2026-11-02 - Planning Board

All set. >> Recording in progress. I'd >> like to bring to order the November 2nd, 2026 planning board meeting. I just roll through with the CO statements. >> All right. Pursuant to Governor Healey's

directive extending the temporary open meeting provisions until June 30th, 2027, the planning board meeting will be conducted in a hybrid format and will be recorded. Any person in attendance making

an audio or video recording of this meeting must notify the chair at this time. Recordings will be accessible on the town's website and YouTube channel. Please be aware participants attending via Zoom

will have their video and audio disabled. If you wish to engage in discussion, raise your hand. If acknowledged by the chair, you will receive a popup message allowing you to unmute yourself. For

agenda, YouTube and Zublinks, please visit www.suttonmma.orgcable- department. You'll do a roll call. >> Bob L is here. Wesley Stanh Hope present. >> Bill Dotard here. >> Mike Aen here. David Mason

here. >> Erica, are you >> in the ether out there? [snorts] >> I don't know. Let me see. >> Okay. >> Erica, are you on your iPhone? If so, let me know. She can just tag in at any point and then we'll

let her in. >> Okay. So, we have no public hearings this evening. [clears throat] [laughter] >> We have action items. >> That's a technical term. [laughter] So the first one's ANR plans 6077 West

Milbury Road the land swap. >> All right. >> Do we have anybody here for that? Yeah, we have um Zach Glass is available online, but I am going to I'm going to share the um plans to the board [sighs]

and [snorts] okay, now let me just share that. Boom. There. All right. So, if you can let Zach speak, he can walk us through that and I will be Vanna White on his behalf. >> Perfect. Can you hear me?

>> We can hear you. >> Yes. >> Perfect. So, for the record, my name is Zachary Glass. from existing grade. Uh the land surveyor for the project representing the applicant, Ron Graves. Um as mentioned,

the property is 66 West Milbury Road. It lies within the residential rural zoning district, the R1. And a quick summary of the project is there's a land swap between the subject property and then 70

West Milbury Road, which is the property just to the north. Um on the plan on the north side there's a dashed line that's to be removed and it represents parcel A of just over 2700 square ft and that

would be merged into 66 West Milbury Road. And then at the rear of the property there is a 2700 ft uh a portion of land parcel B that would be merged back into 70 west um West Milbury Road. So, the

intent is to do kind of a one for one land swap so that we'd be able to garner more land on the northern side of 66 and then convey it back to 70 all the way out on the eastern side. Uh, both

properties currently are zoning conformant. Um, the proposed land swap does not alter any of the existing frontages out there in that both of the regularity factors for the properties are met and they

currently are met now. So there is no zoning nonconformities being created by this swap. Uh there's no existing wells or um septic systems within the area of this. And then the closest structure on 70

is there's a kind of a barn garage that's still going to maintain well over 70 ft of setback to the side lot line. So that's going to stay conforming as well. >> All right. Um, you have my checklist.

Um, the only comment left on my checklist was the RF factor for number 70, which has been added. So, everything is good to go. >> No questions at all. I'll make a motion >> that we approve uh this uh

what's the date? >> 95. There you go. Right there. Um, okay. My motion is to ador endorse the form of plan dated 9526 showing an equal swap between 66 and 70 West Milbury Road. >> I'll second that

motion. Okay. >> Bob Lodge. I >> Wesley Stano. I >> Bill D. I >> Mike Gagan. I >> David Mason. I >> Right. Let's give this a try. Can you unmute the iPhone? Erica says that's her. [snorts] >> Great.

>> Rex McCulli. >> There we go. >> I'm gonna make her Okie dokie. >> All right. >> Perfect. Well, I appreciate your time and thank you very much. >> Have a good night, Zach. >> Very much. >> You as

well, John. Thanks. Okay, we'll move on to the 16 John wrote. >> All right, we have Matt. >> I'm gonna be extra hybrid. I'm going to be here in person and on the computer. >> There you go. >> Super

hightech. >> Very high tech. >> The chair will endorse that plan at the the meeting and I'll be available to pick up tomorrow. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> You bet. >> I have plans. I don't know

if it's possible for me to share screen while I'm here too. >> Yes, Chris is going to take care of that. >> I'm sorry. What's your name? >> Uh Matt Bombassy. Uh good evening. For the record, Matt

Bomby with Polar Engineering representing the epicint. Uh MIG Actton Bob from MIG was going to try to attend as well um virtually. I don't see him in the list, so hopefully he makes makes it on. But

um we've been speaking with him pretty regularly over the past month or so over the comments received from both Jen and a couple from the the peer review. Um in short, there were a couple or more than

a couple of items Jen asked uh that we take a look at and more or less clean up. Um since then, we've been through those comments with them. Um a lot of them they've addressed, a few of them they are

addressing. There are a couple we were hoping to get an opinion from the board on some things that they want to keep as installed. Um, I'll go through and just give an update on on essentially all of

them. Just stop me if I'm going too fast. Um, and I'll slow down or circle back. >> Okay. >> Um, there were a few fire department and building um department closeout items, a list of permits. I think

they've closed out the bulk of those. There's a couple that they were still scheduling inspections when I last spoke to on Friday, but I think they're hopefully mostly closed out on those. Um, there

was a a question from the fire department over um the storage of some combustible gases. Um and I think they've resolved that and come to a permitted that. Um so there was some extra ones on site that

hadn't been included in the permit. Um additionally some interior door um lettering. Um all right. So >> Oh, perfect. [clears throat and cough] Oops. There it goes. Um, no questions from I think both

Jen, the peer reviewview, and and the fire department. There's a a gravel drive along this side of the building. Um, it was not stabilized, I think, particularly at the time. Jen was out there. There

was some dirt washing um into the the pavement over here and it just need to be stabilized. Since that time, they've um installed some crushed stone there. Um the fire department asked if it could be

made one way uh travel just for for emergency access. So, they're going to put a do not enter sign on the on the downhill side or the plan north side of that gravel drive. So, um I think they've

already taken the steps to address that. That's this drive here. This is looking from the back. Um, this is looking from the the front and I think this area here, this picture was a a few days ago,

the picture I saw from Jen looked a little different than that. Um, little bit of dirt that they've cleaned up. Um, there are several layown areas. If you remember the the site plan from a couple um

years back, they had an area down um I call it the lower area coming off the access drive here and one in the upper area. Um, the upper area in particular is kind of more or less under construction.

There's some dirt piles in there. They've built a portion of it, but not all of it. Um, they've been made aware that they need to finalize it and stabilize it and determine the final limits so that

can be put on the the asbuilt plan and submitted to the town as the as the final layown area. Um, they're also aware that area cannot be bigger than was was permitted because that's how the storm

water was designed. So, I was out there this evening before the hearing. It looks like they've started to remove more dirt from there. There is a it's a big hill. There's a lot of dirt. So, it's going

to take them a little while, but I know they've taken those those steps. Um, storm water management. Um, the peer review noted the catch basin hoods had not been installed. Um, and some of the catch

basins, those have all been installed. There was a um some sediment noted in one of the um the coverts that goes under the driveway. They've cleaned that out. Um there was a note that um this runoff

from the soil here was intended to go into the basin here, but they hadn't really constructed the the burm here. I was out there, they've started constructing that to get that water into the basin. Um

unless um there was a a question from Jen relative to um operation and maintenance. I did ask them about that. They have done some catch basin cleaning and they sent me the receipts. I think what they

need to do is um there's an anm checklist or an inspection form in the storm water report. I'm going to ask them to fill that out, submit that to the town. I think you want those regularly. >> Um, so

I'll have them submit those in perpetuity. >> Um, lastly, I think these are the ones that probably caught um, Jen's attention the most. There were a few um, just general construction operational

things that she noted. Um, I think the most notable one was there's a they have a tenant here who does some wire cutting. My understanding is they have a specific operation and maintenance plan that

they're supposed to follow that they they per with the town when they came in. I think when Jen was out there, they had been doing some cutting outside and some some black dust was forming. They've

informed their tenant they have to do it um per the the agreement they made with the town and I think all that's that wire cutting stopped and they'll make sure that doesn't go on in perpetuity. Um,

additionally, there was some they have these large wooden spools. I think almost all of these parking spaces were filled with wooden spools when Jen was out there. I was out there this evening. Most

of them are gone. I didn't take a picture because there were still a couple there that they're still moving. But I think they've they've mostly clear cleared those out. And the reason is that those

spaces need to be available for for people to park, not for the schools. I think maybe people were parking parallel parking or parking in the landscaped areas are doing things because they didn't have

the parking spaces. >> Matt, could I have one quick question if you don't mind? Um I read quite a bit when I was reading through the about layown area. Could you explain that briefly? I couldn't quite

figure out. >> Yeah, sure. So they're um the the the owner of the building, MIG, they they do bridge construction for for DOT. So when they permitted this building, they had the 40,000 foot industrial

building. They also have a lot of um dry storage things that they need. So highway signs, um sometimes piles and things like that. So um the laid down areas are these these gravel areas they intended

