So, welcome everybody. Um, I'm Deborah Carney. I'm the chair. And our voting members tonight will be Bob Smith and Roger Lipton. We also have our alternate uh Kristen Vivon with us. So, what we'd like to do is start by reading the legal
notice for our hearing tonight. And let me share the screen and bring that up. And I will ask our administrative assistant, Gwen. Um, okay. That's very odd.
The host isn't allowed sharing for this meeting. >> Um, is that some Did I accidentally do that? >> I >> You want me to share? >> I don't know. I've never had that happen. >> Oh, >> we absolutely need that function.
>> I just um I just did um multiple people, I think. Um, okay. I >> It says multiple participants can share simultaneously. I clicked on >> Can you Can you Can you turn that off, Gwen? So that I can
>> I >> I'll do I Okay, now I can share. Okay, >> there you go. >> All right. Yes, that was very scary. Okay. Okay. Um, okay, Gwen, you you can read at any time.
>> Okay. Hi, everyone. My name is Gwen. Um, I am the land use assistant for the town of Wheatley, and I'll be reading the legal notice. So, notice is hereby given that the zoning board of appeals of Weightley will hold a public hearing on Thursday, December 4th, 2025 at 6:00
p.m. Bayate Blasting, Inc., owned by Denise Dennis uh Baltazar of Lello MA has applied to amend an existing special permit to allow for the installation of a new storage silo magazine on the
premises located at 71 Chestnut Plane Road in Wheatley pursuant to article 7131 of the Wheatley zoning accordance the hearing will take place virtually via Zoom the rules of the decor forum
for a public hearing remain in effect and the chair's person will seek comments from the public when appropriate to do so. Application to amend the special permit is to be considered under under the provisions of the Wheatly zoning bylaws as provided by
MGLC 4A. This notice is also published electronically on the uh www.recorder.com public notices and ww.mmasspublic notices.org.
>> Okay. Do you have by any chance, Gwen, the dates it was published in the recorder? If not, I can find it in past records. If you don't, it's okay. >> Um, not offh hand, but I will make sure I information next time.
>> Okay. No, that's okay. That's fine. Um, Mr. Valtazar, did you notice any errors or omissions in this? >> I did not. No. >> Okay. I will note one, which is that under um our new our most recent um
zoning bylaws, the special permit is now under 171-37 uh as opposed to 171-31. Um, and I also just want to read into the record at the beginning that in
addition to asking for the installation of this new silo, you are also asking to increase condition A of the 2013 permit from nine storage magazines to no
restriction on the number of magazines. Um although your total storage um is still staying at no more than 180,000 pounds. So just to be clear at this moment you have a permit for nine. You
are asking to increase to 10 and also to change a condition so that there is no restriction on the number. Is that correct? >> Uh not entirely. We're not looking to increase to 10 magazines.
We're looking to maintain the 180,000 pounds. Uh instead of uh splitting them up into currently it's nine different magazines, we would like the ability to have larger a larger magazine. >> Uh so the total storage would not exceed
the same 180,000 lbs. We just want to be able to break up the storage into different sized containers, so to speak. >> Right. But you're also asking for no restriction on that number of containers slashmagazines. >> Yeah, we're we're asking that uh we
thought it'd be s uh simpler to just uh not restrict the number of magazines and keep the same total poundage. >> Okay, that I understand. And I just want to make that clear for the record that um there was an a request for condition
change as well as a construction of this new silo/magazine. I realize that those terms are in interchangeable and I just want to make sure that that is how you understand it as well. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, and also just to mention that
um, we I we do thank you for the detailed response to the criteria for the special permit that you included, but we also need to take a look at your application um, in light of the fact that the business is being situated in the aquifer protection district. So,
we'll be looking at that bylaw as well. So, let me stop this share. Um, at this point, you know, we are you are welcome to um summarize briefly if you'd like your petition to the board. And if you'd like, I can call it up if you want me to
um have you walk it through. >> Yeah, I mean I was waiting our uh land surveyor Rob Lev uh and associates. Uh I don't see that. Are they on yet? >> I don't see them. Everybody who is who
is in our is nobody's in our waiting room. Everyone is here on the screen. >> Okay. Yeah. They they prepared the paperwork and and would have uh perhaps more information as it relates to, you know, the specific town codes and bylaws. Um >> Okay. Um
>> yeah, I'm sorry. They prepared the information for us on our behalf. >> Do you want to give them a call, see where they are? >> Yeah, let me do that right now. I apologize. >> Yeah. Why don't you mute yourself? John, you're on.
>> I am here. Yes. I apologize. Um I was admitted late and wasn't sure what the discussion was about. I I apologize for taking the time. >> That's okay. Um would you like me to bring up your application? I Well, actually, let me stop you for one moment. I'm sorry. We do have our fire
chief with us here. JP, are you still with us? Has he left? Okay. I wanted to give him the opportunity to ask his questions because he's on a limited time. Um, but perhaps
he'll come back so I can also text him as well. Would you like me to pull up your application >> if you'd like? Either that or the plan. I'm not sure which is is uh better uh for viewing.
>> Okay. Well, the plan I everything is put into Okay. Do you have All right. Let me just Do you would you like to be made a co-host and pull it up yourself? if you'd like because I I did create uh in
the last 15 minutes a plan with a little color on it that might make it a little more visible to to especially on a screen. So that would be if you could that'd be great. >> Gwen, do you want to go ahead and do that? >> I could do that now. >> Okay. >> Um hold on.
>> Gwen, are you there? I just see John Kenny needs to be admitted in so I just added him in. >> Okay. Do you want >> I was I was taking Sorry. >> Okay. We need We need to make um
Okay. I'm just John John who's on the screen. We need to make him the co-host so that he can share the screen. >> Right. Okay. Yes, I will figure that out right now. Um Make co-host. Okay.
