WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=7E61jdyDa_I

Part: 1

1
00:00:21.680 --> 00:00:37.280
Okay, Mr. Marshall, you have a quorum of the board. Amoris Media is with us. Um, we're recording and the attendees are joining us. I think you're good to go. >> All right. Thank you, Pam. >> You're welcome.

2
00:00:37.280 --> 00:00:54.559
>> Welcome to the Ammeris Planning Board meeting of June 3rd, 2026. My name is Doug Marshall and as chair of the Ammeris Planning Board, I'm calling this meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. This meeting meeting is being recorded and is available live stream via Ammerst Media.

3
00:00:54.559 --> 00:01:10.880
Minutes are being taken. The planning board will be joined by the community resource committee of the town council for agenda item two to continue the public hearing for zoning bylaw article 18 clean energy infrastructure which is

4
00:01:10.880 --> 00:01:29.200
continued from May 20th 2026 pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 extended by chapter 2 of the acts of 2023 and further extended by chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 5. This meeting will be conducted via remote means using

5
00:01:29.200 --> 00:01:45.280
the Zoom platform. The Zoom meeting link is available on the meeting agenda hosted on the town website's calendar listing for this meeting or go to the planning board web page and click on the most recent agenda where the Zoom link is listed at the top of the page. No

6
00:01:45.280 --> 00:02:01.040
in-person attendance of the public is permitted. However, every effort will be made to ensure the public can access this meeting in real time via technological means. In the event public access is disrupted for reasons of economic hardship or despite our best

7
00:02:01.040 --> 00:02:16.720
efforts, we will post an audio or video recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting on the town's website. Board members, I will take a roll call. When I call your name, unmute yourself, answer

8
00:02:16.720 --> 00:02:35.840
affirmatively, and return to mute. Bruce >> Thank you, Bruce. Red Hartwell. >> Hartwell is here. >> Thank you. Jesse Major, >> present. >> Uh, I Doug Marshall, present. Angus Mloud, >> present. >> Johanna Newman,

9
00:02:35.840 --> 00:02:51.120
>> present. >> And Jara Smith, >> present. >> Thank you all. Board members, if technical issues arise and the discussion needs to pause, it will be noted in the minutes. Please use the raise hand function to ask a

10
00:02:51.120 --> 00:03:06.080
question or make a comment and I will call on you to speak. After speaking, remember to remmute yourself. To the general public when solicited. Let's see. Do we have general public comments tonight?

11
00:03:06.080 --> 00:03:21.920
Doesn't look like we do. So, I'm going to skip that preamble or the general public comment. Um, when when we do solicit public comment, uh, please indicate you wish to make a public comment by clicking the raise

12
00:03:21.920 --> 00:03:37.360
hand button. If you've joined the Zoom meeting using a telephone, please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing star9 on your phone. When called on, please identify yourself by start by stating your real your full name and address and put yourself back

13
00:03:37.360 --> 00:03:52.480
into mute when finished speaking. Residents can typically express their views for up to three minutes or at the discretion of the planning board chair. If a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds their allotted time, their participation may be

14
00:03:52.480 --> 00:04:09.519
disconnected from the meeting. Okay, time now is 6:38 and the first item on our agenda is an update from the staff. Uh Jeff Bag is here uh planning director of planning and economic development to update us on

15
00:04:09.519 --> 00:04:27.360
a couple of topics. Jeff, >> great. Thanks. Hi everybody. Um to the two topics really tonight are are um a brief discussion of a staff transition plan and an update on Hampshire College.

16
00:04:27.360 --> 00:04:45.199
So for the staff transition plan, you I did provide a memo to the plan board members should be available upon request by or available somehow if anyone's interested in in seeing that stated May 28th. And you know it starts off by acknowledging that um your April 22nd

17
00:04:45.199 --> 00:05:01.759
meeting is when uh Nate Mallaloy announced that he was um leaving the town of Ammeris for the opportunity as the town administrator in Hadley. Um it's exciting opportunity for him and you know we're very happy. You know in the leadup to that you know

18
00:05:01.759 --> 00:05:17.919
we had some discussions about workload and capacity within the planning department and just acknowledging that Nate's last day was April 30th. Um it's a major loss to the town in terms of his skills, institutional knowledge, and his ability. He he had a lot of uh projects

19
00:05:17.919 --> 00:05:35.360
that he was responsible for um including staffing your your board. Um the position is posted. We have several applications. Uh you know, it should be anticipated that this gap could exist for a little while. And so that that was really my my need to kind

20
00:05:35.360 --> 00:05:51.199
of express that to this board is this could be and I didn't write this in the memo. It could be four months or so to to get somebody. It could be longer. It could be 6 months. Could be eight months really depending on how this all unfolds. So it's really important to me to come to you and just make sure that

21
00:05:51.199 --> 00:06:08.240
you un like you're aware of that because it's we're all people working on the working on the common goals to move Ammeris forward, but there's some real constraints that this this presents. um you know in response to the loss of Nate you know we really can't sustain

22
00:06:08.240 --> 00:06:24.639
the same level of activity without that position and I just I know there's a temptation to feel like we can but we really have to acknowledge that it's it's a it's a gap in the memo I I really highlight kind of four things uh professional staff support so you know that our early discussions were that

23
00:06:24.639 --> 00:06:40.160
Walker Powell who sat with your with you in the last meeting at least um is going to be the professional staff support. Uh Walker has, you know, experience working with planning boards and other communities and so it's a really good fit. Um but it really has to be kind of

24
00:06:40.160 --> 00:06:57.360
the statutoily required elements. Um because, you know, Walker was a full-time planner with a full-time workload and is taking on the planning board extra to fill in to to provide the professional staff support. New Walker maintains our CDBG program which has at

25
00:06:57.360 --> 00:07:13.440
least four different fiscal years of grants. It's millions of dollars. It's very intensely intense coordination of that. Um, Walker is also staffing the historical commission and the local historic district amongst like other projects that Walker was was working on too. So, this is extra work. It's

26
00:07:13.440 --> 00:07:30.240
important and and and Walker's agreed and and we have it in place. Um, the administrative support. So, Pam um Field Sadler has is offering a tremendous amount of uh support to the board and is really a great asset to the community.

27
00:07:30.240 --> 00:07:46.560
um does the preparing of schedule, agendas, legal ads, minutes um and also does a lot of kind of the behind-the-scenes scheduling of of meetings and such. So, you know, Walker and Pam will act as a team to kind of support you guys with the statutoily required elements.

28
00:07:46.560 --> 00:08:02.000
um the subcommittee that you had the housing and zoning subcommittee. I think this got discussed at your other meeting and you know I think for the time being the request was to potentially consolidate those discussions into a regularly scheduled plan board meeting. I think there was some questions about the

29
00:08:02.000 --> 00:08:16.560
minutes and keeping keeping up with the minutes of a subcommittee. So this is a way we can be a little bit more efficient um but also allow the plan board to continue those discussions. Um, and I think here I am sort of

30
00:08:16.560 --> 00:08:32.560
requesting that the board think about the details, the de the amount of details that are in the minutes. Um, I know that there's a tendency and a desire to have really detailed minutes like almost playbyplay and I think we want to maintain that for

31
00:08:32.560 --> 00:08:48.880
some of the public hearing items. So something that's statuto record, I think that's fine. But something that's, you know, an hourong discussion about a couple different topics, I think we have to allow for a little more flexibility and summary type minutes that capture the essence of the discussion rather

32
00:08:48.880 --> 00:09:05.680
than a a real detailed breakdown. Um, and then the the fourth item is really about zoning amendments, and that's is really more of the core topic. But I know the plan board has a lot of items on their priority list and none of no part of this is to say you shouldn't be talking about zoning amendments or

33
00:09:05.680 --> 00:09:22.160
shouldn't be planning. It's just being a little more cognizant of how you fit into the bigger context within the town. Um you know we have there there's a staff person who staffs the town council and and and walks through those

34
00:09:22.160 --> 00:09:38.640
processes. So as soon as the planning board votes to recommend something, you know, it transfers to other people in town hall. And we want to just have a little more focus on coordinating that. So, the the memo tries to say that if

35
00:09:38.640 --> 00:09:52.720
and when you feel like an amendment is fully developed, and I I do have an asterct here to talk about, but then we just want to make sure that the other staff people and including town council members and and the CRC understand that it's going to pop into their workload,

36
00:09:52.720 --> 00:10:11.279
too. Um the asterct is, you know, we want to make sure that certain people, staff, other staff people see amendments before they're recommended out. Um an example is the mixeduse building standards, you know, by the way that unfolded is by the time it was

37
00:10:11.279 --> 00:10:26.720
recommended, the building commissioner had then looked at it and saw some things that would be potentially problematic and you guys were willing to send it back. So, we just want to make sure we have a clearer feedback loop for the zoning amendments that you guys are talking about. Um, because there, you

38
00:10:26.720 --> 00:10:42.640
know, it it it shoots them into another process and we just want to make sure that we're all aware of that. I think I covered that. Then the memo concludes with just really highlighting that there's a lot of work going on and I realize that the land board may not may

39
00:10:42.640 --> 00:10:59.200
not be critical to every single project, but we we as a team, you know, are are working on the clean energy bylaw, the downtown design standards, the East Ammerson zoning study, the Hampshire College, you know, process that we'll talk a little bit about in a few minutes, the South Campus School, and

40
00:10:59.200 --> 00:11:14.640
then we have the Wildwood School. And those are just the, you know, the town projects that are churning about. Um, and we, you know, for East Ammerson study in particular, we want the planning board to be like really highly involved. And we're we're just about to, the RFP went out for that. So, we'll be

41
00:11:14.640 --> 00:11:30.959
selecting consultants soon. And we want the planning board to be the body who works through that process. Um, the clean energy bio, as you know, is underway, but there's a couple more steps after you're done. And then the downtown design standards is something where we're still hoping that you will

42
00:11:30.959 --> 00:11:46.720
review it and provide comments and then have another opportunity for some discussions in maybe late fall that would actually be zoning amendments. So we have a really full plate. And so that's really what was causing me to come to you and just make sure that my airing that out a little bit of the dirty laundry, but really important for

43
00:11:46.720 --> 00:12:03.200
for you guys to know that context. So I'm happy to answer a couple questions. I know you have a really full agenda with the clean energy bylaw. Um, and I do want to give you an update on Hampshire, too. >> All right. Thanks, Jeff. I know that your memo was posted in the packet this

44
00:12:03.200 --> 00:12:18.079
afternoon and >> perfect. >> I I know I was able to go look at it and I think we'd seen it before. Jesse, >> thanks. And I'll try and be brief. Thank you, Jeeoff. Um, I completely appreciate everything you said.

45
00:12:18.079 --> 00:12:33.760
Very much value staff and what they do. Obviously, I guess I have a little bit concern about your request for us to not put anything forward that's not the complete memo after review by multiple

46
00:12:33.760 --> 00:12:50.079
staff and after you come into the meeting to discuss with us because we are not the experts, right? The panelists here are not the right ones to finalize that memo. It needs to go through staff review, right? And you're trying to accomplish that. I see that.

47
00:12:50.079 --> 00:13:05.279
But the other piece, the way at least many times we've operated is that means we have to put in a huge amount of work before it moves on to then maybe just get a very quick no from the next step whether that's from staff

48
00:13:05.279 --> 00:13:20.959
or you or the council. And so in the recent year, year and a half, we've taken a slightly different approach largely at Nate's urging, which was no, let's put things forward at a little quicker pace to see what the appetite is for that

49
00:13:20.959 --> 00:13:37.279
particular thing. And so it's really, you know, it's going to make that effort a lot more on our side. And I I understand maybe that's needed in this moment. So I guess I'm wondering is there any way the town can add temp staff to help staff you know

50
00:13:37.279 --> 00:13:52.800
millilarate what they can so that there's a little more support for planning board. Uh because to be I'll just be perfectly honest to get the message of yeah you might need to wait 8 to 10 months before you're able to do anything other than respond is a little

51
00:13:52.800 --> 00:14:10.320
frustrating. >> Yep. And I don't want to blabber. I don't think we're saying you can't do anything in 8 to 10 months. I just think it has to be a little more thoughtful, a little more thorough. You know, I think we can get certain staff, especially the building commissioner who is also the zoning enforcement officer would be good to roll in earlier. Um, so that is an

52
00:14:10.320 --> 00:14:27.199
option. Um, temp staff, you know, I think, you know, I don't want you to take it for granted is that we've we're we have Walker and Pam together with you. It's just a matter of, you know, all it's going to take is a couple land use permits and, you know, in addition to those other projects, you you have a

53
00:14:27.199 --> 00:14:43.680
full plate. so we can keep going and and have discussions. I just wanted to put this out there um you know to temper it a little bit. And one thing occurs to me, you know, you might be asking why I'm why I can't just come in and just sit and do all this. You know, I do think that it maybe and hard to know

54
00:14:43.680 --> 00:14:59.760
what was articulated in the leadup to, you know, me being hired, but the position of director of planning and economic development was is new. So it was crafted to to be able to represent the town, you know, in a regional level at the state level with UMass and with

55
00:14:59.760 --> 00:15:16.240
the colleges and to to promote economic development and to, you know, really interact kind of as an overarching umbrella representation. And so I'm just really sensitive to not losing that. And so we do have to at least just triage for a little while. So we can have more

56
00:15:16.240 --> 00:15:32.240
discussion. Um, you know, just one example would be having the plan board draft the report. So, what I saw with the building, the mixed use building standards is the board voted on the language, which was great, but Nate spent three or four weeks drafting a

57
00:15:32.240 --> 00:15:47.279
report, which the plan board didn't have any involvement involvement with. And so, even just that exercise of keeping that with the plane board would really help for this time being if you really feel compelled that there's an amendment that has to go forward. just asking you guys to frame it out with the discussions that you've had and that

58
00:15:47.279 --> 00:16:03.360
would be that would be one way to really make sure that it's not six to eight months before there's another action from the plan board. But this could be worthy of another discussion. I just wanted to preview it today. >> Thanks. >> Great. Thanks, Jeff. Johanna, >> I was going to suggest that because

59
00:16:03.360 --> 00:16:19.040
we're at a transition point on the planning board and our, you know, may have like I'm this is probably my last meeting serving and we'll have some new members. Um, having this discussion or at least encouraging new members to watch the five minute presentation that you gave so that they understand the you

60
00:16:19.040 --> 00:16:34.560
know the constraints of the board that they're entering could be really valuable too. >> Right. >> Right. And then it's just not it's not permanent but it is temporary. It's realistic for me to be here to express this, but it's not permanent. That's the That's the message I'd like to send is a

61
00:16:34.560 --> 00:16:50.720
not permanent situation. >> All right. Uh Jeff, why don't you go ahead and talk about your second topic? >> Okay, great. And I Pam, I should have asked in advance. Do you think it would be possible for you to share that presentation? Um I can do it, but I'm

62
00:16:50.720 --> 00:17:10.240
afraid I have the one with my notes in it. >> I think so. Hang on. Okay. >> I practiced. Apologies for not asking about that in advance. >> While she's bringing that up, Jeff, on um if we do develop a zoning proposal,

63
00:17:10.240 --> 00:17:26.799
is it reasonable for us to expect Walker to be able to circulate it to Rob Moira and see what his thoughts are. >> Yeah. Yeah, I think that's reasonable. And I I think that would be great if if we can build in that loop, you know, and potenti I don't want to volunteer Rob.

