All right. Move Mhm Hello. It’s still getting reverb it’s, yeah, yeah, you seen him mute your. Um, yeah. That’s good, right? Are we on, uh, so I will call. To order the meeting of the town of Wyna’s planning board for Thursday, October 10th, 2024 at 7 p.m. we are in person at Wenham Town Hall, um. We are also being uh recorded on Zoom, um, and HW Cam is also broadcasting us. Um. The agenda online at the town’s website has a link to the Zoom meeting. If you’re watching the television and would like to join us on Zoom. So the first item we have is a continued public hearing for the 47 Maple Street Definitive subdivision. Um, Kate, do you want to read? Do you need to read anything into the record? I think we’ve opened this already so we don’t have to read the notice in. This is, um, 47 Maple Street, obviously when, uh, for approval of a 4 lot definitive subdivision plan, um, which has been continued from. The hearing on September 12th. At that point we had asked for some additional information and I understand that it was received a week ago. Is that true? By the town, um. And I can see that Mr. Bob Griffin is here and would like to speak to us about it. So, uh, we were asked at the last meeting to get our revised plans in the following week. And we did. And then they went to DGT for the peer review and their comments came back. October 1st. There was a little bit of some minor edits that were requested in the DGT plans. And we turn those around in a day so we get them back to the town on October 2nd. And then Margaret sent an email on October 3rd requesting some changes to the landscaping plan which we provided uh. Either on the 3rd or close to that anyway, so they’re pretty minor changes. So I think we’re all caught up with our comments. I think we’ve been responsive to all the comments received. And uh of course we look forward to uh just describe them briefly if you wish. I would also note that when I spoke to Margaret on the phone about the meeting, um, she mentioned that she had had some communication with the police, the fire chief as well about the need to post signs on the street because of the width waiver, so maybe you’ll address that with you. Speak about it. Yeah we we’re happy to put whatever signs uh the town. Things are necessary. I don’t have a copy of that email here, but Kate, I’m sure you do so. Well, before you get started, would you mind just pulling the easel back a bit, it’s just, it’s blocking the. It Say what? um I think further and you might run out of space, you’re gonna run out of space, you’re gonna that’s, that’s fine, that’s fine. So I think I can be OK. Oh yeah. So here’s the. Here’s the letter from Jeff Baxter. The letter dated, um, August 8th will stand with two modifications. One beginning the road with will be acceptable at 22 ft and 2 they’ll be 3, no parking or fire lane parking and fire lane. I don’t know what that means. Signs on each side of the road leading into and out of the circle, 6 total signs, and I think the rationale from what I understood it when I spoke to Margaret was simply that because you’re requesting a a uh. Um, Thinner wrong word, but center street than the requirements would otherwise be, and we need to vote on a waiver that we want to make sure that the fire trucks have. Enough room to pass by so. Um, we did, um. Changed a lot layout as I briefly described on September 12th. I can go back over that if you want, but basically if you remember the, the idea was to change the layout of uh lot 4 in particular, so that we didn’t have to remove any of the pine trees that run between there and. Uh, the 50, I think it’s the 52. Maple Street Lot. Um, And uh that had been a concern of some of the neighbors that were another, another lot back from there. There was, there was 2 or 3 residential houses in that area. Broker Developer Do we need that? OK. All right. So, um, again, I think that the changes are all pretty uh reasonably minor, um. And I note that the road, the right of way is at the, what is that the western end of the property now. Yeah In order to be responsive, I think to the police. Comments about safety. With the uh Roadway at this location and we have another version with it up here. Yeah. Um, We also provided a sight distance, um, graphic with our response to the peer reviewer which showed that there was at least 305 ft of sight distance in each direction. Uh, this road is posted 30 miles, yeah, 30 MPH in the site distance for a 30 mile an hour road is around 250 ft. Um, we went with the police officers uh recommendation of 40 MPH to evaluate site distance which gets you up to the higher 305 ft, and I think there’s there’s more than 30 or 5 ft in each direction, so I think we meet the site distance requirement with uh room to spare. Um, So we didn’t make any changes to the uh existing conditions plan other than picking up all the yeah. And the, uh, in that little strip. So there’s a lot of them. Um, and as when we get to that, um, strip of trees, we do have a note that the, uh, a little bit of pruning will be required to get the lot fore house in, but we don’t need to remove any trees to get the house in. Just pruning some branches. So our um this shows the layout. Same as always uh say lock configuration, same 50 ft wide right of way, 22 ft of pavement with 4 ft on each side, uh, an island in the middle which has a 60 ft diameter. Uh, the town subdivision regulations call for a 120 ft diameter cul-de-sac. We meet that outside diameter for the paved cul-de-sac, but we added the, uh, landscaped island in the middle, primarily because it’s just a small subdivision. I think it improves the look and reduces the amount of runoff a little bit. So that was that. Um, This site layout plan I highlighted the um, Uh, trees to be removed and basically they’re long, uh, Maple Street, but there’s a row of arbovis uh to be removed. There’s a couple of trees in front of the existing house here. They get removed as part of the uh cutting the slope back to make sure that we we get the slight distance that we’ve mentioned, so it looks like there’s 123, there’s another tree there for 5 trees, uh, in addition to the row of Arborvis that get removed as part of those improvements. Um, That’s about all on this one. Um Oh So we, uh, the notes here to say that we revised the layout a little bit and we also on October 2nd made a minor change to the plan. We, uh, got a little bit more specific about the stonewall reconstruction. So our idea is that the stone wall along Maple Street, you know, it’s, uh, it’s a, it’s a nice feature. We’d like to put it back. We just want to make sure that we don’t put it back so high as to create a sight distance obstacle. So we’ve got an 18 inch height uh for the uh stone wall and the idea would be to replace it and basically the roughly the same location. As it is now, um, I think when we get out there and we actually are building this thing, we’ll we’ll look down the road and make sure that it’s, uh, it’s manageable if for some reason the 18 inch height isn’t, you know, reasonable or it’s causing a site obstruction. We just push it a little further back towards the house back to exactly that would be an easy solution. Um, the, the changes to, uh, Maple Street, you know, this, this stonewall relocation, the cutting back of the grades and removing the trees all fall into the scenic road, uh, regulation, so we’ll have to have a, a hearing an application for that, uh, at a later point in time. Um, the grading and drainage pin, a couple of other features, um, each house has 2 drywells,,,, 222 of those are 1000 gallon drywells and we’re going to direct roof runoff into there that’ll, uh, significantly amount the reduce the amount of runoff. We also have a large infiltration bed. Underneath the cul-de-sac uh as part of our September submit we, uh, gave, uh, the town and DGT our soil testing results associated with, I think we did 2 or 3 test pits in the vicinity of the, uh, infiltration, uh, structure. Uh, very good soils at the site. I’ve mentioned that before, but we’ve got, you know, uh, mostly sands less than 2 minutes per inch, very easy to design septic systems and infiltration systems when you have such wonderful soils. So we’re lucky in that regard. We also note on that plan this uh slope grading area here. But uh you talked about a little bit. I don’t have all the papers. Excuse me, I, I don’t have all the paper all the papers. I don’t have all the paperwork in front of me. Was there a concern from the consulting engineer about uh the test soil testing that you did, was it in the same location as where you’re proposing the um leach fields or septic that that wasn’t that was right, that was one of our comments back, uh, probably August. And so we did, uh. Take some additional test fits, I think I’ve got them. Uh That’s here. And we’ve got uh. Anyway, there’s one right underneath the infiltration pit there. We were a little constrained in our test pits and that we didn’t want to, uh, ruin the vegetables that we’re still growing at the time of the test pits, but uh we we’ve done a lot of testing on this property now and pretty consistent results. Uh, so I think we’re in good shape on the soils, and it would still have to pass the the towns muster even after you right, we’ve got to submit detailed plans to the Board of Health, you know, depending on how many bedrooms the house ends up being and all that has to happen. You’re right. Um, OK. Well, the other thing I noted, I highlighted on this plan was the 100 ft buffer zone. There is a wetland on the opposite side of Maple Street, and it just clips the proposed road improvements a little bit. So there is a conservation filing that needs to be made. It’s probably be an RDA application is a relatively simplified application, but it’s in their jurisdiction and uh. So we’ll have to do that. Alright. Mhm Um, This is our utility plan. There was some questions about um. Well, first we added a light post in the middle of the uh. Island And there was a question about labeling the hydrant location, the size of the hydrant on um Maple Street is an 8-inch line and uh the uh electric telephone cable will be underground after we go overhead across the street to a telephone pole, and then we’ll drop there and go underground to the 3 houses. So I think your light post answers one of the questions that I had, which is, will the island have any vegetation on it or, you know, is it just be grassy. Uh, it will have some vegetation and I’ll get to that in one or two sheets. Not to put too much suspense into the hearing, no no no, no, no So, um, so yeah, so this is the, uh, plan after it’s been revised on the 2nd to, uh, add some information about the height of the stone wall. That was a comment that came out on October 1st, and then, uh, there were some comments on October 3rd about the trees and so what Margaret asked us to do is to put a tree every 40 ft on the road, so that we have, I think, uh, 15 new trees and 2 existing trees to use. Um, So These are 34 And this tree is existing and I think it looks reasonably healthy. History also It is existing it looks reasonably healthy. So I think we can use those two existing trees. Uh, but if for some reason, you know, the trees had to come down, they were unhealthy or whatever, then we would just replace them with a new street tree. We also put a table at the top of the plan regarding the, the species, uh, and I think Margaret spoke to the tree warden about this, but we have red maple, Hawthorn, and, uh, honey locust up there the conversation I had, she said that when would Have identified species species 3 of each. OK great thank you that’s helpful to know. Right, so. Um, and then in regards to the island, you can see we’ve added some uh 4 clusters of 4. Uh, shrubs and those are there, uh, American youths, I think. Mm. Um, just, you know, just to, uh, break it up a little bit and I think it’ll look nicer. And otherwise grassy, yes, and I really didn’t want something that’s going to grow very tall. I want to have good, you know, again, sight distances, you know, good security of police drive in. I want them to see