Planning Board - Regular Meeting

is going to be recorded and is broadcast or may be rebroadcast on Westford Cats. Uh before we begin, I'd like to congratulate Bob Schaffer on his election win. Welcome back, Bob, for a second term. Second consecutive term. I know you've been here before. My third. Congrats. Congratulations. U moving forward to open forum. Mr. Gowitz, do you have anything? Just if anybody is here for 37 P Road, the applicant did request to continue that matter without discussions in the June 2nd meeting. Uh so you don't anticipate anything going forward on that this evening? Yes. Um there will be a call for some citizen involvement and a couple of u studies that will be happening over the next year. So there's three different um activities that will be going on. There'll be the update to our open space and recreation plan as well as some monitoring. Uh there'll be a pedestrian master plan relative to the multif family housing uh overlay district. And the last one is a Route 40 corridor study. So in the next two weeks, we think there'll be some advertisements on the town's website. There'll be an opportunity for some volunteers to express their interest through the volunteer activity forum. So be on the lookout for that. Great. Thank you, Bob. You have a couple items here coming kind of off the campaign trails based on questions I've got. one, could we at a future planning board meeting maybe have a discussion and revisit the hybrid meeting with Zoom select board is now doing that. I know I talked to to Jeff and he thinks that with things that are happening in the Commonwealth, we have language that could ease up the concerns about public hearings, but it would allow participation from residents not being here in person and also probably improve the viewability u of our meetings visibility. So like to ask that that be a general discussion in the future. Uh

second, I'd like to follow up on what we had a discussion of last meeting and suggest that we schedule a discussion for what will be our board policy for when um uh one of our agenda items is is requested to be can't postponed after we've received the packet. Um we kind of had that discussion last time, but we didn't do anything official with that. So, I'd like to follow up with that. Um, another one is, and I don't want to go into any specifics, but for signed permits that come before us for excessive size, just like to establish a policy like when they were in a strip mall, one of the items I'd like to see us receive is a scale mockup of what that would look compared to the surrounding businesses as well, because it's kind of hard to judge scale when you just look at the size of the sign. And when they ask for something that let's say is 25% bigger, it may just be due to length, may not be due to massing. So just something that would allow staff to advise the applicant to better inform us and help us make that decision. And the last thing I just wanted to mention, and I mentioned this to town staff already, is how do we measure concerns about traffic from Boston Road? Um, I know we've got a really well thoughtout, it's looks well executed with temporary lights for a detour over to Tadmuk, but people are asking me about things like Conquered Road and Hilder Street already seeing um just an overflow because people are already finding what is the best workaround for themselves and they may not follow our detour signs. They may just do whatever they want to do. So, if somebody's going to towards Littleton, maybe that's the best way they do it is Hilderorth. But I do want to make sure we are aware of where the congestion points are and whether we should request some

alternative assistance if if it is getting too bad over that side of town. So that's it for tonight. All right. Anybody else have anything from open forum? No. Thank you. The audience open forum. Okay. Moving on. Our first public hearing is PB2505 37 P Road. The applicant has requested to continue this without discussion to our June 2nd meeting. Motion continue this. So moved. Second. Second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Uh we have PB25070 and 415 Grten Road as well as an unnumbered Grunt Road parcel. Uh application of Seal Harbor LLC for a special permit for a common driveway. Uh this will be the opening of the public hearing. So, can I get a motion to wave the reading? Some moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. Get a motion to open the public hearing. Some moved. Second. All those in favor say I. I. Mr. Waterman. Good evening, chair and members of the board. I'm Matt Waterman with Glac Consultants for the record. Uh here with me is Mark Gallagher with Seal Harbor LLC. Um we're here tonight for a common drive special permit um and storm water management permit modification for three parcels of land on Grten Road. The special permit for the common drive is for two of the lots and the modification of the stormwater permit is for three lots. Um the board is familiar with this property. There was an ANR application at your last meeting. Um kind of creating the lots. Um it's on the westerly side of Bluebrook on the south side of Graten Road near the Lon extension where it comes out on Route 40

um kind of north of um the Nabasset Lake um near Forest Road kind of in that area. I'm just west of Forest Road. But um lot six, seven, and eight. Um lot six is far right on this plan on the overhead. Seven is in the middle and then eight is to the far west. Um seven is under construction or excuse me, six is under construction. Um the red house that used to be there near Flushing Pond Road um has been torn down. Um and the driveway has been installed and they're working on the house. If you've driven down reporty, I'm sure you've seen it. Um the house is just visible as you're driving by. Um and then again to the to the west we have lot seven which actually has frontage on Route 40 as well. There's a stem that goes up kind of right where Joe is showing you um to Route 40 Graten Road. And then the lastly lot 8 has frontage on Lonway Extension. Um it's all residential A. There is a section of lot six that is resident business B. Um that house that used to be there used to be a TV repair shop. Um obviously that's no longer in use. Um and it's being utilized as as residential. Um lot six is just over 4 acres or 4.44 acres. Um lot 7 is 2.76 acres and lot 8 is uh just under 1 acre and.99 acres. Um we're here tonight um for the common drive for seven and eight. Um what that does is it eliminates a curb cut on Grten Road. Utilizing its frontage or that stem that goes along the side of 409 Graten Road um helps reduce clearing and grading. It eliminates a curb cut on

Route 40 um and puts the curb cut on on a lesser used road, Lonway Extension um and overall just creates less disturbance. I think is a from a planning standpoint is is is a better plan um approach. The the carbon driveway is relatively small. It's only about 50 ft in length. Um it would obviously be constructed in accordance with the carbon drive standards standards. The 16 ft wide with 3 foot wide stabilized shoulders. Um there's a small drainage area. There's an easement. Um, and then it would also include all the requirements for maintenance between the two homeowners of lot 7 and 8 um with a covenant. Um, that would be review and approved um down the road if this was to move forward. Um, the stormwater management permit is a modification of 6, seven, and 8. Um, the land actually in its entirety was included with the original stormwater management permit that was issued for six and seven. A was not a parcel at that point. It was just labeled as parcel A. Um but actually the area um in its entirety was was modeled during that stormwater permit. So we've simply updated that modific include the the additional clearing and grading with lot 8. Um there's additional roof drains for the for the house and then an additional rain garden. um engineering department has reviewed um both permits, the special permit and the stormwater management permit. Um there's a handful of comments. We've gone through them. We have no issues with any of the comments. Uh we'd be prepared to revise the plans and resubmit them before your next meeting. Um I know we also heard from the fire department and they did not have any comments um with the exception that they would reserve like in the building permit phase comments associated with like building permit

related items but they did not have any site development um comments. Um and then I think we heard from conservation commission we are we have filed with conservation commission to delineate the wetland that's to the west ofway extension that was originally delineated with the lakeside meadows. Um, we updated the wetland flags. Um, David Crossman with BNC Associates when we flagged Bluebrook and and the Wetland Associated um, with Bluebrook um, and we're in the process of getting that approved with the Conservation Commission. We're scheduled to be in front of them on May 28th. Flags didn't really move that much. It's actually kind of a steep approach to the wetland. So there wasn't some movement on the wetlands like you can see sometimes where things can move around a little bit over the years but um it was actually fairly consistent. Um be happy to answer any questions and turn it over to the board. Great. Thank you Bob. Really the only one I was going to ask it appears that the amount of impervious surface is going to decrease and and change. It's definitely changing changing and did you do a calculation about what the difference would be in terms of combining the driveways into a common drive and going out LON way? Oh, I didn't. It would be reduced from that approach. Yes, it's increasing from the storm water management permit to the modification, right? Because we're adding in lot 8 to the driveway for lot 8. Um, but as far as the driveway length going out to Graten Road, oh, I think it was I mean I think it's a good 400 ft out there. Those are deep lots. Um, it just seems to me it's an improvement from a storm water management perspective. Yes, exactly. I know it may not have been all in the permit because of existing, but just want to understand what that