for that type of material. >> Okay, that's what I thought, but I just wanted to clarify. Thank you. >> Yeah, you're welcome. Thank you. [clears throat] >> Um there were two dead trees um on the the

side of the building here. They they're obvious. Um so they'll they'll replace those. those. I don't know the timing exactly. It might be a little late in the year to to plant those, but I'll I'll

work with them and and make sure they get they get replanted. Um the debris was was a big one. Um and additionally, some outdoor parking of um onroad road vehicles in particular in the in the layown

areas. I believe there was a lot of discussion when we permitted the site that the layown areas were for dry storage but not for regular commercial vehicle parking. Um, so they've been informed they

have to remove those vehicles and um I think they've I think I have a photo here of the the storage. If you remember um was it if you remember Jen's um visit, I think this whole area was covered with

quite a bit of storage. They've they've cleaned up a lot of it and I think when I was out there this evening, there was just a couple of signs left out there. So they think their intention is to move

that to the late areas which was the the original intention. Um, and then for closeout documents, um, once all this is this is updated, they they know we have to get the surveyor back out there,

located, submitted into ASP bill, so it becomes the record document that this has all been corrected. Um, so so I think they've taken taken good steps. They did have a a couple of questions of some

deviations that they're hoping the board would accept um to the plan. If if you don't mind, I run through those. One in particular was the the installation of the jersey barrier on top of the um the

wall. It's a um it's a MSE wall. I believe it has some geog grid behind it. So they elected for this type of system which is something they're pretty um accustomed to that along the the highway when

they're doing bridge construction for mass dot and things like that. So it's jersey barriers and we asked them to put a a fence on the top just for um personnel safety. Um they're rated TL2 rated

barriers which a little of some expertise but as I understand it is a crash rating that they use for DOT um barriers for 45 miles per hour. Um the reason they went with this is it doesn't uh impact

the wall to as a guardrail wig where you have to really excavate down in and drill them into the geog grid that holds the wall in place. So, they they'd like to use this um these jerseys Jersey Jersey

berries in particular. Um beauties in the ad. Beholder, I thought they they did a good job of at least finishing them and and putting a a new fence on top of them. And you'll see some barriers later

that maybe aren't quite as as good-looking, but um they were hoping to keep this in particular just for the wall itself. It just helps them from having to impact the geog grid at the top of the wall.

So, just for clarification, the approved plan showed kind of a block, a structured wall. You may recall we approved a field change early on in the project to allow I I don't remember the specific name

of that type of wall, but it's basically kind of metal meshing with the stone that they excavated out of the site in the metal meshing that became the new um retaining wall. Um, and with the

structured wall, the plan showed uh a chainlink fence directly into the wall and then in front of it there was going to be the wood um steel and wood guard rail in front. So you kind of have two

layers of of protection. So um and this is what they've done instead um which is the jersey barriers with the chain link on top. um actually a little bit in from the top of the retaining wall. So

that's one of your questions. Um will the board allow the jersey barrier with chain link on top instead of the chain link into the retaining wall um with the wood guard rails in front? So I think

Graves didn't have an issue with this. I believe >> I don't believe so. in his letter he said that he didn't have an issue with this. There are a few of these you might want input from Graves. So, um

you can just let me know any that you want me to get some input from them. So, that's I don't know if you want to go one by one and decide if you want more input or if you're okay with it. Um or if

you want to go stare at it out there a little bit if you haven't had a chance to go look at it. um you let me know how you want to do each of these because there's probably nine I think that they want

input on. >> Yeah, this is the biggest one. Um there there a couple others [clears throat] little ones. >> Any thoughts on this? >> Was it Are you done, Matt? >> Um I have a few more, but if we want

to discuss this one first or I can run through and >> it's up to Wes. >> Do you have a comment to this one? Uh, I guess if Graves if Graves doesn't have an issue, I don't have an issue. But >> the

issues I would have is that [clears throat] it's kind like ask well one thing is asking for forgiveness and sets precedent for anybody else to do this. >> Sure. >> Right. And the other thing is that

these are temporary crash devices on the highway, not the permanent solution, but now they're going to be used as a permanent solution around the site versus what was approved. All right. So, and then

the other thing is it links to the surface water management because I see another aspect here where these are guiding surface water around the perimeter because you don't have the there's another

there's another item here I was reading earlier on B. Yeah, the perm berm. They don't have the burm. So, using these as a berm, but you can see here where there's a light fixture >> there and you

don't have this. >> Yep. So now their water could is not really fully guiding the surface water to where it should be to get to the swailes. >> Sure. >> So like there's this multiple layers of asking

for forgiveness because I'm not doing the right thing and then it's not the right thing. >> Yeah, sure. >> What should have been done? >> A couple of those I can I can address. I think they did

install the burm where there was a gap in the in the barriers. They did install the the patumis burm. Um when you're out there, the the landscape area behind the wall is actually burned up a little

bit. So the we did review the the water drain and it flows to the catch basin. Um in relative to the crash rating, again, I'm not a structural an um engineer, but my understanding is when we're

reviewing these, we we look for the crash rate rating, which is TL2 in this, but these are rated for. So if they had submitted us a guardrail um detail, that's what we would have checked for is what

was the crash rating of the barrier. So, um I certainly understand the point asking for uh forgiveness um instead of permission, but um I think that the hope is that this is an an equivalent um

product. >> So, I guess my [clears throat] questions is is that the is that's the finished product? >> Correct. Yep. >> Is that the finished asphalt? >> Um yes. Yep. >> So, I mean it looks to me like

it's full of dirt, leaves, y >> debris. It It doesn't look like a brand new parking lot with >> Yeah. >> Like I'm looking at something that looks >> not clean. Not looks like there that last picture.

>> Yep. >> The last picture you had up the Jersey barriers were all like broke. I mean, >> it looks like it's a it's half finishedish construction site. >> Yeah. And they had been using this area as

um I think I don't know if I have Jen's pictures on me, but if you saw Jen's picture, there was quite a bit of stuff they had they had stored up here. Um, and I think that's probably a lot of the

reason for the leaves. They've all blown in and all the dirt, but we can certainly I think they understand they need to keep it keep it clean and now they have everything out of the way, they they'll

do so. Um, but I I agree with you. It should be cleaned. It shouldn't be sitting there. >> Um, thank you for coming in. Obviously, um for me it this looks like um a temporary uh situation and we

wanted to do something that was finished. Um two months from now when it snows, where's the snow going? When you're when you're you have to work there. Um where's the snow going? um up and over. I

just think it's uh it's not what we were looking for in there. It just looks like a temporary uh situation and I expected it to be a a finished product like the end of the highway when you're all done

with all this stuff. That's not what it looks like on the highway. That's a temporary thing. So, >> doesn't sit well with me, but you have to live there and work with it. Um, >> and you're going to

have to wrestle with it. >> Understand? Just so I can pass along the feedback and maybe the answer is both. Is it um an aesthetic thing or or a safety thing or or both? Um the concerns. >> Yeah, I I

it looks uh it looks like it's going to be temporary. You're going to have to redo it when the snow comes. You're gonna The snow's going to Whoever is plowing, you're going to have to redo your fences

here. It's a It's a temporary um if we were going to have there was going to be permanent we wouldn't be putting redoing things but you have to deal with it. >> I I get Yeah. I if I could through the

I guess my question would be um because I know you changed the retaining wall is why you kind of went away from the guard rail like going into the ground. But the fact that it's four feet away from

the retaining wall, like the light is on the out, you know, it's the light's not on the inside of it. It's on the outside. They're four feet. Does that make a difference that you could then 4t away

from the retaining wall put in those guardrails as originally planned or is it still going to be an issue of going into the ground? >> I have I think so the geog grids typically extend as a rule of

thumb 2/3 the height of the wall. That wall is probably 20 ft. I think the the geog grids would still be there. >> I wouldn't call it um >> I've seen it done before so I can't say it's something

that's impossible. They they can son tube and I think it's just not wanting to disturb it and they they felt maybe this would be >> they they they construct bridges. Um that's their business. So they

they know the crash rating and things I think. >> Right. I think to answer your question you have about the safety versus the visual. I mean personally I think >> it's a little bit more about the vis

you know the vis you know the looking at it. Y >> because it does, you know, usually when you see those, those are temporary >> things done, you pick them up, you put a final product down, you know

what I mean? Because obviously they they certainly appear to be a safe again, not a safety in play, you know, hitting those is pretty tough to get, you know, is it's pretty good for safety, but

visually it does look, oh, it's almost done, you know. But >> into the board, uh when we vote, if if we allow this, uh another party is going to come before us and they're going to say, "I want it to

look like this on my property." There's a ripple effect. We have to have land to stand on. >> Do you do you have a picture of what you proposed? Do you have a picture that like what you proposed and

then that's what you did, I guess? Um, I don't know if I have a a picture of it. I can show you what it what it looked like on the on the plan. So, we would have proposed um a guardrail along the edge

of the um the curbing instead of the the jersey barriers. >> And I there was supposed to be a chain link fence on top of the wall, too, though, right? >> Correct. That's for people. We don't want