64
00:17:26.799 --> 00:17:41.440
Potentially he could come to a meeting to talk it through. But I think at as an intermediate step is to make sure it gets to especially the building commissioner earlier. Um would really be beneficial I think for everybody including your goals to to initiate things. >> Um

65
00:17:41.440 --> 00:18:00.320
>> great. So um Pam, you can go to the next slide. Great. Thank you so much. Um, you know, we're really pleased. We're we're pleased to announce that we have a collaboration with Mass Development and the way we're describing it is an

66
00:18:00.320 --> 00:18:17.360
extensive but focused initiative to prepare for the future potential uses of the of the campus. Um, we did I did a really similar presentation to town council on Monday night. So, you're you're two days behind them. I apologize to the counselors who are here to hear

67
00:18:17.360 --> 00:18:34.559
this again. Um we are looking to start immediately. That's why the town put out a press release on on Monday. We did the update to town council on Monday as well. Um and here we are tonight. Um um

68
00:18:34.559 --> 00:18:51.280
what what we are doing is getting access to a skilled team. So from mass development's perspective, these these groups are called house doctors. um where they mass development has a team and they can just select them and

69
00:18:51.280 --> 00:19:07.280
and work behind the scenes on a contract and then bring them to the town. So this is this is different than how like a grant gets applied for which takes many many months. Uh we don't need to do an RFP. Uh mass development has all this under their umbrella. And so what we're

70
00:19:07.280 --> 00:19:23.600
really doing is um um it's that third third big bullet is create a process to collect information and community input and create a vision for the developable portions of the campus. And ultimately we want to enact zoning that would implement the vision

71
00:19:23.600 --> 00:19:39.840
over time. And so actually if you scroll down just a little bit more, we're looking to enable the property to generate as much tax revenue as possible. Um, sorry Pam, you're going a little too fast for me. >> I'm so sorry.

72
00:19:39.840 --> 00:19:54.799
>> Just a slide before this. >> Okay, well done. >> Yes, thank you. Um, we want to try to open up an opportunity to allow various kinds of housing again to be implemented over time and then really balance

73
00:19:54.799 --> 00:20:11.120
redevelopment with preservation of important resource areas. We want to embrace the cultural institutions that exist. So, you know, we have this theme that we're we're talking about and we felt like there was this urgency to to send out a message that the town wants to be, you know, looking at the the

74
00:20:11.120 --> 00:20:28.080
property and examining zoning options. As many of you know, it's all one zoning district fairly limited in terms of what the uses would be allowed and we really want to embark on this um with a team. Um so, here well um Pam, you can go to the next slide. Thank you. Um as I said,

75
00:20:28.080 --> 00:20:43.200
we're trying to launch this immediately. It's going to start with really some some background information, some existing conditions. Um, we've never looked at this parcel. It's never really been part of exercises or examination. So, we really need to start with some of

76
00:20:43.200 --> 00:20:59.360
the basics, the basic characteristics of the site. Looking at what the zoning does now, what it doesn't do, understanding where there are wetlands, uh, is critical. uh because if you know it's 690 acres but not all of it is

77
00:20:59.360 --> 00:21:16.240
developable and so really to quickly kind of get a lay of the land so to speak is really critical. This will allow us to look at the market. So the real estate market will be kind of considered. Um we really need to understand what's happening with infrastructure and utilities. So we know

78
00:21:16.240 --> 00:21:33.200
that there's water and sewer connected to some of the buildings but we really don't know what kind of capacity there is. Um and that's going to be really important to any future discussion to to understand that understanding a little bit about the building conditions. Ownership is pretty complex. There are

79
00:21:33.200 --> 00:21:48.720
easements and there are some areas that don't have access. You know it's one large parcel. So we want to begin with that leading to educational materials. So we're want to stand up a web page with the consultant team like story map very interactive where we can uh put up

80
00:21:48.720 --> 00:22:04.960
that information. We want to start to understand some of the basic development potential. So lot area divided by a certain number of housing units equals X um and really start that and then kind of cut sheets or information that's a little bit more digestible and that's

81
00:22:04.960 --> 00:22:21.440
going to lead us to July where we want to host a community listening session. Um it'll present some of the baseline data so that we're have a framework to operate within. um talk about the resource areas, the real estate market, review existing community goals. So, think back to the master plan, the

82
00:22:21.440 --> 00:22:38.480
village center plans, the comprehensive housing policy and the housing production plan. You know, how do all those fit into this discussion and collect community questions and concerns? So, that is a really big kind of lift for the next two months. And then Pam, you can go to the next slide.

83
00:22:38.480 --> 00:22:54.400
That will lead us into what we're calling phase two. Um and we think that by July, late July or August, we'll be having stakeholder meetings and interviews and that would be where the consultants would come to the planning board and talk to the planning board. I

84
00:22:54.400 --> 00:23:10.799
think the consultants would come to the CRC and talk to the CRC and then there are other stakeholders that they'd be talking to in a leadup to coming back to the community. This is a three meeting process where meeting number two would be a sharet. Um, Dodson and Flinker is one of the consulting teams that was

85
00:23:10.799 --> 00:23:25.600
brought in. They have a really great familiarity with Ammeris and they have a great way to lay out maps and have foam building blocks and really help people visualize what's possible on the site. And we're kind of looking at um I guess

86
00:23:25.600 --> 00:23:41.600
we did have some discussions that is more than likely going to end up being a community meeting in September to allow the summer to clean up, have Labor Day, and then have people like back in town. um talks about a walking tour in a Saturday morning kind of session. From

87
00:23:41.600 --> 00:23:59.039
there is when you know we really get into more of the nitty-gritty and and the team will really be able to look at the overall size of the development areas, the density, the extent of new development, the types of potential development opportunities. So really the focus on housing this is like mixed use villages this is you know some notion of

88
00:23:59.039 --> 00:24:14.320
if this is an educational institution um and then housing and really understanding what types of housing would be viable and fit on the property and this would come with illustrative plans diagrams cross-sections and other supporting materials and then we really are looking at a fiscal analysis to

89
00:24:14.320 --> 00:24:32.000
support you know rationalizing this a little bit to understand there would be some potential services that would be impacted but there would be potential tax revenue under these scenario iOS and those are all really critical things for us to have sort of it everyone seeing and really assessing followed lastly by

90
00:24:32.000 --> 00:24:48.000
the third sharet public meeting probably in October um and then from there you know the goal is to have a draft zoning amendment of some sort that would look at a vision plan where there's consensus and agreement and then what is the zoning

91
00:24:48.000 --> 00:25:04.159
that would allow that to occur and the target is November and December so that we can be acting thoroughly with the community but also fast enough to respond to what kind of this outside the outside forces that are out there. Um so the plan board would be

92
00:25:04.159 --> 00:25:19.919
maybe not involved in the leadup to July. We would love to have representation at the July meeting and then really right after that is when there'll be enough information to really get the planning board's concise and specific input on on what you're seeing

93
00:25:19.919 --> 00:25:35.679
and and engage in July or August sometime on that and then hopefully everyone can kind of come to the to the meetings and then of course it'll all come back. So with a draft zoning amendment and a memo and a report, it'll go to town council and it'll go back

94
00:25:35.679 --> 00:25:51.440
through the process with the CRC and planning board and you'll be well verssed and aware of what's going on by that point. So this is a really kind of quick whirlwind update for you. Just to recap, we gave the really similar presentation to the town council only on Monday. You're getting in on Wednesday.

95
00:25:51.440 --> 00:26:08.159
Um we have a lot of meetings, a lot of coordination that is kind of happening just to set up the process. Um, and we will have a contract signed hopefully tomorrow and a scope that um, hopefully is sharable pretty soon in a week or two and the website will be established

96
00:26:08.159 --> 00:26:25.360
soon. And then finally, we're got some feedback which is we hope to identify the date and location for the July meeting as quickly as we can so that people can put it on their calendar. So I think with that I'll I'll happily answer a few questions. Uh Bruce

97
00:26:25.360 --> 00:26:40.880
>> um Jeff um just want to say that I think this is a terrific and laudable uh um response initiative reaction from the town. Congratulations to you and and everybody else. I think this when I read

98
00:26:40.880 --> 00:26:56.880
this today I was hugely relieved. I had had a sense of my that whether I should try and get something like this together as a as a as a volunteer, you know, consent thing from various people in town who like me have retired but used

99
00:26:56.880 --> 00:27:13.520
to do this sort of thing. But this is way way better. Uh I think the fact that you put this together so quickly seems to me as though it's got a a reasonable opportunity of influencing positively influencing the uh the parties that may

100
00:27:13.520 --> 00:27:31.760
be interested in this uh u huge tract of land uh influence influencing them positively from the town's point of view. And that's I think the the the the hope and the that I recognize is the possibility that this thing brings to the table. And I think that's why I'm so

101
00:27:31.760 --> 00:27:46.240
uh appreciative of what the town has done here. I think you're to be congratulated. Thank you very much. >> Thanks, Bruce. And and I I I definitely understand the the the feeling of, you know, what what are we doing was was

102
00:27:46.240 --> 00:28:03.039
really uh driving a lot of this. And I just wanted to actually Pam, would you mind stop stopping the share? um you know it this is a tremendous team so and we have a lot of resources that are available to us and so that is something that I'm I'm really happy

103
00:28:03.039 --> 00:28:18.960
about and kind of short quick it was happening it happened quick and it has a lot of robust um consultants if I didn't mention it Whitten Group um is a really great planning firm and they're kind of like the prime the the lead and then Dodson and Flinker who has a really

104
00:28:18.960 --> 00:28:35.600
great way to do sharets and public information gathering and then U3 advisers who has experience in Ammeris working both Ammeris College. We have them doing a little economic development data now with the town and they have some familiarity with UMass. So we really, you know, I thank Mass

105
00:28:35.600 --> 00:28:50.480
Development because they had the ability to look at teams who would be the best fit for this project. >> All right, Shar, >> I just want to echo actually what Bruce was saying. I'm I'm really just so thrilled to see how quickly all this

106
00:28:50.480 --> 00:29:07.600
came together. Um, I feel really encouraged by the team of consultants that's behind this. Um, and so I just want to say thank you Jeff for putting putting all this get together because uh, you know, this is a what no matter

107
00:29:07.600 --> 00:29:24.720
how much influence we ended up uh, or we end up having over this project, it's going to have a tremendous influence over this town. And so I'm really glad to see um that we're taking some real steps to to take the steering wheel here. So, thank you. >> Great. Thank you. I appreciate that.

108
00:29:24.720 --> 00:29:40.000
>> Thank you, Jeff. Um, Andy Churchill. >> Yeah. I I if it's appropriate, I I I thought I'd share at the same meeting, the town council voted unanimously a set of priorities for the land which were in sync with this this proposal, but I can

109
00:29:40.000 --> 00:29:56.799
share the if I if I could share the document. Um, >> I think that document was shared with us in our packet this afternoon. >> Okay. So, you have it. So, but basically buildable land should be prioritized for housing, small business development, other appropriate tax revenue generating

110
00:29:56.799 --> 00:30:13.120
uses. Sensitive habitat, farming or resource areas should be prioritized for preservation, creating a balance. Housing development should prioritize a wide range of housing types as reflected in the various plans. And if components of the property can support identified town space or needs, those needs to be

111
00:30:13.120 --> 00:30:31.440
considered. So that messaging is, I think, consistent with what uh Jeff is talking about and and it it it was unanimous from the town council, which is quite a statement. >> All right. Thank you, Andy. And uh Jeff,

112
00:30:31.440 --> 00:30:48.320
anything else before we turn to Walker? >> No, just that yes. Yes, that um you know, the website will go live. I would like the plan board to be aware of that. And then as soon as we can find the date, time and location of the July meeting, I want the planning board members to know that. And we we got a

113
00:30:48.320 --> 00:31:02.880
request from the town, one of the town council town counselors to just make sure that we can get as much in uh outreach about that meeting as possible. Um because it is like a listening session. This there will be a some

114
00:31:02.880 --> 00:31:19.840
framework but also listening as the first shot out the gate. And then after that, you know, I just want to reiterate that we will be coming back to the plane board for your detailed knowledge and and your thoughts. It's just that this needs a little bit of that background data. It really needs some kind of

115
00:31:19.840 --> 00:31:35.279
information to frame the discussion. And so that was the team wanted to do first and then and then we'll engage with, you know, other invol. So like the affordable housing trust, the CRC playing board and maybe a couple others. But then anyone else who wants to come who has knowledge like we have a lot of hidden gems in town, a lot of people who

116
00:31:35.279 --> 00:31:50.960
who who have expertise and we want to get those types of people too at the meeting as well. So um looking forward to it. It's been a little bit of a non-stop sort of adventure over the past few weeks, but this is this is really exciting for me as well and it's exciting for me to be able to share with

117
00:31:50.960 --> 00:32:08.320
you guys. >> All right. Thank you. I just want to remark we have a lot on our agenda tonight. We it's now 5 after 7. So, if you can keep your remarks brief, uh we I want to make sure we have enough time for clean energy this evening. Bruce,

118
00:32:08.320 --> 00:32:24.559
brief. Jeff, is there any possibility that this meeting could be conducted or these meetings could be conducted in the red barn on the Hampshire College campus? I'll just put that out there. >> Yeah, it's a it's it's on the list. There's some it may or may not be

119
00:32:24.559 --> 00:32:40.000
possible, but yeah, it's come up. Great. and I am going to leave the meeting. You're in great hands with Walker and Pam and Stephanie is here and then obviously all the CRC members who are really involved in the clean energy bio. So I really appreciate you know carving off the now 35 minutes for me but I

120
00:32:40.000 --> 00:32:56.720
appreciate it. >> All right, thank you Jeff Walker. Uh I wondered if you could uh give us just a quick update on implementation of ADU the ADU bylaw in town. And I I I've

121
00:32:56.720 --> 00:33:12.320
heard some concern about how things are unfolding. >> Yeah. Um I'm not going to go into much detail. I talked to Rob Mora and um as I'm sure most of you are aware, there's been some um controversy over the size

122
00:33:12.320 --> 00:33:28.640
of some of the ADUs that are going into town and how they're being the size is being assessed by the building commissioner. Um, and I'm not going to go into a lot of detail because there is in fact an appeal that's going to be going before the zoning board of appeals um I think in July regarding one of

123
00:33:28.640 --> 00:33:44.480
these ADUs. So a really in-depth discussion is going to happen at that point about what's what the building commissioner was thinking and you know where what we can do and what people can do and what's going to change moving forward. So rather than having that

124
00:33:44.480 --> 00:34:00.559
discussion now before we get all the information, um I would recommend keeping an eye on that appeal, if you're interested to see where that's going to go and then if there's any changes to the bylaw that are going to need to happen or anything like that afterwards, I'm sure it'll come back around. But is there any questions off the top of

125
00:34:00.559 --> 00:34:17.440
anyone's head about that? >> Uh Jesse, >> thanks. Thanks, Walker. Uh just quickly, what's happening to applications in the meantime? Or there are no applications, right? What what's what's happening? >> They're continuing to process the applications as they've been doing um using the same criteria for approval as

126
00:34:17.440 --> 00:34:37.440
they've been using. And um when you learn what the date of that appeal hearing is, can you mention that at our next meeting or or you know any meeting between now and the hearing that

127
00:34:37.440 --> 00:34:52.800
happens so that we are all aware of it. >> I will keep everybody updated. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Time is 7:09. I think it's time for us to welcome CRC

128
00:34:52.800 --> 00:35:09.920
And uh Pam Rooney, let's see. Um actually Pam, I'm going to go ahead and open our hearing and then I will invite you to open yours. >> All right. So this is a joint public

129
00:35:09.920 --> 00:35:26.880
hearing uh advertised for 635 on zoning bylaw article 18 clean energy infrastructure to consider amending the zoning bylaw by adopting article 18 clean energy infrastructure and associated amendments to zoning table 3

130
00:35:26.880 --> 00:35:44.400
dimensional regulations 5.11 renewable energy accessible solar photovoltaic installations slash battery energy storage systems uses 6.2 fences and article 12 definitions. So this planning board

131
00:35:44.400 --> 00:36:00.320
hearing is hereby opened or continued. This is a continuation from was it May 20th I think when we opened this hearing as a joint hearing. Pam, I invite you to open the CRC hearing.

132
00:36:00.320 --> 00:36:17.680
>> I see a quorum of CRC members and we'll go around to see if everyone can be heard. Uh, let's see. We've got um Jennifer Ta. >> Yes, I'm here. I can hear you. >> Andy Churchill. >> Yes.

