[Music] It is now 7:00. I'm going to call to order the Town of Halifax Planning Board
meeting for Thursday, October 2nd. Hard to believe it's already October, 2025. We are meeting in the selectman's meeting room at 499 Plymouth Street here in Halifax. Obviously, um I need to announce that the planning
board meeting is being recorded by Area 58 and can be viewed on YouTube and Community Access Television. Uh I think I covered all of that. If I missed anything, somebody tell me. >> I'll make a motion to accept the agenda as written.
>> I'll second. moved and seconded to accept the agenda. All those in favor? >> I. >> Anyone opposed? >> Unanimous. >> Who's in attendance of the meeting? >> Oh, I could I could do that. >> Yeah, >> I could do that. >> Sorry.
>> No, no. I asked if I missed anything to bring it up. Uh, attending tonight's meeting. My extreme left is Amy Troop. Next to me is Bert Gainor, myself, Tom Millius, and to my right Jamie
>> Walsh. >> Walsh. >> I'm bad with names in case you hadn't noticed. Um, Bruce Sylvester is not attending this evening. He is on vacation. Lucky him. Our
first appointment is the continuation of PSPR 254 590 M Pit Street site plan review. Would you like to present? Please announce who you are and then you can go where you want to go.
>> My name is Matt representing 590 Manson Street. Um, we planned originally to go for occupants of 80 to 120 and we have now dropped it to 60 to get it approved so we can get the building permit
or start that process and then we're going to come back once we have the lease with the church. The pastor's away for 3 weeks. So >> um interestingly so that you should know in case you don't know the building
inspector has u tendered his resignation he will be terminating himself next Thursday. So I don't know who's going to be stepping into that role in the interim just so that you had a heads up that's all. >> Okay. >> Uh so
where you're reducing it to 60 I'm assuming we're not taking into account the deck. We're not doing anything with that at this point. >> So the deck we have on there to be closed. >> Yeah. >> Um so I don't know how that would go with like seating plan wise because seating plan like the tables in that
event room those wouldn't be there during like coffee hours you know essentially essentially the tables would move from the deck outside to inside for coffee shop. So, I put red lines on the site plan of
like what the different departments wanted. Like the highway department said that he didn't want snow piled on the sidewalk. >> Y >> So, we put that in there as a red line. Um, and then we put a red line in for the deck to be enclosed. >> Mhm. >> Um, and then we put a red line in to
change it to 60 occupants, which is 55 people with 10 employees. >> And you can accommodate that either inside or outside. Is that what I'm hearing? >> No, it's mainly inside. >> Okay. because the existing building inspector doesn't uh allow for outside
sales for the zoning. >> Yeah, there's nothing in the zoning bylaws to support it. That's what the problem is. >> That's the problem. So, we plan to just go for 60 occupants and then get a lease and then come back for 80 to 120. Plan is to get this approved. I mean, yeah, it's like red button. Yep.
>> But we'll put it on the plants >> so then we can at least start building. >> So, you'll have adequate parking for what you're proposing. Is that what you're saying? >> Yeah. I count 26 spots. >> It's 27. [Applause]
>> Where am I missing one? >> Oh, back should have numbered them. >> 14 + 7 is 21 plus 27. I did bad math. 27. >> Will you say are you opening up to questions? >> We haven't. Did you got anything else to
bring up or we're ready for questions? Okay. >> Uh when you saying closing the deck, what are you talking roof sides? >> Uh so a roof and then accordion windows like nano wall. You know what that is? >> Like accordion windows. Uh accordion walls.
>> Mhm. But only the top, not the bottom. Bottom's full glass and then the top is accordion windows. >> And conservation's okay with that. we'd have to go back through for that. So, we actually don't have any seating out
there, but the building inspector wanted the deck to be enclosed for people to sit out there in the >> So, what he was saying was in order to get service out there, you'd have to enclose it. It have to be enclosed structure. >> So, it was a halfway wall and then above
that, so it's like a half I'm I'm >> Yeah. So, like the bottom piece >> Yeah. >> is like a storefront window essentially. And then there's and then there's a rail on top of that. >> Okay. >> And then it would just be accordion windows. >> All right. >> And that's going to go on three sides of
the deck. >> Three sides. Yeah. And then the top would be roof >> because eventually we would like to do a retractable, but those are very expensive. >> Mhm. >> How many tables are going to fit out there? >> So out there we would probably only do
two to four person tables. So about 15 people, 20 people. >> All right. And as we discussed in the last meeting before that, the changes came up in regards to the deck. Uh there's no like portable bar or portable
anything that goes out there to be as the building inspector said, uh there'd be no service out there. It be strictly come inside, get your food, drinks, and whatever, and go out there to sit down. Correct. >> Yeah. Correct. >> But I mean with it being enclosed,
>> it's technically not open. >> Yeah. I I I think he was directing you towards that, right? >> He didn't bring anything up about the bar. The bar was more for like if we brought it all the way outside. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Um ju just only because he looks like he's on. I was going to
>> Danielle has her hand up. >> Oh, Danielle. Yes. >> I don't know if it's on purpose, but >> Danielle, are you looking for our attention? Nope. That was my cat on the keyboard. Sorry.
No cats on the keyboard. Um, >> you're on the board. Tell that cat. >> Mr. Mr. Brager, are you there? >> I'm here. I'm here. >> Uh, just wanted to kind of confirm what we were hearing or talking about uh for
590 Mosaic Street. if um did you hear the description of the enclosure of that deck >> somewhat but um I don't believe we ever had any confirm any conversation about a half wall I believe my suggestion why
there need to be a total enclosure could be all glass I even gave my suggestions to them um it could be something that could be opened up with screens but it still need to be a complete enclosure in order to allow that way the food service could be allowed there because it would
be part of the the original structure. Um that's how I that was the meeting I had with them uh last year. Were you looking to limit the total occupancy regardless of whether it was inside outside? Uh when I say outside, I'm
talking about an enclosed deck if we were to enclose it to uh the appropriate level. um or or would adding both add seating capacity immediately or would you restrict it by uh just a limit of
total occupancy that I'm I know I was all over the place with that >> the total occasion >> the thing is I still have not seen what the design is for the outside deck >> okay >> so I don't know how how it's going to be
enclosed how to how to do the measurements for seating that would be allowed out there to add the option of row to that that addition without having plans, >> right? Kind of hard >> because everything changes whether you have concentrated seating, whether you
have standing room, you know, >> that is correct. So Joe, would a I guess then bottom line would a call it a half wall uh with the accordion type rollaway uh wall going from say just this we're
talking say waist high up that is or is not acceptable. >> I I as I said to Matt I met Dan both I forgot who the young lady was that was there. There was three of them. I said it needs to be a complete enclosure in order to qualify to be part of the
structure and be considered in inside seating so there'll be no problem with service into that area. Um again I did give my suggestions to Matt and them about like some like a stellarium or a sun room I called it. If someone would
go like that where say the windows could be open screened or something for air to flow in then that would be acceptable and that would meet the requirements. >> I'm going to ask the applicant do you have a set of plans for what you're doing out there? >> No, it will be finished
two weeks. So, I mean, what I'm suggest what I was going with that was that that's probably something you should present to the building inspector and get some feedback on whether that plan is acceptable or not, except he's not going to be here in 2 weeks. Um, so I don't know who's going
to be here, but um I think that would be the logical next step unless anybody has a different thought on this. >> Well, um it probably would be, but >> I have a question. >> Is the deck there now? >> No. >> Okay. Is the deck approved by conservation?
