[Speaker 7] (0:14 - 1:36)
. .

[Speaker 5] (3:54 - 4:49)
. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

[Speaker 4] (5:15 - 5:18)
. . .

[Speaker 5] (5:24 - 5:48)
. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

Waive that 10-day requirement.

[Speaker 1] (5:48 - 5:54)
I'll make a motion to waive the 10-day requirement for this an hour for center court Second all those in favor. Aye.

[Speaker 5] (5:54 - 5:56)
Aye All right, Tim.

[Speaker 4] (5:56 - 6:48)
Well as you all know an A&R is an approval not required It's a it doesn't even actually require a public hearing. It just requires the determination that the that the lots have appropriate frontage It's more of a technical mechanism for recording purposes In order for the registry of deeds to accept a plan It has to be signed off on an approval not required by at least three members of the planning board So this evening what we're doing is there is a larger lot that will be subdivided to provide for the stop-and-shop on one of the two lots and the second will be the residential structure that had been Previously discussed and approved and the approval review process that we had a couple of weeks ago I Wish I could make it more detailed than that, but it really doesn't require any further detail. Yeah.

[Speaker 5] (6:48 - 6:49)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (6:49 - 6:58)
I don't have any questions And this just referring back to the last meeting this is based on Financing.

[Speaker 4] (6:58 - 7:19)
Oh, actually you the next matter which is the remaining Subdivision which will require a preliminary and then a final approval because it's more than just these two lots is for financing You know in order for everybody to have their equity interest in the parcel that they're going to be underwriting They want a defined parcel.

[Speaker 1] (7:19 - 7:57)
So there'll be no change in any dimensional requirements that have already been reviewed It's just solely for that purpose I think that you know, it's my understanding if I may speak to this that they just want to separate the Read commercial from the residential property and just make them right now. They're kind of on the same lot So it makes sense that there's also multiple, you know owners with different interests in this property in order for them to secure their their financing All they need to do is show that they have frontage on a main road, which they both both of the lots do so there's Excellent. I certainly don't have any questions.

[Speaker 4] (7:58 - 8:09)
So that I'm going to the one that we were just discussing the A&R That's the that's the gist Okay, I would ask if And as I said, it doesn't actually require a public hearing.

[Speaker 1] (8:09 - 8:20)
It just requires that three members of the board sign off I can make a motion that we endorse the A&R as Presented I would second that All those in favor. Aye.

[Speaker 2] (8:20 - 8:21)
Aye.

[Speaker 1] (8:21 - 8:26)
So we need to do is we need to go over here and each sign Mylar copy.

[Speaker 4] (8:27 - 8:34)
Okay, this is the way John Hancock did it. So I I'll bring my sharp. Would you like to um, yeah, let's just do it now.

[Speaker 5] (8:34 - 8:35)
So that way there's you know

[Speaker 4] (8:56 - 8:59)
We know if Garrett is a is on remotely

[Speaker 1] (9:01 - 9:01)
Check

[Speaker 4] (9:11 - 9:13)
Because there's no some issue

[Speaker 8] (9:26 - 9:28)
We don't need to print our names out

[Speaker 4] (9:37 - 9:40)
One is for recording if you want to sign a copy

[Speaker 1] (9:54 - 10:17)
No, all right, I'll come back

[Speaker 4] (10:50 - 11:25)
I Don't mind just holding on to the original mylar and I'll just have I'll figure out who's gonna get it recorded You may want me to record I don't know but I

[Speaker 1] (11:29 - 12:06)
Used to love going to that Salem registry Then you'd have those guys in the back room and you know, whenever No, I'm talking about the one that's down on the water that Shetland Park is that Really was quite I even loved going there when I you know, just to do research on for a variety of things gosh, I you know But you know, they would have a lot of historical archival material on the back You know, they always had people there that were fascinated by the same stuff We're only too happy to you know, take you back there.

[Speaker 9] (12:06 - 12:08)
Is that no longer the case?

[Speaker 4] (12:12 - 12:37)
Everything's been scanned in electronically and In there, it's empty. It's like no there's one person who's not even at the desk and you go. Hello Having it online is great, but it's not the same because you can record electronically now.

Yeah, you know, whereas before you couldn't and They actually looked at the documents and makes closings much easier, yeah Takes away a lot of the churn. Yes.

[Speaker 1] (12:37 - 12:43)
Yeah, I was talking about the research part of it. That's kind of fun Okay, anyway, you can okay. All right.

[Speaker 4] (12:43 - 12:47)
So I'm on my own for this evening So if we go back to the second one, I'll be glad to respond to that

[Speaker 5] (12:50 - 13:02)
So This is for 24 UB-01 by Center Corp Retail Properties Inc requesting approval of preliminary preliminary plans for a subdivision now, it was my understanding that

[Speaker 4] (13:02 - 13:33)
We were submitting them so you could take a preliminary look at the preliminary plans so we could discuss them So what was earlier submitted and hopefully it's in your package. It was a preliminary subdivision plan That shows the breakup of the remaining lots You probably have a larger version of that the other the other thing that that Garrett was felt provided Was this letter dated February the 5th?

Did you receive that as well?

[Speaker 3] (13:34 - 13:38)
I think I forgot to print those out, but I pulled them up right here Okay.

[Speaker 2] (13:38 - 13:38)
Okay.

[Speaker 4] (13:38 - 14:18)
Yeah, we don't have If just for the benefit if you could provide to them So they can review this for the next meeting. This would be yes. Okay.

I believe I sent that out That I'll have it printed for the next meeting Because what the applicant is is asking to do and you can see it on Just easier to see the lots themselves first Plan three.

[Speaker 3] (14:19 - 14:19)
Yep.

[Speaker 4] (14:19 - 14:45)
Okay, you'll notice there are a number of lots. They're all Designated as C1 C 2 C 3 C 4 up to I think C 8 and Those are going to be the the new lots that we want to subdivide for purposes of the financing that okay Discussed so we're going to be going through that process. I think at the next would be the March meeting March meeting.

[Speaker 2] (14:45 - 15:28)
Yeah May I ask a couple quick questions just for for clarification. It would be my Assumption looking at this that we're looking at lot c5 lot c7 Lot c8 as three different building sites Based on the structures that have been proposed. That's correct.

Great and C4 is holding The Existing building that has Starbucks in it. C3 is everything but stop-and-shop and Then if c6 is the building that that has amongst other things Chipotle in it, correct.

[Speaker 1] (15:28 - 15:30)
Okay, so I'm just

[Speaker 2] (15:31 - 15:37)
So it's basically following the logic of how the project is being broken up for that's exactly right

[Speaker 4] (15:37 - 15:56)
Okay, I mean the if you think of it as a puzzle this is this is the picture on the on the outside of the Box, we're just trying to put those pieces back in the same position that they were in originally to give Define lot structure for purposes of defining the equity that they're they're financing

[Speaker 1] (15:58 - 16:15)
I Have a question. So if we're going to do a subdivision Then you're kind of It's almost where's the front the frontage will be on me on the access road Because we're gonna have to show frontage on a road.

[Speaker 4] (16:15 - 16:25)
Well You have the It's interesting because right now we don't need it doesn't need any relief at all Can that frontage be a private road?

[Speaker 5] (16:26 - 16:45)
Yeah, it also can be waived but also is mall road. Is it private or is it public? I thought it was private private road Oh, it's labeled public No, it's not it's not a public road I didn't think it was either but it's a label Which part what's how's it right underneath mall road right here look at the arrow.

[Speaker 1] (16:45 - 16:52)
I can't see Okay, oh that's funny yeah, that's not okay

[Speaker 2] (16:52 - 16:58)
So on that preliminary drawing just as a note that is mislabeled as a public right there

[Speaker 1] (17:01 - 17:19)
Right Right, so I guess you know, my question here is And you can number one can we wave frontage because you know when we look at it So if you're doing this for financing purposes, I have it's it's not that I have any issue with it I just want to make sure we don't get stuck anywhere

[Speaker 4] (17:19 - 17:30)
I think the answer is Since this is being done in this before zoning district and since it's being done as a site as a review as opposed to a site plan You have that waving authority to wave

[Speaker 2] (17:31 - 17:44)
Virtually everyone but I will also point out that each of these lots has frontage if private road is allowed Of course it is. Yeah, of course Three has a leg down C4 has a leg down.

[Speaker 1] (17:44 - 18:29)
So if you look at something like Atlantic Crossing, that's a private road and all of those houses have frontage So that's not yeah, the the issue whether it's private or not is not my concern I guess the concern is I just want as long as they all have their Requisite amount of frontage or we could waive that piece of it. I mean, I'm not I'm really not that worried about it The way this is zoned is that the entire parcel can be looked at as already having, you know, meeting all the zoning requirements. So But I am it's fine I don't want to I don't want to perseverate on that because I think there's as you say there's a way we can you know So what we need then When you come back are the appropriate waivers Okay

[Speaker 4] (18:29 - 19:10)
That may be addressed in his list But I know at an earlier point he was asking for the specific waivers that let's see I Will before I misspeak

[Speaker 1] (19:10 - 19:29)
Yeah, I don't I don't recall it, but I haven't I may not be I may not have seen all the documents. So I want to Contradict what you're saying you might have it already Okay, so if we don't have the waivers then we'll just want to make sure we have that I

[Speaker 3] (19:30 - 19:47)
think When Garrett had sent this around this was the This letter is like twofold the first part of this statement here is the petition to withdraw the Subdivision that we currently have on file and then the second part is the anticipated waivers that they're probably growing Officially come forth with next month.

[Speaker 4] (19:47 - 20:07)
Okay, so I think the earlier one He felt had expired in terms of the timeliness of the filing in terms of then you're reviewing it Yeah Okay, is there does Mall Road become its own Subdivided lot as well. I think it's just a road. It's just a road.

[Speaker 1] (20:07 - 20:15)
Yeah These lots just need to have frontage on it.

[Speaker 5] (20:15 - 20:41)
Oh, yeah No, no, that's an interesting question wondering how it's going to be broken up because you know Mall Road The way this is broken up. It's not called out separately as it flows through the C2 part of the site. I Don't know that it actually matters.

I just want to make sure that the plan has everything identified Correctly. Yeah practically like I don't think it matters I don't think we're concerned that there's lack of access to utilities or anything. I just want to make sure everything

[Speaker 4] (20:41 - 20:52)
I think what they were doing is See one and two they were using Loring Essex and they're using the Mall Road As well as this Paradise Road for the frontage on the other ones

[Speaker 1] (20:54 - 20:55)
It's yeah, it'll work out

[Speaker 2] (20:57 - 21:22)
And I I sort of assume in looking at this from the way the drawing is drawn That on the Paradise Road side of things like lot C and lot excuse me lot C 7 lot C It's just interesting that the the Mall Road sort of vanishes during lot C2 But I think that's because they were using the midline

[Speaker 1] (21:25 - 22:04)
No, it's there it's there It's there just trying to figure out right it just looks different the way this is drawn So I think it's gonna continue to go I would just say that you know when they when when we get the final plan, they should make sure they articulate The roadway so it doesn't look broken up like oh, I know I see what the break. Yeah, I understand That's all It's gonna be raised at some point in there too like in front of in front of c7 and whatever than one is next to it It'll be kind of have a bump or like a table like a slower table, you know I wish I came in with more information.

