The Raynham Channel
Welcome to Raynham Community Access & Media (RAYCAM), where we engage, learn, and create community access media. We are dedicated to providing a platform for all voices to be heard and shared. Join us in creating a vibrant and inclusive media community.
The Raynham Channel
Planning Board 07/17/2025
(Episode Description is AI generated and may be errors in accuracy)
Raynham's vision for the future of its commercial corridor takes center stage as planning officials delve into the Route 138 corridor study. SERPID representatives Lizette Gonzales and Robert McGraw unveil a community-driven approach to transforming one of the town's main thoroughfares into a pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use district with New England charm.
The study, born from extensive community feedback, reveals Raynham residents' strong preference for traditional New England architectural styles with buildings capped at 2.5 stories. Survey participants rejected large-format retail surrounded by vast parking lots, instead favoring developments with 30-foot setbacks filled with pedestrian plazas, green spaces, and limited parking. This vision aims to create "micro-villages" along the corridor—connected, walkable spaces that prioritize human scale over commercial sprawl.
Planning Board members grapple with practical challenges of implementing this vision across fragmented property ownership along Route 138. "It's been a son of a gun since day one," remarks Chairman Gallagher, acknowledging the corridor's complex development history. However, there's palpable excitement about creating alternatives to the "big giant ugly warehouse buildings" that might otherwise dominate the landscape.
The proposed mixed-use overlay district would create flexibility without mandating change, allowing property owners to develop according to either existing zoning or the new guidelines. This opt-in approach addresses concerns from previous failed attempts at rezoning while still providing a pathway toward the community's preferred development style.
What emerges is a thoughtful blueprint for balancing growth with character—recognizing that development is inevitable but can be shaped to enhance rather than detract from community identity. As multiple board members announce plans to step down within two years, this master planning process may become their lasting legacy for Raynham's future commercial landscape.
https://www.raynhaminfo.com/
Copyright RAYCAM INC. 2024
July 17, 2025, rainham Planning Board. You can watch us live here. We're also on Channel 98, comcast Verizon Channel 34. We're taking minutes for the meeting. It's available on video. It's available after the fact on Rainham's YouTube channel when they get around to it.
Speaker 1:Basically I'm Chris Gallagher. I'm the chairman. To my left is Burt Fountain. Vice chairman To his left is brian ophiel. Planning board member. To my right is anthony nicole. He's a clerk. His right is pam and coney, she's our circuit rep. Basically, the way I run a meeting is on every topic, including public hearings. On every topic, including public hearings, I discuss the topic initially. I generally go to each planning board member and recognize them by name to see what their input or discussion would be on the topic. If it's a public hearing or form, a plan or anything like that, I hand it over to the applicant. When the applicants done it comes back to me. I go back each plan and board member. After that, I open it the public input and everything public inputs by a raise of hands and I recognize each person and be patient, I'll get to everyone. That's typically how I run the meeting. So no one talks out of order, including our own members. The first thing we have on the agenda is the minutes of the June 5th 2025 meeting.
Speaker 4:I make the motion that we waive the reading and approve the motion. Do I?
Speaker 1:hear a second on that motion, second Any discussion. All in hearing, none all in favor.
Speaker 3:Aye.
Speaker 1:Okay, the second forest on the right, the Dennis County land. It's been in front of us before the public hearing has been open. There was an extensive list of comments. They haven't been fully addressed. Review engineer, who supplied the comments and did the peer review, was on vacation this week but I had just talked to him today. A lot of his stuff is still outstanding anyway. So the applicant, um, sent us an email yesterday, july 16, 2025. We have an email from the applicant's representative, evan Watson from W Engineering LLC.
Speaker 1:On behalf of the applicant, I would like to request the planning board hearing regarding the East Pine State Subdivision schedule for july 17th. He continued to august 7th, so there'll be no evidence taken on this here tonight. My thoughts of with some obsession we probably won't have a meeting August 7th. So I would entertain a motion to continue it to August 21st. I have consulted Maureen McKinney, administrative assistant, and she said our time to act presently is August 28th 28th. And you were going to ask Evan for a continuation. I mean an extension for that.
Speaker 6:I did. I haven't gotten it. I'll check it in the end.
Speaker 1:Okay, so right now time to act is 28, so I entertain a motion that we continue the public hearing on East Pine State's Defendant Subdivision to August 21, 2025 at 6.01.
Speaker 4:So moved.
Speaker 1:So here's second Second.
Speaker 5:Any discussion, all in favor.
Speaker 1:Aye Aye. Just a quick question for Maureen 539 South Street site plan. It doesn't have a time on that.
Speaker 2:No, I haven't scheduled it in the exact time yet. Okay, okay plan.
Speaker 1:It doesn't have a time on that, okay. Okay, that's East Pine 601. We have an A and R plan. It's not a public hearing. We we can take it any time. That's an approval, not required form A plan. It doesn't require a public hearing since it allegedly meets all the rules and regs. Is there an application going on?
Speaker 4:No, Burke's not available.
Speaker 1:So Burke's checking the application for the necessary fees and for application completeness. We're CHECKING THE APPLICATION FOR THE NECESSARY FEES AND FOR APPLICATION COMPLETENESS. The PLAN, okay, okay.
Speaker 4:OKAY, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay.
Speaker 1:OKAY, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay, okay. The first purpose of this plan is to divide the existing drainage. Now again, this is Goldfinch Drive, a subdivision off Locust Street, bassett and Old States former Jerry Talisman property. It looks like he's modifying.
Speaker 7:This is the one from last time that didn't have any information on it. Oh, okay, so this was in front of us before and we requested additional information.
Speaker 1:Have you reviewed this one?
Speaker 8:I had a discussion with Lee this afternoon. The information that you requested should be found on the plan. Basically, what they're doing is they're changing access locations to give a deeded access to the town, as per request of the highway superintendent, because the original access when the plan was designed had been changed during the construction process. So now, basically, they're removing this parcel and changing the footprint. I mean changing the lot line so that the access area is not part of the open space that's going to belong to the homeowners association. Okay, so that's the access off the Blue.
Speaker 1:Jay Lane, exactly, highway is fine with that access. This is basically an access to the drainage basin for highway maintenance.
Speaker 8:It's actually done because of the highway superintendents request, so we had clear access on his own without having to go over someone else's property anyone have any discussion on this plan for?
Speaker 4:only thing I don't have payment for. I DON'T HAVE PAYMENT FOR THE PLAN SHE.
Speaker 9:DIDN'T TRUST US WITH THE CHIP.
Speaker 1:IS THAT IT, RYAN? No, I'M FINE WITH IT.
Speaker 5:NO, I'M SORRY.
Speaker 1:THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS OR FURTHER DISCUSSION NO APPLICANT HERE. No, I'm SORRY. Any QUESTIONS? Okay, if THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS OR FURTHER DISCUSSION NO APPLICANT HERE. It's PRETTY SELF-EXPLAINATORY. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS PLAN IN FRONT OF US AS TO.
Speaker 4:APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED IN THE CERTIFICATE. To FOLLOW UP, I make a motion that we approve a plan entitled approval not required plan of land at rain hand preserve, formerly known as Bassett Nova State land in the plan not requiring second discussion. I'm sure I signed all these this time.
Speaker 7:Okay.
Speaker 1:Just in case, I think the circuit may take it. Yes, it's GOING TO WORK. Mr STONE, just IN CASE, I THINK IS SURPHID, can I TAKE IT? Yes, it's ADVERTISED FOR 6-20. It's NOT A PUBLIC HEARING BUT I THINK MAYBE YOU CAN CLEAN UP SOME OTHER THINGS BEFORE YOU GET IN THERE. Okay, okay, so THIS COMING UP IS GOING TO BE DISCUSSION ON THE. Okay, so this coming up is going to be discussion on the master plan done by CERF, which is a southeastern regional planning and economic development something or other. Do we have any invoices of bills? Okay, yes, I'm going to connect to the computer. This is invoices of bills. Okay, yes, I'm going to connect to the computer. This is invoices of bills in front of me. I'm going to pass these around. Should I sign it in advance? Yes, pardon, should I sign it in advance and every page on these bills gets signed. I'll send these down this way first, because Anthony's signing stuff. They named streets after Burke over here you got your own candy bus, I know where to find one.
Speaker 4:That's okay, okay.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 1:I'll wait, wait. What comes back? Well, east pine, with the fishing on east pine, and they haven't even gone through the definitive stage.
Speaker 8:I think you should hold off on that until the next meeting. Okay, I think you should hold off on that until the next meeting. Okay, well, I mean, is there enough in the account to pay since continued review? Well, we need to fund the account, but we're not going to approve any bond for any lot releases until the next meeting. No, no, this is a review. Oh, I'm sorry, it's a review. No, this is the review. Oh, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1:The review, do you?