133
00:36:17.680 --> 00:36:33.520
>> Alicia Walker is with us by phone. >> Yes, here. Thank you, Pam. >> Excellent. Thank you. And I'm Pam Rooney and I'm here. And we are missing Mandy Johanni tonight. Uh we also have Stephanie um Chikarella who has offered

134
00:36:33.520 --> 00:36:51.200
to be available for the conversation since she's a driving force and has been involved since the beginning on this. If you want to welcome her in as a visible panelist that would be great. >> Yes, she's she can turn on her video at

135
00:36:51.200 --> 00:37:10.400
any time. >> Okay, great. So, um, just a little recap, especially for the folks who weren't here last time, we have worked through the document through section 18109, uh, all the way up to section 18.11,

136
00:37:10.400 --> 00:37:25.040
which is additional design requirements for specific types of installations. Uh, I wanted to note that the CRC did receive uh numerous comments, many of them from Doug Marshall. Um, that we

137
00:37:25.040 --> 00:37:41.680
were able to work our way through uh essentially up to the same point and that is the point at which the CRC referred the whole document over to the council for public hearings. So because the CRC had not had a chance to discuss

138
00:37:41.680 --> 00:37:57.440
those additional uh suggestions, they are not incorporated into the document beyond this point and we shall just have to deal with them one by one as we come to those sections. So that's um just a little bit of a

139
00:37:57.440 --> 00:38:17.920
overview. Are there any questions um from folks that were not with us last round? Is that a is your your raised physical hand uh >> request counts? >> Yes.

140
00:38:17.920 --> 00:38:34.320
>> Go ahead, Jesse. >> No, sorry. I was just saying I wasn't here before. Apologies. >> Okay. I was just wondering if you didn't if you had any questions. >> No, all good. So I think um and if if Walker is

141
00:38:34.320 --> 00:38:58.320
willing and able we would like to share the document. This would be version 11 as of 26 2026727 as discussed at public hearing. And before we start, thank you Walker

142
00:38:58.320 --> 00:39:15.119
for offering to do this. We'll try not to overwhelm the uh the system. So last time we went through section by section and basically are asking if there are questions or concerns or

143
00:39:15.119 --> 00:39:31.760
additions that need to be made uh in each of these sections. Bruce, >> um I don't have the document open in front of me. Uh are we uh is are we uh uh beyond or have yet to see the uh the

144
00:39:31.760 --> 00:39:47.200
section on setbacks for public for private wells from solar arrays because if we if that's if that's back uh above then I'd like to revisit that if that's

145
00:39:47.200 --> 00:40:03.920
>> well we did we did pass that uh it's in 1809 and We we did make some comments on that at the last at the last meeting. >> Uh but I >> I did some research on that and and I

146
00:40:03.920 --> 00:40:21.680
want to strenuously argue for the elimination of the 250 foot setback from private wells. Um, >> yeah, I think the comment that Mandy Joe had recorded was that

147
00:40:21.680 --> 00:40:38.560
uh the authors needed to consult with Concom and some of the other staff about that, but if you have information, it'd be great to share that. >> Uh, I do and I shared it with you and with Pam, but of course because uh of the public meeting law, I didn't go

148
00:40:38.560 --> 00:40:55.440
beyond that. But uh I talked to some of my uh uh green building high performance building uh uh uh consultant friends from the past those that are still active in the field and particularly Charlie Stevenson who essentially has constructed a red list review service

149
00:40:55.440 --> 00:41:11.599
which is uh uh an international uhly provided service. He's he's used by everybody all over the world. and uh he confirmed the uh the the observation that I made last time that uh these high

150
00:41:11.599 --> 00:41:28.720
performance uh living green buildings are collecting water from PV arrays and feeding it in directly into drinking water. Um uh so the basically the drinking water for these buildings are collected from roofs which are

151
00:41:28.720 --> 00:41:44.800
substantially uh PV arrays and and Charlie's uh uh considered opinion and research tells him that there's there's no u threat to public or private water supply from from water that flows from

152
00:41:44.800 --> 00:42:07.839
PV arrays and and >> excuse me I'm going to interrupt then Walker can you add can you add a note a sticky keynote and just uh essentially summarize that some experts feel that

153
00:42:07.839 --> 00:42:28.640
current PV um yeah there's no risk to drinking water. >> I would change some to all without exaggeration. All all experts all experts feel this way. >> In my experience, yes.

154
00:42:28.640 --> 00:42:43.119
>> All experts that have experience in collecting, you know, there's nobody that I know who's ever had a concern about the uh the discharge from solar arrays having any adverse effect

155
00:42:43.119 --> 00:43:00.400
contamination of drinking water and I'm concerned. >> So that's good. So that's so so noted and um when we come back around I think I'm going to continue to move through the document with those comments and then

156
00:43:00.400 --> 00:43:16.960
when we come back around I would also like staff and and the clean water um protection group to have discussed that. >> Yes. I'm less concerned about the for the public wells and not the best

157
00:43:16.960 --> 00:43:33.280
because there's so few public water supplies, but the private wells could be everywhere and particularly in the outlying areas where these uh arrays these large arrays are likely to go. So I think there's a a real the legitimate and serious concern about the uh 09103.

158
00:43:33.280 --> 00:43:49.040
I'm not so much concerned about the others because I think the adverse impact on on reducing developable area would be much much much smaller. But this one is really potentially significant, I believe. >> Thank you. Um, Doug, do you want me to

159
00:43:49.040 --> 00:44:04.240
just go ahead and call on people? I'm gonna call on Andy. >> Oh, yeah. One of us, one of us should. You know, we've got three other hands. >> Yep. Andy. >> Yeah. Yeah, I was just I mean I guess I was wondering if if that's the case then shouldn't we just um also consider

160
00:44:04.240 --> 00:44:23.760
eliminating 1809 0104 since you know it it wouldn't be needed. >> So that's another recommendation. Fred Hartwell, uh Johanna, your your hand keeps moving backwards. I'm trying

161
00:44:23.760 --> 00:44:40.240
to decide whether to speak or not but in my mind um there are two things right there's the clearing of the land which has the potential to contaminate water and then there's the solar array itself which you know all the research that

162
00:44:40.240 --> 00:44:56.720
I've seen suggests that there is no leeching of any kinds of chemicals that comes off of solar arrays. So um the maybe so I think we should be clear that like the solar arrays themselves don't

163
00:44:56.720 --> 00:45:14.079
actually pose a threat to the drinking water but the clearing of the land if done in an irresponsible way and if the storm water isn't managed well it could create problems. So I can't quite tell which problem we're trying to solve for here in this language. Um, so that's

164
00:45:14.079 --> 00:45:35.280
what I wanted to highlight. I >> think it was both. Fred Hartwell. >> Yeah. Um, I basically agree with Bruce. Uh, I I think that's uh not a major issue and uh

165
00:45:35.280 --> 00:45:52.400
I would agree with that. And unfortunately I also uh I have to leave this meeting for about five minutes. I have been called out by I got a problem. I I will be right back but I will be out of the meeting for

166
00:45:52.400 --> 00:46:11.440
about five minutes. >> Thank you. Thank you Fred. >> Can we go back to Johanna's question then? And is it is it a matter of in the discussion with CRC it was it was both um with the with the expectation that

167
00:46:11.440 --> 00:46:28.640
there might be some contamination from the panels themselves. Um the disturbance area, the the setbacks and no disturbance areas were primarily um

168
00:46:28.640 --> 00:46:46.400
concern of the land clearing and and um disturbance of natural material within a protection zone of a well. So is that something that's dealt with customarily when land is developed

169
00:46:46.400 --> 00:47:02.000
through the conservation commission uh regulations around you know erosion control and managing storm water runoff and that sort isn't that sort of a matter of course regardless of what the land is going to

170
00:47:02.000 --> 00:47:17.839
be used for? So, so is there anything special about clearing land for solar that's different and would cause contamination differently than some other use?

171
00:47:17.839 --> 00:47:34.839
And if there's not, then you know, shouldn't shouldn't these even just be consistent with conservation commission regulations? >> We call on Stephanie. Sure,

172
00:47:37.359 --> 00:47:52.720
>> Stephanie. >> Hi. Sorry. Um, I just wanted to first of all, um, just say that tonight I'm my daughter had a three-hour root canal procedure today, this afternoon. So, I'm I'm mostly off camera because I may be running around to help her. So, I just

173
00:47:52.720 --> 00:48:08.079
wanted to let you all know that. Um, as far as this issue, I really think um this just needs to go back to the um drinking water protection supply committee group because that's really where this recommendation came from and

174
00:48:08.079 --> 00:48:24.960
other committee um other committee review have basically just taken their guidance. So I think um I think that's really the group that needs to weigh in on this particular setback. um because I think everyone

175
00:48:24.960 --> 00:48:42.480
just sort of took their expertise uh as the guidance for this particular recommendation. So I would just um and I apologize if I missed half the question, but I'm just weighing in on what I heard. >> All right. >> Thank you. Um we we will we will make

176
00:48:42.480 --> 00:48:58.079
sure that something gets crafted up and and we'll send it to you and to Walker to make sure that it that it reaches those folks. Do you have any sense what their what their meeting schedule is? >> Um I I don't at the moment. I apologize.

177
00:48:58.079 --> 00:49:13.520
I think I believe they meet monthly. Um so I can double check and I know um that Jason Scales, the town engineer, and Beth Wilson, the town's uh DPW environmental scientist staff that

178
00:49:13.520 --> 00:49:32.960
group. So I can check with them to find out their schedule. >> Thank you. Fred's back. >> I am >> Fred, can we lower your hand? >> Yes.

179
00:49:32.960 --> 00:49:52.480
>> All right, >> Bruce. um to address uh uh Johanna's uh question or or what uh there is definitely um an issue of separation distance and the second and and I think

180
00:49:52.480 --> 00:50:08.800
essentially unrelated hopefully uh no disturb area. So I think that I thought we were talking about in the 1801 0901 03. Oh, it's a no disturb area. It should be

181
00:50:08.800 --> 00:50:23.440
separation distance. um in my view uh because I think there's an issue with no disturb as well and I mentioned this at the last uh meeting I think but I wasn't sure of my facts but

182
00:50:23.440 --> 00:50:39.040
um private wells uh have to be 100 ft from a septic system. So we've already established that uh major disturbance can be 100 ft away from a private well because you can build a leech field

183
00:50:39.040 --> 00:50:56.480
there. So um clearly uh if it's we're talking no disturbance it shouldn't be more than 100 ft um and it probably could be less but uh but the the separation distance in my

184
00:50:56.480 --> 00:51:12.800
view could be zero or some practical uh thing related to as we've already done with setbacks of a different nature. So I think that the setback uh or the separation distance for a private well should be the same as the setback distance. There should be no difference between

185
00:51:12.800 --> 00:51:40.960
the two. >> All right. Thank you Bruce Walker. Did that think you got that? So, well, >> sound like sounded like Bruce was saying the separation distance could be zero or

186
00:51:40.960 --> 00:51:58.559
>> uh I what I was saying was that it should be the same as the setback which I think we said would be 20 feet. It's further up in the we've already discussed it and we had 50 ft. a setback from a property line and not a setback from the from a well. >> That's right. Uh it could be uh I mean

187
00:51:58.559 --> 00:52:12.720
if the well is on the property line then the uh the the the array should be set back from that well the same distance you know no distance from the no different from this because this

188
00:52:12.720 --> 00:52:29.200
there's no there's no risk. Um okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> Yeah. Okay, good. So, we've noted that that that issue and that clarification will be sent to the clean water the clean

189
00:52:29.200 --> 00:52:45.280
water protection group for some feedback on that. Um, and thank you both Bruce and uh Johanna for that information. Can we move can we move back then to

190
00:52:45.280 --> 00:53:06.960
1811 where we left off last time? And so Pam, you're saying that um if I don't bring up the comments that I made and sent off to you guys probably six weeks ago at this

191
00:53:06.960 --> 00:53:22.079
point, if I don't bring them up in this meeting, they won't be considered. Is that right? >> That that's correct. I have I have actually transposed your notes onto this version 11 for myself as a reference,

192
00:53:22.079 --> 00:53:38.319
but um I may not have caught all of your comments. >> Okay. >> So, I hope you have >> I just you know, we were invited to submit comments and >> exactly >> it seemed like much easier to do it rather than dragging everybody on a

193
00:53:38.319 --> 00:53:54.319
meeting through it. Uh, as I was trying to as I was trying to explain, we accepted and incorporated those that we made our way through and where we left off, we had not considered

194
00:53:54.319 --> 00:54:12.800
and not discussed so they were not incorporated. >> Okay. All right. So you are you going to lead us through this or >> Sure. So section uh this is additional design requirements. Were there any uh

195
00:54:12.800 --> 00:54:28.800
considerations or discussions about let's just go for the first 11 181 and its sub subsections. Fred. >> Yeah. This is where um

196
00:54:28.800 --> 00:54:46.000
as long as you're inside the battery electric storage system. if as long as you're inside the building. Uh yeah, the uh state electrical code has some applicability, but the uh

197
00:54:46.000 --> 00:55:04.880
you've got to also capture because these are going to involve direct utility connections. You've also got to capture the National Electrical Safety Code, which is going to be the the actual code that covers uh

198
00:55:04.880 --> 00:55:19.200
those connections and not the state electrical code. And I I say that as the person who is the secretary of the writ I I know your expertise. Um can you give

199
00:55:19.200 --> 00:55:39.520
us wording for that? uh >> because we're and we're talking specifically in this section the following requirements shall apply to all best. So that's battery energy storage its its buil its base its um

200
00:55:39.520 --> 00:56:02.160
confines and its equipment. Um, I I I can if you uh uh I'll have uh I'll get exact wording uh in the next 10 minutes.

201
00:56:02.160 --> 00:56:20.960
>> Excellent. Let's move on. Um 11:013 there was a comment there that says the blah blah blah test report for the product shall be made available to the fire department and the suggestion was made that all components or each component report for each component be

202
00:56:20.960 --> 00:56:37.040
made to the fire department. Is there agreement with that? If we agree, if we agree to something, it's okay to say yes and then we can move on and incorporate it. >> Yes.

203
00:56:37.040 --> 00:56:52.319
>> Yep. >> Thank you. Let's incorporate it. Um 11:0104 best safely contain fires and thermal runaway. Um there was a comment that you can't

204
00:56:52.319 --> 00:57:08.559
contain that. Doug, why don't you explain your comment? Well, I was just um suggesting to replace best with best enclosing structure be just because uh

205
00:57:08.559 --> 00:57:27.359
you know I guess I'm a little bit unclear about what what is it best a building with a container >> and it itself is engineered to contain any fire from the batteries inside of it.

206
00:57:30.640 --> 00:57:47.040
I'm asking Pam. I'm assuming you're the expert, but may that maybe that's erroneous. Do we have any experts in the room? >> We do not. >> Okay. So, that seems problematic. Um,

207
00:57:47.040 --> 00:58:01.599
>> all right. So, that that was not a particularly consequential comment from me. Yeah. Yeah. >> Doug and then Angus. >> Well, I was just gonna say the definition in in article 12 at the end of the document says battery energy

208
00:58:01.599 --> 00:58:17.920
storage systems best a system containing of one or more battery modules for storing electrical energy any equipment needed and one or more physical containers providing secondary containment to any of the above. >> All right. So if the containment is part

209
00:58:17.920 --> 00:58:35.280
of the best then the comment I withdraw the comment. >> Great. Uh 180105 shall be the best shall be maintained in good working order. Um that is actually repeated in 18.16

210
00:58:35.280 --> 00:58:58.160
and it's I guess if if in 18.106 106 I mean excuse me 18.16 uh is facility maintenance. Uh this feels to me like 0105 should go should be deleted here and just it's it's

211
00:58:58.160 --> 00:59:19.920
repeated in 18.16. Same with the next item which is the site shall be maintained including snow removal acceptable to the fire department. That's also repeated in 18.16. >> Uh

212
00:59:19.920 --> 00:59:38.559
>> now we come to Fred Hartwell >> recorder. We're going to delete the next one as well. >> Doug, can I ask this is a point of order almost here at sort of point of procedure. U last time we did some editing as we went along and what Walker

213
00:59:38.559 --> 00:59:54.640
is doing is making all of the comments. So I wouldn't it be prudent that if we have some simple edits that we all agree that we just edit the document rather than making notes about what other people should do? >> That would be fine. Yeah. Pam, are you all right with that?

214
00:59:54.640 --> 01:00:10.520
>> Yes. >> Um >> anyone else anyone else concerned with that? It'll show up as a change. So it's it's track changes. So this document is a track change. Okay. >> Yeah. I I hope it's being done that way.

