I on Mics are on. Oh, they are on. Do we have an echo? No, no, it's loud. OK, so it is 7:03 p.m. and I am calling the July 1st, 2025 planning board meeting to order. So this meeting is being recorded by HWA. And I'll start uh with roll calls.

So when I call your name, please indicate that you're present, Pat Norton. Jonathan Poo, Jonathan Poore present. Uh, I know for the record that Bill Wheaton will not be in attendance. Beth Hur here. Uh, I know, uh, Darcy Dale will not be here. Uh, Amil Alquist, Dahlquist here, uh, Marty Crouch here.

Matt Hammill, no, yeah, and I don't think Jeff is gonna be here either. Jeff, we do have a quarrel. Do we have anybody on online? Do we have anyone online?

00:03:59,400	OK.

00:04:02,830	The town is not interested, um, apparently, uh, so we have now taken role we have a quorum and if no one has any objection, I am going to take uh the public hearing, the continued hearing on the tree removal, uh, uh, application if you will, uh, that's being presented by TEC that was, uh, continued from June 3rd.

Yes, so, uh, if representatives from TEC or the town are here, um, we can go forward with the scenic road hearing so that you're not inconvenienced by, uh, our other board business.

00:04:52,100	Good evening, uh, Tim Olson, DPW director. Uh, Jason is with TEC. He's, he's the designer. Uh, he can answer technical questions, uh, but we come before the planning board, uh, as a continuation, uh, to get, we're trying to move ahead with some, uh, projects, roadway projects that we have planned, uh, hopefully this fall, um, in

order to do so, uh, we have some requirements to remove two trees on Bridge Street. To improve the drainage, uh, on the Lower Bridge Street area between Bay Road and Miles River, uh, constant drainage, uh, flooding issues, uh, we've, we're trying to improve those, uh, with some subsurface drainage, uh, catch basins, and

some drain pipe, and, uh, where the trees needed two trees need to be removed would be our out fall structure, uh, into the Miles River. Um, he has a plan. I'm sure, I'm not sure if you've seen it before, but, uh, that's kind of the extent of, uh, the tree removal.

Um, we are also planning, um, repaving and drainage improvements along Miles River as well, uh, another scenic road, uh, with, uh, limited, uh, there's no tree removal on that, uh, section of roadway. There was a tree that was removed on Miles River. It was down close to the intersection of Bridge Street

in Miles River that was removed prior to the winter and it had major defects in it, uh, and it was a risk, uh, during our winter season. So I made the executive decision to remove that tree prior to winter, uh, but that is, uh, I guess noted on the narrative as a difference from the previous meeting.

We've also had a resident come before us from 14 Bridge Street. There's 3, I believe pear trees in front of their house. um, they claim that it has leaf spot disease. I did not have time to get them evaluated by our, uh, professional arborist, um, but I, I will do that and I would

also like I guess permission or approval from the planning board to remove those trees if necessary and if, uh, if they actually are diseased.

00:07:03,730	for me to not have to come before you again, um, I would not remove those trees if they are deemed to be healthy, uh, only if they're diseased and danger to other surrounding vegetation. OK, so those two pear trees, they are on in the public way. They're not on these property owners' property.

They are in the public way, OK, because it, it wouldn't make sense for the town to pay to remove trees on private property, right? No, the, the Alfa structures within the right of way of Bridge Street, right, but the, the pear trees are the 3 pear trees is, um, they are in the right of way as well.

They're just in front of 14 Bridge Street, um, just a request from the resident for us, I guess, to look at it and. To remove them if if diseased, so you're seeking approval for the uh the the the removal of a tree this winter, which technically I guess you should have come before us on that

because it is a scenic route so you want approval for what happened in the past and approval for what might happen in the future as well as the two trees that are. Clearly within the scope of the that's correct, yeah, and, and I mean we can talk about how I'm gonna move on trees that are dangerous.

