Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Hello. Welcome to tonight's Town of Norfolk Planning Board meeting. In accordance with the provisions of MGL chapter 38 section 20, notice is hereby given that the planning board will meet on Tuesday, October 14th, 2025 at 7 p.m. in town hall meeting room 124. Members of the public are welcome to attend this in person and they are um at one Liberty Lane Norfolk Mass or by the remote Zoom connection provided. Please note that inerson meeting will not be suspended or terminated if technological problems interrupt the remote connection. All right, all of our uh board are here in person, so we're going to go ahead do a quick attendance. Melissa Mayo here. All right, Gary Sullivan here. Daniel Seager here,

and Chris Montfort. Hi. How's everybody doing? All right. Awesome. So, we have a 7:00 appointment one Pine Street. This is site plan modification for a proposed gasoline filling station signed special permit and special permit to wave landscape requirement of 40 square ft per each foot of frontage. And this is now a request to withdraw without prejudice. Yes. All right. So this was a continuation. It was a continuation. Yeah.

All right. So we don't have to motion to open it. The reason for the withdrawal without prejudice is because at the September zoning board of appeals meeting, the um the zoning board voted to deny the variance request for the special permit and without the var excuse me, deny the variance for the canopy without the canopy over top of the gas pump. So, it really kind of cascaded to where they voted to deny the special permit for the gasoline filling station. So, okay. So, they're going to go back to the drawing board. Literally the drawing board. Yep.

Bring us back something new. Okay. Welcome to Curry Suro. Thank you for joining. All right. So, um we need to motion to close it and then motion to wave without prejudice or just close it. Actually, they just take a motion to withdraw without prejudice. All right. So, looking for a motion to withdraw without prejudice the one Pine Street site plan modification. So, moved. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed. Awesome. All right. That leaves us about 10 minutes till our next appointment at 7:15. Um, what do we talk about? We'll go to new old business. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. I was just debating whether or not for Sharon's A is going to keep everyone's attention or if we should go straight to that Midway branch shared use path. Well, we have Bill. So, let's go to for [Music] um Yeah, we can go to I think for Sharon's attention getting Let's do it. Yeah. So, um, the site is probably 99% done. So, they've Come on up. Grab a mic. Introduce yourself. Dan on that. Yep. We got Dan American online as well. Bill Gopoulos. Bill Gopoulos.

Sharon. Property owner. Property owner. Thank you. So, they're requesting a a temporary co so they can move in the new tenant which is a parkour facility. Parkour. Oh, nice. Yep. My park core days are passed but is almost ready to go back. You ready to go back? I was just practicing before. Oh, good. Good. Actually, my days never were anyway. So, uh, they've requested a temporary occupancy permit so they could finish it up and get the new tenant in. So, all right. So, as described, you said 99% of the way done. What's left? Whatever remains the uh what's the sidewalk and the

Yeah. So, the front walkway, which you know, the access the parks in the back anyways, but the front the front the front has been graded and everything just used to put the uh the pavers in and then the parking lot the parking lot stripes. Okay. Doesn't sound like uh anything crazy. Nothing should be done in the next, you know, couple of weeks. Okay. I'm hoping that Well, I know the uh the parking stripes should be is is scheduled for tomorrow, but I don't know the show with the weather and everything. Yeah. Yeah. So, it'll be sometime hopefully this week or by the end of this week, if not early next week. Okay. And when's the parkour company looking to come in?

Uh so, they they are moving out of a location in Norton. Okay. and they're they're starting to they're going to start moving their stuff into this building. They got quite a uh a ways to go before they open up for business. But um you know, let's just say you know, a month before they open up, but we should be pretty much done be we should be done by then, right? So um when are we looking to extend a temporary occupancy to Rich? What made sense? I think end of December is that that's more than enough. Yeah, end of December. End of December should more than answer. Well, let's look at it for our December meeting. How about that? 129. Sure. Cuz then we don't have to go into the new year or anything like that.

All right. So, looking for a motion to approve a temporary occupancy permit for four Sharon's A expiring on December 9th, 2025. So moved. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Hearing none. The motion carries. Thank you. Appreciate it. You guys have a good night. I want to proceed. All right. Enjoy. It's riveting. All right, 9 minutes. Um, can we look at 28 Long Meadow in 9 minutes or you want to go to something else? Uh, I don't know. I'm not sure about that one. 9 minutes. No, definitely not that one. I'm thinking about it. How about we review and approve some uh September 9th, 2025 meeting minutes.

There you go. That's That's a great option. All right. Any uh comments, edits, or concerns on the September 9th, 2025 meeting minutes? sent a couple quick ones. Uh typos. There were uh on the car wash there was two misters with no surnames be after them. Was that me or that? Yeah. Betsy, did you grab those? And then Oh, no. There's one on 36 Pine. Which one was Yeah. The second sentence. Yeah. The second where the end of the first paragraph of 36 Pine Street Cottage Car Wash. Yeah, there's Mr. Blank move to wave.

Yeah, Mr. Seconded the motion. And on the walkway off site had a zero between the off and the site. Uh the shared use path at the end. Uh let me just see. Uh I don't see it now. Uh, it said off zero site somewhere. I see it. It's on the last page right at the top. First sentence, right in the middle. All right. Off zero site. Yeah.

Okay. Any others? All right. Then we take a motion to approve the minutes as um amended. So moved. Second. Second. All in favor of approving the uh September 9th, 2025 board minutes, say I. I oppose. I abstain. I wasn't here. Okay. All right. Thank you. You were. You know, there was What was that memo you sent around? You can vote. It doesn't It doesn't matter if you were here or not, right? If you watch the recording.

Oh, I did watch the recording. Riveting as Chris was. I think it either I don't I'll take my I think it doesn't even matter if you watch the recording actually cuz just providing administrative function the board but then you know what I want to change on the fly my abstination to an approval. Okay. All right. I could talk into it. Love it. Noted in this. All right. Six minutes. Rich. All right. We can So I think the easier one to go to is the open space. That's fun. Yep. Um this is just a um a budgetary item, right?

Yeah. It's really to give the board the uh authority to expend the money that's in the open space maintenance fund. So we've had I think approximately nine subdivisions, open space subdivision since the inception of the first one in 1996ish. Um, and so it needs to set up the revolving open space fund account so you can then expend money out of it to do maintenance on open space. Is there any uh language or anything we have to look at or not yet? No, it's just uh it's on the warrant. I'm trying to pull it up right now. It's just really slow. This is really slow and I forgot to ask it about this

one. Yeah, it's pretty um the only thing is is there's a cap not more than $40,000 to be spended out of there. Languages to a year or ever? A year. Okay. This will be a standing revolving fund suck. Yeah. Yeah. I know we've got quite quite a bit of money in there. $186,000. Yeah. Um, and this will be one of those standing warrant articles every year that we vote that we vote on. Okay.

Um, to see if the town will vote to establish a planning board revolving fund for open space maintenance with an expenditure limit of $40,000 by amending the general bylaws of the town. Article 5, section 5, to insert a new row in the table after planning board advertising. Not to belabor the point, but why 40? It's It's an arbitrary number. We could go higher if you want. It could go lower. I like 50. 50 sounds better. It's a good point. You like 50? 50 sounds good. All right. If you want to vote to to just one.

I just I don't feel like I can do much with 40, but 50 I feel like I can do a lot, you know? I don't know. Uh, I'm not I'm not going to stick to it if it doesn't make sense. But what do you think? Is it as simple as just change the number? Did this already go through like the advisory board and that whole process? They're going to vote it tomorrow night the recommendation. So if you did want to vote it with an amendment to go to 50. I can I mean unless we think that like it's an arbitrary number, right? Like is maintenance ever going to be more than $40,000? We don't know because we haven't done yet, right? We haven't done any maintenance. No. How much do we have in the fund? 186,000. Do we need to have a number on it?

You do need to have a number. Okay. Yeah, you do have to have established how much. Um I mean, and how does it get funded? It's it's part of the condition of open space subdivision. So, it's a it's a per lot basis. So, it's $2,000. So, it's a onetime funding per lot as they get building. So effectively we have an 80 180k finite amount that we're playing with at this point in time. How does it actually get expended though? It'll be allocated in like a budget line item when the budget.

No, they'll they'll have to come to you and say, "Hey, we want to do X, Y, and Z maintenance and where?" And then you'll say, "Okay." And then you you'll have to approve it. So it's got to get be approved by you, the board. Can we proactively say, "Hey, like I know of this open space and it's kind of like worse for wear. Let's get somebody in there to mow it." We can. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So, and more more likely than not, that's probably what we'll be doing, you know? So, every year we'll have a plan. Um, I like it. It's tied to the developments that they were contributed. I don't think so.

No, it's all up his face. Now I would argue from the spirit of it that it should be spent this your comments here says it has to be that open space or that has physical connection. I think that's a um I don't know you I can get an official but that would be my exercise judgment in terms of like for it was associated with those those nine different open space subdivisions. You could argue either way, but I think spending it on open space that wasn't part of a subdivision approval would be a little bit of a stretch out of it because they're going to vary too. So, for instance, I think I even wrote it in there or maybe I didn't write it in there, but I will be. Um,

I'm happy to note that as a problem for another day. Yeah, it is a problem another day. Yeah. All right. Well, looking at the time, I think um I'll accept the 40. I'll take a straight vote on this right now. Um, looking for a motion to approve. Hold on one sec. Does it say annual somewhere in here? Yeah, we have a comment from the audience too. So, okay. Okay. Amending time to establish. Does it say annual? It says revolving, but it doesn't say annual.

