Good evening and welcome to the Tuesday, August 4th meeting of the Norton Planning Board. The public is welcome to participate either in person or remotely. We are in person at the Norton Town Hall at 72 East Main Street in the Crane Room. You may also join us by video via the Zoom link as listed in the
agenda. And please feel free to email any questions before the meeting to the email address in the agendas to town staff. I will call this meeting to order. We have five members in person, one member on Zoom. So, all votes tonight will be roll call votes.
We'll handle uh planning board business and policies at the end. First item on the agenda is going to be ANR 2428 Elm Street, parcel ID 17, 30. Applicant owner is John Drobnes. And I believe Craig, you're here for this?
>> Yes. >> Good evening. [clears throat] >> Good evening. Craig Siginowski, Rim Engineering. Uh John Dness is in the audience, the owner of the land [clears throat] and just looking to divide the land into two uh lots.
Both lots have the minimum uh frontage. We're in the uh R60 zone yet requiring 60,000 square ft of uh contiguous upland. the existing house lot number two has
that we have 65,000 square feet of contiguous upland and lot one comes in at 46,000. So he went to the zoning board of appeals and they have approved the variance to allow lot one which meets the other requirements. We have
the 150 ft of frontage. We meet the uh lot shape area requirement and the access will be through the frontage. Uh the reason for the lack of upland is it's a 6 and 1/2 acre parcel in [clears throat] total, but you can
see the wetlands line cuts off about a little bit more than half of the lot. So we went before the ZBA and was approved for the variance. So we're [clears throat] asking for approval of the two lots. >> So we have access and frontage. Any
questions for the applicant? >> Uh I just want to make [clears throat] sure. So it's un it's an undersized lot. So going forward would be considered nonconforming.
>> No. Uh well the lot itself is non-conforming by the zoning but we have the ZBA approval. So it is then anything for the construction of a house or anything that would be done on that will need a building permit through the building department.
>> Right. But like again we can allow the lot to be built. that's not an an issue. Um, but if you want to put a house on it or apply for for any sort of development, you would have to go through the zoning board. >> We've already Steve,
>> uh, ZBA approved the lot area, so they can build the house >> without having to go back to the ZBA. >> Okay. >> Cool. >> They'll still have to conform to all the other setbacks and everything. The only thing they got the variance for was the square footage. >> Okay, cool. Yeah,
>> correct. >> Any other questions? >> No. >> If not, the chair would entertain a motion. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> We have a motion in a second to approve ANR 24 for 28 Elm Street. We'll do a
roll call vote. Rob, >> yes. >> Robert, >> yes. >> Miami, yes. Steve, >> yes. >> Frank, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. 6. [clears throat] >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next item on the agenda is ANR250 Taylor
Court ID 15, 70. Applicant owner is Robert Anderson. >> Yes. Uh Craig Sowski Rim Engineering representing Robert and Carrie Anderson who owned the land. [clears throat] This land uh back in
2005 was subdivided and what's called lot A4, the large lot on the end of the culde-sac at that time was shown as a non-building lot due to lack of lack of contiguous upland. And we're still calling this a non-building lot. The
[clears throat] purpose of this plan, house number six, uh Taylor Court is lot B from the original 1991 plan. It is a conforming lot that the house conforms to the zoning setbacks. We meet the lot
area. We meet the uh shape factor requirement. And what Mr. Anderson is looking to do is simply divide out what we're calling lot one on this plan 21,000 square ft which includes wetlands. It's a
non-building lot as well. And that will simply be transferred into the ownership of lot B. So [clears throat] the only usable land on the large lot to the end of the culde-sac is what I'm calling lot one. So
[clears throat] it's a non-building lot. There's no proposed there won't be a house there. It's just adjacent to his lawn and can be used as lawn area. >> Just dividing it off for tax purposes or some other >> Yeah. I mean it has no value to Mr. Anderson. Correct.
>> Again, you can't even if we >> try to put a building, it doesn't meet the setbacks and then the buffer zone from the wetlands. So, really no no construction is allowed in that area without going through some type of conservation [clears throat]
uh filing. So, it's just selling off the small amount of upland that we can to the neighbor. Questions from the board? >> Nope. >> No, I got no problem.
>> No. >> If no other questions, chair would entertain a motion for approval for ANR250 Taylor Court. >> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Rob, >> yes. >> Robert, >> yes. >> Yes. Steve, >> yes. >> Frank,
>> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Tuesday, >> we'll sign them tonight for you. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you. [clears throat] Next item on our agenda is a continued public hearing site plan review 22 for one Dean Street.
