at 7 o'clock. We can get the meeting started. Uh I assume there's somebody in the control room that's putting us online. Thank you. >> Yep. >> This is a meeting of the Town of Norton Zoning Board of Appeals. We have two hearings on for tonight
and then some general business to do uh which we'll do after the two hearings. The first one scheduled is property address Zero Island Road. The applicant is listed as Steve Manny. Uh but the owner is the old colony Habitat for
Humanity. We have an application um for I'll loosely describe to construct a single family residence on what looks like an undersized lot. And
who is going to be speaking for Habitat or for Mr. Manny? just uh introduce yourself for the record so we can get it down in the record. >> Good evening. Kimberly Thomas, CEO of Old Colony Habitat for Humanity >> and Scott Faria from Homegrown Engineering.
>> Great. Thank you. And um before the meeting you were trying to tell us that Yeah. the application and the plans didn't quite match. I think I saw that. But wasn't was there an updated narrative? Yeah, this >> Yeah, >> you updated the narrative.
>> Was an updated narrative, just not the application. the application still states a 50 by 100 lot when actually it's a 40 by100 lot. >> Okay. And we we'll get to that. >> The plans are correct. The narrative is correct. Just the application. >> We'll get to that in just a second and give you a chance to spell it out again
so we all understand and it's clear on the record. Um Zero Island Road, which is different than Island Brook. >> Yeah. When I first saw it, I thought it was Island Brook and I went >> Wait a minute. They're putting a house in there, >> you know, different development. I had
to take a quick look. >> Yeah, there. But when it says zero as the address number, you know that something is um something is new in Norton >> as we uh as we sometimes find. So this is um in the Grove.
It's a an R60 um zone. Uh the applicant's asking for a variance from required setbacks in the R60 district to build a single family residence of approximately 440 square ft, three bedrooms, two bathrooms.
There's a narrative and then there's a project narrative that was provided to us and a site plan which uh shows Island Road, Lagoon Lane
and a very small lot and some other very small lots right near it already uh built upon apparently. But the plan of record is the um is dated 12926 by home grand engineering.
Is that you, sir? >> Yes, sir. >> It your name again? >> Spot Faria. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And the plan accurately shows I believe the square footage. >> That's correct. >> It's just the the application when it was submitted uh says there's 5,000
square ft, but actually it is 4,000. Correct? Yes, sir. >> Okay. The plan of itself though to be clear is is accurate and that's what we go by and that's what would be attached to our decision. >> Correct. And the narrative uh that was
supplied just describes um that this is a habitat uh home in process lot non-conforming in size under current Norton zoning bylaw um and that the conditions are unique to the specific parcel not the result of
any action taken by the applicant recently anyway because this was 5,000 square ft and then the town put in a road. How inconvenient. >> And this is all ancient history prior to
zoning or when zoning was then >> 1938 was the u when the road was brought in. >> So again, it's no work of the applicant uh that it's undersized even for our small lot statute or bylaw which allows
500 a 5,000 square ft lots with certain setbacks. The setbacks requested here shown on the plan. I guess they call them sideyard setbacks. Well, to Lagoon Lane and then opposite is 10 ft to the
property line. And to Island Road, the setback is 26 ft to the proposed porch in front of the house. I guess we're using that as the front of the house, if I can call it that. >> Yes, sir. Island Road. Um, and the plan
looks to >> Tom with this one there'll be it's a corner lot. So So they'll both be front front setbacks. >> Um, originally that's what it was here for and then we discovered that it was 4,000 not the 5,000 that they had
thought they had been donated. >> Okay. So the variance was asked for >> originally and that's why it's kind of ro rotated a little bit as it as it's gone through. >> Understood. So the question is, do we also issue a finding under 175
um for changing a non-conforming lot or use? There's it's vacant now, correct? The lot. Okay. And um when we originally met, we were under the uh the thought that it was 5,000. So we thought this was going to be go through the small lot
addendum and it would just need that lagoon lane or island relief to to fit the corner lot setbacks. Yep. >> Um then once this was done, it came back at 4,000 and everyone went >> and here we are. >> Understood. Understood. But an earnest
effort, an earnest mistake and uh we're correcting it now. So understood. Um well, it's a public hearing. Questions from members to the applicant to either the engineer or the personal representative.