what’s going on, so. Uh, those, those shrubs can stay pretty low and they don’t grow very fast. These are still just concept dwelling locations, right? That’s right, yeah, all the online improvements are conceptual, um, you know, we’ve provided a little bit of, uh, screening between, you know, lot 2 and lot 1. Where the uh future homeowner there would be coming in just to provide a little separation there and you can see there’s also some arbovis between lot 3 and lot 2. but I’m sure each of these, you know, houses are going to be nicely landscaped, um, you know, what we’ve shown on the plan is approximately 40,000 square foot house, which I think is what the market will be looking for on, on a lot in one of these days, but, uh, you know, it could be bigger, it could be smaller. Um, let’s see, and I think that’s, uh, we, we did provide. Um, an additional detail sheet I can talk about the details if you want, but I think we provided some more details about the water connection or revise some connections we updated our profile and we also provided an erosion control plan. This is a new sheet and the erosion control plan calls for construction of a construction entrance off of Maple. Uh, we provided some identified some areas for soil stockpiling. We don’t want to stockpile soil on an area that would be used in the future for a septic systems that’s why we do that, um. Also a soil stockpile area in the middle of the cul-de-sac. And uh erosion controls around the entire site and silt sacks in the catch basins, uh, near Maple Street. And it’s a pretty flat. Piece of property as I recall so and there’s no plan to move the existing house, is that right? That’s correct, yeah. And I think that’s sort of uh sums up our changes. Does the board have any questions? Can we go back to the no parking signs. I don’t think it’s an issue for the engineering staff. I think it’s more of an issue for us, um. Are they mandatory? No, they’re, they are because there’s a waiver requested from the width of the road. Um, Jeff is concerned that if there’s parking on the road, he won’t be able to get a fire truck in and out of the subdivision. So my concern is then with that, so let’s say house number 3 wants to have a graduation party, um, and They have to be careful not to park over the septic leach field. Uh, I mean, people park on my grass, but um. Are they now going to be parking on Maple Street, which is a pretty narrow street to begin with with bicycle riders, as you’re aware, and walkers, are we just pushing that kind of traffic onto the. Onto Maple Street, which really probably couldn’t handle even one side parking and I don’t think it’s marked now for no parking. Do we have to extend the no parking out onto Maple Street as well? Just to accommodate people’s, you know, lifestyle of parties and. Graduations, do you know whether this was discussed with Jeff? Yes, so. She actually says the fire code requires at least 20 ft of pavement in uninterrupted for fire trucks to pass. So when previously is required these signs at the boulders and middlewoods. They have I don’t know if at the boulders unlikely to have graduation parties by there and there is, there is some parking around the, uh, clubhouse there as well. So I have 2 points on on this one, I think 6 signs is excessive for for this road, um, maybe 2, maybe 4, I don’t know. 6 seems like it’s a lot, um, second, this is a private way and it’s gonna remain a private way, is that right? So I have a question about the enforceability of these. That I mean we can certainly require the signs to go up, but I’m not sure it’s enforceable. Yeah, I think it’s more to the point if they’re up and someone’s parked in the way and there’s an emergency and Jeff has to brush past a car. I think it leaves the town from liability. Um That’s why I, I’ve had this issue come up in a different. Subdivision which Bob might. Recall, but anyway. When it’s. It’s I mean, to a degree, it’s they do what they want and they’re. It’s, is it creating a nuisance for the community if everyone does head out to Maple. And park along there. And would it satisfy Jeff’s issue if no parking were on one side of the street, I would imagine in this kind of neighborhood you will talk to your neighbors if you’re having any some sort of engagement or graduation party. I need possibly. To ask for their benevolence and allowing guests to park on their driveways or on their lawns, given that they’re in a living in a private. subdivision, I’m wondering if if Jeff would be satisfied if only half of the street were no parking. One side. I’m not going to speculate. I’m happy to put the signs up, so I’m not asking. That’s why I said it wasn’t not asking. That’s why I said it wasn’t That’s why I said it wasn’t That’s why I said it wasn’t That’s why I said it wasn’t That’s why I said it wasn’t That’s why I said it wasn’t That’s why I said it wasn’t That’s why I said it wasn’t So Jeff says the fire code requires at least 20 ft of pavement. And the road is 22, right? So one shot size should technically. One side is no, no, no. Well, as long as you pull into the grass like you’re not curbing this, right? You’ve asked for a waiver from Curbs. That’s correct, yeah. So, and there is a right of way that extends beyond the 22 ft, is that correct? The 4 ft shoulder on each side and the slopes down into a grassy swale, but the shoulder is before this swale, so you could in theory park offshore pavement on your shoulder for sure. What’s the diameter of the Roundabout So the outside paved diameter is is 120 ft in the island is 60 ft, so there’s 30 ft of pavement on, uh, you know, across the, uh, cul-de-sac. There’s 22 ft of pavement. In here. So the there’s more pa. With the cul-de-sac than there is on the stem, so there could be a lot of parking within the cul de sac. Which wouldn’t have the same issue. The no parking signs are only in the entryway, right? Oh I think you wanted the whole the whole street. You’re saying it’s 30 ft of pavement in the actual, in the culture conference there. So maybe it’s just maybe the no parking signs around the stem. Mm, OK. All right, well, we can adjust them at the time of construction as you know, recommended by the fire department or something like that. And as far as you know, Kate, we have all of the. Hm Papers that have been amended that. They’re all in our possession. We’re not waiting for anything. Is that correct? We are not waiting for anything, so we have everything in theory that we need, um, and I appreciate you turning things around really quickly. We’ve been having conversations amongst ourselves about not seeing things in time, so really appreciate that. Um So We have the option of, uh, making motions on various waivers that have been requested. They need to be done one by one. The waivers as I understand them, are, um. A waiver from the shoulder width requirement of 4.4.1 to allow for a 4 ft shoulder width on each side of the street. A separate waiver from 4.1.6.6, the turnaround diameter to allow for a 60 ft diameter island and 120 ft pavement turnaround with 30 ft pavement around the cul-de-sac. Separate waiver and we would, we would require a motion to grant from 4.2.1.2, which is the curbing, the granite curbing to allow for no curbing and thus the parking on the. Right, um, we need to vote on sidewalks because I think you’ve asked for a waiver from the sidewalk requirement. Um, And then there’s a series of of conditions that we can talk through at that point. I, I would like to know what the board’s pleasure is. Do we want to go ahead with a vote on this? There anything we think we still need? I mean maybe the locations of the no parking signs, but um we can also use, put those in as a condition, I think. Um, anybody have any thoughts about this that they want to express. Comment. Oh, that’s true. Does anyone have, are you done, Bob, with your presentation. I know that the folks in the, there are 3 people here in the room, or maybe 4 who want to speak to it, but I think 3, and I don’t know if there’s anyone online, Kate. OK, we need to, um, close the public hearing before we do anything, um, so um, so if there’s no more taking public comment. Well, if there isn’t any comment, we need to take that’s what I’m saying we need, if there is no comment and I’m not seeing any in the room. Kate is not saying that there is any online, then the first order of business is to close the public hearing before we deliberate. Mm I should make a motion to close the 47 Maple Street Definitive subdivision public hearing. Uh, at 7, what I can’t see 728 p.m. on 1010 24. Mhm Need a second. I All in favor. I, I, Anderson. So, um. I’m here for zooming. Um We have waivers to vote on, um, Madam Chair, would you want me just to read them out one at a time and I think they need to be voted on individually we need a second for each one. I’ll just start reading, yeah, sure, uh, number one, a motion to grant a waiver from Section 4.1.4.1 shoulder width to allow for a 4, the number 4 ft shoulder within each side of the street. I need a second so I can. All in favor. Do you have a roll call? Yes, I think so because we are on Zoom so weeks as I. Anderson I Woodland Eye. That motion passes. Motion number 2, motion to grant a waiver from Section 4.1.6.6 turnaround diameter to allow for a 60 ft diameter island and 120 ft pavement turn around with 30 ft pavement around the cul-de-sac. Second All in favor, weak, says I discussion. You know by chance, sorry, it’s not a pop quiz this is the one that where it requires 120 ft diameter, uh, paved turnaround so the island is not contemplated in the subdivision regulations. So it’s the island that’s the that’s that’s the addition. Perfect, thank you. Yeah. Anything else? No, no, so I’m ready for a vote. I’m going to vote I Pascarllo Anderson I Woodland E. It passes Number 3, motion to grant a waiver from Section 4.2.1.2 granite curbing at intersection to an intersections to allow for no curbing. Second Discussion? No Um, a call for a vote, weeks says I Pascarllo I. Anderson I with an I. Passes and 51234 motion to allow the plan for a definitive subdivision at 47 Maple Street to be developed as shown on the approved plan with no sidewalks necessary. Second, All in favor weak says I discussion. OK, so it’s only to the sidewalks. Yes, is this related to the sidewalks because there are conditions that we need to vote on. Unless you want to vote on the conditions. First. It’s just a weird motion, but it’s, it’s, yeah, it it sounds like it’s. Asking for the whole development to be approved. No, I, I, I got that. Do you wanna hold this one actually, do you want to amend it. Why don’t you offer a friendly amendment. I’ll, I’ll propose one, please. Pascarello um that we move to not require sidewalks for the proposed subdivision. At 47 Maple Street 7 Maple Street. Cool 2. OK, the amended motion. For a vote, a week, Paso Anderson I with an I. Now it’s back to you, Madam, right, for the discussion of the. I’m just writing notes here. Um, All right, so the next motion is to approve the definitive subdivision. Add 47 Maple Street is submitted with special and general conditions. So the general conditions. I think as we’ve. Um, granted, I mean with the waivers is granted, um, the special conditions, I don’t know what she’s thinking about in terms of other general conditions. Can you think of anything? There’s a list of general conditions is that on the screen. Oh, sorry. Do you want me to make it bigger? It would be helpful, yeah. So what’s on the screen is general conditions that pertained to most subdivisions in Wenham. Within 60 days of the date of approval, the applicant presents the recording plans to the planning board for its endorsement in accordance with Mass General Law Chapter 41 sections 81V and 81 X, which plans make reference to the definitive subdivision approval and the covenant. The second is construction of any of the common areas shall not commence the town’s building inspector Shalanahu a building permit for a new habitable structure on any lot and no lot shall be sold to a person other than the applicant in each such case unless and until the applicant has recorded the recording plans and the definitive subdivision approval with the Essex County Southern District registry of deeds, executed and delivered to the planning board of restrictive covenant in the form appended here too as exhibit A and incorporated by reverence. and recorded the same with with said deeds. Which recording shall be deemed to have occurred by the execution of said exhibit A and its recording as so executed along with the division of subdivision approval as provided in clause A above and inform the planning board in writing of the recording references of the foregoing instruments. The applicant and owner and or owner shall perform and or observe all of the provisions of the covenant. The covenant may be substituted from time to time by one or a combination of the surety message methods allowed under general law chapter 41, Section 81U paragraph 7, which does not include letters of credit provided that in each instance, such substitute surety shall be sufficient in the opinion of the planning board to secure performance of the remaining roadway and infrastructure work. Such substitute security shall be in an amount equal to 150%. 