people falling off off the wall. >> So, it was there was a 4 foot metal chain link fence that was supposed to be So, you would have seen the chain link fence anyway you slice it. >> Yep. And I think

it was about four feet high. It could have been a six, but I think it was a four. >> And then it was so the chain link was there no matter what. It was just that the So you you'd look out the edge of

the parking lot, you'd see the chain link fence, and then you'd just see the low guard rail in front. And I think that was I'm pretty sure that was the wood guard rail, right? >> We we had shown wood

on our plans. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. So it was the wood guard rail in front. So, I mean, if you've been to the site, it is fairly isolated. It is up at the top of the hill. And, um, these ones you kind

of see, like the end of those, you kind of see when you're down at the bottom of the hill. Um, it's the ones around the layown area, that north layown area, that are much more obvious if you're at the

bottom of the hill. Um, so I'm I'm just trying to give you the the lay of the land if you haven't had a chance to be out there. >> Well, what about um I'm sorry, >> Wes. What about uh Wes's comment

about the the storm water management with the Jersey barriers versus what was planned? Y >> is there a a difference there? >> Uh no. I mean, our intention was to have the water get into the catch

base. And I think they installed the jersey barrier to have the top coat of the asphalt such that it butts up to it and takes it to the catch base. And I think if you wanted the curbing installed,

they would they would install it in front of the jersey barriers. I think their feeling is just not it's not needed because the the water gets where it needs to, but it's not I don't think they're

opposed to it if there was if the board would insist. >> So, the drainage is getting where it needs to be. >> Exactly. and any gaps they put stuff in them. >> They put curbing where there was that the

small gaps in the jersey barriers for the lake posts. >> I do think it's I mean when I first read about it I was like well it's certainly an isolated area that's not like the public is really but then

when you actually see the pictures there it looks a little more messy than I in I don't know. Yeah, I know. >> The the leaf the debris does not help the picture. Um, [laughter] for sure I should have

swept before I took the photo. Maybe >> I mean especially and I did just go back through the graves um and maybe I just had a conversation with him, but [clears throat] um his I don't see him saying

this is safe or whatever in his comment letter. So if you want we can you know we can have uh Graves weigh in on this in terms of safety. Um, and if you haven't got a chance to go up there, if you can

go up there and just take a look, you know, from the bottom of the hill and the, you know, um, there's always a ripple effect as Bob mentioned. Um, but depending on how you act on any item, you can

certainly state the caveat like if you wanted to give some relief based on the isolation that you can't see it from the public roadway, you could do that. You just want to be very specific about that.

Um, so it doesn't have as big of a ripple effect if you choose to do it, if it's something you want to allow. Um, once Graves weighs in on the safety aspect. So, do you want to um I I don't know if we

got a majority on the It sounds like everybody's wondering about whether it's really safe or not. And then there's it sounds like there's a few comments on it doesn't look very good and we don't want

to set a precedent. I think you lose a few feet of snow removal area because I think like >> like he said the original one was behind the light pole. Then there was a few feet then there was the

curbing. So you had a few feet of snow and right now you have a I don't know is that a six foot fence on top of the jersey or four foot? >> We totally need to be 4 foot minimum now. >> Um it's four

feet tied to the top of the fence now. So, it's four feet plus like three feet, >> however high the barrier is. >> Um, yeah, I think I thought they installed a um a shorter fence on top of the

barrier. We told them the entire height needed to be um 48 in. >> Oh, no. I think that's higher than 48. >> Yeah, I think you're right. >> Yeah, I feel like they were as high as me. >> Yeah. So, if

you're going to try to get snow over that >> Oh, yeah. I don't think the intention would be to throw to put snow over it. I think they'd have to find a location either in the lay down or somewhere

else in the site to um to stockpile it. >> Yeah, it just complicates that where you had some area before >> removal space. >> I would suggest and I think like you said have Graves take a second look

at you know and that safety aspect where he might have a you know and then kind of revisit it. Yeah. >> All right. So, weigh in on the safety. You can hear the board is kind of leaning against the

aesthetics and and operationally wondering, you know, it looks on the plan it looks like you might have been able to do some snow removal and pop it over the guardrail in the space between the

guardrail and the fence if that was the case. And now you don't have that available anymore. So, kind of how would that happen now? Especially as when you leave this parking area once the fencing ends

the guard the jersey barriers don't end. We then continue with jersey barriers which you can get snow up and over those but we continue with jersey barriers kind of as you go down that driveway. Very

unattractive jersey barriers >> those ones [laughter] >> the driveway. >> So >> Yep. Yeah. And in talking with them, I think as far as the the impact protection, I think they could provide that

information. They they do this quite a bit. The aesthetics or the aesthetics, I think they'd be willing to finish it in a way the board liked. I think um these ones were were painted, but um if there

was another treatment, I think they'd be open to it. Um but again, at the discretion of the board. >> All right. So, we'll table this one. you hear what the board's saying, so mull it over. And then

if they want to provide the safety information for review from Graves, that's fine. And then we'll get them to weigh in on that. >> Next. >> Cool. Awesome. I'll flip these next ones. Just uh just at

this stage, they were very willing to do just about anything. Um as we were running through the list, they had a couple like I'll ask the board. Um I just don't want the perception to be that they

were I'll fight back on all these. They were pretty willing to work with and I was like, well, I'm going to be in front of the board anyway in particular for this one, so I'll ask the board. But um I

just they were they were willing to do this stuff. So, don't want to make it sound like they were unwilling to do any of it. They they were they were willing to take action. >> Okay. >> Um the second

one, you're going to like these a lot less um than than the first ones. And I think I already know the answer is they um around the the layown areas. They had um we had shown a guard rail. They have

plenty of Jersey barriers. I think it's part of their construction business. So, they put the berries around the the layown areas where they were budding a steep slope. Um they they asked if they they

could keep them. I think I might have a a good sense of where the board leans just based on how these appear compared to the other ones. Um but I told them I'd ask. Um >> yeah, I mean those are pretty

visible. >> And those these ones are are more visible >> as you look up the hill. They're pretty visible. Yeah. And they're not in great repair either. And they're not Yeah. But I'm not a voting

member of the board. I'm industrial staff. So, and it is a construction company site. So, up to you guys. >> So, where are they supposed to go? >> Well, where's the intended plan for them here?

They're actually functioning. >> Yeah. >> Um, >> not the way we would want them to function. >> Well, if they want to if they if Well, here's the deal. [snorts] if they're going to leave them where

they are functioning as the edge of the layown areas in the edge of the roadways, they're not going to be picking them up and using them on sites because then you lose the functionality. So, so

they're not there because they need a stockpile location for those. And if they are, that's a bad plan. [laughter] So if they need jersey barriers on this site for their jobs, you would put them in

rows in the layown areas, >> right? >> Um but yeah, they're using them as opposed to storing them in my opinion in place of other site elements that were supposed to be there in in place of the wood

guard rails in place of you know. >> All right, I I agree with that. Or is that true, Matt? That's >> that's correct. That's how they're using them. Yeah, they think they're ones they probably had as

part of their their ongoing business, but they've put them on site to act as the as the barrier at the top of steep slopes along the layown areas. >> All right, that's a no. Is that being used as like

a retaining wall there? >> No, just um almost it's being used as a guardrail essentially. >> Yeah. >> So, what was supposed to go there? Uh >> a guardrail. Yeah. >> Yeah. Steel and wood >> one you can

see through, not >> correct. Yeah. So, it's kind of as you leave the top area, kind of along the edge as you go down and then around the lay down areas where the lay down areas kind of drop off to the

slopes, >> but there's not a restriction there that you could just use the guardrails as planned. I mean, as far as the retaining wall is where we were just talking about fire, but >> there's no

reason you can't. There's no reason that I know of. You tell me, Matt, why you can't put guard rails in in those other locations as opposed to on the wall where they might destabilize or be harder. >>

They just had the jersey barriers. I think that's that's why they used them. >> We got them. We used >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, I heard a bill on a no on bill. >> Yeah. And then I guess that if we're if

we're going to get rid of the jersey barriers, we might as well get rid of them in the other spot, too. The um the last thing we just kicked around for 15 minutes. Yeah, I wouldn't like I' I'd be a no

because it' be setting precedent on anywhere else in town. Anybody else be coming into us, why can't I have it? And if they don't come into us and ask for it to begin with, they would just go and do

it anyways and ask for forgiveness or demand for forgiveness afterwards. That's the precedent we're setting. >> That's two through the chair. And and I appreciate you coming in tonight. And um I also

appreciate businesses coming to Sutton because we need businesses. Um but at the same time uh there's no flat areas to buy anymore. So people are buying uh there's a geography challenge >> to build

this here. Uh and I I'm pretty sure you're new moving in. This is going to be uh quite a project to make this actually work. Um and they were willing to do it. So, I was willing to support you. But at

the same time, it's u Yeah. Not ex what we were looking what I was looking for. >> But I do want to you stay. >> Yeah. >> And I want it to work. Um uh just isn't uh isn't what I envisioned. >> Yeah.