Speaker 3:have a suggested amount $10,000?. No, that was my review, Okay, Just to sidebar it. On the invoices that we're signing.
Speaker 1:One of them is East Pine, which is the subdivision that just continued in front of us is the fishing funds, because we did have a pretty extensive review Administrative system. More than any suggests that we ask for or require additional funds of $10,000, be it positive accounts or be provided any public hearing doing. Do I have a motion from anyone to so moved? Do I have a second?
Speaker 1:Second and the motion was to add you know, require the applicant to add $10,000 in the review fund to these five states. So the motion was made Seconded any discussion. Anthony, yes, chair, Cronin, all in favor.
Speaker 4:Aye Aye.
Speaker 1:WE HAVE PROJECT FUNDS THAT ARE OLD, old PROJECTS THAT MAURENE HAS MADE A LIST OF. That ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE ALL CLOSED, out AND DONE. There's 1023, broadway, the GUL, south Main Street, king Street, open Space Plan, norfolk existing funds, riverfront, tdr existing funds, and they're not a lot but just stuff that was left in the account. 1555 East State Highway, mastery of Fear, lot 10, fortress or Parkway.
Speaker 1:CT2FB Trust highway, mastery of fear, lot 10 for sure. The parkway to keep you up, you trust. And these are all funds of projects that closed out occupancy permits.
Speaker 3:Done that was left over in in accounts ranging from $600 up to $5,300.
Speaker 7:Do you have this perk in front of you that you get? I don't.
Speaker 1:Well, these are the funds. I'm going to be looking for someone to make a motion to release these funds so we can return them to the applicant.
Speaker 4:Thank you. Well, I'll make a motion that we release the funds as set forth on a one-page paper entitled accounts and clothes second second.
Speaker 1:NO, okay, all IN FAVOR.
Speaker 4:AYE.
Speaker 5:OKAY.
Speaker 1:THAT'S DONE AND IN WORDS OF EXPLAINED. There's A LETTER FROM LONGFIELD HOMES CONSTRUCTION ESSENTIAL. I TALKED TO SID ABOUT THAT TODAY. That's GOING TO BE DEALT WITH IN ANOTHER WAY. Do YOU WANT TO BOLD OFF ON YOUR UPDATE TILL LATER? To be dealt with another way? Do you want to hold off on your update?
Speaker 6:until later. Do you have any circuit update?
Speaker 3:I do not have a circuit update other than what's going to be presented tonight.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I guess that is it. That is some plans to be signed. Are there any other ones? Yeah, catch them up later, chris, if you're looking to fill a void. I do have a couple quick things. What PROVIDED IT IS SOME PLANS.
Speaker 6:TO BE.
Speaker 1:SIGNED. Are THERE ANY OTHER RULES? Yeah, we'll CATCH THEM WITH LATER.
Speaker 6:CHRIS, IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO FILL A VOID, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK THINGS.
Speaker 3:WHAT.
Speaker 6:I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK POINTS TO BRING UP BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S S AGENDA ITEM IS THERE. Any AGENDA ITEM? Yeah, it's NOT AN AGENDA ITEM, it's JUST WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING TO FILL SOME TIME BEFORE THE HEARING AND, if YOU WANT TO TAKE IT OUT OF TOWN, something YOU CAN DO IN LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES. Oh, yeah, okay. So WHAT I W? I THINK WE EACH GOT TWO E-MAILS FROM TWO INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS IN TOWN ASKING FOR A RESPONSE RELATIVE TO A JOINT MEETING WITH THE SCHOOL COMMITTEE AND THE SELECT BOARD. I'm OF THE OPINION THAT WE'RE NOT THE PROPER BOARD TO ORCHESTRATE SUCH A MEETING, but I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF NOT RESPONDING TO A RESIDENT. So I about it, if you, what your thoughts are on that, and we should reach out to the board of selectmen and ask them if they've responded to it. I just don't like the idea of ignoring. That. Was gonna gonna get to that in far squandered.
Speaker 1:Now there was a letter from certain people. I think that they're happy the school thing failed but we should have joint meetings. That's not going to happen. We're very transparent on how we take any project that comes in front of this board. I'm not sure if you're aware, because you're relatively new, but every development comes in front of us. We take a dozen copies and send it to every board committee so everyone has an opportunity for input. A lot of times we don't get, but I mean everyone has input and if the school committee is concerned on what we have for ongoing jobs a lot of times actually notified Bridgewater as well they can always call the office and just give a heads up, say what's going on and we have to provide them with any paperwork on any development that's happening. But in the case of any commercial site plan, subdivision plan, I mean, the crew will not require changing a lot line. That's different. But on any, you know, commercial CHANGING THE LOT LINE, that's DIFFERENT. But ON ANY YOU KNOW COMMERCIAL SITE 44, 138, anything COMMERCIAL OR BUSINESS THAT.
Speaker 2:GOES.
Speaker 1:OUT TO EVERY DEPARTMENT IN TOWN AND I THINK WE ARE PROBABLY THE ONLY BOARD THAT DOES, that does that, but so we're pretty transparent and everything goes out. I don't think a written response is required, but I think you know that's a good point that you brought up that. That was there. I was going to bring it up in discussions. I'm glad you did. But again.
Speaker 1:We're not going to do joint meetings with a bunch of other boards. We're going to have our own meeting. It's available on tv a couple different cable stations, it's available on youtube, minutes are available and again, all the, all the plans that come in front of us get put out to all different boards. They don't go to the school committee but the school committee's not a town board, it's a all-be-town board. But they're welcome to call anytime. Call our office. You get called by a Brady and full-time or a McKenny full-time and get copies of any plans that are coming in front of us or have come in front of us if they want to do their future planning for their, if THEY WANT TO DO THEIR FUTURE PLANNING FOR THEIR SCHOOL. Anybody ELSE THAT NEEDS DISCUSSION ON THAT BURKE, no RIGHT.
Speaker 4:ANYBODY ELSE KEN.
Speaker 6:I JUST WANTED TO THROW OUT THE OPPORTUNITY OF HOW YOU ALL FEEL ABOUT OBTAINING A TOWN E-MAIL. In LIGHT OF THIS E -MAIL THAT WE GOT.
Speaker 2:I.
Speaker 6:THINK THAT A TOWN E, I think that a town email address for us. Right now we're using all of our own personal email addresses, but where the basis of all of our communication is through email.
Speaker 1:Yeah, we don't. The town doesn't have emails for us. They don't have email addresses for us, so now they have to select them. I mean, that's something you could bring up, but you have town administrators' email, you have Marines' email, you have Bobs' email, so we're very accessible because they represent us. So we have them emailing us individually.
Speaker 8:I think what she's getting at is when I share information, it goes to your personal email and not to a separate email where all those files can be kept separate. I think that's what you're so. I think you have time, ministry, to say. Maybe he can help us with that down the road.
Speaker 1:We can set something up. I mean, the people that sent the letters, in other words us, is a, I guess the town administrator. Would you be adverse to sending them out a letter saying to the multiple people and saying you know, all this information is available to?
Speaker 8:our office. I think these two. There's two questions here. I think she's looking for a town email. It's unrelated to that. Not her personal.
Speaker 6:Going forward.
Speaker 3:Yeah, that's beyond I think our pay grade.
Speaker 2:I'm in with vacation, but we will look into it. Thank, you?
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's not something under our purview, I think that would be something under our office Right, but I understand the law.
Speaker 6:Yeah, I didn't know if you all had the same feeling and you could send a correspondence. But now that he's here, I don't need to do that.
Speaker 1:For the $400 they give us a year. I think we're doing funny as it is. But I understand that would be nice. But that's something I think that's going to be brought up either through the TA or through the selectmen. But you know it could be useless for people to access. But I mean, there's so many websites to look. If you want to look for something, it's everywhere.
Speaker 8:It's almost too much stuff does the select board have their own email, or is it personally? So I think that's what she's alluding to.
Speaker 3:I THINK THAT'S WHAT.
Speaker 8:SHE'S ALLUDING TO. She WANTS TO SEE IF WE CAN HAVE THE BOARD. Have THEIR OWN TOWN E-MAIL, OH.
Speaker 1:WE DO, you DO WE.
Speaker 3:HAVE.
Speaker 8:YOU AND MAUREEN.
Speaker 1:I MEAN YOU LOOK IT UP ON THE WEBSITE AND YOU'RE THERE. I THINK SHE'S WHAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT.
Speaker 3:IS PERSONAL TO HER VIEW OF HAPPENING IN THE FUTURE. Oh NO, I DON'T W about this personally to her and you and each of you. Oh no, I don't want people the public.
Speaker 1:I mean the public, whoever it represented, the people that sit there and hit us all up on personal email. I don't think it's really appropriate.
Speaker 6:But that's why I'm not suggesting that we have a town issue email so that that way, if we needed, to oh yeah, no, I see what you're saying.