Owner is Robert Celebri. Applicant is Yamir Castillo. This application is for a pre-existing building, sorry, pre-existing business. Applicant [snorts] has asked for a continuous until September 15th. Uh Brian's got a letter up here from him today. They're
still working on the plans. When they originally in, I thought if they got to this meeting, they would be doing pretty good. But I think we at least wanted them to check in, >> at least say they were had a registered engineer and they they're working towards something, which they have a registered engineer and they we're being
told they're working on the plan, so I have no problem continuing this another >> time. I'm not sure how many times we're going to continue it, but another to our September 15th meeting seems more than appropriate to me. >> Motion to continue to September 15th. >> Second. We have a motion to continue SPR
22 for1 Dean Street to September 15th. Rob, >> yes. >> Robert, >> yes. I mean, yes. Steve, >> yes. >> Frank, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. [snorts] >> Next on our agenda, 47 Elm Street, Owen Haron, um here to discuss a possible
project um dividing off some land from the old Reeden Barton site. >> Good evening. Let me introduce myself. Did I cut you off? >> No. Go ahead. >> Yeah. >> Uh, so I'm Owen, lifelong resident of Norton. I got a small company that
started here called Acceleration Engineering. Right now, we're under contract to support the US Navy design development of some submarine components. We also recently are uh grant award winners through the state of Massachusetts and we're going to be building uh this special qualification
piece of equipment that everything that goes on an aircraft carrier, destroyer, submarine has to go through this test. We're uh the first company making one in about 40 years. There were hundreds of these at one point, less than 75, less than 50. There's none in Massachusetts
um and just a few on the entire East Coast. Uh we probably in the partest the toughest part of our evolution as a business has been trying to find a new home. Uh I have social engineered and stocked every building owner in the town of Norton. Uh we've made bids on
buildings in Taton. We've gone as far as Bellingham. The conversation of 47 Elm Street has come up a couple of times. [cough] Some of the [clears throat] things that's attractive about 47 Elm Street is I grew up on North Washington Street. Uh I would love to see something happen over there. Uh right now I probably couldn't
take ownership of the entire thing, but there was a engineering phase two done in 2022. And when you're looking at the property over on the lefth hand side, there's about 2 acres uh that was by and large completely clean. Uh we may have
to get a little bit of uh updated testing and stuff like that just to definitize that. Right now it's zoned village commercial and so the zoning laws for village commercial allow by special permit and R&D facility and
acceleration engineering will be I don't know why I'm fumbling so much here tonight but acceleration engineering will by and large be an R&D facility. So, uh, one of the things that we're we're working really hard to pull together, um, I may be over informing you a bit, but when we look at like
government contracting right now, the Navy needs something that goes to a large prime, that goes to an engineering company, that goes to a manufacturer, that goes to a test, right? And we got that whole telephone contract game going on. Uh, we're looking to bring engineering, design, prototype, and qualification all in one house, right?
So, you come to us, you say, "This problem needs to go away. We'll be able to do engineering there. we'll be able to do prototype development there and with this machine that's going to be done in the next six months, we'll be able to do qualification efforts there, being able to turn a complete design
package over. So, I think part of uh being here tonight was to introduce you to me, what it is, what I'm trying to do, and and some of my intentions. Uh I've already put a project proposal together. I've done a couple of other things, but uh you know, my next step,
and then I'll answer a bazillion questions that you likely have, would be to put a special permit application together to present to all of you uh to look to getting approval to to make a move on that area. >> So, [clears throat] Mr. Chairman, >> yeah, a couple things first. So, full
disclosure, Owen and I went to high school together. >> Okay. >> Um I have nothing to do with his business, nothing to do with anything that he's doing. Um, we live about a mile from each other and we probably talk twice a year. So, as far as my research and
back when Paul was on, I don't think there's a conflict of interest. >> Um, if anyone else thinks there's a conflict of interest, there isn't. I'm still going to >> there's a form I can fill out to say that >> um for a disclosure basically >> um which is no big deal.
>> Um, but just for a full >> open for everyone um >> to nine. >> Yeah, exactly. [laughter] So Owen is was working with Paul for quite a long time trying to find a piece of property um and is struggling for it and so he's in a time frame too. He
really needs to get going on it. So I said the easiest thing to do um come in front of us quick conversation. Anyone see any red flags that's going to hold him up as far as putting something there? >> I would interject just one thing is uh >> I would really like to stay in Norton.
We've been in Norton our whole life. We've been in communication. My wife's a lifelong resident of Norton. Uh we've been working with the school system on a number of different efforts and stuff like that. So part of this push to do it is any attempt that we can to stay in the town. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. Okay. And my question to you go ahead was going to be um you know we're aware of the challenges with that lot. Um and more you might know what are the type of conditions we need to ask for to >> he's working with the owner. Um, he's in
contact with the owner. Um, >> I could probably give you a frightening amount of accuracy. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, [clears throat] >> it seems to be he's going to be in contact. Have you talked to John Thomas? I know you said you were going to reach out to him, the conservation director. Did he give you any? >> I I haven't yet. Uh, just to have this
conversation, >> understand the intent, and then put all those pieces together and stuff. >> Yeah, the um it's owned by a holding company right now that took possession of it when Reed and Barton disbanded. the town chose not to take it and there's been a a a pretty substantial
amount of remediation that's already taken place there. Uh there's a little bit more that remains. Um taking the whole thing right now would probably be a big chunk. My aspiration would be to take that section and then maybe be able to move on to some of the others. >> Okay. I [clears throat] I have a couple
questions. I guess I to start off the idea itself conceptually sounds great and I don't mind that. Um, what red flags are who currently owns it right now? Like >> it it's held by a law firm as a a
holding company. So, uh, >> so is there nobody right now that we can have clean up that site? >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Because it's just a law firm [clears throat] holding a deed. >> From from what I've heard, the uh the grants have run out. Um
the Army Corps of Engineers has been in there, done a ton of work. They're not going to do any more as far as I know. Um they've got it to a point where I think they've they think they've contained it from what I understand. >> And so whoever inherits the mess is is responsible for cleaning up the rest of it and monitoring it.
