[Music] good evening everyone today is Today is April 3rd
2025 time is 6:00 p.m and this is the Christian planning board this meeting is being recorded for future viewing on the YouTube channel i think we're on via cable we're al also on uh Zoom
tonight uh can I get a motion to open the planning board meeting so moved a motion second all in favor i uh can everybody introduce themselves victoria Alaro Tom Clanner peter Gyo
member steve Bush member mark Francois chairman mark Ellis vice chairman okay uh meeting minutes of March 20th did everybody get a chance to look those over [Music]
so we were we had a full quorum so everybody was here that day particular yeah I read the mot i didn't see any issues and make a motion to accept the uh minutes of March 20th meeting i got a
motion a second second all in favor i Okay um I'm going to go a little bit out of order just for the members of the public that came here we're going to put the public hearing first so the public doesn't have to sit
through everything else um public hearing site plan review and special permit 211 middle road map 23 lot 29 29A 29B applicant Rewild Renewables LLC represented by Bills and
Thomas Inc scope of work is proposed 6 megawatt solar photovol development please introduce yourself uh good evening Zachary Farcus Reenewables with me Greg Samson and Dan
Ky lawyer and um engineer for the project um we are Middle Road project not the Park Drive project just to be clear um to reorient everyone uh we're talking about 1553 acre parcel off Mil
Road on the west side of town of Aushnet bordered on the west by residences off Rhonda Drive and the Care One facility in New Bedford and to the south by Kushnet residence off Mary Drive to the
east is the business commercial district on the same property that houses the white family dairy operations and two or three other commercial operations uh J&R Plastics around you plumbing and uh quality oil um I won't go into much more
detail i think this project's been introduced to this board and obviously there's been a lot of peer review comments so just bringing everyone up to speed on what's happened in the public venue in the summer of 2024 I was in front of the conservation commission and
received an Orad from that group which defined the wetland lines at after the definition of the wetland lines per wetlands protection act we started our entitlement work with planning board for the site plan review and special permit as well as with conservation commission
on their notice of intent um both hearings were open uh we started with our technical review committee meeting with a Kushnet staff in August we had our presubmission conference in front of this board in September uh both the conservation commission and the planning
board has visited the site on formal sitewalks and both public hearings have been open um the public hearing for this project was open in early December of 2024 things are obviously slow with the holidays and um ultimately we spent the
time between then and now working with peer reviewer GAF engineering Bill Madden as our single or point of contact over there uh we got our first peer review letter in November to which we responded we got a second peerreview letter that further refine refined some
of the comments in February to which we replied in March and then we actually received a third peer review peer review letter at about 2 p.m this afternoon so I've had a little bit of time to flip through it obviously haven't gone through it in detail i imagine that's
the same for the board um but assuming you guys have been kind of following along with the back and forth um within those peerreview comments Bill and his team have broken their review down into six categories um call them zoning site
plan review storm water notice of intent board of health and general the intent was to combine all three of the boards within a Kushnet that have jurisdiction through the same peerreview to just help keep everyone on the same page make sure the plan set revisions stayed together
um so in the time that we've been working with Bill um we have completed all the commentary around the site plan review uh around the notice of intent and around the board of health which leaves just a few items open that I'll
kind of summarize very quickly in kind of under the zoning heading um there is a question about the applicability or the application of the new bylaw in a cushion for solar projects this project being the first and looking at your agenda maybe the only project that comes
under this this iteration of the solar bylaw in a Kushnet so there are a couple interpretation questions that we went back and forth on um attorney Greg Samson put together a memo that um from our perspective explains things pretty clearly um there's also some discussion
around decommissioning plans costs and bond amounts um we've gone through three iterations of this um Rew Wild used their template revised their template again and Bill was still uncomfortable with the number so we hired a third party firm to come in and do a uh a full
uh decommissioning estimate i tried to work with SW Cole who this board and this town has worked with in the past they're no longer doing it sw Cole made a recommendation for us um a group out of Eastston and so they completed their third party decommissioning estimate and I provided it to this board as
supplementary to the second peer review response letter um so that's still open it doesn't look like based on me flipping through Bill's latest peerreview letter that he's got it yet but just recognizing that that's still open not a huge um detail for me i'm
just kind of looking for direction from the board or from Bill on what number he'd like to put in there um and then finally there were a couple technical questions on equipment specifically our racking bill really wants some more detail about exactly what the racking structures and foundations associated with the racking are going to look like
so not big questions um with uh under the under the general heading we're having some conversations about construction sequencing um and clarifications callouts on the plan whatnot some very very kind of technical items just to make sure that there's no
gray area um eventually when this project moves from kind of a development phase we're now in construction phase um the last heading is storm water um probably received the most focus from Bill a lot of energy from us and from Bill going over storm water assumptions
calculations etc um and so we're getting there there's almost all the items are closed again flipping through this afternoon's letter showed me we made some really material progress forward there's a couple other items that need to get cleaned up that are kind of above above my pay grade with respect to storm
water modeling but we're getting closer if you have any questions we can talk through them a little bit tonight but ultimately we recognize from that very first technical review committee meeting the importance of making sure the storm water assumptions are sound and that the features that we put in will achieve
what we're trying to get to in terms of storm water control but we know that there was a problem obviously not developed by us but within the town where a site was opened up had some freezing weather and then some rain it really caused some problems so just wanting to be doubly sure to remind this
board that project that problem project had nothing to do with Rewild or any of our affiliates um some of the assumptions that were made weren't great and that site was materially different than ours that was a fully treed site with a lot of grading ours is an open field with very little grading so it
doesn't um it doesn't reduce the importance of storm water controls and making sure we have everything buttoned up but at the same time I just want to make sure the board's clear that from our perspective those are apples and oranges type sites um so that's where we are now my hope is
to wrap things up with Bill over the next week or two and then be in front of this board to close the hearing um I believe the next meeting is April 17th but that may be a little bit too ambitious to get here but we're what feels like rounding that rounding that final final post to the home stretch
here and um I know it's been a lot of time but we're really trying to trying to put our best foot forward with the best engineering we can and really going through the details with uh with with Bill and and his team so I'll stop there i'm happy to take any questions from the board or certainly
from the public we'll start with the board first and then once the board's done all their questions then I'll turn to the public for any questions that you might have and Zoom as well um we just got the the report I got
13 minutes ago uh so I haven't had a chance to go through it at all yep um I don't know if you are prepared to kind of highlight to the board uh some of the changes that were made or
some of the recommendations that GAF recommended and that you have changed i don't know if you're prepared to go over that with us to kind of give us a little bit of clarity on the changes that have been done that's up to you i don't know if you're ready or not cuz again I know you just got this earlier today as well
yeah yeah I mean the the changes are actually pretty simple visually not much has changed from the project the project still is focused on the field right we've got the 55 53 55 acre pro property 30 acre field about 19 of that is within
the fence everything we're talking about with bill materially is within that fence ring road uh storm water control basins uh modules equipment pads etc so a lot of what we're doing with Bill has been kind of tweaking and massaging some
of the details within the fence there's been no material changes to the fence perimeter the module count the system size etc so from from kind of a you know not even a 30,000 foot view but a 5,000 foot view nothing visually has changed on the plans there's been a a lot of
changes to the storm water modeling to some of the assumptions that went in ultimately making um the assumptions that go into the model as conservative as we possibly can and with that comes some minor tweaks um as I mentioned some details have been added to the plan in
in terms of the the racking system specifying ground screws and not driven I-beams um the purpose being we don't want people to hear pile driving tamping for the construction period of it so we've made it very clear that will be ground screws used for the foundation of
the racking um and a few other items here and there but as I said nothing materially different on this plan set than from the initial plan set so the questions um I take it that you've gone
to the court for a portion of the review of this project yes no maybe jurisdictional body for wetlands in Massachusetts is obviously the conservation commission um we're not feeling any impact to any wetlands or wetland areas that reaches any type of
Army Corps jurisdiction okay i mean I did notice a couple of bridges in there no no no no no i'm in the wrong one you're in the wrong one i don't get Oh I'm sorry sorry no no problem that's a valid question but yeah in about 20 minutes we uh we did the OraD
with No this one just No bridges on this one not yet oh thank you so much yeah I mean the board I think most of the board uh was at the site we did walk the site um
it is an open field it is I mean there is no clear cutting on this property um one of the things that this board really concentrates on is um impact to uh the neighbors and the visual the
visual aspect of what the neighbors see and you know it's going to you know impact them as least as possible um I will eventually go over not tonight but you know before our next meeting go over the burm that you have and a
screening that you have for that what is that the west side or north side south side is that the south side where the uh south side's under it that what you were just pointing at is the west side this is the west side where all the all the houses are at right by your kind of
toward you is the south side that we also have the BM for uh the residents off Mary Drive and that BM is how high it's an L shape um I believe it's a 6' high B with a 10ft high fence yeah that's what we're going
to I mean I want to we had discussed the type of fencing we don't want a solid fence cuz then the wind will just knock it down so there when we were out at the site there was different discussions on the type of fence maybe even the the type of We don't want chain link cuz obviously you can see through it um but
you know maybe something where you get the staggered uh to allow the wind to go through so it doesn't become a big sail um I don't technically think you can put Did he say 10 ft i don't think you can put a 10ft fence i think you can only be eight and you have to have I'm not
exactly sure i think we actually have a 6ft fence pile all in town I believe anyway um so that would require something different but I wouldn't recommend maybe a 10ft fence at all coming across yeah
we've got we've already got 6 ft of ground um you know how high are these panels going to be above 100 off the ground off the ground the panels are oriented in
two rows so two high in portrait so you imagine two pieces of paper like this uh they'll be tilted at a 25 degree angle so the way the calculus works is about 9 and 1 half to 10 ft off the ground so what we're trying to do is really
provide a uh kind of a foolproof buffer the uh the design for that Burman fence is copied from a previous project that I did a few years back in Rochester so um I believe during the sitewalk we encouraged you guys off Mendel Road in
Rochester Roundsville Road and Mendle Road right at the intersection uh we built the solar project in 2017 and that employs the Burm with the fence there's no 150ish foot setback that we have here it's right on the
shoulder of the road so just so you guys could get a contact or a visual of what this thing's actually going to be like I'd advise you guys to take a drive over there and check it out i can I can send the the information so you guys don't road and what men at the corner of
Mendle Road and Round thank you on the uh the Plum property um over there so I just want the board to hear that number one like this isn't this isn't something we're making up out of nowhere and then number two uh Bill did ask us to bring in our
structural engineer to put together a preliminary structural design to prove that it will be a sale or show the design specs to make sure that this thing will be structurally sound so we'll have a preliminary memo design memo from our structural engineer obviously the structural type stuff