Sure. And these ones in particular, I think um I don't think I can make the beauty the beauty in the eye the beholder case. I don't think I think any beholder thinks these don't look awesome. So, if

they need to move, um, they will. I think their their their top priority, the questions they want to ask was the ones on top of the wall where they're on the industrial site. You can't see them from

the public right away, but I totally understand the board's comments, too. Um, I think it'll be very difficult for them to to correct or to to put a different product there, but again, it's it's at

the board's discretion, so I totally understand the board's points. [clears throat] >> Right. So, it sounds we got two members being quiet on this one. >> Yeah. No, I would be I mean certainly like

this particular one where you could put a guardrail. >> This should be a guardrail. I mean there's no you know the other one there was oh it's a different retaining wall we it's a little you know

disturbing I mean >> the fancy words you use which I can't repeat but you know going into the and I get you know to that at some extent but on these it really was more just oh we already got them

let's just put them you know there's no reason there's not a guardrail there on those you know um >> you >> I do I mean they're the ones I believe at the beginning that proposed the guardrail I mean,

we didn't make you do the wooden guardrail. You submitted a plan. >> Yeah. >> And now you said what you wanted to do and and the board approved it. >> Um, we've been remiss in not asking Erica's

opinion. >> Erica, >> no, I I agree with the guys. >> So, thanks, Erica. >> You're welcome. >> All right. Um, okay. So, that's a no on those ones. The other one we'll we'll still get our input on and

they can take a look at. Um, next >> I'm going to go super quick because all these other ones are pretty pretty minor. Um, the the swailes they installed rip wrap instead of grass line swailes. Um, in

our mind that's actually an improvement. It's it's better um energy dissipation and better stabilization of the of the swailes. Um, the reason we usually don't show it on a plan is is quite frankly

it's more expensive. So, we would we would opt for grass line swailes and propose check fans along it. Um, I think Jen noted there were some like weeds growing in. They probably just need to maintain

it properly um and make sure they're they're weed whacking it and and cleaning it out and um probably some sediment too because they're still stabilizing the the upper layown area. But um their hope

would be the the rip wrap line soils could stay. Um I don't think they're they're objectionable, but again um it was a deviation noted. So I wanted to to run it past the board. >> Yeah. Um um Graves

did not have an area with them being rip wrap, but noted as we have on other projects that if you want rip wrap, you've got to maintain it because once it gets silted up and filled up, then it doesn't

work the same way and it doesn't look the same way. >> And one thing I would note, we didn't include rope soil in our on andm plans. So we could revise that if they were to stay to show the the proper

maintenance for that, we would have included grass line soil. >> Thoughts? If if it's okay with Graves, it's okay with me. >> As long as it's maintained. I know you have steep slopes up there. >> They

sure do. Yeah. >> Yep. >> That's two. >> Um, one with the >> Wait a minute. >> That was only two. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I need at least one more member to agree with those. >> Maintenance is what you you

got to agree to. >> Okay. >> You'll do maintenance. >> I agree. >> Yeah. Erica. >> Erica. >> I agree. >> Okay. Cool. All right. >> Um, third one. This was um the deviation to this access drive on our

plan was a little closer. The transformer to going here. Um I think just per the utility company, they can be pretty particular about that type of thing. So they they shifted it over. They put two

spaces on this side instead of of that side. There's still the same number of parking spaces. We thought it was pretty minor deviation. But >> where did the parking spaces go? >> There was previously

five on the right side of the the access drive. Um they took those two and put them over here. >> Oh, when I did the count, it still didn't come out. I'll have to go redo the count. >> Maybe. Maybe.

Me, too. I counted them a couple times because I wanted to make sure. But if I messed up, I'm going to >> I was counting under things for most of the spaces. So, it was a little difficult. >> Gravel

there. Or is that >> No, that's all paved. >> It's all paved. >> Paved to to this point here. Um and then the stone. >> Okay. >> All right. So, um I did note that usually I mean M National Grid does

what National Grid wants to do with transformers. So, usually transfer armor shifts are just field changes on the plans that you need to show on the asbuilt. Um, so and the same thing with lighting.

When you go to put in lighting, sometimes that shifts and it looks like just one light pole was shifted to >> I believe this one to the other side, >> a different location. So, those two changes are

more like a field change. That would happen when you're doing construction and you National Grid messes with you like they mess with everybody. Um, so, uh, you know, as long as the board is okay with

those two shifts, they can just just, um, agree those are field changes and that they are reflected on the asill plan. Um, those don't really rise to the same level as these design changes. So, does

the board have any concerns with the shift of the transformer and the shift of one of the light poles? >> I do not. >> No. Nope. All right. So, we're just going to mark those as field changes. Um, all

right. So, [sighs] let me see. I have uh curbing in the north parking lot. >> Yep. That was the the drainage um that we had discussed previously. That's up up this way along the the Jersey barriers.

>> Um I'm thinking of the if you shift at at the base of where the what do you call it? the the access road was your original plan showed a funny little kind of a curl around that side of Burm >> up

here. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, um so now that you Well, first off, I guess the board has to agree that they're they're going to let that gravel access drive remain because the gravel access drive was

not part of the plan. Can you speak to any drainage changes with the gravel access drive, if any? >> Yeah. Yeah, sure. They they've installed a crushed stone. So, um I think if it was a compacted

gravel, we would probably consider impervious. In this particular condition, it's it's a kind of a clean stone. So, um would expect it to have appreciably more more runoff than than what was proposed.

>> And is that kind of the final condition up to the if you can just point to the fire department stuff. >> Yeah, the FDC is right here. I know the fire department actually, I think, liked the access

drive and and requested it be be one way so that they can circle around the building if you know, god forbid, there was an emergency. Um, and they did provide the gravel drive. Um, they wanted just

access right up to the to the FDC. Um, so it helps for that as well. >> So, is that the current condition we're seeing? And is that the condition throughout until you hit the paved portion? >> It's

the condition till you hit the There's like a paved stub up to the past the transformer and then it's the stone throughout. Yep. And you as the engineer don't feel that causes any drainage issues. But

the little curl on the original approved plan of Burm needs to be out of the way, needs to be removed because that can't stay in the way of the like if that would be in your way if you exit this

driveway, right? >> Um yeah, they could put a mountable curb there, but it's it's she flowing away. So I think as long as there's they have a clean stone stabilized drive here, it's not an issue. I

think when you visited it was not a clean stone stabilized drive. It was a very muddy not stabilized drive and that was a problem but under this new condition um is better and they've cleaned that up.

>> All right. So um I don't think we got input from Graves on that but wait I did observe gravel dirt driveway east of the building connects to the northern driveway allows for access around the

building that could be used in an emergency. Nonetheless, the driveway should be modified to have permanent soil stabilization. So, you would want to just make sure Graves takes a look at the current

condition and is good with it. If you are good with it, >> as Matt noted, the fire department >> I have a question on it. >> Go for it. >> Um, so the I see the stone, but where the barrel is and in

between the stone and the building >> and there's a looks like a old Jersey barrier there. What what what is that prop like? Is that done? >> This here, >> that whole area all the way up to looks like

there's a a concrete walk walkway outside the door. >> What goes in that area? >> Oh, that's that looks like blast rock. So, it's just like 4 to6 inch blast rock. >> Yeah. >> What I mean is that the

final >> that's what that's where they're intending to keep there. Yeah. >> So, that's the final product. >> Yeah. >> But was that what was on the approved plan? >> I don't think we would have showed

Blast Rock. No, not on the approved plan. No. Yeah. Do you have the approved plan there or No, >> I do. Yeah. No, we didn't show glass rock. >> We would have shown just just landscaping or grass. >> I

think if I through the if I could um I would I would be interested, Jen, in graves, you know, kind of looking at that again. Is it stabilized? Because I don't know. I just see it going downhill there.

It could get muddy or snowy and >> is it fully stable? I don't it doesn't look >> so you see the you know >> you can see the curly q thing I was talking about that that's burm right and then behind it

you showed a ground cover right what was the ground cover through >> oh here we would have shown probably just like a a seed mix I would expect >> yeah all through that area >> so it was kind of

supposed to be green down to the curb it's not >> well what's interest I mean I think is that in a few of these areas >> you look at them and they look like they're unfinished areas. Like you have to

ask how they is that the final thing like >> doesn't look final, you know, but if it's workable and it's use it works is intended, then that's one thing, you know, but it's just >> Yeah. And that's

really your call with the input of your consulting engineer, >> right? >> You know, this is the approved plan which showed the seed mix down to that curbing. So you kind of have that finished more

finished look. So we'll have Graves take a look at all of that including the kind of hodge podgey area with our our friend Mr. um Jersey Barrier and [laughter] and see if he has any commentary. That's

there's no Jersey barrier on that plan, right? >> On our plan. >> Yeah. >> No, we No, we wouldn't have proposed a jersey barrier. >> Okay. And again, it kind of ties in with the other area of you see

a Jersey bar, you're like, "Okay, that's there for a while until something else is, oh, it's gone." >> Okay. So, general cleanup, I think, is what I'm hearing. >> Yep. Understood. >> Um through the

chair, um I'm still thinking about um maintenance on this stuff. Um maybe moving forward. We say this tonight. We don't think about it anymore. Uh I know a piece of property that I own um every year.

