Planning Board - Regular Meeting

in. We'll um we'll turn it over to him. Um I'm Sandy Crystal, uh vice chair of the planning board. Give me Daniel Slark rep. Uh Carrie Mcin, community development director. Jess Duke, 50 Brown Hill Road. Kristen Hayden to Colonial Terrace Bo. Uh Levi Gary 19 all drive. Jonathan the Petrangelo five woodier drive and Michael Lton three a drive based on numbers we'll need one of the alternates to vote as of right now your choice Sandy my choice I don't know Casey Levi

sorry I I don't even know the timing of when each of you joined us to I'm the newest don't know what it Yes. Okay. Um knows the struggle. I started as alternate. So

um uh so uh number one, we don't have any minor modifications or conceptual consultations on the agenda. Um so Roman numeral 2 public hearings. Um the first item is application number 202-261 91494 Route 3A LOC site plan for two proposed contractor bay buildings 18,400 square foot and 3,990 ft at Loro Plaza located at 1494 Route 3A map 40 block 41B. Now that you read all that, Sandy, I was hoping to catch Don before we started, but he's not here. Um, there has been a request to consider moving the agenda around from uh item number four just due to traveling times. So,

okay. Um, that's for the chair to decide. It's your meeting. Okay. Um, sure. That's fine. Sorry, J. All right. So, so a little bit longer. Okay. So, this is be quick. Mike, this is application number 204- 26 Amber Bow Associates LOC site plan modification to adjust building sizes. Get another storage area and change the previous condition of approval to occupancy of one phase 3 building prior to the completion of the Dow Road E3A intersection improvements.

Thank Thank you very much for taking us early. um for her and I apologize for those who are waiting behind us. We'll try to be very brief. Um as the board knows, I'm Ari Pollock of the Gallagher Law Firm in Conquered and I'm here tonight for Amber Properties and my client Peter Levine is in the back of the room. We're here to seek a modification of a prior site plan approval for essentially two items. The first is to bring the plan forward. Um I think you've all got a copy of it from our submission and um the the change is um really with respect to uh configuration of buildings and in particular 91 DAO road now uh nearly completed actually um is uh going to be a smaller building with a storage area behind the building. And that storage area was allowed by variance by the zoning board in August of uh last year and it's now represented on the plan as the new configuration. So, we wanted the board to understand that that change um had been made that we're proposing it as a modification and actually that um uh building is leased and the tenant is looking forward to opening up uh as early as July um which is obviously great news for the tax base and the development project generally. That leads me to my second uh request for modification. That building and the one beyond it at 93 DO have been described in the prior approvals as phase three of the development. So the good news is we're almost done. The bad news is um the prior commission had talked about having the intersection modifications

constructed before either of those buildings could be occupied. Um we're ahead of schedule in delivering the building. Um we have a tenant that's ready to get in there this summer. Um we uh now um actually earlier this week went in front of the select board. Um we were fortunate to receive uh some TIFF funding uh uh to help us with the intersection improvements. Um the the board however did want to put the construction package out for bid in the form of an RFP. Um that is already underway. It's not issued but it's underway. Um my client understands that he will need to escrow his funds for his portion of the construction project. construction project will be roughly 600,000 plus or minus and uh and his share will be roughly half 300,000. He understands that he'll need to escrow that money. So in terms of the town being protected that the private investment will be there. It'll go into an escrow account and be available as the town pays the contractor for work to be completed as part of a DOT permit for a private intersection. So the t you know the I think the genesis of that condition was to make sure that the applicant and the developer would make good and have that intersection improved so that the development's traffic would be mitigated. Um and and that will happen. It's it's it will be funded. Um and um if I think maybe we can make the reasonable assumption that the RFP will take plus or minus a month um and the escros will take a few weeks to set to be put into place. Um we could hope to be in the ground for the intersection in Jul uh June beginning of June, let's say June 1st to June 15th, something like

that. And it's about a 60-day build to finish the intersection. So if you know the intersection I think we could hope it would be finished by the end of August maybe the middle of September. Um and actually the bu the last building 93 DAO um is likely to be delivered this fall and occupied by the end of the year. So things are moving ahead of schedule um on the property and we wanted to line up the condition with the construction schedule and delivery schedule. So, so in a nutshell, our request is to um modify the prior approvals to recognize the layout on this amended site plan and then also to ask that that condition for the timing of the intersection delivery uh be modified so that it's um under construction when building one of phase three uh can be occupied with certificate of occupancy and then completed before the final building of phase at 93 Dow Road. Thank you for listening.

I'll make a motion to accept the application as complete. Second. All those in favor? Any oppose?

My view is I don't have a problem with the site the adjustments to the site plan. um based on the comments from Tim Sweeney and Dennis and I think sort of the read of the select board to have the contract in place to start building before the occupancy for the fifth building which is the first of phase three. That would be my preference. Um you know we sort of we've spoken about safety a fair amount and I I just want to make sure that we get this thing started. Um it's pretty tight building timeline. It is.

Um so I would just want to make sure there is a contract in place after the RFP process before the occupancy permit is given for the fifth building. I would be fine with that. Okay. Let me just clarify what you're saying. This is a contract between the town and the selected contractor for the intersection work. That's where I Carrie, correct me if I'm wrong, but that would give me comfort that this is going to happen. The the worry I'm not saying this is not a judgment of Peter or yourself at all. The worry is like we give the occupancy permit and then something delays the other part. Yep.

And then we have more traffic and no solution on the safety side. So I think if there's a contract in place to start the building that gives me the comfort that this is going to happen and we're good to go.

