Yeah, good evening everybody. It's seven o'clock and we are calling the Tuesday, March 3rd, um, planning board meeting to order. First on the agenda is public participation on any matter, not subject to a public hearing. Command board name and address please. How you doing? Uh, my name is Allie Connor. I reside at 75 Alexander Place and I'm the owner of Camp Can nine on 2 0 2 Union Street. So I'm here today because on Tuesday, February 17th the board approved a special permit for an incoming business going on 68 Mainline Drive.
And I guess part of the reason why I'm here today is kind of, I'm hoping to get a little bit of clarity on some things from that meeting. Um, I was able to tune in and watch, I understand that there are certain things you can and can't say and there's an appeal process and all of that. Um, but the real reason why I'm here is because when I came to the board in 2000 and my God 15 the first time, uh, we were a brand new business, uh, similar in concept as far as like daycare and kennel. And we were held to a pretty like decent standard. There wasn't anything like us here in town.
And at the time, the only business that was similar was an in-home boarding and an in-home grooming facility on South Hampton Road that did a little bit of daycare. And at that time when we opened that particular grooming business was allowed 25 dogs on the property. When we booked, um, our lease at 2 0 2 Union Street, our business was quite large. Um, and it still is to this day and growing as far as square feet. And we were limited to a capacity of 25 by the board with a 7,000 square foot building. Fast forward a year later, I was back here before the board to say, Hey, listen, 7,000 square foot building, 25 dogs a day.
It's like Tic-Tacs, you know, we were busy, we were doing really well. Um, and so we increased that number to 50 with the help of the board, which was great. A couple years later, we were back again to increase that number to our original goal, which was to be at about 80 dogs a day, which at that time the board approved. But during all three meetings, there were different standards that were held, questions that were asked and special things that were in our permit that are not in the permit that is coming to be for the 68 mainline Drive property. And so my real question, or I guess my concern
or my ask is there isn't really a way for me to like reopen that and ask that question. During that meeting, it was school vacation. I wasn't able to be here. And quite frankly, I didn't know all the details. And so the business concept itself isn't really my problem. It's more just like the standard that they were held to or lack thereof versus what I was held to in my final special permit meeting. It was deemed that if I were to sell the property or the business per se, it was voted on by the board that that number of 80 dogs per day would go down to 50 with a 20 overnight capacity.
The meeting that was held on February 17th, there wasn't any type of limit set to them. They have a little bit larger of a facility, which is great for them, and there was no like standard. There was many references to Ollie's Law and allowing Ollie's Law to handle that. But Ollie's Law doesn't have anything to do with quantity. It's a proposal that they're on the, in the process of talking about, but it's years in the making. It's not part of the current law. And so I hope you can imagine that it's frustrating because I've always kind of, you know, played and done things the right way. Came to a planning board meeting before I opened the business.
I came to round tables, I asked the questions. I did all the things I was supposed to do. So I guess my question really is at this particular point in time and appeal seems ridiculous. Like I'm not looking to drag these nice people into any type of crazy stuff or in any way drive you into that stuff. But what I'm trying to figure out is why that fairness factor wasn't there. Why those same questions weren't asked to a brand new business. Business only is what I'm talking about. Um, I just can't wrap my head around it. And I went back through all the minutes that I had on all three meetings and I watched all the video playbacks
and then I watched the video playback of theirs and I can't read the minutes 'cause they're not up yet. And it was very frustrating to have done everything the right way and follow the rules, but yet there was not really anything as far as quantity or quality of what they were allowed to have in the building. And as you can imagine when you're talking about dogs, it's very much like running a school, like a preschool. It has to be so many teachers per student. And when we came, we were, you know, 25 dogs a day. It was even brought up, you know, we should like limit the, the staff that was there that kind of got nix. But it was brought up, you know, our hours were in there.
The next meeting, um, when we asked for 50, there was other questions about like staffing and hours and square feet and all this stuff. And those same types of questions weren't asked. And then the third meeting, it was like way more in depth. Now we'd been around for a couple years, curious as you know, curious questions are being asked. Um, but like none of that was asked. And after digging into the appeal process today, yesterday, and kind of like talking it over with other people in the industry, it just seems kind of like there's no like happy medium to like really talk about the frustration or like be able to revisit what actually happened.
You know, questions about safety weren't really brought up and that's not really why I'm here. But there were so many things that could have been asked that weren't. And I just really, I'm trying to understand the fairness property of the same type of business. So much so that when we opened we had an indoor dog park and questions were asked about like how that was gonna be and were we gonna staff that? And the answer was yes. And as we grew, we outgrew that part of the business. It's not really, um, sustainable and we converted that space to daycare. And so it's very frustrating to have somebody else very similar come in.
And the only difference is that they're bringing a little bit of food like to the table. And so I hope you can understand where my frustration is, but I guess I'm looking to all of you to kind of give me some feedback if you can, or guide me in the right direction. 'cause I just feel like going through the appeal process is just really a little bit ridiculous. Could you help me understand like why there wasn't that same standard? I mean, at our last meeting a couple years ago, when you can pull it up to the minutes, you could probably pull back the video. We were set as the example and specifically told like how well we were doing as far as like being good business owners and such and such, and that we were that model.
So if that was the case when someone very similar was coming to town, why wasn't that pulled back up? Why weren't we looking, why weren't we pausing and saying, you know, there's a similar business here in town. Let's look at what they were doing. Instead, the meeting took place, they gave you the concept of what they were doing, but there was zero standard on capacity and it just kind of kept referring back to Ollie's law managing it, it, and that's just not how that works. And so I'm trying to understand a little bit, are you able to give me any type of feedback based off that meeting and what I've said,
I I can tell you, I asked a question at that meeting. We're reading it off the minutes now. I question whether a maximum number of dogs should be included as a condition of approval and, and inquired about square footage requirements per dog under state regulations. And somebody else replied that there is a state law, um, that dog passing care requirements are governed by state law and your facility was mentioned in there. Yes. And where the applicant later shot increasing dog
capacity, noted the board may condition hours or capacity desired. We also were told there would be about 24 dogs anticipated to stay overnight at full capacity. We also discussed the hours drop off would be between seven and nine, pick 'em between four and six 30. Uh, extended hours may be available for additional fees. The proposed staff to jog ratio, will that exceed one to 10? Yeah. So we did address those concerns. We may not have asked the questions specifically, but we did get the answers from the applicant.
Yes. That I think, um, kind of answer the questions maybe you wanted us to ask, but we had the answers to those. I think it's hard because like the industry is so different, right? Like it's not like a restaurant or Right. You know, like a school is so different. So all of those things that you just mentioned, I I watched it multiple times to make sure that, you know, listen, the last thing I wanna do is waste your time or my time. No, this is not a waste of your time. So it's frustrating. Um, but when that question was asked about the capacity, that isn't actually a state law.