>> Yeah. >> So, if the deck's approved, they'll most likely allow them to enclose it, right? >> Yeah. I I don't think that's an issue for with Concom. I think it's just >> I'm just making sure to check that box. >> No, no, no, no. I I I'm a big fan of doing that and cover all the bases.
>> So, I guess the word that boils down to is whether or not it's a permanent enclosure. It's not a temporary one or a half one. He needs it enclosed. That's that's what I heard. I I correct me if I'm wrong.
>> I would I would I would agree with >> Yeah, that I think that's what I heard as well. That's why I was asking if there was a plan so he could, you know, present it and uh get some feedback. Um >> what was your question? My question is is so so I understand what he means by the full enclosure and we don't have the
plans but as far as like the site plan goes would that like get approved and then the building enclosure could go through the building inspect or is it all in one >> um >> that's my question >> well you probably >> that's a valid question
>> let's talk about parking >> this to answer your question I personally would say no that would be my own personal vote I I would want to see a definitive plan, >> you know, not well, we're thinking about doing this down the road and maybe this
should happen and uh >> I don't know. That's just my own personal feeling. I don't know what the >> Yeah, things can always get modified down the road, but at least But we're starting in on this. I I I'd prefer to see the whole thing >> presented as a complete package. >> Yeah. And we've had what, two or three
changes since we've started looking at this anyway, you know. So, I I would personally like to see a set definitive plan. >> Don, can I jump in for one second? >> Sure. >> Sure. >> I just wanted to know if you saw the
email from Highway um from Steve. >> Yeah. Yeah. I I perused it. He was talking about the fact that there wasn't a sidewalk on one side and so he wasn't uh in favor of >> a crosswalk. >> A crosswalk. I don't think it's a good spot for a crosswalk anyway. Um, but
that that's irrelevant whether I think it's a good spot. >> Is there any other I >> said that he recommended valet? >> Yeah, I I think it was your father who brought up uh a val Oh, it was you. Okay. A valet service. So, that's
something we could we could discuss when we talk about um >> Yeah. My plan was to drop the documents and go with the existing amount of spots we have. >> Yeah. >> So, we can at least get Yeah. and bring it into the building inspector and then finalize lease because we're talking to
other people besides the church and then come back in with the valet proposal. >> And then what would you do about the crosswalk situation? >> Not do it. >> Not do it. >> So >> no one wants to do the crosswalk. I talked to the head of the traffic safety. He said valet talked to Steve
which he's the surveyor and he's selling the traffic safety. Yep. >> He said to do valet they all said to do valet. >> I I think I think that can work. Do we have a right to do valet in this town? Like under the I mean >> never seen it to be honest with you. >> I I don't know that it's legislated.
>> It isn't. It's not on the >> Yeah. I mean I don't think we specifically address it but I don't know that it would How would you >> Well, I was just asking because >> I've never heard so I mean like I've heard of it obviously but I'm I'm with you. I I get it.
>> Um so how many seats do you have? because that would mean that you would only be able to have um >> if we have >> 25 um you'd only be able to have 50 seats in the place. >> Yes, we have it at 60. >> But you but so like with the amount of
spots 27 if you take five >> drop it to 50 then that's fine. >> So five um and then you'd have 22 * 2 is 44. So you'd only be able to have 44 seats >> and then
because our bylaw reads to you um and >> it's two seats per spot. >> Yeah, but then employees take up some >> two employees per spot. >> So, it's five for that and then you only have 22 seats left. I mean 22 um parking spots left, which then would mean that
you only could have 44 seats inside. Okay. >> Does that sound right to you, Joe? I'm sorry about that. >> Uh we were doing uh parking calculations. Um Amy was mentioning that uh with 27 spots,
five spots were dedicated to employees, which left 22 * 2 would be 44 maximum maximum occupancy of patrons. That sound right without you having to dive into the chart.
>> Well, it's G. One space for each two employees and one space for each two seats, permanent or otherwise for patron use for restaurants and other places serving food or beverage and for theaters, auditoriums, and other places of amusement or assembly.
>> Yeah. And you figure 10 employees. Was that what you're figuring? >> That was for 60 elephants or 50. Yeah, the the plan says 10 employees. Yeah. For 60, but I don't think you can squeeze 60 in there. >> No, you would only be able to by the
parking um have 20. I'm sorry, what did I say? 44. >> 44. >> Were you supposed to meet with con conservation? >> Pass. go >> to it though. >> Yeah. I'll have to go back through.
>> Probably that would be the best thing to do is to go make sure they just check that box. >> Mhm. and then do the plans for um the building inspector to look at for the
deck and then show that there's only 44 spots and you know at tables anything else >> I mean if you're down to eight employees you can make it 46 but you know I mean
we're coming back in for this the documentary I'm Yeah. >> I don't really care what it is right now. >> Just so you know, when he's going to do this and then update it. >> Yeah. >> I just want to get this approved so we can actually start like building.
>> I got a So, he has to go back to conservation just cuz he's enclosing the deck even though he's already been through it for an outside deck. The footings aren't changing, right? >> Well, well, the the process in any event, even if we were to approve this tonight, when he applied for a building permit, it gets routed past Conome
again. uh andor board of health. Again, I'm not I'm not suggesting we approve it. I'm just saying that there is another process on top of this. >> Do we have a letter from the board of health in there? >> No, I did not. >> Email me back today that the existing subduction.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So, that would be fine for any >> Can you email us? >> Yeah, I was going to say we need a copy of that >> if it's it's in the portal, you said. >> So, so Danielle can access it for us. change. >> Thank you.