It's an annual. Uh, I think I have to go back to the statute that it's to pull it up. Uh, I think article. We'll see. I think it's in the article. Hold on a second. Is that article still still correct with um with e-code? [Music] Do we want to table this for now and go to our 7:15 appointment?

Sure. Cuz you're only going to open it to continue it. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Uh this is a new one. So, uh 19 Valley Street. You want to read that in? [Music]

Sorry. It's all right. It's okay. We're a motion to wave the reading anyway. [Music] Do I have a second? I second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed. All right. We've waved the reading. All right. So, 19 Valley Street, they have a request for continuence till November 10th, 2025. Yeah, they received the peerreview comments. I want a chance to review and then come back. Okay. go through with it. Makes sense. There were a lot of comments in there. Mhm. Yeah. All right. Motion to continue to November 10th, 2025 at 7 p.m. 7 p.m. So moved. Do I have a second? Second.

All those in favor? I opposed. Awesome. Thank you. All right. Back to the open space maintenance fund. Yeah. So that is a that is a section of the general bylaw. That is correct. Yeah. vertical.

So, does it specifically need to say that it's an annual revolving fund? All the all the revolving funds are annual. I'm pretty sure it's based on the statute though, so I have to give you that. Where's article? Article four. Article four. Section five. Section five. Section five. I don't know. It doesn't say section 22. It's actually 22 23

23d. Well, that's the reporting of it. So, Betsy, you mentioned there was a comment online. Um, no, there's a comment in the audience. Oh, in the audience. Sorry, Donna. You want to come up and introduce yourself? She's got a microphone. I can't see behind the table.

Um, I I appreciate your comment of how does it get expended? Um, does it have to be only within the development that it came from? And when I think of open space, I think of the conservation commission maintaining the property. So, could they spend the money? Would they need your approval to do that? It's a good question.

So, the um is a statute master general law chapter 40. I know that's not the question, but I'll get to the question. So it's the money in terms of the expenditure and governance is through the planning board because they're the ones that have establish collected the money

but it would be honestly in function will be in conjunction with the conservation commission in terms of what type of maintenance activity will be done in terms of although I will say I still would probably argue that it should be related to the ones that were that came in through the subdivision approvals, not just X, you know, because it was a it was a fee assessed to a development as part of the development process. So to take that fee and then spend on some other that makes sense. Open space that's kind of stretching outside I think would well then do we have a list of those properties and the amount that they contributed into it?

We do have a list of that. Yeah. Now, to get back to Dan's earlier question, I would argue that, you know, if we you'll have some that you're not going to spend how much they put in, and then you're going to have other ones that you're going to far exceed what they put in just because of the maintenance that would be involved with it. So for instance, Bristol Pond Estates at some point is going to be well actually I should say the the the the open space that large parcel that's in between the two roads is already under the care and custody of the conservation commission. That's a more intensive property to maintain than, you know, going in and doing trimming and then maybe putting down some mulch and so forth on trails in some of the other open space subdivisions. So, um, it's not it's going to be the judgment is going to be exercised by this board, though, cuz you're the

Yeah, I mean, I don't think we need to solve this for the actual establishment of the fund. It would be interesting to talk more at some point in the future about how it's actually allocated because if there, you know, say there isn't really a need in one of these subdivisions, but there is a need elsewhere in town, you know, that benefits all the residents um including those within the subdivision, I'd rather see it go to good use than just sit there, you know, and continue to um gather interest revolving fund. But, you know, again, I don't think that's necessarily something we need to solve for the for the bylaw. Great. We have a hand up. Java J. Oh, I think that's the cursor. Sorry.

I was like, perfect. All right, never mind. Sorry, Java. No, I I think it's a it's a really relevant valid point and actually as we related to it as we get going through the open space and recreation plan update that's going to be one of the main focal points about the whole right this plan is that maintenance piece. Again, this will establish so you could spend the money on it. You said you were okay with the 40 for now. I'm okay with the 40 for now. We can amend it next year once we actually know how much we're going to spend.

I'd like it to be meaningful. I'd like to be able to get stuff done. Um the 40 is a little bit more conservative considering that we're at like 180k. It'll last longer that way. So I get it. But like you said, if we have something that needs significant amount of remediation, then 40 is not necessarily going to make it. Yeah. And I think correct. All right. Um, so I'm looking for a motion to approve or to vote. I'm looking for a motion to place the article on the November 12, 2025 special town meeting warrant to establish the RO roll re rolling fund for the open space maintenance. So move. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor?

All those opposed. All right. Hearing none, it's passed. Thank you. So, we've got 8 minutes. Can we do Macarthur F? Sure. So, I think you're pretty well familiar with this, but uh so MacArthur A has been completed in terms of construction. The uh so now we're at the stage of having going before TAMI to accept it, which u would be just the section where the T is that was a hammerhead. the hammerhead. Um, and the purpose as you just refresh your memories that way when you drive up Hunter A, you'll have a place to be able to turn around and come back out, which previously just dived into the woods. Um the it is it is going through the process of of the acceptance through an eminent domain process because it's a paper street and so it was not clear the the developer in this case that built for the single family home on 10 MacArthur A doesn't have all the rights and interest in Macarthur a be able to convey to the town. So we do have to go through the imminent domain process. Uh so it will be as such at the at the uh town meeting. Um so hopefully with the board uh blessing and recommend going forward the the select board next Monday night the 10 uh excuse me October 20th they'll hold the public hearing notice was sent out to the abutters.

Yep. And uh have you spoken to them recently? Like how are they with everything? I spoken to him a few months ago prior to starting this process. This I think he's on too if you have any questions. Who's on? Oh, France. Oh, we got it. Um we sent out letters to the so title report was done earlier on year sent out notice to everybody let them know about the intent and purpose of it and that this is all predicated on the fact that they would wave damages who anybody had interest after understanding the whole purpose no one objected to it. Okay.

Um of course obviously you know we haven't the town hasn't taken action yet. something could happen, but so far everything indicates that everybody seems to be on board with it and it's only that one section of it. Yeah. And that um abandoned section still remains still remains. Everybody's good with the way that it is currently. Yeah. Okay, perfect. And uh we did something to stop like Amazon trucks from going up and stuff like that. Yeah. So I mean now the way the road is you know once France had constructed the per the plan it it drops off and then there's the rip wrap which is used as the you know to collect the storm water it's not it's not really vehicle you know perfect

anybody on the board recently been over there I went a while ago like over the summer and looked all right nothing crazy like anything like I think when they did the top coats the last time I've been there. So if that was the summer or maybe the spring fine. Okay. All right. Cool. Awesome. All right. So I'm fine with pushing this for street acceptance. I'm going to look for a motion to uh recommend MacArthur Avenue for street acceptance at the November 12, 2025 special town meeting. And that'll the bond bond release will be a second vote. That's a second. Yeah. So just for street acceptance. Just for street acceptance. and then the bond be separate.

So moved. All right. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? All right. The first motion carries. All right. Um, talk to me about the bond. Where are we at with that? So, the bond was to ensure that all the construction was to be done in accordance to the approved plan. As you know, I just mentioned everything's been constructed and DPW signed off. They're happy. They signed off on it. We have the uh acceptance plan that uh will as are good. The asbuilts are good. So there is no there's no reason to when we receive as builts, do we have bid to go out there and just confirm?

Not in this particular instance because it wasn't a scale for them to go out and do it. This was done through DPW. Okay. All right. How much is left in the bond? I think it's actually the full amount that it was originally. It's like 20 ps. How much was the bond? It was originally 25,000. I think we got it reduced last year, but there was a minimum fee to the insurance company. So um it didn't really matter. Um the bond cost me like $800 a year. Um but I think it was like I said originally 25,000. Okay. Thank you.

All right. So, uh, looking for a motion to release the bond for MacArthur Avenue. So, moved. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed. All right. The motion carries. Thank you so much, France. Thank you. All right. 3 minutes. We can do it. Which one? Bedway branch. Let's do it. Three minutes. Discuss holding room workshop.

Yeah. So um as suggestion of the board to hold a workshop. So I gave you some options. Um one would be do it before your next before the November meeting which should be November 10th. Could do a special meeting and hold it. But first I would like suggest that you host it cuz you're pretty familiar with this type of uh project. Um, you could do a special meeting if you want, but um, so what I would what I would do is I would we'll get a we'll get an list of everybody that abuts Midway branch and we'll send out a letter to let them know they're going to have a workshop and they can invite to come and we can talk through. Um, this is really just a segment between Barnestow Road and Tucker Road, right?