215
01:00:14.640 --> 01:00:29.839
>> So >> otherwise Mandy Johan will be very upset with us. >> Yeah. >> The numbering will change. So like >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Will need to be changed. >> Yeah.

216
01:00:29.839 --> 01:00:46.240
I don't see a ch I don't see a try like a strikeout. >> Maybe we could do it should just be >> what we were doing last time was highlighting stuff like that for change. Uh if it's difficult or time consuming >> Walker if you go up to where it says

217
01:00:46.240 --> 01:01:06.319
simple markup beside track changes to the right and all markup. Yeah, >> there we go. >> Perfect. Thank you. That's great. >> All right. Going down to the next one. >> Okay. And this comes back to Fred again.

218
01:01:06.319 --> 01:01:22.319
>> Um, facility should be designed, constructed, operated in accordance with NFPA 855. Um, so that seemed to me to be redundant with the very first item up at the top, which is best must comply with state

219
01:01:22.319 --> 01:01:40.599
electrical code 527, state fire code 527 or subsequent standard. And I'm saying should we just add NFPA 855 to the very top uh item 101.01.

220
01:01:41.119 --> 01:02:13.839
Does that make sense? >> It could be. It could be um deemed separate. It's separate from electrical code. This is now fire fire code. So, I'm okay keeping it. I just was asking Well, it did seem super sort of

221
01:02:13.839 --> 01:02:45.599
repetitive to me to have 855 referenced in the header paragraph there and then also in a >> right sub paragraph Hey. Yeah. >> Again, wouldn't we just delete that uh

222
01:02:45.599 --> 01:03:03.040
those NFPA 85 and then again not make the comment? Just delete NFPA85 in in paragraph A. >> Um >> Oh, I see. It's not uh it continues, >> right?

223
01:03:03.040 --> 01:03:17.920
>> Pardon, >> right, >> Angus? Yeah, it it seems like everything in this um 07 section including AB and C are all part of 855.

224
01:03:17.920 --> 01:03:35.200
So I guess it's a question of does the town feel like it's really important to restate things from other codes in this document or is it something that can just be referenced earlier with the other codes and then you could cut this entire section? I I would vote for cutting, but

225
01:03:35.200 --> 01:03:53.200
I know that it more has been wanted to be included. >> Uh it actually it actually states in a that that um NFPA 855 requires an adequate adequate water supply and firewater containment strategies, which

226
01:03:53.200 --> 01:04:11.440
feels like a fairly important element to take note of that isn't it isn't discussed anywhere else. Fred Uh I yeah I have a uh uh

227
01:04:11.440 --> 01:04:29.920
at least of something to start with here on 1811. Um try this. The internal wiring of BSS BESS structures shall comply with the state's electrical code 527 CMR12 and

228
01:04:29.920 --> 01:04:46.400
the state's fire code 527 CMR1 or subsequent standard wiring connected to electric util. This is that's pretty much what was there. Then I would add a sentence. Wiring connected

229
01:04:46.400 --> 01:05:01.039
to electric utility facilities shall comply with the and first letter is capitalized. The next four the national electrical safety code

230
01:05:01.039 --> 01:05:34.880
as covered in their operating policies. All right, Walker. Good. Can you go back to the beginning of the original sentence and just add the internal wiring of a bass? Yeah. Is that Fred? Does that look right?

231
01:05:34.880 --> 01:06:00.240
>> Yes, it does. Thank you. And then we'll then we'll keep 855 separate and no need to change that. >> That makes sense to me. >> Uh I think the verb should be shall. >> Great.

232
01:06:00.240 --> 01:06:19.359
>> All right. >> Okay. Any other comments? Um, until we get to 0109. This is the PAS conversation. Um, let's see. Can we back up to subp paragraph C of that last section?

233
01:06:19.359 --> 01:06:38.559
Um, okay. Thank you. Never mind. You've incorporated that comment. Any comments? >> I had a question >> just and it's I'm sorry it's back on the ABC one the the one we just looked at.

234
01:06:38.559 --> 01:06:54.880
Um are and this is just sort of a are what's the fire department going to be looking at? Um would they be looking at would they be looking to to see that

235
01:06:54.880 --> 01:07:11.520
you know that facilities would be you know designed construction operating in accordance with National Fire Protection Association standards and if so do we need to specify what the fire department would already do or is this be above and beyond what they would

236
01:07:11.520 --> 01:07:33.359
normally do? Just trying to if there's any extra stuff that we don't >> if that would happen anyway. You know what I mean? >> Brad, is your hand up? Did you have a comment? >> My

237
01:07:33.359 --> 01:07:54.480
>> Thank you. >> Not for fire. Well, Andy, I'm not sure there's anybody here who could talk about what the fire department would do. So >> the fire the fire department is uh per

238
01:07:54.480 --> 01:08:12.720
all of these um uh requirements going to review the proposals going to review the submittals and I think this this uh recommendation so the recommended use of water as the primary fire suppressant agent is

239
01:08:12.720 --> 01:08:29.040
um might be redundant. I mean, the fire department certainly would know that, but where we are, I don't think it hurts to re to refer to 855. Um, it also reminds the fire department in

240
01:08:29.040 --> 01:08:44.719
case Yeah. Let's let's not forget to ask for what's their water supply. the emergency operations and and emergency training is an important aspect that uh the CRC wanted to make sure was in incorporated

241
01:08:44.719 --> 01:09:00.960
here. Stephanie. >> So, um staff did review um including fire uh did review the draft of the bylaw and so they have their own procedures that they have to uh

242
01:09:00.960 --> 01:09:18.480
reference when they're reviewing um any projects uh that have to do with battery energy storage. So these are consistent with what they have um required and I believe they even gave us the um the

243
01:09:18.480 --> 01:09:37.279
regulations to site. So the sighting comes from them actually. >> Thank you. Then I guess my question is, could we do what Pam said and just throw the NFPA 855 up into the top and get rid of this other verbiage or >> I've taken I've taken back I've taken

244
01:09:37.279 --> 01:09:56.400
back my comment because the first the first section is specifically to electricity and this is all very much fire protection. >> Okay. Uh can we go back to um 09 down down

245
01:09:56.400 --> 01:10:17.040
down to excuse me 1109 and this is PAS uh applicant shall certify that nonpast fire this is now fire suppression funs this does not have anything to do with panels there was a question go ahead Johanna was just to say I'm fine with this there

246
01:10:17.040 --> 01:10:34.480
are still some POS firefighting foam or firefighting foams that contain POS on the market. I don't know that how much they're used for best fires um if they occur. It seems like they're different applications, but I think it would be fine to stipulate that they use nonpos firefighting foam should there be

247
01:10:34.480 --> 01:10:56.960
a fire at a best facility in Ammerst. >> Great. Any other comments on to that? Angus. >> Yeah, just I I guess the question is what does certify mean? >> Give proof. Bruce, >> it means they write a letter and they

248
01:10:56.960 --> 01:11:12.920
put their signature on the bottom and their uh organizational letter head on top. That's what >> and Okay. And do we do we require this of any other I guess of anything in town.

249
01:11:16.640 --> 01:11:31.280
>> You could ask the fire department that I do not know. Yeah. >> Well, Pam, um, so we're asking the applicant, who is probably a for-profit entity, to write a letter saying that

250
01:11:31.280 --> 01:11:47.440
the phone they want to use uh is commercially available, effective, and compliant. And so this doesn't seem to totally exclude

251
01:11:47.440 --> 01:12:06.239
the use of PAS fire suppression foams. Um to the extent that they are commercially available, well all right. Um, it just seems like you could end up with

252
01:12:06.239 --> 01:12:23.120
some PAS foam because you're just using them to the extent you you can. Okay, never mind. >> Johanna, >> I guess I have a question about this. Like in the unlikely event that there is

253
01:12:23.120 --> 01:12:39.040
a fire at one of these facilities, is it the fire department that's in charge of putting out the fire or is it the owner of the best facility? Because this almost makes it sound like the owner of the best facility is in

254
01:12:39.040 --> 01:12:55.920
charge of putting out the fire and determining what kind of fire suppression is used there. And I don't know, like if my house was on fire, I don't think I would be the person in charge of putting it out. I'd want the fire department to be in charge

255
01:12:55.920 --> 01:13:13.840
of that. So I just I just I truly don't know. >> Question. >> You know, I had assumed that these best assemblies had a has had some level of internal fire suppression as part of the product.

256
01:13:13.840 --> 01:13:29.840
And that that's that was the foam we were talking about. separate from whatever phone the fire department shows up with. Is that your understanding? I mean like you mean like in case of an

257
01:13:29.840 --> 01:13:45.040
emergency like they have some >> you know how I mean buildings are buildings have sprinkler systems and if you have a computer uh a computer room you you may not use

258
01:13:45.040 --> 01:14:00.880
water you may use some other suppression method and so just like that at a battery if there's a container around the best it may have uh an internal fire suppression system

259
01:14:00.880 --> 01:14:18.640
that relies on foam. >> Yeah, it just strikes me as being contradictory to the NFPA 855 recommended use of water as the primary fire suppression agent. >> So, Pam, do you know where these this language came from?

260
01:14:18.640 --> 01:14:33.760
>> I do not remember. It's it's actually a very good question. When I read it again tonight, I was thinking a similar thing like the applicant is not going to be putting out the fire, but um I think requires a

261
01:14:33.760 --> 01:14:48.560
little more work. Fred. >> Yeah. um these uh facilities. There's been a number of absolutely hellacious fires

262
01:14:48.560 --> 01:15:06.640
uh in these facilities and it is very important that uh the suppression action begin as quickly as possible and that means not waiting for the fire department to get there.

263
01:15:06.640 --> 01:15:20.960
uh and uh there's going to be something that is it's it's going to be some suitable chemical that has been very carefully selected to uh address

264
01:15:20.960 --> 01:15:39.280
the exposure in the in the best and uh yeah uh you you're not you don't want to wait for the fire department on one of these and so it's it's quite relevant to uh uh

265
01:15:39.280 --> 01:15:56.560
include uh some some uh specification here as to uh whether or not PAS is uh is an issue. >> Thank you. So maybe we would edit this to say um the epicint shall certify that

266
01:15:56.560 --> 01:16:17.199
non-past fire suppression foams shall be employed as a part of the best internal fire suppression system. Then does that make it clear we're not

267
01:16:17.199 --> 01:16:37.120
talking about the fire department? >> I think that's I think that sounds >> all right. I guess I I don't know. I'm still a little bit I feel like we're like uh we

268
01:16:37.120 --> 01:16:53.520
don't have expertise in this. Um and there have been some horrific fires. My understanding though is that the National Fire Protection Association standards would like horrible fires like the one that happened a couple of years ago in

269
01:16:53.520 --> 01:17:10.239
California don't happen under you know with systems that are designed to the current standard because you don't have you know systemtosystem runaway problems. So you might have a installation with 12 containers and if there's a fire in one

270
01:17:10.239 --> 01:17:24.560
container it can't spread to the others. Um so I don't know we could keep tinkering this with this language but I also think that there's a chance that we should just delete 11109

271
01:17:24.560 --> 01:17:44.400
um and you know trust that the NFPA855 standards and the fire department process is good enough. So, >> Pam, what do you think about at least having Pocket Walker make a note about potential? >> I think a note should be made that Yeah.

272
01:17:44.400 --> 01:18:11.520
And I think it would be it would be very helpful um to have the fire department confirm that 855 covers this issue. If we need to delete it, that would be fine. Great. Thank you. >> And that we can then that we can then delete this.

273
01:18:11.520 --> 01:18:25.360
>> Well, >> yeah. >> Uh Fred, >> yeah. Uh I I'm happy to look into this also. I find as a

274
01:18:25.360 --> 01:18:39.520
longtime participant in the NFPA processes, I they may they I I'm sure that they uh have provisions to

275
01:18:39.520 --> 01:18:59.120
uh control runaway, but uh I I can't believe that NFPA would uh walk away from uh a uh internal suppression system as well. Uh I I'm almost certain, not

276
01:18:59.120 --> 01:19:16.320
completely, but almost certainly that both are involved here. >> Thank you, Ruth. >> I I agree. I think that the the what it sounds like to me is that this is like you have over

277
01:19:16.320 --> 01:19:32.880
big stoves gves to suppress oil fire uh grease fires and you have the same sort of things they're different chemicals and so forth in gas stations. So these you have these systems in special places where particular fires happen and they have to have a particular mode of

278
01:19:32.880 --> 01:19:48.800
control. But I think uh the question was asked earlier. I think Johanna asked it and I think we should ask for clarification between this particular section which involves fire suppression foams and the reference about uh water being the

279
01:19:48.800 --> 01:20:06.880
primary uh suppression agent. I think uh just asking for a clarification or reconciliation but between those two apparent contradictionary statements I think we should reconcile those within this bylaw um in as we as we probably do keep this

280
01:20:06.880 --> 01:20:24.080
one but keeping this as we've discussed doesn't uh solve it doesn't reconcile what seems to be contradiction between what was said before and what's said here. That's great. And maybe Walker, if you could in your last sentence reconcile

281
01:20:24.080 --> 01:20:54.159
this section with the section um uh Above. So it' be 11 18117 A. Thank you. Okay, we're moving on quickly. Oh, Bruce. >> Oh, nope.

282
01:20:54.159 --> 01:21:09.840
>> Fred. >> Uh, one thing I know is that uh lithium, which is you lithium ion battery, lithium lithium uh in contact with water

283
01:21:09.840 --> 01:21:28.159
is uh uh perfectly capable of causing a fire. Uh and uh so if that's how the uh storage system is storing electricity,

284
01:21:28.159 --> 01:21:43.840
uh yeah, there's going to be lithium in there. And uh you're not going to want uh you're probably not going to want water on it. I I again, I can look into this some more, but uh I I

285
01:21:43.840 --> 01:21:58.960
would be very careful here, >> Fred. Fred, if you want to talk to Chris Baskam at the fire department, he's been um one of the leads on this topic. >> Yeah, I I I actually had a chat with him

286
01:21:58.960 --> 01:22:14.400
early earlier this morning about something uh related, but not quite the same. I'm happy to talk to him some more. >> And one last comment on on um the battery fires is they're still using the

287
01:22:14.400 --> 01:22:29.440
products that cause fires. So, um, unless unless they, you know, get rid of or somehow dismantle all of the product that has been has been built to date, um, we're still going to deal with that issue of

288
01:22:29.440 --> 01:22:46.960
runaway fires. Okay, moving on to 1812. There was a suggestion of making this a little clearer. um shall apply to agate canopy SPI SPI and best oops canopy SPI

289
01:22:46.960 --> 01:23:10.000
comma SPI and best installed on prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance we would take out and soils and a bit yeah Okay. Mounting and foundation. So, these

290
01:23:10.000 --> 01:23:26.000
are all just uh sort of um sort of miscellaneous items of of additional design considerations. Is there anything in this paragraph that people have any issue with?

291
01:23:26.000 --> 01:23:43.280
>> Not from me. >> If not, so just kind of shout out or somehow raise your hand. Let's move to 1812, storm water management erosion control. In all of the CMR references, we're

292
01:23:43.280 --> 01:24:01.159
trying to take out um specifics like 0.00's and just make them generic like CMR10s. So, you'll see some of those changes already made. Any any concerns or updates to that paragraph?

293
01:24:02.159 --> 01:24:20.760
If not, we'll move to hazardous materials. Hazardous materials is covered in sort of um several sections. So, this is hazardous waste.

294
01:24:21.760 --> 01:24:41.679
Any comments or considerations in this in the first couple of paragraphs in 01? Just a question, Pam. I I um what what is what is hazardous waste and waste management and so forth got to do with

295
01:24:41.679 --> 01:24:58.800
this? Is it I'm not quite understanding uh why this is here. hazardous well because hazardous waste includes everything from herbicides to pesticides to gasoline to oil, you know,

296
01:24:58.800 --> 01:25:15.040
cans of lubricant. Um there's there's hazardous waste on any con construction site. >> Okay. So, it's the incidental things. Okay. Okay. >> Yeah. Johanna, >> and then the the thinking of why it's

297
01:25:15.040 --> 01:25:30.560
important to include this in this particular bylaw is again kind of this idea that an applicant has a one-stop shop and they don't have to go elsewhere to figure out how they need to manage. Is that accurate? And and so then

298
01:25:30.560 --> 01:25:55.360
>> can we just confirm that there are similar rules like this that apply to other uses that don't have to do with clean energy? I'm seeing Pam nod, but >> yes. >> Yeah. Okay, >> Fred.