>> I would think that if he did these things and make an appointment with conservation and come back in, >> I would be okay as long as get something from conservation. Which >> have a question? >> Sure. >> Since we showed no seating outside
on the seating, >> would that be anything? >> Well, I I don't I don't know. I'd have to calculate your floor space in there to figure out what you could have for maximum seating, but it's still predicated on the uh on the parking. Yeah. >> No, I know it's predicated on the
parking, but I'm saying to get at least something to move forward. There's no seating on the deck outside in the seating. >> Well, we need the plans in concom I think especially since last meeting we sent somebody to concom to get approved
before we approve them. We have to follow that same suit. >> Yeah. Do we have anything from Com? I don't believe so. Did you have anything from that? >> They had they >> That was a long time ago. >> Yeah. It says here March. >> Okay. 3:14 per Comments. So, I'm
assuming at some point they went through Com and made some changes to the plan. >> The only thing they're going to be concerned with if we close the deck is the runoff from the roof. >> Well, that would change. Yeah. Never thought of that. Yeah, I went that
>> shouldn't have brought >> No, no. I mean, it'll come up because >> But I brought the seating thing because >> I could just say that we're not going to enclose the deck just so we can at least start building. >> I I I I know where you're trying to go with this. And it makes sense. I'd
probably be trying to do the same thing. >> I mean, we don't plan to open till the spring, but it's starting to get to the winter where like the outside needs to be done. Did when you went to Concom did they at least see the deck plan? They know they they knew they knew the deck was on there. Okay.
>> The only thing changes with concom is the if we do an enclosure if you put a roof on it >> heating outside at this time then nothing would change and drop the occupancy.
>> Yeah. I mean, the building inspector would still have to calculate to make sure that the size of the building's okay for 44, but you know, as far as the parking spots go, you're you're good for 44. The building has to accommodate it. Um, so there still another little layer
of supervision in there. >> I mean, if you really want to do it that way, then another week or two to make sure that you're not doing stuff and then back stepping would probably be a good idea as much as you want to get started. But >> I don't like to push it down, but you
might as well get it all packaged up. >> Yeah, >> you know what I mean. That's my opinion. But >> I I I don't disagree. I I hate to delay people, but I I think if you're getting close to getting the plans for the room
and you can get that whole thing done, I mean, you're still going to be limited to 44 people until you get some parking squared away. >> Yeah. >> Regardless. >> Yeah. Regardless of how much space you have. We should ask Joe. Joe. >> Yes, Amy.
>> Thank you. Um, with the current um interior space, let's say he's not using the deck for any um tables or anything. Would he have enough space inside per yaw codes for 44 people
and five uh 10 employees? Good question. Um, >> yeah, he'd have to research that. >> He has everything keeps shifting. >> Y, >> so again, I have to go back to the fact that I've seen different things along
the way. And it would be better, but if it's not me, it better definitive plan was put together for this project. So even whoever replaces me can look at it and do proper calculations for square footage, the depth covered, not covered.
Um there's just too many variables that aren't um definitive. >> Okay. >> For this product, that's how I I honest answer at this point. >> Thank you. That's what I wanted is an honest answer >> cuz you know it also brings up another
question in terms of the the runoff it how it's calculated where it's going and um you know from the additional roof. >> I know enclosing the deck sounds nice but it throws that whole thing into it >> into someplace else. Yeah.
>> So it's not like it's a small enclosure the roof the runoff. >> No it's big. Yeah. at 50 ft. So, so, so you know, maybe the just the deck open at this point. I don't know if that or you just don't want to do the deck at all at this
point. >> No, we'll still do the deck >> without the enclosure and then add your enclosure later. Just going to have to structurally design it so it'll accommodate it. That's all. >> Mhm. I I I think that's not a bad way to go.
>> I'm going to have to come back and use this. So, >> yeah. >> What do we have um for dates on the site plan here? >> We did extend it last time. I can't remember. >> I just wanted to make sure what the date is. >> Yeah. I don't remember exactly. It's in the minutes. I think if you haven't got
it anywhere else, I'll look >> I think I remember seeing it in the minutes. Oh, I have it right here. Um, extend 60 days from 911. So, it would be 1939
is 50. So, I think it's November 10th. >> So, we're >> we're good. >> We're good. Yeah, we're good. November 10th though we'll have to So our meetings in November are 6th. So let us know on the 6th if you're
going to need more time, which I don't want you to need more time. So probably get in with conservation and see what you're going to do. And sorry. So, just for my own benefit, they left the deck as just a deck and then
got the permits, built it and whatnot, then came back and said, "Uh, >> okay, we're going to enclose it and put a roof on." It would be in my consideration personally that that would be a substantial change, which would require
>> a modification, >> a whole Yeah. Well, a substantial modification. >> Yeah. So basically, you're throwing the old stuff out and starting all over again, which I would imagine got a little would get a little expensive as
opposed to doing it in one shot and uh take it from there. >> I don't know how, you know, the rest of you guys feel, but I would think you would close and put a roof on and put three sides on it and that's a substantial change. >> I would absolutely agree with you.
Well, I think it's the use that we're looking at. Um, I mean, if the deck's already there, what changes, in my immediate opinion, is any flow from the roof and that that'll have to be addressed.
You know, I mean, it's going to be the same amount of water. It's just a matter of how it goes and where it's going. Yeah. >> Um, it's not going to change the volume, per se. >> So, as far as modification goes, Yeah. I mean, there's a modification involved.
>> Matt, just for just >> But he can't occupy. I'm sorry. He can't occupy anymore unless he resolves the >> Well, dude. Yeah, that's it in a nutshell. >> Yeah. Let me you >> Yeah. Essentially, we would build the deck, overbuild it, like structural
wise, and have those calculations already put in place. >> Yeah. I mean, that's >> more of a load capacity. >> That's just do it in the future. >> That's specifically to Mr. where I go. You said there were like three different recommendations he made. What What were they? >> One was just like a full glass
enclosure. Um >> Oh, that's the sun roof. >> It's like a sun room. >> The problem with doing a retractable roof is they're very expensive. >> So, we never planned to do that in the beginning anyways because that would be about 100 for just the roof. >> Oh, yeah.
>> So, we plan to do a hard ceiling and then just do a full glass enclosure. I think your idea is great. I would get everything crossed and then do it over the winter and open in the spring and it'll just be done. >> Yeah,
>> that's what I would do if I were you. >> A lot of work to do that. >> I know. But it's a great idea. >> Oh, it's a good spot to But parking is still going to be a bugaboo there. >> Yeah, >> most people will come off their kayaks and paddle boards.
