2026-09-29 - Urban Affairs Committee

0:00Good evening everyone. I'm going to call

0:02the city council urban affairs committee

0:04meeting to order. It is Wednesday,

0:07September 29th. No, t

0:10>> Tuesday. I've lost track.

0:12Tuesday, September 29th. We have two

0:15items on our agenda. The first one is

0:17order number 26100 9820. application for

0:21a special permit from attorney Brian

0:24Faul on behalf of 36 Jefferson Street

0:26LLC to construct four townhouse units

0:30and a fourc car garage to the site's

0:32existing single family house to include

0:34a total of 18 spaces garage and service

0:37at 36 Jefferson Street and I will read

0:40the other order when we have attorney

0:43flood

0:44in the room or ready to go. Um, so

0:47attorney Faulk is here with his client

0:51and I don't know if you have any opening

0:53comments that you want to make. Attorney

0:55Faulk.

0:56>> Thank you, Council Roby and committee

0:58members. Attorney Brian Faulk uh from

1:00Myrick from 100 Front Street in

1:01Worcester. I'm here on behalf of the

1:03applicant 36 Jefferson Street LLC and

1:06owner Roundo Netto who's with me. Um, so

1:09this was our application at 36 Jefferson

1:12Street project we're calling Greenway

1:14Overlook Residences. We're adding four

1:16new townhouse units to the existing

1:19single family for a total of five units

1:21at the property. Um each unit will have

1:24its own garage parking and we have

1:26surplus of parking on the site um for

1:29the multif family use. Had our special

1:31permit hearing two weeks ago. We had

1:34three neighbors come out and speak in

1:35favor of the application. No one spoke

1:38against the application and we had two

1:40letters of support for the application.

1:43I submitted a draft decision with

1:45conditions of approval uh to the council

1:48last week. Um we had met twice with the

1:51site plan committee, once before the

1:53hearing and once last week. Um their

1:56comments that were shared with um this

1:58committee um have been incorporated into

2:00a red line of the draft decision which I

2:03submitted earlier today. Um, if anyone

2:05doesn't have a copy, I do have copies of

2:07the red line showing the recent changes,

2:09but if

2:10>> I believe the city clerk provided copies

2:12for everybody in their mailboxes. If you

2:15came in and didn't check your mailbox,

2:17they're there.

2:18>> Perfect. Thank you. Um, so the so the

2:21red line changes show um edits um that

2:25the site plan committee had requested um

2:27some changes to conditions number two

2:30and conditions number seven. Um, so

2:32happy to take your questions and work

2:34through the conditions of approval.

2:36>> Thank you. I'm going to go through the

2:38comments from the manager, some of which

2:40as was stated have been incorporated.

2:43Uh, Chief Georgie has no issues for the

2:46police department. Paul Dunwith from the

2:49board of health. They have no comments

2:51on the draft decision. from Jeffrey

2:55Goen, fire chief. Uh he said, "I'd

2:57spoken with Jeff Emanuelson about this

2:59the other day and we had no additional

3:01comments."

3:02And from Bill Payton, the building

3:05commissioner, his comment is upon

3:07further review, there should be some

3:09language regarding compliance for height

3:11and stories of the structure that it

3:13complies with Marbor zoning. Building

3:15and fire also had some concerns

3:17regarding access to the rear of the

3:19building. U I will comment for this one.

3:22I did talk to the solicitor today and he

3:24felt that the language in the red line

3:28covers the issues that uh the

3:30commissioner has brought up with the

3:32building height and from um city

3:35engineer Deersio. We're in agreement

3:38with the proposed revisions to the

3:40conditions. Any other engineering

3:41related issues can be addressed during

3:43site plan review. And from

3:48Priscilla Ryder who was tabulating I

3:52think comments from site plan in

3:54general. Overall the site plan review

3:56committee.

3:58The overall comments from the site plan

4:00review committee is that we have no

4:01issues with this use and the location of

4:04the proposed buildings as shown on the

4:06plans. However, we recommend the

4:08following edit edits to the draft

4:10conditions. Condition two of the special

4:12permit. Page three should add the

4:14following highlighted sentence. The

4:16issuance of the special permit is

4:18further subject to detailed site plan

4:20review by the site plan review committee

4:22prior to the issuance of a building

4:24permit. Major items still needing

4:27resolution which would be reviewed

4:29during the detailed review by the site

4:30plan review committee include fire

4:33access behind the building, sprinklers

4:35in all buildings including existing

4:37building drainage improvements and

4:39landscaping. And condition seven of the

4:42special permit conditions on page four

4:43should add the following highlighted

4:45sentence. The area between the existing

4:48sites fence and the edge of the Asabet

4:50River trail pavement is to be is the

4:53area to be considered for the additional

4:56trailside landscaping.

4:59I have no conservation related issues.

5:02So unless someone has specific questions

5:06at this point, I'm going to just begin

5:08going through the decision, the draft

5:11decision on the special permit.

5:14Don't see any hands raised. Okay. We

5:16have order number 261009820,

5:19which is the applicant 36 Jefferson

5:22Street LLC, a Massachusetts limited

5:25liability company with the mailing

5:27address of 36 Jefferson Street, Malbor,

5:29Mass. The owner of the property is

5:31Raundo Netto with the same mailing

5:33address. The applicants is the

5:36prospective owner of the property. In

5:38accordance with section 65017,

5:4118, and 65059 of the zoning ordinance,

5:44the applicant proposes to build and

5:46operate at the site a multif family

5:48dwelling consisting of four new

5:51townhouse units with individual basement

5:53garages and a fourcar garage, all

5:55attached to the existing single family

5:57home. The use site's located in the

6:00residents B RB zoning district. The site

6:03has an area of 27,11

6:06square feet approximately as shown on

6:08the plans referenced in paragraph 7. The

6:11applicant buy and through its council

6:13filed with the city clerk of the city of

6:15Marble an application for the special

6:16permit. In connection with the

6:18application, the applicant submitted a

6:20certified list of abutters filing fees

6:22and a detailed site plan

6:25and architectural plans.

6:28The applicant has certified was

6:31certified as complete by the building

6:32commissioner of the city of Marbor

6:34acting on behalf of the city planner

6:37pursuant to the rules and regulations of

6:39the city council for the city of

6:40Marboro. The city council established a

6:43date for a public hearing and determined

6:45that notice of the same was provided to

6:47Abutters. As stated, the public hearing

6:50was held on Monday, September 14th, and

6:52the hearing was closed. The applicant

6:54through its representatives presented

6:56testimony at the public hearing

6:58detailing the use describing its impact

7:01and uh impact upon municipal services,

7:04the neighborhood, and traffic. At the

7:07public hearing, three members of the

7:08public spoke in favor of the use and no

7:11members of the public spoke in

7:12opposition. Two letters in favor were

7:15submitted as part of the public hearing.

7:18Based on the above, the city council

7:20makes the following findings and takes

7:22the following actions. The applicant has

7:25complied with all the rules and

7:26regulations promulgated by the city

7:28council. The city council finds that the

7:31proposed use of the site is an

7:33appropriate use and in harmony with the

7:35general purpose and intent of the zoning

7:37ordinance of the city of Marbor when

7:40subject to the appropriate terms and

7:41conditions as provided herein.

7:45The city council makes these findings

7:46subjects to the completion and inherence

7:49by the applicant, its successors, andor

7:51assigns to the conditions more fully set

7:54forth herein. The city council, pursuant

7:56to its authority under Massachusetts

7:58General Laws chapter 48 and the zoning

8:00ordinance of the city of Marple hereby

8:02grants the applicant a special permit to

8:05build and operate a multif family

8:06dwelling with five residential units as

8:09shown on the plans subject to the

8:11following conditions. Which condition

8:13shall be binding on the applicant

8:15successors and/or signs? Number one,

8:18construction in accordance with

8:20applicable laws. Construction of all

8:23structures on the site is to be in

8:25accordance with all applicable building

8:27codes and zoning regulations in effect

8:29in the city of Malber and the

8:31Commonwealth of Massachusetts and shall

8:33be built according to the plans as may

8:35be amended during site plan review. And

8:37I'm going to read from the

8:40um amended that was sent by attorney

8:44Faulk. Number two, site plan review. The

8:47issuance of the special permit is

8:48further subject to detailed site plan

8:50review by the site plan review committee

8:52prior to the issuance of a building

8:54permit. The new language items still

8:57needing resolution to be reviewed by the

8:59site plan review committee. Confirmation

9:02of compliance with the height

9:03requirements of the zoning ordinance.

9:06Fire access for our ground ladder behind

9:08the building. confirmation of fire

9:10suppression sprinklers throughout the

9:12dwelling units, including the existing

9:15building, drainage improvements, and

9:17landscaping. Subsequent site plan review

9:21shall be consistent with the conditions

9:22of this special permit.

9:25And the plan submitted, reviewed, and

9:26approved by the city council as a

9:28special permit granting authority. Any

9:31additional changes, alterations,

9:33modifications or amendments as required

9:35during the process of site plan review

9:37shall be further conditions of this

9:39special permit and conditions attached

9:41to the building permit and a final

9:44occupancy permit for the entire project

9:47shall not be issued until the applicant

9:49has complied with all conditions.

9:51Provided, however, that subsequent to

9:53the issuance of this special permit and

9:55the site plan approval, the site plan

9:57review committee may authorize the

9:59phasing of site and building work

10:00depending upon weather conditions and

10:03other factors. Number three,

10:05incorporation of submissions.

10:08All photos,

10:10all plans, photo renderings, site

10:12evaluations, briefs, and other

10:13documentation provided by the applicant

10:15as part of the application and as

10:17amended or revised during the

10:19application hearing process before the

10:21city council and/or the city council's

10:23urban affairs committee are herein

10:25incorporated into and become a part of

10:27this special permit and become

10:29conditions and requirements of the same

10:31unless otherwise altered by the city

10:33council. The final architectural design

10:36of the site shall be reasonably

10:37consistent with the plan submitted by

10:40the applicant. The final exterior

10:42features of the site, including

10:44landscaping, shall be maintained in good

10:46condition and shall be reasonably

10:48consistent with the plan submitted and

10:51representations made to the city

10:53council. Number four, modification of

10:55the plans. Notwithstanding conditions

10:57one through three above, the site plan

11:00review committee may approve changes to

11:02the plans so long as said changes do not

11:05change the use as approved here in or

11:08materially increase the impervious area

11:10of the use, reduce the green area,

11:13alter traffic flow or increase the size,

11:16shape or position of the building all as

11:18shown on the plans. Number five, storm

11:21water and erosion control management.

11:23The applicant shall ensure that its site

11:25superintendent during construction of

11:27the project is competent in storm water

11:30and erosion control management. This

11:32individual individual's credentials

11:34shall be acceptable to the engineering

11:36division of the city's department of

11:38public works and the city's conservation

11:40commission. The individuals shall be

11:43responsible for checking the site

11:44before, during, and after storm of

11:48construction plan

11:53and the approved erosion control plan.

11:55The applicant shall grant this

11:56individual's complete authority of the

11:58site as it relates to storm water and

12:01erosion controls. Number six,

12:03landscaping. A detailed landscaping plan

12:06for the site shall be reviewed and

12:08further conditioned during site plan

12:10review process. The landscaping plan

12:13shall be more robust than is required by

12:15the zoning ordinance and shall provide

12:17shade, canopy, and use native plants to

12:20improve habitat. The applicant and all

12:22subsequent owners shall maintain the

12:25landscaping at the site for the duration

12:27of the use. Again, I'll read the new

12:29language for number seven, trailside

12:31landscaping and maintenance. The

12:34applicant shall provide landscaped areas

12:36along the site's boundary with the

12:38Asabet River Rail Trail with a

12:40landscaping plan deemed acceptable

12:43to the site plan review committee

12:45through the site plan review process.

12:48New language the area between the

12:49existing sites fence and the edge of the

12:52trail pavement shall be considered for

12:54additional trailside landscaping

12:56including areas on city property.

13:00The applicant shall be responsible for

13:02maintaining these landscape areas in a

13:04manner deemed acceptable to the site

13:06plan review committee through the site

13:08plan review process. Number eight,

13:10pedestrian access to the rail trail. As

13:13part of the site plan review process,

13:15the applicant shall address pedestrian

13:17access from the site to the abiding

13:19Asabet River Rail Trail.

13:21>> Madam Chair,

13:22>> I'm sorry.

13:22>> Madam Chair, over here.

13:23>> Oh, councelor Fchillo.

13:25>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Ju just a quick

13:26question on this note. I see that the

13:28site plan review is going to address

13:29this. I know that you had mentioned that

13:31you got an informal site plan with this

13:32project. Yes or no? I I don't know if I

13:34remember that from the um

13:36>> from when we first discussed this.