Um I have to get an inspection. Uh if yearly, could they give us a report that a maintenance uh is in place and it's happening uh you know when you're finally done just uh once a year we because

otherwise we won't think about it anymore and then we're going to have maybe a bigger problem. So just once a year um report back to us about maintenance and cleaning and and using this stuff here.

You got to work there and you got to deal with it and if you're happy um then we'll be happy. But if it's uh if it's pretty messy and unfinished >> and I think that was the O andM plan that Matt

referred to. There's an operation and maintenance plan that is part of the >> storm water management the drainage and it calls for general cleaning and upkeep of the site because when there's stuff

dirt runoff all over the site it ends up in the drainage system and it ends up in the basins it affects the functionality of everything I'm >> whining this is my my yearly inspection I have to get

inspections and paid for and give it >> uh to the city >> right there's just your approval require ires that they keep up and be in compliance with the on andm and that those reports come to us six

months and a year, no more than a year, but some are required six months. >> Um, so I think Matt was stressing that that that needs to be >> stressed and that comes into us that the on andm is

actually being performed here. >> Yeah, >> that's what they're they're all supposed to let's just say there's some letters going out. >> [snorts] >> Yes, [laughter] there's a there's a log form um

that they're supposed to be filling out and submitting and we can definitely re read >> every site we have with storm water is supposed to be doing that which is why there's some letters going out

because you got to chase. It's unfortunate but we often have to chase the site's being >> to somebody. >> Okay. Um, so Graves's input on all of this on that the curbing, the roadway, the finish on all

of that. >> Is that the one section that's not tred or concreted over? >> Um, this >> is there more sections that are gravel >> the lay down area? >> Lay down. >> I'm just thinking like for plowing,

that's is that the one section they got to come around, plow, and then push gravel over everything else? >> Push the stone over. Yeah. >> Okay. What you mean? >> Unless you know what you're doing. >>

All right. Scravel Access Drive. Um, parking spaces. I'll go back out there and count. As long as there's number of parking spaces shown on the plan, I don't think the board would necessarily have a

concern with them shifting. As long as they're all there, right? And paved. >> Correct. Correct. >> Paved lined there. >> Yep. >> All right. I'll go back out and count. Um um the question was asked

there is one landscaping island in this on this site and it is um when I was there you couldn't see it because it was covered with everything. [snorts] So the question there it is it's that

rectangular bumpout. Um and it was supposed to have two trees in it. This is a very treed site around the edges, but that was supposed to have two trees in it. We let them eliminate or that was how

they made the what 5% interior landscaping in that one island and then kind of the slopes the slopes are kind of grasped against the building. Um, so the question is if they keep it clear, can they

eliminate the trees? >> Well, I guess they don't feel strongly about this. They'll plant the trees. Um, I think when Jen was out there, it was covered in stuff. They've cleared it off. It needs to be

seated now and and vegetated. I think their question was I told them I could ask the board maybe if we put two trees up front instead of here. That would be they the board would be fine with that

because it'd just be less leaves in their their parking area. But I don't think they feel strongly about it. Um, it's not something I don't think they they'd push hard on to be honest. >> Through the

chair, you can give the town two trees where we need them. You don't need trees. >> Yeah. Yeah, they would do that as well. Yeah. >> Yeah. In our give us money to plant two trees where we need them in

a park somewhere. Not not out here. >> I'm not I'm not advocating hostaging of the site to give the town trees. But unless they remove town trees, but >> yeah, they can put two trees someplace else.

>> Obviously, my only concern is it's a it's a very minor concrete burm. I not concrete uh Cape Cod BM along that area and if there's nothing in it, there's going to be stuff in it. You know what I

mean? So that's the only reason I would put some kind of plantings in there. Not necessarily trees, but >> is is that what we're looking at right there, Jen? >> Or maybe you just say, you know, >>

just >> don't need trees. >> Bm the whole damn thing and sorry, take out the thing and put it on more parking spaces. I you know >> I resisted the urge to offer jersey barriers to [laughter] >> you're

killing me. That's so funny. So >> Matt, you've had a tough job here tonight. >> No worries. >> Yeah. So the first they definitely need to vegetate this and landscape it. I think the condition you see

now is from a product of them storing things on there which they shouldn't have been doing. Um, >> I'll have to say I one of the things I noticed on both of my site visits is the employees of the

tenant um were sitting on the stuff that was filed in there to have their lunch. So maybe >> how about a tree and >> how about you put picnic tables >> and a couple a tree and a couple picnic tables.

Two trees and a two picnic table. I was like, I'm sorry. You're sitting on top of that whatever that is to eat lunch. >> Aside from the storage that there's a nice spot that the woods back there is

hundreds of feet of woods and quite nice if it was picnic table. >> Yeah. So that would be a good option in my personal opinion, but again not a voting member of the district. So thoughts, eliminate

it all together. Throw the two trees on it. Maybe think about the actual use and the employees on the site and have some place for them to sit and eat their lunch. >> I'm going for the trees and the

picnic table. >> I'm uh the poor trees. You don't give them a chance. I got to get snow is going to get put there. Um I just think there's a different place to put uh trees. No trees. A or two trees

and a picnic table. >> You could do the Well, you can combine both of them. You want, you know, do the picnic tables anyways. It's not going to cost you much to do that anyways, right? You're probably

going to do that anyways for >> you put elsewhere >> and do Bob's comment of, you know, put two trees to the town. >> Sure. If if that's easily to do or they'll put it elsewhere on the site. I don't

know how exactly. Yeah. >> Or you put them on the hill. >> Yeah. You got to do stabilization maybe there anyways or something. I don't know. >> Yeah, up near the front like in front of the lay down

areas where you can see it from the public road is is what I was thinking with. >> Yeah, I would agree with that. Um you could put the trees on site somewhere else if you so choose. I like the idea of

the picnic table just so that particular area doesn't get >> stacked stacked again where you know it maybe at least creates a little nice visible spot that you know like you said employees seem to be

out there eating in the nice weather. So give him a nice, you know, little something in that little space just so it doesn't get >> over like you said. It probably would, you know. >> What do you

think, Dave? >> I think probably just like I don't think we need trees there, but definitely grass. Definitely something greener than the picture. >> Erica, what do you think? >> I'm thinking grass

and a picnic table. >> All right. All right. You got some direction there? >> Yeah, perfect. Thank you. >> Um, all right. This one you get to explain. So, you had one entrance to the southern layown

area, which is the one closer to the building. >> The upper one. Yeah, >> the upper one. Now, they roughed in the dirt driveway, which wasn't accessible by any means when I was there. There's a big

old twoft ditch in the middle of it. Yeah. >> Um, you messed up my shoes. That was not good. And but they want that to remain. >> Yeah. Um, again, I don't think they feel super strongly. I think it's

just kind of a quick path um between the front of the building and that lay down area um for for tracked vehicles. Um, what I offered them is, well, I think really what matters is the total impervious

area. So, if when you finally finish that northern area, if you make it smaller, then then this little area counterbalances. But um I they were ready to to cover it up and and plant it. I just told

them I'd ask the board if if it did provide help to their operations. >> How does it affect drainage? >> Um as long as they do not um keep the same area in the northern area, if they reduce that area,

it's all going to the same location and they would need to make sure to have a covert underneath it if when they finalized it to let the the drainage through. So, they have access what what is that?

50 feet up on the right. That's the real entrance. >> Uh the real entrance is up here. Yeah. On the left photo left >> right there. Yeah. >> Right by those nice trees >> across from those nice trees.

So, they have that's where they're supposed to be going in, but they've been just short shortcutting >> shortcutting. They move the Jersey barriers out of the way and move through. >> So, Um, is there

So if they don't Why don't they just shift the entrance? >> Are they just digging up the hill? >> Yes. >> For what? >> Because it's faster. >> Huh? >> Because it's faster. >> No, I mean like back

here. >> Oh, yeah. They haven't completed this area. Yeah, they >> That's not done yet. Yeah, they haven't reached the limits of kind of where that lay down area is supposed to be. And yeah, um I

don't know. What do you guys think? >> And when they finish that limit, is that excavator going to keep on going back and forth or is that kind of done? >> Well, once it's all the area is defined. >>

Yeah. >> And they put down what was the spec? nine inches of compacted gravel to a proctor of 95%. [clears throat] Then that'll be a super defined area and then the the from that it'll slope back into

the hill smoothly. Basically, that's what it's shown. There's no retaining only right up front. Is there a retaining wall? Just >> Oh, yeah. Like right. >> Yeah. You can just barely see on the photo.

Yeah. >> There's no retaining wall. >> But what what's that other retaining wall there? >> Yeah, there is one there. >> Is that going to continue? Um >> I don't think >> I don't think they would.

