2026-09-28 - Redevelopment Board

00:01[music]

00:07[music]

00:11[music]

00:18Welcome to the town of Arlington board

00:20meeting on September 28th,

00:232026.

00:24I like to call this meeting to order. My

00:26name is Ken Laauo. I'm the chair of the

00:28ARB. Can the other members please

00:30introduce themselves?

00:32>> Steve Revelock, Vincent Span,

00:35>> Michelle Schwarzle, Shaina Corman,

00:37Houston.

00:38>> We're also joined by Claire Richter, and

00:41Sarah Suarez.

00:42>> Thank you.

00:44>> I'm going to take uh today's meeting a

00:47little bit out of uh order because the

00:50attorney [snorts] for uh

00:53U Capex is at another meeting. She'll be

00:56in join us in a few minutes. So, we're

00:58going to uh take on agenda number two

01:03is our our uh discussion of 45. And this

01:08is a board discussion, not a public

01:09hearing. And there be no opportunities

01:11for public comment this project this

01:12time. I like to ask Click to provide

01:15some background on the project and give

01:16us the SAS update.

01:18>> Great. Thank you, Mr. [clears throat]

01:20Chair. Um this is an update on the

01:22project at 455 uh Massab. It's on the

01:24corner of Massab and Medford. This

01:27project was originally permanent in

01:28October 2021 and has been under

01:30construction for at least the past

01:32several years. Uh in late fall of 2025,

01:35the inspectional services department

01:36issued a stop work stop work order uh

01:39for the project. And during the stop

01:41work order, multiple deviations from

01:43approved facade drawings were noted. Uh

01:46the docket was reopened by this board on

01:48December 15, 2025 and continued over

01:50several meetings while the applicant

01:52responded to comments from the board

01:53related to the deviations from the

01:55approved facade. A positive decision

01:57regarding the redesign facade and

01:59related items was issued on March 2nd.

02:02Since that time, DPCD has regularly

02:04monitored the progress on the facade and

02:06on the remainder of the project. A site

02:08an inspection of the site on September

02:102nd uncovered more deviations from the

02:12approved plans. Items that were

02:14identified and discussed on the 2nd of

02:17September included the following. We

02:19[snorts] needed confirmation of which

02:20units would be deemed restricted

02:22affordable. ARB approval for enclosure

02:25of the garage. ARB approval of exterior

02:28exterior exhaust fans from the garage.

02:31ARB approval for screening of the trash

02:33enclo enclosure assuming the fence

02:35height is reduced to comply with site

02:36visibility requirements. ARB approval of

02:39the false window along the mass facade.

02:42an ARB approval of a reduction in

02:43parking spaces from 16 to 14 if the

02:46exterior uh parking spaces are not

02:48adequately sized. DBCD reached out to

02:51the developer to discuss how they may

02:53address uh these outstanding items and

02:55we received the email response that is

02:57included in your materials.

03:00>> Thank you.

03:01Um,

03:06this project has been around for quite

03:07some time and um, I'm going to go over a

03:12couple of the issues uh, right now and

03:14sort of give you uh,

03:17my opinion and then I'll ask the board

03:19for sort of their opinion and

03:22recommendations to uh, talk to u

03:25building commissioner about. Uh, one is,

03:28um, they do have 16 parking spaces.

03:33Um, just the two of them are exterior

03:35and they're compact. So, they do meet

03:37the requirements of parking, just that

03:40they're compact, not as described as um

03:44as fulls size before

03:46uh because of situations where the uh

03:49electric company

03:51um placed the transformer

03:54not where they had originally put it.

03:59Not where they originally put it.

04:02Um my only concern is the trash

04:05enclosure.

04:06which is sort of um acting as a um sight

04:10line uh blocking potential people

04:13walking by uh in the school next door.

04:16Uh the building commissioner will will

04:19be working that out with the developer

04:21to try to come up with a remedy to uh

04:25resolve that issue. Um either with

04:28mirrors or cutting back some of the

04:32the enclosure so that uh it improves the

04:35sight lines. But that's something they

04:36can uh I think I think they can approve

04:38that administratively and get that

04:41passed. Um the next thing is uh you want

04:44to go on the pictures there?

04:45>> Sure.

04:48>> The 40 units um has been um worked out

04:52uh with u planning department uh Sarah

04:55here and uh I think we're agreeable that

04:57uh what they provided will meet their

05:00requirements as far as size and number.

05:03So, u the trash enclosure that make that

05:07causes a blockage. That's fine. That's

05:09can be worked out with the commissioner.

05:13So, the commissioner,

05:15this is the thing that [snorts] I think

05:16that's an issue. Um, but I want to see

05:19what the board thinks about this. Um,

05:21the original plan was three windows uh

05:25within these um

05:28uh on the front wall on Massav. They

05:31only put in two windows and a a false

05:35window, a plastic and glass and some

05:38sort of screen. It's not it's not even

05:41all the way through. It's a fake window.

05:42It's applied to the wall.

05:46Um I think it doesn't um look good or

05:49and I don't think we want to be

05:51approving

05:52uh plastic windows uh in town. Um my

05:56recommendation I'll wait for what the

05:58rest of the board wants is to uh remove

06:01the window and uh patch it with the

06:04brick uh facade and just leave the two

06:06windows there. I think having only two

06:08windows

06:10uh will look better than having two

06:11windows and a fake window

06:14uh at this time. I don't think uh we

06:16want to uh create any more undo hardship

06:20on them. Uh on the other side uh of that

06:23fake window is uh an eye doctor's exam

06:26room that's already been built in and

06:28they're open right now. So it's quite um

06:32ordeal for them to uh

06:35stop the doctor's exam room um and open

06:39the window. Yes.

06:40>> So in other words, they're the inter on

06:42the interior space. They're already

06:45>> in the interior of the building. They're

06:46making use of that wall space.

06:48>> Oh yeah.

06:48>> Okay. Thank you.

06:50Can you go on to the next one?

06:53And then the last one is the garage

06:55door. This was not approved of the

06:57garage door. It was uh approved open.

07:00[snorts]

07:01And um I I would say let's um work let

07:06the

07:08u building commissioner work that out.

07:11My only concern with the garage door

07:14would be um um safety where the garage

07:18opens and someone's coming out or

07:21someone's trying to go in and uh cross

07:23traffic along that uh little alleyway

07:25where the school is and u either some

07:28sort of warning device that the door is

07:29opening or some of that might be uh

07:32accurate but they can work that out

07:33administratively. Um I think asking them

07:35to remove the door now is kind of

07:38so that's my opinion. I want to ask what

07:40your opinions are.

07:41>> Can can you point out the vents that

07:43they're adding? Where what are the

07:45exterior vents?

07:47>> Um those two tubes are sticking out one

07:50there way far there are um the exhaust

07:53for um heating.

07:56Um when they originally uh

08:00present this project to us, it was going

08:02to be uh an open garage

08:05uh with a insulated ceiling with a

08:08plenum heating.

08:10So they the plumbing is in such a way

08:12where it's lowered that they they felt

08:14that they could not put a insulated uh

08:17ceiling in. So they so they the garage

08:20is actually heated.

08:23And those are the exhaust for the gas

08:24fired heaters.

08:28>> So I I know we're not enforcing the

08:30building code, but I I would have sworn

08:32that an enclosed garage also required

08:35mechanical ventilation that would have

08:37in my mind brought quite large

08:40ventilation grills to the facade. So

08:42that's that's what I was expecting to

08:43see.

08:44>> I thought so, too. But they have uh

08:46engineer

08:48uh stamp drawings showing

08:51um two exhaust

08:55u fans. One is a continuous one uh which

08:59is right between the two um you can't

09:01really see it but it's right between the

09:02two exhaust

09:04uh pipes stick out. And then there's

09:06another one that's uh a much larger

09:10exhaust fan that's operated by a CO2

09:12monitor. So, if the CO2 goes off in the

09:15in the garage,

09:16uh, that thing kicks on. I am not a

09:19licensed engineer, but they do have a

09:22stamp drawing showing that the that

09:244,000 square ft of garage is adequately

09:28engineered and exhausted by those two

09:30exhaust fans.

09:31>> And there's no intake or

09:33>> the the makeup air is through the

09:36windows. The windows are not totally

09:39enclosed. There are gaps on all the

09:41windows. So, you assume there's 2in gaps

09:45um in all the windows that on the side

09:47there

09:48>> that run on each long side. Um

09:51do you got a floor plan

09:54of the garage? I can Here we go. Okay.

10:03So,

10:04this is where you come in. There's an

10:06exhaust fan right here which is CO2 uh

10:09CO2 uh monitored and there's another

10:12exhaust fan right here which is

10:14continuous but for the air movements and

10:16then these all these windows there's

10:18three windows this side there's three

10:19windows this side which has air gaps at

10:23which uh supposedly engineered such that

10:26there is adequate makeup air

10:30I'll state again I'm no engineer so I

10:32I'm going to rely on the engineer stamp

10:34saying that is adequate

10:37And uh the building inspector said uh he

10:40reviewed that and comes comes to the

10:42same conclusion.

10:45>> But yes, I agree with you. Um from my

10:48past experience um the fans are much

10:51larger and the vents are much larger.

10:53>> Okay.

10:54>> Are there any more questions?

10:57Any suggestions or you think what we're

11:00saying as a recommendation is fine.

11:02Steve,

11:03>> my only request I I think removing the

11:05the false window is fine. Um if my only

11:09request be that um you know if they do

11:14have to install uh the the brick facade

11:19material that it's not like a square

11:22where the window used to be that it

11:25>> better match.

11:26>> Yeah, that it matches. Um I'm assuming

11:28we'll make the request that they should

11:30feather in the brick coursing. That's

11:32right. Yes.

11:32>> So that it would um be like a a brick

11:35veneer wall.

11:36>> Mhm.

11:36>> Um the brick there on that wall there is

11:39tile.

11:40>> Yes.

11:40>> So it's not true not a true brick.

11:43>> Yeah.

11:46>> Uh are you satisfied, Steve?

11:48>> Yes.

11:48>> Michelle?

11:50>> Yes.

11:51>> Shen?

11:52>> Yep. [snorts]

11:53>> Okay. Seeing that um cl um so we'll make

11:57a recommendation that um if Mike can

12:00coordinate or the building commission

12:03coordinate um safety light lines for the

12:07trash enclosure

12:09>> um safety notication uh for the garage

12:13door.

12:13>> Yes.

12:15and um

12:18removal of the f false window and re

12:23reclatting of the brick veneer so that

12:25it looks like it doesn't look like it's

12:26just patched in there that look it's

12:28feathered [snorts] in.

12:29>> Okay.

12:30>> And uh we'll be okay.

12:34>> Oh, also the handicap it was acceptable

12:37by uh by you guys.

12:39>> Okay. the handicap. I mean the

12:41accessessible.

12:42>> Affordable.

12:42>> Affordable.

12:43>> The affordable.

12:44>> All right. It's been a long day.

12:47>> Okay. And um

12:50that's done.

12:52>> That's great.

12:52>> Okay.

12:53>> Thank you.

12:55>> Uh Mary, are you done?

12:56>> Yes.

12:57>> Okay.

12:59All right. Uh we're done with the um

13:04our second agenda. So let's go back to

13:06the first agenda. Uh agenda is public

13:09hearing for docket number 390251

13:13Summer Street. This is a special uh

13:16permit hearing continued from uh July 6

13:19uh 2026.

13:22Um

13:23Claire, would you want to introduce the

13:25project?

13:25>> Sure. I have to.

13:30[clears throat]

13:37Okay, great. Um, this is an application

13:40by Kaix Peak, Massachusetts

13:44um to open uh special perimeter or to

13:46continue special permit docket 3902

13:50um uh looking to put in a retail uh

13:55cannabis dispensary at 251 Summer

13:58Street. Um in the at our meeting on July

14:016th, uh we identified the board

14:03identified um several issues uh for the

14:06applicant to address. I'm just going to

14:09um go over some of the high points here.

14:12Um clarification of the of the design of

14:14the monument sign. The design and

14:17dimensions of the monument sign have not

14:19changed since the previous submission

14:21which showed an internally lit

14:22freestanding cabinet sign. Although

14:25monument signs are allowed under the

14:26bylaw, cabinet signs are not. The

14:29applicant uh requests relief from the

14:31board uh to allow for an internally lit

14:33cabinet sign in this location.

14:36Um another item that came up related to

14:39signs, um the property uh is uh to

14:42provide an allowance for other

14:43businesses to have signs. Um I believe

14:45in the July 6th meeting uh there was a

14:48conversation about uh uh 40 square feet

14:50of wall signage and whether it's allowed

14:53um you know across the two businesses.

14:55What uh research is indic research and

14:58staff indicate that the 40 square feet

15:00of wall signage is allowed per business

15:02rather than per building. So there is

15:04plenty of uh signage uh space available

15:07for the second uh business. The north

15:09elevation on sheet A2 in the drawings

15:11shows a future tenant sign of

15:13approximately nine square feet above the

15:15door to the second business. Um, this

15:17sign is illustrative of a possible

15:19future sign location and is not included

15:21in the sign package. Um, the last uh

15:24item I'd like to sort of uh talk about

15:26or pay draw attention to the applicant's

15:29required to have at least one long-term

15:31bicycle space uh intended to be used for

15:33substantial portions of the day,

15:34overnight or for multiple days. Um,

15:37sheet A1 of the proposed floor plan

15:39indicates the use of a wallhung bike

15:41rack times two. The applicant intends to

15:43use an automatic lift bike rack uh with

15:46a lift assist feature for the two

15:47long-term bike spaces. Short-term bike

15:50spaces are indicated on sheet uh C3. Uh,

15:53one uh short-term space is required. The

15:56applicant is proposing six spaces

15:58utilizing two U-shaped bike racks.