>> So you're looking to take a portion of that land. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, when you're looking at the building there, um >> if the building the building was divided into three major sections, the building on the left was we'll call it facilities. Okay. And there was some tanks and stuff like that that were in the ground. Those were removed. Y
>> and then following that [clears throat] following where they did like some chemical processing. This is all in the phase phase 2 report, which is 386 pages long. It's awesome. >> Um over on the right hand side, the reason they tore that building down is there was a lot of chemical stores there. Okay. So they did uh sediment
testing. They did there's wells that are there. They did soil sampling and stuff like that. That was all in 2022 and segregated off. And so uh Ann Beasley is the woman that represents the holding company. >> Yep. >> And
Brensley I've met her. Yeah. >> And so uh yeah what we there Paul had communicated with her when we had had some previous conversations. uh there is a greater than 120 feet of frontage that could break that parcel off. Not a full
uh requirement for an approval for a subdivide and we would be looking to slice off a definitive line in the sand where we know it's clean and go to the left there. So looking at the building roughly an acre and a half, two acres all the way over on the left.
>> Okay. And by look, for what it's worth, by looking at the phase 2 report, you can see by a lot of their discharge is it went with the water down that little waterfall and off to the side. So it >> kind of preserve that section. >> So would you would your building or lot be occupying like the field to the side
of the paved area? There's a paved area that's there was a building and a parking lot. >> Yes. >> It's just it's just an empty like paved area. >> It's not paved right now. Now it's gravel. It could look paved like if you were driving by, but yes, that's
principally where it would be. Okay. >> So, if you were to the existing building right now, let's say you came off that 50 ft, it would be from that 50 ft to the left >> and we would we would get in there, get it properly uh surveyed. Yes, exactly that.
>> So, would you would you be clearing more of the building? >> No. No, we would be in what is currently cleared where they went and removed the tanks that were previously there. So, he's going to obviously have to do an ANR. Um, that's an easy step. We just
Those are two things we did earlier. As you saw, those are fairly cut and dry. Take no time really. Um, I forget. Remind me. Um, size of the buildings. They weren't enormous that you're looking to put up. I don't remember what you said. >> Yeah. Right now, what I would like to do
is put two buildings up roughly 60 by 50. Really the rationale behind that being keeping the test area uh segregated from the machining and stuff like that. The precision machining will want big slabs of concrete not have
environmental impacts and influence on it and stuff. >> Now is is there um is there a sewer on Elm Street? >> No no sewer that the other problem the other aspect of this is the water line is out for bid. So that grant that we
had for the sewer that got turned down twice at town meeting >> turned into a grant for a new water line going down Elm. Brian, you I'm correct in this. Do you know? >> That's more of a the public [clears throat] department of public works question.
>> Um I believe I'm right. Um we'll double check it and I believe it's out to bid and I believe the intent of constructing it constructing it by the end of the year. >> Just the water man. >> The water man. So obviously if he's going to put a building there, they're going to want to put a stub in while they have it dug up and they're not going to want to dig the road up again.
>> Yeah, exactly. >> The other reason for he's in a little bit of a time crunch. >> So are are you guys going to require sewer? >> We won't require sewer. No. And um >> you'll have to have sanitary You'll have to have sanitary uh bathrooms for employees, right?
>> Yeah, certainly. So, uh, one of the things I've gotten permission from an I've spoken to, uh, the fire department is, uh, we're going to do a couple preliminary perk tests and stuff like that. It'll get fully perked. Even if you couldn't put a subground septic in, you could put a sisterine system in. So,
there's ways to do it. I mean, your your question's spot on and asking those types of things. Mhm. >> Acceleration Engineering is looking at taking some inherent risk of coming through some of those challenges, but for the opportunity to get the property, stay in the town, try to bring something
meaningful over there, try to start bringing that all down, >> we'll assume some of that risk knowing that we it just may have to be an above ground system or something like that. >> Definitely positive. >> And how many employees would you imagine would be at the facility >> right now? Three. And I I see us at some
point growing to maybe 12. >> Great. >> Yeah, that's great. >> So, not exactly. It's not like he's going to put a hundred 100 employees there, 100 cars every day. It's >> seems like a fairly minimal impact to the residential neighborhood. One of our biggest problems is commercial business
and residential zones are mixed all across through towns. >> So, we have constant battles with lots of traffic being introduced into a residential area. This doesn't seem to >> We do traffic studies though. >> Yeah, [laughter] >> we do traffic studies that are useless.