But at the workshop we really want to talk about the larger plan which is to eventually, you know, go beyond the transfer station on the former Medidway branch rail line to to make it a shared use path all the way out. Now, is this something that we would do in conjunction with like MAPC or is this us all on our own? We go to this is all ours right now. When we go when we get to I will call phase two which would be going beyond the transport station out then we would engage similar to like we did with meticcom and greenway get a engineering company

you know look through design options public workshops and so forth and you know look at any uh rights issues that we may need all that kind of stuff flush that all out okay

first um but in terms of this would be the first step in terms of for this phase to hold the meeting and then we could talk about that plus going from Tucker Road all the way down to Boardman to actually widen that at some point. So it's uniform 10-ft shared use path all the way down to Borman Street which then will lead to a future phase which be crossman down to the commuter rail station which would be a much further out because that'll be coordinated with MBTA to be able to do something that would be a shared use path that they would have to be involved with because we'd be do we have visual officially inviting them

I was just going to like if we're going to hold a workshop right like it would be helpful I think for folks to be able to visualize that whether just highlight the part that we're talking about and then subject to change future state or phase it up or you know but something like that. Yeah. So I put together a present I think it was it was a while ago now and presented. So we would use similar those same slides. I do remember that actually. Yeah. So we would use that to uh show the phases. Yeah. other phases of it and the workshop would be its own thing or part of one of our that's what I'm asking you. Yeah, you got the option or or potentially option, right? So,

it should my opinion it should be its own thing just so that it's like the focus of the entire conversation. We don't have other things that are competing for our time. But

so which is completely fine, totally makes sense. I would would probably like to knock it beyond the middle not beyond the middle of December. Like I think I think we go to cuz we submitted the application October 1st. Um then give or take it might we might be hearing by January. So if we wanted to do it for simplicity's sake in an existing meeting. Yeah. You could adjust the your schedule earlier if you if everybody Oh, we also do like a 6:00 thing. You could do that if you wanted to. Have like pie and punch to get people in the door.

What's that? Pie and punch to get people in the door. I heard there would be punch and pie. You could do that if you want. I mean, what do you pie? Are we talking? I just it's seasonal. I mean, should be We'll see what's hot in the next couple of weeks. I'm a good baker. Um I don't November. In terms of forecasting the November. Well, you're not going to be here. Not the 10th or 11th? No. When would our December one be? December 9th. December 9th. 9th.

I could be here early for that if Yeah, I could do the 9th early. It's probably actually a good time anyway because it would give enough time to, you know, let everybody know about it. Yeah. Yeah. Um cuz November 10th is really not that far away. It's not. It's not. Yeah. December 9th would be good and we do it before the meeting which would be good so people don't have to sit around until Yeah. Yeah. work. Sure. All right. Does that work for everybody? Yeah, sure. Yep. So, we'll do an hourong workshop and then we'll open up the planning board at 7:00. Mhm.

Yeah. Uh we would have to open the meeting at Well, I mean, you go to general regular business. Yeah. Okay. Right. Cuz if we're all talking, we're going to do it here. Right here. Right here. Okay. Yeah, it'll be here. You're not expecting a large turnout for it. Just the abutters, right? I don't know. [Music]

But actually, wait. So, let's play it. It's going to be hybrid. We should We should uh hybrid's good, but we should like broadcast it as like, hey, like cuz this is kind of an interesting concept. We don't have one of these in town. We I I don't know many towns that have this. There might be people cuz we know so many so many people in this town love municipal planning. They're going to show up. Well, but you know what? A lot of people in town do during the master plan process really really wanted sidewalks. We heard that so often. So we you know we would set I know this is kind of light the way this room is set up this evening but we would set this up for 40 people. Okay. Yeah. I mean we had a good amount when we were talking about the um senior That's right. facility. Okay.

I'm not too worried about the location personally. Okay. and we would constant aging. Obviously, we'll I'll communicate with Karen, let her know. Oh, I already I already gave her a heads up that we were going to be doing this. So, now we have a date she can

So, we're going to do it on the 9th at 6 p.m. That's all set in stone. It's uh 7:34 now. So, 50 Fruit Street stormwater management permit public hearing. [Music] All right. Notice is hereby given in accordance with Mass General Law Section 4A and the Norfol General bylaws section 26713. A public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 14th, 2025 at 7:30 p.m. in room 124, the Norfolk Town Hall, 1 Liberty Lane, Norfol, Mass, relative to a storm water management permit application for property located at 50 Fruit Street in Norfol, Mass. The applicant Christos Gloropoulos is requesting a storm water management permit for the demolition of an existing single family dwelling and construction of a new single family dwelling with all a pertinent driveways, landscape areas, utilities, and storm water facilities. The property is located in the R3 zoning district reference assessors map 16, block 55, lot 68. The application and plans are available for public inspection on the town of Norfol website or in the office of the Norfol planning board during the hours of 6 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday. Thank you. Good job.

All right, Rich, bring us up to speed.

Sure. And uh Dan American is joining us via Zoom was the engineer record for the project. Um so I just to tip this off um it's interesting project in terms of the stormwater management bylaw. It um it's an existing single family home that's being demolished and then going to be a a new home and new garage and landscaping and so forth. Um, it's being triggered by the stormwater management bylaw whereby if you clear more than an acre of the property, it triggers a storm water management permit. So, to my knowledge is the first one that's been before the planning board uh in the town of Norfolk. Um, it if it was less than an acre, it wouldn't even be here, which is kind of interesting, right? So, um, from a regulatory standpoint, but but it is, um, and it's and it's already been cleared. So, um, the owner has been cooperative in terms of, you know, realizing really like, oh, I cleared more than acre and that that triggered the storm water bylaw. um which is not not surprising cuz stormwater bylaws for single family homes that's kind of a newer thing in terms of storm order management many communities. Um so he's been fully cooperative and he's filed a storm management plan and the Americans here to represent him. The one thing uh I did hear from the interim DPW director um they recommended that a third party review it on behalf of the of the planning board

um as opposed to DPW um doing that review. Um, I did send it out to Beta Group for a u a peerreview estimate, but I think it'd be good to hear from the board and kind of talk about um this in general cuz you very well may see other ones potentially come up for you. So, um, kick it off to Dan for the rest of them. Sure. Thank you, Rich. Um, may I have permission to share my screen? Sure. Hold on one second.

What's up, Dan? Great. Thank you.

Okay. Um, so my name is Dan American with Legacy Engineering here on behalf of property owner Chris Glovers. He could not be here tonight. He's uh uh ill and was not able to make it. But as Rich outlined to you, this is an existing single family house lot and it's quite large. It's 8.6 acres. What you're looking at is the existing condition. Uh long driveway from Prof Street, existing home, an existing pool, an existing pool house. Uh and there's landscape areas associated with all of this. So in the current condition, probably two and a/4 2 and 1/2 acres of the site are part of kind of the landscaped area of the existing home. Uh the applicant would like to um build a new house for himself and his family. And that involves, and there's lots of color here, but that basically just involves moving the driveway, which I'll talk about in a minute, rebuilding the existing single family home essentially in the same location as as what's there now, just a different house. And then a garage um that comes with a new septic system. And all of the other colors you see here are storm water management issues uh that are designed to comply with your by line. And as Rich indicated, this is, you know, kind of unusual to have to go through a full-blown storm water management design for a house. But because the work does disturb more than an acre, um, the existing, as I said, the existing house and yard is is more than an acre. So, just to rebuild all of that triggers it anyways. And the applicant didn't know that he needed this permit. So, we're here to to address that and provide the required drain system design and demonstrate

compliance with the bylaw. Um, what we have proposed for storm water management, and I'm just going to give you an overview cuz I know you're going to go to peer review. For each of the new structures, this is the garage. This is the house. There'll be underground storm water infiltration systems around the structure and basically tie in your gutters to an underground system and they'll uh infiltrate runoff from those areas. This is a septic system which is a separate thing. The septic system for the existing house is here now. We have to rebuild it for the new house. Uh, and then these these hatched areas are something you might not be familiar with, but we're using a low impact development LI um credit techniques, which is nice in a on a site like this where you have a lot of land area. Um, you can take essentially areas of lawn that have a modest slope where you can direct runoff from imperous surfaces over and it provides treatment and infiltration for that runoff. then it meets the requirements for treatment and recharge from those impervious areas. So these hatched areas, these green hatched areas he here, here and along the driveway are just going to be grass, but from a storm water management standpoint, they provide for treatment and infiltration of runoff. The last thing is in order to make sure that in the post construction condition um the peak rate and peak volume of runoff in every design storm is below the existing condition. We need to provide a shallow storm water infiltration basin. It's actually a detention basin. Um it's only 2 ft deep. It has very shallow sight slopes. It's going to look like it's part of the lawn. That's part of the design intent. Um, and we've provided you with a storm

water report that I'm sure that you'll be sending off to your peerreview consultant to review that basically outlines compliance with the storm water uh bylaw. The total disturbance area, as Rich indicated, trees were cut. It's about 4 acres, 4 and a/4 acres. So, that's current uh yard area is about two and a quarter acres. So, another two acres trees were cut. um around you can see this limit of work here. Um this whole area I'll show you this is the aerial. So in the proposed condition this is the aerial photo. So this whole area here is part of the existing yard proper. Some trees were taken there but that was part of the landscape yard of the site. Um, trees were removed around where the proposed garage will go. Mostly pine trees. Uh, a lot of other deciduous trees were left there. Uh, and then some trees were removed along the left side of the property where the new driveway is going to go. Um, one of the reasons why we want to relocate the driveway, and this is going to be the subject of a different hearing at your November meeting, Scenic Road hearing. um in the existing condition and this is a condition that predated the current owner's um uh use of the property runoff. Let me show you the existing conditions plan here. So this is what's out there today. So right now there's a stone wall that that runs along the frontage here and it ends at the driveway mouth and then it picks up again on the other side. And

unfortunately what happens now is that the runoff from the road comes along the gutter of the road and then it cuts across the driveway and then it runs down through this property into our neighbor's property. Now, this is a condition that existed um it's existed for decades. And uh this house at 46 F Street was just recently constructed. It's a new house. Um whoever built that house, I don't know who did, they did not address this issue, and I understand that they're having problems, which is totally understandable. So when we relocate the driveway from this location to here, what we will do is we will fill in the stone wall here. We will remove all this driveway and all of that street runoff that runs along the gutter road gutter of the road will run into this ex existing catch basin here and that is piped down the road and then I believe discharges into a wetland system that's down here down below our neighbors property to the right there's a farm over there so to the right of 46 Fruit Street there's a wetland area and extensive wetland area and that I believe is where the street drainage goes so that will remedy the drainage issue that I know that the um the abutters at 46 Fruit Street have uh has noted to to town staff. Uh and I just want to kind of cover that to make sure that they understand that that this change will solve for them.