Yeah. No, it definitely reduces the amount of clearing going out along the edge of 409, which is right where Joe was showing you. Um, it's significantly less driveway clearing. Um, the grades in there kind of go from west to east. And so there would probably be it wouldn't just be cutting in a a driveway. You'd have to do some grading to to create that level area. So it would probably be a 30 foot wide cut if a minimum if not a little more. um just going all the way out to Route 40. So yes, the the common drive does reduce this the amount of impervious area. I just don't have the exact numbers. And just refresh my memory. Lon Way. Um is that a rightway or is that private? Who who owns that? It's a good question. I may turn that over to But I apologize I didn't introduce. Good evening, members of the board. Jonathan Silverstein here for the applicant. Good to see you all. Uh so that section of Lonway uh further down Lon is a public way. It's a town way. Uh when you get closer to the subdivision, but uh between there between the Culdeac and Grant Road, it is a private way. And um but it's a private way that's open to public use. Okay. And who who owns that? Is it in a budding parcel? what? So, it's a little bit complicated because um a lot of the deeds go way back and don't necessarily say at one point part of Lon this section was owned by the town. It was conveyed to an abuter for purposes of um creating a private way. Long story short, it would be my view that under the derelict fee statute, um, for the most part, people own to the center line

along their frontage. That being said, it kind of doesn't matter because all abuing property owners have the right to use an improvement. Um, so, uh, this was something I, uh, discussed at great length with town council and ultimately town council agreed that, um, my client has the right to use it and that it serves as frontage. Are are people using that section today? Oh, yes. And in fact, the town uses it very frequently and maintains it is to my understanding. Um and uh it frequently but people use it all the time to get to the subdivision to the public portion of the road from GR. Okay. All right. Turn it over to you Joan. Okay. I just have one question. Um lot seven is that being constructed for a specific buyer because I see it's got an additional dwelling unit. So how big is that ADU or is it already sold? It is sold. it is sold and and it's it's not being presented under the ADU. It's being presented just as one house. Um so it's it's it's a complicated looking footprint. Um um but it is connected and it is anticipated that I think the the the in-laws or the the parents would be living with them in in one end of the house and they'd be living in the other end. But um it is one large house. Okay. Yeah. It's just it's kind of a, you know, that kind of u looking weird structure like what does that go with? You know, sports is two-bedroom ADU. Yes. And I think that might be an old old note on there. So, I apologize, but no, I think there's I think it's a salarium that's being built and they have a a planting room and and and so they're they're into gardening and so that I believe that that big open area is going to be like a a courtyard for

for their for their plants. Okay. All right. Was it? Thank you, D. Nope. I saw engineer's comments. So, long as you guys address, I'm sure the applicant will address those. Um, that sounds good. And I just think the only thing I would say is, you know, for owners, there's already sounds like there's already an owner on lot seven. Um, but for the other lots, owners should be made aware that Loon Way is a private road that's being used publicly. So just so they're know they're aware of that, I guess. Uh so lot 7 doesn't have frontage on Lway, does it? No, it has frontage on Grten Road 40. So So I saw that the numbers, the numbering for the houses and for the parcels hasn't been determined yet. Right. Correct. But the intention would be that lot seven would be a Lunway address and not a Grten Road address or is that I mean to be determined. I'm not sure unless you generally that gets determined by um 911 and the post post office. So I think we'll leave it to them unless Yeah. Yeah. I think the E 911 committee in town would you know combination building police fire they review these matters and they set what is the the proper course. The applicant may have some options but at the end of the day it has to pass muster with that committee. Appreciating that it's their call and their discretion on that. Is it possible for us to give a suggestion that a LON way address be provided? I would assume that for first responders, it would make more sense for them to go to a loomway address and not try. I'm very sure they'll have their preference and if you know I do know they're it's a good thing to have an address associated with where you get access from. So, uh, but I don't want to speak for them, but trust me,

they're they're not shy about this. So, great. Fantastic. Um, great. And then the only other thing is just ensuring obviously the the common driveway requirements of of each house sharing in the burden of maintenance be kept in the deeds for those houses, all that. Great. Then I'm good. Okay. Um, yeah, I don't have anything else on this. Uh, anybody from the audience? C can I I just want to confirm that we did u confer with our town council who I just want to confirm what their attorney stated that it is uh proper for them to make this application. So we did vet that with our council. All right. Uh seeing no other comments from the audience. Um question please come up to the microphone name and address. Tom Pepin, resident on Lunway, one Lunway. Uh, question regarding that extension that's private. Um, it isn't, it's poorly maintained right now and I don't know if that's a result of the ambiguity over a private public or the wetlands restriction. Are there any plans to make that more passable? I mean, there's some significant potholes. Maybe a challenge getting fire and emergency vehicles down there. Uh, but again, if there's looks like there's going to be more traffic going through there. Just wondering if that's possibility. Discussion point. Great question, Mr. Winsman. Um, I don't think we have anything proposed. I would certainly could talk to the applicant and see if there's any issues or any proposals to to make any improvements. I mean, nice to see it graded. It is terrible condition. Yeah.

Yes. Uh this was a topic that I think we raised early on in the process um that there might be the need to inspect the condition and if they're relying on that access uh to get to the common driveway that if it was substandard they might need to make that um you know whole for at least purposes what they need to get to their common driveway. Uh that's one of the things you also mentioned uh one of our other I won't say concerns. We just want to make sure that there's a wellthoughtout plan for calling out the maintenance responsibilities um once whatever level is determined is necessary to to get that access. We just think it's fair to both all these homeowners as well as anyone who may use or benefit from LON way that that should be part of this conversation and it shouldn't be an unknown after the close of this public hearing process. So, it's something that we want to work the applicant on, I think. Okay, great. Any other questions? All right. So, we should continue this to our second June 2nd meeting to answer some of these questions and get a draft decision together. So, is it appropriate? I think working on a draft decision would help flesh out the these issues. Is June 2nd adequate time, do we think, to Absolutely. for us to make the change to plan? Yes. Okay. And we'll hear something more definitive on the roadway in June 2nd. I think we can make progress on that end. That's the only if it was just up to us, you know, we'd say sure. But um I think June 2nd is still very probable. Right. Yeah. So includes consideration of a long-term maintenance requirements in that decision. Okay. Um