It's essentially what we're proposing. So we would accept that. Um, can I just clarify one thing is that uh the town manager and I are working with the town's attorney to figure out the details of basically the logistics of and you described a process where you u um Peter would escrow the funds the town would do the contract. So we are working with the town's attorney to develop the details and there are other options on the table that we're exploring that might be structured slightly different. So I would say make sure the motion is generic enough like if for example the contract ends up between the contractor and the developer instead of the contractor in the town just to leave it open because

so you'd say the motion should include the there's a contract for construction depending on how it gets structured not just because we're working out the details of how that could be structured but regardless somebody's going to build it same same outcome, but I don't want it to take a step back really quickly and I and maybe I missed a meeting or something along the way, but the last time I remember about the um intersection, there was like three different plans. So, what like a quick 30 second of like what happened from there till now that we have an approved

come up with a DOT approved plan with turning lanes. Two nights ago, they came to the select board and asked for a certain amount of money from the tiff district to help pay for that. The select board on a 3 to2 vote approved giving $300,000 from the tiff fund in for that area to help improve that intersection. The estimate for the intersection is around 600,000. This was effectively theoretically a 50/50 split between Peter and the TIF district to make turning lanes one right-hand turning lane traveling south. Y

and then I believe what's on the north end. It's a widening with a bypass lane lane. Okay. Because that that was going to be my question. What is the final design comp? I have a copy for you right here. You may take it. This is the DOT permit that was issued to the town. The town was actually the applicant and the plan referenced by the permit. They see DOT is happy with that intersection. Yeah, we got it. Yeah, I know there's some they're also happy not to pay for it. You mentioned that that's what I was going to add. You landed on a plan that they like and approved, but they are paying nothing.

So, I just want to back up for a second. So the and I I apologize because I'm not educated on this intersection at all. So there's a plan that's been done. DOT approved this. So is there additional impervious area? Has any of it been permitted? Does it need to be permitted? I mean typically you go through the as a consultant that's the process that I am required to follow. So I'm just curious of how much impervious area is added and how it's

So DOT regulates the impervious coverage and the drainage structures for the widened roadway. It's all offsite in the public right of way except for two areas that DOT is aware of where we have spoken with the adjacent land owners to acquire easement areas and that is also been part of the conversation and the my understanding we've had both of those land owners here and they are in favor of this. Okay. So nobody has any issue with the additional storm water runoff that's going to be coming from this intersection. I can assure you DOT looked at this 10 different ways and issued the permit only after their exhaustive review. Okay.

I just want to make sure that we don't have we don't approve like a concept of some sort and DOT's on board with it and then all of a sudden it's like oh well that wasn't the official strange things happen at DOT. Yes, they do. Yes, they do. I can tell you this is a final permit. Maybe plan number seven. I think started running out of letters or something. I don't want to go backwards. I just wanted to fully understand because I don't it's a fair question. I run into that all the time. Like even if there's any kind of clearing, you could run intoriccolored bats that messes up your project and delays you. There's so many things that could occur, especially like in an instance like this where you're trying to construct it during the summer. That's when bats are there, you know. So I don't Is there clearing associated with it? Does any of that come into play? No. Okay.

I just want to clear the clearing is relating to earth and burm area. No trees, not trees or roosting areas. Well, I guess there's some on maybe the homeowners front lawn of the landscaping. Some shrubberat for Oh, I see the bat habitat. Yeah, I've got the northern longear bat. Yeah. No, no, no. I'm I'm familiar with that. You are. Yeah. Okay. And then I have one other question. Sorry. So, you're shifting the proposed building into more storage area. Are you changing the impervious cover of your plan, the site plan? Okay. Thank you. And the outdoor storage area is fenced.

Yes, it is. I don't know if it is yet, but it it's called for on the plan. Yeah. With slats. Slats. How long it took Peter to talk? This is a new record. I think he actually said a record. Personal words. Y the only thing the fire department mentioned is just access through there. So what Knox Lock or whatever it is to make sure that they can they absolutely get emergency figured would be standard. But

I have I have a couple questions. So with with that um your snow calculations like have you revised that based on the fact that you because I think I believe before you would be able to fall straight through there. No, it's going to be fenced in. Little pine tree. They're they're going to have to manage it as the tenant and they're aware of obviously what's being constructed for them. Okay. But it doesn't like you still have room to Yes. Okay. And that's the reason it's as large as it is. Okay. And then as far as like what's being stored in there, is it anything that

it's construction materials? there a wholesaler of um uh you know like contracting supply. Okay. But wholesale it's not you're not going to have little pickup trucks all over the place. Okay. All right. Um it's uh this is a um we need to have a public hearing. So I will open the public hearing and see if there are any comments or suggestions. Peter's hand isn't up. No. No. All right. Not seeing any comments. I'll close the public hearing. Um I'll make a motion that says not have a regional impact.

I'll second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? No wavers on this, right? No. Um in terms of conditions for me, certainly the the a contract for construction be entered into without defining who's entering into it is the big condition. Does anyone else have other conditions they want to put on this or debate that condition? Yeah. So, is the agreement that they do half of whatever the ultimate cost ends up being or they decided by the select board? It's it's uh I understand. I'm just curious. We It's not half. It's 300,000.

Okay. Um for a variety of reasons, but yes, 300. So, if the intersection is a million, it turns out Peter's spending 700. Uh, if the intersection is 400, Peter has a great month. That'll be the day.

So, we're 300. Up to three. The town is paying 300. Okay. I like it. So, um, just thinking about contingencies and bad case scenarios, do you want to say anything about 93, the last building, if the intersection, if construction takes forever or they find uh, something special? My suggestion on that would be that we would come back and tell you a new story. Okay? I don't want to predict the future and it should the timing should line up just fine. This would be more complicated to deal with something like that.

They don't have permission to occupy building six. So they have to come back, right? If it's if Yeah. So you're going to specify that they will have permission to occupy 91. Um it's not just it's 91 is the number. Yeah.