Is there anybody chime in as the property owner at 46? Can you introduce yourself?

Yeah, Mike Clearary. Um 46 Fruit Street. Just moved in there a couple years ago. I did send some of those videos of of that ephemeral stream that pops up during heavy rains. Absolutely, Daniel. The road because of the degradation of the mouth of the driveway, it is funneling water in there. But there's also another tributary to that that pops up. I don't know if it's like a pipe or a c something that was put underneath the driveway that goes up about I'd say about uh 25 ft from the mouth of the driveway. there's another source of water that's coming that flows um after the rain has stopped. So, typically when it's on the road, it's when it's raining is when the water's coming in. But then after the rains have stopped, there was water that would pond on the left side of the driveway and make its way underneath and continue to keep that stream running for sometimes 2 days after the rains had stopped. So, I just wanted to make sure if that was being addressed as well, just to make sure that cuz that is in that wetland kind of um area right there. Um if that was anything that you guys looked into.

I wasn't aware of that. Um I'm happy to meet you out there and go over that with you. Um if you reach out to Richard or Betsy, they can give you my phone number and I'm happy to meet you. Okay. Thank you. So, that's the overview, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Thank you. Um, I understand that we need some we need to do some work here uh with peer review and all of that, but I just wanted to give you the the big picture. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Okay. So, um, what's the thought on the peer review? I know you said it was going for quote. Um, is it something that if it's importantly expensive, you want to see if we go without? What are your thoughts there, Rich? Uh, no. I think the question will be to let's see what it comes back with and and then if there's particular things that may need to be adjusted, I guess, but I wouldn't go without. I think it's important that okay that it's done. Um, and so do we have any idea from beta when to expect completion?

Uh, I would imagine I probably would have it this week. Um, and so the the goal would be to get it shortly. Okay. And then send it to the applicant. Hopefully they don't have any issue with it. um agree to sign the scope and uh provide the fee for that and then have it ready for the November 10th meeting. Okay. Um hopefully we should be lined up for November 10th. I suppose if we're not ready then you can always continue continue but there will be the the public hearing for the scenic road the street opening. What time is that at? Do we have that? Oh stepped out.

She stepped out. I think we're going to make it so they're coincide together though. So, whatever. 7:30. I don't think we have anything scheduled. I think we'll just marry him up at 7:30 cuz you did 7:15 for Valley Street, I think, for next month, right? We did 7 for Valley. Oh, 7. Okay. Yeah. Betsie's on our way back. I have that on for 7:30. Rich 7:30 on the Okay. So, we'll go with the 7:30. 7:30. Okay. So, I'm looking for a motion to continue 50 Fruit Street to our November 10th meeting at 7:30. So, move. Do I have a second? Second.

All those in favor? I. All those opposed. All right, the motion approves. We'll see you in November 10th. Um hopefully we'll have more information by then. And uh hope Mike and Dan, you get to meet out on site and see what's going on with that driveway and that possible culvert. Awesome. Thanks everyone. Perfect. Great. Thank you for your time. Have a good night. Appreciate it.

All right. Moving into a equally exciting topic. We have a 7:45 public hearing to discuss the proposed zoning bylaw amendments for the November 12th, 2025 special town meeting. You ready? Notice is hereby given in accordance with chapter 4A of the Mass General Law that the Norfol Planning Board will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, October 14th, 2025 at 7:45 p.m. at the Norfol Town Hall, One Liberty Lane, Norfolk to discuss proposed changes to the Norfick zoning bylaw, which have been submitted to the warrant for the November 12th, 2025 special town meeting. Complete copies of the text of the amendments are available for review at the Town of Norfolk website or in the planning board office during the hours of 9 to 6, Monday through Thursday. The proposed zoning bylaw amendments are as follows. One, to see if the town of Norfol will vote to amend the Norfick zoning bylaw by adding the attached language and bold print and deleting the strikethrough language to section 3106.5 and closure swimming pools and mobile homes or take any action in relation there too. two to see if the town of Norfolk will vote to amend the Norfick zoning bylaw by adding the following new language attached in bold print and delete the following strikethrough language to section 3108.3 affordable housing development or take any action in relation there too. All right, Rich, let's kick it off with 310-6.5. All right. You you saw the this article as you submitted to the warrant. The one thing you didn't see which was added when it went through council was the last sentences related to uh the consistency provision with state statute. So where if you have a manufactured home, you can have it up to a year if it was destroyed by fire or natural disaster. So to be consistent,

not have a conflict with that, that that provision was added to it. Um the other provisions why they're there is there's instances now where folks have made significant investments in their homes and they'll they're not really habitable while some of that work is going and we've we had there's been two of them. One was a a significant uh project in terms of he was completely out. He was cited for for a violation because he had a a camper on site to live there temporarily. This was in front of ZBA. It was. Yeah, it was.

So they they upheld the zoning enforcement from the zoning enforcement officer. So he vacated the home, had to find uh temporary housing. Um then shortly thereafter there was another one that was on Turner Street. U family making significant renovations to their home and they had a a camper on the site with on their property that they were living out of it temporarily while the construction going was going on in their home. And for them it became, you know, became more apparent where they have kids in the school system. And as weighing out all your options, that was a a more manageable option for them to to maintain their occupancy in their on their property while they're doing renovations to the property. um as that turned down that particular one they end up completing it before the ZBA had to make a decision on it and so that one went away. So then question came forward and that particular home owner did a lot of research and presented to the ZBA that these are real things that come up particularly as you you know make renovation changes to your house.

Yeah. at some point it becomes not really that habitable and you need to and it's not so easy to find uh temporary housing. Um so they choose this path and so the thought is to add that provision in the zoning bylaw. It'd be tied 6 months which would be consistent with a a building permit for the work and be discretionary through the building commissioner. So that's the the purpose of this bylaw change. And then at 6 months they could get an extension extension if they needed. Yes. But it's a max of 12 months is how it reads at the end. Yes. Yes.

Okay. Has everybody gone through the uh language? Yes. Any questions, concerns? No. [Music] public.

I'm just reading that last line. Notwithstanding this bylaw on that. So, we're adding the part the beginning part about, you know, if you're doing a substantial renovation, you could live on your property in a temporary home. And then also separate from that. Yeah, it was embedded in the bylaw in the top section of it. So instead of word spinning that, it just added it as a that. Okay. So also if there was a natural disaster, you could have a mobile home. Okay. Yeah.

I have a question that doesn't actually pertain to this as it's written. I think this is fine. I'm just if it's the middle of February and they're in a un a non-inssulated trailer, that's like a board of health issue at that like it like there's there's things in place to like the building commissioner would be able to say like, "Hey, you can't do this for health reasons cuz it's unsafe." I think that's why we go to the point of calling it a temporary home as opposed to like a travel trailer or something like that. Um, that's a that's a good question. I would think, you know, this is could be somebody would exercise judgment and not put themselves in a situation where they're going to be too cold that they would have to find alternative.

But I think from a jurisdiction perspective, it's not on us. I think the closest thing would be building commissioner or board of health. Yeah. Okay. All right. So then I'm I'm fine with this one. I would look for a motion to approve. Was there any public uh any public comments? Comments from the audience? Awesome. All right. Um so looking for a motion to approve uh section 310-6.5 as written in the agenda for the town meeting November 12, 2025. So move. I have a second. Second. All those in favor I. All those opposed?

Hearing none. The motion carries. All right. So, let's go to the Meteor 310-8.3 formal housing development. Okay. [Music] So in terms of the version that was submitted for the warrant to placed on the warrant, this version there was some changes in terms of just cleaning out the language that was in it. Um not material changes. Uh but probably should step back from that and tell what the overall purpose is first before we get into the details. Right. Uh so as you know uh back in 2021 there was a citizen petition to change the inclusionary bylaw. There was a few changes to that uh bylaw. Um one was a rounding up. There wasn't a previously rounding up if it was.5. Um that remains in this bylaw. That's not changing. Um then the the threshold trigger point was went from it was 10 previously brought down to six. Um this bylaw proposes to keep it at the same terms of that that point starting point. Um but then within that change it was a scaling provision. So it went from five to uh well sorry not five six 6 to 12 at 10% and then went 13 units to 19 units became 15% and then above 20 units 20 or more became 20%. And so we have at that particular time there was potential raising the point that that might by

scaling it up. There might be situations where a developer would choose a path of doing 40B rather than going under the zoning bylaw whether it's multif family or single family home cuz we're nowhere close to 10% for and alternatively not build at all which is what we have seen but we're not built at all. So um well we've seen both. Yeah, fair.

