Good evening everybody. My name is Andrew Shepard, current chair of the Towns and Planning Board. I call this meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. like to have a roll call of all the board members present. So, please say your name for the record. We'll go clockwise.
>> Cindy King present. >> Carol Hos present. >> Robert present. >> And Andrew Shepard present. Uh would you please join me in the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. I would like to thank all of our veterans, those who are currently serving here and abroad, their families, and those who contribute their time to public service. I think we owe them our
gratitude. This meeting is being recorded and will be uploaded to the Town of Towns and YouTube channel. Uh I do not. Um yeah, so that's good. So we have a public hearing at 6:35. My hope is we might be able to do our
reorganization um before the 6:35 public hearing. Let's open the gender. Thank you very much. >> Yeah, let's try to jump in. If we don't have enough time then um then we will do
it after but um so 1.4 would be the annual organizational agenda item seating of planning board members and reorganization of the board. Um I guess first I'd like to welcome Cindy, our newest member. Cindy, welcome.
>> Thank you. >> Excited to have you. Um let's see. So everybody, Brett's not here. I believe he has not been sworn in, but Cindy's been sworn in. So everybody, Carol's been sworn in. Carol, welcome back. >> Congratulations.
>> Um, >> I don't think it was too bad. >> So, everyone here has been sworn in. Um, as required under Mass General Law and our standard standard practice, uh, the board will now elect a chair, vice
chair, and clerk for the coming year. So, I'd like to open nominations to the floor. Um, I guess we'll we can do >> per position. So, we can start with the chair position. Anyone has any preferences? >> I'm going to nominate you, Andrew.
>> And I'll second it. >> Okay. >> Okay. Very kind of you all. Would anyone else like a nomination? >> No. >> No, you're good. You're good. >> Okay. Um, well, that being I'll accept your nomination. I don't see much further discussion then. Um, we've had a
second. All in favor? >> I carry I. Yep. >> Cindy King. >> And I Andrew Shepherd. Oh, I guess I guess I can vote I, right? I'll vote I can. Um, now let's go for vice chair. Um, is there an interest in vice chair?
Was anyone would like to do vice chair? Robert, you've been vice chair this past year. >> Do you want to stay vice chair? >> I will. If nobody else wants, >> I move that K House be appointed to vice chair. >> I I I am happy. Robert, I've appreciated your service as vice chair. I I'd be I
think it's great to share it and spread around if you're open to it. Uh do you want to share it or >> Sure, we can share it. >> Share it in the sense that Carol takes it for this year. >> That's I guess like you know rotate the >> Okay. And I guess >> why don't you be this year?
>> So I'm going to second it. Cindy has made the nomination. I'll second it. Um unless there's any other discussion even the the town hall agrees. So all those in favor or Cindy? >> Cindy King. Yes. Carol Hus. Yes. >> Robert Terry. Yes. And And Andrew
Shepard. Yes. >> Thank you. And now for the position of clerk. Uh now past practices, I believe the board has put the newest member as a clerk. >> So Cindy, if you'd be open to it, I'd like to nominate you as clerk for the planning board. >> And I'll second it. >> Second it. Um any discussion?
>> I I I I expected that as I know normally boards will hit the newbie up with being the clerk to have to read everything. So, um, I I prepared myself for that first. >> Okay. >> I think they've all been clerked at one point in
>> Yeah. Um, so I I'll start off this. So, Andrew Shepard, yes. >> Cindy King, yes, if yes, >> Robert, yes. Excellent. Okay, look at that. Within five minutes, we've reorganized the plan. >> There you go. >> Keep going, Andrew. >> Very, very well done. Congratulations,
everybody. We thank you all for your past service and future service. Excited to serve with you all. Um, now we have a 635 sharp time. We can push a little. Does anyone We're in that one minute 1.5. Is that
>> Andrew? I want to keep you on track. >> It's posted for 6:45. >> 6:45. >> Your public hearing is posted for 6:45 online. Does your agenda say 6:35? >> It does say 6.
>> The agenda says 6:35. Is are separate posting the same? >> Yeah. I don't know what she's seeing. >> Um on the town zoom website >> and you click on today's date. Uh it may be in the agenda 6:35, but the posting
on the calendar. >> So posted it wrong. Um, I don't know who posted it or didn't post it. I just know that on the calendar it says 64, >> but the but the legal notice says 6:35.
>> Says 6:35. >> So, the way I understand is we can uh it probably makes sense and is best to push it to 6:45 to allow anybody have time and we'll make an announcement. >> I know Kobe's here for that when Kobe gets back in the room. Um, but we'll push that. I think in the interest of
transparency, it's probably best to >> Sure. >> push it out 15 minutes. It's not like it's 8:00 or something. >> Sure. Sure. Um, okay. So, that gives us a little bit more time um for the other items we have. Colobby,
just uh because I I appreciate that you rushed here and dated. Uh there's a discrepancy in the posting online from the time now. >> Um so, it was posted online for 6:45. So, we're going to just wait 15 minutes until we start public hearing. >> Um,
>> excellent. So, 1.5 is review and approve the minutes of the planning board meeting for March 23rd and April 6th. Um, anybody have any comments? Got a chance to review or >> Yeah, I've looked at them. I don't have any comments. >> I don't have any changes. Um, and Cindy,
I know you weren't on the board. >> I I haven't read them, so even though I watched them, but I'll abstain from the vote anyway. >> Okay. Uh, I'd like to entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes of March 23rd and April 6th. >> I make a motion we approve the minutes
of um 406. >> Yep. And 323. >> And 3:23 >> and 3:23. Yep. >> Okay. Second. >> Second. Okay. U go around and share our vote. Start clockwise.
>> Cindy King abstain. Carol. Yes. Everything else and everything else. Okay. Excellent. So now we got a little bit of time. So meeting business status update
53 was 3.2. two. Okay. So 3 point 3 3.2 is review revisions to 53 West Meadow Road storm water management permit number SM 2026-01. So I have that
for me. Beth, would you mind giving us a brief update for what? Um, >> yeah, this was um the one of the conditions of approval that the um engineer carry out all of the uh tasks
that were noted in the peer review letter. Um, and also there was a section in there about the soil testing. So, uh, I reviewed it and, um, Bob Darside, building commissioner, also
reviewed it and he found it to be acceptable and in order. Uh, the storm water management permit has already been issued. So, this is more of an after approval, but um, the certificate was or the, um, permit
wasn't issued without the building commissioners okay on that, you know. So >> it was a sort of a timing issue. >> You guys have made the decision already. November. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Um >> so you don't really have to take any
action. If you don't want to, you can make a vote to um approve the submitt as you see it. >> Did I don't know if I uh sorry thing in the I don't remember reviewing it in the
portal, but I do have it in front of me if anyone would like to see it. Cindy, it looked like you. Okay. This one, right? >> Yep. Yep. That's the one. >> Which one you rub it? >> Says the man scheme on the top. >> Okay. I think I looked at that one. >> Okay.
>> Yeah, you can probably make a motion to accept the um >> So move. >> Okay. >> And I'll second it. >> Move and second. Any discussion? Again, I'm good. >> Cindy King, yes. Carol is yes. Robert.
Yes. And Andrew Shepher. Yes. All right. Can we make a motion, please? >> Cindy. Two. Good. So, oh, you know what? I I went a little overzealous. I think I forgot when we were reorganizing our board that we need
to select a representative to the Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission and the Monachus Joint Transportation Committee. I'm glad I just add that you might want to do that at the future meeting where Brett is here in case Brett wants to participate. And I also haven't given the board
members the description of what goes on. Okay. >> I'd like to be able to share that first. >> So maybe the next on the 11. >> That's that's fine. We're not missing any meetings to your knowledge of those. >> I don't know. I'll check. >> Okay. >> If we are then I'll let you know when
you can go. >> Okay. That sounds fine. If you guys are with that, we're going to postpone that one. So, let's go back to our meeting. We got four minutes, give or take. Um, so status update, site plan, special
permit versus site plan approval and related regulations, the Monus Regional Planning Commission planning assistance grant. Beth, would you mind chiming in on that one as well? >> Which which number is this? >> 3.3.
So MRPC um the town has a planning assistance grant. MRPC is doing the work. They're taking the zoning bylaw and going through the the whole code um and going to replace and adjust if you
will the process of site plan review special permit which is discretionary and um either revising it with site plan approval non-discretionary with the set of regulations of so there's two separate tasks here one of
them is the site plan approval regulations Um, and the other one is basically to go through the code and to work with the planning board on the process of whether you want your uh review to be site plan
uh special permit or site plan approval. So, it's a little complicated, but uh MRPC never got to it because they claimed that they were working on the MBPA and other things. So this is a a grant that it's a it's a a mix match of
a few grants now. It's a DTA, it's a you know P A. And so I've asked for a scope and a timeline and I printed it out if you want to share it. But that's what we got. So if you could look that over and just decide whether you think that's acceptable or
>> Did you send it to us? Is it in the packet? Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. This should be the I'm trying to catch up with everything in the back. >> Yeah, >> I put it in late because I just got it this morning. >> And I can put it on screen if you want
to. >> Oh, there it is. Okay, I got it. >> You want to throw it on the screen? >> Sure. This is so these May dates are valid. >> These May dates are going to be um
Yeah, I just got this. So, >> okay. >> I am assuming. >> So, are they going to be able to meet those dates? Because in the past, >> pretty aggressive. Have you seen >> We We had grants where they just blow off the dates. They don't mean any >> They don't mean anything.