happens at building permit um but we want to provide that to the board just to to show you guys and I was unaware of the 6-foot fencing limit um We'll take a look at the bylaw and just we'll double check that whatever we're putting up there meets the bylaw um obviously solar
projects use 8ft fences all over the place so there's probably some I I'm pretty sure we can't go to 10 but it might be eight and a half if it would be we we compensate with the BM going up and the fence coming down but we'll uh we'll take a look at that thank you for the heads up but we agree also we we
recognized the minute we stepped on this property that the site you know the the the glaring challenge for us was to find a way to limit uh visual impact to neighbors and so we spent obviously a lot of time specking out this uh this design we provided you guys with visual
sighteline plans in the most recent recent maybe one revision ago of the plan set to show what it's going to look like not only bird's eye but from the horizontal view um and like I said we're we're copying a plan that has worked um and worked very well for a past project
there's no structural issues we've had with that one very very similar application but we recognize the influence so if I understood you correctly it's it's double stacked it's going to be top of panel is going to be roughly 9 and 1/2 ft off the ground about that the
back edge 3T off the ground and the leading edge about 9 and 1 half to 10 ft on the back edge the glare that's going to come off these panels is this is is this why you're looking at it a 10 foot high fence no visual only we've provided we've provided a glare study um as required by
the bylaw as well as a sound study we've located our equipment pads and any noise making um pieces of equipment far enough away from any property lines that um you're not going to have any impact but obviously the fence burm the sight lines is primary but it'll accomplish the same
task there's no failures to sensitive receptors in either the glare study or the sound study yeah the houses on this on the south side are all like a one level where on the west side there are some of them are two levels so I think the glare
cuz the panels face south correct correct i think the glare is more impactful on the south side but yeah I definitely encourage you guys take a look at the glare glare memo glare study um it was part of our original application package
no I mean uh you got the road that goes all you know you got the access road that goes all the way around you have the uh you have the chain link security fence um you have the burm with the Now is there are there are there going to be excuse me cuz I didn't look through all of
these but is there going to be any kind of plantings trees everbodyies anything in front of the burm with the fence we're looking for direction from the board and the and the public um I think I mentioned at the first meeting that um we reached out twice to all neighbors um
above and beyond the the typical notice of a public hearing introducing ourselves and trying to get some feedback we heard back from four or five people um after those letters we heard back from two or three people at the first hearing but ultimately plantings are quite
subjective so we're we're open to hear what people what people would want so um there's nothing on the plan right now but that doesn't mean any recommendation from the board or from the public we're happy to accommodate that did you say that you had had a you have had a glare study
done yes sir and what were the results of that in regards to particularly those houses on Mary Drive no impact no glare and how high was the burm that you were proposing between uh on on that south
side of the array i believe we studied it from a glare perspective without any burm and and what with no burn we studied again with no burn sound study and the glare study were done separate and apart from the burn the purpose of the BM the Burm is for
visual impact only not to mitigate sound or mitigate glare the access road goes 360 yeah if I didn't mention it when I was speaking at the outset we have received uh comments from fire department and board of health that have all been incorporated into the
plan so we we've satisfied those requirements until I finish going through this yeah we definitely I definitely want to look through um that that we got anybody out in Zoom or in the audience have any
questions comments concerns please stand up introduce yourself yeah my name is Tom Bosworth uh 188 Middle Road i'm just curious where can I get copies can I get a copy of the plans or what they're doing for No the plans are at the town clerk's office if
she wanted but we don't give out sets of plans do we i mean I think I I don't know if I have an extra I could send you um Right but so I can go to the town hall and look at it or get a copy made yep absolutely absolutely okay thank you please hi I'm Steve George i live on
Rhonda Drive how far from the road is this burm going to be how far How far from the road or how far from the back of the chain link fence is that Burm going to be everything's Sorry cuz I think it's supposed to be like 300 ft
from the road everything's measured so the the road is middle road so we're Why middle road what about Rhonda Drive i think there's no frontage on Rhonda Drive no but it's Rhonda Drive is a road so if you're going to go I thought it was 300 ft from the roadway so that
means it would be 300 ft it is 300 ft from any way so this uh particular uh project does have a way actually on three sides uh you got middle you got Mary and you got Rhonda so by our bylaw
they need to be from edge of road to the panel over the structure they need to be 300 ft or a minimum of 150 ft from the panel to the property line whichever one's greater uh looking at this right here they are
at least 150 ft from the property line and I'm going to say they don't have actually not on this page they don't have Ron and and Mary is actually almost twice as far so and Middles is
way far so Ronda Drive is the only one that's something that we went over with them clearly and that was actually uh a question that came up of where exactly are the borders to and we didn't originally
we didn't know if it was to the fence if it was to the to the BM to well the fence is the property line the property line is the property line then you have I don't think there are fences on the property line three it's like one foot
from the property line any bit there's an existing existing existing fence okay the existing chain link fence right so I don't know if that's going to stay or if they're moving i know they're going to have an a chain link fence around the entire perimeter for security
then there's going to on the south and uh west side like he had just mentioned there's going to be a sixft burm with a 6 to 8 foot fence on top of that and that's more for visual for all these houses on Ronda Drive to hopefully not see the panels trying to get it as high
as we can to to eliminate the visual aspect of it well my concern is too is the higher you're going with these panels or with these burns and these fences does anybody realize how much wind is back there we were discussing the wind yes the wind is I can't put nothing in my backyard really an
umbrella or anything in windy days cuz it'll just get torn apart with that being said let's just say hypothetically they they're going to do a little study to find out exactly what they can put there and what can withstand the winds it would be beneficial to them to do that because if they whatever they put
up and if it wind knocks it down they're just going to have to go back and fix it but what if it damages the properties on Rhonda Drive that's my main concern you're worried about a fence flying off oh yeah i am well then I can't hold them accountable for that just as much as I
can't hold any of your neighbors accountable for putting up a fence as well cuz that can happen just about anywhere i know but you're talking already 6 ft high okay and then a fence on top of that so there's a lot of ground that that fence can come flying i mean my neighbors fences are on the
ground but then the chances are of them getting lifted up and brought up into our house is kind of slim when it's already six feet and then it's already been 6 ft up in the air okay i I can understand the concern um
I'm just I'm just bringing these points that I have questions on yep no I understand that okay you know and then the just just one second the gentleman had mentioned cuz I thought the same fact of being up too high in the wind load and he's came back and said that
his structural engineer would be reviewing that and that fence would be designed to okay withstand the wind load that's basically the best that they can do even if it's a if it's a 4ft fence or a 6ft fence or a 10ft fence that goes on
top um it's going to have to be um you know engineered to to withstand the load all right and now this access road that goes around the project is this inside the burm or outside the burm inside inside the burm inside the burm and inside the security fence that's between
the burm and the access road and what about if what about anything going with the groundwater you know that so now groundwater falls under a different um area that's under conservation a water table well the water table's a water
table but they do a an they do a study the the storm water study does a and again this is with the conservation commission not with this commission but they do extensive study on which way the water flows they put
retention ponds to capture water they slope the property so it all goes into the retention pond again for us one of our biggest concerns is visual the biggest concern out of everything is water we don't want water that's on this
property to leave this property and go to anybody else's property like Main Road like Main Street like Main Street Meadow Rhonda nobody we've had like the gentleman said we've had issues with some of our earlier projects on Main Street we don't want to have that project that uh problem again the
biggest issue for any solar field is water where's the water going to go it's against the law for any water on their property to go on anybody else's property so their biggest issue and they're still working on it it hasn't been finalized yet is to keep water on
that on on that property and in in terms of the Rhonda Drive parcel the slope of the land is all away from Rhonda Drive so in terms of surface water getting any impact on Rhonda Drive I
don't see where there's going to be any uh the prevailing drainage route is down to the wetlands that's on the property right now and that's in the back and then and then out then it from the
wetland system in the let me get the street that feeds it the the the prevailing slope of the land feeds to the wetland and the existing pond that's on the property all of that land drains
down towards Middle Road and there's two 36-in diameter culberts when I went and looked at it quickly this afternoon uh there were like 30 pages to look through so I it it didn't get a detailed look by me but I in terms of where the water is
going to go the surface water from storm water runoff it's going to go away from Ronda Drive towards the wetlands that's on the site down towards the down towards Middle Road where there's two 36in diameter culvers that will get the
water across Middle Road and downstream so there won't be any that I can't say no impact on Ronda i I don't often say that that there's going to be no impact on your property but that no impact from storm water on your property okay uh there will be an impact on the
wetlands there's a very detailed description and back and forth between our reviewing engineer and theirs about runoff curve numbers and all this other stuff simply though it goes to the wetland the wetland drains across Middle
Road and uh it it appears that uh there shouldn't be ponds like we've had in others with no outlets and what they call C and DTOS which do not percolate water at all i mean most of these uh the
ponds that are on site are all already at the low part there's going to be water in them there'll be there's water in them now there'll be water in them uh when this project's done and it'll be uh transported across Middle Road away from a lot of the street my only question is
where is this located in the field i haven't I haven't seen any plans i was just curious where is it located where on does it go all the way to Phillips Road or does it where does it start on Rhonda does it start at my house at 1168
does it start on Phillips Road at that cult on Phillips Road you know I'm just curious where the panels in the burm are going to start you can come take a quick look if you like at this map right
here i don't see any turn around i don't see any culdeac and anybody else that wants to come and take a look right here but this is Phillips you got two houses right here too yep yep okay so
that's going to be from the panel to this first house right here is going to be more than 150 from the panel to that property line is 15 from the panel from the panel not the
fence or the panel so that property line is 150 ft here and then you got the another 100 150 ft from there i got the biggest swan in 110
what do we got they just have to have that on here i'm not so yeah this is one of fences here to edge of the propert so the scale just for for
reference is u one in is 120 ft okay so it should be and how close is it again this whole property line right here to the panel line that is 150 ft wow it's going to be right there what's our house going to be worth who's going to want to
buy a house with a bunch of solar panels in your backyard construction going to come in will our will our will our value of our house go down will our taxes go down it's going to be much i wouldn't buy my house again it's a private piece of property
this is crazy absolutely crazy think about it thank you no no everything's going to be coming in it's grass the minimum other times i guess it's different because you can go from 300 ft from the from the way right or a minimum
of 150 can we get it can we get this under control please so this right here is questions these are always at the town hall office take as much time as you want to look at
okay anybody else in the audience that has a question anybody on Zoom that has a question okay uh anybody anybody else on the board have anything else you'd like to
add sounds like you have no say i'm also presentation as far as as far as solid fields are concerned and I I understand some of your concerns um there is nothing that this board can do
oh I don't just tell them they can't do what they want to do on their private property um I mean we we've been told legally by our own town council and by the state attorney general's office that we can
condition the solar array to some degree but not to such a degree that you can't put a solar farm there at all right so we don't we don't have uh the ability to just deny any solar projects there um