299
01:25:55.360 --> 01:26:11.120
>> Uh, do we need a definition of hazardous? >> It is included in the definitions if I'm not if my memory serves me. >> I just wanted to make sure. Actually

300
01:26:11.120 --> 01:26:26.320
we actually we do not describe hazardous but we describe disposal and discharge but it's discharge of hazardous waste and then hazardous waste I think is

301
01:26:26.320 --> 01:26:51.360
included in the definitions 18317 >> 1831 and 180312 >> 180 >> is also referenced specifically >> 180317 has hazardous waste as a definition.

302
01:26:51.360 --> 01:27:08.480
>> Okay, maybe I'm looking at the wrong version. >> Oh, maybe I'm looking at an old copy. >> You might be. I'm looking at draft 11. Version 11, you >> Oh, yeah. I'm on draft nine. >> Yeah, we're past that one. It's um 180315,

303
01:27:08.480 --> 01:27:31.120
I'm sorry, 180315. Yes. Has a definition of hazardous waste. >> Yeah. >> Does that answer your question for Bruce? >> Oh, I I didn't ask it, but yes, I'm

304
01:27:31.120 --> 01:27:51.360
sure. Well, >> sorry. Sorry, I let Doug and Pam know that I have to leave to go to a family event tonight, so I just have to hop off. >> Thank you, Angus. >> Brad, your hand is up. >> Yes. Um I

305
01:27:51.360 --> 01:28:08.480
have the uh 180311 uh in front of me right now. Um, and I can't quite make sense out of this um

306
01:28:08.480 --> 01:28:23.280
because it it begins with discharge or hazardous waste discharge um and then the sentence that follows it

307
01:28:23.280 --> 01:28:40.800
uh only applies to hazardous waste. So I can someone uh tell me how this uh makes sense in the in the English language here. Um

308
01:28:40.800 --> 01:28:59.239
I think it may be better as simply hazardous waste discharge rather than discharge or should should dis discharge or come out of that.

309
01:29:00.639 --> 01:29:19.920
I think it was uh yes I I mean the the action is the discharge or the action in number 12 is the disposal. Um they're they're very similar and I would I would >> wouldn't wouldn't we want we're not

310
01:29:19.920 --> 01:29:36.840
talking about treatment. So what if we just deleted the words or treatment in the first sentence and the comma after disposal so that the discharge

311
01:29:37.600 --> 01:29:56.400
or disposal of hazardous waste is prohibited. I mean that at least makes sense. Whether it's right, I don't know. Because we don't we don't define treatment, do we? >> Well, and we're not doing treatment of

312
01:29:56.400 --> 01:30:15.679
hazardous waste on our solar sites. Any any other I mean, does anyone disagree with that? So, it becomes the discharge or disposal and then cross out or treatment. Brad. >> Well,

313
01:30:15.679 --> 01:30:32.840
>> I don't want to lose track of uh the wording of 180311, which has two extra words that I don't think should be there. >> 180311. So, we're going back

314
01:30:36.159 --> 01:30:53.360
to the to the definition of >> discharge. Yeah, >> there we go. >> It I think it should simply say hazardous waste discharge. The act I don't think it should say discharge or

315
01:30:53.360 --> 01:31:13.520
hazardous waste discharge. >> Any disagreement with that? Let's get rid of the >> discharge with this because I thought that discharge I thought that was a kind of a concom world term of art.

316
01:31:13.520 --> 01:31:35.520
>> Well, I mean they do talk about discharge but um let me just look at the language again real quick. So I know there are sections that talk about I mean maybe it's the one we were just on that talks about discharge and

317
01:31:35.520 --> 01:31:52.800
>> exactly. So I think that's why that's here. >> Yeah. >> So I you know that is here because probably of that reference. >> Yeah. So that Fred I don't think this is wrong. It may be a little

318
01:31:52.800 --> 01:32:08.400
>> well I it it's not making any sense to me and the the other places where it occurs it occurs in the context of discharging of hazardous waste. So I think all you need

319
01:32:08.400 --> 01:32:24.960
here is hazardous waste discharge accidental or int intentional spilling leaking etc. Well, I think I mean this seems to be defining discharge. So discharge can refer to

320
01:32:24.960 --> 01:32:39.679
other things besides just hazardous waste. So I don't think it's a blanket term for just hazardous waste discharge, at least in this definition. If you're referring to the language below, then I think we can look at that

321
01:32:39.679 --> 01:32:58.480
again. But discharge isn't specifically just hazardous waste discharge. It looks like it is in this paragraph though. >> Um, >> in which paragraph, Andy? >> Yeah. And this I'm reading the language of it

322
01:32:58.480 --> 01:33:15.520
>> highlighted on the screen. >> Yeah, it's either >> I mean you could have either you have a separate definition for discharge because I'm I'm thinking about, you know, discharge can be anything besides something that's just hazardous material. Um, so

323
01:33:15.520 --> 01:33:33.000
I I would maybe I I would agree the language in this does specifically refer to hazardous waste discharge. So maybe get rid of just discharge. But I don't know if we need to ensure that we don't have discharge defined elsewhere.

324
01:33:33.520 --> 01:33:49.280
Can we make a note here in this in this 180311 and just say, you know, is is this reference um is this reference somewhere else where we need to retain the word

325
01:33:49.280 --> 01:34:18.880
discharge or Because in the next one it's disposal and that's simply disposal but it but it but it addresses hazardous waste. >> M >> perhaps 180311 should just say discharge as it's used in this bylaw only.

326
01:34:18.880 --> 01:34:34.080
>> It is the accidental spilling of hazardous waste. >> Fred. Well, except that uh it goes on to limit this coverage to hazardous waste. >> Right.

327
01:34:34.080 --> 01:34:54.159
>> Right. The definition, >> right? As does disposal. >> Yeah. >> Which references hazardous waste. >> Let's come back to this. >> So Pam, we'll have to circle back back to this.

328
01:34:54.159 --> 01:35:29.760
circle back. Yes. Um, so we're at 18 1301 and 02. Any additions or corrections to 1813 01 or 02? >> Well, let's see.

329
01:35:29.760 --> 01:35:45.440
>> I actually had one up above uh in 01. The last paragraph of 01 says, "Hazardous materials and hazardous waste transported, stored, used, or generated in the site shall meet all requirements. the Department of Environmental Protection

330
01:35:45.440 --> 01:36:06.080
because the the DP already promulgates its regulations. Do we need to repeat it here? Is is a question for maybe Stephanie. >> Okay. Sorry. Forgive me for my distraction tonight because I've been up and down and not just sitting here the

331
01:36:06.080 --> 01:36:21.199
whole time. So, >> repeat the question. Well, the last the last paragraph of 1301, it says all these waste transported, stored, used shall meet requirements of the Department of Environmental Protection.

332
01:36:21.199 --> 01:36:43.120
And I'm asking, is that paragraph necessary since the D already promulgates its own regulations? >> Yeah, I don't that seems superfluous. >> I would agree. I don't see any other hands. We Let's

333
01:36:43.120 --> 01:36:59.360
>> Well, Fred has his hand up. >> Fred, >> um I think I would keep it. Um there's uh any number of places in here where uh

334
01:36:59.360 --> 01:37:16.080
again, the principle of one-stop shopping. Uh, I mean, I could argue that you don't need the uh statements that uh that I edited around uh the state electrical code and the national electrical safety

335
01:37:16.080 --> 01:37:30.960
code and so forth. But uh I think they add something uh in terms of one-stop shopping. And uh uh I I think this is perfectly harmless uh the way that it is.

336
01:37:30.960 --> 01:37:52.679
I would keep it. >> And it sounds like it's your call. >> Yep. Not then keep. I mean, if there's if there's any call for it, I'd rather have it included than than lose it. Hazardous materials 18132.

337
01:37:53.360 --> 01:38:11.920
Are there any uh Doug, you had a comment about wellhead protection area? So, the first paragraph >> in the paragraph that's at the top of what's shown here, >> I just wondered. >> Oh, maybe it was added since since that

338
01:38:11.920 --> 01:38:30.400
version that I was reviewing. I I see it at the end of the section. Your point was that it the paragraph names um water supply protection area or wellhead protection area and you

339
01:38:30.400 --> 01:38:49.920
suggested that we include and wellhead protection area to the first sentence. So that it's supply area and and well and or what or

340
01:38:49.920 --> 01:39:12.480
Yeah. >> Does that make sense, Doug? Is that what you intended? >> Uh yeah, it could be. >> Yeah, but in light of the conversation we had about wells and separation distances, I'm I'm not sure how

341
01:39:12.480 --> 01:39:33.119
significant wellhead production areas are really going to be anymore. >> Well, this has to do with this material. >> Okay, that's fine. That was my comment. >> Yep. >> Great. >> Any other comments on the the various

342
01:39:33.119 --> 01:40:06.560
paragraphs? >> Um, let's see. The second has so ha the third paragraph down hazardous materials shall not be stored in a no disturbance area. Um I wasn't sure whether that term was

343
01:40:06.560 --> 01:40:25.199
ever defined as it but um that was my comment about that >> because I didn't see it in the definitions. >> You didn't see no disturbance area >> right? That's because is that

344
01:40:25.199 --> 01:40:49.280
>> released in version seven. >> Bruce, you're muted. In the second paragraph, um the that capitalized very small disturbance area, sorry, very small

345
01:40:49.280 --> 01:41:08.360
quantity generator of hazard. That is that a term of art or everybody's comfortable with that? Because when I read that, I've just got to tell this person to go away. Just you can answer the question. >> I believe that came from state ress.

346
01:41:15.199 --> 01:41:34.880
Okay. If if if uh if if if if uh being uh informed about the topic will eliminate the curiosity, then I'm comfortable. >> Um and I think so when we get through

347
01:41:34.880 --> 01:41:52.719
the the 1813 section, I would like to call for a pause for uh seeing if there's any public comment. I have not opened up the floor to that at all tonight. >> All right. >> So, in the third um paragraph, I did

348
01:41:52.719 --> 01:42:08.400
wonder if a wetland delineation is required uh to establish the no disturbance area or to establish the 150 ft of wetlands

349
01:42:08.400 --> 01:42:30.000
because some that could be outside the boundary of the property. that >> right >> is controlled by the applicant. >> The the wetland does not does not define let's say the the area of no disturbance is not limited to wetland

350
01:42:30.000 --> 01:42:51.520
setbacks. >> Yeah, I guess I'm just puzzled on how that's how that's established. So, okay. >> Could could Walker make a note about that where it just talks about the No, I mean, this isn't the first time we've

351
01:42:51.520 --> 01:43:07.360
addressed no disturbance areas, but if we can put a comment here about um >> better definition and you know how it's how it's >> how it's established. >> I I'm just sorry I don't have my hand

352
01:43:07.360 --> 01:43:22.960
up, but I just want to jump in real quick. I think Aaron Jacques, the conservation agent, actually may have provided this particular comment. So, um, >> yeah, >> I think it came from her. And of course, she's dealing with her language that she deals with with the wetland regulations.

353
01:43:22.960 --> 01:43:40.560
So, maybe why it's phrased specifically as such. >> Yeah. >> And that in part was what drove the setbacks and the no disturbance zones. Good. Thank you. Thank you, Walker.

354
01:43:40.560 --> 01:44:02.679
Um, herbicides. So, the first paragraph deals with only in the public right of way. >> It talks about >> first paragraph, the last sentence starts with the acronym CIF, which is never defined.

355
01:44:04.960 --> 01:44:24.560
>> SPIS What's that? Oh, really? >> Well, the CIF is the state definition for clean energy infrastructure facility. >> Oh, okay. >> And we and I don't think we included

356
01:44:24.560 --> 01:44:41.280
that in 1803 definition. >> Find it. >> It does not. It's not included. >> Okay. Johanna, >> SPI's restricts it to just solar photovoltaic installations. Would we

357
01:44:41.280 --> 01:45:02.320
want to include best here as well? Yeah, if if um well ne yeah yeah if I read this neither is you know neither the SPI or the best is actually located in the in the public right of way. Um and I think this application of

358
01:45:02.320 --> 01:45:18.080
herbicides is is um the preparation you know if something is built adjacent to a a public right of way we follow CMR 333.

359
01:45:18.080 --> 01:45:38.000
Um I think yeah if we add both I think that's that's fine. Yeah. Fred. >> Yeah. Um, the SPI uh is plural in this.

360
01:45:38.000 --> 01:45:53.600
And I don't think you it somehow seems wrong to me to write B SS in caps and then a lowercase S. But I think it somehow has to be made plural.

361
01:45:53.600 --> 01:46:17.440
uh like uh bees uh facilities or something that can be made plural to match with the SPI. Maybe we just take the s off SPI. Um, and sorry, I'm I'm belatedly raising

362
01:46:17.440 --> 01:46:38.560
my hand, but isn't BESS battery energy storage systems? >> Oh, you're right. >> So, it implor Yeah. So, it's it >> I'll do an Emily Latella here and go, never mind. >> Some of us know what you're referring

363
01:46:38.560 --> 01:47:05.760
to. Okay. Um, the last sentence, the last paragraph on herbicides was was actually fairly convoluted. Um, I attempted to make some some sense out

364
01:47:05.760 --> 01:47:24.560
of it myself. Um, I think what it's getting at is that that pesticides and herbicides, well, first of all, the first sentence, clearing of natural vegetation should be limited to what is necessary for construction, operation, maintenance of the facility. That's basically saying

365
01:47:24.560 --> 01:47:40.639
don't clear any more land than you need to. Don't clear any more vegetation than you need to. >> Ma'am, >> it doesn't Yeah. >> Why do we say that? You know, if I were doing a development on any other piece of land, there would be no restriction

366
01:47:40.639 --> 01:48:02.480
on what I cleared. I think this is in part a reaction to the um the the blowouts that occurred like in Williamsburg and um and other towns where the erosion that occurred

367
01:48:02.480 --> 01:48:18.400
was so horrific that you know it it just it sullies the name of of >> everything. But but but wasn't that a failure of conservation commission and and and construction monitoring and a

368
01:48:18.400 --> 01:48:36.480
whole lot of other things. I I don't know. It just feels like if I bought a tract of forest land and decided I wanted to turn it into pasture land and cleared all the vegetation and planted grass, as long as I had all the,

369
01:48:36.480 --> 01:48:51.760
you know, the erosion controls in place that I needed to minimize runoff, nobody would be able would tell me that I needed to minimize the amount of I don't know. It just feels like it's >> I it's over it's more restrictive

370
01:48:51.760 --> 01:49:06.800
because of this use >> without particular reason. >> I ag I I agree with you and I think um as as you as you read that first sentence is like just this kind of statement plop down. It doesn't really have anything to do with herbicide

371
01:49:06.800 --> 01:49:22.320
application. I was going to suggest that maybe the first sentence could be deleted if no one has any issue with that. It sounds like there is not. Um the second sentence I was going to start with the word chemical fertilization or herbicide

372
01:49:22.320 --> 01:49:45.199
pesticides should be applied only as necessary to get ve to get vegetation new vegetation or stabilizing vegetation established. So the sentence would start with the

373
01:49:45.199 --> 01:50:17.440
word chemical. >> Yep. >> Yep. >> Well, well now we have necessary twice within six words of each >> should be applied. shall be applied only only to only to establish

374
01:50:17.440 --> 01:50:58.520
stabilizing vegetation. Garion Then the last sentence which is highlighted in pink which the question was how does this affect agravoltaics? My suggestion would be that um agravtaic installations

375
01:50:59.360 --> 01:51:38.400
adhere to Mass Department of Agricultural Resources uh regulations That's in lie of the sentence that's highlighted in pink. >> Yes. >> All right. Fred has his hand up.

376
01:51:38.400 --> 01:52:02.440
>> Yeah. The sentence the sentence before that uses should be applied um should is not appropriate in a regulatory document. It should be shall. >> Thank you. >> All right.