>> Writing assistant grants. >> Yeah. So, and you know me. >> Yeah. >> Hold on to it. >> Yeah. Um, you know, this this came in literally um I think Friday and I got it today in my inbox. So, this is what's
being developed. >> Is this coming from Joe? >> Joe Bole. Yes. Um with the Bernard Kill is the new uh grant um person at MRPC. I don't know his official title. I apologize, but he's overseeing all the
grants now. Um and he's also reviewed this apparently. So this is this is what you got. >> Well, I mean >> I mean we have we have the grant and we're moving forward with it. >> So we just got to see if they actually
meet these dates. >> So this schedule >> it's pretty >> looks pretty aggressive to me. >> Ambitious. >> Yes. Yes. Are there deadlines within the
grants that require certain but they always forget they never they never adhere they never adhere to them. >> So it's a grant we got from them. So they're the grant >> provider. So if they blow off dates then
we don't lose anything. It's we still can >> Yes. Yeah. So these are grants that are in the system there. The PE the planning assistance grant I understand does expire. Was it June 25th? Anyway, um so they've
assured me through email, I have it all in email. I don't have anything else that um there will be sort of a mix of grants that will be used to finish this up. Uh I don't know if the board would like me to
do anything more official or I I'm not sure. This is what I got. Have they memorialized in writing that they intend to finish out the grant with this mortgage? >> They emailed to me. >> Okay. I mean, >> so that May 15th they
is that something we should put on the agenda to have them come. >> Okay. Yes. I think that >> to show to show show up and tell us where they are with that. >> Yeah. Because the next When is the next
meeting after the 15th? What do we have? You have on the agenda. >> Sorry. >> Next meeting May 11th. >> So after that, >> it's June 8th. >> June 8th. >> So at the June 8th meeting, you know, I'm sure. >> Yeah. I mean, if they could give us an
update of where they are and if they're close to following that timeline. >> Yep. Okay. >> Um that would just be something. >> So are we planning a schedule here? But let's we'll get to that at the end when we get to the our next meeting at the
end. But we get meeting scheduled to May 11th, June 8th, and June 22nd next month. But I think I I feel pretty relatively content. I mean, uh, in this this matter on the agenda, I don't think there's anything we're going to decide
for ourselves subsequent to it. I mean, MRPC is going to do um provide the assistance that they're they can and work with it and hope for the best. Um, so I'm okay with moving on and I think timewise we we're past the 6:45 and we
can jump into the public hearing. So with that, I would like to open the public hearing item 2.1 at 6:48 p.m. which is to consider the following
citizens petition to amend the zoning bylaw. one to change chapter 145-88D2 from buffer zone. No medical marijuana treatment and dispensing facility facilities use or commercial marijuana
cultivation activities shall be located within a 500t radius from to buffer zone. No medical marijuana treatment and dispensing facilities use or commercial marijuana cultivation activities shall be located within a 100 foot radius from
two to change chapter 145-88 D one from general any medical marijuana treatment center or marijuana cultivation activities permitted shall be located only in the industrial zoning district to general
any medical marijuana Ana treatment center or marijuana cultivation activities permitted shall be located in the industrial zoning district or outlying commercial district three to change 145-88D3
from cultivation. Cultivation is allowed in all districts by right if applicant is eligible for protection under MGL chapter 4A section 3. Any cultivation is required within a building and will be required will require a special permit.
Cultivation of marijuana or marijuana based products shall not be con considered an agricultural use. Two, cultivation. Cultivation is allowed in all districts by right if applicant is eligible for protection under MGL chapter 4A section. Any cultivation rule
requires. So that was the agenda listing. um like to introduce the board members. So, Andrew Shepard, chair >> McKinn
is vice chair. >> Robert Duran, board member, board member. There's a public china in sheet. I believe it is circulating with our large attendance this evening. Thank you. Excellent. I did just read the agenda, but I'll
read the legal notice. So, this is a legal notice from the town of Towns and Planning Board. Town of Towns and Planning Board notice of public hearing pursuant to Massachusetts general law chapter 4A section 5. The towns and planning board will hold a public hearing on Monday,
May 4th, 2026 at 6:35 p.m. in the selectman's chambers. Towns in town hall 272 Main Street Towns in Massachusetts with an anticipated Zoom option available for convenience only to consider the following amendments to the towns and zoning bylaws as proposed by
citizen petition. one to change chapter 145-88D2 from buffer zone. No medical marijuana treatments and dispensing facilities, use or commercial marijuana cultivation activity shall be located within a 500
ft radius from two buffer zone. No medical marijuana treatment and dispensing facilities used or commercial marijuana cultivation activities shall be located within a 100 ft radius from and two to change 145-88D1
from general any medical marijuana treatment center or marijuana cultivation activities permitted shall be located only in the industrial zone district to general any medical marijuana treatment center or marijuana cultivation activities The bridge shall
be located in the industrial zoning district or outlying commercial district and three to change chapter 145-88 D3 from cultivation. Cultivation is allowed in all districts by right if applicant is eligible for protection under MGL
chapter 4A section 3. Any cultivation is required within a building and will require a special permit. Cultivation of marijuana or marijuana based products shall not be considered an agricultural use. Two, cultivation. Cultivation is allowed in all districts by right if
applicant is eligible for protection under MGL chapter 48 section 3. Any cultivation will require a special permit. Interested parties may attend in person at the selecting chambers or if and as available participate remotely in via Zoom.
Written comments may be submitted to the town to the planning board by person, in person, or by mail at towns and town hall, 272 Main Street, Towns and Mass, or via email planning at townsm.gov for receipt by 4 p.m. on May 1st 26 from the
towns and planning board. So, believe we have Kobe here. Kobe, I hear you are potentially the leader. If not, you're here prepared to speak on the matter. principal petitioner.
>> Excellent. That >> was a mouthful. >> It sure was. I'd love to open up to you and >> Sure. >> give us a rundown. >> All right. Thank you for having me tonight. Um again, my name is Colobby Straer. So, I wrote these with the intent of um trying to generate more of
a revenue stream for the town and um another area where a few jobs generated. Uh the way the bylaw is right now, the first amendment there is for um
a 500 foot buffer around um the u dispensary cannot be within 500 ft of a residential zone. It's pretty gravity when written like that. I actually mapped it out. >> Sure. Yeah. Bring up the zoning map like
you want to share. Is that okay to do? >> I I don't have an issue with you sharing. You can if you've got the permissions to do so by tcam. >> Tam, would you share sharing position? >> All I have to do is
>> Yeah. We don't take >> youbert out. there. I guess for all of you, there is a print out right here of the I'm sorry, there's a print out right here of the districts if you want to get something a little.
So, here's Tons. Just for the public's interest, all the uh areas shown in the dark purple are the industrial zone. the lighter
pinker tone. >> Those are the uh commercial districts we have. >> Yeah. >> Is that the >> light purple is the um outline commercial districts. You're right. Dark purple is the the industrial
commercial districts. as right as the bylaw is written right now. Um it's only allowed in the outline, excuse me, the ICD, uh industrial commercial districts.
And with the 500 foot buffer, uh you can see the tan and green colors are the residential areas. Um with 500 foot buffer, it's really only feasible in one of those um zones there.
It's potentially possible up there in the upper left there's a couple little triangles where it's permitted by the bylaw but that's the old town dump and I don't think they're going to be put in there anytime soon. So it's uh the largest one in the middle of the screen
where um which is scales lane where it's potentially possible switch to GIS program now and you got to bear with me it's it's been giving me some issues.
Um it's a free package. Um so it doesn't um it's a little bit wonky sometimes. Um it's expensive. So uh let me see show you what I'm going to show you what what the
permissible area is right here. And unfortunately, this looks really messy. That's an error. In the lower left, I have the buffer saved, but this was a temporary workspace, but this is fairly accurate. This is the permissible
area excluding the error in the left hand corner there, the triangle, >> that darker yellow. They were saying that sorry the bright yellow is the uh industrial commercial district and the
that's supposed to be green but on that it's not the internal polygon is where um medical marijuana spect as you can see it's uh and these are established businesses there already um
it's not likely that um it could be actually exercised the bylaw the way the second one the second bylaw in there would allow for it to be also in the
outline commercial districts which again are these lighter purple colors and they got more work to do on the maps Um but that uh that would uh provide for much more possibility for um business to
be established. I'm not here toh say to talk about like whether or not that business can be profitable or not, but the way it's written now, it's not even real possibility. There's a and I know there's a lots of
different questions and issues, health issues. Again, you know, it's a bylaw that's already already approved for dispensary to be established. You know, I'm just trying to make it more feasible.
>> So, let me just mention the third one and then we get into it. Um the third bylaw um would allow for marijuana to be considered an agriculture commodity. Right now it is not which means that
um you know ag uh farmers agriculturists cannot um take advantage of any tax savings or or grant programs that come along with selling of agricultural commodities. namely chapter 61A which is
a main state tax rate to perman uh Colby if uh just sticking to our form maybe I I'm happy to go into um the mandatory referral comments and then open it up for board questions and And if something comes up, you know,
certainly have the dialogue back and forth. Sure. >> Who's supposed to um give us the opportunity hearing the board will prepare its recommendation at town meeting. >> Yep. Typically, we've done the comments after >> Okay.
>> That would be kind of the last the last bit. >> Okay. >> So, I I'll go through the mandatory comments right now. Um so this is from the board of selectmen. Uh it says I believe the the select board would prefer zoning change come from the
planning board not be a citizen petition. Petitioners should work with planning board if not by uh annual town meeting and that signed by Lorie Shiffron select board chair. And then
the other comment we received is from the zoning board of appeals and it says the zoning board is in support of the changes to the bylaws from Victoria Janiki and ZDA chair. So those are the mandatory referrals comments that we received. Um now we as a board can
review the the zoning map of the bylaws or if we have any questions like to open it up to the board. We'll do let's do the board first and then we'll open up the public comment after like any of the board members have any direct comments or questions. >> I'm not sure
the public's been um given a pros and cons of this change and why the changes being proposed. I understand
as written it's very restrictive and limiting and so the prospects of having these cannabis facilities is very remote as it's written. That's what I understand.
I also regarding the aspect of the afro agricultural component of this. Um, I think Townsen has been designated as a
farm community. And so the question at hand, would this be considered an agricultural use? And in my opinion, it would be. Um,
>> did you could you read the legal comments from >> No, I didn't. Can you read them for us? >> Um, okay. Uh, where does it stop? Okay. Um, regarding article one, municipalities
are free to restrict the the replacement of a medical marijuana treatment center. This certain other uses that is to establish a soal so-called buffer zone surrounding these areas. Just note that
per state regulation C935 CMR501.110 parentheses 3, the default buffer zone from school entrances is 500 ft unless the city or town adopts an ordinance or bylaw that reduces the distance requirement.
Regarding article two where MTC ought to be located is a matter for municipal discretion and thus town meeting is free if the voters so choose to expand the potential development or operation of MTC to the outlying commercial district.