>> Yes. I just made him co-host. >> With any luck, you may be looking at my screen at this point. >> We are. >> All right. Yes. Um >> I don't know. Would would you like me I
don't mean to take over the meeting, but would you like me to at least give a brief explanation of of the plan in front of you? Yes, we would like you to present your request to the board and then we have our questions >> by all means. Um,
by way of formal introduction, my name is John Mik. I am uh uh representing uh Mr. uh Dennis Baltazar, the owner of Bayate Blasting. I work for Arloc Associates. Uh we have prepared uh the plan in front of you this evening uh on
the screen as well as the application that uh you mentioned uh to amend an existing uh special permit uh that was issued to uh base 8 blasting in uh 2013 when they took over this site from the prior uh operator who was running a
similar operation. Um the property is approximately 40 acre parcel located on the westerly side of of Chestnut Plane Road. Um it's accessed through a uh gravel drive through a a narrow access strip. Um from the westerly side of the
road, it rises uh roughly from elevation 175 or so to the uh site of the um operations, if you will, roughly uh elevation 260 to 290 depending upon
where you are on the site. Um, they are currently permitted to store, excuse me, up to 180,000 pounds of explosives in a total of up to nine magazines. Uh, we are proposing, we're before the board
tonight to uh uh try and permit a an additional silo to be constructed uh in this area uh located uh 76 uh feet or more from the uh northerly property line. Um, again, we've shown uh we've
survey located the houses that are uh within the area of concern to the proposed new uh site improvements. Uh we have the house at 141 uh West Bridge Road located here and we have the two
houses on Chestnut Plane Road uh number 69 and number 73 with the associated 1515 foot radi uh sketched in in uh the magenta colored lines and they're dimensioned with the red and the again
the proposed uh new construction is located outside all three of those radi um And the uh as I said, it's it's shown um located area that isn't currently uh developed, if you will. But um we're
proposing the location in that that general vicinity. Um I'm not sure if Mr. Beltazar has anything further to add regarding the the uh brief presentation about the site, but uh I I've not had opportunity to actually be on site, so
I'm at something of a disadvantage. But um that is the uh the rough layout of of the the operation and be happy to uh try and answer any questions that the board may have. >> Okay. And thank thank you for that. I do want to just ask JP are I know that
you're on a time constraint possibly. Would you like to raise your um questions now if you have to leave? JP, you're muted. Sorry about that. Um, yeah, I I've got probably another 25 um or 30 minutes or
so um in the window here, so I'm doing okay. But uh if you want to give me the opportunity um I would have a few questions um regarding the storage um at the site and the proposed changes. >> Um
I'm not really familiar with the silo the proposed silo. Um I'm assuming that this would be for ammonium nitrate fuel oil um mix like an AN anfo or what what exactly is going to be in the silo? >> Yeah, it's for ANFO. Correct.
>> And what is the storage capacity of the magazine? >> Uh so this Yeah, this particular silo is 60,000 pounds which is about 5600 gallons. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry, how many gallons? Uh, imagine
a 5600 a 5,600galon tank on stilts. >> Um, okay. I do have a question. When I met with the fire marshall on Monday, he said that these were pellets and that they would not become liquefied until they went to the job site. Is this
liquid or is it a solid? >> No, this is Anfo. It's ammonium n It's ammonium nitrate with fuel oil. >> So, it is liquid. Yes. Yeah. >> Okay. >> It's an emotion. Yeah. >> Okay.
>> I think it's granular, I think, is what you're my understanding, right? Typically, >> yes, it's it's an emulsion. So, it's it >> it's an emulsion. Yes. Okay. >> Um I'm sorry JP, I just wanted to get that detail. >> Sure. No, I understand. So, this will be
um in a slurry or in a dry um a dry compound? It'll it'll be delivered uh for as one unit. We'll be Yeah, we'll be purchasing from there's a few limited vendors and and they'll deliver it in their trucks uh to fill the silo.
>> Okay. But it it just so that I'm I'm I'm clear, it's not going to be um the same product as we would find in a 50 lb bag. It's going to be in a slurry. >> Correct. >> Be ready to pump out of a truck. >> Correct. Yes. >> Yeah. They're just uh we've decided to go go with the route that there no
premixing that it it's it's mixed at the manufacturer ahead of time. >> Okay, that's in contrary to what the fire marshall told me, but please go ahead with your questions JP. >> Hello. I think he said a screen freeze.
Okay, JP, can you hear gosh? Okay, who can hear me? >> I can hear you. I can hear you. >> Okay, so JP, where are you? >> Um, I just had a um screen freeze also
and it kicked me out, so I had to sign back in. So, just letting you know. I think it's >> Oh, okay. Okay. It just happened to me. Okay. So, I'm sure he'll come back in. >> Can I throw out some questions to the to
the presenter? >> I'm sorry, Roger. >> While we have this dead time, I have some questions to the >> Yes, please. >> John, those those radi they indicate 1500 feet or more from the nearest
residences. those 15-15 foot radiuses radi more are are from the nearest point of the house to the uh the the locust uh uh construction site in question. Yes. Okay. >> And these the houses just to uh
reiterate were survey located uh you know on ground survey by our crew. uh most of the topography shown was generated from Noah LAR but the houses were in fact located uh via on the ground survey as well as tying into the property lines. So
>> is do you have a rendering of this silo a plan for what it looks like and how it's constructed? >> I do. Yes, I can. Uh, John, can I forward this to you now? You can share it.
>> Sure. >> How tall is it? >> Uh, it's the tank itself is about 12 vertical feet and it's about 8t diameter. I just added um JP back in.
>> Okay, >> JP, you were lost to us. Do you want to continue with your questions? >> Yeah, my my profound apologies. Apparently, there's a technology issue here where I just got I've been kicked off the second time. So, um um I think it's my internet connection here. I'm on
my phone now. Um, so what is the height of the uh of the tank? >> Do we know? >> 12 feet. >> Yeah, the tank itself. Yeah. So, I just uh sent the uh the cut sheet to John who was going to share it that has a picture of it. >> Okay.
>> But yeah, 12 vertical feet and 8 foot diameter on the outside. >> Okay. And is there a containment dyke around >> said tank? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um Is it this may sound is it on an
imperous surface? >> It would yeah it would be we would have the foundation design which would probably be of some thickness or strength of concrete with with or without rebar. >> Okay. And then in in um in winter
weather and in the um rainy seasons uh or rainy weather um will there be a provision to pump out um any water that's in that containment um prior to um utilizing the uh the tank?
>> Uh yes. Yes. >> Okay. Um, and I think like all magazines, um, my concern would be, one of my concerns would be, um, what the fire load would
be around the area. Um, and I think I'm sure that's something that the state and the the feds have asked already, but um, can you just speak to that a little bit? >> Yeah, I'm sorry. What was the first part of the question? I >> Oh, the the fire load around um the magazine. Um so how far away from uh
brush and trees and grasses um would the tank be? >> Right. Yeah. So so basically based based on >> Hello. Yeah. B b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b based on the the distance and burm that we build up will dictate
where the other magazines can go. >> Okay. And and uh the the tree line. I'm just talking about the tree line and um and brush and grasses in relation to this one storage silo. >> Oh yeah, John, you might be able to that
distance is better than me >> from the from the tree line. What's that scale out to be? >> Uh I mean we have 76 feet minimum for the uh silo and it would probably be the tree line as located in that vicinity looks to be you know
>> within 10 to 15 feet of the property line. So roughly 60 ft. >> Okay. >> As it currently exists. >> All right. Um Okay, that answers the basic questions that I have. I'll I'll let you uh go on. Thank you for that.