Daycare does not have a state law. That's why Ollie's law is putting in place. As far as kenneling goes. The only laws that are in there are about kenneling. And there isn't like a capacity, like per se, there is a rule of thumb based off of like square foot per pe, per person, per dog. Right. But unfortunately it isn't a law and a lot of people do misspeak that way. So if the applicant was giving you the impression that that was the case, sadly it isn't yet. It wasn't the applicant that Said that. Okay. Yeah. If it was somebody else that was a misspoken thing, Ollie's law will be at some point when they are able
to like get it all together, that is actually something that they're proposing. They're proposing a ratio of staff per dog, which in most cases in other states they have that. In the training packets that we go through in our industry, there are several higher end trainings and they do have a rule of thumb. It is literally just a rule. It's not like a, there's no law in there that says you have to have this or have that. As far as the kenneling goes, that license is basically what I came here for in the beginning. Um, because that's what you have to get the license for, right? Um, you know, and so that's that the hours thing, that's fine, you know, all well and good and everything like that.
But I feel like that standard of saying, okay, hey listen, you're brand new, you should start at this number. It's the same type of concept only there's food being added and there's a whole bag of worms that come with that, but that's not why I'm here. But I felt like They did give a, if I, if I may, uh, Mr. Chair, um, the board should be reminded of your rule members should not engage or deliberate on matters arising at public participation. Mm-hmm. Oh, I'm sorry. Except, IM sorry. As such matter may be added to a future meeting agenda. I'm sorry, I Was just trying to answer. So I guess like the moral of the story
and like I did know that, so like, I apologize, but I guess the moral of the story is in my position where I currently have a special permit where there are limitations where I can only have 80 dogs a day. And since that timeframe, I mean, we've gained inside space, outside space, we've done things to maximize the business. And I remember being told, like, if you're going to ask for more, make sure it's the last time you come. Like was something that was said to me that very last time, I'm comfortable where I'm at. But the thing is, is like, it, it's just not worded fairly. Like if I wanna have 84 dogs in my building
by square foot means I should be able to do that as an owner. I should be able to to say, okay, there's, you know, 65 dachshunds in the building or 65 golden retrievers and make that decision. The software that I have and the staff that we have and the training that we have allows me to dictate that on my own. Like, I don't have to like, I don't just like go oh, 80 dogs a day. That's just not how, how it works. And so I guess what I'm saying is because I have that stipulation, you know, I've, I'm a rule follower. I've not gone over that number and there are many times when I could have and I didn't, and there's a loss of profit there. So now a new company comes in
and they're just like, they don't have an actual number to say, Hey, you shouldn't have any more than this. And it's very hard. And during that meeting, if you read the document that she gave with the description of square foot and verbally, what she said was two different things. And so it's frustrating. I don't know which was right, because I wasn't here to see what was like actually going on the screen, but like you're saying 24, but the paperwork says 28 count, 28 kennels. So it's like very confusing. If I were to sell my business today, I have to go back to 50 under a new owner. So if she was to buy my business
or anybody was to buy my business, they would start off at the 50 dogs a day and 20 overnight new business rolling in town just down the street. They're allowed to just do whatever they want numbers wise. So I guess what I'm saying to you is, what do I do? Like, do I file a new permit and come to you in a, in a week or two and say, listen, I filed a special permit since this particular person has no rules in that regard, can we lift my rules or do I actually have to go through the process of going through an appeal to like dredge up stuff that has nothing to do with me? Like, I'm not looking to like bash another business.
In fact, in our industry, we band together. Like the last thing I want to do is cause tension between myself and somebody else. Um, and it's very, it's a very hard thing for me to figure out why that wasn't put in place. And many of you were here during the timeframe when I was here. So it's frustrating for me. Um, I hope you can understand that. Okay. To answer your question about whether you should file another, um, Um, special permit mm-hmm. That's probably something that should be taken up offline. Yeah. Maybe sit with, maybe sit with Jay. Talk with Jay.
Okay. Okay. Yeah. As for our decision, okay. I can only tell you, um, you know, there's a lot of time between 2015 and 2026. Mm-hmm. We learn, we watch and we watch how successful you've been. Okay. So I, I guess at the end of the day, um, we look at businesses like yours and say they are very successful. Mm-hmm. Okay. When we don't have a lot of experience, we have
to take more precaution. Yeah. Okay. As we get better, okay? Mm-hmm. We get more comfortable, our decision making becomes different or slightly different. Yeah. And, and I appreciate that And, and as for, um, taking up a special permit, uh, another permit, I I think that's something you should talk to Jay about. Okay. Yeah. And I'm happy to do that. Like, at the end of the day, like, I take it as a compliment, we're my husband and I own the business, we're family from Westfield. I do a lot of, you know, stuff community wise in Westfield. And I, and I love what I do and I,
and I like that the fact that we're an example, but I guess that's where the problem lied is when we came back a few years ago in 2019 for that last final thing and we were told that as well, I guess that's where it's like, okay, well if I'm the only other one, like why wouldn't we compare those apples to apples when a new one came in town and said, Hey listen, this is the case. So I do appreciate the feedback and I do appreciate the compliment because it is a compliment. Um, and I, you know, again, don't wanna waste anyone's time, but I will absolutely revisit that with Jay and if that's the route we can take to make it a little bit easier, then great.
And we can have that discussion. Thank you. So thank you. Anybody else? Next on the agenda review and approval of previous minutes 2 17 26. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting of 2 17 26 Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All right. Next on the agenda, public hearing, uh, city of Westfield for a site plan, storm water permit, special permit and zoning ordinance four dash, uh, one 40 and four dash one ten three dash
one ten three thirteen and eight dash 10.21 C To develop police headquarters facility including floor area in excess of 25,000 square feet and an intermittent electronic sign at six and 24 Union Street nine Columbia Street and Parcel two 20 dash 87 zone business A As I do every meeting, um, today we have a zoning special permit site plan approval. After the applicant present their, their proposal board,
members will begin asking their questions. We will then invite the public to ask questions of fact. We will have a separate time for you, the public to speak in favor of or speak against emotions where we recognize you. Please come to the microphone, give your name and address, direct all questions and comments to the board, not the applicant. The purpose of our public hearings is to allow board members to collect evidence and testimony supporting or con contradicting that our, the published finding legal findings we are required to make, to approve or deny an application.