Okay. Regarding article three again meeting is free to eliminate the exclusion of mariju marijuana cultivation as an agricultural use. It should be noted, however, that general law chapter 4A section 3, which says
that municipalities may not prohibit, unreasonably regulate, or require a special permit for agricultural uses, expressly states that the terms agriculture, a culture, floroculture, and horiculture shall not include the
growing, cultivation, distribution, or dispensation of marijuana. But it does proceed to allow cities in towns that permit the same, stating, "Nothing in this section shall preclude a municipality from establishing zoning
by laws or ordinances which allow commercial marijuana growing and cultivation on land useful used for commercial agriculture, agriculture, horiculture or horiculture. Just be aware of the implications as
explained in 59 mass practice marijuana in the law chapter 6.9 December 2020. Although general law 48 section 3 exempts marijuana cultivation from the definition of agriculture
for the purpose of special permitting requirements by municipalities. Marijuana cultivation is still considered an agricultural use for other purposes under the remaining sections of the zoning act. Therefore, unless a municipality zoning
bylaws otherwise define agriculture to exclude marijuana cultivation, the growth of cultivation of marijuana fits into the laws subset of agriculture use of either the raising of crops or indoor commercial horiculture floriculture
depending on the nature of the particular proposed use. A city or town's definition of agriculture in its zoning bylaws is significant as it will likely determine whether mar cultivation is permitted in an agricultural use
zoning district as opposed to a zoning district that permits light industrial use. For example, so there's a lot of legal legal lease there. I another question I have. This would be a change to the zoning
bylaw. Any of these things that we would do tonight? >> Well, wouldn't that require town meeting vote? >> So, we're just holding the public hearing as the planning board. >> Tomorrow, tomorrow town meeting, what we are tasked with doing as a planning
board is coming up with either >> a recommendation, uh, >> recommend, not recommend, or take no action. >> Okay. Yeah, I'm I'm happy that I mean after going through this I mean there's a lot of legal words in here or actually there aren't that many legal words in here but
basically he he's validating that this is fine but this is that we can change to we can do article one you know it says unless a city or town adopts an ordinance or bylaw that reduces the distance requirement which that's what
this is and so that's fine. line article two it says we can it's up to us Tom meeting is free for the voters to choose to expand the development or operation of a marijuana treatment I think clinic or center to the outlying commercial
district so we can do that there's nothing legally opposing that article three gets very interesting I think what it says this one gets a lot of >> pushing around the laws but I think what it says is the caution that he's telling
us is we are a right to farm community. >> Yes. >> So if we make cannabis marijuana a agricultural product everybody right now anybody can do anything agriculturally in any district. >> Right. The farm act says all everything
can be done anywhere. >> Correct. >> Our current right to our right to farm bylaw says anyone can do anything agriculturally anywhere in any district. Um, if we turn marijuana into an
agricultural product, if we anybody can grow marijuana anywhere, anytime without a special permit is what this says. So, if we don't and everybody's nodding over here. >> I think
>> that's the way I understand this. So, >> that's a good point. Well, >> so that's the caution that Adam is giving us is that >> um I mean my my my thoughts are okay. I don't know that we want to go that far,
but if I think I mean I'm I'm in agreement personally. I'm in agreement so far, but this one does give me pause. I don't know that that will pass muster tomorrow, >> right? But I don't know that opening cultivation to every single square inch of town is necessarily what would be in
the best interest of town. I think that in some way we should allow copivation but we should restrict it in some way would be >> well the other thing that the public should be aware of is when a property owner
operates under the agricultural bylaws. The agricultural bylaws are pretty generous in terms of the owner.
>> Right. And so on the agricultural bylaws um agricultural uses are exempt from a lot of bylaws which we should pay particular care to
look at the implications of that. Um, I think that is a concern. I I don't particularly have a problem with cannabis being considered an agricultural product, but when you apply
it to the zoning allowed under agriculture, that could be problematic. >> So, yeah, basically you could put it anywhere in town. >> Exactly. And right now the bylaw says
um cultivation of marijuana or marijuana based product should not be considered agricultural use. I know that's what he wants to change. But but the farming bylaw pretty much says you can do it anywhere. >> If you identify it something as an
agricultural product, you can do any of that anywhere. So my other comments are more not as statements or opinions yet but observations or things that we have to
think about when we act on these things as I was recommending them or not. Um the original bylaw which was approved by the town >> was very restricted purposely
in my view. Um and the changes item number one to reduce this buffer zone
from 500 to 100 is a dramatic change. >> Yes. And for me, for for me, I'm not in favor of that because then you then you'll end up um with the marijuana shop across the street from the high school. >> Mhm.
>> Um and I I'm against putting it anywhere near schools or daycare centers. Um I don't have a problem with the changing adding the outlying district. I don't have a problem with that. But I do have a problem with reducing the buffer zone.
Well, I do. It would appear to me that I mean reading what I see in front of me, >> the initial buffer requirements
were very restrictive. >> Well, they they basically >> and now the new one being is in the opposite end of the pendulum. Well, actually the >> without any middle ground here, right? >> Um I believe
those that 500 bucker zone comes from mass state law. >> It does. It does. >> It does. Yes. And it lists all of those same categories that are listed here. Um if I could find I think I brought the wrong piece of
paper. I um that um when I looked at the because the state has a 500 foot buffer and it does say schools, uh daycare facilities, um alcohol treatment centers.
The these these come right out of the state, >> right? Is that a statue or a guideline? >> No, it comes out of the Mass General law. I think what Adam is telling us though is that we are free to change that he his after looking at that law we are free to make that change
>> we are both of the municipalities can monitor that >> yes that's what Adam was telling us that >> yes it can be >> we have the right to make the adjustments and the cannabis commission has been in upheaval for a couple years now so >> who knows what's coming out of their
>> what's going to happen next right now >> I think we've had a pretty healthy discussion on it. I don't know if does anyone feel like there's a point they haven't brought up or >> Well, I think the other subject is a special permit item. >> I think you have to have a special permit
>> regardless, >> especially for the uh cultivation. You have to have a special permit regardless. That's state. That's >> that's states. >> Yeah. >> And it has to be in in an enclosed building. It can't be cultivated outside of an
enclosed building. So, I'd like to if we have any more comments from us, Miss Indie, it looks like you might. >> Yeah, I'm I'm still I mean I I I think that unless some I'm reading this that we can't I think what Adam is warning us on on article three is that because we
have the right to farm, we can't put a special permit on one particular product without changing the right to farm. is that I think a city or town's definition of agriculture in its zoning bylaws is significant as it will likely determine whether marijuana cultivation is
permitted in an agricultural use zoning district as opposed to a zoning district that allows he he did a a lawsuit um or case law. So I'm >> I think if we change it to an
agricultural use then under the farming by law it can be it could be done anywhere. >> Right. >> And I think that's what Adam's caution is. >> Exactly. So I'm not necessarily >> So I'm not in favor of this. >> I'm not in favor of I'm not in favor of
going that far. >> I would just assume leave the bylaw the way it is. >> I tend to think so. I don't have a problem with the outlying commercial district, but for me, I still want to keep the 500 foot buffer zone
because I'm still concern I want to keep it away from the schools. >> I think we've had some healthy topics come up in a variety of opinions. >> I want to give Kobe a chance to respond to some of the things that come up. >> All right. >> I'll have more later. >> There's a lot of you probably should
have done. All right. Um yeah to this shiffron's comments there I am rugby on this I didn't um didn't mean to upset the or presidents but uh saw an opportunity here uh to rewrite this I I think it can be
rewritten to exclude the areas that you're talking about in the schools every houses the entire list it's really that residential district I
think that you have to tackle. Um that has to be reduced if you want it to be uh any kind of enterprise whatsoever. Um the real um one of the main reasons for to reduce the buffer also was really
to to be able to try and bring it out to the street line where I can have exposure have um be a possibility for um to drive to it and uh be patron to be
patrons of it. Um, you know, I I do think there is some money being left on the uh being left on the table here by not uh being um being able to participate in medical marijuana
dispensary in town. There is tax money that that's a complicated subject. Let's see. Yeah. Anything from the public? >> I think it Cindy, it looked like you might have had a few more comments. >> I mean, I've got more personal beliefs
or feelings about some of these things. I I disagree with Carol on the the the 500 versus the 100. I I I think just thinking about across from the high school, there's a lot of alcohol over there. And I mean, knowing what has
occurred over the last 10 years with there's cannabis stores all over the place, um, we drive through other towns and we see these places and they're not they're not they're not places of illreute if you I mean they're they're professional retail establishments or or
healthc care facilities depending on where they are. And I I don't see a problem with just thinking about the Harbor Mall there if somebody I don't know that somebody would want to. I don't know that there's even an open space over there right now big enough.
But I I don't think 100 I mean I might go along with 200. I mean but I don't I don't think prohibiting if we're allowing alcohol. I don't see a reason why we can't allow marijuana. It has the the fears, you know, going back
to 10 years ago when this was first coming out. There was, you know, my impression of what was happening here in towns and with the planning board at the time was, you know, fear and we don't want cannabis no matter what. And there was no listening really. And I think that the fears have not been realized in
in the communities around us. And that I think that the communities around us are are got some money coming in. we are we're losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax revenue from not having these. Um, plus I I think I want to
stand up for the people that that really use marijuana product or cannabis products of all kinds for healthcare reasons, whether or not they're purchasing at a healthc care facility or they're they're buying it through a recreational. they they it helps a lot of people with
a lot of illnesses and we're denying our some of our residents from having this kind of access that they have to go to another town and some people really can't get out. We we do have a lot of people that could benefit from this. So I and and currently since this since we allowed man
marijuana in some of the zoning we what Kobe has presented is is true. We we really zoned it out because you can't there's no place where you could actually do it right now. And um I but the the second thing I want to
say is you know if this doesn't make it if we either depending on if we recommend or don't recommend and that if it does not make it through to town meeting tomorrow these articles um I I think that I'd like to see the planning
board put it on our agenda to come up with a plan to work out these issues and to find a way to open up. I mean, we're on a short fuse and we got a public hearing tonight. It's town meeting tomorrow. I think this is really cutting it really close for us and I don't think
it's anybody's Well, I'm not going to get into it, but we really should have had more of a leeway. And I don't blame Kobe. I understand there's other issues that happen there, but if we if this doesn't if we're not able to get this through till meeting, I think I'd like
to see the planning board work on a plan to open up some of the districts that we can really sit down, have some consultation with others, professionals in the in the field and help us design where can we put this where we're not
going to upset too many people, where we could come up with a compromise on where some of these districts can be and really show that look, we we we have to open up these districts. You know, that 500 isn't going to work anymore because that we're really zoning it out and that's not that's not helpful. And we
really not from a financial perspective, we know the town's broke and also to assist the people that you know everybody's all the other towns are making our money and our our people are spending a fortune in all these other towns and we
should bring it back and and I think it's this I'm just I'll stop talking now. >> Sure. >> New Hampshire doesn't allow it. We have a pretty right on the border. We have pretty good town just north of here.
I think this square market to your advantage of and you know when writing it I I found that the the buffer number it's really kind of arbitrary and most things are in zoning but it can be um
written so that there is an area like the Harbor Village down near the high school I think that can be excluded >> I think because of the Well, I think we can take a moment now
to open it up to public comment. We've had very healthy but robust discussion. So, welcome everyone. Does anyone have any comments on this? >> Yes, please. >> Thank you. Hi. My name is Broo Shar. I'm a town resident. Um, and I'm a cannabis
operator. So excited to be having this conversation. Um, I have been involved in the community post agreement process in four communities of Massachusetts. So, I would first like to offer um a tour conversations with anybody that has questions. Um the the issue here, I
think, and I want to thank you for raising this bringing this up because the town has voted for this, but zoning prohibits it, right? Um the issue is there's a lot of overlap between the two sections that are making it impossible. So, to address the school and daycare
issue, the regulations, a license is not going to be issued by the commission within 500 ft of school regardless of what the town is. I just think the commission is not going to do that. Um they are in upheaval right now. However, the law was signed two weeks ago. Those
changes are happening. Um I will say it it's an opportunity to regulate what's already happening. We are surrounded in every town around us by cannabis. We're seeing none of that benefit. So I absolutely would support and volunteer any assistance.
