All right. Good evening. Welcome. This is the Town of Southwick's planning board meeting for Tuesday, July 14th. It is currently 7 o'clock p.m. We are meeting in person here at the Southwick town hall at 454 College Highway in Southwick. We are also open
for participation via Zoom. This meeting is being recorded. If you are also recording, that is fine. You just need to let us know. >> This is Cliff Clark with the Westfield News. I'm letting you know it. >> Thank you very much, Cliff. We'll do a quick roll call of those present at the
table. >> Alvin Allen, town planner, >> Jessica Thornton, planning board chair, >> Dave Spina, vice chair. >> Jason Gwald, member, >> member, >> and Randy Brown, member on Zoom.
>> Thank you. First on the agenda is the town planners report. Okay, for the town planners report, I have a few items. Uh, one being uh the state state of Massachusetts has um revamped their
chapter 4A um zoning uh bylaws um which will affect uh every city and town of Massachusetts. just some bullet points from what I have gathered and again I'll need some additional time to sort of go over the
information I did provide uh everyone here at the table with a a document that gives a uh let's say a summary of of the changes um again the bullet points that I have um the the changes in zoning uh of 4DA
would allow for uh use variances for uh residential uses Um it would also extend uh a lapse period for a variance. Uh it would also extend the time frame uh to resume abandoned non-conforming
uses from 2 years to four years but for residential uh uses only. It would also allow for electronic notices to certain parties for zoning amendments and in permit applications.
It also uh regards to zoning boards of appeals uh they would no longer be permitted to condition uh variance approvals. So again we can you know at a later date go over those particulars but uh again those are just sort of my uh bullet
points for what I gathered from from the changes. And uh we do have PVPC here who may be able to glean a little bit more as we go over our zoning ordinance uh rewrite. um and towards the tail end he may be able to give a little bit of his own insight.
All right. And for the second item, town planners report uh have Pioneer Valley uh trading company. They are looking to um uh operate a growing facility on Granville Road. So that will from what I
understand it it it will likely come to you guys at the next meeting August 11th. for my uh third item I have um little bit just just great uh town news. Um so I did have I
um was eating, you know, in the cafeteria. I was on my lunch break and I had a gentleman who actually uh approached me. He was ecstatic about the PBTA uh bus route here in Southwick. Um, for anyone
who may not know, um, anyone on online, this the town does have a PB PBTA Pioneer Valley Transit Authority bus stop. It's, uh, the G447 route, which does stop at Town Hall. It goes, um, from Southwick all the way to
Northampton, uh, via Westfield. So, I just wanted to throw that out there for anyone who uh, may not have heard. Um, but we do have that that route that does come through town and uh we have some folks who are who are uh at least
express uh their their happiness that it it it's in town. So >> provided that for you guys. That's it for uh town finance report. >> Next on the agenda is public comment. This is time for anyone to make a public
comment on something that is not listed elsewhere on the agenda for this evening. Anybody in person? Any online? Seeing hearing none, we will move on to the next item on the
agenda. This is a new public hearing for 34 and 36 Hudson Drive, otherwise known as WGI, Inc. I will read the notice of public hearing into the record. Notice is hereby given in accordance
with the provision of mass general laws chapter 48 section 11 and the town of Southwick bylaw that the planning board will hold a hybrid public hearing on Tuesday July 14th 2026 at 7:05 p.m. via Zoom and at the Southwick town hall 454
College Highway Southwick Mass on an application by WGI Inc. for a special permit, site plan approval, major development special permit, wellhead protection district special permit, earth excavation special permit, and storm water management permit for
property located at 34 and 36 Hudson Drive zoned industrial restricted. The property is shown on assessor's map 49, parcel 006, 007, and 008. The applicant proposes to construct a 68,000q foot building for
remanufacturing purposes, which will include associated utilities and site improvements in accordance with the code of Southwork zoning bylaws. Chapter 183 and chapter 185 sections 9, 9.1, 10, 19, 22, 30, and 33. Zoom meeting information
is listed. A copy of the application may be inspected by contacting Alvin Allen, town planner at his phone or email. Any person interested or wishing to be heard on the matter should appear at the time and manner designated Jessica Thoren chairperson Southwood Planning Board.
>> Mr. Chair, >> I mean the chair, >> Mr. Pler, >> how do we have an an email from the applicant? We did receive an email from uh uh the applicant's engineer Terry uh
Reynolds who has uh requested that this item be postponed until August 11th. Uh the reason being uh we have not as of yet received uh the peer review from our uh consultant uh time bond.
>> Good. Then with that, do I hear a motion to continue this public hearing until 7:05 p.m. on August 11th? >> Disposal second. >> We'll call vote. Jessica Thornton. I >> Dina I.
>> Jason Gwald. I >> Randy Brown. I >> Right. Thank you very much. Right. Moving on on the agenda. You'll go to discussion items. The first
is noble state crossing subdivision planning board review and revaluation of subdivision infrastructure security. >> Good evening, Jess. >> I'm good. >> What's been going on? >> Oh, just enjoying the weather. Just lovely, isn't it?
>> Yeah. >> Refreshing to do hot paving in. >> Yeah. >> Excellent. All right. >> Um, so since I last came in, we um got the test pits done and allied and
everything looked good on that. Um, I emailed that over to you guys, I think. Yes. And uh we have we have everything scheduled for this week. We're going to
be doing our pavement prep, milling and paving the pothole areas in the corner. And then we're going to be paving the top coat on Tuesday, Wednesday of next week. And oh, this is the I made a new schedule. So this reflects everything
that we have in the package. Thank you. >> Um, so that was I just updated everything on there um with, you know,
proper dates like week of 7:13, which is this week. Um, [clears throat] next week, top coat paving. And I put some orange marks out there already so you can if anybody drives out there, you can see how far we're going. But it's going
to be past house number 20 um driveway entrance. Um and right as it and on the high point of that last corner >> and that's the week of >> that's tomorrow next week, not tomorrow.
>> Um and uh and then we'll be doing uh we have a couple manhole pipe connections to do um that go up that hill. We'll be taking care of those between 7:27 97 and then we'll
um do the final section of paving uh up past the station point 3250 which is just past the left the house on the left hand side as you're at the top of the hill. And
then we're going to pave a temporary turnaround um you know, basically box out our construction area um for the crossing and then pave a turn around there with uh a curb to diffuse
the water from from going down there. And we'll be installing a pipe underneath uh [clears throat] I'm not sure the house number, but the house on the right that has a water problems. And we're just taking that on ourselves. We're
gonna I didn't put it on there, but I discussed it with Alvin and uh and John and Rich. >> And that's the homeowner that had the water kind of going underneath the driveway. >> Yeah. >> Right. That we >> that comes out of their their land and into our the roadway.
>> Okay. >> So to kind of just uh >> change the direction of that a little bit. >> Yep. and then just kind of bury the hatchet and not have any disruptions. We're going to take that on and so there's no conflict, >> right?
And uh uh and the um our engineer is working on the uh the revised design, the our structural engineer. Uh and that should be wrapped up in a couple weeks and um I'll have that back over to Terry Reynolds and he just needs to input it
into his drawing that he already has. So I as long as he can get to it, it shouldn't take him that long and then we can resubmit and to >> yeah which is what that option is what
they're looking for. >> Okay. >> After all their comments. >> All right. So, >> and see if you follow this question here. The planned turnaround and curbing that you are doing, is that in preparation
for the anticipated new plan that you're likely going to have to have for the crossing or is >> No, the So, the the new plan for the crossing, it's still the same layout. Okay. It's just we're shrinking the footprint at the bottom of the of the
crossing. So instead of it being, think of it like an ice cream cone, like 120 foot wide ice cream cone, it's only going to be a 60 foot wide ice cream cone. >> So the travel lane is still the same.
The sidewalk's still the same. The guardrail, all that stuff's the same. >> Your approach doesn't need to change. >> No, the approach doesn't need to change. I'm just putting that turnaround in because then there's no reason for anyone to go in anywhere.