We cannot act outside the bounds of the zoning ordinance, nor the stormwater ordinance were also sought. Please understand, public hearings are not a community referendum nor a town meeting. We ask you to keep your comments civil and positive. Remembering, we're all neighbors working to move Westfield forward. While you're free to express your opinion, ultimately and legally the board can only deliberate on the findings of fact not yours or our personal opinions is the applicant here. Good evening, Tammy Teff, chief Procurement Officer for the City of Westfield.
I'd like to introduce Rebecca Hopkins from Techon Architects. She's gonna give you a brief overview and introduce her team that is here today to talk about the project. Thank you. Good evening. Uh, my name is Rebecca Hopkins. I'm a associate and project manager with Teton Architects. I have been in involved with this project since it's inception. Um, so we are very excited to be in front of you tonight. I do wanna recognize Neil Joyce, who is with CMS and is the owner's project manager for this project. Um, and my colleague, I'm gonna hand it over to him to do the majority of the presentation. Um, so as Timmy mentioned, um, we're here to talk about the police headquarters project, um,
and the permits required. Um, Hostway Valdez from FAS O'Neill who leads the civil engineering team is gonna go into the specifics and we've kind of created, um, a presentation of sorts that reference all those drawings and kind of walk you through the specifics of our application. Hello. Um, thank you Rebecca. Um, my name is Jose Valez with F O'Neal. I'm a, um, licensed professional engineer in the state of Massachusetts. And as Rebecca mentioned, we're working together with Ton and and and the police. I'm So sorry, can you speak up a little bit? Um, Maybe Thank you. Is that better or the same? Better, thank you. Okay. Um, so Jose Valez with FO O'Neal,
I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of Massachusetts, and as Rebecca mentioned, we are working together with Tacton Architect and Police Department and the city overall on developing, um, the design for the new police headquarters at six Union Street. Um, if we can go to the next slide. Um, yeah, so here we are pretty much because we need, um, the following, um, permits approval, um, from planning board, uh, we need side plan approval for section 4 1 14, um, and six 10.1.
And then we need a stone water management permit also. Um, that is our understanding that it's being the review, the technical review is being done by the actual engineering department on that end, um, assisting the planning board and we need a special permit, um, given the size of the building that is over 25,000 square feet. And we are also, um, seeking a special permit, um, for a proposed, um, LED electronic sign, um, that will be used pretty much for, um, you know, information per into like public safety, um, that the police department will want to relate
to the neighbor in, in the city overall. Um, the next slide, um, we have a site plan render. Um, pretty much just wanna walk you through what the, um, project is. Um, yeah. Perfect. Thank you. Um, so overall, um, the big, um, wide mass in the metal, that's the actual proposed building footprint. Right behind it, you can see, um, the out building, which will be used as an accessory building to the main building. Um, no real like offices or anything on the outdoor bu on the accessory building
is pretty much storage and, and, and that type of thing. Um, so on the front of the side, which is kind of like plant south, um, you can see like a dedicated kind of like mini plaza area, um, where the flagpole will be, um, special attention has been placed into that corner to make sure that it looks nice and it has like, kind of like, you know, that feeling of, you know, welcoming, um, the neighborhood. As you go in into the, on the right side of that, as you go in, you have, um, the main proposed driveway.
Um, it's actually, um, being designed as a kind of like three lanes driveway one way in. And then as you go out, you have a dedicated right turn and left turn lanes and that's pretty much to avoid any queing as vehicles are coming out that could oppose a significant delay on, you know, um, police safety responses from the patrol cars. Um, then on the front of the site we have pretty much, um, the dedicated public parking spaces, um, with all the accessible spaces pretty much right in front
of the main entrance, which is right, like that's your kind of your main entrance area. So all the accessible spaces are located, um, adjacent to that area. And all public spaces are in that front area as we go kind of front left, left of the main building, we have that kind of like drive that it's mostly a utility access drive is just to access the utilities area where the generator and transformer will be. Um, there will be a gate right at the end of the parking space. It's gonna be like a, um, arm gate, um,
that is gonna be locked so the public won't be able to access that area. Um, then if we come back through the main driveway as we go, right where Rebecca has the finger, there's gonna be a fenced. So all that aria on the back, it's fenced in, so all that entire aria is fenced in, so only outright vehicles will have access to that area. So once you get into that aria is where you get into the operations of the actual, um, police department. So now you have your, um, fleet vehicles, um, parking area, you have your patrol offices, like, you know,
personal cars, also parking areas, um, you have right there also the um, sally port as you come in. So as you see there is a way out and in of the Sally ports is like a kind of like a loop that they can do in as they go in. That's where patrol vehicles come in. The officers when they have a prisoner, so there's like a secured area that, you know, close the doors, they do what they have to do and then they can come back out and park the vehicles or go back on patrol. Um, so, um, as you keep going pretty much farther back,
we have another driveway that connects to um, Columbia Street. Again, that driveway will only be used by authorized vehicles because there is a gate right there. So it's not expected to be used by, um, the public at all. Um, to the right of the driveway inside, we have a enclosure for the dumpster, um, where it's gonna be, um, kind of like double fenced in in a way because we first have the security fence all around the side on the back. And then we have another fence kind of like
around the dumpster, um, for extra, um, say screaming at this point. Um, then from there on, um, from a, which we don't show here, not to make it to crowded, um, we were, we will be bringing like new utilities into the building. Some of the utilities will be coming mostly from Union Street and um, union Avenue to the left. And then, uh, we will also are proposing storm water improvement on site.
Uh, the two kind of like blue purple-ish shades are subsurface systems. So those are underground systems that you won't be able to see, but they will be there and they will help you. Um, they will help us, um, store treat, um, storm water before it leaves the site. Um, so that's our overview of the site, um, design layout. And now I will defer to you if you have any questions. Does Westfield police have canines? Yes. So is that Canine area? Good point. Right behind the accessory building.
Wait, can you show me? Sure. Um, so we, oh, Okay. You Just showed me. Yeah, so there is a, a, a small area that would allow for a canine to be kennel with a small dog run in the rear, um, that also could be used by their community, um, service dog. Um, so it's not isolated to canines, it would only be a dog, um, that was under the department's curfew if needed. Okay. Alright. But did they usually go with the officer and stay with them? Um, not, thank You. They do, yes. Nobody else. Yeah. So that would be used in a very rare occurrence.