I, I don't sometimes have time to come before the planning board, um, if, if we have winter storms approaching and we see a defect in a tree, we're gonna remove it prior to. Uh, it just happens that way. Well, of course I mean if it poses a danger and it could

potentially fall on an automobile or a pedestrian, obviously you want to act expeditiously. I think maybe as a, as a point of clarification you should come within 4 to 6 weeks to get the approval for what you've done instead of waiting too long just because it is uh one of our bylaws just just being a stickler here.

No, I, I mean, scenic scenic trees and along scenic public shade trees along scenic roads are, are definitely important. Um, they do age, they do live and die, and my job as a tree warden is to take care of them, uh, if needed, but I, I do understand, uh, one thing we also have is we've, we've been

given some money, uh, to plant new trees, so, uh, we can, I'll work with Jason and TEC to see if there's some areas. It is along both stretches of roadway to replant some, uh, obviously we'll try to replant as many as we can, but, um, try to at least replant what we take out.

So yeah, and those Bradford pears, I guess they are now a prohibited species. If they, I, I don't know what species they are, but if they are truly those, uh, that's something I'll have, uh, Sequoia tree is our, our tree expert right now, uh, professional opinion. I'll get his.

I'll get Mark to look at him, uh, and remember my parents planted a pear tree and regretted it. It was great for a couple of years and then it was a problem and then it had to be removed. I brought it up, uh, with the guys today in the DPW and they

remember planting those trees so it was a town tree trees that we planted so beautiful when they're beautiful. I mean so there's a, there's a little bit of um. Smoothing that we have to do because they did hard work to plant those trees. I don't want to take them before I get accurate

information from a, uh, professional arborist. So, uh, do any, uh, other planning board members have any questions? I, I just have a curiosity question not about the trees if if you'll. Bear with me. Um, I'm just curious that the, I know on um. Bridge Street, there's been some ongoing drainage issues from the new development there.

And I think that the water crosses over the surface of the foot of um Uh, Mill River, uh, Miles River Road, and I was just looking at the drawings and I was just wondering. I see further up Bridge Street, you have a way. Of um the water crossing the road.

Um, Just curious if if any of the, I know it has nothing to do with your responsibility, if any of your, your strategies will help manage the drainage that's being Uh

00:11:27,730	further up Bridge Street, it could, uh, I know that wasn't that wasn't the design intent. It's just a curiosity and it's a point taken, um, that's been a challenge there. Uh, we looking at Miles River, looking at intersection, there are things that we possibly can do to increase.

Um, the drainage off the Miles River, but also intercept some of that drainage coming off. Uh, there are catch basins. We just need to kind of pull the water as best we can to get to those catch basins. Yeah, and I noticed there was sheet runoff on the on the road

heading down to the Mill River when the that area was overrun, and I'm assuming that that part is going to be addressed. It's just that it. You can't address the drainage in front of those those new developments. Yeah, we're going to try to do the best we can in that

intersection to try to, like I said, control and force that water to the sides of the roadway or to the catch basins to get them obviously then in. The underground system and is there any dialogue with those developers in conjunction with this process, or that's separate? I would say that's separate just my role, I mean what I

plan to do is stay within the right of way, uh, to try to do some of that. Um, I don't plan to go on private property or or or I try to address everything as it as it comes into the roadway itself or or from the roadway.

So, um, I can kind of work with the building department as well to see what their overall strategy was in. You know, the final, the final piece to see if there's anything we can do there, but I think by maybe reshaping or restructuring the intersection there, I think we might be able

to control some of that runoff prior to it going across the the intersection. So again it completely off the subject, and I know it's not in the scope of work, but I just was curious while you were here to ask about it. Yeah, I mean it always makes sense to talk with them and see

uh we can work together or if there's something that we can do and uh as a design team to. To see if we can improve that, uh, it's never a good situation to have that sheet flowing across the intersection, the icing and things like that, so that's all thanks.

So the project itself is still in front of the COSCO. Uh, yeah, we'll have to go in front of the COO. They actually talking to Jason a little bit before this. They, um, wanted us to come before you first. has to approve the tree removal associated with the project before the project gets approved?