>> Everyone knows when to where it where it is. >> Yeah. Yep. >> Anything else? >> I just had a question. So, I sent the um the title report to the state um and they came back essentially questioning um who is the signator for the Noble
State Crossing Homeowners Association. >> That's myself. >> Okay, perfect. >> Yep. board members. >> Good. All >> good. >> Mr. Brown online. >> Yeah, I'm also. Thank you.
>> Uh Mr. Schultz, I see that you're online this evening. Did you have a comment? >> Yeah, I just wanted to see with um Mr. Allen, how did we do with hitting the requirements before the first day of summer that we talked about in your office? Did we meet all those
requirements? >> Um, so again, uh, DPW, they've been the one who ones who have been monitoring progress. Um, whatever's been ongoing on on site. I know there was some some issues with um,
tree debris. Um, I I don't know if it uh if it was in a conservation area. I'm not sure where exactly the the tree debris was located, but I I know that you have those concerns whether that or not that's been resolved. I'm not sure.
>> So So stuff that was supposed to be done by the first day of summer wasn't completed. >> Um so I I guess you you can call that out. I'm asking you you have a checklist in your office of stuff that's supposed to
be done by the first day of summer >> and I'm asking if it was completed. >> Yes, it was completed. >> Mr. Allen, I'll refer to you on that. So, I don't have the list in front of me at this moment, but um again, I know
that there were concerns um that were raised and um >> I'd have to get that. >> So, the second question is the area that was supposed to be cleaned up, the the material was moved over to the crossing,
basically the cut off. So all the the wood, the tarps, all the stuff for the sidewalks was moved over there and then debris was put in the back. But there's still a huge mound of stumps, rock and dirt. Is that what we were expecting to be cleaned up or is that going to stay
and we're considering that natural? >> So again, and again, I know there there were some complaints in regards to equipment that were on site. Uh and again speaking with DPW, uh they stated that um essentially
the equipment that was on site was you know the the best location of I guess where uh Mr. Mr. Salt Marsh could I guess uh keep the the the equipment. So, I know there's a complaint again a complaint in regards to where they were located. Um,
to their they what they attested to is that essentially there was no other place that he could essentially put the uh the equipment other than where where where it was located. >> Okay. I I didn't make the complaint about equipment. I'm asking about the
area that was supposed to be cleaned up that I know I I say this often, but on a couple meetings probably months ago and I haven't been on one since. It was stated it's going to be back to the way it was. It's going to be beautiful. And I don't know, has anyone been on the street
>> in the last couple of weeks? >> I'm sorry. Are you >> Mr. Schultz? So the the stumps and stuff that you're talking about are from whoever built the house on I believe that's lot uh on the right hand side that is a double lot that was
done by Harley that is those are those tree stumps and whoever built that house and stuff that is that stuff that you're I believe you're talking about. So my question for the town, not for Mr. Salt Marsh,
>> is that staying I don't care who did it. If I bought a house and there was something that had to be fixed, I'm responsible for it. This mound of stumps, dirt, and stone is not natural. It is overgrown. I'm asking if that is staying per the
town. And and that's my only question I have. I want to know if that's staying. And then is the area cleaned up to what you guys expected it to be cleaned up to be with with logs and stuff just pushed back into the woods. I'll check with our TPW at our next uh
administrative meeting. Uh next, uh we have a meeting next week. >> And I did drive through before our last meeting where I addressed what I thought were some deficiencies in areas of the road that had already been paved and we discussed that in detail.
if it's the area that I'm thinking of. I didn't see a visual problem with the large logs that were pushed back up towards the tree line. >> No, you're you're talking over by the solar field. I'm not uh you're talking
about I'm talking where the where the street starts to turn >> and it's the conservation area that was supposed to be cleaned up >> first. That's what I'm speaking to. That's not conservation area and I own that property. So, >> okay. So, the stumps and everything are
going to stay. The big mound of stumps and rock and dirt are going to stay. >> How it is right now is how it's going to stay. >> Are we allowed to talk to one another here? I just I just want to be very clear because I'll address him if I can, but I thought last time I was told I couldn't and you guys told me not to specifically, but if we're allowed to
have conversations, that would be fantastic. >> Hey, listen. If you have a pen, my phone number is 203892022. Give me a call. I'll set appointment. I'll meet you out there and we can discuss it in person. >> I have no reason to meet with you, man.
You're not doing the job that should be done four years ago. So, I'm good. I'm asking the town. >> I've been asking the town, >> Mr. Schultz. >> Yeah. The town is trying to work with you and the developer, but each time you come
in, you have some questions about things and you reference them in such a way that we are not prepared to answer your questions at the time that you're asking them because some of us aren't even sure exactly what you're talking about. So, what I would recommend is meeting
together with Mr. Allen and the other members of the DPW staff that have been monitoring this project along with Mr. salt marsh so that you all can come to an understanding of what the timeline is and have a more um productive dialogue.
Uh >> and also if you want us to meet you on site, we we can come on site. >> Well, it's Mr. Mr. Allen, I've been in your office plenty of times. I think at this point we probably should meet on site because it seems as if we keep going the back and forth and everyone says they don't know what I'm talking about, but I know you do. So that's
fine. you let me know when you guys want to come on to the street and we can absolutely look at what everyone said is going to be beautiful and back to normal. >> Okay. >> We we look forward to you informing us about what we know at that time and we'll set that up. >> See, I can understand why you just why
you why you talked like that. I I don't understand what I did that just irritated you like that, but I'm talking about the kind the area you talked about. >> Mr. This is my meeting and I I I don't feel like I'm irritated, but we are going to move on to the next point of our agenda. Thank you for your input and
comments and we look forward to meeting you on site at another time. Thank you. >> Perfect. I'll look forward to the email. >> All right. >> Okay. Can you shoot me an email um whenever you have a chance and then uh we'll set up a a time and a date.
>> Sounds good. I'll have people with us. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> people. All right. >> Again, did I do something to offend you by that comment? >> Again, it is my meeting, [clears throat] Mr. Schultz. I invite you to have a wonderful evening. Thank you. We are moving on.
>> Mr. Salt Marsh. >> Yeah. >> I assume that you will meet on schedule with Mr. Allen and the DPW director >> and Mr. Goddard >> for your schedule. And we look forward to maybe meeting with Mr. Schultz.
>> Yeah. just show throw me some dates and then see what I can >> talk. >> Okay. Sorry. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Yep. >> Thank you very much. >> You as well. >> Next on our agenda is discussion item for the Pioneer Valley Planning
Commission zoning modernization project. >> Why don't you come on up? Not a good plan. >> We do. Before we officially begin, why don't you introduce yourself for everybody at
the table and everybody? >> Hello everyone. Evan Mastriani, senior planner, Pioner Valley Planning Commission. Um, and yeah, happy to be with you folks today and meet you folks. So nice to see everyone. I'm used to just being Jessica and Alvin. It's nice
to see the full board here. Well, I I will interject in that and say that it's not just usually just us um >> up the planning board, I should say. >> Um but let me just before we go into it, let me thank you for being a stalwart
PVPC uh presence throughout the process. [laughter] Even if your assistants have come and gone throughout the process, you have been steady there with us, of course. Um I want to officially give my thanks to Mr. Allan, Nicole Parker, the CEO, John
Gddard, the assistant TPW director, and Diane Gail, um, for coming to every meeting and reviewing this lengthy document over and over again and for volunteering their time to do
that. So, with that, why don't you start? >> All righty. You want to pull up the uh >> Did you mean to do that? Take that on the screen. I know the beauty of
technology, right? writing. There we go. Thanks. Thank you. All right. I just have a brief um presentation just to get us all started and kind of familiarized with the process that's kind of been taken place
over the past well at least from what I've been a part of for the past several months. Um but I know that this has been a project that's been um in the works for a while um in terms of the zoning bylaw update work. Um so Alvin I was going to present that in a second. There
it is. Um yes. So as was mentioned um we began this is the the zoning bioptic project. This began really like I said with with me it began about December um probably Januaryish is when I was uh formally brought out of this project. Um it
involved a variety of stakeholders um from the town. Um we had like N uh like chairperson Jessica mentioned um we had members from the select board um Nicole Parker town admin Naen Signon um we also had representatives from DPW as well as
the planning board obviously um participating um and so we had a variety of stakeholders participating in this process along with myself and uh my colleagues from PVPC um the project itself if you want to go to the next slide Alvin um it's going to be just a a little bit
introduction uction to um what we've done which is you know just introducing the project what the project is the timeline that we've had for kind of the body of work that's been involved with it um and then as well just to have room for discussion on kind of next steps from there um so if you want to go to
next steps please Alan >> so like you mentioned the primary goal was to really update the town's comprehensive um do a comprehensive and really uh top tobottom reformatting and restructuring ing of the zoning bylaw. So, with regards to um that it's
primarily been centered on really updating the current structures of the bylaw um in their current form, it's not um no way has been changed in terms of content. What this has been is really just focusing on making sure the readability, the user friendliness, if
you will, of the bylaw itself um is going to be improved in a way that makes developers and folks that are going to be engaging with zoning bylaw, it makes it a lot more palatable for people. So that way, you know, instead of it being where if I'm a developer or say I'm a,
you know, just an average um person coming into the zoning by trying to find out what to do in my property, um the idea is to make it so that it's as quick as possible and as transparent as possible and what they need to do, what the steps are they need to follow in terms of permitting um and clearances of that sort to get that development pushed
through. Um so that way you know the developers and the individuals but also obviously the board members like yourselves can also function more efficiently and effectively to enforce um those bylaws as well. So if you want to go to the next slide on that one Alvin.