Um, but it could also be used if someone were to bring in the department. It just gives them a space that's safe, um, to keep that animal. And How many units would there be? For the canine? Yeah, For the count. How many units would there be In there? I think there is two units. Um, and just a small dump right on the outside that connects to those two count units. Thank you. Yeah. I'm Assuming that chain lane fence, how, how tall is a fence will we have On there? So it's actually, um, something more nice like an ornamental like a steel post fence. Okay. Alright. And we will be proposing a
screen attached to the fence. Um, the police department, you know, has made it clear that we want to make sure that that RE is not only secured from the public, but it's also screened out. So that kind of like ornamental metal fence, we feel it's, it's provides more security and then the screening on top, um, will provide the screening front of buyers. Thank you. It was important to us to make sure that that design, that uh, that fence was intentional just given the proximity to the residential neighbors. Sure. Um, we didn't want just put up a standard chain link fence, so we did spend some time, uh, talking
that through the department. Appreciate that. Thank you guys. What was the height of that fence we're being recorded? What was it comes off the, the stand if you want to. Okay. But what was the height of that fence? Um, right now's six feet. Six foot. Is there any gasoline on premise? Not on the side. I'm not sure the police department planning. Okay, So There's no refueling or anything like the vehicles on premise? No. Okay. Uh, how many flag poles are you putting out? Just one. One. One. Just one? Yes. So you're only gonna have the American fly,
you're not gonna have the state flag or any of Those? Yes sir. That's correct. Can you, uh, can you show me where the two signs are gonna be? Yes, Yes You can, you can take it off or you can take it off the stand. Want it just makes for better tv. Thank you. Okay, so the um, standard ground sign building sign is located just to the right of that main curb. Cut that hostway aside, uh, described off of Union Street. So it's just there on the right. So it's not on the island there, it's to the right of that
It is not on the island. What do you mean by the island? So the one in and two out, it's not on that little aisle? No, No, it is, uh, it is to the right of the one in. Okay. It's a, that little, it's a gray, it's box in this rendering here. And then the second one is right at the front of the corner as you approach the property On the point? Yeah, right At the front. Alright. And that is the one that was intended to be a digital sign similar to what is here at City hall. Do you have the size of the signs? We, So
The details, um, for the sign are included, um, on the plans. So I will really quick just, okay. It is, I didn't remember a 2 0 1. So the two signs details are in there with all the dimensions. Um, do you any specific dimension you would want me to? No, I was just wondering this, I hadn't seen it before when I looked. So Just for reference, like they are, like the digital sign is four foot tall and the, uh, the other one, it's a pretty, is a similar height
around four feet height And the total, total square footage of the actual sign. Um, so this, I can't find it. Well, I, I can get all the information but I, I will have to like read it in here. Oh, Okay. That's, That's fine. I just Can't, but it is in there like all the dimensions are on the plans and I can pretty much like put it in writing or send you an email or something if that makes it easier later. I just don't have my calculator to add the numbers right now. Okay. So just technically the board can't approve two signs, two ground signs,
so they are seeking a variance from the CBA. Yes. Tomorrow. So, Oh, Any questions from the public, any comments from the public? Any Which sign is going where? So the LED sign is right where Rebecca is pointing kind of like in the intersection of Columbia Road and f that's That's the LED sign? Yeah. Okay. Which is the one we're seeking the special permit for? Yep. Yes. Okay. I think I found And that, uh, driveway, that a above Columbia, you uh, have some trees there and I don't know if there the neighbors trees to be, looks
to be the west up top, which, which up top it goes out on the right. Those, those trees that, that, that that lot is, it looks like I'm looking at Google Earth. Are there gonna be a lot of trees taken down to kind of expand that area or, Um, so I do want to note that, yeah, like the side it's typed, so like pretty much like, um, with the exception of the front area along the flag pole, um, on Columbia Road where we are purposely trying to make sure that we save a few trees, everything else pretty much on the back. It's, yeah.
Yeah. If, if you look on sheet, what is it? CP 1.01, it shows, uh, The proposed landscape plan? Yeah, well the, uh, demo plan, uh, 1, 2, 3 CP 1 0 1 4 existing trees along that, that's the small, that line being retained. Alright. I, I do want to point out that those that are called to be retained is because they are on the border's property. It's not in our property, it's just a way that we call for like three protections to make sure they're Protected. Yeah. Yeah. So they're neighbors trees. Yeah, they're pretty close to the line. Yeah, I see a lot of spaces tagged for EVs.
Are you gonna have chargers at all of these locations or what's the schedule is are, is there a schedule for the chargers? So from an EV charging standpoint, the energy code requires us to be EV ready. So we are putting in all of the underground infrastructure for those charging stations, but we will not be providing them day one that will be at the discretion of the city. Um, but that is future proofed. So it will allow for them to be added either in the public lot or in the private lot for the department itself. Okay. So until those EV stations go in there, are those uh, spaces gonna be marked strictly for EVs
or are they gonna be allowed for, are they gonna be tagged for anybody's use? Correct. They would be allowed for anyone's use until those chargers go in and then they would be designated as Ev then they'll be designated as Ev Correct. We designate them on the plan to make sure it is noted that we have accommodated the, uh, required percentage, um, that the code wants to see in there for EV ready. Okay. Can I go back to the, uh, big sign? It, it looks like on a 2 0 1, it looks like the height of the actual display is four feet.
Do you know what the width is? I can't see it on there. Uh, 12 feet. It's the front Of it's 12 feet altogether, it's 107.52 Square feet. Yeah. The actual display is a little bit less than three feet. And then like there are two dimensions, one for the actual structural design and then you have the LED. So like he Okay. I think he nailed It. Additional questions, comments? We did get letters from the city engineer and DPW on the storm water. So that's been okayed. No, my, my only comment is I think the roll call room
should be bigger, but that's a different meeting. I think, You know, this is one that we asked just about in every project. I don't know, when you guys do all your snow removal and things to that nature, what are we gonna do? Put it in the chief's parking spot. So, So, so, so the first thing is like we do have a representative map showing that in the stonewater report. Okay. Like it's just not included on the, on the presentation, but we are obligated, um, under Massachusetts from a storm water standpoint to show that map in there. Mm-hmm. Um,
however, you know, I think this is where Rebecca can chime in a little bit. It will ultimately be the decision, right. Of the actual owner on how they deal with the snow. So like, it feels like you have, so Maybe the DPW is gonna truck at all. Yeah. That's what they do today. So that would probably be a part of the plan for a major snow event. Um, in any case there, you know, this project is future-proofed. We talk about future growth and flexibility, um, you know, being adaptable, not overbuilding, but there is some future parking spaces designated. So there is a capacity to lose a few spaces for snow removal if required.