and and a year or two ago we we amended the solar bylaw it was one of the first projects that I was part of this town had no bylaw this town had nothing and and they could come in and do whatever they want as closely to the road as they wanted
they could do anything we amended the bylaw and it is one of the toughest bylaws in in in all of the surrounding towns uh and we you know we purposefully made it difficult and but that's as far as we can go or else the attorney general will come down and tell us we
can't do what we we're trying to do so this I mean and I will say they have been very accommodating they have we did a walk through we told them what we wanted they have another engineer we have an engineer that works for us that
is telling them "No I can't do this i has to do this." I mean there's it's a book of it which we haven't even looked through yet and they and they there's no they haven't had a no I'm not going to do that or I don't think this is right or they've been very accommodating uh as
far as this solar project has been uh going on uh so I I will say that um if there's anything that else that you think that you know is concerning please bring it to our attention the only concern I have is the damage I could do
to my property and again that has nothing to do with this board i apologize gentlemen in the back yes sir i just had actually one please introduce yourself my name is uh Roland Gothia from 19 Mary Drive i live at the back corner of this
solar bomb and my property actually has an easement for the New Bedford sewer system on it now the plot plan I got from you folks on where that easement is goes diagonally across my property wouldn't that lead right directly into the middle of that
hole because it doesn't run parallel to the fence right no that that's that's part of what part of your question is answered in this 28 pages i said 30 i was incorrect okay uh they are going to have to
relocate the the force I think it's it's a force man that goes through the property no I'm not a The saw that goes through the property is going to be according to their 28 pages going to be rerooed around the panels so that they
will be able to access it and maintain it without having to rip panels up that's my understanding you know and I I I would add that uh this response package should be at the clerk's office also is it is it uh
Victoria it's in my office i can leave a copy of the clerk i would you know at this point we've got interest you know I would make sure the clerk has got a copy of that also so I supplant okay so right now um we are to continue the public
hearing uh Do you want to go to the next one or you want to go I know no one's had a chance to flip through the latest but there's not much left open so if it pleases the board we'd request a continuence to the 17th which I believe is the next meeting
obviously we'll be in touch if if Bill's not ready by then but the hope is to be ready by then okay um just so all of you know um it's we're going to continue this to the 17th if for some reason our
engineer isn't complete we're going to come here on the 17th and I'm going to push it off to another meeting they pushed it off three times in a row i requested that they send and notify you and you all received something correct
uh they didn't have to do that they did it under our request i'm not going to ask them to do it again for the 17th and if it goes one more I'm not going to have them do it again it's the public as long as it's posted on the website it will be posted i always post i watch the website okay but I I have a lot of
people that get a lot of people like show up and then it's been postponed they weren't aware and they get angry and I try to make it as clear as possible that sometimes these things take time and it might be postponed on the 17th hopefully like this gentleman said it is done by the 17th and we get
everything resolved by then um but you will not be notified again if it does get postponed okay yeah take a motion motion to uh close the motion to continue and close i
want to make it a dual purpose one i want to continue the meeting till the 17th is that the Thank you okay so till May 17th i make a motion to continue until then april 17th april april 17th april okay sorry yep i got a motion i'll
second it all in favor hi hi thank you gentlemen see you on the 17th thank you thank you if you could next time um come if you can have a set of plans so I'm going to get everyone's email address right now oh even Yeah even if you can
on the easel just so people want to come up and take a look next time you do come whether it's this one or another one in the future just try to have something so people can look at when they come in thank you so much all right have a motion to close the public
hearing no we don't have to raise it when we're done okay all right i'm going to go slightly out of order again i apologize um approval not required 168 Lake Street
map 19 lot 2 applicant and owner is Ellis Family Trust representative is John Romanelli at Zenith Land Surveyors LLC before Before you go any further I'm going to leave the room
uh with the caveat that if you have any other questions that you need the owner to answer I'd be glad to come back in and answer them the the only the only thing I will say this time is it basically I'm I'm at an age where I can deal with the estate
planning and that's what this is part of that's all not only are you a member of this board but you are also a resident of this town and if you have something that comes up that pertains to you I feel you have the right to sit and listen and represent yourself if need be so you don't have to leave no no well I
I'm not supposed to unduly influence you know how the board votes on this that's up to you um I'll sit in the back as long as nobody feels unduly influenced and I promise to stay quiet just don't have a party back here okay
john please introduce yourself uh good evening john Romanelli Zenith Land Surveyors 1162 Rockdale Avenue Bedford here representing the Ellis family we performed a survey here a few months ago for for Mr ellis and his wife
uh the existing property I highlighted it here in green it was a total of uh it's about 5 and a half acres total and what they are trying to do again uh is for estate planning we're going to cut off a
portion of 168 Lake Street the home of the Ellis's so we're going to continue that with a 2.24 acres we're not touching frontage we're basically just chopping off 3.12 acres of unbuildable
an unbuildable parcel is what we're creating and at this point I like Rick said for estate planning it basically takes I'm sure it takes some value out of out of his five acres by chopping off three of uh basically unbuildable
because Wood Street is a private way that is not constructed it's basically a wood walking path if you went out there and walked it so at this point that's not developable i don't know if there's any plans uh to do anything with the trailer park at this point it's
basically we are creating a 3.12 acre non-buildable parcel and leaving Mr ellis and his wife with 2.24 acres again it's got the it's got the area it's got no wetlands uh it's got more than 150 ft of furnish on
Lake Street so we're not creating any zoning infractions there that's basically it any questions it seems pretty um pretty cut and dry pretty cut and dry pretty
straightforward that's all I do is cut and dry what's everybody is that street just Just for reference Oak is that street and Oak Street actually a uh street right now or they are paper streets but they're
they're wooded you would tell where you were walking except for that one that says uh pave way right street yes yeah that's how um you actually would drive down to the houses that are on the pond come down Wood Street take a left on Pine Street okay but Oak is wooded ash
is a wooded lot birch maple those are all just wood lots there is a little bit of road furnish there right there is only private way yes on the private way yep probably 24 wide from coming down wood coming down Wood Road
right there if if that's that's gravel right coming down through so you can turn out to Pine Street to get down to the pond correct i'll make a motion to approve um the plans for
168 Street division of of the property owned by the Ellis Trust i have a motion second it all in favor i thank you thank you
will you be signing my secretary we have it we'll sell it if not he has he comes in and ask questions no worries you should come in with the easy ones most of the time most of the time most of the time yes had a
few challenging ones let's see 43 25 victoria I will get you a recorded copy that one's recording proof of recording okay awesome i was just about to say that
maybe better you don't like it i like it i can print stuff easier that's true after I start you want to join us again you got way too comfortable back there thank you for making those changes by
the way if you ever want to look at something before you print all the copies feel free to no problem have a good evening thank you do you have one one paper copy yes okay thanks Mike
actually we got to after the meeting we got to sign all the copies right just I just need one but if you want one for yourself to keep at home well I just wanted one cuz we have a discussion coming up about paper streets yeah oh yeah and and I you know it's just a a
coincidence but I mean I've been working I've been working with John over the last three years to get this plan done so it's not it's not something that got done all of a sudden but it's a good example of the kind of issues that are
going to face the board in the future relative to these paper streets that's all okay good point okay moving on finally uh informal meeting east of the Krishna New Beford
line map 17 lot 22B13 applicant and owner is Whites Farm Inc representative is Matthew Connor Weston and Samson scope of the work proposed is a 4.9 megawatt solar PV
development gentlemen introduce yourselves yep so my name is Zachary Shawing i'm senior director of development at Sarpet Capital and I'm Matthew Connors i'm from West Samson i'm the technical leader we also have Sarah who's here
participating via Zoom she is our uh associate developer on this project hi everyone hello hello so I just wanted to level set here too before we kick off i know Sarah and Matt had the technical review here uh but we're before the
board because this project has had a long history it was originally approved right around 2021 long story short it was approved being on Brooks Drive uh we got all our permits and approvals then realized that we didn't actually have legal access to Brooks Drive so we came back before we
got it reapproved through Lambert um and at that point then we worked with Conservation Commission to redelineate snow lines we worked through that process we've now come to an agreement on that and that has then triggered minor revisions in these plan sets which we would like to discuss today i
understand he actually applied his new application and I understand it was touched on the technical review but I think one we have need to have a conversation about this but also it might make sense to vote to actually withdraw this application and then we reapply as a minor modification here as
well um yeah this one there's a lot of history to it i don't even know where to begin with this one and I will preface to I so I'm not new to solar by any means but I just joined SAR six 6 months ago in October
so there are some nuance details of Leon Ber who has a little more history of the project as well so so now you're saying your intention is to withdraw the previous application and No okay i I misunderstood so there was a little bit
of a of a miscommunication when we submitted it and we gave you every piece of documentation we could have and it was treated as a um or I guess the the miscommunication was instead of being a minor modification which is what we want
was a new application which is what we don't want okay okay that's that that's fine i mean you it's it's taken a while but I mean you've responded to all our comments in the past uh there's obviously this is the result of some some working or not working with the
neighbors um yeah okay I understand thank you you you do have a lot of history you've gone back and forth quite a few times um I will try to give as much background as I can on this project so um originally
you came in front of the planning board wanting to use Brooks Drive as your access road correct um we never actually I don't think we never actually approved Brooks Drive there was issues with neighbors um
issues with u accessibility and then there was trees i I do recall that it was never actually approved by the planning board regardless of what you had going on with the neighbors um then it went and you tried moving from Brooks over to
Lambert uh I do know as far as the planning board's concerned you did come in front of us with a set of plans to show us the um continuation of Lambert with asphalt
we had public hearings we had butters come in um you had a detailed set of plans on the entryway of Lambert into your project it was basically going to be asphalted pretty much all the way if not all the way to the property line i'm
not exactly sure but I know it came through us and you got approval from us as far as accessing Lambert is concerned yep since then um you guys have had issues I know with
conservation i know you guys have had issues with your wetland line i know you guys have had issues uh with replication and now I now you want to build a bridge or bridges i'm not exactly sure i don't
see any detailed plans on here regarding the entryway there is there is something in the back it's it's more of a [Music] Us more if I you'll have to fill in if I'm
wrong but evidently there's some kind of uh standardized wood pile bridge that you know has yet to be quote designed but you know how long it's going to be and how wide it's going to be correct just not necessarily how many piles and
how big the supporting members have to be under the deck and how strong the deck is going to be and and all that kind of stuff yep that is correct and that and I had the wrong site to begin with on the other make sure I'm in the right place i was I was uh going to say
that bridges were popular but I guess it's only our site but um so but yeah to your point sir um you're exactly correct on all that and so obviously as we've gone through all these changes and negotiations right we now have actually improved the total impact of wetlands
and whatnot hence the bridge and a few other details and that obviously requires minor updates to these plans and that was the point of us coming before the board here just to explain that get you up to speed and just be transparent and communicate and go through the process now has the conservation commission looked at your