Any other conditions or debate? I'll make a motion to approve um the the site plan modification on building sizes, adding an outdoor storage area um with the condition that um building 91 can only get an occupancy permit when a contract for construction has been entered into. Second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed or abstension? Thank you very much and thank you for taking this. Sure.

I'll make a motion the findings of factor that this balances out the need for safety at the intersection with the interest of um letting the landowner use the land as it's intended. Second. Second. Oh, good. You got it. All those in favor? I I any opposed? Thank you. Two more words. Thank you. Thanks, Peter. Okay.

So now, thank you for your patience. Uh we go back to application number 202-26 1494 3A LLC. Do we want to take because these are sort of two application one and two are the same. Well, there's the and and the wetland protection conditional use permit 402-26. You want to sort of deal with them together? Yeah. Okay. Yeah, we can Jason the ability to show I didn't bring a board.

Yeah, I'll stay. Um, is there a particular one? Do you want the color one or? Yeah.

Good evening members of the board. I'm Jason Hill with TF Moran and I'm here with Scott Susi who's the land owner and the applicant. He's we're here for like as mentioned two applications per se. uh for one project which is um the construction of two flex industrial light buildings on this property which is um south of the the gas the the truck stop. We were here a few years ago with a plan for like essentially the 8,400 foot building that's on the top of the page for a warehousing um and a slightly so a site plan for that which was approved conditionally was not pursued. Scott has purchased the land and we're essentially um so going to use a similar building layout up in that portion of the site. Um, are you all familiar with the property? It's south south bow district, the south bow mixeduse uh performance district. Um, south of the I don't know if it's still the Flying J. The truck stop is basically immediately to the south. That's um and then the north of us is the guy who parks all the equipment on the ledge face

there. Um and so there's an existing two office uh light office buildings there, Lorocco Plaza. Um those are the brownish buildings. It's a small um office complex, uh trade shops, office space. Um a small parking lot. Um the site's been cleared. Um there's a transmission line corridor for um Everource that kind of cuts the parcel. uh into two/irds the route 3A side and then one third of it. So it basically runs to the in the open space on the left hand side. That's just an open ever source power corridor uh easement um permanent right of passage or transmission corridor easement I should say. Um and so we have um the project is the like I said those two new buildings for essentially tradesman shop flex space light industrial use warehousing. Um we've parked the site for um a combination of those anticipated uses. Um this is on well and septic. There'll be a new septic constructed for the project and there's an existing septic for the front building. Uh and that's on the top of the page essentially like on the northern site uh side of that parking lot. That light gray is represents the existing parking lot area

and then the darker gray would be the new. So, we have a wide uh so for circulation and the proposed usage as well as some storage space. We've got the um the large um open space area in between the the new building and the existing office. That's for circulation of larger truck traffic um and for just miscellaneous outdoor storage of dry goods. That's why that's so wide wide open. Um, what was the So, I remember doing the sidewalk for this. How was the building

originally proposed? Was it going in the opposite direction? No, it was essentially almost the same in kind uh I can't exact. So, it's almost in kind of what was what's different is the the formerly approved parking. It was at least it wasn't parking area, but the area under the transmission line was was much larger. The paved outdoor storage that Pat Patnod was looking to to to closer to like the sign. It took up much more rotorooer sign.

Yeah. So mostly a majority of the easement area was proposed to be paved. In this one, we've uh consolidated that to eliminate the unnecessary to reduce the amount of storage. Um so then we have this so there's that aspect of the project and then there's a um the new smaller 3,400 foot building that runs north south right there. Thank you, Carrie. And then uh we're going to essentially um keep and extend there's an existing parking lot in front of that upper building that we're going to re uh reconstructor and uh extend a small amount that parking lot to the south.

And so so Carrie, can you go back to the northern side of that? Because if I recall, I I don't know who all was on the board when we went out there. I know Sandy, you there was some concerns with like the and it's probably going to get into this as we get into the the wetland protection conditional use, but y that area of the pavement that you have on that northern side like how much more is it encroaching farther north than it was previously? No. No. Okay. The only this is the wetland buffer line, right? This here it's actually shown on a I know that was originally

the pavement is all within the non buffer area.

So we didn't expand to the north. We didn't actually change the actual approved conditional use permit from circle 21. It's the same exact design. Okay? meaning what it is is it's a drainage outlet because of the conditions of the site and I believe it was the request of the board or it's consult so we put in the outlet in and of itself requires to dig in the wetland buffer to to daylight the pipe and the pipe we uh so in order to to daylight the pipe we're digging in the buffer and then in order to try to get some infiltration because the pond the storm practice itself can't get infiltration. We did a we basically gave it a a filtration a small filter bed to try to get some recharge recognizing that's important to the town and others. So, at the outlet, instead of just a standard rip wrap apron, we put in a essentially a level spreader um recharge fil uh bed, which is a small area that's shown in the that gray uh area. It's about a 40 foot wide bed.

Yeah. So, that's a recharge area with a burm that when it overflows, it flows into the wetlands. I recall that. And I also maybe Yeah. So, there was um the other thing that we talked about on the the previous was having to remove the tree, that big tree that's out on like closer to 3A for the other um retention pond. Is that still Yeah. I don't know if we're proposing on the site plan. Would you be able to flip to that, Carrie? I might look talking about that big oak tree in the front. Yeah, that Yeah, we took that down because that was a safety hazard. Okay. So, it's already

Yeah, we had a green in there cuz they had all the pine trees were rotten at the bottom. Yeah. So, I had a logger come and look at everything. Inspected all the trees and a lot of the pines were rotten and the way that tree was viewed. He said that was pretty weak. Okay. So, it was more of a safety concern for the building and people the existing conventions that we had. I would have loved to kept the tree. Should you zoom in? I just I just recall when we reviewed this site previously, that was the other concern was if you put that retention pond out there, it was probably going to kill off that tree anyway. Yeah, that was that tree was the way the notch was. He recommends taking it down cuz um well, it doesn't exist. So that's why tree.

