This government meeting is brought to you by Eastworks and our local cable subscribers. All right, without further ado, I will start tonight's meeting for uh June 24th, 2026. Southampton Planning Board. I have a quorum, Robert Riggs to the far
right, Jim Lee, Paul Fergal, myself, Paul Dean, Mark Darnold couldn't be with us tonight. And the first uh item agenda is um 156 Bulmer Road. um open space committee
came before us a few weeks ago and at the time the plan there's the old plan that's there and here's the new revised plan that um your name again was >> Diana >> Diana Fedman >> Diana Federman's here to represent the
open space committee for the town of Southampton but um Mark thought there may be an issue with some um land that wasn't delineated properly and um he said they
might be back to get this revised and that's what they're here for tonight on the plan that Robert and Jim is has in front of him and Paul here >> there's two parcels um the previous plan was uh 29 acres the old plan was 29.27
27 acres. So, their legal people um asked them to take out uh these two two acres and another acre under um some different names, town of Southampton under a probate case and also Brian
Murphy. Um so now the ANR is 26 acres. That's uh land that the Florics have um approved to not donate but sell to the town of Southampton open space committee
and you said you had grant money plus >> pled for grant money pledge. >> Okay. So that is the only um change in that plan that minor modification.
Does the board have any questions for Diane or >> so so internally are we satisfied with the deliation and the call outs that have been updated since the last go around? >> Yeah, seeing as this one had none,
>> right? And very note that referenced another note, but then there's this flor parcel part part here that wasn't called out that goes beyond the limits that are on this sheet. So those limits have been
extended further up. So that's different than than the note limits that are on the initial plan. >> Yeah. There's something even more um something more to note in terms of
what's been previously identified. 23 29. >> So they're just So it looks like the keeping keeping some more. >> No, they're not keeping some more. No, the two lots that are on the news
today are underwater. >> Sort of a mystery how why anybody owns them or how they were acquired. >> But I think the Florence also car carved out some lots from the you know huge that's not new. That was always the
case. >> So this boundary so if you if you mind coming up taking a look at this. So this boundary here wasn't previously delineated, but it is on this plan. So what's that >> 3 acre >> 3 acres
>> section? >> Well, Mark said he'd be available if you if you wanted to call him. I don't know about that. >> This was Yeah. >> On the old one. Is this >> Yeah, it's way back here.
Down here they moved it way up here. palm tree here. >> So, do we know what size these are? Are there any dimensions on these? Do we have >> Yeah, one is one acre, one is two. >> Well, what's it though? What's the frontage? I mean, are we >> Oh,
>> are we going to create a non-conforming? I I don't know. It's landlocked. Um >> Yeah, those are >> They're just landlocked things out in the middle of nowhere. >> Yeah, right. So they're just cutting those out >> and they're under Diane said they're underwater too, right? >> They're in Alder Pond. >> In Alder Pond.
>> Okay. >> I think there was like maybe people used to harvest Pete from there. Something like that. >> Long time ago. >> So this was 126. That was 6 months later. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
Oh, wait. >> Back from the future. Yeah. >> Back to what? >> Back from the future. >> 126 28. >> Oh, 128 26. >> We don't know. >> We're almost there. >> Yeah, >> that's on this map. It's just not
>> Well, no. this this dash line, right? >> What does that say? >> Dashed boundaries based on town of Southampton GIS map and not the result of a ground survey.
>> Yeah, that's what I think the they said the boundaries were uncertain. >> So, and this line has to be done too. one they said the bomb agreement is recommended on this. So that's just a guess I guess.
>> So I I'm not having any I'm just noticing things. I'm not saying nothing's wrong cuz I'm not a professional land surveyor. He did stamp the salt but he had a general note referencing this area before that wasn't delineated
in its nature. >> Right. Because this was not carved out before. >> No, it was just there was some general mess. >> Yes. >> Oh, actually, you know what it looks like? >> This is actually further way further north than what was on. So, here he
starts the first parcel on this boundary. But then this latest one, they moved it up like I don't know 400 500 ft. >> What are you saying they moved? So this not notice the note two right encompasses this area here.
>> Yeah. >> Encompasses this property corner. >> Correct. >> Right. But they moved it up under this current. >> They took it from here and they moved it up here is what you're saying. This this box here. >> Yes. So that's what they did. That's why uh
that's why there's confusion. So this this is actually further north, isn't it? >> This was in other words, a swap from one end to the other. >> Well, I wouldn't say swap, but just they they relocated. Yeah.
>> And they they clearly say GIS here. >> But I'm I don't have any further. I guess this kind of walked along. I mean, I'm sure he's doing stuff that's >> Well, that's why he was unsure of that. The first one he knew there might be
problems with it and after they went to file um he found out that it wasn't as clean as they it should be. File with the registry of deeds telling them that they were
>> missing something. Okay. Well, if they caught that before, they'll they'll review this. Any other questions from the board? >> Not really. I'm just trying to >> So his initial plan that he submitted to
us back in January, >> that's this one, >> right? had a note saying that it was >> actually it was it was only about two months ago less than two months ago that that's when the plan was done but he didn't file he didn't file with us until 2 months ago. >> Got it.
>> Okay. So he had a very un what I'm finding comfort in what what I'm explaining is that nothing was dimensioned here in terms of its its its boundaries and then
it was submitted to the registry and the registry actually had a problem with whatever they did here. So I went back to the books to do a little more research and then he took the town GIS mapping
information. Plotted out some approximate boundaries that are in water. It's part of Adler metal pond. put a bunch of cover your you know what notes to
identify that this is all approximate. It's in the it's in the palm limits and it's subject to further scrutiny. >> So we're actually making these a separate lot. Is that
correct? >> Well, that's already apparently is a separate It seems like it is a separate lot. a separate lot already. >> Three acres. See the three acre. >> Two here, one here. Yeah. >> Yeah. No, no, no. And then >> up here, >> right? So then >> then then there's this other section here that's 3 acres, but then he's
including this additional delineation that's part of this 26 acres. >> I'm slightly I'm familiar with the research on this. >> Okay, perfect. That's that's Emily Holberg from >> Emily Homeberg. Homeberg and how
um we've been discussing some with one of the attorneys who's involved in the transaction and I believe he's the one who questioned >> um the old these and these are historic
lots that have been there for I forget when they were first >> 250 years. >> Yeah. Yeah. They've been there forever. Um and my understanding is we have a um
copy of the old tax maps and that's my understanding is they placed them based on the old tax maps on this one and
>> not before they were underwater. Um, it's when they came underwater. I have no idea. I just know they they were created. >> There's a dam on the Sorl farm that made the pond. So, >> okay. Very likely they were not quite
underwater or were not underwater all year round when they were originally created. this. She said, you know, they might have taken Pete or anything else out of there or if if there was a pond and it um froze
ice. I don't know. I just know that they are historic and they are based on the very vague descriptions uh about each other. How did you get involved in assembly?
>> Um, let me ask you. >> We did a survey a number of years ago for the Florics and we were doing some trying to figure out where they were then, but we didn't finalize anything on this particular
parcel. And then um one of the like I say one of the attorneys who's involved in putting together the paperwork called us because he knew we had worked on it before. So we've had some discussions
with him on um on the um transaction. But as far as what you're looking at, I don't you're not creating new lots. if and they are um
you know he's is saying they are approximate um the florics right the florics have one of the three lots and the other two um used to be one lot of three acres
and the town had acquired at some point the two acres and The other one acre was sold out of the three. >> So, it's to clean it up legally. >> Yeah, I think that's my understanding
from um we've been um having discussions with um Don Able. He's doing some of the paperwork. So just to go back to the intent, the intent is to
connect this these two parcels through these two sections here of the ANR >> to connect them to. So what the the ANR purpose is for for the land that they're the
>> are you combining lots or are you creating a lot? >> They're not creating lots. >> The florex are donating or selling the land to the ten land that they're that the florits are apparently retaining at the moment
with a >> section to connect the two. That's where >> Yeah. >> Is that what has changed? Yeah. Why are why are they coming to the planning board? Is there something has changed? >> Because the fact that they want to
record >> this is the new one. They want to either >> this one >> divides property. That one >> combines property. >> This one needs to be endorsed by the planning board so they can so they can. >> So this one never got recorded. This
just bounced back. >> This is as far as I know, this has not been >> there. Three acres that they were retaining all along up. >> Yeah. >> What I don't understand. >> Well, they're not they're they're not lots because they don't have any frontage. >> They don't unless
they're separate par. >> I'm just curious. So, the Murphy's bought this. It was underwater. >> So, okay. So, >> so they are creating a separate parcel now. Okay. >> I'm just >> Okay. So, what they're doing, they're
they're creating a separate parcel. >> Sell one part of the town and keep the rest. >> This is their land. >> There's a merch. >> So, they broke this off of this. >> Yeah. >> Underwater.
>> That's all I was wondering. Clear. >> That's a nice simple explanation of it. >> Yes. Now we know. What's that? >> They're they want to retain this and they want to transaction with the town on this, >> right? >> So, they wanted to keep this. So, they broke this off. This is why they're
here. I guess >> I did not. >> That was already approved. I think >> it was already approved, but as far as I know, this isn't recorded. >> So, it got bounced back two lots that are underwater. >> That thing is not approved. Plan board does not approve.