You have questions? >> I don't >> I do not. any issues? >> No, >> I don't see any. Certainly, Habitat is something we >> um like to see in town, another single family residence, affordable even more so. How does that work? By the way,
Habitat's policy, you grant a deed to a family. >> Yes, we have the >> free of charge. Correct. >> Affordable housing, the affordable housing restriction deed is in perpetuity and the family perpetuity. >> Yes. then the family um actually gets a a mortgage. So they have to do the sweat
equity of 250 hours per adult and then also be part of the build in the community and then they get a modest mortgage that we um usually work with Webster Bank for that for the family. >> But the deed itself means it's considered affordable going forward.
>> Yes, it's always stays an affordable >> and I believe that qualifies under the chapter 40b uh regulations. I'm not asking >> that. I don't know, >> but I believe it counts toward our county affordable units. It's not a 40B development,
>> but it is one unit anyway. So, that's a that's a benefit to the town as well in that way. And of course, having a >> U family there and a new single family residence is a great benefit to the town. >> There are no questions. >> I'm sorry I'm not giving you much of a
chance to talk, but doesn't seem like um there's much to u explain. We It's pretty clear in the application. Let me ask then, is there anybody else in attendance either in present or by way of our Zoom fancy schmancy Zoom hookup
to speak either in favor of or in opposition to the application? Nobody present in the room. Uh Brian, is there anybody else signed into Zoom? >> I see no hands being raised. >> No hands being raised or no uh >> mics being turned on,
>> flashing. Um, >> okay. Then is there a if there are no other questions from the board, um, we can discuss this now, um, I'll ask, is there a motion to close the public hearing? >> I'll make the motion to close the public hearing.
>> I'll second. >> All those in favor of closing the public hearing aspect of this hearing, Mr. Tori, >> Mr. Ferguson, and Mr. Noel votes yes. >> So, do we need a finding? It seems to me we should do a finding as well as
variance relief. Um I don't have a problem with this and from your attitudes and lack of questions after clarifying the dimensions u I assume that this is this is a go. Yeah, we've I mean this is not our
>> also I point out >> that first one in town, >> right? And the applicants pointed out and the the public aspect is closed now. So I don't want to go back to the applicants, but they pointed out there are other homes on similarly sized lots in the Grove and elsewhere in town and
it was very helpful to actually list them out. So >> yep, >> appreciate that. Appreciate that. Is there a motion then to grant variance relief? We do it in one perhaps um front yard
setback from the normally required is it 40 ft? Yes, 40 ft in an R60 zone. >> 40T >> to 26 ft on the island road frontage, if you want if you call that frontage.
>> Yep. >> Down to 10 feet on the Lagoon Lane frontage. and sideyard or or rear yard setback of 10 ft on the to the abuing property up
Island Road. I don't I don't see the um compass. Oh, there it is. That's to I guess to the north and east. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. um the property um which appears to be undeveloped north and east of the lot to reduce it to 10
ft there as well. Is there a motion for variance relief? And the hardship is obviously the existing size of the lot and the fact that um saying no to this
is seems silly in my in my um view and um the owner is um not in this situation through any hardship it it created. Uh, and the size of the lot means you can only put the construction in so many
places there. Anyway, it seems like they've centered it as well as >> Yeah, they sent it as best they could. So, >> okay, >> I'll vote. I'll make that motion >> for variance relief as to the three variances variances. >> Recited. >> Second. >> Second. Okay. Any discussion? >> Nope.
>> Um, you vote in favor, Mr. Tori? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ferguson? >> Yes. >> Mr. Noel votes yes as well. Now, because it's a pre-existing non-conforming >> non-conforming use, I think we should take a vote under 175, >> which says uh any change or
modification. And of course, this is an empty lot. It's being built upon um calls for a finding that this not be substantially more detrimental to the area than the existing conditions. Now, I'm not sure if we need to get there
because of the exceptions. This is a single home. Let's I I would think you could do this either with a variance being that the land was taken by the road and that may be maybe a little cleaner. >> Well, we did the var we voted a variance
for the lot size because now we're we're varying the lot size from even our small lot exemption. >> Okay. >> Essentially. >> Okay. So, is there a motion to uh for variance relief from 5,000 to the 4,000 as described on the plan of record?
>> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> And um no discussion. Mr. Tori, how do you vote? Yes. >> Mr. Ferguson? >> Yes. >> And Mr. Noel votes yes as well. >> I was asking for a change of condition to a pre-existing uh lot. >> Yeah. Although the additional sections
now state if it's a single family home. >> Usually we have it for homes. I don't I don't know that we have much for lots. >> Lots. >> Yeah. So it doesn't meet one of the exceptions. So let's let's discuss that. Take a vote on it. I don't think at anything here uh unless you want to
leave the lot vacant uh renders this substantially more detrimental to the area than the existing conditions there. >> I'd agree. >> Agree. Yes. Is there a motion for a finding under 175 whatever it is E uh that this will not
uh render the lot or the U construction the use substantially more detrimental in terms of light noise um and other effects as recited in the bylaw. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> Okay. Any discussion there?
>> Nope. >> Mr. Tori, do you vote for a finding under 175? Yes. And Mr. Ferguson, >> yes. >> Mr. Noel votes yes as well. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Good luck with it all. We'll write up a decision um within the next few days and
u has to be posted. Anybody can object can appeal that decision within so many days, but there's nobody in attendance to object and nobody online to object. Uh good luck to you. >> Thank you so much. Appreciate it. >> Have a good night. Good luck. >> Thank you. >> Excuse me.
Of course, it's running low. >> Dude, this thing. >> We have to go through the motions anyway. So, we'll we'll get that um drafted up and and done. Next on the agenda, are you here for the next item? >> Yes.
>> Okay. This is um this is the one I didn't talk about yet. The owner is Paul Man. You are >> Goosemouth Gonzos. >> Okay. We've seen you before a couple of meetings ago or a few months ago, I think. >> No, this is my first time here.
>> It is. >> Yeah. I thought there was another Maybe it was another Gonzal. >> Okay. Uh well, this is an application for >> uh 133 uh Lincoln Street. And can you just describe what's being done and why you need >> So um it's a single family house that's
pre-existing non-conforming and we're adding reconfiguring the uh the space to add a second level addition adding two bedrooms a bathroom and a den. Um we're building within the same footprint.
We're not extending the footprint and it's just a growing family that it's looking for more space. But it's the same footprint. So there's no encroachment on setbacks. This is here. I >> There's no encroachment on setbacks.
Nothing's changing per se other than they're taking the first floor off or first ceiling off, adding a second story above it. >> But it's going to raise the uh habitable space by over 25%. >> So this is in line for a finding under >> this will be a finding. They just they
were short on the front. Set back was all that really set this here. But the setback is already in place. >> The setback is where it is and it's not changing. >> It's a little it's actually a little tough to tell in the plan. And the plan well I want to note for the record for
the board the plan actually and it's very small writing but it's actually a year old uh septic or sewage disposal plan and there are no uh distances shown on the plan which we frown upon. But in
this case, the applicant's not asking for >> this was self- admitted that they were they were insufficient on that. So instead of making them go back and blow the rest of the budget on that, we determined this would be fine where nothing of the footprint will change in this instance.