So there is some impacts. I prepared a a narrative as to how the design meets the standards of the performance stand the conditional use permit criteria and how we've designed the the site to minimize those. So those are the only impacts to the the district is that that pipe and its associated outlet which are necessary you know components and they've been designed to minimize um the impacts to the the district. Um so the pro that um that's in and of itself that's the project. We we have proposed, you know, lighting and such that would conform to the regulations and landscaping screening of the building that's visible from the road. Um, as you can see on this plan, there's this foundation shrubbery along the warehouse in the front building.

Yeah. Which sheet is it on? Um that would be shown on sheet the landscaping plan which is C6. I think that's on the back. You do have it's on the back. Double size. Yeah. Well, I didn't I only print selected pages. C6. I did want to It's on the back of uh commercial light. It's on the back of C4. right there. Okay. Um the this end of this building I think I have

Yeah, that's a good idea. Could you please share if you're not going to get to the right some point share the architecture? It's correct me if I'm wrong, but it's this blank wall is that side that faces the road. Am I correct? Yes. East wall. There's a loading dock in the right corner right there where the paw is. There would be a loading dock in that position. So this this end of the building is a blank sol and it's metal. Yes, it's a metal building. Well, that'll be a metal building, but you will have a loading dock bay door on that lower right corner.

Okay. So, it will be broken up somewhat. But when you're looking, I mean, that's this wall right here, what you see as you drive in, which is visible from the road. So they proposed some landscaping here. Um but largely it's a big blank wall the door with a big door with a big door. And uh yeah. So I don't I don't know what's possible to that up or help that not look like a 100% metal metal face. But

I mean half of it is going to be the bay door that's going to be there and the other half they're trying to put landscaping in front of it. Those are the species are I don't know what are is what Sandy was looking at. That would be dogwood. So those are dogwood and they're maples and birch diver. Oh. Oh. The small ones in front of the building.

Yeah. Liberum is a mission for everybody. So that'll grow 20 feet 20. That's a mission. So there's a mix there. But it's evergreen. It's pretty tall. I mean, the other thing is if you're coming from the south, it's blocked by that existing building anyways. And the trees that are by that existing building. Well, that is true. If you're coming from the opposite direction, you're still going to be somewhat shielded because there's a tree line that's there. So, yeah, and they've added some trees here. Yeah, when you're driving into the site, you will be facing it. So, you would see it, you know, as a occupant of the site primarily. This is uh

and I know during the conservation commission meeting we u mentioned that the spyhea needs to be changed out because it's spyhea japonica. There are native spyas that could be put there. Sure we can absolutely I do have a waiver request when we get to that point. I didn't submit I I gave it to you late. You may not have seen it. Yeah the update we had one but you updated it. Oh I didn't even know that I'd submitted one. Yeah, you did. But I think it was before you changed the uses. So, it's a little It would be for parking. That's the waiver. And that would be um Oh, I could get it. Did I just want to put that on record? I submitted a waiver for the park for Yeah. parking.

I think that I mean, I don't know how other people feel, but I still think it would be good to do a sitewalk out here given the proposed impacts in the wetland buffer. Um, we don't have a a highway methodology, a functional assessment done of the wetland, so don't know what's really out there at all. Um, and that is one thing that she had said, but I mean, if they're not changing, we did a sitewalk when originally was proposed. So, right, but a we have new people on the board

and they're also now pro proposing an impact in the wetland buffer that wasn't there before. Well, that's incorrect if I understand you. Maybe I didn't explain myself. The there are no additional impacts in the wetland buffer currently proposed. Well, what what was there? What is existing? It wasn't constructed, but it was You're saying it was approved previously, but it wasn't constructed.

I'm saying the the the proposed conditional use permit before you the impacts to the district is identical to what was proposed in 2021. That that permit is the same in terms of the scope of the and the exact use of the land. That's all I'm saying. And I'm not I'm open to the tight one. I guess I guess the the question is still but was this type of structure permitted as part of the approval? Yes. Yeah.

That that type of building. My my biggest question is why I asked the question was did he add or extend any impervious material beyond what we granted in the in the prior the impervious did change but not to into not into the district the the overlay district. Yeah. So the buffer impacts is identical at this point. Yeah, I mean

I'm not I'm not opposed to doing a understanding is just trying to like understand like if if they're making a big change to the impervious material and extending it into like the buffers and everything then I would definitely say we need to re-evaluate. But if he's he's not changing that, right? But Right. But the the drainage is proposed to go and it's kind of all the way into the wetland buffer. But that that was a proof that was the same that was the same thing as before. What would you hope to like? I I guess I What would you hope to learn? I guess you know want to see what the wetland is. I I don't remember what we saw back then. Sure. Frankly,

did we have a third party review last time of the drainage? No, you did not. And you're not required to have an AOT. It's not impact, right? You're under 100,000. Yes. Okay. Has been designed to those standards. Yes, I saw the Yeah, I saw some of the BMP worksheets. So, I saw one of them. We just don't trigger that permit. That's all. But

I did I did have a question about one of the stormwater BMPs that was proposed like the BMP worksheet that you showed showed that the groundwater was 6 feet above the base of whatever you were constructing and it was going to be lined and I just wasn't sure how the hydrostatic pressure would work on something that is 6 ft lower. You know, yeah, that probably that probably meant that the test pit we dug in the cracks was not deep enough is know that we were digging below the water table. And

so we put a under drain there to uh drain to filter the water. But we've done this type of work before a lot of times when we're into the water table. If you have a liner once you fill the you back fill with all the manative material and you put down the filter system there there's no it doesn't push up you have like an under drain around the exterior of the curtain we're not prop we're not proposing a curtain drain but um because we don't feel that's necessary um the liner is required you know for the separation just to keep the contact from the groundwater but we haven't had any you've never had an issue with the hydrostatic pressure on it

the only time we had did was when I had a for bay that was deep a large for bay and before the for bay filled up with water and sand the fur it was in conquered and uh the the the liner popped up in the spring and then once um there was water discharged into it and it was completed the stone was all placed fine was so so I don't think we need a curtains right here but I would make a motion to accept the application as complete I'll Second. All those in favor? I go.