So like we mentioned um the scope of work for it obviously is something that we didn't want to make in a vacuum. Um this was a process like we mentioned before that had been comprised of both an update committee or working group. um for that zoning bylaw update work where
we would have monthly meetings to go over various edits, revisions, drafts that we'd create for the zoning bylaw itself. Um as well as just going over any types of questions, concerns folks had um with regards to our current work uh that we were doing on the project. Um
and another big piece of that was public engagement. Um like I just mentioned, we didn't want to make this in a vacuum. wanted to make sure that if we could try to at least expand the umbrella to make it inviting for as many people as possible to participate in that process. Um so we were able to mainly do this
through a communitywide survey that was published um through a variety of means um both in per in doing digital and also physical copies. So, we passed out um flyers that had QR codes for folks to access on their phones if they wanted to. Um and as well as printing out the
physical like word versions of the survey um for people to participate in as well that they could then hand in to the town planners office to then um have us upload those into the survey itself, the database there. Um they were passed out a variety of locations um that were public they were frequented by the
public. So, the post office, um, various public offices and town offices here. Um, we also had it, um, passed out into the Southwick, what's the news, what's the magazine's name again? >> Southwoods. >> Southwoods. Yeah, >> Southwoods. Thank you. Um, the
Southwoods magazine as well. Um, and also we engage with the school department as well to have those um, fly various flyers passed out um, in their newsletters as well as the mailboxes for the faculty and staff. um as well as sending email blasts to the students and parents um as well with those flyer
materials in there as well for them to participate in. Um so the survey I thought you know we like I said it was a main way for us to really expand the umbrella. really helped us I think gather a lot of really valuable input not just for this project um with regards to you know the current work
we're doing to update the content here and the current content of this form but also I think looking ahead as well as incorporating some questions that ask more broad-based long-term um options for things of nature of zoning reform maybe asking folks what made sense in
terms of what areas of town maybe wanted to see some updates to their current zoning um with regards to maybe having a mix zone in certain areas or there were questions also that asked about would you want us to expand or even add more types of usages um to certain zoned
areas of town as well. So the idea was to really make it a broad-based attempt to not just think short-term but also long-term um for that survey to not only like I said have the planning board used as something for this project but also for any future work um that you folks
might want to consider um down the road. So with that, if you wouldn't mind, Alvin, thank [clears throat] you so much. So like we mentioned before, this is a project that was mainly made up of us, the Pirate Valley Planning Commission. So myself as well as my colleague Ken Kia. Um and then we also obviously
worked with the town. So the zoning bylaw update committee um that like I said comprised of various members of the town stakeholders. So if you want to move on next slide, Alvin, please. All right. So like we me like we were mentioning too is that this really did
not happen in a vacuum. Again I think that not only in regards to how we conducted the current project but also how we got to the project. I think that as we had talked about as you folks had talked about in your many plans that have come out in the in the in the previous years from South Lake, namely
the master plan. Obviously, um this was definitely, I think, something that was very clear, um in the town's master plan that needed to happen, um and especially with regards to setting the groundwork for future stages. I think that was something that at least when I was talking with um folks here from the town
too, um as well as folks in the community, this was something that was used as the idea would be to really use this as a base layer for folks as ter to be able to build on for future amendments. So in essence, you'd have this is the foundation and then future amendments would then be able to kind of
in theory cohesively then go along with this new structure rather than you know doing the inverse of that um from a structure point of view. And so I think that from this standpoint, you know, like I said, this is really in many ways, although this is definitely a very comprehensive project, um, the way that
we've, I think, thought about this has been really a phase one of what'll be, you know, most likely, you know, incorporating other considerations that the board might want to consider with regards to the zoning bylaw as a whole. So, if you wouldn't mind, Alvin, let me go to the next slide, please. And then, like you mentioned, we have
the um timeline that we started with. So, like you mentioned, this started about, you know, fall, late win, late winter, early winter of this previous year. Um, and all the way up to pretty much where we are now in terms of draft, spending most of the winter and spring
just drafting and coming up with the the version you're seeing now. Um, as well as, you know, in alongside having engagement and coordination with the town on, you know, any qu any questions, recommendations, or edits they might wanted to see, um, you know, in terms of this current version you see before you.
Um and now leading us ultimately to kind of where we are now. Um which is going to lead me into kind of my next topic which is really just the um you know now brings us to the consideration before you folks and discussion because you know obviously we made this as you know
collection with a collection of individuals and representatives from the town. But you know ultimately the folks that are going to push this through and help us I think you know obviously be the chief people in charge of this will be obviously the planning board. So, I think that's been really the consensus
from our zoning bylaw update committee has been, you know, that we wanted to give as much input as the committee could, but then ultimately, um, you know, obviously we want to then be able to transition from that to then working with you folks obviously to really
fine-tune this as best we can if we need to fine-tune it. Um and then ultimately if we if we can try to consider this and maybe just get this ready for um you know a potential future town meeting for adoption. Um so I think if I think there's one more slide Alvin but it
might be just a thank you. Perfect. So, in terms of what those would be for next steps, um it's really I think identifying, you know, not just this um provision, but I think what we're also going to be looking for and we're we just we had conversations over the past
month at least with I know with Alvin we've had I've had some conversation with is of you know this but any other considerations um we might have we might want to have I know that you folks have a town meeting coming up. I want to say it's October, I believe, for a special town meeting. Or has that not been scheduled? >> Scheduled.