[Speaker 4] (22:04 - 22:11)
I just anticipate that's okay. I think we have a good idea engineer who is going to be Answering these questions. That's okay.

[Speaker 3] (22:12 - 22:37)
Well, I know he's in the Senior Center And he is online if you want to ask Andy any questions, but I'd like to know where Garrett is Is there anything else we should be thinking about Hold on one second. There's just a volume problem in here. Okay.

[Speaker 6] (22:38 - 24:24)
Yeah Try again Andy I Can rename it if you want to Right Road Right Very good.

[Speaker 4] (24:24 - 24:29)
Do you mind if I ask my client a question? Where is Garrett?

[Speaker 6] (24:30 - 24:48)
I told me Okay So are you gonna we're gonna refile the preliminary plan and we're gonna discuss that in March.

[Speaker 1] (24:49 - 24:52)
Oh, we don't and it's not I'm sorry.

[Speaker 4] (24:52 - 24:55)
The preliminary plan is the one that you have is the one that's okay.

[Speaker 1] (24:55 - 24:56)
That's a preliminary.

[Speaker 6] (24:56 - 25:55)
Okay Okay I I Don't see any issue with it I think you know jr.

[Speaker 1] (25:55 - 26:20)
Bob a good point about just the articulation of the roadway like right now, you know You've got that big Split with the between the lots you're showing the lot line between stop and shop and the rest of it And it looks like the road gets kind of broken up So I just think that if it looks like all one piece that will be better But it's fine Right, I don't have one.

[Speaker 4] (26:20 - 26:25)
I don't have any questions. I have one last question for you Andy. How you feeling?

How you feeling?

[Speaker 1] (26:33 - 26:38)
But I could yeah, I can hear it in your voice but I can I'm glad you're on the mend

[Speaker 5] (26:39 - 26:46)
Thank you So, what is the request tonight then well

[Speaker 4] (26:46 - 27:04)
There was the only request I thought was I was under the impression that Garrett was going to go through this with you So you would have some information so you could digest it So when we came to the March meeting if you had any questions We would then know them so we could then address them to make the meeting more eventful

[Speaker 1] (27:05 - 27:36)
Here's the only thing I would request is that you know, we'll obviously you're going to file about the definitive plan You know however many days in advance of our next meeting that we have the list of waivers at the same time so that we can We just have time to go through that list And if we have a question, we have time to get back to you so that you can adjust anything We need to have clarity on but that's that's all I just want a little time to make Julie, you know We have time to look at

[Speaker 6] (27:39 - 27:39)
Okay

[Speaker 1] (27:54 - 27:55)
Terrific thank you.

[Speaker 4] (27:55 - 28:03)
Okay And anything else that the the board sees at this juncture that they would like us to Address, so we'll have it for you at the next meeting.

[Speaker 3] (28:05 - 28:11)
I might just Move acknowledge to formally or formally acknowledge to withdraw the other subdivision.

[Speaker 1] (28:11 - 28:27)
We have on file We have Garrett's letter and so just to withdraw it make a motion to Do we need to move to withdraw that except the withdrawal? We can accept make a motion to accept the withdrawal of the previous Subdivision application so moved.

[Speaker 5] (28:27 - 28:28)
Okay, all those in favor.

[Speaker 1] (28:29 - 29:03)
Hi. Hi Okay, so I'm fine with this and I can see you took that little nub off of the corner across some Chipotle Good all right good Thank you I Okay, then All right The next earliest night of the week.

[Speaker 4] (29:03 - 29:11)
Yes, you know what we do We try our very best and generally fail when it comes to getting you out early And no and you did it all by yourself.

[Speaker 1] (29:11 - 29:21)
So there you go. No you helped I Will thank you and we'll see you in March what we need is a new building commissioner.

[Speaker 4] (29:21 - 29:22)
Can you help us on that?

[Speaker 1] (29:23 - 29:56)
Yeah, well, I wish I could I Think it's like I mean, you know, it's a good job. Why not? What's you know, go for it cute little town you're building I'd need to get that book of yours so I can follow up my my my skills there Although I probably have a lot of a good historical stuff up here Let's hope Okay, anyway, all right

[Speaker 5] (29:56 - 30:54)
So the next time that we have is just this discussion of proposed amendments And the three that we have are the modification of the ADU bylaw to meet the new criteria Amending the site plan special permits square footage criteria and then updating the coastal flood overlay district bylaws also to comply with new state regulations You know, maybe we should just start with the ADU one each in turn I guess So the ADU, you know, I don't know that there's if anyone has anything to say, you know, of course feel free My take is sort of the state is requiring what the state's requiring and that we should just be modifying the bylaws to Reflect that I would like to amend the bylaw so that it actually says, you know I think one thing that we could have done is sort of have like sort of footnotes or something like that I'd rather just amend the whole just restate the whole thing so that no one's confused in the future

[Speaker 1] (30:54 - 32:15)
well, we do have to we do have to when Melissa submits it she has to submit the original with all the Right, so that's what we don't have here.

We just have the new chart, right? So So my my only I mean I didn't read through this to be honest because I know what I know what the differences are supposed To be in terms of the by right issues I guess I should read through it just to know how lenient it really is but I Can see that this is just the table that I guess this is what yeah the table As right use doesn't change one for a lot it may allow more than one per lot through special permit from ZBA and With that have to do with like do they have to comply with setbacks or is that all that? Okay, absolutely Yeah, you still need to have enough room on your lot to correct us up. Yep, and You might be concerned about 80 use in particular it's just Fire truck access and stuff like that.

So I'm sure that we go through that whole process when you're occupancy that's gone, right so they don't have to One off street parking it's different if they're located within half mile of the train station Transit so that could also mean a bus route.

[Speaker 5] (32:16 - 32:19)
So I think it's basically the entire town.

[Speaker 1] (32:19 - 32:20)
Yeah, that's yeah

[Speaker 2] (32:20 - 32:24)
Yeah, I think if you give or take of where our buses

[Speaker 3] (32:27 - 32:42)
Yeah, I mean, you know if somebody comes in for an application and says that they don't for an ADU and says that they Don't need they think they don't need parking requirements We at least have the GIS capability to blast a half mile radius from the closest transit station to see if they fall within that

[Speaker 1] (32:43 - 32:51)
Ring they do and what if somebody has I mean has the car I mean what I guess they can't do anything about it No, we can't force it.

[Speaker 2] (32:51 - 33:00)
Yeah, so and and with that is it transit route or is it transit station? So is it a bus stop or to bus route?

[Speaker 3] (33:00 - 33:32)
It is a bus stop an actual stop where it Says it in the state thing it says But explains what the transit station is identified as a subway station a commuter rail station a ferry terminal or a bus station and Then a bus station is identified as a location serving as a point of embarkation for any bus operated by a transit authority So Okay up and down Paradise Road

[Speaker 2] (33:32 - 33:51)
super interested to see if Is there a way to really check that where we could? Because it would be it would be useful to know ahead of time.

Yeah, if they're because there's could certainly be a few odd little Curved trying I can tell you right now that my house is not within.

[Speaker 1] (33:51 - 34:02)
I know exactly where the bus stop is But I know it's probably a little more than a half mile from my house. Yeah, I would imagine Neighborhood I have to leave there's nothing on Puritan.

[Speaker 2] (34:02 - 34:09)
No, no, yeah, but I believe it's gonna be a radius of A circle if you can't walk through it, you can't get there.

[Speaker 1] (34:09 - 34:13)
I don't think it's as the bird flies I think you have to actually be able to get there.

[Speaker 2] (34:13 - 34:20)
I'm thinking it's Believe it or not I think there are gonna be some areas.

[Speaker 3] (34:20 - 34:38)
Oh certainly like I would imagine like anything along like Like Atlantic Ave going toward Marblehead is probably not within the know because there's the marble There's the 442 comes right, but doesn't it make a left up on three Street and then goes Humphrey Street's where the end of the end of Salem Street.

[Speaker 1] (34:38 - 34:43)
Yeah, and then down by Is there nothing that runs Atlantic Avenue?

[Speaker 2] (34:44 - 35:02)
I thought there used to be But it would be very interesting to just sort of see if we have zones that that's That that wouldn't apply. Yeah, it'd be good to know before the permit Yeah, I mean, I just think yeah interesting.

[Speaker 1] (35:03 - 35:09)
That's all I mean, you know I don't know that it's gonna make a huge difference in an event, but it'd be good to know we could

[Speaker 3] (35:10 - 35:23)
You know Assuming that it's gonna be that if they're gonna be Fewer parcels or fewer properties that are exempt of this requirement We could make a list of all those like we have a list of all the properties in the Olmstead historic district

[Speaker 2] (35:23 - 35:31)
That's what I'm thinking about is that instead of it being something a neighbor notices after it's permitted It would be good to yeah

[Speaker 1] (35:31 - 36:13)
Yeah at any rate, okay Yes, and I agree with you on that And in terms of design standards to me, I think it it's talking about unreasonable design standards I think you know, we look at for site plan now. Is that something is harmonious with its surroundings? I mean, you wouldn't want to see like some you don't see a whatever some You know colonial house with some, you know, just basic cinderblock in the backyard Nobody wants to see that.

So I think it's really that's reasonable to think that it would actually You know be Harmonious with and that's all that we require.

[Speaker 2] (36:13 - 36:38)
I mean, it's not saying it's gonna have a dormer here and a window there on this on this chart On the current swamp Scott bylaw no reduction in pervious area and Then across from that it says change no Municipality may enforce a design standard on an ADU that they would not otherwise impose on a single-family home Right, I'm not we do impose it.

[Speaker 1] (36:38 - 36:54)
It's you can't well open space is open space. You still have to have right? I just am curious Why that has to be it has to be pervious So I think when they say no reduction of pervious area, no no reduction in open space I mean, I think that'd be a better way to put it

[Speaker 3] (36:54 - 37:02)
Right, that was that was the bylaw that we came up with right when we put forth our local bylaw a couple years ago, so

[Speaker 2] (37:03 - 37:12)
You could you just let the shape that the no no Municipality may enforce a design standard on an ADU that they would not otherwise impose.

[Speaker 1] (37:12 - 37:17)
We do impose it on single-family homes It's that's a that's a norm.

[Speaker 2] (37:17 - 37:21)
Okay, that's why that's there. Okay, that's what because on the on the design

[Speaker 1] (37:21 - 37:28)
They're saying you can't make it more rigid or more difficult for the ADU and it already is for the single family now

[Speaker 2] (37:28 - 37:47)
I have I have no idea if Like that design standard there in our historic districts where which are the only places where there are design standards That's gonna hold tight obviously for that so that's all that that's the only place where there's fully a

[Speaker 3] (37:47 - 38:01)
Review on the designs of the structures that and I guess the Humphrey Street Overlay District if there was a single-family house with an underlying a for Zone that you know that could have an ADU.

Okay in the Humphrey Street Overlay District.

[Speaker 2] (38:01 - 38:05)
So as long as those are still protected That's just Absolutely.

[Speaker 1] (38:05 - 39:37)
Yeah, those aren't going anywhere The short-term rental aspect of it is was something that concerns me. So Where are you on that? I'm not there yet.