all right. Any other discussion? I can have a motion to continue this matter to June 2nd, 2025, 7:00 in this room. So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. All right. Thank you. So if I may, uh for those folks here who are interested in this application, if for some reason um more time is needed, please check the planning board agenda. So if there's a request in advance to continue to a different meeting, we'll note that on the agenda. Okay? So please feel free to check the agenda or call our office. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Moving on. Have a good night. Thank you. Second. Well, we have PB2509, 11th Cornerstone Square, unit A500. Uh due to the required public hearing notice not being published in the newspaper, uh would we need to reschedule this public hearing to June 2nd? I'll move that we continue PB2509 to the June 2nd meeting of the planning board hearing 2011 of second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Next public hearing is PB2510 uh Kinlock Drive 64 and right away lower 66 Main Street. Public hearing Archstone Builders to modify previously approved definitive subdivision storm water management related to roadway and drainage construction. Good evening, Attorney Robbins. Good evening, Mr. Chair. Uh for the record, Melissa Robbins from Feralin Robbins. Also with me tonight is Dave Guthrie. I gota open the public hearing. I'm a good idea. Um motion to u wave the notice. Some moved. Second. Those in favor say I. I. Motion to open the public hearing. Some moved. Second. All those in favor say I. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um also with me tonight is Dave Guthrie, who's the applicant, and Mark Slagger, who's the

project engineer. As you stated, we're here tonight for a modification to a previously approved subdivision. Uh, but this modification will not change the approved rightway. It's not going to uh, excuse me, the rightway layout. It's not going to change any of the lot dimensions or any of the lot lines. Uh, really the waiverss are technical in nature and I'm going to let Mark Slagger talk about that in a moment. Um, just some general housekeeping and some stuff that was brought up in the staff report. Additional waiver was requested from staff. Uh, and I have submitted that as a supplemental waiver request. Um, we do not have engineering review, so we still need that. Uh, we have some board of health comments back and forth, but we haven't wrapped those up yet. So, those are still outstanding. Um, we did meet with fire department, but they haven't given written comments yet. So, those are still outstanding. And we also received comments from the conservation commission, which we've received in the packet, but we haven't had an opportunity to rece uh respond to yet. Um, I think with that I'll just turn over to Mark so he can go through what the plane changes are and just briefly go through the waiver the additional waiver requests. Okay, great. Again, Mark Slagger from Allen Engineering. Uh, as Melissa mentioned, this is a previously approved subdivision and we're only looking to modify some of the construction requirements of the roadway itself. Uh, with respect to the conservation commission, we are not proposing any work within the 100 foot buffer zone. So all work will be out outside of their jurisdiction. Um if I could have a um pointer

disappears frequently. It usually turns up though eventually. One of those chains like they do with the pens at the bank. [Music] maybe you could uh direct. Okay, just to get started, the um the development has access off of Main Street um via a right of way across uh the property at is it 66 um Main Street uh to access uh the property which was known as 64 Main Street. Um, prior to the development, there was an existing house uh with a corral and um small sheds and everything that has since been replaced with a new house uh new driveway. Um the existing driveway was uh repaved. There's been some new tree plantings and uh some lights that are shown on the plan. So, uh lot one has been completely built out. Um but in order to get access to the second house, we need to construct the roadway as approved. Um what we're proposing to do is um well, let me start by saying what was approved was for the first um 30oot rightway uh across the um 66 Main Street parcel. That was approved as 18 ft wide with slope granite curving uh and no sidewalks for that portion of the road. What we're proposing is to just eliminate the granite curve and go with Cape Cod BM maintaining the same width um maintaining the same drainage features. They did lower the road profile a little bit to minimize the adjacent grading. Um so it's essentially

the same road. After we get on to the 64 Main Street parcel, um we'd like to request the roadway be changed from 20 ft down to 18 ft. However, what we'd be doing is eliminating the granite curb that was proposed and approved and replacing that with two foot wide grass shoulders. So, effectively, we'd be going um to a 20 foot wide traveled way as opposed to uh the 20 ft that's approved uh currently. Um, as far as drainage modifications, uh, we've modified some of the drainage at the, um, I wish I had the mouse. Uh, at the beginning there's a couple of catch basins. Okay, good. So, right here we have a few catch basins. Those are in the same position as uh, previously approved. We're going to collect that runoff, bring it down the road to another set of catch basins and create a swale along this boundary line, the northeast boundary line. So that with the revised drainage, we would just be having a few collection points and discharging the drainage uh into a uh rip wrap swale and all that would be collecting in pipe drainage system and go down into the uh storm water detention and infiltration system which has already been approved. Uh there is a slight increase in the uh runoff going to the infiltration system. So I did make it slightly larger. I added one row going uh uphill away from the wetland. So there's uh none of the work is any closer to the wetland than was previously approved. Uh these modifications do require uh waivers above and beyond the waivers that were granted and uh with the original submitt. Um the first

waiver would be to um construct a drainage swale with a slope greater than 5%. Um the town regulations require no more than 5% for a grass swale. However, I'm proposing a rip wrap swale that will be lined with filter fabric and then 6 to 8 in uh rip wrap stones to control the uh the velocity of the flow. Uh this was uh similar to a design that was approved under the subdivision. Um and at the suggestion in of the engineering department at that time uh they just re recommended rip wrap as opposed to grass since it would be a little less um uh prone to erosion during high flow events. Um the second waiver that we're requiring for the roadway itself would be to eliminate the slope granite uh granite curve on the roadway for the full length. And um I presented the um waiverss and the justification with the um with the package, the submitt package. Um one of the um one of the other minor changes to this was the landscape plan. Uh if you could scroll down. Oh, that would be me, huh? There we go. So, the landscape plant, this takes into consideration uh the trees that were already planted on lot one. So, I've moved around a couple of the plantings uh reduced the number of plantings based on the seven trees I believe it is that were planted on lot one. Uh and one of the other changes was in the schedule. Um I had pre previously there was a Bradford pear flowering pear tree that was approved. Uh the tree warden has recommended not using that on other subdivisions. Um so I made a

change um to a um what did I change it to? A northern pin oak uh which was a replacement used in one of the other [Applause] subdivisions. And I believe that's it. Before we um just before we made any of these changes, we met with the fire department um just to get some feedback initially from them. They were receptive to the idea. Uh I don't want to put words in their mouth, but we would not have gone forward if they weren't receptive. And similarly with engineering uh they didn't have any objections to this, but again we'll wait for their report because they uh they come through everything and uh I believe with that objection on everything. So, I will uh turn it back over to the board. Great. Um, well, questions, thoughts, comments? I guess my my biggest concern knowing this area in past discussions has been involved around the drainage because there is some significant sloping I think from this property off towards Ward Hill. Mhm. And I seem to recall we had some similar discussions with Ward Hill during the Woolsack construction. Correct. And that's the area that I want to make sure we with these changes, what are we doing to affect that drainage? You know, you say you're putting the rip wrap in, but does it change the calculations in terms of how much drainage is going to come off of that road? It really doesn't because we're not changing the amount of impervious all that much. Okay. So, um I did have to the only reason I made the infiltration system larger is because the system the way it's working now collects more yard runoff than the prior design. So, that yard ra runoff going into the roadway drainage system um has

