Please really don't want to. >> All right, it is 7 o'clock, so we will get started. >> All right. Uh, good evening. It is 7 o'clock on Wednesday, June 10th, and I am calling this meeting of the planning board to
order. My name is Chris Lavali and I'm the chair of the board. Tonight we'll be following the posted agenda. Um Evan, is there anyone on Zoom tonight? >> Uh yes, there is one person on. >> Okay, so the meeting tonight is both in person and Zoom. If Zoom fails at any point in the meeting, we'll continue in
person. Uh this meeting is being televised live and recorded by a chumpster tele media and will be available on their website and on YouTube. Uh for the record, we have almost a full board tonight. John um is going to be late tonight. Uh he's coming
from another meeting. Uh but he is expected to be here a little bit later. All right. First up on the agenda is public input. Public input shall be limited to statements from the public related to any issues within our jurisdiction, but are not the current
subject of a pending public hearing or uh public discussion tonight. Uh public comment on any of those will be heard only during those sections of the agenda. So is there anyone who wishes to speak tonight during public input?
All right. There being none, we'll move on to the next agenda item. Uh administrative review ANR43 Bolio Street. Do we have anyone for that tonight, Evan? I don't I don't know if there's anyone
in the audience. [cough] [clears throat] >> If you could introduce yourself. Hi, my name is Mark Mo Street and I've submitted a um request
for an ANR uh and copies of the plot plan have been provided >> along with the application. >> And you're looking to combine three lots into one. >> Correct.
>> Okay. And it obviously meets the frontage. Um, Evan, do you have anything on this one? >> No comments. >> Okay. Any questions or comments from the board? >> Doesn't it automatically like if you
have three lots, doesn't it automatically like like used to calculate as a single lot? I thought that was the whole >> Yeah. uh for purposes of zoning, lots held in common ownership are
merged. Um but they're merged uh in theory, >> not in actuality. >> So in this case, this property owner is likely receiving multiple tax bills, >> right? um
when when an applicant uh wants to file for a building permit >> and they'll put an addition on their house, those lot lines because they're still legally separate parcels. >> Those lot lines remain. So the only way to circumvent that is to combine them,
combine the individual lots, remove those lot lines, and then for purposes of applying for a building permit, then there's no um zoning violations for sideyard setbacks. >> Okay, got it. It's good to know.
>> And I assume I assume that's what's going on here. >> But wasn't there a recent law passed about lots that had been theoretically merged can be unmerged for purposes? They can be unmmerged. They have to comply at the time of they were created.
They have to comply with zoning. And then in uh and then for today, the lots have to have a minimum of 10,000 square feet and 75 ft of frontage. [clears throat] >> Any other questions or comments from the board? >> Seems straightforward.
>> At this time, I will take a motion. >> I would move that we grant the ANR three I would have said Bolier. >> Me too. >> Hello. >> Bol Street. Uh with no determination. This is
>> okay. Motion by Mike. >> Second. >> Second by Marcy. John just walked in, but he will not be voting on this topic since just walked in. Um so all in favor >> I. >> Unanimous. >> Thank [clears throat] you.
>> We'll get that signed tonight and you can pick it up tomorrow if you want. >> Great. Thank you. [snorts] >> All right. Next on the agenda is the continued public hearing for nine Lady Slipper Lane. It there is a request for
continuation to June 24th. So we'll entertain a motion. >> I would move that we continue the public hearing on 9 Lady Super Lane to June 24th. Do we have a busy schedule for the 24th, Evans?
>> Uh, no, not overly. No. >> Okay. Second >> motion by Mike, second by Deerra. All in favor? >> I. >> Unanimous. >> It is moved. All right. Next up on the agenda is old business
neighborhood discussion. Um, so I'm going to give a quick intro uh and then I'll pass it along to Anita um to go through the slides. So, this is the third area that we've
talked about reszoning uh with the CBLT zoning um and uh fixing some of the uh zoning conflicts that were identified by the um Northern Middle Sex County Council of Governments uh group that
worked with us a few years ago. Um, we had preliminary discussions for a couple meetings now with the board uh to come up with a draft uh that we that Anita is going to present tonight.
Uh, tonight the plan is to have Anita present the uh the draft. Um, go around the board with any questions or comments uh that we didn't address yet. And then I would like to open it up uh for discussion with the neighborhood um to
give us feedback on the plan. Um provide any input, suggestions. Um some folks did uh submit uh comments and emails to us which we have attached to the agenda. Um if you have uh submitted anything um
you can certainly refer to that. Uh this will likely not be the only chance to speak uh tonight. So uh if we don't get to you tonight, we will certainly get to you next meeting. I do plan on probably having two of these meetings >> [clears throat]
>> um before we wrap things up and then prepare for a an official public hearing uh which is the same process that we've followed with other resonings. The public hearing probably will not happen until closer to town meeting um
because we do have a certain period of time between the close of the official public hearing for zoning and the opening of town meeting. Um so it probably will not happen until late summer uh for all of our zoning public hearings.
But with that being said, we will um entertain discussions, questions from the neighborhood. I do want this to be a discussion uh not just a one-way public input. Um so if we have questions for the the uh residents, if they have
questions for us, um I would encourage people to ask questions and answer them tonight. Uh so if there are no other no other questions, we can get right into the presentation.
>> Okay, we can bring it up. Oh, um, one other thing I forgot to mention. I did, we did attach the CBLT zoning handout that we prepared for town meeting because I realized that neither our books nor the online zoning um, have
the CBLT use table updated yet. Um, so I did attach the uh the CBLT zoning handout that we use for town meeting uh so that people can see what the use table is for CBLT. >> Okay. And just to take a step back for
those of you who maybe haven't been following the planning board or town meeting about a year ago year ago um we passed a new zone CBLT and the reason why we created this zone was we were running into a lot of areas
of things you know developers wanting to build things in close to neighborhoods. Chelmsford is overbuilt. there's not a lot of extra space and [clears throat] we really um decided at that point that we need to make sure that any
development happen happening next to neighborhoods is appropriate. So we created this new zone CBLT um and that's will is in the agenda and you can look at that. It hasn't been as Chris mentioned hasn't been updated
online yet but that [clears throat] has passed. We then um looked at areas and we've been taking a different area each six month every six months for town meeting to um to update. So the first area was Kate's Corner. Um that we
looked at that area um zoned the Lockheed Martin a CBLT um and then you know fixed all the other parcels of land around it because some of them were IIA some of them were AR even though they had homes and stuff and
we kind of like made fixed that. Then we looked um this past town meeting was North Chsford. we did something similar um for that and now we're at finally at Riverneck. Riverneck is a large area
um and it's a bit complex so I apologize for these multiple slides but it's like we're taking a little section of each area of river neck trying to take this on and I and this isn't set in stone. This is to be a collaborative meeting.
We want your input. Um nothing set in stone. We, you know, we're open to what the neighborhood wants. This is not about what we want. It's also about what the neighbors in this is your neighborhood. So, please um add your
comments. So, starting with the first slide, >> can I just say one more thing? And one other thing I'd like to add is that the idea was to have the zoning as reszoned more accurately reflect like you know residential things ideally shouldn't be
zoned IIA industrial which is currently the place the case on the ground in a number of places. So, we're trying to make the zoning accurately reflect what's on the ground and also the CB light to be kind of a buffer between
heavy industrial and residential in the cases where those are in closer proximity than than would be ideal. >> All right. So, looking >> Sorry. >> No, no, thank you. I appreciate that. um
at the first um slide and this is um closer to 129 going up. Um I've also um if you look at it and I may have to get up um I expanded it from the last time this planning board has seen it. I
expanded it because we have the gray is considered IIA. And as you can see, some lots are mostly RB, but they have like a section of their lot in the back that's IIA, which is just weird. I have no idea. We didn't do this. This was done
way back when. So, we went through and I'm going to stand up because I think it might be easier for everybody if you don't mind. And >> Evan, can you use the cursor to follow where Anita is pointing on our screen so that the residents can see it, too? But Riverneck
is right here. This little white road going up. Um, these houses are primarily RB, but the back of their lots. You have an IIA overlay. So, we're proposing these would be RB RB. This is still um boom. Let me just kind
of show you what everything is, right? Um, these are RC and this is currently all IIA. So, we go to the next slide. So, we're just saying this whole lot is all RB. That's what it is. It's homes. These are the condos. This is RV. This
is all RB. This is all RC because part of this before we had some of IA going into this RC. So, that's staying RC. That stays RC. This is actually public owned. So, we're going to change that to public because it's not buildable. It's owned
by the town. Um, and these lots all up here are all public. Ready with me? >> Mhm. >> Okay. So, that's the first section. This one might be a little bit more familiar to folks. This is where the old
Mercury building was, where they wanted to build the distribution center. We've got Mammoth Road here. We've got McFarland. Um, this is currently how it's zoned. We've got IIA and then we've got like one little RV house here. Um, this is
all IIA, all McFarland's IIA. Um, the Apollo road progress app is all I and then we know that um the old Mercury building area is all IIA. So what we did is we changed to RV
because that's what they are. They're single family homes. Change mammoth to RV. Um everything that is the Mercury building. These folks like it's all grandfathered in. They can still have an office building, but they can't come in
and build a distribution center under CD light. So that's what we're trying to do here is kind of like, you know, we've heard the neighborhood and we're trying to make things that are not disruptive to everybody's quality of life and their
property value. So, we changed all of this to CV light. Um, in addition, we also looked at Apollo Drive because Apollo, this building here on Apollo Abuts RB. So, we also changed that to CP light. That doesn't mean like they don't
have the ability to have an office building. When this was originally built, that was the intent back then and they can still have an office building. We just don't want something that, you know, like a distribution center going in there. We don't want a UPS that
converting into a UPS because that's not going to be um good for the neighborhood. And and we actually went down a little bit further. Anything that literally touched [clears throat] residential, we converted to RB >> CB light, you mean?
>> Sorry. To CB. Thank you. >> Um this is going So we got Route three here. This is the other side. This is St. Joseph's Cemetery just to orient you. Um going up river neck. We got the fire station.
So you can see where I is here. >> So all that P there is the um cemetery. >> That's all P. That's staying P. >> And the IA [clears throat] on the near closest to you. Is that that building with the trailers? >> Yes. >> Okay. And then we've got three little
houses here that are also IIA for some reason. >> Um, okay. Go to the next slide. >> And actually, one of them now belongs to the town. So, we're changing that little p that little house to public. The other >> What if the town wanted to sell it?
>> Well, there's no house there anymore. It's now the uh Burbank Gardens. >> It's conservation. >> Conservation. >> They haven't been over there lately, >> you know. So public stays public. Um we converted these to RB because they're
homes. RB across the street there CB light where there's an office building. [clears throat] Um RB and then Bisco person public. Now, I also did this is the same area but zoomed out a little bit because when
I was looking at this, I noticed a whole bunch of chumps water was zoned IIIA. Um, [laughter] I figured we might as well fix this as well. Um, so this is all zoned IIA
and this is all like >> like where they're putting the PAS plant to the PA. No, >> no, this is down Canal Street. >> Yeah, this is East Jumps Water. >> East Jumpsford water. >> This is the the for um this is Route
Three. This is all owned um by Mass Department of Transit. So we go to the next slide. I just again changed these to P. Kept this IIA. This is um PS turned this into P. Um Oh, these should be P, not PB. I
was thinking planning for it. This [laughter] one I didn't know. I didn't know who owned this and what this was. There's a little lot here, but I think that can be turned into P, but I wasn't sure. So, that's the only thing I had a question on. But anything again that was um
public that was, you know, East Trump water or mass, you know, it belonged to the, you know, Massachusetts transit. I just changed to >> So, I'm sorry. What are those two little blue >> the PBP >> should be? It should be I was thinking
planning to do. So, I [clears throat] got it. [laughter] >> Sorry, that's my mistake. >> Anita, that little one is New England Power Company. >> Is it But is it a is it a municipality? I wasn't sure if it was municipality or >> Huh. That should be P. I need to look.
>> New England Power Company Property Tax Department is the owner of record on the property card. >> So, I'm guessing it's just a land they own >> as part of the right of their right of way. >> Right away. >> Okay. So, we may have to keep that, but
I'll reach out to maybe Sam >> any assessors to just to find out. >> Yeah. >> Or I'll look it up and find out who actually owns that is whether that's a government or um a a true company. >> What is that one zoned as now? IA.