Correct, yeah, they, they requested that we come before the planning board in order to, uh, properly. Um, Parramatta trees that the two trees that we need removed for the drainage outlet, um, which is a new location for the drainage in order to, uh, properly convey. Everything, um, at the right elevation and into the actual

larger wetlands and is that area proposed work around these two trees to be removed in the wetland boundary or not? No, no, it'll all be outside of the wetlands, um. And it's, it's actually located at a point in where the right of way is actually sort of wide due to the curvature of the

road, um, and the right of way is sort of linear. So it provided, uh, a very good location to get the outlet in. I didn't have proper stone to prevent erosion before it enters the well. So it kind of makes sense that they would want us to prove the

tree removal because the tree removal is required to to meet the conditions of your design, otherwise you'd have to move this this structure, yeah, yeah, OK. And this is the ideal location of the structure based on. Whatever based on space based on space and right away with um so we can yeah I mean what so.

The structure is then then there will be an outfall, so the structure that we're talking about is like a water quality. Water quality shale water quality vault. Yep, yep, it's, um, you know, a large concrete structure that will, uh, like a storm, yeah, it'll treat all the water prior to it exiting the,

um, so that, as I mentioned, the, the right away with that we do have in that area was the perfect location, um, and since the slope of the road. It is very steep in that area. In order to get the pipe to outlet, we need that extra

driveway room in order to not have to pursue any, any, uh, permanent easements.

00:16:21,299	On private property.

00:16:25,100	OK, thank you.

00:16:28,470	Any other questions for these gentlemen? Can I ask one more off the subject question? Sorry, um, again, given the fact that the the Bridge Street process isn't really done, and, um, it could add a load to your storm scepter at that discharge point, is there any, um, sort of provision for monitor?

I know it's not in the design, but it's more a DPW question, provision for monitoring more frequently to make sure that it's not overrun. Yeah, uh, any clo I mean we have some new structures out on tobacco. We have as part of that project we have some maintenance, um,

proper maintenance for the, for the new structures, um, variety of locations. This would be one of them. um, I don't see too much of the Bridge Street drainage, um, making it to that structure because of the outlet, um, or the, uh, existing culvert is the low spot.

Uh, this is on the kind of the uphill of that towards more towards Bay Road, but. Um We'll look at it, all these structures, uh, annually and get them, uh, maintenance or cleaned or whatever we have to do to keep them optimal. Yes, that, uh, are you, will you be back before us them for a stormwater permit?

No, we're not, we're not, we're staying within the right of way, and it's less than an acre of disturbance. It's just paving and we're just doing some drain work, so the one condition any maintenance requirements or anything like that. They, they would do maintenance requirements on the storms up there for sure, yeah.

Probably similar to what I was mentioning before with tobacco roads so. Right, so So I move, can I make a motion? Go ahead, make a motion that we prove the removal of two trees being discussed. Um, I guess it's on Bridge Street, isn't it? Arizonamiles River. Uh, the trees actually on Bridge Street and Miles River Road.

They're on the two on they're on bridge where we're putting the outfall or the outlet, uh, the water quality, um, and there was 3 others that we was talking about earlier that are on Bridge Street as well in front of 14 and then that one that I took earlier on Miles River.

Well, Moss River actually is Moss River a scenic road? Oh, OK, OK, good. Motion to approve the tree removal requested, uh, along Bridge Street to support the improvements project in addition to potentially the uh pear trees if you deem them necessary or appropriate to remove, hopefully with the condition that you plant new ones, not necessarily pear pear

trees but something else. Second. Right, so it's really a motion to approve the application. Um, second, so, uh, when I call your name, please indicate that you approve of this application, Pat Norton, Pat Norton, Jonathan Poo, Jonathan Po I Beth H I Amil Dalquist, Dahlquist and Marnie Crouch I. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Have a good evening.

00:19:38,099	Uh, so now we can turn to approval of the minutes. Uh, so, um,

00:19:46,630	We'll first consider the minutes from April 8th, and Jonathan, did you have uh a problem

00:19:56,730	with those even though I would just note that some of the attributions are still not quite right, but the, the, the statements are correct, so I just pass them as they are. Did anyone else have any issues with the minutes from April 8th?

00:20:14,099	So I'll entertain a motion to approve those minutes.

