Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Right. See you. Heat. Heat. [music]

[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music]

[music] [music] [music] [music]

Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat.

[music]

[music] [music]

Heat. Heat. [music]

[music] [music] [music] [music] [music]

Can I have your attention, please? We'll be starting up shortly. Good evening and welcome to the low planner board for January 5th, 2026 and happy new year to all. The first matter on our agenda this evening would be the approval of the minutes of December 1, 2025. Any other board members have any corrections or comments on the minutes? Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to approve the um December 1st minutes as submitted. I second the motion. Motion made second. All in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposition hearing? None. Chair votes. Yes. The minutes are approved. Moving along on the agenda. We have a site plan review for 558 GM street. Anybody here from Gorm Street? You are. Okay. This Let me read the notice, sir. Thank you. Um site plan review 558 GM street. The Low Planner board will hold a public hearing to hear all interested persons relative to an application by NLK Homes LLC to construct one triplex and one duplex, a total of five units at the above address. The subject property is located in the urban mixeduse zoning district. The proposal requires site plan review under section 11.42 42 of the LOL's zoning ordinance for development with more than three units and a special permit approval under section 11.32 for four to six dwelling units on a single lot in the MU zoning district. May we hear from the applicant, please?

All right. Good evening. My name is Casey Ferrer. I'm with Howard Hudson with the engineering firm on the project. Um you may recall I was in front of this board uh last year. We began permitting in February. wrapped it up in about August. Um, this the project that you see before you now is really a new filing, but majority of the same project. Um, the project was actually sold shortly after we got the approval in August. Um, and the new owner uh really just was willing to downgrade to two-bedroom units uh in order to achieve the fifth unit. Um, so originally the um hold up in having more units was parking on site, the ability to park the amount of bedrooms that they were looking for. Um, so the original owners were not willing to step down to two-bedroom units. Uh, this new this new owner is um so what we originally had on the previous plan as a single family home um if we create a duplex of two-bedroom units um we can actually park that adequately. So long short of it is that it is majority the same plan. Now I'll go through it uh the same as I would any other new application um because as I understand LOL does not do modifications but rather they do new applications for special permits. Um so uh as I said the property was sold to NLK Homes who is now the owner of the property. Um the property is located just south of the intersection of Gorm Street and the LOL connector. Um, it is a 10,340 foot lot with a currently approved plan to construct four dwelling units on it. Um, as I said, this plan essentially removes the single family home and replaces it with a duplex unit. Um, and the parking required, so the duplex unit um of two bedrooms uh increases the total bedroom count on the site to 13. Uh the parking requirement for 13

bedrooms is 10 spaces really 9.75 but rounding up 10 spaces. Um the site as you see before you uh has 11 parking spaces. So we actually have an extra space. Uh we wanted to utilize that just so that there wouldn't only be garage spaces. Um the way we achieve the parking is by having a um below unit garage for each unit the same way that we did in the approved plan. Um the duplex is wider across the frontage than the single family home was. Um but we are still able to meet all the required setbacks. Um with the front setback remaining the exact same as it was. Um the side and rear yard setbacks uh still meeting the requirements. Um for the utilities, all the utilities that were shown on the original plan remain essentially the same. All we've done is added new utility connections for the second unit that's now in the duplex. Um, and the grading on the the site changed slightly just to accommodate a second garage on that building. Uh, because now it's a duplex. The single family home only had one garage. Now duplex has two garages. So, we just had to change the grading out front of that building to to accommodate a more level spot in front of uh the building. Um the drainage still maintains with two catch basins which inflow to a subsurface uh infiltration system. That subsurface infiltration system is sized to detain and infiltrate more than one inch of storm water per square foot of impervious surface. Uh that is the requirement that we are held to uh by the um regional wastewater and storm water department. Um this is the same approach as the approved plan uh from from August. And then I know one of the um I guess I'll say requests or concerns from the original plan revolved around landscaping. Um so I will say that all the landscaping that was in the approved plan remains in this plan that you see

before you. Uh one of the hot items was trees along the frontage. Um we were requested to have three trees along the frontage. We have maintained three trees across the frontage. Uh for the remainder of bushes and shrubs, we have kept the same number, just kept them out of any conflicts of the new building footprint. Um so they may have moved slightly from the original and approved plan. Um but they are all still there. Um lastly, lighting. Um generally again the same. We've just added one light over the new garage that's now in the duplex. Um so the same um lighting scheme applies. All it is is lighting any areas that would be walked or driven on um and trying to maintain the lowest level of light possible. Um one of the conditions in the approval uh was trash will be maintained as private pickup and that is still the intention. And that I believe summarizes or wraps up my summary of the project there.