16:00Although review of the short-term

16:02bicycle parking plan by staff indicates

16:04that the U-Racks proposed may only store

16:06two bikes each for a total of four

16:08spaces. Staff further recommends that

16:10the applicant widen the p pad from 5 to

16:12six feet, rotate the racks, and clarify

16:14the number of spaces on the plan. That's

16:17what we have.

16:18>> Uh thank you. Uh Mary, do you want to

16:21>> Thank you. Uh Mr. Chair and members of

16:23the board, good evening. I want to

16:25[clears throat] first thank Claire and

16:26Sarah for all their hard work on um

16:28getting this uh before you tonight. I

16:31will touch on a few things and then um

16:33Mr. Peral from KCO Development can

16:36answer any questions you have. The

16:38rendering that you have in the package

16:40is just meant to be illustrative. It's

16:42not to replace the site plans just to

16:44show you what the building is going to

16:46look like when it's completed. Um, with

16:49respect to the uh sign, it's a

16:51placeholder because the other business

16:53owner has not determined what type

16:55signage he wants. With respect to the

16:58cabinet sign, the sign we're asking

17:00relief for, we're looking for it to be

17:02internally lit because this business is

17:05not in a a business area. It's not in

17:09with any other businesses. It's kind of

17:10on a side street. So, it needs we need a

17:13little more uh

17:16to draw people's attention to it. I

17:18think it's a tastefully done um lit

17:20sign. It would only be on when the

17:22business is open. It would not be on

17:24when the business was closed. So, we'd

17:26be looking for relief for that. Um on

17:29the storm water runoff, you have the

17:31town engineers comments. Uh we have

17:33addressed the storm water runoff from

17:35the other properties. In Massachusetts,

17:37it's illegal to uh run your storm water

17:40onto someone else's property, but we

17:42have addressed that in connection with

17:44the swale and with the town engineer and

17:46where it will drain. Um the uh bicycle

17:50issue, the short-term bicycle parking,

17:52Shane will address the the issue that

17:54the cut sheets show that six bicycles

17:57can be um stored correct at that site.

18:00But in any event, we don't want to make

18:01the pad bigger. We don't want to rotate

18:03it. We have more than adequate

18:05short-term bicycle parking. We only need

18:06one. We're proposing four. Uh and then

18:10um with respect to the uh police the

18:14conditions, the conditions are fine with

18:16my client except for the cabinet sign.

18:19Um with respect to the police detail,

18:21I'd like to see language if necessary.

18:23We don't want to just have a police

18:24detail all day long when the business is

18:27open. Um uh I believe that you people um

18:31did that with Escar um and with um

18:34Apotheca that if it was necessary

18:36there'd be a police detail um if there

18:39were cars queuing or um you know a

18:42crowding type of thing. So we'd be

18:44looking for that qualifying language. We

18:47put together a point bypoint memorandum

18:49that I think addressed all of the

18:51questions that you had. I hope we got

18:53all of the questions that you had. We I

18:55think we did. and um Shane can answer

18:58any other questions or any questions you

19:02may have from what we provided.

19:04>> Thank you.

19:05>> Thank you.

19:07Um [snorts]

19:08Shannon, you you want to start off with

19:09any questions you may have?

19:11>> Uh sure. So, first, thank you for the

19:14memo. It was very uh well laid out and

19:18uh very helpful. I appreciate that. Um

19:24so so

19:26you

19:28you refer in various places to um a 6

19:32foot high PVC fence and and um I wasn't

19:37I I wasn't able to find that in the

19:40drawings. Um, was that was it is there

19:45fencing along the side of the property?

19:49Um, or is it or is it only along the in

19:52the rear?

19:54>> You want to pull up C3. This will give

19:56you an illustration of the existing and

19:59proposed fencing. So, currently on the

20:02right side um of the property, uh

20:05there's some a little landscape island

20:07um all the way to the right.

20:09>> No, all the way right there. Right.

20:11There's a landscape island there that

20:12has an existing PVC fence which goes to

20:15the end of the property, takes a turn

20:17and goes to the edge of the building. Uh

20:20that is an existing 6ft vinyl fence. Uh

20:24there is an existing chain link fence

20:25from that point that stretches um back

20:29to the um top of the property and there

20:31was concern about having a chain link

20:33with slat. Um, so, uh, our clients

20:36decided that there's no issue with

20:38changing that over to a PVC sixoot PVC

20:41fence. So, the new fence, the old chain

20:43link will be removed and the new fence

20:45will run from the existing point of um,

20:48where it stopped all the way to the

20:51property line.

20:53>> So, it's all continuous and same

20:55material,

20:56>> consistent

20:56>> and consistent.

20:57>> Yeah.

20:58>> Can you point to that on there if you

21:00don't mind?

21:03So currently there's a fence here to

21:07this corner.

21:08>> It's a sixoot PVC fence.

21:11>> And then from here it it currently is

21:13chain link and the concern was having

21:15not having uniform material uh not

21:17having better you know security. So

21:19we're going to extend the same material

21:21to six foot PVC fence all the way up.

21:26and and what about on um on the third

21:31side?

21:32>> So, this is uh currently a fence on the

21:36property of the neighbor. This is a

21:39pretty much one to one slope. Uh it's

21:41it's very steep coming down. Um and it's

21:45currently vegetated with trees and and

21:48plants. So basically

21:52a fence wouldn't serve any purpose

21:54unless it was put on top of the

21:57property.

21:59>> Okay.

22:00>> Um and if I may, we have talked with um

22:04the woman that owns that property about

22:06screening. Um Shane can describe we we

22:10are proposing arborites on her property.

22:13Um she was thinking of fence, but Shane

22:15can explain why that's not uh feasible.

22:19Um [clears throat] well given the grade

22:22to have the maximum screening it would

22:25be to put arbor buddies or some type of

22:27rope planting um at the highest point of

22:30the elevation which would be on that

22:32property line along the fence at the top

22:34of the fence or just inside. Um

22:36obviously there's going to have to be

22:38some design behind that. We have to get

22:40onto the property, bring our engineers

22:42and and do some investigation. Um, we

22:45had reached out a couple times to try to

22:47do that before this hearing, uh, but we

22:49were not successful, but our clients

22:51more than willing to.

22:52>> Explain what the retaining wall.

22:54>> Well, there currently is a retaining

22:56wall. Um, that's an old railroad tie

22:59retaining wall at the bottom of that

23:01fence line. It is not on our property.

23:04That's one of the concerns the engineers

23:05have when doing any work to that

23:08existing slope is undermining that

23:09retaining wall or causing erosion on

23:12that slope given the how steep it is and

23:15it's currently stabilized. Um so it was

23:18recommended that that stays as is and

23:20our will come through and analyze all

23:23the trees and prune as necessary.

23:26>> Okay. Thank you. Um

23:31um

23:33so

23:36in terms of tree removal, I do

23:38understand this is in the plan set, but

23:40if you could if you could just walk me

23:42through and and point to uh uh what

23:47trees

23:49um you think you'll be able to save um

23:52and and what is likely to be uh removed.

23:56That would be very helpful.

23:58>> Pull up the existing conditions plan.

24:00Let's see one right there. Yeah. Uh the

24:04proposed parking lot is the footprint is

24:06smaller than what is there. We're not

24:08proposing any tree removal. We're not

24:09extending our footprint at all to

24:11require tree removal. The engineer had

24:14showed some of the um larger trees on

24:16the plan that are to remain be pruned.

24:18Um, but in terms of tree removal,

24:20there's no proposed trees coming down

24:23because we are coming, you know,

24:25especially with the revision, we were

24:27five and 1/2 ft off the back, now we're

24:28seven and a half. So, we have plenty of

24:30space to work within the limits that

24:32it's already there.

24:33>> Great. Um

24:44I

24:47believe those were my only questions. Um

24:52and

24:54um and I [clears throat] think I am

24:56going to want to discuss the monument

24:57sign with my colleagues but but those

24:59are my questions for now. Thank you.

25:01>> We can always come back.

25:02>> Yes. Michelle.

25:04>> Hi, I'm Michelle Shortsleeve. Um, I was

25:07not present at the last hearing, but I

25:09watched it. So, thank you for your

25:10comments. Thank you for your

25:11presentations. Thank you for your

25:13updates. Um, so my two main questions

25:17relate to the fence and the plantings.

25:19Um, and then to discuss the sign as

25:22well. Um, so that's helpful to

25:24understand that there's a retaining wall

25:27that is not on the property that you

25:28don't want to destabilize. Understand

25:30that. Um

25:32I I still hear the public and the

25:36abuters in the concern about the

25:40shielding there. So you know I'd like to

25:43discuss with the board but I I'd like to

25:45understand more about how infeasible

25:48would it be right? So how expensive

25:49would it be? Is terracing a possibility?

25:52We're not trying to make anything

25:54uneconomic. We're trying to make

25:55something that works for you and also

25:57works for everybody in the neighborhood.

26:00Um, so I'd just like to hear a little

26:01bit more about what you've learned. It

26:02sound like you tried to learn a little

26:04more and maybe haven't had the

26:05opportunity before this hearing.

26:07>> We had um a proposed arborites on her

26:11property, a row of arborites.

26:13>> Um, and I think that may be a she may be

26:16amendable to that.

26:17>> Okay. Okay.

26:18>> Depending on the height.

26:19>> Okay. And just on her property, not on

26:21the property behind because the fence is

26:23sufficient for the property behind.

26:26>> Yes. Yes.

26:27>> Okay. Okay. And is there in the the

26:30space behind I mean this is Google maps

26:33is slightly old here it looks like but

26:37uh have you considered whether any trees

26:39could be put in the back

26:44looks like there's less of a slope

26:48>> planting five in the front.

26:50>> Say it again.

26:50>> Yeah you're planting five in the front.

26:52>> Right. I'm just aware I'm just thinking

26:54about the abutters and whether there's

26:56any way to add any additional shielding

26:58>> uh with a new storm water design that's

27:00a rip wrap.

27:02>> Okay.

27:02>> Uh flow of water coming through there.

27:04So it's it's more of a swale to direct

27:07the water from Pine A and the abiding

27:10neighbor.

27:12>> So that's more of a storm water

27:14structure that we have to construct to

27:18maintain that runoff on the property.

27:20>> That's also a fair concern. Um, okay.

27:23Thank you. And then

27:26with respect to the sign, it was helpful

27:30to understand why you wanted a a lit

27:32sign.

27:34I will discuss with the board as well. I

27:36have a little concern about that just

27:38because there's a lot of, you know, I'm

27:40not sure how many people will come to

27:41this business who don't know what's

27:42there. um you know and and so I think my

27:46preference is probably to keep the

27:50you know we have a signage bylaw and

27:51stick with that. Um but that was my only

27:55comment and look forward to discussing

27:56further with the board.

27:57>> Thank you Michelle

27:59>> Vince.

28:00Thank thank you Mr. Chair and thank you

28:03for coming back with a thorough response

28:05to all of our comments from last time.

28:07Um Mr. Chair, is it your intention

28:10afterwards to open this up to the

28:12public? Yes.

28:13>> Okay. So, my thought in terms of the

28:15summer street of butter, I would love to

28:17find a solution that's acceptable to

28:19everyone. So, maybe we can talk about

28:20that with the public. We'll get to that

28:22in a minute. Um, with the the concerns

28:26of the the butters on Pine Avenue,

28:30I'm not inclined to ask that the

28:32dumpster be moved to a location that's

28:35more visible from the street or anything

28:37like that. So, I'm not quite sure what

28:38to do there. I think the PVC fence is

28:40fairly

28:42adequate. Um, and in public comment,

28:45we'll maybe hear more, but I I we got a

28:48petition with quite a few names on it

28:49just asking that the project be denied

28:51entirely. So, I'm not sure if they're

28:53looking for specific remedies or if

28:55they're just opposed to the entire

28:56project. Um, but I'm sure we'll hear

28:59more about that. Um, for the bike racks,

29:02um, so I'm a little confused and maybe

29:04you can explain why you don't want to

29:06change anything. the the bike racks the

29:08way they are are not practical

29:11per

29:11>> se the the well you can park no

29:15>> two bikes there maybe three and it's not

29:17the number it's just that when you are

29:19parking a bike you want to be able to

29:21lean it against the rack on the side so

29:23it has two points of contact with the

29:24rack and then you can lock it to the

29:25rack. So having the two front to front

29:27like that doesn't allow you to park more

29:30bikes really. It just kind of it doesn't

29:33allow you to use the racks. So either

29:35you'd want to just have one rack there

29:38in the current direction or you follow

29:40the department's recommendations and you

29:42turn them and you have the two racks.

29:44>> I'll defer to Shane on that.

29:46>> You know, typically they're not

29:47installed tail head to tail like this.

29:49They're they're installed parallel to

29:51one another.

29:53>> So I I would just suggest you maybe look

29:55at the other manufacturer that you know

29:57we try to meet the spec with the

29:59inverted U. Um they gave us a cut sheet

30:01that was a three bike uh parking

30:05um post. So that's how we designed it.

30:07Um we certainly can widen if you you

30:11looking to see maybe going from five

30:12feet to six feet.

30:13>> So the department's recommendation the

30:14dimension that is 5T is to extend that

30:16to six feet and that would allow you to

30:18park the bikes in

30:21and it may be easier for me to point to

30:23the screen.