We've seen some building but uh after that was enacted and we have experienced in terms of developments that well one particular subdivision that was uh open space subdivision if you remember I know history-wise I think you were the only one on the board Gary which was Cranberry Heights. Yes. Um they actually was uniquely they would withdrew withdrew with prejudice. Really? Yes. They drew with prejudice cuz they didn't want anybody else to come back in with the project cuz they were trying to purchase

this the slattery property at the time. They didn't have it under agreement. Um and there was issues more related around Buckley man and blasting and wells and so forth and so on. So

anyway, that that went by the boards. Um and then the bylaw, they then moved forward. The land was up for right of first refusal before the town to purchase it. The town declined to purchase the slattery property. That was the second time actually. Well, maybe third actually. Two that I know of. Might have been the third one I think. Um and so that point they went forward and they purchased the land. So when they purchased it, they said that you know with 20% it's really more economically feasible for to add go to 25% which is the minimum amount for affordable housing and go through 40B because then I then they have the ability to override the local zoning the locality or density and then it went from 21 to 53 or 51. I think it is 53. I think it's 53. Um, and so they filed with Mass Housing and they have a project eligibility letter and they're sitting they haven't they haven't filed yet, but that's one we're aware of it um where it did make a difference. And then the much talked about Pawnville Crossing in uh Ponville, which they were pursuing multif family development under the multif family bylaw in Panville. Um and they just purchased some property and then simultaneously the bylaw changed. They were looking at like 48 units originally. um they weren't buying all these other properties up at the time. And so then it kind of mushroomed into well we can't make it work under the bylaw so we're going to go 40B and so they then bought other parcels

and assembled and they have a project eligibility letter for 200 multif family units. The town did in the spring extend the MBTA district over it. All indications are that they are going to go through the MBTA which will bring it down to 140 units. Abudding that in the kind of in the middle section of it um is another development that that one is a 40B as well for 59 units. And then going through the zoning analysis with Town Center, the question was asked, is that inclusionary? Does it have an impact on mixeduse development? And the answer was yes. It's not the single factor, but it certainly has a factor in terms of doing mixeduse developments. Um, so the prevailing thought is to bring it back to where it was. We still start at six, but we're at 10%. Um, and then we've added a a buyout number. If you want a buyout, payment of L of $350,000 was board discussed. Presently, under the present formula, it's $511,520,000 to buy out for one unit. Um because the median single family home price in town is $80011,000 that we just to do the math. Um and that's a significant amount of money. Um, in cases of smaller projects, there's value in giving consideration for a developer to buy out because it's better for the old for the neighborhood and then for an affordable buyer because of what we see in new family construction are much larger homes. Um, and hopefully at some point we might see smaller ones, but

quite frankly, they're not there yet. So, they kind of stick out potentially cuz you need to blend in, right? So they need to be able to be indistinguishable for the other market rate homes. So the number was set at 350. It will need to be revisit as we go up, you know, as we move forward. But that number was established as a reasonable amount that would provide some money into the trust to add more affordable housing. But yet at the same time have a number where you you can look at a development have a discussion where maybe you might want to encourage the developer to buy out. Um there is a vent rental as well can buy out too. That's not in the previous version of it. That's really kind of the fundamental was of it. We changed DHCD to executive off of the housing level communities and we did add which I think is important too which is this version there is an anti-segmentation provision in it so you can't you know divide your property to try to get under right

the uh inclusionary bylaw um which could very well happen um if this goes through as is that will prevent that from happening as well. So that's another provision to kind of hold whole thing consistent. So that's kind of the summary of it. I'll pause now. [Music] So I'll start with the board. Um we spent some time reviewing this a little bit.

Any questions, comments, or concerns? I don't think we need to go through it line by line. I did notice uh Rich under the table for affordable units where it says note notes been crossed off. We have an asterisk next to the construction of affordable units. I cannot for the life of me find where that asterisk lines up towards. Where's the table? It was in the table. Uh the old table.

Okay. So, we need to get rid of that and replace where this should go. Thank you guy. Don't and I think it's going to slide up right behind a fractional unit of.5 or more shall be rounded up to the next whole unit. So it just get added as part of the paragraph. Yeah, it'll be added to the paragraph above. All right. So taking a note on that for the the vote.

So the asterisk should be stricken and not underlined. Correct. Yeah. And then it just goes to Right. And then it just goes paragraph after. Yeah. It'll just go behind unit. Okay. That may just be a red line issue. Red line goes through the middle. It looks like it's keeping the asterisk. It's very possible that it's struck. Yeah, it definitely is a red line issue.

Yeah, it is in your I think the share drive. Okay. Uh before I open it up to the audience, any questions, comments from the board? All right. Hearing none, do we have any comments from the audience? Mr. Diamond coming up. [Music] My water a little bit. Welcome back.

Thank you everybody. My name boy. My name is Peter Diamond from 84 Secon Street. I am uh a member recent addition to the North Fork Municipal Affordable Housing Trust and I'm also a member of the Community Preservation Committee. Um first I would like to say that I'm a little behind the ball with regard to the actions of the planning board on the inclusionary zoning bylaw due to a family crisis. As many of you know, I would typically be online attending your meetings. Uh but in the last 48 hours I have reviewed some of the videos in your discussions on the inclusionary zoning bylaw change. Um where do I start? Uh so I'd like to provide some comment on Rich's three examples of projects that went to 40B. the one being Cranberry Heights, Palmville Crossing, and Pawnville Station. Um, it has been said the main reason for the change back to 10% has been said that caused developments to go the 40B route, the comprehensive permit. Right? So, Cranberry Heights, I'm just going to tell you what that is. It's 51 single family homes on approximately 30 acres in the R3 zoning district which requires 55 thou,000 square ft for the lots and 200 ft of frontage. Under 40B, the developer will have 18,000 ft lots with 20 ft of frontage. These are the main waiverss the developer seeks. The density at Cranberry Heights will be at less than two units per acre. This development will be like a traditional subdivision

with a bit more density. And the best part, Norfolk will get 13 affordable units. All right. Pawnville Crossing. Palmville Crossing is a 200 unit apartment complex on 7.75 acres of land which is in the C1 on highway zoning district off Pine Street and also on Valley Street. So the part on Valley Street is in the C1D off Highway. So it's a split zone the the 7.75 acres of land. Approximately 3 acres of this land is in the C1 on highway which does not allow residential development period. A portion of this land had prior approval for an 8home 40B project which was called Whitney's Way which has been swallowed up by the Pawnville Crossing development which was also partially located in the C1 onhighway zone which does not permit residential development. This is the main reason these projects went for the comprehensive permit. And then with regard to Pawnville Station, Pawnville Station is a 59 unit apartment complex on 2.14 acres in the C1D offhighway zoning district. This project would not get the density without a comprehensive permit that it seeks. The de the development is actually in the MBTA overlay zone which was created recently which allows 18 units per acre at a 10% affordable. This would have allowed approximately 38 units at a 10% affordable which includes four units and the developer still chose to go the 40B option. Next, I would like to point out that

Norolk has eight 40B projects that were all approved during a time here in Norol when the inclusionary zoning bylaw was at 10%. The inclusionary zoning bylaw, in my opinion, has little to do with the reasons a developer chooses to move forward with a 40B development. And I'll quickly go through that list of projects. In 2016, Boyd's Crossing of Main Street has 40 units. In 2017, Lake Bullman Farms at 80 82 Cleveland Street has 32 units. In 2017, the Village at Norfor at 25 Rockwood Road has 32 units. In 2019, the Enclave at Village Green has 40 units. Number five, in 2020, the residence at Northfor Station, which is 194 Main Street, has a proposal for 32 units. They haven't gone forward on this project. They have already uh seen extensions on their special permit twice through the ZBA. So that project still could be developed or or not. So we'll see. Number six is Lakeland Farms at 144 Secon Street. We all remember this. The the whole neighborhood was up in arms about 104 units, but that has 44 units. That resulted in 44 units. That's on 20 acres. That's a beautiful development. The houses in there are going for a million plus and the affordables are 350. Uh Weights Crossing on Lawrence Street has 64 units and uh Whitney's Way which was swallowed up uh um by Palmville Crossing which was at 35 Pine Street was approved for just eight houses and that was the entrance for that was off Pine Street which is uh on Highway District. So that's the reason they went for 40B. Um

then my next comment on the change back to 10% if you'll permit through the the chair that I can continue. Did you want to pause for any comments from the board here? Any comments at this point? Okay,

