So once this comes on,

00:03:41,729	Yeah. It's still going, it's still going, yeah. I know, she doesn't

00:03:54,430	Yeah, OK, you hear anything now?

00:04:00,469	So we should also.

You 00:04:06,229	It is 7:03 p.m.

00:04:12,069	planning board meeting to order the June 24, 2025 planning board meeting to work. This meeting.

00:04:21,170	I H7 can and because I believe we have one member appearing. I assume, I will take more. So when I call your name, would you please indicate that you're present? Pat Norton, I don't believe he's present.

00:04:39,430	Did somebody reach out to Pat? Mark, do you have Pat's number cause I didn't realize it was changed to the COA. So if he didn't check his email today, we just found out today. That it was here, right? You, you sent out an email today. And I think we were all under the impression that was still

at the library. So do we have Pat's number to call him?

00:05:06,870	Uh, so Jonathan Po. No. Jonathan poor present.

Wheaton. 00:05:16,769	Here.

00:05:19,769	She says she's under the phone number.

473. 00:05:39,329	Wait for. Betacom Uh, Jeff Austin.

00:05:50,569	I think. I'm more, uh, to try and connect with Josey because I know she intention of of hearing by as well.

00:06:02,769	OK, so we're here today and our primary, uh, business is to, uh, consider, uh,

00:06:14,329	report and recommendation and the two. It's not Changes that we discussed at our last meeting, a reduction of the square footage from 8000 to 4000 square.

00:06:29,269	overlay district of Asbury has been

00:06:35,470	and we also.

And. 00:06:45,129	Excuse me, I keep going.

00:06:51,199	Mark, she said you need to let her in, Darcy.

00:06:56,930	It's not in the waiting room.

00:07:00,629	I think she's a password. She was trying to she

00:07:04,569	she said she's muted by you. You need to unmute her.

00:07:13,569	Yeah, we know, yeah, we know it's a cell, your cell phone thing. Oh, it looks like, are you trying to speak, Darcy? You might put it No

00:07:26,600	I don't know what to say.

00:07:30,430	Yeah

00:07:34,100	I'm gonna ask her to see if she can, we can't hear you. She just asked. I'm gonna send her the Zoom link and see if she can come in on Zoom maybe because is she on Zoom? On her phone, but I think she can, if she has Zoom on.

00:07:51,269	Just

00:07:54,230	The spo

00:08:00,829	Is that a dial in or is that? Hey, John, could you try saying something?

00:08:09,230	John McGrath, can he say something?

00:08:14,730	We see your lips moving, but we can't hear you.

00:08:21,699	He's texting somebody.

00:08:25,269	I don't know who you're texting, but. Technical difficulties.

00:08:36,700	John McGrath is texting somebody here in the room.

00:08:47,730	Yes

00:08:52,600	Can you get them on a laptop. The dirty, can you hear us? Yeah

00:09:22,100	That's I can hear you down and see how.

00:09:40,330	You don't have Pat Norton's phone numbers.

00:09:46,100	So you didn't find Pat's number. We can hear you now, John.

00:09:51,970	I can't hear you. Can you hear me? and do we find Pat Norton's phone number or no?

00:10:03,870	Oh

00:10:07,669	I just got I think if he's continually refresh.

00:10:16,100	That's fine.

00:10:23,299	OK, I see that I'm there um online. And I'm not on.

00:10:34,269	OK. Thank you so much.

00:10:44,370	So we can proceed. So Darcy is here, Darcy Dale.

00:10:51,970	I

00:10:56,299	Uh, the Wheaton suggested at our last meeting in the um 38 Overlay district on Asbury Street, and we also accepted the recommendations to section 9.8.4

00:11:10,970	regarding non-conformities, um. And those recommendations were ones that um town councilor Robin Stein uh suggested. So I believe our appendices are uh in the shape that they are intended to be in, um. I don't know if, if select board members have had an opportunity to review these materials, um. The explanation that Mark

Connors produced is, is very helpful. Uh, these two appendices have to work together and in fact, Appendix B in large measure amends Appendix A. And if you were to just read them. Unless you were um very, very intuitive, you might not And so at our last meeting, uh, Robin Stein worked walked us understand that.

00:12:10,370	through how these two appendices, uh, operate, and the reason we have to is because of the requirements of mass general law Chapter 48 section 5, which provides for a majority vote on. Uh, Section 38 compliant districts and a 2/3 majority vote on any other land uses regulated uh through uh what

hopefully will come together as sections 9.8 and 9.7 of an amended zoning Bible. So, uh, with that said, I think we can really turn to um. The report and recommendation and in this regard, I sent to Mark for distribution to the planning board a memorandum that I prepared uh this morning for your consideration and so I

think we're going to have to just take a few moments to enable the planning board to review that memorandum, uh, so we. We can then discuss the ramifications of this vote and recommendation and the other uh item that that we might want to talk about and it's something that unfortunately the select

board uh can't actually address because they don't have a quorum, uh, AMO uh put together a flow chart as to how Uh, appendix A and B work in the event of positive votes or negative votes, so they're essentially 4 permutations and We want everyone select board and everyone at town meeting to understand those ramifications.

A yes vote on Article 1 and no vote on Article 2. and, uh, a yes vote on no, a no vote on Article 1, a yes vote on Article 22 no votes and I mean it, and it all plays out differently, uh, but with that 2 yes votes.

00:14:18,769	said, what is important. For me in this meeting is not how any of our planning board members intend to vote on July 14th. That is not the issue. The issue for us tonight is whether we will issue a favorable report and recommendation, and the reason

that I urge you to do that, and it's all set forth in my memorandum, is that if we don't issue a favorable report and recommendation. Then the planning board is barred for 2 years from reconsidering any of um the articles that were put forth um at town meeting.

Now, with that said, we could still be required by the executive Office of Housing and livable Communities to adopt 3A compliant zoning, but we would not be able to. Address any aspects of the form-based code. Am I stating that correctly, Robin.

00:15:23,870	Yeah, either way.

00:15:30,629	That's on the assumption that there was a negative vote on 3A. So General, good evening everyone, folks watching Robin Stein from KP Law. General Law chapter 48 section 5 contains a provision that says if a zoning by law amendment fails at town meeting. If that amendment cannot be brought back for 2 years unless it has a positive

recommendation by the planning board. The most recent case law evaluating what a positive recommendation from the planning board means is the first time it went to town meeting, not the 2nd time. It goes to town meeting. That's the recommendation that that's the most recent case law. So as your attorney, I think it's safe to, you know, operate

under the presumption that if it's not recommended this time and it fails, this amendment can't come back. Now you could come back with a substantially different amendment to accomplish 3A or to do other rezonings, but an amendment that's substantially the same as this, and that you should be operating under the presumption that it would not

be able to come back for 2 years. And so my, my takeaway from that. Is that by Uh, issuing a favorable recommendation, the planning board is basically reserving for itself flexibility and the ability to, uh, Change whatever we have done or bring it back again in the same format you gotta plug in your computer.

Sorry. So it, it, it's. So I, I want to give everyone an opportunity to read the memo because it is not really about the vote on the 4 14th, but preserving our ability to do a good job for the town depending on the outcome of what happens on the 14th.

But isn't it most likely that People look to our recommendation as to how they're gonna vote. So shouldn't we each be voting how we feel like we're supposed to be voting and that that that that's entirely up to you, but there's no law that says you can't stand up at town meeting and say you.

You voted a favorable report and recommendation to give flexibility to the planning board, but you don't endorse 3A. There's nothing that prevents you from doing that. But by doing the positive. And a favorable means 4 out of 7 if we had 7 people here, yes, it does OK.

I just want to make sure I didn't know if that meant it had to be unanimous or if that was to be 4 and we don't have 4. We have you have 6. You need 4 either way. You need 4. OK, perfect, yep. So take, please take a moment, that the, the memorandum is dense.

00:18:21,029	Mark, is this the same one that's up on the website?

00:18:26,700	Yes, I have a copy here too, but this one.

00:18:32,299	So the argument is that if Form-based code got turned down and we voted 3A. Which we pretty much have to. Um, that there would be a period of 2 years in which the downtown. The only governing zoning for the downtown would be the Overlay district. Well, 3, 3A districts, but

00:18:58,029	this existing zoning, yes, so I looked at, you know, different arguments that have been advanced with respect to 3A, and I addressed them in light of the Milton case, um, the recent Plymouth Superior Court case, and the regulations. With all that said, I mean, I respect. The opinions of people who think that 3A is a bad idea,

but I think as a practical matter, it's here to stay and Although the regulations may be tweaked here or there, I don't see any real, um, Avenue in the, in, in, within a one or two year window of having the whole apple cart turned upside down.

00:19:50,829	When's the next governatorial election 2026. 2026. All right,

00:20:00,170	there you. And even then, do you think there'll be a, a, a, a change in the legislature, so, um, you know, it's, it's, it's a tough road.

00:20:11,700	Right, but it is the executive office of state government that's enforcing this absolutely with the with the don't seem to have a meeting with the legislature but with the executive. Right. But the legislature enact enacted the statute that the Supreme Judicial Court said the executive Office can can uh oversee and the Attorney General can enforce. Crystal clear.

00:21:13,099	Mark, did Darcy get a copy of this memorandum? I know I didn't circulate it.

Uh, 00:21:22,369	it's in the packets in the pack.