0% of the estimated cost to complete such remaining work as reasonably determined by the board’s consultant. The applicant at its sole option may place any cash surety in a gift account under General Law Chapter 44, Section 53A so as to facilitate the return of the funds if not used by the town and use of the funds if they are used. So to be clear, this is all about making sure that there’s enough money to make sure that the roadway can be completed and other infrastructure. Condition 5 areas disturbed for roadway infrastructure construction shall be loaned and seated during construction as soon as possible. 6 during construction, streets shall be swept and catch based and some shall be cleaned regularly at least twice a year. The applicant shall maintain all portions of any public way used for construction access which would be Maple Street free of soil, mud, or debris deposited due to use by construction vehicles associated with the subdivision and shall regularly sweep such areas as necessary and 8, the owner or its representative shout from time to time during construction provides such benchmark Marks of property elevations on plan profile sheets as prudent construction practice shall dictate. So these are general. provisions that are included in subdivisions in when there are several more. Shall I read them all? I would say no. I’m not gonna read them all. I will just summarize, um, work has to be completed within 3 years from the date work extended, the town may use consultants to supplement staff for inspections, the applicant shall record the the covenant within 30 days of recording the deeds, the roadway is not intended to be accepted as a public. by the town of Wenham this one I will read. It is intended that the maintenance of the roadway shall remain the permanent responsibility of the applicant and their successors and interest. The applicant shall record with this document the declaration of Roadway easement and maintenance agreement shown as exhibit C that indicates a responsibility of the private way will lie with the lot owners. I’m also gonna make reference to 13, which says that construction activities including maintenance, startup, and operation of vehicles or trucks on the site shall be limited to between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday at 8:00 a.m. and 4 p.m. on Saturdays, and exception to this has to be with specific approval of the building inspector and the police department. Um, there’s meant to be a pre-construction meeting at town hall with staff, um, 2 weeks prior to pre-construction meeting, the applicants need to submit a copy of the stormwater pollution prevention plan, um, additional management plans before the pre-construction conference need to be submitted, including traffic management, which as we’ve heard is probably going to be important on the street, temporary traffic controls, etc. etc. Um, and the Stormwater operation and maintenance plan previously approved by the planning board and attached as exhibit D has to be complied with during. Is that it? Cater and we’re still going. Oh, there’s many. How many are there? 23, 23. OK, so let’s just go quickly through and I’ll explain what they are since we’ve started, um, the applicants need to conduct an on-site inspection, um, to observe what the erosion controls need to be at any point during construction, um, the town can go onto the site for making observations about compliance, water services need to be installed in accordance with the water department specifications. Um, to lessen the demand of water use on the Wenham water system all landscape irrigation shall be provided by a separate private well. We also, oopsie, we also have a um a special condition about no sprinkler systems, but we’ll get to that. Can we go back please. Um, the Wenham Water department is under extreme pressure from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection to reduce water consumption. The applicant is responsible for mitigating this increase by providing the town of Wenham with a payment of $5 per gallon, da da da da um this definitive subdivision approval is intended to run with the land of the subdivision. OK, so that is what we have for the general conditions, then there is a list of special or specific conditions, uh, special conditions on this subdivision which Kate is going to put up on the screen while that’s happening? Absolutely. are there any plans for irrigation in the roundabout and the landscaped area in the middle of the circle. There’s nothing on the plan right now. OK, thank you. So would you like me to read this? I would love to, since I just read all the general ones get my water here propose special conditions are the following one, no sight work shall begin until the applicant has obtained a permit from the Conservation commission for work to be done within their jurisdiction. 2, no sight work shall begin until the applicant has submitted an application and obtained approval from the planning board for any work done within Maple Street, which is a designated scenic road under Mass General Law chapter 40, Section 15C3 applicant will adhere to the requirements of the town of Wenham Water Department as listed in the memo dated August 8, 2024.4, no irrigation systems shall be connected to the public water service if irrigation systems are installed, they shall be supplied by an alternative water source. We reiterate this oh this is this is also in the general conditions. Um, 5, the applicant shall adhere to the approved landscape plan and follow the recommendations of the town tree warden for the species of street trees to be planted. No final release of the covenant or any surety shall be issued until the trees are planted and the tree warden confirms their viability. And This is the fire lane question. Um, I think we should take this separately. OK, so let’s, let’s take, uh, the motion is to approve. Can we amend any of these? Sure, but we should put the motion out before we amend them. Well, I, I have. OK. Well, discussion first, Dave, do you propose amending any of the general conditions? OK, so then I would like to make a motion. That, um. Approval of the proposed subdivision is subject to the general conditions 1 through 23. That were described. Run that again. If we vote to approve the subdivision. It will be subject to general conditions 1 through 23. And not these, we’ll get there next because you said you might have amendments because you might have changes, so. Uh, second the motion. All in favor, we can take a vote unless there’s discussion. You’re uncomfortable with this, no? This is just the general condition the general condition. Weeks as Island. And now on to the special conditions, so we should probably discuss, so David let’s take them one by one. No sight work shall begin until the applicant has obtained a permit from the Conservation Commission? No change. No sight work shall begin until the applicant has submitted an application and obtained approval from the planning board for any work done within Maple Street, I would say, which is a designated scenic road under Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40 section 15C. I just don’t understand that. Why is any work being done within Maple Street? It’s an adjacent to Maple Street or? For any work done. In other words, I think the stone wall in order to add the entranceway, isn’t that correct? regrading some of that area to get the street in so I think it’s Maple Street is a scenic road, designated scenic road. So if they’re going to remove any trees or do stone walls, they have to come back to us for hearing those things within Maple Street? Yes, because they’re in the right of way. They have to take down that hill too. And that’s in the right of way, so it’s only what’s in the right way. That’s correct. Yeah, which is like 10 ft in from where the road ends or 12 ft. I can’t remember how big it is and it includes the stone wall, so I’m so you’re fine with this, OK. Uh, the third one is applicant will adhere to the requirements of the town of Wyham’s Water Department as listed in the memo dated August 8, 2024, which I believe the Appleant has. That’s OK. No irrigation systems shall be connected to the public water service if irrigation systems are installed, they shall be supplied by an alternative water source. Any comment on this one? I mean, obviously all the water comes from the same general source anyway, but. So they still are subject to we do not have a ban on this. We just have a, we don’t want them connected to the public water service because it that definitely draws down the correct, but it’s still subject to town enforced water bans and uh even though you’re on the, even though even though Well, yes. I mean I don’t think we’re prepared to do this, but I’ll just say that, you know. We need to We need to do better on this as a town for a condition like this. I mean, it should be drought scape, it should be. You know, if, if this. Development turns into massive lawns. That are irrigated from Private wells I think we haven’t done our job as a board, you know, I think we, we should do better, but I’m not prepared to offer any alternative language now unless anyone else feels inspired and and bobs up for it. We have um An implementation. A master plan implementation. Item around this don’t we? Yes, but we don’t, we haven’t done it yet, so I think. It’s gonna take a while to we can do is is this condition. It’s my aspirationally put something in there like. We encourage the planning board encourages the applicant. To use drought tolerant landscapes. That I can sleep a little bit better tonight or just is there not really interested in that? It’s not binding, it’s just aspirational. It’s something that it’s a special condition on approval, so. I mean, I think we can say that orally. Yeah, can we make you an example of somebody who did it and it looks good. See what I’m saying? Yeah, no, I, I think it’s a legitimate point. I do think that the irrigation use on this property is going to drop as a result of its change of views from agriculture to residential, um, but, uh, nonetheless there’s no reason that the houses can’t be nicely landscaped with drought tolerant species. It’s certainly the center of the is the island could be with the applicant be comfortable with that as a condition, again, I don’t want to get into the conditions because it raises questions of enforcement and all that, but I think, you know, Mr. Biglio wants to do a good job. He’s, you know, he wants this this isn’t gonna be his last subdivision, and so I think you’ll you’ll see nice looking buildings and you’ll see nice looking landscaping. I think that’s gonna require us to. Amend the landscape plan. Right. So I don’t think we need to do it here as part of special condition 4. Are you comfortable? We’re, we’re not ready to do this, but I, I, the only reason I made comments I think this is something that we need to. What