13:37>> Sure. Through the chair. So, we we

13:39appeared before the site plan committee

13:40informally before the public hearing. Um

13:43and they also talked about the project

13:45um last week at their meeting. We'll

13:47have formal site plan review um

13:48following special permit process.

13:50>> Gotcha. And so there I assume there was

13:51some uh preliminary discussion about

13:54having public access. I just think

13:55that's a really unique, you know,

13:56obviously this is your property. This is

13:58something you're bringing, but kind of

13:59shows that you're really looking to

14:00service with the community. Um, you

14:02know, obviously would strongly love to

14:04see that. You know, it's a it's a large

14:06property. I got a chance to go by the

14:07other day and take a look. I regularly

14:08drive down Jefferson to get home. So,

14:10um, you know, just encouraged by that

14:13and obviously we'll let site plan review

14:14take a look at that. But, um, would be

14:16neat to see some kind of ability to have

14:18access from there.

14:19>> And it's my understanding, and attorney

14:21Faulner can correct me, that it wasn't

14:23public pedestrian access. It was the

14:25people on the property who rather than

14:28having to go down Jefferson around the

14:30corner and then get to the rail trail

14:31could just go out their backyard.

14:32>> It would just be for the site itself.

14:35>> That would that would be the intent.

14:36Councelor Fill um so that the residents

14:38wouldn't have to um go roundabout to get

14:41to the trail right in their backyard.

14:42>> Gotcha. Okay. Thank you for the

14:44clarification. Thank you, Madam Chair.

14:46>> Councelor Prosiato.

14:47>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um on in regards

14:50to that pedestrian access trail, is

14:52there a way to kind of like narrow this

14:54down so that it is only tenants or um uh

14:58occupants that are currently on that

15:00property that live there that have

15:02access to that? Um cuz it's pretty vague

15:04right here. Pedestrian, you know, as as

15:06councelor Chillo mentioned, he thought

15:08it was for public access as well. And I

15:10I don't want to make that mistake. I

15:12want that to be pretty distinct in that

15:14wording.

15:15>> Could we add in shall address P

15:20shall address the pedestrian access of

15:23the tenants.

15:24>> I was I was thinking um perhaps we

15:27change pedestrian to resident shall

15:29address resident access to the site.

15:35>> And it's possible that they'll decide

15:37that it's not even feasible. I know

15:39there is a fence and that means figuring

15:41out how to put a door in that fence and

15:44it may not be but if it's possible it

15:47would they're not that far from the

15:51trail by going through the parking lot

15:52that's next to them too. But is

15:54everybody okay with changing pedestrian

15:57to resident so it would read the

15:59applicant shall address resident access

16:01from the site to the abuing Asabet River

16:04>> residential.

16:05>> Didn't I say that residential? I think

16:09it's

16:12>> let the lawyer figure out what the

16:13grammar is.

16:14>> I I the I would suggest resident that

16:16implies that's the folks that live there

16:18um

16:19>> versus other neighbors.

16:21>> Yeah,

16:22>> because it is a residential neighborhood

16:23resident. Okay, thank you for making

16:27that clarification. Uh we will get to

16:29number nine. Lighting. Exterior lighting

16:31at the site shall be downward-facing and

16:34shielded to minimize impacts on

16:36neighboring properties with the lighting

16:38plan for the site to be reviewed and

16:40further condition during the site plan

16:42review process. Number 10, compliance

16:44with applicable laws. The applicant

16:46agrees to comply with all municipal,

16:49state, and federal rules, regulations,

16:51and ordinances as they may apply to the

16:53construction, maintenance, and operation

16:55of the use. and number 11 is our typical

16:58recording of the decision.

17:01So that's what we have with the two

17:04amended. Uh does anybody have issues

17:07with inputting in the suggestions from

17:10site plan and um incorporated by

17:14attorney Faul from the original draft to

17:17the amended. All right. And then the

17:20other change. Are there any other

17:21issues? Councelor Ducet. Madam Chair, I

17:24don't see any other issues involved with

17:26this. Uh, now I'd give a motion to

17:27approve as amended.

17:29>> There's a motion to approve as amended.

17:32I will let people know if they're not

17:34aware tomorrow's traffic commission

17:36meeting does have a discussion about

17:38making Jefferson parking on Jefferson be

17:41on one side only. There's concern

17:44Jefferson Street is becoming more used

17:47to avoid the four-way stop sign on

17:50mechanic and the light on mechanic and

17:52having cars parked on both sides becomes

17:56a pedestrian or vehicular nightmare. Um

17:59so that may be happening um by traffic

18:03commission.

18:04>> Is there further discussion? Council

18:05Orum.

18:06>> Thank you. I was waiting for the

18:07committee. I just had a couple

18:08questions. One in the larger plan you

18:11gave us. This plan here, it shows a

18:14dumpster area. I know you said there's

18:1618 spaces. Will that dumpster area

18:18affect any of those reallowed? Are those

18:22noted 18 parking spaces? It's kind of to

18:25the side. If you're looking at it, it's

18:28to the left side.

18:30>> Yes. So, council orms, our 18 spaces are

18:33we have two each in the garages that are

18:37below the townhouse units, one each

18:40outside those garages. And then the new

18:43garage that will be incorporated as part

18:45of the existing home has four spaces

18:48inside and two spaces out front. So,

18:50that gets us to 18. And so, that they

18:52won't they won't conflict with the

18:54dumpster location.

18:55>> So, and they won't be parking in that

18:56area. There will be a no parking or

18:58whatever requirement because There won't

19:00be parking there because it won't be

19:02>> thinking maybe, you know, it's going to

19:04be hard to service if they were parking

19:05there. That's why I was just curious.

19:08Um, I have two other questions, Madam

19:10Chair, if I may.

19:11>> Go ahead.

19:11>> Uh, dumpster, I'm sorry, the fill. Are

19:13you filling in any of this site?

19:16>> There will be fill. We'll be moving some

19:18within the site and then we're likely

19:20bringing in some fill, although that's

19:22still to be determined um to make sure

19:24that we can comply with our two and a

19:25half story height requirement. maybe

19:27putting in some fill in the back, but

19:29that'll be um um cleared up during site

19:32plan review.

19:33>> And the last question I've asked before,

19:35so you're familiar with it, the uh pros

19:37and cons of having it owner occupied

19:40versus rent rentals.

19:42I asked that at the meeting dur during

19:45the hearing,

19:46>> right? Yeah. The the the intent here is

19:48to have these be rental units, not

19:49ownership units. There'll be um the four

19:53um new units will be rentals and then

19:55Rando tends to live in continue to live

19:57in the existing home.

19:58>> Understandable. I just didn't know the

20:01um my view and I think another counselor

20:04just mentioned it recently is trying to

20:06get more owner occupied facilities. I

20:09don't know is there something that that

20:11just doesn't work well for this project

20:13or what what was the reason? Yeah, I

20:16mean the the the financials of the

20:18project were done um as a rental. So

20:21that's that's sort of how we've scoped

20:23it out and and done the proformers for

20:26um getting financing for the project is

20:28as a rental not as a condominium.

20:30>> Do you know if I don't I can find out if

20:32you don't across the street are those

20:34owner occupied that lodge the lodge unit

20:37>> Mr. Berdon's property. Yes, that is

20:39condominium.

20:40>> That is condominium. Okay. Thank you.

20:41Thank you madam chair.

20:43>> All right. Anybody else with questions?

20:45Councelor,

20:46I'm sorry. Councelor Irish.

20:48>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh during the u

20:50I can address this with the chair.

20:52During the public hearing, I had brought

20:53up that uh during construction, I didn't

20:55want any large vehicles or construction

20:58material being parked or staged on

21:00Jefferson. Is that something we should

21:02wait for site plan review, Madam Chair,

21:04or is that something that we could put

21:06in there as a condition? I believe you

21:08have enough sight. The applicant does

21:09have enough sight on on his property.

21:12I'm just concerned um with getting calls

21:15from the police department and things.

21:17We don't want any large vehicles parked

21:19on Jefferson Street while construction

21:21is is going on with the project. So, so

21:24through the chair, the the standard

21:26conditions in the site plan review

21:28decisions um require a construction

21:30management plan that's separate from the

21:32decision and that usually addresses

21:34those types of details in terms of where

21:36will parking be, what will the because

21:39there may be some circumstances where

21:40some deliveries might have to be on the

21:42street temporarily.

21:43>> There is municipal parking right there

21:45as well to the right.

21:46>> Correct.

21:47>> Yep. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

21:49>> All right. Councelor Presiato.

21:51>> Thank you, Madam Chair. All right, a

21:52question regarding the dumpster. Um, uh,

21:55do you do you feel like you do, um, ne

21:59necessarily need that like area for a

22:01dumpster? Is it is there a reason why

22:03we're not doing like individual trash

22:05cans for each unit um, instead of having

22:08like a big box of trash?

22:10>> Yeah, I think um, through the chair it's

22:13thought of as a resident amenity. um you

22:16know these are good size units but

22:18they're also fairly narrow and the and

22:20the garage parking is tandem. So um

22:23where we would put individual um

22:26receptacles wouldn't be ideal um and

22:28then having them all brought out to the

22:30street having you know that many units

22:32that many receptacles on the street we

22:33thought having on-site um recycling and

22:36trash would would make more sense.

22:37>> Okay. I just want to make sure that that

22:40you know those conditions are kept

22:41sanitary especially since they are right

22:43next to the rail trail. Um, you know, we

22:45will see, you know, I'm sure you see

22:47lots of wildlife that you don't

22:48typically see like in other streets and,

22:51you know, just the next block over. Um,

22:53I, you know, I've seen other dumpsters

22:56around town that are kind of unckempt

22:58and and filled over and, you know, the

23:00rats around them and stuff like that. I

23:01just want I just want to, you know,

23:04hopefully get away from that and and and

23:06or at least make sure the applicant is

23:08very well aware that these conditions,

23:10you know, must be or these um dumpsters

23:12got to kept be kept sanitary and and in

23:15turn that whole neighborhood will, you

23:16know, hopefully be clean and and rodent

23:19free.

23:20>> Understood.

23:21>> And council Piato, I know I I did

23:23actually look it up for the next um

23:25project that we have on our agenda. I

23:29know we typically have conditions for uh

23:32businesses about the dumpsters. I don't

23:36remember whether we've had too many. I

23:38also I'm not sure whether they could

23:40even have individual dumpsters. I think

23:42there's a limit of three apartments and

23:45this is more than that to be able to

23:47have individual trash cans. So, they

23:50have to have the dumpster I believe by

23:52code. But we could, if people want to

23:55and they're comfortable with it, add in

23:57language that talks about um screening

24:00and keeping the dumpster clean and that

24:02the dumpster is not picked up except

24:06between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7:00

24:08p.m. so that it also fits the noise

24:12issues that some people have with the

24:14early pickup of those.

24:17Would that be amendable to the

24:19applicant?

24:21>> Um, we we could. I mean, I would I would

24:24given the location, if you're looking at

24:26the site, this slopes down quite a bit.

24:28So, visibility from Jefferson Street of

24:30where this is going to go, I think, will

24:31be fairly limited. Um, I don't

24:33necessarily have a problem with the with

24:35the condition. I think it might be a bit

24:37overkill. It's just going to be five

24:40five uh families homes. I wouldn't

24:43expect that they're going to have a an

24:44issue with the with the sanitary

24:46facility of their homes, but

24:48>> I I would hope not. But I and maybe it's

24:50not the screening as much as keeping it

24:52covered and keeping it clean. Um because

24:54I know there is one next near me that

24:57has rat issues constantly and it's not

25:00covered and it's not kept clean. Um and

25:03so there's no way code enforcement

25:06tries, but with a condition of this I

25:08think that would be a little more

25:12helpful when code enforcement has to

25:15come into play.

25:23>> Madam Chair,

25:24>> the screening is important as as

25:26important as specifying that has to be

25:27covered and kept clean

25:31>> and that that can't be picked up except

25:33between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7.

25:36Councelor Ducet, did I see your hand or

25:38councelor Presi, did you have further

25:40>> went first? Or went first.

25:42>> I'm sorry. Councelor Orum.

25:43>> Oh, okay. Well, thank you. And I was

25:44just going to lead on to where you were

25:46with that working in public health. I'm

25:48hoping it'll be on a solid surface, not

25:50on grass or dirt, the dumpster as well

25:54as your language is perfect. It should

25:56be a covered sealed container, not

25:59something open that rats can get into.

26:01So I would suggest that be part of the

26:03lang excuse me part of the language.

26:05Thank you madam chair.

26:09>> Madam chair

26:10>> councelor ducet.

26:11>> Thank you. Um so what we're talking

26:13about is another condition right?

26:16>> Correct.

26:16>> Okay.