Yeah, I know. I think they just uh carve the slope out and stabilize it. >> And that was on the plan not retaining. >> Um yeah, I believe so. Y >> Yeah, I think they're >> Yeah, because the septic

systems up here. >> Yeah, >> so we talking about just this little cut through here. >> Yeah, we're talking about the muddy thing. >> What? >> It was just convenience. >> I I understand it, but it

shouldn't be there. >> All right, >> we can I can tell them to stabilize it. They were they were barely willing to do it. >> Get rid of it. >> Gone. >> Okay. >> Got plenty of uh barriers with fences.

You can just put a couple there. That it's temporary. >> No. [snorts] >> They just moved it. >> I just I'm um Yeah. >> Does everybody agree with the no get rid of it? >> Yes, I would agree with that.

I mean, again, it looks a temporary thing. It's a much steeper than the you know it just seems for that 20 feet of going 20 more feet and turning into the site doesn't seem >> but I don't know >> this

is coming in for what as built for finishing off the project. >> Yeah it's not an asbuilt stage. >> So all right so I feel like I'm hearing the majority says that second drive needs to go away >> and

be stabilized. >> Yes. >> Thank you Erica. You're welcome. >> All right. And um All right. Talk to them about the stone bin. >> Oh. Um >> don't like the stone bin. >> You can kind of see if they have

a 6x6 stone bin. Um they explained to me what they use it for, but it's part of their kind of morning operations. It's not huge. I told them I'd ask if it would stay. One thing I think we did present

was it would be dry storage, so we wouldn't have like top soil or soils or those types of things stored there. And I guess this would qualify. Um, I don't think it's really eroding, but I told them

I'd ask if if they were ready to move it. >> So, I don't see it. That's not it. >> That's not it. Were you What were you referring to? >> No, I'm referring to the one right on the street. There's one

right I was just going to say behind Wes's head. There's one here. There's one here that goes right onto the road. >> Oh. Um, >> there's one here. And it looks like they've been kind of pulling off

right off the driveway. >> Is this the one you're thinking of? >> Stone dust. >> Yeah, I guess that was Is that back? >> Is that That's further back. But >> no, the one I'm talking about is literally

right on the road and there's runoff coming. There's stuff coming out of it onto the road. >> They cleaned up quite a bit between when you and I went. So maybe they got rid of it, but see if I can

find a picture of it. So that would be a concrete bin on top of the lay down area with with like stone dust or something in it. >> Yeah. Yeah. They use it for their construction. >> So we had said

there wasn't going to be stuff like that just because it can wash on the slopes and stuff, but >> what would they be storing in it? Just crush crushed stone. Gravel >> crushed stone or or or gravel.

>> I don't know what the gradation is. It looks like um it wasn't >> like like cuz gravel the rain would wash it. >> It said stone dust in the wording. >> Yeah, it's like a I don't know if I have a

close picture of it. >> Well, that was my wording for the one that was closer to the road. Literally, it came right out into the road. >> Oh, it was >> that one is not the one I think I was talking

about. >> That's That's the material there. Let me see. >> So I call it like a crushed gravel I guess a quarter inch down. >> Compacts really well. >> So >> talking about the dirt pile, I think, isn't

he? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, there were lots of piles. >> Like fine dust. >> It's got some bigger rocks in it, too. stay or go or do you want input? >> I I I'd probably want to look at the area and see if

it's washing like like you said, is it washing out? >> What's the importance of this pile versus >> everything else? >> I might have to get back to you on that. They they said they use it every day as

part of their morning operations. what they use it for is a little above my understanding, but I can get clarification. They >> That because it's not that much of it, so I can't imagine. It's not like

a huge pile. It's, you know, it's just a little pile. So, but >> but if it if it was in if you zoom back out, you had a container that was like all four sides and a bottom. Yeah. That rolloff if there

was something that actually held it from washing out >> like a containment. >> Yeah. We can have that. >> Was that important? And indoors. Oh, yeah. I don't know if indoors, but something actually

kept the rain off it. >> Sure. >> Well, it sounds like they use it. So, they got to find a spot for it. >> Yeah. Maybe up on where it's flat. Maybe. It looks like it there. It's like on right on the

slope. >> If you put it up up higher on the flat or something. >> Maybe get the jersey barriers closer together. >> I think those might have to go. [laughter] >> Well, you know, there's an almost

normal use of jersey barriers. um or concrete block. So, [laughter] >> but you see the concrete block doing that at a lot of places. >> Yep. Absolutely. >> And it looks pretty. It looks It looks good.

>> All right. So, you guys going to go look at that and then you think about where it is in terms of wash. >> We can move it to a flat area. Yep. >> But you guys can go take a look at it, too. >>

Yeah. >> With concrete blocks. All >> right. I don't think I don't think I have anything else on my list. dumped again >> that you needed input on. >> No, thank you so much for running it through. I

felt very tedious and I you guys are super patient. I don't know how you did it, but I appreciate it. >> No, thank you for >> All right. So, there's a lot of stuff. So, this was my original list of

stuff that had to be dealt with. >> So, I feel like there's still quite a there's been progress, but there's still quite a lot of stuff on here. So, what are we talking for timing? >> Um, I'll ask him

from timing. I mean, I think the one thing we would want before um we asked you to come out again is to make sure the site was super green and stabilized. And that might not happen till the till the

spring. I think everything you could get done in pretty short order aside from that specific piece, the like making sure the grass is growing and and things like that. >> So, I'm thinking about kind

of, you know, the layown areas being pretty darn close to to done. >> Yep. I know they've been excavating it. So, >> and um and then we it sounds like we need some we need some input from Graves and

you guys can take a field trip and then um I'll pow-wow with the chair and see if this goes on to the next meeting agenda or the one after that. But we should definitely have >> Yeah. And we be happy

>> ideally everything but seating >> wrapped up >> or or a really good reason on why it's almost done basically. >> Yes. >> Yeah. um be happy to come in whenever you'd like and give another update. I

think the the things I saw on your list that were most egregious have been taken care of and now working their way back um to to cleaning up the delay areas and things like that. So, >> okay. Um and

[laughter] then there was the one catch basin in particular that was where the wire cutting was and stuff. Was that one cleaned out? It had a really fun smell that went on. >> I'll ask them to provide

a report on that should just >> Yeah, I'll be able to smell if the smell is still there. It was pretty obvious. But [laughter] >> okay, >> so when's our um I'm just trying to figure out the next time.

It's the 2nd of November. our >> so we can get some input from Graves and you guys can take a field trip before the 16th >> and then we can see where things stand and then I'll talk to Wes >> and see

if it's >> if we're ready to put it on the 16th or if we give one more meeting until the >> No, you know this for for me you got a lot to do and it's it's not going to stay dry like this but on Monday

December 7th gives you a months plus. >> Um, we have the before pictures and I'd like to see the same pictures after. You know, if the same if I see this here a month from now, uh, we miss something.

>> I expect you to see that a lot. People not doing anything. >> Yeah, they're going to Yeah. No, I think they'd be happy to. >> And that I mean some and that's fixable. Very fixable. >> Yeah. >> Just

push everything together and you know, >> Thank you. And I'm okay to for December >> a full month. >> Thanksgiving will come and go >> and we're just going to pow with the input from Graves in

between, >> right? I mean, if it comes up that it's available the six, you know, then you and Wes decide, you know, the chair decide. But if not, I think they might need that full month myself just to

>> Yeah. But like I see maybe if if the timing works on the 16th you have the input of graves and then you can give kind of your final input on the the jersey barrier with the fence >> right >> at the

top of the hill and just one or two other things that it sounded like you wanted Graves input before you gave a final decision on. >> So then he can roll into the right >> the meeting in December with

knowing what they're supposed to be doing and doing it. Oky doy. >> Thank you for coming in. No, thank you for having me. I that took a really long time, so I appreciate everyone's um patience and

everything like that. >> Thank you. Thanks, man. >> Thank you. >> Good luck. Take care. >> Good luck. >> See you again. >> Okay, I'm going to try to make this as quick and painless as possible. So, >>

I'm counting on you. >> Had the right page open, so give me a minute. Alrighty. Um, vote materials. >> No, I was worried there. >> Yeah. All right, >> that went long. >> Yeah, I know. >> I got

worried. >> All right, so um for sub rules and rags, um so I gave you each a um a list of kind of where we are right this minute with the subdivision rules and rags. So, um, uh, I emailed to you and

posted in your Google Drive three documents. One was the the draft version of the bylaw um, red lines with all the comments and all questions and it's it's quite a hodgepodge. Um, and then you have

this document which is the November 2nd 26 initial consideration. Um and then I gave you working draft and I gave you some examples of some sections of um subdivision rules and regulations in this

particular case from Grafton who has a really a really nice subdivision rules and rags um document. So, um, so this is kind of step one, which is, um, just letting you know what what you're seeing in

that draft. Um, I've gone through and made some comments um about the organizational structure, particularly starting at section Roman numeral 3 through the end of the document, thinking about does it

make sense? Are the sections or items within the section repeated that they contradict? Um, we're going to get rid of Roman numerals because Roman numerals are annoying and stupid and four >> like 1.2