>> So, whenever the earliest town meeting would be for that. Um, I think that that's something that I at least wanted to talk with you folks about. Um, I know that it's a heavy document. So, there's been a lot of different, you know, it's very comprehensive. And I think that the
the main, I think, challenge that we've had, not just with this community, but with other communities. I think, you know, obviously right now it's just how to deliver it and really message it correctly to folks. Um because I know that in in other towns at least that when you get to town meeting, um you
know, we've heard that the worst thing you want to do is overload people and try to overwhelm people sometimes. You don't want to confuse people. Um and so that's definitely I think what I would love to I obviously want to avoid um with that. And so if there's a way that obviously and you folks know the
dynamics of that I think better than than me right now. So it's something I definitely want to discuss with you folks. I think um you know I also like I mentioned um to the committee and I want to also mention to you is we have this document but and that's just really what it is is a copy and paste like I
mentioned. So nothing's changing contentwise. But then what you'll also see, I believe in your packets, is a matrix that we created that lists the more long-term strategies and things that maybe wouldn't be so much a copy
and paste, but would rather in some cases we're introducing new language. And in other cases, it's deleting definitions or condensing definition sections that would benefit, but really don't make sense um for having as two
separate areas. Um you'll see that there's also some ideas of some maybe potential new language that you might could include for certain areas like for recommended amendments and severability sections that maybe weren't in there previously. Um, so it really kind of runs the gamut from, you know, what
could be considered grammatical slash, you know, not only slash, you know, I would say structural changes, nothing. It it really was again from that all the way to probably, you know, more substantive changes that would actually, you know, be introducing, you know, more
impactful language into the bylaw. Um, so that was kind of the goal that we wanted to have too is that, you know, we have obviously this document, but then on the other hand, we wanted to we wanted to also be able to give you folks this idea of maybe some potential amendments that maybe make sense for
inclusion here, but maybe don't make sense for it. So, we at least wanted to have this separate though as aside from this just for the purposes of your folks's kind of consideration. You know, also your idea to just see kind of what we find included for recommendations rather than having it just be in like a
comment section throwing out throughout the bylaw for you to search for. You know, we wanted to make this kind of a little bit easier for you folks to kind of get in terms of what we had ideas for in terms of recommendations. Um, so, you know, with that being said, um, you know, we really just wanted to
open up the floor, I think, to, you know, discussion with you folks on, you know, that strategizing piece that I mentioned before. And also, like I said, if you have any questions on anything that you know, we've talked about or that I've talked about right now, I'm kind of open I'm very much open right
now to any and all. >> So, this document is just a copy and paste um updated for readability, but no contextual changes. >> Yeah, pretty changes. >> Yeah, these are so these would be the changes that would be new language that would be new language that is not
already in the bylaw pretty much. Um I would say you know in from the restructuring point of view too what it does change is that even though it doesn't change the content what it does change is where things are located in the bylaw mostly. Um, and so I know that what we had kind of been going back and
forth with as well is I think the main kind of messaging that we are we're still I think trying to figure out and you know we have an idea for maybe what would work but I think that one of the thoughts we had was just to be able to show kind of that change is to an idea
we had was to maybe in this for delivery is to include something where for this table of contents you would have something of you here section one purpose and authority for example but then it would be you'd have a note or something something like that next to it
saying for this was formerly section such and such in the original bylaw with and then preface it with no content has changed in this section. So that's just an initial thought that we were we've been having in terms of how you maybe could message that um or present that to
folks at a town meeting. um you know like I said that way you're not kind of like I mentioned you know confusing people and making people like wonder you know if this is really you know a content change or not. Um so I think that's like I said it's it's all about and I like I said you folks know I think
the town better than you know definitely me. So you know I definitely want to hash it out with you folks right now and use this time to really think about what you might what your thoughts would be on the best way to deliver this or what makes sense. And I think like I mentioned,
you know, we have other things that could be considered. Um, but it's all about, you know, like I said, what would work best for the town in terms of a town meeting for that. >> One thing that you did add is a use table. So, I don't know if you want to expand upon that.
>> Oh, yeah. Thank you, Alvin. Yeah. So the use table is probably one of the considerations that is something that you know obviously has not previously been in the South bylaws but is something that I think is another kind of
method in which you know we're not changing anything in terms of the use regulations. The use regulations are are the same use regulations that apply to what is currently in the bylaws. Um but again it's really consolidating that into a cohesive table of use. Um that like I mentioned at the top of my
presentation really brings the zoning bylaws into you know I would say the 21st century. Um for in terms of how you know most communities have laid out their bylaws. Um you know especially with the ease of use that I mentioned to you folks before. Um, you know, I think one of the one of the things that I
think most communities have realized is that especially for use regulations, um, to be able to jump to something very quickly and just dock to, you know, say amusement parks or, you know, racetracks for example, where can I build here? Um,
I think that makes a world of difference versus having to go in page by page and then look into that section then read it through and then figure out what to go where to go from there. Um, so that's been I think from a structural point of view, you know, from in terms of what's in this version, I'd say that's probably
the most substantive um, you know, jump I would say change for that um, in essence because obviously it wasn't there before. Um, but I think again it's it's something that was in that same vein of, you know, we're not ch we're not changing the actual language of what's being permitted and not prohibited or not
permitted in Southwick. Um but it's rather just consolidating that into a more cohesive um section. Exactly. >> So yeah, with the use table, it'll defin um down the board all the uses and then you know across uh you'll have all the
different zones and yet basically yay or nay with you know what what you can and can't do in a particular zone. >> That's fantastic. Whereas right now it's, you know, >> you're lucky if you find the use somewhere in a particular zone and then you can trace back. Well, if it's
allowed in this zone, it might also be allowed in the zone before then. Well, if it's allowed here, it might be allowed. >> Um, really, it's very difficult to follow. Mhm. >> Um, so I'll just say that I think Evan kind of summarized it really well that
as we were going through the process and moving things around um or as they were moving things around and doing the copy paste and then coming to the group um what became important to us was indeed having a document that could go to town
meeting that would pass with flying colors as there's no changes is to who the bylaws affect, how they are implemented, um, etc. That we could have a clean vote up and down. There's nothing being
changed here. Um, the group reviewed it as it came through. You will also will obviously have the time to read through it and make sure nothing comes across as, hey, that seems strange. Where did that come from? And I'm sure there's a copy of a document that I have at home
because I have many copies of this. um where the change happened, at what point in time did we move that and where did it come from? Oh, it came from over there. You didn't even know our bylaw said that because it was hidden. Um, but that was really important to me that I
could because likely it will be me who stands at a town meeting and says, you know, this is this is what the planning board has done along with PGPC. And I and our planning board can attest to you that this does not change anything that this is simply to make it more um easily
accessible for us, for business people, for lay people to be able to um review our bylaws. And then the second part of that as we were going through and as these gentlemen were going through and making these copy and paste were finding these things where we have duplicate
definitions or something as simple as um an authority and separability laws at the beginning of it. Um, and I think >> part of what our decision making will have to be between now and then when we officially open up a public hearing on
this matter and make our decisions and recommendations to town meeting is whether um any changes that we try to introduce at that time, whether we do it in one document because we can say, you know what, we may have added some
language here, but we as a board do not um think it's going to change anything substantively. um versus something like the some of the last um recommendations here include you know like we have a lot of different definitions of family. Well, that could
be an easy answer, right? Let's just go but it also could be a loaded question and depending on where the definition of family is located within our bylaw, it could affect how a particular bylaw is applied, right? And so um I think where
we have to make the decision is something as simple as you know I think um an authority and severability statements are easy enough to add right whereas if we start amending definitions or changing definitions at what point in
time does that start affecting how a bylaw is applied and who it applies to and then it and then the conversation for me becomes this is no longer a public hearing about updating our general bylaw and total and versus
hey we are really changing residential rules here because we're changing the definition of like so I >> that's where my brain has been and where I've always kind of tilt the gentleman at PBC hey because that sounds to me like that could change somebody's
interpretation of it then let's hold off so >> I think between this meeting and next if we all can go through maybe some of these recommendations or changes
um and whether we would feel comfortable including them in a blanket um change or if we would want to do, you know, perhaps two um warrant articles, one that simply does the full just basic