we can do in the future and we, we should insist upon. Noted, noted flag planted, flag planted. You’re not alone, David drought, dark, drought tolerant landscapes idea plants, yes. Um, OK, so we’ve touched on that. The applicant shall adhere to the approved landscape plan. This is also relevant and follow the recommendations of the town tree warden for the species of street trees to be planted. No final release of the Covenant or any surety shall be issued until the trees are planted and the tree warden confirms their viability so discussion discussion on discussion on this, do we have to separately approve the landscape plan or are we considering that approved if we vote to approve. I think it’s all part of the package, is it not, Kate? It’s just a separate sheet. It’s not in the. We’re gonna sign that page too. Yeah, all right, so that will be part of the package, Bob? OK. Do we want to say that in here? The applicant shall adhere to the approved landscape pen which shall be part of the packaged, approved or something like that. Well, it Well, it I would take out the word appro applicant shall adhere to the landscape plan. Approved as part of something like that. Part of the motion. Part of the approval board’s approval. OK, so it reads, the applicant shall adhere to the landscape plan approved as part of the board’s approval. Uh that’s probably too much included in the board’s approval. Um, and follow the recommendations of the town tree board and etc. etc. So with that, are people comfortable with that? Oh yeah, yeah. Those are the 1st 12345 condition uh special conditions. Can we take a vote? Well, the, the 6th 1, the 6th 1 we are gonna take separately, um, so this just to reiterate the motion is to approve the definitive subdivision as submitted with this special with the special conditions just articulated. So I would move that. Special conditions 1 through 5 are a requirement of the. Definitive subdivision plan. I would need a second motion. I’m sorry, special conditions 1 through 5 as amended are a requirement of the definitive subdivision plan for 47 Maple Street they’re they’re not numbered on our sheet, but they can be. Um, And do I have a second? I have a second, a second the motion. Changed motion. Uh, all in favor unless there’s discussion further, no, all in favor weeks says Is Anderson with an I, OK, now we have the discussion of a special condition related to the fire lane signs. The way it’s drafted, the applicant shall install no parking slash fire lane signs along each side of the proposed roadway in order to keep an adequate width of roadway clear for fire apparatus. I mean in the past, haven’t we just Put in A subclause after proposed roadway like comma. Or as Otherwise approved by the. Fire department I mean, can’t there be a discussion? And they, if they, if the fire department decides less is sufficient. Or is that too which I mean, well, if. There isn’t usually a waiver from them. With This is because I think what you’re saying, Dave, is do we just want to delegate this to Jeff to say how many signs and. Yeah. I’m, I’m not sure we want to do that. Based on our previous discussion, do we, do we wanna require 6 signs on this roadway I’ve never found him to be arbitrary and capricious. I mean, I don’t think he’s he is asking for 6 signs so we know what he wants and if he’s negotiating with us, that’s a different story if it’s negotiating with the owner of the property that’s a very different dynamic. I guess We don’t know enough from Jeff about why he’s asking for these I think we do. Well, I don’t know about the number, but he, he, he, he wants sufficient so that people understand that. They don’t not meant to park in the on the pavement. And he has picked 6 as 4 units and an entryway, so you know, I think if we mark the the stem as no parking. Um, It it let the fire truck get within how many so if you hit the cul-de-sac. You’re, you’re, you’re in front of or behind. Two of the units you’re how many feet from that proposed house where on the lower hydrant, right? And where’s the fire hydrant? I mean, you got to get from the fire hydrant to the pumper back to the house burning, right? So what are those distances? I mean. We’re not expert, but. So I would think that if we’re concerned about this what we’re calling the stem. That one sign on each side of the stem that says no parking fire, no parking either side fire lane. But Once you get to the cul-de-sac. And by the way, who’s going to park on the stem, the houses are really on the cul-de-sac and the existing house has parking elsewhere because it doesn’t have access from the new road. So once you get to the cul-de-sac, you’ve got 30 ft of pavement. Which should avoid this problem unless somebody’s going to double park which, but that’s a different only needs 22 ft, right? So if you get. What are we saying 6 6 ft width. parking parking space is usually 8 ft wide. So, so your 30 ft would in theory you could cut down to 22 and you still have 22 for for to maneuver your vehicle or your fire truck around the circle. And if you’re sticking out into that and he needs to bring the fire truck around, he is not gonna. Stop and not bring the fire truck in. He’s gonna continue that truck. They’re gonna go right over that, right over that grassy knoll in the middle of going out, um, where drought resistant no depending I would think that one sign on each side, one on each side of the roadway as you’re entering on the stem would be sufficient. And it’s also going to send the message is the is the I’m not, I don’t have this, yeah, the, the section from the, from Maple Street to the cul-de-sac is 200 ft? How many feet is that? 250 to the center of the cul-de-sac roughly, so that’s like 200 ft. So when every 50 ft, that’s 4 down the bottom. On the road part and before you approximately we just say 4 on the cul-de-sac, I mean on the on the roadways straight away, straight away. Prior to the cul-de-sac on the 22 ft, how about on the 22 ft paved portion? At At 50 ft and 100 ft. Yeah, we’re not even, yeah. It Evenly spaced. I mean, well, that would be if it’s 150 ft. He put one on each side of the 50 ft and 100 ft markers. That’s great you have a gap, a sign, 50 ft a sign, and you know 50 ft to the end, so we have consensus this special, well, let me just read it this this this would read then the applicants install no parking fire lane signs along. Each side of the proposed roadway. Between Maple Street. And the beginning of the cul-de-sac. Um, in order to keep an adequate width, do we want to be directive about the number? I, I think it would be clear if we just said. Or But challenge style 4, no parking signs. Uh, no, it’s 2 along each side 50 and 100 ft. Interval, uh, Mark, Mark, Marks from. Maple Street OK, let me just see how this can read. The applicant shall start stall to no parking or fire lane signs part I think it’s no parking slash fire lane signs along each side of the proposed roadway at the 50 and 100 ft marks between Maple Street and the beginning of the cul-de-sac in order to keep an adequate width of roadway clear for fire apparatus. Wait, wait, isn’t the cul-de-sac the entire road? So isn’t it the beginning of the what would you call that? But the bulb. The cul-de-sac is the is the circular portion the circular part to me. That’s, I would say there’s a roadway and a cul-de-sac at the end there’s actually. Frighteningly, there’s case law on this. I’m sure you know it so well it I’m sure you know it so well it is I’m sure you know it so well it is I’m sure you know it so well it is just like the I’m sure you know it so well it is just like the I’m sure you know it so well it is just like the I’m sure you know it so well it is just like the I’m sure you know it so well it is just like the I’m sure you know it so well it is just like the I’m sure you know it so well it is just like the I’m sure you know it so well it is just like the yeah, so it’s. It’s the bag. Um, And the beginning of the cul-de-sac. You don’t even need to say, you can just say the 50 ft and 100 ft marks from Maple Street Maple Street, OK, from Maple Street. All right, so as amended. Do I have a motion to uh accept this special or to require this special condition as amended. I’d like to make a motion. I’m looking at you. I can install 2 if you can read that. Good luck to the to the applicant shall install two no parking fire lane signs along each side of the proposed roadway, um, at the 10,050 and 100 ft marker from Maple Street in order to keep adequate width of roadway clear for fire. Apparatus 2. All in favor Wee says Idland E. Thank you. Hold on. Yes there a requirement to get an earth grading permit? I don’t think so. Uh, because you only need an earth grading, you know, an earth grading special permit from the, from the selectmen if you’re moving. More than a certain amount of earth. 1000 cubic yards of earth. Yeah, something like that. I’m not sure, but I sometimes there’s an exception in there for approved, uh, building projects, you know, like a subdivision road as well. So I suppose if we need to get the the permit, we’ll get the permit, but I, I’m not. I haven’t had to do one for a subdivision before. But you’re right, there is a in the towns. By zoning bylaw has a permit for grading and redistribution of earth. Which I think is hearing. That petition for parents. But it’s for a specific amount. Which is a lot, as my recollection. It’s without special permit. Except Um, We alteration you’re not removing Earth from this, uh, I mean, some earth might get removed, but I, I think that this might be a question for the building inspector. I sort of wondered, does that, um. By law apply to the individual house lots. Does it, you know, also apply to the private way. Uh, I’m not sure. I don’t think it has to be a condition of the subdivision approval because if they trigger it, they’re gonna need a special permit under the bylaw. I do know that the building inspector has looked at this. And did not mention them back. I’m only thinking cause it seemed like it was a pretty. Big Burn that was gonna be reduced, uh, so I think about, so um 10 cubic yards. Of material is like a pile of compost that I get. So it’s about that big, right? So if you’re going to 1000, you have to multiply that by 100. It’s just, it’s just, it’s just it’s Yeah, I mean, there’s only about 10 ft of gray change over the entire property. I don’t think there’s any alterations of 5 ft, a hill for example. Fair enough. Anyway, We’re good. I think so. Is there, is there a specific approval of the subdivision or is it taken care of it. OK, thank you, no, we haven’t I’ll get out before we have it in mind. Hold on, we haven’t done, we’ve, we’ve approved general conditions and special conditions, so I will make a motion that we approve the proposed definitive subdivision plan for 47 Maple Street subject to the general conditions and special conditions at the board has just voted on. I will second that. All in favor unless there’s discussion. Weeks as I Parello I. Anderson and I wouldn’t I. Thank you all very much. Now it’s been approved. Yeah, that’s careful. Thank you. Good luck and we’ll be back in a few weeks with plans to endorse and covenants and sureties and all that kind of stuff, so. Just be Just be All right. The next item is the Spring Hill Farm request for bond reduction and is Mr. Newman? Online here and do we have the paperwork we asked for at the last meeting? You were submitted. Not only did I submit it, but I submitted it, uh, like 10 days before the deadline. I’m asking the staff a question. I think we all wanted a copy of the original conditions. And I did not get them. Did you get them? I pulled it from the registry of deeds today. So in the future if we and I’m not addressing this to you, but if we’ve asked at a previous meeting to happen we did get these. When did we get them? September 17th they wanted. They’re not. I have an email from Margaret with. This is an attachment with Mr. Newman’s letter. There were 3 attachments to the in there while you’re talking I’ll copy them and you guys are discussing, I’ll copy them. They’re OK. it wasn’t