>> Yeah. >> All right. So, what do we do? What do you What would you like? A motion to continue this. >> Yeah, I I would I would look for a motion to continue this. I think you got a handle on what you need to bring in so we can get this thing done for you. >> Do you want us to put it on the next meeting just in case?
>> Yeah. So, basically, you want me to go talk to conservation. >> If it is a big problem, hold that closure and maybe decide on it or we made the decision if we move forward with it to make us go to a another meeting. >> Yep. And then uh you just want the
occupancy changed and maybe some plans to Joe or the >> No, not not maybe what the deck's going to maybe Joe, >> you know. >> Oh, okay. >> So, we have a definite plan of what's in
front of us, what we're >> a drawing of the deck and what are you going to do with it? >> Yeah. One of the If you can get the plan sooner rather than later before Mr. bragging leaves that would, you know, possibly do that. >> Push things along for you
>> cuz I don't know what the plan is to uh fill the position even in an interim way. >> Who's going to inspect the district? >> I'm sorry. >> We're going to do the inspection. >> That's what I'm getting at. I don't know.
I don't know that the decision's been made or if they've tried to find somebody or not tried to find somebody or I don't know. Okay. >> All right. Thank you. We'll go. >> We're going to try to get this done for
you next time. Get it over with. Do >> I have a motion to continue? >> I'll make a motion to continue it to the October. >> Oh, sorry. Um, yes. What did I say? 60
>> is our next meeting. Yeah. 14 days from today >> to the October 16th reading. >> I have a motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to continue this hearing to the 16th of October. All
those in favor? >> I. >> I. All those opposed? >> Hearing no. >> I didn't say I. >> I. Me, too. I >> Well, I didn't hear any opposed, so unanimous. Thank you. We'll try to get this done for us.
>> See, we should get them off. >> Yeah, >> we have some. All right. Oh, no. Virtual. Thank you. >> There's a lot of people would like to do that.
I'm going to just sit right there. All right, next up, >> the continuation of PSPR25-3, 539 Plymouth Street. And I think this was kind of an if one and I don't see anybody here for that, so I think we can move on from that.
>> Yeah. And the site plan is for um it expires on 11:15 2025. So, we're good. >> So, we're still good. Okay. Next up, we have a discussion from 340 Plymouth Street, a complaintant concerning 318 Plymouth Street. Mr. Alger, hello.
>> I'm Tom Alger, 340 Plymouth Street. Um, I want to thank Mr. Gainer and Mr. Millius, Chairman Millius uh for coming out today uh to attend a meeting that I had with Mr. White that's constructing a storage facility at 3:14. Um, and Mr.
Pek, Joe Pek was there as well. I think he's the owner of the property. Um, so the initial concerns was encroachment on that construction project onto 34 340 and 346 Plymouth Street and we determined that there was encroachment.
So they have uh they agreed to solve that encroachment within 2 weeks. So that was the agreement. So I just wanted to memorialize that. In the meantime, uh we're going to hire a surveyor to come
out and do that. Um even though that they removed our stakes that we had out there, >> it's always smart to confirm. >> So, but we had already had stakes there uh that we'll we'll have to pay again to have reservey.
Um also, I I was a bit concerned uh with Mr. White cuz he was unaware of this decision letter that um was presented to Mr. Peek um
by the planning board. So there are some requirements on here that um we want to make sure that that they're adhering to once this this facility is built. uh one being um that
the hours of operations will be will be 6:00 am to 10 p.m. at the latest um and the dimensions of the signage and also that there'll be no outside storage of any kind ever.
So um that they're and also um that they're utilizing to construct this facility. They're us utilizing a plan that was uh put together by a previous uh engineer uh Sylvia and uh yeah Silva
u Larry and uh so on that it has some easements that's recorded that they don't have uh approval for from us to use our land. So, um, and they felt strongly that they did have the
authority to use our land, but there was no easement provided to them. So, I just wanted to make that clear and and have a record of this. >> Okay. Um, so the last part of the decision letter you're okay with cuz it says on here that
>> there will be no uh varieties, no shrubage on 340 or 346 property. >> Okay? because that would be opposite of what this decision letter does state, >> right? But >> and you're okay with that? >> Yes. I do not want pro I do not want
that on there. The town doesn't have the authority to um to to force >> to put it on your property >> to put it on my property. >> Right. But it says that it'll be placed at the facility which is of their um storage facility. >> Then that's your that's your fight with
them. >> Yeah. So it states as on this decision letter that there should be 12 foot abides and blocked wall with algebra picked stones and blocks and it will be placed at the facility.
>> Yeah, I think they they presented a a view of the the wall. Was that something that was agreed upon? I I can't remember. >> So it says that the algae would pick the stones and blocks. >> No, I I understand. But they they did look at a picture of or >> Oh, today.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I'm sorry. A rendition, if you will. Not exactly a picture. >> And the blocks looked fine. >> Yeah. I I thought so, too. That was acceptable. >> So, you're okay with okay with the blocks? >> And you and even though it does state that there should be 12t eye of the facility property, you're okay with them
not doing that? >> Oh, no. They they can do that if they want. I mean, that's that's the town's that's the planning board's decision. >> Oh, sorry. Right. because it's not on your >> propert. So what's this easement? This is just for the drainage
at the facility. >> Is that the one for the drainage block at the facility? >> At the facility. >> So it's at the facility. So I think that they should be putting I mean I think they should be putting them up for the decision letter. >> Yeah. I don't think they had a problem
with that when putting >> Well, I don't think they have the land or the space to put these. I don't know, >> but that's that's your to make sure that they comply with this. >> They may not be able to fit them on there. That's that that was the case. >> But it is part of the decision letter. >> Oh, I I'm I'm not I'm not disputing
that. >> I think that they should find the room for it where it is part of the decision letter or they should ask for it to be removed cuz that was part of the that was the whole part of the decision that we were making to buffer you guys.
>> Right. So, >> I think I think what happened was it whatever plan they were looking at and I wasn't involved in any of that because that was prior to me. But I don't know if there's another plan that actually got approved cuz that didn't look like a signed plan. So somewhere along the line
this plan materialized with this easement on there and as I explained to them unless they have a recorded document they don't have an easement. >> It can be on the plan who it doesn't matter. But >> so they were operating thinking that they had this easement that was on the plan and I don't believe they did.