Exactly. >> Yes. Do they come in separate cars? [laughter] >> So, it's a fairly low impact. I can't think of anything else I'd want to >> have him address. Um >> I have ANR required and it's going to get fully parked. Is it >> correct? He's going to have to do an ANR
and then uh come in front of us with a >> application for a special permit. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. No, I I think it sounds pretty acceptable. Not Not bad at all. >> Cool. I will uh hopefully I've accomplished a lot of the groundwork of it and stuff, but my goal will be to try
to make it back here by September 15th to present that to you. >> Good. >> Keep keep in touch with Brian and uh he'll let you know the advertising [clears throat] dates and how far ahead um you have to apply everything to. >> Okay. >> Anything else? Anyone?
>> No, I think I'm good. >> Awesome. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Wish you best of luck. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Next item on the agenda, fall town meeting articles. Um, bringing this back up and it's going to be on the rest of the agenda. So, I'm
not sure if it got put out there, but August 20th, we're going to have the joint meeting with the select board. So, Thursday, August 20th. Um we have still only two um proposed applicants u for our open spot. Town manager is
going to send us he had them both do um resumes basically or just a little questionnaire. I believe he's going to send it to us beforehand so we can review it and ask any questions we want that night and then we can vote on either candidate. Um, also that night, we do have one more
meeting before then, which I think is helpful cuz I think there's a few things in our articles we need to tune up and we're going to have time to tune up at this point between what we talk about tonight and then our next meeting. Um, I don't have anything. I'm going to go
through them quick and anyone has anything new to interject, please let me know. Um, fiscal impact analysis, I think we're fairly we have a fairly good presentation to get feedback from the board. I think we have enough. August 21st, I believe, is when town meeting
>> [snorts] >> um article language has to be posted or however you want to say it. The town meeting articles are due August 21st. So, it's right after that meeting. >> Um so, we have to at least know what we're going to be putting on the town meeting by that. So, if there's any
questions, that'll be our last opportunity to knock it out. >> Okay. >> Um I think for now, we could roll with that fiscal impact analysis. I think there's some work we could do on it, but I think it's enough for now that we could discuss with them and make any
changes before and get some final feedback and and fine-tune the language. Um, same thing with the special permit criteria. Um, same theory, noise bylaw, same theory in my eyes. Um, our industrial
zone height and total lock coverage. I think we need a little conversation on that if you want to have it. Right now, we had agreed to maximum building height of 75 ft with possibly increasing the total lock coverage. [snorts] Um,
and then my notes in my head in front of me are since almost all these zones are abuing residential, if we're going to allow taller buildings, what are we going to do for the residences to buffer them a little bit more? Mhm. >> And right off my bat, do do we want to
um Brian, I never asked you to pull this up beforehand. I should have given you a heads up. Could you pull up the uh industrial zone buffers in the uh zoning bylaw? We have some rules for industrial zone buff buffering. My only
idea right now is to maybe set a bigger setback from the street. >> Um introduce a I don't know pleasure of the board, 30 foot, 40 foot, 50 foot setback from the street um whatever it may be to maybe it could be
more I don't know just to feel like the bulking and the mass of those buildings at 75 ft on the street and close to the residential houses. >> Um >> 50 feet, >> excuse me, >> I think the 50 >> at least 50. >> Yeah, >> if not at least 50 if not more.
>> I was going for the largest of your options. Get in there. >> Yeah, I'm fine with going more. I forget exactly how we have it written now. That's why I asked. So this is so this is 100 already. Maybe that's where I got 100 from
adjacent to the boundary of residential 80. There shall be provided a buffer strip not less than 100 ft wide. Such buffer strip shall be landscaped and planted. Um so we already require 100 foot buffer. >> Let's keep that. >> Is that enough? Is there anything we can
add to it? We could do uh step back of buildings such as the first two floors can be um at the same elevation. The third floor and the fourth floor would have to step back a certain amount of feet. The the top floor would have to step back. We could do anything like
that that might be getting too too intricate for this area. I just wanted to make sure we had a conversation of what else we could add into this to help And if you don't have ideas now, we'll just put it on your homework for ideas for the next meeting. Uh, is there
anything else we can add to that to to lessen the impact? I >> mean, I [clears throat] think our criteria is already fairly good. The idea of stepbacks is perfectly fine because the industrial zone is not only industrial uses. There are all
commercial uses allowed. So you very well could have offices or even a hotel which would [snorts] prefer a more elaborate design, a better a different facade. >> I'm I'm not sure we're equipped right now to do a pretty good stepped back type buffer with diagrams and
everything. It's just an idea and it's something we can >> obviously add in the future. >> I think >> I was struggling to find anything else to add. I guess >> I think as simple as possible would be better. So I if we want I think the the
goal is to increase the possible space that could occupy industrial uses without expanding the industrial districts to new areas of town. >> Mhm. >> And if we can do that by allowing more square footage of the lot to be used. >> So Brian could you go up to the not
sorry Steve not could you go up to the lot that show the chart that shows the total lot coverage. So, >> this one. No, further down. >> Yeah, keep going. I think you went past it possibly. I wasn't paying attention. >> Right there.