the packing. It wasn’t in the packet. It might have been what do you mean the packet? No, no, no, it wasn’t in the packet for tonight. I’m saying it was in we received an email from Margaret on September 17th with Mr. Newman’s brief. And in that. Email that was one of the 3 attachments she included the subdivision approval with this condition. That’s, that’s all I’m saying. OK, thank you. That’s helpful. I did not see that. I was overseas on September 17th, so yeah, did not look at that. Um, I did notice that it wasn’t in the packet for tonight. And I noticed that you asked for it. To And I noticed that the state of Massachusetts and particularly our Southern registry of deeds is just terrific and has a very if you know how to use the system, all the information you could ever want is right there. Well, that’s good. And we’re waiting for Mr. We learn to come back with copies. While we’re waiting, I wonder, um, Kate, do you have anything to say about what the town has done since our last meeting with respect to Spring Hill Farm’s request for bond release. I, I understand that there is a peer reviewer comment and that Margaret went out and looked at the sites. I’m wondering if you wanna give us a little brief report on that. I have it written summary, but maybe you wanna. Speak to that and I went out to the site and noticed that there was some. Um Holes and damage to one of the sidewalks and we went back up and it has since been all fixed, OK, so as of today it’s been repaired pretty quickly after we had brought it to their attention in September. OK, great. And so, um. I actually was up there the other day again and everything. to me OK. And at the peer reviewer also has confirmed that everything he listed. Has been completed, is that true? OK. Oh my goodness, what a concept. We all right. Now we have the documents in front of us. Thank you very much for your patience, Mr. Newman. Do you have anything you’d like to speak to us about? Well, I hope that each of you has received my uh my written submission. Um, Uh, I, I, I just go over it briefly. Uh, This is a really a question of a contract. And it’s an agreement that tripartite agreement that uh secures uh the Completion of the work. By the owner, the owner being my client. The work is defined in the document as A construction of the ways and installation of municipal services in the subdivision of land depicted on the uh definitive subdivision plan of Spring Hill Farm. So that’s what the work is and then the contract explicitly provides that upon completion of the work, as evidenced by a certificate of completion, the interests of the town shall become void and the uh lender, the third party to the agreement may disperse such funds. Uh, which have been held as security for uh such work. So, uh, as we just heard, the The work has been completed. Uh, The only difference between uh what I have to say uh today uh and what I had to say in September 12th is that as has just been noted, uh, Margaret, uh, no, uh, observed that there was some small damage to the sidewalk in a day or two after the September 12th hearing, my client went out and fixed that and as you’ve heard, that’s all in order now, uh, and I think you’ve also that the peer reviewer uh confirms that everything has been done. So that takes care of, uh, should take care of all but what’s called the holdback funds, which is $81,200 and the holdback funds are not to be released until the earlier to occur of 18 months following the application of the finish uh top coat of pavement and uh that. Happened about 2 years ago, uh, So that Uh, since that’s that happened two years ago, that’s obviously uh more than 18 months ago, some were entitled to the uh release of the uh hold back funds as well. So, uh, based upon the express which is a contractor, can I ask you a question? I need to ask a question. May we please ask you a question. What’s the relevant to what you’re saying right now? What’s the total amount that you’re seeking release for By the total amount I’m seeking is the 172,700 for the completion of the work in 81,200 for the whole deck which comes to 153,900. I have another question. Has the certificate of completion been issued? That’s That’s up to the planning board to, to do. That we don’t issue a review has been completed. Uh, the peer review confirms that everything has been done. The town planner, uh, went out and saw that everything has been done, so it’s up to the planning board to uh issue a certificate of completion, which triggers the release of the funds. Essentially that’s the, the mechanism by which we get the relief that we’re asking for. I thought the certificate of completion was issued by the building inspector. No. I mean we can say it’s our understanding and we would recommend that the that the funds be released, but the certificate of completion that’s required here, I don’t think comes from us. I’ve never seen one before where we did that. It’s like a building certificate. Type of issuance. Can you, can you pull up the. Um, The covenant The performance one, it’s one of the attachments to this. Sorry about this confusion, but I, I just don’t think that’s our it’s going to address certificate of completion in one of these pages. of It says the board. So that that seems like that was written into the special conditions if I may. The performance bond uh performance secured by lenders agreement which is exhibit A to my submission. I think the confusion is that this is right in it. As evidenced by a written certificate of completion issued by the board upon such a vote. Says right in the agreement the tripartite agreement it does say that and that’s unusual memorandum, page 2. It’s Attorney Newman, we’re not disagreeing with you. We’re not disagreeing with you. It’s just unusual and we haven’t seen, I haven’t seen this before in my time on the board, but it was apparently felt that we should be offering you a formal we as opposed to the building inspector should be signing off on the certificate of completion. We don’t have a template certificate of completion tonight to sign off on unfortunately, um, we can vote and say that it’s our um. You know, we, we, we recommend that a certificate of completion be issued and we can. I think probably. Uh Come back and sign such a thing once it’s prepared for us, but we don’t have that in front of us tonight. Just to be clear, So I would say I don’t think there’s any dispute that. The work has been completed, the peer reviewer has signed off. Margaret has inspected him, it’s been inspected so hold hold on one sec. I’m gonna move that. We, um. Issue a certificate of completion. Um, And release the remaining $153,900 on the performance bon bond, so I know you want to have discussion. Did you just move? I made a motion, I guess it needs to be and or amended. We’re seconded and then amended. And brought again. How did you get to I’m uncomfortable because I don’t have a piece of paper in front of me that says certificate of completion. I don’t know what I’m issuing. I would like the thing that I know I’m signing in to read it and so forth. I think staff can prepare the certificate of completion for us to sign off on, but. The, I think the applicant’s entitled to a release of the. Funds under the bond because this was a performance bond for. Build out of the roadways and the infrastructure and our peer review is saying everything is done. I know there are other issues that we’ve discussed regarding the affordable housing. I don’t think that I don’t think that falls under. Um, this issue here, that’s gonna come up at a at a different time when we consider street acceptance, so. Um, do we have curb cuts for the Lot 17A? Because that’s part of the way. I’m assuming because the peer reviewer said that everything has been done. I mean, I didn’t see anyone look for that. I mean, Kate, do you recall going up there and seeing curb cuts to an undeveloped lot. There’s no car cuts over there from what I know. So the. And is there a water tie in there. For the undeveloped plot. Um So I mean, those are two things that are definitely within the statutory definition of work, but I would also add that the certificate of partial completion that we signed off on in Exhibit B to Attorney Newman’s letter includes Remaining site work. And there’s a lot of items in here that were not just statutorily defined ways and infrastructure. I mean, there’s things on here. I’d be curious to understand what was line item 59 renovation of existing home $200,000. The way this project has approached work. As a term in including under the the certificate of partial completion has not been limited to. This phrase and the money held back has not been limited to this phrase, and that’s been the understanding for the past 8 years of this project, but what’s the work that we’re saying isn’t complete. Well, Because at the beginning of this, there’s a, there’s an email chain. With The list we saw it at our last meeting. There were like 8 or 9 items that needed that needed to be done and they were all checked off and the only thing that came up was the sidewalk repair, and now that’s been done. So if our peer review is telling us everything is done. What, what are we what are we saying is not done? Well, We know that there’s a lot that’s not completed. Now, I heard the I heard the two of you say that you don’t believe that that’s within the scope of this performance bond, but what I’m seeing here on this list is quite a few things that are outside of infrastructure and ways like slope grading, landscaping, um. Other things that. May implicate this development when that lot is. Developed Are we gonna have any recourse? The only recourse is the acceptance of the road. There’ll be nothing left. We’ll have no leverage left around any collateral. Aspects In the development of that lot and the developer, the applicant has played his hand in this memo. And does not believe that he has any more obligations. On that lot under Well, I have a question for you. Is it obligations on the lot that you’re concerned about, or is it curb cut and access to the lot that there won’t be a bond for it’s both, so if we take the narrow definition. Of if we take the narrow definition of works. Then at minimum we all agree that there has to be curb cuts and a tie-in because that is, that is the infrastructure and the municipal way. I am concerned that their historically on this project and including in exhibit B to Attorney Newman’s memo. There has been an understanding that the performance bond covered other aspects of this development, the what’s what’s gonna come next. Is a request for street acceptance without a development. Of Lot 17A as is a requirement and the the memo states to the point that the applicant believes that the applicant has done all that is required under the. Certificate of decision. I do not agree with that, and I believe that there could be. Aspects of the further development of that lot that could implicate the types of things that we have. Uh, uh, held back on the performance bond. Previously So I don’t agree with the applicant’s statement in the memo either regarding lot 17 178 whatever it is. Um, But with respect to release of the funds on the performance bond, I don’t think that that. Issue is applicable, but like, let me ask you this. So let’s say they’re going to develop that lot. And let’s say they’re gonna, they’re gonna have to move some earth. I’m not talking anything huge. And they’re gonna have trucks coming in and out of the the of the way, the road and that there’s an implication to the road because of that construction traffic. Well, and the curb cut, and the curb cut, we don’t, we, they have not finished development of this project. And so we cannot release or Because the curb cuts not done. Well, there you go, I mean. We have not seen the end of the development. Of this project. That’s what concerns me and we are now releasing these funds. So my question would be how much do you think we should reserve to make sure that if when that lot is developed, the roads are fixed, the curb cuts made, and there may be somebody on this phone that could answer the question on the call that could answer the question about the curb cuts we can get that resolved from Dan right now. Is Is there, is there a price you want to put on that? That’s I I see that I can see the argument that the development is not done. There’s one more lot to go, uh, Daniel Spring Hill Beach. Yes. Please. Right, yeah, you answer your question, both the curb cut has been completed and there’s a curb stop for water at lot 17. So the curb cut is completed 17 whatever we’re calling the undeveloped lot at this point. And if I may add something we’re asking Dan and he seems to be frozen, so just so you know, Dan, we can’t hear you. Oh, you’re. Is that any better? Yes, much better. Thank you. OK, yeah, of course, sorry about that. To answer the question, yes, the curb cut exists. For Law 17S to the curb stop for water service. 