>> Did they have a copy of the decision letter? >> No, they didn't. I provided that. >> I was going to say you provided. So that's why I'm so adamant about making sure that we have a signed copy of a site plan or anything like that on hand
so that we have it not just in the computer system, but when we sign a site plan, there should be a record document copy in the town hall so that we have >> and I believe I believe there is. >> Yep. >> Absolutely. Well, it's hard because we
don't have them here, you know. >> Yeah. No, I understand. Plus, honestly, during the move, everything get misplaced all over the place, >> right? >> So, uh the we can always order a copy of the plan, the recorded plan. That's that's where it gets difficult. Well, that's where it got difficult today was
over the course of >> what's recorded, what isn't recorded, what's on the deed, what's it >> there is a recorded site plan and that's what they were going by and uh when they were looking at uh >> that might not have been the recorded plan. That's what I was getting at. That
might have just been a rendition of the plan. >> Oh, you mean the one they had? >> The one they had. So, so we need to see a copy of the recorded plan. And that's what happens all the time. I And I it's happened to me a million times. you get revisions upon revisions upon revisions
and then when you go to pull a plan, >> you pull the wrong one and and everybody's off to the races. >> But ultimately, it's what's being reported at the original. >> Absolutely. Absolutely correct. The one that was recorded is the one that operates. But that doesn't necessarily mean they're right either. Like if that
easement happened to be on the plan that got recorded, that's unfortunate because if there wasn't a recorded document, you know, a deed easement, then it doesn't exist. But today, as in this afternoon, there were uh stakes that were marked the
property lines. >> Yeah. >> And there was the GPS put on it which brought the accuracy in to was it an eighth of an inch or a quarter of an inch. And it wasn't the big pipes or the yellow pipes. It was what uh the
applicant had put down and it couldn't have bent any more on the money. you know, look looking at the GPS, it's like you said, I think it was within a quarter of an inch >> and that's absolutely true. Um >> cuz it was so much different from the yellow pipe that you really thought your
experience >> but they have removed them and you you estimated where you were putting them back. >> Exactly. Exactly. And one of the one of the the the ways that you can tell where those pipes were in estimation is that
we had been mowing uh that that lawn area for the last 30 years. So it's been maintained for the last 30 years. And that was the point that I was trying to stress that um you know I I roughly put back those pipes that they removed and
they were asked not to remove those pipes. uh and they disregarded our request and they just removed our pipes >> and and unfortunately >> coming to us and saying hey we have a disagreement >> and unfortunately they were they
encroached with the digging so it isn't like you could even say this is where it was >> right >> how much did they overdig by >> on the one pipe the yellow pipes that were there were a good 2T off maybe even three when when you actually when they
staked it like I said it was in If you >> within eighth of an inch of of the actual property line, >> if you were using the developers stakes, probably about a foot, foot and a half maybe. >> But if you were using the stakes that Mr. Alicia put back where he believed
they belong, it's a couple more feet. So, it's really hard to tell. Uh, and unfortunately, you're in a terrible position of having to survey it. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> Right. and and then if if they have a dispute, they've got to get a registered surveyor and then that it gets hashed
out between the surveyors. But um >> and there's no money left in here engineering to make sure that it's okay and it cuz this isn't [Music] this was the 318, but this isn't this
the 318 folder, but this is the three 14 site the numbers >> even though it says true storage site plan doesn't state >> I mean this isn't true storage right am I wrong >> how about the drainage report >> yeah I'll open that up this is just the
first one that I did but this isn't right I mean that's Starbucks >> this one you mean >> so to his point the questions that he still is outstanding is the sign and the operations, right? So, we're assuming there's a sign drawing somewhere that they
>> uh I don't know that they've applied for a sign permit yet. >> And also that there'll be no outside storage on that. >> Yeah. Yeah, that was pretty clear. And rewatched some of the meetings, but so you do have an easement for the drainage. That's all set. No problems there. >> Uh as far as that goes with the storage
facility, all that drainage goes directly back to the >> right. It doesn't cross your property. It's it's the Starbucks/ Autozone, whatever it is. So that's what the sement is for Starbucks. >> Yeah. >> Not the storage, >> right? >> Okay.
>> That's the whole thing. Um, so situation rain >> with the P. >> Yeah. The storage facility combs the country club. >> Yeah. Yeah. But it's weird cuz this drainage talks about stone walls. Yeah.
Well, that was included in part of that, too. Is that all we can do? Signage. As far as signage goes, I think unless it's changed over the years, I think the maximum signage is 30 square feet. Is that Did that number ever come
up? We just north >> for a single business. 30 square ft is the maximum >> or at least it was. I don't know. It might have changed. >> But it's just the watershed man.
>> Yeah. >> It doesn't really show us what we need to. So we don't have the 318 site plan. >> Were there multiple plans? Didn't they come in with a problem? Those files might be a little bit wonky because that
was zero and 314 at one point before they gave it the number 318. >> Yeah. >> Um so it might be a little bit all over the place um for what you're looking for, but I can try and look um on Monday when I get
>> Thank you. Yeah, we've figured that cuz it Yeah, we remember that part. Thank you so much, Daniel. >> That's the ad. You would think that that that second bullet would have would have resolved a lot of uh a lot of the the issues uh where the easement would be
res recorded at the county registry of deeds before any permits or work can start. So you would think that that would have been the >> that's what we were talking about this afternoon. I Tom said maybe I had it confused because the I thought it was
recorded that we did have an actual letter with with the signatures on it, but Tom said it could very well have been >> the easement closest to the house as opposed to this one. We we couldn't verify if it >> cuz it would seem to me that we wouldn't sign off on a site plan until we had
that >> definitive uh recording. But that's what Tom said. That's what we have to >> I think part of this had to do with um the storage facility was going to come first and then Starbucks was going to come second.
>> Correct. Yeah. >> So I think that's where the confusion happened and that's why I think that first bullet around the uh drainage >> um is on there is because drainage was going to happen with the >> to make sure the provision was there for
the other people. Yeah. Yeah. That makes sense. That's what we were kind of wrestling with this afternoon. >> You're saying it could very well not been the same easement that we're talking about now, the one that was closest to the one that was
>> but then there was so that was the requirement to to fix that drainage with the with the pipes on on 340 P Street. Um, and >> that's what we dealt with in dealt with
I forget what I was going to say. But um but they never got the easement to put those trees in on our property. >> Right. Right. That's the >> This isn't referring to that. >> Yeah. No, this is referring to
>> Right. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And like I said this afternoon, unfortunately, they showed an easement on the plan they had, but I don't believe it was ever executed. They never actually got an easement. like >> we never talked about them having an easement for it because on the decision
letter it states that they'll be placed at the facility >> and they may have been thinking about doing that and it never got removed from the plan. It just could have escaped the board at the time. >> The upper bodies were on his plan. They were definitely on >> Yeah, they were on his plan as was >> but they were on the facility side.