So, our comments from town are that we should consider a sidewalk and consider a third party engineering review. How do people feel about that? Sidewalk. I think a third party review for the fact that we didn't do it before probably I think it's a very wise decision. So, I'd say that me personally, but I'm I'm not opposed to it like I I I wouldn't go to the sidewalk because I I recall being out there and I've been out there since. So, um I haven't been out there since.

No, I just cuz I I I was curious cuz when they started doing all of the cutting, like I was curious how far back they were going to go with respect to that. I just recall the rotorooer sign that you see when you're driving north on 93. Like that's where they were planning on extending out to before. It looks like it's

like narrower now. Um, and then I recall that drainage that was going into so basically, you know, they're cutting across the existing parking lot to get to the one um drainage and then that runoff was designed originally. I recall that going into the um wetlands before, but that's just my personal take on it. Like I I don't think that I need to go for another sitewalk, but I'm not opposed to having others having others go,

but a third party a third party review I think. Yes. on which third party review or um we have to have a public hearing. Oh, okay. Yep. All right. Uh let's open the public hearing on this application if anybody has any comments or input. All right, I'll close the public hearing. I'll make a motion this does not have a regional impact. Second. All those in favor? Any opposed?

And then I would just make a motion before we jump ahead. Do can we just point out a couple other things just just in case something comes up? I don't want them to come up at the next meeting and have you delayed again. Yeah, definitely. I don't want to delay you any further than we have.

Um, okay. So, let me just run through a few things. I know the fire chief was a little bit hesitant or concerned possibly maybe about access around this building because the building setbacks were only 10 ft in this district. So this building is close to the property line so there's not really access behind it. So they were more questioning like what exactly type of uses would be there as far as hazards go. um and just they wanted to feel comfortable that they could protect this building if they needed to. Well, this is a spec.

It's a spec build. So the it's targeting like light industrial flex and um so that would typically if it was approved by the board when they coed that space they would have a chance to review that it was um that the use was consistent with the planned use and if there was complexities related to the you know fire or other things regulated substances because there's an APO here and stuff like that. They would check that and uh that's usually how that's handled with the spec build.

I think mostly we try not to surprise people. So I think that's why the fire department tries to bring these things up early so someone doesn't build the building and then find out that the tenant they selected is not going to be appropriate. So it's I don't really want anybody with a lot of hazardous stuff myself either. So you know it's actually not permitted in this district storage of hazardous and explosive goods. So, um, well, I think this the aquifer protection is just up in this top corner, I think. Right. Yeah. Um, but we just wanted to mention that. Sure. Um, and speaking of the uses, originally in the application and plans, we kind of got they kept using the word flex and I asked them to tie that to uses in our table of uses. So,

do you want to just explain how you how you selected? Sure. Proposed that we parked this based on uh a mix uh equal mix of um warehousing of you know certain goods that is permissible in the district which is pretty low parking demand and a contractor's shop tradesman shop

tradesman shop excuse me and then um finally um it was actually um processing metal fabrication or manufacturing of um light manufacturing. It's actually specifically processing, repairing of assembling of goods or merchandise targeting like metal shops, smallest metal shops which are all permitted uses and um so that's the proposed use and it was parked like I said assuming equal equivalent uh usage that's how we parked the site. So if when it comes time to do fitups and get tenants, if the mix changes drastically enough to change the parking calculations, you might have to come back. Or if a lot of these flexible type buildings, we end up seeing people come back because they propose a certain thing and then they find someone else who can use it, but it's actually a different category and it could affect parking. So

they want a dance academy. We don't want to overbuild. with respect to the natural conditions here. Yeah. To try to overbuild parking and some things we find is not a good approach to project planning. So this helps us to minimize unnecessary cost and waste of land, you know. No, that's we don't want you to over the basis of what just might require return trip in the future if things shift. Um I have another question if Okay. Um, can you Carrie, can you go to the like the entrance into 3A this part?

Yeah. So, did you change anything? Cuz I I recall we had some concern when we reviewed the original um and having to make a modification to the entrance because that's like right below that crest um like if you're coming past the the gas station, right? So like if you're driving northbound on 3A and the traffic coming out of there. So did you change anything to the entrance?

No, it was reviewed by the highway department and found to be suitable for that and we're amending that for this project. Um it wasn't necessary to move the access point um because moving it to the north puts it into a wetland impact which is would be the way I wasn't meaning like moving it. I just recall widening it widening it because I think at that time whatever was whatever building was going to go in there. I think they were expecting largeriz trucks

coming in and out. We're expecting larger size trucks coming in and out for we're planning on that and so we've reviewed the intersection and we we know that those the widening won't is not necessary and we know that it's the DOT probably wouldn't allow us to widen it much for this particular pro. So, we've u looked at that for like a WB67 62 vehicle. It's actually pretty wide if you look at the radius sweep. Yeah.

Like it's actually the the right turn in and the right and the right turn out movements that have the most uh space. But um so that's um the existing geometry is adequate for the proposed project. I'm assuming a WB67 would take up the full driveway um soon. No, it couldn't be made without If there was a vehicle sitting there waiting to exit, can WB67 enter? I don't know if I have my turning movement planning. I might have it. I mean, it's a driveway. I don't know if it's a big deal. Some of those I don't expect you're anticipating a lot of traffic coming in and out.

No, not that. No, not really. I mean, it definitely would be nice to get it all fixed up cuz sometimes the trucks come in and then they get stuck in there. They think can go in the truck stop and they pull in there and turns into a um this is access for emergency. That would be the fire truck. Yeah, fire truck access. They can get around.