17 S is that is that the lot we’re talking about the, the habitat lot that we have been having the conversation about. Yes, that’s correct. Law 17. OK, because we’ve heard it called a lot of different things so I just wanna be. Certain I know what I’m talking about. Thank you. You’re welcome. Well, if that is the case, I think. You know, I, I do think there’s an argument that says once you go in and develop, you may run into some problem that you need to do something in the street like. I don’t even, I don’t know, bring in a water line. The water line is there, right? The water staff is there, look, I think if we’re looking at this bond. As a discrete instrument. That I think the conditions have been satisfied and that. We need to release the funds. And if we don’t release the funds, we may be in breach of the. Agreement Um, Isn’t there also? The, um, there’s like a catch base in there. Isn’t there a catch basin? Adjacent to the lot or within that lot 17A. But is that covered by the bond or is the bond for streets and infrastructure, water infrastructure. Well, the catch basins. There there’s something there. Is it possible to put up Google Maps, Google Earth. Can I see these conditions. Wherever that table was that you were I can’t. I don’t know what that is. What is that called? That’s the uh sediment they have the stormwater runoff control. Part of that whole, yeah, so it’s a storm water management, it’s here. This is the lot the the the the undeveloped lot right here. OK, now I’m confused. I thought it was the rea I thought it was at the rear of the development. No, it’s right there and. It’s the same thing that I have in my. My midst, yes. Zoom. Hey, what are you looking for? Here it is. I just want to see what the items on the list are. This is gonna be a mega old. Um, photo we gotta get a newer date. If you go to Google Maps. Sorry that I sent you on a wild goose chase. If you go to Google Maps, we might do a little better. So is your argument that the storm scepter is what we’re talking about here? Yeah, if you take a look at this. With the lay the infiltration basin. Uh, that’s gonna, no, you don’t need that. We’ll do the other way you had it. And then zoom in. I mean, isn’t that sorry out a little bit, isn’t that the lot right there and you have. I was gonna have a long driveway or something. Yeah, it’s gonna have a long driveway right there. You’ve got some type of stormwater management thing there. this, this lot is not ready to go. There’s gonna be stuff that’s gonna happen and there’s implications to the infrastructure and the municipal way potentially that’s not the purpose of the performance bond. So if, if that lot is ultimately developed whether it’s by habitat or the applicant or anything else, and there’s an impact. To the the municipal way. The question for that I have is which of these remaining. Items on the schedule that we said needed to be completed has not been completed and is it, is what you’re saying. That the item that hasn’t been completed is the erosion control cleanup. Or the stormwater management erosion control measures. I mean, we, we had a list, a checklist here of items that needed to be completed. The the promise is that when we adopted that in 2021. We, we didn’t know what we know now. Now, which is that the applicant does not intend to develop this parcel. And so. We don’t, we don’t know what’s gonna be required in the development of that parcel in terms of the implications on. The infrastructure in the municipal way. Well, first, Springfield right now it’s a private, it’s a private one understood and it can’t be a municipal way until the town approves it, but the point being that if, if there’s damage caused. To that road. And these funds have been released. The town’s gonna be in a pickle. Because eventually. This needs to become a public road. And so if the developer isn’t gonna cure it. We’re gonna have a real situation on our hands as a town. This is not a viable lot yet. I don’t believe for development. And that’s the problem I have. And there’s no, there’s no surety at this point if we release these funds. I understand what you’re saying. So are you suggesting that there’s some small amount of funds to be held back. I’m going to reiterate, Mr. Woodlam’s question. What and what would that amount be? Um, I mean, what’s listed here. Uh, was the stormwater management erosion control measures at $8000. Um, some landscaping, um. And catch basin work, you know, drainages soil, clean out, and so forth. I could imagine that needing to be dealt with at the time. That lot is developed. Um, And that it might cause damage to the roadway. Uh Can you put up the chart? From our last meeting which had the outstanding, no, it’s not that it’s the bottom half of this. Yeah, from the last meeting there’s a chart that that issue that lists the things that we said or or that. was agreed that it’s not this one. It’s not this one. I thought it was the ball. I thought it was the bottom part of it. I know it was in that September 17th email as well contains things like real estate tax. Can do you have access to the email that Margaret sent on September 17th contingencies if not I can try to email it to you. I find it bond it up. This wasn’t about the infrastructure municipal way. This was for the entire project to complete development. You do. You do. Can you, um, throw it up on the screen? So there’s an attachment to that email that says email. What is that one, yep. So this is the, you need to just blow that up a little bit. Yeah, is it Can you collapse the right side so we can see the full window. All contract construction items have been completed except the cleaning out of the Dodges Row wetland as it was agreed upon. But that task has been removed as a requirement. From a construction, this is the. This is from, who is this from? I’m sorry. So DEP we went out with them and that’s that’s the wetlands because it would do more harm than good. So William. I can’t pronounce that. is what’s his signatures are Samson, he’s our guy, yeah, OK. What’s that full sentence say? The bond can be released as I do not believe the bond included. A street acceptance. Requirement or the Habitat for Humanity construction completion. It is your call on the street acceptance and habitat law issues. He’s not a lawyer, he doesn’t, yeah. Reed conditions for us. He simply looks at. Engineering Facts, the facts, yeah, on the, on the ground, so to speak. So these are the items that we. So it needed to be completed. And they have been, as I understand it. The only thing that you, the thing that I can see that’s connected to your concerns is the stormwater, the storm management erosion control measures at $88,000 which that. Thing that that structure is on the lot that we’re talking about. So if that when and if that lot gets developed, there may be some work that needs to be done with that. Would you agree? I don’t know why I’m not sure it falls on the performance bond. I don’t know why all of those wouldn’t apply. In the sense that. Once there’s been a final development. Of that final lot. Why wouldn’t there need to be street sweeping? Why wouldn’t there need to be? All of those things performed again. We don’t know. Look, it is not the town’s. Fault. That that parcel has not been developed. The burden is not on us. To release a surety when the final development has not occurred. I don’t know why this board feels the need. To Um, allow for. A release of performance when performance has not been completed for the project development. For the full project for the full project development, look, I’m not. I believe I’ve said this before, this is not a surprise to anybody. I believe that there needs to be. Absent a showing of, um, you know, inability despite reasonable efforts. Uh, a duplex on that unit on that lot. Um, we can have a conversation about that a different day, but one thing I think we can all agree upon. And I haven’t heard anything to the contrary is that lot is not ready for building. That lot is not ready to go. It’s not like that lot is ready for a duplex to be built. Well, and the relevant point is simply that once that lot is built out. There will be infrastructure implications. And so I think I, I, I hear what you’re saying and it seems to me that the way to handle this is to withhold some money. And I just don’t know how much money to withhold. It’s my problem. I think we need to get guidance from our so so if Bill Blais says. Um, I don’t know about the habitat law issues, that’s up to you all. Then we should ask him. Um, what is required for development of that lot. And what are the implications to? The the rest of the development. Well, the infrastructure that the bond is meant to hold. Fair enough that we’re holding the bond to ensure water and. Street sidewalk street sidewalk, whatever streets can we look at the bond? You have the bond. Can you pull it up or do we have it in front of us? We, we don’t have it in front of us. It’s in um. Is it on that It’s an attachment to to attorney. Newman’s Newman’s submission. We don’t have it in the papers in front. One is exhibit. OK Performance secured by lenders agreement. OK. But And I, I just want to say that uh the certificate of partial completion had a list of things that had to be done. And And the peer review has indicated that all the things on that certificate have been done, so as a matter of basic contract law, we’re entitled to the release of the bond, but there was a change in how that last lot was going to be developed and that’s, that is not been documented properly enough for myself. So we’re in this because you’re transferring that last lot that you were going to develop over to somebody else to develop and we want to make sure that this uh development. is whole at the end. So In the first paragraph. Secure construction of the ways and installation of municipal services in the subdivision of land. The question is whether that’s been completed. It’s been certified that it’s been completed. I wear. Wessing the point. You know, you’re trying to take this document which is very clear, explicit, unambiguous on its face and you’re bending it to try to, uh, uh, serve some other purpose, but the the clear unambiguous language of this document. Uh Requires the release of the bond at this point. So Attorney Newman, I, I don’t think we’re trying to do that. We’re discussing amongst ourselves. Here No, no, no, so this, this bond the second paragraph says that the full amount $406,406,000. is to ensure the performance by owner of the work in compliance with all covenants, conditions, agreements, terms, and provisions contained in the following, which includes the decision. The work is explicitly defined. And the work in compliance. With all covenants, conditions, agreements, terms, and provisions out of there you go through the documents 4 pages that defines the work in 9 different places and the work has been completed. Can you go to the next page? The work may be more particularly defined and a portion of the retained funds may be allocated to certain defined portions of the work and the time for completion of such portions may be established. Where’s the work defined? The work is described above and it’s a statutory definition. Oh, cause it’s