I 00:22:31,930	Look for bills and he's he's just let us know that he's maybe be able to join remotely. I we we sent him the link.

00:22:44,630	So, uh, question, Robin, um, so a favorable result of recommendation by the planning board is for both the articles. Um, I mean, I, I, if I gonna turn the sound off of this if you. You know, for the, for the two year moratorium, yeah, it's, it's on any zoning amendment.

That's the rule, regardless of what it is, anything, any zoning amendment that you're doing is subject to that. So if you vote no on any particular vote. Then that is not uh a favorable recommendation and yeah, favorable would be affirmative. Would you recommend that we do a favorable vote or depending,

I'm not gonna tell anyone how to vote on this particular issue, but on each article or can we combine the particles or can we just vote on section 9.8 and 9.7 as they would be inserted into the existing zoning bylaw. Going in reverse order of the three options, I wouldn't just

say 9897 because there's a lot more in here than just that, so I wouldn't do that. There's changes to 106. There's 11 definitions. So I think it would be sufficient if the board said we vote to recommend that, you know, for example. You know, if the motion was I move the planning board, you

know, report to town meeting that it recommends town meeting both, you know, the, the total proposal on the bylaw amendment. I certainly think that that would be an appropriate recommendation. It would cover both of them and it covers the definition and all that because you're, you're, you're voting on the whole. Set of amendments.

I also think if you want to take separate votes on one or the other, you can't, you could say we, we recommend approval of the amendments at 4th and Article 1. We recommend approval of the amendments at 4 and Article 2 the two but not sufficient and I, I, but if we do two

separate, I also think that. Our votes may feel different if. Um, the first article fails. So like if I was to vote favorably for form-based code. That would be contingent on. The first article passing. So that's how I would so with the motion. You could, you could say a motion. That's a really good point.

So you could also another fourth option. You could have a motion that that the planning board recommends that town meeting, um, approve the proposed zoning byline. set forth in Article 1 and so long as Article 1 is adopted, approve Article 2. If Article 1 fails, then the recommendation.

Well, let me actually though, I think you still, I think for the 2 year purposes actually, as I think about this, you want to just have favorable recommendations because if you recommend referring it back. Then you're not getting a favorable recommendation that would happen yeah that would happen at town meetings. Somebody, somebody I'm saying, OK, that's fine.

I've, I'm just trying to think it all, as, as am I, and I think if you're concerned about the two years, the best course of action is just to take is to recommend to town meeting that the total bylaw amendment contained in Articles 1 and Article 2 of the warrant.

Be approved, um, that, you know, and then at town meeting, you know, again, if the first one fails and the consensus is we don't have the mechanism for the second one now because the first one failed, someone can just make a motion. So one of us needs to make that you know somebody, anyone can make a motion.

Some prepared to do it, but anybody who is a town meeting member would make a motion simply to refer back to the planning board for additional recommend both, yes, but they do have to be separate. Yeah, they have to be separate votes, separate votes at town meeting, yes. And it says right in the 2nd article.

About the referring back, yes, at the very end of the, in the summary explanation it does say that if Article one doesn't pass for some reason, then it would be recommended to refer back to the planning board. And if the the motion is made a town meeting to refer it back

to the planning board, and that motion doesn't carry in the vote with the town, town votes against.

00:26:50,400	Then we're back to the 2 year moratorium. Well, no, I mean then it's still before town meeting and town meeting would need to do something either you pass it or it goes. But if you, if again, if, if it's coming to the planning board with a favorable recommendation from you. And whether it passes or fails

there, you don't have a 2 year problem. You only have a 2 year problem if you do not recommend approval and it fails. I want to understand.

00:27:19,769	Marty, do you think, is it a good time we do have a quorum now? Maybe I'll just call to order the meeting for the board that way we can have a joint meeting here. So I, I see. I'll let you, uh, I'll let you call to order. I'll let you take the course that you're there.

All right, Bill Wilson. I see that William Olson has joined the call around 7:22 or so. Uh, he is online, uh, but we do have a quorum, so we'll do a roll call, uh, starting with Ben. Ben Giluza present. Uh, Bill, here and Bill Wilson here. So, uh, the select board is on the order. OK, great, great.

Uh, so has everyone had an opportunity to review this memorandum and um Assess where they are coming out on this.

00:28:16,130	Anybody have any questions, questions for me? questions for Robin?

00:28:22,470	Yes, Marnie, can we, can I be recognized, um, just to play it back so I understood it, um, if both articles are voted favorably, then we don't necessarily have to at the um town meeting. We don't need to refer it. Back. So let's say that Article one failed. Yeah, I get that correct. It's a done deal.

Yes, so the way that just to clarify, just so I understand what whatever is about to happen next, then I wanna I'm just trying to keep up to clarify the way they're set up because, and I, I went, I mean this board and we talked about it a month or so ago, but just as a refresher, so.

Because 485 essentially says zoning by law amendments are effective when they're voted, when we have one that builds on another one, we usually set them up like you do one, you presume it passed, you do the second one. So that's the, that's how these are set up. So the second article doesn't repeat anything in the first article.

It makes additional amendments and in some case, so in some cases it's adding new information, and in some cases it's actually amending things that. just adopted in the first article. So if the first article fails, you lose some of the framework you need for the second article. So we had discussed that it would probably make the most

sense if the first article fails to simply have the motion at town meeting on the second article to be referred back to the planning board because it's going to need to be reworked. It doesn't really stand alone. So the second article can't stand alone anyway, so OK. Thank you.

00:29:46,329	So one last little procedural thing. That's very helpful. Sorry, um, if a motion is made at the town meeting to refer it back to the planning board at the town meeting, you know, we have all our clickers and everyone's voting whether or not to refer it back to the planning board, presumably is

that a 2/3 or is that that's simple, OK. OK. Uh, do any board members wish to make any comments in support of my memorandum or in Take issue with any of the contents of it. So you, I think your memo this is all helpful, the flow chart, um, so you, you talked about the two-year moratorium and

really preserving your rights and flexibilities, I guess going forward. Is there anything you the planning board feels it takes away from you down the road, you know, that might have been better suited if you didn't recommend it, or is it all flexibility, you know, to the favorable action it's really just flexibility because there's nothing, uh, that would

preclude planning board members or anybody else from voting. The way they think is best. And it really comes down to whether you think the form-based code is something that we should really uh Endorse and promote because it basically preserves essentially almost the same density that exists already in the town

center but provides enormous other benefits uh to to retain the the scale and uh and whatnot of the existing downtown. Of the foreign-based code. I One selling point is enhanced if we approve 3A cause you can go to the town and legitimately say with far-based code. The downtown will be better protected from any kind of

adverse development that happens in response to the 38 vote because we will have greater effectively greater design and review powers and so if you're worried about the future of the downtown, you're more worried about the future of the downtown under 3A, then you definitely want the foreign base code because it provides you with you know, greater

guidance and regulation. Right, and those actually what I did in this memo is I attached the tables from the appendices so that um That uh you could see all the different um aspects of uh of how uh structures have to be uh designed. Do you want to add to that? I'd like to say something.

One of the common misunderstandings that I've heard before is that uh That EOHLC will just ignore the code and just come in and do what they want in the downtown. And I've heard that before and What happened in this process is that our consultants worked with EOHLC to be sure about their conditions, what would

still constitute a 3A house or or projects, and they complied with all of that and then they listened to the town about what type of character you want in your downtown. They listen to all that and they produce something based on metrics that complies with what uh 3A requirements are.

So it can't be denied because it's it is consistent with what those requirements are and it does something that's consistent with what the town wants. It is in effect a protection for the town that previously did not exist going forward in terms of sizes of buildings, locations, uh, and all of that.

So that, that's been again a misunderstanding that somehow. The HLC can override your local zoning, but they, they can't because it is the law and the metrics currently conform with 3A requirements. What I'd also like to add is that even though we were a bit rushed to get this all pushed through because there were so

many moving parts, there was a delay, then there was deconstructing it into two pieces which Robin helped us immensely with and um. And one thing we didn't really have time to do was really take it for a thorough test drive to make sure that there weren't any sort of loopholes or unintended consequences.

But I think the good thing about form-based code and Matthews online and could attest to this is that uh If once the town takes it for a test drive and there's something they want to amend in the form-based code, that can So it can be refined to better and better reflect what the be done.

00:34:37,230	town's goals are downtown.

00:34:42,070	So are there any towns that have form-based code that have complied with that we know of? There are very few towns that have form-based code at all. OK, um, I can think of a couple, but I don't know that they've necessarily done them for their 3A zones in a form-based way.

I mean, EOHLC does allow for design guidelines, so certainly there are communities that have levels of design guideline. But I can't think of any off the top of my head that are as comprehensive as what you have. Well, let's think of this as a real asset that we have something that no other.

No, I just, I think, no, I just figured it would be good if, if somebody else had it and they've already gone through the process how it went through with the math you can probably speak to that better than I can to to the point as he was on,

um, but if if the terms are all different, they're all different, right, he can probably speak to that better. Belmont has some form-based pieces in their, in their 3 day zoning. It's not comprehensive, it's not as um detailed as the one you have, but there are elements of it that are

Prescriptive and form-based and I think there's a there's a, theres is an overlay district. They, they presented a 3A overlay district. Correct, yeah, um, and I think Brookline, um, has some not everywhere in their 3A district, but, um, in some portions of it extremely prescriptive. Um, form-based elements, everything down to the, the

profile of, you know, architectural cornices and things like that. But they, they come in different forms and, and Um, I think the one that we put forth for Hamilton is a very nice balance between some, um, just straight up dimensional requirements that can be translated into 3A compliance

and then good sensible kind of language and imagery about, you know, where parking should go, landscape features, things that you don't have in your zoning.

