 2] (2:31:51 - 2:32:06)
tell you all right well fun meeting any team other motions maybe they'll be adjourned adjourned I so moved all right all those in favor all right thanks

[Speaker 3] (2:32:06 - 2:32:06)
everyone thanks