 This is the first meeting our Chairman has missed, Dan Dunn, since he took over. So if I'm a little bumpy, slow doing this, bear with me. This is the meeting of Monday, November 4, 2013 of the Allington Board of Selectment. This meeting is being recorded by ACMI for our cable channels, as well as streaming live at ACMITV.com. Our first agenda item is a proclamation, Allington Recycles Week, 2013, Mr. Jameson. Gordon. Thank you, Diane. I'm Gordon Jameson. I'm one of the co-chairs of our Allington Recycling Committee. And each year at this time, we ask the Board to proclaim a week in the middle of November as Allington Recycles Weeks. I've lost track how many years we've been doing this, but it must be eight or nine. The week coincides with America Recycles Day, which is November 15. And during that week each year, we now have our fall community collection day. There'll be lots of information forthcoming, both in the e-alerts on the town web page. I believe in the DPW will be putting some stuff out in the Advocate. So that's not quite, there's some information you can find on the website, I think, under recycling and composting and things right now, but there'll be more information about that. I won't bore the Board with those things, and people at home won't remember what I tell them to do and not to do. So the website is the better source of interaction. And just before we signed on, I requested that maybe the manager could have the proclamation put out as part of that on the website to tell people what that is, and we might get better distribution that way. As always, we thank the Board for their continued support in this ongoing endeavor to reduce the amount of waste that we pay to dispose of at the incinerator. As we remarked last month, we've made very good progress, reducing one-third the amount of tonnage that we send to the incinerator over the course of the last 10 years. And Adam, perhaps you could mention how this impacts our green communities thing. There was something just put out. Yeah. I mean, the town's recycling efforts and the recycling committee's efforts were certainly one of the leading reasons that the Commonwealth honored the town with the leading by example award that I informed the Board about last week. Is that what you were referring to? Yes, yes, yes. Yeah, I mean, recycling is a huge part of the sustainability efforts of the town and all the work of Gordon and the committee, and Mr. Rottemacher and his team at DPW have really paid off in that regard. I've been remiss to forget the hardworking people at DPW who over the years first Ruth Inetti was a big import, and now Charlotte Milan is the full-time, part-time recycling coordinator, and she really makes our life simpler so we can focus on good ways to approach the mic and the other people at DPW on ways to further reduce our tonnage significantly so we can first hit our 50% diversion target in the next couple of years, hopefully. Any questions? No, we'll just have the manager put the proclamation online, and I believe you may have said this, but recycling week is November 10th through November 16th? No, I didn't, but Arlington Recycles Week this year is November 10th through 16th, and the community collection day is on that Saturday the 16th. Nine to one. Don't come early. Don't come late. No early birds. Okay. Thank you, Gordon. Thank you very much. Take care. Okay. Agenda item number two, for approval, our consent agenda, minutes of the meeting of October 7th and October 28th, 2013, as well as, that's it. I would say as well as it's usually longer. Is there? Move approval. Second. Seconded by Mr. Byrne. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? You name this vote. Agenda item three, we have a request from Anotomy, Grill and Tavern late night event 1129, 2013. We have Mr. Lyons, the owner and operational manager here. Hey, Bill. How's it going? How's it going? Not too bad. How you doing? Do you want to give, we have some information here. Do you want to give a little bit of information at the microphone about your event and what you're requesting? Committee members of the class of 1983 approached me before the restaurant was even built and wanted to do their high school reunion. So I, you know, we had a lot of dialogue as the place was being built and we sort of came up with a game plan. And I agreed to close the restaurant for the night and recently they approached me and asked if I could go before you guys for that one extra hour for the event. I have two, there's two committee members here from class of 83 and all I know is I'm looking forward to the event. I will have food served throughout the night. I have door security, fully staffed. I think it should be a great event and I'm looking forward to it. I move approval. I'll second that. Second, any discussion? I do just want to say that I think when the tavern was built that this was, you know, going to be a main proponent of it. And I think it's really mentioned that before in front of us. And I'm happy to see this, you know, taking place and I'm looking forward to more of these in the future. Yeah, it's sort of a test for me, but I'm looking forward to it too with the parking and a lot of the people coming to the reunion are actually staying at the hotel. So it's sort of benefiting the whole town to a degree. So. Thanks, Billy. Mr. Grilly. Yeah. William, what's the capacity down there? Well, we seat 150. Okay. So the capacity is like 225. In the letter, we're expecting probably 150. We're hoping. So we won't even be close to capacity. The only thing we normally ask in a case like this is if you would agree to like call for a last call at 1230 or quarter of it. Sure. Absolutely. Absolutely a stop by one o'clock. Yep. Just just for the alcohol. People want to keep eating up until one o'clock. Yeah, we'll just did it last last meeting with Punjab for New Year's Eve. Okay, great. Mr. Managers or anything in terms of there's no police detail or anything like that. He has his own private security. That's what I heard. Okay. Yeah. No, I don't believe there's anything required. Motion by Mr. Carol seconded by Mr. Burn. Any further discussion? If not all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? unanimous vote. Have fun Dorothy. Can I be an honorary class of 83? No. Thank you very much. Good luck on your first test run. Gender item four request food vendor license Aurora Lanang doing businesses Walgreens store 1864 and 3112 at 324 Mass Ave and 1425 Mass Ave. Hi. If you could just say your name and hi. I'm Patrice Palmezy. I'm the registered store manager at 1425 Mass Ave with Walgreens. Hi, I'm Mike Carroll. I'm the manager at 324 Mass Ave. Walgreens. Okay. Just want to say briefly what you're sure. We're just representing our company. We're opening up a brand new department within a store. It's called fresh and what fresh offers is all basically fresh foods, vegetables, sandwiches, fruits, desserts. It's catered more or less to the the public for a better eating. We've promoted this in our Walgreens in Chicago and some of our inner inner city stores and it has proven to be quite a success in regards to just people coming in and just picking up quick bites and also some meals too. We won't be offering meals if I'm not mistaken. It's just more or less like sandwiches, fruits, vegetables and we go through a proper training for safety. We also go through OSHA training. We have it, there's certain departments, Mike's department is going to be more of an island where mine is going to be more of, it's going to be basically in the wall more or less, the refrigeration. All the products are made outside of the store, nothing will be made in the location and it's delivered six days a week and all the stales will also go back. Okay, Mr. Greeley. Move approval for both locations subject to our conditions as set forth. Is there a second? Second. Mr. Curell, any discussion? I have a question. Are you going to have any seating? No seating. No seating. Thank you. Just one quick question in terms of the meals, packaged meals, sandwiches, et cetera, to go, people are going to take them to go, no microwave heating up? No. I'm just asking for curiosity sake. I'm not saying you should or should not. Okay. Any further discussion? I'm in motion by Mr. Greeley, seconded by Mr. Curell. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, unanimous vote. Thank you and good luck. All those opposed, unanimous vote. All those opposed, unanimous vote. Okay. Thanks your debate. All rights reserved. All those opposed, unanimous vote. Thanks for debate. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You may. Okay. Okay. Any other questions? Yes. We have a second comment? Yes. Aye. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Irving Street, the applicant is represented by Attorney Inessie. I think I'll let you stop the process. Yes, Robert Inessie for the applicant, actually Mr. and Mrs. Pickett. We're here to amend an old board of survey going back to 1924. Now we're here because we were told to be here by Juliana Rice, okay? Juliana was a town council three months ago. I had a chat with her and I asked her, where should we go? Should we go to the ARB? Should we go to the Board of Selectment? She said adamantly, Bob, the Board of Selectment sitting as a Board of Survey. Now, to further buttress that, if you look at the new rules for the Board of Survey, they talk about a subdivision of a tract of two or more lots, okay? We're talking one lot here. We're not talking two or more lots. In addition, the plan laying out Lot 104 was laid out probably 75 to 80 years ago, long before the new Board of Survey regulations came into existence in 2010. Now, everybody who purchased on Irving Street, okay, and in that neighborhood knew about the Board of Survey because they would have had a title examination done when they purchased. They had an option at that point to buy or not buy. They chose to buy, okay? Mr. and Mrs. Pickett own a home in the same area. What they would like to do is they would like to build a single-family house on that lot and sell their existing home on Windermere to their son. Now, what we're proposing to do is we don't want to build the road all the way out. If you build the road all the way out, you come to the east of the side of Irving Street, and there's a 16 to 18-foot drop, okay, which really does not make it feasible to do that. So we're not proposing to do that. What we are proposing to do is build it out approximately 150 feet to come to the middle of lot 104. Now, Dave Lanatter is going to talk with you in a few minutes about the engineering aspects. Dave has met extensively with Wayne Shanard, the town engineer. Wayne gave Dave a two-page list that he had to comply with in terms of drainage issues and the like. Dave did do that. Dave got the plan back to Wayne Shanard, and Wayne Shanard said, I'm okay with it. Pass it on to the board, let's get this thing going. And that's exactly what we did. Now, you've got that plan. With respect to, again, the individuals who abut the property and who have complained and may complain about the buildout of the street. Again, they knew when they bought that this was going to happen at some point down the line. What we're trying to do is we're trying to do it in as reasonable a fashion as we can. We are, to some extent, changing the slope, okay? The width of the road, by the way, is going to be approximately 16 feet. If you check out private ways in the town of Allington, you're going to find many private ways with the width of 16 feet, 17 feet, 20 feet. Indeed, I cited one that Mr. Tomeyan did on a road in town. Actually, three houses, and that one was initially not an old board of survey. But he came before the board, this particular board, back a couple of years back, and he got a board of survey approved for a 20-foot wide road. Now, the issues before you are not that we're building a house. That's not the job of the board of survey. The issues are whether, in fact, we comply with the regulations with respect to building a road. And Wayne is going to talk about that. Dave, I'm sorry, I was going to talk about that. Now, some of the issues relate to fire safety. Can we get a fire truck down the road? We can. Can we get a fire truck down and have that fire truck back out? We can. And that's been done in the past in this town. I believe it's been done at 50 Washington Street, as a matter of fact. So we can do that. So fire safety is not an issue. And by the way, we showed this plan to the police department, to the fire department, to the Board of Health, and the Department of Public Works. We got no objections from any of those individuals. I spoke with the Department of Public Works myself, and we made sure that he acknowledged that he had seen that plan. So again, with respect to the with issue, we don't think that's a problem. With respect to fire safety, there's a hydrant within 188 feet of the house we propose to build. There are two other hydrants within 500 feet of, again, where we intend to build the house on lot 104. We're not going to do any blasting. If we do blasting, it's going to be minimal. What we're going to do is we're going to chip away at that ledge in that area. And there was ledge there. There's no question about that. We're going to chip away at that so that we're not going to be disturbing a budding homeowner's with respect to blasting. With that, I think I'd like Dave to at least show you the plan at this point, show you how the drainage works, okay? But again, I emphasize to the Board, we're not here to get your permission to build a house. That's not what this is all about. This is simply about a Board of Surveys to extend a road that was laid out essentially way back in 1923, okay? And you've seen this in my package to you from Wayne Shanara, the town engineer, that in fact he's okay with the plan as modified. He's the town engineer. He's not my engineer. He's your engineer. Dave? And I just want to say to Attorney Nessie, I just want to let you know that this Board is very mindful in terms of what its job responsibilities and duties are and are not. So when we take that very seriously, so I just want to lay you any concerns on that. I'm going to set up. I have a quick question. Maybe the manager can answer. I know you said no blasting, but perhaps a little bit of blasting. In that case, if there is any blasting, that has to be coordinated with the fire department and no, is there a threshold? It wouldn't need to be. Okay, so you said there wouldn't be any, but there might be on the off chance, but I'm sure you're well aware that if you are to contact the fire chief, I'm not. Absolutely. I'm just, as you say, thanks. I'm writing things, so now I can take it off of my hand. I think if you stand where Mr. Nessie is, because you have to make the microphone. And if you could just