>> That's under the the people's cameras. >> The maximum percentage of lock covered by a building in the industrial zone right now is 33%. In VCC, we have it at 75%. In VC, we have it at 50%. So, we have some
precedent in town that we can definitely kick that 33% up. >> Yeah, I I think it's >> You brought it up. >> Very valuable to do, though. >> You've been saying that multiple times. >> Um I guess the I think we should start kicking around an idea, come up to a sort of consensus
on where we're comfortable and then see if anyone on the select board on the 20th has any ideas about it or no one cares or they want to expand it. And the other part of it too would be any building that's 10,000 square feet still needs a special permit.
>> Correct. So they still need a special permit. They still have the setbacks in place. They still have that 100 foot buffer. Um I I'm I have no problem right off the bat going up to 50%. I don't know what
anybody else thinks. And obviously we all know half our lots are wet anyway. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> Um, so >> true. >> Chances are they're dealing with conservation constrictions anyway. >> I have no problem with 50%. If anyone
else has a different number to start with that we could pencil in, >> take 50 as their starting >> 50 is a good meeting starting point. >> Type it again. >> Yep. >> I I figure making something consistent
in our bylaw if we already have it is [laughter] more than acceptable. >> Absolutely. [snorts] Uh, in Massachusetts, anything above 70 is considered a high-rise. Is that correct? >> I'm not sure. That's a good question. >> As opposed to what I normally thought was 75.
>> I'm not sure. >> Uh, by the building code. >> I don't remember. >> Okay. Um, but I'm perfectly fine with going to down to 70 or whatever to like meet standards. >> Let me uh run it by the building inspector.
>> Sure. And [snorts] see what he says. down to 70 on which >> in the industrial zone. >> If if there's something that's in the building code that triggers something over 70 feet, maybe we just make the maximum height 70. >> Oh, I see. >> Okay. >> I'll run it by Mr. Bailey and let you
know by next meeting. >> Now, is that occupied stories? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Well, that'd be the maximum building height, not even stories. >> So, if they put a huge air conditioning >> Exactly. It's the top top of the building the biggest structure on the
building. So top of the air conditioner top of whatever. >> Okay. >> And like any rooftop fencing can't go more than like 4 feet or something like that. >> So in my head just to give an idea the uh Blueest Star Industrial Park, all those buildings, those are 32 foot clear
on the inside. Um plus the units, I think they were close to 40 feet done with the uh rooftop units. So we're talking 30 feet over those buildings. I think it would be the most efficient way to add value to how we already have
the town laid out. >> And I think that's exactly what we've talked about a few times, what we want to do. What can we change that's going to be dimminimous on the residents and have the best impact on finances. >> Okay. Yep. I agree.
>> Let me just make that note so I don't forget. We'll have a we'll have a chat for if it does go to town meeting showing everybody where the industrial zones are. >> Yeah. >> Cuz that will be asked. >> Yes. We'll have to have a small presentation with the industrial zones highlighted and
>> which isn't isn't a big ask. Just a page on GIS pulled out and that'll be easy to accomplish. >> So industrial height when we were talking about 75 ft and I had a question mark after that or 50 feet might be considered >> 50. It's at 50 right now. Yeah, it's 50
now. Yeah. >> For the height of the building, >> correct? So, we definitely want to make it more is what we're saying. >> Go more than 50. I the It's 50 ft right now and three stories in the chart. >> Okay. So, Brian has our industrial zones
pulled up. They're >> they're in the purple. >> 270 ft total. I mean at at minimum I think we need to increase it to four or five available stories if not six but occupying a a slightly
increased building height from 50 to either 60 or 70 maybe 75 would be the maximum but >> 75 with a written down right now >> there might be a sweet spot in there somewhere I'm going to ask Mr. Bailey, I'll ask a couple of uh contacts that I
have in the business if they have any input on what would be best or better or not make sense, not make sense. And >> right, >> that's about all. >> Might it might be five stories at 60 ft or something. I >> I also don't want to scare the crowd with a big number.