continue. Thank you. Um, recently a wellrespected developer who's done many 40B projects in this area came in front of the Norolk Municipal Affordable Housing Trust and said the comprehensive 40B process gives him assurance the development will happen. He explained that many times when trying to approve a project with the planning board, there would be repeated engineering and design changes that would result in a project that was very costly in the at the approval process and sometimes was even denied. Many other reasons to do a 40B project may involve wetlands and the state requirements are less stringent than the local conservation regulations. We also need to look at the waiverss from local bylaws requested by a comprehensive permit which include for example more density, reduce lot sizes, waiverss on road length and width, Cape Cod BMS over granite curbs, for example, just to name a few. Boyd's Crossing on Main Street had three dozen waivers from the Norfork bylaws, not just the ICB where they were concerned about. Lakeland Farms on Cleveland Street had four dozen waivers. In my opinion, the change back to 10% will have little impact on to deter 40B development in Norfor. The developers will choose the 40B path due to the many reasons other than just our exclusionary zoning bylaw. I have asked you all in the planner for consideration to to keep the 15% cap in in my uh table um instead of rolling back to the 10% but this proposal was not considered. I think it was considered but in the end you all decided to just go 10% across town. I am pleased that the starting point of the proposed change stays at six units

and the language that fractions of point.5 or more round up to the next whole unit. I have concluded that the change back to 10% was brought forward in my opinion without merit. To outright present to the citizens of Norolk that this change is needed because Norol's current inclusionary zoning bylaw creates 40B development is unfounded. Uh those are my comments on the inclusionary zoning bylaw. And next, if we could go through some of the uh language in 310-8.3 line by line, if we could possibly pull Is there any comments on that?

Exactly. Yes. Any comments from the board? Sue, would you like to make some comments? Sure. Please come on over. can give you one. Thanks. Good evening. Well, how lucky am I? I will just preface that I don't want it to be a continual back and forth. Absolutely.

Uh Sue Jacobson, affordable housing director. I I just want to bring up uh one point that I think it's important for the board to know. Um Rich and I uh are involved in all of the pre-construction uh meetings with developers. I'm included if there's an affordability factor. Um otherwise, I I don't participate. Um and and we've sat with the with different developers who have told us frankly that the reason that they've gone this route is because of the increase in the inclusionary zoning bylaw and that if they're forced to do 20% they'll just do 25% to get the density and the num the higher number of units. So I I just want people to be aware that it's not uh you know something that we've sat down and just decided that we think that this is a great idea to return to it. It it absolutely is coming from feedback that we have received in meetings. Those meetings are not before boards. They're not before other uh the the typically the building commissioner does attend. I attend. Rich attends. Police chief, fire chief. any of the department heads that have an impact or want to speak to those uh new developments coming to town and provide feedback to the developers. Um so I just wanted to kind of make that clear that this is not without meetings and thoughts and discussion with folks that are involved in in making those decisions.

I appreciate that. Yeah, I think um from your comments and Mr. Diamond's comments, it's easy for us to kind of identify that it's not just one thing at the end of the day. Correct. Right. Like Correct. I think it's easy to say, "Yeah, if you're going to hit me with 20 because I want to do more than 20 units, it I can just go to 25 and really recoup my cost at that perspective and at that point for some of these smaller locations that you had noted, Mr. Diamond, um you know, they weren't coming up to that 20% obviously, but they did have other benefits by doing so. as you said, building in a highway restricted zone. Um, and additionally, like the the number of waiverss that they were requesting, right?

Building in Norfolk is not easy. Uh, when I joined the planning board, one of the comments that I heard was, "What are the first two letters in Norfolk?" No.

No. Exactly. And so, you know, that's something that I think we need to come to terms with and we need to figure out how do we move in a manner that is beneficial to not just the town and our residents, but those who are looking to build and make more housing in here. And how do we make sure that the housing isn't just for, you know, those that can afford above and beyond, but making it affordable for a larger amount of the population that's out there. Um, so that's I I think both of you are making amazing points and you know really I think the board really needs to listen to what both of you are saying and take that into our consideration as we look at additional bylaws in the future as well cuz it's not just about this affordability piece but I feel like we're constantly hanging our hat on it

and we need to stop. We need to note that it is part of it but it's not the end all of it. Thank you. Thank you for recognizing that. Any other comments?

Align with what you were just saying. Um but and I'll just repeat some of it, right? It's complex complex soup of variables and um a lot of this stuff needs to really be driven at the state level, but at the local level, we can, you know, I think Mr. Mr. Diamond made some pretty good points on things that we can look at uh in future, but you know, for now um you know and I you know I do recall Mr. Diamond that this was your citizen position that that you know made these numbers the way they are and you know respect for that and your ability to get everybody on the fly. This was like an on the-fly thing, you know, that you kind of pitched and we all voted for. Um but um I think this is one of the things that we have to scale back but um not lose sight of the other things that that we have to tweak as well moving moving forward. So conversation will be going on for a long time.

Agree. So I guess I would add because this I think it goes back six years at the time when I was clerk and I used to summarize the notices I was getting from all the other towns and at that time uh which precedes the meeting where you put this forward there were many towns that were doing something very similar. I don't know where they were with regard to achieving their 10% but uh towns like Walpole Steel was one that did

yeah there there was a few towns that ended up uh capturing getting captured in the notes and I remember presenting it uh at the monthly meeting. I remember you were listening at the time uh shortly after that it moved forward in town but it isn't like this is uh uh unheard of prior to when it got passed here. Uh I and I don't know the status of it right now in the other towns if there's still and obviously if you had the 10% you wouldn't have to worry about people going to 40B. Um but I I can't say where in uh my perception this had any impact one way or another. Um it is a safer thing to do once you're close to the 10%. 100% agree.

Yeah. And I think that you know to the point um is that you know it's it's a balancing here and I think that's the you know people we hear often times they they talk about the amount of development they're seeing their town and the changes that that are occurring which they do. Um but we also don't want to necessarily force changes that otherwise maybe could be prevented or or design a different way and I will say that you know we are as I mentioned the last time there are stone in particular was the one that got challenged and lost. It hasn't gone through the appellet level yet, but um as more towns have inclusionary bylaws, there could be a pressure point where developers decide they're going to take it all the way through the courts to say that it's a it's a regulatory taking.

Um and then you lose everything. I think we're trying to be mindful and I think we want to have manage growth and we also don't want to be the one that's out in front sitting before the the courts because we're up at a high percent and now we're you know putting ourselves

I think we've been managing it creatively right like with the MBTA overlay I think that was chef's kiss that was an amazing way for us to execute against that um you know I think there's other opportunities for us as Well, as we move forward, um, you know, particularly, it would be great to understand all of these different, um, waiverss that are being requested for these 4DBs and getting a consolidated list of those and just really understanding is this still serving the purpose or are we just being too restrictive for the sake of restriction. Yeah. So, right off the bat, the one that's going to jump out at you is that we require 200 ft of frontage. Yeah. You know, 55,000 ft of

55,000 square feet. And the length of a dead end street is 500 ft, right? So those right off the bat are the ones that jump out at you. I mean,

you can't you can't go into a property. Um, and Lakeland Hills is probably the perfect perfect example of multiple tries um, in terms of developing that property. I mean, you to get to the piece where you can develop, it's like 1,500 ft before you even get to where you can really create lots. So, those are the things. 500 ft is quite frankly, that's an urban length of a street. It's not it's not a length of a street in a rural community. You have 200 feet of furniture. So, that's definitely a driving big driving factor um that we need to take a look at. Um and you know si lot sizes I mean I we don't want to go too far because then you know but it kind of cascades on itself. The town's estab I mean the original lot sizes were 15,000 square ft

right. Mhm. Back when it first got adopted the zoning bylaws back in the 50s but it's multi-layer clearly. No we're not and I fully agree that it's definitely multi-layer. Um, so we still need to continue to look at the other things and we have to be creative about it because we don't want to like open up a can of worms where we end up with one acre of property with like 16 units on it in the middle of a a very much like old neighborhood of other 1acre properties with single family homes on it. You know, we've got to

to to Peter's point the Enclave example that went through long battles with the conservation commission. and they want to try to have a wetland crossing to get over to Borman Street which was denied and so yeah so there are definitely all those variables. I think the other thing we have to be mindful of is if I've learned anything from attending your your meetings is that you know we have some zoning that's existed for very very very long times and we're starting to or at least the meetings that I'm attending I I see you working through some of those things that were implemented in the 40s and the 50s and I I think it brings to light that maybe some of these need to be a little bit more flexible and And uh they are going to be things that we that you this board can't make a decision on in 2025 and expect that in 2070 it's going to stay the same.

Right. 100%. Great. It was a line by line. You don't if through the chair there's no other comments. I'm good with that. Let's do it. So if we can pull up 310-8.3 and uh the first section I have a couple of uh comments on is B. applicability. Thank you. Just want to have everybody clued in on B applicability before I speak. Yep. Yep. Yep. We ready? Mhm.

So, I'm curious uh and would like a better understanding of why we added the section of MGL chapter 1, chapter 41, subsection 81 peak um to the language. What what's the driver behind adding that language in our bylaw? So, if somebody were to file an ANR plan, that's the section of the statute that will fall on 81P to create approval not required on on a street in town that's already approved.

Yeah. So if someone were to do for example on Main Street at the corner of Myrtle there's a long field and you take a right they wanted to do six houses on that myrtle around the corner approval is not required nor is affordable housing right? No somebody could divide the land and then fall below so you wouldn't get anything out of it. They could Okay. I'm just trying to get a better understanding instead of So it protects Northwork by doing this.