>> Thank you. Any other comments? Chicago. >> I I wish I had prior to first I always talk the only question I have in relation to like the high mall one the school you got the distance from the
school proximity from the school to the mall here you got a buffer zone all around the three sides of that three sides of the shopping mall 500 ft measure out from the edge of the buffer zone that you you exclude that place right out of the gate
>> right I agree places in town try to have a 500 foot rule. >> That's general business. >> So I don't see any hard to find a piece of property in towns and it would comply with it, >> right? So if you if you take the hog mall for example,
it's all retail zone general business. >> So we're not restricting anybody from putting in a cannabis retail store there. Um we are we are now >> well you are now because of the fact that if with a 500t rule there's
absolutely no way they could meet it and if you question school what's that >> I I question if the high school is really within that 500 ft >> well if it goes on the school property which is right off the edge of the road >> but not the entire
>> Robert I think I think as president it's only zoned for industrial zoning I'm pretty sure >> so if we allow general >> yeah Then I think that would that we're not allowing anything. >> No, but I mean if we consider >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> a general as part of the allowable district >> in addition to the industrial district >> that should remedy that problem. >> I want to keep on track with the public comment and Veronica has some comments. >> Can I'm sorry. Can I just make one more
comment? The last thing I wanted to raise was that you do have a special permit process built into the bylaw. So changing the zoning still allows you to analyze every single proposal on its own individual merit zoning aside. And so the board still has the authority to vote on
keeping in mind though Adam's note about special permits and agricultural use for cultivation. But I just want to note um I I was on the very fearful uh planning board that Cindy mentioned and the um
the idea was to do what was right for the town. >> It wasn't to oh keep it out. It was to do what was right for the town. And um I really think this has to go back to the planning board. I will vote against it at town meeting because it hasn't been
looked at totally. what you're changing is medical marijuana, but 14590 is recreational marijuana. So, we have we have two bylaws. If you look at other towns, they just have marijuana establishments
because they've gone back and looked at things from on top. When this first started, it was medical use first >> that was allowed and then we brought in the recreational use. Um um so the 500 foot would be only for a medical
establishment and I don't know that there's a difference between the two and more. You could probably answer that is there. >> Yes, but not for one. >> Right. So um if you look at the groten bylaws or the pepper bylaws, it's marijuana establishments period. No
breakdown between the medical versus recreational. Brotten which has all the marijuana stores has a 500 foot that is there. It is not 100 foot is 500. Pero is 300. Um so if you look at the other
towns most of them stayed with it. As far as the um the industrial district there were other properties but the town resoed them on citizen petition to residential out by the dump along Greenville Road.
>> That's right. that was one of the possible places and the town said, "Oh, let's make that residential." And that was a citizen petition. >> So, so that cut out that possibility. It wasn't the dump itself that was being
targeted. It was those properties along the road there which did fit the establishment. It wasn't just Scales Lane. So, it it really needs to be looked at overall. I I do oppose um taking out the statement about
agricultural use within a building makes a lot of different and cultivation is allowed anywhere >> by the bylaw residential or not and it makes a big difference as far as um distances from wetlands, things that you
can do with wetlands if you're agricultural, but you're not driving a tractor around. you're within a building. You're not doing what you would think of with typical agriculture. So, I I am opposed to taking that out.
However, the bylaw gets rework, but I think it's worth taking a look at. And um I mean it was almost 10 years ago that we did this. I guess it was 17 and then 18 I think. Or was it 20? No, it was 18. >> It was I was on the board. 18 in 20 I
was on the sle >> I was on the floor >> and figuring out and looking at the zoning maps and um thinking about those distances I think but on a citizen
petition sorry I won't be voting for it not just to say oh let's just do this without I know you've thought about it but um and it's only medical So what happens if you have a facility that's recreational? Well, they're still 500 ft
and they still have all the it's it's 14590. You're looking at just 14588. So um and it's true. I've said this already other towns have kind of merged them and it might be time.
>> True. Thank you, Veronica. I want to be mindful of time to a certain extent. Kobe is the proponent. Looks like you have a few more thoughts. as the proponent. Um, happy to and I mean if there's any other public comment, I'd like to turn it to Colby have a final discussion at the board and
then uh work towards closing the hearing. So you >> know if nothing else I hope this is going to start the conversation. So maybe this wasn't the right way to go about it, but hey, got you guys all done.
>> Hopefully something. >> Thank you. Thank you. And thank you everybody for coming. >> Kobe, you mentioned the financial aspects benefit. Are there any numbers supporting that anywhere? I know that I
wonder if our operator in the resident operator would speak to >> Yeah. So, so originally it was most of the agreements were structured at 3% of revenue assuming there would be a community impact, a negative impact to the community and that 3% was designed to offset. In the 10 years of operation,
there has not been a proven negative impact to communities. There's been improvements to communities. So, I wouldn't be comfortable saying the company the the town is going to get 3% of revenues. I I the town has to justify where that impact was to get those revenue. However, most agreements will
work in some kind of agreement to the town. In addition, as part of the licensing process, you have to have a positive impact plan with the with the cannabis control commission. So, each operator, we commit to x thousands of dollars per year to go to specified local funds and that's beyond obviously
jobs and and benefits to all handle on the local level. >> That's part of the community agreement and as part of the licensing agreement at the state level. Thank you. Um, all right. Any other Thank you for the public comments? Uh, I guess one final
note for the board. I mean, any um any other things we'd like to bring up before we close the public hearing and decide what we want to how we want to recommend it for meeting? >> Well, I'm comfortable with addressing
uh allowing the general district in the industrial. I think uh I think that is worth it. Um in other words allowing >> the outline district.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. >> And not just restricting it to the industrial. >> Yeah. >> I'm definitely opposed to any reference to it being an agricultural product.
Um then the next one is the the distance of the 500 ft versus the 100 ft. Um I
I definitely believe we need a buffer zone. Um, I don't if we were trying to do something there, we probably want to find some middle ground, I would think, so that we're
showing that we put some effort into trying to do more in that area. >> Robert, not to interject, but I we're not making any proposed changes to these. >> No, but we're going to be making recommendations, >> right?
relatively general to recommend or not to >> but I'm giving the board a feeling where >> where I think we might be able to work on okay >> but working on it is a separate >> we understand
>> um so I I think if if there's no objections I'd like to close the public hearing and then us as a board will make a recommendation um so I need a vote I think correct >> I move to uh close the public hearing I'll second it. >> Second coat. All in favor?
>> Cindy King IA says I >> hearing yes. But thank you guys. Thank you everyone. Thank you for our exciting business. So I guess let's jump right into I think technically agenda item would be 3.1 which is to discuss and finalize the
planning board recommendation on the citizens petition subject to the public hearing to submit to the annual town meeting May 5th 2026. So Beth went ahead and drafted I believe um a draft decision per se and it was relatively
straightforward. It just cited the proposed changes and and then it just said we recommend we choose to recommend not recommend take no actions and list uh a list of reasons if we have them. So
I guess I'd like to go around the table and and just share our thoughts and Cindy happy to start with you. Yeah, I'm trying to find it on my my thing with with um her. There's so many things in this. >> Yeah. Yeah. If you're trying to move quickly through it, it can be difficult. So, this is
>> is what she gave us. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, if you if you want I guess you can take a minute to >> Yeah. I Well, what I wanted what I'm thinking of doing I wanted us to come up with the the finished product properly. Sure. But I'd like to recommend that we
say we not recommend any of them. >> Sure. >> But not either either not recommend or take no action. One of the two. Whichever is the most appropriate. >> Take no action. I think is >> I mean because what I but I want to add I want the town's people to
>> know if we all agree my proposal that I made earlier is that we immediately as soon as possible initiate an agenda item or to start working on fixing this. I mean that this has come up a citizen petition that let's not go
with this because it came too quick >> but that we we want to initiate plans to make do make more thoughtout professional changes to the zoning bylaws in relationship to marijuana in order to make it easier for access. But
>> that's what I recommend those um bylaws from the other towns >> you can find them easily >> you do Google cannabis bylaws. Okay. Federal cannabis. They have ecodes similar to
we are in agreement and get to that point. We can easily pull those up and compare them >> and compare them and maybe >> take some time over the summer and even into the fall. Even if this goes >> I mean I'd like to see this get >> opened up. But even if it takes us till
next time to do it right to get it right. Yeah. And yeah, I think we should take some time look at some of the surrounding time towns bylaws, maybe combined two bylaws into one. >> Yeah. >> And and make a recommendation then. So
>> I'd like to hear from consultants. >> So do you want to address the distinction between medical marijuana? >> Why don't we just do we want to just say no act take no action at this point? And >> I would take no action on all three.
with the plan that we're going to work on this over the next >> several months >> to do it right to do it in a way that's not >> so fast give everybody including the public >> an opportunity to participate with us to get this done right
>> so I in terms of the way uh the draft decision is created so it would be the planning board potentially voted unanimously to take no action on adoption of the proposed amendments for the following reasons and then I think we could have a brief sentence that would say something to the effect of um
we as the planning board would like to have a more in-depth review of the uh recreational and medicinal marijuana bylaws and submit something at future to >> yes for consideration the other effect.
>> Yeah, >> let me uh let me just draft down a draft reason. Okay. Can I get the number one again? Claire, you should um you'd like a more indepth review of the medical and recreational marijuana bylaws.
>> Yeah, you might be quicker at writing than I am. I'm try. So, um which is cool. That's great. So, yeah, I think um and please interject everyone. I think um would like to take more time to review those bylaws and hopefully submit something with our community partners at
a later date. Is there any other thoughts from that? >> I think that's good. >> Okay. >> I think we support the intent of it. >> We support the intent of the petitioner. Is that cor is that that we understand that we want to make changes? >> Maybe we should just leave
>> just leave it out. Leave it. Take no action. If >> we want to speak as private citizens, we can tell we need to review this in depth. And I think our effort to be willing to take it on is significant. >> Yeah, we're going to take a look at it.
See if we can do anything with it >> and have from local. >> Would you mind if you just read our sentence back? >> Yeah. So, you just want that one reason or you gonna develop more? >> I think so. >> I think that's about wraps it all up.
Okay. So, um we the planning board um would like a more indepth review of the medical and recreational marijuana bylaws. Um we also like to make to take more time to submit something with our
community partners. Uh I guess to submit potentially submit something to a do future town meeting in working with community partners something >> community partners >> well I don't know what >> the community >> the community >> just okay yeah so like the hearing process
>> yeah yeah I guess that would be >> a light way to say you guys feel comfortable with the language we've discussed or would you like to get a final verbiage from >> that's fine. >> So, you'd like to take more time to
submit to revise the existing bylaws? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I I'm okay. Beth, I think you've got the sentiment of what we're add I think vaguely >> I think we will our intent is to re
review the current bylaws in surrounding towns and come up with a new bylaw. >> I guess I don't see the need for us as a board to all stare at Beth while she writes a sentence if uh even though
you're great at it and they don't mind the pressure of us watching you. I I think we vote to approve the draft decision subject to the one condition. I I think you'll have the gist of it and >> I think that'll be okay. I'd like to
entertain a motion to uh to take no action. Um and um have Beth finish the um the the single reason to discuss the plan. >> So moved and I'll second it. >> Second. Let's go clockwise. All those in favor?