identify yourself again for the record, sir. Dave, identify yourself for the record. I will. My name is Dave Lanada. I am owner of Lanada, and Associates. We prepared the plans that are associated with this project. Now, what we plan in doing, this is the voter survey plan, which is in accordance with the instructions of the town engineer was to revise the profile. So it goes in the downward, away from down grade, away from where we don't, instead of heaven and earth, through grade. So the grade going from our end, the blue line, down towards Churchill F. And the yellow line was the previous approved 1923. So is it fair to say there's a change in the slope date? Yes, it's a change in slope. And what is it? One direction to the other direction. What's one direction to the other direction? Well, instead of going away from Churchill F, what it will do is come back towards Churchill F. The elevation. So what's the drainage? I don't know. What does that do to the abutting properties, particularly the abutting property on Churchill F. In terms of the drainage? Well, what's intended to do is the roadway is tilted sideways. Sheep flow. And it's going to, the water will run down the curb line, the gutter line, the pavement. Christ in front of his driveway leads to a catch basin, which is just beyond his driveway. You can see the catch basin in here. There's a catch basin here that's supposed to catch all the water from here. And then put it into the drainage system down the road. Can you point to where the house is on Churchill? Approximately? Okay. And then point to the drain again? Okay. Thank you. I just want to orient myself. So was the plan designed to divert the water away from that house on Churchill? Well, yes. The, over the years, prior to, prior to whoever owned the property. Now, it seems like the gutter line was created along Churchill to divert the water down, straight down Churchill. And I believe that the original border survey, it was constructed in accordance with the original border survey. Because the existing typically a five to six inch high curb now is down to an inch or so. So I think what they did is they built it up to divert the water down Churchill. So that condition of having the water go down early was not acceptable to the prior owners. So in the same vein, that's what we're going to do. And we're going to modify the curb. We're going to raise the curb to a minimum of three inches to make sure we have a defined gutter line. So in essence, oh, there's one other thing I'm going to do in front of the driveway. We're posing to put a slight burn. Three inches or so. So there's another defined gutter line. So it's going to go up a little and then down the driveway. Again, all these are in effort to minimize the runoff towards number 64 Churchill. And basically it's going to take water that is currently going that way and divert it into either the catch basin or down the road up beyond his property. So it's going to hopefully alleviate more water than take more water out of there instead of allowing it to go down into his driveway when down the slope. And the utilities will be placed in the road in accordance with all the commonwealth and the town rules. I think that pretty much all that will alleviate all the drainage and build comedy for the runoff. How many meetings did you have with range Naruto with this plan, by the way? I think we've had probably about six or eight go rounds back and forth. So we worked out some details, some things that he would rather see this way is that way we could accommodate him. So it seems like he's well, I know that he's satisfied and pretty sure that DPW satisfied. And this is this plan is the result of those meetings. Yes, correct. This is a this is more of a site plan than is a board of survey plan, but it's more shows a lot more information. And it's all in accordance with what Mr. should not want to see. This is basically the base plan that we used. And from there, we went to the board of survey play, which doesn't require to be shown a lot of information. Okay. Just once I had any questions from my colleagues of Mr. Leonardo. I just have one and one for attorney Nessie. You said that you're going to raise the current curve height by three inches. Did I hear you correctly? Curve height, the existing curve. What is the existing approximately? Well, it varies. It goes from six inches up to one inch. So I'm going to make sure that when we do that part of the roadway that we reset that curve, either raise it or modify the gutter line. So it's a minimum of three inches. And we may actually be able to get six inches reveal out of it without going. Right. And I'll leave that to if you should receive approval. Also working with the town engineer and DPW. I just want to say when we, the board of select men had a lot of flooding concerns up on the street, up on some street by the Denapolese. Putting in those high curves didn't completely 100% mitigate it, but came really, really close, made it a lot better. The only time we have splash over is when people are doing more than 30 miles an hour and a beating rain, but you can't really engineer for that. The other thing, and I apologize if you address this and I missed it, in terms of plowing, who's responsible? Snow plowing? It's a private way. Mr. Pickett is going to plow. Okay. By the way, the Pickett family has probably lived in this town, Charlie, his ancestors for maybe 100 years. Okay. So he's not coming into town for the purpose of building a house, selling a house and disappearing. Matter of fact, his intent is to build a house, move into it. It's going to be more conducive to his age at this point and sell his home on Windermere to his son. Yes. I can't, I'd be lying if I say I didn't hear the name before. So thank you. If no further, Mr. Curell. Just to the chair, thank you. Just to the chair's question, when you're talking about the raised curb, you're talking about an asphalt berm along the- No, this is an existing granite curb, straight-faced granite curb. Okay. But you are going to put, I think you said a three-inch berm or a temporary, some kind of berm near Churchill? On curb, right in front of the driveway. So the water doesn't go down, the driveway is like it currently does. Okay. Mr. Towne Manager, anything before I move on? Is there any members of the public that would like to come and have any remarks on this plan? Madam Chairman. If you can go right up to the microphone. Thank you, sir. Madam Chairman, members of the Board, my name is Carl Tumane. I represent Drew Klein, the owner and a butter at 46 Church-O-Lev, 64 Church-O-Lev, I'm sorry. I'd like to raise a couple of procedural issues first just for the record. First, I would like to note that we filed a memorandum in opposition to this with the Board and I would like that memorandum incorporated into the minutes of the meeting. Second, I don't know, I was outside talking to my client. I'm not sure whether Mr. Attorney Nessie brought this up or not. But we raised the issue with Towne Council while she was still with us about the jurisdiction of the Board and hearing this matter. As the Board is aware, there was legislation passed in 2009 giving jurisdiction to the Board of Survey to the ARB. And I just question what authority the Board of Selection still has or has retained with regard to hearing these matters. As a practical issue, I'm not sure how the Board of Selection can endorse