30:29So you could park bikes like one, two,

30:32three, four bikes if the two racks were

30:35oriented in this direction the way that

30:38they are now in this direction. You can

30:40park one bike on this side, one bike on

30:42that side.

30:43>> Oh, yeah. Okay. Yeah. All right. No, I

30:44understand.

30:45>> That was the just trying to communicate

30:46with the department.

30:47>> We were under the impression that the

30:48bikes went in underneath the loop and

30:52>> we we were the orientation of the bikes

30:56that you're looking to park is how we

30:58expected it. We if we have to shift turn

31:00the bike racks.

31:01>> Okay,

31:01>> that's not a problem. We just we thought

31:03that

31:03>> that's how they came into the from that

31:05same direction.

31:06>> That's kind of the old style of bike

31:07rack where you have to lift it up and

31:09then you end up twisting your wheel and

31:11the you know these new models are much

31:13better but the orientation is just

31:15turned.

31:15>> So we can move it.

31:16>> Yeah, that's not a problem. And if you

31:18need more go to six feet that's

31:21>> Yeah. And I think that communication

31:23from the transportation planner was was

31:25written out pretty clearly. So, as long

31:27as you guys follow that, I think that

31:29works. Um, and lastly for the monument

31:32sign, you know, we'll discuss it. I

31:34don't see any reason to grant relief. I

31:37think that, you know, as long as the

31:38bylaw doesn't allow cabinet signs, then

31:41we should just stick with an externally

31:43illuminated um monument sign. And that's

31:46it for me.

31:47>> Thank you. Uh, Steve,

31:49>> so I'll start with the cabinet sign. Um

31:52[clears throat] you know the citation is

31:54623B uh which reads prohibited signs uh

31:58except as otherwise provided in this

32:00section the following signs are

32:01prohibited and considered illegal. And

32:04item number three is cabinet signs. So I

32:07I don't think we can we can grant them

32:10that. But um I'd encourage them to

32:14consider either you know external

32:16illumination or perhaps halo lit uh to

32:19just follow up on my colleagues comments

32:22about the bicycle parking. Yeah, the

32:27we do have a set of bicycle parking

32:28guidelines with dimensions and so on. Um

32:33normally they we recommend leaving you

32:36know 6 feet length. So, in in that

32:39configuration, you would actually need

32:4012 ft instead of seven, but turning them

32:4390° um you know, would would work

32:46better. And I'm thank you for your

32:48willingness to to entertain that idea.

32:50That's all I have. Thank you, Steve. Um

32:54I want to thank you for listening to our

32:57comments. Um and um I do have a few more

33:02uh if you don't mind just a

33:03clarification on your um notes to us.

33:08You said that you are going to uh reuse

33:11um existing parking lot uh signs or

33:17light lighting.

33:20>> The post base anchors. Yep.

33:23>> There's three on your side. Four.

33:29Okay. And I was there this morning. I

33:31thought I counted only three. There's

33:33one on the other side.

33:35>> Yep. Five total.

33:36>> Oh, okay. Well, fine. Um, there's

33:39[snorts] one if you want.

33:41>> I'm sorry.

33:43>> Uh, existing condition.

33:47There's one right here that's almost a

33:49street light for

33:50>> Yeah, I thought you going to remove

33:51that. That's why I didn't have that.

33:52>> Yes.

33:53>> Okay. So, you got three

33:54>> existing. There are four. We're going

33:56down to three. So, this will be removed.

33:58We're going to just be replacing the

33:59fixtures themselves on these four

34:02locations.

34:03>> When you say replacing the fixtures, I

34:05don't understand what you mean by that.

34:06>> We're replacing the post and the light

34:08fixture itself.

34:09>> So, you're replacing the whole light?

34:11>> Yes.

34:12>> Not the post base. The post space we

34:13reused the 4ft concrete.

34:15>> That's fine. [snorts] Okay. Because I

34:17was told that the lights don't work and

34:19the light the lights there have not

34:20worked since they changed from a gas

34:22station. I'm not sure the status of the

34:26>> well

34:26>> the lights that are currently there. We

34:27weren't able to perform a existing

34:29photometrics. We didn't have the data on

34:31the lights. Um we just did a analysis of

34:34what was in the parking lot and then the

34:36building itself lighting which we

34:39indicated in our wedding plan.

34:40>> So all you're going to reuse is just the

34:44concrete base. That's it. And you'll run

34:46you'll run all new wires and conduit to

34:49that base and run new lights.

34:51>> Correct.

34:51>> Okay. Then I'm going to request that um

34:55you submit whatever light fixture you're

34:57going to use on that base and that could

34:59be approved administratively. Okay.

35:02>> Uh the spec of the light fixture is in

35:03the plan.

35:04>> It is a photometrics uh

35:08>> it's not on this pack

35:09>> on the architectural set. It's uh

35:12>> L1 I believe [snorts]

35:18we're drawing

35:20>> right there. Yeah. So, we're going to we

35:23indicated where the four light poles are

35:26currently located and the replacement

35:29um utilizing 180° shields so there's no

35:31light spillage cut.

35:34>> Next page

35:37right there. Uh

35:38>> okay.

35:38>> On the right. So, this is all the

35:39building signage itself that is

35:42incorporated in that.

35:43>> So, that's the life picture right there.

35:44>> Yeah.

35:45>> And then how tall is the pole?

35:47>> 12 ft.

35:48So right now those uh those poles are

35:51how tall?

35:53>> 11 10 to 11. Okay. They go at they go at

35:55a radius. They're

35:56>> it's going to arc a little bit at the

35:57top. Yes.

35:58>> Yeah.

35:58>> I'm just concerned that they're not

36:00really tall. They're not going to be

36:01casting a light onto the neighbors.

36:02That's all.

36:03>> Yep. No, that's why we did the

36:04photometrics and we got the 180°ree

36:06shields. Um there's no light spillage.

36:08They're going to be facing the parking

36:10lot. Yep.

36:10>> So there'll be no light spillage behind

36:12them.

36:12>> Okay.

36:13>> Going into any of the neighbors. And the

36:15three that's on your parking lot is

36:16controlled by

36:18uh the cannabis store, right? The one

36:22that's way over the other corner will be

36:23controlled by the other store or No,

36:26>> it's going to be on a uh base building

36:29meter uh a house meter and so it'll be

36:31on a timer where they turn off at the

36:34close of business.

36:34>> So all three are

36:36>> uh yes,

36:36>> all four are sorry all four

36:38>> the whole building itself. So there'll

36:39be a separate

36:41>> circuitry that is your house lights. So,

36:43it's your building exterior building

36:44lights and your parking lot lights.

36:47Those will be on a timer that turn off

36:48at business.

36:49>> And when I walked there today, there was

36:50a bunch of little gooseseneck lights

36:52stuck up on the top of the roof.

36:54>> Yes. I indicated the existing lighting.

36:57Um,

36:58>> okay. You get rid of those, right?

37:00>> Oh, yes. Okay.

37:00>> Those are all being removed. I put those

37:02in the

37:03>> There's a

37:04>> There's not much here to see.

37:05>> There's some flood lights on the top.

37:07There's some up and down lights. There's

37:10lights. There's a plethora of lighting

37:11currently there. It's It's all getting

37:13removed.

37:13>> I would say half of them don't work. But

37:14>> I just don't want you guys to be

37:16creating a light. Yeah. Okay.

37:18>> Yeah. Everything that whole roof

37:20structure is going to be removed. Those

37:22lights are coming out.

37:22>> While we're talking about lighting, it

37:24is clear that the board is not going to

37:27um agree to the cabinet um signage. So,

37:30we have a we came prepared.

37:33>> Okay. But yeah, I was uh going to maybe

37:38I'm a rogue, but I was okay with that

37:40cabinet sign.

37:42Um just because uh in in that in the

37:45area in that neighborhood having you

37:48know like little gooseseneck lights and

37:51all or whatever lights that's you know

37:53that shines off to a sign in that

37:55neighborhood I don't think it's

37:56appropriate especially for a monument

37:57sign because someone can come by and

37:59just grab the thing vandalism and just

38:02snow and everything else just doesn't

38:04seem appropriate in that neighborhood.

38:06So I sort of agree with you. So, but

38:10let's come back to that to talk about

38:12that because you know if they all four

38:14say they don't like it then they don't

38:16then we go that way. It's not

38:19[clears throat and snorts] it's kind of

38:20a majority rule here. Um

38:24so the other thing is uh you uh you did

38:28delineate between the um the car replace

38:33the car repair place and yours. uh you

38:37put a break right at uh at the asphalt

38:40so that no uh uh rain water or anything

38:45from the repair place would go onto your

38:46onto your uh your lawn, but you stopped

38:50it right at the at the asphalt. You

38:52didn't carry it across the concrete

38:54paved section of it. Is that your intent

38:57or you going to carry it all the way

38:58across?

39:00If you look at the slant here,

39:08um

39:10right here you call this right here. It

39:12is has a little curve asphalt curve.

39:15>> So if any water over here won't drain

39:19into your new lot, you know.

39:21>> Yeah. That shaded area is is the

39:23existing asphalt parking lot. That's

39:24that's to remain.

39:25>> Yeah. No, but that's car repair place.

39:28Okay. So I'm assuming it's not going to

39:30be nice water that drains off of that.

39:35But right here is concrete. You don't

39:37have a barrier from here to here.

39:40Nice warning. Can you carry that

39:42continuous barrier all the way across?

39:44So if any sheeting water from concrete

39:47side will not also go into the

39:51the block.

39:52>> Well, the barrier itself is the fence

39:54that's inset. Um,

39:56>> yes, but it's

39:57>> right now there's no there's no curbing

39:59there. That asphalt the engineer u

40:02because this was a concern last time the

40:04engineer went and reshot that that

40:05asphalt and he showed it on the grading

40:07plan is grading away at the concrete pad

40:10and asphalt.

40:11>> This is graing away.

40:12>> Yeah, it's on the grading utility plan

40:14C3

40:15>> um

40:16>> or C4.

40:17>> When I was here today and it was

40:20raining.

40:21It's grading the other way. This is the

40:25uh stamped engineer grading plan.

40:28>> All the water

40:31outside here was drained this way to the

40:33existing.

40:37>> So water does go this way.

40:41>> That may have been from in front of the

40:42garage bay which is now going to be

40:45grass area.

40:51>> Say lake one.

40:54right here and it was it seemed it was

40:56good this way. Okay.

40:59>> You have problems with just putting a

41:00curb a small curb right there and that

41:02small curb or something prevents the

41:04water from migrating that away.

41:06>> No,

41:07>> that's

41:08>> Yeah. No requesting just so that

41:11>> your nice green grass nice and green and

41:13doesn't get soiled by

41:15oily water.

41:18Were you looking for a a to match our

41:21side concrete pre-cast concrete or a

41:24Cape Cut style asphalt burm?

41:26>> It could be an asphalt bas on the other

41:29side is just existing. It's not not

41:31pretty.

41:32>> Yep. Okay.

41:34>> Um

41:34>> not a problem.

41:37>> And then uh your signage is fine. Um

41:41you you meet the requirements for

41:43signage as far as that. Um the signage

41:47for your uh the tenant next door and the

41:51uh painted parking is just illustrative,

41:53right? It's not it's not up for

41:55approval, right?

41:57>> No, no building signage. It's just

41:59>> but also you you should indicate two

42:01parking spots and one of them being

42:03handicapped to over there.

42:04>> That is proposed.

42:04>> That's just illustrative. Not you're not

42:06asking for approval today. That's that's

42:08that's has to do with existing

42:10pre-existing, right? No, you guys had

42:11asked last time for us to show the work

42:14the line striping to be done at the uh

42:18tenant side.

42:19>> So you are going to uh stripe that.

42:20>> Yes, that calculation was done and it's

42:23in the parking calculations to show the

42:26requirements for that tenant. There was

42:28concerns about not having striping on

42:30that side at the last meeting. So the

42:32engineer would wanted to address that.

42:35I have this feel I drive by there all

42:38the time and that parking lot's always

42:41full of cars and they they don't follow

42:44any parking striking at all. They just

42:46park wherever they park and so

42:50I would suggest that we just leave that

42:53out and let

42:55>> that's what we had proposed originally.

42:57We were we were asked to show

43:00>> I would if we did I I would like to uh

43:03withdraw that request.

43:04>> That's fine.

43:04>> Cuz u what I don't think we want to

43:07approve what's you're not representing

43:11or what the other tenants what the other

43:12tenants going to do. So just leave that

43:14off. Okay.

43:15>> Okay.

43:17Um,

43:24I did talk to um uh the police

43:27commissioner uh about this project maybe

43:29a few weeks back

43:32and um she had uh no issues with safety

43:35on the project. Uh she had no issue with

43:39the location of your um

43:42drive your curb cut. Uh she does think

43:44it's an improvement. So she has um she

43:48has no concerns. I just want to pass

43:49that along. She said to go ahead and

43:50pass that along in the meeting.

43:53Um thank you.

43:58And

43:59the last thing I'm going to talk about

44:01is where your new curb is that you're

44:03going to install. Um it runs directly

44:06right over a manhole.

44:14Sorry.

44:17Your U curve is right along here and

44:19there's a manual right there. So, so the

44:22curve, it's going to run right over the

44:24manhole.

44:37Yeah. The cover should be it's existing

44:39cover should be inside of that curve

44:41line.

44:43The structure itself is half and half.

44:46But the either either way I'm asking

44:50I'm okay with having [clears throat]

44:53uh the town engineer approving your

44:56rend. Uh I don't want to make a

44:58contingent for this approval here but

45:00but that has to be worked out and that

45:02then uh the planning department will uh

45:05will work that out. Okay. No problem.