>> No, >> the recorded one. >> On the record on the plan that he had. Oh, you mean it it was one that he had that he used and it wasn't the correct one? >> Well, we don't think it was the correct one. I mean, because we didn't have a copy of anything that we could verify
was the recorded plan. So, we're going to have to look for a recorded plan. Um, >> there were two sets of plans. One was from Silver in 2022. And then theirs was as of March >> 23 was pretty close to the date of this.
>> Yeah. March 23rd, 23 was it? It was May 18th, 2020. You mean the decision letter? >> Oh, no, no. I'm I'm getting it confused with next door. Never mind. Scratch. >> I guess that's what I'm confused cuz this this easement talks about the
storage facility. >> Those plans >> with the retaining wall. >> Get a copy of those plans when you do find them. >> Yes. >> And his address. >> Thank you. >> I'm sure you heard that, right, Daniel? The retaining walls are shown on plan
entitled site wall how effect storageed site plan get a copy. >> It's really confusing. You got to go >> cuz there's there's a wall that's already up between >> the center.
Right. But uh off is um that that's built a stone wall. Yeah. And then there's another supposed to go across the ement on that side to help block their view
to block to um the storage facility. >> But they have one up. They got you got to go there and see >> 2025 >> anytime you remember. It was a big hello. We wanted to do it.
>> Looks like they haven't either. >> Nothing was going to happen until everything was in writing and I thought everything was in writing cuz I know >> and I try to watch the try to catch up but >> with
you know >> maybe I'm confused but you know with there was two different easements that uh we'll figure it out. Yeah. Well, come. >> That's the important thing. We'll figure it out. >> We can go to the registry and get the book and plan though. >> Exactly. >> In fact, I think the attorney said at
the actual book and plan this afternoon. >> Yeah. This just an easement and that's that's what we have in place right now. >> Yeah. 59756 page 153. >> Good. >> Okay. Duly noted. >> What was that page, Amy?
>> Excuse me. is that >> and I was I was commenting this afternoon. I mean what you said the easement is on what book? >> Um it's on book Plymouth County Registry needs book 59756
page 151. So that's the >> Yeah. >> If if by two weeks it doesn't look like they're going to do what they said they were going to do, then you know, by all means, let us know. >> Sure. >> Then we can intervene with whatever we can do. >> Plus, they did agree just to the rest of
the board that Yes. >> that uh >> to back fill with loom and then plant the seed up up to the wall, >> right? But again, the wall had to be put up first cuz it's >> cuz if you put loom down, it's just going to go across. So the the walls
going in, the loom's going in, seeds going in right up. >> And he said he was going to compact it, too. So >> And he has two weeks to do it. >> Yeah. >> And um >> No, no, no. He he wasn't going to get the he wasn't going to get the the block for two weeks. >> Yeah.
>> And then he needed a week. So Right. He said he's not going to be able to get the block for 2 weeks and then it's going to take him time to put the wall in, then put the loan in, then put the seed in. >> My understanding was two weeks. He has two weeks to do to accomplish this. >> Yeah, that got a little muddled. I I
>> Well, first it was one week. >> Yeah. Right. >> And then they said, "We don't even get the block." >> I said, "I want it done tomorrow." >> Tomorrow. Yes, you did. >> That resonated, by the way. >> And then I was flexible and I said, "I give him a week." Uh cuz he offered a week. He said, "Let me do it. is is a
week. Okay. And I said, "Fine, a week." >> Um and then after that it stretched out to two weeks. So he has up to two weeks. >> Yeah. When he was first talking about that week, I think he was talking about the side that the original side we were
looking at because the wall wasn't going to be as close there. But on the other side, I think he wanted to get the wall in. Uh but >> but he has two weeks. >> But he said two weeks. He said two weeks. So two weeks. Does that mean we put it on the next planning board meeting? >> Yeah. Yeah, we could put it on the
agenda and see how we're doing. >> Put it on at 3:18 and 3:40. Um, >> sure. For an update and and then we can take and and take any action there. >> Amen. >> All right. Unless you got anything else we can
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Correspondence. We do have a letter from Midland Contractors, also known as uh Starbucks.
>> Want me to read it into record? >> Sure. I was just looking for it, but as long as you have it. >> Midland General Contractors Incorporated, 716 Windsor Road, Loves Park, Illinois. Um it was sent to us on September 30th,
2025. and it was addressed to the building commissioner of the town of Halifax. It was the reason for the letter was to request for a temporary certificate of a occupancy for 314 Plymouth Street permit
number NC-24-2 deer building commissioner and planning department. This letter serves as a formal request for an approval to obtaining a temporary certificate of occupancy for the property located at 314A
Starbucks Plymouth Street associated with building permit number NC24-2. The project at this location is for new construction. The following minor items are still outstanding and are the reason
a final certificate of occupancy cannot be issued at the time of completion. Upon completion of the shell scope of work for 314A Plymouth Street that a temporary traffic signal system will be installed on the access drive from
Plymouth Street next to Starbucks. We are requesting the approval to obtain the temporary um occupancy with temporary traffic signal system in place. The permanent traffic signal system is delayed due to
an extended lead time for the mast arm. We will be requesting the TCO for a period of 180 days. We understand that obtaining a TCO is at the discretion of the building department and that additional conditions may be imposed to ensure occupant safety. Please let us
know what additional information or inspections are needed to obtain the temporary certificate of occupancy. Thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, Cindy Matias, Controller, Midland General Contractors. I >> I would like to jump in first if I may.