storm water management plan to at this the one that's on here i don't have a good enough memory to know what detention ponds were or were not provided on the last one do you want me to I can So I have a presentation I can pull up and I can go through like what
has been changed that would be great it's fairly minor but it's great it improves the the overall project so let me uh there you go there we go um so I will let me blur through some stuff here so
the outline in red this is the the lots that we're dealing with we have our entry over here on Lambert this uh probably half of this lot is where what I'm going to refer to as the southern solar field coming across here where
where I'll touch on these are where the bridges are going to be and then this area here is the central solar field I'm going to refer to and then we have the ner northern solar field over here um this between the northern and central is
is bisect by using for gas and electric and then this down here is park you guys oriented All right so between um this is let me see here so this is so
again we have the southern field we have a wetland on this side we have piece of it comes through here this is our main entry point i'll touch sheet 104 kind of touches on this entry and coming across here we have um basically our connector
point these two pieces in blue are the bridges that we're talking about and the prior to having the bridges we were filling those areas and in working through MEPA we've we basically determined instead of filling them if we
put bridges in then we basically number one make a better project for the wetland area but it pulls back a lot of our meat uh meat effort so coming up through here this is the um central field and I'll I'll dig into this a
little bit more but this area over here is the new wetland delineation the basin was originally over here so we pulled it back out of the wetland area um and then this field
is I think it was 85 panels uh tables and now it's 60 tables so it's it's been reduced this area here really hasn't changed at all this there's just about nothing that's happened up in there
have have the have the limits the outer limits of where the panels are placed now has that expanded over shrunk it's shrunk okay that I again it's been a while so I absolutely
and so so here's the this is the northern area and again this area is essentially the same nothing's changed up here uh in blue circles this is the detention basins we have one on the east side and one on the west side because we have a
high spot that basically bisects this upper area in green these are filter strip BMS to slow down storm water as it comes across the property and then these areas in purplish um are water quality swell so as the water comes down water
quality soil picks it up takes it to the basin basin discharges it into the wetland same thing happens on this side filter strips to the water quality um swell and then we have basin and bas discharges to the uh to the wetland this
area down here in uh the red circle is um the sistern and that was provided for the fire department they wanted 1500-gallon sistns on in the areas let's see ah hang on my computer's acting
weird there we go all right and then so this is the central and the southern area uh so the central piece again uh in as we went through the process with
the conservation commission the wetland line was originally over here and it's now over here and that basically had us pulled our basin out of the wetland cuz that doesn't really work um but the actual process of everything else is
primarily the same we have filter ships and there is no water quality to spill here because at the low end of the field the basin basically takes up the entire breath of it so there's no reason to re allocate water towards that and then there
just coming through here this is another system this area here is the bridges so we have one bridge with some land and another bridge and we're basically going over the wetlands that the new delineation of the wetlands coming in here this primal
really hasn't changed either at the end we have a basin we have a basin we have filter strips we have a water quality swell pretty much operates the same as the as the northern this piece down here goes out to uh park that's our Lambert Street
connection so for our Lambert Street connection we have a little bit of fill i believe it's 2700 square ft and we have replication area here this is a bit more detailed of it but it's not quite 21 on filter
replication there's a little bit of pavement out here we have a water quality swell that picks up um the the new road section we've graded it towards my side I guess east water quality swale with some check dams to
keep the water slow take out the DSS and then that goes to the that's kind of it in a nutshell um again the primary changes are the bridges between the southern and the
central and some minor changes in the central because of the changes to the uh wetland delineation yep so even though you're putting bridges and you're not filling that whole area there is some
there's some disturbance there's still some disturbance so I mean correct me if I'm wrong but you can only replicate 5,000 square ft you got about 2500 here in the front correct that doesn't go over whatever disturbance you're doing
no because So so the the disturbance from the bridge portion the permanent disturbance is going to be about we're estimating about 250 ft y and that's because of the support system for the bridge bridging over rather than disturbing
you're bridging over everything rather than Exactly yeah to reduce the filling and reduce the environmental impact yep all that all that good stuff they wouldn't do it unless they were told to do it they would have done the fill it would have been a lot cheaper but
I do like a question I get for reference um if we go back to uh the previous map um how much of that property where we are is this the dotted line that's shown
on uh 10 C 101 is that you know the the extent of the lane down the the No no we're we're not clearing everything so this is the property okay this is a a a portion coming up through here this is a funky shaped property basically a piece
that comes through here our limited work is very tight it's there is actually a limited work line that comes through here we're we're not going past the uh the fence okay if you could just so that people can see if you could point that out that's great it is a point of
reference just the public understand all right so as we were discussing the the you want the the upper one right hang on let me get the right page okay so the this is the property line this line out here it's kind of
funky at the end of the day but we are we have a road that goes around the property or it's not a road it's more of a path um but it's 20 ft wide it's what the fire department wanted on the outside of that is a fence and that's
basically our limit of work we're not clearing the rest of it a lot of it's wetlands so we don't want to go into it at all okay um and we're trying as much as we can to stay at least on this this upper portion the majority of the area
um in the 100t buffer we have tried to stay out of as much as possible this side here we're in it a little bit here and there um it's a little bit tighter on this side as we come through but and
then down here um the basin is probably the closest to the wetland buffer and I believe we tried to keep it 25 ft off the edge of from the outer edge of the burm um on this side here there's a little bit where we're in the 100 foot
buffer in this area here that's actually this line as we come through um cutting across obviously we're in the we're in the wetland as well as in the buffer u but for connectivity there's really no way around that and then down in here in this
southern area again we're only clearing to the fence line uh we have basically a wetland on this side we're not going into the wetland we are in the buffer in this area and then I'm going to go down to this piece uh for basically to get to
the road we are going through the buffer and that's that's the area that we're we're filling so thank you how how far down Lambert Street were you going to actually put pavement pavement in or were you going to put any pavement
in at all that is a good I don't know that off the top of my head sarah do you know or that might be a question we go back to Chris on as well i mean I I unfortunately I also don't know the exact um location of that um
but we'll have to we can get back to you okay i mean that that was an issue with the abut on Lambert Street you know in terms of what was going to happen to that road and you know there Lambert Street is not in the best of condition uh and there will although once it gets
built there won't be much going on there for traffic uh during construction there will be and if the road is so beat up uh especially that last leg beyond Park Drive uh I think that's something that the
board would want to look at i I certainly would I wouldn't want to see all the the trucking to happen the construction equipment and the pile driving equipment and all that stuff and then what is a marginal road now gets just torn up completely um I I think
that's that's something that I would want to see addressed in some fashion yeah I'd actually I'd actually have to go back out and take a ride up there and take a look at it what I'd say is let us just discuss with our rest of our team just so we can get up to speed on it too and then we can definitely figure out a
way to address that okay yep again um this is this started a long time ago i mean now that you're even talking I'm thinking of we wanted uh because of the roads to get in and
out of this area so tight that uh if I recall correctly we want right to the the path to get to that yeah the we wanted to have signage for the truckers to only go down a certain path uh I
don't remember if we coordinated with the police department to discuss which roads we wanted actually used whether you're going to go out through a cushioning or you're going to go out through New Buffett but that I mean and I'm going to have we developed the
traffic management plan i would have to dig that up because like you said we did do it a long time ago but we did discuss this in our board previous board meetings right and what I would like if you could dig up everything so if you're going to dig up that traffic report and
I'm going to do the same on my side i'm going to watch these old meeting minutes uh to remember the board's issues back then because I know everything wasn't resolved back then and it's been a long time that uh you guys have been in front of us so if you could
bring everything that you have from way back when I'm going to do some research and look at what was uh issues from the board back then um and and and yeah we we definitely got to kind of not start from the beginning
but we definitely got to refresh everybody on what's going on get up to speed we can provide a timeline for you too from from the records that we have if that if that helps out yeah as much as you can give me we'll help out uh and and that's definitely something like I
said I know I know that most of your issues are with conservation yes uh most of your issues prior to we we I know we approved Lambert Street um I know you've abandoned Brook books a I know we've
approved Lambert Street so there are changes here so correct me if I'm wrong but the planning board and conservation can approve minor changes
i don't want to speak for conservation just cuz that's not my department i'm not asking you to speak whether these are minor changes no no I know yeah planning board can approve uh modification minor modification to a plan they feel is minor but it'd be up
to the board if they feel that the changes rise to the level of needing a new public hearing if the plan changes are that significant now if now let me ask you also if the planning board finds it okay but the
conservation finds that it's major then what you are reviewing two different things so that's just something to be mindful i would just say if the changes to conservation could potentially affect
the plan you know they're not okay with it and the plan has to change again that's just something the board should consider we just want to make sure we're working off the same plan set which I mentioned earlier and that's primarily that's why we we resubmitted is because we want to make sure that we're both
same plans with both entities and I will say that our intent was originally to go to Comcon and then planning board like stagger them obviously as we touched on earlier there was a confusion and mixup here like we weren't applying for like a new application but more of a
minor modification so you know with that said originally you know the intent was to report Com first have that conversation obviously to add any comments make those revisions or changes and then have a follow-up conversation here as well we have Bill Madden doing
the review on this one as well correct the peer review is it Bill Madden doing peer review for this one as well currently there's no peer review i think he did re GAF did review it in the past if I'm not mistaken right yeah but currently there's no nothing right now
so peer review is complete or this will once they're done with this set of plans it's going to have to go to peer review again i I will leave that up to the board i think as far as their previous approval you know it was peer reviewed right as far as previous approval yep so I really
depends on the board and if you feel that the changes rise to the level of you know if you don't if you're not comfortable making that determination you could request you know JF to look at it to say do you think this you know this changes to whether it's con for
storm water or whatever binds to the level of that or not um we have a couple options i guess we're just going to look at the original how much has changed with the overall layout of the original plan i mean
every I can get you the original plans that we have for for your record not a problem but in a summary uh it's the same layout we're we're making little tweaks and changes yeah I'm concerned like the the original layout of the
array of the panels none of that stuff has changed stuff is the same with exception of just the center array this piece here is what's changed and it's been pulled this way smaller which is why we lost it was like 15 tables something like that 15 modules okay so
it it the the it the overall kill watch okay yeah all right the intent is to use the same module class and everything I just had a quick question i'm sorry just for the record I've had a couple questions on it the when you refer to it