377
01:52:07.199 --> 01:52:23.760
uh emergency response. The last paragraph uh providing emergency response proceed procedures following a discharge of hazardous waste shall be developed by the project owner in collaboration with the Ammeris fire department approved by the PGA. So we already we've we've stated a couple

378
01:52:23.760 --> 01:52:41.920
times emergency responses are needed. Um, it's it's kind of a sentence that doesn't have a lot of weight right here, but it's reminding them that that in some cases there will be a uh emergency

379
01:52:41.920 --> 01:53:01.119
response plan. Yeah, I had suggested replacing this with a sentence that read, "The emergency response plan shall include protocols for responding to a discharge of hazardous waste."

380
01:53:01.119 --> 01:53:17.520
That seemed clearer to me, but I'm not going to >> think that makes more that makes more sense. >> All right. The emergency response plan shall include

381
01:53:17.520 --> 01:53:38.880
protocols for responding to a discharge. You're doing great, Walker, by the way. >> I know. I'm just thanking you in my head >> to a to a discharge. And the discharge should be capitalized because it's a term we've defined or back in

382
01:53:38.880 --> 01:53:59.520
definitions. Discharge of capital Hazardous Waste period. And that would replace the other sentence. >> Great. >> All right, we got through 13. You We were

383
01:53:59.520 --> 01:54:16.560
>> Do you want to call for uh attendees and and input? Public public comment. >> Uh why don't we see if the public wants to make any comment? We have three members of the public here. Uh do any of you want to comment? We have a hand

384
01:54:16.560 --> 01:54:35.199
raised from Steve Roof. Uh Pam, can you bring over Steve? Steve, you'll have three minutes after your introduction. >> Great. Thank you. This is Steve Roof. I live in Deep South Ammerst on Southeast

385
01:54:35.199 --> 01:54:51.119
Street. And um first just want to commend you all on your very detailed and meticulous review of this. I'm I'm I'm very impressed with your attention to detail and I have I guess three particular little things that I've

386
01:54:51.119 --> 01:55:07.119
noticed that I want to just raise your attention to. Um first in an earlier section 18104. It's kind of there's several paragraphs there, but towards the end it references that applicant shall avoid sighting in a manner that would require construction

387
01:55:07.119 --> 01:55:24.639
or tree clearing activities. Couple other things within 100 ft of groundwater monitoring wells. And that struck me as a little bit odd or confusing. I don't know what groundwater monitoring wells might be, but I can

388
01:55:24.639 --> 01:55:38.719
imagine that groundwatering monitoring wells may well be installed near or on a site just to monitor the groundwater before or after any sort of development. So, you may want to go back and just double check to see if that's something

389
01:55:38.719 --> 01:55:54.800
that um you believe is still necessary. >> Okay, Steve. Uh Walker, can you scroll back and just note that that was something to check? It's 18104, I believe. >> Yes, 18104 near the end. There was several

390
01:55:54.800 --> 01:56:16.800
paragraphs in that section, I believe. >> So, and your comment had to do with ground monitoring wells. >> That's right. groundwater. >> Yeah, that yep, that paragraph. >> So, at the least groundwatering wells might need to be defined, but I would

391
01:56:16.800 --> 01:56:43.920
wonder if this is really necessary overall. And then two other comments. when uh you're ready. >> And then the second question. Yeah. >> Okay. The other two are definitions in section article 12. My reading of the

392
01:56:43.920 --> 01:56:59.360
definition of the best the bees. >> You mean 1812? >> Um article 12 at the end the very end. >> So I don't think we've gotten to article 12 yet. >> No, you haven't. But >> but you've referred to it.

393
01:56:59.360 --> 01:57:16.239
>> Okay. Um, the definition for bees does not have a minimum size on it. And if I read that strictly, it seems like maybe my cell phone battery pack would qualify as a best under this. >> Walker, you need to go all the way to the end of this document.

394
01:57:16.239 --> 01:57:30.400
>> All the way through. Go all the way through 18. There we go. >> There we go. Yeah. >> Um, >> so battery energy storage systems. So there's no negim >> no minimum size there. And likewise, a

395
01:57:30.400 --> 01:57:46.480
couple lines down, there's the um um SPI definition, um also no minimum sizes indicated there. So, it might include my solar powered garden walkway lights.

396
01:57:46.480 --> 01:58:02.320
>> Okay. So, Walker, could you just highlight those and add a comment that we >> Let's Let's continue. He's got a third comment. That's >> those are those are my three. The first was groundwater bonding wells, then the definition for best and the definition for SPI.

397
01:58:02.320 --> 01:58:17.679
>> The latter two having no minimum size that you might want to just check on. >> All right. So, since >> also for SPI, okay, good. >> Yeah, since this is um public hearing, uh I think it's appropriate to try to

398
01:58:17.679 --> 01:58:34.239
respond to things that are brought up. So right there where it's blue highlighted um I I would point out to Steve Roof that on the preceding page of this volume um there is definition of

399
01:58:34.239 --> 01:58:49.760
the scale and size of battery storage uh components and or um SPIs and we have tier one this is a state, sort

400
01:58:49.760 --> 01:59:06.560
of the state example of how to uh create levels of scale. And tier one is uh your your walkway lights, if you will, uh or your housemounted

401
01:59:06.560 --> 01:59:23.040
materials. Um it's it's essentially by building commission only. So that's where the that's where the minimums. >> Okay. >> So there is no minimum on these, right? >> I mean

402
01:59:23.040 --> 01:59:39.040
>> there's not a minimum. There's not a minimum in the definition. There's there are maximums in the table 5.11. So, Steve, are you saying, "Well, in this case, I might need to go to the building

403
01:59:39.040 --> 01:59:56.639
commissioner to get approval of my groundmounted sidewalk photovoltaic light." >> Um, yeah, perhaps a strict reading might might um suggest that to somebody reading it very strictly.

404
01:59:56.639 --> 02:00:14.719
I I think the context in the rest of the bylaw would make it fairly clear that this bylaw does not apply to such small things. >> So Pam, I think the question is do we need a minimum? >> Yeah. >> You know, of 10 watts or something

405
02:00:14.719 --> 02:00:30.800
to exclude those little accessory devices. >> Okay. Maybe maybe um Walker could put a little sticky note over there. >> I have a simple solution, >> Fred.

406
02:00:30.800 --> 02:00:48.719
Uh yeah, I turn the uh less than uh arrows both less than and less than or equal uh into what they should be which is greater than or greater than or equal

407
02:00:48.719 --> 02:01:05.679
which means the uh arrows need to point the opposite direction. No, but we but we don't want to like tier one is things that are smaller than 25 kilowatts. >> Okay, but >> right. >> Oh, I All right, never mind.

408
02:01:05.679 --> 02:01:22.639
>> Emily Lella again. >> Okay, Johanna, >> greater greater than zero, >> right? And then I think um this might be a little bit getting ahead of ourselves, but plug-in solar systems are

409
02:01:22.639 --> 02:01:40.080
increasingly a thing that consumers are interested in. Um, the current UL code for plug-in systems is well, it doesn't really allow for plug-in systems, but a handful of states have set 391 watts as

410
02:01:40.080 --> 02:01:56.880
the threshold for a plug-in solar system that like doesn't need utility interconnection. So, if we want to set a minimum, I think we would want to set it at a level that would allow clarifi like make it clear that small

411
02:01:56.880 --> 02:02:15.840
plug-in systems would not be regulated under this bylaw. Oh, and if I if I may add als to make sure perhaps well clarify whether a residential um like Tesla power wall battery packs that might be installed as

412
02:02:15.840 --> 02:02:32.960
part of a solar a rooftop solar system if that falls under the best definition or not. >> You you might just use the word and this the electrical code does this in many places. use the phrase permanently

413
02:02:32.960 --> 02:02:58.080
connected. Plug in is not permanently connected and that way you separate it >> and so add that to the definition of of say tier one. >> Yeah, >> that's that's a good thing to take into

414
02:02:58.080 --> 02:03:12.800
consideration. Thank you, Mr. Roof. >> Thank you. >> All right. Do we have any other public comments? We're down to three public members. I don't see any hands.

415
02:03:12.800 --> 02:03:30.560
>> Could Could we go down to uh the first thing that he mentioned? Uh because I had a solution for that. Um let me just This is where it was, right? Uh one more. No, this was the second. This was

416
02:03:30.560 --> 02:03:49.599
the same sort of minimum. >> No, it was Yeah, it wasn't there. >> The first was the groundwater monitoring wells which is 18104. >> This is this is the this was raised by uh the member of the public

417
02:03:49.599 --> 02:04:06.320
and we were covering it just before we got into the the table. Right. Yeah, Steve brought this up, Fred. >> Yeah. Um >> I think Fred means the definitions of

418
02:04:06.320 --> 02:04:30.960
best uh which we were covering just before we got into the table. >> Yeah. >> Oh. Oh, okay. >> So, back to the bottom. >> Yeah. Um >> well it seems like between the definition here and the table we we it's

419
02:04:30.960 --> 02:04:46.320
really one question about should we have a minimum def minimum wattage specified and if so we could do it in either place. I'm also wondering if it in the applicability like the first section or

420
02:04:46.320 --> 02:05:06.159
two there's the applicability and it could be stated in there that it does not apply to X or essentially you know the following >> Bruce >> I was just saying that I think this is

421
02:05:06.159 --> 02:05:22.719
probably where the permanently collect permanently connected ph or phrase which uh that Fred mentioned uh could be installed and that's not there. It's the well both of them perhaps. Um but the the the best systems are

422
02:05:22.719 --> 02:05:38.080
probably going to be permanently connected but the uh the the the uh the canopy SPI or SPI generally those are the ones that are building mounted could be a plugin. Uh,

423
02:05:38.080 --> 02:05:56.159
and so it's 12. We've got 12xx and 12xx, but they're the two the two uh uh definitions below the blue area. I think those are the ones where Fred was suggesting that permanently connected be installed somewhere in the definition.

424
02:05:56.159 --> 02:06:11.440
And that >> also Yeah. also in uh battery energy store bees. The third line, physical containers. Uh I think the the better word there is

425
02:06:11.440 --> 02:06:42.800
enclosures, physical enclosures or just yeah one or more enclosures providing secondary cont containment. All right. So, Pam, I was thinking maybe

426
02:06:42.800 --> 02:06:58.320
we should take a break. It's been an hour and 45 or almost it's been more than two hours. So, >> Doug, I just have my hand up for one quick point that is in reference to >> um 18104 that came up, the groundwater

427
02:06:58.320 --> 02:07:14.639
monitoring wells. It's a very good comment. Um, but I just wanted to say that there are established groundwater monitoring wells throughout town. Um, and so those are established. So I think this is saying that um, you can be clearing and doing other

428
02:07:14.639 --> 02:07:30.960
thing that could potentially impact those established wells that are throughout town. So it's not a random thing that just happens. they um they are specifically established in town now in

429
02:07:30.960 --> 02:07:49.520
our in our um inspected and checked. So, >> and and does does tree clearing activities affect them in some adverse way? Well, I mean, all I can think of about that potential is um erosion and

430
02:07:49.520 --> 02:08:05.119
sedimentation somehow impacting them in some adverse way. I don't know specifically why they said tree clearing, but >> um >> was did this come from Aaron? >> I think this yeah, this may have been

431
02:08:05.119 --> 02:08:24.000
another one from from Aaron or the water supply protection committee. It may have come from them as well. >> Okay. Well, it seems like we still have a number of things to check with that group to >> clear up. Yeah. Yeah. I would I would also agree that we

432
02:08:24.000 --> 02:08:41.520
have a lot of folks that have been patiently waiting through this. Be good to take a quick break. >> All right. Okay. Um, uh, >> Stephanie, I assume you're finished and

433
02:08:41.520 --> 02:08:57.119
and your hand is just a legacy hand. >> It is. >> Walker, I think we could, uh, take a break here. Take a five minute break. It's uh 8:43 on my clock. Come back at 8:48,

434
02:08:57.119 --> 02:09:14.679
folks. Uh, turn on your um cameras when you come back and let us know that you're back. Um, Walker or Pam, you have a slide you usually bring up when we're on a break

435
02:09:14.800 --> 02:09:29.280
just to let people know that we are on break. So, >> I do have that. I just want to make sure, Walker, that we won't lose your work that you >> Yeah. Why don't you do a save and then >> Yep. Make sure it's saved. It's still in

436
02:09:29.280 --> 02:16:20.480
my background. Okay. Great. OMG, this is crazy. All right, it's 8:49. Please turn on your camera as you return from our break. Pam, uh, as we all come back, I wanted to ask you,

437
02:16:20.480 --> 02:16:44.280
um, given the pace at which we're getting through this, do you think we're going to need a third meeting? >> Thank you. >> A joint here, you're you're muted, by the way. Those don't want me. There we go. There we go.

438
02:16:44.559 --> 02:17:00.240
Um, my gut reaction is that we would need another meeting um if only to come back with some of the answers for things that have been brought up tonight. >> Okay. >> Sadly. >> Yeah. Yeah. It seems like there's a

439
02:17:00.240 --> 02:17:14.719
number like we need to talk to the fire department. We need to talk to the the clean groundwater group. We >> and we have we have the 17th outlined. I

440
02:17:14.719 --> 02:17:33.519
want to thank the CRC members again for you know agreeing to meet on an off night off day and night. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Should we pick it up and keep going? >> Okay. We stopped

441
02:17:33.519 --> 02:17:48.080
>> at some point. Should we like say we'll go till 9:30 9:4 9:30 and just cut it off there? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah, that sounds great. Maybe get through. >> So, Walker, bring it bring it back up.

442
02:17:48.080 --> 02:18:03.359
>> Bring it on. We were at 18.14 response emergency response plan. Does anyone have any concerns or disagreements with what we're asking for in a this defines sort of the response

443
02:18:03.359 --> 02:18:26.479
plan? We we asked for it in submitts back in 180 408 I think. But this is this actually describes what it is and what what it should meet. And I think

444
02:18:26.479 --> 02:18:46.000
>> so this says it has to be submitted and approved prior to system commissioning. So that implies that it doesn't have to be submitted with the application. >> It's supposed to be submitted with the

445
02:18:46.000 --> 02:19:04.000
application, but maybe we could add the words the final the the final copy. Um, okay. Well, I just thought that that was inconsistent and and be approved by the Amoris Fire

446
02:19:04.000 --> 02:19:21.120
Department. Okay. Well, maybe then that works. Okay. So, it so it's submitted with the application and has to be approved before bit system commissioning. >> All right. Then then never mind. We'll leave it.

447
02:19:21.120 --> 02:19:36.080
1815 building permit and building inspection. We don't really have too many buildings per se, but um there shall be construct, installed or modified without shall not be.

448
02:19:36.080 --> 02:19:53.359
So, you know, this section is duplicated in 1804, just that 1804 says, you know, whatever you do has to get approved and get the applicable permits. So,

449
02:19:53.359 --> 02:20:19.439
it's just more words. Any reason not to delete it? I don't have a Well, I I wonder if because because the building commissioner would be the the the permit granting authority for some of the

450
02:20:19.439 --> 02:20:42.040
smaller things that don't come to uh to you all. Um the reminder that a building permit is something that is required. It doesn't actually say that in the 1804 section. It doesn't say go get a for 18.

451
02:20:43.520 --> 02:21:08.520
>> Yeah. I mean it just says >> it needs to >> 1808. >> Sorry. It says applicable building and electrical permits. I mean, >> you know,

452
02:21:09.120 --> 02:21:28.720
>> it's it's it's it's not a problem. It's just repetition, right? Is that that's your concern though? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Anybody feel strongly about keeping it? >> At least not the question as to whether

453
02:21:28.720 --> 02:21:46.479
it is. The question is, is there a reason to retain this? >> Yeah, >> it appears duplicative. >> Yeah. >> Great. Construction maintenance I think will suggest >> before you do Walker. Um, is this

454
02:21:46.479 --> 02:22:08.319
necessary to retain? It appears duplicatus. Dup duplicative. >> Okay, >> great. Thank you. 1816, there was a suggestion to change from construction maintenance, which doesn't really make

455
02:22:08.319 --> 02:22:30.319
sense, to facility maintenance. And given that and given that everyone agreed um to get rid of some of the information back in 1811 0105 and ' 06,

456
02:22:30.319 --> 02:22:46.560
this facility maintenance um paragraph makes more sense. And that included ma maintaining the access for the fire department um and and maintaining the the solar f photo the s actually this should be

457
02:22:46.560 --> 02:23:06.840
changed to spi. We could change spi caught one or best just plain old in good working you know good condition. Um, great.