[clears throat] Thank you.

So, I take it you have nobody else but the applicant to speak tonight besides yourself since I don't see anybody else with you. The applicant was planning on showing up, but he must not be yet. So, at this point in time, what I'll do is I'll um open them open the meeting up to the public. Um, is there anybody here like to speak in favor of this project? In favor? In favor. In favor. Hearing none. Anybody like to speak in opposition? In opposition. In opposition. Hearing none. At this point in time, I'll turn it over to the board members. Any of the board members questions, comments, concerns?

Mr. Chairman, if I if I may. Um so just to recap from the uh the prior approval um is we definitely wanted the facade of the uh the um the the gable end to have a the facade look of uh of the traditional homes along Gorum Street which the has been incorporated here. Um little disappointing. Remember we actually congratulated you for actually reducing the units when you came. you know, that doesn't happen very often. Um, little concern about the loft space. Those have a tendency to become bedrooms, you know, and they officially come back and say they're going to reduce a bedroom, but then there's enough room in the loft to create a bedroom. Um, and but certainly we um certainly would would would look to address that in a in a condition, but obviously homeowners are going to do what they do. Uh can you clarify are these going to be sold as owner occupied or individual condo units or they going to be uh rented out be sold as individual units?

My understanding is condo units. Um question on uh on the uh elevations plan on uh I guess it would be page four of 18. I don't know if it's if I'm looking at it says rear elevation and the windows have shutters and on the front elevation they don't have s shutters. I'm assuming it's the other way around. I would assume so. Also, we did have them um flip the orientation because they had it backwards. So, I believe when they flipped [clears throat] the labeling, they might not have switched it to have the shutters on the front, but the shutters should be there. Yes. Yeah. Right. because I I would I would assume so because that's the more aesthetically pleasing correct look.

And we and I should have mentioned this during my intro. all the architectural elements that we had uh I guess agreed to and came to on the triplex unit. For the front, we did uh request that the architect match all of those for the new duplex unit so that it would appear as the front of a Well, one of one of the things that makes this a little bit more palatable for me is I actually like the look of the duplex building better than the single family building, okay, that we had approved. So, I think from a from that perspective, I I I think it looks better. Um, you know, I I've got to ask the question though. Uh, the garage doors are 14 feet looks like wide. Is the garage doors are 14 ft wide? Yes.

That's um I think that's enough to get two cars pulling in at an angle in there. Uh we had uh worked with the architect to determine what would be a required garage width for both a single and a double and 14 was that minimum requirement for a double uh car unit. a twocar parking garage. No,

it it's I mean that's tight. That's tight pulling into that site and pulling into that garage. I just don't want to end up with uh you know appears to be adequate parking within that structure and then having the cars actually be outside. Um and that doesn't mean they can't. People will so choose but don't want to be because they can't really get in there, right? Um, and god forbid if anybody owns a large SUV, that's not going to happen. Um, yeah, I do have some reservations about the the the the um two cars getting into that, but um I think that's Mr. Chairman, my comments right now and see what the rest of the uh board feels about uh [clears throat] plan submitted. Thank you. Lucia, you may go to Lucia next. Thank you.

I had a question on page five of the plans. It looks like the duplex the square footage is in gross square footage whereas um the triplex the units are labeled as square feet, but it I'm wondering if that's mislabeled the square footage for the triplex. So, are you on the the layout plan page five? Yeah. Materials and layout.

Uh, yes. They're they're um both the triplex and the duplex labels are for gross square footage. The G just didn't make it over to the uh the triplex labels.

Okay. Um I also had a question. Um I believe it would be for Mary because I thought the umu um for parking requirements was um 75 per bedroom or um nope, I'm sorry, I'm saying it to myself and it's it's right 75 the greater. Um but as far as the site plans go, I think that if they're mislabeled that we can't approve them today. Is that right? The number is still correct and it's still a square footage.