45:07>> I am assuming the elevation of that

45:10manhole will have to be raised because

45:11the sidewalk's higher cuz right now it's

45:13a curve cut and then it's also it lands

45:17right sort of in it. So you might have

45:19to adjust it over a little bit but some

45:20rework has to be done. Okay.

45:22>> Yeah. And we'll coordinate that with

45:23>> coordinate so it meets his approval.

45:25>> Yep.

45:25>> All right. And thank you for looking at

45:27the existing um drainway in the back. I

45:31read the a memo from the uh engineer. He

45:33says it's fine. Um, just maintain it and

45:36you'll be good.

45:38>> Okay, so that's good. Um,

45:42I think that's all the comments I had.

45:45Um, with that, I'm going to open up this

45:47to a public comment if [snorts] anybody

45:50would like to speak.

45:52>> Yes. Yes. Well, hold it. Hold it.

45:56Um, can you guys make some room so they

45:58come up and speak microphone, please?

46:01>> Thank you.

46:03Uh, please state your name and address

46:05when you come up here. And then, uh,

46:10what you got to speak into the

46:12microphone so people at home, please.

46:13>> Okay. Thanks.

46:20>> Thank you.

46:20>> Hi. Can you hear me now?

46:22>> Yes.

46:23>> So, thank you for the opportunity to

46:25raise our concerns. I am the owners of

46:29277 and some 79 summer street which is

46:32the house right here [snorts]

46:36and that um by now that I wanted to

46:39point out something. So um Mr. per right

46:44if I pronounce your name right mention

46:46about the the speaking microphone

46:48>> mention about the PVC fence but I wanted

46:52to make a point clear point whatever

46:54they mentioned that does not include my

46:57properties the lines right um on the

47:01left over 100 ft completely ignored it

47:07um they were um indicating as a fence

47:11here but In fact, it's really a chain

47:14link. It's no fence. It's completely

47:17see-through. I see the cars down here

47:20and the cars see us. Um, in the

47:23summertime, we got some tree block set.

47:26So, this is a very misleading and that

47:30um also on the memo number item one and

47:33two, they're talking about replacing uh

47:36the chain link. It's happening in here

47:39but not here. So right now that this

47:44properties everyone has PVC except ours

47:49and ours is being governed by the

47:52section 6.111 D1 and two which is

47:56required to have effective screening and

48:00right now it's clearly fail. Um there's

48:03no PVC um proposed there's no uh tree

48:09proposed. Um I heard they just right at

48:12this meetings that they were going to

48:14propose some trade to me and I saw that

48:17there was a low trade. Um I don't

48:20understand that why they are not able to

48:22do something um a taller and they say

48:25it's going to grow up in two or three

48:27years but who can wait two or three

48:30years and if they don't die right so

48:33this is a very important point. So this

48:37um updated

48:39site plan has absolutely ignored us.

48:44I'm a little disappointed but I I I

48:47heard that they tried to reach me a

48:49couple times.

48:52I may miss the cause. Um I appreciate

48:55that but uh some works need to be done

49:00and I am requesting a PVC

49:04along the property line.

49:07Um

49:09again my fence is not a fence it's a

49:13chain link. We need protection here. We

49:15need screening here.

49:18Um, and on the emails that I sent to

49:22you, uh, to the board, uh, if you don't

49:25mind to pull it up, um, I will look.

49:29Hold on.

49:44[snorts]

49:45You're slow down.

49:48I wanted to open up the picture so you

49:51can see. So this is a one but there was

49:54another pictures.

49:56>> Yeah, this is the one. So I

50:01so I took a

50:02>> sorry.

50:02>> So this is the page three. Anything in

50:06black is the the the updated side plan.

50:11Anything in red it's mocked by me. So I

50:14stated two requests. I wanted to build a

50:18PVC fence along the property line. So

50:20this is the starting point. This is the

50:23ending point. I am a little flexible on

50:26exactly when I think maybe here is a

50:28little difficult and then we normally

50:31don't go there. I'm willing to give that

50:34section up. But anything in here it must

50:37to have it because we we got in and out

50:39our doors and windows right here. Um and

50:44then we need some trades uh planted um

50:48right here on the stoope. I prefer

50:52evergreen trees because they will

50:54provide year round protection. And then

50:56also for the benefits of the retail

50:59store, they don't have to deal with many

51:01dead leaves and and dead branches. Um

51:05that's costly to maintain.

51:10And then there were other pictures. So

51:12this is my um request

51:16and the other picture is that

51:19uh ideas of what they can do with the

51:22slope. And from the memo number four, I

51:26think they indicated that um the slope

51:29is too steep to walk with. And this is a

51:35idea of what you can walk with. Um you

51:38don't I don't think you need this high

51:40and you may need two but each of them

51:44may be lower. So this is exactly how

51:48they do it. You know this is the fans,

51:50this is the tray and this is the the the

51:53retaining wall.

51:55It's everything is walkable.

51:58The question is how much you wanted to

52:00spend on it. Right. The other things

52:03that I wanted to uh correct is my

52:07current fence has no retaining wall at

52:10all. There was no railway foundations.

52:14Nothing absolutely nothing there. It's

52:16just probably I I put it in a piece of

52:20uh that um that piece like maybe

52:25three feet uh maybe three six inches

52:29wide and then half inches thick maybe

52:33five or six inches feet tall. This is

52:36all we put it in because we need a

52:39little support on that little section.

52:41We simply just put two poles in there

52:44and then and then against to that and

52:46then we put some dirt in there that is

52:48absolutely no retaining no railway kind

52:52of a retaining things and also when they

52:55build that uh PVC they should be outside

52:58of that things too because um that thing

53:03is we think my property is area so I'm

53:05not getting how the road I mean the the

53:08the driveways could get erosion

53:11Even though um I am welding to redo my

53:15driveway without accusing the eroding my

53:21driveway. So everyone hears that I give

53:24them respon you know a free on that but

53:28we really do wanted to have the PC we uh

53:32our protection. The trees could die. Um

53:34the trees need time to grow and the

53:37trees will never um grow without any

53:41space.

53:44>> Thank you very much.

53:45>> Mr. Chair, can I ask a question or do

53:47you want to wait till after public

53:48comment?

53:49>> I think I want to wait till after public

53:50comment. Um I think this could be quite

53:52a bit. So I just want to make sure we

53:54get everybody a chance to speak. Thank

53:56you very much.

53:56>> Thank you.

53:58>> Does anybody else wish to speak?

54:00>> Yes, sir. Can you come up here and state

54:02your name and address?

54:09Are you going to [snorts] join your

54:09husband or no?

54:19>> Hello, my name is Michael Walsh. I live

54:21at 17 Pine Nav. I am the property um

54:26with the PVC fence.

54:29>> Okay. There you go.

54:30>> Um,

54:32so I just wanted to uh I got a chance to

54:35look at the design finally on uh when it

54:37came out Thursday. Actually,

54:40>> could you speak up? I'm sorry.

54:43>> Sorry. It's all right. Um, so I we got a

54:46chance to look at the design and and

54:48have some concerns about certain things

54:50and I wrote a letter. I kind of outlined

54:52the things I was concerned about. I was

54:54hopeful that there was some with a

54:56property that size. I thought there

54:58would be someplace else would be logical

55:00to put a dumpster um because it's very

55:03close to my pro my home and I look out

55:06my dining room window and that's where

55:07it's going to be. Um I don't know that

55:11um

55:13[snorts] there isn't another spot, but

55:15I'm not the expert on that. But it seems

55:17like and I know I also know that I think

55:20there's a note I'm sorry to turn my head

55:21here but I think there's a note on there

55:22that references that the dumpster has to

55:24be locked per the cannabis commission

55:26and I think it has to be supervised by

55:28the police or at least available for the

55:30police to see. So that was part of my

55:32thought of putting it

55:34of of maybe suggesting it goes where the

55:37bike area is and and the bike area goes

55:39where the dumpster is.

55:42There was years ago when the property

55:44was actually being used as a facility.

55:47Um there was a dumpster and it is where

55:50the shed the the enclosure is still

55:53there where they call it on the existing

55:55plan they call it uh they reference the

55:58shed. Um so um there was the notes on

56:02the 20 questions I saw that were

56:04answered um did talk about um

56:10um the the hours of pickup and those are

56:14regulated by the board of health I

56:16believe and the town

56:18>> here.

56:23So the dumpster I believe is reg pickup

56:26time and uh location as well are both

56:29regulated by the select board and the

56:31board of health. And if I'm not unless

56:33I'm mistaken if that's the case I that's

56:36what I read. So I hope that hopefully

56:38that's accurate. Um so uh I just u we

56:43you know we've had this lived there for

56:45many years

56:48>> and not had a uh any activity back in

56:51this air in the area of the building.

56:53Uh, the building itself is a

56:54non-conforming structure as you all

56:56know. I referenced that as well, but I

56:59don't think that's going to get any

57:00legs. So, um, you do the best we can

57:02with what we have. So, um,

57:06I just asked that there's it should be

57:08entertain a different location for the

57:10dumpster. Seems like this should be

57:12locations closer to the street. It may

57:13be less offensive to everybody. Um, but

57:17um,

57:19that's for somebody else to decide where

57:21where that would be.

57:24Um

57:29in terms of I also um

57:34there was some other issues that were

57:35pertain that were um the loading dock is

57:38the other area. The other thing it's got

57:40to be at the dumpster also. So now you

57:42got to build something that's going to

57:43be closer to the property. It's got to

57:45be a structure I believe within the and

57:49I believe it gets into the buffer zone.

57:52So I think or I think is it uh within

57:55the distance away from my property line

57:57to a structure to a building structure.

58:00So um that's another concern and maybe

58:04motivation to move it somewhere else. Um

58:11the um and and then of course the uh

58:14loading dock being there as well would

58:16also be you know there's going to be

58:17activity there which has never been

58:19before

58:20even at any time.

58:23It's been it's most it's been used far

58:26as to park cars on occasion and they

58:28stay there for a month and then they

58:29move.

58:31Um

58:34the um something you want to say.

58:37>> Yeah.

58:38>> And my name is Kathy Walsh. Um I we've

58:41lived at that property for 48 years. Um

58:45and I think

58:48let's go way back to where this all

58:51started. There was a um host agreement

58:55made through the town for one business

58:58in that property. one business and that

59:02was the host agreement was one business

59:05and now it has morphed into two

59:07businesses

59:09and back in an August meeting this board

59:13decided that Call Peak had to go back

59:17and speak with the select board the

59:21board of health and the police

59:22department on all on on having a a

59:27reapplying for their permit. at that

59:30point. So, was that done? Because that

59:35was this board that wanted them to go

59:38back and where where has that been done?

59:43Um,

59:44what you're referring to is there was a

59:48delay between when they first applied

59:50and then they came back again. The

59:53question to them was not for them to

59:55reapply. Was their first application

59:57still valid?

59:59uh because they got approval from the

1:00:01select board and the board of health and

1:00:02so forth. They had all their approvals

1:00:05before they came here. We wanted to

1:00:07check that was all the approvals still

1:00:09valid because of delay in applying to us

1:00:12again. That was the question. It was not

1:00:15for them to reapply

1:00:17>> but it was for one for their own

1:00:20business not to share that property and

1:00:24have two businesses there. Uh, we did

1:00:26not we did not suspect that.

1:00:29>> So, can I ask you that did you did you

1:00:31happen to read the attachments of the

1:00:33meeting minutes that I sent today?

1:00:35>> Um, you sent today. No, I did not look

1:00:38at it and then they're sent to me today.

1:00:39I usually look at it.

1:00:41>> I'm sorry that you didn't got it sooner,

1:00:42huh? I mean, I usually take my, you

1:00:44know, weekends and I'll look at during

1:00:46the weekend, but during emails to send

1:00:48during the daytime, I [snorts]

1:00:50I have other things I I have I can't

1:00:52just read up to the last minute before

1:00:54the um but

1:00:58um

1:01:00as far as the number of marijuana

1:01:03dispersion in in uh in this town, this

1:01:07board is not

1:01:09>> um um have any jurisdiction on that.

1:01:12Okay. This board has no jurisdiction on

1:01:15allowing marijuana in Arlington. U we we

1:01:20don't have any of that. We're just we're

1:01:23looking at it in terms of does this

1:01:25building, which is a business, fit

1:01:28within the neighborhood and meet

1:01:30neighborhood concerns.

1:01:32Um the stuff you're bringing up right

1:01:34now is valid. I don't um say I I I don't

1:01:39disagree with it or agree with it, but

1:01:41are you saying you should bring it to

1:01:43the select board? They're the ones

1:01:45>> they were supposed to, sir.

1:01:47>> They were supposed to.

1:01:49>> Yes, they were.

1:01:49>> Yeah. Your meeting notes, if you get a

1:01:52chance to read them,

1:01:52>> okay,

1:01:53>> clearly say they were supposed to go

1:01:55back the three boards and get approve

1:01:58and verify that their certificate was

1:02:01still valid and then get back to you.

1:02:03>> They did. They're their certificates are

1:02:07valid.

1:02:08That's why they came back to us.

1:02:10>> So the so the select board sent you

1:02:12something saying that or

1:02:14>> we have something.