>> IA. >> All the gray is IIA. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That's it. Right. No. >> And then for the 129 overlay, anything that changes away from IIA would no
longer have the overlay. >> Right. >> Right. >> Yep. >> Anything I related would keep the overlay. >> I would take Well, we're getting rid of all the IIA on River, so then I would Yeah, I would
keep it IIA. So it would just be on 129 pretty much. >> Yeah, >> it's supposed to be >> that's fine. [clears throat] >> But I think we actually have to take Do we actually have to have a vote on that to remove the IIA from there? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Regardless of whether
>> Yeah. >> I mean remove the 129 overlay, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And we should figure out how to reshape the boundaries of that somehow on the slides or map or somehow I don't know how easy that would be on
the GIS. >> Oh, we'll figure something out. >> Okay. >> That way it'll be we'll need to have some visual for town meeting. >> So all that the grid is part of the 129 overlay. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> That is very weird. >> So right now the 129 overlay is including the whole middle bit that we're now taking out. That's not grided. >> No, it's just the grid. >> No, she's saying right now that white part that what we're really looking to
reszone, is that currently part of the 129 overlay or is that our >> white part that's on that slide? No, that's not the overlay. >> All right. >> It's just the grid piece. >> Just the grid piece that goes around it. [snorts] Yeah, because I think the 129 overlay is
only on IIA. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, anything that's already not >> IA like all of 129. Yep. >> Went up Progress A >> or Apollo a right and then it crossed Riverneck >> and went into the Mercury area and that
one house that was by itself. >> Yeah. >> And the and machine mechanics I think building which is to the right. It doesn't necessarily make sense to do that. I don't know why they did it over there. >> You went there for it. So,
>> yeah. >> All right. Any questions or comments from the board? [cough] >> Looks good. >> All right. At this point, um I would like to invite any residents to come up. Um give us any input, feedback,
questions, comments. Um, if you do come up, please state your name and address for the record. Um, and I see Sean getting up. So, [laughter] so, um, we got, um, I actually got two speeches. One was kind of a short one,
one was kind of a longer one, but I guess I'll I'll try with the longer one. [laughter] I mean, my longer one was only 12 pages compared to my my 80page document that I >> Sean, we do have all of your um emails and records attached to the agenda. So,
>> okay. Yeah. I mean, I wasn't going to get into any of that. Um, for some reason, I just um I was trying to cram so much data into such a small packet and it's just it's incredibly challenging. There's everywhere I looked, uh, this isn't part of my speech, but everywhere I looked, it was
just information and then another door or another issue. Um, so, uh, I'll [clears throat] start with my my speech >> if you could just for the record, state your name, and address. >> I'm going to get to that. Uh, so good evening, uh, Chair Lavali and planning board members. Uh, Sean Campbell, [clears throat] precinct 10
representative. Uh I live on Mammoth Street um one of the 38 residential homes of Mammoth Street and McFarland Road um that are subject to tonight's resoning. [clears throat] Uh I think you all know me. You've seen me at these
meetings time and time again. Uh and I want to be honest, I don't enjoy being here. Um at least not at this mic stand. Um I would rather be at home with my family. Uh I have a 16-year-old. I have a one-year-old. Uh I am a busy person,
but I keep coming back because we live in a hot zone. Um this is not Lady Slipper Lane. Um if I live there, you wouldn't know me. Uh and I wouldn't know what a planning board does, but I don't live there. Uh I live where there is
demand for change and it is in this corridor. Even when we win, the fight seems to come back. Two developers on Riverneck Road right now have been told no and they don't care. They're going to court. I'm trying to overturn this board
and the wishes of the people of East Chsford. It's not fair, but it is needed. So, I am here. Uh I want um I want to note for the record that the 10 detailed documents reported uh the detailed reports were submitted to this
board ahead of tonight's meeting and attached to this agenda. Those documents represent months of research, confirmed assessor data, uh certified historical maps, parcel by parcel analysis for all 38 homes. They are not a complaint. They
are for a record. Everything I say tonight at the mic is backed by something in those documents. I would ask that the board recommendation the board's recommendation whatever it is reflect the seriousness of the submissions that were made in the data
that was considered [clears throat] when um a little background. Uh so when my family came to Mammoth Street 1978 uh 300 Apollo Drive was a farm. Mammoth Street was a dirt road with five houses
on it. My c my family came from North Jonesford Lynn Avenue. We were locals. Uh my grandfather worked for this town for over 20 years and lost his life serving our town during the blizzard of
1978. He is one of four police officers who have fallen in this town's history. The Chsford Police honor guard lays a reef on his grave every year now. Chief uh Gary Hanigan did it this year and gave
me a small coin. It is good to see that recognition. My father and two uncles followed. They joined the fire department. They are now all retired. This was a really good area to select in the 70s.
That farm became a 3,000q ft office building, roughly five football fields, seven Walmarts sitting directly behind our backyard in our backyards.
Um, this is just one of the buildings on Apollo Drive. There are many now. I lost count. To give you a sense of the scale, you may remember the Davis Company's warehouse project that this board denied. That one building has more
square footage than the Davis was asking for. And if you look at their own marketing for 300 Apollo, they list having heavy power as a building highlight, one of seven highlights to their building.
Heavy power from a residential street running through our backyards. This is what industrial zone. This industrial zone came to us. We didn't come to it. M Street was plotted as a residential subdivision in 1892.
The 1963 Chsford zoning map certified by your own town clerk shows this corridor mix of residential, including all of McFarland residential before Apollo Drive even existed. This board reszoned
Middle Sex Street from IA to RC on January 28th of this year. Mama Street and McFarland are in the same situation on a different straight. For over 50 years, this corridor has
generated millions in tax revenue for Chsford. 300 Apollo Drive pays 530,000 a year to this town alone. These families have received nothing in return. No sidewalks on McFarland. No sidewalks on
Mammoth. No sidewalk or adequate sidewalk on Riverneck Road. Unsafe bus stops. Um Riverneck Road just has a stub that connects to 129 that dumps you in the middle of the road. I think everybody has seen that. Um overhead industrial
power lines that run through our front yards on River on Mammoth Street. 10 years ago they upgraded all of the the poles on Mammoth Street to support 300 Apollo in one of my reports. Um I don't know if you guys saw that but um not the
neighborhood we get we get nothing national grid demanded the right away cut every tree and green buffer within 10 ft of the poles lines. So once those three phase came in they just went 10 feet you know changed my front yard forever. um scorching our front yard,
permanently changing the face of Mobment Street. They come back every two years to do it again. We cannot even connect to those lines. Three phase is for industrial only. You can't connect to residential. Apollo drive buried its own
wiring underground. So at 36 Mit Street, there's an underground conduit that connects to Apollo. They don't want they didn't want any poles. Uh we got the poles. The town spent uh 4.1 million protecting coolest farm for for another
neighborhood. That neighborhood has sidewalks, underground utilities, proper zonings. These families got poles and parking lots. Uh I want to talk about a small piece of land uh a.34 acre uh about the size of
three basketball courts. Lot 75291-17. This town owned, this is town owned since 1979, 46 years. It sits in the middle of Mammoth Street. Is the only separation between a nearly 3,000 square foot
office complex in the backyard of my neighbors. I'm asking this board to designate it P tonight. And here is why. And this matters more than anything else I say tonight. Zoning can change.
History tells us that. We've watched this happen in this corridor over and over again. Zoning changes when the right developer comes to town, not when someone wants to add a deck. It changes for cash creation projects. The right
developer, the right proposal, the right pressure on the right board and zoning changes. But conservation land cannot be undone. This is the difference. RC zone can be changed
again someday. RB can be reszone. IIA can come back. We've seen it. We know it. But once that third that 34 acre lot is a designated P and transferred to the conservation commission, it's protected forever. No developer can touch it. No
future board can sell it. No institutional owner with 39 million can assemble it. This is our insurance policy. It's the one thing we can do tonight that stops the IIA creep permanently. A physical red line between
300 Apollo Drive and Mit Street that no zoning vote can ever erase. Tonight's resoning map shows already using the Pzone on multiple parcels. You are already drawing red lines in
this corridor. I'm asking you to draw one more. Lot 75291-17 already town owned. Zero cost, zero accusation needed. If you can do it for those other properties, uh, including
nearby Carter Drive, you can do it for Mammoth Street. Um the overlay rem so I was going to this is my next paragraph which about the overlay. I think you've addressed that. Um so a concern I have is once you go
CBLT it allows uh residential zoning apartments with the overlay. Um but it sounds like you are >> Oh we're going to take that. Yeah. >> You're taking any anything that goes CBLT >> with the over Yeah. The over like we're taking that overlay out. that that would be our re well we haven't voted on it
but that would be I would strongly feel >> okay so I just wanted to reference that you know so I'm going to skip a little bit there but I'm going to say that CBLT is defined as a transitioning zone but with this overlay you're giving a super magnet that says they can skip ahead and
be [clears throat] highdensity multif family and they can skip a lot of uh traditional um I think special permits um with that type override um right now in IIA it's really challenging from my understanding to have apartments um or
to have any residential but once you go to CBLT and I think it's important for all the neighbors to know that you can people can live in CBLT so it might sound good but you might have apartments at some point uh and with this overlay they could be super apartments very very
high density so [clears throat] so uh let me skip ahead the Okay. So, it it sounds like you are doing 300 Apollo CBLT. Is that correct? >> Okay. Um I'm going to skip that because
I think you've addressed it. I was just basically suggesting that removing that overlay once anything is CBLT, no overlay. Um, every IA parcel resone a CBLA must have that board overlay removed simultaneously. Not later, not
in the future, tonight. If you reszone CBLT um, and leave the board in place, you're not it's disastrous. >> So, just >> But also, Sean, multifamily is not allowed in CBLT, >> but it's allowed. It's allowed with the overlay.
>> But we're taking the overlay. >> He didn't know that speech. >> Okay. >> I didn't know I didn't know that you were moving the overlay. So, right now the overlay is present. Um, and it wasn't clear with your last meeting that you were removing the overlay from the 300 Apollo. And I think the overlay is present. I mean, the overlay is present
on my property. >> It's present on >> Yeah, I again have no idea. >> Um, I mean, I I can speak to that, but it's not part of my speech. Um, >> a question between >> Can you I'm too on that section you were asking to be P
>> the town. >> Clear where that is. It's that I believe it's that lot right there we were talking about before. It's got nothing in it. >> Evan, could you pull up my um Mit Street buffer document? >> That one. >> I have pictures. I have I got I got everything on that.
>> When you look at the GIS map, it's the one that doesn't have a house on it. >> And that's something you didn't >> I didn't No. >> Yeah, that's it. I just left it. >> You can't build a house on it because it's not enough. >> Who owns it? >> The town owns it. >> The town owns it.
So if you scroll down to from Evan, there are pictures. That's the Mammoth Street view. It's it's all trees. Um and then the next view is from Apollo. And essentially what it is is it's a buffer. Um it it's it's about I think
it's 100 ft. It's 100 ft wide buffer. Um you can't build on it, but what can happen is somebody could build an ADU. Um somebody could push for a permit. I mean, um, if my opening speech, there were five houses on Mammoth. There are
more today. Um, and those lots were non-buildable. So, um, you know, Dear Drew's old house was built in the '90s. I mean, things things happen. Um, the only way, but I think that the real seriousness is if you want to protect
the neighborhood, what's happening is once that's conservation, any expansion at 300 Apollo can't push through it. So it they can't absorb Mammoth Street by any means for 300 right now 300 Apollo or some big developer they could
purchase these houses right here and they could latch on to Apollo drive um which has been presented um in the early 2000s. It's not it was actually almost close to happening before the dotcom crash. So uh it's it's it's a you put a
red line um it's not valuable by any means to the town. Um, and even I I said the town has owned it for 47 years. I believe prior to that they owned it and they they sold it and nobody built on it. Um, it's just kind of wasted. >> Sean, can I just make one clarification?
While we could we our board does have the power to zone it. We don't have the power to have conservation commission take it over. That would be entirely up to them. >> Um, >> but we can talk to them. We could we could make a recommendation, but it's
it's completely in their control. >> So, um I was going to present something um to you regarding that because I kind of anticipated that could be um if you wanted I mean you could zone it P and then I could do some a lot of the leg work. Um I believe what has to happen is
the town article um needs to needs to be submitted. Um, I believe if if I made the speech or somebody made the speech about this, I think the town, you know, considering how we we do vote, I think they would find it acceptable. Um, and it's not really a valuable piece. Let's
say, for example, I purchased it, right, which I couldn't build on it because I don't have bought it. But then I'd go to, you know, the tax town um tax collector and I'd say, "Hey, I don't want to pay that many that much taxes on this because I can't do anything with it." And I bought it as a buffer. So, I
don't think the town would, you know, really get any reward by selling it um besides that that one cash offer. But it's risky because we don't know who could buy it. And we we we if if we make it conservation, it deems that Mit
Street will be protected forever. And I see we have some, you know, Riverneck Road residents here that are on that map. And that means that you know my house and the houses by will be residential that they can't get eaten up. It's just kind of a small red line.
>> Sean, just to explain on the process. So the conservation commission would have to be amenable to taking over that parcel and then as you said it would take a warrant. It takes a vote at town meeting to officially transfer it from the town just being town land to the
being conservation land. >> Right. Yeah, I understand that. So, I think the first step is designation P. Um, and that that would mean, you know, the town would still own it. It would it wouldn't be buildable by anybody. It would be town property, which it's been for, you know, a really long time. And
then the second step would be conservation. Um, and I'd be happy to work with the planning board and the conservation on seeing what can be done to streamline that. Um, and if needed, I mean, I could I haven't done an article, but I could do one um at town meeting.
Um, you know, >> no, I I mean I think >> it'd be better if you guys did it. >> It would have to go through conservation first. >> Like we can't, but you know, we have a leazison to the conservation, so we'll bring that up. >> This is a quick question. So, it doesn't have to be designated P though for that
article to still happen at the town meeting and for them to take owner the conservation if they were to take ownership regardless of how it's zoned, right? It could still >> I believe that's correct. Um, >> if it's owned by the town, might as well just make it P.