It's gross square footage is but they're labeled as square footage because if you put if you do the square footage based on the dimensions it should come to 1232 square ft if you're excluding the garage. But it says 2,298 square feet. So I think that it should be either labeled as gross square footage or revised to the correct square footage.

Yes. I mean when when we label something as square footage, it can be either the gross or a denominator specific subset of the square footage, but I we can absolutely revise the label and and give that back. I don't think that has to hold up a a vote that can be conditioned as part of an approval. That's just a label the number basically comes down to the request of the board. If they feel uncomfortable that the square footage is we can request that the square footage be provided. If we feel that they could have amended properly um or how they calculated it and if it's satisfactory to the board it's up to the board to decide.

Caleb Caleb you have any questions? Uh no, I I think other members have addressed um uh of all the con my concerns and uh I I recognize that uh uh the applicant have um take the comments from uh and our concerns from the previous approval as as you know um into consideration and address um all of them. Actually, uh I I share similar concerns with uh with um member Fchett on on the width of the garage, but I mean uh I I suppose there are building codes or that that might might dictate that and and I mean that's more of a matter of the building inspector. Um so I mean if they are okay with it then um then I wouldn't have a problem with that. So, um, and as far as I think the gross square footage, I think if we can recognize is more a technical error, then then I'm okay to give a conditional approval on that for fixing it. But that that's my take. Thank you.

Okay. Do you need any any questions, comment?

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, just following up on what the board has mentioned thus far. Um, it's my understanding when we get a plan, we're supposed to have marked out parking spaces. It's my understanding parking spaces are 8 ft by 20. Um, I don't think these this garages are sufficient um to put put the spaces that they're they're talking about. I don't know if there's some other code. Um, but I can tell you with this plan, you can't tell where except for that outside parking space, which is denominated. Oh, and it says 9 by8. So, it's probably 9 by8 is what's required. Um, to me, if if we're going to fix the square footage, and we probably should, um, we should get marked parking spaces on this lot. The other thing I was looking for is where's the trash going? Didn't see a trash receptacle. Jerry, uh, member Fchett always mentions, you know, some fencing around it and, you know, uh, where is it going to go? I didn't see it. Maybe I'm missing something on the plan. Um, what do I think of the the the project? I probably have to agree. I like the duplex better than the single family. Um, am concerned about the attic space being used. U maybe that can be a condition as as Jerry uh member for has mentioned. Uh trying to think if there was anything else that that I saw. Um, but I think they should be coming back with a plan that actually indicates uh whether it's gross square foot square foot and certainly the parking spaces, certainly the trash. Um, and otherwise I I think

it's a decent project. Um, I really do if they truly have the parking. All right. And and I I question that. Thank you. Thank you, Matenda. Mr. S. Any questions? No. No. Mr. Chair, I did have one. Sure. Go right ahead. Question. Um, you mentioned that the intent is to have it under an HOA. Um, should we assume that trash will be private? Okay. Because I believe that was a condition.

I thought I had mentioned that during my initial summary if I missed it. Um, one of the conditions of the previous approval was that trash would be private pickup handled by the HOA for the for the facility. um that is still intended to be the plan. So trash won't have a collected receptacle that's fenced in and a you know trash recycling unit. It's going to be all private pickup. Thank you. Handled by the HOA.

And if you would like me to just answer the questions regarding the parking spaces, I could do that quickly as well. Um so the bylaw has 9 by8 for surface parking spaces. um that is a general um or that is the guideline for when you have an open parking uh lot like a parking facility. Um when they go indoors into a parking garage, the requirements become part of the architecturals or the building code requirements. Um those typically because when you have a let's say a residential unit with a garage that's designated for that single residential unit, they can be smaller because those um both cars or the cars that will be within that same garage are by the same owner, not as you know halfhazardly open doors or whatever. So they don't require the full widths or the full as long as the length and can fit in there. Um they have reduced requirements and I can get back to you with what those are. I don't have them off the top of my head, but we can show them on the plan too as well.