to be accounted for. So, I I did that and I'm sure Jeremy will take a close look at that when he gets around to his review. during construction. I guess that would be a an large area of concern as opposed to post construction. So, correct. Yeah, we will be proposing uh there is an erosion and sediment control plan. So, we will be doing um is the the construction of that catch basin. One of the first things that gets done that retention basin. Uh well, no, not the infiltration system. We don't want water going into that until um the upgradient site is stabilized. So, there'll be a temporary sediment basin that will be constructed and that would be down in uh in an area where the the head wall is going to be located. If I may, uh Dave got through the applicant. Yeah, the the existing pavement out there now is in some cases 12 to 14 ft with with none of this drainage installed. So, almost everything that's happening is is an improvement compared to what's there now, but it's functioning highly functional now. Okay. uh kind of informally. We anticipate that when we put this infiltration basin in directed into a swale some catch basins it's going to be substantially an improvement but obviously adding 4 ft of asphalt and of course an additional home at that time but that's going to that's going to be focused right towards that infiltration basin will be building so it should be I think engineering will find it substantially better compared to what's there now not necessarily speaking for them compared to the original design and also the uh stone quail that we are proposing is right along the uh northeasterly boundary. So that will collect any runoff and prevent any runoff from leaving the site and going onto the adjacent properties. It'll be directed down into our storm water management system. Okay, I'm going to pass at this point.

Okay, thank you. Okay. Um just a couple questions. Um I assume that this is going to be a private roadway, correct? Yes. Okay. theory on why you want to go to Burm as opposed to the slope granite curve. Burm doesn't hold up. So just um well it's it's just a very small subdivision. Um trying to cut a little bit of cost out of it too, but also keep a more rural look as opposed to making it um a more inviting roadway for traffic where they might not know where they are and you know have some unwanted traffic down there. but just kind of keep it a little moral and save a few um save some money on the construction costs. Okay. So, I mean my concern obviously is delivery trucks. You know, we've cut down the size of the roadway now. So, you you know, the Amazon guy who comes down is certainly not going to, you know, I'm just concerned about it holding up because obviously they, you know, just do their thing and going to Well, let me let's just clarify. The Cape Cod Burm is only going to be in this first 300 ft or so. After that, there's going to be no curving at all. It'll just have uh stabilized grass shoulders. Uh as far as delivery trucks, there's a circular driveway on lot one now. So, if there's any delivery vehicles, they can certainly have ample turnaround space. And we're also proposing a circular driveway down the end as well. Okay. um concern a little bit too about you know setting precedent you know um you know with this kind of a waiver is the applicant willing to I don't know offer something to the town you know consideration to the town or this kind of a modification or waiver not that it's a lot of money but something just to think about

sidewalk we get a sidewalk yeah sidewalk bought something. It's for two homes. Yeah, I just saw one come out of here 10 minutes ago with two homes on it. No request for a sidewalk or a donation. Are we different than them? Without getting into that conversation. I have uh some added concern for this proposal given that it's gone to land court twice, appeals court once, and there is an approved subdivision. So I just suggest respectfully that if you are um considering the waiverss or any offset that you really limit it to just what is different about what is previously approved that they could construct now versus the changes they're looking to make. So I would just really focus in on the added waiverss that are uh before you in terms of what already is approved. And I do want to confirm uh we did speak with our town council and their opinion is that the added waiver for owner I'll call it the owner applicant waiver is is necessary. So I guess if there's a concern with the with the granite versus the cape put the granite in for the first 300 ft. We're just trying to keep it looking like a private drive for two homes not not a public roadway which it's not a public roadway. There are a few of these scattered around town. There's one adjacent to us right now that is is is pavement. It's pretty it's a common drive. There's six or eight houses down there and it just looks like a little driveway out of town center. We're trying to maintain the same look. We could do it without the Cape Cod Bird. We try and do it without anything. But I don't think that necessarily works for the abiding home there. So, we try to contain it with some curving. But if it's granted for that first fee that's your concern, we'll go back with you. Okay. It's an aesthetic issue. Yeah. Okay. Dylan. Yeah. I mean, I'll wait for the

afternoon comments to like have my final comments. I guess I would say for for me it's all about managing the flow of the water because I'm kind of looking at the the height elevation of the road that you provided and it just seems like does it kind of like dip in the middle of of the of that common drive back? Does it kind of like go trying to figure out it it goes down towards the back of the property towards the house? Right. Correct. But in between the run that's in front of the other house, there's a bit of a dip in the roadway. It kind of looks like the from an elevation perspective. Yeah. Right in here. Yeah. No. No. Further back. Keep going. Right in there. Yeah. Between the that first curve and the second curve. No, there's no dip in the roadway there. Not there. No. Right. Right in front of house one. Uh, no. There's no dip in the road. There's no dip there. That's flat. Okay. So, for me, it's just about from a, you know, Cape Cod versus Granite Birming. is going to be whatever moves the water the best and that should come in the engineering comments and then otherwise I'm not opposed to it not having a you know curving it makes sense it's two houses that's it yeah similarly I'll wait for engineering's comments because I'm sure they'll take that into account if they're looking at the drainage um curving or no curving so curious to see what their thoughts are on the proposed design too so yeah it's you know as long as that runoff is contained and managed I think that's the main concern. So, right. Yeah. I have full faith in our engineering department to make sure that the water's controlled. I would ask that you take a look at uh the conservation resource planner comments. Um I would like to see the the trees marked and um if possible put the the uh permanent markers where the 100 foot buffer is. I don't know that the twice weekly inspection is necessary. I know what happened up at uh they mentioned spotting estates and it was just so much water.

Um I guess uh we go to the public. If you have a comment, questions, please come up to the microphone. State your name, please. Come on. That's your drive. Lastic six-wheeler lane. So, I was just curious about the drive coming down into the two lots and what that is going to look like. Right now, there's a lot of trees. because there's a small stone wall separating the two uh you know um uh little one lane roads. So what is you know from six to the main street going to be looking like there? All right, Mr. Sligger, you want to allow them? Sure. Um the landscaping plan details uh the number of trees that were going to be removed and also the trees that are going to be replaced. to provide uh replacement screening um along here. So, there is a detailed uh landscaping plan that has been approved um that we're not proposing any changes to this area, but there are some trees that are going to have to come down and there's some um evergreens that will be planted to replace the trees that are coming down, which are primarily hardwoods. Um, so these will pro provide a lower um lower level screening. So be providing actually better screening than the standard now. Okay. And um I guess I was a little confused about the whole sidewalk thing. Um you know uh we don't we don't have a sidewalk. I I don't know if a sidewalk would really benefit uh having you know there's no proposed sidewalk. So okay. Yeah. So um that's my question for now. Thank you. Thanks. May I add to that? Mark, could you just clarify for for everyone that's here when you say no changes? No changes from the previous planned or no changes from the current