as mega I might have put on the agenda that it was DC is it technically like So there's two there's a DC and an AC ranking and I on the cover page I believe we put both so you'd see what Okay yeah is there one that you is there one that most people go by more than the
other i don't think so it varies i mean one number is bigger than the other the AC size remains the same because that's what we're injecting into the grid that's what the utility recognizes the DC has slunk just a hair because of the loss of 15 tables yeah good i don't know
that exact number off top of my head but it's negligible it's around seven Mars okay so but you know as I was saying this this area here used to come this basin used to be over here yeah and we pulled it this you know now we have
all these A series flags it's A100 the new flags so the basin ended up being pushed this way this field here had to get reconfigured so it basically shrank cuz we don't have nearly amount of space so that's the change it's that and the
bridge and the bridge everything else was approved and the bridge is in the same spot i'd rather see bridges than Phil in those areas that's my personal opinion the bridge is in the same spot as where we were crossing so even the layout really hasn't chang before you
would have been over 5,000 you would have had to go about 9,000 square ft before so we had me issues but if we take that fill out of that area and put bridge sections in we're well below the 5,000 ft per right and that's the thing if anything when you look at this
conceptually right what was the last approved Lambert versus now i mean these are minor modifications but if anything they're actually improving the overall impact and footprint of the project i guess my my my only other comment is and it's just based on some history
we've had with a couple of the other projects is there needs to be a clear a clear limit of clearing no pun intended at all uh there were some liberties taken uh
and we made some I did too some bad assumptions uh the panel construction was pulled back considerably but they cleared the whole site right out to the property line and that did create some problems with conservation and with the
neighbors sure obviously we're not anxious to see that repeat itself and and understandably we said we also want to be on the other side of that either i Yeah I I I guess that's my
only real major concern at this point is that instead of clearing it and asking for permission later uh let's get Yeah let's get it straightened out ahead of time and that's why we're here and that that that that created a tremendously
adversarial position between the contractor the person who actually owned the property and the town y and I I for one am not anxious to see that repeat itself on any solar project as as long
as I'm sitting on the board anyway so your uh your access road that's a gravel road and goes around the Nope well all right let me let me clarify this cuz um in this piece here all the all the
sections are connected by a gravel road so this is gravel coming through here actually this comes up and this is gravel and then this piece down to here is gravel the rest of these exterior are
grass so that you could have 360 degree access but we're not putting gravel everywhere and you got the fire chief's approval on this that Yeah the for this plan when it was approved in 2003 the fire chief approved it I think 2003 no I
I mean the fire chief did today so that's another discussion that came up this afternoon uh he's going to go back and look at what the records were and and what was approved so that there's clarity on that yeah um I mean things
like the tanker truck are going to be heavy and and uh it it needs to be suitable in all weather conditions for that tanker truck to get in and around the property right but that's so we I I
certainly would be looking for something from the current fire chief that he's satisfied with that being able to get all the way around system around the panels i don't know what the legalities are behind it if one former chief approved
it back you know 2001 when 23 23 uh Now a new fire chief I don't I mean I'd like to Yeah if the road's going to be changed a little bit to satisfy him I mean I would look at that as a minor a
minor improvement yeah but that said Mark uh that would be another thing that if you could do like an overlay if it was all gravel before and now it's part gravel and part grass that's something we have to address
i think it's the other way around so it's or whichever way it is yeah right i mean it's always it's the what was approved was what you're seeing it's part gravel part park part park grass ask the current fire chief yeah just I definitely want something written by him
that he's okay with this sure i I I would not want to be driving a tanker truck around near the edge of the wetland in the spring when that top three or 4 in or 6 in of lom turns to mush um and I'll tell you what we've
we've had issues like this in the past and I don't know um we've made them change it uh so again you're out in the middle of nowhere this is out in the middle of the woods if there's an issue way out back
and the tanker truck has to get out there or something's going to get out there um I feel that the fire department should have access with some of that big equipment to get back there i'm not the fire chief i'm not the one that's going to be doing it so it's his call um but
um I I frown on the fact that there isn't a gravel road all the way around okay this has chain link fence security fence all the way around correct y obviously we're not worried about screening there's no
neighbors um they can see anything um yeah um again this has been a long time since it's been in front of us i know you got a little bit of a road with conservation um now we've submitted to conservation that's that process has started yep no I
I am aware um please next time we come back do some digging on what was approved what wasn't approved everything that was brought up cuz I want to do the same on our end yes sir uh the roadway
uh the access i know there was uh signs that have to be put up uh for the truckers to know which way to go there was a lot of conversation regarding that there's a lot of conversation on that and and you had picked up on it that uh
Lambert not only Lambert but all the roads leading to this site aren't in the best condition uh what happens with all the trucks going in and out there's a lot that I know I recall was discussed you know two
years ago um I'd like to get refreshed on that uh do the best you can on that and ultimately that's going to behoove you too you know you know you don't want trucks wandering around the neighborhood trying to find out how to get to the
site it's not an easy place to get to correct i've been in town all my life and I still get confused like driving back this road and that road this one goes right this one go it's it's it's not particularly easy but that way if
there is a designated route at least it limits the possibility of people coming back and saying you know I've got a pothole in front of my street that I never had before if there's a designated trucking route and you can keep the bulk bulk of the traffic on that route at
least that limits your your liability in terms of potholes and road destruction the thing I did recommend too is that before they did this was to before they started doing that ro take a good video yeah conditions the roads back the other
part of the discussion was um time of day to avoid school bus school bus traffic that makes sense school time that again that will just help your truckers out they'll be spending less time you know standing there you know waiting for the school bus to get out of
the way and and the more information you can feed the board Absolutely the easier it'll be for you and the quicker we can get this done again human conservation is a whole another story that's between you guys but the more you feed us from what was approved or not approved or
whatever back then would be very appreciated yeah sounds good in front of conservation before it comes back to us now at this point I think it's scheduled to go Mark it's scheduled to go in front of you soon yeah our next meeting um I'm Mark Minton i'm the
conservation agent um next meeting is April 9th i don't think it's on the 27th it's the It's the 23rd oh thank you right there we have the plans yeah third week i know
like I said I know you guys have issues with them um that's between you two um yeah so what are we doing today we discontinuing this well I think it's was going to withdraw yeah so if that's the request I would I
would Yeah our intention not to be a new new application but that was never the intent it was intent was to come for a minor modification all right let me ask the board do you general feel what they're doing is a minor modification yeah I mean I do i
mean there's less panels than there were before i mean the the wetlands impact has been reduced the all the all the feedback we got from the neighbors for I think it was access off of Park Drive that they're not even using now that's not an issue the only one that I
remember is the the last house at the end right he wanted as fault i think maybe his property line or which I believe there's a section of pavement i believe it does go past his driveway
i I guess the only recommendation would have just give us a summary of what the changes are we can flip through and get a get a visual you know a written summary yeah so I I'll get you a summary of what's happened so far and then I'll give you a summary of basically the two
changes that's that have been triggered the required the changes that have been required because of the process you go through exactly we I I don't really want to know about the all the details of the MEPA filing but come on and then we'll dig through all of our
records and we'll try to get you copy again as much information cuz the last thing you need is for somebody to want a new traffic study or something done and you guys already have one the more you support with us the quicker it is for you my intent is to get all this
resolved and get it built okay okay okay uh what are we doing so if you want to if you want to accept the withdrawal hold on a second i I just had one question so um hi again i'm Mark um when
when did uh the project go through MEEPA so was you I mean that's a it so be we talked with Meepa and we got input from them about how to not go through MEA so that's that's what that's what the
basically the premise of removing that fill and putting bridges in got us below the 5,000 foot threshold okay so that's within the last year you had this okay thanks thanks yeah of
course we've been talking with a bunch of So it would be a motion to entertain resubmission of the project as a million a minor modification of the previous approval well just stepping back for a
second they um wanted to request a withdrawal right they want to withdraw we realize this came withdrawal is a strong word can we Yeah we request a but we got to verbalize it correctly so I would I would say so they did submit and I have
a package here they did submit new application so if the request is to withdraw and that's the board's you know the board would like to do that i would recommend a motion to withdraw without prejudice i think the board does not have to make a decision tonight as to whether or not they you guys feel that
this is a minor modification if you do feel that it rises to the level of a new public hearing all of this information is based off of their our old by us anyway they would need to resubmit the package regardless does that make sense
resubmit the package under the old bylaw or the new bylaw no I'm sorry so if you feel that this requires a new public hearing they would have to adhere to the new bylaws right so that means they would have to resubmit anyways and this wouldn't this um you know doesn't apply
so it's it's up to the board so we're just trying to take their they asked for a new permit we're just going to let them withdraw it correct and then they will come next time correct me if I'm wrong to discuss the minor modification they'll have more information correct
correct so at that point you can uh you know if the board is comfortable make the vote or not as to whether you feel that is a minor modification so two separate uh votes that makes sense it does okay i understand the concept i'm not quite sure how to word it so
i'll entertain a motion to approve the withdrawal without prejudice of this plan plan is that all i got a motion i'll second all in favor i I Okay so you
didn't apply for a new permit correct you have the existing permit we just went over some of the changes today yep now you're going to come back to us somewhere in the future soon we haven't said anything i'd like to I'd like to meet with the conservation i would agree with that i would agree with
getting some of that resolved because I don't approve anything until they're happy yeah and until they're happy we're not happy makes sense so uh make them happy come back and see us tell me that they're happy and then everybody will be happy perfect so I'll talk with Victoria as we go through the process make sure
everybody's on the same page and then you'll see us hopefully okay awesome awesome we really appreciate it okay i do want to add just one component here sorry to uh extend this um we are also requesting an
extension for the permit which is expiring in the summer but that is something that I can discuss with Victoria on whether or not that should be included in our current package or if that should be separate it's also something that we're uh sorting out with the concom so it depends on your
preference whether or not we want it to be if you want it to be separate or not or allin-one minor modification so if I can speak please um just like I know we had spoken a little bit about this earlier this permit is probably covered under the recent permit
extension um you know signed by the governor so I'll forward the guidance we received from our attorney because it has the specific dates in there y um that's Alex right Alex we use KP law sometimes different um people um but I'll forward you that guidance we received just so we're both on the same
page but I do not think you need an extension but we can verify the dates just make sure I think it's 3 years now right I thought it was 2 years yeah I think it's the extension I think is 2 years but like I said I just want to double
check the dates before I say for certain but the but isn't the initial permit for the guidance isn't isn't the initial uh approval good for three years now because of what the state did through the process
it was three years but then we changed it at town meeting and made all our special permits down okay okay but this was under the old one right this was under the old one and then the governor's made all it's a legal thing that's why we're going to go with what your attorney says
