the planning board meeting for December 9th. First things on the agenda uh to approve the minutes of the previous meetings of November 4th and November 24th, 25th.
We'll do that together. If there are no objections, can I have a motion to approve meeting minutes November 4th and November uh 25th? >> I make a motion we accept the minutes of the the last two meetings of November.
>> Have a second. >> Second. >> Any further discussion? I hear see none. All in favor? >> I I all oppose. No opposition. Meeting minutes approved. We'll open the public hearing for Mount
Wusa Community College. Ro project and the only thing I have to say about that right now there Hanigan Engineering on behalf of uh Mount Wus Community College Foundation submitted the withdrawal of the project. As you recall
in one of the I believe in the public meeting there was a discussion of the boundary um on the back the back boundary was they took away some of the property of an of an abuter and so that reconfigured
the project. It lessened the parking spaces required and they also reduced the building size so below the requirements that would require a public
meeting. So they submitted a withdrawal um without prejudice and so it's removed from any further discussion. If I if I may just kind of interject, the size of the addition
didn't change. It stayed at 2,00. That's not what originally triggered site plan review. The site plan review was triggered from the additional parking spaces that were originally created. Uh this parking spaces on the site as of right now are 30 with the proposed
changes to the plan given the land that's now being taken into account uh for the abuter is now changed to 42. So that's an additional 12 parking spaces that are being created for this and site planner view is triggered at 15 uh
additional spaces. So that being the case for what triggered site planner view and no longer being the case with their development now their build is considered as of right and all they have to do is go through uh obtaining an order of conditions through the conservation commission and then a
building permit through the building department. Make a motion to grant leave to withdraw without prejudice for the site plan application for 42 Lisa Avenue. >> Have a second. >> Second. >> Okay. Any further discussion? None.
>> All in favor? >> I oppose. I hear none. Passed. It's withdrawn. Next one is Gamma G A M A H the GR Green Street project. Good evening.
>> Good. Good to see you. >> Oh. Um, in front of you, Jason on the table right here. Oh. Could you state your name and who you represent? >> Wesley Fiss Marti Engineering here to represent Gamma Incorporated.
Let's see PC there. So, the reason we're here this evening is for a definitive site plan review application. Um, before we get going on my presentation, I do I know actually heard you guys talking previously and I do want to
apologize for the late uh information and so we went in front of the conseration commission for the same item last night. We had a continuation in front of the conseration commission and so what we were waiting for was information from Mass D on their review of the project. They sent us their review on 3:00 on the Wednesday before
Thanksgiving. So, by the time we got that and had a chance to revise everything, obviously we were trying to get it back to you as soon as we could get it done and get it reviewed on our behalf um and then get it to you guys. And so, I apologize for late notice. Understanding tonight that the thought is to at least come and present the product to you. Um there's
not a lot of changes from when you saw it last, get any of the questions out from the board members, any of Butters that may be here tonight, and then come back in January hopefully for a final meeting. Um but at least have this initial meeting to get any questions out if we if we needed any changes. We had the same issue with, you know, same
conversation with the conservation commission last night and they obviously wanted a chance to obviously review the information. I know Rob needs a chance to review the information because part of our uh adjustments to the plans had to do with Rob's uh initial peer review and I know I'm sure Eric you probably want to and what I would ask is if you
don't have questions tonight if you have questions between now and then if you could just send them along through Jason to us just so we can maybe address them before the next meeting. >> Very good. Thank you. >> Hopefully they're minor nature. we can address them quickly and then and take care of it at the next meeting and then hopefully close everything at the next meeting if possible. So again, the
reason we're here for is a deficit site review. Uh we trigger two two uh standards regards to the site interview. One being a structure greater than 2500 ft and the other one is the 15 new parking spaces. And so as we presented you a month ago for the preliminary site
plan review, we were about 115 acre parcel that Gamma owns off of Green Street. It's 827 Green Street is their property. They have a number of u buildings on the property. This is the Eric Dollhouse. Um they have a couple barns on the property and some smaller
sheds. Obviously the horse track. Uh they have a large area that they have for the farm animals um for their treatment um programs that they run on the property and some garden areas and so forth. This the blue square here is the new location for the cell tower
that's going to be going up on the property that I know was in front of the the town of the city in the past um for that. So that's under construction now. See so again this is just a little closer look of the area that we're looking at
on the site for the development. This is the Eric Dollhouse. There's a barn here and a barn here. Um we do show some wetlands on the property, some isolated wetlands, some uh boarding vegetated wetlands that we're in front of the conservation commission for. Um and really this is the area that they're
looking at to put up their new facility. The the cell towers in this locate roughly that location in there. Um and so what the proposal in front of you this evening is is for a 74 by 100 uh foot uh barn. We call it a barn. It's
going to be um I can show you the floor plan real quick too. Just have a better idea of what we're looking at. And so this is the the building I'm looking It's, like I said, 74 ft by 100 ft. We call it the barn. The bigger portion of it, it's going to be an open barn area.