00:36:47,429	So the point of all this also is that that um form-based code was actually conceived well before before 3A showed up on the horizon as a good thing for the town. It's just that 3A arrived simultaneous to the form-based code effort. And so the the task was to meld the two, but that wasn't the

The original mission was to incorporate form-based code original mission. into the downtown for a better downtown in a way that protects and envisions a downtown that's more in line with what Hamilton values and um has more protection than your current zoning does. For forget 3A, just your current zoning. So that was the original vision.

Right, and, and the 3 of the form-based code is much more protective of what the citizens expressed that they wanted than the existing zoning, which is really use-oriented.

00:37:44,699	So Pat, I don't know if you have an opportunity to read the memorandum that I, I was actually reading your memo while, uh, experiencing a powder outage in Ipswich at New England Bio Labs, which is why I'm late. I don't blame you for it.

00:38:01,829	What do you remember?

00:38:08,269	I have a statue of that witch in Salem. I mean, you could put one of me

00:38:15,769	I did have a chance to read it. if I like that. OK, good. So we're all up to speed now. So does anyone else, uh, have any comments? I obviously have put my, uh, uh, thoughts on paper and everyone knows where I stand, but if, if anyone else wants,

well, I, I just wanted to say that Middleton has appealed the unfunded mandate, um. Denial from the superior court, so that is still outstanding. I am concerned if we pass 3A, as I've said before, it's a simple majority to pass 2/3 to repeal it, and I'm concerned

that we may lose standing um if we put, if we put the 3A into place and that, that um the appeal comes back. Um, in a favorable manner for Middleton because that would potentially close the door for us. I, I, I, I, I will take a little bit of issue with that

and then Robin can jump in, but, uh, whatever a court determines with respect to Middleton, uh, may or may not have brought application and so really for Hamilton to preserve its rights, it would have to commence some type of litigation and frankly, I thought. Uh, I, I read the complaint filed by the 10 taxable

inhabitants of Hamilton and I thought, this is just my opinion, um, that their arguments centered around the train station were probably the strongest and they were the most pertinent to Hamilton. They, they were unique to Hamilton. And so with respect to the unfunded mandate. Um, the, the 10 taxable citizens had standing under the

unfunded mandate law, but they will not have standing to represent the town of Hamilton. And so, so Judge Gildea, he, he for the sake of argument, said, I'm going to treat. The 10 taxable citizens arguments as as though made by Hamilton. Now whether that was an error of law or not is, I'm not gonna

opine on that because it certainly didn't give Hamilton an opportunity to say what they wanted to do vis a vis that uh announcement, but um. So it's, it's difficult. You can't necessarily extrapolate. Maybe you can't, maybe you can't. So one other thing that came up and, and, and, and there's no

telling what the result of that would be and when any definitive ruling would.

00:40:43,300	Your assessment as well then it's kind of I mean they filed an appeale same time right yeah they don't, it's funny we

00:40:49,900	we were just talking earlier with um Matthew and I happened to have appeals on the same day at the appeals court. We saw each other over there and neither of us has a decision yet, so we were talking about the timing and, um, you know, you can't predict when it's gonna come down some

things take longer than others, but, um, you know, there's a lot of moving parts in this, and I think, you know. what I think what I'm, I'm, you know, obviously it's just, it's not my, I, I don't mean skin in this game, but I think what you're saying our, our questions that we definitely

will hear in in town meeting, right? Those are things that, and I think it's important for us to at least acknowledge that those are out there because we have people who, I mean I just think it's important. The other thing that I was just seeing today is when I had a reduction from the 750 to.

Like 365 units, which is like a 51% reduction. They never, they never had that. No, I think it was originally everybody you had to ask for a reduction, and we got a slight reduction. For the record, that's what you's number was never as high as our number, because the, the, the formula is based probably on how many

units you have existingham's numbers. No, with 750 was the minimum and then you had to get a reduction. I respectfully I don't believe that's OK, I will find that and I will send it on. I don't believe that that's I did not check that today, but

that is my memory is it was 750 was the minimum and then we different towns got different reductions. When I'm getting like a 51% reduction, we only got a 3% reduction, so that is. Just concerning because we're like practically the same town. The other concern I have is like um with the specialized

and stretch codes um for the building codes, the under, you vote those in, but then some of the underlying guidelines have been, become stricter and stricter. So is there a with the EO HLC to say instead of 731 units you're not gonna have to have 1000 units without coming back

to town meeting because that's what's happened with the stretch code and the specialized code and the building codes, the energy codes again. The regulations are what they are. The calculations have been done, right? I'm just saying like we're, we're saying there's a zone here, but can the EOHLC come back and say now instead of 700

units we want 1000. So I think that's unlikely, but obviously I can't tell you what anybody would ever do in the future, but I think it's highly unlikely at this point that they're going to increase numbers, um, and if you have compliance zoning, you have compliance zone. So if our zoning is compliant.

Then because it does say it's conditional, some of the uh letters have come back conditional. That's because they're recommending that towns make changes. So if they, you know, they're conditional if they're they're saying, hey, this is an issue we want you to look at, or, OK, no, none of us including me

sitting in this room can ever protect. Right. Well, I'm just saying we have a precedent with the specialize in the stretch codes where those codes have actually gotten stricter over time. And so when we're voting this in, I feel like people need to know that the underlying could change. That's a topic for town meeting.

Our topic tonight is really simple whether we want to. OK, and I have one, I have another issue with one of the things you said is that you think that it's, you know, we're not gonna have growth. Lexington has 1000 out of their 1400 units under development in less than a year.

So while I think people say it could take 10 to 15 years, if we're gonna vote something in, we have to be ready to handle all of it all at once, because that's basically what we're saying because it's by right. I mean, that's by right. It is certainly by right again, every community is different so

if Lexington would have. That infrastructure where developers could come right in and hit the ground they could, um, you know, there's many, many, many communities that have adopted 3 that haven't had Lexington's experience, so I can't speak to why each community would or wouldn't. You, you are correct.

The minute it comes in, it's allowed as a right, but whether you're gonna have an equal experience in Lexington, oh no, I'm not saying we will. I'm just saying. I think the community needs to be well informed like we've asked for fiscal statements as well as public safety and other

risk assessments, and I don't think anyone's seen any of those things and I think that's a fiduciary responsibility we have to the town and I don't think that has come forth and I'm, I'm concerned about voting for something when I haven't seen any of those things that might help us understand. What this might look like.

We are not voting. On 3A compliant zoning or a form-based code tonight. We're not voting on it. We are merely making a favorable report so the planning board's hands are not tied for 2 years and as I said. Each member of this planning board can vote um each article any way they want and they can speak.

In their personal capacity at town meeting and raise all the issues that you're raising now, but that's not the issue for tonight. The issue for tonight is as a planning board, do we want to empower ourselves and maintain our flexibility to address whatever comes down the pike within 2 years, or are we going

to say, OK, let the chips fall where they may, and in 2 years we'll pick up the pieces. I think, is there another consideration to be made to in

00:46:23,469	Our recommendation may. Influence the decision to move ahead with the date, uh, in a couple of weeks from now, or I think acknowledge the fact that we have a less than perfect. Uh, application of what we set out to do, um, and I think maybe it's fair to also like publicly acknowledge that nobody in this room

knew when we decided to prioritize 3A as a as a as a purpose and goal in the form-based code, that it would then many months later require us to split. The code and dissect it in a way which makes it very confusing to understand and have two articles that are now

like majority and 2/3 and then like what if this happens or that I don't think anyone understood that to be true

00:47:18,000	Man, I mean it was only until last week I think you figured when making that decision. it out for being the most perplexed,

00:47:23,869	but, but I guess to acknowledge that as a group and understand that we're in a situation where we have, uh, an unintended. Consequence of a decision that was made to prioritize this as a goal for form-based code and not realizing That it would end up in this weird dissection of two articles because of chapter

48 section 5 exactly right. So so our next topic is going to be that flow diagram. So would it have been a more ideal if we were looking at ideals to pass the form-based code first? Like if we had, like going backwards, would it have been more ideal to have passed that and then brought 3A in afterwards?

I'm not sure in the last analysis it would have made any difference. I guess what I'm I'm now they're happening simultaneously, so right, I just didn't know if that might help people wrap their head around what um Pat's saying, but to finish my thought about the question of timing and how

our vote influences the select board decision to move forward for July 14th or not,

00:48:27,130	A lot of the work has been done to develop already. It the work, the work is there in front of us to just modify it in a way that creates a very simple 3A overlay district like every other single community in the Commonwealth has done, and,

and tee that up for vote, and it's 1 vote, it's one article. It's overlay district 3A, very simple. Keep the form code in our back pocket and keep it as intended, you know, as is originally intended for its goals and opens the door to, to, to. The kind of 3A development that none of us want.

Not really, because a lot of the protections Matt uh described last week said could be written right into that overlay district. The 3 overlay district could have the elements that's what Bill did last week. We wanted to start over at the end you're now attributing something to me. I actually had conversations with 7 people about this.