Speaker 1:They issue them for the selection, but the other boards conservation Commission's own board. I mean, if they want, you want to try to get that done, that's fine we're gonna all or nothing.
Speaker 7:Definitely all the boards are yeah, they don't.
Speaker 1:That that's a town practice, not us. So I mean, if the town wants to try to do that, um, that's fine, but um, I mean for me.
Speaker 7:I created a filter so I can just. I'm more concerned with I can keep.
Speaker 6:I'm more concerned with public answer. Public records requests I think you're getting into a messy territory if you ever do that. A public records request and the only correspondence between any board member and somebody at Serpid is on my personal email. All of our emails are vulnerable and it could be very vulnerable or if you are somebody that deletes your emails regularly because you do good maintenance. There's no server that we can extract that information from and provide the information to the public, which is kind of a disservice to us.
Speaker 1:Well, if that's something you'd have to take up with the select committee and IT department, I mean, I'd rather keep my personal email on it.
Speaker 3:I agree with that.
Speaker 1:I mean I'd rather keep my personal email out of it.
Speaker 8:I agree with that. I think, if you don't mind, I'll take this and run with it and I'll work with Greg and we'll try to get something put together here in the next couple of months, I mean since Tim's been gone, I don't know what there is out there for the IT. Not a lot.
Speaker 1:There's nothing. That's what I think. Since Tim's been gone, I haven't seen much advancement advancement, but you know it would be nice. That's the case because right now we're very, very careful on any discussion, when we do emails to each of us and Bob, on just about every time, says if you're going to respond, just respond to me, don't ever do a reply all, and that way it's a violation of public media. So we're very conscious of that and very careful of it. It would be nice if that could happen, but I think that would be something you'd have to take up with the selection, right? So give me something more. Yeah, yeah, yeah, you know.
Speaker 1:As far as, like, the people that sent the letters, there's plenty of information out there. If you want to know what's going on at the school committee in my 20 something years here in berks 30 something I don't think they've ever asked for anything, but they want anything. It's there, um, you look into it and let us know how you make out. So I'm 16 taking, so I'M SICK OF TAKING CARE OF ALL OF THE BUSINESS EXCEPT THE PLANNING COORDINATOR UPDATE AND THE PLAN TO BE SIGNED TO BE AFTER THE MEETING. So WE HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THE MASTER PLAN THE MASTER PLAN IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN DONE BY CERPID. The master plan something that's been done by serpent. It's a plan that a vision of what, how they see bringing him and see how it's developed. It may not be the vision of people in rain ham that vision always gets discussed at town meeting but surf it's basically given us direction and some stuff to think about before I turned over. Does anyone have any discussion on this briar, the circuit taking over?
Speaker 8:no, I just want to make sure we can get this on the screen.
Speaker 1:Don't even ask me. See, we can't even get our email straight, never mind get something on the screen. That's what happens with no IC.
Speaker 8:Oh it's behind me.
Speaker 1:There you go, you're going to have to be in the audience tonight. I get eyes in the back of my head. I was married once, but I shouldn't say that I think that means we're all going to have to turn around.
Speaker 8:She can get it on the screen. We'll see. If she gets it on the screen, I'm going to have to laser on my forehead.
Speaker 1:Okay, before anything, before you get started, you know want you to, you know introduce yourself and then give your presentation to us. Now has CERF put a bill on this for the most part, I don't think so. No, I didn't either.
Speaker 8:They've got to pay their bills too. Yeah, it's going to be true. I got one, yeah this is a good argument to hire an IT guy.
Speaker 9:Everyone should have a good IT guy.
Speaker 8:You need an IT guy.
Speaker 7:You'll see my TV is on the worst You'll see.
Speaker 8:my TV is on the worst.
Speaker 5:You need to have the same accent, okay, thank, you, I'm scared to touch it so Professional man, zero chance of it going on.
Speaker 7:that one right.
Speaker 2:Oh, is there a oh boy?
Speaker 7:is this for us, or for the cameras, or for you guys? Ideally for everyone? Well, yeah, I think they do that. Okay, all right, and if it's for that, I will work for that we're going to put it on the website.
Speaker 1:Let's try to get through it. All these websites, let's try to get through it.
Speaker 9:So Introductions. My name is Lizette Gonzales. I'm the director of economic and community development at Serpent. I'm joined by Robert.
Speaker 2:McGraw and.
Speaker 9:So over the last few months of just about a year we've been working on the Rainham Route 138 corridor study, which came directly from the master plan process which we helped the town go through, and I do want to clarify that the vision that was presented in the master plan wasn't Serpent.
Speaker 9:We don't plan for ourselves. We plan based on what we hear from the public and it is. You know, we think of ourselves almost as translators. What we hear from the public, we translate into goals and strategies for zoning, economic development, housing, and that's some of what you'll see today. Just to take a step back before we dive into some of the more detailed and technical stuff tonight.
Speaker 9:The route 138 corridor study came from this idea. That and previous efforts, you know. I want to recognize that this has been something that the town has been working towards for a while now to produce a mixed-use overlay district along the 138 corridor. We're hoping that this iteration of the process addresses some of the concerns from the last time and OVERLAY DISTRICT ALONG THE 138 CORRIDOR. We're HOPING THAT THIS ITERATION OF THE PROCESS ADDRESSES SOME OF THE CONCERNS FROM THE LAST TIME AND WE'RE ABLE TO PRODUCE MIXED USE OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT MEETS THE NEEDS OF BOTH BUSINESS, economic DEVELOPMENT AND NEARBY RESIDENTS AND NEIGHBORHOODS, because WE RECOGNIZ it is adjacent to residential neighborhoods and we want to be sensitive to that context, creating buffer zones, areas that are protected from them. So just want to make sure that we're thinking about that throughout that whole process.
Speaker 9:The corridor study goes from Britton Street all the way to the Eastern Town Line and covers only areas that are existing business district or industrial. So no residential districts will be impacted by what we're talking about today ZONING AREAS THAT ARE EXISTING BUSINESS DISTRICT OR INDUSTRIAL. So NO RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WILL BE IMPACTED BY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY AND, in FACT, anything THAT IS ADJACENT TO BUSINESS DISTRICT. That IS LIKE YOU KNOW, one PARCEL IS BUSINESS, one PARCEL IS RESIDENTIAL. They're GOING TO BE BUILT IN PROTECTION. The other thing I want to mention is that a mixed-use overlay district is an alternative. It creates flexibility, so the underlying zoning will always be there. So anyone who owns property along 138 in the study area or is thinking about owning property, wants to buy there.
Speaker 9:They always have the option to either develop with the existing underlying zoning and, if this is passed successfully, they have the option to develop in a way that fits with the existing underlying zoning and, if this is passed successfully, they have the option to develop in a way that fits with the overlay district.
Speaker 9:So it creates flexibility and an alternative. It is not something that people are going to be forced to do. I'm going to let Rob talk a little bit about our survey results and I really want to focus on the concepts as to how the survey results connect to the proposed zoning, so the big concepts of how what we've heard translates into height and dimension and what that looks and feels like, and that really gets us into the design guidelines, because zoning can tell us about all those really important things about height setback, all that, and we'll get into what all that means later. But design guidelines really complement zoning because they tell us what it should look like, what it should feel like, um, so I'm going to hand it off to rob to go into a little bit more detail on all yeah, thank you.
Speaker 2:Thank you for having us here to talk about this plan. So I think you set it up perfectly. We're going to go through the questions we asked in the survey. Some of you may have taken it. Uh, you know what the results were and how that informs a decision that we would make for the corridor, so hopefully we can track survey, survey answers, how we'd interpret that and then like how that would manifest as a recommendation for zoning.
Speaker 2:So the first question we asked is looking at these types of development and asked what you know folks felt did best around the corridor and once it have a green outline it's a little see it. But the top two on the left there, payton, Aram and Winsop Village respondents really chose those, with some you know less. So people still like Wellesley on Center Street there and then people did not like these larger buildings on the bottom here. So how does that inform the zoning recommendation? You can see kind of here. What that says to us is 2.5 maximum stories, so two stories.
Speaker 2:If your first floor commercial in kind of architecture language it's usually 15 feet is the ceiling height on a commercial, 10 feet of residential above it and then the half story is to encourage like New England style architecture which we think people tended to like when we talked to folks around here. Again, those two precedent images were kind of New England style. So your dormer that lets you get that extra half story but encourages a sort of style that we felt that people were responding positively to. And if you want a building height, an exterior building height maybe minus non-residential stuff, you know you can get into utilities on the roof and things like that that are kind of like on the margin. Let's call it 32 maximum feet of building height, just to be transparent again about the output of the responses circled in green here.
Speaker 2:If you look at the first and second, that means first choice, second choice. People really liked those two. Center Street again, people kind of felt it was in the middle range and you can see pretty strong negative response for those buildings.
Speaker 3:The closer you get to four stories.