it's a lot of legal we'll get let's get before the com first we'll come back and we'll close it all out all right thanks everybody appreciate it of course i did all good thank you when
I was on the other side thank you have a good night when I was on the other side anytime somebody was that was not that was not a warm and friendly just with this one
there was a call earlier and I missed him i just came to sit a there was a little bit of confusion just so clear we just withdrew these new the new that book over there
with they're going to continue under their old permit that they had then they're going to come back when we get all the information they'll come back we'll see what the changes were and then we'll decide whether it's whether it's a major change then
everything is thrown away correct present it like that again just the way they did it's nice on teams right and then that makes it easier for discuss rather than look at 3,000
panels between the old the old one gentlemen can I ask you to Mark Mark can I ask you guys to take a step out i'm sorry no worries thank you very much thank you all right
let's go to uh other topics and we're going to discuss um let's have a continued discussion on the solar bylaw amendment um at our last meeting uh Victoria was uh good enough to go
through our entire bylaw and highlight a lot of changes um I also went over all of the changes that she recommended some I agree with I think that we should do others I disagree with I think we should
keep mostly is the um everything that's repetitive I think we should keep um the more times it's repeated the less excuses people have that they didn't see something uh but there are certain things like here on page one um she
wants to change the wording uh so all the wording of large scale ground mounted solo solar voltaic installation should all be consistent throughout the bylaw i agree uh the repetitiveness I would like to
keep um we want to specify as to the edge of the panels that's the kind of the biggest issue that this started out with and any apparence that goes with it any um
uh potential battery storage any buildings anything anything anything structure or either the panels or any structure or we just put structure and that means and that means panel never but that doesn't include see
the thing you know I'm I'm in terms of the details the some of the things are necessarily I would think going to be closer to the street I mean like the maybe the batteries maybe the you know when cuz at some point they've
got to transmit the power out to the street and they I I don't know I don't know if there's going to be a need to put some of that equipment closer to the street or not or closer to the property line i don't know we just got to make sure that if they depending on which the
way the structure is designed that it is 150 ft minimum from the property line or 300 ft away from the way okay uh and that means we we just don't have what is 150 or 300 ft so we have to
specify any panel any storage facility any um and and to that point um I was just I was just reviewing something from um Cape Cod um commerce and that was one of the
recommendations um this is back going back back to 21 that was one of the recommendations is to make your setbacks to any structural apparence okay or the field not include not it would have to probably not including
utility poles and stuff right but it was had to do with any kind of structure the battery storage um building that may be put on the site that I mean battery necessary for the for the field battery storage I would think would be
if I was I want to put a different hat on if I was the fire chief because of all the problems there have been on airplanes and other locations with batteries suddenly deciding to start on fire uh if I was a fire chief I would
want battery storage closer to the street to be quite honest with you or easier for access rather than buried way back at the end of the parcel i'm I'm just just saying stuff right now but uh there there may if I Now on the other
hand if it's an inverter that's going to make noise I don't want it next to my house because I don't need to hear that all day and all night every day for the year absolutely so uh yeah maybe a little a
I just think I just think we need clarification on the bylaw to where they're measuring off of i don't want people to mistake the the security fans or the screening fans as being part of that 150 it goes to a structure which
is a panel or define the structures yes define storage facility in inverter you know inverter uh anything that is a structure i mean I wouldn't consider a pole uh part of that and I
wouldn't consider storm water drainage lines or or culverts or things like that part of it it's um well detention ponds would would have to be almost part of that cuz I don't know
if I'd want it my I don't know if I would want it within the you know on my property line either so if we're going to go down that road I mean we got to set you know the minimum clearance from anybody's property line putting a retention pawn in all retention ponds in
this town are they're not uh holding ponds they're retention ponds so they're not holding any water so whether Yeah they're filtration pond so that whether the property is flat within 150 ft or it's flat goes down a foot and it comes up a
foot as a little pond I don't see an issue with that being within 150 ft that's not obstruction of view that's not uh hindering anything having a retention bond in that area if it's
what's needed to be in my opinion question um another thing I think that uh Victoria highlighted here is it should be deleted as a special permit fee um the fee isn't something that is you know
made up at the time we have a fee schedule so that's something that should be taken out of here and they should look at our fee schedule to u verify the what that that'll make it easier to change in the future if if so required you know if you have if you have
something like that in two or three places you know and you don't catch all three of them yeah yeah absolutely agreed uh everything else uh is you know a lot of is what Victoria highlights is is you know things that are repetitive
um I I again I say keep that um what did I add here she quote for a solar array this is not needed oh uh yeah it says here that the applicant shall provide information for
adjacent roadway in the area of the proposed project to include accident data for the previous 3 years site distance roadway construction existing traffic volumes and site generated
traffic uh Victoria has a note here saying that you know we should probably delete this i agree that this isn't something that has a lot of movement uh it is unir oh vehicle and emergency access
number two i there's no paid okay yeah I get you yeah now once once the solar field is built then there's very very little traffic coming in and out of the solar field so I agree that this doesn't pertain to a
solar field as far as but during construction like this one that we just saw there's going to be an extensive amount of construction going on for you know 6 months to a year to have this i think that you know they should definitely have some kind of
uh site restriction or you know uh traffic guidelines during the construction period my my comment was mainly to the accident data i mean it's Yeah it's relatively easy to
get but I don't think I don't think that's really necessary we're already waving that for the first project well I'm sorry i shouldn't say that the board sounded amendable to that waiver from the project that's in front of us when that was presented so yeah it's it's not like you're putting up a big office
building or or a retail facility with a drive-thru i mean those are those are critical in terms of you know adjacent intersections and accident reports and stuff like that i mean that's my negotiation every morning every morning I drive down Middle Road
past the the uh array that's in the the Cranberry blocks where Pine Hill Pavilion used to be and other than during construction I don't think I've seen more than one or two vehicles from you know every couple of months kind of
thing there's not there's not a lot of activity no once it's built there's very little activity and even and even when they when they start bringing solar panels in they don't bring all of them in and make a big pile they're taken in you know sequentially to some degree
right so that they don't have to have this huge stockpile area i mean I you you still have the issue like this last one where if the roads are tender uh yes they may be damaged during the construction process but another thing
that uh Victoria highlighted is to consider adding preferred fence types i think that's a pretty good idea we should put right in there we prefer you know X Y and Z so we don't have what happened over on on you know
Robinson Road with that you know cattle fence whatever you want to call it uh I I think if we have something in the bylaw saying this board prefers you know whether it's the staggered fence whether it's the vinyl
fence whatever you know I think vinyl is kind of cheesy but myself I'm a fan of BMS because they don't blow away you know they don't they don't fall apart uh I do like BMS and I kind of I am curious to go to where he said that they built
that last one i want to go see what they did over in I've seen that one yeah i I like the one right um that's in Wearingham right if you go up the back way to Lowe's on the opposite back half of Lowe's and you got that big solar farm they have I don't know it's like a
4ft burm maybe could be I don't think it's 6 ft and then they have a big row of arrivites across the top of it you know what I mean it looks really nice it screens but obviously takes years for those abites to grow it's not something that happens overnight but as far as
aesthetics are concerned I think that's a really good look uh yeah I I mean right on the one of the solar arrays off of Wing Road in town they built this burm I swear it's 8 or 10 ft high and then the arborites that are on top of
the burm they must be another 15 or 20 that's Oh that's right when you first drive in on the right yeah yeah that's a screen yeah see i I think if we're all in favor of something like that where you know if if you like Middle
Road Yeah do they should they put a BM all the way around no there's no houses in the front there's no houses to the uh to the north but if we have something in here saying if you're you know within x amount of feet or if there's a lot of uh
housing on you know whatever side then yes you need you need a burm you got to put in a burm and and then you can either you could discuss you put a fence on that burm or you put arrivites on that burm but it it's easier it's easier to write in the maximum and then give
some relief yes than it is to try to give it to them later yeah yeah yeah exactly to to my to that point is where I was going to go basically same thing with the traffic study it should be we should still have the right to reserve the depending on where a solar field
ends up okay of being proposed it may be different we should be able to say that you know let them put the waiver in for it and then let us decide whether or not to give the waiver for it instead of mandating something that's not in the
bylaw right issues and that uh sorry Absolutely agree you know I mean like the the one we just talked about in the traffic management plan i mean that's probably one of the worst places in town to try and access oh you know I know
that's especially for strangers we went over that extensively i remember but I mean that you may not need that on any other on any other like I said we got the right to wave it that's it i was just asking if we have to do we have to
be do we have to be specific on a burm or specific on a certain fence type or do can we just put something in there that says what that the board will on a site bas sightby-sight basis we
change we can change the fence type it's easier it's easier to do what you want and then entertain relief afterwards I don't think you can go back to them and correct me if I'm wrong but if it's not in the bylaw for us to say you know I
don't know if we can or not but say um no there's too many houses i want a 64 BM there can we do that without them giving us a bunch of push back and legal problems because it's not in the bylaw now we're making things up as we go kind of thing if it's in here then they can
say well you know the house is a 500 ft away okay we'll wave that i'm just saying like we don't have to we don't have to say if whatever it's going to be this type of fence that you have to use everywhere no idea the BM thing is the
BM thing is one thing that we could say has to be on every site and and if you choose to put greenery or put a fence up that's something that we can go side by side we can decide that that would work with a 15t high burm unless you've got an alternate proposal
then 15 of course then you have to explain to the neighbors why you're giving them relief yeah you know I mean just the same thing as what happened tonight and what happens again and again uh just it has to be somewhat reasonable
because the neighbors don't want anything to happen next to them and uh you know it requires a little thought as to the minimum screening required you know and and some of it has to has
to do with what the adjacent topography is you know if you're if you're up high and you're looking down even that 15 foot high burm might not do any good yeah so it's uh Yeah i don't have an answer just more questions because it it
just gets so different between sites there's no quote the standard cookie cutter site that anything happens on all right um just one thing I want to clarify when
uh my comment about preferred fence types was specifically about the security fence chain link yes so that was my So they don't end up with that DF fence with the six yes because that I feel like is not secure we talked about that we talked about that last yes so I
just want to make sure that was so okay with making that change about the fences and then just to clarify the crash data so would you like to leave that in and then have applicants wave i know that was me so I just want to make sure leave it in and let it wave okay and the chain
link fence um I'm not sure if we should specify a gauge cuz you can get that stuff where it's um quite thin versus um some heavier gauge stuff i'm not sure if that's I don't know i mean if somebody
breaks in and damages I don't know if you get really a lot of push back on that i mean if you're investing millions of dollars into this I don't think you're going to want to put a cheap fence up if you want to keep people out I think you're going to probably road to be sturdy they put the deer