Uh I I I think it's a little premature to be asking for a TCO. Um and what exactly? And they're talking about the mast arm, but they're also talking about an occup temporary distributive occupancy for the whole site and they
need to come in. I think we need to invite them in and get some discussion. They're going to have to tell us how exactly they plan on leaving this whole thing and whether in fact the uh ancillary store, also known as maybe AutoZone, is if they're coming, if they're not coming, if they're not on
board, how are you leaving this thing? Uh I have some questions about the island uh that is in that other entrance, the eastern most in and out with the left turn only. Uh >> handicap >> and the handicap rep on front that isn't I was going to that, but but yeah,
that's okay. that isn't on the plan anywhere. I mean, I'm assuming it's a handicap ramp, but we don't know. They need to come in here and start giving us some information. Um, I I I I wouldn't even entertain personally the discussion
about a TCO until we have them here and have an opportunity to discuss this with them. Evidently, also just to add to that, I understand there was a discussion with uh with uh Steve Haywood uh in in regards to uh you know a
temporary signal being put up there in in the meantime because of the mast and uh Mr. Heywood said uh bottom line, you know, it's it's a matter of conditions that you uh that are on the site plan
which uh have to be adhered to and he certainly doesn't have the authority to wave or or put off or give an extension to. You know, he said you'd have to go back to the to the planning board to to review that. And even if we were to give a TCO
um and Joe Brager brought this up and it was a really good point and I'm sure we would have come up with it eventually. Um we might probably require a shity bond for the completion. We don't want to run into this thing where we're getting 3/4 of the way done and then the
fight is on >> and and put a time limit on that shity bond. If it isn't executed or performed in x amount of days, the bond gets surrendered. >> Yeah. it. >> So the security would be for the completion of the traffic light or the completion of the other building.
>> Exactly. To to to the point I was trying to make earlier, we need from them to tell us what they think they're going to end up with, what they're going to be looking for, >> cuz when you come out of there, you're supposed to only be able to go right towards Cumberland Farms, right? That way. >> Correct. And and correct me if I'm
wrong, but aren't there two masks there already? >> There's one that was supposed >> on one side and one coming up. So, what do they need another mask for? I >> I would like to get clarification. Maybe just >> Yeah, exactly. I mean, there's just too many open questions to be talking about
a TCO at this point in my opinion. >> Right. And I agree >> to now that you're saying this, wasn't it supposed to be that they were going to center with the stop and shop, which could could be done. I'm just saying like the checklist >> and I feel it >> they were going to correct the whole
traffic light thing. So, would that >> they moved them and they have They have pulled the cement in the base, but again >> where the mast is where the mass problem comes down and up, >> I'm missing something. >> Okay, so we're on the same page. >> Way too many questions to be even
talking about a TC at this point, I think. >> So on that, we would probably need to have a PR engineer on how much work would need to be done and then figure out how much that bond would have to be. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Correct. And and like I said, right now
they're asking if we would I don't know if they're asking if we would entertain the idea. That isn't how it sounds. It sounds like would we give them one? And then they specifically talked about the traffic signals, but if you give somebody a TCO, a temporary certificate of occupancy, you're giving them a certificate of occupancy. They can
operate. Yeah. >> And and I don't want to get into that mess where we've got people operating and then we're trying to tell them, well, we got to shut this down. I don't I don't want to go there. >> Especially with a multi-million dollar corporation. >> Yeah. And I'm not sure that that's how it would go. But if it can go that way,
it could, >> right? >> You know, so uh if I would entertain um from from the board to communicate with them and ask them to present their plan. >> I I I would make I would move that motion, please. >> Could be.
>> Sure. Tom Al, 340 Plymouth Street. Um so um when we were talking about the construction of Starbucks and the easement uh that's through 340 Plymouth Street into the golf course uh with
those two pipes. >> Yep. >> Um you know it's they've done about I would say good 90% of the work 80% of the work on that. Uh however there is some sink holes developing with those pipes and uh there's also some drainage
issues still uh on the property. So, uh, once that's completed, I wish that would be taken into consideration for occupancy. >> Sure. Sure. We can bring that up at that same time. >> I mean, there's just so many open questions. I I I think it's just premature to be talking about certificate, temporary certificates of
occupancy. >> Yeah. >> So, I I had a motion. Do I have a second to invite them to a meeting to discuss what their plan is here? >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. All those in favor? >> I. Anyone opposed?
Excellent. We will uh draft a letter and send it out to uh Midland. >> My daughters will be upset. >> No, wait a minute. Wait for >> two of them. It's Storm's fault. >> I mean, is a new company still doing or is this Midland's the original one?
>> I think Midland's the original one. They hired contractors to do various things. I believe >> they fired them. >> Yeah. >> It was Casco, wasn't it? >> No, they were the engineers. They were the engineers, >> I think. >> So, >> oh, the contractor. Sorry. >> Yeah, >> I was thinking the other
>> I just get a point of clarification. So, >> 314 is Starbucks. >> Yes. >> And 38 >> 18 is the storage. >> This talks about 314. >> Well, what happened was >> 318 is
>> the storage. >> Oh, behind startup. >> All right. There was some where Starbucks is and where the purported second occupancy whatever it ends up being because they were on the same parcel of property they couldn't
give them two separate >> street address and it shouldn't so they gave him the A and the B got okay that's how that evolved >> right and at the time when we were going over all of these things have a number yeah I remember that >> so it was really fun yeah everybody uses
zero And I hate that. >> Yeah, it was really fun. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um >> WB Mason. >> So, we have some bills or a bill from WB Mason. I think I've got it here. Maybe.
>> Yeah. >> Soon as I get my hands to work. Here we go. We have a bill from You want to read it? >> Sure. Nice. >> I don't have my glasses, so I'm going to >> I'll make a motion to pay WBM Mason
invoice number 256951492 for office supplies in the amount of $148.19. >> It's been moved to second. >> Moved and seconded. All those in favor? I. >> Anyone opposed? Unanimous.
I'll sign that. Next up are the meeting minutes. Has everyone had an opportunity to read the minutes? >> No. >> Can I have a copy so I can have them at home? I have I have to come in and talk to Caesar about my email still. >> Okay. >> No, I haven't been able to come in. I've
been cracked. >> Well, we can we can put the minutes off until the next meeting. >> Thank you. >> And take care of that. I have a copy in here if you want to make them. >> Yeah, might as well just take them, right? or I can make a copy.
And last but not least, >> actually I think I got him in an email. Did you get an email late in the day? >> I got I did. >> Yeah. >> Do you want a motion for the next meeting or you want to just say we'll do it at the next meeting?
>> Um yeah, sure. Let's have a motion. Motion to do the minutes of September 4th, 2025 at the meeting on October 16, 2025. >> Moved and seconded. >> Oh, no. Just moved. How about second?