Speaker 2:No surprise, people were not as into that. So the second question we asked pertains to we decided maybe what folks like in terms of height, what about the distance between the height and the street? So we say everything that sits on top of the curb. So when you walk you know if you wanted to ride bikes there or whatever, like what's that? Distance.
Speaker 2:Look like it's plants whatever, and so these top three again people responded positively to so D Street in Boston, Thomas Street in Mansfield, Academy Street in North Carolina Again more lukewarm in this Portsmouth example, which and so what I'd say you? Know well, I'll do the last two Plainville no, and Auburn no. These two that people didn't like were both the closest and the furthest from the street, so a large setback. We saw there's negative response and a small setback. Negative response.
Speaker 3:Intuitively. Again, it kind of makes sense.
Speaker 2:On 138, there's traffic speeds, there's traffic you don't want to be too close and you're kind of subject to the noise and the busyness that comes along with that, but too far away. We heard the last time we were here at this planning board as well. Maybe at the time before that people were a little bit unhappy with the large format retail and the really large parking lots, and if we're going to do something we need to change it up from that so it made sense again that what this means to us is maybe like a 30 foot minimum set back and what that really means?
Speaker 2:is this the closest you can get to the street? You?
Speaker 2:could go further away from the street and that's maybe a question for the board or folks the audience is would you want to set a maximum setback to make sure someone's not going really far off the street? I mean, was that mention like design guidelines? We could get into some of the whys and how to kind of create a continuous public realm that feels like a nice place to walk around, which is what you want for a mixed-use district again just to jump into this part of it.
Speaker 2:If you look at these top two responses again, these last two people really like them. The thomas street I'll go back. Just so you can see which one that relates to that was this one. It was kind of everybody's second choice and you know we do know we're asking about distances.
Speaker 2:But it's worth observing that there's a small parking lot in front, so maybe people are open to the idea of a small, you know, one stall parking lot, maybe not multiple lanes of parking, so we can get the end of that a little bit too so that was something people liked, uh and again.
Speaker 2:The unlikely story which is in Plainville, too close to the street, is what we took away from that and the Auburn example too far away from the street, so we land on. Thatainville, too close to the street, is what we took away from that and the Auburn example too far away from the street, so we land on that 30 feet, kind of in the middle. And this last kind of question we'll go over is we talked about the building height, we talked about distance. What happens in that space that we're talking about?
Speaker 3:so we said 30 feet. What's in that 30?
Speaker 2:feet. So we asked what you want to see. People liked grass or lawn or plantings. People wanted plazas in the storm water. Planting with trees and benches was a popular one as well. Again, people were kind. We asked about the small parking lot. People were open to that idea. People kind of like to do a little bit of seating and tables loud and clear. No, large parking lots is what we heard. We asked it. We can't just dive into. There's a large parking lot and then these ones kind of yellow again in the middle. But the top two choices.
Speaker 4:If you look at them you know depending on you, know, it's a little bit of kind of how you want to parse the numbers.
Speaker 2:You know pedestrian plaza if you count first and second choice. People really like it if you just count first choice. People prefer the planting interventions a little bit more so how does this all come together?
Speaker 3:This is just a diagram.
Speaker 2:This is an idea of how these buildings could look together, bringing some of these concepts into a drawing, and so we have our two-story buildings and something that probably is worth mentioning. On all this, we'll start with the buildings.
Speaker 2:We'll talk about the setbacks and we'll talk about the stuff in the setbacks, how it all comes together in this image. Again, it just tries to capture what we saw in the survey, and what this could be is the basis for a tool for the planning board to advocate for things when a development proposal comes in underneath a potential overlay district. So to.
Speaker 2:Lizette's point. I think certainly you can write all the right things on paper. It kind of comes down to the development proposals that come through and hopefully this is a useful tool to advocate for a certain type of development.
Speaker 3:We want to get it right.
Speaker 2:What the kind of development people want to see is.
Speaker 3:When it comes to the building.
Speaker 2:we've got the heights two, two and a half stories here and I think what isn't in this gets a little technical isn't in the survey questions is sort of these mixed setbacks within one structure, kind of having a little more of a complicated roofline. We talked about New England architecture.
Speaker 2:we saw that If you look at, kind of architecturally, Payton Arum, Windstreet Village. If you were to look at that from above, it's kind of one building, but when you're on the ground it looks like a lot of smaller buildings, and that's what would be really important for these mixed use developments. So this projection is what we call volume, and having another projection that is part of the same building, this would look like two buildings or this. I mean. This is an easier example where this outline is maybe one building, but staggering it creates the effect of two massings, two buildings.
Speaker 2:So that's really what you want to see, Of course you can do a smaller standalone building, and that's what would hopefully feel different as well than what's on the ground now is being able to have architectural proposals that mediate the scale of the corridor and make it feel smaller. Please go ahead.
Speaker 7:What are the red and yellow arrows representing? Yeah, thank you.
Speaker 3:So, Dan, let's get into the setbacks here.
Speaker 2:One of the most important concepts, I think, of having it feel like a village is being able to move and have circulation hierarchy I guess it's a little technical term for it, but what does that mean? When we talk about the yellow one, I'll start with that. When we talk about the idea of integrating maybe a smaller parking lot and that standard 30 feet minimum setback, how do you make it so you can walk across all this stuff? Right now I think I wouldn't feel comfortable walking necessarily along a long stretch of 138. It's true for a lot of streets in Southeastern Mass. I'm not trying to pick on any one street or anything, so that continuous sidewalk is what we're trying to articulate with the yellow line, that it needs to feel like you could. Even if you have that parking lot in front, it feels like someplace you want to walk. You have to treat buffers between that and the parking lot and ideally maybe it's probably easier to do without the parking lot.
Speaker 3:We recognize the vehicular traffic that's there as well, we're trying to do something that's a little bit realistic and leave options.
Speaker 2:But if people are going to do it. We want to try to provide a guideline to do it well.
Speaker 3:The red lines.
Speaker 2:We heard one of the things we heard. A lot is concerned about traffic. When we were here again a while ago and one of the ways to mediate and mitigate traffic is, if you think about it, we try not to have a lot of curb cuts, so you have a continuous sidewalk not a lot of places to turn left and right, so you funnel it down here and you make these almost feel like cross streets.
Speaker 2:Even though you're kind of in a parking lot here it would feel like you're between two buildings on a regular small road. Minimizes the right-hand turns reduces conflict points. We've all been behind someone like turning left or right forever on a street. It never feels good, Please.
Speaker 10:Good question. Yes, the yellow line that's supposed to be 138,. Right, that's right.
Speaker 1:Yeah, because 138 is a 60-foot layout and it's been designed for a long time to have that thing. Two the whole way and two sidewalks they're gonna have. You know, there's enough for two 12 foot lanes each way from the taunton line all the way up the eastern line. So that's realistically, in the future, what you're probably going to see at some point. So that's kind of what it should be designed as we could put in the extra traffic we just grabbed it light, oh, it's never going to be like that.
Speaker 1:It's going to be like that, okay. I mean, they never thought. You know, I lived across from my market basket and we used to ride our bicycles down the center of the road. Now that's all two lane, but it's going to continue, especially if you have a mixed use development like that, because it's going to make it more desirable to build up there.
Speaker 2:We could. But as part is to advocate, to keep the lanes the same, but if you'd like us to, no, I'm just saying it changed the look because now you're trying to cross four lanes, Absolutely yeah, and so you'd end up with little micro villages on each side, which is nice. We're open to whatever you'd like.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's all. That's what you're going to realistically see totally understand that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, we could have it relate to future plans, so it's something that's useful when those things are enacted.
Speaker 2:Yeah, um and understood that other parts of the corridor are that way right now as well, so we could just have a reflect that. But those red lines again kind of show what we talked about. That I think very well said. Sort of those pockets of the village keeping that circulation. That's what's called very local. So you're circulating in and out going on this red line, being able to use the parking to move in and out, so you're not getting a hundred right turns or hundred left turns in a really of here, so you're not getting 100 right turns or 100 left turns in a really small space it could be a negative externality of a smaller footprint built.
Speaker 2:that's good and bad and all that stuff, and we try to mitigate that. The other part of it is showing parking is always a concern. Shared parking for the commercial aspect of it could be a really valuable tool.
Speaker 3:Obviously if you're living there.
Speaker 2:You want to have a dedicated parking space on the upper floor. But for the commercial part of it we all know that the parking numbers vary quite a bit between peak hours, when people are shopping a lot on a saturday or whatever, uh, versus times where people really aren't using the commercial activity at night or something like that. So we could make it flexible the parking counts and you know this shows that that it'd be easy to move from one part of the park to another and hopefully walk around in the back of the front of these buildings and have a nice day of using the commercial portion of it.