And they, I was surprised. I was pleasantly surprised. They all said, oh yes, foreign-based code will help protect us. And if that's the view of the voter. Then you want to pair these two together because having form-based code makes it Makes 3A seem a little less on onerous because we have more controls.

If you were just voting yes or no on 3A. Then you're kinda like, you want the bad world or the good world, or we're gonna sit somewhere in the middle and go through court cases for the next 20 years, um. But if you do the two together, you can legitimately say, We will have more control over 3.

I, I think we're not doing the two together because they're two separate articles and we've separated the 2/3 vote from majority vote when we could have an overlay district that's just majority and has form-based code components weaved into the overlay district. Uh, it's a whole another that's a whole another 6 months or a

year or another contract with ETL. I mean we could do that, but I'm not sure there's any advantage in doing. Is there an advantage in doing that? I think we should. Uh, I don't, I don't have my gavel. It's in my car. I could go get it.

Um, uh, I think we should wrap this up because we're, we're, the issue is simple. It's whether we Uh Issue a favorable recommendation on these two articles. Yes or no. It's not about the ultimate vote. That that's a conversation for July 14th, and everybody has their own opinion. I have mine. Uh, Beth has hers.

I'm sure Darcy has hers, but, uh, yeah, that's right. Are we ready, uh, to vote on this? Did did Pat know that we're thinking of? Potentially voting for favorable for both of them. Yes, he, he read the memo.

00:51:22,530	He got the memo. OK, he got the memo. Great. I'm just making sure and again you can have, it's up to you. You can do one motion that just says, you know, the somebody on the planning board moves to make a report to town meeting to favorably recommend the town meeting adopt both articles you

want if you want. I think that's the simplest, the most straightforward, and I know if you vote no on one, then you're gonna vote no on that whole. If somebody wanted to vote on one part, no, and not necessarily the other part, no, they're gonna vote, but they're tied together and that's doesn't help the planning.

It doesn't help the planning board. You can take two votes. I'm not saying you can't. I'm just the most seem to be the board's pleasure it's, it's simple for us, I think, but it, it's the reality is still true that in town meeting. But we're not talking about, I know, but, but we're

recommending that we that we proceed with both articles for a specific purpose and that specific purpose, I mean, if you want to stand up in your personal capacity and explain why the planning board voted the way it did, you're welcome to do that at town meeting. I'd rather, um.

00:52:34,369	OK, I have a question though on here on the article, it says, you know, what the, what the report vote is. So we would just put.

00:52:46,869	But even though it It's not necessarily reflecting why the vote if you want if you want to take two separate votes, I just I just wanted to point that out, however, people want to do that. And again, so you know, different towns present the planning board recommendation town meeting differently.

I always think it's great to have an alart just in case it's something minor and somebody forgets to stand up at town meeting and say anything, but you can give an oral report at town meeting as well. So you know, the planning board's vote can be presented

to morning or explained or however you folks want to do it just because it says in an alarm doesn't preclude you from saying anything you want at town meeting. I, as your attorney, like to see it in the warrant because then I know check the recommendation has been made,

it's there, but I mean, lots of towns also have a planning board presentation. For their zoning amendments at town meeting that explains them and explains the planning board's recommendation. So if we're gonna vote for both of them, I think it should be noted on both of these that our vote is on both of the articles

at the same time that makes sense. OK, I just want to be clear with what people think. Yeah. I mean, again, if you take one vote tonight and, and it's the planning board moves to um report to town meeting that it favorably recommends adopting both zoning by law amendments

to set forth on Article 1 and Article 2, I think it, it's fine if the warrant just says the planning board recommendation was favorable by a vote of whatever, and you can do it on each because you'll put it in, but, but what I'm saying is for them to know that those were voted on together.

00:54:26,070	Because I, like I said, for me, I would potentially vote different on this you can you can vote differently. You don't have to do one. We can take what you're saying is you want to vote, have a, a vote on Article 1 and then a vote on Article 2, saying that

she would like to have it at the at the front that the public know. that it was taken as one vote. So when they read the warrant. If we take it as one vote, I'm not, I don't, I'm just saying there may be people who would vote for the form-based code who wouldn't 3A or vice versa.

But why don't we, why don't we take a vote to see whether we want to do it? Well, let's gets. Joe, did you have something.

00:55:07,329	Just briefly, point of order that the warrant is the select boards. If the select board, if you recommend the select board that you would like it represented that way in the warrant, I'm sure the the select board would take that under advisement and make an amendment to the warrant language tonight so

that I could make that change tomorrow. We can do that. Yeah, I just wanted to be clear to the voters's wishes collectively we'll take that under advisement. Well, if, if, if it makes you happy, we can vote on Article 1 and then we'll vote on Article 2.

It has the same effect in my, you know, for me, but if it Maybe somebody wants them together. I don't care. I'm just saying that that I was just saying that we need to stay up front and we can you know what the vote was and how it was that's all that's all.

It may be better to just take two votes if it's gonna be problematic. OK, I will entertain a motion. I will entertain a motion. I move that. The planning board. What are we doing? recommends recommends

00:56:13,869	Article 202561.

00:56:19,170	For the town. Just that one. Go a 2nd, 2nd. So just to clarify, you, you're recommending to report the town meetings that the planning board recommends favorable action that the towns favorable action on Article 202561

00:56:38,369	and I had a second. OK, uh, so when I call your name, please indicate whether you, um, uh, support that motion, Pat Norton. I would recommend if we're held to a timeline of July 14th for these articles that we, that we support these two articles, I believe what we have done.

I, uh, try to design a hybrid bike for mountain biking and road biking, and we've ended up with something that doesn't do either one very well. Um, so if we're forced to move forward with what we have in front of us because of a timeline and the date of submission, then I would, uh,

00:57:22,699	then I recommend, OK, which reservation. That doesn't get on the line. Sorry, Jonathan Po. Jonathan Po I Bill Wheaton, Bill Wheaton Emil Dahlquist, Emilquist. Beth H nay,

00:57:37,500	Darcy Dale. Darcy, I had to um mute you because there's some background noises, but um you should be able to unmute yourself.

00:58:02,500	She's still on, is she? She is, she's uh the phone number, yeah, she's coming back. Yeah, it's coming back. OK, can you hear me? Yeah. OK, I am going to vote no. I don't want unintended consequences, and I don't believe we've had the time to really go over everything that we need to understand.

00:58:27,730	and Marnie Crouch, I, so the planning board, um. Uh, votes by 125 to 2 to approve, uh, Article 1. So I will now entertain a motion on that. The planning board.

00:58:50,329	Recommend Approval of Article 202562.

00:58:56,630	To the town meeting. Do you have a second. OK, Pat Norton. I recommend uh That we support Article 2 if Article 1 passes. I don't think we can do a caveat. That would be a different motion, honestly. I recommend it. No, no, I just recommend we support it. Jonathan, Jonathan I Bill Wheaton Wheaton Emil Dahlquist, Emil Dahlquist,

Beth.

00:59:29,429	Uh, Darcy Dale. Darcy Dale I.

00:59:35,800	And Marnie Crouch, hi.

00:59:39,769	So that's your nan revolt of the echo. 0 OK.

00:59:50,599	alright, uh, Bill, I don't know if you want to jump in or after listening to that, I mean we did get a.

00:59:59,969	Um, no, I'm, I, I'm here, I'm here. I mean, I'll let you run, run things, but I don't have any questions right now, but I think that, you know, we gotta, I mean, I'm like you said back to the original thought is that we gotta put this in front of the town to vote on.

So regardless of what we think might happen in appeals court, um, we're gonna let the town decide if they want to take the risk of losing state grants and what they want to do with their town. I think it's our decision to make. I think we're gonna put our best product in front of the

town and let them vote on it. Would be looking proposes for recommendations and then uh finalize the warrant language as proposed to you tonight so that we can have you sign the warrant if that's what you wanna do. Right, no, I think, you know, like from a timing perspective

we're definitely, you know, overdue to bring this to the, to the public and, and get a community uh vote on this, um, so definitely for to stick within the timeline, uh, I think July 14th, uh, is definitely something we need to do. You know, we just listened to a good discussion.

You know, but I feel like, you know, what you voted on your recommendation was really to preserve flexibility going forward, not each individual's opinion, you know, of, of. Of whether or not, you know, this is good articles, right? I mean, if you sat here and we said again like how would you

vote because I do think the public looks to you, looks to us on what's your opinion, maybe that will lean how I'll vote, you know, I don't know that this helps them or confuses them. I'm just, you know, from what I heard, um, so, yeah, I think

you have to say, I mean, I think like that fiscal, all those things they're gonna read our recommendations and that's why I couldn't vote for it because I felt like I don't want to mislead people thinking this is a great thing because people will ask me how I think they should vote and I.

any advantage in another motion. That says if the first article goes down in flames. That we moved to the table to refer back to the planning, the second article back to the planning work. I mean that's something we can do on the spot. Do we need to Have our ducks lined up for that?

I don't think you need to take a motion that I think might be that might be construed as a

01:02:14,570	I don't have the mechanisms in place as discussed earlier to a negative.