>> I I just wanted to note to the board that um I had to blow it up and print it out actually because of my aging eyesight. It says same footprint, additional living space on second floor,
but on the left side and the the date is um I think it was yeah 2025, April 9, 2025. Uh the property notes on the left hand side of the sheet say all information
shown has been taken from another plan. So there wasn't a site plan done by meats and bounds by somebody going out there. It says it relies completely on that. Um and it actually says this plan not to be used for
um design, construction or any other purpose. >> And it's not a property line survey. Number four says if you want to see that I I blew it up. You can see it. I I agree this is not a sufficient plan in the normal course where somebody is
asking to change the footprint uh but here it's mostly interior work except that it's going up a little bit >> going vertical >> and it's within the 35 ft >> uh of height. Yes. >> Yes. Okay. >> So we're just doing one additional floor. Uh we talked with the neighbors
across the street and and Lorie Blair and they're totally on board and they love the idea that we're doing that. Okay. Thank you. >> Are there questions uh from the board? >> No questions. >> I don't think so. Curiosity questions. So, the new they said additional
bedrooms. So, there's septic tank is is in compliance with that. >> They'll have to work with the health department regarding that. >> Gotcha. All right. Again, curiosity question. >> Yeah. When it when it's it goes by number of bedrooms, I think, right? Correct. >> The size of the tank. So, in order to get it finalized and inspected, but
that's health department >> and that'll go through as the building permit goes through, the health department will see it and then they'll either say yes or you know this needs to be adjusted, but without this there's no point in getting to that to them. >> Yep. >> And uh the homeowners already did their
septic tank to accommodate the other two >> Oh, is that so? >> Yeah, the other two bedrooms. >> Good to know. Okay. But as for zoning, um I I don't see a problem with this. Is there a No other questions? No. >> No other questions. >> Let me ask if there's anybody here in
this room or online by Zoom to speak in favor of or in opposition to the application, sir. You're not here for this. Okay. And Brian, is there anybody raising their virtual hand? >> I don't see anyone. >> Okay. Then is there a motion to close
the public hearing? >> I'll make a motion to close public hearing. I'll second. >> Mr. Tori, how do you vote? Yes. Mr. Ferguson, Mr. votes yes as well to close the public aspect of the hearing. >> Then it's open for discussion for a finding under again under 175 that the
alteration uh here as recited by the applicant and as shown on the plan of record wi which we will use the I assume that's okay with the board to use this plan. You agree? I would be okay with using that plan. If if they were making a modification outside the current
footprint, then I'd say >> we we need to see the distance to the road and you know survey. >> Yeah. >> You know, we can note it that it can't >> it'll be within the same footprint of existing construction. >> I'd be comfortable with that. Yep.
>> I agree. Uh is there a motion then under 175 uh section E that this will not render the locus uh significantly more detrimental to the area than the existing um construction? >> Yeah, I'll make that motion. >> I'll second.
>> Okay. Any discussion? >> N. >> Mr. Tenor, how do you vote for the finding? >> Mr. Ferguson, do you vote for such a finding? >> Yes. >> Mr. Noel votes yes as well. >> Very good. I think you're on your way. Uh the family is living there. It's the same occupant.
>> Same occupant. >> Okay. Well, good luck to them and um good luck to you. >> Thank you. Thank you guys. >> Okay. Thanks. We'll write it up and then um it'll be posted and u >> we'll wait. >> Yeah. A little bit. We'll try to get it done. It's fairly simple. We'll try to get it done in the next few days. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Have a good night. >> Good luck to you. Good luck. Thanks. >> It bothered me at first, but when I saw the plan, I said, "Well, wait a minute. how we then I looked at the date and then I >> but when you look at what's being asked for there was >> if it was any different I would have
said absolutely but because of the way they set it up at >> Y no thank you for looking at that aspect you've seen we've had to ask people a few times >> yeah even if they were close I probably would have asked just to hey if you happen to have the 40T great but they weren't it wasn't even close to
>> no because we need the distances if we're making a decision that something can't be X more than X feet from you know a property line we need the X feet shown and you know in the decision but in this case it's the same footprint so that'll be noted in the uh in the
decision and that's fine. >> Yeah. >> Okay. U sir did you have some business uh before the board? >> Uh yes I'm here on behalf of >> Oh okay. Is that on the agenda even? >> Yes it's the first thing on the agenda
right there. >> I I missed it. I'm sorry. I went right to the uh two hearings. No, >> it's fine. I don't I don't know if he came in at that time, which >> I'm sorry to you to put you off to two hearings. Um go ahead. Could you introduce yourself and tell us where we are in the process?
>> Thank you. >> And then I have >> gentlemen, my name is Oh, thank you. >> Welcome. >> My name is Salem Kadura. I'm here on behalf of the applicant Islandbrook. I'm council for Island Brook and the contractor Stonebridge Homes. and we are at the stage of uh applying for final
approval from Mass Housing. And Mass Housing asked whether the uh zoning board has approved the regulatory agreement and so I'm here to ask whether the board is willing to sign the regulatory agreement. >> Uh the regulatory agreement, have we
signed that in the past for 40BS? >> I'm not aware. >> I'm not aware that we have. And we have the regulatory agreement. I did not print >> I added it to one. >> Okay. I did not print it out. >> So, >> was it in the file?