fence up with a big cuz we didn't have it specified so that was and if somebody breaks in and smashes their panels that's their problem they got to upgrade the panels and they got to fix the fence i mean it's it doesn't hurt the town at all if
there's somebody that can get through their cheap fence somebody can get through their cheap fence that's their problem because now they have to fix their own damage that's nothing to do with us that's if they want to be cheap about it it's their problem in my opinion um and then I think that
was all I found that I wanted to add or change um yeah any um anybody else i just I'm sorry go ahead Steve i only got one minor thing so it wasn't about this it was um as I was reading through here
there was you know another recommendation about creating an overlay district for solar basically you know where permissible and where it would not be suitable to put in somebody's backyard because it right about now it can go anywhere i I don't think we can I
don't think we can say you can't put it in i I I don't The way I read that it was it was like a recommendation basically of where you can put them u if somebody has a piece of property big enough in the village not that there
is but let's just say there was if there's a piece of property big enough right here in the village district we would have the right to tell him what he could and couldn't do on his property it's because we still have the right for for public safety public health okay is
is one of the few things that we've got some sort of um regulation people have got panels on their roofs all over town i I I I know what I know what you're saying it's there it's just a it it it's a just
a if if we choose to rather than having an inner center of town it's they're further north or wherever we may may want to put them i'm just it it it's a I would hate to be I mean I I understand that um different people have different
opinion on solar panels i totally agree um some people are for them some people are against them some people like them some people don't i totally understand that um I try not to infringe on somebody's private
property and that they've been paying taxes on and whether they just like if they have enough property to build 2 three four five 10 houses well if you meet the bylaw you can do it and if you got enough property to put in a small solar farm and you're reaping the
benefits to be able to rent it for 20 years lease it for 20 years and then turn around and sell it 20 years later i don't think I don't know again everybody's got their personal opinion i don't like to push my opinion on them uh if if they meet the bylaw and the
standards of the town and the state I don't think I'm going to be the one to tell them they can't make money or do what they want to do to feed their families or or I don't Yeah i mean I for me the at I'm interested in keeping the
town out of court or even hiring lawyers if they have to uh I mean the attorney general's was been pretty clear that It's allowed in all districts and if you set up something to prevent it from
happening uh they may re they may decide that your bylaw is not in line with state requirements uh I I'm not interested in getting in one of those fights uh they're expensive and long and
it would it would either go through or it wouldn't basically when when the new bylaw is submitted they're either going to tell you it it this is unacceptable or it's not you know yeah i mean they they there's already an opinion out there that and and actually one of our
proponents reminded us of it that uh you can use the special permit to condition the approval of a solar array but you can't use it to deny someone the ability to the way I read it to to uh to
put it in so if it's a big enough array and there's enough money to go to court and enough uh desire to go to court and you deny it you will go to court and and and that's even if it's
just we don't have this problem so much in this town at this point but like in places on like Martha's Vineyard I mean you could be next to somebody who's uh you know on the Forbes 400 list and if he decides he wants to take you to court
because you've issued a permit that you shouldn't have you'll go agree um all right so anything else anybody want to bring up i just had one thing but I think I actually answered it this one here
you're just saying take this line out yeah which basically says the same thing it does and that line and then that line correct but I mean I know uh we said or we've heard comments about keeping the repetitiveness so I can read that in i mean if it's repetitive in the same
paragraph it's it's literally it says if applicant is not owner name address and certificate of agency if applicant is not owner and name address and seal of person preparing site plan so to me that sounds like it's all the same yeah if it's repetitive in the same paragraph or
in the same sentence then yeah you can get rid of that it's when it's in one p you know one part of the bylaw and then the other one and they two pages later or whatever as long as it's all stating the same thing I'd say keep the repetitiveness
that is your number BA1 all right uh so I think we've kind of nailed down the solar bylaw victoria will make the changes i'll find it uh and then we're going to start scheduling uh public
hearings for anybody in the public that wants to come in and discuss and uh I think we're good as far as uh solar bylaws concerned can I say one more thing actually please um just cuz I know it came up last time sorry i know it's getting late okay um
we are officially the planning board okay receive confirmation yes so that's one of the changes I will make for the commission yeah okay we're the board i I noticed that on the things I read what you put up here when I opened the meeting we are the Kushner planning
board meeting gotcha good to have clarification all right let's move on to uh so that's the biggest one because that's on the um springtime meeting so I think we got that nailed down victoria will make some changes we'll have some public hearings
that I think we already started advertising no uh correct today advertising for the public hearing and then uh anybody out there has any comments questions concerns come to the public hearing and we'll
discuss all right next is uh paper streets so I'm actually going to put two of these the next two together cuz I think they almost go together so there's a discussion on paper street policy and discussion on a on the ANR approval not required guidance document so the
approval not required document is yeah in our system already well for one thing I just put that together to get the discussion going that that guidance and also in terms of I really do
feel badly about people getting direction from I do too you know and and I mean I can remember one time when I was working for the big developer
and I had some questions and in the meantime time or before me was somebody that came in asking for you know what they had to do to get a sewer connection permit and at that point and it's relatively straightforward or should be
relatively straightforward at that point i mean I had gotten a sewer connection permit approved for a 400 40 and 45 room hotel i know the pro I knew the process i may not know it now as well as I knew
it then but I and the things that that clerk told that person I I had to really zip my mouth shut like it was the some of the worst advice I could ever imagine uh and you
know you've got people coming in that typically I would think to the building department that say "I want to put a house here what do I have to do and if it requires the board to to put a to sign a
plan my recommendation recommendation at this point is that we put together at least a handout we don't have to change any existing laws or anything like that but just do a handout that lays out the considerations that the
board should take should take in to sign or not sign the plan uh that way they're not going to get told one thing by the building inspector another thing by conservation another thing by the clerk blah blah blah blah blah blah and uh I
agree and that's that's the only reason for that and it was to get the discussion and this is in our bylaw now well I that is most of that is out of the approval not required manual put out
by this by the state mo that's what most of that uh encompasses because there are things that have modified the planning board's responsibilities relative to s to
certain issues one of them is what constitutes frontage that has been the subject of countless lawsuits across the state and the and that was the reason the state came out with that approval
not required manual is to clarify some of those things just and in 1989 and it bothered me when I saw the year and how much how how far back that was land use manager
devoted five major articles to things that the board could required plan uh there are other sections relative to grandfathering same thing it's there's a court
history it's it's not simple and straightforward uh but to have just to have something to drop off at the building inspector's office and say if somebody comes to us for an approval not required these are some of the things
that we are looking for okay that's no and I agree with you um give us a quick rundown of what you might want to show us on your plan there of as far as paper streams are concerned i will and and because and I went over briefly with
Victoria some of the areas in town and there are several and it does amount to a significant amount of acorage where we have these paper streets that were created in the early 1900s that really never got built out so it's not just
it's not just isolated to this piece that I'm going to show you but many areas there's lots of them um [Applause] and I mean the the plan that you guys
just signed if you look at some of it you're going to see Mhm all these streets and even though somebody may own all of this right now uh they could ask
us for an ANR plan to to split it up they could ask us for a determination of adequate access up Ash Street to get to a piece back here uh as land values increase
uh I expect all of these issues in all of the different sections of town whether it's the south end where it's highly developed and you've got water and sewer or up on the north end in the case of one of these subdivisions that
doesn't even have clear legal access to the subdivision itself forget about the roads in the subdivision uh the there I'm I almost guarantee you and I haven't looked at the plan but if you go up Heat Road there's a number of
old smaller houses there there may be the potential because of all these paper streets that are on record for more houses to be put so I I think I think and and the way I understand approval not required plans
unless you say it's not a building lot when the board signs the plan there is an assumption of adequate access to the lot okay so I actually had a discussion with Victoria regarding this earlier
today so uh not long ago we had somebody come in for and I wasn't Yeah we had somebody come in and let me make another example let's just say this person right here okay this person comes in i Let's just say
hypothetically it's just a regular 150 ft 60,000 ft it's a lot it's a house lot y hypothetically okay or or it's a grandfathered lot bounded by or or a grandfather lot before subdivision control laws and it passed back then and
it's still grandfathered in but there's no access to this law but this guy owns all of these or whatever this person wants to sell this lot that technically has the size okay but
there's no road okay again it's a paper street yep it's got no access but technically if this road were to be constructed that house could take frontage off of that road mhm and it has
the requirements to be a buildable lot so I think if something like this comes in front of us because there are people that might want to sell this but they don't want to build the rope let somebody else the person who buys that build the road i think in my opinion correct me if I'm wrong if somebody
comes in and and proves to us that this is a buildable lot if this road was constructed we could say not a buildable lot or approved buildable lot only once road
is constructed the clearest way is to do it and and you know I've seen the same thing happen in a number of places of town over the last few years typically the guy that's doing it wants to just put like a little note on
list of notes and and so a realtor gets the plan and sells somebody sure you can put a lot there right and then they find out later on that they can't correct and now I feel bad for them because they've been
hoodwinkedked correct if it doesn't have a road that runs continuously from Lake Street all the way up to here I don't think there's adequate access and it should say not a build not a building lot period uh even
though that there's and and that way but you can't put that so just so this person has the ability to sell this lot there couldn't be something on the note saying um I don't know reaching i know I'm reaching but
not a building lot until roadway is constructed you know in in conformance with planning board requirements right or approved by you know approved by planning board as buildable law only after access has been determined the road has been built something of that
nature i'm just looking at somebody owning property wanting to sell that property and the buyer having some kind of asurances that once they buy the property they'll whoever you know they'll be responsible to put the road in but at least they have asurances that
the guy that they bought it off of has been in front of us we said "Yeah once the road's in we'll approve the lot." you know uh at least that one the seller has some kind of asurances that we're not going to back out and say "Nope you sold it but now we're not going to give
you the okay to build you know at least it came in front of us it meets all requirements for ANR buildable law except for access or the road that I feel we should be able to say yes we will approve that only after the road
has been put in." Yeah and that's kind of that's that's kind of the gist of what the two uh roadway bylaws that Victoria uh gave us the one I forget the title here you go they're right here there's the short
one there's a short one i'm going to tell you this this particular one seems to me to be a just a repeat of what's in the town subdivision rules and regulations and they've just set up and I'm sure this
would have to be at town meeting that they gave the uh they gave the authority to the East Long Metal Board of Public Works to control how the street is constructed that provides uh access to the property
uh I don't know that that's really necessary or even desirable we've already got some subdivision rules and regulations in place that we can give waiverss to and that we have given waivers to that sets up the process that