26:18>> Everybody okay with that?

26:19>> Yeah I got no problems. That's fair

26:21points. So this would be uh condition

26:24nine uh 10 and then 10 11 would be moved

26:26down.

26:27>> Uh works for me. that the solicitor can

26:29put it in wherever he feels is

26:31appropriate. Um, and I think that

26:34>> the solicitor between the solicitor and

26:36attorney Faulk, they can work out the

26:38language. I can just write up something

26:40for my notes that we want language that

26:42it's

26:42>> and it's based on the boiler plate for

26:44businesses as far as doing it for those.

26:46>> Yes.

26:48Covered clean and the hours

26:51and do we want that it is on a pad? Was

26:54that your plan to put it on a concrete

26:56pad?

26:56>> Can be. Yep.

26:57>> Okay.

27:01Okay. So, with the addition of that,

27:04everybody's okay. Councelor Vital,

27:06sorry.

27:06>> I was just listening to the comment of

27:09overkill. Number 10 talks about

27:12compliance with municipal

27:14regulations and laws and so forth and

27:17and

27:19the upkeep of dumpsters is already

27:21listed in our mun, you know, and

27:23municipal ordinances.

27:26We you mentioned the sound ordinance

27:28about coming in between 7 and 7. That's

27:29already an ordinance. So why would we

27:31need to reiterate it when it says here

27:33they have to follow all local

27:35>> I don't know that there's anything about

27:37dumpsters being specifically kept

27:39covered and kept clean. There is hours

27:43about uh truck traffic between or

27:46construction noise between 7:00 a.m. and

27:49700 p.m. but not necessarily dumpster

27:53pickup between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.

27:56or or before after those hours. So, I

27:59think it's a common

28:01inclusion in business

28:05special permits. every single one that I

28:08looked at had language about the

28:10dumpster. Um,

28:12>> yeah.

28:14>> And I think the the compliance is sort

28:17of similar to the language that's at

28:19number one, construction in accordance

28:22with applicable laws. Um, where then we

28:25also then added in in site plan review

28:28some specificity of what they want them

28:30to make sure that they're looking at.

28:36So does that help?

28:39>> Okay. So I think we had a motion to

28:43approve as amended. Can we consider this

28:47additional piece as part of the

28:49amendments?

28:49>> Additional amendments. Yes.

28:51>> All right. Is there further discussion?

28:54Seeing none, all those in favor? One,

28:57two, three, four, five.

29:00Okay.

29:03Um, we meet again on Monday next week.

29:09What I think would be better is to

29:12suspend to have this referred to the

29:14solicitor to be put in proper form and

29:17then that gives some time to have it on

29:20the following agenda for an actual vote

29:23of the full body. Does that work for you

29:26for it sort of keeps you in a close uh

29:29schedule, but it's not real real quick.

29:33So, um,

29:34>> no, that works. Thank you.

29:35>> Works for everybody.

29:36>> All right. Any other questions on this

29:39one? Are we all good to go?

29:41>> Thank you very much, folks.

29:43>> Thank you.

29:44>> Thank you, Mr. N.

29:52All right, give them time to move out

29:55and we will take up our second item on

29:58the agenda, which is order number

30:01261009819,

30:03the application for a special permit

30:05from attorney Christopher Flood on

30:07behalf of Boston Bruins LLC to

30:10construct, own, and operate a drive-thru

30:12only coffee shop in an existing building

30:15at 2 Mount Royal Avenue. So, attorney

30:18Flood, if you can introduce

30:22who you have with you,

30:26please, if you have any opening remarks.

30:29>> I'm an attorney from Malro. My address

30:31is at 14 Winthre Street in Malro. And

30:33with me tonight is Nicholas Salison from

30:36Stonefield Engineering and Design. He

30:38was also with me at the public hearing.

30:40We were here two weeks ago on September

30:4214th and told you about a um seven brew

30:46drive-thru coffee shop that we hope to

30:48install over on um to Mount Royal A. So,

30:52I did submit a draft of the special

30:56decision, excuse me, the the special

30:57permit decision and I did see some

31:01comments that were emailed to me um from

31:04the various city personnel. We're ready

31:07to go over it with you and take your

31:09comments to see what we need to add to

31:11get this finalized.

31:12>> All right. I just have to I had the

31:15right documents, but I moved over the

31:17wrong thing. Uh, do you want have any

31:19opening remarks or do you just want me

31:21to get right into the manager's

31:22comments?

31:23>> Go right to it.

31:24>> Okay.

31:27So, manager's comments for Boston Bruins

31:30LLC

31:33from Jeffrey Goen, the Marble Fire

31:36Chief. I'd spoken with Jeffrey Emanuel

31:38and we had no additional comments

31:41from Bill Payton, the building

31:44commissioner. Should there be conditions

31:46regarding hours of operation and noise

31:48levels? I have seen articles regarding

31:50loud music coming from other locations

31:52around the country running late into the

31:54evening.

31:56From

31:59Paul Dunwy from the board of health, I

32:01believe conditions regarding hours of

32:03operation and compliance with city noise

32:05ordinance be added to this draft

32:07decision.

32:08from Chief Georgie from the Marorrow

32:11Police Department. I would agree with

32:13the suggestions that conditions about

32:15noise levels for the business be added,

32:18although it is further up the street.

32:20The residents of the Blind Street

32:22neighborhood have dealt with noise

32:23issues from Apex already.

32:26And from Priscilla Ryder, I've reviewed

32:30the draft special permit conditions for

32:32Boston Bruins to Mount Royal Avenue

32:34proposal and have the following

32:36comments. a condition should be added

32:38regarding landscaping as this is a

32:40prominent site viewed by people coming

32:42off the highway. So we will want it to

32:45look its best. So adding the usual

32:47landscape language would be appropriate

32:49as shown here. The area noted as lawn in

32:52the center of the project could use some

32:53landscaping too which I would suggest

32:56during the site plan review process. So

32:58she is suggesting adding landscaping. A

33:01detailed landscaping plan for the site

33:03shall be reviewed and further

33:04conditioned during the site plan review

33:06process. The landscaping plan shall be

33:09more robust than is required by the

33:11zoning ordinance and shall provide

33:12shade, canopy, and use native plants to

33:16improve habitat and shall enhance the

33:17curb appearance along Route 20. The

33:20applicant and all subsequent owners

33:22shall maintain the landscaping at the

33:23site for the duration of the use.

33:27As this site falls within the water

33:29supply protection district to the backup

33:31water supply, I just note a correction

33:33that will need to be made to the plans

33:35is that the lot coverage required in

33:37businessowned areas is 70% in this water

33:41supply protection district. They are

33:43proposing 66% so this has been met. We

33:47are looking for drainage water quality

33:49improvements during the site plan review

33:51process. And from

33:54Mr. Dr. Deersio from engineering. I

33:57request the following additional

33:58conditions. First, we have a standard

34:01condition for special permits related to

34:04storm water controls. Storm water and

34:06erosion control management. The

34:08applicant shall ensure that its site

34:10superintendent during construction of

34:12the project is comp competent in storm

34:14water and erosion control management.

34:17This individual's credentials shall be

34:19acceptable to the engineering division

34:21of the city's department of public works

34:23and the city's conservation commission.

34:25The individual shall be responsible for

34:27checking the site before, during, and

34:29after storm events during weekends and

34:31evenings when storms are predicted. This

34:33individual shall ensure that no

34:35untreated storm water leaves the site

34:37consistent with the states and the city

34:39storm water regulations.

34:41This individual shall ensure compliance

34:44with the approved sequence of

34:45construction plan and the approved

34:47erosion control plan. The applicant

34:49shall grant this individual complete

34:51authority of the site as it relates to

34:53storm water and eros erosion controls.

34:56And second, the following condition

34:58related to long-term storm water

35:00management. The site design shall be

35:03revised to include measures for storm

35:05water management. The project should

35:07meet the DP storm water standards to the

35:10maximum extent practicable. The storm

35:12water management design shall be

35:15reviewed and approved by the city

35:16engineer as part of the site plan review

35:19committee. So we have three potential

35:23additions um as attorney flood did not

35:26do as attorney Faulk did and revise his

35:28draft. Um but you don't have any issues

35:32with adding those. I guess we can have

35:33that discussion as we go through the

35:36actual

35:39draft special permit application.

35:42>> I did forward those to my client and I

35:44think they were fine with those.

35:46>> Okay.

35:46>> I think I was not as familiar as the

35:48process. Attorney Faulk. He does a lot

35:49more of these than I do.

35:50>> Yes.

35:51>> And I was uh first see whether or not

35:53that's something that your board says

35:55yes, we agree. Put that in or if we just

35:58automatically do it when we see it from

35:59the the board members. And I'm hearing

36:01we should have done it.

36:02>> You you certainly can or you cannot and

36:05then we can have the discussion and and

36:08typically we go with recommendations

36:10from site plan or from the manager

36:12>> and all of those are acceptable. So I

36:14will add those to the revised agreement.

36:16>> All right. So we have the notice of

36:19decision

36:20grant of a special permit

36:23for order number 2610089

36:279819.

36:29The city council of the city of Marble

36:31grants the application for a special

36:33permit to Boston Bruins LLC. The

36:35applicant to construct, open, and

36:37operate a drive-thru coffee shop at the

36:39premises as provided in this decision

36:42and subject to the following findings of

36:44fact and conditions. Number one, Boston

36:47Bruins LLC is a limited liability

36:49company with an address of 405 Catitu

36:52Road, Framingham. The applicant is the

36:55prospective tenant of the property

36:57located at 2 Mount Royal Avenue being

37:00shown as parcel 33 and 33B on assessor's

37:03map 79. The site the site's located in

37:07the business Bz zoning district in

37:09accordance with chapter 650 section 17

37:12of the city code of Malber applicant

37:14seeks to construct open and operate a

37:16drive-through

37:18coffee shop. I didn't catch that the

37:21first time around. Coffee shop at the

37:22premises. A drive-thru requires a

37:25special permit in the business B

37:27district. The applicant by and through

37:29its council filed with the city clerk of

37:31the city of Marble an application for a

37:33special permit for the use.

37:36In considerate, in connection with the

37:38application, the applicant submitted a

37:40certified list of a butters filing fees

37:42and a detailed site plan entitled Boston

37:45Bruins LLC proposed

37:497 coffee shop by Stonefield Engineering

37:52and Design 120 Washington Street, Salem

37:562011 or sweet 2011 Salem, Massachusetts

37:59with the last revised date of April

38:0116th, 2026. Is that supposed to be Brew

38:057? because that's what the

38:07>> seven brew and I just carried it in the

38:09word brew when I updated it.

38:10>> Okay, reading through it, it's just like

38:13there's missing a word there. Um, the

38:15applicant was certified by the building

38:18commissioner of the city of Marorrow

38:19acting on behalf of the city planner for

38:21the city of Marorrow as having complied

38:23with rule four items A through M of the

38:25rules and regulations promulgated by the

38:27city council. Pursuant to the rules and

38:30regulations, the city council

38:32established a date for a public hearing

38:34on the application and the city clerk

38:37not uh determined that notice of the

38:39same was provided to a butters. City

38:42council held its public hearing on

38:44Monday, September 14th at 8:00 p.m. and

38:46the hearing was closed.

38:49The applicant through its

38:50representatives provided testimony at

38:52the public hearing detailing the use

38:54describing its impact upon municipal

38:56services, the neighborhood and traffic.

38:59At the public hearing, no one from the

39:00public spoke in opposition to the

39:02proposal. Based on the above, the city

39:05council makes the following findings and

39:07takes the following actions. The

39:09applicant has complied with all the

39:11rules and regulations promulgated by the

39:13Marbor city council as they pertain to

39:15special permit applications. B. The city

39:18council finds that the alteration of the

39:20site to allow the applicant to

39:22construct, own, and operate a drive-thru

39:23only coffee shop at 2 Mount Royal Avenue

39:26would not be detrimental to the

39:28neighborhood.

39:29The city council finds that the proposed

39:31use of the sites and appropriate use and

39:33in harmony with the general purpose and

39:35intent of the zoning ordinance of the

39:37city of Malber when subject to the

39:39appropriate terms and conditions as

39:40provided herein. City council makes

39:43these findings subject to the completion

39:45and inherence by the applicant. its

39:47successors and or assigns to the

39:49conditions more fully set forth herein.

39:52The city council pursuant to its

39:54authority under Massachusetts general

39:56laws chapter 48 and the zoning ordinance

39:59of the city of Malver hereby grants the

40:01applicant a special permit to construct

40:04own and operate a drive-through only

40:05coffee shop in an existing building at 2

40:08Mount Royal Avenue at the site as shown

40:10on the site plan filed subject

40:15to the following conditions. Which

40:17condition shall be binding on the

40:18applicant, its successors and or

40:20assigns? Number one, construction in

40:23accordance with applicable laws.