1:02:16>> Um what I know about [clears throat]

1:02:18what uh the select board has done is um

1:02:21this project was presented to the ARB in

1:02:242023 and I believe it was in the summer

1:02:26of 2023 that this bar this this board

1:02:28made those comments in the in the

1:02:30meeting minutes. Kick speak as far as I

1:02:32know went back in front of the select

1:02:34board. uh in December 2024 right around

1:02:37that time and they had a long discussion

1:02:39about the host community agreement. Now

1:02:41the meeting minutes don't indicate that

1:02:43the select board specifically asked how

1:02:45many businesses were going to be in the

1:02:46building or anything you know that

1:02:49definitive. However, they did go back um

1:02:51they did go back and talk to the select

1:02:53board about a year after they pulled um

1:02:56their application uh from in front of

1:02:57the ARB. I I do not know if they

1:03:00contacted APD. I didn't know if they

1:03:01contacted the health department, but I

1:03:03do know they went back in front of the

1:03:04select board and had a conversation

1:03:05about this project. Now, again,

1:03:08specifically, did it come up? There are

1:03:10two businesses in this building. The

1:03:12meeting meeting minutes are silent to

1:03:13that, but they did go back.

1:03:16>> Okay. So, way back the original host

1:03:18community agreement, which is which is

1:03:20which is on video.

1:03:22>> Yep. Part of the we have it as part of

1:03:23the materials for this as well.

1:03:25>> Okay. To do so, the whole presentation

1:03:27of that [snorts] was always a single

1:03:29business. Well, I've I've read the host

1:03:31community agreement a couple of times. I

1:03:33there's nothing in there that indicates

1:03:35that it's a single business or that

1:03:36another business would be prohibited.

1:03:39You know, all I can say is that the

1:03:40business of this board has been to site

1:03:43legal businesses in legal places. If

1:03:45there's a discrepancy, if there's a

1:03:47concern about, you know, does the select

1:03:49board know that this is two businesses

1:03:50or one business, um I think that's up

1:03:52for the select board to determine at

1:03:55this point.

1:03:55>> Okay. And I was at that select board

1:03:57meeting in August in December of 24 and

1:03:59there was no mention of they what they

1:04:01did say is that what they were concerned

1:04:03about is reusing the host community

1:04:05agreement for another property somewhere

1:04:07else.

1:04:07>> Oh, right.

1:04:08>> If they couldn't get uh things together

1:04:11so they could proceed. That was what the

1:04:14plan that was what the discussion was.

1:04:17And the they the the

1:04:22notes on the meeting minutes clearly

1:04:24state that Mr. La quoted here that the

1:04:30project has changed enough

1:04:33nothing to do with agreements. The

1:04:35project has changed enough that it needs

1:04:37to go back to be reviewed. That's what

1:04:40the notes say. They your notes not mine.

1:04:43>> And I believe they did.

1:04:48and reviewed the changes.

1:04:50>> They presented they represented their um

1:04:53um their thing. I wasn't at the meeting,

1:04:56so I can't tell [snorts] exactly what

1:04:57was presented. Okay. I was I was told

1:05:01that their agreement with the town is

1:05:03still valid. So, I I I I don't know what

1:05:09I can do more than that. I asked I

1:05:11questioned I I got I got an answer back

1:05:14saying it's still valid and I don't know

1:05:17I I don't know what um to pick these

1:05:20nuances and say hey this wasn't spoken

1:05:23up this wasn't spoken I don't know okay

1:05:25all I've been saying right now is I'm

1:05:27proceeding on the fact that they got

1:05:29approval

1:05:32and it's not our approval it's it's not

1:05:34ours to approve or not approve

1:05:37we can only approve

1:05:40site plan and bit of this business in

1:05:42there. Not the license, not the two

1:05:45businesses, none of that stuff. We don't

1:05:47have jurisdiction over that. You're

1:05:49asking us to do something we cannot do.

1:05:51>> No, I'm just asking you to read your

1:05:53notes and if you read the notes, you'll

1:05:54see it. It's your notes.

1:05:56>> It's pretty clear.

1:05:57>> Thank you.

1:06:00>> So, I would just ask you to the the

1:06:02third thing would be um

1:06:05in the area of the parking lot. I

1:06:08noticed after the discussion with the

1:06:10town engineer etc. that it looks like

1:06:13the elevations may have been adjusted a

1:06:16little bit. I just didn't know if that's

1:06:18um something that can be it's also in

1:06:21part of my letter of um keeping that uh

1:06:24as it is because the drain drainage

1:06:26works well as it is now. They have

1:06:29agreed to maintain what's uh uh what's

1:06:33there and actually in in um

1:06:37uh make that drain better by putting

1:06:39roof wraps in uh maintaining that corner

1:06:41there and maintaining the existing line

1:06:43that they have acknowledged that and

1:06:45that's what they're doing.

1:06:46>> Okay. I just saw the elevation changes

1:06:48in the middle of the parking lot. So I

1:06:49just wanted to make sure that that's

1:06:50>> Nope. That's also been reviewed by the

1:06:52uh town engineer and we have a letter

1:06:55from

1:06:56>> I saw that. Yes.

1:06:57>> Email or letter? emails,

1:06:58>> an email from town engineer saying he's

1:07:00happy with their uh uh what they're

1:07:03trying to do and what they did.

1:07:05>> Okay.

1:07:10>> Thank you very much.

1:07:11>> Thank you.

1:07:12>> Is there anybody else like to speak?

1:07:14Yes, sir. Please go up here and state

1:07:15your name and address.

1:07:25>> Hello. Hi, I'm Christopher Walters. I'm

1:07:28at 154 Westminster. A. So, um, the only

1:07:31comment that I would make about this is

1:07:33you, this board seemed to have

1:07:34disagreement about the internally

1:07:36illuminated cabinet sign. Um, I would

1:07:39argue against accepting that. Um, as we

1:07:42all know, this is the old CW gas station

1:07:44site. You can't miss this when you're

1:07:45driving down Summer Street. It's very

1:07:47visible. Um, so I I think that in terms

1:07:50of visibility for this business, it's

1:07:52more than adequate at what is pretty

1:07:54prominent almost uh intersection with

1:07:56the traffic light and and adding an

1:07:59internal internally illuminated cabinet

1:08:01sign uh adds to a commercialization of

1:08:04the street stretches that down the

1:08:05street and to what is otherwise becoming

1:08:07a residential street unnecessarily and

1:08:09it also sets a precedent for other

1:08:11future businesses to do the same and I

1:08:13don't think we should do that.

1:08:15>> Thank you, sir.

1:08:17Um, yes, ma'am. You want to come up? Uh,

1:08:21state your name and address.

1:08:28Um,

1:08:32well, my name is Yushi Chen. I live on

1:08:35uh at uh 281 Summer Street uh right one

1:08:40house away from from this end.

1:08:44we use the same uh driveway uh with the

1:08:47our neighbor

1:08:49and I have to say that Arlington has

1:08:52done a very good job in

1:08:55uh having the best parks for our kids.

1:09:00You know, I've seen sever a lot of parks

1:09:02across the country because I have two

1:09:04grandkids. I take them to parks.

1:09:08But look at this site for this uh Kix

1:09:14Peak

1:09:16um marijuana shop.

1:09:19And now they are proposing to have the

1:09:24um

1:09:28uh the the lines show big letters on the

1:09:31wall in the front. Uh and then the big

1:09:36uh pylon um

1:09:39thing in the front near the street and

1:09:44our kids are walking down the street

1:09:46every day morning and afternoon and they

1:09:50are seeing those signs every day. Are we

1:09:54advertising marijuana to them?

1:09:58That's really troubling to me and I

1:10:01think it should be troubling to our

1:10:02neighbors too and because this is

1:10:05residential neighborhood. We have a lot

1:10:07of kids around. They go to school and

1:10:09they come back to from school. They see

1:10:11the signage and they see the signs. What

1:10:14are they going to do?

1:10:17We are teaching them the wrong thing.

1:10:22So, so that's one thing I'm really

1:10:25concerned about. is not

1:10:30we raised the concern last time but

1:10:35apparently they um colleague pig hasn't

1:10:40addressed this concern at all

1:10:45and another thing I have noticed is the

1:10:48operating hours is from 9 to 8:00 p.m.

1:10:52900 a.m. to uh 8:00 p.m. By 8:00 p.m.

1:10:58the young kids have gone to sleep and

1:11:01the all the noises from the site will

1:11:04affect their sleep

1:11:08and [sighs and gasps] I think they

1:11:09should close much earlier like 6:00 p.m.

1:11:13the town has the

1:11:16uh authority to to demand a certain uh

1:11:20closing time, right? And this is not in

1:11:23the commercial uh um uh street. This is

1:11:27a residential street.

1:11:30And so that's another concern for me,

1:11:32the operating hours to 8:00 p.m. That's

1:11:36too late.

1:11:41And

1:11:44As Mike has mentioned that during the

1:11:47very first meeting uh Calix Peak

1:11:50presented to the uh community, they did

1:11:54present the building as a whole building

1:11:58for their use.

1:12:00is not

1:12:02anywhere indicating well nowhere

1:12:06indicates from their presentation that

1:12:08they are [clears throat] going to divide

1:12:09the building into two businesses.

1:12:14I was at the meeting. So, we were so

1:12:17surprised

1:12:19that there's another business. Well,

1:12:22they are combining. Well, they're

1:12:24dividing into two businesses.

1:12:28And as a result, there is more traffic,

1:12:32right?

1:12:33And also right now if you look at the

1:12:36new design

1:12:38we already know they propose to have a a

1:12:42long in the middle to block the traffic

1:12:48uh from the other side.

1:12:51Why?

1:12:53I guess it's just trying to um direct

1:12:56all the traffic to the one engines

1:13:00and

1:13:02they how many uh cars they are uh they

1:13:07their study has suggested.

1:13:10So they have

1:13:14there are like

1:13:19in the afternoon

1:13:22only not whole day they said there could

1:13:24be 34 coming and going traffic cars and

1:13:30on Saturday in the peak hour there will

1:13:32be 43 coming and going cars. There are a

1:13:35lot.

1:13:37So that single entrance going in and

1:13:42coming out, that's going to be very

1:13:44crowded.

1:13:47So I wonder if we can ever go out of our

1:13:50driveway.

1:13:53That's really a a concern for us.

1:13:58and

1:14:02they did a very I suppose a good Q

1:14:06observation and this is conducted on

1:14:10March 3rd 2026.

1:14:12So that's a good sign.

1:14:15and all the other traffic uh studies

1:14:18they did were way much earlier.

1:14:24The traffic volume or the crash data

1:14:26they were really old.

1:14:29And for the Q observation they studied I

1:14:32think uh is a good one and uh it looks

1:14:35good. It says

1:14:40there is

1:14:43like 475

1:14:46ft

1:14:49from their uh um uh entrance or exit

1:14:55cars or traffic waiting

1:14:59to pass.

1:15:02So essentially

1:15:04is a long traffic all the time in front

1:15:08of the entrance

1:15:11or exit. So that's very crowded.

1:15:18So it's very disappointing. I don't

1:15:20think they have address uh uh address

1:15:23any of the concerns we raised last time.

1:15:26>> Thank you.

1:15:28>> Thank you.

1:15:31Is there anybody else would you like to

1:15:32speak?

1:15:35Seeing Seeing there's none, I'm close uh

1:15:37public comment. I'm going to return to

1:15:39the board for discussion.

1:15:42Um before we discuss, I want to go over

1:15:46a couple of things that came out of the

1:15:48u um try to answer some of the questions

1:15:50that came out of the um public forum.

1:15:55Uh one uh this business has been zoned

1:15:59commercial

1:16:01um and it's not it's not a change uh in

1:16:05use. So uh this uh space is commercial

1:16:09next to a residential. Yes, I agree to

1:16:12that. When you bought your house, it was

1:16:15always a commercial space. This used to

1:16:18be a gas station and there used to be a

1:16:21lot of traffic going through there. I

1:16:23think there'd be a lot less traffic

1:16:24going through this place. Now,

1:16:27um I talked to the

1:16:30police commissioner about traffic safety

1:16:34and about uh the appropriateness

1:16:37[snorts] of uh police details and so

1:16:40forth. I will agree with you Mary um

1:16:42that we will say shall instead of must

1:16:46uh for police details um like we did on

1:16:49the other

1:16:51um um retail stores apart. So if if

1:16:56needed okay for police details that's my

1:17:00recommendation. I didn't hear you, Mr.

1:17:02Chair.

1:17:02>> I talked to the police commissioner and

1:17:05about uh public safety around um

1:17:08recreational marijuana stores. She said

1:17:10there's none. She had none in the the

1:17:13other two stores. So, um she also

1:17:17concurs with us that we don't need a

1:17:19police detail and I will agree that uh

1:17:22we don't need to require one unless one

1:17:24is required. So it be shelled in the in

1:17:28our findings not required. Um the

1:17:32location of the curb cut um was also

1:17:36reviewed with her when I talked to her

1:17:38and she said that um it's a lot safer

1:17:40now because the curb cut has been um

1:17:43much reduced and it'll be uh limited to

1:17:47cars not to the oversized trucks that

1:17:49were there be uh before um for the

1:17:52repairs. And um I believe that's an

1:17:55active towy yard. So um that company

1:17:59there that's there now towes for the

1:18:01town. So it's it's it's an active

1:18:04toward. So there's a lot of um tow cars

1:18:08coming and going from there. That's why

1:18:10I was told. Um

1:18:13and um as far as what you quoted on um

1:18:18uh screening for parking lots um you are

1:18:21correct in what you said but you applied

1:18:23it incorrectly. Uh there is a sufficient

1:18:26mound

1:18:28uh between your property and um in the

1:18:30parking lot that the mound itself acts

1:18:33as uh the screening for the parking. Uh,

1:18:36as far as the lights,

1:18:38>> the the hill, the side of the hill,

1:18:41there's almost

1:18:43a 14 to 15 foot difference in grade from

1:18:46uh from a picture.