Um, I can zoom in a little bit for you guys to see what we're looking at. And so, what they want to do is they they need some office space. They need some classroom space. They're running out of kind of some space that they need here. And they're trying to better service um the clients that they have on the property and that they that come onto
the property. And so, again, this is the bigger open Let's see if I can >> That frustrates me. >> Yeah, I know. Huh? This is >> If you want, you could always unplug the Ethernet cord if it runs into trouble in
the computer next to you. >> Got it. That's fine. We're good. So, this is their main barn area. They have some storage room. They have a a I guess a smaller barn area. They call it their workshop. So, they can do some one-on-one animal uh client um work
within the workshop area. They have some smaller meeting space, a group room for a larger uh meeting space, some offices, bathrooms, more storage, and just a break room, a couple more offices just for the the employees. And then what they're trying to do is, like I said,
use this space to better service the clients that they already have. Uh expand some of the programs they already they've already been doing, but just have a better uh better space to do that where u really they've been kind of retrofitting a lot of the buildings that they have now for their programs. they want to build something new to better
service their clients. Um, and so that that's the intent of the the building. Again, it's um it's nothing new for the programs they already run in the city, but just really an you know, expansion um of those, you know, better better
facilities, the uses they already have. Zoom in here a little bit. And so the location of the building is going to be right between the two barns that they have on the property. And so this is the L-shaped barn. So this will be the Eric Doll house right
here on the left hand side. They have the L-shaped barn and then the the long uh rectangular barn. There's a pocket of isolated wetlands. This is where the driveway is going to be for the cell tower. And so we're just going to connect right off of where they already have the the driveway kind of being built in. If you put out to the site,
there's already a stone driveway there that they're using for the construction uh driveway for the cell tower. And so we'll expand on that driveway. Uh pave that driveway up to where we'll need it for this project. Put in a 15th space parking lot with a couple handicap spaces adjacent to the building. The
like I said the the barn building here, the concrete sidewalk in the front and some handicap ramps. So it'll be handicap handicap accessible. Um where I showed that more of one to one classroom for the animals. They have a ramp here out of that area. So they can have a overhead door for that. And then
there'll be an overhead door in the back also uh for the barn, that larger barn section. There'll be a couple other main doors also in the on the back side there. As part of the the project, we are proposing an individual um septic
system for this building for the bathrooms um in the field. And so it will have to be built up a little bit. When we did some soil testing out there, the soils actually were good soils, but the groundwater is very high up there. It's 18 in from the ground surface. Great for farming, not great for uh
drainage. And so then for drainage, we do show along the edge of the building. We do show a piece diaphragm on each side of the building to allow for infiltration off of the building. I know it was a question last time about the metal roof. So it is going to be a metal roof, but it's going to be a treated metal roof. So there's not uh doesn't meet that the requirement that DP needs
a pre-treatment of that. And so that was something I did go back and ask um my boss who because we're actually I think we're going to be building the building also for them. And so that was one of the things I asked him is one of the things that we could you know what are we doing for that? He said they'll treat the roof um we paint it with and I can't
remember he had a term for whatever he's going to treat with but there's something on there that it meets the D requirement that it's not a metal roof. And so that was the intent of that. And so we will do the POE diaphragms for the roof drainage. The parking lot runoff will come off into a POE diaphragm and then into a forbay which will give us
the 44% uh TSS removal which will be help meet that standard five and six which we'll talk about a little bit on the response letter that I have to and then into our soil water basin here before going out to the wetlands. We are going to be working with um a
different company in regards to water supply for this because we there is no city water out here and so they'll have to put a new well in is what they're looking at. And I know as part of everything that goes on in the property, they already have a water supply on the property, but because of what's going on now for the new building, they'll have to put a new water supply on the
building. So, we're working with somebody else on getting that permitted. It's going to be a process. We'll have to go through DP with all that stuff for >> public water supply. >> Yeah, I think public water supply for this. And that's the problem is because they have so many they they service so many people on the property right now.
They're they're maxed out with regards to the well they have on the property. I think above beyond that with this expansion that's going to trigger us into a and so that's something we'll be working with gamma on that piece of it but they want to at least get the site plan review get the concom approval for the building and all the work that we're
showing here and then the public water supply part will come in at a a later date with regards to anything that needs coming in front of the city >> is that new well area been designated or >> it has not so that's it's a >> be some research >> it's it's a big process with regards to
that correct drilling test drilling >> test drilling it has to be approved by D before they before they can even do that then they have to do the test drilling that has to be reviewed by D it's a process it can run up to a year on a on a process like that so that's something that we are working through u getting
that rolling with the different company to do that part of it it's just complete different animal that it's it's quite a process where something of of that magnitude but because of the number of people they service on this property now puts us puts them into that threshold um So that also requires a monthly
testing probably imagine. >> Yeah, there's all kinds of stuff that they need to do. Like I said, it's even to get the well in and running. Like I said, it's a it's a long, like I said, the last one we were doing, I think it was around a year that we were involved just to even get it up and running. It's it's quite a process to
get going. >> But in the meantime, if we can get everything else in the ground and ready to go, and then they can tie the water at the same time and hopefully get that up and running at the same time and get everything moving together. So, uh, erosion control we do show on the
property, um, really it's at at the limit of the disturbance on the low side of the pro the property and so we're showing road control barriers here, this area here, and then along the storm water basin adjacent to the wetlands. Um the site is very flat out there and so
we don't expect a lot of erosion issues as part of the construction of it which is a a benefit of the site because it's it's so flat you know good and bad benefit of it we don't see a lot of erosion in the construction the bad part of it is trying to get the drainage to move in a in a positive way but also
meet some of the standards that D has um and so there's there's pros and cons of this site and that's something >> without without putting in sledge pumps and things like that >> well even even that it's without really building the site up four or five feet in there and then have to bring a ton of fill in. It just it doesn't make sense
to do that for a project of this size. So that's why we're trying to balance balance that as best as we could and just want to make sure I'm not missing anything on this before I get to the response to comments. So again, the
project itself is fairly very simple in nature. Um you know it's the the building it's just you know it's an accessory to what's already going on on the property. you know, we're showing the p the pavement, the parking lot to better service their clients. Um, we have the drainage and the sewer. We'll
get the water done um within the next year or so. Um, and really what I want to do now is touch on a couple of the the comments that came as part of the review and just go over um really minor changes to the plans the last time you saw. And so, actually, I'm going to go
back to the plan and I'll just read the letter if that's okay with the the chair. I had it. >> What's that? >> If you were looking for it, >> I I have it here. I got it. Thanks. >> And they kind of the comments from Rob
actually tie in some of them tie in with the comments from D. And so when we're looking at the D comments, it actually um you know, they're separate comments, but some of them do tie in together. So I'll go through at least Rob's comments first. And so Rob's f first comment had
to do with a site plan. uh including an erosion and sediment control plan um especially during construction period erosion control measures. And so again, we show at least we're talking about for the the um straw waddles on the property on the plan already on the plan, but one
of the things that we have to also do before the start of construction, we have to prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan um as part of the EPA filing. And so what we recommended to the conservation commission last night was that once we prepare that and we have to prepare it within 14 days at least 14 days of start of construction
once we prepare that document we'll give a copy of it to the city if we need to get you know we can send another copy over to Rob we can send electronically Rob if it's easier for you and then we could just at least have Rob take a look at it too and it's Rob's seen them they're they're very extensive document that we have to put together as part of that EPA filing um and the the
contractors on site have to do their weekly reports um and anytime time there's a rain events of I say significance but it's really any kind of normal rain event they have to do reports just make sure that everything's stable on the property and so we have no problem I know I think the conseration commission is going to put that as part
of their conditions of approval I'm not sure if Jason you want to add it to yours too and that's we have no issue with that so uh comment two had to do with the product being located within the so zone C surface water protection area and then uh so we added that to the
plan zoom a little bit too because I want to show That was it came same thing. We had a comment from TP on the same thing. And so we added the perennial stream location and it's just off to our west you know here the zone A
delineation we show which is 200 ft from that perennial stream. You can see we're well out of that 200 feet of the perennial stream. We're about almost 400t to our basin for the closest point to the stream. But we also do show the zone A as it comes in here because it's tied to the the pond that's further off