40:25Construction and/or demolition of

40:27structures on the site is to be in

40:29accordance with all applicable building

40:32codes and zoning regulations in effect

40:34in the city of Malber and the

40:35Commonwealth of Massachusetts and shall

40:37be performed according to the site plan

40:40as may amended may be amended during

40:43site plan review. Number two, site plan

40:46review. The issuance of the special

40:48permit is further subject to detailed

40:50site plan review by the site plan review

40:52committee in accordance with the city of

40:54Marro site plan review ordinance prior

40:56to the issuance of the permit. Any

40:59additional changes, alterations,

41:00modifications or amendments as required

41:03during the process of site plan review

41:05shall be further conditions to this

41:07special permit. Subsequent site plan

41:09review shall be consistent with the

41:11conditions of the special permit and the

41:13site plan submitted, reviewed, and

41:15approved by the city council as the

41:17special permit granting authority.

41:19Number three, modification of plans.

41:22Notwithstanding conditions one and two

41:24above, the city council or the site plan

41:27review committee may make engineering

41:29changes to the plan so long as said

41:31changes do not change the use as

41:33approved here in or materially increase

41:36the impervious area of the use, reduce

41:38the green area, alter traffic flow or

41:41increase the size, shape or position of

41:43the buildings. All is shown on the site

41:45plan. Number four, incorporation of

41:48submissions, all plans, photo rendering,

41:50site evaluations, briefs, and other

41:51documentation submitted by the applicant

41:54as part of the application and as

41:56amended or revised during the

41:57application hearing process before the

41:59city council and or the city council's

42:01urban affairs committee are herein

42:03incorporated into and become a part of

42:05this special permit and become

42:07conditions and requirements of the same

42:09unless otherwise altered by the city

42:11council. The detailed site plan entitled

42:14Boston Bruins LLC proposed 7 Brew Coffee

42:17Shop

42:19by Stonefield Engineering and Design 120

42:23Washington Street, Sweet One 2011,

42:25Salem, Massachusetts,

42:27with the last revision date of April

42:2916th, 2026. The site plan is attached

42:33here to and incorporated therein. Number

42:36five is lighting. Exterior lighting at

42:38the site shall be downward-f facing and

42:40shielded to minimize impacts on

42:42neighboring properties. And number six

42:44is the recording of the decision, our

42:47standard language.

42:50>> Madam chair,

42:51>> councelor Ducet,

42:52>> thank you. Um, so there are three

42:55conditions which is to be added to this,

42:57right? Because we're already short on

42:58conditions. So there's the landscaping,

43:01storm water control management, and

43:03long-term storm water management, right?

43:05>> Correct.

43:05>> Okay. Um and then uh was question uh the

43:12date of the plan is April 1626. There

43:16has been no updates since then.

43:19>> That is correct.

43:20>> Okay. I just wanted to confirm that for

43:21my own sake, but thank you.

43:23>> That's all right. And then I do have a

43:26couple of um questions that I would like

43:28to propose as if we want to add

43:31additional conditions based some on the

43:33comments from the um department heads.

43:36The first one is um hours of operation

43:39and noise and I had looked up a couple

43:43of

43:46prior

43:47um special permits that we had done. I

43:51think we typically have hours in

43:53business operations and I believe you

43:55told us what your hours were. I remember

43:575:00 am but I don't remember the ending.

44:01>> 5:00 a.m. uh sorry 5:30 a.m. to 1000

44:06p.m. Sunday through Thursday and then

44:095:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. uh Friday and

44:13Saturday.

44:15>> I'm sorry. What was um Friday and

44:17Saturday? 5:30 a.m. to 11 p.m.

44:21>> And how about Sunday?

44:23>> Uh 5:30 a.m. to 10 p.m.

44:26>> Okay. So, are you Sunday through

44:28Thursday? I put the S. Um

44:36All right. Does anybody have objections?

44:38So, I know we have a gas station open 24

44:41hours. We have um although we do

44:44condition it on an annual basis, we have

44:46a restaurant open 24 hours. There is one

44:50one of the McDonald's. Um I saw

44:52councelor Ducet's hand first.

44:54>> Yeah, thank you madam chair. Um these

44:56are reasonable hours for a coffee shop.

44:58Uh I mean Dunkin Donuts opens up just as

45:01early but they close much earlier. So if

45:04you get late people going for coffee,

45:05good for you. Um but yeah that I don't

45:10see any issues with ours.

45:12>> Council Presiato.

45:15>> Okay. um

45:17>> I I am wondering about the the um noise

45:20issues and if we could limit the hours

45:22of noise if the

45:25>> um if they are going to be open 5:30 to

45:2711:00 p.m. Um I don't know how the the

45:30ordinances affect that in terms of

45:33outdoor noise because

45:34>> the suggestion from the solicitor was to

45:36have the simple the applicant will abide

45:40by the noise ordinance. Um because I had

45:44questioned I believe I found in one of

45:48the other

45:50we had in the McDonald's that we

45:52recently did that there would be no loud

45:55music signage but it was for the cars

45:57waiting in line. Um my understanding and

46:01I actually did go to a seven brew when I

46:03was in Missouri just to kind of check it

46:05out. Um, I went on a weekday in the

46:08afternoon and there was not the noise

46:12that I anticipated and I asked the

46:15person who brought me my drink. Um, and

46:17he said they asked to have it turned

46:20down because they can't hear you when

46:22you tell them what you want.

46:24>> Okay.

46:25>> So hopefully that would happen at this

46:28one. that loud noise that you hear when

46:30you do a re any kind of search um and

46:35listen to the the videos that are out

46:37there. It's very loud when they open

46:40those doors at 5:30. So, if they choose

46:43to do that and there are neighborhood

46:44complaints, then I think that there

46:46would be code enforcement checking the

46:49um the noise level.

46:51>> Quick quick question.

46:53>> Just you go. Um,

46:55>> so I think a simple the the applicant

46:57will abide by the um the code the noise

47:02ordinance in the code.

47:03>> Do you know what the hours are for I

47:05think that the cut off is 9:00 p.m. but

47:07I don't know what the

47:08>> I don't know if there's any hours. I

47:10think I know a resident who complained

47:12about noise that he had constantly and

47:15it was just the where he was versus the

47:20commercial building that it hummed

47:22constantly and he could hear it all the

47:24time. Um, so I don't know. I actually

47:27didn't look it up, but I I think if

47:29there's allowed noise regardless of the

47:32time of day that they're

47:35>> Madam Chair, if I can just point of

47:37information on the noise, uh the state

47:39does have regulations. It's under 310

47:41CMR 7.00.

47:44Uh it talks about being 10 dB over the

47:47normal noise. So, as you mentioned, if

47:49you have an industry that has a normal

47:51noise, then it's difficult. But

47:53excessive to the 10 dB is where that

47:56state code uh falls into place. Thank

47:59you.

48:00>> So, are you okay with having something

48:02in there that just says you must meet

48:04the uh noise the ordinance regarding

48:09noise?

48:09>> Yes.

48:10>> Okay. Um

48:12>> Madam Chair,

48:13>> oh, I'm sorry, Councelor Navy, I did

48:14have your hand up.

48:15>> That's okay. Um just a point of

48:16clarification, there are no speakers,

48:19right? So for people who are paying

48:20attention at home, this is because of

48:22music and other noises coming from the

48:24business because everybody everyone's

48:26taken in a personto person with an iPad

48:28or something along those lines.

48:29>> It's a individual person that takes

48:31orders from the cars using a a tablet or

48:34iPad or something along those lines.

48:35>> So it's music loud. Is there like a

48:38voice like a voice loudspeaker or

48:39something like that?

48:41>> No.

48:43>> There there will not be one at your

48:46correct

48:46>> location. No squawk box or menu board

48:49that you typically see at a normal.

48:50>> No, but I mean there were speakers

48:51within the building itself that were

48:56could be heard throughout the location

49:00and the surrounding property. So, it was

49:02speakers. I don't know if they were

49:03inside or outside the building, but it

49:05was coming from the employees. When they

49:08opened the door, they immediately turned

49:10on a speaker blasting music.

49:13Is that covered by the

49:16>> if it's too loud

49:17>> you have that says it's um abide by the

49:19noise ordinances.

49:20>> I believe there's a decel level that's

49:24acceptable and if it's above that then

49:27there's an issue.

49:28>> They would have a the ability to change

49:30the volume but turned off as

49:32>> which sounded like the employee I talked

49:34to said they need to do that because

49:36they can't hear people driving up and

49:39ordering their drinks. But

49:42>> did there sorry there will be the

49:45additional noise of the highway next to

49:47the coffee shop. So I'm I'm sure the

49:49decibel levels will be higher than than

49:51normal.

49:52>> Correct. There is normal traffic on

49:54Route 20. There's normal traffic on the

49:57highway.

49:58>> I can I can hear traffic from my house.

50:02>> Yeah. What what I'm trying to to say is

50:04that um you would probably have to play

50:07even louder to overcome the sound of the

50:10highway. Um and and at that point, you

50:12know, the disciple levels might be, you

50:15know, way over what what is safe for for

50:18the people that are actually there. But

50:20I I don't know. I'm not

50:21>> I don't think it's our understanding

50:22that there's music played outside.

50:24>> Okay. Or anything like that. So my

50:26understanding is you saw people open the

50:28doors and you heard it in or there was

50:29music in New Orleans. There was music

50:31played outside.

50:32>> I was in Missouri, but the videos that I

50:34saw were in other locations across the

50:36country. And it was the comment was that

50:38the even the employee unlocking the door

50:41at to be open at 5:30 said,

50:44>> "Why do I have to blast this music?"

50:47>> So I I guess a better question would be

50:49is are there going to be outdoor

50:50speakers at the establishment?

50:52>> They typically have outdoor speakers to

50:54create a ambiance of

50:56>> welcoming. Okay. So there will be noise

50:58out from from the outside of the

51:00building. Okay.

51:01>> Councelor Ducet, did you have further

51:03questions or comments?

51:04>> Uh, comments about Yeah. com comments

51:06about the speakers and everything. I

51:08think the biggest issue isn't the

51:09necessarily the coffee shop, but the

51:11people coming in to buy coffee that love

51:13to blast their radios. I mean, that's

51:16where the real noise comes from. Nothing

51:18personal, but you're going to have to

51:19pay no play noise cop to your customers

51:22if their things are too loud. I mean,

51:24let's just put that out there, right?

51:26Um, but uh I think you know the this

51:31where it's located close to 20 close to

51:33495 the the ambient noise of traffic is

51:37going to muffle and destroy any of the

51:38noises that is coming from this little

51:40shop. I mean it's not a big shop. This

51:43thing looks like one of the old uh Kodak

51:46photo mart almost, you know, drop off

51:48things, you know. Um maybe a little

51:51bigger. I'm not necessarily sure, but I

51:52get that impression, you know. Um,

51:55>> I have a picture.

51:56>> Yeah. No, I've seen the pictures, too,

51:58you know. Uh, by the way, did they call

52:01it Boston Brewing where where you were

52:03or something else?

52:04>> No, because I think that's the LLC. It's

52:06called Seven Brew, and Brew Seven Brew

52:09is a a circular emblem.

52:11>> The franchise

52:12>> is your franchise, but Seven Brew is the

52:14master franchise.

52:16>> Thank you for the clarification. I

52:17appreciate that,

52:18>> Madam Chair. Council Orum,

52:19>> just a recommendation. And we did this

52:21on McDonald's on Maple Street when they

52:23were renovating. We had noise concerns

52:25there as well in the parking lot. People

52:27pull in, they put the radio up and uh we

52:30required signage just that says please

52:33if you're parking here, keep your radio

52:35to a limit. So that that's a suggestion.

52:38We did it for McDonald's.

52:39>> We did. And that's where I got the

52:42this suggestion of maybe not that it

52:45would be the people in the queue, but

52:48the actual noise itself emanating from

52:50the speakers that they have. And the

52:53solicitor had just suggested making sure

52:56that they abide by the noise ordinance.

53:00But to me, there are two separate

53:02things. one is,

53:05and I haven't been through the

53:07McDonald's drive-thru to know if that

53:09sign is there or if there are any issues

53:12of people playing

53:15too loud while they're parked, waiting

53:18in the drive-thru. I've been at other

53:20drive-thrus, and to me, the noise isn't

53:23all that loud within a car.