And we've kind of talked about different areas that would allow for that. Um, but yes, we would, they would have to leverage kind of every bit of the site and then truck off anything that's interfering with their response. The chief's got connections. Yeah. Bike Rack. Is there a bike rack here? Some someplace? Yeah, I saw it's on there. Is it? Mm-hmm. I was looking, I couldn't find It. There's actually two, I believe. One for the public and one for the officers. Yes. So keeping them designated for the public insecure area. That's one of the things I saw because I always see 'em biking. Yeah, I know it was right there. Okay. Uh, the gate on Columbia, uh, will that,
will officers coming in to work and leaving work, will they'll be able to access that? Yes. For work Purposes? Yes. So both the gates that are included in the secure area of the lot, not the gate. That's kind of I'm talking about the one in Columbia. Yeah. So yes, officers could come in that way. Okay. Um, and we've talked that that may be a preferred route to avoid Union Street. Yeah, it probably Would be coming from the north instead of going all the way around. And they'll have, um, control that will all be controlled access. So they'll have, um, designation or fobs that will allow them through those areas. Great, thank You.
Anybody else? We do have a draft condition, a special permit site plan approval storm water management permit 20 Union Street, formerly 6 24 and zero Union Street, nine Columbia Street draft conditions. One. The site shall be developed, maintained in accordance with the approved site plan set entitled Westfield Police Headquarters Permit set date 2 12 26 prepared by FASS O'Neill sheets G 10, uh, 0.01 G 11
CN one point 10 CP 1.1, CCE 1.1 CS 1.1 CG 1.1 CU 1.1, LP 1.1 and CD 5.1 to 5.9. Signed and sealed by Scott D. Turner PE and general compliance with the submitted lighting plans sheets S pH one and 1.01 and dash one as prepared by Teton Architects and constructed in general appearance
with the submitted signage and building elevation plan sheet. A two one and a two one A four 10, a four 11, and a nine 10 as an alternate as prepared by TechCon Architects plan revisions. The Eastern most ground sign shall be eliminated unless variance relief is obtained from the Board of Appeals sheet. LP one 10 planting plan to bear the seal of mass registered landscape architect a digital PDF copy
of the site plan incorporating any modifications here and conditions shall be submitted to the planning office prior to making application for building for a building permit or commencing the subject site construction to ground sign digital component. A different static message may be displayed provided none is displayed, uh, for less than 10 seconds and there is no scrolling, flashing, or animation. This condition shall not apply when the Chief of police determines that the greater the greater public interest
and safety is served by a temporary use of such mechanism and only for extraordinary matters. In this case, the planning on board chair shall for with be notified of the reason and intended duration and such departure. B the illumination levels shall be dimmed during evening hours as commensurate with diminished daylight. Um, standard storm water permit conditions. Three pre um, pre-construction. No further work shall commence until pre-construction conference has been held
between the contractor, city Storm water coordinator and other appropriate city officials and project personnel where, where applicable a copy of the notice of intent to comply with EPAs M-P-D-E-S construction General permit and evidence of EPAs receipt authorization shall be provided at that conference for post-construction. Upon completion of the construction and prior to applying for and being issued a final certificate of occupancy from the building inspector,
the applicant shall provide the board with an as-built record plan and the written statement from the project engineer with his or her personal seal AFF effects certifying that all work has been done in accordance with the approved plan, applicable conditions of this approval or otherwise noted. And that stormwater management system is functioning as designed, including any supporting evidence. Occupation permits will not be granted until corrections to all storm water practices have been made and accepted.
Five Maintenance and inspections maintenance of the storm water management system shall be in compliance with the submitted long term operational maintenance plan. Appendix J is sort and water management report prepared by Fass O'Neill dated 2 12 26. Inspection reports completed not less than once annually shall be submitted to the city stormwater coordinator. This condition shall be deemed to constitute an operation maintenance and inspection agreement binding on all subsequent owners of the Land
six Administration. This storm water management permit approval grants, no relief from, and other requirements of the city storm water ordinance including performance standards, operation maintenance inspections and enforcements. And then we have our standard findings. Any comments, questions? I just have a quick one. Um, I'm, I'm looking at the lighting plan right here and to the far left of the sally port on the corner of the residence. Uh, this northwest corner. Um, you see what I'm talking about?
I I'm just curious. Yeah. Here or here? Yep. No, first one. Yeah. Okay. I just see a lot of high numbers where we're supposed to be zero at the property line. So 5, 6, 6 1, 6, 8, 5 1. So what happens is that right there you have the fence with the screen. A six foot fence. So it will A six foot fence though, right? Yes. I don't think six feet's gonna, Those are those lights there are coming from the building. Those are not light pole Posts. No, I understand that. But that's, that, that's constituted as light trespass into the neighbor's yard.
Can we drop? Yeah, that's, yeah We, we we we can drop a few shots on the other side. Yeah. What My understanding is the thing we're we're zero at the property line. Yeah. This we're just a little high. That's what I'm pointing out. Just right there on that line. Were those like Four Spots? Yeah, it's like one drop, 2, 7, 5, 6, 6, 1, 6, 8, 5, 1 and then, and then drops. Then you take a left and it's 0.0 or 0.1. It's, you know what I'm talking about? Yes. Yeah. I think what happened was that we, like the shots should have been placed right after the fence.
Yeah. And there are not Yeah. That, that means represent As long as we squared away. So we Yeah. Should be fine. You know that that poor neighbor's got enough chaos on that corner. I know that. Yeah. Yeah. So those lights, those are on the property line, but um, you're not issuing a waiver. So, uh, it would be enforceable if they do trespass Enforceable by the police department Building inspector. A brave building inspector. That's my only comment. I have a question on the illuminated sign is that have the capacity to tie in with the, a sign here at city hall
so they can show the same message? Possibly. We would need to discuss that with probably your city it and our electrical engineer to make sure that there was connectivity there. Um, and, and understand exactly what's provided here. Um, but it's something we could look into if that is a feature that this Board, I would think from a safety perspective, if there's an emergency, you would want both sides showing the same thing at the same time. Amber alerts or things like that. People aren't gonna be in the same place at the Same time. No, but instead of having the program one you program one at a time,
They are different sizes. So, um, could probably display more information here. Here meaning the police Place. Anything else? No. Will hear a motion to close the public hearing. I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Do I hear a motion on the, on draft conditions? I'll make a motion to pass the special permit site plan storm water for the new police station. Second. Okay. And just, uh, it didn't come up, but your waiver of the 20 foot buffer planting
for the fence is, is included in your findings. Cheryl? Yes. Bernie? Yes. Ray? Absolutely. Yes. John? Yes. Jane? Yes. Phil? Yes. And I a Yes. Can't wait. We're on our way for a new police station. Thank you. Thank you. It looks nice. Next on the agenda is other business landscaping equipment storage. 1 41 Springfield Road, Walmart. So Walmart reached out, um,
because they would like to store a couple trailers they use for landscaping mowers or whatever equipment, uh, in the parking lot. And you know, if you look back to your decision from 2012, um, specifically conditions, let's see, 29 and 34 I believe. Talk about no trailers. Um, now I know at the time trailers meant tractor trailers where they were keeping them in the parking lot storing merchandise and the board wasn't happy about that.