>> Yeah. [laughter] Yes. >> No, but I I think if we have some reasoning behind it and >> the intentions behind it, um I think we can make an argument. >> And our first argument is going to be in front of the select board and then I'm
going to pro propose after that very quickly getting on the next finance commission meeting and maybe two of us going to them um and explaining all of this because obviously they have to vote on it. I think that's a misstep that we've done in the past and not instantly
taking it to them um and putting a couple of us in front of them explaining answering questions as we saw with the last town meeting there was some confusion and then after some explanations you know people's minds swayed um and and after they got the facts so
>> I think we'll try to do that from now on >> but right now pending you asking more questions 75 is our talking number >> right now our talking number is 75 Okay, next one. Data centers. >> I'm sorry. Could we pull up the industrial district buffers again? I
have a question on the last sentence. >> Sure. >> [snorts] >> Where industrial properties adjoin residential properties regardless of zoning district, a buffer of 20 ft shall be reserved and screening adequate for the situation and characteristics of the
use shall be provided in the form of thick planting wall earth and BMS to be at least 4t high or higher if prescribed. So basically in that 20 first 20 ft there has to be a burm with thick. >> Okay. Right. That's the first 20 of the hundred. >> Correct. >> It's just not it's not describing the
district. It's describing the use >> 20 [laughter] on the property. >> Okay, that makes sense. >> Industrial use next to a residential use regardless of district. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, it's a little word salady in there for >> Yeah. >> No, I was coming up to like 20. It's
going to upset somebody. >> The intention is to be very thick for the first 20 thick for the first 20 and then put 100 feet. I'm thinking um right off the bat something like New England Ice Cream >> if they were thicker for the first 20. I'm just trying to think of buildings
we've had problems with noise and >> something whatever to knock down noise and headlights. Um something more than a vinyl fence and some arborites basically. [snorts] >> Everybody likes ice cream. >> Um data centers. We always thought this was up in the air. I've got a little bit
[snorts] of clarification on a couple things. Um, I don't think it came out today, but by tomorrow, the AG was supposed to rule on Mansfield's bylaw. What has happened in the meantime is LOL instituted a 2-year moratorum that was
approved by the AG already. >> Um, so I was talking to the town manager today about other things. I threw that by him. Um, how would everyone feel about just to make it very easy for now, less language, we kick it down the road. Not
that I want to put things off, but this seems like something that's it. It's it's a very prominent right now across the country. It's developing every day. The law is developing around it. We have the opportunity to freeze it for two years and do nothing.
>> Yeah. >> And revisit it in a year and a half from now. >> That a lot. >> That'd be great. we can see how all these towns pan out and handle it and then pick and choose how we want to do it. >> So my idea is going to be a two-year moratorium data centers and pull ls by
law and pretty much copy it. >> That sounds great. I agree. >> Easy is is what it makes it for now. >> Yeah, >> I like that. Especially because like you said the the laws are kind of >> it's bouncing around like crazy and if they already approve this, we know they're going to approve it. >> So why do anything different [snorts] if
that's ultimately what we want to do anyway? This is the easy quick way to do it in the short term. >> Yeah, >> I'm not sure. There was a question I heard. >> Could can a moratorum be extended with a Tom eating vote? I don't have that answer. Um
>> or would the AG accept a extended moratorium? I don't know. >> Um but I don't think we have to get into that now. I think we can just get this moratorum language button down and >> two years to work out language. >> Well, that's Yeah, exactly. It buys us a ton of time in figuring out what they
want to do. There's also, and I hope we never see this, but there's I think there's been some states that are talking about might just take it away from the choice to the town saying, "No, you got to support this." >> Oh, yes, 100%. It's uh >> Texas is doing that >> much like what they're doing with the uh >> solar
>> the solar bylaws update that there's still a question if we're going to have to update that uh by the end of the year. Um there is significant changes to the permitting of clean energy facilities. Um, the building inspector is reviewing
it. Paul was reviewing it. Town council's reviewing it. It pretty much looks like it's something like an ADU right now. The state law is going to be the minimum. >> So whether we adopt it or not, whether we adopt the minimum or not, it's
they're going to be able to >> do what the state says is a minimum. So it doesn't look like we have to do anything with it right now. >> Okay. >> And with how hot button solar and everything is, if it's something that we don't have to touch, >> right? I don't think we want to touch it. >> Um it's the only thing possibly we might
be leaving on the table is more maybe a little more community control. Maybe adding buffers and maybe adding some small stuff, >> but it's not going to be anything. We're not going to be able to add a 250 foot buffer around every property. I know that's not going to fly.
>> Um >> data centers do have the noise thing though, so you could single them out. But I I like the moratorium for two years too because um I like what Mansfield did a lot, but I'd love to see that shake out more before we try to make our >> It should shake out by tomorrow and
their their bylaw ultimately bans most of it if not all >> it the size that people are wanting to do. Yeah, they kill that. >> Correct. Um I haven't read through it 100% and memorized it 100%. I was kind of waiting until I saw if it flew with
the AG or not. I didn't want to put any time into it quite honestly. Yeah. >> Um, so if I see that come through in the next day or two, I'll uh just email that all to you because it's >> So if we do a moratorum down in our industrial park, there's a company going they they want to put in a computer room for just them. That's still fine, right?
That's not a data center. >> I think we'll have to create a definition of data center. Okay. Um, which is which will be >> okay. Because I'd be inclined to allow those things. >> Oh, yes. I mean, if you you need a server room. Well, for in that in that >> instance, we don't [clears throat]
technically have data center in our uses table. >> Correct. >> And so we don't allow them right now. >> Does that mean we don't allow them or does that mean they we >> explicitly stated that we allow them? >> They could argue they're a different
type of facility. >> I think a two-year moratorum, like we said, it takes all the questions out for now. we can let it all hatch out and just keep track of what everyone's doing and kick it down the road. >> I move that we we take that approach. >> That I agree. >> I agree. >> Yeah.