Yeah, Mr. Chairman, just to follow up on that [clears throat] because in the umu zone again, it is cited now several times 9 foot width, 18 ft length. I I would want um somebody would have to show me where that is um reducing that is within um the the the appropriate manner here within this zone under site plan review. I just I want to see how a vehicle is going to turn right in and then turn turn right into that garage with another car parked in that garage. I'd actually almost similar to where we see the turning motions uh the um the swipe path analysis with the uh fire engines. I really would like to see that with uh with the garages um and um not just a compact car but a full size I mean everybody drives an SUV it seems like today. [clears throat] So I so I I really I question really that the the width of that. I really do from a practical sense. I think it's just going to be easier for somebody to just leave a car out there and that's not what's being proposed here and that's really would create a an issue with the driveway I believe. Um so I really would want to see that. And then so uh back to the trash receptacle though which with private pickup are they going to be they're going to be bins that that people have individual bins?

That's my understanding they'll be wheeled out whenever the pickup is. So, just trying to think with this is a tight site now. Traffic flow. Where are we? Yeah. Um, they're going to be in Yeah. Right. The cars will be outside. Um, I I'd like some some indication on the plan as to where do we think that those those bins are going to be. Yeah. My anticipation would be that they would be in the garage. In the garage. Yeah, we can show um what we can do.

You show that. I want to see all that room that's in that garage because that's where you you got to justify to us that that accommodates the parking within the zone. Yep. And we have um uh as part of the architecturals, we have that floor plan. So, we can kind of mark up that the floor plan of the garage to show how everything would fit, how how that would the sweep path analysis to show the cause. I don't want to I don't want to make a condition on how people have to have their garage, you know, organized, but we can definitely show how it's going to fit. Yeah. You can't control We were talking about the American garage [laughter] has everything in it but the car. I get it. But but but for us to [clears throat] approve it, I want to make sure that it had the capacity to handle it as as represented. So, thank you. Absolutely.

Yeah. I mean, what Jerry was saying, I was talking earlier, I said, you know, in my house, I have a garage and I have three parking spaces and I have three more to the side. But inside my garage is the lawn mower, the snow blower, the two bikes, the trash bins. So, I got to move everything out just to get one car in there when the snow comes so I can have one left to dust off. But, um, so some but we understand what whatever the dimensions are if people put the as long as it meets the parking, I get it, you know. Um, understood. But I think the concern is if we could get a future drawing on how you plan to put that parking in there um at least show where the um trash pickup is, which both fall under our site plan, I think it'll be a little more satisfied. And then if we could have a change just to um to correct the square footage um and I think the board would be more comfortable with that.

And this Mr. Chairman just and then to reabel those properly because it's it's got the rear facade versus the front. So that way architecturals. Okay. Um I I I noticed one another thing um maybe uh discrepancy of the architectural is that they have side doors on both front and end but on the site plan there's only one end. So um you can clarify that as well. Sure. I'll review those and make sure that they match. And if you're changing it, it might as well swap the shutters as well. Um thank you. So I noticed when I was up there today you already have the foundations for the three units, right?

Correct. So that's the same and then to the right was just a big pile. But you had your notice sign up there and everything else. You had a gentleman working there today putting what's that black stuff you put on the foundation. He was brushing that all on with Yeah. Whatever you call that stuff. I don't know what it is. True. What they put on the foundation? You know how they put the black color on it? That's what the gentleman was adding to it today when I was there. But um yeah, they're making progress. So I basically what I told them is, you know, proceed with what you can on the approved plan. um don't do anything that's you know new obviously yeah proceeding with the

I mean you have an approved plan so they can go forward on that yeah but obviously the lot to the right which could be changed and obviously I you haven't touched that yet there's just some dirt there from the previous three lots so um so I think the board would be looking for continuous is that correct gentlemen and ladies yes Mr. chairman. Okay. Um so, uh next meeting is the 22nd, which I know is is full. Um Mayor, how do we look for February 2nd? I know the 22nd we have a leaf. Uh the second is pretty open. Okay. Okay. Um would that give you enough time, sir, to come back with the Yeah. adequate changes? Absolutely. Okay. Um then I'll make a motion that we continue the matters of February 2nd, 2026.

Right. Second. Motion second. All in favor say I. I. I. I. Motion carries. Okay, we'll see you then and thank you very much and very much. Yeah. Happy. Thank you. Happy New Year everybody.