>> It endorsed. No, it wasn't endorsed. It was not it was not recorded >> right >> by the registry got bounced back >> right there it's brought back for for revised endorsement >> ex Yes revised endorsement that's a good
way to put it >> but the purpose of the ANR is to separate one what they're going to retain from what they're going to sell >> yes and the revision is what they've plotted for the historic IC lots that
are not owned by the Florex, the location of them. >> Okay, now it makes more sense. I understand that. >> Do you got any more questions before I ask a motion? >> I just want to take a look at the >> GPS. >> Yeah, the GIS.
>> You shouldn't be using GIS in survey because there's a disclaimer statement typically says it's not for survey purposes. this. >> No, I know. But they have a GIS note in here. >> I know. >> And I just want to see what the previous >> Yeah.
>> I had a I had talking to to someone about that the other day. It's funny you brought that up. >> By the way, if um >> Yeah. This is what it looks like now. And actually this is this GIS mapping
>> this this lot information. >> So you can see the lot is right here. >> So these are the this is where they moved up the >> the boundary. >> I was thinking of going back >> this uncertain area >> you know up to >> I
>> it's rough because this they don't continue this line on the >> or you can just scratch through. This this is showing the dotted this line >> correct. >> But that line continues these two dots down here. Okay. See >> some wants to call. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. Scratch the >> So this is changed over here. >> Right. So that's being changed. >> That's why they're here. That's change. And they're just reflecting historical stuff on it to make sure it's >> Yes. >> This changed. I don't think the
>> Well, that's what's being conveyed. So that that's not being conveyed to the town. This this is so Wait, hold on. >> Not between the first and the second from the recorded what's in legally there. >> Yeah. >> And as I said, Mark is willing to take a
call. >> I think we've >> he's been involved. I think we've we've uncovered the onion. Somebody want to make a motion on that >> to revise the endorsement the previous endorsement for
156 Palmer Road. Um, do we need to do we need to >> take back the initial >> no >> endorsement or do we just say accept the revised >> AR just move move to endorse the revised
ANR plan? >> Yeah, >> they have two revised dates here. Which one you want to use? >> Well, the revised date was June 9, 2026. >> June 15th, right? >> Oh, so it must be the second iteration. Yeah. So, I'm wondering
>> what's the date of this? What's the the date? >> So, this is the one from 2012. >> We're endorsing the uh revi actually I'm sorry. Um revise June 15, 2026. >> Right there. Right. >> Usually, if we make a motion, we'll say revise.
>> There really is no way to resend endorsement of an plan. >> That makes sense. Yeah. Do >> I have a motion? I'd like to make a motion to ex to uh
>> revise the endorsement. >> No, to endorse >> to accept >> to endorse the revised date and open >> to to endorse the revised ANR plan >> dated >> June >> June 15th >> 2026 >> 2026.
>> Motion made and seconded. All in favor? Hi. >> Hi. >> So, let me give you two copies here. >> This whole thing was just about this. This is all staying the same. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> From the previous one. Yes.
>> Right. Or what you already approved, >> right? >> Well, I wasn't here. >> And I think what happened was So if you're going to approximate approximate it based on an approximation rather than your own >> and they just like there's parcels not
lots but there's parcels. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Sorry for the delay. >> All right. Good luck. >> That's it. Was there a vote?
Was there a vote? >> I I heard motion. I didn't hear the vote. >> Anybody in favor? >> No. If you ask me like 3 days later >> actually 18,000 miles >> regardless
Okay. Next on the agenda, I have Emily Holberg here is representing the U. Next applicant for an ANR, two ANRS. Um, she's representing Robert and Joanna Merritt and it's for 7 W Road in
Southampton. So, Emily, you're >> you've got the plans. >> I do have the plans. I got all kinds of paper here. Is this what your uh It should be up here guys.
Okay, Elen. So, this plan is creating lot B1 and B2. Um, and then we did a re-ervey of 13 and 15 Wula, but they were um they've been separate lots since 1973, so they're not
a part of the ANR application. Um, it's in the >> RV >> RV this zone. B1 is completely in RV and B2 is has a
very small sliver in RR. >> This is RV. Yeah. Yeah. >> They have the they both have uh sufficient frontage >> line >> for the RV. >> See this lot has a little bit of
of the um a little bit of the rural mural. Correct. It's mostly in the village. Now, is there any I'll ask Richard this before we go any further. Is there any because there's just a smidgen in the other district, but the frontage, Emily,
is it um >> the total frontage for B2 is 17413. >> And the the zoning is what on it? 180. um in RR it's 175 but like I say it's
just the majority is in >> RV >> RV and my understanding is that's the um the zone that would >> what did you say u before >> matter and the RV uh minimum width is
130 and so there's at least at least 70 in the in the RV zone. >> That looks straightforward to me.
>> Now, I know behind those lots there's a a corn field or something. So, is that was that >> that's owned by somebody else? >> Yeah. So that's that um 70 ft that divides the other two. I mean that is that an old road or something or an access to get back there?
>> Um I don't know if it's an access to get back there, but it's owned by the Fletchers. Okay. >> That own behind it. >> They It is for the cornfield then. >> Yeah. It's not the >> It's not the merit property.
>> Yeah. So, do we need >> lot numbers? >> We will eventually, but that's I got to do that separate. Anybody have any questions on that? Jim or Robert? >> Not for me. >> No,
>> I guess my just just clarification. >> The only delineation that's changing is the is the split down the middle, >> right? Cuz this this was one before. These were long ago. >> Right. This is chop eight and a half. Correct. >> Basic. Yeah. Yeah. It's uh
>> So so you're chopping two, >> right? We're creating two lots out of one. >> So you're only adding one lot technically. Right. >> Right. Only adding one. >> It was a lot before. >> It was a lot and now it's going to be two. >> So just going back to 13 and 15. What?
Why are they shown? I mean, you just shown >> the the client wanted them shown on the same plan. He wanted us to reservey and um >> monument. >> No. >> Uh they're they are
>> uh still owned by the merits. >> Yeah. >> So, they are still >> They are 13 and 15 are owned by the merits. 13 and 15 are owned by the merits, but they were created in 1973. >> And so with those lots, all you're doing
is adjusting some of the lot line dimensions or something. >> We're just confirming. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Confirming the property lines of those two, >> but they were pre-existing. So, >> right. So,
uh, for for 13 and 15, we've got the, um, 81X endorsement that they're existing property lines. >> Not to play Columbbo here. Um, going back to these lines. So, so you're just documenting monumentation found in
the field. >> Yes. >> How it's how it differs from >> what was the publicly recorded >> previously. These are details as to where we found the monuments in relation to the corner based on the recorded
plant. Yeah. So, that one was uh 1.28 ft out. That one's 44. That one's point 44 for a different direction. We held this one >> as well.
>> We held this one >> and then we created that dividing line. >> Okay. >> Um so just for my sake of understanding these uh ANRS so when you document
something you're obviously referencing the book and page. So that's where all the um >> obviously that that's where all the research comes from, but in terms of the owner showing it, it's just to show it on the plan for its visual sake rather
than the deed write up, >> right? Yeah. So they're all in the same >> right >> um book and page, but different parcels within that >> deed.
Okay. And I have a separate >> cuz the traffic wasn't sure how much. I have a separate 125. >> Uh, no. >> Or no, >> no. >> Okay. >> No, cuz you had one and you're just creating one. >> Okay. >> Not two. >> It's always Yeah,
>> that's why I asked you. You're creating only creating one. So, it's only one one number. All set. Do we have a motion to endorse lot B1 and B2 on Walcott Road for the merits? >> So move.
>> Second. >> All in favor? I >> I >> I >> Robert could. Yeah. Okay. Now, these need um you've got 13 and 15 already assigned numbers. Now, we're going to
need to address um put addresses on these two. You had seven before. Do you want to go with five and seven because we have to do that for the assessors? Um, >> I mean, do you do you think they had a preference when it comes to um lot
number? I mean, you can you can tell me at a later date, but I thought that because it was already list the one lot was listed as seven. There's no other number on Walcott. That
would be the first one. You go with five and then still have seven. >> Okay. >> Because then it jumps >> the lot on the corner. I don't know. >> The the lot on the corner has frontage on Palmer Meadow. >> Okay. Is a Pome address. Um
>> I believe >> Yeah, that would make sense to me, I guess. >> I'm just trying to understand these numbers here. This is 1350 and we got that already. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And then this had seven like you said. Yeah. Seven. >> Was just being divided.
>> Yeah. So that's the one that >> the other one is the other one. >> The other one's 43. Yeah, you're right. So the other on Yeah. Seven. >> So do you think that'll be suitable? Number five and number seven. >> No. >> No.
>> Well, cuz does it does it matter that the seven Maybe it's just the way it's delineated here. Yeah. Five. I guess it could be five or seven. >> Five here and seven here. >> Yeah. >> Still gives you two numbers for further division. >> Yeah,
>> that way. Yeah, >> perfect. >> Sorry, I'm used to the building inspector assigning street addresses. I wish he would do these because he's on a payroll. I'm not. >> Yeah,
>> we should vote on that tonight. >> But typically subdivisions, plan boards would do them. ANR is easily a split debate. All right, Emily, you're all set. Do you need more than one paper copy? Um
you >> sure you provided something? >> Yeah. >> I'll give you another case the merit case of the merits. As long as you have enough. I do.
>> Thank you. All right. Thank you. Somebody should send a uh invoice over to for ANR. Okay. A lot of people back here Just don't shoot.