a Board of Survey plan as the Board of Survey when they are not the Board of Survey. That's the one issue that I've been struggling with and I just would like it noted for the record. So noted. What's being proposed today is a radical change from the Board of Survey that was approved back in 1924. It was originally, the Board of Survey is originally approved was a descending street running from Churchill to the existing Irving Street. Today they're proposing an ascending Irving Street which would basically have all the runoff running towards Mr. Klein's property. And that has created an issue for Mr. Klein because when he purchased the property, he did his due diligence, went to the engineering department and looked at the Board of Survey and discussed with the engineering department that Board of Survey. And they had indicated to him at the time that if the lot was to be developed, it would have to be built, the road would have to be built in accordance with that Board of Survey. Which he felt comfortable with because again, gravity being what it is, any road that was constructed would take the water and shed it away from his property. Today what's being proposed is bringing all that water back towards his property. And his property is already affected from the runoff of Churchill and the other five intersecting streets that exist out there. Having said that, Mr. Klein has two major issues with what's being proposed. Actually three issues. The first is drainage and he has met with Mr. Pickett and gone over some plans. There have been some discussions about revisions. And I think on the drainage issue, as far as the road layout goes, we might be able to reach an accommodation. But our engineers need to get some more information to go over it and review it. A secondary issue from the change in grade aside from the runoff is that Mr. Pickett is going to have to increase the height of his lot. Basically he's going to have to bring in tons and yards of fill to raise that lot 10 feet. He's going to be constructing retaining walls around the perimeter. Again, when my client met with Mr. Pickett, Mr. Pickett offered an alternative where they would terrace the walls. And that's something that we could look at and again we'd have our engineers look at. But it's the consequence of changing the contour of the neighborhood and the effects of drainage that's of concern to my client. So before any decision is made, we'd like that analyzed if that's in fact what they're going to be doing, terracing of the walls and the effect. Our engineers again haven't had enough information to look at it and give their opinion to Mr. Klein. The third issue is one dealing with access and public safety. Mr. Nessie alluded to a board of survey I had approved on another project being 20 feet wide. That may be the case, but it was also a cul-de-sac which allowed for access, public safety equipment to turn around, for plows to plow without having to back down or pull snow out. It had enough access and room for snow to be deposited. Here you're talking about a 16 foot wide way that if you have a car parked there, Mr. Klein and other occupants of his home do park on the existing Irving Street. If you look at the plan you can see his garage is literally, you know, there's just one enough space for one car to park in front of his garage and then it's Irving Street. So parking on Irving Street is an issue with snow banks. Again, I don't see any area where that snow is going to be deposited other than on Mr. Klein's property at Churchill Ave. And with the amount of snow that we've been having, if you have snow banks on a 16 foot wide road, you're not going to have access. If there's a car parked there, you're not going to have access. So at a minimum, it's our opinion that the road should be widened. 16 feet is not adequate for both public safety. As it is, trash removal is going to be walked down to Mr. Klein's property in front of his property because the trash trucks can't get down there. So all of that needs to be looked at. And all we're asking for at this point is that there be some public input by the different departments. Now, I've heard that the engineering has signed off on the drainage plans. Again, our engineers on the drainage plans that were provided to us indicated there wasn't enough information to make a conclusion one way or the other. I don't know if there was something else that was provided to the town engineers. I received an email from the town engineer because I specifically asked him, when you said that it was your opinion that the plans complied with the original 1920 Board of Survey, what did you mean? And it wasn't his, he basically said I wasn't approving the plan. I was just simply saying that it contained the same data, that it had the same information, but it wasn't, the information wasn't the same. It just had the same data. That's all he was basically signifying. He has not approved the way he has designed. At least my last discussion with him. Thank you. Anyone else here from the public? I don't know if Mr. Klein, if you wanted to, or if you're a attorney. Well, I haven't had to keep her up and say what my attorney said. But again, the three years for me, I think as data is described, I've got the issue going on from the new roadway. That can be engineered. I'd like to know more about the details of that. I want to make sure the firm doesn't provide an issue with a snow cloud or a snow blow or something like that. So that that's, the details are understood better there. The second issue is, regardless of by changing the road file, we change the nature of what you can develop there. That brings in, that brings in the pertaining laws. I don't want to, we're not able to now, but any of us who have seen that plan were not going to make a study of public laws. He was a creditor. I think Mr. Pickett has recognized that. He's proposed some concepts. They aren't engineering certainly yet, but I think if you follow through on those concepts, there'll be a lot more instances for the support that's given. So I'd really like to see that happen. My third one is just the width of the road. I don't know how to get it out of this property. If there's a parked car there, a 16 foot road, a wide road suddenly becomes a 10 or a 9 foot road, and you may get access to the property. So that's what I'm going to do. Anyone else here from the public? You can just identify yourself for the record, please. Sure. My name's Robert Zeemer. I'm Lisa Grohlman. And we're butters to the lot on the Irving Street side. You know, thank you, Madam Chairman, for giving us the opportunity to speak. We wish Charlie and Jane our neighbors of 25 years best wishes in their project. But at this point, we are concerned about the project, the process and the criteria by which this change in the survey is being applied in this instance. And, you know, I want to echo the attorney of my neighbor on why this is being heard here and not with the Arlington Redevelopment Board. You know, there is in 2009 legislation was passed and it's titled An Act Establishing the Arlington Redevelopment Board as the Board of Survey. And, you know, it states the Arlington Redevelopment Board shall constitute the Board of Survey. The responsibility of the Board of Survey shall be to protect the safety, convenience, and welfare of the inhabitants of the town in regard to the layout and construction of private ways. And so, you