458
02:23:09.040 --> 02:23:36.720
Great. So, so this covers everything. Uh, 1817 I get I see. So, solar voltaic. Um, does anyone want to know a little bit more about the eight the modifications

459
02:23:36.720 --> 02:23:55.160
paragraph? Um, and I Fred, you have your hand up actually. >> Yeah. Um, in 1817, um, the, uh, just a minute here.

460
02:23:56.399 --> 02:24:15.920
Oh, eight. No, I just a moment. >> While Fred's deliberating, a simple one, it seems. The fourth line uh on the left, it says battery energy storage. Shouldn't that just be best? That's

461
02:24:15.920 --> 02:24:31.840
consistent. >> Yep. Yep. >> Yeah. Actually what I'm looking at is in the uh last line of 18.16 uh the comma should be deleted after

462
02:24:31.840 --> 02:24:50.880
road parenthesis s because that the the unless accepted as a public way that phrase only applies to access roads and not anything else. Nothing else is going to be a public way. So we should just cut it off at that

463
02:24:50.880 --> 02:25:08.280
point and delete just just delete the comma. >> Okay. >> So any access roads unless accepted as a public way. >> Thank you. Um 1818 waiverss.

464
02:25:09.439 --> 02:25:31.760
There was one typo suggested and that is in the in item number one. uh its surroundings, comma, or the proposed design rather than the proposal design. We have number two. We have Yep. Thank you. She's quick.

465
02:25:31.760 --> 02:25:50.560
She got it. >> Question. All in favor of moving quickly, but I wanted to go back up to 18.17 really quickly. >> Sure. Um, and this is probably just because I'm looking at an old draft, all apologies, but um, the change of use

466
02:25:50.560 --> 02:26:07.040
from agravalaic canopy SPI to ground mounted SPI. I I guess I'm just trying to number one, I want to confirm that we have a definition for agotaic canopy SPI in the latest draft. And then my second

467
02:26:07.040 --> 02:26:25.040
question is what I guess I'm trying to understand like a case study where this might happen. So like let's say there's a farmer, they're doing agrovoltaics and then for one reason or another they stop crop production

468
02:26:25.040 --> 02:26:44.399
for you know like would that require a new permit in order for that solar system to continue to work? So, I wanted to just dig into that a little bit more. Uh, the way it's written, it certainly

469
02:26:44.399 --> 02:27:04.640
would imply that um the aggravaic um acceptance process might have been quicker, easier, lighter. Um, and if you are going to let go the the the positive benefits, if you want to say that, the

470
02:27:04.640 --> 02:27:20.160
positive benefits of having agriculture, then you need to come back to the PGA and say, hey, you know, we've we've changed our TAC and um we're no longer doing agriculture. There may be some

471
02:27:20.160 --> 02:27:42.880
other requirements than levied on that project. But are there different like where it is is sorry and is there a is there a definition of agravtaic in the latest definitions?

472
02:27:42.880 --> 02:27:59.200
>> Yep. It's 180301. It actually calls it out as agravtaic canopy solar f solar photovoltaic installation. >> Okay. >> Where the land beneath the SPI is used for agricultural purposes in accordance

473
02:27:59.200 --> 02:28:19.840
with chapter 128 blah blah blah. So they follow those those requirements. They give it up and the PGA may want to you know work through some other requ you you know permitting

474
02:28:19.840 --> 02:28:34.399
conditions. >> Yeah, may I address this? >> Sure. Yes, Stephanie. >> Um, sure. So, um, I'm thinking specifically, again, my background with wetlands that, um, there are exemptions for agricultural uses. And so in this

475
02:28:34.399 --> 02:28:50.880
case, if you're using um agravtaics in a farm setting and then you discontinue the farming practices, then it essentially questions the exemption. I guess that's more that they

476
02:28:50.880 --> 02:29:06.560
just have to then go back to ensure that there isn't sort of a change of use of in terms of the landscape because there may have been exemptions that were granted as part of the farm farming operation but if the farming operation stops

477
02:29:06.560 --> 02:29:24.080
then there may be reasons why that system was allowed only because it was an agricultural operation that may no longer apply if those practices cease. to operate. >> Okay, thanks. I'm comfortable with it, I

478
02:29:24.080 --> 02:29:40.840
think. >> Andy, >> so what would happen in that case? Would they conceivably be told you got to take this thing down? I mean, or, you know, you can't you don't you don't have permission unless you're growing something under it.

479
02:29:41.520 --> 02:29:57.040
>> Definitely. >> Definitely. I can only um say that because it's basically a review by the permit granting authority, they would make that determination. Um so this is just giving them the opportunity to if there is I mean there

480
02:29:57.040 --> 02:30:12.000
may not be there may be no reason for them to remove it at all, but it it gives the it affords the permit granting authority the opportunity to review it in case there is something that is relevant. we may not be aware of right now, but there may be something that is

481
02:30:12.000 --> 02:30:28.160
relevant. >> And Andy, it might it might be as simple it may be as simple as requiring them to establish vegetation on something that had been plowed, therefore erodable. And they may say, you know, you're going to continue

482
02:30:28.160 --> 02:30:47.040
your your SPI, but you're going to have a maintained ground cover. So, so that you reduce erosion. I mean, it could be as simple as that. speaking for the PTA as I am. Okay, let's move to 18/19 if everybody's

483
02:30:47.040 --> 02:31:04.000
comfortable. >> Yes. >> General reporting requirements. Um there was a uh a recommendation some time ago, if Mr. Marshall remembers this

484
02:31:04.000 --> 02:31:20.160
in several in several of the subpar paragraphs. Uh the the third-party inspector um is referenced and the the phrase a third party inspector selected by and acting under the direction of the

485
02:31:20.160 --> 02:31:38.240
building commissioner um is a phrase that could easily go into the first sentence paragraph which is 1819011 and then that phrase would not have to be repeated. Eden,

486
02:31:38.240 --> 02:31:58.240
>> that that's true. That was a comment. >> Just trying to say it once and not have to say it five more times. >> Yep. >> So, the third party inspector selected by and no, just the third party

487
02:31:58.240 --> 02:32:24.479
>> Walker. Go up go up to the 18 1901 which is Yeah. at at the end of the first sentence there at just add third party construction inspectors. And those are all capitalized, by the

488
02:32:24.479 --> 02:32:56.800
way, because that's a term of art, it seems. shall be selected by and act under the direction of the building commissioner. All right. And then you could put in parentheses or a comment.

489
02:32:56.800 --> 02:33:26.960
Can remove text can can remove similar text in subsections below. And that way we don't have to drag everybody through that later. Pam, you want to move on? >> Yep.

490
02:33:26.960 --> 02:33:43.760
>> Yes. So, we'll take both of those out of 012 and 013. We'll we'll >> tighten it up a little. Okay. >> Wait, hang on. But we'll keep the third party inspector there. So during construction of SPI and BES, the owner,

491
02:33:43.760 --> 02:34:01.040
operator or thirdparty inspector shall submit inspection reports on a weekly basis. >> Yes, thank you. That's correct. >> Yeah. In the next sentence, um, credentiing appropriate inspection credentiing. Is that required for the third party

492
02:34:01.040 --> 02:34:28.120
inspector only or is it required for an owner operator too? inspection credentiing. It would be for the third party inspector. Okay. Uh maybe I mean that's that's ambiguous at the moment.

493
02:34:30.479 --> 02:34:54.479
So maybe after the word lensure three words over from what you just highlighted. Yeah, you could just say of the third party inspector and then my inclination would be to move that whole section of inspection

494
02:34:54.479 --> 02:35:11.600
credentiing up to 19.0 01 11. Since we're not talking about the weekly reporting requirement, but actually the selection of the inspector.

495
02:35:11.600 --> 02:35:33.000
Yep. >> Right. >> Good. So, so 012 now deals with reports. >> Good. 013. Again, we have photo solar f photovoltaic installations.

496
02:35:34.800 --> 02:35:51.560
>> In the second line, you could delete at the cost of the applicant because that's already been specified. >> Yeah. And then do we include best there too >> for one year post construction of SPI and BES?

497
02:35:52.640 --> 02:36:22.720
>> Yeah. All right. Uh, and then so on the sixth line down just after the acronym SWPP, who decides if it's applicable, >> Stephanie's department. >> Okay.

498
02:36:22.720 --> 02:36:44.439
or just make a comment and move on. Yeah. State 014 the debris cleanup. Uh there was a comment about report to the town of Ammerst rather than local government.

499
02:36:50.160 --> 02:37:09.200
19015 uh in in the one, two, three, like fourth line description on date. >> Yeah, it was just, you know, I was going to I wasn't going to pursue a lot of these, Pam. >> Okay.

500
02:37:09.200 --> 02:37:26.920
>> You know, because Yeah, that's >> fine. They're they're really minor. Yeah, you're right. >> Is it worth everybody's time? >> No. All right. >> 1902 transfer of ownership.

501
02:37:31.840 --> 02:38:05.200
Who do they contact? Written notification to the PGA, the building commissioner, and suggested emergency personnel. Great. Perfect. 1820. There's a suggestion that

502
02:38:05.200 --> 02:38:29.359
um we add the words the emergency phone number that is staffed 24 hours a day and then we can take it out below. >> You can take out the whole the whole first sentence.

503
02:38:29.359 --> 02:38:55.680
>> Yeah. in 1803. >> Great. Financial sur >> and decommissioning. Any comments about that? >> So, this is another instance where we're requiring something that has never we don't require if I build anything else

504
02:38:55.680 --> 02:39:14.319
in town. And I'm sure we're reacting to some operator who abandoned the whole pro the whole installation at the end of their uh useful life and walked away. >> I think this is a good thing and I'm not

505
02:39:14.319 --> 02:39:31.680
sure that we don't require it of the cell towers. Um, I remember and Fred was there too, 25 years ago when we first started having to do the same kind of thing we're doing now with Cell Towers and I think we thought that that this

506
02:39:31.680 --> 02:39:46.640
was an appropriate uh stipulation for Cell Towers. So, I agree that it's we we should it's not unreasonable to imagine that something like this uh should happen. And we have the we

507
02:39:46.640 --> 02:40:03.200
have that fish farm up in on 116 that stood there for 10 years. Um thoroughly unsightly and everything. So I I think there's a case to be made here. >> And whether it's what the amount is and

508
02:40:03.200 --> 02:40:19.359
everything, I guess it's got to be enough to do the job. Stephanie, >> I was just going to agree with Bruce and say that it's fairly standard contractually when you're um contracting solar installations and certainly large

509
02:40:19.359 --> 02:40:38.560
scale. Um so I I don't think there's any reason to get rid of this. I think it's important. So, moving to abandonment or decommissioning. Were there any concerns? And I had none from the outside source

510
02:40:38.560 --> 02:41:01.720
who made the previous comments. I didn't Oh, actually, actually, I'm looking at >> a small one. Don't Don't worry about it. removal shall consist of do does anyone have comments they would like to make about 1822

511
02:41:05.920 --> 02:41:24.240
do we really want to require recycling I guess in in section B if I may it's probably another one of those unnecessary things because uh that's what happens to construction uh

512
02:41:24.240 --> 02:41:42.720
materials these days. >> Is that a given in in the field of solar voltics? Do they actually I mean is it possible to recycle a PV? Johanna's nodding. It's possible and

513
02:41:42.720 --> 02:41:58.640
then you know I think there's a little bit of a question like how cost effective is it? like there might be some spots where there's a market for it and then that makes sense for someone decommissioning a system but if there isn't a market then it might make more

514
02:41:58.640 --> 02:42:18.560
sense for them to dispose of it. So I don't know if that's what all possible is. Yeah. Should we say uh it says it says recycle of all possible materials. That that implies that some may not be possible.

515
02:42:18.560 --> 02:42:36.560
>> Well, it's just like how do you define right like it's possible. The question is is it cost effective? >> Yeah. Does it if we force them to do things that are not necessarily cost-effective,

516
02:42:36.560 --> 02:42:54.240
you know, we're not encouraging, we're discouraging. So, um, in my mind, I think the part A seems fine. Remove the stuff from the site, but I'm not sure that we >> should

517
02:42:54.240 --> 02:43:11.439
dictate necessarily what happens afterwards. I think those are market market forces larger than Ammerst. Is that a little bit like a leaning toward our net zero goals where we, you know, we're we're asking that if and when something is dismantled, it

518
02:43:11.439 --> 02:43:28.640
actually, you know, gets distributed as as appropriate. And Bruce says it's standard practice. That's that's great, but often you have to actually ask the contractor to recycle the materials. Bruce.

519
02:43:28.640 --> 02:43:44.240
>> Um, yes. I mean what was standard practice is that these things go to places where the useful materials are extracted. Um and and I guess you're right not everything gets recycled perhaps and you know it's hard to know

520
02:43:44.240 --> 02:43:59.439
but I I think that what has got there is uh is good and I would just add the note that the concern is that uh recycling may not always be effective. Uh the concern is that uh this obligation may

521
02:43:59.439 --> 02:44:17.680
be uh ownorous or or may discourage uh um what we are trying to encourage. In other words, PV systems. >> Yeah. Google search uh found some EPA, US EPA

522
02:44:17.680 --> 02:44:34.960
data that says it costs between $10 to $45 per panel to recycle compared to$1 to $2 to send it to a landfill. So, it's pretty significant. >> Yeah. My I think my preference would be to

523
02:44:34.960 --> 02:44:49.279
strike it because we want to be encouraging like the purpose of this bylaw is to encourage and I feel like this doesn't do that. What if we just left in recycling of of

524
02:44:49.279 --> 02:45:06.080
all possible materials is encouraged. >> It's not a it's not a shell. >> Well, this is a continuation of the the the header there. It's removal shall consist of recycling all possible materials

525
02:45:06.080 --> 02:45:27.760
>> to the extent >> I mean you could say all >> practical >> to the extent feasible and cost effective or something but >> so after the word materials okay yep >> feasible and cost-effective

526
02:45:27.760 --> 02:45:44.720
>> yep extent. >> Then are we saying disposal of remaining solid and hazardous waste? Oh, >> sorry. >> Uh, no, that's just the recycling.

527
02:45:44.720 --> 02:46:02.680
>> I should move up behind materials. Yeah, >> thank you. Good catch. Okay, let's move on. uh stabilization or reveation of the site.

528
02:46:06.560 --> 02:46:31.680
Um so paragraph E there, the reuse of the site, wouldn't that be a new site plan review with the PGA? Well, this this

529
02:46:31.680 --> 02:46:53.520
>> isn't that the point? Well, it goes to the building commissioner, but it doesn't come to the planning board or zoning board, but the building commissioner would make a judgment as to whether there is appropriate zoning and so forth because and and this can't be written in because

530
02:46:53.520 --> 02:47:09.840
it's a plan for reuse. And so the building commissioner will make a judgment about whether the plan for use uh requires Oh, I think I know where you're headed here. If if if the building commissioner decides that there is no permit

531
02:47:09.840 --> 02:47:30.000
granting, if there's no um uh land use permitting agency required, um then this says that the reuse of the site uh voids u A through D above. And Doug, I think what you're saying is the

532
02:47:30.000 --> 02:47:47.680
reuse of the site uh subject to uh further permit granting f subject to further land use permitting. Um yeah, I mean I mean or do we want to be do we just want to say these

533
02:47:47.680 --> 02:48:08.479
requirements may be waved or modified at the discretion of the building commissioner and just leave it at that? >> Yes. I would prefer not to give examples of >> and you know it just feels like getting

534
02:48:08.479 --> 02:48:30.000
into the next reuse of the site is a whole new conversation. >> Right. Right. And abandonment. Any concerns about abandonment? It's perfect. Oh, Fred has a comment. >> Fred.