Um, I don't think you intended them to apply to trailers like the size of a car that fit in a parking space. So, um, I just wanted clarification on your, um, work condition and if, if you're okay with Walmart keeping that a couple trailers there. When you say trailer, what do you mean? Like, Like a landscaping trailer That's like A flat trailer. Like a Landscaping I think box trailer. Yeah, I think they said one box. One Box trailer. One of 'em Landscape Trailer Flat one. Yeah, one of both. I think. One of each. Yeah, but they're not Said You can, if you look at your condition,
just make sure 29, um, storage trailers aren't allowed and 34, uh, detached registered trailers only in the loading dock area. And I, again, I know you meant the discussion was about big trailer truck stuff that you didn't want all over. So yeah, They're talking a 10 by 14 landscape trailer and a 14 foot dump trailer. Yeah, that's and a couple trucks to pull 'em. So if you wanna clarify that condition, if that's your intent that these are Okay, I would just have that on the record. Um, I'm impressed They asked to be honest.
What'd you say? I'm impressed that they asked us to be honest. Oh yeah. I do have a question though. Go Ahead. If this is just intended for landscaping materials, which would probably include trees, um, other small plants, um, does it include mulch? Does include rocks? What are they actually storing in there? So here's my question. If they've never asked us before on all these years, are they trying to free up space where they are putting the stuff that's taking away parking spaces? So that's my question. And then how, the second part is
how long would they be put in these box trailers? So we are talking from May to August, September, um, and how many are they looking at? So I'm trying to figure out what exactly they're doing. I think it's equipment. Just the equipment. Oh, it's equipment. Take care of the property. Oh, I'm sorry. Take care of all. Am I correct? Yeah, so it's just equipment. They're actually, this is what they're talking about. Um, I guess they're developing a program to manage all their, um, stores in Western Mass or most of 'em. And they'd be, you know, going from where to Pittsfield,
taking care of those stores and, and just moving this equipment around and uh, coming back to Westfield. So it's operational stuff. It's not sales stuff. So it'd be mowers. I don't know what else Trevor. I personally have no issue with that. I i I just wanna make sure I understand this correct. They're storing 'em right in the middle of the parking lot. Red I's red Square. That's where they showed, I think they didn't want 'em on the edge where they might obstruct views and obviously not too close to the store where it would take up priority customer parking. So it's gonna be in the parking lot In the red square in the middle of the parking lot. I'm trying to find,
How many are they looking at? Well There's two trailers and then I think they had two, uh, pickup Trucks. Two trailers. Two trucks, Trucks. Are they adding anymore? Are they just requesting two trucks? Well they're looking for four spaces to store this equipment. No, I don't think the trucks are an issue 'cause they're Talking eight spaces cars Anyway, but Eight spaces That they, they blocked off. So it's in the back end of the lot. Yeah, let's, if you go hang on a second. So I don't see an issue with this right now. They're storing bulldozers there so they can do snow removal. Yeah, it's basically the same concept.
Yeah, they're talking, there's the store. So This is stuff they're using in order to keep their Property cleared, all their property mowing lawns and trim their hedges And that. Yeah. All, all the Walmarts not just, not just Westfield. So they'd be, you know, moving around. I don't have any more room in the back of that building to, to build like a, a small area to house it. Share Of the back is filled with the pickup people. There's not even a spare Parking space back there. Yeah, I didn't know if They had, I mean, I think even though they're in the center of the lot, they're kind
of away from all the commotion. I think that's the idea. And if the board wants to suggest a different location, I think I'm good with the location. With the location, fine with It. Like I said, pick, I think the main issue is if, if you can interpret your trailer condition to not apply to this situation, well we Do have to clean that all up, remember? Mm-hmm. 'cause they were storing stuff back there. We told 'em to get it out of there. They clean, They wanted to put this for pickup. Is there, now I begin with what's the difference?
So is this considered like a slight modification? Is this Considered Asking? Well, I say it's a clarification. So when they, when you said no trailer storage, did you mean to include this kind of trailer? I don't think, but I think our intent was tractor. Yeah, that was, that was clearly discussion at that time. The Big difference between box trucks and 53 footers. Yeah, I'm, I'm good with it. I don't know about anybody else. I'm good. I'm good With it. Fine. I'm good with it. Anybody against it? I'm not against it in any way. But what are we doing? Is this like modifying a special permit or I don't know what granting permission is.
Well it's, it's clarifying what your condition meant. So when you said no trailers or all trailers need to be at the loading dock, was the intent to cover these? I mean, they are technically trailers, but I If you, I guess they're looking for interpretation of your condition. Like if you, if they put these there, are you gonna say, Hey, those are trailers and cause an issue. See, I agree with John's statement. I'm just, I'm just thrilled they actually came to us. So I consider it a minor change and I think we should clarify our
Wording. Yeah, I think the clarification is that we were, we were against like the trailers for a tractor trailer. Combine. Combine. Yeah. That, that's what I remember at the time. But it's just, just to have it on the record, They're only asking for two small trailers, the box trucks. Uh, yeah, I don't think they're boxing. I think there's like a pickup Truck stuff. All right. That's in the agenda. Mass. DOER 2 25 CMR 29 draft guidelines, battery energy storage systems. So, So just on the last thing,
so we'll reflect consensus. It didn't take a vote per se, but You wanna take a vote on the recommendation? Well, I mean the, no, I'll Just a recommendation just clarifying that the board was in agreement. I, I recommend that we allow this and clarify trailers means, uh, tractor trailers, not lawn care trailers. I, on the next thing I second it. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Is that We good now? Yeah, no, I just, just want to be Clear. So now we can move on to the D-O-R-D-O-E-R.