All right. So this is Yeah. So we got looks like this is must be the retention like the a bales or whatever it is some of the grades.
Okay. Yep. And next we have a residential storm water um permit and The applicant is Alan Kauitz and he's representing a a lot on 64 Cold Spring
Road. The abuters were notified by me personally. And then the public hearing notice published in the Daily Hampshire Gazette on June 8th and 15th.
and I will read it. Pursuant to Mass Journal Law, Southampton Planning Board will conduct a public hearing on June 24th, 26 7th amendment at Town Hall, 210 College Highway for residential special permit application in accordance to the storm water erosion control bylaw
section 19. The application is submitted by Alan Katoitz for 64 Cold Spring Road, map 6, parcel 16. So we can see what it started. The application is available by contacting planning board at south town of southampton.org or view at the town
clerk's office. And once again, it was published the 8th and 15th. So, who do we have here? Is Mr. Kauitz here tonight to represent the u come up to the podium and state your case about your
no I think you may have >> um before you start the plans that I have it says sheet two of two is there one of two somewhere >> um it's probably the um >> two without the house located on it. The
existing propos I sent you guys. Did you have a chance to see that information? Did you pass that down? >> What was that? Or was this this without the house located on it? >> Do you want >> existing grades and everything?
>> Do you want to Is that is that necessary to show too or is it the same? >> No, I think that's just >> Yeah, this is just showing where the house is in your top wall. Yeah. >> Solid floor.
>> Does this one go be okay then? >> Yeah, it's fine. That I think that that's that just the conditions. Yeah, but we didn't know >> what that one was represented by Mr. Costa. George Costa here. >> George Costa. >> George Costa. This is the same drawing
with some modifications here. An expansion of the erosion control and the developed area. >> You're revising the plan that was submitted to the board. >> Um, showing actual conditions. I don't know if I'm revising the plan. kind of showing what's what's out there.
>> The only thing that we have that was changed is this has all been um approved by conservation commission. Um and we didn't realize at the time cuz I was
never advised I guess uh by by triggering this extra footage. The guy that I'm representing I'm building for is um Mr. Lica. And while we were lodging here to get set for our erosion
control package that we do, um, we've been using grinded mulch from our trees that we cut and and we grind everything up and then we use that as a hill about this high and about that wide all the
way around the perimeter where we were approved by conservation. And then they came out there. They did a visual. Mr. Russell, he had help helped me get advice advised us all the way through
along with our engineers. Um, uh, Ed Chaplain by surveyor. Um, Steve Liberty, bog hunter, wetland specialist. Um, also Mr. LC and George George uh
here uh Costa. So anyway, we went ahead and I I checked with conservation this area here, but the the the gentleman asked me about cuz this was all flat through here. He wanted to have a spot for a garden and shows kids how
to grow vegetables and have it for their own consumption. So I I I emailed over to Mr. Russell and I spoke with him and he had no problem with us going this extra little section. So needless to say
it triggered an extra footage square footage and I never knew that we had to file a a uh storm water management all this water on this he owns 14 acres here Mr. Mica does and everything. There's
nothing going to a butters anywhere. It's a wet land back here. It's I'm going to have a swale cutting through the driveway here. Um I'm going to keep my water and we're putting in rain garden type of swailes uh type of uh
stone and like brook beds that it's all beautiful sand and gravel. So everything's going to get absorbed and we're going to dress it nice and and there's no water leaving this property. >> Okay. So
this that you delineated here is what now? Because it wasn't shown here originally. >> Well, again, we just drew this in to show you that extra little part that we we cleared. Uh this >> So this was your this is what you were originally going to do and then he added
this to your your excavation. >> Yeah, all we did we didn't really do any excavation except clearing. Okay, we stumped it all. Of course, maybe that's excavation. >> Well, that plan that plan has to be kept with the planning board because that's the plan that is being discussed,
>> right? This one here. >> Yes. >> Well, that's okay. I mean, it's not >> it's an extension, right? >> You need to keep that, but you need to keep this one in particular because that's different. It's a revision. this and yeah and I presume that the
storm water calculations and uh plan reflect that additional clearing. >> Yeah. >> So is that what we just passed around the NOI? Is that what >> the >> No, that was for the for the uh
conservation commission. >> Yes. Right. >> What's that other um piece of paper there? that other packet. The one that's curled up. What's that? Is it >> French? >> The other one. >> There's just more of these.
>> Oh, okay. Is it all the same? >> Yeah, those are stapled together. So, they seem a little more complete. >> So, again, I I have proof of of contacting the conservation commission about any extra cutting that we we went
outside. were still outside the buffer areas. But again, I I talked to him before I did anything. First thing I did when I was entered into this project was to go talk with the building inspector, board of
health, conservation, know which avenues that they like me to take. I've been doing this all my life. My my family's been in business since 57 building homes. So anyway, I I'm not trying to get away with anything. I just didn't
realize that that little thing would this little area here would trigger the storm water management. So I'm sort of and again I have my emails with Mr. Russell stating that uh asking permission to do this and and he
responded back and said he saw no problem with it and and um I can send them to you if you'd like. But bottom line is it caught me off guard when uh I went back with everybody signing off on the building permit and and then the
building inspector said, "Hey, you got to get this from planning board because you might be over the >> 40,000 square ft." Well, under the uh EPA MS4 permit statewide is at least if you disturb one acre of
land anywhere in the state, you have to get as a storm permit. In some towns, they they made as low as 10,000 square ft of disturbance. >> Other towns don't even enforce it where I build and that's why I got
>> they're supposed to be enforcing it. Yeah, that's why it was surprising to me, but I've been after um and it's not your fault, but there was nothing in the building permit application that says anything about warning people
pulling a permit about the uh 40,000 square ft um threshold. So, I contacted um Ron Lauren and asked him if he would put something on his building permit, but I also called um Randall Kemp from
Highway because they have to get a curb cut permit number one. >> So, I asked Randall if he would put some language in there about um warning people that of the clearing in the 40,000 square feet because it's not
listed anywhere. And um I I don't know where where else it could be other than the building department or highway. So uh now the community I was working with that sim situation and in that case the building commissioner add in a
requirement they identify the square footage of the area to be disturbed, cleared or grade or whatever. And that way that would trigger automatically if it hit the threshold of 40,000 square ft
the building commissioner and then automatically require them to go to the planning board. >> So so they had on on their permit how much is to be clear. >> I think it's important thing to add. >> Yeah. >> And again no no fault of yours and you
were well you were well into the uh did you get a foundation for it? No. No, I stopped when I spoke. I You guys said we got to wait until we have a meeting. So, I've been wait, you know, I lost two months really here and and um it's a
very large house and the the whole thing is between our well, our well is over here and the septic system is over here. By the time we put this house in and the well uh area and the driveway
and and uh around it's it's a lot of square footage and I didn't I I didn't know that it tri it would trigger it. I I'm sorry. Um so just ju just to build off this. So this this area that you guys expanded that was done
um preemptive to your clearing of this area or was that an after? >> No. When the loggers were there, they were clearing and and then my customer asked me if we could it was a flat area for the kids to have a spot to play ball. I mean all this is sloping off.
>> We have a walk out seller here so grades are cutting down. But this this erosion control is the best stuff we've ever used. Silk fence, waddles, all. >> No, no. I mean like this section here. So this add-on before the So the So these this was done for the conservation commission, right?
>> Yeah. And I got permission to do that as well. >> Okay. And then you did that >> at the same time we were clearing cuz you know to try to get the loggers back again. If I knew that it would trigger extra extra >> No, I just want So, so what I'm trying
the point I'm trying to make is that this erosion control measure was done >> at the same time that the lot was being cleared. >> Yes. >> Which is which in in essence covered this area that was disturbed.
That's all that's all I'm trying to say. to expand upon this additional flat area that they added. >> They were impressed with our the our mulch uh the way we did things. Again, there's no water getting through.
There's no erosion. Whereas silk fence or waddles, they blow right through it. If you have a a lot of rain with heavy velocity, this mulch barrier that we do is is like um foolproof. You can't run
It's It's about this tall by about this wide the whole river and there's no erosion getting through to damage that wetland. I was always taught wet lands first and that's why I went to see Mr. Russell and I saw that
>> totally protected. You know, >> I was up there last week and I saw that >> and and again like Jordan looks like a fence >> saying wherever our our grades are cutting and swailes are being done, >> we're going to put like brook beds there with stone. We take off the top soil
which there's not a lot of there and it's beautiful uh gravel that'll take the water. So, and my swailes, my pitches are going this way as well as as well as this way and out here. So, we've
designed a a a type of spot where wherever the swailes are, the water's going to run toward those swailes and it's going to saturate into the gravel like a brook bed type of thing. >> Hold on just a minute. Is there anybody here from Cold Spring Road in a butter that has any questions or Go ahead, sir.
>> I'm not a butter. Peter Prairie 67 Cole Spring Road 19 East Street. Oh, I looked at the lot when they're clearing it and asked him. They were away well away from the wetland and all of that. So, I got no problem.
>> I mean, it appears on the map, too. I mean, especially since he owns all the property, too. >> I watch the perimeter right >> Easter time. walked the perimeter, saw where the stakes were and all that stuff because I went to the conservation commission meeting.