535
02:48:30.000 --> 02:48:55.439
>> Yeah. Um 1822 02. Um let me just a minute here. Okay. So, the uh the just the building commissioner uh waiver that only applies

536
02:48:55.439 --> 02:49:12.560
to uh the removal of structures uh and so forth. It doesn't apply to anything else, right? If >> that's the intent. It's just this section 2202.

537
02:49:12.560 --> 02:49:26.880
>> Okay, then that's fine. >> Should we say the these the requirements of this section? >> Yeah, that's probably useful. Yeah.

538
02:49:26.880 --> 02:50:01.120
>> All right. Great. >> Yeah. I I don't want building commissioner discretion extended any further than necessary. >> Should section be capitalized. You guys are you guys are under the

539
02:50:01.120 --> 02:50:16.720
microscope here. So we have we have gotten through the text and I want to just Yes. So this is next time. It sounds like this is a good place to stop unless in the next five or six minutes we can actually talk about these. Maybe

540
02:50:16.720 --> 02:50:37.840
we could talk about them generically and see if there are any um concerns that we need to actually deal with. So this table um is added to our would be added to our

541
02:50:37.840 --> 02:50:53.279
table three under the category of renewable energy uses. And this is where we're trying to identify the sort of the the maximum size in in different increments of

542
02:50:53.279 --> 02:51:14.200
scale. You can building mounted slashcanopy SPIs are under 25,000 kilowatts and you can see that it's generally um site plan approval with um

543
02:51:17.680 --> 02:51:37.120
and I think this was this these are the accessory uses. Is that right? No, no, no. That's table 501. Sorry, sorry. Um, the second section is groundmounted

544
02:51:37.120 --> 02:51:53.439
solar with or without colllocated vests. And the these are the tiers of scale again tiers of scale, levels of scale. Um, and it would be really appropriate for you all to read these

545
02:51:53.439 --> 02:52:11.120
carefully and think about SPRS, SPS, uh, building commissioner approval and just see if if these meet your expectations. This is what was developed primarily by staff and reviewed by CRC

546
02:52:11.120 --> 02:52:25.359
to this point. >> Well, Pam, is it correct that under the tier one for groundmounted installations. The the Y's that run AC across that

547
02:52:25.359 --> 02:52:43.760
column, that means it yes, it's approved or it's it's it's allowed and it's an administrative approval by the building commissioner. >> Correct. >> It does not, you know, it's only if it says SPR or SP that it comes to probably

548
02:52:43.760 --> 02:52:59.200
the planning board. >> Yeah. and and or ZBA. >> Okay. And then the nose, it's just not allowed at all. >> Correct. >> So, end of end of conversation. >> Correct.

549
02:52:59.200 --> 02:53:20.399
>> Um and so that first category, the the building mounted and the canopies, that was that was also put right into the hands of um uh building commissioner So that goes to the

550
02:53:20.399 --> 02:53:40.479
the little battery up in the roof. >> You want to do you want to take time to three more minutes? We can Oh, Fred. >> Uh just a question. uh the second column I take it that is the standards and

551
02:53:40.479 --> 02:53:55.279
conditions column of uh the uh table three. It's the sizes. It's the sizes of the arrays or actually it's the energy

552
02:53:55.279 --> 02:54:11.600
produced >> which is a I'm I'm trying to fit this into existing table three. And >> yeah, I see what you're doing, Fred. And um

553
02:54:11.600 --> 02:54:27.439
I guess I mean that certainly seems to be the way it aligns. And um I guess you could say that the size are the conditions under which something is considered a

554
02:54:27.439 --> 02:54:50.319
tier 1, two or three. It's a little bit a little bit of forced, but I think that's certainly seems to be the way it was proposed. just uh if you open up the zoning bylaw to the end of table three,

555
02:54:50.319 --> 02:55:17.840
you're going to see and maybe ask the same question that I just did to see how this Yeah, it seems clear. So, I guess Pam, the question I'll have when I scrutinize this is probably

556
02:55:17.840 --> 02:55:32.800
whether the uh all the nos that run across here, whether I would argue that we should be more permissive on allowing these around town

557
02:55:32.800 --> 02:55:51.520
than the relatively small number of districts that are allowed. But maybe >> maybe that's a conversation for later. >> It could be. And so if you want to give it some thought in the next week or two,

558
02:55:51.520 --> 02:56:05.760
um part of it might be if you think about the parcels that are in, you know, residential village centers. uh there may not be much opportunity beyond a small establishment

559
02:56:05.760 --> 02:56:22.160
>> and it could just it could size itself, you know, out of competition, >> right? >> Okay, Red. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't put my hand down, but uh yeah, you're you're quite

560
02:56:22.160 --> 02:56:38.479
right, Doug. That is something we should we should look at. that we should also >> that's in the Bailey wick of of the planning board for sure. Um Bruce and then I want to wrap up with just some thoughts for the next meeting.

561
02:56:38.479 --> 02:56:55.680
>> Um maybe I'll do this for the next meeting, but we should be cognizant of how big a 250 kilowatt array is. And I think when we know how big a 250 uh because that's that's like

562
02:56:55.680 --> 02:57:12.960
10 or 15 house roofs. It's big and it's quite possible that it's that that whether it's allowed or not, there wouldn't be the opportunity. So putting no is probably clear. My guess is that and and I'll I'll I'll

563
02:57:12.960 --> 02:57:30.479
make a little uh um I'll send an email out just saying how big how big an area 250 kilowatt system applies and at least we can know that as we're having our conversation. >> Thank you. If you want to do it for the

564
02:57:30.479 --> 02:57:46.960
different tiers, that would actually be very very helpful because I've never seen a comparison table of, you know, of how many acres per essentially perop. Um, if you look ahead, if if Walker would be so kind as to scroll down,

565
02:57:46.960 --> 02:58:05.040
>> we have this is the um accessory uses table. Very similar. We're still talking about different scales of of um construction. Uh so give that table some thought.

566
02:58:05.040 --> 02:58:24.080
Uh and then if you want to scroll down beyond that, we have the section on fences which simply because we refer to it in this bylaw, we refer to um section 6.2 20. And then the definitions as as we talked

567
02:58:24.080 --> 02:58:41.120
about tonight, there are a number of definitions. They'll get their own numbers because they get added in alphabetically and we don't know yet where they're going to end up. Fred? Yeah, I'm going to have to look this up, but uh

568
02:58:41.120 --> 02:58:57.920
there are fencing requirements in the National Electrical Safety Code that that are going to apply here. And uh I want to check and make sure that this is not inconsistent. >> Okay, good.

569
02:58:57.920 --> 02:59:13.040
Thank you. So, um sounds like we're going to have a another shared meeting on the 17th of June. We've got this remaining chunk of material to go through. We should be able to do that fairly promptly. We will try to have some answers back. We may not have

570
02:59:13.040 --> 02:59:30.160
answers back from the um the clean water drinking committee or protection group. Um but we'll try to do that. Uh questions from the fire department. Uh and all questions that we couldn't answer tonight.

571
02:59:30.160 --> 02:59:45.279
>> All right. So, I guess we need to have motions for each of our groups to continue this hearing to June 17th at 6:35, I guess, just to be on the safe

572
02:59:45.279 --> 03:00:01.120
side. Do you agree with that, Pam? >> Yeah, sounds like we need to do that. Johanna, I move to continue the hearing to June 17. This is for planning board. for planning boards.

573
03:00:01.120 --> 03:00:16.399
>> Jesse, >> I'll second that. >> All right. Any discussion from members? >> All right. Uh why don't we run through a quick vote? Uh Bruce, >> yes.

574
03:00:16.399 --> 03:00:31.040
>> And Fred, >> hi. >> Uh Angus has left us. Jesse, >> hi. >> Johanna, >> hi. Jera >> I and

575
03:00:31.040 --> 03:00:48.240
>> I'm on I as well. Six in favor, one absent. The motion carries. The planning board's hearing on this topic is is closed or continued. Go ahead, Pam. >> Careful. Be careful what you vote for. Uh I'll make a mot similar motion for

576
03:00:48.240 --> 03:01:02.880
the community resource committee that we continue this public hearing to June 17 at 6:35. Is there a second? Second, >> Andy. >> Let's go around the room. Um, I'll see

577
03:01:02.880 --> 03:01:25.359
if Alicia Walker is still here. >> Alicia, can you hear us? >> She was having she was having connection problems tonight. Um, Jennifer, >> yes. >> Andy, >> yes.

578
03:01:25.359 --> 03:01:44.000
Pam is a yes. So that's three yes. Uh one absent, two absent actually. >> Thank you everybody. This is this is really >> the definition of tedium adnauseium, but

579
03:01:44.000 --> 03:02:00.240
it's really painful really important to get through it. Jennifer, >> no. I just wanted to thank uh Walker and Stephanie and Stephanie's daughter. I'm sorry Stephanie had to had to be with us tonight, but thank you.

580
03:02:00.240 --> 03:02:20.880
>> Thank you. That's very sweet. Appreciate that. >> Okay. Thank you, CRC. >> Oh. Oh, we have Sorry, we have to we have to vote to close. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Um, yeah, I move that we adjourn. We have no we have Yeah, it's

581
03:02:20.880 --> 03:02:37.439
not our regular meeting. So I vote that we adjourn. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Andy? >> Yes. >> Jennifer? >> Yes. >> Pam is a yes. Alicia is absent. So our

582
03:02:37.439 --> 03:02:53.760
meeting is adjourned. Thank you everybody. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> See you next time, I guess. >> Bye. >> Yeah. And then planning board members, I can't make the meeting on the 17th. So, I think this is my last planning board

583
03:02:53.760 --> 03:03:08.640
meeting of this tenure. It's been great working with all of you all. Thank you so much. I learned a ton and I hope we got some good stuff done. >> Well, we have a few more things to do tonight, Johanna, on our agenda. >> Oh, shucks. I thought we got to wrap up

584
03:03:08.640 --> 03:03:24.399
too and watch the basketball. >> So, so do folks want to do anything else tonight or do you have you had enough? We had we had a general housing discussion about the uh the PRP zoning changes, but of course Angus has had to

585
03:03:24.399 --> 03:03:40.479
leave us, so maybe that's something we should skip. Um we, you know, Walker wanted us to finalize or or have one last chance to talk about open space and recreation plan.

586
03:03:40.479 --> 03:03:55.920
Um, and then, um, you know, we had the usual reports. I'd be perfectly happy to just call it a night. Um, but, uh, Walker, uh, you know, the one item, you know, on the open space and recreation

587
03:03:55.920 --> 03:04:12.720
plan, are you under pressure to finish that up and publish that? I I know I sent you some comments last week. Um, but you know, can this wait for another meeting or you know, do you need to wrap it up tonight?

588
03:04:12.720 --> 03:04:28.560
There's no set deadline. We're already a lot later than we hoped to finish it. Um, but it's not like it has to be done tonight. Um I if everybody's had a chance to take a look and you're okay with it, we could just do a memo saying

589
03:04:28.560 --> 03:04:46.240
that you've had a chance to review um the >> Well, I I know if you in the minutes, you know, Nate had brought this to us, it could be six months, it could have been a year ago, and I thought we were done with it. So

590
03:04:46.240 --> 03:05:04.319
>> yeah, it's been significantly updated in those six months, but uh since the only requirement is for you to have reviewed it, it might be that that requirement has been met and that we don't have to go any further with that. >> Yeah. >> Any comments that I did receive will be incorporated, but um you know, it's not

591
03:05:04.319 --> 03:05:21.200
>> right. Well, it's really up to you. I mean, >> if you want to bring it back to another meeting, we can put it on another agenda. I only want to bring it back if people think that it's worth your time to talk about. If you're all satisfied with the level of re review you've had,

592
03:05:21.200 --> 03:05:36.240
then I'm happy to uh you know, >> well, I see Jesse's hand. Maybe he wants to talk about it. >> Thanks. No, I was going to move that we approve the minutes tonight. >> Okay, >> that was on our agenda, too, and then

593
03:05:36.240 --> 03:05:53.520
off the rest. But I also I don't need I'm happy if we don't talk about the space plan further. All right. >> I think I am similarly satisfied. >> All right. Well, Walker, maybe you should just check the box that we've

594
03:05:53.520 --> 03:06:10.080
reviewed it. You did receive a few comments from me, which to the extent that they you can incorporate them, that would be great. >> And um we'll move on. >> Great. Sounds good. Thank you. >> All right. So, Jesse, you want to talk

595
03:06:10.080 --> 03:06:26.080
about minutes? Well, it seemed like an easy thing for us to do. >> Yeah. We have what was it? The uh March 4th minutes as drafted by Pam Field Sadler. >> Yes, March 4.

596
03:06:26.080 --> 03:06:42.560
>> Yeah. So, did anybody have any comments on those? >> I did have one comment. >> Yeah, Jesse. >> It's very small. uh in the general housing discussion on page two the second paragraph starts sentence

597
03:06:42.560 --> 03:06:59.120
that I added helps etc etc. Can we change that one word for our discussion regarding limiting student housing and where student housing might be? I would suggest we change limiting to regulating because I'm pretty sure that's was my

598
03:06:59.120 --> 03:07:16.720
intention there >> and it has a very different connotation. Thanks. >> You got it. >> Otherwise, I would move to approve the minutes. >> Approve the minutes as amended modification >> in in the meeting this evening. I'll

599
03:07:16.720 --> 03:07:33.520
second that, Jesse. Does anyone have any other comments on the minutes? All right, we'll go ahead and vote on those. Jar, I'm going to start with you. >> I. and Johanna. >> Hi, >> Jesse.

600
03:07:33.520 --> 03:07:49.840
>> Hi, >> uh, Fred. Oh, did we we lost Fred? >> I think he thought he was part of the CRC. >> Yeah. Uh, Bruce, how about you? >> I'm good. >> You're a yes.

601
03:07:49.840 --> 03:08:05.600
>> All right. And I am, too. So, that was five in favor, two absences. All right. So in in light of that, I don't see anything specific on the rest of the agenda. So

602
03:08:05.600 --> 03:08:21.200
I'm thinking maybe we should just skip it. Um I will in my report of chair I will I will do two things. One is I want to recognize Johanna who is coming off the board and thank her for I think it's

603
03:08:21.200 --> 03:08:38.319
six years of service. >> Yep. my how how fast has flown by >> postcoid. >> So, thank you. >> And um I believe Fred and uh Jesse are going to have another three-year term

604
03:08:38.319 --> 03:08:53.359
coming up and we have one new member to replace Johanna. And then the second thing I want to say and this is not gerine to all of you but um effective

605
03:08:53.359 --> 03:09:08.560
Friday I will be retired from UMass. So, uh, I wanted to just kind of put that out there because I've taken there's been criticism during my time on the board that I'm just here doing

606
03:09:08.560 --> 03:09:25.439
UMass's, you know, work to encourage housing in Ammerst that by other somebody other than UMass. Well, I I have uh not felt that was the case all the way through my time. And I guess I

607
03:09:25.439 --> 03:09:41.920
just wanted to say I once I retire for the my remaining year on the board, I want anybody to just see if my opinions have changed because uh I've been behaving and and acting in consistent with my beliefs regardless of

608
03:09:41.920 --> 03:09:58.160
who I work for. All right. So, um Walker, anything you want to say for staff? >> Uh, nope. I think Jeff said it all. >> Okay. Uh Pam and Walker let the uh minutes

609
03:09:58.160 --> 03:10:14.880
show that we abandoned this meeting at 9:44 and and did not talk about anything else. Uh and and we will see you all at 6:30 on June 17th except for Johanna.

610
03:10:14.880 --> 03:10:31.279
>> So goodbye. Goodbye Johanna. >> Bye. >> You're welcome to stop in anytime. >> Awesome. I might just do that. Make a three minute public comment only to then be heralded by Pam's music. >> We might We might give you six. >> Don't you dare.

611
03:10:31.279 --> 03:10:49.040
>> That's only if you're recognized by the chair of >> Oh, good point. >> He might decide to stiff you. >> Also, Doug, congrats on your retirement. >> Congratulations, Doug. That's great. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Congratulations, Doug. >> Yep.

612
03:10:49.040 --> 03:11:02.000
>> What's next? >> What's that? What's next? >> I'm figuring that out. >> Awesome. >> To be determined. >> Let's get coffee.