>> Uh, I shared it with Mr. Deeppi in advance of this uh >> Yeah, I >> I didn't put it in the file. >> Okay. U >> because Islandbrook didn't have a file cuz they had permodize. So, I couldn't and then I'm just forgotten to give it
to you guys cuz we >> I think Paul sent it to me and I forgot about it. frankly until tonight. Um, can you tell us look this over? Well, it's a lot to look over. Can you tell us what a
regulatory agreement is? And this is between the developer and the state, is it not? >> That's right. >> But the zoning board signs off, the town signs off. >> You have uh some signatures for zoning board and members. So the the template
does have uh room for the local zoning board to sign the agreement. The regulatory agreement will go on record and govern the uh the entire property. Uh and it is I will say it is historical
practice uh for many towns to not approve the zoning the uh regulatory agreement. So it is >> to not it is not required. It's not required by mass housing. I don't think we've done it before and that's why I forgot about it. Paul did email it to me
separately I think. Um right before he left um and um but I it was not in the file so I didn't focus on it. I actually didn't didn't see that it was on the agenda. Um so I'm not prepared. I
appreciate the explanation and we're not here to stall you or to give you a hard time on it, but I'd like to hear what the regulatory agreement does and how it governs the project going forward. I see that it's signed already
by Oh, by Mr. Itani as the developer, Islandbrook LLC, and then it's signed by it's not signed by the state yet. No, they wait until uh we can give them an answer regarding whether the town has approved it or not.
>> So they are they're waiting for us. >> Yes. >> So just a reminder um this is for us having Norton getting the first choice right for >> No, the local preference is a different document. >> No, I just want to make sure.
>> So what is this document for? Cuz we've already >> we approved the application. Correct. This acknowledges that the comprehensive permit was issued by the town and that it will apply to this project and that uh the project meets
the regulatory requirements of Mass Housing's 40B program. >> So the state will mass housing will sign off on this? >> Yes. >> That there's a signature page for mass housing, but there's also >> how do we approve that? >> I don't know. That's what I >> I don't How does the zoning board
approve that this meets Mass State requirements? You you understand what I'm saying? >> I do. >> Like I don't I don't I don't understand that part. >> Well, let me read. >> Sir, you you said typically uh the zoning boards will not sign off on these. Correct.
>> Are you asking? >> Certain certain towns, to my understanding, do not sign these as a matter of course. >> So, what does that do to your project going forward if they choose not to sign it? Uh, I don't believe it makes any difference. >> Yeah, that's that's why I'm a little confused and I apologize for that.
>> I'd like to read it over and maybe even ask town council, do we sign these? Normally, I'm not suggesting that the gentleman is trying to put anything over on us. I just don't want to sign something where it's not ex he's explained to us from the developers viewpoint. Obviously,
>> I'd kind of like to at least read it and ask town council, >> should we sign this? I agree. >> I I just wanted to make sure. I mean, it it sounds like it's not going to hold them up whatsoever. This is a either a formality or a nicity. >> If the applicant wants our signatures,
we can put this on for the next uh meeting, which is >> Oh, it's >> Yeah, that's your cue when I look at you confused. When I have a confused look on my face, >> that's it. >> That's your cue to uh >> May 27th. >> May 27th
>> 7. >> Yes. >> Yeah. We had the latest May. >> Yeah. And that's that's right after Memorial Day, isn't it? Two days after Memorial Day. And that's a long time to wait, but as you're kindly telling us, you may not need this anyway. I'm going
to suggest that we put this off to the next meeting just so I can email town council and ask, >> would this have to be signed at the meeting? If if you were to say, you know, in all likelihood we approve it, we'd like town council to take a look at it. Well, we have to I we would have to
take a vote in order to okay it and sign it. >> Well, could you vote on it and say stipulated upon? >> I don't know. >> Yeah, I'm I'm throwing a lot of hypotheticals, but >> I'd certainly be more comfortable doing it the way we usually do it. >> Does Let me Do you mind if I asked um
does us by putting it off a month affect you? It does in the sense that uh our application for final approval will uh will have to wait until we have that um approval or >> well it won't wait though if you can do it without our page there right I mean
if you said >> yeah but he needs an answer yes or no is that what I'm understanding >> mass housing will not process the final approval until there's a answer either way >> I thought you said you submit it without zoning board approval
>> they won't process the application until that question is answered. So, the answer doesn't make a difference, but they need an answer. >> I mean, I >> I mean, with his I would tend >> Well, I'll I'll read it. I mean, I would
>> I will add that Mass Housing has reviewed this uh the language of this regulatory agreement and uh we've gone through the red line process back and forth and they have no further changes. >> I would just say we don't sign it. >> Yeah. I um
>> and then he will just take that and go back to mass housing and do what he has to do. >> Yeah. I agree. I I certainly wouldn't want to sign before comparing this also has everything as attachments you know the decision itself which is a
big document and the plan set and um there are a number of attachments here and I just don't want to um sign for something that's not all in front of us and that I don't know >> um fully that this is um you know
>> but if he if the applicant saying they don't really need us to sign it. >> Right. >> So, I would say just we we could I'd be comfortable taking a vote saying we don't have all the documents here. >> We're not based on all the information we have,
we're not going to sign it and he can move forward. >> Well, I >> I kind of agree with that. Does us not signing hurt you in any way detrimentally? >> No. >> Not to my knowledge. No. >> Yeah. Then I I kind of agree with that because then they can continue forward with the project.