>> Um JP, I have a question for you. The the fact that the petitioner is asking Oh, thank thank you. I see the image >> ju just popped in. I I was waiting. >> Okay, everybody can see that. Um the the fact that the petitioner is asking for
an unlimited number of magazines. >> But but I'm I'm sorry. We're not we're not asking for unlimited. >> You don't want a fixed number. >> Yeah. Because essentially if if we're maxed out at 180,000 and this unit takes
60,000 pounds, then that means uh we could only have six other magazines with 20,000 pounds. >> Well, that's that's my question. when I um it seems as though there are many different kinds of magazines and I know that the I know that I believe it's the
ATF that establishes how far apart they have to be from one another. Is that correct? >> Right. Yes. >> Okay. Um, so I guess I'm I So the position of those magazines wherever they're going to be placed,
does is that something that our fire chief needs to know in case of a brush fire or something else up there? In other words, how would anyone know where those magazines are located? Is will that be on a map? Will that be available to all?
Yeah. Yeah. So, we get inspected yearly by state fire marshal and and we've met them on site already ahead of time to make sure that everybody was on board with this and and the locations and capacities were all within their provisions. So, we've already met with
them uh for this site at this location. >> Okay. So, then if you know that you're going to put this in with 60,000, why can't you specify a number of magazines? I I've under I I've come to understand that some of these magazines
could be mobile that in other words they could be in a day box on a truck. >> So that's I'm just >> Is that not true? >> Well, no. These would not be No. So our our trucks do have day boxes that >> the way we work now is our trucks go
there when we need to pick up explosives. They take them out of the storage magazines and put them in their day boxes on the truck to get to the job site. >> Okay. So why why can you not specify the number of magazines and where they would be located? I'm and I'm not challenging
that. I just don't understand it. >> We just thought it'd be for we did it for simplicity reasons. Uh to be honest, we thought it would be easier to not increase the total uh capacity of the site. We felt it would be easier to just
say we're not looking to increase our capacity. We're looking to keep it the same. We're just looking to store uh we're looking for each individual storage unit to have different capacities instead of being locked into nine 20,000lb units.
>> Okay. So, what would a scenario look like? What what what's a what's a combination of magazines? What's their different what what would be the most and the least you could have in a magazine? >> Well, so it depends on the capacity and size of magazine. So currently we're
we're only approved to store 180,000 lbs on this site. >> That's right. >> Right. And so we're not looking to increase that capacity. We're just looking to change how we store it. So instead of limiting us to 20,000 lbs per
magazine and have up to 9, we would like to have the ability to store a larger capacity in one magazine and then decrease the number of other magazines we would have on the site. Okay. And JP, does that present any kind
of an issue for you is if if you were to um envision a fire situation? >> Um, no. I mean, I think as long as we know where the magazines um individual magazine sites are um and I mean conceivably there wouldn't be
more than if I if I'm understanding correctly, we're we're probably looking at a maximum of seven magazines. Is that correct? >> Right. Yeah. Yeah. If you take this 60,000 lb silo, then yes, we'd be down
to six additional magazines for a total of seven. Okay. >> Okay. >> I think it would it would probably make make uh make it a little bit easier for people to understand if we just go with the number seven. I don't know if that would require an amendment to anything
or not, but um it just helps better understand. I think there there there is a concern that you know there might be that the number of magazines might actually increase for some reason if you know if it's not limited. Does that make sense to you? I I I I
understand what you were saying. You were just trying to keep it simple, but I think that's one of the concerns that people may have had. >> Yeah. And we're fine with that. I I Yeah. Yeah. I mean, at the end of the day, you know, we're we're limited to the 180,000 pounds. If if we want to
specify the permit to be, you know, seven magazines, I I'm completely fine with that. >> Okay. All right. That's Thank you for that. Um Okay. And now as I mentioned, no, let me just
stop. Does anybody else have any questions about the structure of this um >> Yes. >> Yeah, I have a question. So, you were describing that you had a containment um area, but I don't see any containment area in this um >> I'm I'm I'm so sorry to interrupt you.
Could you identify yourself for our >> Roger Kennedy, 82 Chestnut Plane Road, across the street from all of this? Okay. And can someone answer that? >> Yes. So, it's within that it it's within that shell. You're seeing the outer
containment. >> So, the containment is the is an outer jacket. >> Correct. >> And there's an inner jacket. >> Yes. >> Okay. What's What is the What is the jacket made of?
>> Uh I believe everything is uh carbon steel. Uh let's see here. >> Yeah, it's carbon steel. >> Yes. So I'm familiar with this area over here. There's um the on the map that you
showed um because you know I've lived here my whole life at least my my childhood uh life and there's a lot of wetlands um and marshy areas right there in that location right adjacent right next to where that site is.
There's a brook that runs through it and you know there there's also a lot of hunting that goes on. I'll say right at that right at that boundary line. >> Yeah, I think I would defer to John right it was the plan was b all that was
taken into consideration. Um, I would say that the topography that's shown, I I see no, you know, indications by the topography of of a, you know, a stream or or brook course uh in that vicinity or anywhere particularly close. Um,
>> yeah, there is right there. You'd have to walk it. Uh again I with due deference I I have not been to the site personally but um uh I I don't believe that our survey cruising you know they would have presumably located any sort of water course if it had been encountered in the course of doing the
field work. So >> the my name is Mike Moore. The Brooks they run down to Mill River and the Mill River runs into the Connecticut. >> The there there is surface running water on both the north side and right through
the center of that property that come down and then cross the driveway and go to the north side of our property which is at the base of all of this. We are at 73 Chestnut Plane Road. >> Yeah. that brook that comes right from there goes right into my property.
>> Okay. That is a conservation commission uh requirement then if if you're working in wetlands in that way that requires a hearing with them. Um you're I mean I know you say your surveyors would have presumably found
that but that needs to be um absolutely documented. I'm not sure that these areas have been designated a wetlands, but there is a lot of water up there and it's year round. It is not just in the spring when
we have meltoff. >> Yes. >> Okay. That's not a that's not an issue for the ZBA, but I will say that any permit the ZBA issues will have conditions that it must have have had um you know that every other town
requirement will have been met. >> Yes. Yeah. And and the grading that will there's really no grading we'll be doing up there to install this. It'll be a flat concrete pad. So the the grading isn't going to change. I have another question about the uh
silo. Um, so you're saying that if that thing if that thing fully leaks, you have that all contained? >> Yes. >> In the jacket.
>> Okay. This is um th this is is this your first time having a liquid an emulsion since your 2013 permit? Uh yes. So our our the the magazines we have there aren't large enough to store this.