1:18:48>> Let me finish. Okay. And this is not I'm

1:18:51just trying to respond because I I gave

1:18:53everybody a chance to speak and I just

1:18:55want to respond and try to answer some

1:18:56of your questions. And um so the great

1:19:01difference is enough. Uh they're the

1:19:03blocked headlights. That's what the um

1:19:04the ordinance you set is for. Now, as

1:19:07far as the view from your house to uh

1:19:12the garage or the um or the that area

1:19:17that that always been u that view there

1:19:19um this new business coming did not

1:19:21change that view. So,

1:19:24let no I'm I'm speaking now. I'm it's

1:19:28not a discussion here. Okay. Uh I will

1:19:30return to you if if you feel like we

1:19:32need to talk some more. Okay. But I want

1:19:34I want to give the board members a

1:19:35chance to speak too. Um, so those are

1:19:38some things I I just want to re remark

1:19:40back to some of the comments that are

1:19:42brought up in uh in open forum. Um,

1:19:45Steve, do you want to

1:19:46>> Yeah. One uh quick question for you, Mr.

1:19:49Chair. To the applicant, the loading

1:19:50area is just basically a paved area

1:19:52where a delivery vehicle will park

1:19:55>> when making deliveries. So regarding the

1:19:59regarding the the the setback for for a

1:20:01loading zone, the setback applies to the

1:20:04structure, but in this case, it's just,

1:20:06you know, the loading for a loading zone

1:20:09um that has the same requirements as

1:20:11parking. So 10 ft without a fence or 5T

1:20:15with a fence, they have between 7 and 12

1:20:17and 8 and 1/2 ft. So I I it does meet

1:20:20the requirements of the bylaws as far as

1:20:22I can tell.

1:20:23>> Thank you. Yes.

1:20:27let us speak first and I will give

1:20:29everybody a chance to speak. I just want

1:20:31to um I don't want this to become a

1:20:33discussion. I'm sorry about that.

1:20:35>> Um anything else, Steve?

1:20:37>> No, sir.

1:20:38>> Uh Vince,

1:20:39>> thank you. So, I think with the abuter

1:20:42at 277

1:20:44um Summer Street, I'd be curious to see

1:20:46if there's a solution that would be

1:20:48acceptable to both. And what it my

1:20:51understanding is that there's difficulty

1:20:52with placing a fence or plantings on the

1:20:56hill.

1:20:57It seems to me there is an opportunity

1:20:59to either take down the existing chain

1:21:02link fence on the 277 property and

1:21:05replace it with a PVC fence or with

1:21:07plantings. And I'm just wondering, you

1:21:09know, knowing that would not be on the

1:21:11Kix Peak property but on the neighboring

1:21:12property. I'm wondering if that might be

1:21:14a solution that would be acceptable.

1:21:17>> Well, um, this

1:21:20But I should let the chair decide who if

1:21:22anyone is responding to that.

1:21:25>> Keep on going.

1:21:27>> I I don't want to go. I'm

1:21:30want to pick this up. Anything else?

1:21:32>> Sure. I mean, we just want to kind of

1:21:35if possible, I'd like to get out of this

1:21:37meeting a sense of whether there's a

1:21:39solution that's acceptable to both

1:21:40parties. So maybe later we'll let them

1:21:42talk.

1:21:43>> Yes.

1:21:45>> Then that's it for me for now.

1:21:47>> Thank you, Michelle. Uh thank you.

1:21:50Similarly, I would like to hear from

1:21:51both parties on whether there could be a

1:21:54PVC fence on the 279 property um or

1:21:57whether there can be terracing um on

1:22:00this property which had which would

1:22:02include a fence andor plantings. Um

1:22:07obviously I leave to the people who own

1:22:09the properties what they think is the

1:22:10best, right? So you if if this

1:22:12individual and you all decide it's

1:22:14better to have a fence on her property,

1:22:16then that's fine. Um, all things being

1:22:19equal, my preference is that the

1:22:21developer does it on their property.

1:22:22It's cleaner. You don't have issues of

1:22:25who's accessing whose property, what

1:22:27who's in charge of everything. Um, and

1:22:30opening kind of doors there for

1:22:32litigation here. Um, so I would ask you

1:22:36to think about terracing, what terracing

1:22:39can be done.

1:22:41>> Thank you.

1:22:42>> And I are we discussing the sign?

1:22:44>> Yes, we are.

1:22:45>> Okay. Um, my preference is that we have

1:22:48a signed bylaw [clears throat] and that

1:22:49we stick with the signed bylaw,

1:22:50especially as this is sort of a

1:22:52residential area and having kind of a

1:22:53backlit sign definitely would look a

1:22:56little different um than what we're

1:22:58seeing now. I mean, there's a giant sign

1:22:59and that's going away.

1:23:00>> Seems like I'm I'm in the minority here,

1:23:02Michelle. I'm okay with that

1:23:04>> and we will we will require a um them to

1:23:07follow the bylaws, but that's

1:23:09>> okay. I I hear what you're saying and I

1:23:10I wish you know I I'm sorry but I

1:23:14>> the town of Arlington has made a

1:23:15decision about signs and I feel that we

1:23:17should follow it but that's my

1:23:19>> thought. Yep.

1:23:20>> Thank you Michelle. Uh Shannon,

1:23:23>> so I'm going to echo both Vince and and

1:23:28Michelle. Um

1:23:30uh I I agree that the cabinet sign um is

1:23:37not in compliance with the bylaw and

1:23:39they need to find another solution. It

1:23:42sounds like um with small adjustments uh

1:23:47to the monument sign. That solution can

1:23:50be found. Um

1:23:53and

1:23:54and apart from that in my mind really

1:23:58the

1:23:59remaining open issue is to find um some

1:24:04screening for for the abuter at 277

1:24:09summer street be it a fence or

1:24:11something. Um uh yep that is my big

1:24:17concern. Is there a way to get a fence

1:24:21um up there?

1:24:23>> Thank you. Um do you want to make a

1:24:25comment?

1:24:26>> Well, let me say I've given Director

1:24:28Ricker the alternative signage

1:24:31>> now that the cabinet is off the table.

1:24:34Um I just want to before I uh have Mr.

1:24:37Peralt address the screening for 277.

1:24:40You people are aware that the board of

1:24:41health regulates the hours of um

1:24:43cannabis stores. Um and they regulate

1:24:47when they can open and close, but I'm

1:24:49going to have him explain what can be

1:24:51done, what can't be done logistically as

1:24:54to the screening for 277.

1:24:59>> Yes. Um any chance you can pull up this

1:25:02the uh existing conditions site plan C1.

1:25:07>> Sure.

1:25:12>> It's the same thing. It's just

1:25:18>> And I just Yeah. I just wanted to make a

1:25:20note too. Um, by no means did we ignore

1:25:23this fence location or choose not to

1:25:26work with this uh a butter. Uh the fence

1:25:29that's currently there is on their

1:25:31property. Uh we were able to make

1:25:33adjustments to the rear of the property

1:25:35because we were making adjustments on

1:25:36our own property. Uh to do something on

1:25:40the butter's property, we would need to

1:25:42coordinate with the butter to uh do a

1:25:44sitewalk, have our engineers present. Um

1:25:46we did reach out multiple times to try

1:25:48to do that. before this meeting. Um, so

1:25:51I just would like to note that we did

1:25:53not ignore it. We just can't design

1:25:54something on someone else's property

1:25:55that they don't approve. Uh, that being

1:25:58said, our our clients are more than

1:26:00amenable trying to meet a resolution.

1:26:02Uh, we tried to meet with the neighbor

1:26:05because of the uh magnitude

1:26:08[clears throat] of differences in what

1:26:10can can and can't be done. And the last

1:26:12meeting there was uh discussions of PBC

1:26:14fencing and our provide planting which

1:26:17we're more than amendable to. There was

1:26:19also discussion of tiered retaining

1:26:20walls uh

1:26:23to build tiered retaining walls. There's

1:26:26it is is absorbent amount of soil

1:26:29analysis that has to be done structural

1:26:30engineering um different topography

1:26:33engineering drainage. It's a massive

1:26:35undertaking of a project uh that um you

1:26:39know we we're not willing to entertain.

1:26:42Uh but we are certainly more than

1:26:44amendable changing the fence to PVC or

1:26:47um trying to plant plants on their

1:26:50property. The problem with the top of

1:26:53the hill is right where our property

1:26:55ends is the base of a old retaining wall

1:26:58that is about 3 or 4t tall where their

1:27:00fence is secured. It's it's dilapitated.

1:27:03It's old. Doing anything on the

1:27:05underside of that is going to undermine

1:27:08and going to cause issues with what's

1:27:10currently there. Um, our engineers have

1:27:12looked at this from our side and

1:27:14recommend that we don't disturb that. It

1:27:16is a steep slope. That's a one one. It's

1:27:18going to be subject to massive erosion.

1:27:21If we start disturbing that, um, which

1:27:23is why we wanted to go on to the

1:27:25property side, but we are more than

1:27:26willing to

1:27:28exchange their PVC, their chain link for

1:27:31PVC if that's

1:27:33>> on top of the retainable.

1:27:34>> Yes. On their property. Well, there it

1:27:37Yes. Oh, again we haven't been able to

1:27:39go and shoot grades and do asbuilts. I

1:27:42haven't been able to be allowed to go on

1:27:44the property without um obviously

1:27:47approval from the owner. Uh we did

1:27:48attempt that. Uh but we are definitely

1:27:50more than amendable to working together.

1:27:53I just by no means that we specifically

1:27:56try to ignore that that that wasn't the

1:27:57case.

1:27:57>> Are you okay with them uh replacing your

1:28:00chain link fence with PVC? I wonder that

1:28:03if they they probably more than able to

1:28:06stay well. Um

1:28:10because the

1:28:12PVC it's is a solid the the wing when

1:28:16the wind blows it it it will need much

1:28:19stronger to stay there the chain lane

1:28:22otherwise it doesn't need a very strong

1:28:25foundations and also the my chain ling

1:28:29right now it's like maybe more than feet

1:28:31into my own property and

1:28:35I not necessarily wanted to have them to

1:28:38put it in my PPCs and how about two

1:28:40years later it's well who is it going to

1:28:42repair that this kind of a things so I'm

1:28:46okay for them to put it definitely along

1:28:49the property lines they don't have to

1:28:51put it on the same high as what we have

1:28:55just put it whatever the highs that it

1:28:57allows them to do

1:29:00>> so their answer is No.

1:29:02>> Um,

1:29:04>> so

1:29:05>> if I am understanding correctly and and

1:29:08and please please tell me if if I'm

1:29:12understanding correctly to to put a

1:29:15fence

1:29:17um uh because of the slope of the

1:29:21property

1:29:22um

1:29:24to install a fence it would either need

1:29:27to be on the Abutter's property or down

1:29:30at the bottom. bottom of the hill next

1:29:32to the parking lot where it would not um

1:29:38where it it would not provide any visual

1:29:41impact uh for the AB butter. It wouldn't

1:29:44screen anything um for the abuter. It

1:29:48would um

1:29:49>> Yes. Yeah, that's correct. to correct

1:29:51>> to get away from the footprint of the

1:29:53base of that retaining wall, we'd have

1:29:54to come down the hill and by the time we

1:29:56get 5 ft off the property line with a

1:29:59one to one slope, the fence top of fence

1:30:01would wouldn't be past their grade. Um,

1:30:04also putting one on the base of the

1:30:05fence base of the hill also isn't going

1:30:09to screen. Um, ideally we put it on the

1:30:12the tallest part of the the hill to

1:30:15maximize the screening. Uh, there's a

1:30:19fence there now. uh we would assume to

1:30:21put a fence in its replacement in its

1:30:23replace it in kind in its location if we

1:30:26want had to come in a little we can

1:30:29remendable to coming in a foot or two

1:30:31again I don't know what the property

1:30:33looks like if what's back of there but

1:30:35>> I'm assuming the retaining wall can

1:30:37withstand it

1:30:40>> you have did you have a comment on that

1:30:44>> I'm just trying to picture how we would

1:30:47phrase this so that my understanding is

1:30:49that We would be stipulating that the

1:30:52two parties would come to an agreement

1:30:54about a possible PVC fence or perhaps

1:30:58dense plantings wherever it's most

1:31:00feasible and you know we if we need to

1:31:04let the department follow up on that

1:31:07then we can do that.

1:31:09I'm I'm not asking I I believe the

1:31:12butter was asking for both a PVC fence

1:31:14and evergreen plantings. I'm not

1:31:17inclined. I mean, I think it's kind of

1:31:20one or the other is is is already a

1:31:22fairly reasonable step. And then if

1:31:24there is some technical impossibility

1:31:27where the PVC fence can't be properly

1:31:30anchored on a foundation then you know I

1:31:33think we need to allow someone some

1:31:36wiggle room perhaps the planning

1:31:38department to just say we're satisfied

1:31:40that there is no real good solution here

1:31:44and everyone has done their best.

1:31:48So that's that's all I've got is I'm I'm

1:31:50trying to put into words a way that we

1:31:52can um

1:31:55>> Steve.

1:31:55>> Yeah. I I wouldn't stipulate that the

1:31:58parties have to come to agreement um

1:32:00because they may not.

1:32:02>> Yeah.

1:32:03>> Um and you know some sometimes you you

1:32:06know there you look at the alternatives

1:32:07and you just say and you end up with

1:32:09none of the above. Um, as far as like

1:32:12the plantings go, you know, the the bit

1:32:15the bit of the bit in the bylaw that

1:32:17talks about plantings uh as as as

1:32:19buffers, you know, it does have a limit

1:32:22of six feet. So, it says the planting

1:32:24shall be 5t high but no taller than six.