53:25>> Madam Chair, this was more for people

53:27that not are going through the

53:28drive-thru, but park there and play

53:30their radio loud. And

53:31>> they don't park there. they drive

53:32through that

53:33>> understandable on this, but I was just

53:35trying to relate to the signage how that

53:37was helpful for there. It obviously

53:40you're not going to allow parking, but

53:41it could be helpful to put a sign. I've

53:43seen signs at McDonald's. Not that I go

53:45there all the time, but uh please

53:47refrain from smoking at the window,

53:49things like that. So, signage can be

53:51helpful. It helps your employees, too,

53:53if they're your employees. Thank you,

53:55Madam Chair.

53:57>> All right. The other issue that I had

53:59was uh queuing as I had said one of the

54:04concerns that I had read about although

54:06it wasn't as so obvious at the one that

54:08I visited because it was later in the

54:11day and there was no special giveaway

54:13but when giveaways are given and I

54:16understand today was a special today was

54:19national coffee day and something was

54:22being given out at seven brews. Um so we

54:26had in the special permit when we

54:30revised for Chipotle to go in language

54:33about traffic circulation. Um

54:38that the city site plan may require

54:40modifications to the site's internal

54:42traffic circulation if it's determined

54:44by the police chief that said design

54:47causes an excessive number of vehicle or

54:49pedestrian accidents. And I don't know

54:51that we want them to modify. What we

54:54want them to do is either shut them down

54:57like we did with Canes

55:00>> or to

55:03prevent drivers from blocking Route 20

55:05or Mount Royal because I think it could

55:08be both. Either or both. So I don't know

55:10if we want language added in that.

55:14And I think with the very first

55:16marijuana store we had, we actually had

55:19police presence for the first six

55:20months. We don't want that because it's

55:22not every day. I don't think that this

55:24occurs. It's when they do their

55:25giveaways. Um,

55:28but the concern is valid. Um, and so I

55:32don't know if we can put a language in

55:35there that if there is a queueing issue,

55:38then the police chief can I I think they

55:42can do it regardless of whether it's in

55:44there, but I'm more comfortable with it

55:46in there. And counselor Ducet, I did see

55:48your hand in.

55:49>> Thank you. Um I you your point extremely

55:52well taken especially with Raisin Cane

55:55because that was you know we when we got

55:57the Raisin Cane in there there was

55:59traffic going almost all the way to 495

56:01exit people coming in to go to Raisin

56:03Cane because it was the only one in this

56:05area at the time. The pro you know like

56:08either it'd be nice if you guys could

56:10notify the police to say hey we're doing

56:12this event that may cause a surge in

56:15traffic. It would it behoove us to you

56:18guys tell us when you expect a spike in

56:20traffic so that if someone's that you

56:22know we can send someone there to keep

56:24an eye on it or intervene if necessary.

56:27I think maybe we need to do something

56:28like that because it will be sporadic

56:30but you know when it will happen and we

56:32don't. So how does that work out?

56:35>> Councilor Fillo I saw your hand and then

56:38I'll go back over.

56:39>> Thank you madam chair. Think on a

56:40similar vein, I'm I'm concerned about

56:42the queuing on Route 20, but I'm also

56:44concerned about queuing going back into

56:46the office park, right? There's there's

56:47nine existing tenants. I know that

56:49there's a mental health care facility

56:51there. There's a daycare facility there,

56:53right? I mean, any queuing existing

56:55there, I think, is is pretty

56:56inappropriate to the neighborhood that

56:58already exists. So, um, just being

57:00cognizant of that. That's kind of one of

57:01the things I keep getting stuck on is

57:03when the queuing goes beyond the 22 kind

57:07of queuing spots that exist, which based

57:09on what I've kind of researched and seen

57:11and like councilor Robi had mentioned, I

57:12know that these giveaways happen every

57:14now and again, but from what I've seen,

57:16the seventh of every month there's a

57:18giveaway because it's seven brew 7 and

57:21then they do flash deals. So twice a

57:23month there's going to be a flash

57:25giveaway where I mean from what I'm

57:28seeing online hundreds of cars are

57:31showing up at given times for these sort

57:32of things. So I guess I'm concerned and

57:34would appreciate some language that

57:36ensures that we're protected from

57:39something like this from happening

57:40because I'm not I'm not seeing where the

57:42cars go aside from the queuing. So I

57:44don't know if there's a kind of what

57:45happens when that when that happens like

57:47what have you guys done in the past? Is

57:49there kind of a safeguard that you guys

57:50usually use when this happens? Um, but

57:53similarly, I would I would appreciate

57:55some kind of language here.

57:57>> Do you have a a comment or

57:59>> Yeah, absolutely. Um, so typically when

58:02they have the deals, um, they'll bring

58:04in more experienced employees who can

58:06help manage the traffic. Um the seven

58:10brew uh tenant has also offered the

58:14solution of hiring a third-party traffic

58:16management company to help um you know

58:19remediate any congestion through site.

58:22Additionally, we're working with the

58:23owner CB CBE equities um who owns the

58:28office park as a whole um to ensure that

58:31you know the businesses of the offices

58:33and 7 Brew are working harmoniously

58:37>> and I I certainly commend the effort to

58:40bring in seasoned staff, but if you've

58:43got thousands of cars, that's not going

58:44to make any difference. If people want

58:47to come and there's a queueing issue,

58:49regardless of the stepping it, there's

58:53still going to be cars that don't have

58:55room to get in that line and are going

58:57to be flowing somewhere. Um, councelor

58:59Naven did,

59:03>> what are you giving away that is causing

59:06h I mean, I thought this was a coffee

59:08shop that had muffin tops. What are you

59:11possibly giving away?

59:13>> People love free things. It's almost

59:15like the McDonald's toys. This is the

59:18>> the craziness of

59:21>> consumerism.

59:23>> It's squish toys that you get your

59:25choice of color. So, you have to get

59:27there early before they run out of the

59:28color that you want. It's

59:30>> okay.

59:31>> Um I for I got an email.

59:33>> I'm not questioning whether or not

59:34people do it. I'm just curious what I

59:37mean. Don't get me wrong, I'll get in

59:38line for coffee, but I don't understand

59:40what it is.

59:42>> Um stuffed animals. um varies.

59:46>> Okay,

59:47>> Madam Chair.

59:48>> Oh, sorry.

59:49>> No, I'm council president.

59:51>> Thank you, committee.

59:52>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um I also had

59:54the exact same questions as council

59:56pushello based on the queueing. Um I

59:58mean the these there's one road that

1:00:01goes up to your queue, right? Um and

1:00:03that goes past um the hostage care that

1:00:06goes past the little sprouts um which is

1:00:08right in the same park as you guys. Um,

1:00:10I am worried about those businesses

1:00:13being affected by the traffic that may

1:00:15be caused by you guys. Um, right here

1:00:17the traffic study says 80 cars total u

1:00:20during the week in the mornings. I don't

1:00:21know what mornings encompass. I'm

1:00:24assuming between 5:30 and 12 um is your

1:00:28morning. Um, so that's a um that's quite

1:00:31a bit of cars coming in around those

1:00:33times. I'm assuming most of them come

1:00:34around peak time, which is early 5:30 to

1:00:36maybe 8 8:30. um would you probably see

1:00:39the bulk of the cars. Correct me if if

1:00:41I'm wrong, but um the um you know,

1:00:44everyone else is going into work at that

1:00:46same time, including people trying to

1:00:47get on to 495. Um and there there really

1:00:52is only one way to get into this coffee

1:00:55shop, right? And if you're going

1:00:56westbound on Route 20, you are kind of

1:00:59>> there's actually two. You can turn down

1:01:02Glenn Street and then go into Mount

1:01:04Royal or you can pass Glenn Street and

1:01:07then get Mount Royal where it comes out

1:01:09on 20.

1:01:10>> Yeah, but you can you have to be

1:01:13traveling eastbound in order to get

1:01:15>> Correct. Yeah. If you're traveling west,

1:01:17you would have to make an illegal Uturn

1:01:20at the light

1:01:21>> or go down Glenn if you know it's there.

1:01:24>> Yeah. Um

1:01:27or Landry Street and then go down Glen

1:01:28Street and Yes. Yeah.

1:01:30>> So for people who don't know it's there,

1:01:33they're not going to see the sign until

1:01:35they're past Glenn. So their only

1:01:37entrance is going to be Mount Royal off

1:01:40of 20.

1:01:41>> I wonder what that does when there are

1:01:43giveaways if people will see people

1:01:46doing some illegal maneuvers over at on

1:01:48that that first intersection onto Glenn

1:01:50Street. Um but but you know, aside from

1:01:53that, I'm still, you know,

1:01:55I would suggest um the addition of some

1:01:58like safety signs along Mount Glenn. Um

1:02:01I mean, um Mount Royal and um you know,

1:02:04just just having uh people that are

1:02:08going to um visit your business, just be

1:02:10aware that there are pedestrians nearby

1:02:12and then that they cross the parking

1:02:14lots that you will be driving through.

1:02:16Um and and that includes, you know,

1:02:18children and elderly. And I site plan

1:02:21will probably have them have that kind

1:02:23of signage on the property. Uh

1:02:26wayfairing signs I think are they're not

1:02:28considered signs they need special

1:02:30permits for or signed permits for they

1:02:33can just be included so site plan can

1:02:36make sure they do that. My concern is

1:02:38offsite the traffic on 20 that that's

1:02:41going to back up from Glenn or that's

1:02:44going to back up from the Mount Royal.

1:02:46And I know this is potentially brand new

1:02:49to Malber residents and surrounding

1:02:52communities. There is one in

1:02:54Springfield, so people may be aware of

1:02:56it for, but for the most part, people

1:02:59have no idea what this is and will be

1:03:02like I was the first time I went.

1:03:04>> There is no menu board that's really

1:03:06readily available. There's over

1:03:1077 different drinks that they offer. So

1:03:13if you don't know what you want, now the

1:03:16person waiting on you has got to tell

1:03:17you what your choices are. So the first

1:03:20couple of weeks as people learn that

1:03:21there's an app that you can download

1:03:23that then helps you make that decision

1:03:25so you know what you want when you get

1:03:27to the window um will help. But I think

1:03:31like raising canes when we were the

1:03:33first one, even if people knew, it was

1:03:36still a

1:03:40long line of people trying to get into

1:03:43the place. And it may be that there

1:03:45isn't an issue because people don't want

1:03:49to try something new and they know that

1:03:51they're they know the coffee shops that

1:03:52they currently go to and they'll

1:03:55continue to go to them. But

1:03:58I would rather have and and since it's

1:04:00now

1:04:02ev every

1:04:05seven on the 7th of every month plus

1:04:08special occasions to have that language

1:04:10of you will have a police presence. I

1:04:14would rather have if there's the backup

1:04:17versus making them have to have police

1:04:21there just because they're doing a promo

1:04:25even if there isn't an issue. So,

1:04:28councelor Naven,

1:04:29>> I'd like to hear a little bit more if

1:04:31you could about the the willingness and

1:04:33probably like past experience for

1:04:35engaging a third party traffic

1:04:36management consultant or whatnot. what

1:04:39what has the company used kind of in the

1:04:41past and how would that

1:04:43work?

1:04:44>> Um, so there hasn't been one that we've

1:04:47done with this would be our first for

1:04:49Boston Bruins. Um, but they would be

1:04:51willing to look into a third party.

1:04:54>> Um, whatever, you know, that would

1:04:56entail having a certified individual who

1:05:00is there on site able to flag and,

1:05:03>> you know, maneuver traffic. they would

1:05:05be there full-time or would they only be

1:05:08there when there were issues that they

1:05:10would then have to be called in?

1:05:13>> I would have to look into that. Okay.

1:05:15Okay. So, M madam chair, I'd be

1:05:16interested in maybe, you know, similar

1:05:18to what we did with the marijuana stores

1:05:20with the police, but not that far, but

1:05:22something with a with a traffic

1:05:24management consultant for the opening

1:05:26for a small period of time for the

1:05:28opening and then on giveaway days, you

1:05:32know, and then subject, you know,

1:05:33subject to review

1:05:35>> and also subject to the police being

1:05:37able to go in there regardless of what

1:05:39traffic management is or isn't able to

1:05:42manage

1:05:43>> as is there. Yeah. as their right. But I

1:05:46would be interested in having you I mean

1:05:48we certainly don't and I'll speak for

1:05:51myself. I don't want to in infringe on

1:05:53the business being able to open and

1:05:55succeed. But what we certainly don't

1:05:56want is the negative impacts that we're

1:05:58all talking about here without at least

1:06:00trying to come up with something that

1:06:02would say, "Hey, do this at the

1:06:03beginning. If it's working and it's not

1:06:06necessary, we can back off. But if not,

1:06:08then this will continue in perpetuity as

1:06:11right. I mean, this is good for

1:06:12business. If you're getting cues out

1:06:14onto 20 that are going to go a distance,

1:06:16that means you guys are making a lot of

1:06:17money. That's great. It's good for us.