>> Okay. >> Yes. >> Um so that is that's a different kind of storage and that and as I mentioned at the start of this hearing, this is something we need to look at not just in light of the special permit requirements which your application was very thorough
about but also uh in light of the aquifer protection bylaw dis bylaw. Um, so I I see that we do have um and we'll get to that. Um, um, we have Judy Marlin here who is very knowledgeable about
that. Um, okay. If you I think you can stop sharing. Does anyone have any more questions about this at all? >> About what? I I have a qu I don't know if this is appropriate time, but um is there a a process for cleanup and
notification to the town of any leakage or spills >> or damage to the structure for whatever reason? >> Yeah. So, it'll be it'll be inspected every year. Uh it'll have annual maintenance, annual inspections. ATF and
and state fire marshall uh are on site every year inspecting all our magazines. So it'll it'll have annual inspections and annual maintenance. Uh and then you know the standard protocol would would uh with any spill would would fall to you know haz whopper conditions and uh
you know you call the authorities OSHA and and whatnot. um you know any any construction standard spill I would say. >> Okay. Um I I would just mention that um it's the building inspector who actually
is the enforcement authority for the zoning board's permits. Um and then the fire marshall and ATF are they overlook the explosives part of this. Um,
so other other questions on what we've seen so far from any >> we have can we have the petition uh or the petitioner present the the full petition before we jump into the questions? >> Yeah. And so now I can bring that up. I
can share that. Um >> I mean I have some other questions too. I don't know if it's the right time to ask it about, you know, but this you mentioned. >> I think we'd like I think we'd like to have the presentation first and then the questions so we have the full flavor of
what's being requested here. >> Okay. Do you h would you like me to keep scrolling or would you like to um have me go to a particular spot? >> Are you addressing that to me? >> Yes. Whoever wants to present this. I
mean, I think the narrative might be the most illustrative uh thing to to scroll to. Again, I think I briefly explained the history that it was, you know, originally permitted in 1981, amended in 2013 when Bay State blasting took it over, and I think the narrative does a a
reasonably uh good job of of summarizing uh what what is proposed. Okay, >> just getting to that. We've got quite a bit Okay, this is the project narrative. Would you like to just paraphrase it?
I mean, we we know the history as you've said. Um, so where would you like I I think you've scrolled by probably the the the most um if you want to go. Yeah, if starting in in the middle of
the uh the page there, I mean, if we can just move on to the Bay State blasting uh you know portion of the uh site. Um you know, it speaks to the 2013 special permit uh that was issued um allowing
the nine magazines with up to 20,000 pounds per magazine. Um and there were some we'll call them housekeeping measures to remove conditions five and six. um which were approved at that time.
>> Okay. >> Okay. So, condition five said um >> we removed that condition. >> We removed that condition that expansion in any form will only be allowed under a
new special permit. So, so why are we here for a new special permit? We're here for an amendment to the existing special permit because the the >> But I'm asking I'm asking the petitioner though because isn't this an expansion
of the existing permit? >> I I I would argue that the we're not increasing the uh volume of material on site. So I I that would be my response in short. >> Okay. So but why do you think you need an amendment?
Well, because it states that our magazines have a maximum capacity of 20,000 rounds per magazine. >> Okay. So, it's the it's the specific increase of that one uh the big guy above the 20,000 limit,
>> right? That that alone would trigger it. Yes. >> Okay. Thanks. Would you like to move to um your your responses to our special permit
requests? I mean our our special permit criteria. >> You'd like to to scroll down there. Um my associate Nina Fazio has has prepared this and I think the responses are are succinct and and uh you know >> address them.
Okay. So, we do the the applicant has given a response to each of the special permit criteria. Um, and this has been on our website for more than a week. Um, I don't know how you if you want to walk us through it
again or how many pe I mean what ZBA members, what do you want to do? >> I'd like them to walk us through it. >> Okay. Yes. Um a in front of you. Uh the proposed project shall comply with the
environmental performance standards specified in section 171-15 of this chapter and with all other pro provisions of this chapter. Um the new magazine uh will comply with the performance standards outlined in the
section of weight zoning bylaw. Um it's not going to alter the uh intensity or nature of the permitted use um other than the larger uh silo uh that is you know larger than the 20,000 uh maximum
that was previously permitted. Um and again as we were discussing earlier the the buffer distance from the uh property lines and and the existing site topography and and wooded nature of the site we believe will uh satisfy the that
issue. >> Um next one B speaks to uh traffic congestion and uh pedestrian safety. Uh I'm presuming and and Mr. Beltazar can certainly jump in, but I I don't think that uh this is going to demonstraably
increase the amount of traffic uh going to or from the site again without significant change in in operations uh proposed. Uh you know, it's going to be basically the same operation just with a different material coming in and exiting the site. Uh um would be my my brief
explanation of that. Um if Dennis has anything to add, feel free. No, it's it's there will be no change to the you know to the amount of trucks coming and going >> and similarly uh see you know speaking to uh noise, dust, fumes, gases,
radiation or other significant adverse environmental impacts. Again I I would submit that the um use is going to be largely the same with similar vehicles entering and exiting the site just with different material being uh brought in
and transferred out. And it also speaks in that uh to the uh the proposed silo that I'm sure it meets all of the you know requirements by uh state and federal regulations for the storage of said materials. Item D um shall not increase erosion,
flooding or sedimentation either on site or on neighboring properties consistent with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act. Um the site uh in our narrative we describe how the uh site is going to be
silt fence uh and erosion controls will be added prior to the start of any construction as Mr. Beltazar noted. Uh the site preparation will require minimal grading. They're essentially going to be putting this uh pad on on uh
existing grade in as much as they can. Um the uh there will be obviously clearing and rubbing of the of the site in order to uh you know create the uh pad as as to to contain the silo. But uh
you know it's it's not a very large uh >> pad or or silo. So, you know, we're probably talking about, you know, even with accessing it, you know, a work area of, I don't know, perhaps, you know, 40 to 50 feet square would be my best guess to allow for grading and access to uh
construct same. And as noted uh we are not aware of any wetlands uh within jurisdiction of the proposed uh you know work but uh again that that is something that as noted by the board we will certainly have to
comply with if it is an issue and fully intend to do so. Um item E, proposed projects shall not create significant adverse impact to the quality of surface water or groundwater during and after construction and provision shall be made for maximizing
groundwater recharge. Uh we are the only amount of imperous area that we're proposing would be the uh pad that the tank sits on as noted in a prior um uh number excuse me letter D. We are
going to be installing silt fence and erosion controls um prior to any construction. So we don't anticipate any uh runoff from the site uh certainly not uh within or onto adjoining properties. And again as noted the uh with the pad
uh it's going to be a dimminimous uh you know impact on the amount of imperous area on the site. So the recharge is going to be essentially what it was beforehand. It's not going to change uh you know virtually at all.
>> Okay. But but there is if if god forbid this emulsion leaked it it won't leak in leech into the groundwater. Is that correct? >> That is correct. the the silo as uh was discussed and shown on that cut sheet is
a you know a doublewalled uh structure to if if the inside were to rupture or leak somehow it would be contained within the outside uh um jacket if you will. >> Okay. Okay.