existing conditions. I just want to set expectations for construction of what's happening from what's there today to what it's going to look like going forward. So everybody understands when and if we get start out there that you know it is it's going to be different than what's there today. Yes. Um, when I mentioned no changes, there's no changes from the plan that's already been approved. It is different from it's going to look different from what's there. I mentioned uh there's some trees that are noted on the um the landscape plan. They're noted as to be removed. Uh and then there's the additional plantings that are shown on the plan uh to supplement the trees that have been uh removed. I got another question. Sure. Come on. Come on. Lane. So, um, we have a bunch of, uh, you know, trees up there now that they're planning on obviously removing as they just stated. Um, so the stone wall that is there now, it's kind of being hidden because um, of all the landscaping that is there. So, when the trees are removed, um are they planning on kind of um uh kind of putting that stone wall back together again? It's it's a little halfhazard at this point. So, just curious how that's all going to look. Um if there's any disturbance to the wall during the tree removal, then it will be repaired as needed. Um it's just a stacked boulder wall that represents the property line. Yeah, it's it's still a little I think with all the snow and trees kind of being in there, the stone wall is really kind of taken a different form, kind of going down. So, didn't know if that was going to be something that was going to be kind of kind of put back together again a little bit as the trees go in. Is it Is it your wall, Mr. Slay, or is it the neighbor's wall? Do we know? We kind of own both of it. We both The property line runs down the center of

the wall. It's a little sticky. See? Yeah. So wouldn't wouldn't be opposed to having the stone wall looking a little bit nicer as it's uh you know a lot of the stones are pretty large and over time um you know with the shrubbery and the trees that have grown up some of the boulders have kind of fallen over and you know we've done our best to kind of put them all back together again but if they're working on that lane that' be something to consider. We're certainly happy to manage our side of the wall. Great. Hi. Uh, good evening. John Conway, 66 Main Street. Um, I guess my questions I have a couple of questions. The first would be you've mentioned several times the previously approved plans. So, why what's why does this need to be done? I mean, why are you guys doing this? keep on. Yeah, we feel like it was overdesigned and we're just trying to simplify it. Granite curving on a private drive. So there's no public value or anything like that. Yeah, I would say less impervious is public value. Yeah, we're going to build less less asphalt, so there's less impervious, less impact on the environment. There's public value there. Yes. Okay, that's usually there's a reason to do something, I guess, would be my Yeah, I think I stay on that. The second thing I have is why um in reference to Kinwalk Drive. Um approval, what's approved there are two dwellings. Um it's not a massive subdivision to use your words earlier. So why the push to name a rightaway that's over my property Kinwalk Drive or

some or by by virtue of other places in in Wester you drive around there's certainly a lot of you know 64A 64B there's my brother lives on the Evergreen Circle and that's his circumstance there. So why why the push to name it? I assumed it was a regulation. I think it's part of the is it the 911 committee? So, if I may, as of as of right now, the currently approved plan, it is titled Kinlock Drive. Uh, but based upon um some comments received from the Conways, I did reach out uh preliminarily to the E91 committee. I also did reach out to uh Mr. funeral who lives in the newly constructed home uh that's currently 64 Maine. Um Mr. Federal did not offer any objection to retaining his current street address because that takes no effort. So um but the real concern is what is approvable by the E91 committee. Uh I did begin those conversations at this point. They do not offer an objection yet at this time, but they have to as a committee uh meet. Uh they are open to considering it that would work for um their purposes, but they're not going to pre-commit until they meet as a committee. However, uh one of the things that they would have to look for um if it is not named Kenlock or some other drive with a a street sign is there would have to be some consideration for street addressing at the entrance along Main Street. So, it's clear that there is say a 64 and a 64R. It would have to be something that would satisfy their concerns and there could be some additional requirements once they get past your property and you know where the driveways might might split or something but they're open to that but they can't promise that at this point

and then could we modify this part of this modification and modify the name of the subdivision? Mhm. Would that be appropriate or would not? I'd like to wait before. Well, there is precedent because other parcels in Westford are clearly marked. I mean, mailboxes are used um with either the R designation or AB, but that could be a different scenario. It could be a hammerhead lot that was brought in after the fact. May not be a subdivision as this is, but Mr. Yeah. I I would also like to point out that there has been a few common driveways that have been approved that have been named as well. That is true. So, uh it's not unusual to have a private driveway named. This one specifically provides frontage for two lots whereas a common driveway generates its frontage um from the existing roadway. However, some of the common driveways that work have been named. So we can I'm sure we'll have opportunity to discuss but we own it which is different in some of those circumstances where people are naming a common driveway because it's jointly owned. This in particular is a a rightaway that they pass over our property to get to those properties and we we we've we've had some good debate about it which leads me to my final question. Um, well, before you vote on, I think just to be clear, if the homeowner isn't opposed to it, planning board wouldn't be oppos. I don't want to speak for everybody, but I don't think we'd be opposed to not calling that and putting that up there. So, I think if you can work with 66, we are opposed to it. No, the Kimlock. So, what we're saying is if if the homeowner, Mr. Federal, isn't opposed to changing it, then I don't think the planning board would have an issue with it as long as the E 911 committee is okay with it. No, I think Jeeoff, that's fair. We'll wait and see what comes out of it and go from there. Uh the the final question I have is kind of given given these these waiver requests are

sort of let's say opening up some discussion. I guess I would ask a maybe this is a a legal question on what is the town's definition of a dwelling because when land court handed down their decision it was for two dwellings. And given that given that the lot one now has a roughly 5,000 square foot home and a roughly 2,000 square foot pool home pool house as it's referred to. Does that count in the the Westford zoning or planning board? Does that basically mean that's the second dwelling which is what the land court approved two dwellings? And I don't know if I tried to research it, had a few people look for it. We haven't come across that yet, but that is something that I would be curious for a perspective if anyone has one. Mr. Chair, I can speak to that quickly. We're allowed to construct on each of the lots in accordance with Westwood zoning bylaw and the mass building code. That didn't answer my question. If if the board would like us to get an opinion from council question to do that. However, um if it was considered more than a single dwelling unit, then that would have required, you know, special relief to do that. So, my expectation is that anything besides the primary dwelling would be considered accessory to the overall principal use. So, but we can certainly get that confirmed by council if that's the board's wish. Is the pool house considered an ADU? I don't have that information handy, but um I'm sure it was reviewed at the time of the building permit process. So, I do know that if for example, you know, you have a a microwave is not really considered. If you have a bedroom, if you have multiple bathrooms, if you have a stove,

there's certain criteria that would legally in certain towns uh make that a a dwelling which potentially in the letter of the law from Land Court could be interpreted that that pool house is a second dwelling. Therefore, they have their two dwellings on the property. We're happy to get an opinion from council. So anyway, that that's those are my questions. Thank you. Thank you. Can I ask? Sure. I just I just noticed um lot one, lot two, lot two. Is that lot two part of it lot two or is that somebody else's lot too? Uh they are one and the same. There's a strip of land. Oh, it goes on the side of the road. Yeah. So that's all all of that acreage that's lot two is for that second house. Correct. Anybody else from the audience any questions, comments? Hi. Um Emily Barerlane. Um we're we admittedly moved in after um this lay everything occurred. So, the first we heard of anything going in next door was with an abunders's notice for this meeting, but when I went back and looked at the planning board um agenda, there was a meeting on February of this year. Um, and I just been wondering why there was no abut's notice. I believe there was that. So, the earlier meeting was simply, as I recall, to endorse the plans consistent with the ruling of land court. So there's no new public hearing process uh required to simply carry out and sign the plans uh once the public hearing process is done or in this case