Happy New Year to you. Moving along on the agenda. Are anybody here for Chapel Street? Chapel Street. Let's see. We got 75 Chapel Street. The low planning board and zoning board of appeals will hold a public hearing to hear all interested persons relative to application by Eduardo Bernard to convert the existing 4-unit residential building to a six-unit residential building. The subject property is located in the urban neighborhood multifamily zoning district. The proposal requires site plan review approval from the planning board for the expansion of a residential development with more than three residential units. The proposal also requires a variance relief from the zoning board of appeals under section 6.11 for having stacked parking spaces and for any other relief required by the zoning ordinance. I was up there today and they did have the sign out front posted and I'm pretty sure the sign had today's date.

Okay. Yeah. Let me Raphael, you have your hand raised. Yes. Can you hear me? Uh, yes we can. All right. And I move forward. Yes. Take your name and address for the record, please. Yep.

Okay. Good evening chair, members of planning board and staff. For the record, my name is Rafael representing the applicant and the design team for the project located 75 chapter street in low and we see a reveal for of a renovation of existing multif family building. The scope is literally the conver conversion of a existing attic space into a new residential unit bringing the total number of units in the building from four to six. Uh this project is basically low impact. There's no expansion of a building footprint, no increase of the building height, no changes to setbacks or the exterior overall of construction affecting the street. No changes on drainage. Uh from the zoning standpoint, the property is located in the UMF district and complies with all dimensional requirements. Parking requirements are fully meet. uh 13 space provide where 12 are required from a life life safety and building coding perspective. Uh the planes include new code compliance mean of progress verify travel distance well below the maximum allowed and full compliance uh with current fire protection and alarm as required by the fire department. Overall, these projects

improve the safety, usability, and housing capacity of an existing viewing without introducing a new new impacts to the new neighborhood or the public in structure and we respectfully requested board's approval and we are happy to we are happy uh to answer any questions. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Anybody else want to speak on behalf of the applicant? Hearing none. Um, at this point in time, I'll turn it over to the public. Anybody this evening like to speak in favor of 75 Chapel Street? Anyone in favor? In favor? In favor? Hearing none. Anybody like to speak in opposition? Any opposition? Any opposition? Hearing none. This time I'll turn it over to the board members. Anyone have any questions, comments? Mr. Chairman, if I if I may. Sure, Mr. Fishette.

I I do have and so going out to the site. Um, and uh it's nice to see a large parking garage, especially in that neighborhood. There's actually quite a few of those in different properties around there. Um, and I I'm not uncomfortable with the stack parking because it's similar to uh large condo developments where they actually have a garage and they have a a spot in front. I it's not uncommon to see that. Uh there appears to be enough room back there. I guess one of the issues I have and with site plan under site plan uh review is really the the safety of um the uh the site and for pedestrian and vehicular traffic and I unless I'm I looking at the plans here and it may have been properly addressed. I'm just not sure from what I'm looking at here is um when you drive into the rear of the property, there's back stairs that come out and and matter of fact, it's it's blind. If you take that last step out onto the driveway, your leg is right into the driveway and it's not wide enough, you'll easily get hit. Um and so if you're coming to us and looking to increase um cars going back there, I I just think it's incumbent upon us to address that. Uh seen that similar configuration in other buildings and we've either you know required some sort of a ballad ballid that would be uh concrete ballid that steel that would be uh at the base of the stairs so if somebody steps out they're not right in the way of traffic but you've got a narrow area there. My my thinking is you have to reconfigure the stairs, but in looking at the site plan, I'm still I I and it's small print and I have to

apologize if in fact you've addressed it with the stairs, but if you could if you could speak to that a little bit because uh um just concerned about how that is uh currently configured right now.

All right. [clears throat] So the question is regarding the the configuration of the stairs right in the in the rear of the property the the the the on each side there's there's a set of stairs that comes right out the last step you step out and you step right into the drive the drive lane. Okay. And the building is right there. Somebody coming down would not even see a car coming. And if it's a Tesla, you wouldn't even know it was coming. Yeah.

So, basically, we keep the existing stairs and we create uh the third the third floor unit. We create the exist a new stair to comply with the code. So, everyone that going to drive is going to uh be lower level of this is there. So I believe uh it's easy to see around it and be aware of the environment.