copy and paste versus one that then adds the authoritability and um excuse me for the authority and severability statements. >> Any other changes that we can agree are, you know, doable and we should do to make sure that our bylaw meets current
legal standards, right? Um versus, oh, this changes things. Like, I mean, there were some recommendations where it was like >> it references like a state guideline or guide book or something like that that that no longer exists. It's now something else. called the storm water
instead of this water guideline. So things like that where it's like okay I think we could >> we could do that and I could stand up at a special and say hey these are some of the changes and we and your planning board have agreed and we've looked out for your interest and say that this is
doesn't actually change anything that needs further explanation other than a name change or >> a simple move. >> Cool. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Were there specific ones in here that maybe we you
you should call out to us to look at as the ones that maybe the lowest hanging fruit or >> I would say that in terms of you know what what we would probably consider lowhanging fruit. I mean it probably would be things that are you know directly citing MGL um for example or
just clarifying language. Um like you mentioned the amendment severability section. would probably be one that I would, you know, consider a lowhanging fruit because it's really it's just legal. It's just adding some legal ease um in essence to just, you know, just resay and be able just to be able to fall back on for the town's language um
in terms of zoning bylaws for, you know, just things that um you know, and again, it's those sections don't change the bylaw. If anything, it's just again reinforcing the authority and the purpose of the bylaw itself. So that would be one that I would probably highlight as being, you know, one that's not really a quick or probably it is a
quick probably insertion versus some of the other um languages here. Like I would say a more considerable one would maybe be the enforcement piece here. Um we do mention that you know under um you know MGL chapter 40 there are um typical
best practices and maybe some examples in terms of how you could maybe overhaul that section of the bylaw um in terms of things like a tiered warning system for example um for those areas. Um and that would be a substantial change because currently I believe there's really not
nothing really like this in the current iteration of the bylaws. Um so that might be something that's more of a discussion obviously amongst that because they have to discuss I imagine you know what would be you know would we want to this kind of system would we want to make it a different type of way in terms of how we do enforcement here
um for zoning related matters. Um so that could be one that you know maybe more of a substantial one. Um, I would say also like Jessica was mentioning too, um, you know, a substantial one that could be, um, maybe more of a, um,
well, the family definition is probably the thing that jumps out to me as like uh, substantial because I mean really in terms of state guidance, the best practice really is not to have family defined. Um, I would point especially to like things like that
recently have come out with you folks like the ADU bylaw as being an example of that where family really isn't something that the state has said is is best practice for communities to really spell out in terms of what that means. Um, and I would say from just looking at federal cases too, that's a practice as
well that's being reinforced in the federal level that they really don't want to see the the term family really heavily enforced um for define for definition. So that would be something that, you know, I guess in theory could be a simple fix, but again, might be something that you might want to have further discussion on. It might not be
as simple as just, yep, throw it in there and then, you know, it'll be a quick kind >> like the way you just outlined it. It makes it sound like the easy thing would be to just erase whatever family definitions we have. >> Yeah. If you folks want to go that way, >> we go and go through and see that well
the family is part of the calculation of something within our you know apartment dwellings or something like like it's just like we could do it but then we need to be careful that we're not shooting ourselves in the foot. So >> yeah, it's it's like Yeah, exactly. It's kind of that it's kind of that weighing
of what would cause more more discussion than another I think was is the main takeaway. You know, I think like I said, the amendment severability clause that's really not going to, I would imagine, cause any kind of ruckus because again, you're not doing anything that's changing what the impact of the bylaw is
versus like um the chair was mentioning the definition of family. That would be something you probably have to you study more closely on what the impacts of that would be for the town as a whole in terms of development of housing units and in general development. Um, so I
mean I would think those were areas too. I think also um you know they're also one of the more substantive maybe things that we highlighted as well and we see this in a lot of other communities too. Um the definition of signs um I think
that there is something that you know in terms of the revisions the restrictions to do with signs what classifies as being a permanent versus prohibited sign. I think that we've I've seen a lot of these a lot of our communities that there's definitely been a constant theme
that the signed bylaws are always a point of contention. They're always a point of, you know, constant discussion on what is the right balance, what is not the right balance in terms of regulations for those. Um, and so I think that's another kind of area that we kind of delve into here in the
recommendations, but really it's only pertaining to the definition section that you have for signs. Um because currently um you have multiple definitions of signs that mean different things um but they're all they all have sign next to them but they mean
different things each definition. So I think that's an area where again you know in theory you should be able to just combine it under one roof just one giant sign definition but again you might want to have discussions on that and think about do we want to have one
definition do we want to have multiple different types of sign definitions maybe is another consideration to you know bring up. Um those are just probably the at least in my opinion what would be like the high probably topshelf ideas for when it comes to the recommendations though and again just
examples but you know we obviously have a more the full list here that we break down by you know not just the recommendations but also next to them the sections that we were you know they pertain to obviously. So they really I think try to connect the dots on you know where those areas are going to be located if you were to consider them. Um
as well as like I said if you have any I would say probably questions on that. I think what also is helpful is that we also just provide some example language for certain areas too to give folks an idea again for future consideration. >> Okay, just going back to ladder. Um so
you've recommended that we uh revise that particular section. Have you guys offered any sort of okay this is what you should do uh solutions? I mean, I think that I think that it's it's something, you know, like I like I mentioned, it's it's something that that
varies varies depending on what the town what the town would want because I think that we there's there's definitely I think some model language that could be drawn for things like if you wanted a singular definition for signs or if you wanted multiple types of definitions for signs.
I think that would probably be the biggest question um for the board would be, you know, what kind of structure would you want for to remedy that, you know, error with the signs or the confusion that could happen with the sign the current sign definition. Um, like I said, I think that from my
standpoint, you know, the my our recommendation would be that, you know, if you were going to want to have like areas of the definition of the signs that maybe wanted to be maybe broken up into their own terms, I think that would
make sense for uh definitely for that. Um, but I think there should be, especially to limit confusion, that if you're going to have sign as a definition, it really should just be one definition versus obviously having sign listed three times or two times and then meaning different things for each one. I
think that's probably the the most like glaring, you know, recommendation that I could make for for the board on that. um in terms of but in terms of you know obviously with the terms that are defined by the by the signs that's probably one you'd want to consider if you wanted to combine those definitions
or if you wanted to have those definitions even remain in the bylaw or would you want to strike those sections entirely. Um I think that's something that you know might be definitely worth some discussion consideration from the board. So
take a look then through the sign related definitions. There's a couple of pages. Um and you know so if there's ones that you feel like this is an easy combined
or you know and again something that [clears throat] we could do that you feel that we could have a discussion between our next meeting maybe the and the one after where you would feel comfortable making that change without
further discussion or further input or calling attention to the fact you know hey we're going to be significantly changing the sign bylaw if we do more than one or two deletions here. So, um that would be the other part of it is we don't want to go making changes as part
of the zoning modernization um public hearing that then doesn't address address the more substantive things that we would end up making changes to. So, um, unless you think we should go otherwise,
I think board members should take the next couple weeks to review what's in front of you. It's obviously it's not fun to read through it. But if you can kind of skim through and say, "Okay, this this makes sense to me when I read
through it this way." Um, or, "Hey, why is this here? What does this mean? I don't this isn't familiar to me. Go through the definitions and you know hey there are three definitions for out how sorry let's just say right what
does that mean? What are the intent intentions of this and could we make the argument that hey we we could just deal with one definition here that combines the words of these two and it doesn't change um how it affects the bolon in general. Um and then that way hopefully
because we're going to vote to refer this matter um to the select board so that we can open a public hearing on it. Um and therefore we would hopefully be able to complete that within a meeting or two so that >> if and when we a special town meeting is
called we will have had the time to discuss it, review it, get the public's input on it and feel comfortable that whatever product we do send to a town meeting we can all stand behind and feel comfortable about. >> I do have one more question.
>> Absolutely. Um, you said you reached out to the community after we had all those signs and the QR codes and whatever. >> Um, what was the feedback? >> I think the feedback and you know apologize. >> I have one. >> Oh, you do? Beautiful. Okay. Awesome.