>> Cindy King I. Carol Hopes. Yes, >> the yes. Yes. Excellent. All right. Thank you all. >> Can we get your contact information today so she has my information? >> Excellent. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
Appreciate you going whichever. >> Motion was Cindy and second was Kelly. >> Okay. So, uh, that takes care of 3.1 and 2.1.
Uh we'll talk about this when we get to 3.7. Um so 3.4 is understanding exparte communications and planning board members responsibilities Q&A. I believe Beth had
put up some talking points and um not to speak for Beth. I'd like Beth to comment. Um Beth and I talked a little bit earlier about kind of now we got to be board members just all as a group. I think it'd be a good time to refresh like roles and responsibilities
of municipal board members and such. Um I would like to take a little bit more time to just review it before we talk about it in earnest, I think. Um, but Beth, I don't know if you've got any comments you'd like to bring up on it or at this time
>> if the board is okay with it and would like to bring it up at a future meeting and have us all have a chance and Cindy are pretty at aware of the different laws and such and >> right. Um, and I I want to thank Beth for sending this out. I'm glad to see
this because I realized that I had had an exparte communication regarding the the marijuana stuff. I had spoken to I in fact I did a disclosure. I submitted a written disclosure which is in your packets now I believe um because I had talked to Kieran our town administrator and then I had a brief a brief convers
brief conversation that I had with both Kieran and and Kobe and by reading this it's like wow yeah I mean I needed to do a disclosure as simple as those conversations were I I felt that it was my obligation to make the disclosure publicly so I did that so and so I think
this is good though you know making sometimes I think disclosures can seem to be like I'm always doing a disclosure But that's what you know we really do need to do some of those to >> so certainly I think once is is seated and I think we could have a an agenda item and talk a little bit more in depth
about it and make sure all the board members are familiar. So so that is 3.4 3.5 is review 108 Pittsburgh road aid restricted development draft need restriction. Um,
which one is that? Can you describe it to me on the road? I know both buildings, right? >> Is that the the old one or is that the new one? >> I think it um is um undrafted. I'm >> the one closest to
>> um so we have I believe the builder of the permit present. Um >> Okay. Beth, I I don't Would you be interested in giving a quick update from your perspective on 3.5 the draft deed restriction and what you received and reviewed?
>> Well, I think the developers can give you the review of where they're at and um basically this is a deed restriction. I put a copy in your packets. >> Um Mr. Ketta sent that to me. Um and uh
as such it's your decision whether you think it's compliant with the um orders of you know the conditions of approval of the special permit. >> Sure. >> So Phil, we've got you here in mind just talking briefly about it. >> Yeah. So as of today um irrigation is
pretty much 90% in loan ming is done. We're going to seed tomorrow, but I think the rain said it was going to be like an inch of rain on Wednesday. So, we're going to hold off on that. Paving of the driveways are scheduled for Thursday. Uh, storm water retention
ponds are all in, planted, seated. Um, walkers are done. I got received a little bit of a list of um from from Mr. Grass, I think. Yeah. Kind of right now that we have we're cruising right
along. Uh the construction of the buildings are done and Bob is waiting to sign off on his his occupancy. The fire has been through and lecture is all signed up. So as far as buildings and structures, they're done. The paving is Thursday, which would kind
of bring me to like right there. We're going to do the top coat probably later in the summer, probably end like in the fall, but we're doing binder and everything. So, it's um I'll be seeing it tomorrow, but I think the range is a little off. Probably seated Friday, Saturday, Sunday. So, we're
right there. Okay. Excellent. Thank you. Am I correct in saying there's a sign on that property? >> Yeah, correct. >> Condos for rent. >> Correct. I'll be retaining them. >> Right. How do we protect uh the tenants
who um how how can we enforce that the tenants that would be renting would be subject to the age restricted requirements. >> The property would be restricted with
the deed. >> It has a 55 >> Yeah. >> restriction in the deed. >> Say what? >> It has a 55 restriction. It says I think it says something about at least one person has to be 55. >> Yeah. Well, that's that's what's before
us, Robert, is is um I I I understand it's all covered legally. All right. But there's no mechanism >> to monitor that.
>> Well, I think the Fourth Amendment prevents people from >> I'm sorry. I think the fourth amendment would prevent people from being us to to go and check out who's living someplace. Um I think we we'd have to anytime we'd have anything like that. We'd be looking
at >> I think it's like any any deed restriction on any property that like we say we're going to do something, we're going to do it. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, I think you're asking if like there's a party that rents there that's underage per se. They the
neighbor could potentially go to the building department and say, "Hey, this is this is false or this is wrong." And he comes and enforces that. I talked to Barb Gide about that. >> And the town census would be another source of okay, we got
the census and everybody that's listed at that address is 35. What's going on? And I think over 55 that that always generates there's always conversation that always comes up any where I've seen it is that if you've got somebody in the home that's elderly and passes away and
they're living with their adult children who might be 30 then that is an issue that I'm I'm not quite well verssed on what how that is supposed to work but that is something that does occur and it is it is dealt with. I think you're probably well verssed on it. that was part of the conversations we had when we
improved that. >> But I think there's I don't think there's a way for us to be in intrusive in in ways. I think we have to work and wait for the things like the neighbors to complain, the census to show up and then say, "Hey, we think we have a I
don't know who has the authority who acts at that point, whether it's the building inspector or us." >> The building inspector is a zoning >> enforcement. So there you go. I >> I know that in my opinion I as the plan or as a member of the planning board,
not speaking for the planning board, don't wish to be in the business of checking home occupancy, ages and such, you know. >> No, I agree and none of us are advocating that. >> Sure. >> But again,
this was a special privilege that was provided and the enforcement part is very weak. So, so the word for rent and for sale, is that messing you up on your comment? If it was for sale, you could have the same argument.
>> It is the same argument, >> right? >> It is the same. >> This isn't the first, >> but it's exposing it to a whole other world of things. And um >> I mean I can from personal experience when I was going to try to buy a 55 and
older condo but I was only 54 and they said no you have to wait till you're 5. Let's just envision the kind of problems this does because you have a condominium owner who might be in financially stress
who will lease that just to take care of his financial burden and I don't know anyway there are avenues it's done and we'll have to live with it but >> well you guys you guys approved the bylaw
>> you guys are going to tighten up the bylaw >> I Robert, if we if we wanted maybe look at the bylaw and see if there's any industry standards or something that I think that some of them were not opposed to doing. >> No, you know what? It's done anyway. So, >> I'm saying, you know, to remedy your
concern, right? You know, I that seems more opposed to this specific project. You know, may maybe we take some time over the summer or whatnot and relook at that bylaw. No, I'm I'm not going to deny this because of that. But uh
it's just >> I think we can cross that bridge when we come to it. >> No, it's just I want this board to be aware of >> the weak parts of these things that >> but that could be any condo community of 55 and old old I mean I was told they
stole when I was 54 it's going to be like 55 and six foot. They says, "Why don't you have your father buy it?" And then, you know, so I think our our community is actually aging. So, I think this might be a non-issue. And, you
know, if if we had to be under 55, that might be a problem. I think more more and more people are our age group looking looking for some place to downsize to. I mean, finding some place I don't know how big these places are, but finding someplace to downsize is a
critical problem. And I think finding somebody to fill a 55 and older is probably not that difficult. >> Let's just move on. Okay. I think you guys already So we have to vote on this. >> We need a a vote either of you or approval. I I think it
>> we basically my attorney just took what we had in the zoning bylaw, put on paper. We just wanted to >> I think we're I don't think we need to necessarily vote on it, but I think we're okay with it. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Okay. Excellent. Thank you. The other issue, well, not issue, but um
the other condition of approval is a conservation restriction on the open space. You want to give us an update on that? Planning board needs to see your progress because I I think you're looking for occupancy or >> We're looking for temporary occupancy. Yeah, >> temporary. Yeah. So,
>> so where's that at? The conservation restriction. Um, I need to find more information on that part of it and kind of deep dive into what that really means and all that. Um,
the the lands there. We didn't I did we didn't have any conservation restrictions or not tender RDA on the property, but then we read through the bylaw and again I want to kind of like see what that really means. my restricting
what does it really mean off the top of my head I don't know but >> yeah mean we have >> totally sure >> so the restriction means that they're um giving up some sort of right to a
portion of the property for the development development right like the building rights for this this square footage of whatever area on the property won't have a building on And it can it can come in a number of
ways what what you say is permitted or not. But the general the general understanding is that the conservation restriction is a holder and the property owner the property owner that's pretty
but the holder is another could be an entity of the town or land trust. Yeah, >> we're facing the same problem. We're on depot street. So, we have to have a CR on ours. You're talking 21,000 ft. A land trust isn't going to hold the
conservation restriction on 21,000 ft because there's not the the land that's not built on is already in open space. So, our conservation restriction on land is already in open space that you can't nobody can build on anyway. So, it's
kind of like a redundant thing. So, who was going to hold this conservation restriction? I don't have a problem with the language of who was actually going to hold this thing. >> So if it's a town entity, it's got to be the conservation commission. >> So the conservation commission will bother itself with holding the conservation. >> Yeah. And it's their responsibility to
monitor the agreement. There's no trespass. >> Okay. >> No, because I know a lot of towns won't think they won't be bothered with >> Okay. So what were the steps? What do I What are the steps to do that? we talked about that or I'm okay with that. I think it would help both parties here.
So, >> um yeah, um I think it's going to be a lengthier conversation that maybe we should have hours, but I guess uh I need to get some information to you about template. I've
been looking I've been searching for what other towns do as far as these smaller conservation restrictions for specifically develop. >> Yeah, we'll talk about language in so see if that's suitable for
>> and again this I don't want to get into a bigger conversation but but maybe should talk about these small developments and waiting that waving that requirement in the future. I think arguably you guys are the I can't remember if you're the first two or
>> was the first. >> Yeah. So we as a town have not done many of them >> and certainly updating and adjusting them to be more functional in the future. I think we're open to >> they're much more meaningful on larger developments. >> Exactly. That's the thing. It was a
project that's got 10 acres of something like that. That's one thing. You got you got not even half an acre of land around around the outskirts of a project like that one. >> There's some complexity to it too because they're generally not attached
to the master. >> How is it incorporated with the master? >> Yeah, it's usually stand out standalone document. It can be anywhere from a page to entire book depending on how Um but um
>> so I think maybe just in the interest of time I mean don't mind but like I think you guys connecting with Colby and probably talking more about the conservation commission side things >> on on our side of it I I still think it comes before you because somebody's got
to say okay this is good and and let's go with it because what happens if you couple weeks down the road we we want to sell one of those units and all of a sudden we're we're high up the final sign off from the planning board to let us let us move forward.
>> Yeah. If you look at the agreement that uh that >> I mean we got a pretty different but we're not lawyers so I don't know what the planning board wants to do. I mean >> this is a >> you have two very different agreements.