Yeah. I just I the reason that I was bringing it up is I recall us having a discussion where just as you pointed out where if someone was in the I don't even know if the insurance is insurance still in that first building. There was an insurance company that was in there. Oh, yeah. Hey, they're in the back building. Yeah. So, so like those vehicles coming in and out if they're at the stop sign, you got a truck that's trying to come in there. Like that that was why

I was bringing it up because that was what I recall from the prior application. All right, moving on that. I'm gonna keep going. Um, I asked about the sign. You said there's an existing sign with enough space, but I wanted to know if there are going to be any wall signs like on the buildings in addition to that. Not that I'm anticipating. So, there's just one where is is it on the Rockco sign? But then on that they got the main header and underneath that there's a There's little inserts and that got more space right to the right of that coloredriccolored tree right there. Yep.

That's a non-illuminated uh master sign with uh some open. It's an exterior illuminated, not interior illuminated. Exposing any wall signage. No, I don't think I need it. You got a nice big blank wall, you know. Honestly, like a nice sign on that blank wall. Yeah, I was the same thing. Yeah, a high quality sign could actually. Yeah, I really haven't thought that far ahead, I guess. So, um and then do you want to talk about the parking waiver request?

It's essentially um tied to the existing use. We're parking, we've parked our project, our new expansion, and if you apply the I literally broke out the subuse of that existing building and applied the current code square footage to the existing Lorocco which generated like 60 spaces which they don't need and haven't needed over the there's never been currently a parking. So again we don't want to over park the site. So it's from our point of view like we're for our expansion use we're providing parking that meets that need and the additional parking uh for the existing condition is waved to allow for us to consolidate the development and uh minimize disturbance.

Interesting. So existing there's was it 29 spaces existing? Yeah. So there's currently 29 spaces and your calculations showed that it would require 60 for the current use. Is that I'm just going but it's I put it on the sheets. It's the site plan. But yeah, I think you're exactly correct. Um 57 for the office space, 11,000 plus square feet and then the remaining was 3,800 of warehouse. So it's a net of 60 by the So so currently there's 29 spaces on the site where our ordinance would say that you need 60 and then for the additional the 12

additional use you say you those would require like about 30 more and you're providing about 30 more. Correct. So the existing works as it stands and they are adding what our ordinance requires for the additional use. So that's kind of the breakdown that request. But if you guys you can act on that waiver tonight or you can take a look at it during the sitewalk and decide on that next time. But if you have any questions or want any information now's the time to ask them for it. the sidewalk. Might as well just put it all together.

If we're going to get more information, let's get more information. Sounds like it's an easy thing, but um I think that was everything. There were a few checklist things that have been addressed already. There's only a couple little maybe one little thing left, but that's no big deal. So, I'd make a motion to put a sidewalk at 6 p.m. on May 21st. Uh, uh, that we would have a third party engineer review the plan and that we continue this application to the May 21st meeting.

Second. Um my only concern is that um for the conservation commission to attend they don't get to meet after the sitewalk and kind of discuss what they saw or if the sitewalk was earlier. So I'm happy moving it earlier. I just put I was being selfish for this. Right. Well, I know it's always I mean um when does the conservation commission meet? We meet We meet the Monday before the um Monday before. We meet on the 18th. 18th. You want to do a Saturday sitewalk? I'm not going to pay.

Yeah. Saturday. There's like other things planned apparently. Yeah. Still before the conservation commission. Yeah, that probably would be good. Monday. What time you guys meet? At seven. Okay. Do you want to do Monday? the 18th at 6 pm for the sitewalk. The continuation is till this uh 7 p.m. on May 21st and that we require third party engineer review. That's the motion. Second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. Thank you. Hopefully we can be efficient next meeting. So yeah, thanks for your time.

Great. We did it already. Yeah, I just Sorry. Thank you. I was trying to put the I put in my calendar for That's right.

Just make sure that's in people's calendar. Um so the next item uh on um the agenda for public hearing is application number 203-26 Devin Coleman site plan for proposed 10 unit 10,000 ft² plus 4200 ft² mezzanine contractor bay building line tallwood drive back again. Good evening. Um Carrie, do you have the plans that you can put up there or I have a board? I'm good. I'm good. Tell just tell me what sheet you want me to go to.

Um why don't we put up the site plan first if you go the third sheet set I believe.

Good evening. My name is George Chad with Design here with Devin Coleman. um the land owner. Um if the board recalls, I think it was June of last year, we're in front of the board for a self storage type unit. Um over the winter, Mr. Coleman decided to change his um what he wanted to build. So, we're here tonight. Um the plan's located at 9 Tallwood. If the board also remembers, we did a sitewalk on that one as well. It's a uh flat sanding site.

Um, it's known as tax map 35, block two, lot 190g, parcels 2 acres in size with no wetlands. Um, we did have Luke Curley walk the property have in your files a letter from Luke stating that there's uh no wetlands on the property. Property zoned I2. Our proposal is to construct a 10,000 square ft tradesman type shop with 4200 square uh square feet of office mezzanine above and I'll show you an elevation of the building in a minute. Um the project requires 24 spaces that is uh 14 required for the first floor being the tradesman shop. the mezzanine um requiring uh 10 spaces, one per um per unit for a total of 24 spaces. We do provide 38 spaces. In discussions with the staff, we wanted to make sure that we had sufficient parking for different types of tradesman type uses that were proposed. If uh a use changes that's not allowed in the use table similar to what you saw um before us um we would come back to the board to talk to the board about that particular use. But if the use the use did fit into that tradesman category um I believe we have sufficient parking. Um the additional parking that we are proposing um is just on pavement that we already need. So, I'm not adding 10 spaces of additional pavement to provide the 10 spaces. Um, those 10 spaces are located behind the building. Um, there's a uh an overhead door with a passenger door in the back of each of the units. So, the