I'm just looking at just glancing through everything else What is protected by MGL chapter 40 a Section 3 So, let me see I mean it says here you can't impose design standards, I'm kind of going back to your Your issue with historical like even you know 760 CMR and 310 CMR They all mentioned historic districts in terms of them being you know You can waive a lot of this, you know You don't have in other words if we we probably do have to raise the fish house But they're saying if you needed to rebuild the fish house, you don't have to raise it because it's historic district You know, that's basically in the mass law now, but getting to there you raising our a I s

[Speaker 2] (39:37 - 39:40)
E or you are a ZE.

[Speaker 1] (39:40 - 39:56)
No raise. Okay elevate. Sorry elevate the structure Yeah, I guess a question that I I'm just looking at historic district because they do That where do you see that in the definitions?

[Speaker 2] (39:57 - 40:23)
It's in the definitions and then I'm going there now Okay, because the the other one that jumped at me in here was That you were allowed to tear down And I just am curious pre-existing detached structures eligible eligible for conversion to an ADU may be demolished and reconstructed But that's not no number eight and the last page are you there yet? Not yet.

[Speaker 1] (40:23 - 40:53)
Oh, so I'm in the executive You're talking about a pre-existing bylaw that we have in our So wait, the second municipalities may establish design standards and dimensional standards for protected use ADUs That are more restrictive or different from what is required I Was looking I'm sorry, I was not looking at like an indented a day.

[Speaker 8] (40:53 - 41:00)
I was looking at the 7103 and I'm like Okay Where was the short-term rentals issue?

[Speaker 5] (41:02 - 41:02)
Right.

[Speaker 3] (41:02 - 41:16)
That was the one that I'm right, right a couple underneath historic districts Municipalities may establish may establish restrictions and prohibitions on the short-term rental of protected use ADUs so I Use it underneath.

[Speaker 1] (41:17 - 41:18)
Oh, yeah, they're at sea.

[Speaker 9] (41:18 - 41:18)
Yeah. Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (41:19 - 42:53)
Yeah may establish restrictions. Okay, so That what do we have in our bylaw about short-term rental? Nothing.

We should we should that's that's something I think that you know The problem with you know, and they even mentioned in their states thing, you know, it's like oh, yeah there, you know They're not just talking about Creating the granny flat for you know The family member that's going to be kicked out of their house if I can't afford or the young You know the kids that aren't going to be able to buy their own house And so they need to be able to live but you know When you when you start and that's why people can deal with it You know if it's all the same utilities and even if now they're you know, getting rid of the The family relationship thing. Okay, whatever but you know when it comes down to when you start pushing what could Possibly be a transient nature like if you own the house But you rent out the house and now you decide to build an ADU in the backyard Now you're gonna rent that out too, right, you know, I mean there's a is it just a transient nature Changes everything and especially in some, you know in any neighborhood because we're small But especially in like really kind of tight neighborhoods I mean, I just think that's that's a terrible thing to to put on people. Mm-hmm that don't you know You don't want to feel like it's every two weeks or even once a month, right somebody new in there And I think that we've got to you know, we need to we need to add something Mm-hmm.

I don't know what best practice is.

[Speaker 3] (42:53 - 43:13)
What are other you know towns doing and But I really feel strongly about that I know that in our last conversation last meeting that we had with when Ted was here He was saying that short-term rentals overall as a bylaw that I think we want to look to incorporate Next year in 2026, but I do think if we let this go without it.

[Speaker 1] (43:13 - 43:24)
We're we're in trouble It's it's something Yeah, I mean so now that we have to change it and you know, it's it's loosening up a lot of Totally little protections.

[Speaker 3] (43:24 - 43:46)
I agree that we should It's you're gonna be there's gonna be so much we're gonna be on a slippery slope hopefully in a year You know talking about From now and like 20 a year from now hopefully there won't be that much of an influx of short-term rentals especially within a to use because Since we've approved the bylaw a couple years ago.

[Speaker 1] (43:46 - 44:22)
We haven't seen a huge amount of construction Well, they are they technically are already because we don't have any short-term rental bylaws Oh, so it's technically a free-for-all across town Oh, it will happen because we have a lot of short-term rentals right in town And it's just it's just a matter of time before it filters down, right? And I you know, I think that we need to be you know, we don't put something in there now We're just gonna be in trouble because that's actually not even in the spirit of the ADU bylaw It's really somebody going month to month is not right what it's not

[Speaker 2] (44:22 - 45:05)
ironically, that's one of the things that ADU is is This battle is happening at the same time that municipalities are Curtailing short-term rentals because of the impact on right rental housing This is just a curiosity but address assignment I'm assuming where we have all of these streets that have Like our street really goes Every other number. So is this is this using a use or what is the one mailbox for?

[Speaker 3] (45:06 - 45:32)
It would be a shared address Even if they don't they don't get a separate address. Nope. Nope attached detached.

It's all It's all one in the same the only because designating a separate address would identify a Second dwelling. Okay second principal dwelling and the point of this is to maintain it as accessory to the principal So that's why there's a shared that makes sense

[Speaker 2] (45:32 - 45:42)
It's just interesting that it says that like the number eight is all ADU shall be assigned an address Consistent with the most current address standard published by mass GIS

[Speaker 1] (45:42 - 45:55)
Well, that's so in other words, it would have to be it would be like my house address is published on mass GIS Mm-hmm, so it would have to be the same have to just leave that address That property has an ADU on it

[Speaker 2] (45:55 - 46:02)
It just seems funny to me all ADU addresses shall be reported to mass GIS and eoh LC after assignment

[Speaker 1] (46:02 - 46:11)
That's well, then they know which lots have it, but it's still gonna be the same That's how they're gonna be able to track it because it's not you're not creating a new address.

[Speaker 2] (46:11 - 46:12)
Mm-hmm, right?

[Speaker 1] (46:14 - 46:58)
It just seems funny that that doesn't directly say that now interesting how does that I mean we try them we haven't talked about How does an ADU affect the assessment on someone's home and someone's property? I would imagine it's going to increase the tax burden on the the owner Yeah If I bought build a you know a thousand square foot thing or 900 square feet in my backyard and it's a cute little mini house Mm-hmm That's going to increase my you know, I got utilities going out there a walkway its own little garden, whatever So now I've got quite a bit more property and it's worth more Right, so my tax bill is going to go up certainly and you go right and I guess it would only go up based on square

[Speaker 2] (46:58 - 47:10)
footage because it wouldn't be based on Potential income because that would be taxed separately not as property So it seems like it would be

[Speaker 1] (47:10 - 47:13)
Well, you know some of them won't be like

[Speaker 2] (47:13 - 47:20)
But I think it would be I think it would would really be on the square footage and I think that's the way they look

[Speaker 1] (47:20 - 47:27)
At now they look at it by the zone. It's in Desirability, I suppose the amount of space and the amenities, right?

[Speaker 3] (47:27 - 47:43)
They have like anything else on the lot that makes it nicer right, and it's like the unit is be as is the dwelling space is classified as having a full bath and You know, what kind of appliances it has and right what kind of utility hookups it?

[Speaker 1] (47:43 - 47:54)
Oh, you know what, you know, just what it says on the assessment card And then they Are you opening up for public comment?

[Speaker 5] (47:55 - 48:53)
Yeah, we can you know, give us one more minute. I just want to jump back to Angela's comment quickly though so I'm just looking at the MGL 64 which is the one that the statute that's referenced With the short-term rentals and so it says that we can limit The number of days a person may operate and rent out an accommodation in a calendar year So maybe we should all just think about that a little bit. I don't know if we're thinking None, or if we're thinking that there should be some amount but yeah Like you'd have to rent any other place.

Oh, you're saying so is that the yes I mean just like you'd have to where else can you sign get a little see the way the way I read it I read it a year. I wonder So the way I was reading it was that you could sort of limit the total number of days.

[Speaker 1] (48:53 - 49:05)
I don't know I don't know if we can say you have to rent it for just a minimum In other words, you can't it can't be rented out for short-term periods, right? That's what protects us Does it use the word minimum?

[Speaker 5] (49:05 - 49:14)
No, that's what I'm saying The way I read it was that you could say like you could use a maximum of Under this section the number of days a person may operate and rent out

[Speaker 2] (49:15 - 49:55)
So like on on on the Cape, yeah different jurisdictions allow You to rent your house Up to two weeks a year without it being considered a business Yeah, so that could be given some consideration why Well, it sounds it sounds really crazy, but the Some of the reasons that that might occur would be People that get out of town and rent their houses for Different events that are happening like sailing events are having a marble

[Speaker 1] (49:55 - 50:07)
In terms of how it's helping with the housing crisis. That's what a to use are all about How does it help with the housing crisis? I don't care If someone's renting out their house, you know good for them.

[Speaker 2] (50:07 - 50:28)
Yeah, but at the same time if you if you minimize it they likely No one is going to build a house to rent it out for a year or week or weeks a year You know, though that I don't I don't know No, but it just you know, but I also don't know if it needs to get legislated.

[Speaker 1] (50:29 - 50:58)
Yeah, I You know So maybe I'm not That's my feeling I think you know, you are we doing short-term rentals or are we not it's a year lease That's that's if we want to help with housing and that's what this is about So the policy people can rent like they'd have to sign a lease anyplace else if they're renting That is and have a full year lease. That's Housing not what is the in-and-out for two weeks?

[Speaker 2] (50:58 - 51:04)
What is the current policy on? Non adu short-term, right?

[Speaker 1] (51:04 - 51:05)
We don't have one.

[Speaker 2] (51:05 - 51:13)
Okay, so I think what has to happen There has to be one that's written that covers both house and adu because you can't really have to now that we're changing this one

[Speaker 1] (51:13 - 51:17)
I think we can that we have to you know, now that we're in the process of

[Speaker 3] (51:19 - 52:02)
Amending this bylaw technically we have like a We have implicit language in the bylaw that I think we could build upon to create a more Robust bylaw that allow us to enforce short-term rentals But it's this idea that when you have an accessory structure be it an accessory dwelling unit or a pool its accessory use is residential because the principal use is residential and if you Produce income off of that accessory use you are changing It's used from something that is residential to something that is commercial and a commercial use is not allowed in a residential district, so there's an adu

[Speaker 1] (52:02 - 52:23)
You know the whole purpose of this now with you can have any Anybody can live anywhere you can be renting out your you can I can own my house and move away and rent my house out And I can build an adu in the backyard and I can rent that out So, you know what's to prevent my neighbors from just having a constant stream of people short-term rentaling, right?

[Speaker 5] (52:23 - 52:45)
I think sort of this is we can restrict. I think what you're saying that was like Okay housing it's but I'm so I understand but if someone goes away and they're leaving for a week and we limit it to a Week or two weeks. No one's gonna build an adu just for that purpose And I think what you were also sort of saying is if we say they can't well people might just do that

[Speaker 1] (52:46 - 53:08)
And you know, at least we have some protection if it happens because you know, it definitely happens and it I know it's um, you know, I just I just think that some people may not care, but I think those people that do care should be protected from you know someplace that turns into a you know, just a You know evolving door.

[Speaker 5] (53:08 - 53:16)
No, I agree with the revolving door I think if someone wants to rent out their house for a week Harmony when it doesn't incentivize they to use but I totally agree.