>> Yeah. Right. >> And my brother even walked >> live there in Iraq. >> He's taking a waiver from water. So you can containment project
building requires approval of the planning. >> Yeah. Well, we have to approve this and that will decision will go to the building inspector, you know, to give them the go-ahhead, >> right? So, I think building building inspector will not proceed with
planning work. >> Exactly. >> Anybody have any other questions, Jim? >> No, I think uh I think I understand what's going on. >> Bob, it's all Greek to you. Yes and no. >> Yeah.
>> All right. Mr. Kausz, do do I have a motion to approve his plan so he can get on with building his uh home >> with the waiverss? >> H >> with the waiver from doing a storm water >> Yes. >> report and all the other >> and a peer review and everything else. >> Anything else? Yes.
>> Yes. I make a motion to approve the the plants here and um issuing waiverss for storm water study and the
requirements that would be necessary for 1acre disturbance. >> I have a second. >> Motion made by Paul and seconded by Robert. Should we be >> Those are the only two waivers. Just waving
the items that you mentioned. There's nothing. No other waivers. Yeah. >> No. >> All in favor? I >> I >> I >> All right. Um I'm going to keep this and um because I have to You can have your board back.
>> Should we take a We should take a picture of that just to because I don't think we have a scan copy of this. What's that? >> This this plan. >> What about it? >> We should document it. >> Well, that that copy needs to be kept with the town. >> That's getting have it digitally as
well. Trying to get >> So, did you is this your plan that you did? >> Yeah, I sketched it for this meeting, but before you take it, I'll take a picture for my >> Yeah. >> So, that's that's >> I Yeah, I'll need that.
Just yeah, let's take Paul probably just have that in our files. Just a document that this was add. >> You can have this board. That's That's an extra one if you want it. But
I'm I'm keeping this one. >> I have to I have to write the decision. I will forward it to the town clerk and the building inspector. I will forward it to the town clerk and the building inspector and I'll copy you on it.
>> Okay. He's got writing written decision. >> I have it just can't be verbally. I have to put it in writing, >> but I will give you again the building. >> Thank you very much for your >> I'll probably hopefully I'll get to it
by Monday. All right. >> Sorry about your your delay. So, I don't know. >> Make sure you check the rings whenever you're building in whatever town you're in. I learned a lesson for sure.
A lot of houses over in Graham. Done it many, many times. It's next door to your uh hometown there. >> I'm shocked. No watchdog. You know, we've been blessed to the kind of material that
we're working with a lot. >> The the the key is if you're disturbing 40,000 square ft or more. >> If you're 35,000's fine, but the threshold statewide New England is
one acre >> and NASD regulates that and enforces it on behalf of Is it around that? >> I thought it was on the you go around the >> you come up around. >> Thank you very much.
>> Did you try the potatoes in terms of the uh screen I small systems. >> That stuff would be great to >> Yeah.
12 ft where the carrier and there was no water table whatsoever. So >> that's great. >> Yeah. Nice spot. >> It's like that around the airport. >> Okay. >> Water table. >> Thank you very much.
>> Thank you guys. >> Very much. This is our hard packet that you didn't see for that sound tower. >> I I watched the uh I watched the video today. >> Send me an email about it before that next meeting July 8th. But that's the uh
plan. >> All right. Next on the agenda, we have the uh continued discussion on the best bylaw and Richard um had taken
all the notes from the last time and rewrote it and then um Jeff Bod, who I think is here tonight, sent a couple more ideas and um Richard
has um considered them. So I will let you pick up from where we left off um last time and that's page one of it. Um Jeff Boder had suggested and of the table one use
regulations >> that the tier 2 under RR district be changed from site plan review to special permit. He suggested the accessory use tier 2 for RR and RN districts be changed from
site plan view to special permit >> and accessory use soda facility RR and RN districts tier 2 be changed from site plan view to spe special permit. um set board right you want to
recommend. My concern is when you look at the zoning map and you look at the proposed bylaw already prohibits it in the water supply protection district
which is I think about a third of the town. I'm concerned that making these changes might be interpreted as being overly restrictive, especially when given the other restrictions that apply to that this
bylaw imposes on any uh battery energy storage system. Um so that's my concern. Um because basically the only places you'll be able to do by site plan view is in the
uh commercial highway and industrial and there's not very much in Southampton that's zoned in those districts and then when you impose the prohibition of doing in the water supply protection
district it's even less Yes, probably I would guess I would have to guess far less than 5% of the town. Could you do it under site plan review? And that's my concern is it may be too
restrictive. And if it's too restrictive, the I would I would not be surprised attorney general just throws out the entire bylaw because this is such a essential element of the bylaw. If you had these
geographic areas and you effectively prohibiting 1/3 and over restricted in the balance in the rest of it, it doesn't matter what else you say in here that that pose a significant
barrier for them for a battery storage uh system. Um and that's my concern. Um the other uh area >> so just going back I'm sorry.
>> Okay just step back. >> Yeah. So that would be in aside from the unbalanced nature of the restriction. >> That would that would be a
just to repeat what you were saying earlier that that would uh focus on populating it in in what zone specifically? >> Industrial district and >> highway. Marshall Highway >> and just before >> it would allow it only by special permit
in uh high in the RR and RN districts and for tier three commercial highway is all special permit. So
>> okay understood. But how can we can we quantify the the zoning area to say is what if one is more or disproportionate to another in our
town? So have we looked at that? Um that and that's the problem of the time frame is we would need P planning commission to devote some time to do the
mapping to identify exactly what >> I'm guesstimating from looking >> open up our website or the the town website and do an area of of what what those are within our zoning maps.
um the online GIS does not have the water supply protection district shown. Therefore, trying to exclude trying to calculate what is outside the water supply protection district
would be really tough to do. >> Um >> I think there is a colored map. >> Yeah, there is a map. It's kind of map, but the but the online GIS, which is one you need to use for the calculation. >> Yeah, we we >> does not have that. >> Someone someone I know people that can
overlay maps and >> Yeah, they didn't put the overlay maps in there. >> What's that? >> On the online GIS does not include the overlay maps, >> right? But we can we can export the data into the mass mapper
and the mass mapper should have the aquafer district in it. >> If you can find somebody to do that. I just don't have time. >> No, I Yeah, >> I I can This is like a 15-minute exercise. >> Okay. >> In my head,
>> I'm probably creating more time for somebody else to do it. 4 hours later. >> 4 hours later. Yeah. >> 15 minutes. >> I I but but let's just entertain that idea. Let's let's say all is equal, right? Let's say it's not that disproportionate.
>> Yep. My my approximation is that less than 5% would be site plan review. Just to clarify what you said, less than 5% >> of the town's land area will allow a battery engine storage system of tier 2
or tier three by site plan review. >> Okay. >> Challenge accepted to see what that number is. So, I I can put that on my list of things to do if that's >> and and that's going back those looking
at the U online zoning map. >> And you might be right. I I don't have that memorized in my head by any means. So, I'm >> Yeah, >> I'm just trying to find a way to see if there's a way for us to calculate those ratios.
And furthermore, if Paul does that, that could be possibly useful information down the road at the public hearing. What I would suggest you do is if this ready to go with is um have a
written report to town meeting so that when the bylaw is acted on and that is submitted to the AG the general general for review they have that report as part of the document to review >> something needs to be documented that
that that is actually the case right >> because because if if you're making an argument that we're not unreasonably restricting it. >> You want to be sure you've laid out your arguments in writing and that the attorney general >> and stuff professional. So, so what I'm
saying, what I'm going to do is not going to be a >> it's going to be some almost the equivalent of a sanity check, right, >> to say, hey, do we want to further investigate this as as as a board to look at this ratio, right? Because if it's
>> if it's 95% the the five, then we have a Just looking at it's going to tell us, well, no, no kidding. We can't do this. >> Yeah. >> Because last thing you want to do is have a bylaw that everybody agrees with
on vast majority get rejected because it's perceived as being overly restrictive. Yeah. Okay. So, because in this instance, if the attorney general made that
determination, I would expect they would reject the bylaw in its entirety because this is so so foundational to the rest of it. >> So, just go back to the overlay.
So, I'm I'm making a huge assumption that it's on the on the um mass mapper state cuz that usually has all the aquaer overlays. >> It's on there. I looked at it the other day. >> Well,
>> perfect. So, that's that that that that's 95 that's like >> you can blow it up and zoom in on it, but it's not easy to use. So, >> right. But you can export. >> Well, they use the D zone one and zone two.
If your water supply protection district has an additional area, it won't be shown on there. >> You mean that it's not state recognized? Is that what you're saying? >> Yeah. For instance, a lot of communities use zone one, two, and three, and mass
DP does not map zone three. >> But we're in zone. >> If you're using zone one and two, >> what do these zones identify? These these zones are what zones >> mass D identifies um
zone one and two for water spot protection. They don't map zone three because zone one is the wellhead itself and zone two is the contributing zone three is a further contributing area. >> Okay. >> Zone three is is more of a local
jurisdiction. >> Right. Okay. >> Delineation. just saying you're kind of over the aquifer basically. >> No, zone 3 is way beyond. >> Yeah. So, so it's like it's So, for example, let's say the state was doing
something here. Let's say the state was the proponent of a project. >> Mhm. >> Right. And let's say the town delineated a zone 3 that was way outside of what zone one and two were as defined by the state. The state
doesn't have to meet any local regulations to review zone 3 or to even acknowledge zone 3. So it's not jurisdictional. There's a supremacy clause that the state passed says we don't have to look at that. That's because it's it's a
lower jurisdiction. >> Okay. >> And I'm not sure how zone 3es were delineated. I think they were just more So the map that's the delineation map that is on the second on the second
floor, right? It's on one of the walls. Is is it in town? Just >> a big print out upstairs of it. >> Yeah, there's a u it's like a grid that shows it. That's an overlay district. That's the same one I have.