01:02:17,829	revert back as needed. We just have to among ourselves understand that if Article one fails, that someone needs to make a motion to uh refer back to the back to the planning board. And it's in there too, so I think that's helpful. Yeah, so I think as a select board now we gonna follow this

a similar path or do we want to recommend and on how we feel, you know, are we recommending, yeah, a lot of work's been done, this is our this is our best foot forward, you know, we, we're gonna have form-based code which will put on those restrictions to mitigate, you

know, a lot of the problems people fear with 3A, um. So do we, uh, is that our, are we gonna take a similar approach and a recommendation? I, that's awesome. First, I just want to thank the planning board for all the hard work. Um, I know that it's been extremely challenging over the

past several months in particular need to kind of pull everything apart and understand how it all then relates back to each of the two things. I know it's just been a lot of uh late nights and very hard work, and I want to thank you. I think you all have done a fantastic job.

Um, even right up until today, putting together additional documentation such as the memorandums and the flow charts, um, Mark as well, uh, your, your memos and getting everything organized. It's just been a huge lift. And I just wanna say thank you for that. It shows and um I think that you all have done.

In the discussion today and outlining how this helps um kind of protect the town from unintended consequences to the greatest extent possible, given the tools that you had at your disposal when 3A hit this town, um, and integrating it in with the form-based code initiatives, I think you've

done this town a great service, um, and I do think it's time to get this before the town. I think that the downside. Risks are too great to delay it any further, and I was very pleased to hear favorable action on both articles as well that gives you additional protection and flexibility to make changes in the future.

So I think that's really important that people recognize what you did tonight. Um, gives you further flexibility that you've been constantly optimizing for that under a lot of pressure and a lot of time constraints, um, that I think are necessary so that we're not in violation of any of our state's laws.

Um, and so thank you very much. Um, I just wanted to state that plainly and that I appreciate the discussion and uh including us tonight.

01:04:58,429	So do you have a thought on, so I, I guess I'll entertain a motion. Um, we'll do separately just similarly to what the planning board just did so for Article one. I'd like to make a motion that we as a select board um recommend and include on uh the upcoming special town meeting, Article 2025/61.

01:05:24,099	I second that. OK, we have a 1st or 2nd, um, we'll do a roll call, uh, Ben. I Bill Olson Wilson and Bill Wilson I. So that passes 30. Uh, can I get a motion for Article 2? On motion, uh, that the select board, um, Vote for favorable action and includes a warrant Article 202562,

01:05:57,000	the zoning bylaw Amendment.

01:06:02,329	I second that. OK, we'll do a roll call again, Ben. Benza, I Bill Olson. Wilson, and Bill Wilson I. Passage 30. Uh, to abstain on both. I'm sorry, absent.

01:06:22,030	Can I get a motion to accept the warrant as proposed was presented here this evening. Uh, uh, a point of clarification. So, uh, Mark, uh, drafted an explanation of how these two warrant articles work together and I think it would be helpful if that actually appeared on the warrant, uh, particularly because, uh, a lot of people

don't print out the warrant, um, the appendices or anything else. So if they don't, if they just look at the language of the warrant articles themselves, they're, they're not very informative. I, I mean, no offense to Robin, I called it a word salad, but it's, it's just a lot of words.

It doesn't actually, I mean, I'm sorry, but it's just a lot It doesn't really present a picture of what the town is of words.

01:07:18,670	trying to do through the appendices and then the finished articles, so. Stop looking at article where, where are you stating what pieces are in that she's referring to versus I think it's worth confirming that there's something in here. It's brief summary, and it's all in italics, and I thought that was Mark's summary.

That's yeah, taking that and I put it in. OK, so that is in the. OK, so the secondary question would be, would there be any value while we're all together to talk about the usefulness of a flow chart? Absolutely. You stole my thunder. That was coming up I put it out there.

Wanted one more motion for go ahead. I would love to have one more motion from the to accept the warrant here so that they can close the warrant and agree to sign it, uh, because I have to post this Monday. OK, but that contains that contains the summary what you have in front of younation drafted.

01:08:14,199	Yes, that was my only question. Yeah, and then we could as far as presentation materials both prior to our meeting and that I mean we could have that for the rest of the evening if you like, but I'd love. And this is, this is on the website now as well. I saw it up there earlier today, so

01:08:36,569	I would like to it discussed as a group too. I'd like everybody's input because it's so important for people's understanding of this very complex issue. So I'd like everybody in this room to have input on this idea and we do that sort of as any other as this additional business.

No, this is our main, but the flow the flow chart was primarily for this vote tonight with the boards. Uh, we now have a public, we want to take this into a public version, which means, uh. Uh, kinda correct some things and maybe clarify some things, uh, because we, we brought a certain amount of knowledge

into this to lead to a vote, but some of that knowledge won't be, uh, held by people in boat on this. So. Um, do, do we need, doesn't matter the order we go in? I know you want, want to get this and we have every intention of, of, uh, of closing this and such, but you

want that right now versus any discussion.

01:09:36,470	So either or, I mean we're gonna have it. We're gonna go through that discussion. It's very important. I wanna understand what gets up, what are the reports, so we're not, we're not solidifying the form, the chart right now, the flow chart. That's all I'm doing. Does this need to be that'll be in the

01:09:52,369	presentation materials and on the website. The explanation would be is what we're after, yeah. So we can close the warrant and leave. So I'll enter entertain uh a motion to close the warrant. I'll make a motion to close the warrant for the special town meeting on July 14th, 2025 at 6:30. Um, oh wait, that's Yeah, 6:30 p.m.

at the hand. That's good. OK, thanks. Alright, I'll do a roll call Ben. Ben glu an eye, Mr.

Olson. 01:10:24,069	Diane Wilson I. The warrant is closed. Thank you. You bet. All right, let's talk logistics. You need us to sign. Yes, I have, I have. So I had mentioned it as an idea for the both the planning board and for the public, um, the idea of the flow chart because number one with the separate warrants, it's confusing.

2 with one amending the other is confusing and um. I think it's really helpful for folks to understand the The framework, why it's broken down and what the votes mean and um I, I just think of sort of a visual clarity to all those words would be useful.

So I would love to have, you know, Robin's input on, you know, the, the clarity and accuracy of the legal aspects of it, um. And, uh, you know, like and Joe, your, your comments on how you feel with the fly, you know, with the public, and that obviously the select board's opinion because it's part of

your, your warrant article. And then and then the planning board hasn't had any opportunity to comment on any of this, so it's really. I did take a an initial look at the one with Mark's recommended changes. I thought it it made sense if you guys want to use it.

I didn't have any issues with the way I did anything, so when everyone's done discussing it, I know we all have some recommended changes. I can read it again, but, um, first take, I thought it was fine. And are your ideas for changes.

01:11:54,470	Yeah, um, this all came about today. So, to kind of finalize things. So, um,

01:12:04,229	as I, as I mentioned previously, it might, for the general public, it might be better to provide a little more information without getting it too complicated on that, to be sure, just to elaborate again or Uh, clarify what it is they're voting on. And the one thing I would add to the chart that um Mark created, um.

is to actually put a result or consequence below each of the two articles. In other words, Article 13 majority vote required. There are two options, yes or no, that's an appendix A. And what are the consequences if, for example, 3A is a no?

01:12:46,100	And that's where I would put as of like something like as of 724 25, the time will be 3A noncompliant. Forbased code will be incomplete, and it'll be a two-year moratorium required. Uh, on a form-based code in absence of a PB positive, uh, recommendation, but I can be that

01:13:07,470	that doesn't follow if we vote down 3A. That follows if we vote down the form-based code. No, no, no, no favorably recommended both amendments, so you should not have an issue with a two year prohibition at this point.

01:13:24,170	OK, OK, I'll take it out. And then, then it'll be uh also uh comment under uh the yes column. So this is a yes for the majority 3A vote. A yes decision will be required in Article 2 to fully complete the rezoning to protect the town center.

Uh, and then the second bull is a full 3A compliance with form-based code for protection pending a yes decision on Article 2. In other words, it's just acknowledgment that Article 2 is a completion of an amendment to Article 1, and it's So that's just stating if you approved it the first time,

then you have to pay attention to what's in the second. The 2nd article. And then after the 2nd article, there'll be 4 options. You could do no. Under the under the form based code, uh. Article 2, no and yes are the two responses for each of the two parts to that. One is for the um

Uh, if you voted no for the first time, there are two options after that, going to Article 2, there's a no and a yes column. Again, that appeared in the chart. And then if you, if there's a yes vote on the Article 1, then you could be no or yes on Article 2.

So again, uh some bullets underneath the yes and no answers so people can see what the conclusions are or consequences of voting a yes or a no for each one of those. So that was. The major change, change was inserting comments after Article One as boxes, which would be Um

That was one of, one of two flow charts to our context, uh, articles I would recommend. The other is to actually provide some information on what is in the article, and this was one that um Um, Where I had for example under Article 1 majority vote, I had

two bullets under that again this is a description of what are they voting on. Article 1 provides for new zoning for multi-family housing 3A permitted by right as noted here, and I took this information from actually what Mark had drafted for the draft explanation, but again just condensed it as information so people would just be reminded.

Uh, that was a long two-page article, but this was, this is just down to a couple of bullets.

01:15:52,569	so Article 1, multiple family housing, there are 3 bullets That's in 3 new town center subdistricts that would replace under that.