So, I was going to say we had a we did I did send >> that used to create these or was that >> I I would definitely I would say that this was mainly pertaining to the bylaw. Thank you. Um, this was mainly pertaining to the bylaw itself. Um, this probably the survey report that I h that
Jessica has here, um, I think gives a really good breakdown for folks about kind of the options we have here and what we presented to folks. I think the goal of the survey was it was in a little bit of a different type of vein than the zoning bylaw project. I mean, I
would like I think I mentioned before to you folks, the zoning bylaw, this this actual effort was probably one part of what this survey is trying to really gather. So, like I, you know, it's probably, this would be something that's identifying, you know, those short-term priorities and has questions in there
that list, you know, maybe some more shorter term goals for folks to get feedback on, but it also, like I mentioned, lists some long-term priorities to think about. So, one of the areas that we had was, you know, if zoning were adjusted, what types of housing would you support in appropriate areas? And so what we did is we had
single we had a list of all the different types of housing that we could think of pretty much um next to here along with an other option and folks would go down and list do I strongly oppose do I oppose do I would I support this and then we could go from there to
solicit feedback on you know that type of you know housing development type topic especially and then another area that we did was types of businesses in terms of support in terms of appropriate areas town. This one kind of was asked
in the frame of what areas would you want to see these types of businesses in in terms of zoning? So, really looking at, I think, trying to get people's response to and feedback on, you know, not just the, you know, where would you want to see development continue, but
maybe if there's some new areas that maybe could benefit from some new types of zoning for development where what that town maybe doesn't otherwise have. because I think you know one of the things that we mentioned that we included here was something like a mixeduse development district um which I believe South really doesn't have in
terms of their current zoning. So I think that would be something that in terms of looking at um for additional responses you know we saw here there was a very substantial amount of folks I believe it was something of the tune of at least 70% of folks wanted some kind
of mixed use um you know activity taking place in town. Um so I think that really informed us for like I mentioned the long-term activities. Um I think I don't know if uh the chair or the player >> I think I think this uh this like feedback >> yeah this was definitely a f this was
like yeah it was definitely great it was a way of casting umbrella for us >> and getting feedback from the town I guess >> the part where I only got a little stuck was um how do we know that these what I guess what percentages of the town responded and how do we know that the people are from the town >> oh yeah >> respond we have that
>> well I think that's the thing it's like we did we did have a disclaimer for folks to look at that um We had, let's see here, we had about 63% of folks that were residents from the town. Um, we had about maybe 12% of folks that um were
employees that worked here but didn't live here. >> Okay. >> Um, likely those are folks from the school department, I would assume. U maybe some other areas just because like I said, we did do a lot of outreach at the school department. And I want to also mention that, you know, we had it was a definitely definitely skewed very heavily towards residents participating
in this. But one of the other things in terms of on an even more micro level that I thought was very cool to kind of see was that the vast majority of respondents were under 18 to the survey. So again, I think pointing to the school department as a resource for that was very helpful. And also I thought it
really gave a gave something of a perspective that maybe we haven't seen in a lot of surveys that I've done in the past when it comes to especially these types of topics where >> Yeah. I'm not I I don't I don't I'm trying to Yeah, I think that you you definitely wouldn't see that kind of
population participating if you didn't do some kind of outreach with the school department like like we were doing. Um, so I think that was very useful to really and I think very useful for the discussion of you know the the views and the types of things that were shared here is that it really I thought gave a sense that this was not just something
that was you know being suggested by the usual crowd in terms of who responds to the and participates these types of activities is I think really this really served as getting some kind of a newer type of audience to really give their attention to this type of topic and give
their feedback on it. >> Thank you. Yeah. >> And I know there might be, you know, there's sometimes a why are we listening to the under 18 crowd? Those are the people that we are planning for. you know, they're going to be,
you know, I remember once being under 18 [laughter] and the part of the same concerns that I had then are ones that follow me today and they're ones that for my own children I think about and I so I think that that really kind of um the
responses of what people would like to see like we know Southwick is a recreational community that has wide open spaces and recreation and but the next generation that is coming up is saying that we like what we have
here but we also need maybe some mixed use. >> Mhm. >> What we also need are some areas that you can have a little bit more denser housing. Maybe explore that some more. We would like to see more activity
based businesses available like um what was one of the answers like a teen center something like that you know like >> more recreation and combined you know what I mean so it it definitely gives us ideas and I think um I don't want to say
permission but >> yeah permission to think outside the box a little bit and say what >> the people who want from the future future. How do we get that future for them? >> That's the whole planning partless, I guess. Right.
>> And uh one of the other I would say questions too that I thought was very kind of going off of what um you know, the chair was mentioning is in terms of planning priorities um you know we oftentimes the planning priorities question it listed you know things like economic development opportunities,
infrastructure planning, um preservation, open space and farmland. It asked you to rank them in terms of like one to five, you know, one being the most important, five being the least important. And we had it was preservation with space and farmland was number two, but above that um in terms
of responses was for housing options and affordability as the number one planning priority. So, I think kind of going off of like I said, what Jessica was mentioning is that there definitely was, I think, a a strong um feedback and amount of folks that wanted to see um you know, at least some kind of and
would have an appetite for some kind of um mixed more of a mixed development um in Southwick in terms of a combination of like we said, not just open space and farmland preservation, but also maybe coinciding with, you know, having that, but also encouraging some new development um to come into the town as
Well, that seems to be the strong indication from these surveys. >> Cool. Very cool. >> Anything else? >> Board members, Mr. Brown online, you good? Do you have any questions? >> No, I'm good. There I assume you have a
document in front of you with those changes. Can That's how you can send that to me. >> Yes, definitely. And my apologies. I didn't get this till later in the afternoon, so I wasn't able to distribute. >> Oh, no worries. Thank you. >> Anything else, Mr.
>> No. So, I think >> Go ahead. >> want to uh I I did not have a chance to look at the presentation. So, I just want >> Ramsey, we are all Americans
>> and we will not judge our point presentation. We support. We do not judge. Um then before Evan goes, is there any questions or concerns from board members
about referring this matter to the select board so that we can begin to hold a public hearing? >> No. >> No. >> Um then I'm going to skip ahead on our agenda and ask for a motion to refer the request to hold a public hearing on the
chapter 185 zoning bylaw modernization project to the select board. Dave Spina is so moved. >> Chase Blald second. >> Roll call vote. Jessica Thornton. I >> Dave Spina. I >> Junwald. I >> have I. >> Randy Brown I. >> Thank you.
>> All right. So, can we ask that you'll be back next >> or we'll have >> If you really want me. Yeah, sure. [laughter] Of course. Of course. No, no, no, no. just um that way in case if the
public have any questions, I'm sure we could answer them. But >> yeah, of course, happy happy to be here. I say I tell people this all the time, this is one of my favorite boards. So, [laughter] >> thank you. >> And you can get that on the record. >> It's not [laughter]
your favorite board. One of your favorite chairs. >> That's right. There we go. >> Nobody's at me. >> Do you folks want to talk about 4A while I'm here? >> Oh, yeah. Um yeah, we can jump into that. >> All right, cool. Yeah. You want me do you wantanna you want do you guys have you want to start off with anything or do you want me to >> say something? Go ahead. What What are
your thoughts? I We just All right. >> Mr. Allen and I got this over the weekend. >> Yeah. >> An email from our town attorneys. >> Yeah. This kind of and this was this was this was kind of dropped I think for a lot of folks on the uh on the latter half of the week from what we've seen in
terms of when the budget was signed too. So, um, it was definitely, I think, a lot of things, a lot of language that many towns are looking through and trying to figure out how it impacts them. Um, you know, I should say, you know, a lot of a lot of it obviously was covered by Alvin his report, but I think, you know, one of the other, I'd
say, big things that we were at least highlighting for some communities in terms of what it impacts in 4A has to do with the non-conforming uh, pre-existing uses. um regarding the expansions there. Um I think that's something that's you know obviously I think going to be impactful for a lot of communities. Um I
think you know specifically when we talk about what's required now and or maybe what's not required because previously 4DA required um you know the special permit that you were special permit was required for any type of expansion into the pre-existing non-conforming
structure. Um now um the state has said that that can be a byite. So instead of going special permit um as long as it meets the dimensional requirements for a heightened setback um that expansion can now be as of right um for those matters.