after it's gone through the courts and been um finalized and no further appeal. So it's an administrative action that just really documents the process that previously occurred. It seems like the um land court decision was several years ago, right? It is correct. So, is there no expiration or timeline for getting it plans approved prior to there was a slight um note problem on the plans that had to be resigned because it had been what seven years since Yeah. I just typically it's like two years two years of service administrative a modification to the clerk certification. Yeah. So we did check um at the time that they wanted to move forward with the plans. I will note also that there is additional time frames allowed for um subdivision plans. It is different than a typical say site plan review but even in addition to that there has been the permit extension act which does grant additional amount of time to take action. So, it's covered on multiple ways because we haven't amended our subdivision rules or regulations or the the zoning requirements that would affect this subject property. So, it is in my opinion still fully valid in for some time still. Okay. Um just would be nice as a a letter to have known that this was happening um especially if it went back before uh the planning board. Um people are moving in and out and seven years is a long five years, however long it's been is a very long time. Understood. So, thank you. Thank you. Hi, Mary Smith to Willer Lane. Just to go back to the lot two, the two different lots. Um, is there we are only

approved for two lots back there. Am I correct? Correct. was I think that there was three at one time then land court you went back and it was two is that going to be a so initially in 2015 there was an application for a three lot subdivision that application was withdrawn they then refiled for a two lot subdivision which they approved went to land court was remanded back got approved went to land court went to appeals court and then came back so it is for just the two lots one additional lot than what is already constructed back there. So there would be one additional dwelling yet to be constructed for a total of two. So is there any down the road is there any possibility that we could be back here again possibly? So we cannot prevent someone from making an application but my recollection from 2015 is that they went to the two lots because they did not meet all the requirements the zoning requirements to get the three lots. And I don't know if you remember differently. I don't remember. It was a while ago. Yeah. Nothing taken. I can't come back, but of course. No, I mean, I figured that. I And going back to to Dave's comment earlier, you know, living in the center, it's just kind of nice to have everything be quaint. And I think that's ideally what you're saying, what I think he was saying tonight earlier was it would be nice to have it be a smaller less traffic. I mean, there's tons of traffic. I've lived in my house my entire life. It's in a little embarrassing, but we're back at it. And um and there's been so much change. Not I mean, some really great change, but um you know, the traffic is bad and it would be great to kind of keep it at a minimum if possible. So, thank you. Thank

you. Okay. Anybody else? Um so um Mr. Mor generates was uh engineering on board with getting comments for our next meeting. I think that would be viable. Yeah. Is that okay with you attorney Robbins? Yes. So June 2nd, Mr. Chair. Yes. Does that allow enough time for addressing all the comments in your opinion? Yes, we have all the other comments. So as long as we get engineering, we should have plenty of time to respond. So we have fire department comments, too. I don't know. I will I will also reach out to fire very short staff right now. Uh we'll also reach out to council. I I do expect to be a fairly simple so normally I'd say push it further but I think it's a a lighter lift. Yep. Um, and then again, just a reminder to everyone, if for some reason comments are taking longer to address, please check the planning board agenda and or reach out to the planning department just to make sure um there isn't any request for a continuence. Okay. Uh, anything else from the board? I guess I'd like a little education from the last one and one of the concern is we heard fire and I guess the other one I just want to know what they're doing with snow storage how this road gets plowed just the way it's plowed now it'll be just plowed off to the side of the road right onto the grass shoulders so it'll be down at the end of lot two uh well it'll be off to the side of the road the whole way and there might be a larger embankment down at the end of lot two yeah it's not a full push. It's too long. So, it's a block to blade to the side. Off to the side. It doesn't look like there's much space on the side. What's that? Doesn't look like there's very very much space on the side. Looks like all the space for the snow on this is at the end. I just No, there's If you drive down there, you'll see that there's a lot of grass on the side on

both sides, but I would imagine there'll be some snow storage over in here. Okay. Between the road and the swale and then plenty of storage down in here on both sides. There's a push on both sides, actually. plenty of grass over there. The the longest push probably three first 300 ft and then we start to turn. Yeah. And all of the runoff would go up into the roadway drainage system or into the swale and then ultimately down into the infiltration system. Well, it depends where you put the snow storage cuz some of it could go off the side onto the other properties. That's part of my Well, I think again we're looking at adding 4T asphalt to this, right? From what's currently there. This is not not not coming into virgin territory. There's 12 to 14 feet out there now. We're going to end up at at 18 feet. So, it's not a substantial increase. Yeah. So, either it's being formalized. Whichever side of the road the snow's on, which will be on both sides, it's going to go into either the roadway drainage system or this swale. If it's over in this area, there's a yard drain here that's going to collect it and dump it down into this bed wall. So all of the snow melt except maybe a small section of this driveway, any of the snow you put onto lot two, the first part of lot two, this Yeah, it will melt and come down into this swale. It will come down into the swale. Yes. It looks like it might go off to uh 68 Main Street. Well, there's a there's a stone wall here that acts as a fairly significant barrier as well. because I understand how the water gets trapped in the road is when you push the snow over the edge of that curb. It's going to go in all the directions possibly. So, well, in the first 300 ft, it's going to get plowed straight. So, it's not going to be pushed to the side. There's no room to push it to the side.

It'll be dumped down under here, seep into the ground. I mean, if there's enough snow to plow, there's going to be enough snow cover on the lot itself to prevent any um you know, runaway snow material. Okay, John Conway again. A clarifying question, Dave, when you said the four feet, is that the right away or or when you get back into the back? I guess I think you ask the chair the question you asked to me. Is that how it works? I'm sorry to hear the question. I'm sorry. Yeah, my question is on the existing right away. is that it which has already been uh when uh the first home was put in, the road was replaced. The right away they dug it up and um did a nice job on it. But do you need to You're not digging that up again, are you? The right away 30 foot. Yes. So from Main Street, you're going to be ripping that up again. Yes. And now that's why that's what I would want to understand why. Because when Chris put in the house, they had uh they ripped up the rightway, they put in a significant drainage and plumbing for in uh wiring and all that was done for the home. And now you're saying you need to rip it up because you're putting in one more home. That's But we we struggle with the same question. Yeah. But honestly, because what's there we feel functions for a second home, Mr. Chair, if I may, that's the construction that's necessary for the subdivision as approved. The existing driveway, like Dave says, is about 12 to 14 ft. The plan requires it to be 18 ft. We'd love to leave it the way it is, put

another house down there. We think it will function fine, but wait for that. I mean, that's uh like hopefully at some point maybe aside from a planning board meeting, we can have a discussion to minimize the disruption to the neighborhood in terms of those types of projects. You guys know they're very disruptive. Um that rattled our home when you ripped that up the first time and it's going to happen again. Um and that's where we'll continue to to fight it. Honestly, you know, that's kind of the I don't I'm not going to just let it happen. Sorry. Could we ask for engineering's opinion on that since we're going to hear back from the next meeting? Can we We did ask an opinion of engineering on the viability of the road as built to support two homes even though that would be a for that stretch there for that one stretch. Mr. opinion on it. Hold up. M. Um, I I mean I would love to see it as minimal as possible, but I think the fire department is going to have the ultimate say on what needs to be put there. Well, sounds like they might be too busy to answer. We can certainly when I did meet with them, they indicated that they wouldn't have any intention of bringing the the ladder truck down there unless absolutely necessary. And they said their protocol would be to send a smaller vehicle down to see if the ladder was needed, then they would send the ladder down. If I may, I know if I may, but I know we're moving to 18 feet in this in this request. Um I I think the extension off of Loon Way I heard was 16. We'll we'll move it down as as less as possible with the asphalt and move to more stabilized gravel. If that's a request that wants to come from this board to fire, we're more than happy to do that. We we consider less is more in this particular scenario. Um but again we you know as coming in as developer fact we're going to get a little harder line from highway