Speaker 2:So that's sort of the setback part of it and what takes place there, one of the things I think that is really important with the 30-foot setback it is a little large, advocating for things like varying paving types, staying true to some, some of the traditional new england style, uh, but you know we showed us a mix of kind of paver or paver-like situations that you know you could have outdoor seating in front of a building or maybe just a very coherent building entrance, but distinguishing between the parts, such as a regular sidewalk where people walk, the planted areas and then the space in front of the building that really relates to that building would be really important again to mediate some of those setbacks and just one last slide and then we'll open it up.
Speaker 2:Just to describe these in sections. Here's your standard 30-foot setback on either side with plantings and a bench. This is some of the other scenarios folks asked for in the survey, where you have planting in front, showing how that sidewalk can be continuous.
Speaker 3:On the bottom there is the setback.
Speaker 2:You can see these dash lines show that the road lines up, it does grow out a little bit more than 30 feet setback to try to fit in, you know, one row of a parking lot but showing bi-directional circulation in the front as an example, and a parking lot. So again. This is just to show very diagrammatically how these setbacks could relate and how it feels next to the height of the buildings.
Speaker 2:It's tough to do mixed use with less than two stories, kind of intuitive in the idea of it, but showing that the building height and the street, kind of how they would feel next to each other, the sense of enclosure. Again, these are kind of some of the architectural terms we throw around, but just to display the general feeling of it and how it works.
Speaker 2:So with that happy to talk about any aspects of this. What we're hoping is a consensus on some of these bigger picture ideas that could form the basis for zoning bylaw. If we can kind of agree that this is the right direction, that could be the backbone of the zone. So with that, thank you very much for your time.
Speaker 1:I'm going to say a couple things and hand it over to each of my board members. There might be some questions coming back at you and then hand it over to the public. You know I think and I've always talked to Bob about thisED TO BOB ABOUT THIS THAT THIS SHOULDN'T BE A MIXED USE WITH A RESIDENTIAL PROPONENT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN TO MASHPEE COMMONS.
Speaker 3:PEOPLE WILL.
Speaker 2:GENERALLY LIKE IT WHEN WE SHOW IT AS AN EXAMPLE.
Speaker 1:OF PROJECTS. 138 IS CHALLENGING BECAUSE IT'S NOT A LOT OF LARGE, of large tracks, and I've talked to like the Rosinas and Connie's at times trying to think if they'd come in and we could sit and talk, depending on if things aren't going to go the way they expect on the warehouse. They both had buyers and I don't know how that's sparing out. I haven't seen Frank and them in a while, although, to sidetrack I would like to point out I actually saw George Cotty last week. He turned 97 yesterday and he's just a heck of a good guy. He's done a lot to Rainham. He's got some history here since 1940, his family, but he's 97, still doing good. Saw him a bunch of weeks or so ago. But I'd like to see those bigger tracks possibly be something like that and make it more attractive, having the residential component like a public business, like a Mashpee Farm.
Speaker 1:Some of the developments have gone like that. They're tasteful. Your height, I think, is a little short. Um, most many towns that have a height instead of, like some towns, just go two and a half stories. Generally the height's 35 feet, so it gives you a little wiggle room. So I think the 32 is a little tight. You know the tall pitch, depending WITH A RUMP. So I THINK THE 32'S A LITTLE TIGHT. You KNOW THE TALL PITCH, depending ON YOUR WIDTH. It CAN GET UP THERE IF PEOPLE CAN.
Speaker 2:TOLERATE IT. We AGREE 35 WOULD BE BETTER.
Speaker 1:YEAH, no, and I THINK WITHOUT A DOUBT. You KNOW, if THE STAND BY THE GUY'S BEEN INVOLVED A LOT OF BUILDING, 35 IS PRACTICALLY FRON, practical the front with the 30, no issue there. I don't think there should be a max front because it's every possible. You've seen on 138 everyone's different depth size. It. It's a challenge, it's a real challenge, especially until you get up to the big open parcels because of the residential components so close by. But I think you're on the right track and it's some good stuff for everyone to think about. Um, besides that, I don't really have much. I don't know. Do you have any?
Speaker 4:well, just what you already talked about. If you don't have large parcels, you don't have a lot of frontage, and so I see you had about eight buildings there. You're gonna do one of them and you're not gonna have people agreeing to have cross easements for parking and going from one building to another. It's a challenge, big, big time agreed, and you know that's why we try to have the document to advocate for this stuff because it's it's a challenge big time Agreed.
Speaker 2:That's why we try to have the document to advocate for this stuff, because it's never going to be like this all at once. Like you said, it's probably one and a half times the size of central oil that we're looking at here, so it would be about the size of a bigger parcel. You can see how many buildings would fit on that If they were developed one at a time. Again, it's just hopefully a tool to advocate for leaving those connections to a future parking lot, or incentivizing or encouraging card owners and future owners to work together, but I it's a.
Speaker 2:We totally understand the point you bring up, the challenge it presents to have this ultimately.
Speaker 1:I'd like the flexibility come time that a big fire comes in, some of those things they have to come. Work with us on that, brian, do you have?
Speaker 5:anything. The only thing is if they do come in and put up buildings and apartments above them. I'd only like to see one-bedroom apartments above you know, not big families, and all this if that's what they're thinking of doing on some of these we didn't intend to have any bedroom restrictions on the units, you know that's I mean the town right now is in you know, might as well say financial, you know, with some stuff and to me if you're gonna put a commercial building down below, maybe one bedroom apartments up above, nothing more than that.
Speaker 5:That's how I feel personally. I think now we're more on the concept and 138, it's going to be redone over but it's only going to have a sidewalk going up one side.
Speaker 2:Certainly, and these are long-range plans where we've done them in other communities and the idea is sort of when it gets to the public realm, stuff to advocate and SERPED is able to have conversations with MassDOT to show them these kinds of documents, if it's something that the town feels like this does represent a vision for the public realm.
Speaker 3:We can't tell.
Speaker 2:MassDOT, what to do, of course, to your point. But we can, we can try to have that conversation and show them it's kind of planning that represents the values of the town.
Speaker 1:To uh do this kind of stuff. I mean, ultimately everything's going to go through town meeting, of course, but uh, anthony, did you have a response?
Speaker 7:um, was this the first time? I'm'm relatively newish to the board? I think I was only here for your last meeting. Was that the first survey that went on? That was, I took it shortly after the meeting. I like how the results were interpreted. I mean, there's a lot of small parcels and a couple just big ones. I do see it being a challenge, but I like how that survey was interpreted.
Speaker 2:Thank you. And to the point that's adjacent to it, mr Mountain, when we get into the zoning, I suppose the lot frontage isa valid question. Because if, say, you set a small lot frontage requirement, it would make more parcels eligible and encourage smaller development, but many of the parcels the smaller parcels would be non-conforming under the zoning we set up. But if you go, bigger it would encourage, I guess, someone to string a bunch of parcels together and you would get more of a master plan development.
Speaker 2:So pros and cons, but I think it's a good, important point.
Speaker 3:you guys brought up.
Speaker 1:And if you have thoughts on it, you can're like trying to bang out the concept now to fine tune, like Brian. The one bedroom in the front, that's something that's going to come once we. You know it's a lot of tweaking, but this is more conceptual. But to find direction, that's what we're looking for.
Speaker 6:138's been a son of a gun since day one yeah, to kind of piggyback off what brian said, I do have a concern about the living quarters above these buildings. Um, I know that when we met earlier we discussed um implementing some type of a ratio, um, in regular terms. My concern is you're going to have a little tiny regular terms. My concern is you're gonna have a little tiny convenience store and it's gonna be a loophole right gateway into a massive apartment complex.
Speaker 2:So I'd like to revisit that about having either proportionate or ratio or limited to to what can can go there yeah, thanks for bringing that up too, and I suppose there's two ways to do it numerical, a numerical ratio or, if we like, the idea of whatever, 1.5 to 1, it would be like the whole first floor would have to be commercial. No residential on the first floor, because then you're kind of forced into the ratio through the again whatever folks kind of think makes the most sense.
Speaker 1:I thought about it after you brought it up. You know I mean, what would probably happen this is going to be, you know, if it ends up coming to fruition, some form of overlay where everything would most likely have to come through. You know site plan, which is now special permit, where it wasn't a special permit before, so now it's got heat so everything could be crafted then. But I mean we're a long way out. It's just we're trying to get good input from everybody and, you know, from our support members in the public. They've given more direction. So it's just, it's a it's going to be a long road, I think. Think it's getting there. It's a lot better than what we started with. Is there any?
Speaker 7:affordable housing component with this with you guys, with us.
Speaker 2:Again, if it's what the board would like to advocate for, we're happy to include something like that. I'm familiar with drafting that kind of zoning, but it's in your report.
Speaker 1:I mean, I don't this is going to be questions. Maybe go off this. You want to have some input. Is there like a projected time? We are trying to come up with an actual thing that can be brought in front of the town meeting the longer we wait, the more water down is going to be.