>> Can I can I raise one quick question about the um the containment? Um, so I I do understand that it's a double wall tank and and it's basically to pro protect against corrosion from the inside um should it leak. Um, and and I
guess would give some measure of protection from the outside from penetration. uh if there is a leak cuz my that's why I asked the original question about a containment uh dyke around the area because if there is a leak in the plumbing or in the valving and it is a
liquid presumably that would go unchecked until somebody returned um to the site. Is that a safe assumption? I I would assume that if the leak were to be uh you know outside in in the
valve or or um you know I'm not super familiar with the uh proposed uh um structure but that that is probably fair to say. I'm not sure if Dennis has anything further to uh add. Uh yeah, I mean other than redundant valves um you know I the having the
containment and redundant valves you know I think you know all the precautions have been made to as is you know as much as you can. >> Um okay that that does raise a concern for me. I mean I realize this business
has been in operation for 40 years. We have not had um a breach. But now you're proposing a liquid and the the simple reality is that that this is 100, you know, this is
60,000 lbs of the liquid that is sitting on top of our aquifer. Um, so I don't think I think that there has to be more than just two tanks for safety's sake on this, but I I that
I'm raising that now and we can come back to it when we look at the aqua for protection bylaw. Um, >> how often is somebody up there? >> Well, it's, you know, it varies. It could be multiple times a week. Uh, one
time a week, could be every day. So, I think the fire chief's question was related to whether there's a alarm system or anything like that, but it sounds like there's not. >> Yes. So, uh that's something we could look into as far as like a leak alarm. All all all the magazines are armed for
security reasons. Uh but as far as a leak detection, that's something we could we could look into with our security company. >> What do you mean by armed? >> Uh for security. >> What does the word armed mean? I mean, >> alarm system. It's a It's a security alarm system. So,
>> alarmed. Okay. Armed. Alarmed. Okay. Got it. >> I'm sorry. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, they're ti They're tied into emergency response. >> Um, >> so the is there not liquid in the other tanks now? What's in the other tanks?
What type of material? We don't know this. >> Oh, so yeah. So, the magazine So, magazine is just I would say a general term uh for something that holds explosives. Uh they can be different shape, sizes. Uh currently we have uh you know uh sticks of dynamite uh which
is nitroglycerin. Uh whereas the ammonium nitrate uh emulsion is um you know compared to the nitroglycerin. It's a lot less sensitive. It it it's takes a lot more u energy uh to to ignite than
than uh uh dynamite the sticks of dynamite. The other magazines have six of dynamite uh lead lines, caps, and boosters. >> All right. So, not liquid. >> Yes. No. Right. So, basically, this is bulk. This would be we'd have a bulk
truck that would uh you know remove the remove the emotion from the tank into our bulk truck and go to a job site. >> Okay. That is that's very that's very new from what we approved in 2013. >> Yeah. Versus Yeah. Versus >> Yeah. Whereas right now we're taking
we're still going in with trucks and and tra we're manually transporting the material into the day boxes on the truck. Uh here we would be transporting the material into a different truck. >> Yeah. I mean that was one of the um the points I wanted to make because you said
there would be no change in the you know in the traffic with the trucks or it would be the same but really that's not true because you're talking about different trucks. you're talking about pump trucks are going to be going in there now that also could potentially leak. I mean, you know, there's once you
once you fill these trucks, right, and assuming there's no leakage when you're actually filming uh filling the truck, um there is the potential that the truck could leak um as it's driving down the road or you know um driving from that
site onto the main road. Um, and it is a different type of truck that is generally bigger than the box trucks that you guys have been using. >> Yeah. Yep. Yep. It's definitely >> more wear and tear on the roads and more noise.
>> I I mean, I wouldn't say it's more noise than we're going to have less pickups going into the our other magazines. So, I would say it'd be an offset as far as activity and noise goes. Well, I mean, a truck that would like that size is going to have Jake brakes
and other engine retarders and things that make noise when it goes down the hill. >> Do you have a picture of the truck? >> I do not. No. >> Are they What's comparable? Uh, I mean, I would say if you, you
know, uh, it's, uh, some sort of, um, you know, oil tanker with pumps on it would be something comparable. >> They're definitely bigger trucks and and they make they do make more noise and
and they're a lot heavier. >> Okay. Yeah, they're all permitted by DOT and we have uh you know, we're licensed to travel on interstate highways and um you know, we have our you know, they're all
licensed, inspected, and good to travel on interstate roadways. >> Well, they got to go down a gravel road. I'm familiar with the road that goes up there. Okay. It's all gravel and you know so you know there would be um you know an impact to that potentially to
the adjacent properties the neighbors with uh you know whatever disruption that makes with uh having the bigger truck going up and down and like I said it is definitely a noise um increase in noise with those size trucks
>> but with a potential leak as well. >> Yeah. I mean again everything's licensed. Yeah, I I mean any anything can leak anywhere at any time, but you know, operations still you know, we still have to operate a business and you know, we just feel that this usage uh
really isn't we're we're storing explosives on the site to a maximum capacity. I don't know that there was really any limitations to the type of material. Um >> Yeah. Well, I mean, this is an aquifer as was mentioned before for the whole
town. >> Mhm. Yeah. Yeah. No, we're aware of that. >> Are these your trucks or that you license them from or you rent them from third parties? >> So, no, we would we would be purchasing a truck. It'd be our truck. >> Okay. >> So,
>> we we would have one truck that we purchased >> and go from the property to job sites. So, for your uh you re you had a another project last year and uh I bought a decibel meter and your trucks passing by
our house. We're reaching about 50 which is the about the limit. So, this whole area is zoned residential agricultural. It's not even zoned as commercial. And a lot of the work and
things that go on are commercial and that doesn't seem to be changing. But this adding the large additional larger trucks coming in and out does not sound like it's going to have no impact on what's going on. And it's
it's it's just kind of beyond what's been expected in what had been there for a lot of years, which had not been problematic at that point. >> Okay. Let's let's let them finish.
>> Okay. special per and I'm noting everything you're saying about the changes um to >> Can I ask one question though Deborah that's on this topic? >> Sure. >> So Dennis uh I believe that you uh your
company has other facilities in other locations. Is that correct? >> Uh no we don't. >> Oh this is the only facility. >> Yes. >> All right then I don't have any other questions. Okay. Okay. So, I think you're on F.