>> Would that map I guess we can talk about this later. Not to not to take the air out of the room with this discussion, but we can we can take a look and see how that compares to what the state might have. Just for reference, >> the other approach to make that simpler would be to um instead of saying it's prohibited in
water by protection district, just say it's prohibited in zone one and zone two of the realhead prohead zone protection zones as defined by mass DUP. But then you don't have a map of us that
that won't work either. Well, I I want to push back that idea a little bit >> and and your your water protection district may only use one and two. I don't know. >> We have to compare it and see. >> We need to take a look at it. Yeah.
>> See what the town cuz we're not the only one that's sharing this. >> No, you see Westfield in the same aquifer. Yeah. So you're on the inside if you want to make the changes Jeff suggests on table
one change those site plan view for RR to special permit and RN to special permit. >> Can we punt this? >> Yeah. I mean, we can leave the way it is now. You can advertise public hearing
and as result of public hearing, you can make changes in it. >> Okay. I think that's probably done. >> Okay. Give us some time. >> Okay. Um, >> so you you want to change that from special permit to or site plan to special permit? >> That's what Jeffier suggested.
Um the other comment he made was a concern that on page 14 under noise that the way it was worded could
noise generated and I hope I'm understanding this correctly. Noise generated by best installation. Could it be interpreted as not being subject to chapter 206 of the town's general bylaws since it's
not expressly listed under chapter 206 of the town's noise town's general bylaw? Um I think it would because the listing of um presumed nuances is listed as
non-exclusive which means or non-exhaustive it means we've got these here but there may be more that >> yeah new technology comes around how can you define everything >> so what I by addressing that a little
bit I revised a little bit to read must be constructed and managed to ensure that excessive noise which is the term used in the noise bylaw is not generated from such installations so as to constitute a a nuisance in
violation chapter 206. So I think that addresses that concern even more. Um and those are only changes I made. Well, you see the other changes I made. I I took out the noise generated by FE
regarding decibb because that was mentioned at in the May meeting as being a concern or last meeting concern. Um >> can I say something about what you just said? >> Yes sir. >> Noise decel reading
a letter from Kate I think you got Paul from Kate. Yep. >> And basically the solar bylaw has in it state noise regulation which is 10 dB over ambient. What was in the original draft best by
law was 20 dB over 60. It was a flat rate of 60 dB. But I guess what I'm wondering is is can this new best bylaw mimic the noise rating in the solar bylaw which
currently I believe jives with the state regulation. I don't know. It's just that it puts some sort of real number on what noise is allowed. It could that
the problem as I recall at the last meeting and discussed this issue that was raised regarding having the decimal level means you got to have somebody quantified first you got to have the device to read it to measure it and
you have to have somebody certified in use of that device to do the the monitoring and that was a concern that was raised that if we have a decel level. How are we going to
enforce it? Because we don't have the town doesn't have a uh measuring device and doesn't have anybody certified to >> for it use. >> That that's something that can be
added as a professional service to an application. >> It could. But the bigger problem is the word ambient. >> Yeah. >> What defines I mean obviously ambient is is the benchmark that could be set by
the professional, right? >> Mhm. So how so that that could not possibly jive with the sound ordinance potentially when you already have an ambient voice uh
excuse me ambient noise that's exceeding what some people find >> right >> acceptable. Yeah. So you have a a potential argument there.
>> Did you did you actually have a def sorry they they actually have a definition of ambient in the state bylaw or in the state rules. I'm reading it right here. says, "Oh, ambient is divine defined as a background awaited sound level that is
exceeding 90% that is exceeded 90% of the time measured during equipment operating hours. The ambient may also be established by other means with a consent of the department. This came from the department of air
quality control state of mass. Did you happen to see um Richard or whatever the DOER guidelines that came out the the most recent one? >> No, I I haven't. >> And the the one about noise
shall comply with local noise bylaws, regulations, or ordinances. SCIF shall also comply with 310 CMR 7.10. A source of sound violates 310 CMR 710. If the source either increases the broadband
sound level by more than 10 dB above ambient or produces a in quotations pure tone condition. A pure tone condition occurs when an octave band center frequency sound pressure level exceeds the two adjacent center frequency sound
pressure levels by three dB or more. These criteria are measured by both at the property line and at the nearest inhabited residents or other sensitive receptors. The CIFS may implement a sound suppression or mitigation measures
to achieve desired sound levels and that's that's the most recent one they came out with. And those two things A and B that you read the 10 dB and the pure tone noise and all that that exact wording is in
the solar bylaw now. >> That was the one that was voted in last a year ago in May. >> So I can do I can just copy from the um solar b I'll put that in there if you want to. The only other thing I saw, well, you
you can go ahead, but I said the only other um interesting thing that pertains to what we've been writing uh was they finally put in something about wellhead protection. >> I can cover that something else if you
want to continue. >> The the other one they they put in which wasn't in there before, pursuant to 310 CMR 22.0 O CIS are prohibited in zone one areas unless directly related to the provision
of the public water system or if the public water system has demonstrated to mass D satisfaction that the SC CIF will have no significant impact on water quality. SCIFs in zone 2 areas or zone A
areas must comply with local wellhead and surface water protection and nonzoning controls and prohibitions required by mass D. So zone one areas are so small that it doesn't really
have any impact. Zone two is what's the most critical one zone zone one is critical from water protection. Zone two from a land use regulation perspective. Zone one are typically a 400t radius or
something some variation thereof. >> So it's a small very small area >> very small area. Yeah. >> I think they can go down as small as 200 feet something like that. Hence the term. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. So, so we're going to pro prohibit them in zone one. Big deal. >> 30 will >> Is that the only Is that the only two um points you had? >> Yeah. Um the other thing he made was suggested that we should revise the soda
bylaw to be consistent with this. That's another whole project. Well, the only reason I say that is the solar bylaw mentions best. It doesn't use the acronym B as battery energy storage
system once in the whole bylaw and the bylaws number of pages and and yet all these solar proposals are out there saying, well, we got to have batteries with them. So, so if the solar bylaw, you know, we did a best bylaw now,
that's great. I just would think that there would be more referencing the best bylaw now that we have one or some something back and forth to tie them together. I don't know. >> Well, you could simply refer to that part of it. Uh couldn't you in the
current solici bylaw refer to the new one coming out refer to >> you have to amend the soda bylaw to do that. Um and I think that can simply be done by having a statement in the soda bottle.
All battery energy storage systems associated with soda and soda energy generating facility must be cons compatible with section section whatever the zoning by law. That's >> Oh yeah. Just like it has to be
compatible with section 9 of special permits or whatever else. Yeah. >> And even if you don't have that in there, they still have to. >> And I think that actually comes out better addressed in the plan board's rules and regulations regarding what's required in
the application for solar and best that and the uh solar application. They have to address their battery and storage systems and how they're compliant with with the bylaws. >> Have you gentlemen had anything else to
add to the >> no >> draft to draft at all or >> at this point? >> No. Ju um >> someone have something to say? No.
Um I I guess I got one one other thing. Uh the solar okay the best bylaw is you guys did a great job and Richard you did an awesome
job on this. Is there a way to and I know you I guess you can't put too many restrictions in there but you you got certain setbacks from front lot lines, side lot lines, but it's
allowed in basically any residential district. I believe it's just a lot line setback. >> Mhm. >> Then if you've got streams, rivers, and wetlands, I don't know that there's any like
distance. It's got to be away from those things. But >> that's all conservation, isn't it? that >> is if that's separate from the best bylaw I guess I I don't >> I would expect that'd be regulated by the conservation commission because if you're doing work within >> 100 ft
>> a wetland area within 200 ft of perennial stream or 100 ft of other wetlands you've got to file with conservation commission >> isn't that already in there isn't that in there already that it still needs to conform to conservation
conservation issues. >> It doesn't have to be in here because you still have to conform to conservation >> whether it's in there or not. It has to be conservation within 100 ft. >> That's one problems a lot of communities do is they repeatedly say you've got to
comply with this. >> Of course. Yeah. Yeah. That's the answer. >> And and you don't need to do that. >> You don't need to have it in there, but you need to comply. >> Yeah. But but don't you don't need to put in in every bylaw that every provision of every zone bylaw that you
have comply with conservation because you do just like you have to comply board of health applies you have to comply with building permit requirements applies you have to comply with DPW requirements there's an almost endless number of
related requirements Their their simple action of developing triggers that that regulation. >> What? >> Their simple act of development triggers that regulation. >> Yeah. I I will say that your statement about
you don't want to affect the bylaw to be rejected by too much restriction. I agree with that totally especially since it's my estimation that keeping this thing out these things out of groundwater protection areas is the number one
thing with the changes. Are we going to be rewarding the paragraph that talked about the R1 and R2 restrictions not being a allowed on a water recharge area?
>> It already says you it already has in here that they are prohibited in water supply protection district regardless of the underlying zoning. >> Is that going to be rewarded? >> I don't know. I I don't see it. It
there's no reason to. I mean, it's it's just it always says not withstanding the classification permit and prohibited uses. No tier 2, tier three or tier tier four shall be located within the water supply protection overlay district.