the infrastructure and yeah. OK And we have released everything except $81,200. And Some other amount,900 are being held. which is what the total was of those 900. Well, it seems to me that the way forward is this. We either define an amount that ought to be held back. Against the concerns you’ve identified, which I think are are legitimate. About what will happen to the streets uh if that if and when, well, I should say when that lot has developed because we all agree that that lot is going to be developed. It needs to be developed. Whether or not that has anything to do with the bond money is uh not on the table right now. The question is, is there Potential damage to the infrastructure that the town would need to hold money against, um, to ensure that the that the. The way is passable after the development is finished. That seems to me to be the question on the table right now, and Uh, I mean. It’s, it’s reasonable. It’s a reasonable question and. We don’t have an amount. To I don’t have the, the, the ability to define what that amount should be. I just don’t know enough. I don’t either. I, I hear the issue. I just, I don’t think that that was the intended uh meaning of the performance bond, which was to ensure that the ways were built out in the subdivision, which. They have been the infrastructure was built out, which it according to our peer review, it has been. I from what I hear you guys saying is you’re concerned that when Lot 17 is developed, there might be some kind of. Damage to spring him Spring Hill Farm Road from construction vehicles or or. Yeah, something, some other. And who would be on the hook for that you know I don’t know. So, so if my truck, if I’m building that lot and I by accident, I don’t know, break the water main so there’s no water up Spring Hill. Isn’t that the responsibility of the builder of Lot 17 to fix? Well, hasn’t Lot 17 been conveyed? Yes. So the the. Developer doesn’t own any of the lots anymore, nor any of the land in the subdivision as far as I can tell. Yeah. It’s a tricky. If you follow the logic, uh, the, the bond in those circumstance would ever be released until every single lot in the subdivision was completely developed, which is, that’s, that’s not the theory underlying the uh Yeah, but it is in practice the idea is to the street if you look at the list, can the street if you look at the list, can I give it. I gave it to you. Here, here it is. If you look at the list that wasn’t absent previously is to secure the that wasn’t absent previously is to secure the that wasn’t absent previously is to secure the that wasn’t absent previously is to secure the that wasn’t absent previously is to secure the that wasn’t absent previously is to secure the previously is to secure the work, not that wasn’t absent previously is to secure the work, not So what I see on this list, and this is Weston and Samson, Spring Hill Farms Development estimated cost for remaining site work. 73 items. But that’s the oldest, yeah, but this is what we voted on in terms of certificate of partial completion. So it was the understanding of this board is my basis to believe that this was the work construction budget remaining costs. This was. There’s a lot of of the work, but this is what we voted on in the context of a certificate of partial completion. But that was 3 years ago and and our peer reviewer now is telling us everything has been completed, has been completed. My point is something slightly different though, which is there’s a lot of items in here. They do not have to do with infrastructure and municipal wastes. So this concept that the performance bond has always been intended to be a singular concept specifically to reserve for the infrastructure and the municipal waste is simply not the case in terms of how this project has developed, which frankly, my understanding, it would came up at some point along the way. I think it was when we were dealing with the landscaping issue with the trees. There was active litigation in in connection with this project. I don’t know if that’s still the case. I don’t want to see the town. Get left holding the bag on this one. This project is not done with development. We are at a crossroads at this project. I am just very concerned that we are giving up leverage. When I don’t think we have to. To a developer that’s telling us to our face that one of the conditions and specifically. The responsibility for the development of the affordable housing unit. Frankly, a duplex on this site is not his, and we are gonna release the performance bond on that, that doesn’t strike me as the right approach here at minimum, I would want to have input from our peer reviewer that we could talk through and have a conversation, what is the potential Financial impact for the development, the preparation of this lot. For construction. What, what kinds of costs could we could be incurred, what kind of damages could be incurred to the the public way or not the not yet public way that the roadway and the infrastructure. I, I do think that. When this comes up to the town for a vote on acceptance. That that’s gonna be an issue. Um, And so to preserve the acceptance. potential for acceptance, it would be a good idea to withhold some money. I don’t know how much. Money to withhold. Um, I think there are two options here. One is we make that decision tonight based on nothing. I don’t have enough information to to suggest what that amount should be. Um, Or we ask for information and take this up again at our next meeting or we vote tonight on what’s here. And I sometimes you gotta just take the vote. So I The Should we ask the applicant? What his preference would be? Well, There’s a motion on the table that’s. That second and so we have to. Well, we have to do something with that. Right, but I think, I think we probably ought to unmute the applicant’s attorney and, and ask if he wants a vote tonight or if we um. Want to ask for more information about what we should be reserving. that Mr. Newman, you need to unmute if you want to say something I see. I think that is, is that his hand up? No, that’s your hand. I like a bowl. You’d prefer a vote. Yes. OK, can you repeat the motion on the table? Well, I’d like to amend the motion. OK. Does your seconder agree with that? I’m looking at the bottom paragraph of. I don’t know what page of the bond this is. Notwithstanding anything here into the contrary I believe that the hold back funds need to be released at a minimum. Because That condition has been satisfied. We are more than 18 months out from the application. Of the top code of pavement pavement. OK, so I will amend the amount of my motion from 153,900 to 81,200. Do I have a second? I’ll second that again for you. OK, uh, any discussion or shall we go to a vote? All in favor, Weeks, says I. Pascarellos’s eye. Henderson, no, uh, Woodland Eye. So that passes. So then there’s the remaining question of the 70, however many $1000 Mr. Newman, do you want us to vote on that tonight? Uh, What’s my alternative, let’s get a number about what needs to be reserved to make sure that if there’s infrastructure damage but when that lot is developed that the town is. Covered. I would suggest also that. We get an opinion from town council on. Whether we are able to continue to hold back these funds. And then we take this up at our next meeting. That that is another option. Well, if, if, if that’s gonna be deferred till the next meeting, can we also uh someone was suggesting getting, getting estimate for the cost of some work which you believe so can we, can we get all these things done. In time of at For the next meeting so that uh all the issues can be addressed at once at that time. Well, the, the issues remaining because we’ve just voted on releasing your happy with that, you know, uh, I’m talking about you wanted to get an estimate on what work uh may have to be done and I’m reserving my, my, my client’s rights to say that, that that’s not a proper uh consideration, but if it, if If it’s something that that concerns the board, maybe they can get that done in time for the next meeting. And as Mr. Pascarello said we’ll get an opinion from legal counsel on what our options are in this position. I, I’m not I take off my, I mean, is that gonna cost the town $5000 to get an opinion? How does that work with town council? No, no. I mean, isn’t, isn’t this something that the bill like the town council is just we pick. Couldn’t the building inspector, if we identified what kind of work you’re concerned about, I’m, I’m assuming our. Building inspector might be able to give her public works department might be able to give us an idea, a ballpark a ballpark a ballpark, but can we get detention basin on the bottom. OK, so can’t we just get our peer reviewer to show up at the next meeting or get an opinion and say, what is the risk? To The work that’s been done. Including, frankly, the finished topcoat of the pavement that we just released, but be that as it may. Of development of that 17 a lot. And put it on Weston and Samson to say what the risk is in financially, what’s, what’s the amount that needs to be? And it’s the detention basin as well, which is covered by the bond. Hm OK, I think that’s how we will proceed then if that which wouldn’t, I don’t think we need a motion on the remaining items. I think that’s something we can take up at the next meeting. All right, thank you very much. Thank you. Alrighty. I Lost my agenda now in this. There you go. BTA communities. The last here’s Peters. But Peter’s not here, so I give you his. Peter’s not here. Yes.. 000 no,,, 000, thank you. I’m like yes, I know. I was wondering if we would have a 22 vote actually on that last one, the MBTA communities uh discussion, um. We had a vote by the select board and a letter to the state describing it, canceling the special town meeting and explaining to the state why that is the right thing to do at this point, um, There was a Oral argument in front of the. Supreme Judicial Court state’s highest court, um, about 3A. Did you go to that? I did not go to it, but I watched it. I listened to it. I didn’t watch it. I listened to it, um. Did you, Dan, did you leave with the same sense? I think that many of us did that they’re gonna tuck out on the easy one, which is the guidelines, guidelines, yeah. I think at a minimum. They’re going to Take the 30A argument, the 30A, the administrative Procedure Act wasn’t followed. Yep, and I don’t want to read the tea leaves with whatever the court would do, but. It didn’t seem like a very good. Day for the um AG’s argument based on some of the questioning and. That The failure to follow the APA and, you know, I think the fact, the argument that their guidelines because the label is guidelines is not a very good argument, and I don’t think the justices were buying that so. The the question is how far are they gonna go though when and I hope they don’t take the narrowest course because there are questions that are many towns would like to see resolved. Like the remedies the remedies issue and the scope of enforcement authority I think would be great if great if the arguments, but have real implications for What towns are going to do, um, I would note that unfortunately for us, if the guidelines get thrown out, I mean one of the reasons we were able to do MO 1 and 2 and put a lot of density out by the highway is because of the guideline. Um, the, the statute itself doesn’t give you that flexibility, so. On the other hand, if they issued the guidelines with the proper notice and comment and public comment. I don’t think it’s sufficient to just have the town’s comment on it. I think the public gets to comment on a rulemaking like that, um. You know, they they could pass something that would allow for that kind of distribution of the of the density, but it gives it buys us time anyway and maybe we don’t need distribution of the density because. You know, if, if we have a comment period, how did they come up with 25, 24 acres for one of them and 25% of our housing stock, right? So all the statute says is a dis a district of reasonable size within a half