>> Um, sure. Um, resuming the, um, items here. Uh, project shall be compatible with existing uses and other uses allowed by Wright in the district and shall be designed to be compatible with the character and scale of the neighboring properties. Um, as was just
alluded to, um, this, uh, operation is, uh, you know, it's it's we'll say grandfathered. Um, it's a pre-existing nonconforming use at this point under the Weightley zoning bylaw. Um as we have just been discussing also recently
um we certainly are of the opinion that the notwithstanding the size of the vehicles that the amount of of traffic and uh you know vehicles entering and exiting the site is going to be essentially the same as uh is currently
going on. That there's going to be you know virtually no change in in the operation of the site or or or minimal at best. And it's also um again as noted in further down in there, it's it's uh
uh the site of operations is located well over a thousand ft from any of the existing residences and it's shielded by uh uh the wooded nature of the site. Like I will move on to G. The design of the project shall minimize
the visibility of visually degrading elements and protect the neighboring properties from potentially detrimental or offensive uses through the use of screening or vegetated buffer zones. As noted in the prior response, the uh distance from the existing residences
and the wooded nature of the site uh is going to preclude probably anybody being able to see uh the proposed new silo. Okay. >> H. The design of the project shall minimize earth removal and the volume of cut and fill. Any grade change shall be
in keeping with the general appearance of the neighborhood. Again, as I noted in one of the uh well earlier, um there is not going to be uh significant grading of the site. We're going to try
and set the uh pad for the silo um as close as we can to existing grade. There will be minimal uh grading around it to allow for a level uh structure, but u we're not going to do any significant cuts or fills anywhere on the site. and
any materials will be I'm sure maintained on the site and not trucked off and no material will be brought in to construct the new um silo and pad. >> Okay. >> I the removal of existing trees and vegetation shall be minimized. If
established trees are to be removed, special attention shall be given to the planting of replacement trees. Um, as was noted when we were looking at the site plan, uh, the area in question is, uh, the tree line is, uh, to the north
of it. So, I'm sure there's likely some vegetation there that will have to be cleared and grubbed, but um, again, the site is is well, uh, wooded as I understand it. And, uh, you know, there will be obviously we have to maintain some clear area around the uh, the silo
and pad. Um but uh as as far as the uh vegetation and buffer zone associated with it, again I think the site is uh uh well established as as a you know a wooded area. So
>> okay, >> I'll move on to J. The design of the project shall provide for adequate methods for disposal of sewage, refuse, or other waste generated by the proposed use. Um we are not propo I mean other than uh during construction you know the the
silo will be you know accepting uh deliveries on a regular basis and and you know will be uh trucked out in in stages on on the vehicles to uh you know the various work sites in question. Um, you know, as far as any other operations
on the site, they are not going to be impacted uh in any significant manner by the proposed new uh silo. >> Is that silo brand new or is it in use elsewhere? >> You're muted. >> I'm sorry. Yeah. Uh yeah, it's a used
silo that we're buying from one of our uh distributors. >> Do you know how old it is? Uh I I don't >> and if that's no further questions, I'll move on to item K. The proposed use will
not overload the capacity of public facilities such as water and sewer systems, storm drainage schools, and refuge disposal facilities. As noted in the prior couple of responses, uh this should have a dimminimous effect on the operation of the site and it should not
significantly alter the way it's currently running. Um non non-issue as far as I I would uh as far as I can see. >> Okay. So, that is the response to the special permit and we've heard some
challenges to um your responses. I maintain my biggest concern remains the fact that there is liquid that could leak into the town's aquifers. Now, with that,
>> Deborah, Deborah, can I just interrupt? And it didn't really make me feel good to have Mr. Balthazar say that anything can leak. >> Yes. Yes. >> And it doesn't make me feel good um that it's a used container. >> No, >> I I'm sure it's certified and all that,
but those things don't make me feel good. I wonder if there was as much as 60,000 lbs of material that went into the upper aquifer of the eastern part of town to pollute it forever. Um this is just something that I can't
that sits on our water. >> Yes, it does. And we can't minimize uh how careful this has to be done. I've watched trucks load and unload material before. There's always stuff that spills.
>> Yeah. >> I don't I I don't want I don't want it to be minimized. I I want answers to these questions about how we're going to be careful if if this gets granted, how we're going to be careful about all this on our water supply. >> No. And and I I could not agree more.
and not just how if it's possible to be as careful as we need to. >> Yeah. And I and I and I I'm sorry. Yeah. I don't mean to minimize it. Um uh by any means. I mean, we're in the business of of not having issues, not having mistakes because they cost money. Uh but
you know, it we do have a second containment. there's redundant valves and we would be open to discussing perhaps a third measure of containment if if if that would make everybody more comfortable. I I think at the very least
we need to see a much more detailed safety plan and and that is not that's please don't and again I'm aware that your business is that this this use has been in our town for decades
and no one is against it per se but this is a significant change to the 2013 permit where we now have a liquid emulsion sitting right on top of the aquifer. And so that is why after going through
the special permit issue, um, and this does not discount the noise and the trucks and and those things that could make a difference in that area. Um, but I, you know, as Bob mentioned, this would be beyond catastrophic for this
town. You know, this this would not this would be the water supply. I mean, I don't know how familiar folks are with what Weightley went through in the 80s. We're losing all of its water supply in the east. So, that is not something we
can we can sanction or or take lightly again, which is So, at this point, I I can stop the share and I have brought up uh for another possible share the aquaer protection.
Um, Um, okay. At this point, I don't I don't uh Judy Marklin is here who has done a lot of work with the aquifer and she did send a letter to our board with
her concerns. Judy, do you want to speak to that before I show this or do you want me to read your letter or? >> Well, I think many of my concerns have been addressed already, but I didn't want to and I should point out that both
Brandt and Tom Litwin, Tom was one of the original authors of >> Yes. >> and they are they're probably each better equipped to deal with it than I. But I did want to point out that the aquifer protection district has its own
requirements for special permit application which have not been addressed. >> And I have those to share. >> They are lengthy. >> Yes. >> And and I suspect it would involve another you know asking the applicants
to address those and come back. >> But is there a map? Is there a map? Is there a map that shows us clearly that we are over the aquifer in this location? >> Yes, there is. Hang on. I'm gonna I'm not I may have >> It was It was in the application. It's
It's zone two, which is the immediate >> in their site >> in their zoning site, they address zone two and zone three. >> Yep, they do. I think it was toward >> it's in a separate on the line. It was in a separate attached separate link.
>> Okay. I thought we had put it into this one. If not, I can go out and get it. Um just bear with me. Okay. I'm going to need to um hang on a second.
Stop the share. Okay, hang on. Hang on, hang on, hang on. >> The joys of technology. >> I know. Okay. There's only so much my screen can hold if I load it up in advance.
Okay. Okay, that might not be it. Okay, let me see. I can share this. Okay. Okay. I think we did see this though. Let me see if I can make it a little
bigger. >> No, there's there's another one in color. >> Okay. >> And I don't think it's >> I believe the map you're looking for is included in our our application. Um >> I thought that >> section 4 locus but just beyond what we
were going through actually. >> Okay. I had thought that it was and it's beyond these old permits, right? >> Well beyond. Yes. >> I think it's at the back. >> Yeah. Section four. >> There it is. Yes. Yep.
>> Okay. >> Okay. So, where Sorry, folks. You see where it says zone two and zone three? Those are the aquifer protection districts. So zone 2 and there's some zone three in here as well. So it's
sitting right there. Zone two is the one that flows immediately into into the well area, >> right? >> Zone three flows into zone two. And the prohibitions and the the use
restrictions for each are similar. And so on on that note, and Brandt and Tom by all means jump in this, I had pulled up a few pages
from the aquaer protection. And so you can see that, let me just make this a little okay. And the bolding, the bolding here is mine. These are the prohibited uses.