>> Yeah, we've already approved the plan set. We've been I mean my other question is can you even vote on this cuz you weren't here for any of the >> I don't know. >> I don't think he can. I don't think he can. >> Yeah, that's a good question. >> He wasn't here for any of the
>> Yep, that's right. >> the island. >> Of course. Yeah, you're right. Um, with that then I you can report that we have no objection to this and it's been approved by Mass Housing according to the applicant. Um, so we're in a we're
in agreement, but to sign it, we'd have to come back to the next meeting or take town council instructions that you can you can sign your names and we can do it off meeting. Is that Are you comfortable with that? >> Oh, yeah. I just
>> Yep. Okay, then I don't know that we need a motion uh to do that. I'm going to ask that this be continued to the next meeting though, just so we can resolve the question. >> Okay. >> But there's no objection to this from the zoning board.
>> Does he need a vote to not sign it so that he can move forward? >> No, it's up it's an item on the agenda. We we're talking about it. >> Yeah. So, I I gonna put it off to the next meeting date. If the applicant or the state says, "No, no, we want signatures," then we'll take it up with
the next meeting date and I'll have town council's um opinion on it as well. I assume it's okay. >> Well, that's what I didn't know. I didn't know if he needed to vote no, we won't sign it to move forward or just the continuence and no signature would
do what they >> I think continuing with no signature for now. you you may continue without signature of the zoning board. >> I I don't think that's correct. I think um I would propose that we have a motion or that we that the board decline to
sign at this time and if um mass housing >> Okay. would prefer that uh >> do you want to make a motion to decline to sign the regulatory agreement as presented to us tonight uh but to take
it up at the next uh hearing date if mass housing or the applicant u need signatures in the meantime >> uh we will look into it further >> uh that's a perfect motion I will make that motion >> okay >> am I involved in this
>> uh Yeah, you're it's procedural. >> Okay, then I'll second >> second that. Okay, Mr. Tenor, how do you vote? Yes. Mr. Ferguson? Yes. Mr. Noel votes yes as well. Not trying to put you off at all, >> but thank you. So, that's a that's a
>> try to you could try to proceed. If anybody says they need our signatures, we will uh we'll take it up in um in May at the May meeting and I'll find out in the meantime what this is all about. I I can tell you we've I don't think we've
ever signed one before. I'm not even sure it's been presented to us before. >> Never. >> Has that >> We've only had a couple. >> Is that regulation changed or recently or >> I'm I'm not I I understand that the historical practice among many different municipalities is simply not to sign
even if given the opportunity. >> Okay. Okay. >> But I think mass housing would wants to give the local uh town the opportunity to to endorse the plan. argument. >> Well, we'll then if that's the case,
we'll make a we'll we'll do that at the next uh meeting, but um >> right now we >> not getting in your way. Anyway, >> yeah, right now we can report that. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Have a good >> Thank you. >> Sorry for the confusion on that too. I don't know.
>> I um I didn't see it on the agenda and um as I said, Paul had emailed me something a couple weeks ago, but >> but I didn't Well, it was on the agenda, but I didn't see it there.