Speaker 2:I think we're in a good spot to move this forward in the next six or eight months we can prepare something if, if we like the bones of the idea and hear from the public and there's some more sentiment, you could put together a bylaw, put it on the website. Excuse me, sorry for the project, we'll put a full report out that this is an outline of that covers what we covered here, but then also, you know, introduction to the site and a full set of design guidelines for everybody's public review. Have a conversation about that detail, just kind of as you guys described. But there's any big picture stuff that we should. We could move and produce that kind of stuff and have it online for distribution. Like, I think, once you produce the dialogue at stuff and have it online for distribution, I think once you produce the bylaw, the starting point, it's going to go through several iterations.
Speaker 8:Yep, just prepare somebody and put the night before it moves forward. But it kind of just that. I think this concept works tremendously well north of the 1600 block of Broadway, where we have a larger postage, where some of this may not develop on the street front but maybe internally, where you can have these shops similar to what you have in Mashpee, but they'll be internal, off the roadway, and these people own these parcels. Then that these people probably Are not going to develop. Someone else who has a better vision will develop these parcels internally and that'll save the town from, you know, ending up with these big giant ugly warehouse buildings and you'll have a multiple-use piece of property where you have commercial resi. You I think that, like pam and brian said, you need to have a percentage. Maybe it's one one. If you can have a thousand feet of commercial and you're only allowed a thousand feet of resi and you're limited with your two and a half stories in those districts our pipe restrictions in in business and industrial allows us to go to 40 feet. I wouldn't change. That gives more people some more options to do some different, that you know, different kind of architectural design. But I do think this works very well north of 1600 block you might have, you know, three or four parcels south of that. That. You may get a, you know, substantial building.
Speaker 8:But other than that, changing lot sizes doesn't make any sense to me. Leave the lot sizes the way they are. Have them design a property that can fit on this lot. If they want a bigger piece of property, a bigger building, they'd have to buy two properties. By changing the lot sizes, all you really do is make things more difficult and you'll never see this happen. So just a couple of ideas.
Speaker 8:We keep working on it. I know there's going to be a lot of concern, a lot of questions and hopefully we can resolve them. But if you have that one-to-one or two-to-one ratio, it's going to limit the number of bedrooms. In our residential B we already have that restrict. Maybe we can look at that language where you're allowed 12, one bedrooms or eight two bedrooms, and that goes on lot size. So maybe we could mimic that so we have some continuity in a in a bylaw. But I think you've done work. I know there's a lot of people who are waiting for something like this to come so they can plan what to do with their parcels. But to have 60, 80, 100,000 square foot warehouses north of 1600 block is not going to do with the town. That's kind of what it is.
Speaker 1:It's over now, but it would be nice to mix it up. Just one last thing before I turn it over to a public, if no one else has anything to say Before we like, if you do, formulate some kind of bylaw to look at, I think it would behoove us to have some public meetings. You know more amongst ourselves and you know it's still posted and that we can digest this before it gets to a public hearing stage, because the public hearing stage I think we're gonna outline that the course of events moving forward right yeah, absolutely okay so, if the board and all is all set, I'd like to turn it over to the public and first I'd like to see if, uh, administrator, do you have anything, any input?
Speaker 1:okay, I saw you with all that paper so you might. Um, if anyone in the public has any input, show of hands, seeing none do we want a summary.
Speaker 8:Well, why don't we talk to them about what's the next step, what's the plan? Moving forward, yeah.
Speaker 9:So, seeing as we have some type of consensus and it seems like we're generally happy with what we, presented today we can move forward and provide a draft bylaw which we will share with you and you can digest and talk about it and make edits, red market, line it all you want and you can take whatever time you need for that.
Speaker 9:And you can take whatever time you need for that. Um, when you are ready, we're happy to you know, take that back, edit it again, provide you a new copy, um, and from there we can uh have that public meeting with members of the public.
Speaker 9:We were thinking either before uh next, uh, whatever planning board meeting comes after that process is completed, um, like 430 to 6 and then we have the planning board meeting regularly scheduled, but that gives a little bit more time for people to come through ask questions about it, if they need, before we produce the final bylaw. Does that sound like a rough plan? And then we can detail that all in writing as well yeah, and I think we could even invite other boards and committees to come.
Speaker 8:So it's my understanding we have a draft, we have some kind of a draft document already yep, we'll refine it based up what we heard do you mind if I start if I ask I can do that.
Speaker 2:So we like the 35 or 40 feet, because I it's 40 existing but 35 makes architectural, since we have a preference on what we put in there.
Speaker 8:I think we can leave it alone. We have a preference on what we put in there. I think we can leave it alone and leave it on what we have already and just continue to use the 40 feet max.
Speaker 2:40 feet max. Keep the frontages exactly how they are and then reference the residential D and a ratio of. Are we okay if we do 1.5 to 1, because it's one story the one where the first floor always was has to be commercial is that? If we you can stop there, okay, thank you sorry.
Speaker 8:No, no, no, this is yours. I just want I don't want this to stall. That's why I'd like to you know we're going to have a draft document for you to read by the. You know of weeks Yep, so we should probably schedule another meeting with them sometime in the early fall, end of September or early October.
Speaker 1:Why don't you shoot to getting us the draft document by our August 21st meeting, so we can digest it?
Speaker 4:And then we can schedule something after that.
Speaker 2:In addition to the draft bylaw, we will release a report of our findings you know this kind of stuff will be in there and a draft set of design guidelines to accompany the bylaw, to hopefully provide the planning board again with tools to advocate for the higher quality development of the CME score.
Speaker 1:On behalf of the board, thanks for your efforts, thank you for having us, thank you. What you come up and, tim, what we typically do is anyone that comes up from the public identifies himself. Sure. Just tell people where they live, so we know you're a ring hand resident yeah, sure, uh, so my name is timothy wells.
Speaker 10:I reside at 169 catherine's way. Um, I remember sitting in here and you proposed a mix, or maybe it wasn't you, but a subcommittee proposed a mixed use on the same stretch of street a couple years ago several years ago what was the? Was there a doing? It was voted down. What was the reason for voting it down? Do we have consensus to that or no?
Speaker 8:this guess we didn't have enough information. There wasn't, it wasn't enough in the bylaw to make people comfortable with it. So we're trying to we're trying a different angle this time and trying to build in some safeguards so we don't have people misuse the language and create things that we're not looking to have created.
Speaker 10:So the purpose of having a third party do this is more language by law, Like yeah, CERF has done this in multiple other communities.
Speaker 8:They don't know how to write the language and have to build in the safeguards that apparently went there first or second or third time around. This is more of a second shot. This town's talked about this for 20, 30 years. Ok, all right, thank you Appreciate it.
Speaker 2:I mean also thanks for bringing that up too. One of the things that we can put in the reports is the zoning language from these comparison districts we looked at, so you know, dartmouth, mattapoisett, whatever, some of the other examples we looked at. We will also provide a table comparison between the things we talked about tonight and exactly what was in that 2012 file. So the folks want to see exactly what's different, what's the same, and one of the changes that I wasn't here in 2012 but that we heard was to move that study area north, the Britain Street starting point, to keep it to the north end of town, further away from some of those residential districts, and seemed like a sticking point to me early on that we tried to address.
Speaker 1:MEETING EARLY. On THAT, we TRIED TO ADDRESS NEW SPEAKER. Thanks FOR YOUR TIME AND THANKS FOR YOUR EFFORT NEW SPEAKER. Thank YOU VERY MUCH, new SPEAKER. Do YOU WANT TO DO YOUR UPDATE NOW, bob YOU.
Speaker 8:NEVER DID THAT. New SPEAKER. Thanks GUYS that I just wanted to update you on a couple things that coming down the road party cities gonna be in front of us for a abbreviated site plan approval. I'm sorry, the building and party sitting that's going to be probably subdivided into three units and so you'll have different entrances for the three units. So I'm going to bring that forward as an abbreviated plan once I get it. I'll let you know when we have a department head meeting on that. I think I told you last meeting about the stop and shop building. That's going to come forward in the next couple months as an abbreviated site plan approval too. And then, uh, I think uh, I've also told you about paramount drive. So all these are still in the works, but a lot. 35 paramount drive we have a company that's proposing another hotel behind walmart. Other than that, we do have uh two applications for from longville for road acceptance. Uh, that's uh bayberry extension and the goldfinch drive subdivision. That's being reviewed right now by the highway superintendent, just bringing that to your attention.
Speaker 8:Uh, that's moving forward um and then we do have um, I think, chris you, we talked about this earlier the covenant, uh request for laylorates, which is now called West Pine Estates, your approval for a covenant that was never recorded when the Laylor Estates subdivision got approved. Lee wants to get that recorded, so all his documentation is in order.