>> Yeah. We don't get the same problem in the agreement that Tom Guson drew up. If you if you read it, it's pretty explicit of the project and holding it all the question
you know of approval here too. It has to go to the state EA Executive Office of their environmental affairs. Yeah. What happens if they don't want it? What happens if they don't want it? >> And I don't think they'll do this. >> They won't this state won't mess with
21,000 feet per se cuz we work I work with land trust and D and they hold big ones you know farms and Drake and you know big acreages and the state doesn't want to be bothered with happening. They won't even they won't even look at
you. You tell me. >> Now when the restricted by law is amended, >> the planning board did get the right to waver. However, these are old projects. So what does that mean procedurally? Do they ask for a modification to come back
to the board and and be run through that rhythm or is there a way again? I I think it's a question for council. Um the bylaw was changed after these two permits were granted and the bylaw did
does say that the planning board can wave that conservation restriction where it couldn't before. So it really is a different animal now. The bylaw is restricted to development bylaw you have a different power of these
>> you know and for that's why that was made I think that was a smart move to allow the planning board to waiver because these small little CRs are really a waste of energy. >> Sure they are. So I I mean I I would think uh
in terms of attempting to follow the bylaws and be fair, I would want to ask council based on what the regul what our regulations are, what would be the best approach for us as the planning board. I don't of course would not wish to hold you guys up in any realm in that sense
as you're moving on and getting close to finishing your projects, but I would think maybe we as a board consider uh asking Beth to connect town council on this matter and see what the best remedy would be. >> We have the potential of getting this
resolved and on our agenda for the 11th. I mean, could we theoretically have counsel, have the conversation with council, have him review it, give us his opinion council that quick? >> Well, sometimes he goes fast, but can can we get this on the agenda for is
that potentially possible to do that? Well, the thing is I don't you know this is kind of unchartered or borders because now we're paying our council to review their agreements and I'm not sure that's the intent of the bylaw. >> I guess less less
>> no can we wave it. The question is can we >> can we use the new bylaw? >> Yes. >> So that not their agreements but can we wave the conservation restrictions that were put on before the bylaw changed. Can we use the new bylaw? >> Mhm.
>> To go back on to that haven't been You really haven't been completed yet. So, you're still in process, right? Yeah. >> So, that's the question, not to review their >> Okay. So, >> very good. Now, I understand. And then if so, do they have to go back through
the modification process, which can be laborious, which can be posting the public hearing, yada yada yada. Is there an administrative way to get that done? >> Well, you know, you know what to ask council. Yeah. >> Or is is is there a acreage requirement
by the state for this conservation? Like in other words, do we change our bylaw to say if you have less than x number of acres the conservation doesn't apply or something? >> I don't think you have to because you have the power to wave it. So case by
case you say this makes sense, this doesn't. >> If you got two or three or five acres along or something like that, I can see it. I can see it. The little piece that's in the top of the sand pile. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I move that we ask Beth to contact
town council and ask appropriate questions and get back to us and >> Okay. >> possibly have this on our agenda for the 11th. >> Yeah. >> And in the meantime, separate separate agenda items. >> Can I just ask one question? If town council works like other towns and he
does get back by the 11th, is there any chance that we could get like a temporary agreement where we could maybe close on one unit or something? >> I'm not saying the town council is not going to get back, but just you know legal in other towns and it just sucks.
>> I personally do. We have a comment from is that Lori? >> Yes, Lori. Sorry to interrupt, but I have to agree with um Cindy. It's in your purview to wave that with the new bylaw.
>> And at this point in time, it's going to be June or July before town council gets back to us. And um June anyway, we really don't have any money left and we've overspent at this point. But you do have that right within the board to
make that decision. Lori, would you know, and I know you're not a lawyer, can we wave it administratively? >> You can wave it administratively. >> You can have it confirmed. You know, we can confirm it however way you you want,
but it should be able to be allowed under the new bylaw. So, there's no reason why you can't wave it. That was ourility one, remember? Uh, yeah, I remember talking about this a number of years ago. I I guess maybe
let's take a chance. Maybe we can all look at the bylaws and just have a chance to review it ourselves. If town council does get to us in a week, great. If not, hopefully we can have it as an agenda item on the next uh the upcoming meeting.
the meeting for us. >> When you finish >> the 11 before you >> Yeah. I mean, I think the goal obviously would be a work you guys. We don't we don't want to try to hold something up forever, but we do want to try to abide by the
bylaws, you know, follow the right processes and procedures best we can. >> Yeah. Because everything's still protected. It's just that the CR language goes away because we're not going to find someone in the state to approve the C for 20,000 ft. They're
just going to the state acres. I guess >> in my opinion, it's less that and more just process-wise. uh what is the right process that we need to follow so that someone doesn't get jealous or somebody doesn't say hey you did this for them and you didn't do
it for us or you know why did you do the last minute Monday morning quarterback thing it's just making sure that I think we're comfortable with the mechanisms >> so Cindy has made a motion um that was not seconded or but was to
ask Beth to communicate with town council Lori did appine that it was unlikely, but >> well, we wanted to make sure there's enough money to even ask town council cuz it's almost at the end of the fiscal year and they may be close to being out of funds. >> Well, I guess it sounds like from Lori
that's highly unlikely, but I don't think it's not worth checking maybe formally. >> We just got to make sure we have money to cover because >> if we go into a deficit, we might not be able to cover. >> He's going to be at town meeting tomorrow. Maybe we can borrow his time.
No, this be okay. It's got to be focusing on the water. >> No, ask just ask Adam a question while he's being paid already to be at Tom meeting. >> Oh, good idea. >> Slide it in. >> Prepare the questions to stick to them.
>> We'll see what we can do. You know, >> it's obvious problem. >> So, barring the the conservation restriction issue on this 12step um email that Bob gave me. >> Should I connect with him tomorrow and
just kind of go through and see where we are on to like update this this list >> update >> the the email from Bob that he was responding to getting a temporary >> where where does it stand with the
planning board to do that or is there another step for me? I'm not really sure how it falls out to get >> So the CR, how does that fall in your chances of getting temporary occupancy? >> Uh the CR but there's nothing you haven't developed the CR yet. You
haven't >> Yeah. Yeah. But the uh temporary occupy for the planning board on the special permit side of it. >> Oh, see the board can't do that. That's got to be >> Yeah. So to let what you sent me, you know, the agreement, the deed agreement.
Yeah. um is before the board and I don't know what the board is going to do with it. That's my job is to get it to them. >> So the de if you guys need I was I was just asking like at the board at the board level what's my next step to get
the zero finalize everything. China. >> Uh top of mind, I guess I do not. I'd have to look at it. I would think if we approved the deed and then if we're open to waving potentially if we're satisfied by the mechanisms and path I'd have to double check the conditions of your permit, but I would think
shortly after that you'd be able to write a request to come to a meeting. Is that how that >> you want to do that? >> Yeah. >> Oh, I did I didn't know the steps. I'm sorry. I don't know the steps. So I come to it and request a final sign off to the planning board.
>> A sign off >> or >> Oh no, that's the occupancy permit is is issued by the building. >> So is there any more steps with the planning board for this to close out the special review? >> No, not any more than what we're doing now. >> Okay. So this is it
>> potentially. >> I didn't know if I had to come to the planning board and say, "Hey, by the way, I'm done completely sign off." >> Right. And prior to issuing the occupancy permit, the
building officials should contact other department land use to see if there's any outstanding issues. >> Okay. >> Okay. That's the list here and I'm pretty much through the whole thing. >> Yeah. >> We do have a list. >> Yeah. So, we're just saying so we don't
need like an official vote complaining saying that. >> I guess that's my question. >> Okay. All right. >> But the role of the building inspector is the enforcement of the zoning dry >> as well as the building code.
>> Well, he's required to review all the other departments everything is the water >> kind of thing. and as the subject calls that >> um and then when he has those releases
from the appropriate departments then >> it doesn't >> there's no such thing as a temporary occupancy either >> you talking about a partial or temporary >> temporary occupancy >> no it's either occupiable or not
>> so is is there going to be somebody living there when you're finishing the construction. >> So the bottom of this email says, "Please review answer these questions for this list. My guess is if you're a renting, you would want to do a temporary t TCO for 180 days with the agreements that these issues."
>> Who said that? >> There's a temporary occupancy. >> That's not what the building code says. >> So I I don't I have no idea. I'm not well versed at this moment, but I don't think it's the planning board who's making >> I don't want to get too into here. Well,
that that's something to pay attention to. >> They do issue a build temporary. Building departments do. >> No, they don't. >> Okay. Maybe it' be worth if you have a chance talking to Bob Garcid checking with your knowledge and seeing how it's
>> I'm just I don't I don't think we as a body >> at this time are going to get into weeds on that one. So, um, we 3.5 reviewed the draft deed. Seems like we're okay with the draft deed.
>> Okay. Um, 3.6 is the deep. >> Um, we kind of if you guys are good, I mean I was there any comments on the draft for the depot road depot? >> No, it's just the same issue. for sure. >> He was very creative in the um
description of the CR in that agreement. >> Yeah. >> Um so I mean if the board feels like it satisfies the condition of approval, then you can take action on it. I can't tell you what to do. We got you got to review the >> Yeah, that's our attorney's got the the
master de all the CR stuff all done in great detail. I mean, I I guess I personally they they do have a >> work product that covers it in front of us. Um I would I wouldn't be opposed to
approving it as is if they've got it done and wouldn't be opposed to to seeing if we have as we're kind of exploring the >> reach. Did you reach for >> I didn't read that section. So I don't mind >> Beth has read it. >> It's really well done, >> but I'm not a lawyer. So yeah, you guys
got >> so I defer to the the rest of the board and and if the applicant wants us to attempt to wave it if we can, you know, and they at least have a they have a work product that covers it. >> Oh, okay. >> In indeed. So if you want take a minute,
uh you can read it quickly or I don't know if you'll read it all quickly, but you can read the conservation description section. be comprehensive. This whole document, >> I'm just trying to find where I got to go now. >> The conservation research >> section 17.
>> Okay. Wow. I'm getting there. >> I'm getting Yeah, I'm getting page. Second or probably third or last page. So these are condosind I don't personally have an issue with They they got something that covers it.
They seem to be happy with it enough that they put it before us. If you're okay with it, I can have the nasty recorded master has to be recorded the registry before we close. That's one of the requirements attorney general.
So would the motion be I moved to accept the master key? >> Um yeah I mean do you do would we be accepting a draft master gate or we would just be >> there be no change. It's just stamp draft just just in case we got here tonight and said we'll
>> I think you're actually it is a draft in sense because there's in the >> the section about conservation restriction there's a plan plan blank of >> I mean I I don't know I guess what I'm saying is I don't know if you I don't know if we need to accept your draft you
know like I think we would accept your final and I think I don't >> I mean yeah I guess either or but I I'm okay with it I'd like to go around the world there's no You can't approve that. That would be the >> Yeah, we're not going to make a change.
We're not making any changes to it. >> So again, I guess entertain a motion to approve the draft submitted for >> Are we talking about a master de >> seems like confusion for what is going to be that way.