00:20:20,170	I move we approve the meeting meeting minutes of April 8, 2025. 2nd, I think since we don't have any members online, we can just raise our hand. All in favor

00:20:38,099	unanimously. Oh yeah, but that's not a planning board member board member, so those minutes are approved, uh, now we can turn to the April 29th and. Great. Uh, Amo, you had an issue with those. Uh, yes, April 29th was, uh, on page 1 of 3, down at the bottom, vote.

Mr. Wheaton made a motion to leave the zoning of the carriage lane area intact to its original proposed form Bay Road mixed use. The planning board voted 4 to 3 to 0 by roll call in favor. Um, it's a little, uh, the language is a little garbled there.

Uh The, the motion, uh, it's too bad Bill's not here, but the motion that he made was to uh change the carriage lane area from its current. zoning to the proposed Bay Road mixed use. Category and I believe that was the uh motion in the vote.

00:21:42,000	So we will have to forward that correction to Mark, so we'll have to continue um um the minutes from April 29th until. Well if that's the only one we could approve those minutes on the condition that that vote is clarified the wording it says to leave the zoning area intact to its current proposed form,

so it was being proposed. At that point currently. But I think that the vote was that it would become part of the Bay Road mixed use. Yeah, that was the 4 to 3 vote. Perhaps, uh, what we should do is advise Mark to listen to the transcript and make sure that's clear, so we'll continue that as well.

uh, May 13th, uh, I did, uh, have some

00:22:33,769	minor edits to those minutes and I will forward them. Um, to Mark, um, Did anyone else have any corrections to um those minutes?

00:22:52,769	Mine were essentially uh stylistic. I corrected uh the uh uh reference to mass general laws. The uh citation was inaccurate, and then I just had a few other very minor edits, but um. It um Uh, I, I can pass them on to Mark. Uh, the minutes from May 20th are missing, and then the only

other, uh, set of minutes was from June 3rd. Is there any, uh, uh, discussion about those minutes?

00:23:35,470	I, I had some, again, some stylistic, um.

00:23:41,230	Issues, not, not many, but we can uh get them clarified, uh, but, uh, one problem that I identified, um, it's in the middle on the first page, um. Referring to the table of use regulations, it says the table of use, it's really the table of use regulations identified the planning board as the responsible entity, but it

needs to be the zoning board of appeals that was reversed. I think what we intended was that the planning board would be the um responsible entity for all the uh. Uh, new subdistricts and and the planning board would replace the ZBA. So again those, uh, minutes have to be corrected and given

that we have all the minutes coming back to us, we might as well, um, wait and vote later wait and vote on all of them, great, OK.

00:24:42,269	So I'll send my corrections to Mark.

Great. 00:24:52,029	OK. So the only other item on our agenda is a discussion of the um July 14th, 2025 special town meeting. Uh, one of the um items that

00:25:10,869	Uh The board is considering including with the materials at town meeting is the flow diagram that uh AO prepared and uh I actually think in its present format it's really clear. I do not think it contains opinion. I think it's quite factual. That's not the one that's not the final one.

I don't, yeah, do we have copies here? I don't. I saw them online, but I don't see it here.

00:25:48,829	Emily, you don't have your computer. Do I get up, do you? I can look it up.

OK. 00:25:56,630	The one I sent around. So this,

00:26:01,799	where did I get this one then? That was the one Mark, uh, maybe.

00:26:08,400	The one he was working off.

00:26:14,769	while Amil pulls that up, could we talk kind of in principle about other materials and presentation, um, at town meeting and sort of what needs to be vetted by the board and what doesn't need to be. Right, and that unfortunately is going to be quite difficult because uh the uh Finom

uh the planning board, I don't know if I doubt the select board has any materials but uh. UI I believe is presenting some information so I know Joe has tried to organize a meeting of all the different people that may have a role at town meeting to try and coordinate the presentation so.

I don't know if if those of you who are on Facebook saw the Fincoms present well, the material that they are proposing to include as an appendix to the warrant or as part of the warrant so that they have their materials prepared. We don't know what UTO is going to do and um so.