to our north. And so I did include that because I know that was a comment that Rob had to make sure that we added that to our plan. And so we are staying out of the zone A as part of everything that we're getting our approvals for from this board and the conservation commission. And I know that was and we'll get into it was one of Kim's comments. Also,
comment number three had to do with standard number five. Uh that we obviously have manure on the property because of the farm animals. And so I did make sure I change that in the updated drainage report that we do um trigger standard five. And the two things that uh I guess standard five is
the 44% TSS removal prior to the basin that I talk about the the Pstone diaphragm in the foray meeting that 44% pre-treatment before the basin and then uh 1 in of uh recharge which we already meant anyways we had that calc
water regulation. So that was already as as part of the design before we already had it in there. I just didn't include that in our narrative that we were using that standard. And then the same thing with standard number six is if you look at standard number six, it's the same two things that would apply to this project. It's the 44% TSS removal prior
to the basin and then it's the one in runoff. >> And so we already met those. I made sure we I put that in the narrative though in the report. So we made note of that and I made sure I checked off the correct boxes. Um and then number five had to do with the
increases of the peak rate of runoff with the two and 10ear storm events. And so I'm going to leave that for right now. And and my my response was that was and you want to get to Kim's comments. We had to change our drainage analysis. We her comments had to do with our soil
types and that's her comment number three is in our analysis we looked at as it was an A/D soil. We we took the analysis as D soil because because of the high ground water we we considered to be a poor soil. She disagreed with us. She thinks that we should an analyze
it as an A soil. So I put that in the hydrocadab model, ran those numbers. It actually helped us in this case. A lot of times it wouldn't, but because of the the nature of the project because I I was being extremely conservative before I wasn't taking into account any of it and we could have that conversation,
Rob, about drainage. And >> so now just quickly, so now you're using infiltration. >> This is what I don't agree with there because I think it still should be soil. >> Yeah, because it's not going to work in saturated conditions. >> I agree with you. So this is where and
it was funny because the chair of the commission last night said do you agree with her? I said I don't necessarily agree with her but she I'm doing what she asked us to do and that's modeling soil. So I give you both you have both models now and in between now and the next meeting if you want to have more conversation about where we should go. I
we I have no problem with that. >> I'll look at it. >> Yeah. Let's take a look at let's have a conversation and then let's go we can go back and forth on that before the next meeting in January and and come to some resolution on that. Right. That's that's the biggest thing because I know in her comment she started asking can you do other storm water devices? Well, we
can't because our our depth of the basin is only a foot and a half. So there's no way we put a water quality unit in it and there's no other thing other than piece of diaper in a for bay. And she was asking about infiltration through the a you know through the top and the subsoil which we never do. >> Right. So you know some of the questions
she had weren't necessarily our standard you know engineer you know engineering standard. So that was some I we did what she asked. I submitted it and then we can have like I said I'd want to submit it and let's have the conversation and that's what Eric if you when you look at it too. If you have comments if you want to send it over to us let's have some
conversation before now now in the next meeting and see if we can come to some solution. And if we have to add something here and there that we all think can work we can have that conversation. We have no issue with that. But there's not a lot you can do here on this side. Right. >> I do have a thought. We'll talk about it often. >> Yeah. Exactly. So that's where and so
item number one on Kim's letter had to do with showing the perennial stream. What I told the conservation commission last night that we're not asking them to certify the perennial stream in their order conditions. All we're asking them to certify is the wetlands that we show in our plans and that's its right. We're
not asking to certify anything else on the 115 acre cross parcel. That's not under their purview right now. And they agreed to that and I think we're all happy with that. Uh, number two, we already talked about it just showing the zone A and the property, making sure all our B&Ps are out of the zone A, which we
already knew before, but we added that to the plan. Uh, number three, I just talked about the A and D soils. We could have some more conversation offline about where we really should end up, I think, on that that conversation. I'm not like said, we don't necessarily
agree with the a soil method just because of the high groundwater. Yes, the soils underneath are great when they come time for perk rate and the perk for the septic system. It was a good perk rate. >> Um, but the high ground water really is going to restrict us during the wet season. Um,
you know, she talked about the, you know, number item number four had to do with the 14 first 18 inches of permeable soils. We typically strip the top of the sub on any of our construction for storm water BMP. So, we don't ever do that. And that's something we can talk about
too is I know they give you some TSS credit for grass areas but no infiltration credit. It's it's something that we we don't get into. And then number five had to do with the the TSS couch which again we can talk about again if it's if it's an A soil then it becomes more
of an infiltration basin we obviously need it. If it's not an A soil then it's going to be to the maximum extent practical. It's a detention basin. And that's where again we don't necessarily agree with everything she's looking for. Um and then number six some of my
wording because at the last meeting I explained to you that when it's dry season it acts as infiltration basin and it's wet season acts as a detention basin. I think because I had some confusion in the narrative there. I just I called everything a storm water basin to take some of the confusion out of
that because it all you know acts as both ways and I kind of added some of the maintenance the more conservative maintenance process in it just to make sure the base was taken care of correctly. It's not a big basin. It shouldn't take a lot to maintain that basin. Uh but just we want to make sure it's taken care of correctly. Um and
those are the again the changes. Like I said we show the stream now we show the zone A. I did change the parking calc. I didn't talk about that but we did change the parking calculator. I know that came up at the tech review meeting. Um the building inspector asked us just to make sure that we showed our park and kel cuz
she right cuz it was um and I didn't meet I wasn't there. I know Justin from our office was there. I didn't know that the building inspector was asking us just to break out office space meeting space just to make sure that we showed it because there's nothing in there for barn space. There's nothing in for you know we were looking at as maybe
warehouse space but even that there's no number in the parking requirement for warehouse or barn. right? It's animals. So, our thought was we put in, you know, kind of taking direction from her, we put in the office space and the meeting space, we come up to 15 spaces required. Um, they do have other spaces on the
property if they need more parking, too. There's um I know when we visited the site with commission, we parked right next door to this site, next to where they have the trailer, right, for the um the kids program that they have out there. So, um, and so there's additional
parking if we need to, but those are the changes of the plan that from the last time you saw it, we didn't change the building. We haven't changed the park. We haven't even changed the the size of the drainage because when we did the updated drainage analysis, we didn't need to change any of the size of that. If we need to make some small tweaks between now and the next meeting, we
we're open to that. Uh like I said, we're open to have any, you know, dialogue between now and then once you have a chance to look at the the calcs and again we don't necessarily agree with the comments. We thought our the way we were doing it is actually more conservative just because we didn't want to take into any of the infiltration
because it was we know it's going to happen in the wet season. Um but I guess at that point I guess taking questions from the board members and see what you guys think. >> Anybody have any other questions? Did uh did using the A soils did that
like alter the required recharge volume in a way that required any resizing of the basin or >> because of the city requirement of the 1 in we already we already were using a bigger bigger number. So yes the the recharge number went from 0.1 to 6 but because we were already using the 1 in
because of the city requirement it we already meeting that requirement so it didn't didn't make any difference. So I guess that's the beauty of the new city requirement doesn't really matter. really puts us into the higher water quality volume re number that we need to meet. So, um, and I know a lot of the towns around here are starting to use
that. So, it's it's making it pretty standard. So, >> that's all I have. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Like I said, if whatever just if you want to follow us, whatever it is. Yeah, we'll I'll have a conversation with Wes at some point when I've gone through
their information. Um because yeah, I mean it's what D is requesting is is different than what we initially talked about and what generally is acceptable practice. >> Yes. >> Um so we can talk about that. >> Yeah. Okay. >> And then after that we me and Justin can have a conversation in terms of what the
order of conditions that he's proposing for the conservation and then what I can make for myself. Um >> I know he has he has a draft already. He shared he shared me the draft. The only thing that he may add to it is the SWIP. >> Yep. >> Item on there if it wasn't already in the the draft so I can remember. >> I'll take a look at it and then we can
coordinate so that we're not overlapping the same orders between the two. >> Okay. Awesome. All right. Thank you guys. >> Thank you. >> So we will see you on the 13th and continue. >> Yeah, we'll we'll continue this meeting on January 13th. Make >> a motion to continue the hearing to the
meeting on the 13th. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, too. Not need to vote the continuation, Jason. >> Um,
no, you should make a motion. >> I think we have to address item three. We've already said, >> we should make a motion to continue the public hearing. >> I think we did. I second. >> Did we actually Did we vote? >> We No. No, we didn't vote yet. It just
was there was a motion and a second, but no vote yet. >> Okay. Any further discussion? >> None. All in favor? >> I I so we'll go along with that. >> Then for item three, as we've already closed, >> we've already done that
>> about what you said. So, we can strike that off. >> New business. We have another presentation from the Barrett planning group about the city's master plan on >> Where do you just go here? Sure. >> Yeah, we have the laptop set up.