>> So move second. Robert, I guess we're in discussion. Do you have a question or no? Okay. Uh let's go around the room and >> Cindy King house is >> private hearering. Yes.
>> Yeah. Andrew. Yes. So I think we're okay and good to go. You guys perfected and finish the draft and then Phil will do our best to work with you on the on your side. >> But the my my team is fine. They restricted draft was >> Yeah, I think so.
>> Yeah. I guess we didn't vote on it, but I Thank you very much. >> Yeah, I mean I guess >> I guess the mot is that a comment from Lori? >> Yes. Um the motion is good to accept
pending legal review on the master deed. Okay. So if you >> second it. So we have an amendment to the motion pending legal review. Um in discussion if there's any comment otherwise
>> Cindy King I say yes >> Robert Daring. Yes. >> Okay. And then um so I guess we can vote. I get my only thing with voting on Mr. Coz was he doesn't really address the uh
the conservation restriction. >> I agree. >> So >> it's very simple. >> Um well it's uh and he expressed a wish to try to move towards um I exploring our willingness to wave that I think that's probably the best option
here because to wave it. Yeah. because it's not a realistic situation that can >> be executed to >> in terms of the intent of the bylaw.
>> I Yeah, I mean I guess I guess I in >> I guess there's a few different ways we could skin the cat. Um I'm I'm not opposed to that. >> It sounds like we're not sure if we're going to get a full legal review. Maybe we'll be able to approach town council tomorrow and just say, "Hey, what do you think?" Lori does seem to think that we
can administratively do it. Um um >> I I will tell you that I did uh forward this to Karen and he is forwarding it to Adam. Not promising anything, but he'll have it so that >> I think they have to wait till they get
a legal review because this is beyond our >> capabilities. Yeah. I guess per Cindy's suggestion, you know, we could approve it pending a legal review. >> And if the legal review says no, I mean, it's a >> but that's the thing I don't like.
>> I hear words like pending, temporary. Okay. Um, people rely on that. >> People buy mortgages and >> change money. And what happens if it was
a mistake or somebody messed up? >> Um, and >> we have run into that. >> Yes. And I I don't know. I mean, I'm sorry. I was really upset when I heard about a temporary occupancy permit. That's a
public safety issue. You know, it's there's nothing temporary, particularly on a new building. Um, so >> either it's occupiable or it's not, you know. >> Sure. Um, so let just real quick I >> I don't know. So I got I hear Robert. I
hear Cindy. Carol, do you have any perspective or thoughts? >> Well, I'm kind of leading with Robert, you know, depending, you know, people >> buy condos. >> We got to wash our hands with this. This
is not something we can do. So I think >> yeah I mean I think we need the legal opinion because we're not lawyers and hopefully we'll have it shortly. >> So I guess maybe we make a motion to to move 3.4 to our next scheduled meeting of May 11th. >> Right.
>> And so >> I think so >> and we'll you know hopefully there'll be an update there and we'll do the best we can with the information we have. >> All we can do is our best but >> we understand the situation. >> Sure. >> But we're not equipped to. So I'll make
the motion that we uh we move 3 point uh sorry 3.5 review 108 Psburg age restriction draft development deed restriction to our upcoming May 11 meeting. >> Yes. >> Second go around >> Cindy
>> King Ian. Thank you. Okay so we have done 3.5 3.6 and 3.7. So, um, Beth handed to me. Um, Beth, would you mind giving a brief update as I find that piece of paper
about 3.7 Road? >> Okay. So, this is something that, um, you know, just a word of caution. the signing the public hearing is not been opened but in the background um but I've
been working with a consulting engineer to who's been conducting the peer review um and all of this will be discussed on May 11th but what has happened is the peerreview consultant has expended the
almost the entire budget um and there is still remaining attendance at the public hearing to be Yeah. to be >> Yeah, we have to pay him for it. >> So, his he's written a request and it's it was in your packet. It's a request to
amend the original contract and in that request um supposedly he explains why and he gives a dollar amount. Now, this was all came into my inbox this morning.
So um I felt it was important for tonight's meeting because the board needs to know whether he's going to attend on the 11th or not. Your consultant normally will attend, >> right? So, um, in the meantime,
I corresponded with the, uh, engineer of the applicant, um, and he is asking the board to take no action on this request tonight because he needs time to discuss
it with his client basically. So, a lot has happened, but I did want to bring it up tonight without talking about any detail for the application. How did this happen with the >> Did he extend the budget? >> Yes.
>> Well, I asked for an itemized um you know list and I also told him to stop work in email. You know, you can't come to the meeting if the money's not there. I also explained to him the process of amending and you know replenishing the
escrow account and that involves a vote you know review by the board a vote of the board and then you know replenishing of the escrow and then the consultant can start working again. The problem here is the applicant's engineer hasn't
had enough time to discuss it with his client, >> which isn't fair. If if you make a decision tonight, >> you know, it I don't know fair. I mean, you certainly can. It's it's within your purview to decide whatever you want. But
I think consideration of the applicant's situation is is you know the best path. So he wrote an email late during the meeting and he just hasn't had the opportunity to you know discuss it yet.
So you can, you know, he's asked the board to take no action on it tonight and he feels that there's ample time to address the, you know, the um the escrow account, the unfunded escrow
account. Um, >> so >> um >> I guess >> I understand everything that's going on here, but um >> what about >> important thing the board has received
the review letter number one, >> right? >> And typically and that was in the board folders, >> right? >> Um the applicant has not yet responded to that. But what typically happens as you know is that first review letter comes out the applicants engineer
responds to it the town's engineer your consultant responds to that >> and all this is going on however >> I'm not sure that your consultant needs to come to the public hearing that's that's what
>> that that your consultant needs to attend the public hearing. Do you know what I mean? Mhm. >> That's just my thought. Why did I make you come? I don't know. You have a a very detailed peerreview letter. It's 13 pages of of comments.
>> It's very detailed. >> So, both consultants will be communicating with one another regardless. >> They have been communicating through me. >> Mhm. So sort of getting the process going before we come to public hearing in the interest of moving things,
>> right? And there's a lot of work still to be done on that. >> So I think that helps a lot. My primary question was when the scope of work was put out for
the consultant Whether it was included presence at a public hearing or not, it would appear to me that if this person is competing,
bidding, submitting a bid, that the bids would all have to be the same. So did we have that in the other biders? So I kind of feel he's still compelled
to perform. Um whether he doesn't have enough money for it or not is not what I envision here. This was a public bid. Everybody had the same information and the same
requirements. So the only way that that could have happened is if the scope of work in the invitation for bid address that.
In other words, they should only be bidding on what they were invited to bid upon and only that document. So if those service were included
in the original scope of work for the biders, then we accepted that bid. We didn't make any authorization in his bid submission other than what the value was.
So that means he owns it. Robert, I guess, you know, I don't think we should take any action tonight. I don't want to spend too too long, I guess, discussing it. I think to your point, my initial concern is, you know,
Cole and Tanner who gave us a very nice presentation um around the time um or a little bit before I think this came up and they submitted their quote um you know they were able to look at which included coming in public meetings and included
the scope of work and they made their estimate and they did it and clearly they've they were wrong and I'm not well I feel There's two there's two points here. We're talking about a specific situation. All right. And then
we're talking about >> did we error in preparing the scope of work >> which is a subject of this board. >> Sure. To my understanding is the looking at the documents is that when they
submitted their estimate you know it included coming to public meeting. >> Yeah. It wasn't an estimate. It was a bit >> I don't know that it's a contract and it is a contract that >> they submitted a proposal >> correct
>> based on the scope of work we asked them to give us a price on. >> Right. Yeah. >> And the contractor was prepared premise on that scope of work. >> So the contract should be very clear as
to what's included, what's not. Sometimes there's movement in there >> that delineates additional services >> which I don't believe we had any
additional services or delineation in his bid proposal. >> So I don't want to I really don't want to spend too long on it. I we're not going to make a decision now. >> That's simply that's the truth, right? But I think we're in agreement that we're not >> I understand. But everybody has to
understand. >> I'm not disagree with you. No, I don't disagree because if they signed a contract for a scope of work with a dollar value and nothing changed, we didn't make any changes to that, then whether they ran
out of money or not, they they need to fulfill the requirements of the >> this board approved that contract under the assumption that was the same as the other biders and
that everything we would need would be there, right? >> It it's it's fairly simple when you come to contract it unless unless >> Sure is. >> Unless you make a a change. >> So, and our our next meeting is the beginning of that public hearing.
>> Right. So, what would the board like me to do about that? >> I mean, I I in my opinion, I think we're kind of because it just happened today. I we kind of don't have all the information either. You're still waiting to hear back from Lyman Tanner, I believe, on the questions you asked them
or for the itemized kind of, you know, >> I don't think I'm going to get that to be honest with you. I asked for an invoice and they said it was in the middle of a billing cycle or something. So, I don't think I'm going to be able to get that. >> Okay. So, >> but we do have the work product from
them with the review. I think at our next meeting hopefully the that has been transmitted to the applicant and their engineer you know hopefully by then we'll have feedback on that and if we are at a point where we're perplexed and we need to go back to our you know then we kind
of conversation >> well the question is are we going to have the opportunity to have our consultant president or not >> is that the question >> yeah that's my question >> right so if we're going to have a hearing hearing.
I I probably don't think we should have one unless we know we have that opportunity or not. >> You have to have the hearing. There's no option. >> Say what? >> No option on the hearing. It's a legal notice. It's legally posted, published.
>> The option of having our consultant present, >> right? So >> for that, >> I can reach out and ask if they'll come. But if it's if it's in the contract that he's supposed to show up, >> he should show up.
>> Yeah, it's included in the original contract. >> Either that or we request them to >> you can read the amendment, but yeah, >> I would I would recommend just reading the amendment and >> Well,
Robert, I don't want to >> I'm sorry, Andrew. No, you can't. That's fine. When the subject of him being present came up, did he quote you a price to do that? >> It's in the contract. Did you see the contract?
>> I'm I'm sorry. Just >> Yeah. >> Did he quote us a price? >> He included it in the scope. >> In the scope. >> Yeah. Let me pull it up. Let me just I don't want to speak from memory here. It's been, you know, since over a month
ago that this was executed >> and I'm not and I Robert, I get and I know you have feelings and you have more feelings that you want to make sure are heard and that we approach this the right way, but if we're we're not going to be making a decision on this tonight, it can give us time as individual board
members to make sure we review the scope of work and all the documents that came in, including 13page. I want to know >> I I know >> we can have this consultant at that next meeting where we would have normally planned on them. >> I think because this all happened today,
I don't think we know with any cert. >> It's in the scope of services task 10 attendance at up to two virtual planning board meetings. It says that in the scope of services and the signed contract but there is a line called assumptions. This proposal is based on
the following assumptions. consultant will be granted one site visit which we did submission of all documents relating to the preliminary subdivision hearing and then I don't know what that's all about but anyway um and then there's
some little clause in here that he pointed out um services outside the scope outlined above will be charged at standard hourly rate um what else is there something else in here.