Period. Uh so e if the underlying zone is industrial that's water protection district is prohibited. If it's RN or RR RV whatever the underline is is within the water supply protection district is
prohibited. All right. So, where does that uh put us now? >> Um then make the revision to copy the um soda provision for noise into here. I get that to you and then you need to
advertise a hearing. >> You got that wellhead one too or is that necessary? >> Send that to me and I'll take a look at it. >> That was in the same emails. I think I'm pretty sure I sent you that.
>> If you sent it between June 1st and June 20 20th, I didn't pay a whole lot of attention. >> All right. So, it's best to resend it. >> I copied you guys on it, I believe.
Yeah. My daughter sent it to me. She works in that field and she saw it and reported it to me. So, but as uh who as it was Robert was saying that um spoke to a u
one of our legislators and there's more stuff in the works. There's yeah they've there's vless I wrote VA list a page and a half letter about all this and on these and I don't I can't recite the bill numbers but they have four bills that when when they go back in session next year that they that they want to
introduce to to add controls onto all of this um because they do think that they agreed but my position is that it's liberal it's awful it's it's it's loose and it's just promoting this um and the
permitting process is done from Boston and we've just I get it. They're not my backyard thing, but um it's a pretty big push to get these out there. And um and I think I'd like to
see us learn a little bit of more a little bit more through experience on what goes wrong with these and how we address that. Um, and there's been conflicting reports on fires. So, California's had four of
them. New York had four. Um, um, D said that they didn't find any contaminants in the water or in the groundwater, but there were other agencies um, independent agencies um, studies that were done that did. So, I just think I just think we have more to
learn than this. I'm not against it. You know, batteries are definitely the future, but um a lithium fire is bad news. I mean, theoretically, the best thing to do with it is let it burn itself out. >> I don't think anybody wants to watch that happen, but >> that's why they have dumpsters for uh for electric cars.
>> Yeah. >> And there's a fire at the side of the road, they'll just throw it dumpster and let it >> let it go. >> Let it go. So, it's going to be contained within that within that dumpster structure, >> right?
But by letting that burn, you still have >> Oh, more pollution. Yeah. No, there's other environmental issues. There's no doubt about it. Yeah. >> But would you know pick your poison? Do you want in the ground water? You want in the air? At least it gets it gets diluted a little bit a little bit in the
air. In the ground water, it's depends on where they're located, >> right? Exactly. >> When they're located right in the middle of a residence, >> right? You're drinking it or you could be. >> Yeah. >> So, there's that. And I had asked Paul earlier that and I'm new to all of this.
So I'm trying to get up to speed and learn about the rules and regs, but um my example was that we have a cell tower we're working on right now and we're allowed to request uh the applicant to hire a consultant on
behalf of the town to do a peer review. >> And do we have we'll have that right with these as well? Right. Well, with any zoning application, you have that authority. >> Okay. >> Um, you don't have to specify in this bylaw that you can do it. Any zoning,
any subdivision. >> Okay. So, what regardless of the permitting process, we have that right to do that. >> As long as it's with as long as you're permitting it, you have the authority. >> Okay. Cuz I think that's this is this is highly technical. I mean, I don't think
I don't think any of us know exactly how these work and what to watch out for. So, >> especially on the onset, >> um, getting back to your conversation with
the legislator, so we can we can pass, um, a draft anytime. If there's any new information that comes up before the public hearing, before it goes um, to town meeting or the public hearing, we we can uh, tweak
it. Um, and then even after the fact, you can go back and um, edit edit as it goes along if changes come about down the road. >> Yeah. I'll be surprised if the state legislature has anything
in the next 6 months. I'll be shocked. >> Oh, that ch that new to this. >> Well, they're just slow. >> It you'll be lucky if it's a year. >> Well, yeah, that that's what I mean. So it's it's >> I'd be skeptical that anything passes next year.
>> Yeah. >> Cuz it's just piling on. >> It's very it's very Bostonentric. >> Yeah. >> And anything outside of um 495 really >> I get it. >> Yeah. >> We're in another state.
So if it were to pass that town meeting in say in November, could the town then use it even though it hasn't passed in Boston? >> Going to need AG approval, right? >> Yeah. >> You still need that approval >> and that could take up to four months.
>> Yeah. No, I understand that. >> I think this will be a work in process for years to come. I mean there's a lot going on with it. >> Years to come. So, >> okay, we'll u wait for your revisions
and then from there um >> hold advertise and hold a public hearing. Uh it's either in July or August and it's just probably August. >> Shall I shall I find out if there's going to be a town meeting in in the
fall sometime? Yeah, I I would I'd be shocked if there isn't a town meeting in the fall, but when would be important to know. >> All right. >> I think at the last meeting, board member who is here said, you know,
probably November, I think. >> Okay. Uh because it usually usually do most most towns do a financial town meeting in the fall to correct things that based on
final state budget. >> Yeah. >> All right. Next on the agenda, we've got um Mr. Harris has got his contract here for the FY27 for his services
which we are glad to have. And last year because we had some uh budget problems, we had to cap it at $2500. um he has that same amount in this
contract, but I would I would ask the board that we increase that to 4500 knowing what we have coming down the road for his services. And um I do have I I know at this point I have
the money to cover it. So, I'm looking for um discussion or recommendation that um we hire Richard back for this coming fiscal year for um we cap it at $4,500. Any discussion on that?
As I understand it, you've got m there's funds to hire a planner. >> Yes. >> Okay. Yeah. >> And so so way this is written is if you do hire a planner then my serves be more
as assistance to technical assistance to get that person up to speed and support them. >> Yeah, I forgot about that. >> Just curious, how many hours do you average for the town for a year?
>> Well, I would tell you this year my hours is seed of the budget. They probably do most or >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I think it sounds reasonable. >> I think cap for years prior to last
year, we had uh we had him a $5,000 contract with him for two or three years after Larry Smith retired. And last year was the first year we cut it back because I
didn't have the funds. So now I I know I've got them and also I know what's coming down the road and um it's not going to be cheap. So that's why I'm asking for the 4500. >> I'm good with it.
>> I have a motion for $4,500. >> I'll make a motion. $4,500 cap. Second for Richard. >> Motion made by Jim and seconded by Paul. All in favor? I
>> I want to remind everybody um of the uh Atlantic cell tower continuation July 8th. I I haven't heard that it won't happen yet, but I don't know. I haven't heard any more from city cityscape, the con uh the consultant
that we hired for the peer review for that cell tower. >> They send you the con signed contract, right? >> I've sent that down and I provided them with all the information that they required >> and I'm just I I have no idea how long those take.
I I'll email them tomorrow and ask them how how the review is proceeding >> because otherwise it we'll have to continue with >> Yeah, you need they need to provide their review by early next week to give the app opportunity to prepare for July
8th. Otherwise, we need to continue the hearing again. Right. Yeah. >> Okay. Um what's everybody's schedule looking like for July? Um 22nd. We have an application that was
filed for 43 and 53 Pleasant Street for the solar array and the battery energy storage and that is uh got to be um scheduled within 45 days. It was filed on June 9th. So, I'm looking I know you have to
recuse yourself. >> Yes. I won't be around late July anyway, so it doesn't matter. >> But I'm looking uh either 15th to the 22nd. Are you around, Paul? >> I would. >> What's your dates? >> Oh gosh. >> And Robert, what uh
>> the 15 is much better for me. >> 15. >> 15th of July. How about you, Robert? >> Um, I think that works. So, tenatively then we're going to have a meeting on the 8th and the 15th.
>> Yes. >> Unless we Oh, jeez. That's next week. Good heavens. Never mind. >> So, where I could Did Are you out of town the 22nd? Me?
>> No, I I have kids things that day. two two sporting things with my son for that day. So, I got he's said he's got triyouts, so I got to be in Connecticut that day. >> What would What's 40? How about the 29th? Is the Is that
beyond the period? >> That'd be pushing it. I know. Let's see. You see on June 9th? >> Yep. like day 43. Uh I would go with the 15th if you could
and if something comes up and don't have required number of members then go to 20 then defer to the 29th instead of aim for the 29th then being stuck. So, how many members can make the 20th
the 15th? >> I don't have my a home calendar with me, so I don't have everything on here. I think I can. >> Yeah. >> And I'm refusing. So, >> right. >> I believe Mark is going to be around. He told me he didn't think he was going to be.
>> So, you have four members. >> Yeah. Verify with Mark that he can make it. >> Was he's not sick that night out of the blue. Come on, Mark. Hey, drag yourself into the meeting if necessary.
>> Well, we can make it Zoom. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Okay. >> Okay. It's a joke. >> I I need to I got to be Connecticut. >> And what are we actually voting on? >> I got to be in Connecticut. Um, >> so I'd go with the 15th.
>> Whether you vote that time or whatever. Okay. Decisions made that still needed. Okay. >> Yeah. >> 45 days. Does does that include Saturdays and Sundays? >> Yes. His calendar days.
Paul, it's likely that it's I got in Windsor that night. It's probably it's probably not wise to schedule uh hopefully the cell tower continuation the 15th have those two on the same night
wouldn't be very advisable would just >> Yeah, I don't see any issue with that. >> Like midnight? >> No, you you can
um it's the first session of the solar and I guess of the cell tower. Uh if the peer review comes back on cell tower, very good then fine. Um you're
probably going to do a peer review of the U storm water associated with the solar. So that's going to be a reasonable continuation that anyway. >> They had one done for conservation. Does that count?