If anything, I through this whole process we're always a little bit the last to know so we're a little bit the last to know. I, I think that from my point of view, uh, that the planning board should focus its efforts on. Educating the voters at town meeting how the form-based code

is a protective measure for the town with respect to Article One, which is the uh article which will bring the town into compliance with um 3A so. Uh, can you admit this

00:28:18,230	this is Marty, this is the one

00:28:24,930	Oh yeah, I think you have to leave it over there though so we don't get the feedback from it. Yeah, I was like I started, yeah.

00:28:35,000	On the weekend I think I sent it.

00:28:38,170	I think the volume is on the laptop.

00:28:46,730	I don't hear an echo. Yeah, I was starting to hear Marnie though

00:28:53,769	and then there was somebody who was trying to get on. Oh Yeah, we got them in.

00:29:02,369	That was what started it.

00:29:21,630	Did Mark have a comment?

00:29:29,470	So, while we're waiting for that again, um,

00:29:36,470	To Well, I'll, I'll repeat my point though. I, I think that even though I'm, I had it, uh, in front of me, uh, a slightly outdated, uh, version of the flow diagram, I don't think that the flow diagram actually contains anything that's not factual. It's mechanics. It's really the mechanics of the vote.

It's the mechanics of what happens with the vote. So, and then to to to play off of what you just said before, I have agreed.

00:30:05,529	the planning board's role should be to help people understand the role of form-based code in managing 3A and managing the rest of the downtown. What I think would be a useful strategy if the rest of the team is in line with it is for any. Question, technical questions or challenges around the town's

relationship to 3A, they really should be directed to town council, not to the planning board. Right. The planning board should focus on planning and the metrics around planning, not the legal permutations or speculations on 3A, but should be that'll be Robin Stein or whoever the whoever the representative is

00:30:55,230	um so I'd like to just promote that and make sure that the planning board is in line with that. OK, but so, so let's just review here, uh. The select board controls the warrant and Bill Bowler actually I think controls the conduct of uh special town

meeting so uh Joe has set up a meeting on Monday, uh, to have all the different participants uh discuss their presentations, and that is something that you will have to confirm at that time. It's not something. That the planning board we can recommend it. That's what I'm, that's what I'm getting to here is could,

could the planning board get behind that recommendation? I mean if it's a legal issue then town council should address it. If it's a planning issue, uh, particularly a form-based code planning issue, the planning board should address it and if it's a straight 3A. Clients issue then uh if UI is there I think UI should address

that because they are the ones who ran the compliance models that the uh executive office Agreed and I just wanted to make sure the whole the board is behind that approach and I know that Bill Bowler will be the final say in that but I wanted to make sure that the planning board supports that approach.

Um, I support that approach. Be a little leery about using words like this code will protect it because. That's subject. Like I think it's, it's really good to explain what it does in action, but say it protects is, is there is a little bit of subjectiveness in that, um, we could say, you know, there's a

lot of options on how you, you can adopt this, and we chose this route because of these reasons, but to say that it protects it if you don't want to use the word protect, it prevents. Uh, any type of development that's fundamentally at odds with the existing scale of our downtown, I'd say even that's

like I would say that it restricts it to these like the their numbers. There are numbers are restrictions to this, and they come to the form, but I wouldn't say what the form does. I wouldn't say that it is in

00:33:21,099	the character of down. Well, even last week when Bill was talking about um. It'll never get built. I'm like, we should not be saying that as a planning board. That's not our job. So I think, I think to your point, I think that's helpful to just really parse through some of this to make sure that

we're clear on what we are saying and not. So let's tackle that for just a moment, um. Uh, I think it was in Mark's FAQs, um. And I don't know whether Mark is on online there, um, oh,

00:33:56,200	And he actually compared the, the maximum, uh, Open the required open space, the maximum lot coverage, and the footprint size of the building comparing the current code and the form-based code on a typical one acre lot, right? and gave the metrics that's in his FAQ. Those are numbers. Those aren't opinions.

And when you look at the numbers, the numbers say that they're, it's a smaller building. Um, with more open space, that's a fact. It's not an opinion. It's a metric and the planning board should be able to say that. That's a fact. So on a given lot. For example, one acre lot, under the current zoning.