and fire. That's just a fact. So if by six wheel lane uh again so uh in our on our wheeler lane uh eight wheeler lane subdivided a while back and we ended up getting 10 wheeler lane back there. We have a I believe our wheel of lane is 8 ft 12 I think. So it's it's small. We've got five houses back there. We don't ever have any issues. The fire department never had any issues when 10 was being built and ours was at 12. So I guess um you know we are looking at providing less asphalt and you know taking up less of the Conway's side right away and their land. You know, I don't see why just two houses can't have, you know, that same right of way remaining. Nothing was dug up on ours and a gigantic house back there on 10 mill. So, it kind of feels like a common sense win-win win. I mean, less work for you and cost for you. We actually have more turns and twists going down into eight and 10 than they do. So, if there would have been a problem, surely it would have been with Wheeler Lane. I mean, it's it's a 90 degree turn to get down to 810 and then it splits off again and it goes down into a little ravine and it then goes back. I mean, it was, you know, it's a it's a lot of twists and turns back there. So, I I 100% agree. And what I don't want to do is have them start the process over again and have engineering and fire. Is there a way to have this discussion with engineering, fire, and police? We couldn't we couldn't facilitate that conversation. I happy to do that. Okay. There's a public safety standard. They have to be I understand there's rules and regulations on what needs to be done there, right? I think the board

would be happy to wave some of that if if we can get everybody on board on that. Yeah. So, it's not like you're putting in six houses back there or something either. It's like how much risk Yeah. is is incurred by one additional house. Correct. If you remember our original argument coming in for a narrow roadway in the beginning, and I don't think this entire planning board was seated, but our argument was wheel land adjacent to us, how they were able to add another home or two on 8 to 10 or 12 ft of asphalt and not have a public safety concern. That didn't really carry any weight when we got to the board and or to the public safety administration. So, I don't know that you're going to change their feelings now, but maybe if this board is willing to to have that discussion with them, it would change that. But that was always our argument. Wheel of land has eight or 10 on far less asphalt than we have. We're building one or two and and doubling the size. I mean, given where it is in town and the impacts of traffic and disruption of neighbors, I mean, I feel like it's worth exploring the compensation. I agree. And engineering should I think be favorable because of the reduced I think engineering may be okay as long as the water's taken care of. I don't want to speak for them, but I think it's public safety that's going to be the hurdle, right? So, yeah, if we can have that conversation, I think it would be better for everybody. Less pavement means less runoff. So that should be a pretty easy thing for the engineering to review. So the one one other point I'd add is that the um rightway is straight, you know, let's say the first 200 ft certainly and that's the area I'm I'm selfishly most concerned about. There is a an old uh lynen uh tree on uh on Main Street and sort of uh at the corner of our property. There's actually two on one closer to 62 main. It borders it nicely, but that in an initial conversation I had with Chris Finl some time back was potentially you know that tree it's kind of a nuisance to begin with. Lindons are very soft. It's tough to uh maintain because

there's a utility pole there and that to me might be uh you know if that tree came down for example the entryway is wide open then it would give certainly the developer trucks as well as fire trucks easy access um right down the rightway and then what we you know what they want to do once they get over the rightway is plenty of space but I would prefer prefer not to have to drip up the road again. Um, and if you take down that lynen, you will have a a very wide entryway, certainly wider than what would be at Wheeler Lane now for five homes, right? And then it's a straight shot. All right. So, why don't we make that the plan? Well, can I can I ask a question, too? So, Jeff and and Joe, maybe. So, when this land court decision came out, was there anything that said this had to be a roadway? Because why isn't this just a shared driveway which eliminates all of these problems? Well, as they mentioned earlier, um well, first of all, it already was before the application in 2015. It already was an existing rightway. Um so, period. and rightway provides uh frontage which is necessary but um and really providing a a common driveway through the right ofway it's really just really just getting a waiver construction standards for the subdivision roadway if it's within the right of way. So which is what they what they did. So you need the frontage but it already existed. Okay. For Mr. Chair, if I could just add to to I think your staff's discussions with public safety and engineering is that you know obviously less is more all the way down the road. I do feel the first 300 ft. Not only um consideration of the abutter but al but also the town's people driving by. If we could leave

that, leave the trees, leave the wall, leave everything untouched. Um it's 300 feet. if we are trying to pass as neighbors, we can see each other from 300 ft and make accommodations to let other people by. Um, and it would really allow us to hopefully leave that first leg untouched, which I think is probably the charm of the town center there. Um, you know, push for the entire piece, but if you're unable to break that block, then at least maybe settle on that that first leg of it being as is. We feel it's going to function. Yep. Okay. All right. Anybody else? Um Emily Bernie Willer. Um if the land court decision resulted in two lots being or two dwellings, how long does that land court decision um hold weight for? Well, the plan's been recorded. So, it's what the plan is recorded is I'm not sure the subdivision plan is recorded. I mean, the land court decision is still valid. Um, so as long as they exercise and get the plan recorded within the what seven years or so from whatever um they have a good amount of time to act on this. We still have quite a bit of time. I guess I'm just wondering can they come back and ask for another lot? We can't prevent them from doing so. But again, my fading recollection from back in 2015 is I think in addition to concerns from abutters, I I think they might not have been meeting all the dimensional requirements that zoning said you need for those lots, but we can certainly um double check that. There's also nothing

that says the dimensional zoning requirements could change in the future when they amend the zoning bylaw. So you can never say they can't come back. Obviously once it's developed, it becomes far less likely that they have that flexibility going forward once they if they plan for two, they site for two lots, you know, you don't usually magically have another lot, you know, uh but you can't rule out anything. Okay. Okay. Um, can I get a motion to continue this? What is this? PB 2510 2510 to uh our meeting June 2nd, 2025 7:00 in this room. So second motion to second. All those in favor say I. I. I. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you. We got your pointer right there. All right, moving on. General business. Uh, first item, review draft decision for PB241487 West Street. after the fact request for a project generating more than one acre of disturbance specifically the construction of 6,000 foot garage pre removal and installation of drainage infrastructure staffing first board attorney gentlemen you had a um meeting last May 5th um the applicant addressed all engineering's concerns as for draft decision been provided to the applicant I don't think has any requested changes although there may be a discuss question about you know the amount of time it'll take to uh implement the plan moving