3.4. >> No. So, we'll have um it won't be just like Grafton's numbering, but it'll be similar. So, you'll have section one, two, three, four. >> Yeah. I know. And then if you want we can do ABC's or

we can do section three points and we can have the smaller section ones. >> Yeah. >> And then one one. >> Yeah. So I see it as probably a three like a a numeral for the top heading number for the next

heading and then lettering. So like you said 3.3 point A or point A B. So, um, that's what I'm going to try and you guys can let me know what you think. >> I think that would be easier to see cuz even

I'm looking at one of the ones I have 4.4.6.2. Like, there's a lot of numbers. I mean, you can follow it if you obviously take it step by step. >> Yeah. Well, and they've, >> you know, >> one thing I

don't love about their bylaws is they've >> they've numbered everything. I don't know that you need to >> Yeah. Every layers. Yeah. [laughter] >> All right. Yeah. So, we tried to be very uh look for

consistency in terms um the current regulations interchange words like applicant, developer, but you know, use one term. Um there may be places where separate terms are are needed, but there was a lot

of places where you're interchanging similar terms. Um the meaning of phrases and provisions. Boy, there's quite a few places where you read something and you just go, "Huh?" [laughter] Because it

just Yeah. So, I did a lot of looking for that. Are the cited standards still accurate and up to-date? Um, there's a lot of reference to Mass Highway standards that were probably not the current

standard. They're the standard from back in 2006 when this was last updated. So making sure those are all up to date and if there's a way to reference it so you don't have to constantly change it that

was a focus as well. Um are criteria still relevant and in use. We had this discussion recently in terms of the requirement that three permanent benchmarks be sent and the the discussion about well

with the technology you use now with satellites and GPS and stuff that's really not necessary you know so looking at those things flagging those kind of items and going over those with um our

consulting engineer in particular um clearly state standard practices. So, there's certain things that um that we do in practice but aren't in the bylaws. And one of those things, for example, is I

usually if wetland delineations are shown on the plan, I ask the engineer to state who did the delineation, what company did, and when did they do it? Because a wetland delineation from 10 years ago

does us no good. So, um and that's not in the rags. I normally ask people to do it, but it's not in the ranks. So, making sure those practices over time are in the ranks, the validity and the

feasibility of provisions. Um, community fiscal impact assessment. As you know, the board can require this assessment when you have a large project, so like a subdivision over 20 lots or a big

commercial subdivision. Um, but there's provisions in or requirements in some of these things and you'll um see it I think in one of the Grafton examples um that we just want to make sure we're not

doing things that are crazy like this provision requires that you estimate the cost of manh hours for your police and fire departments with respect to a subdivision of a per a particular size. Really?

Okay, now we've got a crystal ball we need to go by, you [laughter] know. So, it's it's are what you're asking it for, is it even reasonable? Is it even or are you just going to be taking a guess? And

what value does that really have? So, just making sure when we have provisions that they're reasonable and doable. Um, are the technical standards up to date? So, those very technical things like the

270 foot centerline radius. Um we've had Graves comment out of that at different points. You know, it can be germanine to grade. It can be gerine to the number of driveways and structures and you know

should it be a cast in stone number or should there be a range or should there be different levels? I think the Grafton example they have two different standards um that are based on design speed I

believe of the roadways. So um should we include new or improved standards? [snorts] One of the things we're looking at as you know we always wave road widths. Well if we're waving at every single

subdivision perhaps we should have a better standard. So many towns, including the Grafton example, have levels of roadways. You know, Route 146 is different than Central Turnpike. Central Turnpike is

different than, you know, um, Putnham Hill Road, which is different than West Milbury Road or West Sutton Road, which is different than, um, you know, Eight Lots Road, which is different than a culde-

sac in town. there's different standards of roadways and one sizefits-all means we're always granting waiverss. Um so not that we need to go to six different road standards, but just having um a

graduated road standard and type defined with a range um is the preference. And again, I've met with the fire department and the highway department already on these. I've asked for another meeting

with somebody out in the audience as well as I have an upcoming meeting next week with Graves Engineering on these as well. So um um are there places where we should reference related policy? The town

of Sutton, for instance, have a has a complete streets policy that they enacted in 2019, which says, you know, when you're doing town roadway projects and putting on state or thinking about

transportation provisions in general, you should think about um the desire and the need to provide transportation conveyances for all types of of of um transportation. So, you know, do you have

sidewalks in every subdivision? And if not, how what size at what point do you make sure there's striped bike lanes or or the like? Um do you want to mandate off-site trails within certain kinds of

development or certain size development? So thinking about these kind of standards that are out there and whether you want to integrate those or at least reference them. And then you'll see I've noted

a lot of areas where I just have general questions or where I think you might have general questions. Um I I referenced section two page 13. If you read this provision on the board of health and that

they have to respond within so many days, it actually looks like it might actually limit their powers to then act on title five applications as each lot is developed. It's very weird wording. So

really um as you kind of go through the drafts thinking about subdivisions we've reviewed all the what waiverss do we give all the time should we adjust things for those as you read through the

language or look at what I've flagged do you also have questions or suggestions if you're bored and you're fluffing through somebody else's subdivision rules and rags do you see something that we

might want to consider Um, so that's really where we are now. The initial markup. I've flagged sections, some questions. Um, I've met with two um, departments. I'd like to meet with one more

department and the town's consulting engineer. And anybody else you think I should meet with obviously um, to just bring in their base um, input and then um, and then this won't be scheduled again

until December. Um, but if you can in your spare ample free time, um, just kind of start rolling through these and just jotting down any questions or comments you might have. Um, and if you're aware

or find, um, towns or provisions that you think would be helpful. Um, if you can make some copies of those or jot that down, that would be helpful as well. So, the goal is to really kind of um start

solidifying a draft in December and um and then um start putting out some really solid drafts to the website, seeing if there's any input on those at the beginning of the year and to enact subdivision

rules and rags. Um it's just a public hearing in front of the planning board because they're really technical standards. There's no they're not zoning bylaws. We're not deciding on uses. It's just if

you're building new roads within the town of S and this is how you do it. And obviously this also addresses form a lot divisions as well. So divisions of land on existing roads. >> Okay. >> Mr.

Chairman, there is a hand up. I believe >> us homework to do this. >> Do you want um >> is that Andrea? >> Yeah. Okay. Andrea, do you have something to say? >> Andrea, do you have something to add? >>

I do. If I can be unmuted. Am I okay? >> You're good. >> Yep. >> Great. Thank you very much. Um, Andrea Mate, 21 Golf Ridge Drive. um planning board and Jen, I missed the I must have missed the

meeting where you talked about the context the uh reason that we have desire, you know, we have um determined to go through with amending the subdivision law at this point. >> Why are we >> No, just

just like the the context, not substance. >> Um it hasn't been updated to with for 20 years and >> Oh, yeah. >> Thank you. >> There you go. So that's number one. It hasn't been updated for 20 years

and um so a lot of standards have changed. Um if you um watch the board reviewing subdivisions plans, you'll see you know waivers that are consistently granted, >> right? >> And whenever you start to

be granting waivers constantly, it's kind of a red flag that you need to kind of look at your regulation and decide if language needs to be adjusted or updated. So the primary reason is it's time and

the secondary reason is it's time. [laughter] So >> yeah no that's great. So [clears throat] the the follow on to that would be >> if um some of these interesting legislative changes occur >> such as

the um 5,000 square foot lot >> ballot initiative or the um mandatory duplex law go forward coupled with the um ADU revisions that we passed. asked at the town meeting uh recently, do these

subdivision requirements need to speak to those possible changes or can we amend the subdivision bylaw itself without kind of worrying about what's going on out there? >> Um, no. I mean, this, as I

just alluded to, the subdivision rules and rags are about road construction standards. So, and usually when you're talking about road widths or design speeds or grades or or the like, um the the the

grade like the types of roadways and how you would treat and design those roadways usually or is often based on the number of dwelling units along the roadways. Um, so that that won't change because

of the the potential changes to kind of housing provisions you're talking about. It just might kick in more. You know, you might have more roads with more than 20 units on them or more than 10 units

on them or the like. Um, so no, this the sub rules and regs are a very technical document about how we design and or how developers design and install um roadways on the ground within residential and

commercial subdivisions within the town. So, um there's um no potential kind of changes you would make to those relative to an increase potential increase in the number of housing available. >> Yeah.

To to a potential significant density increase in the Yeah. Okay. All right. Jen, thank I I appreciate the um board allowing me to speak and thank you for such a great answer. >> Okay. Okie dokie. All

right. So, that's it with that. So, peruse in the within the next month. Make some notes. You can save them up for that next meeting or you can forward them to me so I can start to try to integrate

them. >> Um, and we'll go from there. >> Sounds good. >> All right. Um, ballot question seven. I just did a little bit of followup on that for you. Um, it was very interesting because, um, I may have

mentioned most planners I know across the state in New England are on one of two planners list serves where planners just post a question to get other planners input. And um, the main debate in the

last month has been the ballot question. And I wish I could give that all to everybody to read because boy what amazing amazing wellthoughtout discussions in favor opposed thought points you wouldn't

normally go like huh you know so a lot of um uh a lot of people on the ground working and living like out there in the communities every day who you know talk to residents and people on all different

sides of the equation and some really thoughtful stuff out there. But um the only thing I was going to just get back to you on was the um that kind of the final numbers um from uh Graves Engineering

which let me pull them out of the hat here. So, um, okay, I don't have them in the hat. Where is that? >> Um, uh, the only two numbers were the number of lots potentially affected, which was over 600.