know, that was approved also by town meeting. And a year later, the regulations governing the design and installation of ways, you know, was adopted. And so part of my question is on the process. If the Board of Selectment is the Board of Survey, then are they abiding by the process that was adopted by the town? And, you know, we're just concerned that these were adopted by the town and, you know, basically the rules that we have to play the game by. And so I'm just, I just have a question about that and to my, you know, right as of now, I don't really have an answer as to why we're here. But be that as it may, here are some of my concerns. The change in the street layout raises the elevation, you know, and it changes the nature of what can be built on that lot. You know, instead of street sloping in one direction and having a certain elevation, it's sloping up in a different elevation. And so it changes height limits and restrictions like that. And it needs, you know, requires fill, retaining walls in the back end of the property. Now, keep in mind this is a challenging property to develop. You know, it's sloped significantly 20, 30 feet, perhaps, from front to back, okay? That's significant. That's, you know, several stories, you know, of just the land, okay? And I would also, from the layout that you see here, it's not only just a change in slope. There's also a change in the width. These regulations have information about curbing, side slopes, retaining walls, all of those things that I just haven't, you know, I've heard the engineer answer the drainage plan, but what about all of those regulations that govern, you know, private ways? Have those been considered? Have they been signed off on by the appropriate, you know, bodies? I don't know. You know, so there are certain things that are, to me, I'm not a lawyer, you know? They seem out of compliance, you know? I read the regulations. I see that it's, you know, they don't seem to be being applied here and no variance or anything, you know, being granted or asked for. So that troubles me because there doesn't seem to be a process. Also, what else? So, you know, we also have concerns about drainage because of the elevation change and all of that and the need for walls, you know, there is going to be an impact on our property and, you know, I understand that Charlie proposed some new tiering of edges and all of that so there won't be such high walls and all of that and, you know, that's good to hear, but we're not here about, you know, approving a house or anything. So that's why I'm talking more about the street. So I mean, all of that stuff, you know, he's willing to work with us to mitigate any issues is good, but I just still have, you know, some questions about it, the process. And, you know, so we would like the town to, you know, be able to confirm for us that, you know, the road and the house are going to be abide by, you know, the zoning, the height and setback requirements and all of that stuff and. Well, I can say on that point when we get to it, Mr. really has his hand raised and maybe to this on the issue of the road and the previous speaker also brought that particular aspect up, not in terms of the house or plowing, that was just adjunct conversation. We do have the town manager and DPW director. So what I wanted to do and I'm not stopping you, but I wanted to get all the public testimony so that the town manager and DPW director can hear the town questions as it relates to the road, the slope, the grade and the width. And then when everyone finishes, we'll get an answer to that. Yeah. So, right, because the process is outlined where, you know, these departments may have been shown things, but did they realize that they, did we, you know, did they provide written approval? Did they have, you know, the proper site plans and all of that to be able to sign off on them that, you know, this is okay. And I don't know that. And just in terms of, I mean, we're not, I'm not trying to be bureaucratic about this. We live in a neighborhood where there have been literally three fires and we've watched houses burn down. So we do want to make sure that safety and some of these other concerns are really, really addressed. And we live at the other end of Irving Street, you know, the dead end, the very end. So we've had our share of issues with snow plowing and all of that. And we understand, you know, a wide road, the wider the road, the better the snow piles up. You get the delivery trucks, the oil truck that comes up. They need room if there's a car park there, you know. So, I mean, those are, you know, legitimate concerns, I think. You know, definitely valid points and I understand your position. Thank you. And like I said, we're going to take anybody else from the public who wants to speak unless any point of my colleagues right now. Okay. If you could come up to the microphone. If you want to line up or if there's more than one person, if they want to start lining up, if that'll make the meeting move more quickly, swiftly. Thank you. I'll be very brief. Just identify yourself. My name is Nick Deldin. I live at Nine Windermere Park with my wife and my two-year-old daughter. So just so you guys understand, when you look at the schematic here, I would be, Charlie is proposing to build on a 30-foot hill. I would be at the bottom of that hill. So when we speak about runoff and rain, that would be coming into about half of my lot. So really, I'm not really here today. I don't think to speak on the technicalities of this plan. I have never seen this plan. In fact, the first I've heard of this matter was a letter that I got on the mail on Friday. So I've not had time to educate myself, but I have the material to educate myself. What I would say is I think everybody that spoke tonight is a reasonable person. I haven't heard any unreasonable facts. I think people have raised some very significant questions. Also, I've spoken with Charlie on many occasions. I like Charlie and his family very much. Like Charlie, I've been in the town 40 years. It seems to me that we can all work together and work this out. I think we all want the same thing. I would just ask for more time to understand these plans. Charlie's lawyer talked about a lot of work that was done. Unfortunately, I've never seen that. So I would love to understand the impact of my property such that I could address the board in a more articulate manner. But again, I just want to say that I think Charlie and his family are great people, and I'm happy to work with them. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Hi. My name is Jean Yoder, and I live at Seventy Churchill. And that's the house above the lot. For the house that's being proposed. And we're not opposed to this plan, but the only public concern I want to register is that we're very concerned about how the ledge is removed. We have a retaining wall that'll be very close to the work site and also the foundation of our house is literally built on ledge. It's literally on the ledge. So the lawyer mentioned they do primarily chipping and blasting only if necessary. So I just want to express my concern that they be as cautious and careful about the removal of the ledge because it could negatively impact us. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Dr. Chris Geyer. I am neighbor to Mr. Delvin and Mr. Klein. I live at 56 Churchill and I'm representing the condo association there, which consists of two units. I haven't had much time to look at this issue. I was informed about it on Friday. I haven't met Mr. Pigott. I don't have complete understanding what the plans are. I've reviewed some of the documents from Mr. Klein and the memorandum and just reiterate concerns about potential issues with safety and drainage. So thank you. Thank you. Hey, anybody else? I'm Bob Willemann. I live at 70 Churchill. I'm her husband. I just wanted to add that this has no legal or engineering significance, but because Charlie is a neighbor and a resident building a house for himself and it's going to be quite a nice house, my feeling is that I think it will generally enhance the neighborhood, enhance the aesthetics of the area and so on. I may be the only person who feels that way, but I think he will take care to try to placate neighbors' concerns and so on. That's my feeling. So I just wanted to express that. Thank you. Anybody else? If I could, Mr. Towne manager, if you want to answer again briefly and or Mr. Rademacher, I do know what questions have been posed about, you know, interface with the town. I know Mr. Attorney Nessie said various meetings with the police department, fire department, board of health, as well as DPW. And I think I heard six to eight meetings with Wayne Chinat. Is there anything you want to add or maybe Mr. Rademacher or? I think I'd ask Mr. Rademacher to talk a little bit about what would happen should the board choose to approve the amendment to the board of survey tonight, what process would follow in terms of approval of the layout of the private way and stormwater management and development of the site. And Mr. Rademacher, if anything I stated it was incorrect, please correct my memory. Sure. Mike Rademacher, director of public works. I'm going to have to ask what specifically you were. So I know there was a lot of questions in regards to approval of stormwater management and drainage. Yes. And I know reading through the documents that Wayne Chinard has told the Piggits and others and Attorney Nessie that some of those approvals wouldn't happen unless the board chose to approve this amendment to the board of survey. Well, correct. So the engineering department's purview is on the drainage of the stormwater for the house lot itself. About, I guess it was maybe five years ago, the town adopted a stormwater runoff bylaw that pertain to the lot, the development of property, but not private ways. Private ways, excuse me, the paving of private ways is exempt from this stormwater bylaw. So that review is not necessarily for the roadway itself, but for the house lot. I think what Wayne Chinard and the engineering department did not want to approve drainage for a house lot when there was question on the private way matter. So if he made any comment that he couldn't review that until that was approved, I would imagine it was in that regard. And because the private way, excuse me, is being proposed to be developed at a different grade than the original board of survey, that's why it rose to this level. As far as the private way plans themselves, I believe the reason that it's being brought to this board rather than the newly adopted a board of survey is because the original board of survey was approved by this body. And this is not a new private way, but an amendment to an existing private way. And there has been some comment about all the requirements of the new board of survey, curb, height, width, grade, drainage and all that. That's all correct. But that pertains to new board of survey plans. This is not again, this is adoption, this is a revision of an already existing private way. So it was not felt that those criteria pertain to this. Do my colleagues any questions, any comments on this motion or whatever? Mr. Greerly? Yeah. So, you know, we as always want to hear and listen to all the neighbors, but we have looked into this as has just been explained, we've gotten two different opinions, I believe, on this issue. This was done originally by a board of select men, only a board of select men have authority to amend what was done by a board of select men, not the redevelopment board. So that's why it falls here, right? We saw a number of the issues brought up in this, our issues that we have nothing to do with at this point in time, but we'll all be dealt with as time goes on. Our only responsibility here is whether or not to amend that original board of survey and I move that we do that at this point in time, that we amend the board of survey with the drainage corrections or with the design that has been made. The purpose of tonight's hearing is to answer questions that people have on the board of survey issues. We can't answer blasting issues, we can't answer all of the other kind of issues, but withstanding the fact to pick it, sir, and all these neighbors are outstanding on Antonian citizens, I see no reason why we as a board should not amend that original board of survey and allow this to follow along in the process now. I'll second that. Seconded by Mr. Byron. Mr. Curell. Thank you very much. I have a lot of concerns and I would not be able to go forward this evening, I don't think on this with what we have right now. First of all, let me say that the positive thing that I'm hearing is that it sounds like there is a lot of good will and a lot of discussion between various neighbors and Mr. Piggett and I think that's the way that these things should ideally play out. What I'm concerned about is that what we have a lot of material from proponents and opponents of the proposal before us, as far as input from our own departments in front of us, we actually had more for an icy machine and a coffee maker at Walgreens than we do for this. I'm looking at the materials we have before us and for some previous board of survey proposal, I think when you were the engineer, Mr. Rademak, we actually have some memos regarding with issues and memos from the planning director as well with input into that before the board of survey took action. I feel a little uncomfortable. There's also a memo in here from a previous proposal from the fire chief himself and I have no doubt that the proponents have consulted with the chief but we don't have anything in front of us advising us from the chief as to whether or not these are issues with the widths as they propose the 16 foot widths as they proposed. I feel much more comfortable voting on this with that material in front of us and while I grant that the new board of survey the redevelopment board has a new set of criteria is there anything to prevent this board of survey in acting on an amendment in our decisions? I don't know to whom. As far as things like width and such the only criteria that can be used is what attorney Rice informed me of when making this opinion prior to her departure would be the criteria that were in place when the board of survey was initially implemented. Okay. Mr. Byrd? I appreciate Joe's concerns and I will agree with him that it's very nice to hear about the work that's going on in the neighborhood itself. With regards to the safety issue and the width you look around Arlington and there are many roads that are even less wide than what is being proposed here and I don't see how we could change or not allow this project to go forward after we have seen other roads move forward throughout this process with even less than what's being proposed here. I'm