>> Just asking. >> Yeah, >> the P would give another protection because if it's zone, like right now it's IIA. So Apollo, if it were sold today, which it would have to go to town meeting, it could be useful to Apollo right now. If it's RB, um, it remains
useful. If it's P, it means that you would have to reszone it and auction it. So, it's a two-step process. The the only the only other option would be if either one you know one of the two abutters wanted to purchase that through
a it would have this was foreclosed in the early 80s for non-payment of taxes. The law regarding foreclosures changed in 2024 about the sale or disposition of foreclosed property. But because this goes back so many years, it would most likely be sold through the public
auction process if if that was the decision was made. So like if if one of the neighbors wanted to, you know, put in a bid to potentially buy it to have a bigger lot, that's the only like alternative of what could happen that we would lose that. But like I have no
>> the reason for that is many times a Butters will contact the town and try to purchase land and be the law is pretty strict on this. It's to give everyone a fair shot so that you can't just have neighbor a cop and say, "Hey, I'd like to offer the town, you know, $5,000 or
$10,000." It has to be a fair public open process. So that's the reason for the auction. >> Okay. >> I've kind of calculated that risk. I mean, it's dicey to auction it because you don't know who's going to own it. Uh it could be a developer. It could be somebody that just buys it and wants to sit on it. I can tell you that there was
a selectman back in the '9s that contacted my father and he was saying he wanted to put a house there and he wanted to get our feedback. So you you don't know. Um, but to protect it, um, and Davis Company referenced it. They noticed it. They said they're going to
put a park there. Um, and it's definitely on the radar. So, protecting it. Um, we're protecting a lot of land I think already with this P. And this one is very important even though it's not really that valuable. Um, and I think if it was valuable to town, they would have they would have definitely zeroed in on
it a long time ago. >> Okay. >> Um, any other points? >> Yes. So, um, the next point I have is, um, is, uh, is, um, I, let me skip ahead here. So, I have three asks, main ask
tonight. One is, um, reszone Mut Street, McFarland from IIA to RC. Uh, RC and RB are both residential. Either one of them fixes the IIA error. RC fits these lots.
RB does not. Uh the data is in your record. Um the other ask was uh the lot and um I I I did have something that um a request of sidewalks on Riverneck Road
as a condition of any uh CBLT approval on this corridor. Um I read that you could do that. If somebody comes and wants to do a CBLT pro project, we can ask them to contribute to sidewalks. Um, so I'd like to make
that a condition. Um, these families have waited 50 years. Uh, the corridor can afford afford it. Um, something I want to talk about something real, something that affects every homeowner on these streets. Every time they want to build a deck, add a room or put up a
garage. Right now under IA their homes technically sit at 40% lot coverage. The moment the board reszones them RB that drops to 15%. RC gives them 20%.
Um this is not an abstract number. I have pulled permits for small changes on my own property. I know what happens when you walk into the building department. The lot uh coverage calculation is one of the first things
the building inspector checks when a homeowner wants to add a mudroom. Small addition a garage. That percentage is a real difference between yes and no. Um and between an approval and a ZBA
variance hearing under the RB. These homeowners also face a 40 foot setback and a 25 foot set a side setback on a standard 75 wide McFarland Road lot.
That leaves 25 ft of buildable width. 25 ft. The width of a singlecar garage. Almost all of these home families will never know this until the day they try to improve their home and they get told
no. RC fixes this for all 38 homes. Better setbacks, more coverage, more flexibility, the same permit process every residential every other residential street in Chsford has. Ask any building inspector.
This is real. It shows up every single time somebody needs a permit. We have been in the wrong zone for over 50 years. 50 years of industrial rules applied to residential homes. 50 years of permits processed like factories. 50
years of watching the corridor grow around them while their zoning stayed frozen in somebody else's economic plan. Tonight, this board has an opportunity to select a zone that actually fits these streets. Not a zone that was drawn
from a commercial value. Not a zone that punishes small lots with setbacks they cannot meet. A zone that fits. These 38 homes are owed that they are owed the time they lost. They are owed
the time the the permits they that were harder than they should have been. They are owed the peace of mind of having of living in a zone. This reflects what their street actually is. They deserve a good start after 50 years. They deserve
that. So, um, next I I just was more or less interested in the RC topic. Um, and I was going to suggest that uh I I don't think RB was ever uh requested by anybody. Um, and I would point out, um,
I tried making, um, I tried making a map, but, um, we have RC right nearby pretty much, uh, everywhere. If you, Evan, could you pull up the [clears throat] GIS Chsford? And then, could you, this was my I I
went to Staples and they're supposed to put my map on a on a poster, but it came out of the paper. So, I think I I think the the reality is is a lot of um [cough] [clears throat] a lot of people don't know the difference between RC and RB
and it's confusing when you bring it up and you say uh Evan, could you put the zoning on the Yes. >> Why don't we discuss RC like just >> zoom out Evan so I can see like >> not do that yet. I'd like to get other p other residents. So
>> is in first. >> Okay. >> But we have Yeah. Okay. >> We'll get to that discussion. >> So just to to to not force you, I just want to point out that um those lots that are are RC are actually bigger than
most of McFarland and Mammoth. Um and it's it's not a problem. It's right nearby. Um if you could just, you know, you could grab one at random and we could look at the lot size. Um, let's just see what we got here. So, this is a
this is uh basically a half acre. Um, so that that particular lot, you know, right nearby on I think it's Dawn Drive is larger than all of McFarland. Um, it's bigger than most of the Mammoth lots. Um, and it's RC. Um, and I think I
think you you go from IIA to CBLT to RC to RB. It's a It's a really It's not perfect. Um but it's a lot better than RB. If you go RB, every single one of those homes on um McFarland, they're
never going to be able to expand. Um, and if you, uh, I'm sure at some point, um, you know, you guys saw Lady Slipper, the demand is for, you know, larger homes and, uh, I think, you know, you're going to see people want to add on and,
um, I think it they should have that, right? Um, and right now they're going to be trapped in 1950, 1960. Um, if we go RB, especially with the setbacks. Um my all this data is in my 10 documents including a very detailed uh analysis of
RB verse RC. Um but to summarize it to some of these residents here um RB is mainly for a lot that is over an acre. It's the perfect cookie cutter. So if you have a perfect cookie cutter like
Lady Slipper Lane, I was hoping they were going to be here. I know they're not, but they are a perfect cookie cutter. Um, and it fits them beautifully. Um, when you have a 1950s uh lot, it uh it does not fit you. Um, and I was going to, you know, this was
one of my feet and I think last, but um, this is where we live, you know. So, this is this is Mammoth and McFarland. And you could see this IIA creep. This is this is the creep I call it. and it's between Turnpike U and Route 3. It
starts at Mill and it's just nothing but industrial and we are just these oddballs. So there's a home. >> Sean, can you address us please? >> Yes. So we this is what I call really
the the IA uh and it's creeped >> and this is Mammoth in McFarland and this is you know the end of Mammoth and you can see how close like you're going CBLT here CBLT here but this is somebody's home and this is I and this
is Apollo drive and that home is actually 30 feet from a drive. I mean it is we're we're there right there. Uh, I would definitely say uh it's not an RB neighborhood when you look at that map.
Um, but I mean we got to work what we got. >> And I just want to clarify RC is two family, RB is single family. So yes, there are different setbacks and what have you, but the main driver is RC
is two families. Before we get into the discussion about RC versus RB, I would like to give other residents a chance to speak. >> Okay. But just just to clarify that point, only four homes would qualify out of the 38 for two family. So you can be
two family with RC, but you have to have the right dimensions. So out of 38, you're talking four. Um, and you would have to economically and sewer sewer restrictions, it makes it impossible. So, it's it's not um there could be one home that I think is kind of older that
could be a threat to be converted. Um but it's not the end of the world if somebody tears down a home and makes an A and a B. Um I think I think the the economic pain of freezing 38 homes for that one [snorts] possibility.
>> Okay, Sean, I am going to stop you there because we do need to keep moving and give other people a chance. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other residents wish to speak? Uh my name is uh Philip Perin. Uh I'm at
101 Riverneck Road. I saw a bunch of uh things. I didn't see any numbers on all the lots. They're just, you know, kind of squares drawn out. I'm just wondering if my lot is one of the ones that are going to be changed. I have a uh small carpentry business. I've
run out of there for >> 20 years. >> Evan, can you bring to put any restrictions on me if I'm changed out of IIA? >> So 101 is >> that's the one next to
>> that that has the Yeah. the uh the right of way for the uh electric company you were talking about that runs basically next to my house almost over my roof. This you? That's 121. >> No, that's not. No, it looks
like you said the one that looks like it's a house. The one >> across from the cemetery. >> Yep. Cross from the cemetery. >> Every every everything on beside me is is a fire station. So, that one right there. >> Yeah. The fire station. I have a pigeon club in front of me. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Oh, that one. Okay. [laughter] So, you're running. >> That's a 15,000 square lot and I don't even know how they have a building on it. >> Yeah. So you're you're contracting out of your house, correct? Okay. So that would be considered a home business.
>> Okay. So that would be allowed in So the proposal would be to change you to from IIA to residential RB and that would allow a home business as well. >> And you'd also be grandfathered. >> You'd be grandfathered in. It's just like
>> Christopher Towing. You're an RV. You're not That's RV, isn't it? Your property >> resial. >> Yeah. You're residential, but you run your towing business. Yeah. Because you're grandfathered in. >> You're grandfathered in. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That like he's owned RB, but he's grandfathered in.
>> That's going to restrict my lot from doing any type of industrial building on it. >> Correct. Uh, I would prefer not to change my lot to because I bought it like that. >> Why can't Why can't Why can't it stay
like that? >> Well, >> so he's going from IIA to RB. >> Yeah. >> He has a home on it. He has a home on it and he has his business out of it. >> Did you plan on changing your business?
>> What you're going to be doing? >> No. Then you will be grandfathered in. >> You want to sell it to a warehouse when you when you leave? >> I don't know. That should be my option. That should be my choice, right? Because right next to me is right next right
next to me is a is a is a twin trucking. Beside it, there's a trucking company there. There's a there's a a company that runs buses out of there. >> Those will be those are going to be >> those will also be >> changed to C. to CV.
>> What does So what does that mean? >> Could his >> There's already They're industrial buildings that are there already. >> They're grandfathered in as their current role. >> Right. But we're going from those ones to IIA to CBLT. He's going from IIA to RB. Could he go to CBLT?
>> Yeah. So the the properties across the street would be um grandfathered in. Their current uses >> across the street. They're right next to me. >> Or >> the fire station is next to me. >> The fire station is across the street. >> Directly next to me. No, it's directly next to me.
>> I'm thinking the wrong house. >> You're thinking the wrong. Yeah. So, that lot right there. >> Across the street from me is a cemetery. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, we could do CP light. >> Okay. >> Which would have the same uses, you know, >> these ones here >> as IIA. Like would have a lot of the same uses as IA with the exception of
like the really building a warehouse there or anything. I just don't want to be restricted. That's I mean that's how I bought the property. >> Isn't there certain restrictions underneath his property now by being an IIA zone for what he has? Because didn't we talk about that before too? Like if he wants to do anything to his property
because it's IIA there's more restrictions like more setbacks things like that. So you're you're already being restricted. >> I wasn't see when I I tore down a house there and the board here would not me they made me keep a piece of the old
[snorts] uh block foundation and when they came to inspect they made me tear it out. So now and so not only that I mean I'm on top of that that uh right of way. >> I mean I'm I'm maybe five feet.
Do you have more restrictions with IIA regarding >> Right. So if he wanted to do anything today, he's in the IIA zone for his property and he would have more setbacks and everything else. So you're underneath a very restrictive area today on your property. >> I'm on 3.9 acres.
>> Right. >> And it would actually become even more restrictive because it's going to be a budding residential. >> Yeah. But she'd be light. Well, the what's next to me is uh the cemetery owns
property next to me. It's in between me and this gentleman's home. >> Okay, thank you. >> [snorts] >> Hi, I'm Katie Melville. I live at 6 Monmouth Street.
Um, first I'm some questions of mine were answered about the 129 overlay. So, I'm glad that's going to be removed from our street and all the the areas around it. So, thank you for that. I did have a question. So, I live next to that lot that's been under discussion, that vacant lot. Um, I live directly next to
it. If it were reszoned RB or RC, could somebody build on it? I've just been doing some research about pre-existing non-conforming lots. And so, I'd just like that answer. I don't know if that's an answer you can give me. If you can't, I would like to know who could provide that answer for me. If it was sold to
somebody after being zoned RB or RC. So only if right now if it was so say it's RV and it's less than an acre, you can't put a house on it unless you go to go through the ZBA. Correct me if I'm wrong
um for um a waiver. they go through the ZBA to do that which means that's a whole process and neighbors get you know would get notified >> or unless that would be and I don't think they would I don't think
>> I mean if she bought it she could put an ADU on it right >> sure >> where you can you know if I mean I don't want to do that but >> or [laughter] but you can like >> or the per the >> Yeah it the >> okay >> um Ria's old house is on the other side
right >> uh the grams are the other side Okay. So, anyway, if you bought it or they bought it, then you could build an ATU, but otherwise, I don't think it's buildable. >> Yeah. I mean, I had a neighbor because I live in East Chumpshire as well. Um, so none of us have acre lots out there. Um,
they actually, um, split their lot and had smaller than an acre land. Um, and she, you know, she called me up, she called up all the neighbors, she wanted to build a house on that, less than an acre. She had to go through the zoning
board. um to get a waiver and um I mean it's beautiful and it immediately added more value to us. I was when she was originally asked me I was a little like oh god she's going to see into my neighbor like into my yard all of that.
I will tell you I was apprehensive about it but I knew the family and it's and it looked like a nice house so I didn't oppose it or anything. Um, but you know, lesson learned to me because it actually really is a nice home and it not too
close and it actually improves the street. [clears throat] Um, but >> when did she do that? What year? What year did she do that? >> Not too long ago. I mean, I would say 15 years. >> Okay. >> So, so now someone could do that. >> Go to the ZBA and get a waiver.