>> I jumped ahead. Moved and seconded to uh put the meeting minutes on the agenda for the next meeting. All those in favor? >> I. All those opposed. The eyes have it unanimous. Uh, other business
>> decision letter. >> Yes, we have a decision letter. There's a Do you have a copy? >> I do. >> Yeah. >> You want me to read it in front? >> Yes. I >> We have the plan. >> There's some confusion as to whether the authority was given to
the chair and or vice chair to sign um decision letters. Um, so, uh, I had signed it, but what I would be looking for is a, uh, confirmation, um, or a ratification of of the thing just in case. I also, uh, reached out or
had reached out to council um, with some guidelines on signatures and whatnot, and I think they're in your packets. You might want to take a look at those and we can >> I don't have those. >> Yeah, I don't see them either. >> No. Uh yeah, they're on the >> or I don't think so. Hold on. Oh, yes I
do. It's right behind the meeting minutes. >> Yeah, they're from uh Rich Huxom. So, you know, you you may want to just mentioning you may want to take a look at those. Um so, I would be looking for a after
everyone takes a look at that letter and confirms that that's what we put in there, a ratification of my uh signature on that decision letter. And we need to sign the plan. Do we have the plans? Yes, we do.
>> So, I guess this says that we if if one person was supposed to sign then >> typically the the chair >> have to be voted. >> Yeah. And I think I remembered we did that at one point, but then I couldn't
remember if it was for one specific plan or for generally speaking. Okay. >> But I believe the law allows for the chair or the vice chair, but just to keep it up and above board. Um >> well, it's it says that we would have
had to have voted to authorize. >> Yeah. Yeah. So I I I think that's how we should proceed in the future just to acknowledge either the chair or the vice chair can sign for the board unless there's some reason everybody wants to sign it but it's not necessary.
>> I like I like the fact that the decision letter at least comes to to the meeting before it's signed so that we can make sure that >> Yes. Yeah. >> You know people are protected. >> I I don't have a problem with that. >> And then if it's at the meeting then we can vote to have it signed. Yep.
>> I was actually quite proud of this one because I can actually sign my name again. It took me took me almost a year to be able to write my signature again. That's good. >> Kind of interesting. >> It's it's you know the human body is pretty amazing. Um do you have um the
list of things? Oh, the plants right there. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Do you want me to read this into record? >> Uh sure. August 27th, 2025 to Paul New. >> There's only one one copy. I'll pass it down to you.
>> At a meeting held on Thursday, October 20, I'm sorry, August 21st, excuse me, 2025, the Halifax Planning Board voted 5 to 0 to grant the site plan review application with revised plans dated 82025 for num um number PSR
25-2. Site plan application was submitted on March 12th, 2025 by Webbby Engineering on behalf of the property owner Paul Nukem of Nukem's Tree Service for construction of the two additional buildings.
But it's only one. >> Oh, yeah. Now it's only one. >> Yep. >> So one. >> Yeah, cuz he changed it. um 125 by so this is not right said to
be located at 38 358 Industrial Drive Halifax as shown on the assesses map 47 lot 5A with the following conditions as listed new plan submitted to show grass on the north side being changed to recycled gravel new plan submitted to
show one building sprinkled sprinkler it's funny to see that way. New plan submitted to show all underground structures be road rated. Fire hydrant installed as shown on revised plans 820
2025. Dumpster pad to be moved to the southeast corner as shown on the revised plans 8 2025. 20 foot fire lane maintained around the perimeter of the buildings per the fire chief Mike Wiom. In making its decision, the planning board reviewed the criteria
listed in chapter 16728H of the code of the town of Halifax as part of site plan reviewed and was assured that the use of the property was reasonable based on the criteria listed in the bylaw. Any change in the use, the scope of use or the location of the business will require a
new or modified site plan review and approval. Any relief requested by the applicant which is not expressly granted here is hereby denied. The following are the votes of the planning board. Millius, yes. Gainer, yes. Troop, yes.
Sylvester, yes. Jamie Walsh, yes. >> Um, >> I'm sorry, I missed it. Was the, uh, relocation of the fire hydrant on the property. Was that one? >> Yeah. Um, fire hydrant for condition fire hydrant installed shown on a revised plan date 2025.
>> I missed it. Thank you. >> You're welcome. So, >> so what we should do, >> the site plan should refer to the final date of the plan and we need to make it one building and cross off the dimensions and put the
correct dimensions. >> Yes, make we can make those changes and and authorize either the chair or the vice chair to sign. [Applause] was there. Oh, and the only other one that I like is to follow with our all
Halifax um bylaws and codes that used to be in decision letters and I think that it's it it just makes it clear and concise. Can we add that please? >> I don't have a problem with that. Does anyone else?
>> So, with these should we vote to make these changes? So, I vote I I'll I'll make a motion that the decision letter have the date of the final plan, which is Oh, sorry. It does. I got confused
because of the mod 12 original, but it does. So, it's not changing. I make a motion to change it to one building and put the dimensions for the building and um at the end say that it needs to
follow all other Halifax bylaws and >> needs to conform. >> Thank you. Right. And in that language we take it >> second. I can second
move and seconded what she said. I hate doing that. >> Sure. >> Um, what was the last thing that you said? Um, >> so the same way to follow all other
Halifax bylaws and codes >> to be in compliance. >> Yeah. >> Am I missing it? I >> I miss it. I don't know if that's what you're saying. >> Oh. Oh. Oh, no, no, no. Yeah, I see what
you mean. And I was wondering if that was it, too. No, it just says that we used the um planning 167 28. It didn't it doesn't talk about all the other. So, it you could probably find it on a
formal letter. You have the has something like that. >> Okay. Um, thank you. >> I haven't changed anything in the decision, but I see what I look um this
Yeah, I promise you this isn't against you. I'm just making everything clear. Um, where is Thank you. That's me. I was taking it home. >> Please be advised that special permits and site plants must comply with all the
rules, regulations, and codes of the town of Halifax. >> Yeah. Yeah, >> that's fair. You >> Where did we leave off with that? We have a motion in a second. Did we have a vote? >> No, we didn't.
>> We have a motion in a second to >> approve with the changes. >> Approve the site plan approval letter with the changes noted. >> And for this, I might as well Can I amend this? Yeah. >> And I might as well for this decision letter where we just voted and went over
it that the chair or vice chair can sign. >> Yeah, that makes it the the second agrees. >> All those in favor? >> I I >> All those opposed? Unanimous. Thank you all. And I believe unless there's
anything else I'm missing, the next schedule meeting is October 16th, 2025. >> I'll make a motion to adjourn. >> Do I have a second? >> Oh, actually, let me >> move and seconded to adjurnn.
All those in favor? He's in a three-point stance. I >> I >> Thank you. Thanks. >> Go Red Sox. Red socks on. >> What?
[Music]