forward. Um so do you want to mention anything? I the only change I had was that I think he suggested 120 days staff had suggested 120 days in the decision I would request 180 just go to the end of the year just practically speaking once this is approved we actually have to find a contractor that will install this. Once we find that contractor we actually have to schedule a pre-construction meeting with all required documents and then we actually have to complete the construction. Uh so I would just ask uh that that be changed to 180 days. Other than that, everything exceeded reasonable. That will bring us to December. I think right now we have to have all construction done by September, which is unlikely. Okay. Um Bob, no, I'm fine. I noticed they've changed they've corrected the plan as to uh removing the address for the commercial parcel. No, nothing. No one no nothing. Darren, no additional comments. All right. So, with the change to 180 days, a motion to approve the draft decision. So, moved. Second. All those in fair say I. I. Great. Thank you, Attorney Robin. Thank you very much. Uh, next, general business PB2513 142 Littleton Road, Unit 7. Request to change approved views from retail sales to general public 110 nutrition to medical office revival aesthetics. on the way out. Hi there. Hi. How are you? Good. Good. Good. Chris Labota. Nice to meet you all. Nice to meet you. Welcome. Joey, you want to give us an introduction on this? Sure. So, this is going this business proposed going where 110 nutrition is current. Well, I guess was currently what was 110 Nutrition. Uh so that was a because retail sales would have fallen under Arizona dialogue. This will fall under medical office recent

category developed at last town meeting. Um so the health department didn't have any concerns. Police conservation fire nobody had any concerns uh with the proposed use as it's uh indicated in your packet. Um all information hours of operation uh were indicated in there as well. uh no addition to the property at all. Um I don't if there's any other details the applicant would like to provide but otherwise there are no comments from town staff probably even less traffic. Yeah. Um all right Bob, do you have any questions? No, I you just hit it was just I wanted to find out what was there before compare for the traffic and this should be much less traffic. So that's any not a concern. No concerns. Dylan, no concerns. Uh, no. Uh, just a reminder, is there parking under that building? Yes. Additional parking below. Yeah. So, okay. Yeah. No worries. No questions. All right. Can I get a motion to approve P2513 142 Littleton Road, Unit 7, uh, change of use from retail sales to medical office. So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. Great. Good luck. Good luck. Thank you. Good luck. It's the uh proposed opening date. Hopefully sometime in June, not July. July. Yeah. Good luck. Do a little bit of construction inside. A big open space. So, we're going to put a couple walls. Nice. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good luck. Good luck. All right. Uh the most anticipated part of the evening for everybody home is at the edge of their seats. Board reorganization appointments for the following positions. Mr. Chair, Vice Chair, Representative Dimog, Representative to CPC, Representative Storm Water Panel, uh, pedestrian safety, open space planning, uh, pres recreation plan update committee, uh,

the MCMOD pedestrian improvement plan committee and the Route 40 corridor study. Uh, to begin, I'll ask staff to take over uh, for the chair and then the newly appointed chair can continue from there. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, at this time I'll entertain any nominations for chair. There any nominations? I would, if Mike wants to do it again, I think he runs a pretty smooth ship, so I would nominate him if he's amendable. I second amendable. Do you accept the nominations? I do. Are there any other nominations for chair? Right. Is there any discussion on the motion? Mike Bonafan is chair of plan board. No discussion. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? Abstain. No. Carries unanimously. Congratulations. And I turn it back to you. Thank you. Thank you everybody. Uh now are there any nominations for vice chair? Well, you've been vice for a couple times, right? I did uh at least one. Yeah. So, I mean, Bob, would you have interest in being vice chair? I'll do that. That's fine. You know, given longer tenure. So, I'll recommend Bob if that's all right. Uh Bob, would you accept the nomination? Yes. Are there any other nominations for vice chair? All right. Seeing none. Wait, who was the second on that? Second. Okay. All right. Can uh we get a vote to Bob Schaffer, vice chair. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed? Congratulations, Bob. All right. Representatives for Nimog. Now, everyone jump up at once. Oh, happy to stay. You

are donate Joanie. Is there a second? Second. Yeah. All those in favor? Joanie for Nimog representative say I. I opposed. Thank you, Joanie. uh representative to CPC. I am that person today. I'm happy to keep doing it if the board would like me to keep doing it. Nominate Don. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor of Don for CPC say I. I. Opposed. Thank you. Dylan. Representative Stormwater panel. This is a heavy lifting. I've done it. Um I'm willing to stay on. Anybody else wants it? Uh nominate Mike for storm water. Second. Second. All those in favor say I. I. Thank you. Uh pedestrian safety committee. I will be happy to stay on with that too. Awesome. Nominate Joanie for sidewalk committee. Second. All those in favor say I. I. Thank you, Joanie. Uh open space recreation plan update committee. This is new, correct? This is new. Yes. Anybody interested in us? I was going to suggest maybe we discuss the three of these and figure out how to address them kind of got three new ones here. So, and let me ask I would say and with that said, I'd be willing to take on Route 40 or the or any of them actually, but um I'm certainly willing to step up and take one of those pedestrian improvement plan and Route 41. Those will be more intensive, but they'll be a I guess shorter amount of commitment time. Um, both scheduled to end at end of June 2026. The open space plan will be probably about four or five meetings in this upcoming year and then meeting probably once or twice a year just as follow up on, you know, how the plan is getting implemented. So from a

historical perspective, I did participate in the original 110 master plan. So maybe the pedestrian improvement plan, I'd be willing to take that on. I have that background already. If you want to do that, Bob, I'll do the Route 40 since I live over there anyway. Okay. So, I just want to point out these are we shamelessly suggested on those committees that planning board you should at least be asked to have representation. if you were dead set against it. The charge is not yet finalized, but we think it makes good sense for your board to be active. I think it makes great sense for all these in terms of the relationship between them and the master plan and what we do. Yeah, I So, uh, any takers for the open space recreation plan update committee? What is that one? Is that That's new, you said? Yeah, that's new. It's new. Yeah, that's for updating the open space plan this year, basically by the end of the year. Um and then subsequently once the plan has been updated meeting once or twice a year as a group just to follow up on you know how the plan is getting implemented do priorities need to shift of what's being carried out from the plan so it's less intensive but it's a longer duration right it's a seven year plan. Any ideas on scheduling of that and how often and who? I can't. So that's a big variable for you folks. I think the suggestion was Thursdays, but it was only a suggestion on the plan you presented to us last last meeting. Meeting. And I guess if we don't decide tonight, we can always backfill it. Yeah. So, but it sounds like we have some depending on schedule, we have potential volunteer for group 40. We take turn and open space

subject to schedule and availability and there's nothing that prevents an alternate. Yeah. To ensure the planning board always has representation. All right. So, let's just go ahead. Bob, nominate Bob for the MCM mod pedestrian improvement plan committee. Second. All in favor say I. I I I nominate uh Mike for the Route 40 corridor study committee. Second. Well, in favor say I. I. And I guess we'll leave open space open for now. Let's leave open space for open space. Open space. Do we are we no volunteer for open space? No, we're waiting to find out more information. Might might be willing if it works with the schedule. That's right. I'm I'm certainly willing to take that on as well because I don't have the others that you already have. Well, let's see what it looks like. So, yeah, but to do that before 1 July. So, let's see. We can always Yeah. All right. Uh didn't see minutes in the package. They came in right on packet day. So, we just uh next meeting for next week. And I didn't see correspondence. Nope. So if there's anything else right a motion to adjurnn some second favor say I. Hi.