>> Can I see that? >> Yeah, the agenda. >> Nope. The the the >> agreement. Yep. >> The agreement. >> And I don't know what Paul emailed me. He might have emailed a whole pile with the tax >> inventory agreement. Are you for Island Brook is a 40B development we approved. >> Yeah, that's on that's on the main
street, isn't it? >> Yeah, >> it's right out. >> Yep. That's right. Not too far from here. >> Yeah. I've never heard of that. >> It's never come back to us before. >> I've never >> It seems silly. It seems silly that we we'd approve the plan set.
>> Yeah. >> And then the state would say, "Well, do you approve it again?" Well, it's the reg it's a regulatory agreement, so there's more to it than just reapproving the plan. >> I just don't know what the regulatory agreement how it works.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, I I was not comfortable. >> Yeah, I'm with you on that. >> Just signing away and not knowing what it is. >> I think as long as he's got his vote of no, we won't sign it at this time, they can move forward with mass housing to keep their project going.
>> That's what it sounded like. >> Yeah. I mean voting no doesn't affect us negatively anyway either though right for the town >> according according to their lawyer no >> right >> right and that's why and that's right it you know >> if it was the applicant I'd feel a little different but it's their lawyer
>> right >> so >> okay so we have three sets of minutes >> did you um look them over >> sure did I did >> and okay great now Nick can't vote on the Oh wait a minute >> you get to vote on all of them
>> that's Right. Nick was a >> actually you can't vote on one of them >> in February. You're right. >> Okay. So, let's look at January 14, 2026. Um, are there any changes noted? >> I didn't see any.
>> Me neither. >> Is there a vote to approve the minutes as um as edited? >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second. >> All those in favor? I >> I >> I >> Okay. Now, February 11th, the meeting I was not at, >> y
>> um I edited a little bit just for, you know, some clarity and uh formal. I I put signature lines on it. >> Yeah. >> But >> it looked fine with me. >> Yep. Same. >> It didn't look out of order with what I know you guys did. So,
>> I'll ask I'll make that motion to approve the February minutes. >> I'll second. >> Are you in favor, Mr. Chair and Mr. F? >> Yes. >> Mr. Noel abstains cuz he wasn't there, but it's okay. This this is noted as approved by committee anyway, so it's
not like it's a >> formal vote, but this is good. And the March minutes also were circulated, and they note that we approved a bunch of other minutes at the March meeting. >> Yep. And I am I'll make a motion to
approve the March minutes. >> I'll second. >> Okay. Mr. Tori, how do you vote? Yes. Mr. Ferguson. >> Yes. I vote yes as well. Very good. We are actually for the first time maybe in our history >> up in minutes. Yeah, >> look at that.
>> Pretty good. >> We had outstanding ones from 2023 that I had forgotten about. And so the clerk should look happy on us now. We should get all kinds of presents in our clerk mailboxes. >> Bonus would be great. >> Yeah,
>> bonus candy. Whatever they whatever they hand out for committees that actually are up to >> property tax abatement. I mean there's pie upstairs if you wanted it. >> Pie. >> Pie. >> Pie. >> What kind of pie? >> Apple, blueberry, and key lime. >> How did that happen? >> Key lime. I'd go for key lime.
>> How did that happen? >> Uh we were given some pie today. >> Pie. >> Uh staff had gotten pies at Flakies. Those are the three pies upstairs. >> Nice. >> Wow. And what was it for, Brian?
>> Administrative assistant appreciation day. Ah, >> thank you everyone. >> You're looking a little heftier. Did you have pie today? >> I did have pie today. >> Okay, good. Good for you. We We will leave the pie for the administrative assistants, including you. You deserve pie. But, you know, you just announced
it over live community network television. So, we might have a line of people. >> I doubt it, but >> coming in. We better get out quick. Yeah. >> Is there any other business for us tonight, Brian? >> Nope. >> We have one that's on. We We know we
have a hearing for May. They missed the uh publishing deadline and I didn't get whose >> fault it was, but I they asked if we could meet again next week. I can't >> meet next week. Next week. And I I'm not in favor of
>> extra meetings. I mean the publishing deadline is the publishing deadline and if it didn't get done it we'll do it at the next meeting. >> Sounds good to me. >> Um >> next meeting is >> but anyway I'm not around next uh
Wednesday so I couldn't um next meeting is May 27 >> 7 p.m. keep us informed. Um motion to adjurnn at wow 7:40. >> I'll make that motion. >> I'll second.
>> Nobody's not in favor. So we are adjourned. Nice. >> Thank you. Thank you.