still more than comfortable and I'm moving forward with Kevin's motion. Mr. Carroll? Is the representation accurate though that we're in some of these materials that the width that's being proposed in the amendment is actually less than what was on the original board of survey? That the original was for 40 and the current width being proposed is actually shrinking what was approved in 1924. When equipment was smaller. Mr. Grilly? It's not 1924. I know. Quite a few homes have been built since that period of time. They only have the width that they are but that's exactly what we're voting on as a board of survey. We amend that from the 40 feet to the 60. And bluntly Mr. Rademacher Mr. Chapterling speaking and saying that this has been violated by Mr. Shenoud is plenty of information for me. I know you don't have it in writing but I have no question procedures that have been followed here. I would just state that which I know Mrs. Kruppelka has already taken care of and I'm not going to make any legal rulings on the legal questions posed. Not an attorney. I am a court reporter so I know what I should speak, what I should say and what I should say it. I've been advising me and my colleagues all the way along in the process about what our role is, what our due diligence is what the scope and parameters of what we should be considering. But we like to hear some of the outside issues just because here's a forum neighbors are here. It seems like you all are already talking anyways. Mr. Mrs. Piggett seemed willing and able to have met with you and continue to meet with you as well as the other residents who are just remembering first names Robert and others. I know Mrs. Kruppelka will make sure that the memo of opposition filed by attorney to Mayan will be incorporated into our minutes. I'm going to deal with the issues that I think we as a board should be dealing with as well as both attorney to Mayan and the husband and wife were you are you are you? The residents of 113 Irving they wanted it both parties wanted it noted the question if this is the appropriate body board of selection to have that board of survey I feel that we are and that can be debated later day in the later forum and as well as I can't really speak to the other things but in terms of plowing and the like I really feel like all these neighbors know each other and things can get will be resolved and what I've told of the Pickett family people of their word and care very much like everybody else who lives in Windermere and Irving and Churchill about their neighborhood and about their town and I just I know I can't include this in our vote but I'm encouraged by again with the flooding issue the discussion around the berm as well as raising at least I'm not just putting a plug it's not incorporated as the vote at all I'm a firm believer of the high of the curbs as well including the engineering the better it handles some of the runoff so on and this is any further discussion by my colleagues I just want to make one further point even if this went to the redevelopment board it still would have to come back to us we are the only ones that on this issue can amend the board of survey so I'm sorry I'm not sure whether we have the authority there's no question we do motion by Mr. Carroll I don't argue that I'm just saying that I feel much more comfortable having the the fire chiefs recommendation in front of me on this we ask for it for all sorts of other permits that we grant that are much less import I'd much and I have no doubt about the drainage I feel like I do have sufficient information on drainage but on the other side I think the public works issues including the plowing trash removal Mr. Rademacher maybe you can address whether or not you feel that the plan would be sufficient for that because well I think we all appreciate the offer of the proponent to privately plow the road there's no guarantee that family will be there forever this amendment in these dimensions we're actually putting a responsibility also on the directive butters to this as a private way so we have to make sure that I'll allow some leniency on that just but stating for the record again that's not under the purview of the board of survey but if Mr. Rademacher has a quick answer to that but that really isn't in consideration of our vote did you have any questions or comments on the plowing and trash we would work with the proponent to write an agreement about the plowing it could be something that goes in the deed of the property or what not it goes for the life of the property and the trash pick up the same may have to come out to the intersecting street so we wouldn't have to back trash trucks up the road as well would you have precedent for that I believe we've made those requests of other in the past and sorry town manager do you have a sense from the fire chief that this is workable that these I can't say that I do I've read the documents provided by attorney Nessie which states that he's spoken with the fire department but I've not seen a document or had a conversation with Chief Jefferson myself okay any further discussion and a motion by Mr. Grilly signed by Mr. Burn all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed 3-1 thank you next we thank you everybody for coming out thank you next agenda item 7 we have the Vettemint Order Madison Ave we had a hearing on this two meetings ago actually I'll let everyone get ready to go out so I'm not screaming okay we had a hearing the public hearing on this two meetings ago the neighbors on Madison Ave put forth a proposal under our Vettemint relief to pave, repave again talking about curbing and berms we now have before us the actual document that needs to be signed and everything else I understand from Mrs. Burn is all set with Madison and we just need to take a formal vote sorry Mr. Chapter Lane the document before the board tonight is the formal legal instrument which will allow the town to collect payment on the taxes for the repaving of this road on the butters tax bills over the course of the next five years if they choose not to pay in advance and can I ask is the maximum amount $164 no higher than that $441 and $0.30 that has not changed from when we got at the first time that was the only concern that the neighbors had as they were through the plan and they're aware Diane if there's any additional charge they have to they bear the cost just where we're putting liens on people who don't pay the amount in full which sounds like some people will be doing that by January 1st on or about 2013 second second any further discussion questions with my colleagues if not all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed unanimous vote new business Mrs. Kruppelka Mr. Town Manager Mr. Chapter Lane yeah two quick pieces of new business as the board knows I last week spoke about hopefully this week having an update on our search for a new town council and we do have an announcement that a new town council has been extended off for employment and has accepted his name is Douglas Heim or Doug Heim he right now is working for the Boston Public Schools in their legal office and prior to that has experience working in the New York City Office of Corporation Council with a great deal of experience in that particular job working with the New York City Police Department so he has extensive municipal experience although different types of municipalities in the New York