01:16:00,100	the existing base zoning, either business or R1A on the affected parcels. 2 is a new 3A multi-family overlay district encompassing two articles on Asbury Street outside of the town center. And the third one is because Article 1 and Article 2 together contain all of the form based and regulations, only one cannot be a complete code.

And then lastly, Railroad Avenue, Bay Road, and Walnut Road, most of Hamilton's commercial land uses were excluded from multi-family housing to protect the town's core commercial tax base and to provide the planning board with greater control over mixed-use development in these areas. So that's information before you make a vote. So now you have Two options,

you vote no on Article 1 or yes. For the no, then you go to Article 2, and if you vote no, these are the consequences or this is what's facing you for Article 2 to vote. Number one, the planning board recommend that Article 2 be referred back to the planning board while we can.

We can, I can scrub that now. Article 2 in corporates new zoning districts not permitting multi-family housing as of right, including the proposal of Depot Square and Bay Road Civic subdistricts replaced the existing base zoning of business or R1A on the affected parcels, and the existing business district and Willow Street overlay districts could

be eliminated if they would be superseded by the new zoning requirements. So again, that's Appendix B. If the vote is yes,

01:17:36,869	Uh, for Article 1, then Article 2 incorporates new zoning districts, not permitting multi-family housing as of right, as noted. So again, whatever your inclination is to vote on that, you have sometimes duplicate information. Uh, again, the proposed new depot square and Bay Road civic subdistricts replace the existing base zoning of business or R1A on the affected parcels.

The existing business district and Willow Street overlay districts would be eliminated as it would be superseded by the new zoning requirements. And Article 2 assumes that Article 1 has been adopted. Uh, and treats, well, it has been, and treats the amendments proposed in Article One is already being in place, but that can be changed.

And then lastly, Article 2, if Article 2 fails, the new town center districts would only allow multi-family housing by right and not allow any other land uses. That's a, that's a very important point. So we would have a downtown that is strictly zoned for residential. If article B is. Voted down

01:18:43,430	And I think that should be bold and underlined. Yeah, so you propose to hand this out. It's a two page, uh, I think that was. Is everybody. I think it's a good set of talking points for proponents to talk. What do you think about this? That's even worse.

I think it's it's a, it's a conditional flow diagram that 3/4 of the voters will sort of be scratching their head against. It's complicated. So it's like a teacher who passes out something and everybody's gonna be looking at it and they're not gonna really be and they're not gonna be focusing on listening to people.

They're gonna be all what's happening here now what's this what's that better to bring it up, you think at the time I think that we need to have a script for some of us to go up and talk and then you know we can make some of these points. Uh, but I think.

A two-blades flow diagram is off the charts. So what's wonderful voter voter attention. What's wonderful right now is we have a focus group here. So we have folks who are mired in it and we have folks who are not mired in it.

01:19:56,329	So we'd love folks who are mired in it are trying to, to like, like organize it in some way. So what we'd love to do is hear from you what's helpful, what is not helpful, and how can we manage to. Success here. How can we create clarity?

And I know there's no magic one right answer, but we have a focus group here, so let's focus. Yeah, it's definitely gonna be a difficult challenge to get it across. I do love, I mean, people learn that some are visual, some, some will get caught up in the reading the words on the page

and not listening to what's being said. So there's gotta be a balance, you know, this is a lot. I would be scratching my head, uh, for sure, um, and you live this every day as opposed to somebody, right so. But I also think when I'm not a good focus group because I

01:20:49,670	So, so let's, it might be talking apples and oranges wait a minute.

01:20:54,000	because we have uh Mark's version, uh, and, and that uh doesn't have much language on it. That was the one you reviewed, Robin, and it's, it's one page. It's one page. Yeah, and it doesn't have uh you do have to keep it to one page. This is less complicated. I think Amel took a page from

my book by adding a lot of words.

01:21:21,670	Because you added a lot more information, and I think in adding the information it lost the simplicity of just the four options. I appreciate your work, but I wouldn't put that in front of the town either. So one way to do it though is to is to layer the information

out like and to and to break it up into multiple like if it was gonna be slides or if you're gonna do a presentation or something like that. Um, you might consider saying, well, the favorable action. Goes down through the flow chart, like you only you only show that one first, like the favorable action is this.

Because, and then it's like, and then you show kind of like the next scenario because if you only voted yes on the 50% 1, and then you vote no on the 2/3 1, like the fear that is like against the favorable action because you have to kind

of like then like walk it back of and if you for whatever somehow magically. Vote no on the first one, but voted yes on the second one by 2/3, which doesn't seem likely. like start with like the most favorable action first and then like kind of like walk them down through like the let's not

go down these paths um because it's not in the town's best interest or what have you, but it's kind of like start with what. I think you have to do an overview, don't you like to give them kind of a, well, Mark has done the overview in a in a draft explanation, but that's 2 pages.

Can I, can I make a quick comment? Yeah, to be brief. Uh, so first of all, it's not meeting a couple of things that happen, right? So somebody will stand up and make a motion to move it, probably somebody from the planning board, and then there'll be presentations. There'll be a presentation by the planning board.

They'll likely be a presentation by the TIO. Um, a lot of this information could be introduced during those presentations and the time between now and the town meeting, we have an opportunity, uh, we've got. Almost 3 weeks to start to push information out in the community that we

think the community needs to know about what are the reasons that the planning board select boardinom will vote on this tomorrow night. So you'll have 3 recommendations out there. We can explain over the next 2.5 weeks why the different boards voted the way they did. We can explain what the high points of the 3A proposal are.

The good news is that even though a lot of people, particularly yourselves, have been talking about this for over a year now, there hasn't been a lot of widespread conversation throughout the community because there wasn't anything to really talk about. It was to this point it's only been, you're in favor of 3A,

you're not in favor of 3A, and you know. You actually have a polls in front of you. You actually have a zoning bylaw in front of you that can be dissected and discussed, and people can look at it and say, OK, I like this or I don't like this, and now we have something

for them to vote on, which is great, and Mark and I can work really hard in the next couple of days to have stuff that starts to flow out next week. We can do social media posts. We can do stuff on the website. All of your web pages can have what you want us to have on

there for you, and then it's really about getting. It distilled down into a couple of presentations and having some handouts. Yeah, that was the whole point of it, yeah, exactly that public engagement because there has not been a lot and that would be the next couple weeks.

A goal of that effort would be to have a comprehensive and and like well coordinated message because in the past I think it's kind of been chopped where it's like you got the one person's and then you got the other person's and you're like where are they to meet so but it would be nice if like one

presentation kind of it almost was one presentation with two parts and when you think that Util is still planning a match on here you can confirm that. Util is is already, uh, preparing presentation slides to help help this planning board with this. Um, we have a separate, a separate second, um.

Consultant that will be providing us a report on Thursday that we'll be speaking to potential economic impacts of the adoption of 3A which people had sought and on behalf of FinO we had went out and obtained some assistance on that so we'll have that report by Thursday.

So we'll have these things that we can start now that we know what we're we're, I guess my recommendation would be that it would be one instead of having this guy and this guy, this guy or this consultant and this consultant like have one presentation, you have multiple like but the cohesive.

Message multiple speakers in one an agenda as opposed to like 43 separate ones. The only, the only normally is to speak and normally the proposer that speaks, but if the Fincom has no objection and they vote tomorrow night to coordinate with the planning board, we could. Probably work it out so that there's one presentation that

would avail itself of somebody from the playing board, somebody of the FinO, probably somebody from UTI maybe Mark this is complicated enough so that I think we, we all need to know what will happen for each of the situations and that's why sending it through Robin is a good idea so that we, we, um.

We're all on literally on the same page, but we're not gonna give different answers for different things because it is that complicated. Agreed, but I don't think a coordinated effort in in presentation would be would be helpful, you know, even if it's, it's each representative from the various boards is

presenting, but we coordinate in advance so that they're complimentary and not confusing or contradictory that might be presenting because uh. Maybe to the chagrin of the people here, but Uh, not to me. I will be in Switzerland on July 14th, and, uh, you know, that trips, you know, it's a go, I mean.

Can't not backing out now, uh, so I couldn't, I mean it would be an economic, uh, um, what's the time difference? Can't,

01:27:05,069	um, uh, I, you know, we could have the chairs here, he can't speak for the whole board, but he could speak to whether or not he'd be willing to bring the idea of, uh, you know, consolidated presentation, uh, to this committee tomorrow night.

01:27:16,569	Did John have anything to add? Did he wanna make Yeah, John, I know you've shared documents in the past, in the past to get into the fiscal impact that we talked a little bit about earlier. Is there a plan to present that same document, something updated? Yeah, so our, our plan is one to write a book

recommendations, which is a given. So we'll, and that's been drafted and it's in final stage. Um, I sent. They 40 page deck to the fincon today, um, and that will be posted on our, on our town website. That, that was our plan. Um, we're more than, more than happy to collaborate to get a clear message out.

So, um, we'll definitely talk. I mean, we, we. I mean Joe can give you a, you know, I sent him a copy of it today, but I want the income to go through it. Um, so we've put up a fair amount of um scenarios and revenues and costs in place, so it's a pretty healthy document

similar to what we did for the school boat. So, anyway, I'm more than willing to sit down and let's collaborate and get a clear message. It also gives an opportunity to time it out like instead of half hour, an hour and a half from John, and then like a half

hour from, you know, it's like we know that it's gonna be kept to 45 minutes at the most and then there'll be that time for people and I think it spreading the message is starting to get the message out. by the end of this week, building up the town meeting in

small bits helps, and then, you know, cohesive 45 minute joint presentation with UI involved and planning board and income involved, perhaps Mark if we can twist his arm and then. You know, get into the debate, that would be probably the most logical. It'd be nice to hear from Matt also on this idea.