that leads me to the short the short version uh something for simple minds to read but basically it's planning board guidelines this is not mine this is planning board guidelines uh for
construction of paper streets something like this along with that uh at least gives the board uh or it gives people more warning even just to go hire an engineer to do the
plans for some of these things that that people come in with it's expensive oh yeah and you know if you're going to have to put up you know for between wetlands determinations and all these other things you could be spending 5 to
10 grand for a plan an ANR plan for the planning board to sign uh I think that they the person that wants to do that should have some idea of what the planning board is going to be looking at for for access that's that's the that's
the whole reason for that and I just pulled this out because you know there's a lot of big roads out there there are they're all over the place and to be quite uh to be very straightforward about it I mean the the reason to carve
this up is I don't need all that land to to to put a house on and and enjoy myself uh this is like a big fence across the back of the mobile home park a buffer zone because
if and I could do this today i could come in and say "Okay I want to improve Wood Road from here to here and get frontage to put more houses back there." Believe me that's the last thing in the world I want to do uh for for a number
of reasons uh mostly because you know the guy that buys the house next to the airport runway you know and and he bought it because or she or she they bought it because it was cheap then they lived there for a year and now they're
sick of listening to the planes well they are on the town officials constantly to not extend the runway you know to have them put in some noise prevention you know I mean don't don't need that for for the park
yeah uh I mean that the the place has meant an income for my parents that allowed me to go to WPI and get an engineering degree there
uh and and now I'm utilizing it and it's mostly people's parents and grandparents that live here uh it's and it provides a continuing income and to in this
case I I'm you know I don't know what's going to happen after I pass but anybody would be crazy to have a bunch of houses go in here and there's a lot of crazy people yeah it's so Uh so I I'm I'm in
agreeance and I think we should have something we could do the easiest thing in the world and you guys can obviously look this over and read it again but we can easily just change the name you know and put a cushion on here adopt this three-page
bylaw add this to it and make it our own i mean it's something as simple as that as long as we have something like Brick says when somebody comes in and says "Hey I got land on a paper street what's what do I do?" Here you go this is what
we're looking for and then obviously there are waiverss and there's gray areas and all other things but at least it's something that we don't have to create somebody else has already created it and and we can just adopt what they did attached attached to the conclusion
put what subdivision what we require on is which is mostly on this page and I looked at this I read this over this is very similar to like a form C subdivision creating of a road is what this is this is just telling people that
this is what how wide we want the road we want to turn around in the road if the road has sidewalks you can continue in sidewalks if it doesn't you don't have to you can do Cape Cod BMS it's got curbing utilities blah blah blah it's basically the very similar to what we already have as a pharmacy subdivision
rules and racks uh but it's only three pages we can people come in and what do I do i got land i have on a paper road um and and uh this is what we give them and say "There you go." And then come back in front of us and and and they
might say "Hey wait a minute wait a minute." I don't know can I ask for a waiver there's no sidewalks on the previous street do I need sidewalks well no right you can ask for a waiver if there's no sidewalk we'll let that slide or you know hey it's a dead end but we can't possibly build do I need to do a
turnaround well you know there's different waiverss for different things uh but I think Rick is right and the easiest way is to just adopt this something like that and just put our name on it and say "Thank you very much." And give it to them something that simple at least there'll be something
on paper of what we are kind of going by keep in mind if somebody I don't think it actually has to be a by sorry to interrupt i don't think it has to be a bylaw doesn't it no no not at all no that's what I'm getting at we keep calling it a bylaw sorry yeah you're right it doesn't have to be a bylaw it's
just an amendment to at the very least you should be able to do something similar to that with a an amendment to the existing subdivision rules and regulations which requires a hearing and
then a filing with the change with I think land court and the uh the Bristol County uh registry registry so that'd be the easiest way to go to go in front of town i will say the other reason for the guidance is there are
some parts that aren't clear in terms of signing or not signing plans and one of the classic cases and it's still cited out in Nucket there was a town
road town road down here and there were a bunch of pork chop lots that were created with frontage on the town road but you could not build a driveway cuz the houses were up here and the road
was down here you could not build a driveway within your property to get up to the building portion of the house even though it had frontage and it had area the courts found that they did not
have practical access to the building portion of the lot and the planning board was not required to sign that form a plan okay now let me ask you another thing that's not that's regarding that same idea okay let's say somebody's got a piece of property meets you know size
setbacks everything but whether it's the height whether it's a swamp regardless of what it is what if their the neighbor in the back wants to give them an easement to get to their property that the courts have said that the planning
board does not have to sign the form a plan in that case also on wetlands there are two there are two cases that are still cited to this day one of them dealt with basically a small fill to get to the property uh to get to the
building portion of the property in that case the court said the planning board was obligated to sign the plan because it was obviously very they didn't they didn't say that in the decision but the court determined that it still was
feasible to access the building portion of the lot across the wetlands there's a second case relative to wetlands that's entirely the opposite the court the guy had the frontage and
he did have access to the building portion of the lot from another part of town the court said "No you had to have access to the building portion of the lot from the street where the frontage
was was claimed." And in that particular case the court it would have required a bridge not just two little wooden sections like we just saw for for this one but a half mile
long bridge and in that case the court said the planning board did not have to sign the plan even though he had access from another portion of the town uh there's there's simp it's I understand if that came in front of us in front of
me uh somebody had a piece of property and their neighbor was willing to give them act a deed you know uh right of way through their property to access their property it would be the board's discretion but if Bill Gates was the next door and didn't want you to to
build on that lot he would take you to court and and the town the town he would win the town would Well they wouldn't take the Yeah they would take the time to court for signing for me to win right right yeah okay yeah it is my bedtime i
hate It's It's not What are we thinking about this my idea of just kind of putting something down kind of adopting this you guys can you know Victoria can send it back out to you guys uh read it through yeah but in a nutshell it basically is just telling people how to
build a at least it would give some warning to the person and attaching attaching this and and just kind of putting something in our bylaw that says this is regulations sorry thank you uh
thank you of what we are looking for okay and I Yeah i mean I'm I'm for anything that tells people upfront uh you know what we're looking for so we don't have I mean when somebody wants to
do that house it's always just the next one and you want to build a 12t wide gravel driveway to your house because that's the cheapest thing to do you don't want to have to put in pavement no and that's that's where the consideration comes in is there
potential to to extend it out further what we did years ago is we told somebody they had to build the road up to the property and I think it was like another 50 ft of pavement like on some of these old these old lots back here
that way they only had to build that much but they did have to pave it up to their lot the next guy could then say he'll pave that and then 50 feet on his lot uh and
that that where we got most of those requests for uh and that's how we dealt with it back then and I think it and you would look at how the street was built in the rest of the subdivision and then just well let's extend it because the
person that has the lot now are the person those people that have houses there now they had to pay for the street in front of their house you know through the sale of their property you know okay just to continue this along no it's okay a lot of great information there i
appreciate it um so Victoria will send that back out to everybody you read it we'll kind of discuss it again briefly next time just so we can kind of put that one to bed as well okay um other topics are done time planner update
yes i'll be super quick guys i know we've had a long night um okay so um there's a couple things I just want to bring to your attention tonight so first one is the municipal ADA improvement grant program um so what this is it's funding that supports what's called a
self- evaluation and transition plan um which evaluates all of our town owned property and recreational areas for um accessibility under the ADA which is the American with disabil disabilities act which is required under the administrative requirements of title two
of the ADA um this plan would also develop mitigations actions to improve accessibility like signage um you know renovating bathrooms that sort of thing to meet um ADA um there's some eligibility requirements which are to be
a part of the community compact um community compact cabinet which we are a part of and have utilized in the past have an ADA coordinator which we do have our building commissioner and have a notice of non-discrimination posted and a ADA grievance procedure which I'm
checking to see if we have those um if we don't have those it would be my recommendation uh to this board to request um that the selectman put those in place uh I think in general those are good to have aside from the grant program um the estimated cost of this
project is around 30 to $35,000 and that's what the grant request will be for there's no um I would not be anticipating requesting or having a match for this um so no town funds will be used um I do know our fire
chief um did we did speak about this um together and he did offer his support and also provided a letter of support for the town on pursuing this um applications are due in the middle of June and awards would be made in the fall so that's sort of a quick rundown
are there any questions about that program nope uh I said go for it and um you know just keep it you know obviously dig deep to make sure there's no matching and no like you said the town doesn't pay anything but if there if we can apply and they give us money
for it okay go for it awesome may I request a motion uh to recommend we apply for to the select board because I believe we need their approval to apply for You do i'll make a motion to uh request a select
um review the um the grant and recommend it thank you a motion all in favor i I Thank you um lastly I just wanted to mention a different program um that the
town uh could take advantage of it's called the community technical assistance program um that is offered by SERPA our regional planning agency for a variety of transportation issues um so a project so this had come up at my uh
last um joint transportation planning group meeting it's a monthly meeting of of the region um it had come up that they have this opportunity and something I thought of um is this intersection outside town hall um with South Main Main Street i believe it's Crompton
Street um I know that has a lot of accidents um and and stuff like that so it might be worth doing some sort of safety analysis um and start bed at no cost to the town can provide what's called a technical memorandum and they will provide an overview of any issues
and any recommendations they have or next steps the town should take uh to address those you know any deficiencies um any questions on that we got to make a motion for that one yes please is that just specific for like
one intersection or is it will they do it for the town no so that pro this program that's specific to one issue um there's a program I had mentioned previously called complete streets i don't know if you remember that a few months ago that one would be townwide
okay um so that's also a good program for the town to participate in in the future can I get a motion i'll make a motion that we how do we uh say it yeah to uh to refer to to recommend to refer to re
recommend community technical assistance program to the board selection is that all we have to Yeah i got a motion i got a second second all in favor i I
Thank you so much it's traffic light or land takings to do a traffic circle i mean those are the only realistic improvements that you could do there at that intersection yeah I know a lot of people don't want to no I I just No I'm just telling but I mean in terms in terms of the mechanisms that are
available to improve traffic safety there those are the two things that you can't really get traffic yeah i mean traffic takings for a traffic circle which would be an incredibly difficult thing to do or you know you got to put
lights in you know I go through an intersection every day so I say sometimes it can be tough yeah okay no no other business nothing's come in in the last 48 hours except this big pack packet that you all got that we'll read through for GF uh our next meeting is
Thursday April 17th right here in this room anything else gentlemen so let's take a motion motion to close me we got a motion i got a second all in favor i Hey hey hey
[Music] [Music] [Music]