I'm sorry sir I did I didn't uh I didn't understand what you said. So are you keeping the you you well if I have my way you're not going to keep them but I mean is your intention to keep those steers the way they are right now where they you step out into the drive lane? I I I just want to clear by we're talking about the first floor units there, not the new ones, right? In the rear in the rear of the building in the rear of the building. So [clears throat] the way that units that exist right now. Yep. Okay. We we talking about the Yeah. the exterior. So which is existing.

So we didn't change. What I'm saying though is this proposal is going to increase cars, additional cars. So now we're looking at the entire site plan and I do believe that's an unsafe in my opinion. The other board members can weigh in on this. I believe that's an unsafe situation. We've seen that before and we have addressed it. We have not let it gone uh such as this. So that's that's why I'm I'm bringing this up, sir. Okay.

All right. So I believe uh the best option I I can create uh a different layout layout and and show to you uh in order to to receive the approval,

right? If if you're going to reconfigure the stairs, especially with the upper unit and and redo those stairs, ju reconfigure that so that you're you're you're coming out towards towards the rear of the building. I I just stepping out like that is not something that I would approve. If somebody got if somebody got hit, it's incumbent upon this board. Again, we look at the the safety, pedestrian safety and vehicular safety within the site under site plan review, and I just think that's an unsafe situation. Okay. All right. Um

Exactly. Yeah. And and it exists on both sides of the building. more concerned about and then we'll I uh it looks like you're having oneway traffic, right? You go in facing the building, you enter the rear of the property from the right hand side, uh park in the rear and then you exit uh from what would be the left-hand side of the building when you're facing it. Um at least at that uh the the the rear stairs on that side, you're you you're able to see the cars. The cars can see you. Uh, but I still think that probably should be reconfigured on both sides of that in case you know the somebody goes the opposite way on on that uh those drive lanes. The other thing is are you looking to put any Well, I would be looking for signage. It looks like you have arrows that show that the intent is to have one way in and one way out on the other side, but I would be looking to have signage that would make it very clear what the uh the the path of the traffic should be on the site

circulation throughout the site. So, those those would be my comments. Um, and I I'll wait to hear my other board members to weigh in on that. [clears throat] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Panza.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I went [clears throat] to the site um and I was lucky enough to be accompanied by my wife um and I drove down that thing, that driveway, uh tight, extremely tight. Uh, member Fchett's comments about the staleways [laughter] um are certainly what drove me to look at all right what are our requirements regarding pedestrian and vehicle safety on the site to the site and egressing from the site. Um I also when I drove down um literally I had no room on either side of the vehicle. it was 9 point whatever 9 point something width um for that driveway. Uh the way out was equally as tight. Um one of the other things I noticed and I got a chuckle out of is on the narrative it indicated that um the landscaping will be kept the same. Um a chuckle because there is no landscaping. This is a paved over built uh paved over lot uh with buildings on. That's it. There isn't any landscaping to speak of. Um I heard the applicant mention that, you know, there'd be a new tax, new taxes. Um the way I see this is this is a new tax for the neighborhood. um with adding two more units. Um let's face it, all right, if you get a visitor per unit, Chapel Street is a cluster to begin with. Adding more units to this area, I don't think is a great idea um at all. Then I looked at the lot and when I was driving around it, I'm like, well, fortunately, it didn't snow. Where do you put the damn snow?

Also, um I couldn't basically when I drove through, I couldn't figure out where the garbage was or where it was kept. Maybe it was kept in the garage or or something like that. So, when I went through this, I was my my first reaction was, "What are we doing to Chapel Street?" That was my first reaction. And then when I drove down those skinny little driveways, um it just it just alarmed me uh regarding safety on that site um and pedestrians in in and on the walkway um for Chapel Street. Those are my comments, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Lucia. Any questions, comments? No, Mr. Chair, all of um Okay. Concerns. question, comment.

Um, yeah, I share the um concerns with uh the stairway um also with um the snow. I mean, definitely it's all it's all pavement and it's all driveways. So, um yeah, you will have to figure out one way to satisfy the snow removal requirement. Um and uh yeah I mean the trees requirement uh [laughter] I mean uh I suppose there is a fence area where some of the vegetation could be uh um tidier but um yeah uh it's a pretty tight lot right now but uh it still we we'll appreciate if there's some thought into that that aspect. Um, that's all I have right now, chairman. [clears throat]

Okay. Thank you. Um, so do do you plan on putting in a full fire alarm system?