mile of the station area. That’s all it says. That’s all it says was a modest approach, the original governor had when he proposed all this. So for small, the governor didn’t define it does define the density. It does It does define units per acres. But, but who’s to say that, who’s to say that 2 acres or 3 acres is not a reasonable size, right? Well we know who’s HLC right we also know that the guidelines define us in a certain way as a as needing to do a whole lot more than we would have to do if we were a rural what is it an adjacent community. So the guidelines Of what town you are, what type of town you are is not in the actual legislation. It is not. All it says is you have to have a reasonable district of with a minimum messed up acre, they messed up. Well, and I mean. I don’t wanna get too far afield here, but. If this comes out in say February and they strike the guidelines. Political landscape. It’s very differently different. So we don’t, we can’t speculate on what will happen with this. What we do know that there won’t be any, you know, there’s still is the deadline for, for, um, compliance isn’t in the statute, is it? No, so that’s that was one of the, uh, I think it was Justice Wahojian. Mentioned, which was. About the definitive of the guidelines, yeah, why would Milton not be in compliance because the deadline comes from the guidelines and if the guidelines get thrown out, then you don’t have a deadline to enforce is what gist of that was right. Um, Just save space, throwing it out there. I mean, is there any? Well, I agree. I hope that there’s something said about the enforcement aspect because And by that for those who might still be listening even though we’re 2 hours in, um, we mean can the Attorney General Sue a town that doesn’t comply because. That enforcement provision is not in the statute. And the other portion of the statute. And I don’t know this part you can probably do a better job with this than I can, but it sounded like the other portions of the statute that authorized the Attorney general to enforce the laws of the Commonwealth, etc. etc. is not generally used for zoning. What’s in 40, um, it’s in 40B. But it’s not they didn’t put it in this 3A. So they, they, they’ve done it intentionally in other sections, so they put the authority into the section, the specific section itself, but they didn’t do that here. OK, well, it’s. So the attorney General tried to make an argument that they have authority under 40A Section 7, which is the general zoning, but the counterargument to that was the attorney General used to have I think they took it out was removed um, I also thought it was a good point that the legislature has relooked at the remedies aspect. And amended it to add a 4th grant. And they didn’t do a lot of other things. And if they wanted to add 10 more, they they they they they would have Picked up on or or noted the point that or ask the, uh, attorney General’s office, aren’t you really going after the franchise of the town here because this is voted on it. This is the vote of which is the general construction of how zoning amendments get handled in Massachusetts. Towns get to vote. So anyway, if. If you’re interested in this. You should really Take the time and watch those arguments because they were, they were well done, which is why I think as a town we need to circle back to master plan where we really need to look at what zoning proposals we need to make as a town to start carrying that out. So as this is all happening at the state level, at least we’re preparing ourselves for we want to build a diverse housing stock right what we want to look like so that if we ever have to fight, you know, or say, well, no, we’re working on this. Um, I think we’ll have a better position with. You also have, yeah, I also have to say that. MFOD one is a reasonably sized. Area Within a half a mile of the Of the, of the station, so satisfy many of the requests that town people have made. Yes. So that’s an interesting point, I think if the. That’s just is gonna flip something and they take the narrowest approach. I think it’s going to be these weren’t promulgated properly under 30 days to go back and do it properly, which is gonna take some time and we don’t know what. Future regulations are going to look like. Um, so. I, I hear what you’re saying what MFOD one. I mean, I guess one of the things we could. Look at our contingency plans for. Would we want to just stick with MF41 or would we want to look at something smaller because the only reason we have a 6.3 acre. Parcel there is because they told us we couldn’t split lots, right, right, and why can’t we split lots if we want to say. You know, let’s just do a 3 acre or something, yeah, is this. And I think we should really look because we can’t. Lose the density requirement. So maybe we have to look at this in reverse order is how many units do we think is reasonable for well, and so That we do this work with the town stakeholders, which is to ask Eric Mansfield, how many more water connections could you support in terms of density? Ask the schools how much more students, what would be the impact of different amounts of students. Fire and police, and I know it’s a little bit sensitive because around budget talks nobody wants to say they have capacity for anything, but I still think that everyone should chime in and say if push came to shove. How many more units could you support? I would also just uh hold the mic for a second longer and say I was one of the most. Troubling parts of the whole process and I was resistant to the whole thing, but I lauded. You know, Um, Uh, Dan, your work. Uh Tireless work, Robins sitting through countless revisions and whatnot and having to be a broken record doing her job, which was if you’re not doing it in other aspects of development, you can’t do it here. So this whole premise that we were gonna increase potentially. Our housing stock by 25% relying on, you know, bylaws, only bylaws that are. Relatively old. Struck me as unfortunate and so I would say I reached out to. People in the planning community, they encouraged us to look me to look at Sharon’s bylaws as a community that’s redone. The bylaws recently and may have some more 21st century things. Canton was identified as a subdivision ordinance needs to be for the subdivision rules so that’s a community that we could look at. You know, Could we bring those up in the time that we have before. The issue comes back up, that would be my dream and it’s certainly consistent with what the master plan. Um, Kate I think is motivating. I, I think that um. Yeah. Implementation of the master plan, has, has there been any decision made about. Is that coming through us to come up with a list and start moving or is this gonna be punted to a committee. Do we know? Kate’s got something awesome. Do you remember? Were you there for that meeting? I don’t think I was, so. Um, so basically we’re gonna be focusing on those 3 sections that I presented the the we as the staff and trying to, OK. So it’s not on us to come up with a list of priorities. Based on that. OK. Because I do think that It would be better to have gone into that. Whole process with an implemented master plan that we could point to and say, yeah, we. You know, we’re going to do this kind of change the deck and get you get and get you get going and get you get going on that and then when and get you get going on that and then when and get you get going on that and then when going on that and then when this comes back and get you get going on that and then when this comes back around with zoning. OK, I think I’m gonna call this one discussed. And move on to the next bullet, um, which David, you were gonna talk to us about I’ll be super brief on this. Yeah, I’ll be super brief and obviously we’re gonna have to have the item is we have our own rules about, you know, what needs to happen in order to satisfy us so that we’re ready to go to a hearing. It’s like a a a set of process rules and David was going to take a look at them. So I went. Through a lot of towns and a lot of them, including neighboring towns, have, um, like if your meeting is on actually they publish a schedule of meetings at the start of the year of dates and then they put deadlines for submissions and they’re usually like 3 weeks before and like if you look at Beverly, what they’ll do is say, you have to submit 3 weeks before and then at that first meeting. You, the only thing that will happen is a date for the opening of the public hearing will occur, which is a little weird to me. I it seems like that doesn’t work with the timing, but maybe it does. Yeah, there’s statutory requirements about how many, how many days you have to respond. You have 90, whatever. So that was interesting to me, but like what I was hoping for, I never found, which is kind of just like an omnibus set of. Guidelines, which is like if you want something to be considered at a meeting, it must be submitted at such a time. If there’s a revised plan, it has to come in. If this happens, if this, if you want something. There just wasn’t, I’d never found anything like that, which just told me like I don’t see any reason why we can’t publish that, even if it’s not enforceable in the sense that. We couldn’t exclude something we could at least be consistent in how we approach things and we could. Maybe it would help people kind of self comply. Suppose, suppose we suppose at the next meeting we actually get out of our. We have process rules. Let’s get them out, put them on the table and talk about what we want. I don’t think we have to look to some other community for what they do, but as long as we’re within the. Requirements of the law that you know that we’re bound by. I think we can Say what we want and you know. I think you know a couple weeks ahead of time is not too much to ask, so anyway, is that can you just note that and yeah, that would be, that’s great. So we can either be what we currently have and we can just review that live altogether or it could be. You and Margaret telling us like this is what we would want to have happen? What do you think and then we can give input we definitely need to have that input for sure just a working session and come up with what we want or something I don’t know. I don’t know if that’s the best use of time, but we can. You my Hm Well, the homework is to pull it out and look at it. Minutes Minutes Thank you for your, you’re welcome. I’ve gotten much. I’m not, I’m not looking at these. I’ve already looked at them, so. Oh, these are the MBTA zoning committee. OK. Yeah, this first was our joint meeting with Hamilton. Mm I will note that we got a nice note, apologizing for from Chairman or chairperson Crouch. Apologizing for the. Some of the statements that We’re a bit derogatory. So I appreciated that. I asked Margaret to write a note. In response saying thank you from us. We’re all doing our best here. I, I would, the only thing I would notice the meeting was open for questions at the bottom of the page. Um, I think it was the Hamilton Planning Board had a number of questions. Sure. Makes sense. Just a silly knit, but. Most of these are silly nets, so. Mhm And Catherine’s with us, so she’ll hear the. Thanks, Katherine. OK. Everybody We’re done reading motion to approve the minutes. Of the joint meeting August 21, 2024 is amended. Oh, I’ll second the motion. All right, all in favor. We as I. Paso I Woodland. All right, September 12th. Sorry, the amount of that bond is 57,000 for that for Lily Lane. Just to say I’m not deliberating. I’m just reading it. Mm I would move. That’s not another page, right? I would, yeah, there I thought there was. I’d like to make a motion that we accept as edited the meeting minutes of uh 9 September 12 to 2024 of the Wynham Planning Board. Uh, second. All in favor week says I Pascar Anderson Woodland, and so our next meeting we, I would take a motion to adjourn and what this one, there’s one OK, so we’re good um, I need a motion to adjourn our meeting until November 14th at 7 p.m. in town hall. Second in 2. All in favor, week says I Pascarllo I I I. 2