Um, >> 67 >> 67. Yeah, >> you got it then. Yeah. So, oh, here it is right here. um 677 parcels would potentially be affected and um or could be affected and those parcels had the potential to yield an

additional 1,095 lots. As I expressed at the last meeting, so many caveats. Could lots be split into the maximum lots considering the positioning of existing structures? I uh gave you some existing

lots within town where that illustrate these questions. Um does not consider development constraints like wetlands and ledge. Again, I gave you an example where you can see if you just look at the

outside of the lot, it looks like there's a ton you can do and then you lay in the wetlands and it's like not so much. So, um could more lots be obtained with a new roadway. So, you know, there might

be some lots here where you could put in a subdivision roadway and get some more lots. So, would owners even entertain the potential now or in the future? So, frankly, it's it's a guessing game.

Another I mean, if anybody creates a really good um crystal ball, they'd be a gazillionaire. But um this is just the factual datadriven numbers. Approximately 677 parcels could be affected and if

those were maxed out without the use of subdivision roadways, it could yield an additional 1,095 lots. So, um, anybody who's interested, um, can kind of take a look at the illustrations that were

provided for actual lots in town. And, um, I did list values because that would weigh into decisions, too. If you have a very small lot, I like um did one on Leland Hill Road. It's only49 acres with

135 ft of cridge. They have the potential for one additional lot, but the home on the lot is worth $716,000. Are you going to knock down a house worth $716,000 to wedge in another home on that very

small lot? So, that's why I listed some values on those because again, the decision on a lot where the home is 400,000, maybe you make a different decision. So um >> I mean I think the reality in this

one of the question you know will be answered tomorrow. >> Exactly. >> But you know going forward if it passes then you'll be okay. So >> how does this realistically really going to >> right? How's it

going to play out? So I'm just letting you know there's our base numbers. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Interesting. Yeah. Thank you. >> It's not in our control. Well besides the vote tomorrow is not in our

control. >> Only your vote is within your control. Mhm. >> This is the information, some base information to help you make your decision. But um as I I was saying that the discussion was just

stimulating to the brain cells. It was pretty cool. So, [laughter] all right. So, there's that one. Um Wes asked that I put the Westboroough drone restriction bylaw discussion on the agenda. So, I did

provide you some documents relative to that. And um you can just uh I'll let you take that one, Wes, and decide what you want to talk to the board about and ask the board about. >> The plug today. >>

What's that? >> They pulled the plug today. >> Plug heard on the news. >> Amazon. Yeah. >> Westpro Did West Bro pass a bylaw? >> Yeah, they passed article 34. It was unmanned aircraft systems. And I

did give you the timeline. So you do have and it's out on the website if anybody's interested in >> and it goes from um September 28th lots of stuff from actually September no August August 18th 2026

kind of action started on this right up through recently. Um and it kind of gives you the background and they did pass an unmanned aircraft system bylaw. Would that have covered um would they have

been grandfathered in because it was >> Yes, they would have been grandfathered in. Absolutely. Um and the the question remains what the attorney general's office does with this because it hasn't gone

to the I it's gone to the attorney general's office but where that will bylaw >> you know 90 days they have initially >> to re um review that but um >> so would it be worth having something developed

or take the base of that for our own and hold it to see how that works for Westboro for that review and then if something comes I know Amazon didn't pull out, >> but they have other facilities and so

do Walmart and many other places like them. It is going to keep on coming probably in the future. >> Yeah. I think the question is does the board want to consider a bylaw like Westboro once we know

what the attorney general does with it obviously. Um do and or do you want to seek input from residents about how they feel about this? Um, >> well, they'll we'll know how they feel when they vote on

it. >> Yeah, I know. But it's always nice to do a little preemptive [laughter] asking. >> Okay. But I mean, I don't think we How effective are the surveys we put out there, Jim? >> Yeah. I mean, we

the deal is I think these ones are in the news more, so you probably have a lot better chance of getting people's input on things, especially if you send out a a survey that says, you know, something,

you know, invoking. I don't know. [laughter] Um, but yeah, I mean when you just say here's the open space survey, only 300 people ever answer that. Here's the this survey. Here's the that when you you

ask questions on stuff in the news, whether it's about a lot more discussion or you find a better method, you know. Um, >> it does seem I'm sorry. It does seem though like on this one in Westboro, I

mean, they enacted a bylaw very quickly. >> So, it seems like if it was an issue like this We could have a special >> meeting too and you know pass a bylaw within a week or two if whatever you know

the limited time. >> Yeah. I mean just literally >> ideally you're the planning board. So ideally >> you want to be planning. >> Well have a public you're going to have a public hearing on it, >>

right? >> Yeah. >> But it's also I think it's not like in Westboro they were going to be taken off of Westboro, [laughter] >> right? >> I mean it's not here. The ones that we'd be concerned would be

wor as two places they technically could be doing. >> Yeah. I mean, we immediate site here with inside, >> but they could be landing here. >> Well, I mean, they weren't going to land here anyways. The

They did touch the corner of the town. They're just dropping. They never actually touch down if they're drone deliveries. They actually come to 13 feet and drop the package if nothing's within the 18

foot circle. So, [laughter] um, so yeah, and you know, so see what the attorney general says about the bylaw. Let you guys know and then you can decide if you >> I would think at that point. Well, >>

yeah. >> And in the meantime, >> y >> talk to your community about what they think because it's always good to plan with the input of the people you serve. But yeah. All right. So, there's that one.

Um, minutes of 105. >> I make a motion that we approve the minutes from 10526. >> Second. >> Bob Lodge. I >> Wesley S. I >> Bill Dot. I >> Mike Gagan. I >> David Nason. I >> Erica McCullum. I >> Were

you an I or an abstain? Were you here Erica? I watched it online. >> Oh, okay. Alrighty. Any Oh, site visit report that came in Friday. I gave you a copy of a site visit report for the unified parkway

paving. >> So, the rest of the roadway has been paved. >> So, should you like to take a a cruise, feel free. We can go see the final pavement >> all the way down at the end >> all the way to

Providence Road. Yes. >> Is that going to get opened up soon? >> Um I believe the discussion was that they will likely gate it to use it for their vehicles to try to comply with the condition you

placed that said if any traffic was coming out of that street that it needed to not take the left down Boston Road. So, per the discussion when Mario J was here with his concerns, um yeah, they're in

the process of working out a gating system for their vehicles. >> So, >> Jen, is there what triggers the uh site plan? Like Grace doesn't just wake up one day and say, "Oh, we got an extra guy for two

hours. Go check this out." There's certain >> site visits, you mean? >> Yeah, site visits. There's certain specs that need to be done like paving and measuring it and so on. >> As as you'll see as you

delve into your subdivision rules and rags, there's a minimum inspection schedule in the back of the subdivision rules and rags and paving. Both base course and top course paving are required. Okay.

>> Inspections. >> So yeah, >> I must have missed that section when I was reading it. It's in little columns. It's actually one of the ones that doesn't look like they're It's way at the end. >> The

asphalt plants are still open. >> They are still open. >> But that's that's coming. >> That's the excuse people. >> It's interesting because it feels like, and Dave would know better than me, but it

feels like it used to be more hard and fast. Like the plants would close like November 15th and that was it. And lately it feels like they'll stay open a little bit longer. Usually right up till

Christmas now. >> Yeah. >> At least. >> Really? >> Yeah. It feels >> That used to be the excuse. >> Unless we get real cold water, >> right? >> Yeah. Feels more >> 70 and sunny. >> Pave it. [laughter]

All right. I'm good. If you're good. >> I'm good. >> Will we close it? >> Oh, we did have public notices. I'm sorry. two public notices in Milbury. >> Yeah, >> there were two from Milbury. >> Milbury

solar. >> They're doing some more solar over in the community of Milbury about what 11.7 megawws over at [clears throat] 40 Auburn Road and that's about I for to give you an idea that's about four

times the size of the Oak Road install like on both sides. Some of that's in North Bridge. The whole thing is about 3.3 megawws. So they're doing 11.7. So about four times the size of the one that

straddles just up in North Brook. And then they did they're making an adjustment to their solar bylaw. I don't know if it's reactionary. Um but it basically it it it's different levels of permitting

depending on the size of the install. So just two we thought you might be interested in. But the yellow file folder is here should you like to peruse all of the hearing notices you got of which

there's two more three more. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> All right. I make a motion that we adjourn at >> what's that say? >> 840 >> 8401 >> 8:41. >> I'll second that motion. >> Thank you. Rogers. I >>

s Bill Dan. I >> Mike Gage. I >> David Mason. I >> minutes. >> Eric McCullum. I >> awesome. >> Stay for the whole thing. Nikki.