>> Well, I mean, you'd have to seek a variance. It would be a variance, not a special permit. That'd be very unlikely today. >> It would be unlikely. Uh the only other thing is that uh somebody who wanted to build a 40B could potentially do that there because there zonings
>> that overrules the local zoning. ZBA just makes the decision, but they have criteria that are very difficult to meet. >> Yeah. But how big of a 40B could you put on that little lot? >> You'd be surprised. >> Yeah. Is that only if we're below the 10% uh threshold for that to happen or what's
the >> Yeah, we would have to not meet the statutory minimum and and I think right now that's a little bit of a question mark. Okay. >> So, that's something that we're actively trying to stay above, but >> that that would be, you know, there's it
would not be allowed under zoning. >> The only thing they could possibly do is seek a variance. I don't think they would get that. The only other thing is if they uh some 40B developer tried to do it. >> Okay, great. That's I mean that's my biggest I love everything that you've been proposing. I'm just worried about that next to me. I know you know it's
right in the middle of our neighborhood and everybody loves it. So that's my biggest biggest concern. So I'm glad to hear that it would be very unlikely for the ZBA to approve a variance. But I do worry about the little bit possibility of it. Um >> what are your thoughts about public it being zoned public >> public? Um I'm not opposed to it. I
don't know what value it really adds for the town and I don't know what value it adds as conservation land. Um, I'm open to whatever avenue just keeps it kind of the way it is. So, I'm open to all, you know, all of the above, I guess. >> So, [clears throat] if if if it goes to
conservation, can they put like a playground in it? Like a small little playground conservation? I don't think so. >> It depends on the conservation restrictions that they decide to put on it >> because I'm thinking like, you know, we have a like up by um Carow, we've got a
small little playground by the school there. Typically, they're not doing playground properties. They're doing um pollinator gardens, things like that. >> Well, we don't need to solve that. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um otherwise, I really like all the zoning you've been proposing. Um I think that RB makes a lot more sense versus RC. I know there's some people have questions about the setbacks and how RB is more restrictive than RC, but IA is more restrictive than
RB. And I know people, myself included, who have been able to do additions even when we've been zoned IIIA and we're one of the smaller properties on the street. Um, we did require a variance to build our portico on the side of our house under IIA, but had we been RB, we
wouldn't have needed that variance. So, I think RB is great. And I do realize that most of the lots are non-conforming because they're under the 40,000 square feet, but the RB zoning was created back in I think 1998. Um, and a lot of the town is zoned it,
even including places in the Westlands, which we all know those are very small properties. So, it's not out of the ordinary to have homes on lots that are smaller than 40,000 square feet, be zoned RB. Um, and I just think it helps prevent like we talked about duplexes being
built. Um, and the RC has very low setbacks. I know about the side stepbacks from our addition, but for IIA it was 40 ft. For RB it's it's 25, but for RC it's only 15. So if we're RB versus RC, it prevents people from building additions that are overly large
and encroach upon our neighborhoods. And I really appreciate the board wanting to protect us in that way. Um, yeah. So, I mean, bottom line is it's it's a messed up area. It's like toothpaste out of the tube kind of situation, and I really appreciate you guys trying to find the
best solution for everybody who's there. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> John. Before you come back up, I'd like to give other people an opportunity to speak if there are others. Hi, good evening. Uh, I'm Craig Walsh. I
live at uh, I own 128 and 140 Riverneck Road, the place with the trailers, Mr. Nini. Um, I've been there 46 years. I've been running a business out of there since 1984 with my father before he retired. Um, I worked for the town for
37 years and um, I retired two years ago this July and uh, I'm currently still running my business there. Um, raising my family. My my children both uh, all live there with us and um, I own 15 acres there and I know you're talking
>> 50. I'm sorry. >> I just didn't catch what you said. 15 or 50? one five 15 acres >> and um for years I've been surrounded by um commercial buildings. >> Yeah. >> You know, I have an IIA building right across the street from me. I've lived there
>> my whole life. Never had any issues with that. Next door they put twin trucking in. Again, no issues with that. My abutter is the East Cha Water District. My other is the the um uh UPS building down the street and then and the cemetery. And uh I think like this
gentleman said um you know our our properties we bought them under an IAA district um you know maybe future development down the road or something. I have no plans of that at the time. My my family's all living there with me. But um you talk about removing the overlay.
U how wasn't that a pretty tedious process to get the overlay into place and how easy is it just to say we're going to remove it? Town meeting vote >> votes on that >> to remove it. >> Yep. >> Okay. And how long did it take to get
the overlay in place? >> Town meeting had a vote on that. >> Okay. But there was a lot put into putting that that overlay into >> Right. And the 129 overlay would still remain just not on these properties. >> Okay. And where are you stopping on
Rivenneck Road? I It seems like you you came to the other side of the little connector and which is where I am. Yep. >> And that's where you're ending >> because the rest of it's RB. Like then you hit you go past
um the cemetery and we go into RB and that's all RB. >> Okay. >> So what we where we've been having problems has been around >> the Mercury building. anything that's in the IIA district, the developers looking
at that sometimes not realizing that there's no easy access to 495 and one um three and you know like one of the things we went through was the distribution center >> correct >> because that's allowed it was allowed at
the time. So, um, and some other there was a contractor yard that came up in front of, um, that wanted to go there. You know, a lot of heavy trucks, you know, now going on a smaller road that really can't support it or what have you. So, that's why we looked at CB
light, like what types of businesses would be appropriate next to neighborhoods or, you know, smaller roads, you know, similar to Kate's Corner. And that's why we came up with the CB zoning. So, we're taking away the IIA, which has those really negative effects
to the neighborhood, and replacing it with the CB light. >> Okay. >> Again, it's really to protect >> I understand what you're talking about as far as neighborhoods, but once you once you get to the other side of Route Three and the little connector, I don't
live in a neighborhood. I've never lived in a neighborhood. >> I live on a very busy street. In fact, they just put speed limit signs up in front of my house finally after >> 40 years. um cuz it's like a racetrack day, you know, it always has been. >> And um I just think that, you know,
you're talking about neighborhoods and I completely understand McFallen Road, Mammoth Street, all that. Those are all neighborhoods and you don't want that heavy traffic there. I understand that. But once you get to the other side of the little connector, we're surrounded by by industrial buildings, >> right? And
>> and you want and you want to limit me to to a residential >> No, yours. Oh, yours was RB. Yes. >> You listed me as RB? Yep. Um, so those other buildings, CBI would allow for those types of buildings under CBIT. >> Those like office buildings, you know,
that type of building. >> What about multifamily housing? >> Not in CBI. Not in CB. That's No, that's not in CB. That would be RC. >> Yep. >> Okay. All right. Well, I just uh I think maybe you need to look at it a little
bit more once you get to the other side of the bridge. We're we're an industrial area right there. I'm I'm surrounded. The only two houses that are there are my two. >> I know. I understand that. That's it. >> I live on Columbus a so I go straight down river neck. Take a left. Y >> So and I live You grew up on Manning
Road. >> But you ended you ended at what we call it Nelly's Corner. There you end you kind of ended it right there. I think at 101 Riverneck Road is where you kind of ended where you're making any changes to the zoning. The the challenge with
Riverneck Road is that you've got the industrial area right in the middle where those highways are, but you've got single family residential on both ends of Riverneck. And for all of the impacts
or for any industrial development in that center, the only way through to get there is through those residential areas. And that's where the negative impacts of IIA are felt. Not [snorts] in that center area, but in both ends. And
that's those are the neighborhoods we're also trying to protect with this these changes. >> But Rivenac Road has been a cut through for years from Route 3A to 129. That's how people get to Chad Center coming through LOL. That's that's that's how they get there. They're not taking the
highways. And we're not trying to protect against car traffic because we I think most of us realize that that is a pretty significant cut through to get there. I use that path all the time to get to the center. But it's the heavy
construction traffic, the heavy truck traffic um that we're trying to protect those neighborhoods from >> with these changes. >> Yeah. Yeah. Like I said, >> we we we do have the heavy traffic with UPS. I mean, but >> but we're trying to limit that
>> the potential changes. >> Wouldn't it be a little bit a little bit better maybe to end it at McFaren Road, your your proposed changes as opposed to coming to where I'm I I'd be living across the street from a industrial building. I have UPS behind me. I'm all my abutas are industrial. Now, you're
going to take and take my piece of property and change it just across the street from an industrial building. >> Would you prefer CB light instead of residential? >> I don't know what I would prefer. I just need to research it a little bit more, but just to make these these changes, you know, that's why I'm here tonight to
to get educated on this. >> If you take a look at the um the link on the agenda for the use table of CB light, it'll give you an idea of what is allowed, what isn't allowed in there um and let us know if if that is more uh desirable for you than the residential
designation. >> Okay? >> So, it's kind of lined up CV light IA and all the uses. So it's yes or no. So you can see the where the where the distinctions are. >> So it breaks it down. >> Yes. Yes.
>> Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> Information. >> There is someone on Zoom who has their hand raised. >> Okay. >> Zoom user. >> You want to uh unmute yourself and video on please. >> And please introduce your name and address for the record.
>> Oh, there we go. Sorry I had myself on mute. So good evening. My name is Chris Graham. I live on Mama Street. Um the uh a butter of that vacant lot that Katie Melville was just speaking about. >> So um we moved here 19 years ago, my
wife and I, and you know, we chose Chelmsford because it's a small town that you know valued its characteristics. It's open spaces. It's a quiet residential pocket. And we moved here to get away from the dense squeezed in overdevelopment.
So I'm here tonight with the support of my neighbors including the only other director of butter to that parcel. You know we're the individuals who live alongside this land every single day. You know we are there you know unanimously and we oppose this parcel
being declared surplus to be sold or developed. So it's something I really just want to get my point across tonight to this with this meeting. Um, you know, Chancellor's current 7-year open space recreation plan explicitly states, and
I'm just reading here, so this is verbatim. You know, it's the core municipal goal is to enhance climate resilience, protect neighborhood natural resources, and preserve dwindling open
pockets of land. Selling this municipal lot completely contradicts the town's published promises. So, you know, it's a small lot. It's 0 0.34 acres and it might look, you know,
just like something small, a simple line on a, you know, town spreadsheet, but the OSRP recognizes that small neighborhood level green space and they're virtual buffers. This land, you know, it serves as a natural drainage,
absorbs storm water, it acts as a localized wildlife carter. I mean, developing it, it's it's going to remove those functions permanently. I mean, this is, you know, there's a there's a mismatch here with the zoning. I understand that's really what this is all about, but, you know, we're
saturating this town. I mean, for over the past decade, our neighborhood and the town, it's just it's seen aggressively open space development, our infrastructure, local roads, the neighborhood's character. I mean, we're at a tipping point. You know, when when are we going to stop? It's I I feel like
it just keeps happening. And I, you know, I talk to my neighbors and friends in this town and it's always the same comments. It's just like, "Oh my god, we just keep building and it's just when's it going to stop? You know, we don't have enough teachers and schools and the the the storm water, the runoff, the the
sewage. You know, there's all nothing but complaints and I understand like we want to bring in revenue and I'm all about that, but you know, we've done our part to absorb this growth. You know, we just can't afford to lose the few natural buffers that we have left. So,
you know, correcting this inequity with the zoning, you know, our neighborhood is currently caught in the IIA mismatch, you know, forcing commercial potential or dense plan for open space development into this tiny parcel. You know, it's directly abuing 38 residential homes. I
feel like it's bad planning. It's just going to worsen existing zoning error instead of fixing it. So, just to get to my point, I know you have a lot of people that want to, you know, make their points tonight. I mean, we urge like the select board tonight to listen to the director Butters, refuse to
declare this parcel as surplus land. Do not open this door to a private seal. And uh that's that's pretty much it. I thank you for your time and all the people that are supporting our town trying to keep this town's character and charm. Thanks again.