There's less protection in if you say that a bigger building is less desirable than a smaller building. There's more protection under the form-based code than there is under the current zoning. Yeah, you could say it it limits construction to a particular footprint, a particular height, a particular number of square feet.

More so than the existing downtown so if that's if, if, if limiting size is a protection, the answer is yes. If limiting size isn't a protection, then that's subjective. So, so those are just numbers. I, I, this is unfortunate because uh uh Mark is on vacation obviously so he sent uh me uh.

Some FAQs and I think he sent it to Jonathan because Jonathan is going to be presenting a town meeting. Oh right, because I haven't seen the FAQ. One of the things he put in his materials is that there are only 5 lots in all of the downtown that exceed 1 acre. That's another fact.

That's not, that's not an opinion. I didn't realize Jonathan was the, yeah, I, I came tonight and, and, uh, because I was afraid that if I didn't show up, you guys would nominate me because I'm here we, we can nominate you. I mean, Bill Weed's not here. See, I'm, I, I, I'll be in

Switzerland, so she, yeah she did. She had spent a lot of money to get out of it. I spent a lot of money to get out of this.

00:36:29,630	I didn't volunteer for this. I was volunteered. Yes, so, so I, I don't know if you were there at the Council on Aging, but it was like everyone was very silent, but I mean, step back. Jonathan stayed still.

00:36:45,900	But so, so here are the, here are the five parcels that are 1 acre or larger, the condominiums on Willow Street, 100 Willow Street, um, 121 Railroad Avenue, that's the housing authority, 121 Bay Road, that's Cumberland Farms. Uh, 203 Willow, that's offices and 281 Willow, I, I believe is probably Dodgere.

Dodge, yeah, but that's also, you know, that's also fuzzy. I'm not sure that's a really good because lot lines can change lots can be combined. Oh, absolutely, but in terms of, uh, to do a uh uh a section 38 development you need an acre. The acreage is there and the yeah yeah the zones that we've

established of course but you know you would have to uh aggregate small lots, and the point that Bill made at the last meeting is that when you go to aggregate lots that are owned individually, that isn't necessarily going to happen within a two month period of time unless the developer were to.

Proposed to pay way over far fair market value. So if you look at the properties on Willow Street, some of them are very nice and in what we are calling downtown residential. So if you were to try and aggregate that you would be, Pay at least in my estimation and it's a guesstimation but uh, having.

00:38:26,929	it's one based on my real estate market in Hamilton at least $600,000 per house, so you want aggregate all those then demolish those houses, then build a septic system. Then build the units which would cost

00:38:48,300	my guests yeah what I'd like to do is. All I'm saying is that when you put all those pieces together it's not it's not like the. I agree and there's something overarching on top of that, which is, yes, you could speculate that that wouldn't happen. What if it did happen?

Which. More protection, the current zoning or form based code, not an opinion, a metric. You can do the calculations. You could say, what if they aggregated it into 3 acres? What if they aggregated into 5 acres? What if they aggregate into 1.75 acres? Do the math for the, for the, um, current under the current

zoning versus the form-based code. There's specific metrics if size. Buildings position of buildings in relationship to each other, positions in buildings in relation to the street and placement of parking and screening of parking is is considered more protection or less protection. If those are your criteria, the form based code offers more protection. It's a fact.

It's a number. That is actually something that might be helpful to do because I'm looking at it. As a developer would, I mean, can I make money if I do this but you're looking at it and if the developer did decide to do that. That's really what matters everything else is speculation

everything else is speculation and I would like to avoid having any conversation about that at the public meeting. I'd like to stick with the metrics, not speculation. I don't wanna I don't wanna, I personally don't want to render an opinion about what's likely or not likely. We don't know what's likely.

What we do know is what metrics we've put in place to govern potential change. That's what matters. Right, but we do know that that any development in Hamilton is circumscribed by the absence of a public sewer system, so anything like that so so the. And the fact that it's all built up and there's no vacant

lots and there's only 51 acre lots, yes, those are all facts but if we get into speculation of what about aggregating properties, yes, somebody could do that doesn't make economic sense? Probably not, but we can't really comment on that. Mhm. Yeah, it's the FAR that averages everything out whether it's a small lot or a large lot.