Yes. Alright. Anybody sit through the, uh, zoom meetings? Mm-hmm. Very interesting. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Did I hear that right there? There's another one on May 4th. Uh, March 4th. I thought the same thing but I couldn't find it. That's Tomorrow, right? Yeah. I'll watch it again 'cause I have more questions. So, so I, I jumped on it on Friday, um, and I started to think, I mean they're going through a lot of details and meetings and, uh, sites scoring
and all this stuff, but this only applies if the applicant chooses to go through the state process for their local permit instead of the normal local permit. They're both local permits. This one is just a, a state sets up the, Um, Procedures and I'm beginning to think that it's so onerous. No, applicant is gonna want to choose that and they're gonna want to go just through our local piece. Um, Which Means I'm beginning to think the state consolidated process would be more favorable since they're creating all these hoops and double checks
and scoring and all this stuff. And so I think as we draft our ordinance, probably you can find a way to incentivize going to the state consolidated process. Um, and maybe that means adopting all the things that they're requiring into our local ordinance. So, um, so there's, there's not like an easier path There. I am thinking if I was proposing one of these, I would say, I'm not gonna deal with all this hoops the state's putting in. I'll just go through the normal, get my wetlands permit,
get my planning board permit, and just deal with the city. So you're suggesting if we have all the same requirements as the state, That they won't necessarily just default to us? I I'm thinking that the state process is not gonna look attractive. 'cause there are a lot of things there requiring that we wouldn't normally have in our local zoning, these pre-meetings and all this stuff. So, um, kind of incentivizes us, I think to more or less mirror a lot of those same requirements.
That's just my thought. I agree. It's a be an easier for them to come through us rather than go through the state. It, it should be just as, Yeah, I don't know, easy but cover some to go through us being thorough and all that. Yeah. So, Well, not to play devil's advocate, wouldn't, wouldn't that in some respects relinquish our control over the project and give the control to the state itself if they go through their, their processes. So it's the state is establishing this process for local permitting. Mm-hmm. So it's not a state permit, right?
They're just saying if you go through this, you can, you're guaranteed your permit within 12 months, but you have to go through this and have this pre-meeting and site suitability scoring and all these things the state is putting into play for the consolidated local process instead of the normal local process. At, at any point in time during that process, do we have the ability to turn around and say, well, we need these additional things on there. See, my point, my point to this is,
I I'm not sure we want to be first on this one. Okay. I, I think we kind of want to be second or third to the table because the way I, I look at these battery energy storage systems, the way I look at cell phones on day one we carried a bag around. Okay. And, and you know, then we stuck this thing that gave us all cancer to our head. Okay. Flipped it open, you know, and, and little by little they've evolved into what we carry today. And I think this is the exact same thing.
We're looking at the infancy of storing energy, you know, and we're realizing that lithium ion I is great, it's better than lead, but it's, there's a lot of perils that go with this. And in five years or 10 years down the road, okay, if, if we're not first to the table, we're gonna benefit from that development of that technology because we'll have space and ability and we'll actually have a cleaner environment to put it in.
So I, I'm not jumping up and down about allowing the state to turn around and say, Hey, we can put it up there on the aquifer. We'll put it over here, we'll put it there, you know, we'll put it right next to a school somewhere. Um, you know, because the state doesn't care about Westfield. Yeah. Uh, well again, the state. So just, just the really big ones, the state's gonna have pretty much full control over. Mm-hmm. Uh, so we're talking about the small medium facilities. And this isn't just best, it's also solar. Solar, these new clean energy things.
Wind, I think, um, what was I saying again? We, we will have our local regulations, so those will apply whether they just go through the normal process coming here or hearing, going wherever they else. Or if they choose the state established procedure for getting the local permits as one consolidated permit, but they'd still come here and they'd still have to meet our zoning and all the usual stuff. It's just that there are layers on the process that the, the state would put on onto them if they follow that option.
Bill, I, whether we're first or last to the table, I guess, you know, if an application comes in, we're it's gonna come in, we'll have to deal with it From, from what I've been reading, we're, we're already not first, there's two or three people that proposed, uh, restrictions that got squashed. So we're not first, um, you know, this is really, uh, the bigger picture. This is a difficult thing, but, um, you know, uh, I don't know how they're applying
the Dover Amendment to battery storage. It's not education or, uh, Well, I don't think it's the Dover Amendment, but there's other provisions in the, um, zoning that kind of exempts solar, solar related things. So if they say a battery energy storage is, is accessory to a solar field that may carry certain exemptions, Um, That are not related to the Dover Amendment. So I, I guess again, big picture is this state process and all these hearings, meetings they're having
and processes and procedures and safety standards. I think you've got a draft of, of their standards that only applies if someone chooses to use the state consolidated local permitting process. So let's say they choose to go through the city, they don't get the result that they want. Can they then say, oh no, we want to do the state way now, Essentially It should be the same. I don't, I don't think so. And you can still deny it through the, the state process, You know, and one of the examples that they gave on the call Friday is, um,
we're not denying this, but we want you to move the road from here where you have it to over here, where we think it suits the city better. And if the applicant doesn't want to do that, you're at an impasse. Well, I mean, that could be a condition of approval Or which, which in, in theory is a denial if they don't choose to do it, which we can't deny the application. Well, You can. So you're saying that we have some leverage is that's what I'm understanding. I mean, we can still regulate these and, and there's still special permit options.
Um, I think you can't regulate 'em out of the city where they can't go anywhere. That probably wouldn't stand. But, um, reasonable regulations and possible denial of a special permit could, could come into play. It's not saying these have to go everywhere. It's not that level of permissibility. So I, But I mean, back to my kind of original thought. So the safety standards you've got on your shared drive, a guide on public health safety environmental standards. So if you look at all those things and they talk about archeological resources
and, uh, asbestos decommissioning rules and, and, Um, Herbicides, whatever else, but, and that it's only gonna apply if they choose that state process. So unless we also fold something like this into our local zoning, I think we would incentivize them to just do the local process, which would seem simpler. So we almost have to make a complex, uh, ordinance or echo this state standards somehow.
Um, Which means that we all then have to learn their process. But I, I agree. I I think your theory makes sense. I think if it comes, goes through us, we have more ability to be involved in the project. It's gonna come through us anyway. It's just a matter of the process. It gets through us. And if the state makes these, uh, guidelines more restrictive in the future. So we're gonna, we're gonna mimic the state. Well, I mean, I don't know what we're going to do, but I'm just thinking. So right now, like our solar, solar field ordinance,
it's basically one line. It's under special permits, solar arrays. There's nothing about decommissioning in the ordinance, nothing about, there's some setback stuff, but nothing about emergency response and all these things they line out. Um, so if someone today were to want to put a solar field up, they can say, well, I'll go to Westfield and it's just this one line special permit. Or I can go through the local per state, local consolidated process that the state's establishing. And then they've gotta have all these requirements, um,
and standards and meetings and such. So again, it kind of incentivizes, uh, our simpler system. I think that's, would make it seem like there's skirting, uh, some of this more thorough analysis. Well, I, I, I think at this point it's pretty obvious that, um, there are things that we should have had in that ordinance. You know, we should have decommissioning Clauses somehow. Yeah, I mean we, we've required it as part of the special permit as a condition, uh, which is,
you know, you can do, it's obviously, I think, better to have it all spelled out in the ordinance, but, um, someone who chooses either process, they'll be here at the presentation and the same public hearing and all the same as far as this board's concerned. It's probably the same, um, same evening for you, whether they're pursuing the local city process or the local consolidated process, it'd make no difference to this board. You'd be looking at the local ordinance making your decision.