1:32:27I I do tend to agree with the chair that

1:32:29you know the main purpose of the

1:32:31screening is to basically prevent

1:32:34headlight spillage onto other properties

1:32:36and you know adjacent adjacent to the

1:32:39parking area and the you know the grade

1:32:42change is effectively doing that. Thank

1:32:45you.

1:32:46>> Okay. Um, what if we phrase it where

1:32:51the owner and the

1:32:54neighbor

1:32:56um give a best faith effort

1:32:59to come up with a come up with their

1:33:01reasonable

1:33:03um agreeable fence or planting which the

1:33:08U planning board would oversee [snorts]

1:33:11and would have the authority to say

1:33:14that's it. There is no agreement. We're

1:33:17leaving it.

1:33:17>> The planning department.

1:33:19>> Planning department. I think we wouldn't

1:33:20want them to come back. We would want

1:33:23administrative.

1:33:25>> Yeah, it would be administrative

1:33:27approval for that.

1:33:28>> Yeah. Before we I I like all of those

1:33:30ideas. I think that's great. Um

1:33:32uncertainty is always difficult. So, if

1:33:34I did hear you say that there might be

1:33:36something doable with a small fence on

1:33:39your property at the top of that hill.

1:33:41If there's any way we can get to a level

1:33:42of certainty. Did you say that there was

1:33:44something that there was a space there

1:33:45that might not be for a large

1:33:47>> Well, if we were to put one on our

1:33:49property and have it not affect the

1:33:52retaining wall, we'd have to come down

1:33:53the hill and

1:33:55>> Where is the retaining wall?

1:33:56>> It's It's on It's on where the fence

1:33:58line is. There's a retaining wall

1:34:01directly under that.

1:34:02>> No retaining wall.

1:34:07>> I [snorts] have pictures.

1:34:12short of I'm not going to argue about is

1:34:14there is one. We'll we'll send the

1:34:16department out to verify if it is or

1:34:18not. Okay. I mean there's no use going

1:34:21back and forth right now. Okay. But

1:34:23irregardless if there is one or not one.

1:34:25Yes.

1:34:26>> We'll just

1:34:26>> Mr. Chair like him to be able to finish

1:34:28his answer.

1:34:30>> If I [clears throat] hide

1:34:32>> if I can one minute. Can you wait one

1:34:34minute?

1:34:35>> Okay.

1:34:35>> Um you were you didn't finish your

1:34:37answer. So there's there may or may not

1:34:39be a retaining wall there. There very

1:34:40well may be. Um where did you said there

1:34:43might be possible to put a fence up

1:34:44there that's shorter

1:34:46>> at the bottom of

1:34:46>> we we could put the fence lower down the

1:34:48hill. The the top of the fence

1:34:52>> as a sixoot fence wouldn't even reach

1:34:54the

1:34:54>> the grade

1:34:55>> the grade um

1:34:57>> that's okay. Um

1:34:59>> even is lower than our current it's

1:35:02fine. We need

1:35:07I think it's not going to block

1:35:08anything. Um, okay.

1:35:10>> And also that my question is that they

1:35:12say it's difficult to do. Um, if I can

1:35:16get a contractor can do that, would be

1:35:18willing to accept that proposal and pay

1:35:20for it?

1:35:23>> No, they said no.

1:35:26>> Why not?

1:35:29>> I'm not going to ask him that question.

1:35:31>> Okay. I think you I think you I think

1:35:33you're suddenly being a little bit

1:35:34unreasonable

1:35:36creating demands on something that's

1:35:37adjacent neighbor that you know we're

1:35:39trying our best to work in fit and

1:35:41you're trying to be something that's not

1:35:44reasonable right now. Okay. So I'm going

1:35:46to I'm going to let this go right now

1:35:48because there seems to be an impass in

1:35:50this here. So I'm going to let these let

1:35:52you guys work it out amongst yourselves

1:35:54>> and give the best effort. Okay? And

1:35:56Claire's par will will say hey they're

1:35:58doing the best. If they're not then

1:36:00we'll come back and say no.

1:36:01>> Correct.

1:36:02>> Okay.

1:36:03>> One point I wanted to make though um yes

1:36:06it has been always business but that

1:36:08section has been always functioned as a

1:36:11stationary because it's a gas. So they

1:36:14come in to fill gas and they leave. They

1:36:16don't go over to park in front. They

1:36:19don't park in the parking lot. Only the

1:36:21owner have some cars parked there but

1:36:24they park there for months without

1:36:25moving it. Therefore we are not seeing

1:36:28people's you know in our face at all. It

1:36:32has been there for 20 years. So that is

1:36:35important differences between business

1:36:38current business to the future. This

1:36:40case

1:36:41>> for us

1:36:42>> because it's a gas station. They're

1:36:43building gas then they leave.

1:36:45>> They never come to mind.

1:36:46>> Um it's it's it's it's a way of looking

1:36:49at it. If you look at it and in terms of

1:36:52u the zoning, it's a a business adjacent

1:36:57to a residential area. Now, it doesn't

1:37:01say a busy business or a slow business.

1:37:03It just says a business. So, I can't

1:37:08I can't I can't

1:37:10respond to that uh saying that, oh,

1:37:13well, they only park there uh four or

1:37:15five days or or leave it there for

1:37:17months on a time. It's still a business.

1:37:20So, it's hard for me to say. Okay. I

1:37:22think we're being very

1:37:24um amenable to asking them to put a

1:37:27fence in. And I think they are too.

1:37:28Okay. So, let's leave it at that right

1:37:30now. I'm not going to talk about that

1:37:32right now because I think the subject is

1:37:36uh to the board uh finished. All right.

1:37:40Yes, ma'am.

1:37:40>> Should I?

1:37:41>> I had another question. when I was

1:37:43reading the whole thing. Um

1:37:46um

1:37:46>> is it time to make a motion?

1:37:48>> I I didn't see anywhere that mentions

1:37:53whether they will allow customer to

1:37:56smoke in the parking lot or in front of

1:38:00you. I don't

1:38:01>> I believe that's regulated by the board

1:38:04of health, ma'am. And and that's against

1:38:05the law jurisdiction

1:38:06>> and then I'll then I'll do that. Okay.

1:38:08And that's off that's controlled by the

1:38:10board of health and by the police

1:38:13department. Okay.

1:38:14>> So they should not walk in the parking

1:38:15lot.

1:38:20>> I I don't want to answer that question.

1:38:22Okay. Because um what you're saying is

1:38:25stuff that just a lot of bad publicity

1:38:29has been spread about this stuff. Okay.

1:38:31I've already stated clearly that the

1:38:34other two stores in Arlington has no

1:38:38issues with people hanging out, smoking,

1:38:40doing anything like that at all by the

1:38:43police department. So, I I don't know

1:38:46where you're basing that on. And I'm I'm

1:38:49just saying that I I want to leave leave

1:38:51that alone for now, okay? Because just

1:38:53because you believe that doesn't mean

1:38:55it's true.

1:38:56>> So, I'm That's it.

1:38:58>> Mr. Chair, could I make a motion? Yes,

1:39:00please. Uh, I move to approve docket uh

1:39:063902

1:39:08251 Summer Street with the conditions

1:39:12outlined outlined in um in the ARB memo

1:39:20of September 24th, 2006

1:39:24uh with the with the following changes

1:39:29that special Condition number two uh be

1:39:33revised to indicate that um that the

1:39:39applicant shall be responsible for the

1:39:41cost of uh any police details if police

1:39:45details are necessary.

1:39:48Um and further

1:39:52um and further that the striping on the

1:39:57side of the site that is not involved in

1:40:02um in this portion in their portion of

1:40:05the project be removed.

1:40:08Uh additionally

1:40:10um a a low cement burm divide the site

1:40:15the parking lot of the site. Um,

1:40:20additionally,

1:40:21uh, the shortterm bike parking should be

1:40:24revised to allow for four bikes to be

1:40:28parked. Um and finally

1:40:32uh that that uh the applicant

1:40:38continue to uh make good faith efforts

1:40:43to work with the Abutter at 277279

1:40:49Summer Street to reach um agreement

1:40:54about fencing and or screening. Um,

1:41:00yep. Uh, have I missed anything?

1:41:04>> So, uh, with a non-c cabinet monument

1:41:07sign to be left for administrative

1:41:09approval.

1:41:10>> Yes. As um as presented by um with and

1:41:15the option presented by the applicant

1:41:19today um

1:41:22uh

1:41:24is approved.

1:41:26the non-c cabinet option presented today

1:41:30um swapped in for the cabinet option.

1:41:33>> Thank you for summarizing all of that,

1:41:34Shaya. I wouldn't not sure I would

1:41:36change anything, but just for the

1:41:37applicant, I would consider good faith,

1:41:40you know, to look at if there's any way

1:41:42to have any plantings that can be on a

1:41:45hillside. Um and make sure that that's

1:41:48really been the tires have been kicked

1:41:49there.

1:41:51>> Could I add one more Can I add one more

1:41:52thing to that? Um, follow on what

1:41:55Michelle said, I I would request that

1:41:57maybe any of the um evasive

1:42:00planting along that um hillside there be

1:42:03removed. Um, you know what I'm talking

1:42:05about? Those um what do you call those

1:42:07those trees with the

1:42:09>> Japanese not Japanese and I have it all

1:42:12across the back of my

1:42:14>> Yeah. Yeah, I think that's it. When you

1:42:16were a little kid, you you ripped off

1:42:17the Oh, you want it? It's on It's on the

1:42:20[laughter]

1:42:21>> You want that? Okay. Okay. So, all

1:42:24right. So, if you can um So, if you can

1:42:26remove that, I'd be appreciative.

1:42:28>> We'll remove it from our property.

1:42:30>> Are you talking about remediation of

1:42:31invasive species?

1:42:33>> It is.

1:42:35>> Uh

1:42:36best faith effort in in the way your

1:42:40property. I can't ask you to go on other

1:42:42people's property. Okay. But yes, on

1:42:44your property, best face effort to

1:42:46remove what you can. Okay. Cuz um

1:42:51>> Yes. Um, you okay with that?

1:42:54>> Okay. Do I Can I get a second?

1:42:56>> Second.

1:42:58>> Steve, you have something to say?

1:42:59>> Uh, no. No. I was acknowledging Mr.

1:43:02Bedwin second.

1:43:03>> Um, Steve,

1:43:05>> yes.

1:43:06>> Vince,

1:43:07>> yes.

1:43:07>> Shell,

1:43:08>> yes.

1:43:09>> Shannon,

1:43:10>> yes.

1:43:10>> I'm a yes. Congratulations.

1:43:12>> Thank you very much.

1:43:13>> Okay. And um I encourage you to do a

1:43:15best faith ether to um work something

1:43:17out. Okay. Thank you.

1:43:28Uh our next topic is uh open forum.

1:43:31Would anybody like to speak? Uh please

1:43:34raise your hand and speak.

1:43:37>> Yes sir. Come up to the phone and say

1:43:38your name and your address.

1:43:40>> Uh yep. On my way.

1:43:48>> Thank you. So I'm Christopher Walters

1:43:49again. I'm at from 154 Westminster A. So

1:43:53uh this is the second time I've attended

1:43:54one of these meetings. The first one was

1:43:56talking about the Heights business

1:43:58district the last time and some of the

1:43:59work that's gone on around there. So um

1:44:02I haven't had a chance to get back into

1:44:03the details yet and I know there's a lot

1:44:05more work to be done. So first of all,

1:44:07thank everybody who's working on that. I

1:44:08know a lot of the work that goes into

1:44:10the volunteer work takes a lot of time,

1:44:11a lot of effort and I I do appreciate

1:44:13that. um some concerns that I had about

1:44:17the con conversations that happened last

1:44:19time um felt like um we were opening the

1:44:24door to make things a little bit too

1:44:26easier too easy for developers. So I'm

1:44:29an architect uh I've been in this

1:44:30business for over 40 years uh and I've

1:44:33worked for developers extensively. So, I

1:44:36understand that we want to

1:44:39uh we want to enhance the the

1:44:41Massachusetts Avenue corridor all up and

1:44:44down Arlington. I think that's a very

1:44:45worthy endeavor. Um and there was some

1:44:49discussion during the last meeting about

1:44:51the the former Gold's Gym site, whatever

1:44:53we're calling that, that's sort of been

1:44:55pulled out. Um, I don't exactly know

1:44:58what's going on with that, but I'd be

1:44:59very surprised if that didn't someday

1:45:00turn into another housing development

1:45:02very similar to everything else that's

1:45:04been going up all the way down the uh

1:45:06railroad corridor in Arlington. And I

1:45:08get that. I get that that brings tax

1:45:10revenue and that brings a whole bunch of

1:45:11things into uh into Arlington. My

1:45:14concern is that the corridor itself and

1:45:16particularly in the Heights, there was

1:45:18discussions about doing things like

1:45:20relieving zoning ordinances, relieving

1:45:22height restrictions, things like that.

1:45:23talk, you know, discussions that got

1:45:25into once you get beyond seven levels or

1:45:27whatever the height restriction is, now

1:45:28you get into high-rise uh construction,

1:45:30things like that. And and having worked

1:45:33for developers extensively, um they

1:45:36don't always they're not local and they

1:45:38don't always have the community's

1:45:40interests in heart. And so part of I

1:45:43would think this board's responsibility

1:45:45is not just the economic development of

1:45:48of of the Heights, but also sort of the

1:45:50physical character of the Heights also.