There's only only so many square foot feet you can build in an acre, whether it's one lot or 5 lots. So I'm just, it'll be very easy to go down rabbit holes at the town meeting. Everybody will want to get up and go down those rabbit holes. I don't as a.

If I'm, if I'm on a on a on a panel or if I'm speaking, I don't want to go down those rabbit holes, right, right, no, but I, you don't want to go down those rabbit holes, but I think that there will be people at town meetings will be you bet they'll be deep.

You know, neck deep in those rabbit holes. So I already there was already a tax thread that, uh, not tax thread, but a text went out today to a number of people in town with information saying it's um hold on. I did not get the text directly, but somebody sent it to me, um.

They said that this is a modest update to our zoning plan. Um, and what else did they say? Uh, modest amount of new homes for Hamilton's senior citizens, teachers, and young people wanting to return home after college. Um, and if our community does not approve this plan, the town

meeting, we will lose critical funding from the state for important projects. So, I mean, there's already. You know, again, it's, there's all these speculations and even in that, so. I thought um going back to Amel's flow chart that I thought the information was good to have. I wondered if people would then like pre-program a voting

cadence because the vote might be a different vote. It might not be Article 1, Article 2. It might be Article 1 and then whether or not to hold. You know, you know what I mean, there might be a, and people are gonna have to pay attention to that, of course, in a

meeting or whether it's a vote to, you know, to, to vote on Article 2 or whether it's a vote to turn it back to the planning board for further development or whatever it is. Um, I think it's good to have it in the presentation. I wondered whether or not it

was a good thing to have as a handout. That was the question I had, because it then like the flow chart you're talking about as a handout, I think that the idea was to try to have that as a handout and a slide. Yes, that would belt and suspenders in the interest of fairness,

uh, uh, Darcy, uh, has some issues with the flow chart. I'm not she asked that I read her entire email. I, I, I'm going to summarize it. Um, with respect to Article One, she makes the point that, uh, any type of funding is never guaranteed. Of course that's true, and, uh, Hamilton, if it's not 3A

compliant, will lose the four sources of funding that are set forth in the statute itself and then uh it's status. As noncompliant can be used as a factor with respect to discretionary funding, but discretionary funding is just that even if we were compliant, we might not get it and that I

think was Darcy's point that all funding is, is. Right, all these all these sources we may or may not get. Right and then with respect to Article 2. Uh, she says, how does voting for the form based code protect the town and that's what we're talking about and she says the

planning board should demonstrate in what ways it's supposed to protect just saying it does, um, just saying so does not make it so so. I think that's what we were talking about and she says much of the information in the chart is speculative and I respectfully disagree with her on that.

It is really just uh an outline of. What happens if the town votes one way or the other way on each article. There's a, there's a ramification from each vote and, and it, it, it is what it is. I mean if we vote no on Article One, we're noncompliant.

If we vote yes on Article One, we are compliant, but then that goes to Article 2 and how do they play together so this flow chart is really it, it clarifies what happened when we pulled section. Uh, 9.7 and 9.8 that that UI produced a part to reflect the majority and 2/3 uh of voting requirements.

I'm wondering, I know we were talking about a handout and a slide. I know sometimes when you're teaching a class, if you give something out before people are ready to digest it. It could be a distraction, so I don't know how to better do it, but I'm wondering.

I think that's kind of what Pat was asking if we're gonna hand it out because I think people could then get.

00:46:00,070	distracted and be reading this and not hearing. The background and not maybe just put the flow chart up when we're talking about the flow chart. I don't know, I go back and forth on whether we have a handout or not because I do think it could raise a lot more questions that might be answered.

In real time, but if we hand it to them, they're gonna be like trying to figure it out and they're gonna be confused possibly. I don't know. I'm just, I'm just. This is a one, you know, there are 2 votes at this town meeting. It's not like it's buried in.