Yes. Because if you have enough frontage, let's say you can create six house lots along a long stretch of frontage. This provision says you're going to need one affordable. You need one affordable, which we don't have today. So that's why So this says you would need one or you wouldn't need one. You would. It says this bylaw does not apply for something that's that's right now. So nobody's filed anything as of right now. So now we're into everything is passed.

So it's basically saying it doesn't apply to it and then at the end it says no project may be divided or phased to avoid the requirement of this section. So through the chair, if I read this sentence, it says does not apply to development under MGL41 section 81P. Is that how we read it? So it's actually anything that's been we don't have anything filed yet. So for instance, nobody's filed a form a plan. Nobody has, but we're putting the language in here. Yeah. So you have to have a start and time when this is going to be applicable. So from if this passes November 12th

Mhm. Then from that point forward, you're not going to be able to divide a property and void this requirement. Well, they wouldn't divide it. If they're going to build houses, it's not being divided. If they do ANR along Main Street and across Myrtle, put in 12 houses cuz they got 200 ft of frontage and whatever that zone requires, this bylaw does not apply. So for this for for affordable, does that does that make sense? I don't think your interpretations make sense in terms of this provision. Okay. Uh we can ask council to double check, but Richard, you're just saying it would not apply if that plan had already been submitted. Correct.

So that's basically so you're not changing the rules midstream on a project that's already under review. Correct.

But once this effect goes into November 12th, you have for that it does. I have no more comments on that. If we could um if you could allow us to move to let's see um 310-8.3 um A3 contribution of funds to the Norolk Municipal Affordable Housing Trust. Three is quite a long section. And um this is where you've you've added the language that the payment of Lou of $350,000. Um and then um my comment in the last sentence of the first paragraph says the planning board may consult with the Northfor affordable housing trust about payment in lie amount as to whether or not the payment in L is preferable to an affordable unit on or off site. So given that the affordable housing director's here, would would better language be shall instead of may?

Uh I may is really not a divisive verb. I think shall would say they have to come to us. So the answer to that question is that the planning board can't delegate their authority to another to the trust. So that's why it's may. They are the special permanent granny authority. So that's why so they don't have to consult with us on whether or not they're going to choose to. We had shall and it was changed. Okay, that explains that.

Okay. And then the second paragraph, if we could take a look at um the cash payment formula and timetable may be adjusted by the special permit granting authority from time to time through the issuance of guidelines and regulations. And I I can't understand the need for that sentencing there anymore if the payment is at a fixed amount of 350,000. So why would we have why would we need a timetable to adjust and so forth as this sentence says? I think that's just our mechanism of going back to changing it in the future.

And it's not necessarily fixed. It says a minimum of 350,000. So, we went back and forth on this in a in a previous meeting where we were trying to figure out how do we put something in there that doesn't stay that number forever and be able to adjust that without having to go back to town meeting every single time when we're just really looking at a formula that changes constantly with with housing values. And I think that that sentence has been in the um

it's been in there for a while. So it isn't anything that was brought into this for for the 350,000 that just kind of my interpretation is I don't even understand why it's needed because you have a fixed amount now. So there what formula are we talking about? What guidelines and what regulations? Oh Peter. Wow. So we had all these conversations. You had them? I did watch the meetings. It was a fun call. It was really we went through all it was it was in a public forum. Yeah. In a meeting and two meetings because we were like wait what is it based on? Should we have a table and then we continued it

because I brought it up and I was a hard ass on it for a while. We need something talked about it in the second meeting and y'all just talked me down from there. But basically it's different every time you make a calculation. Yeah. Right now it's constantly changing. number is fixed to Peter's point because it is 350. Well, the minimum minimum the minimum correct and the timetable I know when you did to the the previous um payment loop that was done there was a special they through the permitting process they the board and the applicant gave a delivery time for the payments schedule.

Yeah. For example, the development on Norway farms where there's payment on L for one unit. If you built four houses, you pay a fixed amount and built the next one. So I can understand that timetable for payment. So is that is that what is for? Correct.

Okay. I'm done with that. If any if you all done with that, I'd like to move on to the next comment. And that's the part where you've deleted the part that this shall not apply to a rental development. So meaning that you can take payment in lie for a rental unit of $350,000. So, uh, through the chair, if you give me a minute to just, um, gather my thoughts here that I did I did take a look through your videos at Northfor Cable TV for July 8th, August 12th, and September 9th along with a recent October 1st advisory board meeting. And there was absolutely no discussion or explanation of the payment in loo component as it relates to rental units. So I' I'd like to have a better understanding of does $350,000 is that reasonable for a rental unit when that number was basically created for a single family home unit in what I saw with your discussions. So, you know, was there consideration of that amount for a rental unit? Do do you know, you talk about being challenged in court. Would that be challenged in court of of a developer having to pay $350,000 for a rental unit if you wanted to buy out instead of doing that? And one example could be you're moving to change Pville Cross into an MBTA which is 140 units which is only 14 units of rental um affordable housing at 10% if he buys out those 14 units. Um we we have no affordable units when

that when that's done. I you know this all goes against the housing production plan and our need for affordable housing in this town at and rental units. So just to clarify the Palmville Crossing is under the MBTA. So that that has its own inclusionary provision 10%. Correct. And there's no there's no buyout. There's no buyout on that. Okay. So we would get the 14 unit we get the 14 units. So having said that, why why did we create this? What why were we looking to eliminate rental units for a payment in L?

Again, the it it's a tool. It's an option. It doesn't mean the planning board has to, you know, hear an offering if that was the case from a developer to um do a payment in LO. I mean, more likely than not, I mean, it's hard to say, but I think it allows us the conversation, right? This is the option that we have on the table and we can say yes, this made sense or no, it doesn't made sense. Obviously, we're going to have you in the room so that we can discuss it. But sometimes it makes more sense to have cash in hand so that we can do something somewhere else as opposed to the location where it's being proposed.

So So on that note, we received through your meetings $300,000 for payment in Lou at project off Medway Street. How has that money been spent for for affordable housing? Um, I don't think we've been able to purchase a unit since since that development, but that money came in, Peter, over several years. It, you know, it was 60,000, I think, for every four units sold. And that project probably went over 3 years. So, I shouldn't be quick to say that I don't think we've bought anything. I'd have to go back and look at our last purchase, which I believe was on Mirror Lake, and we could have had two or three payments from that subdivision go towards the purchase of that home. But I'd have to I'd have to double check those dates. I'm happy to get back to you with that. But it did take Mr. Kaine, I think, probably almost 3 years to get through that project and get the total amount paid.

Yeah. So when it comes to a rental loan unit, I just don't see taking the payment in Lou creating a one for one rental unit in any way anywhere in this town and I I just don't see that that language should be in there. It's just my comment on that. I appreciate it and it's something that we can take under consideration. Absolutely. But I think it does open that conversation for us. Thank you. That's all I have for tonight. Thank you for uh allowing me to speak

and I just want to take a moment to thank you um considering everything that's happened on your side um you taking the time out watching those videos consolidating these notes coming to the board and bringing all these concerns. It's always appreciated and it's always a pleasure to have you. Thank you. Thank you for everything you do for the town. Thank you. Thanks Peter.

All right. I just have a copy of my Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So, having heard all the comments, unless there are more. Okay. Um, I'm looking for a motion to approve section 310-8.3 affordable housing development for the November 12th, 2025 special town meeting. So moved. I have a second. Second. All those in favor? I I as revised. as revised. Yes. As revised for both of them. For both. Well, no. For the second one. Yeah.

Um all those uh opposed hearing none. Motion carries. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. All right. Uh master plan implementation committee discuss the creation of a committee. Can we have a committee for the committee here? Thank you. So

appoint the committee. So I did provide a example of so it's a mix of you know some committees are a select board appointment some are created through the planning board. So as in this there's definitely options in terms of how you want to create it and then who would want to serve on it. So, I gave you some examples just, you know, search to see what some of the other towns have done. Um, I will say that I think it it does need to happen. Um in terms of what option you can certainly um maybe you want to have some discussion with the select board and kind of get their thoughts on open you know talk about who would who would be the appointing could I suppose it could even be a joint too you know may um so the it's open terms of how what best fits for what you think would be appropriate here and then how many members would be on it and where are they coming from? So is there it's it can be pretty tough to grab from that same pool of members that are already on existing boards and committees cuz they have a lot of other commitments too. Um, in particular, I think back from when you did the master plan, the conservation commission was I don't think they weren't really able provide anybody with their bandwidth in terms of somebody to sit on that committee. And then once we get through the whole open space

recreation plan update, that's going to need its own implementation committee cuz that was something that didn't exist before to have that populated people who are going to be kind of the the representatives from different entities to make sure that plan gets implemented. So, you know, it's and then the size obviously how how big of a committee you want to be. So, what's the timeline?

It's your timeline. We're probably I would say probably past due almost. We're getting close to cuz we're now a year into the the plan. Um so, I would think we would want to try to get something moved forward. When can we get on the agenda with the select board to talk to them about this? October 20th. What should we Okay, so there's owner in the action plan that is in the folder. Do you have um proposed owners for each of the areas?