Um, it's all that ancillary stuff. That's all these standards that they have to also have to meet. Uh, I, I guess my point to asking that question was, in some respects, I'd like to almost have a reverse liberalization clause. If the state makes the guidelines more restrictive, we should be adopting them. But if they make them more permissive, I'm not sure we want to adopt them. You know, they were pretty clear on, they were pretty clear on the, um,
session I sat in that you guys can make these much harder than you want, uh, than our guidelines. They were really clear on that. You know, you guys can, you know, what you can't do is straight out ban them completely. Okay? And if we think that your rules are punitive or um, overly restrictive, we have the right to go around you. Um, and they were, they're really clear about that with us on my, on my session. So I'm just looking at it saying, okay, if this is the state's guidelines, I, I understand where you're going with this. And I, I agree with it. Right?
But if they make 'em more restrictive a year, two years, five years from now, our, our hours should automatically step up to that new standard. And if they make it less restricted, I'd like to keep the current standard. Well, I think it, you got to move with the flow. I Mean, It's gonna ch their state's gonna change it, there's no doubt about it. And we just have to react. We have to stay on top of it. Mm-hmm. But you know, my concern about what you just said about us being overly
restrictive, how do you find out? 'cause I have some ideas of things that safeguards we should put into place and some may think it's over restrictive, but how do you know The state will tell us? I Well, it sounds like the attorney general will tell us 'cause she's the one reviewing stuff. Yeah. Um, yeah. Not the city ordinances, but, um, again, you can't zone it out of this. You can't make a such a restrictive, have 5,000 foot setbacks or whatever that effectively it can't go anywhere. It's similar to when we had the marijuana issue when it first started. We started going, well, we put it in in commercial,
we put it in industrial. We have to have it 3000 feet away from the school X, Y, and Z to make it Unattractive able To be done. But there's got a lot of math behind it. Overcompensating. Well, I guess my first question is, is everybody on board with the way Chase thinking about adopt rolling in the State's guidelines into our, into our guidelines? I, I think it's a good idea. I don't, I don't have a problem with it because I'm, I'm looking at some of their guidelines
and it's a lot more, definitely a lot more than we have. Yeah. It's makes it a little bit less attainable or, or, or, um, I don't know. I have a question. Um, kind of to John's point, as if the state goes back and changes their restrictions or their guidelines, we can then, instead of automatically just adjusting ours, we can go back and amend ours maybe based on that. Or maybe it's something we don't want
to adopt, we can do that. Correct. Or if the state amends it and makes it easier, but we just kind of leave it alone. Right. We don't have to automatically end Up don't, yeah. We don't have to make it as pretty. Right. So I, I I don't have an issue with Jay's proposal at all. I think it's a good idea as a baseline. Yeah, Me either. Okay. Anybody else have a different opinion? I, I, my only thought is, I think I would like to have it resemble the state's thing. I don't know that we need to copy it exactly, but I'm not sure what I would leave out either without going line by line.
So could we Look at, I mean, I'm open to doing a review. Look At that idea now, and then over in the next two weeks or so, we'll kind of take notes, massage it a little bit, and re-look at it at the next meeting. Happily. Sounds good to me. Again, we, you know, we're just gonna have one local ordinance. Um, so the idea is to not, not incentivize one thing over the other. Maybe. Um, I think there's some confusion as to that. There's this state issuing a permit or the city, and that's not the case.
It's always gonna be the city and it's always gonna be whatever ordinance we put in place. Um, it's just the process that they would need to follow that differs. It's The process. It's the process. Yeah. Like pre-application meetings, they're requiring if you go through the, the state established local process, which we don't require currently require pre-application meetings locally, but things like that. Well that's, that's what I meant. You know, minimize the meetings if we can. Anything else. So Jay, the, the next step
after that is, um, how do we structure safeguards that we want to put in place over and above? Because the thing that I got out of the presentation on Friday is we can put in whatever safeguards that we want within reason. So yeah, I'm the guy that likes to push the line of within reason. So we should have that discussion. I don't know if tonight's the time or a different time. Well, I mean, get at something, probably best to have something drafted and, and look at it.
Okay. Um, before for, you know, so the state talks about setbacks here, um, establishes certain setbacks. We can do something different. We don't have to follow that if it's reasonable and contextual, but, So we want to, as Ray said, start with, and then, uh, look at it again in two weeks, Uh, two weeks, four weeks in the future. We, we don't, yeah, we don't have any
hearings for the next meeting. No. Applications have come in, So we've got extra time for homework. You tap down With the gas station. They still on hiatus? Oh yeah. Wait, they, they are on. Nevermind. That was continued to the 17th. There was a continued hearing. Next Meeting, right? Yeah. Yeah. There were no new ones. I forgot about that. I'm not opposed to discussing it more than, obviously more than once until we come to a conclusion. Mm-hmm. Oh, I, I I think we're gonna have to absolutely have to discuss this more than once Right. Until we come to a Conclusion. Right.
So if we had a maybe other business for the next couple meetings and we have something to kind of wrap our heads around a little bit. Did Jay, did the moratorium go through? I assume it did. Yeah. What, when is that? Until, Um, April, October. Oh, alright. So we have no scheduled hearing through next week. No, we do have a continu. We do. I thought we did. That Was God bless you. Yeah. So why don't we spend a little bit of time on this next week as well. Okay. Uh, and again, remember we're just, we're drafting our own local ordinance. All this state stuff can inform that.
Um, but we don't have to have to comply with, With What they're saying. Anything else? Anybody? Good? Um, there's a, uh, I don't want to say public hearing. It's a public meeting tomorrow night at Westfield. Uh, intermediate school about, yeah. Uh, free release center going on, uh, Southampton Road. Mm-hmm. Just wanna make sure everybody knows about that.
Six o'clock. Yep. Jay, Did I hear correctly that that project falls under the Dover Amendment Case law would seem to suggest that it qualifies as an educational use. State law seems to case. Case Law. Case Law. Courts case law. Okay. Case law. Okay. You said educational use, Correct. Primarily education. So it's A by right use. It's, it's very specifically listed as an educational use. It's gonna be tough to be, Well, I guess a prison could be too. That's gonna be what it's, yeah. Cool. 602 feet.
But you have anybody, anything else? Okay. Meeting's adjourned. See you all in two weeks.