01:29:25,270	Matthew. That you're a mute.

01:29:41,670	Not that I want to speak for Matt, but I will say that he has indicated that they're, you know, utils on board to the vote on the 14th, and they, they know that part of this is helping get the message out about the zoning and, and, uh, making the presentation. Are they gonna be here it comes here.

Sorry, I had to step away for a second. Yes, uh, happy to put together a presentation. So the question on the table was, um, the idea of the various groups collaborating so that we're coordinating what the message is and what the timing is and the sequence for the message.

Mhm. That you, yeah, you'd be one section of that, Matt, not the whole thing. Fincom and yeah, my, my recommendation would be to keep it as brief as possible. So I would say Fincom will have two slides.

01:30:33,300	I like that 40. He here as well, as well.

01:30:41,529	It'd be good to see, you know, what they all look like and then how we put them together, you know, before the night before if, if the planning board wants to designate who they want to participate in the collaboration, I can, Mark and I can pull together a meeting with John and and Matt in the

coming days and so we can start the the work of getting that down, uh, after Tincom has their meeting tomorrow night.

01:31:06,899	when I planner sent me their presentations, borrow and steal from other towns that have had presentations, although our. You know, as it's been pointed out during the discussion, our zoning here is quite a bit different than what a lot of other towns have done. We've done a lot of work in doing a kind of wholesale

adjustment to the town town zoning, um, and change out, so it's not just an overlay district, which is what Wham did, but that's that can still be explained. I will say when people call and come in and ask about it, it's always. People don't understand zoning like they're not ingrained in

like we are, so it's always like, what is the state building, how many units are they building? You always have to step back and say like explain what zoning is and so some of those basic questions can be helpful just to. Or people a little bit

01:31:53,569	Should we put a list of FAQs together that that we might think of ahead of time and get those as part of it as well?

01:32:01,829	But a 101 is probably helpful

01:32:09,529	on zoning, right. I think people have heard that just upsets people now. Everyone has heard that message. Well, I also think in understanding what right means because I don't think people understand what by right means.

01:32:26,029	Yeah, that's

01:32:29,829	an important some definitions.

01:32:34,069	So do we feel that, I like what Joe just said, you know, we'll identify people from each board, we'll coordinate, you know, kind of the flow of a presentation, whether it's 45 minutes as Joe recommended or whatever you come back with, that's something that has connective tissue and flows.

The old saying, keep it simple, stupid, I guess, and make sure everyone understands it. I mean, you can get lost in this, but also there are a lot of people that will help. I do like your idea about keeping two different flows. This is what a yes means. This is what a no means, one page each.

Yeah, as I kind of build it out, yeah, and then you can circle back on it if you need to, but, and then it comes back to an if then.

01:33:16,800	And we Mr. Olson, any other comments from your end?

01:33:24,569	No, and I appreciate all the discussion.

01:33:30,100	We feel like this focus group was useful. We have.

01:33:35,470	So do we like this slow chart, and are we gonna incorporate it? What are our thoughts starting point for a slide deck but not ready for primetime handout. So on that left that first column, we don't need yeah. So on that first column we don't need that last bullet point I think Marty said, right?

Oh no, I haven't,

01:33:57,270	if you have somebody you wanna you know have part of Joe's presentation group, is there one member of the planning board or a group that Joe and Am he'll follow up, yeah, and, and, uh. I actually had was going to be here on June 26th, but when the

date was moved that um that was the trigger so I can look at my planning board members and they could duck under the desk, but I'll look under the desk uh.

01:34:26,600	Do not feel guilty about your trip. If you need someone else to go, I'll go too. We're gonna be hiking, so be pretty fun.

01:34:35,800	The other question I have isn't all the way over on the right hand column. I'm not sure. It says a yes vote on both Article 1 and 2 is the only option supported by both landing board and select board. Yeah, it shouldn't be on there. I don't know if that makes any.

Yeah, I, I, it was just a little confusing to me, so I'm trying to say like what would be confusing is a non. You know and I think if we have less bullet points, I mean, I think, I think some of the stuff is really important like

what happens if we vote yes for 3A and no on form based code like I think people really need to understand chaos and I think that that needs to maybe be. It might be in the presentation, but if we, when we go to that second vote, I think we might need to reiterate that section

depending on what just happened. I don't know what what do you think, Marnie? I'm just thinking that people can only digest so much and so like when we go to the second boat, I think. We need to have that another like mini like maybe one slide explanation. I think it's really important that that.

There is a meeting at which the presentation is presented and basically a test drive to see how it works and uh I, I, I think John's right we don't wanna get, we don't want it to be too long, um, it just has to be succinct and, and really understandable, and I don't think that the uh. The actual

article language or the appendices can do that job. We need other materials. So, uh, I really hate to say this and I'm almost afraid to say it, but I don't know whether the planning board wants to meet on July 1st, whether we would have anything close to uh uh materials ready.

Um, July 8th is an option, but not a good one because I leave on the 9th, but I could Risk the wrath and. You know, maybe, uh, have something on, on that day, not the night, the 8th, um, but, uh, if it's just going to be a more informal group then, then someone, you know, I'll be

happy to participate as much as possible, but someone from the planning board has to, another member has to volunteer to be part of the, of the process of, of being, of getting this presentation together.

01:37:10,130	But I was an advisory committee at one point established and I don't know if those members, I mean, if they were ever part of the process to develop ultimately it became the code I'm not sure, but. The leader of that group was Jonathan and. They're a multifaceted group of unique individuals could support development of a presentation, maybe.

I would have 1 or 2 slides for each of the two articles. Right, so for 3A. You have to make people realize that just because you own land doesn't mean it's gonna be developed. Right, zoning is not that you're, if you're at the end of the green line in the Mystic Valley Parkway and uh you know,

thousands of people go by, sure, you know, if you zone it, they'll build it, but in a cow pasture in Hamilton. So I mean that's one misconception. Second misconception is it's right. It doesn't, it doesn't make it doesn't matter if it's by right, doesn't make economic sense.

01:38:15,930	That's the key. It has to make economic sense, but do you really want to say that? And what if it does make economic sense and then the town relied on what you presented? I think it's risky to say I'll tell you what, I've taught real estate economics for 48 years at MIT.

And I can tell you it does not make economic sense in many locations aside from, you know, the end of the green line and all sorts of urban places, OK? I can't promise you, but the point is it's, it's just because you give somebody the ability to do something doesn't mean that they're going to do it,

OK? The second thing is there's just a.

01:39:02,229	There are ways of controlling. What happens under 3A, starting with form-based code, also with just simple maximum building sizes, setbacks, uh, just because you allow 15 units breaker doesn't mean you're gonna get huge apartment buildings. Some people really still confuse 3A with 40B. It's two completely different things. So just because you're, you're supporting, you know,

multi-family apartment, it turns out that the that the 40B component of this 3A is even smaller than it is, uh, for the town as a whole, so it's not that, uh, this is going to, you know, add to affordable housing. Um, and 3A is a perfectly reasonable policy. Under reasonable implementation guidelines for helping to, you

know, support transit usage, get people off of roads, cluster development around. There isn't a country, there isn't a city in the world that doesn't have cluster development around transit stops, so. Um And the final thing is, if you don't do it. You're gonna, you know, be fighting the state for the next 5 years. One way or another.

The state's gonna try and do this one way or another. So support 3A. Learn to love it. Another thing that gets brought up, uh, is the Winthrop school property, um, the Winthrop school property, so it might be good to. Outline the fact that this Uh, these districts that have been developed do not include the Winthrop school property.

And if, and if you extended the lease at the Winter Winthrop school property, you might even get more favorable vote on 3A because it'd be, it'd be even less off the, you know, it'd be more off the table. I would wait, why would that be? I mean, it's not the Windsor property is not part of the

downtown development, but the fear, I wouldn't, I wouldn't try and confuse that. At all, that's it.

01:41:06,430	I, I'm saying I'm saying I was being cheeky, but my recommendation was to clarify that I was being cheeky simple slide shows it's not just in the show that's one slide. The second slide is why support form-based code. And we, you know, rely on a set of design guidelines that wind

up making development look more like Hamilton already does and something else. Yeah, I think the most. Powerful one of the maps the maps. These, these maps are really powerful images. They, they help explain things, and I think the one that um ETL put together to show like kind of the for instance of what

would happen if, if the Crosby's, uh, parking lot, that whole area was purchased and redeveloped, what would happen to that? And when you see what that looks like in practice under the form-based code, it's certainly looks just like Hamilton right? it's pretty nice, you know, so I think. There there's a couple of these

graphics and images, you know, that.

01:42:06,670	how form-based code is protecting the town from becoming, it's actually protecting the town.

01:42:16,369	Yeah, were you gonna say something about the leaves on Winthrop? I wasn't saying anything about the police on my, I was just gonna say this, the uh. Ironically, the, uh, regulations from HOHLC don't allow us to, wouldn't have allowed us to use the Winthrop school site anyway, they, it was considered

excluded land because it's under contract to the to the school district, so we wouldn't have been able to count it and put it into our district, so it is kind of ironic that it continues to be conflated because we wouldn't have been allowed to use it anyway under the current regulations.