>> It depend. They had a peer review of the storm order. >> It's up to the board whether or not to allow that to accept that. >> So >> I'd recommend yes.
>> If if the conservation commission did a peer review of the storm water, then I'd look at that that peer review and very likely just accept that. But be sure they reviewed it in light of the
town's stormwater bylaw and SD >> standards. We'd have to find out. >> So this event ends so this trial my son has ends at 6:15 in Windsor, Connecticut. >> It's cutting it too short.
>> Yeah, it's cutting it short. >> We'll go with the 15th. Well, it doesn't have to be >> what happens in the event, say for instance, that peer review from the cell tower comes back not in time for the 8th.
>> How how do um do I have to still open the meeting on the 8th and then continue it because the abuters um >> unless there's lack of >> there's no way of notifying them. No, the well one way would be is if the applicant
requested a continuation of the hearing from 8th to another >> future date and then you send out notices to the abuter saying the applicant has requested this continuation and therefore on the 8th the board will vote to continue the
hearing that gives the butter's notice. Hey, this all we're going to do this I did this numerous times. South Hadley. All we're going to do on that night is vote to continue. >> Open it and close it. Right. >> Vote to continue.
>> So, who's whose dime is it on for the butter notification? >> Us. >> That's what I've always done is just it. It's by by regular mail. It's just whatever the first class postage is and
of a one-page letter, onepage notice. Paul, can we pop if it's better? How about like a Tuesday or Thursday night instead? I mean, that was a
suggestion Jim made. >> Well, that's a that's an idea. >> Could we do the 21st? >> I don't know. I'd have to check I'd have to check what the availability of this room is. I know that select board went
now to second 2 second 2 second 2 second and fourth Tuesdays I'm pretty sure. So they're here the 21st. >> Well, you can use the upstairs room or whatever. That's >> whatever you got. >> Oh yeah, you're right. The second
>> you might need the school, you know. >> Yeah, >> you might need bigger room than this. >> How about the the the 20th? How about a Monday night? Is that conservation on Mondays? >> All right.
>> All right. Robert, you said you don't have your schedule on, right? >> I'm sorry. >> You don't have your home schedule. You don't >> No. And I just >> All right. So, >> I've been texting, but I'm not getting a response. >> You're You're available. You said like the 20th.
Yeah, but not the not the day after. >> Not so not the 21st. So, >> um, >> how about the 23rd? >> I'm sorry. The 21st. Let's Let's start over. I'm sorry. The 20th, 21st are good.
>> 21st is out because that's select board. >> Okay. Unless we had it. >> How about the 23rd? >> I I don't think that's too >> No. So, you're good. The 15th or the 20th?
>> Yes. >> Okay. Robert, would you just email me or text me in the morning? >> I will tonight. >> Yeah. Let me know with the 15th or the 20th. >> Yeah. >> When can you get it advertised in
newspaper? I can do that anytime. I've got to >> Okay. >> I've got to let them know the Friday Friday before the first publication. >> Okay. And when do they publish?
Which newspaper do you use? >> Gazette. >> When do they publish? >> They publish six days a week. >> Okay. So they can post Monday then. Okay. >> Paul, the select board has it listed. They're
they're July meeting is July 28th and July 14th. >> Oh, so the 2nd and 4th. Okay. All right. So 20 and 21. Add 21 to your list,
Robert. 15, 20 or 21. Okay. >> Unless this this is the my my government my town government. >> No, you're right. It's the second and fourth. I thought it was the uh first and third, but it's second and fourth. Okay. All right.
So, in order to It doesn't look like there's anything on the 20th on anyone's calendar. See, I would have to have it advertised on for the July 6th and 13th issues.
>> So, there's no meetings here between July 4 after July 14th and before 28. >> July 6th would only work if you're doing the 21st, 22nd, 23rd. It's 15 days in advance. >> I thought it was 14.
>> I believe it's 15. >> Seven and 14. Yes. So, no. >> I'm sorry. What's the advance notice of 15 days? >> I believe it's I believe it's 15 days >> for >> No, it's I always read it to me 7 days
in and 7 days prior and 14 days prior. >> Okay. >> That's what I've been doing right along. >> Not going to Yeah. Yeah, the very latest I'd have to do for either one of those. Well, the 15th
would be out then. Christ s I would have to have we go with the 15th. I'd have to have it published on the 29th. I would have to get to them uh this this Friday.
>> Does that have to be written up any special way other than the usual I do? usual >> just just quoting the chapter 275 and >> this is normal. >> Yeah. >> Why don't we Why don't we
>> Why don't they shoot for days? Okay. Let me shoot for the 21st then. So you're good on the 21st. >> Tuesday night. Yes. I'm going to I'm going to knock out the 15th. That's going to be too close. >> Another project in town.
>> They have another project. >> So, I'm going to key on the 21st, Robert, but the 20th is an is an option. But >> 21st is what you would like. >> That's what I'm shooting for is the 21st. All right, >> that's a no. I'll just tell you about
the other two and you can decide what you're doing. >> Um, last piece of business here. I waited for you to come. >> I know. I heard >> I'm sorry. >> Can we talk about something about what we just discussed about the 21st? Is
that right? >> Tenatively. Yeah. Right. So I I just wanted I had a question. So we're going to have a public hearing on the blue wave project for Pleasant Street without having a best bylaw.
>> We have to go with the existing bylaws which does not have any regulations. Has no regulations. What's that? >> It doesn't pertain to the best system. >> There's nothing in it that says that it's they're um regulated at all.
They're grandfathered in. >> So, it's just rubber stamp. >> So, we're screwed basically. We might as well not have a public errand, >> right? >> We have to we have to go through the process. >> I don't know what standard are we going to be using. Just >> you can't you can't do a standard that's
not been accepted at town meeting and the attorney general's office. We can only go by what we have now. >> And also, correct me if I'm wrong, isn't there state? Yeah. >> Well, there's this is solar electric generating
facility. Their battery energy storage is an accessory use to that and therefore you treat it as an accessory use and therefore it's been interpreted as being allowed. If a solar facility is permitted, battery storage is is permitted as
accessory to it. >> But that's in a home, right? US No, no. Any any solar generating facility has a battery energy storage system associated with it >> and therefore it's treated as necessary
to that solar system. >> That's because of the smart program here in Massachusetts. >> Any any solar generating electric facility of any size, okay, >> has a battery energy storage system.
they're essential for their operation and therefore they're treated as an accessory to the solar generating facility. I guess my question is >> someone at uh last last time we
discussed when I when I was here there was a reference to a state regulations or or guidelines for >> systems the doer that's what we we base the
>> right but doesn't is that solely it's solely it's only teeth is just not teeth but it's it's guidance it's for what towns to consider to adopt rather than anything on the environmental >> perminating side of the state
there's no mechanism on the state end >> not that of no um but is this solder a special permit application or site plan review. >> Site plan review because it's
agriculture. >> Okay. So to the extent that it impacts the site plan then you may be able to incorporate design stand related environmental design standards
in your consideration as a as a condition of approval. M >> now this is where um expert peer review >> right
>> is paramount. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So you may end up wanting a peer review of not just the storm water but of the solar facility itself. >> The entire
>> Yeah. operation. >> Yes. one of those a peer review on that. >> Yes. >> Yeah. The board could require that. Yes. >> Does that happen before or after the >> during during the hearing?
>> During the whole the whole process, >> the applicant's on the hook for any development that has site plan review or special permit. The board by right can ask the developer
to front an independent peer review. any >> of the boards like >> well you're not familiar with it but there must be certain companies that do that too. >> Yeah, I'm sure there are. I I can go online tomorrow and email uh other planners and say
>> who have you used for solar energy peer review >> particularly best >> that would that would help >> especially with their accessory bests. Richard, I have a question. Um, previous meeting when you were here, I
asked you I said we don't have a bylaw for wind turbine generation that somebody can do and those are allowed and those are could be a nuisance and you said just because we don't have a bylaw if we don't have a bylaw it's not allowed. Is that correct? >> Unless unless otherwise exempt from state by state law.
>> Okay. Because then I was talking about this best thing. We don't have a bylaw for the battery storage, >> but the attorney general has interpreted that it's an accessory use. >> Okay. So, it's an accessory use. It
>> supersedes. >> Yeah. And additionally, they have interpreted the um chapter 48 section 6 exemption for solar as including battery energy storage. So, subject to reasonable regulation.