[Speaker 1] (53:16 - 53:37)
I don't want people to use to have year-round Renters and again, my whole point is that it's not It's not compliant with it's not in step with the spirit of the law, which is to produce some housing for people It's not place where they're gonna rent and they can live that's you know would be cheaper for them than someplace else, right?

[Speaker 4] (53:37 - 54:10)
Yeah, we're not trying to build hotels right Public comment, I Have a couple of questions if I could I'm not speaking on behalf of any client. I just had some questions The first was is there going to be any site plan oversight on these ADUs? because if you're limiting New construction, which was 3,000 taking out that parameter and and just any new construction Would they have to go through site plan for every ADU?

[Speaker 1] (54:10 - 54:10)
Yes.

[Speaker 4] (54:10 - 54:24)
Okay the second was You said that the first ADU by right any additional ADU would have to go through There's a special permit through the Board of Appeals.

[Speaker 1] (54:24 - 54:27)
That's what this new you have any criteria

[Speaker 4] (54:28 - 54:33)
For the site plan special permit for the second ADU

[Speaker 1] (54:34 - 54:42)
Just that it has to comply with zoning You setbacks and stuff like that, I don't know that and I didn't have any lots in town that are big enough

[Speaker 2] (54:42 - 55:08)
I believe the state's policy on the second ADU is based on the number of units in the in the main building if if I remember right so if you have a two unit building you're allowed to Have two ADUs Like it's a it's sort of a strange You know, it's gonna be interesting to see

[Speaker 4] (55:10 - 55:21)
It doesn't doesn't isn't dependent on the size of the lot it's dependent on the number of Units that so a single family could have fewer ADUs.

[Speaker 1] (55:21 - 55:34)
Yeah, then a three family on a smaller lot But but the thing is that there's still individual little accessory structure. So you still need to meet setbacks Yeah, they still have to comply and you know, you can't just jam them all together

[Speaker 4] (55:34 - 56:01)
There for instance with with the site with special permits their parameters in other words It says you have a certain amount of set but some allow for 20% off of that or 15% of the height So I was just curious whether those Site plans, excuse me, those special permit Dimensional special permit criteria would apply to the ADU The same way as it would for that particular district that the ADU is located in

[Speaker 3] (56:04 - 56:26)
To make one clarifying point though I think in earlier iterations of this draft bylaw in and I also feel like when I attended some of these working sessions that this was brought up that the regulations would apply to also multi multi-family zone districts, but this final version is saying that It applies only to single-family residential zone, oh it does

[Speaker 2] (56:26 - 56:32)
Yeah, because you you remember that conversation because I was thinking that I had heard that in presentation your day

[Speaker 3] (56:33 - 56:36)
Unless we're both going crazy, but I feel like I remember it too

[Speaker 2] (56:36 - 57:10)
yeah, and and the thing that disturbed me about that was I was able to sort of think about a structure in town that is a multi-family house With a very large carriage barn that they that According to it based on that conversation that you and I are remembering they could end up having multiple units in that barn and And get it through or all of a sudden they would go from having two or three units on the property to five or six Which was quite an increase

[Speaker 1] (57:11 - 57:20)
More than one ADU doesn't mean that it can be a bigger ADU with two bedrooms or anything It doesn't you know, it doesn't know that they can both be in one building

[Speaker 2] (57:21 - 57:53)
Yeah, but it was it was a case where? What Marissa and I are remembering that that conversation was really about like if you had if you had condo owners of a building or even multiple units in a building they could build an ADU for each and In that case, I was immediately thinking to this place where you know, you could do that So that that's good that that's not in there Exactly, and so I'm sort of confused by the second ADU going in front of the Zoning Board of Appeals Cuz I that was my plan

[Speaker 3] (57:54 - 58:46)
Imagine like a very hypothetical situation in which you wanted both your parents and your in-laws living together on your property And Decided to walk that fine line You had to you know granny pods in two detached granny pods in your backyard You probably would have to have like at least a thirty thousand square foot lot to be able to like Accommodate to it because also remember the size dimensions like they're also based on the size of your principal dwelling So you max out at 900 square feet, but if your house itself is only 1200 square feet Then you max out at 600 right for either one of them. And so And then they both got to be set back 10 feet from your house But also 20 feet from or 10 feet I guess from the rear yard the rear property line

[Speaker 2] (58:47 - 59:05)
This sounds like a Lincoln problem of Lincoln and a Concord problem Yeah, exactly the two acre lot problem is Tourists to set a tourist

[Speaker 4] (59:07 - 59:35)
Actually, I had one one other question that's dealt with the issue with the rail and The areas that are covered by the transportation of lines Were they just talking about bus stops or bus lines, and I know you said it with stops Does it have to be a defined for instance? We're putting in a bus a new maybe a new bus stop station where they had a bench Is that I don't know what defines an actual bus stop?

[Speaker 2] (59:37 - 59:39)
Someone gets on or off a bus

[Speaker 4] (59:39 - 59:47)
If I were to flag down if I were to flag down a bus And I'm not actually at a bus stop and I'm just raising my hand they pull they're not gonna stop

[Speaker 2] (59:48 - 59:56)
I can tell you don't ride buses They're not allowed to say they can't They're not taxis

[Speaker 4] (1:00:02 - 1:00:14)
So that's the radius that I work off of and those are defined and you can actually look Yeah They're on they're on the map, so it's not gonna be an ambiguous thing these are no it's not it's not

[Speaker 2] (1:00:14 - 1:00:22)
That's why I asked the difference between a route and a stop You know because it's if it was a route, then you're just you're pushing a half-mile swath

[Speaker 4] (1:00:22 - 1:00:27)
I used to run after buses and they would stop for me, but well, you know Well, that's if you like if you were

[Speaker 1] (1:00:27 - 1:00:34)
Stop and you were just late getting to the stop and they're just pulling away and you're like and maybe yeah

[Speaker 2] (1:00:34 - 1:00:47)
If you're just walking down the street stop wherever yeah, and and sometime, you know, it really depends on the driver I've seen seen people, you know get their Umbrellas stuck in the doors closed and they start pulling off

[Speaker 1] (1:00:52 - 1:00:55)
We have a 20 maybe he'll stop

[Speaker 2] (1:00:55 - 1:00:56)
It really

[Speaker 1] (1:00:57 - 1:00:58)
Okay

[Speaker 5] (1:00:58 - 1:01:08)
Again Close public comment on that one anything else before we move on to the next one No, okay

[Speaker 1] (1:01:10 - 1:01:15)
So do we decide on the rental aspect though the term I think we have to

[Speaker 5] (1:01:16 - 1:01:19)
Of course, is it possible to see if there's like some best practices?

[Speaker 1] (1:01:19 - 1:01:27)
Yeah Let's leave it there and we'll take it up All right That would be great.

[Speaker 3] (1:01:27 - 1:01:39)
Thank you And I mean and I can also work with KP to see if we can sort of elaborate on what I was talking about That sort of implicit language we have in the bylaw commercializing a residential accessory use, right?

[Speaker 1] (1:01:39 - 1:01:47)
I don't think it's strong enough to be honest, but I think it's good to have it there without a doubt But but I think we need to give it some teeth.

[Speaker 3] (1:01:47 - 1:01:59)
Yeah. Yeah Okay, and like plus we you know If the purpose of this is just to regulate short-term rentals and not actual like year-long leases, you know We know it's meant for housing right?

[Speaker 2] (1:01:59 - 1:02:47)
All right, and people and people are gonna rent them So I think we have to make it, you know, what's whatever is reasonable any place else you'd rent a place I do not know what mass laws on this and because I don't own rental property here in California You have a one-year lease and then you immediately drop two month by month, is that the case in Massachusetts for rental? That's an area that It restarts so that's that we just have to be careful how we write it, right? You don't want to be stating that you know every year you have to have people in 24 excuse me 12 or 24 month leases.

[Speaker 1] (1:02:48 - 1:03:02)
I think it's perfectly Normal for people to to be able to maybe they're you know They found another place to go where it's a you know They can afford a better place or whatever they were saving and they're gonna you know, six months But it's a you know, they want to get out.

[Speaker 2] (1:03:02 - 1:03:25)
I think as long as the initial term Yeah, the initial term is 12 months. I would agree We don't we don't want a lot because again, you know in the housing crisis There are some renters that need that flexibility Yeah be able to and not be taken advantage of because there's nothing like I would agree that there's no place that you're not going to Be able to get a one-year lease, you know Can I ask one more question?

[Speaker 5] (1:03:26 - 1:04:12)
Let's move on to the next one. I think Ken I don't want to just open it and close it That's all I was just I just want to comment on one less So amending of site plans special permits where footage criteria. I don't think we have You know anything written out here what we were discussing at the last meeting was just I Guess there were two things that we were discussing one was whether or not we wanted You know additions to homes that are under 800 square feet to be subject to Special permit and Whether or not we wanted new builds just generally to be subject to special permit Whereas right now they're 800 square foot and 3,000 square foot thresholds respectively, so

[Speaker 1] (1:04:13 - 1:04:53)
I'd like to address that if I may I mean my my priority with this was to Was talking about any new construction.

So any new construction of a single or two-family home? Doesn't matter if you you know took down 90% of the building and you're whatever you have to building you're putting it back up. It has to go through A site plan special permit and doesn't matter how big the building is or was it was going to be?

Anything on you know, any any new construction of a single family or two family? Anywhere and It's a site plan special permit.

[Speaker 2] (1:04:53 - 1:05:34)
I would also say I Personally think the 800 square foot addition being the trigger that is a huge addition It is a huge addition and there's I couldn't find any other, you know Towns our size that have it. It's all under it's 500. We have so many small lots I think it would be very wise to just eliminate both of those minimums and and Think about or or really come up with a square footage that makes sense where maybe we don't want to be doing it when someone is putting a Bathroom addition on a house because they don't have a first-floor bath or or you know, something like that

[Speaker 1] (1:05:34 - 1:05:37)
Well, that'll never be under that's what I'm saying

[Speaker 2] (1:05:37 - 1:05:57)
Maybe way under anyway, so 800 is a 20 by 40 foot addition, which a residential property is huge. It's an ADU Basically, it's it's an ADU or you can think about it. It's a it's it's the footprint of a 1600 square foot Two-story house, right?

So like a good-sized Cape house.

[Speaker 5] (1:05:58 - 1:06:05)
It's a it's a big it's a big footprint So I guess can I ask so I I'm fine with the status quo. So I'd like to know why you both

[Speaker 1] (1:06:06 - 1:07:49)
Think it should change because I think that first of all, I think that the the Additions many of the additions that we've looked at over, you know that are 799.9, you know square feet are you know, they're they are You know, they're built either above a garage or garage as it added on to a house and it has really imposed upon me They always have to go to zoning for you know For relief and they typically get it and now they're up again. I mean I could pick out a Bunch of recent well recent even over the past few years I can think of ones that they really start to impinge upon other people's property just for the sake and you know it's the McMansionization of a lot of houses.

So there's that one piece of it that the other piece is that it It doesn't give us any kind of Control over any type of site plan review and some of them that have been just lobbed on to houses are are For lack of a nicer way to put it they're just, you know, terrible appendages that are I'm so I don't mean to be rude about it, but they can be really terrible that That are a real detriment not just to the property but to to neighbors and everyone they're in everyone's line of sight and I I just think that it's it's not unreasonable To you know to have some oversight on it.