Yes. Okay. And you going to put in a full sprinkler system? Sorry, I I couldn't hear the last question.

Okay, so you are you [clears throat] going to put in a full sprinkler system throughout the whole building? Yes. Because I'm sure that's a requirement that you have to do while you don't get a building permit, right? Yes. Correct. And that was addressed in the copy was to the applicant, right? Okay. Correct. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah, I was concerned with the flow through the traffic as well. Um, like I said, if there's no markings of who'd be going in which way, who'd be coming out the other way. So, you could have one car pulling in, one car pulling out, and that'd be at a standstill, and then they'd have to back into each other and back out to the street. So, there was no traffic. Um, you know, except for just an arrow, which was on a plan. So, if someone pulls in and someone's pulling out, they're both going to be facing each other on on either the right or left side of the building. Um, so I was concerned with the traffic flow, especially now with the other where the other board members picked up the width of your traffic flow. Um, and the fact that you didn't show, you know, we need snow removal um on site where it's going to go. Um, if you just push it all the way back down those two lanes, snow's still going to try to accumulate on both sides of the lanes going in. If you can get a plow in there that's wide enough. Um, and I did see some of the dumpsters that were under the stairways. I did notice that they were the covers weren't down and they were overflowing as well. So, they weren't in compliance with our um our recycling and our regular um trash bin covers cuz they're open and trash is piled on top of it. It's supposed to be so they can be shut so they don't they don't attract rodents. So, now that's not in compliance as it stands as of today.

So, so those are my concerns. So, um, have you got an estimate of what's going to cost yet to put in the full fire alarm system and the sprinkler system?

So, I have to uh ask my my client.

Okay. Is your client with you? My clients in present in presence because that's a major concern. I mean I mean luckily at least you have a fire hired in front of the house but because there's no way a fire truck to get into you know they have to run a hose to get to the rear. No doubt about that. Not getting a fire truck down there. We know that um also the storm water wants a full utility plan. Are you have you given them that full utility plan yet? Um I don't have uh the answer for the question. I have to ask my my team if we are ready forward that. Well, be nice if you had those answers for the board.

Okay. Sorry. And um also um the storm wants to know what you're going to do with the runoff on the roof drains. Have you discussed that with the applicant? How those new attics you're going to have all your water run off on the drains? That's a question that uh storm water has. Yeah. So, I will address uh the comments and fully reveal the planes.

Okay. So, [clears throat] yeah. When would you be doing that? Yeah. So, uh as soon as tomorrow so we are going to uh start reviewing uh doing the changes proposed uh the stair exterior stairs um comply with the fire department. Uh I'm going to come up with the budget for the sprinkler system with my client. Okay. And they start more uh requirements as well. [clears throat] Yeah. for the storm water. They want the full utility plan as well as the um the rooting of the roof drains to the storm water. All right. Okay. Okay.

And then you um address the questions that were raised by the fire department which um we always go along with what the fire department tells us because that falls under health, safety, and welfare. And if we have a negative report from the fire department and uh then we usually do not vote for it because the fire department is very important. I mean, it's a big huge building. Um, so and you're looking at six units. You want to make people make sure people have adequate safety get in and out. Um, and that's why when you convert from the four to the six, you need the full fire alarm system and also you have to make sure everything is sprinkled. So, okay. All right. Thank you.

Any followout questions? and and I've just um if you could be prepared to show I know in the in the proposal you said we basically handled the snow the same way you're doing now but we don't know what that is. So, uh, if you could kind of, um, uh, with with, you know, exactly demonstrate how, um, snow is stored on the site and then removed because I'm assuming with fewer units, there's probably more paved area available, but once you have two more additional units, uh, with additional cars, there may be less area for storing snow, uh, snow. Um so just again the plan should address that and those are basic items under site plan review and again going back to the uh the concern of the safety of pedestrians and and vehicles on the site uh really um you know under site plan review that's it's incumbent upon us to address that. So really if take a good look at those stairs in the rear of that building. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So are you requesting a continuance so I can address those concerns sir? Yes. Okay. Any of the board members have any further questions? Um I may follow up like so um again u mention about trees. So I mean if you can work with the the um DBD on whether there's any possibility of certain tree species that can you know add to the facade uh of the front frontage of the um not facade but the frontage of the lot uh that will be a plus if

okay good to have a conversation on that. All right we have like a small space in front of the building that maybe we can work with that. Okay, thank you.