Speaker 8:Okay, just to back up, but the road acceptances, we typically hand them, plans over to our reviewer yeah norm, norms instead of working on the two road acceptances, they're gonna they're gonna be working on that the next several weeks I'm just bringing, I'm just bringing to your attention that they have come in with, finally, with the requests for us to accept the roads. And it's in the hands of the highway superintendent.
Speaker 1:And and said I, would recommend that the water and sewer also get cc'd on this, so they they have any comments or questions on it. Um, and any other issues out there manholes, pipes, whatever sounds good. I'd like to see a blessing from them as well.
Speaker 5:I wasn't on the board at the time, but a couple residents night talked to Bob asked me when that subdivision was approved before we took it. Was there a sidewalk supposed to be put down on locust Street? No good, it wasn't approved like that.
Speaker 1:No, I thought it was the original plans the engineer on for wrong Kelly.
Speaker 5:Jerry, but I thought when they came in front that was part on that point.
Speaker 8:The only thing that was.
Speaker 5:That you know, I'm just somebody asked me and I wanted to bring it up the first entrance to Goldfinch.
Speaker 8:There was a catch basin and some drainage work that had to be done. That was the only thing. It stopped there.
Speaker 1:There was no extension of sidewalks, okay any bars that goes they'll get CC for the department. So wait to hear from them. And that's really good selectmen down the process. The Covenant is routine. It's a form that we have in our subdivision rules and regulations. We typically sign a covenant that goes in to get reported and so just the covenant basically says I'm not going to sell any lots or convey anything unless my roads are complete or I put up a bond to complete them for the town standards and the bonds determined by the board.
Speaker 1:So the Covenant just is just to get the ball rolling and allow the applicant to but you can't do lot releases unless there's a covenant voted yeah, and he's gonna come in subsequent the covenants, called the form J lot release, and he's going to come in subsequent to the covenant it's called the Form J law release and he'd have to come in, put up the appropriate bond that we or our consultant determines and we'd have to vote on it. And that's the way I interpret it. Burke, do you agree on that? I do, okay, well, burke agrees. It must be right. I concur, and that's what it is. So we we have to vote on signing that government.
Speaker 1:So I guess I'd entertain a motion to sign the Covenant for Layla. What's?
Speaker 8:it was originally called Layla. The Covenant does refer to it as Layla, but it also talks about West Pine Estates in his covenant. Did I send it to you?
Speaker 1:You should all get a copy.
Speaker 8:It's Layla. Layla is now West Pine.
Speaker 5:Oh, okay, but it has nothing to do with across the street.
Speaker 1:No, no but he's going to entertain a motion, then Assign this covenant which should be in our package. Yeah, I thought I saw it again here it is towards the end. Form 81, form 8-1. All right, all right, I thought I had a full 24 hours and I was like oh my God, I'm going to get in.
Speaker 2:I'm not going to take it, I'm just making sure that everything else I've done.
Speaker 5:In the next, the water.
Speaker 1:So he records this. We don't do anything.
Speaker 8:We don't do anything, we just do it, we just do it, we just do it, ladies and gentlemen, please proceed to the call.
Speaker 4:I'll defer to Burke's legal advice on it, as he's seen a lot of these. I make a motion that we approve the wording of the Form H-1 Covenant from West Pine Estates LLC to the Town of Rainham.
Speaker 7:It was set forth on the Do I hear a second on that Second?
Speaker 1:Discussion.
Speaker 5:All in favor? Aye, but, mr Chairman, on this cost estimate, sid's going to do ours right. We're not taking estimate. Yeah, sid's going to do ours right.
Speaker 8:We're not taking it. Yeah, we're not going to attain those numbers. We're going to have Sid do it right. Yeah, those numbers are not going to be in the system.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I wanted them pretty much expunged from the file because I don't want cost estimates coming from applicants. They may be a bit biased and be interested to know, to see the difference, how different they are. Okay, the final thing on the agenda is discussion and vote for an associate planning board member. You all recall we did this and took a vote a while back and I checked certain powers of fee and it appeared we followed past procedure and it was legit. It's the way a lot of towns do it, but the selectmen and others thought we should put it out to advertise the town's website. Um, it was done on the town's website. I mean, we have an outstanding vote. That was a legit vote by a board.
Speaker 1:We have, uh, four people that responded, um, you know, first was tim wells. I'm familiar with his family. He has a lot of construction experience, um, and looks like a very good candidate. We have actually four good candidates. We have Paul Belou. Belou I'm not really exactly sure how to pronounce that. He's got some survey and AutoCAD experience. He worked for some engineering firms.
Speaker 1:We have Anthony McAuleley, who I've known, you know as a friend and as a coach with my kids, and he's also married to a friend of mine's daughter. Anthony's a very good man. I mean, his expertise is mostly in the culinary business. And we also have Matthew Andrade, who we actually voted to appoint before. He was a prior planning board member for five years with a lot of planning board experience, very instrumental in making sure we didn't get burned on the 3A apartment zoning.
Speaker 1:But these were all forward to us and I'm going to ask individually did every planning board member get to look at these applicants? You did, brian. Yes, I did. Can I finish my turn? You can. That being said, we could stick to our vote, we could re-vote, and also, with this package comes a letter from the selectmen inviting us to come into their meeting next tuesday, julynd 2025, 7 pm. What I think? Tonight we can either reaffirm our vote, re-vote, but I think, since we're invited as of tonight, it might behoove us to vote tonight while we're all in the room, because I don't know who can or cannot make it to Tuesday night's meeting.
Speaker 4:I do have other plans for Tuesday night.
Speaker 1:So Burke has other plans. I'd rather vote while we're all here, then, and try to get as much representation as we can. The selectmen have asked us to go about it this way. I'm going to ask for input from the board on this and how we want to proceed forward, mr Anthony.
Speaker 7:I think it would be in our best interest to conduct a re-vote, especially in lieu of all these new applicants. There's some really good candidates and I just want to say, obviously, if you don't want to choose one, it would be four For any of you three that isn't chosen tonight, I encourage you to run and pull papers the next time when these seats are open. I believe there's going to be one every year when these seats are open.
Speaker 7:I believe there's going to be one every year. This is a lot of interest and it's pretty exciting.
Speaker 1:I think that people are so interested in this, but I think it would be in our best interest.
Speaker 3:Before I go to Pam.
Speaker 1:There was one other thing I wanted to say For the future of the board. In the past 22 years it's only the second time someone's ran with Cam running. The last was Bruce Rapel ran against Dan Andrade years ago. So we haven't had that interest. We appear to now Burke. Correct me if I'm wrong. You're going to call it quits after this year, most likely.
Speaker 4:I am.
Speaker 1:So Brian has two more years left on his term. I may end after this year and go out with Bert. At most I'd stay with Brian. As Brian had requested, I'd stay with him. Requested, I stay with him. So within 21 months there's going to be three openings on this board. So it's going to be a complete new structure from what it's been for many years. I've been on it over 20. Bert's been on it probably around 30. It's time for me to move on as well. Last time I ran, I wouldn't have if anyone stood up and made that public in the time before. So I'm not going to run again. I'm not even going to make my turn. I haven't decided whether it's going to be nine more months or 21 more months, but I encourage everyone to stay tuned whichever way this goes. So we're going to have a whole, entirely new board within less than two years. That being said, uh, pam, any input that anthony thinks we should revoke um, I would echo what anthony said about having interest.
Speaker 6:I don't think anybody would disagree that trying to fill these positions are hard. So to have four applicants come forward with an interest and four that are actually really, really qualified, it says a lot. I think they're all really strongly qualified. I don't know that one is qualified more than the other. I think they're all really strongly qualified. I don't know that one is qualified more than the other. I think they're qualified in different ways.
Speaker 6:You've gone over each resume that we have received and what each one would bring to the table if they were chosen. So I think it's hard to look at paper and see what somebody can bring to the table. I see two members here tonight that have applied. I think it would be appropriate to maybe invite the other applicants to a meeting and have a conversation with them so that we can just vet the process completely. I know the select board has invited us to their meeting on Tuesday. Barc can't make it. I'm not suggesting that we attend without bark or without a member, but it's been over a year since it's been filled, so I don't think it would do any major damage if we scheduled a meeting and invited all the candidates to come in and maybe have a conversation. I think, if you're willing to put your name out there and you're willing to go forward with it, I think we own the courtesy of inviting them into our conversation okay, that'll be noted.
Speaker 1:Um, well, I'm going to say on that it's been since after his vote. This has been three months of a delay. Um, everyone that put in their name knows we were meeting tonight. It's evidenced by tim well showing up. Um, but you know, I'm one member, I'm not the board. As far as a motion to vote for anyone, um, has anyone ever been interviewed?
Speaker 7:I don't know. I wasn't interviewed for my associate position.
Speaker 5:No, I know. Is there a precedent for that?
Speaker 6:No, but yours wasn't advertised either.