1:45:53and maintaining that. Um that also helps

1:45:55maintain our tax base, our tax um our

1:45:58property values and and things of that

1:46:00nature. So I I a lot of the discussion

1:46:04it felt to me in the last meeting was

1:46:06very much about the bottom line, very

1:46:08much about increasing tax revenue, very

1:46:10much about making things easy for

1:46:11developers. Um, I'd also like to see

1:46:14this board very much interested in what

1:46:16the physical aspects are of what's being

1:46:18uh proposed here and maintaining a

1:46:20certain character of the heights that

1:46:23keeps it similar to the character that

1:46:25we have now. And don't get me wrong, I

1:46:26understand that we need some work here.

1:46:28We need some some things to happen along

1:46:30the Massav corridor. Um, but I wanted to

1:46:33just voice that as a concern that as we

1:46:35move forward um let's let's not let's

1:46:39not give the key let's not hand the keys

1:46:40of the kingdom over to developers

1:46:42because um they're not always what we

1:46:45want them to be. And then once you do it

1:46:48and I'll give an example tonight

1:46:50you were you you were promised by

1:46:52someone three windows along uh Massav.

1:46:55You only got two and you're willing to

1:46:57sort of accept some haha window

1:46:59treatment in in its place. If I was in

1:47:01this position at their own expense, I

1:47:03would force them to go put the window

1:47:05back in. And I don't care what they do

1:47:06inside the building because it maintains

1:47:08a certain t tactile quality along the

1:47:10street. Uh it allows that frontage to be

1:47:13used for something else should that

1:47:15tenant move out and someone else move

1:47:16in. And now we've sort of we're proving

1:47:18that well, you know, you can kind of do

1:47:20not follow the rules of this board and

1:47:23kind of get away with it. I think that's

1:47:24the wrong message. I think this board

1:47:26wants to dig in and also have some

1:47:28really strong backbone with respect to

1:47:30design and the physical environment. So,

1:47:35>> thank you very much. Um, I'm going to

1:47:36say I welcome you to come to uh our

1:47:39board meetings for uh the heights and

1:47:43express what you just said. Okay. Um

1:47:47I'm just going to make a small comment

1:47:49and I'll leave it at that. Okay.

1:47:51uh we're not giving any relief on uh on

1:47:55for developers or anybody else. um where

1:47:58we have given a goal to increase

1:48:02um businesses and we're looking at how

1:48:05we go about increasing it.

1:48:07And um we we've talked to many people

1:48:10about that, brokers, developers,

1:48:14architects, uh business owners, property

1:48:17owners, and they state that it's foot

1:48:20traffic, it's population around there.

1:48:23And uh the other thing is um um

1:48:28the willingness to uh uh to to to invest

1:48:32money in doing that. So we're not giving

1:48:35relief, we are giving incentives

1:48:38for people to do that. So

1:48:42u we saying if you do this you can we'll

1:48:46give you some relief for that. So that's

1:48:49what we're doing. We're not just saying

1:48:52books open. Do what you want to do.

1:48:55>> Okay? And I encourage you to come to

1:48:58those uh to these meetings and put your

1:49:00two cents in. I I I I would like to have

1:49:02more people uh give that kind of

1:49:05response back. All right? And um uh what

1:49:09I don't like is um when people armchair

1:49:12stuff and say, "Hey,

1:49:14you know, you did this, you didn't do

1:49:15that." Yes. Yes. Um I am

1:49:20extremely pissed.

1:49:23Okay, I'll use that word that we're

1:49:25allowing this this developer

1:49:28get away with that window. But there's

1:49:31more than there's more to it that's

1:49:33going on there, okay, than just that one

1:49:35thing. And um if you followed what we've

1:49:40done as far as the history of how we've

1:49:43gone about trying to get them to do

1:49:44better

1:49:47and all the effort we have done to uh

1:49:49tried to make them do better. You might

1:49:50realize that it's not just not what

1:49:52happened just here today. Okay. There

1:49:55was many many that that's been going on

1:49:58since um 2017.

1:50:03Okay. I personally have gone out to the

1:50:05site many times and talked to them about

1:50:07what things they can and cannot do

1:50:10just so they they they um try to do

1:50:13that. We follow up on all the projects

1:50:15and make trying to make them do that.

1:50:17So,

1:50:19yes, uh I uh what you said is correct,

1:50:23but I wish you knew the history behind

1:50:26it.

1:50:28And I say it with a heavy heart that we

1:50:30let that um that they may get away with

1:50:33that. That's all. But thank you for your

1:50:36effort and I thank you for your comment.

1:50:37That's it's well received.

1:50:40Uh anybody else like to make a comment?

1:50:45See,

1:50:46>> can I just make another comment?

1:50:48>> Come up here. Say your name and address

1:50:50and uh

1:50:56again this is Yin. I I live uh uh at 281

1:51:02Summer Street.

1:51:04Um, I think my major concern is about

1:51:09the kids in the neighborhood because

1:51:11this is a neighbor uh residential

1:51:13neighborhood

1:51:15with all that big monument and they

1:51:18propose the lighting on shop and the

1:51:22potential

1:51:24uh uh smoking in the yard. I mentioned

1:51:28the third point, the smoking in the

1:51:30yard, in the parking lot or near the

1:51:32building

1:51:34because

1:51:36just this weekend, well, last Friday, I

1:51:40happened to um pass by a marijuana shop

1:51:46>> in Arlington.

1:51:47>> I did

1:51:48>> in Arlington.

1:51:50Well, I didn't notice the marijuana shop

1:51:55name, but I noticed a lot of people

1:51:57standing in the front. Then I saw the

1:52:00marijuana sign.

1:52:03So, if they are trying to do uh uh

1:52:06advertisements, that's the third advert

1:52:08advertisement. They are saying this one

1:52:10and that one the two advertisements and

1:52:13I don't want them to do another

1:52:15advertisement. But if Arlington has a

1:52:18law to prohibit them from doing such

1:52:20things, that's a great thing. Okay.

1:52:24>> Thank you.

1:52:28>> Anybody else like to make comments on

1:52:30open form?

1:52:32Seeing none, I close open form.

1:52:35>> Steve has.

1:52:36>> Yes. Uh Mr. uh Mr. through you, Mr.

1:52:39Chair. one. As far as the marijuana le

1:52:42marijuana legalization in Massachusetts,

1:52:46it's been a long process that's gone on

1:52:48for several years. When we adopted our

1:52:51marijuana regulations, this was

1:52:53something that town meeting, you know,

1:52:54our legislative body talked about. Um, I

1:52:57understand that not everyone will agree,

1:52:59but, you know, may not agree with where

1:53:01we ended up, but there was a process to

1:53:04arrive at the current laws. And you

1:53:06know, one of the things that we can't do

1:53:08here is sort of relitigate, you know,

1:53:12what was already decided. Thank you.

1:53:15>> Thank you. I'm going to close open

1:53:18forum. And uh is there any new business,

1:53:22Steve? Yeah, I um I noticed um thanks to

1:53:28the town's electronic legal notices that

1:53:31uh the attorney general re reviewed some

1:53:34of the bylaw, the stuff that we passed

1:53:36at town meeting. Uh about half the

1:53:38zoning law warrant articles were

1:53:41accepted and the other half they

1:53:43requested an extension to October 31st

1:53:46to review them. Um, one of the things

1:53:48that was I was not aware of was that um,

1:53:5250 and 51 the reasonzoning of the St.

1:53:54Camila's property was challenged. Um,

1:53:57the attorney general

1:54:00upheld uh, what town uh, town meetings

1:54:03decision. However,

1:54:05>> thank you.

1:54:08>> Anybody else? Vince.

1:54:09>> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, two

1:54:12weeks ago I went to a conference in

1:54:14Boston and I just wanted to report back

1:54:16a little bit because I thought it was

1:54:17interesting and relevant to the work of

1:54:19this board. Um, it was a conference

1:54:21called housing, land use and building

1:54:22reform and basically had three speakers,

1:54:26two of whom were presenting new reports

1:54:28and the third one was presenting some of

1:54:30her research. So the first report and

1:54:33speaker um Jonathan Burke was the

1:54:36speaker. The report is called Delayed by

1:54:38Design: How Discretionary Permitting

1:54:40Stalls Housing in Massachusetts. So,

1:54:42sort of the thesis of the report is to

1:54:45look into the different ways in which

1:54:47the kind of cumbersome permitting

1:54:48processes

1:54:50um make it difficult or impossible to

1:54:52get projects approved or if they are

1:54:55approved by the time they are, it's no

1:54:57longer financially feasible to build

1:54:58them. Um I did want to note that

1:55:02Arlington actually kind of came out

1:55:04looking a little favorable. For example,

1:55:06they looked at a case study which was

1:55:08under our MBTA community zoning and they

1:55:11they described it as being a relatively

1:55:13low friction process compared to some of

1:55:15the other communities they looked at

1:55:16which had quite high friction processes.

1:55:20Um so I'd recommend that to anyone who

1:55:22has free time who would like to read

1:55:24that report and maybe see if there's

1:55:26some lessons for Arlington. Um the

1:55:29second speaker in the second report was

1:55:31Sam Naylor who is presenting a report

1:55:34called unlocking small multifamily

1:55:36housing through building code reform. So

1:55:39this now we're moving from the first one

1:55:42looking at permitting processes. The

1:55:44second one is looking at building codes

1:55:47specifically what things might make it

1:55:49difficult to build a small infill multif

1:55:52family project kind of in between three

1:55:56units which is where you start being in

1:55:57the international building code anywhere

1:56:00up to say 24 [snorts]

1:56:0225

1:56:03units before it starts to be a large

1:56:05project and in that

1:56:09um scale of project there's issues like

1:56:12the requirement to have two separate

1:56:14egress stairs. Um requirements to do

1:56:18with sprinklers, elevators, energy code

1:56:20requirements, you know, things that are

1:56:22individually important, but things that

1:56:25if we adjusted the code somewhat, we

1:56:27could make it easier to build uh smaller

1:56:29multif family buildings, maybe single

1:56:31family stair buildings. So, this one's

1:56:33not really in the scope of this board

1:56:35because we don't do building code

1:56:36compliance, but I I I do think it's

1:56:38important for us to understand, you

1:56:39know, when we deal with zoning, there's

1:56:42all these other things that that

1:56:43interlock with zoning and make it

1:56:44difficult. So, for example, if we're

1:56:46doing a zoning plan for small multif

1:56:48family buildings on these small parcels

1:56:50and then nobody builds small multif

1:56:52family buildings on these small parcels,

1:56:54the reason might be that the building

1:56:56code makes it very difficult to do so.

1:56:58And the last uh speaker Amy Dayne um

1:57:02researcher so she wasn't presenting a

1:57:05new report but she was just talking

1:57:07about re her research into progress on

1:57:11um zoning reform uh specifically. So

1:57:15what have we been trying? We've been

1:57:17trying to persuade communities to reform

1:57:19their zoning. That has a little bit of

1:57:22effect. We've been trying incentives

1:57:24such as chapter 40r which is the smart

1:57:26growth zoning. um that's seen some

1:57:29production of housing units over the

1:57:31past several decades that that's been in

1:57:33place, but but it's been marginal. Um

1:57:36the third thing we've tried are

1:57:38mandates. Um MBTA communities is an

1:57:40example of a mandate. Um the

1:57:44effectiveness in terms of producing

1:57:46housing seems to be a success. However,

1:57:49her argument was that the work and the

1:57:53kind of um the huge political lift

1:57:56required to make MBTA communities happen

1:57:58both at the state level and at each

1:58:00individual community makes it you know

1:58:02that there's very limited capacity to

1:58:04keep doing things like that. And then

1:58:06the last possible tool for reforming

1:58:08zoning is state preeemption where the

1:58:11state might say and we've we've seen

1:58:13this with um the ADU bylaw for example

1:58:16where the state just preempts local uh

1:58:19towns and cities from being able to

1:58:21prohibit certain ADUs. Um

1:58:26I had another example, the um

1:58:30upcoming ballot question on whether or

1:58:33not we would allow homes on lots with

1:58:365,000 square feet uh and public sewer

1:58:40and water. That would be a sort of

1:58:42another example of state preeemption.

1:58:44Um, [cough] and Amy Dne's argument was

1:58:47that that might be the most effective

1:58:48way of of reforming zoning. Um, but that

1:58:51remains to be seen. So, um, I sent the

1:58:55summary of all of this to Claire and if

1:58:57she's willing, she might send it out to

1:58:59the board and, um, you know, I I

1:59:03[snorts]

1:59:04it was nice to see there were folks

1:59:05from, you know, our neighboring

1:59:07communities. The planning director of

1:59:09Lexington was there. We had there were

1:59:10like city councilors from Somerville and

1:59:12Cambridge. I hope that, you know, we can

1:59:14also get Arlington folks out to some of

1:59:16these future events um because it's a

1:59:18nice way to share ideas and best

1:59:19practices and keep trying to improve.

1:59:23>> Thank you.

1:59:27>> Thank you for that both of those. I

1:59:29don't have anything to add.

1:59:31>> I have nothing.

1:59:33>> Nothing here.

1:59:35>> Thank you. Go ahead and make get a

1:59:36motion to adjurnn.

1:59:37>> So moved.

1:59:38>> Second.

1:59:39>> Steve.

1:59:40>> Yes.

1:59:41Yes, Shell.

1:59:43>> Yes.

1:59:44>> Yes.

1:59:44>> I'm a Yes.

1:59:47>> Thank you very much.

1:59:50[music]

1:59:59[music]

2:00:09>> [music]