car would be parked in front of the passenger door for that unit user. Um, it could be used for a tradesman van or something like that. If you had a um electrician and he had his electrician van, he could park it there. Um, the structures on septic and well. Um the town has reviewed the um septic design is on hold with them at this point until I get site plan approval, but they will issue the uh go-ahhead for me to submit to the state once we obtain approval from the board. I did uh um we did speak to the fire department and the fire department wanted to make sure there was proper circulation around the building. We did do a uh um firetruck turning movement plan that's part of the set. It's the last sheet in your set um that shows the movement of a fire truck and the approved fire truck from the town. Uh providing There you go. Right there. Providing uh snow storage, the necessary snow storage. Um, we need a total of 5,360 square ft of snow storage and we're providing 5,750. So, we're providing whatever that is, about 400 square ft more than what the regulation requires. Um, I believe the site's pretty well landscaped. Um, it will have a single sign out by the street as shown on the site plan. it will meet the town sign regulations, but at this point, uh, it'll probably be like a 4x8 sign. There's a detail on the detail sheets that shows you what that sign would look

like. Um, we did write a traffic memo and based on the 14,200 square ft, uh, 140 vehicles per day, 70 entering and 70 exiting. That's the weekday peak. Um, the AM peak is 24 vehicles per day. 17 entering, seven exiting. uh the PM peak being 28 vehicles per day, nine enter, 19 exiting. So, what that tells me is um it's not going to generate a lot of a lot of traffic. Um we did submit a full drainage report and I can state that there's no increase in runoff to uh Tallwood or to the Abutter um on lot 190J. I've got the exact figures if you'd like to hear them. you did submit a long-term long-term storm water management and inspection plan. Um that's in your your files. Um and lastly, uh we did submit plans to the staff. Staff reviewed the plans and I believe um we've addressed all their comments at this point by knowledge.

Speak a bit to the fire suppression. I know the fire chief had a question about that. Um the plan will have fire uh will have a fire alarm and will have a fire suppression system. Um he did want to know what the demising wall between the units were. At this point they will be fire rated walls. And so I think from my conversation with the fire chief he was saying that you could do separation between units or fire suppression. But you're saying you're doing both? I prefer not to. I mean that's the fire

I we'll we'll meet the rule and the code whatever is necessary. Obviously if he doesn't have to do a full fire suppression and he wants to put you know fire rated walls in between units and that's acceptable then uh we'll work with the architect on that. Yeah. We talked about even like it wouldn't have to be between every unit. It could be like every two units probably. Yeah. It was for self storage is every 2,000 square ft. Yeah. for this particular use. I don't know what that figure is, but we'll make sure it has the separation or fire suppression. And if you do have to do fire suppression, so I there was a sistern on the original plan and then you took it off because it was uncertain.

Well, we labeled it a sistern. It really wasn't a sistern as you would think in a subdivision. 30,000galon berry tank. It was a a placeholder for a tank of some sort in order to provide the necessary storage for the building. Um, it is on a well, so it's not like we can turn on a hydrant and have the fire flow we need. So, we need to store that quantity of water in order to fight the fire. And it would be all piped into the building with sprinkles, sprinklers, and and so on and so forth if that was the route. But I did label the well. If you read the note on the well, it says proposed well with storage tank. Um, there also was, and I almost forgot this, there was a question whether the dumpster could be located in the well radius. I did some research and it's it is allowed. There's nothing prohibiting you putting a dumpster in the well radius.

Yeah, that was a comment from the drinking water protection committee. They were concerned about the dumpster and the storm water. I'm actually concerned with the storm water. Um, but obviously the state would have to permit the well. The town does not get involved in that. So, that was more of a a comment and if for some reason you find out you have to move stuff. Yeah, we have to move the dump. Plenty of room in the back. Move the dumpster. Um, lastly, um, you know, once we do make it through this board, the only state permit that I'm aware of at this point is the sub system.

It's been designed. It's in your packets. It's approved by the town pending this. So, I can send that up to the state. And then, um, I can't driveway permit from the town. Is that would you get one previously or uh we I no we did not get one previously. Um if it could be a condition of approval that Yeah. Yeah, definitely. Construction. I did want to show you what the building looks like. Yeah, I want to show you guys too. I think it's beautiful. Gary actually commented earlier that it's oddly good looking. I think it's I'm pretty excited to see this now. It's really nice. It's uh second to the last sheet. I think it's part of us. Let's take a look at all the gray buildings over there.

Oh, not that one. So, there's the floor plan. What the the building looks like. But, uh, next one. There you go. Oh, cool. Sorry. Hold on. Let's see. It looks like that. I like that. Whatever that is called little things on top. Yeah. Koopas. It's much much nicer those storage units. Yeah, it uh trying to Well, they doesn't really come out well on the thing. So, it's not as bright. The blue is like uh it's like navy. It's really dark. It's not It's not that it's like a cray. It just doesn't forgot

be the prettiest girl. Motion to accept the application is complete. I'll second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Public hearing zero people. All right. Let's open the public hearing. Any comments? Okay. They're invisible if they're there. All right. We'll close the public hearing. I do have Can you just confirm that the storm water infiltration basin is allowed within that well radius? Um, there's a note that says that it is. I just Can you just confirm that for me? I I will confirm it. Um, I've done them before and I know they've allowed them.

They have. It's It's I think it's like less than a half acre that can drain into it or something along those lines. Or maybe it's just has to be a high load area. I don't remember the exact terminology. I think it has to do with um if it is a high load area, it's not allowed. Yeah, just confirm that. Yep. I'll make a motion. does not have a regional impact. Second. All those in favor? I think John got it. That was a I I Any opposed?