City and the New York City and the New York City but through the interview process through the assessment process through meeting with me everybody who encountered him was very impressed with him I look forward to bringing him to meet the board at a future meeting we anticipate his start date will be sometime in mid December he has a commitment with his current employer I look forward to introducing him to the board in the very near future the other quick piece of new business Wednesday evening we have a public meeting in regards to the Arlington Center Safe Travel project I know the board has heard presentations on this for Mr. Rottemacher and others in the past there's two discussions happening in this meeting one are the updates to the plan which talk about the removal of the seven parking spots on Mass Ave in front of Cambridge Savings Bank and the GM and Java are soon to be kickstand cafe parking lot and what that means for the total project the second part of the meeting will be for members of the public to give the town input on potential alternatives for replacing those parking spots I know I told the board about a plan that the town had put together in regards to using some space on the GM and Java parking lot to replicate those spots but that's one alternative that's out there Mr. Rottemacher has done really Yeoman's effort to try to identify other parking spots that could be created in Arlington Center some on the roadway some through some other creative means so on Wednesday night we're going to have sort of a public dialogue about some of those alternatives and what concerns residents might have and other users of Arlington Center parking so that should be a good public dialogue as well and that's what we're going to have for new business Mr. Greilig Mr. Kira I just say that if you haven't gotten your fill at the senior center on Wednesday on Thursday there's going to be a master planning public forum where the vision statement and the initial set of goals as well as a really impressive draft set of existing conditions will be presented distills the input of hundreds of the residents of the town a lot of us I know while we're interviewed and it distills a lot of that and it should be a very interesting session and I think that's at 7 at the senior center on Thursday Thank you Mr. Greilig No new business How do you say the new attorney's last name? Heim H-E-I-M Just to that venue and I'm going to leave it to the chairman Mr. Dunn to work with the town manager on that I have total respect for somebody that has a commitment to their job and I really do admire that he's finishing something for the city of Boston that shows great character and it's a good testament to the town council we're about to get. Here's my concern and it maybe can be addressed with Mrs. Kruppalk also in a myriad of ways where we have to it was anticipated but by September there'd be some draft language on the Hackney rules and orders and we have to do that in December as well as there was discussion that by October we would have some draft language on our alcohol policy Mrs. Sullivan has seven or eight suggestions from the board that does not mean they're incorporated but suggestions possible suggestions to be put forth before the board one of them being the night of the offense occurs is the night that the penalty of the offense is going to say the wording wrong just as a proposal for this full board to discuss I really think both those things have been sort of stalled just because there is need for a town council so I know there's been an offer by a former town council as well as we really need to get that going on the Hackney with Joe Carabello Mr. Chapter Lane we need an attorney which on the proposed amendments additions, revisions to our alcohol policy so I'm just concerned that we need to address that in the short term so if we could leave that to Mrs. Kruppalko and the town manager as well as the chairman Mr. Grilly? I think tonight was an example also where I would have felt better with the town council here I mean I totally respect for Juliana's opinion and I know we sought the opinion Mr. Marlin can I say that now that I've said it yeah I prefer in the future if we can even if it's Mr. Attorney Marlin and I'm with you Mr. Heim I appreciate that kind of dedication and I expect that he's going to bring to us but I wonder whether we want to look like for a one month that would be my proposed solution but let's get some ideas and have the full board For what it's worth with all due respect I've been taking direction really working with the chairman Dunn in regards to not bringing Mr. Marlin here if we didn't deem it necessary so I apologize that he wasn't here tonight but I wasn't really acting in any ignorance of the fact that it's obviously preferable to have an attorney I'm just saying now that we're getting into starting to kick up with a budget and revenue task force and things like that I'd really like to see something just as well as to get moving on these two projects and then just the other two and I want to thank the town manager and the members of the committee town officials Mrs. Grappelka for doing yeoman's work on the town council search you didn't leave any stone unturned and I really do appreciate all the time because I know I've been with my colleagues waiting with the town manager who sent the letter actually the chairman did to DCR had a phone call that I played for the manager from Dan Hunt from DCR along with dealing with the lesser work intensive of the signs up, down, wherever Dan Hunt of DCR has put forth a draft statement that he will be presenting to the town the town manager, board of select council he's put it before his deputy commissioner I think he said for approval where I've asked them that if we can get back on the road and get back on the promises that Mr. Grairley and I lost July 2012 in terms of the maintenance and other issues on sunny side and that's sort of the last piece of the pie that needs to be cut and served so hopefully that'll be done and lastly Allington hosted and won't be doing it for another 11 years because there's 12 cities and towns in middle sex league competition hosted at Wednesday night it was very successful I have to say all coaches being very competitive it was commented by the coaches and all of the ADs were there except for one it was the night that the Red Sox won the World Series so you know what that means that they said it was a very well run from the school department and his custodians Jeremy, Rodrigo and Frank as well as all my high school parents husband and wives actually it wasn't too hard getting the dads out really they ran that event and I heard over and over again Allington has run the best league competition which really is a big undertaking you have about 800 plus people in the red gym you have about 200-300 cheerleaders in the cafeteria and then you have people cycling through the blue gym so really and we are the Allington High, Varsity Cheerleaders are moving on to regionals November 17th so hopefully we're successful from there and we go to states if there is no further business you mean to national we go to states then to national you're thinking papa water good I'm glad you're paying attention they do it backwards they do it differently for high school moved to germ second second third fourth fifth sixth seventh seventh sixth seventh seventh seventh seventh seventh seventh