>> I also like that easier that's an easier thing to come into town meeting with this fall. >> Correct. Correct. I think it's a popular with people. >> Quick conversation. No barely any explanation. Read the definition and say this this is what we're trying to do and it bans them for two years. >> Going to be near unanimous.
>> A lot of the people that are getting worked up into hysterics over it now. you just come in and say mortorium, they're going to >> So, there might be a sixth thing we might have to weigh in on and have a public hearing on. I just kind of found out about it today, >> right? >> Um
in the charter and we when we went to a DPW director, it gets rid of the water and sewer commission. >> Okay. >> And so there is I forget how many references, 60some. It's all been hashed out by
lawyers already. We'll see the language by next meeting. Um, basically in the bylaw, everywhere that says or refers to water sewer commission is going to be DPW. >> Basically, okay. >> Okay. >> Because they're going to have a separate water and sewer. No, >> they have it separated water sewer, but
it all files under DPW. >> Okay. >> And there's not going to be a water sewer commission anymore or commissioners, I don't believe. So, it's changed slightly. So, it's basically erasing just changing the information. It seems pretty straightforward. >> Um it's just something that obviously it's because it falls under zoning
modifications. We're going to have to >> the that is all there for us. The bylaw is all written for us. We just have to hold the public meeting. >> Okay. >> Um and present it at >> town meeting which I don't think it's going to be anything crazy. Um it's nothing I don't think we can handle. So
>> putting it on this one. >> Um so that's up to six now. Anyone else have anything to talk about for those six? We have a I have a couple things to get back to you on, but >> I think we're progressing. >> My thing was that the uh >> for >> the data centers, what what they do to a
small town and so >> you like the moratorium a lot. >> I do. [laughter] Yeah. Yeah. I don't want them. >> I will I will I don't want them either. I I will pull together um using AI all the definitions that are available in Massachusetts right now.
It's fairly simple to scrge that all info now now that I know how to do it. Um, and I'll put something together that we can look at or I'll put some different towns languages together and we can review it. >> Okay. >> But as long as we have it's going to be on the warrant articles and we've got
some time to before the public hearing to look at the definition and I don't think it's going to take much of us much conversation to hammer out a definition we're all happy with. >> Yeah. with the fiscal impact and environmental impact that would they would [clears throat] have to prove that
to us with the data centers if they did come to town. >> Yeah. Correct. >> So, as long as we have that in our tool belt, >> I think that would be great. >> Yeah. I said I also really do if we ever do start putting things that the tiers and basing them on uh uh consumption,
BTUs, and and um noise. >> Yeah. >> We don't even have to think about it right now, which is nice. >> Yeah. [snorts] >> Forget I said that. Yeah, exactly. [laughter] Um, so >> I have five things for the thing. You said you had six. >> That's sixth is the one with the zoning the update with the water sewer
commission to DPW. >> So fiscal impact analysis, special permit criteria, noise bylaw, industrial zones, data center bylaw, and the water sewer commission to DPW. >> Noise bylaw. I missed. That's where
joint meeting we talked about. Did we talk about storm water peer reviews last meeting? I forget. >> I put a question mark. I can't I don't believe we did. I've had a couple conversations about it, so I can't remember. >> Basically, um John Thomas, conservation
director, and I had a conversation. A couple of the conservation members brought it up and with um not having a planning director, they were afraid of and they want to make sure that basically any project that comes in front of us that's not in front of
conservation still has to meet storm water um bylaw and storm water and they want to make sure we're peer reviewing all of those basically. >> Okay. Um, I believe they've set up a couple different new and maybe a different peer reviewer. Um, they wanted
to make sure that ball doesn't get dropped. >> Um, >> well, they by conservation then are we telling them you've got to go through conservation? >> No. No. We will if it's not in front of convers conservation that we take over >> then it falls on us.
>> Oh, okay. >> So, it's basically on us to get it peer reviewed and >> Yeah, I agree. >> We're not we're not doing the engineering. We're not doing anything. We're just simply, yes, it has a storm water system. Yes, our peer reviewer says it it's what it's supposed to be. >> Yep. >> Other than them doing it,
>> um just wanted to bring it up because they have brought it up in a few of their meetings. I don't think it's anything controversial for us to do. I think we do it anyway. I don't think it happens that often. Um most of most of our projects are in front of conservation, >> but it's just something for everyone to be aware of.