>> Thank you. I have a question for the speaker for Mr. Graham. Uh, so are you also then in favor of zoning that parcel as public? >> I'm not sure. You know, the what would the direct benefit be to to us as a
direct to for it to be public besides obviously we protect it from being sold >> sold or built on, >> right? As opposed to being as opposed to being zoned residential. [clears throat] >> I'm not opposed to that. I mean, I I'm also not opposed to, you know, like
Anita was speaking about the the situation 15 years ago where the neighbor, you know, split the land with her other aut, you know, they did a ADU or an addition or something like that. I mean, there's I'd be open to anything
that would protect that land and just leave it e as it is or, you know, just add on to our backyards because our kids would all play on there and, you know, we just we love having that natural buffer. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Any other members wish to speak? >> [clears throat] >> I'm going to be uh brief this time. I just wanted to follow up with the um other butters that I've heard. Um so I I I mean the lot is everybody cares about it and uh I think everybody
independently would like to own it, but that's a roll of the dice. And the safest thing I think everybody is independently saying is they like it the way it is. Um, which is exactly why I'm proposing making it pee and then conservation and you'll never have to
worry about something going there. Um, and you know, like I said before, there were uh five houses on Mammoth. Um, and they they get added. Um, and to add some more information than I haven't previously said, that lot has a sewer
connection. So that somebody with that studies it could see that um and it it you know and then I think you could probably bring it to court and you could challenge when the town took ownership and you could
say hey look you know I want to play by when the town took ownership. Um and you don't know what a judge would say. So you you know it's it's dicey to leave it um just open like that. Uh secondly, I'd
like to add on the RC topic that uh I heard one of Butter suggest that they added on, which is true. Um and I would like to add that based upon that lot size. Um they would have never been able to add a third onto their property if it
was RB. uh they did have to conform to the setback but they did they played by the IIA FAR rules which was 40%. Um so they would be taking that right that they just exercised a year and a half
ago of adding a third on their property away from every McFarland and Mammoth residents. Um and that threat of um duplex is only limited to um four
parcels of the 38 and it would be a tear down and the sewer connection. I think you're only allowed um five bedrooms. So you'd have to tear down a single family, make a duplex that has uh I think it's
two bedrooms. Um, so it's just it's not um it's not feasible to tear down any of these houses to build a duplex. Um, and I think uh I know um based upon just some quick analysis that many of or some
of these board members live in RC and I would say that the board members that live in RC, they're not seeing that. Um, and if you look at these neighborhoods, which they're right nearby us, um, you'd see that, you know, they're they're great neighborhoods. They're, you know,
I I would say that they're nice. They got sidewalks. It's clean. RC does not destroy. It just gives the homeowners what they want today, which is if you want to add a sun room, if you want to add a mud room, if you want to add a porch, and you know that neighbor, they just did that. And, uh, I would like to
see how that would play out under RB. Um, and then the last comment I'd like to make is, um, I think you heard about 140 Riverneck Road, MT Walsh. Um, I mean, he's he's making good points, but
that's also on our water supply. So, we have to consider that carefully. That's all I got. >> Thank you. Any other members of the public wish to speak? questions for so Tom Bishop,
>> could you wait till you're on the mic? Thank you. >> Tom Bishop, uh 21 Riverneck Road. Uh we own the left building of that Mercury headquarters used to be there. Um the right one is 199. Um mainly just wondering what the CBLT does for us. Um
what happens if we keep operating the same way we're operating? Um and then the uh 129 overlay. um that going away, does that affect us in any way or do we just continue doing business as we are now? >> So, it is currently an office building,
correct? >> Yep. It's the old Mercury building. >> Yeah. So, that would continue. Um it is actually allowed in CBLT. Okay. >> As well. Um so, there's no change in your operations. Uh the operations would
be allowed under the new zone as well. >> And just to be clear, you're you're grandfathered in. So, you can just keep doing whatever you're doing. >> Okay. And then >> someone who comes after you could also be doing what you're doing because CBite would allow that. >> Okay. And then as far as like other tenants moving in cuz we only occupy
about 60% of the building. Um, and we have no plans to ever do a distribution center. We're actually never probably even going to sell the building. So, good news for all the residents. You don't have to worry about that side of it. U, but we just wanted to know if it would affect us in any way. No, actually, um, if you if you go to the,
uh, use table that we've linked to in the agenda, it actually lists out the uses that you're now able to do that you wouldn't be able to do in the IIA. Um, retail is now allowed in CBLT, whereas it's not allowed in IIA. Okay. um
>> like a coffee shop like one of like in North Chsford, you know, the mill buildings. We changed that from IIA to >> CBLT because someone wanted to, you know, the owner had a tenant that wanted to put in a coffee shop which are, you know, popular and stuff like that. Um so you get a little bit more of those types
of uses which are more neighborhood friendly. >> Okay. As far as um like for freight deliveries we get to the building currently um that doesn't get impacted. No. Okay. All right. Perfect. Thank you very much. Any other residents?
>> Yes, [laughter] sorry, >> I started speaking before I looked up. >> I live on um u 36 M Street and I just I have a just very quick comment. I'm in very much in support with Sean based on what he said. Um it just gives us more
options. So, um I don't have any plans to make my house bigger or anything like that, but just the very fact that I'm not restricted. It's just I can sleep at night. [laughter] So, um it just gives you again just the options there. And um I'm not sure if
others I haven't heard any strong arguments. If you listen to Sean's point, you know, only four doesn't conform to um um for what is it? 36 doesn't conform. Um, and I don't think
you should be pushing or punishing the rest of the, you know, um, like 32 so residents. So, um, >> I have a I have a question for you, son. That is, uh, so if you were zoned RC, >> yeah,
>> then what would be your feeling if one or more of your neighbors decided to go to a duplex instead of a single family? You, is that fine? Is that >> um to be honest? Um yeah, I don't not too concerned >> care one way or another. >> Yeah, to be honest, I mean it's not an apartment building. It's just a
>> Right. It would just be a duplex. >> Yeah, I'm not Yeah, I'm not not concerned. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Any other residents? >> I know there are residents here like that maybe are shy to speak up. I really would like their input because again
this is those of you who haven't spoken. Um I really would, you know, like your input on what we're doing, especially for your property, your area, please don't be shy. If you want to email us afterwards, you know, our all our emails
are on the website, you know, please reach out. And again, this is your neighborhood. These are your properties. Um we want this to be a collaborative. We want to do what what's right. Thank you. [laughter] >> I am Fred Gallagher. I live at 222 Riverneck Road. Um I believe it's now
the oldest house on Riverneck Road and I have pictures from the historical society where there's nothing else except for this house in the middle of the of the road. I want to commend you all. Um, I was growing tired of having to come here at least once a year to
fight for my neighborhood, to keep in a neighborhood. And I think this takes a lot of that away in that it allows for certain things, but not enough to to the detriment of our neighborhood. Um,
there's still some finetuning, I know, to go, but I um I'm happy to be here tonight. I was here mostly because the charts were kind of hard to to read this big. >> So, it was good to come here and and get your input on that. And I want to at
least say thank you for doing what you can to save our neighborhood. Um because it is very difficult having residential, industrial, and residential. Mhm. >> Um, so I I do appreciate your efforts and hopefully they will continue and if
not I will be here again uh complaining rather than saying thank you. But I think you're on the right track. Thanks. >> Thank you. [laughter] >> I was um just [clears throat] uh two quick points that I forgot. Um you know
I was just kind of sidetracked by the RC and that lot. Um, I wanted to talk about that small house that um in the five acre lot. So, um, I think Evan knows right where I'm going. Yeah. So, >> Yep. Okay. So, yes. So, I mean, we're
all aware that there was a contractor yard that I think we're we're in legal battle with. Um, so I mean I I I think that you're looking at CBLT here because we know who the applicant
is. But I think, you know, based upon its location and especially that we have 5 acres that is blank, we shouldn't just automatically assume that we want some type of industrial here. Um, I I believe that, you know, these two buildings,
they're there, they're in, but this this 5acre lot isn't in. So, it's a blank slate. So, I would probably recommend it RB. Um, and somebody is living in that house now. Um, and it's a house, so I think we could keep it RB. Um my my the
reality is is that we know we have issues on Riverneck Road that we have no sidewalks. It's windy. It's it's not suitable for truck traffic or you know heavy heavy loads. Uh it's not 129 and there is not a connection. And if you
look at the map, Evan, can you zoom out so we can actually see 129? Can you pull it towards 129? just uh head down a little bit more. So, what you're seeing, I think you could go even further all the way to um
was it Mil Road? Um what what you're going to see here is this is the industrial section. It's 129. And to be an industrial player, you have to connect to 129. Now, what happened was it jumped over Riverneck Road and it
shouldn't have. it should have stayed with the 129 connection. So I don't think we should encourage any more jumping even though so be cautious on I mean I know we got a legal battle that could play out either way but for I
don't think we need to in just hand them uh superior zoning um on those two parcels. So Sean, if you had seen the last meeting, actually there was a bit of debate on the board about that particular parcel. >> I I watched it. Yes.
>> Okay. So that you know that the argument on the reason for considering it CB light is because it creates a little pocket island of residential in the middle of CB light and what we're trying to do is eliminate zoning conflicts and that essentially creates one. So that's
why we were looking to exclude it so that we could have contiguous sections of zoning either residential or CP light. That just puts a little sore thumb of residential right in the middle C light, [clears throat] >> right? I mean that makes sense that you know I look at the machine shop and I
look at that uh old former former Mercury building is very quiet, you know. So I don't I don't particularly look at either one of those sites as disruptive. Um but um that could change, I guess. So, I think I'm saying if there was residents there, I don't think they
would be disturbed by the actions. That machine shop, I believe you said the last meeting, was the cleanest machine shop you've ever seen. Um, it is it is very nice. And the um I I believe that that second former Mercury building, they're they're regutting it into a warehouse um is what I what I saw on the
internet. Um so, I don't know what the future of that is, but um there's no good connection here. Um, so I think if the more activity you put in this corridor, um, the more traffic on Riverneck Road and we we definitely know
there's problems with connectivity of Riverneck Road. Um, the IIA it jumped over. Riverneck Road is an old windy farm road. Um, it's really not suited. 129 is it's five lanes wide at one point. Apollo Drive is an industrial
lane. It is >> I need to interrupt you because we're not proposing to keep that IIA, right? >> They're proposing to change it to CB light, right, >> where warehouses and contractor yards are not allowed. >> Have you looked at the use table for CB light?
>> Um, I have, but I think a lot of what we're seeing now, like these um buildings, their uses fit into CBLT light. Um there's so there there are certainly some uses in CBLT that could
increase traffic more than a residential. Um I I believe that RB would be more if there were five single family homes there would be generate less traffic than some type of office office complex or mixeduse or gym. Um, I'm not really sure what they put there,
but um, I think if you were just looking at a clean slate, you would think you probably wouldn't put those three buildings that we see [clears throat] there right now. You But they're there. We're not going to change that. So, the question is, should we add a fourth
because three are already there. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> I just want to make a point of clarification. I don't know if everybody knows this, but that house that they're talking about Ferrer, 81 Riverick, 76 Riverneck, and 12 Gorm Street jumpsuit.
>> So, I bounce around a lot. Um, that little house right there out in front of the commercial building, that little house, that was commercially zoned and it was a repair shop for a while. Very small. The owner that lived there worked in it, but he ran a repair shop until he sold the house. >> So, I just wanted to make that
clarification that there was I know there's people living in it now, but at one time it was a little repair shop, you know. Sorry. Um, sorry I'm back. I I I wanted to comment a little bit more on your question. Sorry, Mr. >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> You asked me about um if I'm concerned if by if they're more multif family. I'm I'm actually not concerned at all. But >> I didn't say multif family. I said duplex. >> Sorry. Duplex. Could a difference. Um but one thing that Sean al mentioned and I live in Mammoth Street is that in his
research he said that the sewer the current sewer system in Mammoth would only support up to five bedrooms um per per lot. Um and that would make it kind of hard to break into multif family I would think because that's
severe limitation. Um but I I'm not concerned. I mean property values are pretty expensive as it is throughout. I mean, um, I think other people should have access to boarding home and small. Yeah, I'm not concerned about density in my neighborhood.
>> Thank you. >> Any other residents wish to speak? >> Okay. At this point, I'm going to have the board um any items that came up, want to discuss, any topics,
concerns, questions? I would I would like Mr. Parin and Mr. Walsh to look at the CB light uses um since obviously your use will be grandfathered but for any subsequent
sale of your property for a potential use or I guess a modification of use um to look and see if you think those things are reasonable to you um if we were to change the zoning from RB to CB light for your properties. So, I'd be
very interested in your input on that. >> You're IA right now. >> Yeah, you're IA right now. Yeah. Yeah. >> One comment I do have on that. I was looking at the um GIS and
obviously the Mr. Walsh's property, but also Mr. Perin's property. Significant wetlands on those properties. Um and the 101 river actually has a vernal pool on that property as well. Um, so I think
>> that that rule was created by the state when when the uh >> Could you come up to the microphone? >> So that that was created by the state when 495 came through. I don't know if you are aware of who lived on Bartlett A back there, but that was uh Loretta
Moore. >> Mhm. >> Uh and so I can tell you much about that property. So that pool that's right next to the highway that was created. >> Yep. So that's really not wetlands. >> It is actually >> that's a settling pool for for water that was never there before.
>> It is. >> It was never there before 495 came through. >> Yeah. But now it is considered by the states regulatory wetland regardless of how it got there. >> Oh, okay. So they can change. >> Yeah. >> Things things can change even old storm
water things that get neglected after some period of time. I mean, cuz I I I als I I also have water that runs out of the storm drains from the cemetery onto my property that was in a pipe that clogged and they came to the pipe out. Now you call it a wetlands. >> Well,
>> it's supposed to be in a pipe. >> Yeah. >> And that pipe clogged. >> Things can become regulatory wetlands, but they don't all just happen because of clog pipe. I mean there has to be conditions in the soil and so forth and so has >> I mean the condition was with with the agreement was that that was going to be
in a in a >> I don't mean to debate the issue with you. I just I just pointing out the fact that they can in fact be regulatory wetlands. That's all they can be. >> Okay. I'm going to stop this. >> I mean I mean they also they also added um a a drainage and drained it off my [clears throat] property from the road.
>> Sir, I understand that. >> Okay. >> But there are certified wetlands there and a certified vernal pool there now. Okay. Um, so given that, I would not be willing to keep that as an IIA zone,
either one of those properties. I I think CB light is a decent alternative. Um, and provides protections uh for those wetlands. Um, it also indicates to me given the size of the wetlands on
those properties, there's not much that's going to be able to be built there in the future anyway. Um, even if we did keep it IIIA, um, the buildability of those lots in the future is going to be pretty
significantly limited. Um, so >> I know I know I know through variances that things happen because the buildings that were built behind me there's a um 40 ft from wetlands was allowed. >> The building is 40 ft from wetlands.