And so the storage of liquid hazard materials and or liquid petroleum unless the storage is um and so it has all the um requirements. So I I would say but
it's these are substantial. Um and I I genuinely believe that given this change it should that Judy is right that this should have been addressed in the application. >> Okay. And if you go down to sections G
and H there's actually a whole separate special permit application. Um, >> G&H E F I didn't even bring up G&H, Judy. I just >> Okay. Well, that's fine because >> Yeah, it's it's it's very lengthy. It's
in our It's in I can show you where it is. I can share one more thing. Um, let me grab it. >> I realized that this was liquid storage. I would have I hadn't assumed that.
Well, frankly, on Monday when I met with the fire marshal, he said that it was not, which is why I would not have um um I would not have waited until this moment to tell this to the applicants. Um I appreciate the fact that you were very honest about it.
>> Well, and just to clarify, I mean, it it's it it it's it's not a true liquid in the sense of a free flowing liquid. I mean, it it it it's a it's a mixture that um you know, it it's more cleaned up, you know, with a shovel in a bucket
than than leaking. Um >> yes, but it's an emulsion which is liquid. >> See, I don't know that for a fact. That's a scientific point. I don't know the distinction scientifically. And >> I think that's something we can look into.
>> And I think we need to know that. Um because why would the why would the fire marshall say it's not a liquid? >> He said that it was pellets and that it was moved as a pellet to the job site and there it became liquefied. >> Why would he think that?
>> I don't know. I do not know. I mean >> I'm not asking you per se, but I mean >> because the material, you know, in the business how we call it bulk liquid, right? So, it's perhaps that term that I use on a regular basis is not the right
scientific term. Uh, it it it it's not your typical liquid that that spills out and and flows like water. It's more of a u you know, like I said, it's uh it's it's picked up with buckets or or shovels uh more so than free flowing
it. So, I I apologize if if that term threw everybody off. Well, I I still think I mean the zoning bylaws are available on the town website, the most updated one and you will be able to see
um okay, I guess it didn't bring them all up. Um you will be able to find the aquifer protection. It's its own section. And I think that
um I I Well, first of all, do do people have other comments or questions? >> Um are the Yeah, I'm sorry. I do. Um are the uh trucks stored overnight with the with the chemicals in it?
>> No, the trucks would not be. So when they are finished at the end of their project, if the product hasn't been completely used on the job, it gets repumped back into the silo. >> It it the product will all be used on the job. Yeah. >> Every time.
>> Yeah. >> Now, if it does get in the ground, will it melt, be absorbed? >> Uh, no. Like I said, you know, it's it's not a true liquid where you think of water running out of a faucet. It's not going to run like water. It it's a very
thick and and uh easier to pick up with a shovel. >> Yeah. But it has to be pumped. I mean, it's a liquid. If it's pumped and you know, and if it's spilled and it rains, it's going to become very liquid.
You know, it's like a, you know, I'm familiar with explosives. I've worked on job sites before. It's like a u it's you know it's kind of like mud. It's that's what it's like. >> Yeah. So again you know we can discuss
uh uh you know some sort of uh containment area uh you know uh some sort of a trench around it that can you know hold that capacity that that would make everybody feel better. Well, I think and I'm just one board member and we haven't voted on anything,
but I I think where we're heading is that this meeting needs to be a continued. >> Yes. be that the petitioner the burden's on the petitioner to come in with a scientific report and may not be maybe
beyond the scope of expertise of MVC and associates with a scientific report from someone with uh credentialed expertise that will tell us a is it a liquid is it not a liquid what's the difference what is an emulsion what happens if an
emulsion spills into the ground and if that spill is over an aquifer And until all those points are addressed, it's premature for this board to have a vote. And further, even once we see that report, we as a board have a right to
refer out to a um third party expert uh of our own choice that would be paid for by the petitioner who would evaluate the report of that um that scientist. But it's it's and further that the um the presentation be amended to address all
the points in the aquifer protection overlay district. Um >> thank you Roger. Yes. Um >> we need we need some science here not just um the good faith effort of your your presentation team to tell us what
you think it it might be but we need we need some expertise. Bob, Kristen, >> agree 100% with Roger. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I want to fully understand this. >> Yep. >> Yeah, that's our problem. We don't fully
understand it. >> Yeah. >> We just lay people here. >> No, no problem. Yeah, we can we can get an expert opinion. That's that's not a problem. And >> Okay. and to address the uh act of protection bylaw that you'll find in the
zoning zoning bylaw uh the zoning our zoning bylaws and you might as well also think about additional safety measures. Um you had talked about a leak alarm in addition to uh multiple layers of containment
um just so that all bases are covered so that we have as much information as we need to make our decision. Um, we can continue this into into our next hearing in January. Um, if that doesn't give you enough time, we can continue it beyond that. We're happy to
accommodate your time schedule so that we get this information. >> Yeah. John, do you think that's enough time on your end? >> I would like to uh yeah, ask for a continuence to your next scheduled meeting in January. I think we can likely address the concerns in that amount of time.
>> Okay, let me just grab a calendar. January 8th. >> January 8th. Thank you, Bob. >> Um, >> one last question. I also wanted to just double check. Is this going to be something that is only going to be
accessible by Bayate Blasting or are there going to be other vendors in there to use this on other job sites? >> No, we're not selling the product to anybody. It's just for our own use. >> Okay. Does that answer everybody's questions
before we um have a motion to continue this hearing? >> I would be com more comfortable if there were more details on the silo itself or you know a cut sheet um some detailing on the double
>> Yep. and any information on safety safety um recognition or designations for the silo. >> Okay. You you might also want to use this time as well just to make
absolutely sure that you don't need conservation commission um hearing on that and um and you can reach out to their chair um they're on our our town's website as well to see what you'd need to do for that. >> Sure. We have we have staff members on
site who are >> wetland scientists who can inspect uh prior to the next meeting certainly. >> Okay. >> My question is why wouldn't we have needed that back in 2013? I mean why would the wetland suddenly reappear or or suddenly appear um to
>> I don't know. >> It's a new site. I mean it's away from some of the other magazines. >> Oh, how far is it away? Well, it's actually we're going to have to move some magazines because it's it's going to take the place of uh >> I'm sorry
>> where we currently are. >> I'm sorry. >> Yeah. So, it's it's it's not in a new location. We have magazines there already. >> Okay. So, do I have a motion to continue this hearing? >> Yeah. Could I ask for one more thing?
So, since there seems to be some confusion here, because what I saw on the map that they showed is is something um different than what I'm, you know, kind of hearing now. So, how about if you brought some pictures? Um, and then also maybe you could give us a a walk
through of the area so that you know people can actually see for themselves what I'm talking about when I say that, you know, there's um, you know, there's a marsh wet area over there and where the brook is because it seems like the person that did the map there wasn't even never even been on the site
himself. So I think it would be helpful to have some pictures of what that landscape is immediately around that area >> and the truck delivery trucks. >> Picture of the type of truck. Sure.
>> And delivery. >> Oh. Is the delivery truck different than the type that takes it out? Uh uh no. One last I've got one last thing, too. Um, what time are the deliveries going to be coming in and out
>> for resupplying the silo if it granted >> because right now you all come in and out anywhere between two and you know 6 in the morning. >> Yeah, that time would be based on their availability. I I don't we don't have
set times that we it we'd be reaching out to our vendors to see when they're available. >> Okay. >> Anything else? >> I move to continue to the January 8th hearing date. Second.