So that >> for residential uses >> or or just >> so >> just residential uses >> in terms of in terms of the non-conforming it's for residential uses. >> Okay. And that would be something that again instead of it being special permit, it would be a buy right now as
long as it meets the dimensional requirements. So that's probably I'd say the biggest one of the bigger changes in terms of 4DA from respect of that in terms of zoning procedures. Um, one of the other things I think that and I I don't know if you mentioned this, I
think you did Alan mentioned the four the two to fouryear increase now. >> Yes, >> that was that was one. Um I think another thing and Alvin touched on I know too is the variance um procedures now have changed. Um one of the other things that they mentioned um as well is
that in terms of the findings for zoning boards of appeals to issue variances now and I know this is you know obviously variances are handled by the zoning board of appeals. So this is something that might ne it might not necessarily come across your desk in terms of things but you know obviously it's helpful to for folks to know um is that now the
state has changed the threshold for that variance requirement um and now versus before how you know there obviously was this high degree of you had to prove that the topography and geographic and soil um was very much that there was this there was this high bar in terms of
the ex the the types of um reasons you had to site for variance um in terms the arc of the property if there are special exemptions that need to be made for the property that really required it to be to have a variance for the zoning there. Um, now the state has changed that guidance for 48 and has included a new
language that says a variance shall be issued upon a specific finding that a strict enforcement of the ordinance or bylaw will result in practical difficulty and practical difficulty is not defined. >> Practical. So they have spelled that
out, but they have kind of left it pretty much at that and not and have not defined what practical difficulty is. >> Until case law is established, nobody's going to have the answer. >> So that is probably I would say like I
said the the biggest takeaways from the 4A um revisions here. I think that and you know Ken and I have had conversations about this too is that we have a strong hunch that the reason why the state is um you know revising these
and I think you folks probably see it too is that they're trying to really make this more of a housing related um you know push in terms of why they're changing this um in terms of making the I think processes um in their minds maybe more streamlined in terms of being
able to set up and develop new housing units. Um I think you know when we look at especially how they call out um for residential uses for that by right expansion for non-conforming new structures um I think it's definitely there's there definitely seems to be an indication that you know the reason
really that this is all happening is to really help the state um in their minds you know take on the uh the housing crisis that's going on around the state. So um you know that's kind of I think been the informing on why this is happening. Um but nevertheless like I
mentioned I think you know it is going to be something that is a a change um in the you know current um processes for how 4DA is now administered obviously um for those types of non-conforming
structures. >> It's a lot but it doesn't it's not as scary as I think it maybe >> could be. Yeah, >> you know, variance of, you know, >> I don't like the general, you know, >> language and practical practical to whom. Yeah.
>> Um, >> but I I do agree that if you are somebody who's ever been in front of a more stringent zoning board of appeals asking to be able to put your shed at 15 feet instead of 20 feet and the guy on
the zoning board of appeals's nest buddy is your neighbor who doesn't want your shed any closer. You know, it's it's like what's the practical solution here honestly? and and how do we make it so that um land that is already in use as residential land continues to be
>> usable as residential and if you know it bec the same house and the same footprint is currently giving housing to four people but could give housing to six people and it doesn't because of something small like a zoning variance
then >> that I think so we can look at it with open eyes and not be so scared of it, I guess. But >> we just updated our pre-existing
non-conforming. So, it should bump the number from three to four. [laughter] >> All right. Is there any questions? Anything else? Mr. Master, >> thank you for Yeah. Anytime, folks.
>> Thank you. >> Anything else? You have feel free to reach back out. >> We will [laughter] get a quick help. >> Is this it for the meeting or are you >> sorry? [laughter] >> The next thing on our agenda, we have a
number of ANRs. Start with the one that's most familiar to us. 9G3 and 95 sheet pasture road on the screen. This just doesn't look right.
>> All right, Randy, can you see the plan? >> Yes, I can. Okay, if you can recall uh the issue with the plan previously, this plan has been revised and it's been revised uh to give clearance for the accessory
structures that are on the lot. And uh the changes now do allow for the proper um zoning setbacks of at least 10 ft from each uh accessory structure. And it still gives you um adequate
frontage. I believe it requires 200 uh ft along the public way uh which it it meets that uh frontage. So it has adequate um lot size, it has adequate frontage and it does um u keep its
distance from the accessory structures. So board members can see parcel A, which is the teeny tiny uh triangle along the existing gravel drive towards the entrance, and parcel C are being conveyed
to Pavl Kmenco, which is the larger property piece that we're looking at. And then parcel B, which is kind of a triangle there in the middle, is being conveyed to the land to the south of Precision Kitchen and Bath.
>> Are there any questions from board members on the plan in front of them? >> No. >> Any concerns? >> No. >> No. Okay. I'm glad we caught that at the last one and that they were able to make
the adjustments. Um, with that, do I hear a motion to endorse the ANR plan for 93 and 95 sheet pasture risk? >> Dave Spina, so moved. >> Jason Gwald, second. >> We'll call a vote. Jessica Thornton. I >> Dina, I grown. I
>> Randy Brown. I >> next we have another ANR >> for 761 College Right away. Oh yeah. Okay. So if you can see this triangular portion parcel A
belong currently belongs to the larger uh lot to the north. They're going to convey that triangular portion to lot 12 which is fronted on Sawrass Lane. Are there any questions from board members regarding this ANR?
>> It's good to me. >> My only question is there's a house um on the adjacent property of Donald Mleen, which I don't know that'd be like 759 College Highway.
And similarly to >> so they would northeast. >> Yeah. So similar to the plan that we when we looked prior, it's almost looks like this house is quite close to where this new
property line would be conveyed and is there enough? Yeah, I mean it it doesn't change the existing property line um from uh it doesn't change his particular
property lines. >> Um but it it does convey the land again to to the property owner to the south. >> Yeah. >> Then do I hear a motion to endorse the ANR plan for 761 College Highway?
>> Dave Spina moved. >> Second. We'll call vote. Just Thornton. I >> D I Mald I >> Randy Brown I >> thank you. >> All right. Next we have another ANR for
169 Anderson Road and 196 Vining Okay. So, this is basically a land swap. So, Claus Anderson Road or the the property budding Claus Anderson Road has
uh currently has parcel A. >> Yeah. They so yeah they they have ownership of parcel A and um the lot on Bing Hill Road has ownership of parcel B and and essentially they're they're
swapping the two. >> I'm sorry no I said that incorrect. Sorry. Um Vining Hill Road the the house that fronts on Vining Hill Road has parcel A. So they have a large rectangular lot. Um and for whatever
reason they have an easement that goes to their lot um which kind of separates their their home and their um barn from from the what's conveyed as parcel A. So they're going to give parcel A to the lot to the north and then the lot to the
north is going to give convey to them parcel B um which is south of that easement line. >> So it makes theirs wider and it actually improves our setbacks >> spacing a little bit. Yeah, >> it's but they right now they've got 85,000 square ft that they have to cross
an easement in the electrical lines, the power, >> right? >> No, the other guy >> and and the other guy, same thing. He's got 76,000 square feet that he would have to cross through. So, >> makes sense. >> Makes more sense. >> So, yeah, they both require 60,000 square feet, which both part uh you
know, they they have the >> All right. Then with no questions or further comments, do I hear a motion to endorse the ANR plan for 169 Anderson Road and 196 Fining Hill Road? >> Dina so moved. >> Jason Brown second. >> We'll call vote. Jessica Thornton.