That's allowable. >> Not likely today. >> It's there. [laughter] >> It's there. So anyway, um so I think at this point, uh if you could take a look at the CB light uses, let us know if
that's um amendable to you, uh at our next meeting, um or email us either way. >> Uh any other comments or questions from board members? >> I still like the idea of that section being changed to P that we were looking
at for that land. Yeah, >> mentioned on the slide. I did you [laughter] >> I figured you would be fine with that too. I already changed it on the slide. >> Did we want to discuss RB and RC at all >> or do you want to hold that? >> So I can give some thoughts. Um I think
if you look at the residential along Riverneck, the residential that's there now is RB. um RC while that area has some RC
near um that end of along Golden Cove Road, Bill Ricka Road. Um it's closer to the center. Uh it's not really further outneck. If you look
at the other end of Riverneck, again, that's also RB, not RC. Um, so I also think that it's going to be a balance between protecting the properties that are there
now and build buildability for the future. Um, while it's true it would require variances for people to build if variances are granted. Um,
RC does provide a the ability to do two families and less of a setback. So, people who don't want to build are going to get less protection. >> I'm in I'm not sure what you're in favor of. I am not in favor of changing it to
RC. I was just curious. I'm not either. >> Okay. [laughter] regarding the sewer issue. Yes, there you know we have a sewer moratorum and stuff like that, but as you know on your street when they want to add duplexes, they build septic systems and so like
that just because they can't connect to the sewer doesn't necessarily it prevents >> doesn't prevent them from building right >> from building. So um >> and just like on my neighborhood you have the water department and the aquifers and things like that to contend with there as well. And I was also
looking at >> folks please. >> I was also looking at other areas within Chumsford as he was talking about it. There is a lot of small lots that are RB mine included and that's okay. >> All these chumps [laughter] is RB. Um, I do I you know I do think it
would be worthwhile to do an exercise on the FAR um to see if like I like if we could maybe you know Evan Atkins maybe sit with you or so or with the um with Jose and go through the far and maybe that's
something we change to allow for reasonable additions like a garage but again with those RB setbacks that allows was, you know, the abutters to have that ability
um and that space. >> Didn't we try and do that and it got turned down by town meeting a couple years ago >> there? I think it was a little too um because I voted. >> It was a little too I Yeah, I had issues >> specifically for the RC and
[clears throat] um duplexes and multif family like I was fine with it on the single family side, not on the multif family side. Um and that was my issue to be quite honest on it. But I think that's it's worth revisiting >> because I have heard that from other
areas and again I don't think it's necessarily bad to change it if that's the only issue that >> um >> there I'm hearing right there you know that this but I would like to recalculate each one each property >> on the far to see where where we are
with that. >> Um >> so Anita you're taking that? >> Yeah I guess so. I'm a math [laughter] >> she's volunteered herself. Um, and then I also would like to kind of ret talk about the five acre lot across the way >> because I keep going back and forth with
that. >> Okay. >> I think it might be a nice place for a little village. >> We need more housing. >> Small small village housing. >> All right. >> But that would be >> so >> that would create I think another zoning >> that would create another zoning
conflict. >> That's the problem. And that's what we're trying to avoid. >> Ask them. I know this is only like >> What do you guys want there on that big acre lot? That's all. >> No, let's [laughter] not get into that right now.
>> There's going to be Let's as a board think about the debate. We [laughter] >> Let's think about that 5acre lot. Let's think about um RC versus RB. Anita, you'll take a look at the FAR for next meeting. Um, this Sean John, I'm gonna ask you
not. >> Okay. I wasn't sure if you asked about the opinion of the fiveacre. >> No, not tonight. >> Not tonight. [laughter] He cut me off. >> We do have other on the next meeting. >> Next meeting. >> Um, the small parcel. Um, >> make sure everyone's in favor of looking
at that as a >> P. You'll reach out to conservation. Yeah, I'll reach out to conservation before the next meeting to see if they would entertain looking at it in terms of um conservation. >> I like it as the wildlife corridor that
I heard. That's that's nice. [laughter] >> Um >> I think a good marketing tool. >> I have that in my backyard. >> All right. Any other topics for tonight on this one? All right. I would like to thank all the residents for uh showing
up and uh discussing this with us. Um we are >> and Anita for a great job. >> Yes, thank you. >> We are going to continue this. Um Anita, you'll update the slides. >> Um we will continue this one more
meeting um and see how things go. Uh and then we'll take a look at it next meeting and see if we're close enough to get to a draft for a public hearing uh later this summer. [cough] Okay. Uh so
at this point I will take a motion to continue. >> I move that we continue this. You want to push this to the 24th? >> Yeah. Next meeting. >> Yeah. Next meeting. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Move that we continue our discussion of this. >> Second >> motion by Mike, second by Deerra. All in
favor? Hi. >> Hi. Okay, [clears throat] we will continue this next meeting. Thank you everyone. >> That does not want to stay in tonight. >> All right. >> Try this one. You got >> Next item on the agenda.
>> Oh, it doesn't that doesn't even want to stay in >> is data center zoning. >> Down. >> So Joel this one before the same thing go to hit it. >> Yeah. Folks, if you if you're going to have a discussion, please bring that outside so we can continue this meeting.
>> Shut the door. >> How do I make this go away? >> Can I How do I >> Folks, if you're going to be discussing, please know what happened there. There you go. Thank you. No worries. Thank you.
>> I'm surprised data center. [laughter] >> Oh. >> Well, thank you. >> Are you being sarcastic, >> Evan? Do we have anyone on Zoom? >> Not at this point. >> Okay. >> You're welcome.
>> All right. Okay, this is where they >> So, at this point, >> goodness gracious, >> we had homework to take a look at the data center zoning. Um, give thoughts and opinions as to how we might want to
do this. Um, Joel, do you have anything to add? [laughter] Well, well, just that uh Chris did a yman's amount of work, which I just looked at most recently and went, "Wow, this is really good stuff." So,
basically what he did was he uh well, actually, do you want to talk about what you did? You want me to talk about what [laughter] you did? >> I can talk about it. Um so, I didn't send it out to everyone. Um but essentially what I did is I took a
look and found that there's a company uh called the International Data Corporation IDC that actually categorizes and sizes data centers. Um
they have different types of data centers. Uh they have um warehouse manufacturing traditional data center AI data center. Um they're categorizing it mostly by power demand. Um but they also
categorize them roughly by square footage. Um they've also added a a new category called hypers scale uh which is essentially the new AI data centers. Um
they have um they talk about how regulating data centers by building size or square footage isn't necessarily
um effective because you could have different types of data centers in the same square footage using vastly different amounts of energy. >> So it doesn't recognize the impact. >> Correct. >> Appropriately. >> Uh a warehouse data center in 100 square
feet could be um up to one megawatt of power demand. An AI training data center in 100,000 square feet could be 30 to 100 plus megawws of power. So the square
footage doesn't necessarily give the the full picture. Mhm. >> Um, and with technology changing, a lot of what you're seeing in terms of the the cooling towers,
um, backup generators, things like that, all of that technology is changing as rapidly as the chips. >> So, regulating that doesn't necessarily help either. >> As soon as you [snorts] zone it, it's obsolete already. Like we were talking
about cooling towers last time. Um, since then I saw an article about how they're using uh copper to cool now um and chemical cooling mechanisms as opposed to water tower cooling mechanisms. >> Interesting.
Um, so they also talked about potentially doing a combination of uh square footage because that's typical zoning um and it helps with footprints but also electrical demand too. So they
looked at a typical um if you have a typical large office building the typical load is under one megawatt. A small industrial user is 1 to three
megawws. major industrial facilities five megawws and um something over that would be like 10 megawws. Um hypers scale data centers usually use
about 50 megawws uh and that's that can power about 50,000 homes just to give you some idea of scale. a large AI campus 100 megawws plus and that's 100,000 homes.
>> So it's one megawatt per home basically >> or thousand homes >> thousand homes. >> Yeah, >> bad math. >> One megawatt per thousand homes. Um so what they're what I fed all of this data into chatpt um
>> gave it some idea of what our zoning looks like and one recommendation is that if we do uh three tiers um under one megawatt that could be accessory or a business
supporting type of data center under 20,000 square feet. Mhm. >> Um maybe that could be in commercial and industrial areas. Uh tier 2 could be 1 to 5 megawws, uh 20,000 square ft to 75,000 square ft.
And tier three is anything over 5 megawws and 75,000 plus square feet. Um, so we could say maybe tier one would be allowed in commercial and industrial. Tier two
could be maybe industrial by special permit. And then tier three could be something um that we wouldn't necessarily want in town or be able to support in town. >> Right. Has it been has it been proposed
anywhere? Do you know? I haven't seen it, but um that the companies who are building these types of facilities um are compelled to build green
power to support their energy use. >> I haven't seen anything that they're being compelled. No, but I have seen some that put like solar panels on the roof to assist with it because I I spent a [snorts] lot of time actually looking at water consumption compared to like megawws
um and the different cooling systems that exist today. Um to his point though, they're constantly trying to improve on it and make better ways of it. But just to give you an example that evaporative cooling towers, that one its water usage is they're saying approximately 18,500 gallons per day per
megawatt. And that uses more water, less like electricity. But then when you go to other other versions, they start using less water, like half as much with the hybrid adiotic version. But yet at the same time, it uses more power. So it keeps on varying through it.
>> So there's there's a lot of like resources that get used on these depending on what type of system you're associated with it and how much power you're drawing, >> right? >> Um but but I have seen them trying because they know that there's problems with this. I mean, this is a big industry and they're trying to improve on it. So, there was a lot of articles
out there about ways to try to improve their green space, but I think it's their own coalitions that are doing it, but nobody's forcing it. At least from what I saw, >> didn't [cough and clears throat] um my mere contribution was to look up to see what data centers there actually are.
So, so-called data centers that actually are in Chford. mentioned one last time which is 187 Buildica Road which is in the building that you see on your right as you pass Community Tree. Um so that actually has an 8,000 square foot one
megawatt what they call a data center. It doesn't look like it's necessarily an AI kind of center. Um, so it's interesting to So, and there isn't anything about it that necessarily draws the eye except for the fact that there's
there is a large greenish kind of object that looks like it could be a diesel generator. It could be something else. I don't really know. I haven't haven't actually gone to look 187, Bill Rick. >> I wonder if it has like air cooling because that would require like the more power versus like the less water. Like
maybe that's why there's a generator and stuff. Wonder what cooling system they're using. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I don't know. And then also there was another place that was advertising it could be used as a data center which is off of Industrial Lab. So just basically Kitty Corner running
south east that was larger. Um I think they were I don't remember what megawatt size that they were >> [snorts] >> um advertising. And then just for comparison there's Barracuda networks on the other side of the street. Um, again, there's nothing obvious about those that
you would say, you know, this is a concern for us zoning wise. So, I think basically the tier system that that um Chris sketched out, I think is a good start. Mhm. >> And I think that we would just want to also I do think that we would want to
include how to handle if they're drawing such power that their ways of dealing with that power involves you know exterior kinds of things like diesel generators, towers and that sort of thing. I still think that we want to, you know, include some aspect of that so
that if somebody is saying, "Hey, I'm small, you know, I'm using this much power." But if they're putting a diesel generator right outside their door, you know, then that's another concern. The other thing, too, is these these things are all an IIA and they also are not near residential. >> And are they
>> so we may we may want to employ some sort of a residential setback as well. >> Are they incident? the data center is incident to their primary use. >> I didn't look into that like like what what are who are the tenants and is it their primary use or what that sort of
thing. Yeah, >> I imagine it could go either way. It's just matter who the tenants are. >> Yeah. So, but I think [clears throat] that's the thing that we're mainly I think I think it's right to use power as a means of establishing the tiers because power is essentially what drives
the the need for backup power and the need for cooling and the need for all of that. So power I think is a good metric. We I don't think we could enforce it as a criteria, but it is a good tier [snorts] system. In other words, somebody comes in and we're not going to say, "Well, you can only use so much
megawatts." But instead, we'll say, "Well, what megawws are you?" And then you fall into one of tiers that then we'll be assessing under a certain criteria. But I feel like the the usage of the power is at the end of the day,
even if you have a lot of small users, the they're still so much more than >> like current usage that they're going to overall have a impact on the >> energy requirements of the town. And so
I mean is there not a way we could make them >> I [snorts] mean I don't want 27 diesel backup generators anywhere. >> Yeah. Well I mean so back up a little bit right. So controlling like what the sort of supporting peripheral kinds of
things like diesel generators that we can explicitly control the the uh the use of the square footage and the power relative to what industrial uses are right then will en I think provide us
the ability to control in that way right so that basically what we want is we don't want to allow our data centers to be the data centers we allow we don't want them to draw any more power or have any more of a square footage input than an industrial use would be if it's in an industrial zone. And I imagine we're
probably going to want to restrict these to industrial zone only. >> Oh, for sure. >> So, you know, but the but we do want to allow that somebody can have something they would call a data center, [snorts] but it wouldn't trigger, you know, that could be in something other than industrial, [cough and clears throat]
right? if it's not essentially drawing uh some some level of power and it also doesn't have any of these exterior kinds of things like generators and stuff like that. I mean if somebody has a generator inside their building that's one thing. If they have it outside the building and
it's near residential that's another thing alto together and I think that's the thing that we want to kind of control. >> But don't >> most like most office buildings have backup generators. >> Yeah. Right. So that's that's the thing. We don't want to now be more restrictive on data centers than we would on anybody
else, right? I mean, that's we want to make it more equitable. What we don't want is we don't want somebody that's going to come in and draw an extraordinary amount of power or have things like the 27 diesel generators that Sacred Heart has, you know. So we're just trying to avoid just trying
to not allow that sort of that degree of use to happen. And that's why with the tier one, if you do less than one megawatt and less than 20,000 square feet, that's typically Yeah. >> an office building data center,
>> right? And I would just add that, you know, you could have that use, but also you you could not have like an exterior diesel generator for that use. If you do, you go to a higher tier. Much like the um much like how we're doing the
contractor yard, you know, is if you have certain vehicles, you just go up a tier. Doesn't matter, you know, anything else. So, I think that would be the >> go home. >> So, how do you how do you deal with the other resources they're consuming of the town, right? Like we talked about like
water like so water consumption depending on the cooling version could be huge, but and I think we talked about before it's not really in our stuff. I think you or somebody was going to look up something but because we have our different water departments but they could they could shut down depending on
the water usage they could consume the water that we have and I think that's a real world problem >> and in some areas they're already in level three water bands and restrictions on our usage. >> Well look at like Westford what um week or so ago they had one of their pumps go down and then everyone got restricted in a certain area to like very low water
usage. It's a real concern. Even Lowels put in the paper that they look they're restricting water usage and they get >> right. But we can't I don't think we can restrict water usage for data centers because we don't restrict it for any other use. >> Right. >> But we don't we don't restrict it directly but we restrict it indirectly
by limiting the square footage and the mega and the power directs. >> But their power draw can vary according to what they're using for a cooling system. From what I saw, >> you use more water, you use less power. Well, we can specify certain >> cooling systems are not allowed.