I just don't think it's unreasonable.

[Speaker 2] (1:07:49 - 1:07:50)
I

[Speaker 1] (1:07:50 - 1:08:04)
Mean 500 and under I mean, that's the way the way Marblehead does it and no matter where they are Where they're in the old town if they're on the neck, it's 500 or under Or over pardon me, I

[Speaker 2] (1:08:04 - 1:09:51)
am only certain districts I would also just sort of say I think my my feeling on all of this is it is is a planning board of planning office It is about our common existence So the shared existence of neighbors So though it may be a bit of an impediment to the person that wants to expand a house or alter a house The value lies in Maintaining the values of everyone's home in the district. So that's why I I personally think having Having review having moments that people can come forward and express concerns I think it's a it's a good role to have and I think it being something, you know Ten years on the Historic District Commission, and there are people that are upset by having to follow rules but there are a lot of people that have an appreciation for the stabilization of their neighborhood of the Their largest investment in many cases So I think I think just as as common practice it's a very sound thing to to have things in step because When a house is in a neighborhood of small lots that scale of addition or that scale of building can be really overwhelming and I think those those numbers probably came in at the same time that a lot of the sort of standardized Setback rules and so forth that were adopted without thinking about What the impacts were because I think there's a lot of things that could be improved in time

[Speaker 1] (1:09:51 - 1:14:09)
yeah, and and a lot of the you know, we've also had a lot of construction right in right on the on the coast where people have not complied with the Proper type of building permits or where they've been able to scoot around it.

So there's a couple of things the sheer number of applications that have to go to zoning as Opposed to just coming to us if they're if they're meeting all the criteria and zoning bylaw ZBA wouldn't have to look at anything but nobody ever is because we're first of all, we're small and second of all people are gonna you know, they want to Make the most of their lot and there are ones pushing the envelope.

It's height. It's setback. It's this or that it's frontage I mean the frontage things don't bother me because even pre-existing lots, you know As long as we can sort of make something fit, but it's other stuff.

It's just it's squeezing in a lot of house on a lot and What's happened over the past and over COVID it was particularly bad But when everything I mean, but most building permits for additions happen online okay, people go in and they file an online permit and No offense to any You know in particular Building inspector, but we've had such a revolving door of building commissioners and building inspectors that you know A lot of times, you know, someone's there somebody new steps in they're looking at something They don't know and they're you know, calling out estimates Oh, I don't think it's 800 square feet and when we know for a fact that I can name, you know One that's just down the road for me.

That was well over well over 1200 square feet that was added To a house and it's a two-family besides that was just Flat out not addressed. Oh, we didn't think it was we didn't think it was over 800 and you know We didn't think oh just because they tore the second story off We yeah Oh, we just assumed that we were counting the house that was in this was from the building inspector You know and stuff does not get looked at it does not get looked at and what we end up getting is a mishmash of Anything goes anywhere where we you know, normally never would have you know, anybody that you know Actually complying with our bylaw has to go through a process and these people don't go through a process and it's not you know It's it's not right. So we had so much of that happened during Kovac I mean the whole mess with 53 Puritan was all because of a building, you know Building permits that were applied for online and that's just that's a glaring example But there are many just go online and look at the number of permits that are done that just and they just get oh It's under three. It's you know under 800 square feet.

Boom. Boom. Well, they never get looked at never They don't get looked at for what's being blasted away.

The thing on Salem Street is obviously another big example That lot with the number of trees they were told the building inspector was promised that it was under 3,000 square feet. It's not it's 4,400 square feet and There's nothing we can do about it and they blasted and chipped off the top of the lot There are numerous trees cut down the drainage pouring down into the neighbor's historic house is Appalling it's you know, there are a lot of mistakes that happen in this town all the time It's a it's not like one in a million It's routine and I don't think that someone that's putting a 500 square foot or greater addition on their house Is going to you know be oh, it's really a big hardship for them to have to pay, you know to submit a plan That's my feeling and I've just seen it messed up for years and as far as building an entire house that to me, that's That's there's no there's no argument there at all, you know, it just that's been a that's been a big problem for years so I feel very strongly about both of them about limiting the addition to you know, 500 square feet or under You know, let it go and 500 and over and any new construction.

[Speaker 3] (1:14:09 - 1:14:30)
I think 500 it's too big That's too big my feeling it's 25 by 25, yeah, what about What about making it a percentage of I I Don't know if I'm Have to think about it for a second. I don't know. I'm thinking percentage of the existing square footage or the percentage

[Speaker 4] (1:14:31 - 1:14:35)
Relation to your pardon marble head is 15 percent 15 percent

[Speaker 3] (1:14:35 - 1:14:43)
Yeah Cuz obviously a 500 square foot and 800 square foot addition is going to look very different on a house Little's Point Road than it is on a house on Erie Street

[Speaker 2] (1:14:43 - 1:15:01)
So I would think to keep it under the dimensions of a two-car garage would be an intelligent place to cut it because I think that's a That's sort of a given addition that a lot of people put on that can be very overwhelming on a house

[Speaker 5] (1:15:04 - 1:15:23)
I'm still sympathetic to people that want to make changes to their homes, but I hear what you're saying. I'm not saying don't do it Understand I Guess I'd want to know like what would our is DBA is already sort of addressing scope right and that sort of thing They don't they're just looking at the number of feet.

[Speaker 1] (1:15:23 - 1:16:17)
They're not looking at the building. They don't Regulations right so like they're not even that they're just saying okay, here's what's allowed in the bylaw You can get 10 feet. We can give you another 20% and okay, we'll do it You know, if that's it, they're not looking at the building.

They're not looking at the Massing they're not looking at anything. They're not looking at the trees the tribe the nothing They only look at what they can You know somebody goes to them. It's the Zoning Board of Appeals.

They only go if they have to appeal sure, right? Do it or you know, whatever the bylaw so and and the Zoning Board is allowed to do five percentages or Whatever they can and we rarely grant a variant. So but if they can grant the Grant the relief they do and there's nothing else that they look at.

[Speaker 2] (1:16:18 - 1:16:23)
Yeah, what is the fee? For coming in front of this board as one of the questions.

[Speaker 3] (1:16:24 - 1:16:48)
I would have It's the same fee when you file for the ZBA 450 it'll be it's 450 well 400 plus the $50 Advertisement fee however additional $50 per bedroom. So it's 400 for a standard three bed The per bed, it's an additional $50 per bedroom. So if you have a four bed, it's

[Speaker 2] (1:16:49 - 1:18:15)
Because I guess I guess what I was curious about is there any way to when you're doing an addition on a house to Have the fee somehow be reduced I mean one of the one of the issues like historic district zero fee right for getting the permit your own fee structure We can we can create our own because I mean if that's if the heart if the hardship is financial That would be one way that we address that Yeah, we could definitely do that the the the hardship of having to defend what you want to do in a neighborhood I don't really consider a hardship. I consider that process so, you know, it is it is a case where It's very easy to look at communities where Just from the work that I have done communities that have very strict rules and regulations What those communities look like what what their property values?

It's a protection of asset And it doesn't allow things to be ripshot. But you know, you can look at You can look at Houston where there's no zoning or you can look at You know different cities in California Piedmont, California where there's very strict zoning And process and You know, they there's the people benefit from it more than people are hurt by it

[Speaker 5] (1:18:17 - 1:18:58)
Yeah, no look I mean I hear what you're both saying and you know I'm just one member of the board, but you know, I might be open to reducing the Square footages or something like that and I would certainly want to like adjust the fee structure You know whether or not 3,000 square feet is the correct square footage for a single-family home is a Open question, but I don't want to impose too much of a burden on people that are trying to do things on their Property.

I don't know if this also sounds like it's a little bit of an issue of like design Guidelines to maybe and there are other things that we should be doing to really I wouldn't say it's really an issue of design

[Speaker 1] (1:18:58 - 1:19:31)
Guidelines, it's an issue of you know lot development I mean when you what I think that it's it's an issue of the site itself how a building is positioned of you know, the you know the steepness of a driveway the amount of Trees that come down the you know, the location of utilities I mean, there's there are so many things I it to me in my mind any new home construction should be looked at It's just it blows my mind that we don't look that there are some that we don't look at

[Speaker 2] (1:19:32 - 1:21:19)
It just does it throws me significantly. There are no design guidelines except for the historic districts in this town No, and we say I don't think it's to the benefit of the rest of the town I mean what I think one of the finest examples is not in our town but what has happened to the historic stucco house out on the Lakeshore Drive is a really good indicator of what can happen anywhere. It does not have guidelines you know, it's like a Chick-fil-a and It's that's kind it's there not really if you knew what I thought it's Chick-fil-a, but But but that the thing is that that is I Don't know I am I am all for protecting people but I'm also really for people protecting people that need protection and I really feel when people have the ability to be Doing these kinds of projects They can get guidance. I will also point out the project that is now under construction on On Humphrey Street, and I can't remember the name of it but over by the police station that came through here That's Coming in and it it is the right scale and it is the right You know, that's the kind of input that we're able to have as a board That really created a project that is much better Because of review would you agree? I would of course it's my project No, but but I think what we did with them and and helped them It not only helped the town and the neighbors and the values around it.

[Speaker 1] (1:21:20 - 1:21:49)
It helped them So I would agree with Jared that I don't think that the person who who is building the home Who has every right to build the home and will be able to build it are the only people that have that have rights You know, we all were a community here. We all live together You know, and I think that everybody the neighbors have rights I think everybody has rights and everybody should be able to I mean those people that live Downslope from that new house that went up on Salem Street.

[Speaker 3] (1:21:49 - 1:23:06)
They had absolutely no say no recourse nothing Nothing I also think too that especially when it comes to new construction The people who are building these homes are not necessarily the homeowners. They're developers I can't remember the last time I saw a new construction that wasn't led by house, right? No, sorry, that wasn't a spec house Yeah, that wasn't that wasn't applied for by somebody in construction or property development With residential additions I think I could be a little more sympathetic because I think that's the kind of site plan application where you'll see like Somebody just applying for an extra bedroom or a family room or something like that So, I don't know I see both sides, but I think I Personally am all for eliminating the requirement for new construction.

I just think that there's It's it's an arbitrary number to begin with And in a like whether it's a teardown rebuild or you're building straight from virgin land Which we have very little of to begin with Either no matter what way you roll the dice the site is going to be altered significantly And I think that it deserves to have review for the board

[Speaker 2] (1:23:06 - 1:23:40)
One one of the things that I also think a site plan review can do Is it can help to avoid litigation? In a situation where like the property you're talking about that did such massive earthwork created flooding What is The neighbors recourse because the neighbors recourse is likely only legal instead of input and concerns To create ways to mitigate and that legal

[Speaker 1] (1:23:40 - 1:23:42)
Do that part of me

[Speaker 2] (1:23:42 - 1:24:13)
No, no, yeah, they they won't do that, but You know it it could be saving not only the developer the homeowner it could be saving the town because if we have permitted something that puts feet of water into the basement of somebody else's house They may see the only way to correct it is legal action So having having eyeballs on it is is not a bad Not a bad process.

[Speaker 5] (1:24:13 - 1:24:15)
Do you guys mind if I open up to public comment?