Um I don't know the scope does include it. Let's just let's just go with that. And if you know he's >> But you can't if he's >> he was required to have two public meetings. >> There's going to be >> So he was required to have two public
meetings. So he should be present. Does the attorney generally look at these contracts before they're signed? >> No. So, we don't have attorneys reviewing contracts before the town before they're signed.
>> No. Um, town administrator reviews them and sign them. >> May maybe Beth, we could ask if you would be willing to send an email to our consultant and say the board has some questions about your overage. Okay. >> We we would really appreciate it if you
would be willing to come to this next meeting and we can you know discuss >> could be present at May 11 >> at May 11 conveniently which is the public hearing but also if he is interested if he is asking us for more money to do more work. We as the board
have I don't even know if it's mixed opinions. We have strong feelings and concerns about it and would like to talk to him about about what he's done and I you know hopefully he would honor it and show up. If he doesn't, then we'll have to address it at that time. >> Okay.
>> So, are you guys amenable to that? >> Yep. >> Um, okay. So, that's 3.7 um correspondences uh notice notices from town and abundant towns. Our new clerk.
>> Okay. Should I read the other towns or should I read >> I would think you have the license to choose. >> Okay. your favorite town or other towns and I would >> in the interest of your voice and our
ears if you um and this is a hard yeah I just hit the high level >> I just have question about about the folders one is town board decisions certificates and oh towns and and other town notices that's all of them >> there's a lot in there
>> there is a lot there is a lot but just do this >> all right I'm going to read all the other towns and if I need to open another folder and start reading. Let me know just so we can go home tonight. Okay. All right. We have one from Grten and they u they had the public hearing
on April 23rd at 7 p.m. in their town hall to consider special permit and major site plan review regarding personal wireless services facility site plan review and a tower comm CPRV
whatever that is. That is yeah um the tower is going to be located at the Gondell School Regional High School. So they had that um on April something I lost it. April 23rd. We missed it.
Okay. Lunberg had uh oh they have they're having a public hearing on May 11th the same time. Here we are for a site plan approval application for the storage, display, and sale of 12 motor 12 motor vehicles
at 149 Summer Street. And that's all I have to say about that. And they have another Lunberg has another one for Par Road there. That's also going to be on May 11th.
They have two storm water permit applications covering 12 single family house lots at multiple addresses at Paral Road as well as multiple addresses multiple addresses on Ruth Street
and let's see here also to here in reveal two shared driveway special permits that will serve seven single family house lots on roof street the same roof street most of the same street addresses as well.
All part of the same package. Then Lunberg's got another Lunberg's busy. All right. They have a they had a public hearing on April 27th regarding a storm water permit application for a single family home 30
Pine Grove Road and another one at 64 Crossroad and a duplex at 68 Crossroad. In addition to the dwelling at 60 crossroad pursuant to chapter 204, the storm storm sewers in the code of
Lunberg. And one more for Lunenburgg is they have notice of a decision for 39 Intervil Road for site plan approval with conditions to allow for the construction of
um a 5,000 foot vehicle maintenance building. Um, I think that's enough about that. And Pepper has a couple the notice of decision for them
for property the applicants at Pepper DPW property at 13 Jersey Street between Jersey and Crawford Way to major site plan review and land disturbance permit. to permit the
construction of a water treatment plant. Good for them. And couple notice. Let's see. They have an application submitted to require special permit to allow a home
occupation for the purpose of using an existing space in the residence as a home office to see clients onetoone for energy healing work as well as hold monthly wellness related events such as meditations and group energy healing
at 57 to 59 Park Street. Um, the hearing is will be held remotely May 6th at 7:00 p.m. And that's all for the other towns. Not
do I is there something for towns in >> so I unfortunately I was sitting on a folder Beth printed that has some of these printed out. >> Okay. >> I don't know if it's easier on your computer or >> Oh, no. It's I mean I just I got an 18 Street storm water certificate. Should I read that as
>> just high level? Okay. Um, a certificate of completion for the storm water management permit for 18 Main Street. I don't know if that had to do with um the Was that that was that as a result of Starbucks?
>> Uh, yeah. >> Okay. All right. We were also invited to we were invited to the CPC meeting um on April 30th, I think. I don't know if anybody went to that, but um
CPC had a meeting for them to to go over it. Q&A for >> Robert is the chair on what >> you're the chair of the CPC. >> Yes. >> Committee presentation. Okay. >> So, >> yeah. So, >> we were well represented. >> Yes. >> I was drafted. >> You were drafted. Okay. All right. And
that's all I have. >> All right. Excellent. Um Beth normally does print out a folder and I was just sitting on it unwittingly. So um you should have that going forward. So that um 4.1
and I it seems like that included 4.2. So 4.3 um this is kind of a fun one. A culmination of things that we have worked on as a planning board. The Mass DOT hosted the road safety audit, which is the RSA.
>> Oh, they did. >> They did. Um I was I attended, Beth attended. >> Um Lori attended for the select board. It was well attended in my opinion. >> Yeah. >> Um there was representatives of from
Townsen, uh Highway, police and fire. Great. Groten had I believe police and highway. Uh Peril had highway police and fire as well. Um there was not a representative from the
school or any of the local businesses that would be affected by that corridor. Um but there was a good number of mass DOT individuals there as well and the agency who was running the RSA and the the format was we started in this room
had generalized conversation about the corridor uh strengths and weaknesses to it some of the challenges as locals that we've experienced. It then was a walkound out of the site and then came back here. they uh you'll see in the portal there's the
agenda there's kind of the the states analysis of the number of crashes per location and then there's a generalized print out of I guess potential remedies and the as the my interpretation of what the
consultant for the state said is that their goal is to just look at and say what is the breadth of options that could happen here. Obviously, uh, funding is a constraint. There's other constraints, but our goal is to represent the state, put together this
analysis, and then share these potential options, which may or may not happen depending on who knows what. >> And certainly any deadlines or schedules or >> um, you know, as one may assume with the
state, there's no >> commitment anywhere. >> No, no. there there was a a relatively I don't know certainly not certain but shared opinion that that certainly like lower tier improvements that the state
seemed to have potential funding for and would be willing to do in the short term and that could be it sounded like as small as changing some curving um from slanted to vertical um but they you know and I wouldn't expect them to commit this early to specific
>> no I just uh It's it's certainly a step in the process. >> No kidding. We got it going. Um, you know, I meeting with I'd like to ask >> I'm glad there were that many people there because it would give some some muscle to it. Anyway,
>> the the other thing that I I've talked about this a little bit um as a planning board, not too too much, but uh something I brought up with I think it was Grace from MRPC and then subsequently the PEPAL, an associate of the PEL DPW is there was just, you know,
what are the other avenues to potentially change traffic patterns? And I think one would be potentially doing an overlay district like we did with the MBTA housing and thinking about as a condition of permit approval would be saying you know we
want this we would try to aim for these changes. So with that, um, you know, as a as an individual, I talked to the DPW individual and she shared and asked the whoever the PEO DPW director is, but
asked about the prospect of having sewer from PEP come to town if they had capacity in an unofficial capacity, just like, hey, you know, what do you think about this? and they said they would be open to it because if you're going to do any development there due to the as we discussed due the proximity to the river
there's septic challenges. So I I guess I and I share that in the sense of uh sharing a conversation that I had but also um at some point to see if the board has an appetite to consider that or see upon the direction of the select board in regards to uh this roadway and
potential avenues to change the improve the traffic pattern what they may have for a direction. So I and Beth, I don't know if you have any comments or thoughts from attending the RSA or takeaways. >> Oh, yeah. You covered a great >> Okay. Okay. And I don't know if there's
any questions of the board members. I mean, >> well, thanks for doing that. That was great. Sure. It was a uh >> a big step. Well, it was something, you know, and you're excited and and credit to select board at the time who pushed for the DTA for the MRPC to do the corridor analysis that helps spur with
our pushing the RSA for the corridor from the state. >> So, we're going to hear the future. This is just going to be an ongoing. >> So, this will be ongoing >> all the players rather than waiting on all the play. We have all the players now. >> Yeah. to a certain extent. I think once the RSA comes out, you know, my hope
would be that the select board and us will be able to look at it and say, hey, you know, what makes the most sense to try to do next? You know, the state's going to do some small things, it seems, but are there more? Are there things that we as a town can do? I don't know. The problem with this is we're doing
this conceptual planning now knowing that it's not going to be funded for probably a very long time. And by the time it's really going to be funded or if it can be funded,
it would have been all this information would be archaic. >> I think you can do projections. >> Yeah. >> Well, I mean, no, we have to do something. So, at least we're doing that. what the you know the traffic counts which we have a long history of
the numbers for traffic counts that we can >> you know this I'm sure that there's a >> there's a way to estimate how to increase that number >> well hopefully >> even though there may be a master plan for everything there be some components
we could implement you know with smaller grants just to make improvements subtly or whatever so we had to start somewhere and I think we did a good job. >> The state might come up with money. >> Oh no. >> Well,
only if you want to pay more. >> That's my late night joke. >> But if if we don't have a you know much with the DTAS as they come across if it's not something we've been thinking about and you know then we're not in a position to execute on something if an opportunity does arise in the future. So,
>> well, there might even be subtle modifications that we could handle our own as a town to >> or at least lean on the RSA, lean on the studies we've done and apply for grants or the highway department, >> small parts of it. >> So, I've had the question for a long
time. Is Graten and Peril interested in working on a plan for for the the other end of town? Is that are they actively involved or is it Townzen is the one who's just keeps asking and we're just >> so I can't answer that.
>> Most of the problem is in Grten. It's not even in town. So, >> and when you when you look at the the crash layout, there's a lot in front of the high school because you got, you know, the entry and exit, but then there's way more in front of the Proctor Road, >> right? >> Which is Broen and the border of Peril,
of course, border town as well, but >> um much more in those towns. So that mean they were present. Um I get a sense that you know everyone at that meeting talked very passionately about the challenges that we all experience there and to the point where you experience them so often sometimes you just accept
them as normal. >> And I would think if we as a board or if the select board gave us the direction I would think we could probably work together with those towns to you know continue to push something along and you know see what other avenues there would
be. But I we'll wait and see what the RSA looks like and discuss that I think. And um >> that's great. >> And then just kind of keep keep it as a focus. And you know, much like the other things in front of us. >> So is there any followup or what happens
next? We don't know. >> You know, you're dealing with like David and Goliath. The state will tell us when they're done in their chair as they wish. And >> you know, thank you. So, it's best for us as individuals to just read the materials and come up with our dream
sheets or >> as we go. I mean, just as just to be educated, I should say just educate ourselves on what this is so that we can be more prepared for. >> Yeah. Yeah. And >> the opportunity to speak up at some point. >> Yeah. So, yeah, I think that's kind of the the
big the big one on that which is 4.3. Um and that so section five next next meetings are May 11th, June 8th and June 22nd and the 11th is the beginning of receiver road hearing tomorrow.
Um if there's not any other business a motion to adjourn. >> I'll make a motion to second >> second. Cindy King Il very good. Thank you all.