>> Dina I have eyes. >> Randy Brown I have the Greens of South East subdivision. no update on that particular matter. Um,
from where I know things left off that the property owner I think bond did complete a a peer review. Um, but the property owner and their um will never I think our associates is representing them has not
responded to the per pe per pe per pe per pe per pe per pe per pe per pe per pe per pe per peer review comments. >> Okay. >> Or DPW's comments for that matter. >> All right. Um did we have any late submitt ANRS? >> We do not. was not enough. Let's see. And we've already referred
the zoning modernization project to the select board. Um the next item on our agenda is the discussion of forming a subcommittee to address updating large scale ground mounted photo voltaic systems bylaws to include best or
battery energy storage systems. So yeah, as you all [clears throat] recall, we did um put together a moratorum that was denied by the AG's office. Um our our current ordinance does not uh speak to uh battery energy
storage uh facilities. So, um, we should revise our our ordinance and, uh, uh, you know, I'm I'm just asking of the board that we put together a subcommittee of, um, planning
board members, um, and members from other, um, boards, potentially a board of health, um, certainly our our our health director and maybe other town administrative staff, um, maybe fire
department and DPW you know, whoever wants to be involved to to try to put together proper language that we can move our our ordinance into the 21st century. >> Okay. Um discussion. >> I think we do need to update our bylaws
to address battery storage systems. That seems to be a thing that's a >> it's like a thing. >> Um I agree. Yep. >> Language. >> Okay. Um I would also add that in general to adding the best we also just
want to make sure that we take a look at it um in regards also to the general um uh consolidated application process that the state has implemented. Um we might want to include like reference to the local government representative which is
a position that has to be um established whether it's um the town planner or the CEO of the town. um that is the person who is supposed to lead whatever larger scale solar purpose project comes before us. So yeah, massaging the
language to include those processes and um increasing our protections where we can and ensuring that it's cited appropriately to the best of our ability that we can. Um >> we'll also work with Pioneer Valley
Planning Commission uh to see what other communities are doing and see what we can implement from uh you know uh let's I think Atley um has some language where they don't allow best within their aquifer uh area. So things of that nature you want to incorporate here in
Southwood. And so I thinking ahead I assumed that we would all be kind of on board with having a subcommittee for it. Um my thoughts were that similar to maybe the short-term rental
subcommittee where you have a planning board member. We can invite a member of the select board, a representative from the fire department, board of health or health um director, member of the conservation commission, somebody from DPW,
perhaps the building inspector, and then two members of the public. that would make a nine person sub subcommittee which I think is I think if if we were to cut any of those people out
it might do a detriment to because it's such a large issue. Um but that we don't want to make it too large that it become it's it's difficult for the subcommittee to meet and to for work to get done. Um, and then you end up with not enough people at a meeting
and you don't have a quorum and all that stuff. Um, is there anybody that I am leaving off of that list that you think we should add or is that nine people already? I won't ask now because it hasn't been
given permission to, but I would ask that um my fellow board members give thought to whether they would um like to volunteer to be uh the planning board representative on that subcommittee. uh somebody who maybe has a a thirst or
has some technical knowledge or [clears throat] um knowledge of infrastructure and water supplies and protecting aquifers. you know, there might be some members of this board who have experience
um you know, >> puts together, >> you know, just things, you know, I've got a lot of talent here behind me and I'm I'm surely don't want to take all the glory for myself. So, um keeping that in mind, is there any further
discussion on the matter before I ask for a motion? Do we need to ask the select board to to form this subcommittee first? >> That would that is I would be asking for a motion to refer the request. >> I I checked with Nicole. She stated that PL the planning board has the authority
to create a their phone committee. >> Can we Does that sound right to you, Randy? >> I don't remember honestly. >> All right. So then >> if you're not I defer I default to air caution if if you're not sure.
>> Yeah. Um then do I hear a motion to start the process to uh create a subcommittee to look at updating our large scale uh groundmounted photovoltaic systems bylaws
um and refer it to the select board if necessary. >> Dave Spina so moved. >> Jason Gwald second. Roll call vote. Jessica Thor I >> D I Ch Cornwall I >> Randy Brown I >> Great.
>> All right. Uh next thing on the agenda is the Hampton County Registry of Deeds. We received a very nice letter from Cheryl Kley Rivera from the Registry of Deeds requesting an updated list of board members with our authorized
signatures um so that they have that at the registry of deeds when recording our all those ANRS that we will sign off on. Um so there is a letter here responding back and we will all sign off at the end
of the meeting tonight when we do our duty. to move that along. Um, the next thing on our agenda was to update our meeting calendar for the fiscal year 2027 or this September to next September. Um, I'll remind board
members that we have a meeting scheduled on September 1st in order to keep our business going before Labor Day because it's so late this year. Um, I have looked ahead at the schedule myself.
uh trying to avoid holidays. We had to avoid election day, >> school vacation, >> um school vacation week, you know, at this pointable who really have to worry about that at the moment. Um
>> but uh no, I don't want to be here the I don't like to schedule myself on the Tuesday before Thanksgiving because that's pie making night. Um, >> so if we don't, you know, we right now, um, the schedule that I'm looking to have Alvin kind of put together includes
just one meeting in November on the 10th. Um, and then we have a meeting in couple in December, but then have a nice break for the holiday um, and New Year's. Um, we will look to have
meetings on a mostly bi-weekly basis through the spring until we get to the beginning of May. We'll have a oneweek break so that we can get a May a first week of May meeting done before we are out of business for town election day
and annual town meeting. >> Um, and then we will look to have one meeting a month in the summer. Um, right now I'm looking at the 22nd, the 20th, and the 17th. I don't have any vacations scheduled for next summer. >> Anything specific yet?
>> I I got to get through this summer's vacation first. Um, but I've looked at my dates. I will along with Alvin put together this list and email it out to you guys to just double check your own schedules. And if there's something there that you go, "Oh, hey, don't I
know I'm going to be in Europe this week or something like that, let me know and we can try to massage the schedule a little bit to give us some time in between meetings, but also not give so much time that we run the risk of things getting approved because we don't have
the timing right." >> Good. Okay. Um, we also have a couple sets of meeting minutes. We have the planning board meeting minutes from June 16th. Did everybody have a chance to review those? Who can
>> who would be here? >> Here. >> Um, >> any questions, comments, or edits? >> Nope. >> Then do I hear a motion to approve the meeting minutes for June 16th, 2026? >> Motion to approve.
>> There are second. >> Second. >> Okay. Roll call follow vote. Jessica Thor and I. >> Dave Spina abstain. Jason Gunwald. >> I also >> Randy Brown abstain. >> Okay, that's three. That's good. All right.
And then um we also have a quick copy here of the joint meeting between the planning board and the select board where we appointed Mr. Alstead to the planning board full time. Are there any questions, comments, or concerns with
those? >> Yep. You have the date in that for the record. >> Oh, July 6th. >> Yes. All right. And then do I hear a motion to approve the joint meeting minutes for July 6, 2026? >> Dave Spald call vote. Jessica Thor and I.
>> Dave Spina. >> Jason. I >> Randy Brownstein. And only thing left is planning board and staff member comments. >> The EMPIC continues to work with the
various boards and committees to try to get action items completed. I believe Norm reached out to you guys about trying taking credit for it, but I think I can't remember the number off the top of my head, but basically the ADO bylaw the works that we did there. You guys
had talked about that. >> Yeah. Did we do we fix that up? >> So, originally I think he stated that we weren't going to be able to get um uh >> credit >> credit for that particular I think it was housing. >> There was one it was partial credit.
Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> That's okay. It's fine. I'm I'm okay with not getting credit for that for the year. >> Full credit. But there's another one I think which was more related to the ADU bylaw one I think is more >> you think you'd read that one. That one
we could take credit for even though it was planned for next year. I think we early credit basically. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> I'm pretty sure I was like, "Yeah, that one's done." Yeah. >> Um All right. And then he had also emailed Alvin and I to verify that we had nominated somebody like, "Yeah, we
we did do that." And I I don't know if we need to do it again. I don't think so because I think we had you >> for the next year. Not for >> um you don't have to I don't think we need to get reworn in. >> I don't think so >> for that. Okay. Um so that should be good. I >> think we're good.
>> Do we have a select board member representative now? >> Not as of at least the last meeting that I was at. Okay, >> still figuring that out. >> In fact, the last meeting we did not have a quorum, unfortunately. >> Ah, sense.
>> All right. Anything else? >> That's all I have. >> I got no update. The uh open spaceeland management committee has been we've been firing emails back and forth, but we haven't had our first meeting yet. Um, but Allan sent over an awesome update, so super appreciate that and they were
super happy to get it. So, all right. Thank you. Anything from your first full meeting? No. You good? >> No, he hasn't run away yet. >> Anything from you, Randy? >> No, I'm good. Other than that, it's
beautiful up here in New Hampshire. >> Oh, must it must be beautiful. Say hello to the family for me. >> All right, then. Um I don't [clears throat] think I have anything to add. No. Anything from you? No. All
right. Then with that, do I hear a motion to adjurnn? >> Spina. So moved. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Thank you very much. for the rest of your time