[Speaker 4] (1:24:15 - 1:26:43)
I just have a couple of other if it's just so I can leave I Agree with Angela, and I just want to sort of give a little bit of a historical perspective that 3,000 number is a number that I know very clearly because Gene Barden and I Were discussing it because he was very Eugene Barden was former member of the planning board I I know you know him and I think he was chair for about 24 years He was very concerned about me, you know, these homes being torn down and big ones going in their place So he and I talked and we came up with this arbitrary number of 3,000. Where do we get it from? We got it from probably the the Lincolns and the Westons because we had no guidance They were the first of the towns to get really nervous about building these enormous homes.

That's where these numbers came from It was it was purely an arbitrary number, you know, we didn't we didn't have a scientific way of Giving assigning a number to swamps good So I wouldn't put a lot of credence in 3,000. It would just you had to pick a number. Yeah, and that's the number we picked Similar interesting because the lot sizes in the towns that probably had these that's right yeah, and and what what became very problematic is 3,000 in one lot is very different than 3,000 or 30,000 square foot lot But there was net we never distinguished between the zoning districts.

We just picked out the square footage Similarly for the additions as well The other problem that came up was there was a real liberalization of the zoning bylaw with a case called Barletta And you should read it. It pretty much Eviscerates the authority of the zoning board on one and two family homes. They can pretty much do far more than they ever could before Half the cases that now come before the zoning board.

They say we have no authority anymore You can just do it. You should read Barletta because it's very informative Barletta Barletta, I'll If you don't have it, I'll get it to you Because more often than not if I representing in a butter, I have no no authority anymore They said, you know, we we've made a determination that you can do it by right because you're one or two family So so there really is less and less Barletta Yeah How do you pronounce it?

[Speaker 2] (1:26:44 - 1:26:52)
Okay Right, I can spell it I guess B I can send it to you guys.

[Speaker 3] (1:26:52 - 1:26:55)
Yeah, B E L a L T a it's a rate

[Speaker 4] (1:26:56 - 1:28:19)
There's actually one after that but it liberalized the process to the point where your concerns Angela are real and And people are able to build all sorts of things and there's absolutely no oversight Because they don't think they have any authorities a jurisdictional authority to say no So I think site plan is now probably the strongest thing that's left because Barletta didn't talk about site plan They talked about zoning.

They talked about special permits. It was I think it was a Brookline case. I Think it's important that there be oversight As far as the amount that's charged They should you know, you can pick a $50 if you want to right if you think that's in fact the issue Because there were so many people that live right next door That lose completely lose their view.

They can't see anymore. They don't see any more sky and they say well There's nothing we can do why because the wall of the house is already that close But the fact that they go up a story and a half is outside their jurisdiction now, right? So all of a sudden their sky is gone.

Their light is gone and the board says this. We're sorry. We don't have any authority It's very frustrating to tell a client that there's nothing they can do and in in suing isn't going to solve the problem either

[Speaker 2] (1:28:19 - 1:28:21)
But it's gonna cost people money

[Speaker 4] (1:28:23 - 1:28:42)
well, you know, I Would recommend that they not spend the money in the lawyer just to just to get their angst out because they're gonna lose right Because because the state has liberalized and taken away a lot of the authority of zoning boards As it relates to that issue.

[Speaker 1] (1:28:42 - 1:29:14)
I mean, I just feel like a site plan Special permit is just not that hard to do My only my only concern was is that when you bifurcated the process instead of having one board Doing it all you can't have a Board of Appeals Reviewing site plan even when we switched it can and they were doing the site plans. They weren't reviewing site plans You know something still doing all the work They weren't and then we were sending them the comments so that they could write the permit. I agree I mean very familiar change anything.

[Speaker 4] (1:29:14 - 1:30:11)
They didn't do their job doesn't mean that they couldn't have done their job well, exactly, but that's not that's not the job of a Board of Appeals a site plan is not an appeal it's Once upon a time a site plan was a site plan review the minute all of a sudden it became a spike plan special permit It was more consistent with the zoning what we're needing a supermajority They were very different. You doesn't have I'm not saying I'm an agreement with the site plan I just wasn't completely Permanent it was followed. You're not gonna have all these problems going to zoning in the first place I I think they dropped the ball, but I didn't I just thought One other suggestion then I promise I'll leave you alone and the suggestion was holding your meetings together If there in fact is both a zoning issue and a site plan issue that they could be scheduled for the same evening I'm just trying to cut down on costs.

[Speaker 1] (1:30:11 - 1:30:19)
That's interesting. So has that ever been suggested to anyone before But we know we could do I suppose

[Speaker 3] (1:30:19 - 1:31:01)
When Heather came to the meeting when we were hearing for the Eastman back in October So I remember that I was on the phone with her and I said You know This is and this was one of those months where we had you guys back-to-back because yeah holiday or something And so I said, you know in 491 Humphrey for that matter to happen the same night So I said, you know Might be good for you to come to the meeting just so you can see what the planning board talks about and then that way At least going into your ZBA meeting tomorrow night. You have a clear recollection of what was discussed And so that's where that came from and I've been bringing up for a while.

Yeah, I think it might make sense, especially for commercial. Yeah site plans I feel like if you're gonna contemplate a residential addition maybe but

[Speaker 1] (1:31:02 - 1:31:06)
It also allows you to have you know, we get it ahead of time if we know it's gonna be problematic

[Speaker 4] (1:31:06 - 1:31:21)
I mean, I want you to talk to the zoning board I mean your decisions are unique, but it doesn't mean you can't collaborate and it also makes the process a lot easier For an applicant as well as for the butter to not to have to go to all of these meetings

[Speaker 1] (1:31:22 - 1:31:33)
With that I mean, I think it's an efficiency we can do I think in that in that case We really need to look at the burden of how many how many things are on an agenda, right?

[Speaker 3] (1:31:33 - 1:32:24)
So that we actually can get through stuff But it might be something where if it's just one item that concerns that you know Jurisdiction over the first one we can or we could set it aside and create a separate meeting that way you guys Just for clarification, so basically a joint meeting for the portion that needs to be joint and then switch it Application in and we're like this is it's fine. It's like, you know meets all the setbacks It's meets the height, you know, whatever whatever you don't need to have a joint meeting for that But for something as big as 40 Eastman was actually where you had that sort of bounce back, right? Because of the architectural amendments that were made and for 491 Humphrey because that was in the coastal flood overlay zone You know like that.

I think those would have benefited from a joint meeting. Certainly.

[Speaker 2] (1:32:24 - 1:32:26)
Yeah, I Think it's a really interesting.

[Speaker 1] (1:32:27 - 1:32:34)
I think it's I mean, I'm I have no opposition to that good I guess my purpose for being here.

[Speaker 2] (1:32:34 - 1:33:12)
There you go You know, it's it's interesting because I know that Historic district we had something go very south at one point where the Homeowner had an approved plan and then decided they wanted greater ceiling heights So they went to the Zoning Board of Appeals and got the building building height approved Without Anyone telling the historic district so then that when they built it it was completely out of proportion It wasn't at all

[Speaker 1] (1:33:13 - 1:33:15)
Approved that they should be you know

[Speaker 2] (1:33:15 - 1:33:22)
but that sort of coordination between is I think anything that we can do to tighten that because that turned into a

[Speaker 4] (1:33:22 - 1:33:29)
Yes The same problem with the demolition. They feel like they weren't brought in involved, right?

[Speaker 1] (1:33:29 - 1:33:51)
Really there should be some dialogue amongst them and that's the other thing even the way that bylaws written which don't get me started on that but the You know saying that if the building commissioner thinks that it's it's if the building commissioner thinks at 75 years or younger They don't they can just you know, say oh I was looking at this date. This was the last date It was modified.

[Speaker 2] (1:33:51 - 1:34:53)
So I use this date and it never goes to historical I mean, there's all kinds of crazy stuff that well And I think I think one of the things just in talking about the turnover in the building department When you start realizing that the committees have more longevity We have to start structuring. We do the the actual security of following Policy into the committees because they are turning into being the the long-term More long-term regulatory than People in town not talking about you. Not you But it's Revolving door sometimes and sometimes Always I mean I have I I've lost count like in 20 years.

I have no idea how many how many people have been in that office, but I know how much re-educating different I Can tell you it had to do the number is staggering.

[Speaker 4] (1:34:54 - 1:35:12)
Yeah, and I'm not sure why I don't I don't know what the And there are because there are And everyone has a different reason they give me for what they're leaving Yeah, the one thing that I'm unclear on is it a swamps got phenomena or is it a phenomena?

[Speaker 2] (1:35:13 - 1:35:20)
Is it like the superintendent of school average on in the Commonwealth is I said liking it to coaches and teams, you know

[Speaker 4] (1:35:20 - 1:35:41)
You know, they're great until they're not so great They go to another town or another and then they're then they're the general manager again And they have a life of their own and they just you know At one moment, they're just switching from team to team to team and building inspectors have historically been doing the same thing Anyway, thank you.

[Speaker 1] (1:35:42 - 1:35:45)
Thank you. No, and thanks for your input.

[Speaker 2] (1:35:45 - 1:36:01)
That's helpful Okay Coastal flood area overlay you sure you want to leave before we dive into this coastal flood area overlay district Flood area overlay district flood.

[Speaker 1] (1:36:01 - 1:36:08)
I think we're going to use that I Use the state's term. Yeah flood plain overlay district.

[Speaker 2] (1:36:08 - 1:36:19)
Yep. Oh, I'm The the word plain is not showing on page 42 I know I know that's why these are comments.

[Speaker 5] (1:36:19 - 1:36:31)
I made when I was at home But other than that, I think this is I mean Anybody speak up if they'd like I think these are sort of are what they are, right?

[Speaker 1] (1:36:31 - 1:37:26)
Yeah, I would take even Yes, yes is the answer to that and I I also actually had a excuse me before we jump off Site plan all together. Yeah, I just had a few a Few other edits in the The site plan review and special permit and it was literally like just some edits Marissa that I can send you so nothing That's gonna start anybody besides you know You know, there's like Yes, we're talking about site plan special permit and then it says following the granting of relief We don't give relief and site plans. So, you know, that's something that's a zoning term little things minor stuff someplace where CF the coastal flood areas mentioned that we want to take that out and change the name So I can just give you my corrections and we can update that They'll you can you guys it's nothing that's

[Speaker 3] (1:37:27 - 1:37:41)
Meaningful to discuss since we're getting into floodplain Something else to consider for site plan special permit This is something that Marblehead has is that they require any Structural addition in a floodplain or early district to be said to be site plan.

[Speaker 1] (1:37:41 - 1:38:23)
Well, I think it should that's Really do I mean that that house on on Puritan Road that's building a garage on Like that's that would not have been allowed under under this new the state bylaw, right, you know under What do you call it it was 760 because 760 With that one it was it was one of them It was one of the state bylaws either 310 or the 760 that basically says that if you know any kind of building that is taking place in a lot that has Two that's either if it has two zones.

[Speaker 3] (1:38:23 - 1:39:06)
Yep. The the more stringent zone will apply Only if though only if the structure The the way I understand it Only if a portion of that structure lies within the morse It doesn't say that in the in the new language. It doesn't say that seven 760 CMR Or are you in 710 CMR because that's building code But I can double-check but I believe That in When a property has a E and V E V E being the more strict a E being the one that you can build with it Oh, sorry, seven eight.