All right. I was just curious. >> You don't have a bon uh data storage centers either. >> I know wind turbine. I mean, there's some big turbines out there. That could be crazy and it could be a big thing. So,
>> the purpose of the planning boards, >> if you have no guidelines going forward on that type of a project, >> we we have the guidelines. you're agreeing and allowing. >> We only have the guidelines that are printed in black and white that we have in front of us currently. That's all we
can go by. >> It currently doesn't address. >> It's if I wanted a nuclear power plan out there, you don't have bylaws for that, do you? >> We we could we could shoot down any project that comes before us and then it's subject to appeal and being sued by
the applicant. You know, that's that's always a possibility, too. So we let everything just >> but we can't we can't make up things. >> We're jeopardizing. >> If there's if there's if there's criteria before us we and the applicant
meets it and we say no >> then they go to court and say we met everything here and they still uh shot it down. So you it's subject to you know a court >> and the court's very favorable to to the applicants when
>> right and the the town has no money to go >> it doesn't matter how much money the town has >> the town could have more money than all the western mass towns it's not going to do you any good >> you know the town the town certainly could uh you know
could be part of the soup but say for instance it went the other way neighbors could get together and say we appeal it and then you have to uh >> right do you know that after the planning board makes their final decision there's a 21 day I think it's
21 >> day 20 >> appeal 20-day appeal period >> that neighbor anybody can file an appeal against the the project >> just letting you know that >> if you don't agree with the board whatever the board decides but if you don't agree or anybody can within that
20-day appeal period once that expires Then the door closes. >> We attended the last planning board meeting when we were the lawyer was here representing the cell tower people. And looking back on that and as I heard him say a number of times,
you don't have to say yes, but you can't say no. >> Say no. >> Is that what and I know you you're hurt and you said you don't listen to that, but you know what? People do listen to that. >> And it's so like what are we doing here? Well, I think that his his comment there
was reference to federal >> all right >> federal regulations. >> There's a federal preeemption of >> but it applies to what it's different than us. It's different than us. >> The state. So if you shut it down and they decide they're going to go to the
state, the state goes, "No, you're doing you're doing it. Put it in. This is what we're up against." The court system is very fair to applicants when it violates their rights.
>> And being I I will tell you professionally, I've been on on applicants side where it went to court. All you're prolonging is time and
public dollars that are ultimately going to get wasted. Well, that's why we think this should be tabled until we have long. This is the board. This is something that's going to affect a lot of people and it could affect thousand thousands of people
drinking water if they pollute it. >> The the board cannot simply table an application submits. The board has an obligation to hold a hearing and make decision on it. If they don't, then after 65 days, guess what? If I write, they get it.
>> Automatic. >> Automatic approval. >> I know. Yeah. Isn't that something? >> Automatic approval. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, when we have the public hearing for this and everybody's here and we're all having the public hearing, do you make a
decision that night? >> No. >> It's going to take several meetings because of all the peer reviews and all the expert opinions that have to be given. And um who knows how long who who knows how long it it it'll go on. It could go on for 2 months.
>> Well, we could ask for an extension, can we not? >> Yeah, I've I've had special permit applications take 6 to 12 n months for hearings where the applicant agreed to a continuation.
the the deadline for a decision can be extended based upon mutual agreement between the applicant and the planning board, >> but their grandfather to the old right that it's subject to the regul to bylaws
laws in effect at the time they apply. >> I thought the new rule was one year, not 65 days. the the town has six one year to act on it from the time of application which evidently was 79. So
>> 69 >> Oh yeah June 9th. So in my mind you got till June 9th of next year to >> No. >> Oh go by what the zoning bylaw says. >> Oh your zoning bylaw says >> 65 days. >> The new state thing one year.
>> You have about 65 days to render the decision. start till July 1st notice they got their application in before then. >> Okay, I've got to get on with another agenda item here. >> I got one one one more thing on this.
Can >> can we access what was what was put in for an application for documents from for this thing coming out? >> There's there's going to be in fact I think I left one there. There's going to be a there's a two binders of uh
material with the conservation was 256 pages. I had to go to the print shop and spend $400 to get >> it's it's online electronically. >> I mean seriously, >> I'll send you the link uh electronically, but these uh two binders will be in the clerk's office as well.
Hard copy. >> Is there any chance you can have the applicant submit a digital copy that you could pass out? >> All said it's online. Yeah. >> Oh, it's online. You have it. >> She sent it. Yeah. >> Okay. >> It's a big It's It's a huge
>> You put on the planning board website. >> I took and put it somewhere. Oh, in my town government. I think this part of the I'll I'll check that. >> Can we see if it can be um >> It's a huge file,
>> right? So, >> most communities around us. This is where a full-time planner was originally. >> I'm going to send there's an active projects folder. >> Yeah, >> that it's on the town web page. >> We'll send it to Christine Fo. She put the best one on. >> Yeah, she did
>> before. >> I used to put all applications on planable page or South Hadley. So, in fact, I kept them on for years just because people want to go back and look at the history of them. I'll send her the link and then she can
post it. >> Can we can we look into that with the town web administrator, IT administrator to have a section that that has all the links to every single active project from DNRs to anything on the agenda to
keep it >> formal on the town on county road. >> That's not a big ask from from like the IT side. They only >> well they can do it but then I've got to remember to do it. >> I mean when the new planner comes comes on board.
>> Do we have one? >> They have it >> when they hire them. Okay. >> And it's recorded. That's as far as they went. That's coming. >> I've got to wrap this up. >> That's all I ran into. >> But uh I delayed doing it last meeting because uh Paul wasn't here. But
>> I have to have election of officers for the coming year. Who wants to be chair? >> Paul Demon. >> Second. >> Does anyone else want to be chair? >> I don't hear anybody's
demanding to be chair. I don't know. >> I >> All in favor? >> I like the way Mike fits. >> Vice chair is currently Paul. Nominations. >> I unless Mark wants it or you want it. I
don't want >> see this is your opportunity. Mark's not here. >> Take your take your >> make Mark the chair. >> Well, vice chair or >> I nominate Paul Fergal for vice chair. >> Second. All >> in favor? >> I I
>> uh secretary, I'm also the secretary to take >> that goes with the chair. >> The minutes. Does anybody want to take minutes? Anybody want to do that? >> Oh, thank you. Do we pass it off to Mark? >> Yeah, Mark. I >> No, I can't do that to him.
>> Well, he can always refuse it and then we can reassign it. >> And then um I just have to do uh PVPC is me right now. Is anybody interested in
uh being our PVPC rep? >> It's really simple. >> You know what that is, Robert? Piner Valley Planning Commission. >> I know what it is, but I don't know what it is. >> Save yourself for open space. >> But Stephen Johnson is like the uh
um he's also a >> select board of representative from the select. >> No, he's not the select board. >> No, but I'm saying he's a liazison to PVPC. I think he still is. I'll I'll check. But >> but I think that was as as a function of
the select board. Yeah, but if he's no longer a select board member, does he lose that seat? >> I don't know. I've got to check out. >> I think so. >> Um, open space is I think there's a vacancy there. Is anybody interested in being >> I was on it. Um, somebody else wants to
fill in. I'm good right now with this. >> Mark is on safety complex, I think. >> Or is he? No, >> you have you have >> Are you CPC or is he CPC? Now I think he's on CPC. Does he want to stay on
that? Because if he wanted to switch, I would switch with him. >> Well, whatever. >> Maybe I can ask him next time. >> Yeah, just talk to him and see what he wants. >> All right. Thanks for uh uh selecting me again. I really appreciate it.
>> Hey, I'm on the master plan. Don't get the master plan. >> You guys You guys got to step up. >> Well, you got the master plan, right? >> You got the master plan? Yeah, I'm on the master plan. Did you talk you'd say that, right? Cuz I I >> master plan.
>> Yes. >> Um I know we bring this up every year or every time there's a vote >> this this phantom alternate uh >> November. >> How do we engage
>> what do we need to do? I've got the information on that at home somewhere because I inquired about I'm trying to think what the stock board how do you how do they go about alternate members is that >> has that been approved for for you to have a member >> stock board has to approve that
>> well first do your bylaws allow for for a member >> so that will be collect bylaw to provide for alter member yes bylaws meaning general for >> uh we didn't zoning bylaw What benefit does
>> chapter 48 section 9 allows for >> what benefits the town >> uh towns to have an altern that's part of my problem with this >> I've got associate member something like that >> and associate >> for >> so we amended the zoning bylaw to make
that provision >> to mimic doesn't work >> but the only thing that person can vote on is special permits Yeah, that's right too. >> It It doesn't work for me, but whatever. >> Yeah, because you they can't vote on
they don't count towards quorum. >> They can't vote on site plan. They can't vote on subdivision an only vote on special permits. >> But you're talking about voting which is great. Yeah. I mean I'm I'm
these committ be >> Yeah. Uh and they engage in full discussion. Or we used to one benefits of having social member was that if a member >> resigned or whatever
>> they could be appointed for that >> they'd have you'd have some some experience on with the board that could then be appointed by the select board and planning board to fill the uninspired term or until the next election stuff like that. >> So we so that's a that's a article that
we should have. >> Yeah. Yeah. draft that up. Yeah. >> Where Port >> I didn't want to show the people these, but pass that down to Robert. >> Oh, the time.
>> There you go. >> All done. Are we going to make a motion to adjourn or did I miss that? >> Motion to adjourn. >> I'll make a motion. I don't think you missed it. >> Okay. >> Why did they give me so many? >> I'll make a motion. We adjourn. We're
done. I got to get Don't worry. >> Yeah, >> that's my bedtime. >> So, let let's second it. >> This is This is Well done. I'm not even looking at all the details in here.
>> Particularly Weston Samson. >> What is >> How many do we have? Do we all get one or you only have three books? >> I think each person gets two notebooks. >> Yep. >> All right. Can Can we make a motion to
uh Let me see. So, what's this? Two of them. Perfect. That makes my collection even better. I had those I had those maps out on my living room floor the other night because they were
so big and you had to piece them together to see the entire project. So I think the 21st is going to be a problem for us. I'm getting feedback from home now.
So >> we have two books. >> Yes. >> Yes. Okay. >> And there is going to be a test. >> Well, I'm scared about that.
>> Creating a uh cliffnotes version if anybody wants to pay me for it. >> Did I do we >> No, there's a motion and a second. He's I made a motion. >> I I >> All in favor? Hi.
>> Hi. So,