Hopefully, you don't have to log back in. >> I don't have a presentation, so I'm just going to talk real quick. >> Could you please identify yourself and your who you're representing? >> Yep. Um, so I am Jen Dy. I'm a preservation planner with Barrett Planning Group. Um, so we have been working with Jason and Eric and the city
for the past few months on preparing a new master plan for the city of Gardener. Um, this would be an update to the city's last plan which was done in 1975. So certainly time for a new master plan. Um but the master plan kind of
looks at what's going on in the city right now and then looks forward you know another 10 20 30 years and kind of what the city wants to be during that time. Um and develops action items and you know steps on how the city can sort of reach that vision of its future self.
Um we have a couple different topic areas that we're working on that are regulated by mass general law. Um, so we're talking about things like land use, housing, transportation, open space and recreation, um, and historic and cultural resources and economic
development. Um, I believe Jason has been giving you some updates perhaps. >> Yeah, all the materials are been uploaded to the one drive. I made sure to send you guys a notice um, notifying you all of those. >> Okay. >> Those documents. Um, and so we just
wanted to kind of come here tonight and let you know that we're sort of getting towards the home stretch. Um, we're starting to work on actually developing the implementation plan, which is the, you know, steps, the recommendations, the things that the city should do to, you know, ultimately reach its vision that we've developed as part of the
master plan. Um, and we wanted to give you this update because ultimately at the end of the master plan process, the planning board does need to adopt the master plan. Um, so I certainly hope you take a look at the materials that Jason has provided. Um, probably in the next few weeks we are going to release a full
draft of the plan for public comment. Um, so certainly then would be a great time to, you know, get in touch with us um, with any comments or questions or anything that you want to see in there. Um, but that's um, kind of our main update from me tonight for that. Um, the
other thing that we want you all as the planning board to be thinking about is implementation. um and how the city wants to kind of track that. Um communities handle it differently. Uh sometimes it's the planning board, you know, sort of
annually reviewing the action items and saying, you know, are we making progress on these things? Um sometimes communities set up a separate committee, an implementation committee to oversee that process. Um sometimes it's something that comes from city staff
when they prepare their annual reports. they sort of give a summary on how they've been implementing the action items that they're responsible for. Um, so that's something that we'll want to put in the plan. Um, but again, it probably would be coming from the planning board. Um, you know, because it
is in theory your plan. It's the master plan for the city. Um, so something to think about, you know, over the next few months as we start to wrap up the plan. Um, how does Gardner sort of want to track that implementation? um and really kind of keep an eye on the master plan and make sure you're really implementing
uh the recommendations in it. Um so that was my spiel for tonight. Um does anyone have any questions kind of about the process or anything? >> Any interaction with other citizens or the of the city coming in and
>> giving you ideas? >> Yeah. So we've um done quite a bit of public engagement so far. So we um kind of our base has been so Jason and Eric are part of the master plan steering committee um which is a group of citizens as sort of our you know base here in city hall. Um but then outside
of that we've done stuff we did interviews with staff um we uh did several public engagements um community workshop um we had an open house a few weeks ago at the end of October. Uh we did a public survey. Um we've done some tableabling at different events at the
library and national night out. Um so we've been kind of trying to get out and you know reach out to folks and you know see what they have to say about the city. Um right now we actually also have some of our boards um some sort of posters that we used at our open house um that are in a couple places around
the city. Um there's a QR code on them that connects to the website that we have that has all the information about the master plan as well. Um, so we've been doing what we can to try and reach out to folks. Certainly. >> Any other questions? >> No. >> All right.
>> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Um, and I'm going to turn it over to my colleague Lily and she is going to present about a different plan, the housing production plan, which Gardner is also working on this computer. >> Yes. Is it still logged in? >> Uh, yes.
>> Perfect. You just have to plug in the HDMI which Wes Yeah. >> Yes. Like Jen said, my name is Lily Kramer, also with their planning group. Um, and we will be working on the city's master plan.
I can put this in. Great. So, I just have a brief presentation. Um, All right. So, I'll give, you know, a brief introduction of what an housing production plan or HPP is and its purpose. Go through the different
components that are required. Um, go through the project timeline and then end with any questions that you may have for me. Um, so what is a housing production plan? It's a document that is used to understand um housing needs in the community. Both what types of
housing might be needed and also who um has unmet needs in gardener. Um it also looks at what barriers might stand in the way of addressing those needs. Um and it's sets goals to increase the types of housing that are
needed um in the community. And this is a five-year plan. um that is adopted to um meet those goals. So all housing production plans have
these three main components that cover a period of 5 years. A comprehensive housing needs assessment, affordable housing goals and implementation strategies. Um so the comprehensive housing needs assessment looks at demographic information. Um housing characteristics,
future population trends and housing trends, um recent housing developments that might be happening in Gardener, current zoning and land use, um and any barriers or limitations that might impact affordable housing production in Gardener. Um so those types of things
can include local regulations like zoning, um the current housing market, construction challenges like the house of co um construction right now, funding opportunities, um capacity within the city, stuff like that.