[Speaker 1] (1:39:06 - 1:40:11)
So 780 CMR is the building code. Yeah 310 that might have been environmental protection It might be under that one. I have it at home.

I pulled it out It's always been it's good to review we should yeah, we should go over it to make sure I have my facts straight and That's my end. That was my understanding. Okay, I'll double check on it in any event they had you had mentioned Joe that you thought that you know, the the word, you know the language that Marissa had inserted from the Massachusetts model into our model the only thing I would add was a little bit more of a I Like the introduction that they use in terms of purpose and we go right into purpose here Need to minimize flood damage taking into account blood This is really the language that Kleinfelder gave us And taking it to account the effects of long-term sea level rise, which is fine to have in there, but I do think that

[Speaker 5] (1:40:13 - 1:40:16)
There was what else yeah, I'm all for more of it.

[Speaker 1] (1:40:16 - 1:40:17)
Yeah

[Speaker 5] (1:40:20 - 1:40:21)
I

[Speaker 1] (1:40:21 - 1:43:59)
Think this was it the local floodplain overlay district is established as an overlay to all of the districts in Massachusetts It's a floodplain overlay district by law ordinance as part of a federal requirement There are communities that choose to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program, which we do However, the state already administers regulations that take care of many of that Referencing existing regulations is important to ensure that projects have been reviewed under the appropriate state Regulations and that variances to the conditions of the bylaw do not erroneously allow variances to state requirements and Then it says all development in the floodplain overlay district including structural and non structural activities Which is important because we have a lot of you know Revetment going on Whether permitted by right or by special permit must be in compliance with the following and it lists the 780 CMR and 310 Then you know then for those and F IP requirements that are not found in the above The community must adopt these requirements. I mean, I just I feel like Putting this language in our bylaw gives it much more team Instead of us, you know, you know how it can go even a town meeting where people are like, well, why are we you know? why we're making it harder and there's And sometimes it's just you know, some people know but a lot of people don't know right?

they're just not aware of the regulation right and and I think it's important as a educational piece for people to understand how how How Necessary this is and how it's essentially required by our state and and sometimes our federal government, right? so There was this, you know, just a couple of paragraphs from this beginning page I don't know how you guys feel about that, but I agree. I'd like to see it in there And then of course naming it so a couple things we already have what's called our Floodplain slash wetland protection overlay district so the idea would be and that is four point one point zero point zero our our proposed new floodplain overlay district, which is currently being called the coastal flood area overlay district is Four point two point zero point zero.

So, you know, I know as I mentioned to Marissa earlier When we first sat down, I know Tony Bandritz from you know Con Com has is very interested in updating some of the language on the wetland protection overlay that word floodplain should really be eliminated from 4100 Because the wetlands are their own thing wetlands do already cover floodplain So in in that are the floodplains that exist in the wetlands, right? So wetlands are wetlands or wetlands. We have been Calling it floodplain wetlands.

And then when we have We just had the coastal flood area overlay. So often when we had projects that were in You know that we're in a flood area. They were looking at the you know Floodplain wetland saying oh, no, it's not in a wetland.

It doesn't apply when it does apply This is and so our we need to sort of rework and just take all this You know new state language, you know give brand new teeth to our coastal flood area overlay Which is kind of like a limp little name and make it our floodplain

[Speaker 3] (1:43:59 - 1:45:02)
Overlay district because the reality of wetlands too is that like there is or and I guess sort of twofold the the reason we're changing this from Coastal flood to floodplain is obviously to encompass all the areas in town that are subject to flooding some of which are because of Pre-existing wetlands, right and but wetlands themselves are to help with different right there in their own category floodplains and so and even from a conservation perspective to because the wetlands itself You can't touch the only thing that you can actually build in a wetland is like a bridge like at the last meeting when we Closed out on Paradise Road somebody in the comments suggested maybe like activating the wetland space in front of stop-and-shop thereby Constructing pedestrian bridges or something like that. That's fine.

That's a regulated activity, but the flood the flood areas themselves that might surround wetlands You can build with those you can build in those with certain restrictions All right, both from a zoning standpoint and a conservation standpoint.

[Speaker 2] (1:45:02 - 1:45:29)
This this is just Sort of a random question, but when I think of the floods that have occurred in this town Many of them have not been on the coast and many of them have not been near wetlands, right? Right and really have a little bit more to do with Infrastructure drainage in the infrastructure. So it's the built environment, right?

So are those are those caught in the you know

[Speaker 1] (1:45:29 - 1:47:26)
Don't show up on the state plans, which is all that we can deal with Yeah, that issue is a is a really good one to talk about Vinland Square is a perfect example When you look at that part, especially the parking lot on the on the Kimco side we're literally, you know cars can float away and that sometimes it gets so bad, but That's why you know the issue of drainage and pumping being able to have them underground pump stuff and having the proper You know drainage receptacles is is so important, which is why it was so important for them to you know pull everything off the Essex Street and take it out to Paradise Road and right into the sewer system that other parking lot is You know, there's again that stream that runs underground.

They built on top of it Everything's sunk in and it's not connected to the proper drainage. So, you know, that's kind of what you get But those are drainage issues and unfortunately if you look at the FEMA maps or any even the wetland maps, it's not on there Because I'm thinking there's also two other spots on Paradise Road that are prone to yeah, yeah, that's near the family What is it the family doctors and then there is Elmwood Road? Yeah paradise There's a yeah there's a very soon there was there was a flash flood there that took out an entire block of cars and filled everyone's basement to the If I'm not mistaken reading through all this stuff you know that the town can actually report to the state unless it's it's strictly a which it could be strictly a Drainage issue.

Yeah, you know has nothing to do with the state, right? It has to be like a naturally occurring thing Yeah, like the way Phillips Park just floods, you know, and it's just you know, the water just rushes in and where yeah, you know How do you how do you qualify naturally flooding though?

[Speaker 2] (1:47:26 - 1:47:33)
I mean that's that's sort of hard because I think of like even though the end of monument that floods every Significant rainfall.

[Speaker 9] (1:47:34 - 1:47:34)
Mm-hmm.

[Speaker 2] (1:47:34 - 1:48:10)
It doesn't cause damage because it's you know it's actually a good flood basin in the sense of a slow drain and on we go, but that Elmwood Road incident was Tremendous. It was a fluke storm, but it which side of Elmwood Road everything from Gosh, I'm blanking on Thomas Road down It had to do with the fact that it was it was high tide and those street drains go to They they go to the ocean.

[Speaker 1] (1:48:10 - 1:48:23)
It was high tide and the water had nowhere to go Okay, when you know the table becomes so much higher, you know, and now what's what's coming and it might it might actually be captured I don't have the map.

[Speaker 2] (1:48:23 - 1:48:28)
It might be captured That's a really good point.

[Speaker 3] (1:48:28 - 1:48:42)
Yeah, I Think unfortunately for the purposes of this overlay district We can only work with what with what we indicated on the new and FIP maps, which I haven't seen yet I Was able to look at it online.

[Speaker 1] (1:48:42 - 1:48:58)
I cannot download it They're so big in file size. Yeah, and they Indicate some way to oh for you know people that want to use I mean I I couldn't do it So you can look at it, but I can't download it.

[Speaker 3] (1:48:58 - 1:48:59)
It's massive.

[Speaker 1] (1:48:59 - 1:49:30)
Yeah, I figure something out But I thought that would have been good. I want to see how the zones are broken down because they've can you know, they have Continue they have gotten to another level of right now with the with the mapping which is great But we do need to get our hands figure out how to you know Print out some massive map that we can actually have because I think people who want to apply for permits in this area You know, they should be able to walk into the hall and see some, you know, see a detailed map Yeah, at least have it.

[Speaker 2] (1:49:30 - 1:49:35)
Is it something that could be added to the mapping that we as a town have we do on GIS?

[Speaker 3] (1:49:36 - 1:49:43)
We already have We have a floodplain layer, but you can activate but it will have to send it out to for updating.

[Speaker 8] (1:49:44 - 1:49:44)
Excellent.

[Speaker 1] (1:49:44 - 1:50:01)
Yeah So but yeah, but someone had mentioned what was it about having site plan for any of these? Any kind of construction in Round in a floodplain. Yeah, let me get any kind of new construction You know marble.

[Speaker 3] (1:50:01 - 1:50:38)
Yeah marble had any kind of new construction in the floodplain is Falls under the jurisdiction of site plan review, you know, and we For our purposes right now under site plan site special permit any New construction or 800 square foot addition that does fall within The floodplain overlay district is required on top of their like plans and others standard submittals to submit that memo Which when we had that construction on 233 Puritan Road a few months ago They came forth with that memo that explained the long-term effects of no, they did a good job

[Speaker 1] (1:50:38 - 1:50:46)
Yeah, that was like the only permit I've ever seen that was like actually Really? Yeah.

Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (1:50:46 - 1:51:17)
Yeah, and so something like that we could require of everybody that I mean you get to build what you want, you know It's a bill you want to spend a lot of money building a nice house Just just go through the process right just he did it boom Yeah, one meeting and he had what he wanted right and that and that memo was just a few short pages It's not a huge stormwater report. That's 500 pages long. It's just a quick memo that summarizes everything puts it into simple terms and it explains the Long-term effects, you know, yeah, so short and long-term.

[Speaker 1] (1:51:17 - 1:52:04)
Well, they also had the construction documents that were Elevation and stuff like that. I need to create like an archive of like exemplary We actually have that for the historic district, yeah, I have a couple that we So, you know, I wouldn't be opposed to doing that and maybe that's something that we Depending on if it's a you know, whole house. That's one thing He used to have site plan, but right, you know, maybe if it's like minor stuff, but it should you know have site plan we could you know, not either, you know minimal be or I don't know how yeah deal with it, but It's not a bad idea right and the fee structure is something that we don't have to Consider for annual town meeting.

[Speaker 3] (1:52:04 - 1:52:19)
That's something that's we can do that or specific rules and regulations. You can amend those at any time. Yeah, so In fact this whole thing we did separately Right when we updated the rules and regs two years ago.

We had a joint meeting after with the ZBA that summer

[Speaker 1] (1:52:23 - 1:52:40)
It says in the bylaw that we shall adopt Regulations, so that's between ZBA and and planning so that does not have to be just like subdivision rules and regs do not have to be They don't go to town meeting right you can adopt them

[Speaker 2] (1:52:40 - 1:52:44)
Yeah, that's good because some of these federal agencies might not still exist by time

[Speaker 3] (1:52:47 - 1:52:50)
So, I think we you know, we were in good shape with that Yeah

[Speaker 1] (1:52:50 - 1:52:50)
Yeah

[Speaker 3] (1:52:50 - 1:53:22)
I think the biggest thing that didn't exist before at least that I could find in our CFO ad bylaw was the designation of the community floodplain administrator and when I got training a couple weeks ago That was one thing that they really talked about.

So Margie and I spoke with Gino Gino has Such a great suggestion. Yeah. Oh, that's great So and but he also wanted to make it so that he could designate Mark, who's his town in here to do it as well if Gino is yeah, you know I was really happy to see that so That's terrific.

[Speaker 1] (1:53:22 - 1:53:38)
Yeah Okay, so I've got my you know little notes and stuff I didn't hear I'll do the same thing and Essentially just you know, my little way this should say this instead or but it's not What am I trying to say?