So, the request in the continuence. Um, I think we said we still have February 2nd open. Okay. Um, so I'll make a motion that we continue this matter to February 2nd, 2026. Second the motion. Motion made and second. All in favor say I. I. I. Any opposition? Hearing none, the motion is approved. Will be continued to that date. Um, so try to get your plans in ahead of time so everybody can review them. Thank you very much, sir. Okay. Have a good night. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, moving along on the agenda. We have a application for site plan review at 22 Herd Street. The low planning board will hold a public hearing to hear all interested persons relative to an application by Lampex LLC to redevelop the existing parking lot to build a new four-story mixeduse residential building resulting in 38 residential apartments and ground level commercial space. The subject property is located in the downtown mixeduse zoning district. The proposal requires site plan review per section 11.42. 42 of the LOL zoning ordinance for development with more than three units. We did receive a letter um from the applicant requesting that this matter be withdrawn. Anybody here in attendance in regards to uh H Street? No. So the matters before the board for request for withdrawal. Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to uh allow the applicant to withdraw the um uh the proposal without prejudice.

I second that. Motion made in second. All in favor say I. I. I. I. Chair chair. The motion is allowed to be withdrawn. Under other business, we have a appointment of the planning board member to the zoning rewrite steering committee. I cannot think of a better person than Mr. Pette to be on that board. Do I hear a second? Second. Second. All in favor say I. I. I. Vote as indicated. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Pette. I know you've come a long way with doing a lot of work on our zoning and you're probably more knowledgeable since all the times you've spent with the other zoning in the past, especially with the master plan. Um, so we appreciate all your hard work and thank you for making this acceptance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, just as a followup, um, so Mary, do you know who else will be on this committee or is it just I don't know yet. Uh the ZBA will um

yeah I know usually they have the counselors at planning sometimes they yeah they ask sometimes maybe ZBA members or something like that. Um then sometimes they even invite public people from the public as well and they usually um I know they have a lot of round table discussions where we've seen in a couple of plans that came before us where we had opportunity to see pictures of Jerry at the round table. go. And on another note, um I'd like to um congratulate uh our senior planner, Mr. Dylan Ricko, who had a baby boy on Christmas, I've been informed. So, congratulations to Dylan. I believe his son's name is Owen. And Dylan, we wish you well. And um hopefully not too many sleepless nights, but good luck in regards to the wish you well. And congratulations to you and your wife. Um moving on. Do any other board members have any follow-up comments?

Hearing none. What's the status of the Rock Bridge? Still going forward, right, Jerry? Yeah. [laughter] Drive down the boulevard. You'll see a lot of signs of work being done. So, yeah. Yeah. I I saw some uh what are those? Jersey barriers. That's the area. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Okay. Interesting. What's the work being done? I I don't know what the No idea. Is it soil testing? Is it that type of stuff that point? Yeah. No, they're actually they're actually were starting with the the pylons for the uh Oh, wow. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Awesome. So, this is going to happen. Yeah. Oh, without opera funds and we were guaranteed that. So, I don't think Jeffy's hoping to be there. Yeah. You must be [laughter] that first guy going over.

They haven't indicated. There's a group that you can be on the the email uh uh group to get uh updates and I haven't looked. I should have looked before the meeting, but there has been no indication that there's been any dis disruption in the funding and in the work. So, we don't have to name it after a certain person. Oh, who knows? You know, [laughter] just wondering. Well, they plan on keep I think so. I believe they will. I mean, I believe they will after Timmy and Ray, right? That's That's correct. That' be great. Great people. Yeah. Y Yeah. Okay. Um I believe we motion to adjourn by Mr. Tenzar. Yes. All in favor say I. [laughter] I. I. We have Jiren. Good night. Thank you everyone.

[music]