Housing goals. So the housing production plan has to have a numerical goal for annual housing production, but there can also be other goals that address um how to create a diverse housing supply with a mix of types for a range of uh income
levels. Um, a housing production plan does have to include goals for low and moderate income housing um low and moderate income households but can include other income levels um above that. So the implementation strategies
um for an HBP to get approval by EOHLC, it has to include five local actions to increase the supply of affordable housing and work towards a 10% minimum under chapter 40B. Our currently above 10%. Um but a housing production plan is
still helpful because you know how house um units can fall off the SHI, the subsidized housing inventory. Um it's you know planning It's a document that goes beyond just low and moderate income uh levels like I said and can be used
you know to target different needs like senior housing um disability housing and stuff like that. So those required five required components include changing zoning to enable um affordable housing development or allow a wide wider variety of
different housing types. Um, identify ways to make effective use of the chapter 40B approval process. Identify specific municipal properties that could be used for affordable housing. Um, and identify ways to work together as a region to meet regionwide needs. Um, the
plan can include a number of other different strategies as long as it does address these five. So, all housing production plans usually um also include some form of community engagement. So, we'll be drafting a community engagement plan. Um, and this
may include interviews with different local stakeholders and housing advocates. Um, periodic updates to the planning board. As like Jen said, you will along with city council be um required to adopt the plan before it's sent to EOHLC for approval.
um outreach materials for the city website, a survey for the public um and focus groups or community meetings to um sort of introduce the housing needs that we come across and get feedback on potential goals and strategies.
This is a brief timeline. We're here in December at the sort of project kickoff. Um and community engagement will be happening throughout this process. Uh the contract end is June 30th. So, we have until then um to get the plan for you for submission.
Um so, we'll be focusing at the beginning of next year on drafting the plan, including the needs assessment goals and strategies. Um and then hopefully to be presenting it to you for
adoption uh in April and May or May. >> Any questions? That's a lot. >> At the very beginning of the presentation, you said there's a five-year housing. Is that to be revisited every 5 years?
>> Typically, yes, they are revisited every 5 years >> and updated and changed as necessary. Yeah, >> I guess on page number six, the last uh the bullet over occupancy. Sure. What do you mean by that? Um, so
this is sort of just an example, not necessarily applicable to gardener per se, but um, you know, in cases where more people are living in a house than necessarily should be um, in terms of like the number of occupants
per bedroom or something like that. So >> over like three families in a single Exactly. More than one family in a regular single family home. You mean Okay. Well, I think we've done part of it already. We've adopted the zoning change
for the small houses. >> Yep. >> So, that could be included as part of it. >> Right. Exactly. So, you know, work the city has already done will certainly be addressed in the housing plan. And um >> the avenues that are defined in that ordinance are ones that we'll look at
especially as we look towards you know what housing options are available for the you know the surplus land that I had sent over >> um amongst the other um different strategies that have to be addressed in this. >> Thanks.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Can I unplug this? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> 1.2 we've already addressed. We moved it to a January meeting. GMA,
we moved it to January. >> Yep. January 13th. And then I just have a quick edit for the next item 4.3. There is a mistype on here of Templeton pond expansion. It is actually a project in Hubertton, not Templeton. So I just
wanted to address that before we got into this. But um I believe to make a presentation on the packets in front of us for the determin determination of applicability uh we have uh Tom Christopher from
Christopher Environmental Associates here. >> I guess I stand up there or would you like me to? >> Right over there. >> Okay. Thank you. Gentlemen, >> just state your name and who you represent. >> Yes. Uh my name is uh Thomas
Christopher. I'm the principal of Christopher Environmental and I am representing Falline LLC. Um Fall LLC is actually Dr. Joey Edel who uh owns a property in public.
Uh I have been working on this project since 2009. uh was originally uh brought in uh by the conservation commission and it was a highly disturbed site. Um there was uh
complaints filed uh with EPA with the EP and my company was tasked with restoring the site and it took a year uh to restore the site and then Dr. Edo bought it and it's uh essentially 64 acres uh
partially wooded a lot of uh open field which was part of our restoration and uh she bought the property for her dogs and it is uh warmly referred to in
Hubbson as the dog pack and she uses it for training her dogs and u her dogs are basically very high-end Labrador retrievers. So when uh over the years we have done a
number of site improvements and appeared in front of numerous boards uh in front of Hubson most notably uh the conservation commission with all the restoration work that we had to do. Uh we've also uh in 19 excuse me 2016 which
is this project right here. Let me open up my book so I know what I'm talking about. In 2016, um we uh applied to the conservation
commission to um dig a pond on the site because as part of the training regimen for the dogs, she wanted a water feature. So this was uh what was designed
um for the for the site. The project was uh permitted through the conservation commission and approved. And this is what the asbuilt would look like.
So we submitted um a certificate of compliance to the conservation commission was uh accepted and recorded. time matches on and um she has uh
younger dogs now and uh last year she came to me and said is there any way we can expand the pond because these younger dogs need more physical area in part of the training. You will notice in that picture with
those fingers that come out into uh the uh aquatic area, those are different points that they use in u in training the dogs. It's quite remarkable to to watch them do that. Quite frankly, I
think the dogs are a lot smarter than I am. But anyway, so we went back to the engineers and uh we came up with this plan last year and you can see it's uh substantially
bigger. It's almost double in size. So because we had already had the larger pond approved in 2016 or 17 whatever it was rather than file a whole notice of
intent with uh the conservation commission. We opted to file just a determination of applicability and provided them with all of these details. Uh the conservation commission approved
the project and in their approval uh sent it off to DP regional office and uh D sent an email back to Concom and said uh we think that uh you should do a
sidewalk. So they did a sitewalk. We had a follow-up meeting and it was subsequently approved. When that approval went to D, uh
they sent us a negative or superseding order of conditions denying the project >> and demanded a sitewalk. So we had the sitewalk. um two young ladies from D came out and uh we did the
sitewalk. They checked all of our wetland lines and basically all the information that had actually now been approved twice. So uh consequently I got a final letter from D
basically saying uh we believe this project needs uh a full notice of intent and it uh because it uh is in the uh the limits of the uh
zone 2 well uh for Snake of the Snake Pond well. Um, and the other reason is, uh, you are actually, uh, down, uh, you're above the groundwater, but you're within, uh, 4T of the groundwater. We're
actually on ledge. The whole excavation is all ledge. It's down about uh, 5 1/2 ft. >> How deep did you say? About 5t. >> It uh, the ledge is uh, at 5 1/2 ft.