>> Okay. Um, [snorts] had a few con few uh conser uh conversations about the uh serpentid bylaw that they're working on for us. Brian, since you and I talked last, there's been no movement on that, right? >> You haven't talked to the
>> So, I'll try to get them in front of us um for our next meeting. We'll try to get them for the 18th. >> Cool. >> Um to present something bigger meeting >> could be a little busy, but we we've been fairly light, so >> we can we can handle it. It's still fairly light [snorts] >> with the things we talked about and then
I think that's when LGL is coming in. >> Yes, >> but they're going to be quick. They're just going to read through and we're gonna >> It shouldn't be that bad. We're going to have to more digest what they have. Hopefully I can get it to everyone ahead of time. I haven't seen it yet either. >> Yeah. >> We can digest it before the meeting. >> Who Who's coming in? I can't hear you.
>> Sorry. Serpent Rob Cabraw from Serpentid that wrote the uh >> MBTA. Okay. >> Design standards for us. And again, we're not going to have to bring that in front of town meeting. We can just simply adopt it with a vote. >> Okay. >> And lucky green ladies is coming in the 18th, you said? >> Yep.
>> Yeah. That's an approval we've already given, but for >> sake, we just need to go through the motion again. >> They're coming for a special permit and a site plan review. >> Yeah. >> U should be the 18th hopefully. >> They come the same thing as last time that we did approve it. So I figured
only other item on my agenda that I had written down. We only have three more meeting schedules. I'd like to schedule out through the end of the year so we can at least get all the meetings on the website >> so people know what to shoot for. [snorts]
It helps with planning for everyone. So, we're going to be into October. The last meeting is September 15th. >> Well, that's our last one we have on the books. No, we have August 18th, September 1st, and September 15th right
now. Um, so we'd be looking for two weeks would be September 29th. I don't think we're going to need a third meeting in September. Um, it'll be October 6th
and we definitely Falltown meeting is the 19th. So we're not going to do a meeting on the n 20th. >> We could do October 6th and October 27th. >> Okay. >> So after September 15th will be October
6th. >> October 6th >> and October 27th. >> And then obviously we all of us don't know our schedules. If something comes up, email me or Brian. And if there's if we have to move a meeting um or shuffle something around, it's fine. And if one person can't make it and we have a full
board, um, that's acceptable, but if we have a couple conflicts, um, I don't mind moving the meetings down. I think it's just helpful to have something. We're not going to continue anything right now to October 27th. >> Well, generally with this type of advanced notice, I can let this dictate.
I can tell other people these dates aren't available. >> We still have still. >> Okay. >> So, October 27th, that would be November 10th. [clears throat] Yeah, >> we'd either have to do November 10th and November 24th. >> Okay.
>> Where's Thanksgiving and all that? >> Yeah, that's Thanks. Two days later is Thanksgiving. Does anybody not like that? We could do >> No, I'm fine with it. >> I'm bum. >> There's a chance I >> It's not the day after cuz I won't be able to walk. >> I bet they'll [laughter] just be fasting in Thanksgiving, too. >> I think I'll be here for that. I might
have to change. Let's pencil it in. Let's pencil in the 10th and the 24th. Yeah. Okay. >> Might have to change. I might not be here the 24th. I'm not sure. Okay. How >> you going to travel for Thanksgiving? >> Uh the week be the few days before. See,
>> we probably want to stay away from Christmas week. >> Yeah. What if we just It said the 24th. It just did the first week of December. I >> was just going to say that. You want to get rid of the 24th and we'll do December 1st and 15th. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> That keeps you away from Christmas.
>> Yeah. Kills two birds once. Well, >> and what we can do is if we get >> Oh, it's two birds in $1. >> If we get busy and and if we seem we need to, we could always add the >> we could add the 17th if we had to
>> December 17th. >> Uh, no, November. If we're canceling a November meeting and if we if we have to pencil in a meeting, oddly, you know, because we have whatever come up, we that's always a risk of what we have to do. But >> okay, >> but now I think that's fine. August 18th, September 1st, September 15th,
October 6th, October 27th, November 10th, December 1st, December 15th. >> Yep. And November 17th is if we needed to. >> Yeah, we could pencil something else in in November if the if it came up. >> I've got it. >> What time is the meeting on the 20th?
the six six o'clock ap joint meeting is will be 6:00 I believe the when the select board meets. >> Yeah, select board meets at 6. >> Thank you. Cuz that comes just walking in here dumb as hell at 7:15. [laughter] >> Yep. >> What? I'm sorry. What day was that? >> Didn't need you.
>> Uh 20th is a Thursday round. >> Thursday, August 20th is the Thursday is uh at six o'clock. Okay. Tell me >> then either Brian and I will we'll put those all those dates and we'll just send an email today or tomorrow just so
just so they're in an email for everyone to >> look to. >> Yeah, I put them on your desk calendar so they're on the phone. >> That's all I've got written down. Anything anybody has to talk about? >> Motion to adjurnn.
And what's the what's this? >> Looking for a second. >> Second. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second to adjourn. [laughter] >> Not that I had a question, but no. >> Robert, >> yes. >> I mean, yes. Steve, >> yes. >> Frank, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes.
>> Thank you everyone. See you August 18th. >> Thank you. >> Looking for discussion. Shut up now. What?