1:06:19It's good for you. But also, let's put

1:06:21some of that, you know, revenue to

1:06:23mitigating some of the challenges.

1:06:26>> Was there language that you had seen?

1:06:27You had mentioned Chipotle and you had

1:06:29mentioned I forgot the

1:06:31>> language. Did I copy it? Um,

1:06:35police detail. The applicant, its

1:06:37successors, and are assigned shall

1:06:38employ a city of Marorrow police detail

1:06:40at the site during all operating hours

1:06:42for the first 60 days unless the chief

1:06:45of police determines in a letter that

1:06:47the police detail is not necessary. So,

1:06:49we could change police detail to traffic

1:06:51management

1:06:54employee.

1:06:55>> Was that for the um

1:06:56>> this was for the No, this was for the

1:06:58very first marijuana facility that we

1:07:00approved, the one on 20 wet

1:07:04>> east. Um

1:07:06>> because I think I thought I heard you

1:07:07say something about the chicken place

1:07:09that sort of said if the queue gets too

1:07:11much

1:07:12>> that they would not that they would

1:07:13notify.

1:07:14>> No, there was nothing.

1:07:16>> We didn't do it for raising canes and it

1:07:17was an issue.

1:07:17>> We didn't do it for canes. Um for

1:07:21>> um for the Chipoti it was that the site

1:07:26plan review committee may modify the

1:07:28traffic circulation, but to me I don't

1:07:32know that there's a way to modify that.

1:07:34The issue isn't the traffic circulation,

1:07:36it's that uh there are so many people

1:07:39that want to go there that you can't

1:07:41handle the traffic and so that backs up

1:07:44into surrounding communities. So I I

1:07:48thought maybe it would just be

1:07:51that they may require the police to

1:07:56be I guess getting back to whoever had

1:08:00suggested it at special days that the

1:08:03police be there to prevent the

1:08:07excessive number of vehicles.

1:08:10Um

1:08:12>> I would say the fir madam chair may

1:08:14>> councelor naven

1:08:15>> thank you uh madam chair um I would

1:08:17suggest the opening period I I mean I

1:08:21think the 60 days that we use for the

1:08:23marijuana stores I think works here as

1:08:26well right as you noted right it's an

1:08:27extensive menu you've got a lot um of

1:08:30firsttime customers coming in learning

1:08:32the process so that early period and

1:08:35then add and during special giveaways

1:08:38>> that that would be on site I will add if

1:08:40I could that during the opening periods

1:08:43they typically do a limited menu um you

1:08:46know as to not overwhelm new customers

1:08:48with the extensive menu that they

1:08:50already have. Um so limited to normal

1:08:53coffees, cold brews, uh milkshakes and

1:08:56smoothies that aren't too extensive.

1:08:58>> Yeah.

1:08:59>> Madam Chair,

1:09:01>> I'm sorry. Who was council or

1:09:03>> yeah that was one of my questions is you

1:09:05know when you get busy I'm glad you're

1:09:07going to get busy uh giveaways but what

1:09:09concerns me is if cars are queuing out

1:09:11on Route 20 they also have to exit out

1:09:14on Route 20 and you are right near 495's

1:09:18ramp. So if there's cars on Route 20 and

1:09:22a car is trying to go around them and

1:09:24then there's another car trying to come

1:09:25out because you got so many cars in

1:09:27there. I think you're going to need

1:09:29police detail and I think that's for the

1:09:32chief to decide or his traffic division.

1:09:35Uh it may happen maybe five times a

1:09:38year, but whatever the case is, I think

1:09:40there needs to be as noted a condition

1:09:44to indicate the police department shall

1:09:47be contacted, you know, and a detail

1:09:50shall be hired because that's a that's a

1:09:53city or state road. You can't just have

1:09:56private traffic mitigators out there.

1:09:58You need the police department out

1:09:59there. So, I suggest highly that there

1:10:01be a condition in there. It could be

1:10:03vague enough so you know, you don't have

1:10:05to do it every day, but at least when it

1:10:08does get congested because I'm very

1:10:10concerned that you're right next to the

1:10:11495 ramp. So, if there's car, as I said,

1:10:14if there's cars stacking up down to

1:10:17Glenn Street, let's say, cars trying to

1:10:19get to 495 going to have to go around

1:10:21them and there'll be people exiting at

1:10:24the same time. So, it's concerning. Um,

1:10:27I would suggest the committee do put

1:10:29that condition in. And just just one

1:10:32other note, point of information, the

1:10:34plan up there is dated June 10th, 2026.

1:10:38That I can see. I've read it on this,

1:10:39but I think it's also on your side date

1:10:41there, just as a point of information.

1:10:46>> Thank you, Madam Chair.

1:10:47>> All right, let me read the language that

1:10:50was in the marijuana special permit.

1:10:53Police detail. The applicant, its

1:10:54successors, and/or assigns shall employ

1:10:57a city of Marorrow police detail at the

1:10:59site during all operating hours for the

1:11:01first 60 days after the commencement of

1:11:04operations unless the chief of police

1:11:07determines in a letter filed with the

1:11:09city council that a police detail is not

1:11:11necessary during certain times of the

1:11:13day. At the end of the 60-day period, if

1:11:16the chief of police determines in a

1:11:18letter filed with the city council that

1:11:20a police detail is still necessary

1:11:22during all operating hours or certain

1:11:24times, then the applicant, its

1:11:26successors, and/or assigned shall

1:11:28continue to employ a city of Malbor

1:11:31detail until deemed unnecessary by the

1:11:34chief of police in a letter filed with

1:11:36the city council. In the event a city of

1:11:38Malber police detail is not available

1:11:40when required the applicant its

1:11:42successors and/or assigns shall obtain a

1:11:45private detail. So kind of leaves that

1:11:48and I believe if I remember correctly

1:11:51the chief actually did send a letter

1:11:54stating that it was no longer necessary

1:11:57to continue. Councelor Det.

1:11:59>> Thank you very much Madam Chair. Um I

1:12:02think 60 days is too much. I think 30

1:12:04days would be fine. Uh just because when

1:12:07when it came to the dispensaries like

1:12:09within two weeks they were the police

1:12:11chief was like yeah you don't need it

1:12:13you know.

1:12:13>> And I would agree except it's my

1:12:15understanding from what he said that for

1:12:16the first week two weeks they're going

1:12:19to be doing limited when it becomes the

1:12:21full menu then it's going to be back up

1:12:24and it's also once a month we need to

1:12:27find out more than one time. I think in

1:12:29special occasions, you know, like the

1:12:31giveaways and stuff like that,

1:12:33>> we need police detail for those. And I

1:12:35do think it's important that it's city

1:12:37police details, not a third party. I

1:12:39also consider more of a precedence that

1:12:42city, you know, traffic details is

1:12:45handled by the city, you know, Malro

1:12:47police, not a third party.

1:12:49>> And I would agree except I know there

1:12:50are times when Marorrow police cannot do

1:12:52it. And that's why you see other police

1:12:55who we delegate out. Well, I I think you

1:12:58need to give the police department the

1:13:00ability to say, "We don't have staffing.

1:13:02You need to have somebody, so you need

1:13:04to hire someone else."

1:13:05>> Agreed. Yes.

1:13:07>> Because they will say, "We don't have

1:13:08the staff to do it

1:13:10>> at that time." Yeah.

1:13:11>> But if the requirement is that somebody

1:13:14is there,

1:13:16the applicant will have to make sure

1:13:17that they hire from another police

1:13:20department that's willing to do extra

1:13:22time. Um

1:13:25so I saw a hand up. Councelor Presiato.

1:13:28>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um on that note,

1:13:30um you know, we if it does come to that

1:13:34and we do have to use Monroe PD to

1:13:36mitigate the traffic, we are using

1:13:38public resources. You know, the taxpayer

1:13:40is paying for that officer to be there

1:13:42for your business. Um so I just want to

1:13:45make

1:13:45>> No, actually it's not the business pays

1:13:48for the detail.

1:13:48>> I'm sorry, the clarification. Yeah.

1:13:50Okay. So then it's fine. Um, but I did

1:13:53have a another point to make that you

1:13:57you will have new customers, new people

1:13:58driving through that intersection,

1:14:00right? My

1:14:02um I just want to make a point that

1:14:04there all that new traffic, new

1:14:06customers that you will be receiving

1:14:07there. Um those are new trips going onto

1:14:11that ramp. So imagine that traffic just

1:14:14being put onto um this on-ramp, this

1:14:17intersection right here. So that to me

1:14:19puts a bit more strain on this really

1:14:21busy intersection or busy ramp to 495

1:14:24and also continuing onto Route 20. So I

1:14:26don't know if there's again this this

1:14:28goes on to to the other boards, but

1:14:30signage um clear signage that that

1:14:33states you know there's traffic incoming

1:14:35and or or whatever. But that would be an

1:14:38issue for me as well just in terms of

1:14:41safety. I know it was discussed at site

1:14:43plan, the concern that it was so close

1:14:45to the ramp for 495, but I think it was

1:14:48dealt with through signage and that the

1:14:52the driveway was far enough away that it

1:14:54didn't it couldn't prevent them from

1:14:57approving the um ANR that they did.

1:15:03We did also provide a traffic study that

1:15:06showed uh most of the traffic that

1:15:08they'd be expecting is already existing

1:15:10from Oh,

1:15:13>> but during

1:15:14>> but during your giveaways and during

1:15:16your promotional events um that would be

1:15:18a big increase in in that intersection,

1:15:21right? That's all.

1:15:21>> And people don't know what Seven Brew

1:15:24is. So as soon as they see there's

1:15:26already been a lot of posts on social

1:15:30media about the excitement for this

1:15:32coming to Marbor. So I don't know where

1:15:34the word's coming from but people are

1:15:36ready to get in line.

1:15:37>> Yeah. And and sorry councelor Patulo but

1:15:39um regarding the 30 days and keeping it

1:15:42at 60. My argument would be um the trial

1:15:45period is not one giveaway one

1:15:47promotional period. I think the trial

1:15:49period should be two um you know, one to

1:15:52say yes, we need it next time or you

1:15:54know, no, we don't need it and just kind

1:15:57of feel it off there. I I I don't know

1:15:58if it would be such a hindrance to you

1:16:00guys to just keep that as 60 days. Um

1:16:02you can still function as a business in

1:16:05in my eyes.

1:16:06>> Council Fill.

1:16:08>> Thank you, Madam Chair. And um I'll

1:16:09second that from Council Presiato. I

1:16:11completely agree. I think the 60-day

1:16:12window is appropriate just given Right.

1:16:14I know it depends on the month. I see

1:16:16that in September it looks like there

1:16:18were three giveaways. There was a

1:16:19September 1st one with a new menu, then

1:16:21there was a September 7th one, and then

1:16:23as councelor Roby said, the National

1:16:25Coffee Day. So, but from what I can see,

1:16:26it looks like October there might only

1:16:28be one, right? So, I' I'd like to see at

1:16:29least 60 days so we have an opportunity

1:16:31to at least do it twice if if those

1:16:33months just happen to only have one

1:16:35giveaway. Um, I want to touch quickly on

1:16:38the traffic study itself. Um, I know I

1:16:40had a few concerns because um, I know

1:16:44council Presci, you mentioned this a

1:16:45little bit and there was a little bit of

1:16:46discussion here, but um, the idea that

1:16:49most of the traffic being generated is

1:16:51pass by trips, right? So, existing

1:16:54traffic, people are driving by, kind of

1:16:56like when I see a Duncan, right? Oh, I

1:16:58didn't plan to go to this one, but I see

1:16:59it, I'm going to pull off, I'm going to

1:17:00go there. Um, I I just I know that the

1:17:04the claim was that 84 to 98% depending

1:17:07on the peaks is going to be pass by

1:17:09trips. I mean, I just think based on the

1:17:11promotions alone that we've heard, I

1:17:13think that those promotions, I know the

1:17:15promotion day is when we'll see a

1:17:17majority of that traffic, but I think it

1:17:18exists well beyond that as well. People

1:17:20hear about the promotion, oh, I missed

1:17:22it. Well, I still want to go there,

1:17:23right? Oh, I I missed this month. Well,

1:17:25I want to try it and then I'll go next.

1:17:27Um, I think that's what we run into. So,

1:17:29I do think this is a destination site. I

1:17:32think I think we're kind of over

1:17:34overcompensating for the amount of pass

1:17:36by trips. I also know that just this

1:17:38being new to Malro, I know that's been

1:17:39talked about a few times and fact that

1:17:41this is just the second one in

1:17:42Massachusetts. I can imagine similar to

1:17:44Canes that there's going to be a lot of

1:17:46traffic over that first period of

1:17:48window, right? I'm sure that, you know,

1:17:50in a year from now, two years from now,

1:17:52maybe it will be mostly pass by traffic.