So there's two types of groundwater. There's what we call unconsolidated groundwater and then there's basically and that that's groundwater that has poor spaces,
air, things like that. >> Okay. >> Um true groundwater. There's a free attic line and there is it's unconsolidated. It's all groundwater. There's no air involved with that. So where we're on the ledge, I question
D's wisdom in this. We had done several test pits and I'm not going to argue with D. We we we don't argue with anybody. It's not worth the time, expense, and trouble. So
the second part of uh the letter was that we should follow up because it's zone two with uh the one of the uh the people at D that deals with uh groundwater issues. Her name is
Katherine Serinus Hamilton. So we got in touch with uh Miss Hamilton and it was a a very good conversation and uh she said well you know the project is in Hston zone two is Gardner
you really ought to look at Gardner's regulations. So we did and basically everything that we could find in the regulations relative to potential threats to
the snake tomb wells which by the way are at least half a mile away. >> That's maybe a mile. uh whether or not um we would or this project would pose a threat if we were
to uh make the pond a little bit larger. So going through your regulations, I couldn't see anything that would specifically determine that making the pond larger would be a potential threat
to the snake pond wells. Um, it just made sense to me that if the project was going to go forward and because you gentlemen or this board really is in charge of all of
the groundwater issues that happen in town through your planning process, it just made sense to me to come to your board and find or determine whether or not we could get uh an opinion or a vote. from you on whether or not it
posed a threat to uh to uh the snake the snake pawn wells. If you said no, it doesn't present a threat then I would go to the Hobbitson planning board
with your opinion because I assume boards collaborate with each other from time to time and I would ask the same question. I would make the same presentation to Hobbitston. I have very good reputation in Hobbiton. All the
boards know me. Uh we've done a lot of projects there and u we we've enjoyed very positive relationships with all the boards. So I would then go to Hubbetson and if they approved it, they do not
have a zone 2 designation in the town, but a year ago they designated the area where the planned pond expansion is as an aquifer zone. So that's why I would
go to their board as well as your board. So, if this board agreed that it didn't pose a threat, I would then go to the Humston board and hopefully get a similar opinion. And at that point, we
would go through the notice of intent process with the conservation commission and I have no doubt in my mind that they'll approve it again. We we've enjoyed a very good relationship with them. So that's uh a little convoluted
and uh sadly for me a lot of the folks that I used to deal with uh with D u are no longer there. they've mostly retired off and were dealing with a younger
generation of analysts that uh have uh their own ideas on how some of these regulations ought to be interpreted. So, I'm I'm happy to answer any of your questions.
>> I know Rob, you sent an email over to Judith at D to get a determination on >> Yeah. So, if I may, yeah. Um, >> following up on Mr. Christopher's presentation, um, so we have a zone two in town that is to protect Snake Pond's
u, the well at Snake Pond. Um, unfortunately, for the most part, it's in Templeton in Hubardston. The largest part being in Hubbertston. So, it it travels the the zone 2 is south of the wells of the well. Um, for a little history, back in 1997
when Snake Well was going online and getting approvals through D, part of the approval process for drinking water is to it's um it's called best effort. We as a community passed our flood plane protection overlay district that was
because of Snake Pond. Um, at the time DP requires you to do this best effort with surrounding communities if your zone two will extend into them. Um the letter I have from that time does state that gardener did their best effort which means Hubbertston was contacted
essentially asking Hston to um adopt an ordinance similar to ours to protect zone 2 in Hbertston because obviously as a community we have no authority within Hubbertston for zoning. So that's that's why DP makes you do that. Um,
unfortunately DP should have pressed gardener over the years every time we have a sanitary survey to do it again to reach out to Hubbertston and say, "Hey, as a, you know, friendly neighboring community, we'd ask you to do this." So, that's one thing. I need to explore
that. I need to talk to you about that and perhaps, you know, get the mayor involved um before we do that because as Tom said, um, they have an they have a I forget what they called it. It's to protect future sites. >> And they only did this last year from
what I can determine. Uh where they designated where my particular project is all along Hston Brook as u an aquifer an aquifer zone >> to be protected. And if you look at
their uh bylaws and zoning bylaws, uh a lot of what is written in terms of protecting the aqua for dis district district is very similar if not identical to what you guys have got put
together in your in your zone 2 regulations. Um other than the airport, I am not aware of any direct threats to >> Yeah. So, so when you look at the zone 2
on the maps, there's not a lot of development within it. I don't think there's a lot of danger of development. At least in Harvard, I don't know Harbertson's zoning or um but it's pretty pretty hilly and it's it's a um at least I know in Gardener it's it's undeveloped.
um in in part of my looking at this. So, I did email Judith Schmidz, who's the wetlands um head of wetlands for Worester for our district. Um, and I did contact um Saraphinus Hamilton um who's with drinking water at D.
>> Um because obviously, and I've run into this in my past too, where I'm in another community that has zone two for a different community. um we essentially don't have really any say but they they're quoting in this letter the D
letter and the superseding um request for determination um it talks about you know excavations within 4T of groundwater um and you have to either show through testing or borings or whatever um the soil conditions and
groundwater and historical groundwater um I think differently than we when we look at when we do test pits to just do um you know safer septic systems or or storm water runoff. But what was interesting in my conversation was I for from her point of view the biggest
threat to water supply in a zone 2 when you have you you want to stay away from man-made ponds because it introduces an area for storm water to more easily get into the aquifer. Um now looking at the aerial pictures of that site, it doesn't
look like it's developed. It's just open field in the pond. >> Well, when I uh this is my showplace. When I have a client and I want to show them what kind of work I do, I bring them to this site. I can't tell you how
devastated this site was when I was first brought on board. The gravel operator was fined 25,000 by DB. the land owner was tasked with the restoration and it was over $200,000 and
we were there for a year. So, um right now it's fully vegetated. Um the grass is mowed
four maybe five times a year because I don't want the grass any taller than that for the dogs. this whole site is about the dogs. Um, so consequently, when my client has an
idea or a project that she wants to get done, essentially get it done for the dogs. >> Yeah. >> Uh, I uh I I do know Judith Smith. Uh, we've communicated several times. Uh I
had been uh uh the uh conservation chair in Lancasta for a number of years. So you know we know each other and Judith has been there a while. >> Um and my email to Judith was more
procedural on because you got deep. He got involved with the request for determination. Um have you done the notice of intent yet or is that that's coming? >> No. you guys are top of the list. As I explained earlier, if we get an okay or
a determination that there's no threat, then we'll go to uh Hston and then we'll go to the conservation commission at Hston. Um you know, Tom brought up if it's a threat, you know, to our zone to to our water supply. I can't necessarily
answer that. Um, and I think my my feeling is is the current use. It's not uh a high, you know, it's not a a real high volume use. I is it open to the public or it's just it's okay.
>> No, it's gated. Uh, our biggest issue is ATVs, >> dirt bikes, things like that. We have spent literally thousands uh trying to secure the property. um any of the excavation material. There's a
there's about two acres of uh gravel area that uh has uh not been uh has not been restored and what we take out of this pond area will go to the gravel area uh and use for further restoration.