[Speaker 2] (1:53:38 - 1:53:39)
Substantial.

[Speaker 1] (1:53:39 - 1:53:53)
Thank you Consequential nothing that that I would that I feel like the board's gonna need to me to spend time discussing. It's like, you know Just other types of edits, right? All right, so I can send that stuff to you.

[Speaker 3] (1:53:53 - 1:54:35)
So for next meeting So sort of working calendar wise going town meeting we typically is like this do with the second or third week in May, right? so last year Pete Kane and I had the community meeting outside of planning board where we you know Yeah, we ran it out of the Community Development Office had it in here Just did a quick presentation on the upcoming amendments that way people had another platform to express their questions or concerns Whatever and then we had the planning board hearing so I'm happy to host that again. I Am out the last week of March and the week of the 24th and 31st And I'm trying to remember I feel like every year changes But when do we typically do the do we have in April?

[Speaker 1] (1:54:36 - 1:54:51)
Do we do a separate a separate public hearing like we have a regular monthly meeting and then we do a separate public here Yeah, unless it was like, you know I think one time we might have just had the public hearing as part of it when yeah, just some little tiny chair, right? But typically we'll have a separate meeting

[Speaker 3] (1:54:51 - 1:55:04)
Okay the public hearing then I could probably do a community meeting sometime in the beginning of April like before a regular meeting and then at The regular meeting will probably touch up on any last details and then have a public hearing at the end of April

[Speaker 2] (1:55:04 - 1:55:16)
Do we have any new things in the pipeline that We should be expecting this, you know see coming up for like like filing matters for us. Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (1:55:16 - 1:55:31)
Yeah I think so for March we can expect the plans for zero Mason Manson Road. Okay And that'd be a preliminary Lens.

[Speaker 2] (1:55:31 - 1:55:54)
Yeah, I talked to Chris Drukis explain that they should really be prelim We'll have the prelim plans for 450 paradise Yep, that's fine Now I do know that there is Rumblings of a March special town Yeah, and would there be any logic in Is there anything that needs to be presented?

[Speaker 1] (1:55:54 - 1:56:06)
I would never ever want to No, no not presented but I mean ask answer questions on or anything like I don't want to get not at this First of all, it's just isn't it?

[Speaker 3] (1:56:08 - 1:56:45)
Yeah, I think and so then in terms of I guess deliverables for lack of a better word for our March meeting where it concerns zoning bylaw amendments ADU I'll do a redline version I'll get that list of properties that would be exempt or would fall outside of the transit. Yes, and then See if I can find some best practices on short-term rentals from other municipalities So that we might have something to work off of I think we might have had a bunch of stuff that when we first Talked about it.

[Speaker 1] (1:56:45 - 1:56:48)
Yeah when Molly was here. I have although I can check my files

[Speaker 3] (1:56:48 - 1:57:46)
Yeah, I have anything but yeah, anyway, go ahead and then so I guess you know, obviously this is something we want to talk about with Ted and Bill here next month, but do we have like any sort of direct like obviously doing a red line of the site plan special permit stuff is going to be like literally two red lines because there Are two red lines and that there are two lines dedicated to the requirements section of the bylaw Where else does it appear in the zoning bylaw?

Just in section five four zero zero and then everything else is within the rules and regulations. Okay, which are separate so Okay, so that's I guess the only sort of I Get I guess I'm leaving this meeting still feeling like we don't have a clear answer on where we want to like it seems like Eliminating the square footage for new construction is Probably what we might end up agreeing on but where do we stand on the addition aspect of it?

[Speaker 2] (1:57:47 - 1:57:53)
I I thought Ken made a very good comment about the 15% Footprint.

[Speaker 3] (1:57:53 - 1:58:36)
Yeah, we're footage We had something similar to that in the zoning bylaw where it came where it dealt with additions to single and Additions to single and two-family Non-conforming structures. Mm-hmm or single and two-family non-conforming properties or structures, which is what we eliminated last year and it was this I'm Honestly, I think all for the better But it was this crazy rule where like if you were going to build a conforming addition But it exceeded 15% of the existing gross square footage It had to come for it had to come before the ZBA for relief And then the ZBA would look at it and say what are we giving relief for?

[Speaker 1] (1:58:36 - 1:58:55)
This is a dimensionally Right, it's not really it's not relief So that's why this drives me nuts, right, you know people get so confused. I go it'll go to ZBA It's a Board of Appeals, right? I mean, they're not right Reviewing anything else exactly.

[Speaker 3] (1:58:56 - 1:59:47)
So like these these additions were coming. They were completely conforming They were 20 feet or more back from the rear lot line seven and a half feet or more back from the sides They respected the 35 feet two and a half stories, you know, so that's why we changed the bylaw last year to offer to to create protections for single and two-family structures in line with what MGL already does and if you are building a conforming addition on a To a single or two-family home that either is not existing on that is not conforming already structurally Or is on a non-conforming property or both so long as the addition is conforming It does not need zoning relief if it currently meets the triggers for site plan special permit then yes, it has to come before the planning board, but if it's 500 square feet as of right now and you're gonna build it completely conforming.

[Speaker 5] (1:59:48 - 2:00:02)
It does not require review or any board Yeah, I think for that meeting we're saying you could just pull the relevant section I mean, I know we could all probably do it but just yeah, we have a packet. Yeah, you could just highlight the thresholds Yeah, that way we can just look at it and talk about so that's the thing.

[Speaker 3] (2:00:02 - 2:00:05)
There are Oh for a site plan special permit Yeah, yeah. Yeah

[Speaker 1] (2:00:05 - 2:00:45)
Cuz right now as far as the new house, I mean as far as I'm concerned, that's my opinion I feel very strongly about that and I think we can sell the town meeting I don't think I have any trouble to or I or whoever else wants to present it would have any trouble doing that Because there's there's so much Data behind it in terms of the the addition so 5,000 square foot house We could put up a 750 square foot addition Without having to get any kind of a permit.

That's 15% right?

[Speaker 2] (2:00:46 - 2:01:11)
You know, it's part of me thinks that something with a smaller house should actually be able to put on More, you know, so I might have a smaller house and need more space But I one of the things there that gets so dangerous Just from a design standpoint and the impact is is very often those smaller houses Have adjacencies to smaller houses. Sure, and then then you can really overwhelm. I mean Here's my very simple.

[Speaker 3] (2:01:11 - 2:01:51)
Remember HDC last year. We had that house on Ellis Road that built the addition to the rear Bob Zarelli did the architectural drawings and it has seen with flying colors before HDC but it otherwise was not regulated by planning or ZBA and I know the person who lives on Paradise Road who's Now has to look at that addition and said and she came to me and said do I really have? Do I really have any like standing with this and I said I Said she said is it worth it for me to come to the HDC meeting?

I said Not for the concerns that you're having.

[Speaker 2] (2:01:52 - 2:02:21)
I said, I mean it is something that we would have We would have had a hard time defending dimensionally. Yeah, if that had been Added, you know where it was secondary elevations Glimpses the public way is all that we're charged with and The impact like I've driven by it recently the impact from driving down the streets It didn't did almost doubled the house.

[Speaker 1] (2:02:21 - 2:02:25)
Yeah, it was big. Yeah, big was it we didn't see it It wasn't it wasn't us.

[Speaker 2] (2:02:25 - 2:04:16)
It wasn't a big house. It's a It was under under site plan Yeah, but dimension and again dimensions before ZBA, right but with respect to the Size and the impact on the on the neighbors, but with there is no there's no You know, it was no really altered the neighbors backyards because now this is in their crazy same discussion on the on the property. That's Excuse me up from Danvers.

I know. Yeah, that's up the hill from Danvers or and I can't think of the name of the street Eastman Avenue you know, this is this is a hard thing because these these have a lot of Implications within the neighborhood and and I think we addressed as much as we could on on that but it is Interesting. It is very it's it's very impactful When things like that happen that all of that said the addition was done very well you know it is it is something that That creates but it's it was, you know, they did everything right and and it was not egregious in the sense The family has five children and they were in a house.

They liked and and you know, the whole thing made very good sense Well, let's let's look at the percentage then. I mean, I'm happy with that and I think if we can kind of because I just think about it and and and the 800 feet that I react to 20 by 20 is the minimum dimensions for a two-car garage and that's a two-car garage With a full 20 by 20 on top of it, right? That is the smallest footprint that you'd be looking at and then well, then the 20 by 10 by 10 Can be 20 by 40 20 by 40.

[Speaker 3] (2:04:16 - 2:04:27)
Thank you 20 by 40, which is the largest or Or 10 by 80, but it's not happening footprint could be 400 square feet but Right.

[Speaker 2] (2:04:27 - 2:04:53)
The footprint could be 400 square feet up to 800 feet and and even a 400 You know, that's where the that's where the problem lies. Is that that that is not an That's not a small I also think as I said before I think it's really good for things to be reviewed for community members to be able to express Because you know, there's a lot of neighbors that want their neighbors happy, right?

[Speaker 3] (2:04:53 - 2:05:18)
And those are some of the comments that came up when at town meeting last year when ironically I like I thought that the MBTA community by law was going to be the one that held the floor for an hour and a Half and it was this protections to the single. Yeah, and to family non-conforming one, right? And some of the concerns that came up from town meeting members was if this no longer goes before ZBA What is my chance to comment as in a butter?

[Speaker 9] (2:05:18 - 2:05:18)
Right? Mm-hmm.

[Speaker 3] (2:05:19 - 2:05:33)
Well, I get notified Yes, if it goes to planning, but not necessarily Marissa when you Doubt those next week. Could you also just make a note about the ease because yeah, I can put out the current piece Definitely go over that.

[Speaker 2] (2:05:33 - 2:06:36)
Okay. Yeah, I think that was When we opted for the historic district to not have a fee attached to it that was part of the reason this community was able to Yeah, yeah because it was like it took away a Perceived hardship right because really some of the projects that are going through review might be a thousand dollars, right? A thousand dollar project is a lot.

Hey $450 agreed board review it, you know, yeah, it's crazy, right and that was You know, I've seen that in San Francisco. There was a friend of ours whose whose stairs came down and ended 14 inches above the sidewalk and then there had to be one step That and it was on a historic house and the step got destroyed and they they had to pay Hundreds and hundreds of dollars for a step just to get through the permitting Yeah, and you just have to you want to be careful about that because that is not that's not really and

[Speaker 8] (2:06:37 - 2:06:42)
You know unless it is a revenue that we are desperate to get it just doesn't seem like no

[Speaker 1] (2:06:42 - 2:06:49)
I think the building permits are one thing but like this other stuff is you know, we can definitely take the foot off the pedal with that

[Speaker 5] (2:06:51 - 2:06:53)
Okay, great. Do we have me?

[Speaker 3] (2:06:53 - 2:06:57)
Thank you. I don't have meeting minutes. I'm sorry, but I'll have the next time That was really helpful discussion.

[Speaker 5] (2:06:58 - 2:07:02)
Yeah Thank you very much Anything else?

[Speaker 1] (2:07:03 - 2:07:09)
Anticipated No, sir No All right.

[Speaker 2] (2:07:09 - 2:07:15)
I would make a motion Okay Second all those in favor.

[Speaker 9] (2:07:16 - 2:07:16)
All right