>> Yeah. >> I mean, it's just I don't know what we can do with it. It's just it's a big concern of mine. >> So, I've got a couple questions because I thought like because we don't define data centers, we're not supposed technically like they're not allowed in town, but you just said we have one
>> on one in East 7 road. >> Well, again, we have one that advertises itself as a data center. So whether we haven't defined what a data center is yet. So it could be that it's not doesn't meet the definition of a data center even [snorts] though they may be
claiming that they are >> which one 187 >> the eyes of the iron >> a U-shaped brick building. >> So that's it looks like an office building. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. If you if you just Google data centers in Chelford, it'll show up. It's proab.net whatever
whatever >> collocation regional data center. So here's the thing. I don't we can define it all you want. I don't think it's going to any area be will pass town meeting. Oh, you can it'll be like the the would we would we try to pass
[music] last town meeting the >> breakfast? >> Yes. Thank you. That one it will be >> right. But you have to allow some type of data center because an office building has a data center in it. So I think it's important that we have to
[cough] >> so it's a it comes off of the definition again, right? >> It's going to be a balance between the definition and the criteria. >> So what >> so if we overly define it, right, then we potentially lose the ability to control, you know, other aspects of
things. If we more broadly define it, then we need to be more specific in our criteria about what we're allowing or not allowing. So there's a balance between the two. And doesn't every I mean I'm sure Loheed Martin and everyone else I mean I'm sure they all have a server banks and everything else consuming power within their building. So right what is I mean it's part of
infrastructure. So >> well I'd like to go and knock on the door of this person and find out what exactly >> because I'm going to say at 187 you get multiple different units in there because I know like the Boston Globe was in there. It's an imaging area in there. So it's not it can't be that big of a data center because it's only >> it's 8,000 square feet.
>> Yeah. >> 8,000 is the whole building or the is the data center? They claim that the data center is 8,000 square feet. I don't know. I haven't. >> And that would meet >> the tier one requirement, right? >> 49,600. >> So, it's a very small data center. >> Yeah.
>> And it's likely the old style collocation data center that doesn't require a significant amount of power. They're probably not doing a ton of AI >> compute in there. But if they were if they were to do an AI and then they wanted to add a diesel
generator or a cooling tower or something like that, then that would be something we would want to have some say in. >> Yeah. And that would probably increase their power draw. >> Yeah. >> What do you think about this, Evan?
Um I I think the accessory uses um as Chris is saying that needs to be allowed that needs to be made very clear. Um I like the tear approach. Um I Joel mentioned something about
um having a residential setback. Um I like that. I like that particularly for if you could combine that with a tier one whereby if you were outside a certain distance from residential
then maybe uh maybe it's by right even if it has external infrastructure you know limited um the sense I get from the tiered approach is that strategically
you may want create a tier one that um is attractive to the marketplace. >> That's the sense I'm getting. Whether the town whether the infrastructure grid can actually handle it or the water department can actually service it, you
know, those are technical issues. The board is certainly free and clear to try to engage with those entities. >> From a pure land use and zoning perspective, it it may be as a viable use as any other use of 129. We we just don't know enough about it yet.
>> Wonder if we could make the backup generators have to be battery, >> not a whole another >> not fossil fu [laughter] >> concerns about fire and so forth like that. >> Yeah, I I wouldn't be concerned with the
um with the miscellaneous exterior infrastructure. As I've mentioned before, most businesses out there have tanks, generators, towers of some sort. They're just limited in their in their tucked
away and they're not visible or or close proximity to residential properties. Mhm. >> Yeah. I think I think we absolutely have to allow the accessory use of data centers
>> and then maybe the standalone maybe [snorts] we divide tier one into two two >> subtiers an accessory tier one and then a standalone tier one. That's a good idea. >> And I I was
again I don't think I think it's good to define it. I think first out for the town meeting is this allowing it for accessory and no for everything else because at least then we get the definition out
there. Mhm. >> And then as people this technology evolves this because there's going to be a lot of discussion there's a lot of discussion at the state level at the federal level. Um it's going to change but at least we
have it defined clearly and then we can always come back to it and flip it from a no to a yes >> under these circumstances >> under appropriate circumstances. I think it's I think that would be the best way to approach it from a town meeting
perspective. >> I would agree with that. >> I think that that would be the >> And the other thing about that, the other benefit about of that is that someone can't come in and just ram it down our throats because we haven't considered it and we haven't defined it and we haven't Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Just zoned it. >> Right. Which is what this is about. >> Yeah. >> Right. [laughter] which is the point which is why we're doing this. >> Would you define it >> like the accessory is utilizing AI
versus non-utilizing AI? No, you can't. >> You can't. >> Okay. >> No, everyone's utilizing AI to some degree. >> You want to try to stay away from being tied to a particular technology because the technology could change. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> But the use of power I think is a is a fundamental principle
>> and that's the standard that the industry is using anyway is the power >> power consumption. So they will be able to say >> yeah when we ask them what power are you using that we know >> and we have to make sure that we're very careful on that wording that it's the power consumption in total of the
facility not how much they're drawing from the grid >> because if they put solar on their building they're using less from the grid. >> Y >> so it's >> total power consumption of the facility >> the kind of power we're talking here uh
what they can get out of a set of panels on the roof really isn't a very weak part of the true. >> So, >> you have to get some vision going or something. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> All right. Any other thoughts on this
one? >> Do you have enough [clears throat] to >> Yes. >> draft? >> Yeah. >> Something for us for next meeting to look at? Yeah. >> All right. >> All right. Thank you. That was a really good discussion. >> Yeah.
>> So, I will take a motion on this one >> to continue to next meeting. >> Well, I will do just that. >> I'll move that we continue the discussion on the data centers. >> Second. >> Motion by Mike, second by Anita. All in favor?
>> I. >> All right. That is moving on. 210 Boston Road. We're just leave off course. All right. 210 Boston Road. I updated
the slides on this one. Essentially just listing out the um >> parcels. >> Parcels. Uh and then Evan, you are going to >> I'm in the I've received the data. I
just need to uh compile it. Uh, so that will be ready for your next agenda. >> Okay. >> Oh, excuse me. >> All right. So, next [laughter] meeting we will so I'll put the slides to bed and then we will um talk about the
restaurant tiering for next meeting >> for um now were we thinking of adding that tiering to all of the commercial areas >> for restaurants? Yeah.
>> Didn't it already I thought we >> I don't see why not. >> Yeah, I thought we said >> you really only need it for CBLT and maybe CA. >> Yeah, but >> I don't know why you would need it in the other commercial districts.
>> Those those allow restaurants. >> Sure. >> Currently. >> Yeah. So, it' only be the ones that we don't allow it in. >> Yeah. which is CA. >> Will we allow restaurants in CBLT?
>> Right. By moving all of those CAS into CBLTs on Boston Road. >> Yes. >> So the the 210 Boston Road coffee shop is fixed by the CBLT. >> Yes. >> So if restaurants are allowed in the
other one, you're just adding tears to the definition of restaurant. Wasn't that what it was? What were we doing? I thought it was >> I thought we were adding tears within the >> That's why I was a little confused after last meeting because if we're fixing 210 Boston Road situation with the CBLT,
we don't necessarily need the tiered restaurants unless we want it in the other CAS as well. >> Well, what's the harm? >> There's a lot going into town. Cool. >> Yeah, I think it' be a little bit simpler just to change [clears throat]
it to C like fix the problem, change it to CPLT and then we could always >> address. >> Yeah, we can treat it as a separate issue >> as a separate issue because otherwise like there's a lot going to town meeting with >> Yeah, pitching this at town meeting won't be >> I'm so I'm confused. I'm confused by the
fix. >> May not need it. >> So there are two ways >> go to CB. You probably don't need it. >> Yeah. So there are two ways of fixing the 210 Boston Road issue. There's changing it to CB light or taring
the restaurants in CA to allow a small coffee shop but nothing larger or small pizza place but nothing larger. >> Okay. >> I think we could do the ladder later and just do the CB late. >> Yeah.
>> Now. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Exactly. That's >> I think Yeah. Town meetings now comfortable with CB light. They know what it is. You know, we'll be bringing it to >> Okay. It twice. >> Yeah. >> In actual use. And we'll be bringing two CV light changes to town meeting
>> already. >> Already. Riverneck and this one. >> And especially if we present it as, you know, the owner, came to us with a use that they wanted to use that we feel like >> seems perfectly reasonable, >> right? It seems like it's a
>> it's a bonus to the neighborhood. Now, we haven't had a neighborhood discussion with the CB light area yet. >> Yeah, we should we should do that. >> So, we going to open that up the next meeting or >> Yeah, although there's there's not really much. >> That's what I was going to say. >> Down there in terms of
>> I wouldn't trust the the mail. >> So, maybe the one after. >> Go for the one after >> July 8th. >> Do we decide we're getting rid of any meetings in the summer or do we >> We haven't talked about it yet. >> Yeah. I think we should
[laughter] >> if we can get through some of these hearings. >> Um, so July 8th would be the next time we could do a neighborhood one for this one. There wouldn't be a ton of neighborhood.
>> Yeah. >> Right. There's not a there residences up there, but nothing like uh Riverneck. >> Yeah. >> Well, that group's already activated. >> Yeah. Yeah. [laughter] We've been aggravating them for years.
>> You have no idea. [laughter] >> Yeah. Oh, yes, I do. >> All right. So, All right. So, let's go July 8th for the neighborhood meeting for this CBLT. Okay. >> The first of two. [snorts]
>> Uh hopefully one. >> Um >> Okay. >> But we'll see how that one goes. [snorts] >> Um and then we do have to start talking about when we're going to start scheduling these
public hearings at some point. >> Talk about it next time. >> Yeah. Well, how about if we do the public hearing, the first public hearing for the um Riverneck
the meeting after the second Oh, no. You said you were going to do it later. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I got to work with Evan to kind of work back from town, right? >> Um and then select board >> and fin presentations
>> and then we'll work back from there. So, I'll work with Evan in the next >> come up with a timetable >> to come up with a time. >> Also, the fall is better because people are going. >> Yeah. >> Right. [clears throat] >> Um I just hope we don't have a lot of big projects coming to us in the fall.
>> All right. So, All right. So, we won't do the coffee shop >> tiering >> tiering um yet. and then we will move forward with this public hearing. Okay. Um, so
I don't think we need >> You don't need a motion. >> No, we don't need a motion on that one. So, we're all set. All right. Any topics for discussion on the aquifer protection gap analysis? I >> think we can probably remove that. >> Yeah, we can remove it now.
>> Okay. and then we'll put it on if something else comes up for >> you'll give us an update on your um because Okay. >> All right. And then managed growth strategy. So we talked last meeting
about how with John's uh role um he needs to step away from the managed growth strategy. Uh so we need to replace him on that task force. Um, so your homework was to figure out who would like to take his place on the task
force. >> I thought we decided we weren't. >> Well, I'm immune because I'm already on it. >> So, yeah, Mike would step in as full chair >> and then we need to replace John on the committee on the task force.
>> Do that. >> Yeah. So, I mean I mean I uh if somebody else wanted to do that do it, I'm more than happy for that because I I will still plan to attend. >> I think you should too. >> I think you would be awesome in that role.
>> Yeah. I think >> Do I hear a nomination? >> I nominate Joel. >> Nominate Joel. >> I second Joel's nomination. >> Nomination for Mike, second by Djour. All in favor? >> I. >> Unanimous. >> With delight. >> That was easy Joel. [laughter]
didn't set back fast enough. >> No, I didn't. >> That's actually It's pretty interesting stuff. >> It is. >> Uh, speaking of which, do we have any sense? We were going to have a summer meeting. >> Well, we we scheduled the June 25th. >> June 25th. Okay. >> I'll be sending out an email probably
tomorrow. >> Got it. >> All right. June 25. Oh, no. That's your meeting because we have a June 24th. Because you got me all confused there because I would have been here on the 25th. [laughter] actually early too. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> No, I'm on vacation on the 27th. Like
>> All right. Uh so moving on. >> So I just updated the tracking document. Uh so you can have that with all of the recent changes. Um there'll probably be another one coming out for next meeting
on that. Uh contractor yard updates. So there is a version 4, a new version. Um, I didn't get any feedback from people on that last version. Um, but
what I did do is looked at some of the overlaps and the gaps between the three between the subuses. So, the
low impact tier one, moderate tier 2, and heavy tier three. Um, I looked at the number of vehicles. Actually, before we get to that, can you scroll down to the definitions? So I had my friend Chachi BT help me on
this one again to identify gaps and overlaps and it correctly pointed out that I had defined heavy equipment and heavy commercial vehicles but not really defined light >> vehicles. Um and because there were some
gaps and overlaps, the suggestion was to define a medium commercial vehicle. Um >> and so I defined light commercial vehicle as anything less or equal to 10,000 pounds.
>> Medium 10,01 to 26,000. >> Do you have those pictures that you say? I have no idea find them. I'm trying to find pictures and I I haven't been able to find. >> You put pictures up before
>> the gross vehicle weight. >> Oh, vehicle weight. >> GBW. And what are you talking about now? >> The gross vehicle weight. >> And what were the other ones? >> They were different vehicle weight. They were different tiers. It wasn't exactly matching this.