Speaker 1:But it's moving. What my thoughts moving forward is we've never had any policy on this. It was just a bylaw that got put in. It was just a bylaw that got put in Each time it got put in, which many, many boards take their vote, like we did, and then it goes to selectmen Selectmen generally 99 out of 100 times, take the recommendation.
Speaker 1:So we followed the procedure we've always followed. It might behoove us in the future to create a policy, not necessarily a bylaw, because from what I was told from people I've talked to on the state level is you're better off having a policy because you've got to be careful on what you put in a law. But if you have a policy that this position should be advertised, uh, so you know, the applicant should be interviewed, all that moving forward, uh, that should be something that we should tend and between us and the selectmen, as we're a joint vote, that'll be along the same lines as getting us a separate email address as we can start. You know, I think we should start working on a policy, brought up some good points and moving forward, um, that in the future we should have you know policy in writing on how we proceed and how we select. That's never been the case so far and again, it's up to the board on that. Burke, do you have any idea or any objection to a revote or anything like that?
Speaker 4:Whatever the chairman feels is proper is fine, I think.
Speaker 1:I agree with Anthony that it would be clean to re-vote Brian.
Speaker 1:I agree with what Anthony said Okay, we've all looked at all the applicants and again, keep in mind that you know on all ears there's going to be some openings coming up. You know on all ears there's going to be some openings coming up, so I'd encourage you to stay tuned if you're sincere and really want to be on the board. Some of the openings are going to be from stepping off, so there'd be appointed openings. Some will be from someone not running, so there'd be running openings. In my case, it will probably be appointed, unless I notify stepping off well ahead of time for an election.
Speaker 5:We have to take the vote we already made.
Speaker 1:I think we already took that vote. We can re-vote. If we choose to re-vote, we'll have to go back, I think, and to be clean, we send the old vote. I think that would have to be the case because right now we have an outstanding vote, but so yeah, so maybe we should rescind it first. Um, if anyone's interested in making a motion to rescind the previous vote, I'll make the motion to rescind the previous vote second okay, seconded in discussion Anthony Pam Brian.
Speaker 1:Okay, all in favor of rescinding the previous vote. Aye, okay. Do I have anyone that would like to make a motion to take a particular candidate out of the pool?
Speaker 7:I'd like to make a motion, I think, for the board to have an alternate right now, someone who has the most past experience. While these are all very good candidates, I think it would be in our best interest to make the motion to nominate matt andrew for the ultimate position okay, does anyone have a second to that motion?
Speaker 1:okay, um, I'll open it up to discussion.
Speaker 4:Um burke as I see the position, it's when one or two of us regular board members are unable to vote. It might happen once a year. For us to appoint someone who doesn't have any experience and make them come to every meeting or watch it on TV every meeting for a year before they actually get to do something to me doesn't make sense and is unfair to the applicants. Matthew Andrade has been on the board. He could step in with knowledge and be up and running immediately, as opposed to having to learn the job.
Speaker 5:Therefore, I would suggest we appoint Matthew Landry Ryan.
Speaker 1:I agree with what berkside okay you made the motion.
Speaker 6:I agree with everything that they said, but I I don't think it's fair to not that the process falling. I think it's got a good point with matt stepping in um talking about one or two times a year. Nobody here has a associate member had any experience either. I think it's a tough call. I'm struggling with this. I'm not gonna lie. He's definitely qualified. He served on the board for over five years or five years. There's other people that are qualified as well and that might bring something different. We have an engineer, we have a construction, some of the construction license and somebody who raised their family here and is pretty tight with the community.
Speaker 6:So we don't have mechanical engineering so well. You see the point I'm trying to make and to not have a conversation with these people. I struggle with that. I know that what's been said tonight is we've never done it this way. This is the way that we've always done it and, as a personal thing, that's the worst words that I like to hear, whether it's sitting on this board or if I'm in my job in Middleborough. I hate the words. That's the way we've always done it or we've never done it this way.
Speaker 6:I've sat on boards before in my job where we do have vacancies volunteer, not unlike what's going on tonight and we always invite them in to have a conversation. So, while it might be unusual for this board to conduct business that way, for me that's the norm and I'm not saying that one is better than the other. You guys are used to doing it your way and I'm used to doing it my way, so I mean it's obvious there's going to be a vote tonight. I have nothing negative to say about Matt or any of the candidates, but it always goes back to me with procedure.
Speaker 1:Quickly on that. The way we've always done it is someone came in, almost recruited, like a lot of boards, and we voted on it. This actually isn't the way we've always done it. We took our vote but we already took the way we've always done it. We took our vote but we already took, and because you know you wanted to go towards the direction of advertising, we went in that direction. We've gone through a process, been three months, so this is the first time we've ever done it this way. Um, so we have vetted it out, so we have edited out.
Speaker 1:Moving forward, I think that we should consider coming up with a policy. If it gets advertised, it gets this. We can have some formal policy in writing and I think everyone wants to move on at this point and, let you know, bring that as a discussion when we meet with the selection on creating a policy. I briefly talked to Pat Riley about that, saying we should have a standard on what we're going to do. We have to go by. You know I've had discussions with Tim Wells. I'm glad he's here. I hope you stay in. Like I said opening, and I'd be going sooner than later. But, that all being said, I'd like to move it to a vote. Brian vote would be yes. Would be for Matt Andre yes, number yes, anthony, yes, pam.
Speaker 3:No.
Speaker 1:No, myself is yes, so the vote carries Four yes, one no. So I'm going to go to the planning board, I mean to the selectmen, at seven o'clock.
Speaker 8:I'll be there tuesday um any years that could make it, I'd appreciate it and I'll report our findings so do we need to advertise that as a as a hearing planning board hearing, since they're all going to be the same meeting?
Speaker 1:I don't know how that works.
Speaker 6:I mean, we're invited for a meeting, but I think legally you have to because there will be a quorum, so any conversation will be a violation and it's usually posted as a joint meeting.
Speaker 1:Do we? We post it as a joint meeting? Do they post it as a joint meeting? Because typically in the past we post as a joint meeting.
Speaker 2:Yeah, as a joint meeting with the select committee.
Speaker 1:So they would have posted it today. I don't know if they posted it today, I don't know if they'll do it tomorrow. Well, they better. Well they'll have to do it by tomorrow 48 hours.
Speaker 8:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Or they'd have to do it at their next meeting, which would be two weeks.
Speaker 8:Actually there's some sessions, so they don't have it every Tuesday. So next tuesday is a meeting that they skip with tuesday and then two following tuesday. Yeah, so you're gonna be in tomorrow morning are you gonna be in tomorrow?
Speaker 1:that's a negative okay.
Speaker 8:I DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S BEEN ADVERTISED. Do YOU BRING A PROXY VOTE TO ONE OF THOSE MEETINGS? Has THAT EVER BEEN DONE BEFORE WE REPORT OUR VOTE TO ONE OF THOSE MEETINGS? Has THAT EVER?
Speaker 5:BEEN DONE BEFORE NO. I MEAN WE REPORT OUR VOTE TYPICALLY.
Speaker 1:THEY'RE DONE AT TWO SEPARATE MEETINGS. Chairman.
Speaker 4:I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT YOU DO A LETTER FOR THE SELECTION SETTING, that YOU TOOK A VOTE AND YOU VOTE FOR IT. Put THE VOTE IN.
Speaker 8:Put the vote in and sign the letter and put it in there. So all right, Okay.
Speaker 1:Do you want me to do that and put it on the letterhead? Give me some letterhead.
Speaker 8:Can you just do that in an email? Does it have to be in a letterhead? No, I would say Greg an email.
Speaker 3:Okay.
Speaker 8:Then we send them an email and if, worst case, we just won't show up with a quorum, I think whoever can show up would show up, but the quorum can't be here. That's why I talked about the possible proxy, if you could do a proxy go to or attend remotely or whatever. But you'll have to find out whether you're gonna be able to do with this to me or not well, I mean they invited us in this letter saying July 22nd, so yeah, I mean SO, so THEY CAN HOST IT, they CAN.
Speaker 1:HOST THEIR OWN MEETING. Yeah, I MEAN WE'VE DONE THAT BEFORE, I've DONE THAT WHEN WE'RE ON SURE WE'D HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH SELECTION PLANNED, whatever YOU KNOW.
Speaker 3:YEAH.
Speaker 1:YEAH. So I THINK WE'RE GOOD FOR THAT. And WORST CASE WE JUST WON'T SHOW UP. Think we're good for that. Worst case we just won't show up with a form, just have to have two people because all we're doing is reporting what I'm finding, what the vote was. Okay, I think we're good on that. I can touch base tomorrow with Debbie and Greg and make sure the doctor in a row. So all we have left, I guess, is a plan to sign the other room. That's the case. I'd entertain a motion to adjourn.
Speaker 8:Seconded so the next meeting is August 21st.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah, that's the answer for summer session. Anyway, I don't think there was a place for me to sign it. I think we just motioned it for language.