There's no waivers. So, we have conditions which is missing checklist, receipt of state and local permits, stamps and signatures, a driveway permit from the town. Are there any other conditions people would want to put if we were to pass this? And I'm pretty I'm believe all of the checklist requirements are they've all been addressed. I just always put that in as a placeholder. Can you just confirm that the infiltration is allowed in the well setback area when we submit the septic uh to subsurface? They're going to have to go through. Yeah. Agreed. Doesn't need to be a subsurface permit without so they permit. They couldn't get the permit without that being

they wouldn't be able to get there. Well, and then if they weren't able to that then they're going to have to change something and come back to us. Show us the change. So, any others? I'll make a motion to approve applications. Give me a second. Um 203-26 Devin Coleman with the following conditions. Receipt of other state and local permits. professional stamps and signatures as well as owner signatures on the final plan. Um, all conditions of approval on the final plan and the driveway permit be approved from the received from the town. Second. All those in favor?

Can I ask one question? You voted. I understand. Um, the driveway permit last time we're handling it as part of construction. Does that need to obtain before signature of the plan? So that we're clear. Well, it's really not not a big deal. I mean, that's up to the board. I don't think so. But yeah, especially in this location. Yeah, I don't think it's a it's a big deal. So, just for the record, we will note that the driveway permit would be a requirement before building permit. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate your time. Nice building. Oddly good looking. Yeah.

Can you make it like an apartment building? Where is I've lived here for 10 years. Yeah. How far is I know. I was like regional state. I I checked. We are a little bit outside of the window. I think I think they were generous to cover their bases. But where is it? Windsor, Newsor, New Hampshire. I only know Windsor, Vermont. Someone's putting up a cell phone tower and it's a regional impact. So, we get notified from a town that I sadly have never heard of. It's actually different than a regional impact is for cell towers. They have to notify every town within 20 miles of the tower cuz we might get service because you might be able to see it. Kip, did you want to do findings of fact before

that last one? Thank you. The I'll make a motion. The finding effects are that it's an appropriate use of the area based on the local zoning and that they have met all the criteria. One second. All those in favor.

It is. That's actually a really nice. And it's funny because here we are arguing about this, you know, the other one that had was very plain and then we have this one with beautiful multiple an area that's never going to be seen down tall with just dawn. I'm just going to drive to the end of the room, turn around, and come back. So, do we have to do anything of this or just acknowledge that we got it? Just let you know, but I'm going to show you guys where it is. It is out of curiosity. Route 31 goes through it. Um, let's see. How do I just looked up something else that was like I never heard of that term, but

so the triangle. Oh, so it's by Hillsboro. Can you zoom out? It's like, no. He's like, wait, where where are we? I I grew up over here. So, I passed through this way and I've still never heard of it. Um, so what is it actually next to Hillsboro? You said Hillsboro Washington. Washington's also They're probably like, "Where the is Bo?

Yeah. So, um, good. So, we got a notice that there's a service on Route 93. I was a few people in New York and Boston because they drop a kid at summer to go skating. So, um, if anyone's interested, the meeting is April 21st. 262 people that really want a cell phone cell phone.

You have 262 residents. Like, it's not very populating. Is that what it was? That's what it said. It's an expensive cell phone. Interesting. Um I have one I think it's just one other thing I want someone has a vacation home there.

Um Jeff Knight, you may remember, is doing um excavation on the Keller products property. He came and got his excavation permit through the planning board in January 2025. Since that time, there was a zoning amendment that extended the allowable time frame for these the renewal period to 5 years. So, he is curious if you want to see him in January 2027 or if you would consider giving him full five years. So, I told him like don't sit through a whole meeting. I said I'd just kind of present the issue and then if you want him to make a formal request, you can. What are thoughts about that?

So when did he get get he got it in January 2025 and then at 2026 town meeting. So like a month ago, right? And and at at that time it was two years. Two years. And now he gets another three. I think he gets another three. So you think he's good till 2030? Yeah. Yeah. I mean that's not we're not going to say that's the intent behind the news anyway. Right. All right. So I can let him know that he is good till 2030. Yes. We need a vote on it or is it like a um It wouldn't hurt.

I'll make a motion to extend Jeff Knight's excavation permit till 2030. Second. All those in favor? I I Any opposed? He's doing the town a favor. He's the one. So the wreck edition Jeff is doing it and my understanding is Jeff is basically doing it for free. Free. He's not taking his GC costs for it. He's one of these I don't know if you know Jeff. He's one of these sort of guys around town. just like likes to get involved in everything, but he like basically is not taking it. The usual GC fe

we're getting a discount. How much discount? I don't know. I think Jeff still the neighbor discount. He's he's fine, but uh he's doing a bit of a favor, I think, there. So, um I'll make a motion to approve the minutes of March 19th with Jonathan and Michael abstainating because you absent. I think I just said one word. Oh wow. A 120. It's as if the building it tries to be was rather than were. True. That's the only thing I have. Was it done by you, Carrie? Good job.

Or was it done by like chat GPT? So chat GPT. Oh that's right. That's right. What are we doing here? Yeah, that's what I also I wanted to talk about. Yeah, sorry. We need a second. Second. Okay. All those in favor? I And then thanks. Okay. Um, is this your last meeting? Yes. We should have done something. Cookies. So, I plan to be not here for May and June. Um, we also don't have a land use assistant. Um, so things are going great.

We're doing the best we can. Um, we will have Matt Monahan from the regional planning commission who will be here during the meetings. He will do plan reviews and, uh, staff reports. Um, Ginger will assist with getting notices out and getting packets together. Um, but we'll just appreciate everyone's patience. Will he be here or be virtual? He will. I plan for him to physically be here. Yes. Utilize that for the period before. So it's not like we can make a motion to adjurnn and turn it on. Yes. Which I will do. Make a motion to adjurnn. I'll second. All those in favor?

I. Any. Okay.