Uh the small gravel area uh is uh immediately adjacent to Dave Richard's pit. If if any of you gentlemen know Dave, >> is it on the map? >> You can kind of see it in the top corner in the map that you provided.
>> I can do that. Sure. >> No, no, no. I think it's already included in that top corner of the map. It looks like there it's a gravel pit area in the >> So, uh, relative to use,
there are probably no more than a dozen times a year, if that. Usually, it's done around five or six times a year. She will have uh training schools for other dog
lover types. And uh I think the most cars I've ever counted, they're maybe 12 or 13. And uh they get out and they set up
their marks and everything else and they keep the dogs in the vehicles until the dog is ready to go through whatever he does. I It's pretty interesting to watch him. But uh anyway,
that's that's basically the level of use. So the potential threat is that water from that pond will breach into the snake pond. Is that what it is? yet.
I don't know the snake pond area that well, but right now in a heavy rainfall event, when you have spring runoff, we have two detention basins, one on each side of the access road,
uh that will retain or certainly detain uh the flow. Part of the project then these are open basins. Now part of the project that we're we uh
are asking is to convert these open basins into a stormt system so they could be subterranean. And it's not that these basins don't function now. They're doing a great job. I no complaints with the way they're
running. But my client wants a little more physical area and a little more length so the dogs can run. And I'm talking 100 yards or maybe a little bit more than that. I mean, watching the dogs train it, they get a workout. So,
that would be part of this project, converting uh the open basins to a storm tech system. And I did uh I think in one of my last pages send you an example of what a storm tech system looks like. So
that would be part of the project. When uh the pond reaches full capacity, there is an outlet drain which uh lets the water flow through a
wooded area for approximately 150 170 ft where it then uh comes into a wetland where it dumps into a wetland. The wetland then drains into Hubbetston Brook. Um
when Hubbetston Brook is there up until uh last year uh Hstonbrook did not exist in that form in that area. There was a beaver dam and uh the water
then flowed into the pond from the beaver dam. So, could I conceive in my mind that making a pond a little bit bigger is going to have any impact on Snake Pond? Snake Pond's over a mile
away or close to a mile away. I I I have a hard time trying to understand what the is on this. >> Whatever would run off would go into the woods or >> Yes, absolutely. like it and just get
dispersed into the soil. >> That's That's correct. Matter of fact, see if I have a picture of that. No, I don't. Uh let's look at this picture here. Uh
right here in the corner. >> Yeah. >> Uh there is an outflow that is about that wide. And it's uh it's uh got uh trap rock and from there it flows as I
say 160 or 70 ft into I'm sure the beaver pond will be back because that's what they do. You know I spent a lot of money having a trapper come in and trap the beavers because I didn't want to lose that road. But uh anyway,
uh yes, to answer your question, it it it goes through a a heavily wooded area before it hits the wetland or or Hsonbrook. >> But even though even then the whatever water would could possibly go would be
minimal, >> right? >> You know, I'm not thinking of a breach. They're just thinking about overflow. >> It's it it is a very slow release. >> Yeah. >> I mean, you've got detention basins,
you've got a pond, you've got an outlet to the pond, and 160 or 70 ft before it goes into either a wetland or another pond eventually. Now, uh, we had both the,
uh, conservation commission and the the two D analysts on the site. They looked at all of this. And, uh, what was really what's really interesting, I really didn't plan it this way, but when that
outlet hits the wooded area, goes a little ways. It almost forms like vernal pools and it flows to sort of the east and it drops down a little bit and it forms
another pool. >> Then it goes another 10 yards or 12 yards and it drops down a little bit and forms another pool. It never actually reaches the wetland. That's really cool
except except now I have to worry about what's gonna what's gonna hatch in the ver. But we're not we're not going there. We're if it's working all right, we don't we don't have to work patrol. Oh, by the way, we did uh when we filed the
original notice of intent, we did uh send a copy of uh the notice to uh Natural Heritage and we got uh a negative letter back from them. In other words, there uh was nothing that they were concerned of. >> Is this in priority habitat?
>> I'm sorry. >> Is this within mapped priority habitat? >> Uh yes. So I guess my perspective on the request for us to
say that we don't think this is going to be an issue is that I I you know from the sounds of the project and you know just the overall look of the site to me it doesn't look like it would necessarily be something that would have a negative impact but I don't know that we have enough information. I I
personally don't feel like we have enough information to make a formal determination of that. Um >> I think the in the superseding DOA that D issued, you know, they cite I don't know if I guess they said it was from
our ordinance that may have overlapped with some of the state regulations. Yeah, in the letter they quote the state drinking water regulations for um zone 2 um and then recommend, you know, working with our zoning, at least the way ours
is worded. Um so there's there's two things at work. Um there's the state drinking water regulations and then the zone 2 stuff for gardener. Um and I agree with with Eric that there's not enough information. One question I did have Tom, you mentioned it's that pond
was was excavated at a ledge. >> It was down to ledge. Yes. >> Okay. So, the important thing to remember for zone 2 is you're protecting the aquafer for our well and that where you get your protection from surface water from storm water is the soils.
They they you know they filter storm water. Um the concern here is that a man-made pond in a zone 2 is a direct interface with the groundwater because this is this is essentially supported by the the groundwater in our aquifer our zone 2. So and that's why I asked you
know what's the intensity of the use of the site? You know how is it being used? Um you know we do so apparently there's occasions throughout the year where there's additional cars on the the parking lot. Now it's not paved. There's no buildings. So it's there's not a lot
of pvious area creating storm water. Um so I I I mean I' I'd agree with Eric that it gives the impression to me that I'm not too concerned, but I can't say and and tell you know Tom and the owner
of the property that you know, hey, it's great because it could be a problem. We just wouldn't know it. Um so it's a you're in a unique position. >> How was that pawn filled? If it's man-made, is it just use the ground water within?
>> Uh we we put in drainage I think was in uh 2017 and primarily uh it is uh some unconsolidated groundwater flow uh from
the wetland and uh an elevated area. It's all sloped and uh we've captured u a lot of the water in the u in the
vegetated area that is not uh uh forested >> and uh that goes into the two detention bases then goes into the pond. >> Okay. >> It's a it's a it's a good little system. I'm I'm really, like I say, this is my
short place. If the weather was better, I'd take you guys out there on Saturday. It's just really great. >> So So even the distance from Snake Pond to the man-made pond. Anything that runs off will be
the water will be filtered by the by the natural soils. >> That that is correct. >> And and eventually vegetation in the area. So >> that may be the case, but for me it's a zone 2 is a state regulated area. I know that.