Yes. um shouldn't we just if those are going to be the leads for each of these areas then shouldn't that answer our question because it's by department right so like there's land use there's planning board there's department of public works there's cultural council I mean first I don't I don't know that we all agree on the owners cuz we haven't I don't think we've talked about that in a prior meeting so I guess we'd have to review that but then wouldn't that be the own like each one of these has its own owner once it's all agreed. So then that seems like it would be at least a starting point for the implementation team, somebody from each one of these areas. If we're going to have owners and we're going to manage this as a project, then those

it's really more the the implementation committee is kind of the management like so who are they going to report to in terms of that? That's kind of the the concept of it. I'm going to report to a whole committee. Yeah. Oh wow. or it could be I feel like like one project manager is usually good. No, but I mean in terms of their area, it's going to be divided, right, amongst different tasks, implementation things. So, they're going to need to their own people to their own people delegate to.

They're going to delegate their own people and then you're going to want to they're going to have to report back that they've at least accomplished the one of the objectives or not or why not, you know, to kind of oversee it more the management structure. I the implementation committee is more the manageable structure, right, to oversee it because it's going to be divided. Um, and then to your point, I mean, some of these things might be divided within their own little sub implementation, who's going to do it. Mhm. Too. Um, but generally that's how it's kind of structured kind of a very government structure kind of way.

Yes. government kind of structure thing. I mean it doesn't you know it's is a living breathing document so you know you could actually if you wanted to manage it yourself in terms of the board the planning board you know it's your you know you you voted the plan you could not necessarily rely on a on an implementation committee and you can get you know report back on different tasks and you know we get reports back on where we are in this project in terms of the implementation. So that that's certainly an option too. Um but it just needs it just to the point is we don't it can't sit on you really don't want to sit on the shelf, right? So these things need to be actively

engaged in to make sure they're

there's movement towards completion of it or what are the issues or stumbling blocks that might be uncovered like trying to move it forward. So, um, you know, that's that's kind of really the, you know, basis to have a committee. But to my earlier point, maybe that's not that might be a harder fit here with everybody, you know, already tapped out. Or maybe it's more geared towards those people, citizens that want to be involved, but they're not necessarily on a boarding committee. It's an opportunity for them to be engaged in the process and learn things and you know somewhat in terms of like the citizen academy right we're going through that exercise for people to participate these are goals objectives and from the town's people so maybe it's it certainly could be more citizen driven you know

can we start with that as a a reach out yeah can we Hey all of you all out there in the internet, we could want to join the committee let us know. Yeah. What in terms of starting you would I think maybe five you know have a you know I think that's appropriate you know at least we could definitely do that. I would again we kind of touched on we didn't want away from but I could reach back out to people who were citizens involved in the master plan and steering committee to see if they then would want to serve on the

I think they'd probably I mean if it were me I would want to know what the expectations are how often are we going to meet you know like all of the I would want to know more detail before just yep I'm in because I don't know if I can actually commit to it. I'm looking for a nomination of Melissa to lead the organizing to create the committee. All right. I'll work on this this month. Well, in the next couple weeks, I'll I'll Rich, we can have our meeting. I'll come in and bring you coffee and we can chat and we can work through it. All right. I just said I haven't seen you in a long time. So, now we'll see each other. So, come on in. Can I say hello to Betsy? We could and then I'll we could provide a what I think should be a series of recommendations.

Yeah. And then bring it back to you guys. I think it made sense for you to reach out to folks as well and just say this is something that we're thinking of doing. Yeah. Certainly your interest. In the meantime, I could reach out to the the folks that are on the steering committee. Yeah. Yeah. I mean they Yeah. They already know what was involved last time. Yeah. Yeah. I mean I think it it will need to be formalized in terms of what their duties will be, duration and all that. We definitely need to put all that together.

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, what if we just sent a message out or Rich sends a message out to those folks? And just FYI, you know, we don't want this to just be a pretty document on a shelf. So, we are going to be um we're figuring out the next steps for putting a committee together to to implement everything that we worked on for 16 months. You know, if you'd like to help, you know, just feel free to raise your hand. Otherwise, we'll be sending out more formal communications. Perfect. When we know more. Yeah. Yeah, I think you can gauge input while we at the same time put together some sort of strong proposal for what the actual structure um and commitment level would be. Okay, I love it. All right, so thank you. You're welcome.

We're going to have Thank you, chat. Come back. Oh, I miss her. I thought you said we're going to have Chad come back. I was like, what? I would love that. Can we fly him in? He said Chad and I immediately thought Chad GBT GBT. That's what I thought you were going but I Nice. I was like you're getting AI. Awesome. And you know what we can do? We can meet and go through what we think. I did AI by the way. So if you see the M dashesh if there's M dashes through I love M dash. You would never be able to tell if it was me or a chat GPT cuz I use M dashes in my regular just for the heck of it. I put in there in your master plan the implementation committee. So, if you see that everything that's pulled through together from that, that was Chad.

I love it. You're modernizing. Nice. Let's do it. I was reading I was reading that tonight eating dinner and I said to my wife, I I think this came from Chachi. But good for you. Get the paid subscription to really uh up the of the game. Paid subscription is worth it. Yeah, that was it's definitely worth it. That was a free uh Yeah, but it's good to play around with it first. Make sure you like it before you spend the 20 bucks a month. It's worth it. Just Worth it though. Yeah. Well, all right. Moving on. Town planner updates. I just Wait, did we skip 28 long? No, no, no. We didn't skip it. We didn't do it. We didn't do it.

All right. So, yeah. I don't have any I don't have any further updates. We can just go to 28 Long Meadow. Yep. 28 Long Meadow. Um, this is when we're supposed to start with the uh the hammering of finds.

Yeah. So we have not as you know received a stormwater permit earth removal bylaw. Um going back to the stormwater bylaw some things that one be the recommendation I think from the my recommendation to the board would be to designate me as your agent because that's something that's in the bylaw. I think in this particular instance for now just for this project and then once we kind of settle out in terms of you know a DPW director the interim cuz there's a lot so the finding provision in here runs through DPW director um so for now I think it talking with council to you know vote to authorize me to be your agent so I can defining and administration of it for now and then we'll revisit it at some point in terms of when there's a permanent uh director but we haven't received anything. Um I think it's I think it is time um and it can be done on it doesn't have to be consecutive. It can be random but I think it it should start now.

Yep. say on a monthly cadence. H Yeah, I think it I think I would do it I would I would propose that we do it daily. Yeah, cuz the fine's per day. It's per day. Yeah, right. So, if you do it monthly, you can't just batch. That's true. Right. It's got to be It's got to be So, it will it will require a little bit of u

postage. postage because we have to provide a letter um with a fine each day. Um so and when I say each day, I will be proposing 4 days a week coincide with our 4-day work week. Yeah, that's fine. Um not, you know, so like I I sat in on the last con meeting, doesn't like there's just no there's just no traction on this. like I feel like the gentleman was here 3 months ago and seemed like it's like yeah um that I'm going to figure it all out. So that just

you had people on board and did the engineer say that they were in process too. Everybody they just they're ghosting everybody now.

We've been all indications we've been ghosted to this point. Yeah. Um, as you probably so the conservation commission did reach out to the D circuit writer because of concerns about some of the reportable concentrations. So it could be an MCP as contingency plan in terms of so that that if if it does take traction there, that's certainly going to amp things up significantly because now the D is going to be potentially involved with it. So, but yeah, we've been essentially ghosted to this point. We're not hearing anything out. Um, which

So, you you started writing letters about a fine and mailing them months ago. Well, I didn't know it was more was a threat. There were threats you mailed out. It would be would be. I get it. But now, now it's real. I'm asking for the board to vote to point authorize me to be your agent. and just start sending out fines because we want to have a record of that so it's in the minutes so in case we end up

So the motion has to be that we are going to appoint you as agent to handle the finding for the for the water management bylaw for 28 long metal road 28 road is the com issuing any fines no do they have they want they don't have authorities Uh, it's a little bit they do um under the wetland bylaw, but they haven't as of yet. Well, if the triggering D stuff, that's just as bad. I'd rather take the right.

Yeah. All right. So, I'm looking for a motion to approve Rich as the agent of the planning board for 28 Long Meadow Road storm water management and earth removal permit nonconformance. So, I would just just a friendly amendment to that. Authorize the director of planning and development to be your authorized agent. Fancy. All right. I would like to authorize the director of planning and development to act as the agent of the planning board of Norfolk um for 28 Long Meadow Road for non-conformance of the storm water management and earth removal permit requirement. So move. Do I have a second?

Second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Hearing none. The motion carries. Rich, get that stamp going. Thank you. Let's do it. All right. You said no updates. 2025 meeting schedule. I won't be able to join um I won't be able to join the November 10th meeting, Gary. Um that means I'm in charge. You are in charge. God help us all. You got to have the same amount of vigor and vinegar that I've been bringing to these meetings. And the humor and just the happy Gary, you did it before and it was the senior center one and that was that was very funny. Yeah. So, that was a So funny. Awesome. It was a good first one.

Polling the room. Any other unanticipated business? Hearing none, I'd love a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Do I have a second? Second. Second. All those in favor? I I. All those opposed. Have a good night before 9:00.