1:17:54I just think in this kind of infant

1:17:56stage of this whole thing, it will

1:17:57definitely be destination traffic which

1:18:00will increase the traffic. I think in

1:18:02this corridor um in a lot of ways I I

1:18:04know my other concern is just the

1:18:08conclusion that there's really no impact

1:18:09on the knowledge park um existing

1:18:13infrastructure. I I think that in all

1:18:16honesty 100% of the trips there will be

1:18:18new traffic. I don't I don't think

1:18:19there's going to be any pass by traffic

1:18:21going down into Knowledge Park. I think

1:18:23all of that would end up being new

1:18:26traffic to that area. Um, just because

1:18:28I'd assume that the nine existing

1:18:29tenants, they're going to walk over and

1:18:31correct me if I'm wrong, but there is a

1:18:32walk-in window. So, they would walk to

1:18:34the walk-in window. So, I don't think

1:18:36they're they're generating any existing

1:18:38traffic, but they would generate new

1:18:39traffic to there. So, um, again, I'm a

1:18:42little concerned about the neighbors who

1:18:43exist there already. Um, and I think

1:18:46that just in the short term right now,

1:18:47we'll be seeing a lot of new traffic,

1:18:48but I do do recognize that that'll

1:18:50probably trickle out as as we as you

1:18:53know, things get going and and you get

1:18:54your feet under you, but um do

1:18:56appreciate the traffic study. A lot of

1:18:57times we don't we don't see one with

1:18:58with stuff like this. So, um it's good

1:19:00to take a look at. I'm happy if you have

1:19:02any kind of um back and forth or

1:19:04anything that I said that that didn't

1:19:05sound accurate or correct, but happy to

1:19:07have some dialogue if needed. Um thank

1:19:10you, Madam Chair.

1:19:11>> Thank you. I I think I would agree with

1:19:13that. I wonder because it got the point

1:19:15got brought up that they we would need

1:19:17to have a traffic detail during special

1:19:20giveaway. So, if we modify the sentence

1:19:24at the end of the 60-day period, if the

1:19:26chief of police determines in a letter

1:19:29filed with the city council that a

1:19:30police detail is still necessary during

1:19:33all operating events or at certain times

1:19:36and insert specifically during special

1:19:39giveaways,

1:19:41then the applicant, its successor and or

1:19:44assign shall continue to employ a city

1:19:46of Margo police detail. Does that take

1:19:49care of the special giveaways part?

1:19:51Councelor Naven.

1:19:54>> Thank you, Madam Chair. The only thing

1:19:56um that would

1:19:59um that kind of gives me the you know

1:20:01what what is the out here is if when you

1:20:05guys open if you're planning to have a

1:20:07simplified menu, are you also not going

1:20:09to have a certain amount of giveaways as

1:20:11everybody kind of gets their legs under

1:20:12them? If it's a 60-day window and we're

1:20:14going to kind of delay some of the

1:20:15giveaways and some of the really like,

1:20:17you know, that things that will generate

1:20:19more trips, I think I would probably

1:20:21like to see that extended. Um, or some

1:20:24language in there to make sure that we

1:20:25are including giveaways. If there are no

1:20:27giveaways, in other words, if there are

1:20:28no giveaways in the first 60 days and

1:20:30the chief just goes, "Yeah, this looks

1:20:32great." You know, we haven't seen too

1:20:33much of an impact. And then there is a

1:20:35driver. I just want to

1:20:38I know we're going we're spending a lot

1:20:39of time talking about giveaways and

1:20:41traffic and whatnot, but we you know we

1:20:43don't have a lot of teeth here, so we

1:20:44don't like to, you know, take them out

1:20:46before before we're given the

1:20:47opportunity.

1:20:49>> So, do we want to change that's if at

1:20:52the end of the 60-day period, if the

1:20:54chief of police determines that the city

1:20:56that a police detail is still necessary

1:21:00at certain hours, then the applicant

1:21:02shall continue to employ

1:21:06I think you could even say you could

1:21:08even add to it, right? That because the

1:21:10languages it says it says during all

1:21:12operating operation hours of operation

1:21:14within the first 60 days. I think you

1:21:17could also I would defer to the

1:21:18solicitor on this, but you could also

1:21:20say and special giveaway events during

1:21:23the first six months of operation.

1:21:25Right? You could just add a special,

1:21:27right? So the 60 days and on these

1:21:30occasions within a different period of

1:21:32time. So 60 days to me is different than

1:21:34six months.

1:21:35>> 60 day all hours of So that language

1:21:37says that you will have a police details

1:21:40during all hours of operation within the

1:21:41first 60 days. I submit that you could

1:21:44also then you know add a comma

1:21:47>> and for all special giveaways during the

1:21:50first six months of operation. Right.

1:21:53And leave it to the solicitor. Right. So

1:21:54it's this it's all hours during 60 days.

1:21:57>> Yep.

1:21:58>> And then only during special giveaways

1:22:00for the first six months. But the

1:22:01special giveaways I think are until

1:22:03they're going to be gone, right? So it

1:22:05starts at 5:30 and then if there's no

1:22:07big queue then it goes until they close

1:22:11>> and though that may happen for years on

1:22:13events.

1:22:14>> Yeah.

1:22:15>> I don't want to see it die.

1:22:17>> I

1:22:17>> that's why I I prefer

1:22:20>> at the end of the 60-day period, it's up

1:22:22to the chief of police to determine that

1:22:24yes, we need to be there on those

1:22:26special giveaway days.

1:22:27>> Correct. So if during a six-month period

1:22:29while there are giveaways the chief says

1:22:31this is an issue we're going to need

1:22:32these at all times the chief is the one

1:22:34right so he's required for the first 6

1:22:36months and then after that it's public

1:22:39safety's discretion

1:22:40>> madam chair

1:22:41>> councelor det

1:22:42>> thank you nothing personal Sean I just

1:22:45want to make the conversation le

1:22:48>> um I prefer the term event versus

1:22:50giveaways because god knows what other

1:22:52events you guys would pull out to try to

1:22:53get traffic right um so I I think that

1:22:56you know not giveaways, but events, you

1:22:58know, um, and if there's any events that

1:23:01require traffic, we need they need to

1:23:04notify us ahead of time when those

1:23:07events are. I think that's important.

1:23:09>> But to me, it's not events. It is

1:23:12giveaways.

1:23:13>> Well, that's a giveaway is one event,

1:23:15but they may come up with other events.

1:23:17The events collect, you know, attract

1:23:19>> customers however they want to attract

1:23:21customers. Either giving away something

1:23:22or something else. Maybe they get, I

1:23:25don't know, a football star to show up

1:23:27at a seven, you know, seven brew just to

1:23:29get traffic going or something, you

1:23:32know.

1:23:32>> I haven't heard of those. They may be

1:23:34happening, but I think the issue is

1:23:35really the giveaways.

1:23:36>> Madam Chair, if I may, my concern is

1:23:39just traffic backing out onto the

1:23:41street. So maybe that could be a

1:23:43condition or when traffic starts to back

1:23:46up into the street and it could be

1:23:47caused by all these items we discussed.

1:23:50I think that would be the key factor uh

1:23:54for the police chief to get involved to

1:23:56require paid details uh down at that

1:23:59spot because I don't want to see

1:24:00accidents out there. That's my concern.

1:24:02If they're doing it on their own

1:24:03property, no traffic's build building up

1:24:05outside. The only reason I'm so

1:24:07sensitive to this, I'll never forget

1:24:09Canes when they opened up. Their traffic

1:24:11was backed up almost to the light on

1:24:13Route 20 going down the hill. So that's

1:24:16why I think that condition of when

1:24:18traffic backs onto the street that the

1:24:21police chief has the right to request a

1:24:22detail.

1:24:23>> Are you talking about Mount Royal A? Are

1:24:26you talking about Route 20?

1:24:26>> Right on to Route 20.

1:24:28>> That's I wanted that clarification.

1:24:29>> Yeah. Right on to Lakeside Avenue.

1:24:31>> Okay.

1:24:32>> You know, and it could happen easily.

1:24:33There's not much space between

1:24:36>> place and Route 20. And I think the

1:24:38police chief

1:24:40>> during the first 60 days will will know

1:24:43um if there isn't any traffic issues for

1:24:46backup then they'll stop being there

1:24:49because I would assume within the first

1:24:5160 days we'll have those giveaways and

1:24:53he'll see he she they will see um the

1:24:57impact and it my concern is that it

1:25:01might take a while for people to become

1:25:03aware that this is there. Um, I think if

1:25:07we're okay with giving sort of

1:25:09parameters to the solicitor that he and

1:25:12attorney flood can work out the language

1:25:15with the specificity of that special

1:25:18giveaway days added into the the

1:25:21language that I read.

1:25:23>> Does that work for everybody? Councelor

1:25:26Presiano,

1:25:26>> just have a clarifying question. Um,

1:25:29what do you call your events? Are they

1:25:30promotional giveaways? Are they like do

1:25:33you guys have a name for them when you

1:25:36when you uh promote these events?

1:25:38>> I don't know the answer to that.

1:25:40>> Um I also don't know the answer, but

1:25:42it's the seven day of seven of every

1:25:46month.

1:25:46>> It's just a promotional giveaway. I was

1:25:48just trying to

1:25:49>> you know see if we could have that in

1:25:50the language like specifically like

1:25:52these you know there's there's like back

1:25:54and forth with what is a special event,

1:25:56what is a giveaway and this and stuff.

1:25:58So, I just want to make sure that when

1:26:00you guys have your special events that

1:26:02bring people in, that that is covered.

1:26:04But I do I do like the verbiage that we

1:26:06had um originally with with Councelor

1:26:09Naven. I think that's and and um Chair

1:26:12Roby, I think that's pretty good.

1:26:14>> The uh promotion that was sent by our um

1:26:19staff doesn't It just says National

1:26:23Coffee Day and the promotion for Seven

1:26:25Brew is a free license plate sticker.

1:26:27And the signage that she has doesn't

1:26:30call it anything specific. It just says

1:26:35that you get something with a drink

1:26:37purchase. So, and that's what I had

1:26:39seen. They don't call them giveaways,

1:26:42promotions. They just put out there

1:26:45today is the day you'll get X, Y, or Z.

1:26:51So, I don't know if just calling them

1:26:54giveaways or promotional, either one. I

1:26:57think is okay

1:27:00and maybe that can be a decision between

1:27:04attorney flood and the solicitor.

1:27:05>> So I'm trying to understand I know

1:27:06there's lots of back and forth, lots of

1:27:08comment. I'm trying to figure out how I

1:27:10write this. Is it a 60-day time frame

1:27:15where you're requiring I guess you guys

1:27:17would impose a condition on this special

1:27:19permit?

1:27:19>> Correct. We're using the language from

1:27:22the um

1:27:25marijuana that I had read and then

1:27:29enhancing that to add in figuring out

1:27:33after the 60-day period to make sure on

1:27:36special giveaway days that the police

1:27:39presence would be there.

1:27:40>> Do you have a copy of that?

1:27:42>> I can give you my printed copy because I

1:27:45have it on my computer.

1:27:48>> Thank you.

1:27:50That'll make life a lot easier

1:27:52>> than trying to make it up on my own.

1:27:53>> Is that correct, Councelor Naven? I'm

1:27:56sorry. I'm that that was you want police

1:27:58presence on all

1:28:01special giveaway or only if it becomes

1:28:03an issue during those days.

1:28:05>> No, during special giveaways. Yeah.

1:28:07Okay. You understood me correctly.

1:28:09>> And I think the solicitor can make sure

1:28:12he listens to our discussion and figures

1:28:15out what we want between the two of you.

1:28:18How does that how does that work for us?

1:28:19I know there's discussion back and

1:28:21forth. Is there a vote or a consensus

1:28:23that says urban affairs says they want

1:28:26this condition in the permit? If the

1:28:29applicant accepts it, we write it. You

1:28:32know, I'm

1:28:33>> I think the cons it's the consensus that

1:28:36this is what we want with the solicitor

1:28:38being able to do his

1:28:41>> okay

1:28:41>> uh verbiage with your

1:28:45working with him. Um, but I uh my

1:28:49understanding is regardless of whether

1:28:50the applicant wants it, if it's in the

1:28:52special permit, you got to abide by it.

1:28:54So special permit passes, that's the

1:28:57language.

1:28:58>> Right now it would be police details

1:29:01from 5:30 a.m. to 1000 p.m. or 11 on

1:29:05weekends for 60 days.

1:29:07>> Right. It I don't think you need to

1:29:10specify the hours because that will be

1:29:11in the permit anyway. So it's just just

1:29:13when it's open. Well, um, it says during

1:29:15all operating the way the language you

1:29:17gave me is during all operating hours.