>> Okay. And I So, and now can I have a motion to vote on it? >> So moved. I too move to continue until January. Our January hearing. Uh, Roger, you're voting. >> Yes, I vote fail.
>> Okay. Um, okay. So, we will reconvene. You can continue to send information um to our ZBA um mailing address and we will post this um and an agenda for our January hearing.
>> Okay. Very good. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Thank you. and ZBA members stay. We have minutes to approve. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you all. >> Good night. >> Okay. Um I'm going to
I believe I pulled up these minutes. >> Can I ask for like a twominut recess? >> Yes. And I can go find the minutes we need to approve. Thank you. Okay. Okay. >> Mute myself here.
>> Oh, where are those minutes? Okay, I will return all the tips. Oops. Okay. Okay. >> Hi, I just want to get clarification. Is it January 4th that we all agreed on or
they agreed on? >> Uh, is it January 8th? >> It's January 8th. Yeah, January 8th. >> Oh, it was 8th. >> Yes. >> Oh, okay. Good. I just make sure I got that correct.
>> Yes. And um I >> that's okay. >> Yeah. So, do you feel comfortable, Gwen, letting um Jess know that we're going to need to
meet on that day and getting the um Zoom codes and stuff or do you want me to handle that? >> No, that's fine. I've been doing it for the planning board. That's so I can do that. >> That'd be great. And then >> we won't I won't do an agenda yet because you can just send me the codes
when you get them. I won't do an agenda yet because it's still possible we could get another hearing come in. Um, so I'll do an agenda. >> Right. Right. >> You've still got >> Yeah, I'll set a reminder. >> Yeah, that's fine. Just let me I'm using
my Outlook to do reminders right now of like we need what is not clicking. Um, So, January 8th and then um yeah, I would just touch base. Oh, yeah. There's
also a deadline for agendas that Amy just sent out, >> right? But yeah, >> I just I have to I haven't counted back yet for December when we um I always go 19 days back from January 8th. So, I'll do that tomorrow. you
know, and and we'll I I saw that agenda deadline come through. So, we'll be okay because if it's January 8th, you know, we only have to have it 48 hours in advance. So, the holiday the holiday holiday season will be behind us,
>> right? For sure. Yeah. Okay. I'll just set a reminder for myself December 30th to start thinking and asking if there's any other materials. >> Great. So much time. Okay, that is great.
>> Yeah, this is um so I'm trying to I can share I know we're waiting for Roger, but um okay, so well actually Roger doesn't have to
be here. I mean he can come back, but it he was not here for that meeting. So Bob and Kristen and I, we're the only ones who are Are you still there, Kristen? >> I I am. Can you hear me?
>> Yes, I can. So did people have a chance to look over these minutes? >> I I have any any issues? >> Everything looked good to me. >> Are you good, Bob? >> Yep, I am.
>> All right. So, can I have a motion to accept it? I move to I move to accept the October 2nd, 2025 minutes of the virtual meeting as written. >> And I will second that. >> Okay, Roger, you don't have to worry about this one because you weren't here.
Um, okay. So, a motion to vote then. >> So moved. >> So moved. Okay. I voted to accept them as well. >> Me too. >> Me three. >> Excellent. So, I will send these on to Jessica tomorrow. Thank you for doing
those, Gwen. Um, >> yeah, no problem. If you're going to send it to Jessica, does that mean I have to post it to agenda, though? I have to still send it to >> You know what? Why don't you know what? I'm going to send it to you and you can post it to to agenda. Okay. Will you do
you have it already? >> Yeah. Yeah, because that's I want to make sure I got the correct Yeah, because I just have to do that with the planning board, too. So I'll do that like right now. Just send it if everybody's fine with it. >> Yes. >> So I don't forget. >> Okay. No, that is perfect. That's
perfect. So in that case, we are we are done. >> Okay. And then we are joining. Okay. >> Okay. Well, we haven't voted to adjurnn yet, but we're about to unless anybody anything else. >> Could I just ask a question? >> Sure. uh
about the the uh town water system that that went in off of Chestnut Plane Road. Was was that done before the permit for the uh storage facility there for explosives?
Was was done? Which which came first, the permit for that or the water system? So the 1981 permit predates the um the building of the water system by 8 years I think. So it's 8788 something like that is when we um put the water system
in. >> Right. Okay. So so they knew about the uh explosive storage back then when the water system went in. I get okay what you're saying they knew. Well, interestingly, the person who worked the hardest to install the water system was
Paul Florio. >> Right. I know I realize that. Right. >> Right. >> At that at that point, it was a vested grandfathered use. >> Um, and >> and there's no in that at all. >> Right. >> Yeah. And and even in 2013,
it was it was slightly expanded, but it was the same type of a product. you know, this is this is a different product as as you know, as as they openly stated. Um, and again, you know, as I said, when the fire the fire
marshall as I put in my notes to you all after that meeting because um I would never have not let these folks know that they needed to bring more information if I had thought they did. >> Um, so, okay. So, a motion.
>> How did the fire chief or the fire marshall know what their product is? I you know Roger first of all he is the person who inspects once a year. He was um and he was he was very straight, you know, he was very open and he just he
was very sure of it because I even have it in my notes and in fact that very day I wrote the next day I wrote it up for all of you as a as a also for myself but I double checked my notes and he said no it would be liqufied on the job site and
so he might have assumed it based on um previous um areas that he inspects But >> well that's my point. But did he have any information about >> I don't know >> this petition in other or he's going
back on what is there now? >> Oh yes he was I'm sorry he was he was there because the select board had not yet determined that JP could come to our meeting that there's a conflict of interest there. He's now in
a butter. Uh Lisa Moore is Lisa Floral Moore, so she's his cousin. Um and the select board last night determined that he could act um in his professional capacity to advise us. It was, you know, it was it obviously it was a tricky
situation. I think he did a great job. Um, so the so so the fire marshall was there at the meeting with Pete and Amy and me because of the of the pending conflict of interest. He was there to ask questions. Um, but he was very very
clear. He said his role was the explosives part of it and zoning is the purview of us and the building inspector. He seemed surprised when I said, "I'm asking this because we really
have to be careful of liquids up there." And he said, "Oh, okay." He said, "Well, that's zoning. That's planning." But he seemed to think that the product itself would be pellets. >> Okay. >> Okay. Any anybody else have any questions about it?
>> No. So, but essentially his advice is, I hate to say it, but useless. Yeah. And he and he wasn't pretending to to be otherwise. He's he would be useful in terms of a yearly inspection up there for the the explosives, but in terms of
being aware of the weight history and the water situation, I'm not sure that's not his >> his wheelhouse at all. >> Ron. >> Okay. All right. So, a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Seconded.
>> All right. I'm I'm voting to adjourn.