>> And so you can introduce I guess the theory is if you introduce pollutants anywhere in zone 2, it could impact our well >> and it's face saying yeah but there are a lot of other things that would minimize the infiltration
or contamination like the soils, >> vegetation and >> well there are they are they are type D soils on the site. >> Okay. >> So, uh the uh the infiltration
uh factor is uh certainly something that we actually took advantage of when we dug the pond because as I said some of uh the water flow uh is from unconsolidated groundwater.
the uh the pond uh periodically does dry up. Uh it it dried up this year uh in 2023 in the fall. It was full pond all year. You know, we had a we had a lot of rain that that particular season.
I have uh you know given the way climate change is running today I have no doubt that there's going to be a continual fluctuation uh when we have uh job periods where uh we don't um we don't uh
you did say that you were uh that you felt you needed more information. Could you detail out exactly what you would be looking for and perhaps we could provide that? >> I guess you know personally for myself
the you know the the regulations that were cited in the superseding DOA talk about excavation into certain depths above groundwater. We don't have I mean we don't have anything that even says where groundwater is at this site. So I think some sort of soil information
would be a starting point. Um, I, you know, I don't know. I think it's probably getting a little bit out of our area of expertise to review that kind of information. Um, and so I'm
I'm not sure that sort of like some sort of peer review process, there's um something that would convince me to want to give a formal opinion here. Unless you know if I mean if the city engineer
has other ideas that would satisfy his opinion differently. But >> I guess in terms of more information um you know you talked about the history of the site um and it was cleaned up. Um what kind of I mean was it it was an
illegal gravel operation fills type of thing, wetland fills. >> Is there any history of contamination on the site? Um >> I have uh a whole history of the site from the time uh we were brought on and
history includes all the complaints filed and court cases filed uh with uh the building inspector at the time. I've forgotten his name and um everything that brought the project to where we
were brought on and um let me see. Yeah, I think I I think we we've got the notice of intent at the end of excuse me, the certificate of compliance I think at the end of 2009 or 2010. I know
my client bought it shortly thereafter. Uh I do have a whole history on that that I'll be more than happy to provide to you. I may have a picture If I may, Mr. Chairman.
>> Sure. >> I mean, it almost uh at this time, I'm going to agree with my members. Uh they're looking for our blessing or approval. I just can't see us giving any blessing to this at this time. No. I think his best route would be go through
the state and without the city of gardener to have the city of gardener and the planning board make a decision on this. I think it's very dangerous. I think again uh >> we just need more information.
>> Yeah, I believe it's their best effort to go through town and go through the state and see what they say about that and and leave us. We like to be good neighbors, but I think uh I think if you got approval from the state that would supersede city of Gardner and that would
kind of get our hands off of it. >> Yeah, I agree. I mean, again, I don't you know, I'm >> I don't necessarily see an issue with this. I just feel like, you know, it's outside of >> but just for us, it's also outside of our town lines. So, it's >> it's correct
>> within our regulatory purview either. Um I mean definitely appreciate being consulted on it. I think that shows great willingness of the applicant to engage with the community. >> Well, Mina Har u
pointed out that >> you don't really have to go to Ghana. >> That's correct. I don't I don't really feel comfortable >> I I >> without without informing everyone >> and that's fine. If the state agrees
with that, that's fine. I mean, there's for us to make a determination. >> What the site look like? >> I don't feel comfortable like my board and fellow board members engineer. I don't still don't think it's it's kind of out of out of our so instead of going any further with
this I believe uh I mean we could talk about this all night and you going to >> I agree that uh I appreciate you very much coming to the board and your presentation but for us to make any decision towards our well and our
drinking water it's way outside of our prime at this time believe that we should that So, just to offer something for for you to consider. Um, and Tom actually kind of brought this up and I hadn't reviewed our own I hadn't reviewed the flood
plane overland protection district to see where this would fall or if it was would even if it were in gardener would it how would perhaps through cons consultation with the zoning enforcement officer talking to the building commissioner to say if
this project were to come forward in gardener >> how would our zoning apply to it >> and perhaps it's easy enough to say it wouldn't or it would or it wouldn't be allowed, um to at least have while we're not experts in protecting zone 2 in
terms of what couldn't couldn't happen. Um but perhaps just to say, you know, per our zoning it would or would not be allowed >> or this would be applicable to >> right >> allow it. >> Yep. Or maybe a special permit's required or something. Um, yeah, cuz I
don't I don't recall ever seeing anything about man-made bonds in our zoning in that overlay district. So, maybe it's as simple as that. And that's what you have to offer. >> Yeah, I agree. >> Okay,
then Tom, I'll introduce you to Melissa, the building the building commissioner, and then we can have that conversation. What I can do is uh send you uh a history >> of the project
and uh I can also I still have uh the uh the groundwater excuse me the soil analysis for the whole site. And this one is broken out into one area and that was
done by uh another company, not me. >> Is old, >> but it's the same. >> It's the same, right? >> It's the same. So, I can send you a copy of that. >> Yeah. >> And u that'll be fine.
>> Yeah. Uh I think maybe with that with that information and then coordination collaboration with the building commissioner >> next month we could probably make a decision. >> Well maybe I don't know.
>> Certainly I can appreciate uh your uh hesitance and and wanting more information. Uh it's important to protect groundwater. I you know I'm all in on this. So, you know, I'm just trying to make sure that
uh whatever steps that we have to take, we'll take and that's >> I think that's our our major concern is to protect our own drinking water. >> Sure. Sure. Of course. >> And and be aware of potential threats to
it. But, uh that's what we need to investigate. >> Okay. Okay, we can present the recommendation that comes from the conversation between UI and the building commissioner as well um of if this project were happening within gardener's
bounds, what would be the determination of of >> how the development would proceed if possible. >> Fine. And uh um you can email me u when he would be available, set up a time. >> Yes.
>> And I'm more than happy to come up again. Uh, I'd love to take you out to the site, but you know, snow snow. >> Put on my snow boot. >> It's coming. >> Put my snow boot on your skates. >> Yeah, >> truly at this point. Skismobiles.
>> Yeah. But uh uh any I'd be happy to take a gentleman out there, you know, next spring sometime. It's of all the of all the projects we've done over the years, this one was probably the most challenging and had
the best outcome. Can't get any better than that. >> Nice to meet you, gentlemen. >> Thank you, Mr. Christopher. >> I was uh on a planning board in Lancaster for 10 years, so it's uh always >> good to reach out and meet other
colleagues and see how you run your meetings. It's a tough town there, Lancaster. >> Oh, I I still attend all the commission meetings and and and the guy that's the chairman
is doing a great job, but you know, >> be careful. You're on camera, so I don't want to say anything bad right now being recorded. >> He's doing a great job, but >> the town is struggling and has been struggling for a long time. And that's our question, but I'm I'm always happy
to >> lend a hand when we can. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. Take care. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Tom. We'll be in talk. >> Any news announcements or communications or? >> Nope. >> Nothing. Have a motion to adjurnn.
>> I make a motion we adjourn. Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I meeting is adjourned. Thank you.