1:29:19>> All operating hours.

1:29:19>> So, if I specify in the special

1:29:21parameter, I think one of the conditions

1:29:22was to specify the hours. Right.

1:29:24>> So, if I do specify the hours and this

1:29:26says all operating hours, I'm just

1:29:27trying to clarify what you're looking

1:29:29for. Yes.

1:29:29>> So, that'll be a police deal detail 7

1:29:32days a week unless

1:29:34that be unless the chief says it's not

1:29:36necessary.

1:29:37>> Correct. And then at the end of the

1:29:3860-day period, if he says it's continued

1:29:41necessary, then it is then it's a

1:29:43continued requirement,

1:29:45>> right? But but along with that is the

1:29:47regardless of whether there needs to be

1:29:50everyday police presence, we would want

1:29:52police presence at special event days.

1:29:56So somebody would have to reach out to

1:29:58the police and say on

1:30:01November 10th we're or November 7th

1:30:04since that seems to be the day um we're

1:30:06doing a a special

1:30:07>> for more than the 60 days.

1:30:09>> I I my understanding is that would be

1:30:12constant un

1:30:14>> I suggested a term of six months of a

1:30:17review period of six months for special

1:30:18events and someone said three months.

1:30:21Oh,

1:30:21>> well, I think it was he wanted 30 days.

1:30:25I think the 60 days is the consensus. He

1:30:28wants 6 months for that review of the

1:30:31special promotional days.

1:30:33>> Councelor Det.

1:30:35>> Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Um, so

1:30:38I think as far as wording goes, we

1:30:41should allow the police chief to come

1:30:42back with us and say, you know what, I

1:30:46don't need to be there for all the

1:30:47hours. I might need to be there in the

1:30:50morning during normal operations, but we

1:30:53basically let the police chief say,

1:30:54"Hey, no one's showing. There's not a

1:30:56mad rush. It's, let's say, 3:00 p.m. to

1:30:5911:00 p.m. So, let's save these guys

1:31:02money and keep the police on the streets

1:31:04versus waiting here." So, it'd be up to

1:31:06police chief to restrict or limit it

1:31:09that. Uh, second is that we've covered a

1:31:13lot of ground tonight. I want to see

1:31:15another draft before it goes back to the

1:31:18council.

1:31:21>> We could continue this to another

1:31:22meeting and ask the solicitor because I

1:31:25do actually have two more potential. So,

1:31:28if you would prefer to see the language,

1:31:30we can

1:31:31>> I think that

1:31:32>> that before it would be cuz I don't the

1:31:35solicitor is probably not going to be

1:31:36able to pull this off by the for

1:31:41Thursday to even be on and we don't want

1:31:43it really to be I want it to lay on the

1:31:45table. So, we would refer it to the

1:31:47solicitor on Monday, give him time to

1:31:51look at it, but if we want to wait to

1:31:53refer it until we see the language,

1:31:56>> I would prefer to wait to until we see

1:31:58the language before we submit it to the

1:32:01council. So, can the can the solicitor

1:32:04make a draft and then bring it to the

1:32:06council? Sorry, the committee instead of

1:32:08the council.

1:32:09>> I think he would be amenable to doing

1:32:11that. just

1:32:13>> put this out further because I wouldn't

1:32:15move to refer to the solicitor on

1:32:18Monday. I would just talk to the

1:32:20solicitor and say we need a

1:32:22>> draft from you with language that we

1:32:25could then review

1:32:27>> and decide if we'd like that language to

1:32:29vote on to then

1:32:31>> refer to be put in proper form.

1:32:34>> So we'll stay in committee. I just

1:32:35wanted to make sure.

1:32:36>> That's the preference, but that means

1:32:38setting up another committee meeting to

1:32:39be able to review that. I'm fine with

1:32:41that. I just don't want to rush through

1:32:43it tonight.

1:32:44>> Councelor Naven.

1:32:45>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, a couple of

1:32:47things um to build on what council just

1:32:49said. Um, I think the police language as

1:32:52written does give the chief that ability

1:32:54no matter what within that first 60 days

1:32:56to send a letter saying it's not

1:32:58necessary to do it all the time. It is

1:33:01ne, you know, it would be helpful here,

1:33:02right? Like I don't see that this is a

1:33:04problem at all hours. However, rush hour

1:33:07is a problem. Keep going. So I I we can

1:33:09certainly change it, but I think I think

1:33:11>> I just want to make sure it's not all or

1:33:13nothing, right?

1:33:13>> No, I don't think it is. And so I think

1:33:15you're covered on that. Okay.

1:33:16>> Um and I do want to clarify just in case

1:33:20anyone misinterprets, right? The police

1:33:21aren't off the street. They are special

1:33:23details. They are not they are in

1:33:25addition to the people who are already

1:33:26working. This is overtime for a detail

1:33:28whether it's I I don't even know if it

1:33:31would have to be state police because it

1:33:32is Route 20, but you'll figure out the

1:33:34jurisdiction there. Um I'm fine with

1:33:36that. May I also suggest, Madam Chair,

1:33:38um if this if this works from a

1:33:40procedure standpoint just to kind of

1:33:41streamline some of these conversations.

1:33:43I know you mentioned um you have a

1:33:45couple of other things perhaps working

1:33:46with the solicitor. I know Attorney

1:33:48Flood didn't um make some of the

1:33:50amendments that we had talked about

1:33:51maybe

1:33:52>> throw them in there.

1:33:53>> Throw them in there and that way when

1:33:54the solicitor puts a new draft, he can

1:33:56share it with attorney Flood. Attorney

1:33:58Fle could share it with his client and

1:34:00that way at the next meeting we've got a

1:34:02working document with some of the

1:34:04committee's other thoughts so that we

1:34:05can kind of engage in a dialogue and

1:34:07move along so that we don't kind of get

1:34:09stuck in limbo.

1:34:10>> So, do I rewrite this and send it back

1:34:12to you for this list or does he rewrite

1:34:14it and send it to me with his

1:34:15>> I would suggest you write some You've

1:34:17been here. He would I'm sure he'll

1:34:20review the tape of this. You can have a

1:34:22conversation. I can talk to him. I think

1:34:24between the two of you, if you give him

1:34:26a draft, um he's already seen the

1:34:29suggestions for the three that were

1:34:32given to you and I've seen I can get

1:34:34those in there.

1:34:35>> They can get incorporated. Um this one I

1:34:37think we're done with this one. Then I'm

1:34:40going to bring up the other two. uh one

1:34:42was signs which is there's nothing in

1:34:45here and I know as I said we did have um

1:34:49some

1:34:51language in the McDonald's

1:34:54um which I won't read but what the

1:34:56solicitor suggested is that there be a

1:35:00condition that all signage shall comply

1:35:03with the code and I I bring it up I know

1:35:07I showed this to somebody else I can

1:35:10pass this around at the site. Um, there

1:35:13is three windows that were covered with

1:35:16handdrawn advertisement and it did not

1:35:20appeal to me at all. And I know we have

1:35:22a coverage of windows. Um, and to me

1:35:26those are temporary signs and temporary

1:35:28signs have a time limit on them.

1:35:31My understanding is there's always

1:35:34handdrawn signs on the window. And I

1:35:37guess so long as it doesn't

1:35:39go over the

1:35:41coverage that's allowed, I can't stop

1:35:45it. I just personally think it was

1:35:48tacky. Um, so if it says in there that

1:35:50you meet the sign ordinance,

1:35:53then you can do whatever and

1:35:58put hand signs. Um, is that okay with

1:36:01everybody?

1:36:02>> And the other one, I'm sorry.

1:36:03>> So, you you expect to be counting that

1:36:07the window signage, the window covering

1:36:11is part of the signage.

1:36:13>> Um, there is language in there about

1:36:16temporary signs, which to me that would

1:36:18be cons, but temporary signs in the sign

1:36:21ordinance are

1:36:23um promotional stuff that is a there's a

1:36:26time limit on it. So, they have to be

1:36:29removed. That just seemed like it was

1:36:31another message board that was on the

1:36:34wind. It was advertising the drinks and

1:36:36some special promo drinks for the day or

1:36:39the week or

1:36:41>> um so I know there's specific language

1:36:44about how much because I know I asked

1:36:47the uh building commissioner at 57

1:36:51Maine, you'll notice those windows are

1:36:53completely covered um where the

1:36:56commercial is going to go. and he said,

1:36:57"So long as nothing's in there, he's

1:36:59fine with them being covered. As soon as

1:37:00something is in there, all that stuff

1:37:03has to come off the windows."

1:37:05There was another commercial on 20 where

1:37:08they covered their windows and they were

1:37:11given code enforcement notice that they

1:37:13needed to remove it. So, there's a limit

1:37:14to how much you can put in a window

1:37:18and to me that means

1:37:21handdrawn kind of stuff versus a

1:37:24permanent sign. So, I just want to make

1:37:27sure that they're if they're going to do

1:37:28it that they're making sure they don't

1:37:30cover more than they're allowed to

1:37:33cover. So, that's all.

1:37:37And then the other one was the similar

1:37:40issue of the um the dumpster. Do we want

1:37:44the same the dumpster will be

1:37:48um there was language for a dumpster? Um

1:37:53delivery. Oh, well actually trash

1:37:55applicant at successor center signs

1:37:57agrees to keep dumpsters covered and to

1:37:59screen the project's trash area and then

1:38:02to have the no trash pickup shall occur

1:38:04before 7:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m.

1:38:09>> So I know your dumpster is kind of right

1:38:11there.

1:38:13>> Okay. So you met that part. Um

1:38:18but I think

1:38:20>> it's an office part. I'm sorry.

1:38:22>> It's an office part. then

1:38:25we wouldn't want it happening while

1:38:27other employees are coming in. Right.

1:38:31So, I think uh the condition

1:38:33>> it's 7 a.m. or se before 7 a.m. or after

1:38:36700 p.m. I think that was really we have

1:38:39you can't have construction before 7

1:38:41a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. So, I know they

1:38:44want the dumpsters not to be bothering

1:38:47the residents that are behind you or to

1:38:51be

1:38:53noise. So, you're just going to have to

1:38:54work with whoever you hire to make sure

1:38:56that they're coming to pick up. And if

1:38:59you're to me the location of where the

1:39:02dumpster was is sort of impacted by the

1:39:04queue. So that may become an issue for

1:39:07the dumpster being picked up. But

1:39:14is it okay with everybody to add that? I

1:39:17mean, they're they're doing it anyway,

1:39:18and I think it's in sight plan that it's

1:39:20covered and closed. Um,

1:39:25but this just makes sure that it is

1:39:29Okay, those are really the only other

1:39:34parts that I had. And anybody else with

1:39:38concerns, comments?

1:39:41>> Should we just table or adjourn at this

1:39:43point?

1:39:43>> Um, I think we'll just uh keep it in

1:39:46committee. Um, we can we did the other

1:39:51one already. I think we

1:39:53keep it in committee. I'll set up

1:39:55another meeting and hopefully we can get

1:39:58something done as soon as possible. Find

1:40:00out with attorney flood when he can do

1:40:01it. Find out how quickly the solicitor

1:40:03can get this put together so we can have

1:40:07it with the new new draft back to us.

1:40:10Um,

1:40:11>> okay.

1:40:12>> See what people's schedule are for next

1:40:15week, next two weeks.

1:40:17>> Could you help us understand the what

1:40:18you mean by the timing so it'll stay

1:40:19here for one more meeting? We we are not

1:40:23I'm not reporting this out on Monday

1:40:24with a vote of the committee to

1:40:26recommend that it go to the solicitor.

1:40:28We're going to

1:40:29>> have a discussion with the solicitor.

1:40:31Ask the two of you to work to bring us a

1:40:34new draft that incorporates sort of all

1:40:36of this and we can go through and look

1:40:38at the language, especially the language

1:40:39about the uh police detail.

1:40:42>> Yep. And I have that here that you

1:40:43>> and so we it will remain in committee

1:40:46and then we'll just set up another

1:40:48meeting time.

1:40:49>> So we come back here one Okay.

1:40:50>> One more time. Do you set that up today

1:40:51or is it set up at all?

1:40:53>> We can try to set it up today once we

1:40:54adjourn the meeting and then uh see what

1:40:57everybody's schedules are in your

1:40:59schedule and make sure that we give

1:41:00enough time for the solicitor and you to

1:41:03have the conversation and get this done.

1:41:05>> Thank you for that.

1:41:06>> Motion to adjourn.

1:41:08>> It's been moved and seconded to adjourn.

1:41:10All those in favor? One, two, three,

1:41:13four.

1:41:15We're okay. We're

1:41:18missing them. 1 2 3 4 Okay, so we are

1:41:22adjourned at

1:41:26>> adjourned at 9:10.

1:41:29Huh?