>> Oh. >> So, I didn't want to add them in because it was going to be really confusing >> because they were slightly different, right? >> They didn't align. >> Yeah. >> So, >> I mean, I'm still working the sizes of vehicles that exist. So, maybe we should
make our >> sizes align. What does the RMV use for classification? That's what we ought to use if we can. >> Yeah. So, that's what this is basically what it it uses. >> Yeah. Because like class B is up to like 26. >> Yeah.
>> Second one you had. Class A >> Yeah. >> Is the higher than that and class D and whatever is the lower. [cough] And then I also did heavy and light equipment um to address your concerns also.
>> Yeah. >> With the smaller equipment. >> Yep. Thanks. >> Um and so what I did is I looked at any of the gaps. So what I did is so for the
tier one I removed the number of vehicles and essentially said that is three or fewer light vehicles. Three is actually should not be crossed
out. So tier one would be three or fewer light vehicles. No medium or heavy commercial vehicles or heavy equipment. Tier two. Actually, I got to go back to my other version
because I think this one's wrong. I think tier one is less than five. Tier two is five to 15 light commercial vehicles or medium commercial vehicles. >> Less than five or five. >> Less than five is 5 to 15. Got it. Okay.
>> Second one is 5 to 15 andor commercial vehicles and no heavy commercial vehicles. storage or use of light equipment or one piece of heavy equipment for tier
two. Tier three would be more than 15 commercial vehicles of any size, storage or use of heavy commercial vehicles or multiple pieces of heavy equipment. >> How are we going to defile define small
stock piles? And what's the story with gas refueling? >> Does that make it? >> That is tier three. Refueling is tier three. >> Yeah, >> Chris, >> I absolutely trust you on this, but I
really need pictures. >> I know. I'm working I'm working on it. >> Like, you're saying this and it sounds great and I agree with you, but I have not a clue. >> I know. working on it. Good old >> Maybe maybe you should just have >> total combined GVW.
>> You know, you can have one big truck >> or or or or 10 uh [laughter] golf carts light for one heavy. >> Yeah, really. It might be a more practical way. >> It's giving me a headache. >> Trucks. Lightweight trucks.
>> I'm getting a headache. [laughter] >> No imagination. What number strike this more than >> 150 mark? >> Yeah, the strikeouts are >> I'm feeling a bit in the weeds here. >> They're very I'm sly going [laughter] am I reading this right? >> Just going to zoom in. It's
>> all right. What I'm going to do what I'll do for the next meeting is clean this up. >> Okay. >> Um I'll accept all the tracking so we I'll keep this version there, >> but I'll clean it up so that it's easier to read because it's confusing me now
online. [laughter] Thank God it's not just me. >> I like how the five is underlined. The zero is crying out. [laughter] >> Not sure what that means. >> Like what is going on here? Am I missing something? [laughter] >> You got a capital V cross 9:30. Our eyes
will need some extra bold >> and I will add pictures [laughter] >> for the next one for >> No, I I already asked that. >> Those are the main changes that I made. just >> it's 9:30 cleaning up the gaps. >> Thank you for all that hard work.
>> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Um >> yeah, I don't think >> Yeah, there are no other changes on that version. All right. Anything else on contract for the arts?
>> Okay. No new business. Uh Evan, community development director report. >> No uh no updates for tonight. >> Okay. Do we need to continue? >> I don't think so. >> I don't think we really do much discussion, but we're having a hard time figuring out the documents.
>> Uh, leazison updates. >> Nothing here. >> Development director. >> He said nothing. Oh, nothing really happened. >> Aquifer gap analysis one. Um, all of the comments have uh been received by the consultant.
He uh he said they came in in a variety of formats. So, it's going to take him some time to tabulate them. >> Uh, >> he didn't give us a format. >> So, that's you get what you asked for. uh and uh once he [clears throat]
tabulates them, he's going to request an internal meeting with staff and then we'll report back to uh to the boards. >> Okay. >> Because I'm I'm definitely going to want to track how each of my things was respond. >> Absolutely. [laughter]
>> Can let them know that >> all right updates >> here. Quick one. So, the Vinyl Square committee, the historic district representative or whatever they're called, came out and they were discussing the possibility of Vinyl
Square becoming a local historic area. >> Um, but at our next meeting, we're going to have more discussion around the possibility if it's something we want to go after or not. >> Um, are there funds associated with that? >> There's actually there's different funds that can be available to historic buildings for things like it sounds
like, what did they say? They said they could do like facades and improvements. >> Yeah, there's different there's different things. Um, if we do go forward with it, there'll be some like open meetings discussing like impact. Um, we asked them to bring back like, you know, typical questions that's heard, what type of risks associated
with making something a historic area. The woman that came to speak, she was actually excited about the thing that had gone through at the last town meetings that we had in regards to reaching out to them if something came up of significance. So, it it was it was a good discussion. And it actually
probably took up a good portion of our meeting. >> So the funds would be available for housing. >> They're like grants. >> Grants would be available for buildings only if they were in a district. >> It sounds like it it gives a little bit
more local stuff for that. But it sounded I I still need more details on it because it almost sounded like you could go after some of those grants if your building was considered historic. like they said that like you could go after it if you prove that it's older because it's only 75 years. >> Yeah.
>> And they were also looking to put some of the traditional white signs on maybe some homes. A historic building saying circa, you know. they have one I need to put at my house. >> By the way, reach out to them because apparently to get the sign it was free,
right? I was surprised. >> That's my understanding. [laughter] >> They gave it to me in my front hall. decorating me. [laughter] >> He gone after the grants. >> All right. Anything else? >> Uh we meet Senate Village meets tomorrow.
>> Okay. Housing Advisory Board met and we're planning a um a housing forum with which we're going to invite a bunch of organizations to um trying to engage
with the community in terms of what their needs are and make them aware of resources that are available to them. We're also going to invite other communities nearby. So, we figured we'd get more buyin from state agencies that might be helpful to our um
people um if we had if we also invited like Bill Reka and Tingsboro um and I can't find in my calendar so I must September 10th. I knew it was the 10th or the 24th but I couldn't remember what we decided. >> Thank you. Anything else you want to add
on that Evan? And then the community preservations meeting next week. >> Okay. Anita, >> um the ZBA, they only had um the chumps arms one Smith Street went in front of
them. >> Nothing exciting there. >> Okay, John. >> Nimcog Council's meeting next Wednesday. Um they did contact me um about um they're applying for a grant from the state to try to study a possible rail
extension from LOL to Nashville, you know, be a long-term project. And they were seeking um letters of support from town managers and all the NIMCOG in the Nimcon district. So I think I know that person. So I provided a letter. [laughter] >> Awesome.
>> Good. >> Joel, the man of many hats. [laughter] uh board of health met on June 2nd. Um [cough and clears throat] they uh one of the interesting things was the PAS issue at fire station 5.
They u the source of the PAS was not fire which was interesting because normally fire is a culprit for PAS. Um so then you may ask well what was I I didn't ask so I don't know. Um they also
sent comments to uh Senator Barrett and three representatives with regards to the um ready act. I think it was called mass ready act or whatever. Um so uh so they appreciated getting notice of
that heads up about that so they could comment on it as well. So that was good. So I think children had a good response uh on that. Um, they also briefly talked about nine Lady Slipper Lane and I asked them I said
that u because they had they were under the impression when they met that they were going to be on sewer and then that when they proposed to us they were on septic and my question to them was you know is there a concern I think we have discussed this at that hearing that is
there a concern the board of health has so the concern that was expressed at that time was that um Richard Day remembered that the Chumsford Waters District was entertaining the idea of a new well in which this could that could potentially be in its influence area,
but there are no issues now. So, they basically don't uh need us to wait on them or anything like that. [clears throat and cough] So, uh Board of Health is not feeling like they need to provide input for us necessarily on that. So, that's good to
know. Um and [clears throat] then also the issue came up, this doesn't directly involve us, but nonetheless it's interesting because it has to do with sewer. So there are uh 25 homes that are in the aquifer that are in um that are
not on town sewer but have septic. And the board of health was considering one thing [clears throat] to be able to if their system fails to have them actually go on town sewer rather than to reinvest in a new septic system particularly
because they're in an aquifer area. Um however they got into a discussion with DPW because DPW is the policy holder on the sewer moratorum. Um but then ultimately it's the select board that needs to decide that. And so they were going to pursue discussions with DPW and
then also ultimately potentially uh with the select board depending on how that goes uh to essentially seek to have those home to be able to have those homes go on sewer if their septic systems fail. >> I thought that was a [clears throat] very good point. >> 25 in the whole town.
>> Yeah. >> In the zone two >> in zone two. Isn't uh one of the reasons that some of these houses are still on septic is that it's a long run to connect? >> I believe so. >> And is that likely why DPW had questions or concerns because who's going to who
would pay, >> right? I think well I think that I think that it was particularly because uh I think the board of health was under the impression that and again I'm speaking for them so they would have to be able to say but that that it would be it would be to weigh the cost of uh what it
would take to connect a sewer versus installing a new septic system in place of the failed one which likely could involve a different location. If you're you know leech field failed then you need to go to a different field so forth and so on. So there could be potential significant ramifications and just for
the betterment of the protection of the aquifer. >> Yeah, that makes sense. >> So >> yeah, I mean I don't think there's any capacity concern. >> Yeah. Well, I think that was the I think there I don't know how much uh you know it was just an issue of who owns the
policy and the debate about whether the board of health could require that or whether the board of health could request it and so forth and so on. had to do with easily resolved. >> Uh but once the board of health forces an applicant or a property owner connect,
>> it's a long run. >> Yeah. >> Which is probably why these property owners have waivers >> not to connect currently. >> I'm not entirely sure that that's true in every case. But nonetheless, >> just playing this forward, if >> I think DPW's other concern may be
similar to the grinder pump situation where the town has some sort of ownership on grinder pumps. >> I don't I don't I can't imagine DPW on behalf of the town wants to get involved in a cost sharing or >> maintenance sharing on long runs. >> Yeah. But in any case, they're going to
be discussing it. >> Yeah, makes sense. >> And and potentially any changes to the policy then would go to SLboard. So I think that's all in a good direction. You know that's it. >> Okay. Um anything >> uh nothing here. Not much historical
happening. >> Okay. Uh nothing major from Concom. Um but I did want to mention the mass ready act. Uh this was uh an environmental bond bill um that we were alerted to
from the conservation uh commission. um was alerted themselves by the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commission. >> Yeah. And then I also sent it to the select board. Um, essentially there are two amendments to that bill uh that were
added in the 11th hour. Uh, essentially restricting or eliminating the use of wet local wetland and wa wastewater bylaws for priority housing construction and would penalize municipalities with wetland and water protection bylaws by
making them ineligible for new funding preference modifier, whatever that means. But essentially, um, if new housing is needed, then it would limit our ability to, um,
enforce the wetland and wastewater bylaws for this type of priority housing. >> Did this get voted on already? >> I don't know if it got voted on. >> The last thing we knew is going into conference between the Senate and the House, and I we haven't heard since then.
>> So, we need to get this out. So, this it was sent to us on May 12th. Um, it made its way through the commissioners. It made its way to the select board. Um, as the chair of the planning board, I also
uh contacted our reps. Um, Simon did respond to me uh that he um agrees with our positions that that shouldn't those >> he's the vice chair of environmental resources. >> Yeah. So he agreed that those amendments
should not be in there. Um >> I mean are are they legally >> are they legal amendments? I mean >> I have no idea. >> Wouldn't mass D have a different >> So the last I heard >> point on that.
>> Who can explain the state at this point? >> The last I heard that they were going into committee um in late May. So I haven't heard any updates since. It's just >> I can reach out to Simon and find out if there's any update.
>> What's interesting is that it it wasn't it's not a administration proposal or an administration amendment. >> Whose amendment is it? >> I don't know. >> Real estate developers who want to build in the wetlands. >> I don't think it was any private entities. I think it was a legislature who
>> who you know I want I wonder what their full-time jobs are. I'm just saying [clears throat] >> like to see how many of them what their real full-time jobs are. >> So anyway, um so it did make its way through uh the Chelford boards and a
number of us did already contact our reps. So it was very vocal. Um all right. So, moving on,
we have the minutes from last meeting, May 27th. Did everyone take a look? Any changes, updates, edits? >> Move to accept the minutes of >> Chat GPT is making some good minutes.
>> 52726. That's as long as it's spelled Mike. >> Motion by Mike. >> Second by John. >> Gabri may have beat me. >> I heard John. >> I heard John. [laughter] >> All in favor? >> I I >> unanimous motion to return.
>> Okay. We got to discuss the next meetings. >> Yeah. So June 24th, Evan, what do [clears throat] we have on June 24th? >> Um Lady Slipper. Um tonight zoning items.
Nothing nothing new. >> Oh, did was there a uh Chunzford Mall department meeting today? >> Didn't they want to be on the 24th? >> There was today. Um >> Oh, wait. Was this the thing the [cough] multi? >> They're targeting I think August.
>> August. Okay, >> that's right. They asked when we're going to have one or two meetings in August. >> Okay. >> Which I guess we haven't determined yet. Um, speaking of which, take a look at calendars for summer and we'll talk through the summer schedule next meeting
as well. >> Something for July 8th already. >> Well, it's a typical >> meeting. Yeah, we did schedule that. >> All right. So, we're not going to skip that one. >> Probably not. >> Say, I know I'm not here on the 24th of July. So,
>> all right. I motion to to to respond the 24th. Do that. Well, we'll talk about [laughter] it next meeting. >> I made a motion. Anybody second? Come on. >> We'll talk about it next meeting. >> You already made a motion to >> know what we're talking about. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> She said she couldn't do it. >> All in favor?
>> I