So and we took it out of our plan even before the regulations came up, so. We haven't been thinking about the the site at all, but that's what everybody goes through. So again, that's an example of people misunderstanding what's what's in it and what isn't in it, and that's why it's great

to finally have a zoning proposal that People can look at and respond to. And when is the lease up as Pat was saying if that was extended.

01:43:13,869	A year ago or 2 years 10 years, so there's, I think there's at least 7 or 8 years left on it. I can double check. I believe there's at least 7 or 8 years. Yeah, it was definitely 10 years. It was extended. We extended it by 10 years when Sean Farrell was so.

Last year, so it was at least 8 years. OK, that's. Yeah, I think the other important thing is, uh, recognizing that the town center as a district is different than than the other districts and then they allowing for mixed use and, and multi-family, the way that it's structured. That wasn't just, you know,

kind of as the focus group person. It took me a while to understand that on the outside coming in. Nuance between the districts would be good to go through.

01:44:00,399	So who from the planning board is gonna work with with our group and uh it could be two people, right? I'll be happy to, to work um as much as I can and, and, uh, you know, who, whoever would like to volunteer to make the presentation for the planning board.

01:44:21,000	So Marty can be your primary contact and come back with that information through your work session if you want to talk it out.

01:44:28,869	Don't everybody all jump in at once?

01:44:36,170	Well, you know, we could put 48 years. names in a hat and I can draw one.

01:44:42,229	That'd be dangerous.

01:44:46,930	Yeah Yeah

01:44:53,000	I will comment on

01:44:59,270	We didn't have it on the agenda, but.

01:45:03,770	the discretion

01:45:07,300	We have lost our uh chair so that falls to you vice chair. We don't have a quorum to you want to call the time the select board uh lost a member at. 8:45 we no longer have a a quorum as a select board. So you've adjourned in the essence and listen and talk,

but we can't make any official select board more deliberations from us. Yeah, Marty, if you're, you know, I'm, I'm happy to hear you on, on the topic that we really focused on, which was our report and recommendation and the reason that we did that. I don't need that at this time.

I, I don't need another, uh, uh, comments about the merits or demerits of VA. Oh, you're right, it wouldn't be about the more just basically just something Mr. Wheaton just said and I believe, um. just said Do you wanna use the microphone I this did we, we close the public

01:46:17,100	Yes, we did last time. hearing on this? We closed just a deli. This is just deliberation. So I'm getting this as a courtesy to you. So if you could please at the last meeting.

01:46:27,130	OK, is it, is it alive?

01:46:30,770	First of all, Barney, thank you very much for that consideration into, uh, breaking the flow of what was officially scheduled, um. Just, uh, I think as far as the public's confusion, you said the public might be confused about mixing up 3A with the Winthrop site and also about. The by right, I think Beth

mentioned the by right being a concern. Mr. Wheaton said it may be by right doesn't mean anything will be built there, and that's correct. It's not a guarantee. It's not like eminent domain per se. And you have to remember site plan review still applies. So this is unlike a 40B because under 40B, the developer can

actually ask the ZBA in conjunction with the comprehensive. Permit to waive uh local uh regulations so the buy right under 3A is still subject to site plan review. It was it does absolutely that can kill a project site plan review. It would be a rare circumstance, but for example, if the planning board imposed conditions and the developer

didn't like them and withdrew the. Application or if by chance we had years of drought and there was insufficient water to put out a fire, I would assume under that circumstance they couldn't even get a building permit, but you know my understanding of site plan review is that it really is focused on public health and

safety so any conditions that the planning board would impose would be oriented toward that but I mean we can't authorize the construction of buildings if there's insufficient water. I mean, it, it's just, it doesn't, it doesn't work. You can't have a building where people can't take a shower or get drinking water. I mean, and if our situation

were to get dire, that, that's potential. There might not be enough water pressure to put out a fire. Right, I just, I haven't seen anything in the regulations that specified, uh, you know, local water flow and all that. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just part of site plan review. OK, I'll, I'll remain skeptical, call that.

I appreciate your answer. Mr. uh, Wheaton mentioned the economics of building a building any kind of project, and under a sort of normal market-based economics, one could argue, OK, it might be prohibitly expensive for a developer to purchase with their own money, uh, say they see lamps in sight comes up or something like that and let's.

You know, with their own money the many subsidies, but we do have the whole reason this 3A thing came down is a political decision, partially. There's a pretext that there's an economic theory not proven that if you build a lot more units, you'll bring down the housing cost per unit. That's not necessarily proven.

I mean you be very cheap if density meant cheaper, right, so. So we have a political reason where people want to densify our towns and um you know it's very vague. Some people say it's it's for demographics and such, but since it's politically based, not necessarily rationally based, the state could take your taxpayer money on the

statewide basis, something like a millionaire's tax or something analogous and subsidize developer to purchase private properties and build up your build up your town, and it would that would kind of destroy a purely market-based economic. reason why you shouldn't worry. I think the state could the legislature could have a fund

that's billions of dollars and say now we have my right. We're going to look for properties, pay a lot of money over market for properties we think are suitable. So that's the, that's where they're going if you, I don't know if you realize that, but. Yeah, I hate to use the word speculative, but I think I'm

gonna listen to our professor emeritus here about real estate economics, and I really think that developers are in the business of making money. Yes, but they don't care where they get the money. If the state gives them subsidies, they will build programs like that. The other fact that's really important is that in Hamilton,

most of the land that will be rezoned under 3A is already built. So that makes the economics even more difficult because you have to basically you don't have vacant land to to to develop. You have, you know, neighborhoods and houses that you're gonna have to buy up for a million dollars or $500 a

piece and then tear down and and everything it it's. Just not a very good, not a very good site, and it's all still subject to the form-based code. And that is subject to the form that's the form-based code is your ace in the hole and the form-based code is the ace in the hole because

there's 3A compliant and, and the form-based code is going to keep the scale of Hamilton the same. There will be no high rise apartments if you look at at the uh two tables that I attached to our memorandum, the height limitations and the whole bit roof lines have to be a certain way, um.

The setbacks the whole nine yards. I, I, I would be really surprised if in 5 years or 10 years there was anything but better development in Hamilton. For-based code prevents large blocks of buildings from floating in seas of asphalt. with parking out front. You will never see that again, I think that's a great one.

01:51:45,630	I know that's a vision and I think that's why, but I think that's helpful wording for the average person because that just gave you that whole picture in one. Thank you for that, Marty. I appreciate everything that's been said. One quick point about public confusion because the Winthrop

site was also brought up, and I understand it has nothing to do with the actual territory of the 3A zone. People are making more of the uh a more holistic connection between, I think, housing density that could possibly go there if it was no longer an operating school, and that's,

that's we have our 3A districts and and barring any unforeseen whatever that site is not gonna be part. Of the town center at, at what we're dealing with at town meeting. It's off the table. It couldn't be part of PA as Joe said, even if we wanted it I think some people land under the regulations. to be.

01:52:40,170	I think some people are simply voting against the school, uh, consolidation because if it's an operating school, nothing can be built there, be an operating school. So that's where they, that's where the idea is coming from, you know, there's a potential 40B in the future could be put there if the land is sold off.

Sam Andrews said he would advise the select board to sell off the Winthrop property. He said that last year. At a it was a, it was the, it was an executive, um, sorry, not executive, a it was a workshop in uh July, I believe July of 2024, where you said you would advise the select board to sell

off that property. You didn't get into the details as to who or what, but I could, we could look that up and I could bring it in the future. That would be subject to, uh, yeah, you'd have to vote on it. It would still be voted on, but I'm saying there are people in

town who have high to try to sell it. I appreciate, um, the interruption and, uh, you know, Thank you.

01:53:31,369	no, I mean, well, it's, you know, we have uh you know allowing it. It's, it's, it's important to understand what confuses people in town.

01:53:44,970	Make a motion to adjourn.

01:53:49,569	Do we want to talk more about our presentation materials? Do I have an assistant? You're the primary, so you can bring an assistant.

01:54:01,529	Jonathan, would you be up for this? Come on. Come, it's not that hard. I've done it and I know, I know you've done infinitely more presentations than I've ever done. I don't know Bill Wheaton, professor

01:54:20,770	you can tag team is next week. Then should we leave a panel up there for Q and A?

01:54:29,069	Like when questions come from the audience, like, should there be a, like a panel of sorts. Or do we just kind of like point and ask people to respond to questions. Sometimes like the presenters could sit there and field questions just to thought. Actually, you know, that is Jonathan's biggest gift. Yeah, the questions people there addressing what

01:54:54,529	asking based on the top of the question be part of one of the presenters, right? We think we've identified three peoples

01:55:03,829	we do that a lot, you know, just OK, this is to be continued. I'm the motion that's on the floor. OK, so, uh, I don't think I'm gonna get a lot of pushback on this, but, uh,

01:55:32,170	Pat Norton, Jonathan, Jonathan, Bill Wheaton, Billy Emilquists did we lose Darcy, so we get our power substation. Yeah, because it gets tricked doesn't ever stop.

01:55:42,930	Darcy, Dale, I and Marnie Crouch, I, we are adjourned.

01:55:54,670	You still get and my wife.