I know, no, I was just, I'm just trying to think about the best way to get people to stay focused because it is a lot of information. Well, I think people having it in their hand is helpful. No, I again, Darcy disagrees. She, she's not in favor of either of this.

She, she doesn't think this is the way to go, but this is, this is how, you know, she can um respond at town meeting. It's, I don't think that her opinion as to this affects the um utility of the flow diagram. Are you saying that she said she doesn't think we should use OK, she's not.

a flow diagram, or you're saying she disagrees? She, she doesn't agree with Article 1 and 2, so that's not the flow. OK, got it. Flow diagram again is the mechanics of the vote, yeah, yeah, yeah. I still think it's good with the dialogue and standing alone on its own. Provides limited value.

Um, I think it's good in a presentation. I think it's good with dialogue. It's a visual. That supports a conversation, but to have it stand alone as a, as a document to provide guidance I think is. Not useful. Well, actually, can I just, it's for the benefit of all those people who are nearsighted.

00:48:00,530	If you're, if you're in the back of the, the auditorium, you can't see the, the, the slides booming voice, but you can't, you know, I, I never could read the slides. I mean, I loved it when they put all the numbers up there and I couldn't read one of them, so I think having it in

in hand is really helpful. Uh, I speak for those who have who need glasses and have challenged acuity. Um, so I, I think it's also useful to have people read it and ask a question about it. In other words, um, if you have it in your hand, you've heard

all sorts of things about whether it's a good idea or a bad idea. If you're reading, uh, something like the flow chart was. As Jonathan correctly said, it's a it's the mechanics of the process, but if you have a question about that mechanics. You know, at least this might trigger a good question from the audience.

Um, anyway, that's, I think the usefulness of the handout, just to prompt people to start thinking about what they're gonna vote on. And then have the opportunity to ask a question.

00:49:11,929	Yes, so, uh, unfortunately I, I'm not sure, uh, you know, again, um, we are really hampered in our discussions tonight and we've been hampered all along by getting information a little bit too little too late and now because of uh. The the fact that that time is running so short we can't other

than this flow chart we can't really even discuss what the planning board might. Show, uh, because it's really contingent on what

00:49:51,530	uh you tell assuming that and I, I think Matthew said he was going to be there. That's my recollection. Well, I think he provided those slides to Mark and he may consider that his contribution. That's my question is, so again, but it's up in the air. That was part of his commitment though.

It was part of the RFQ actually. He was committed to doing all they could possibly do. At the town meeting, I think my recollection is I'd have to go and listen to the last video, but that he was planning to appear. So depending on what he intends to present that affects how

that was at the end of the last meeting, right? Was it at the end of the last meeting that we were talking about? I'm just gonna see if I can find this

00:50:37,929	transcript. Could have been a joint meeting, the last meeting. I think we should. It's a great, I mean, it's regardless of how it gets utilized, it's a nice visual, I think, um, leaving it up to the team that meets on one day. Joe and the rest of the folks, let them, let you guys all hash

it out whether or not it stands alone in the presentation or makes its way into the Ultimately Bill Bowler, I guess, gets to have final say over what does and doesn't get included and whether it gets edited so you know the select board controls the warrant and my understanding is he control,

you know, he's in, you know, he's the town moderator and he, uh, uh, makes sure that that. flows and so in terms of uh I think that we can agree the planning board's focus should be on the metrics in the form based code versus what the metrics are or what they or not

as the case may be for the business district and you know potentially the commercial. Uh, uh, the Willow Street Overlay district because those two, well, those two districts, the overlay district and the business district, will be eliminated if Article 2 passes, and so it's fair game to to compare the, the existing

metrics or lack thereof with what happens, um, uh, with the uh form-based code components in the proposed zoning.

00:52:10,469	Well, the comparison is useful so you can see that whether you're getting more or less, you know, yeah. So I think and that's I think that's people's biggest fear is that somehow the downtown will just be. I irrevocably changed in in a bad way and um. I personally think that it might be changed in a very

positive way over time if this form based code code goes into effect because we have areas of the downtown that don't function very well the intersection of Bay Road and Walnut Street, that's not a pretty intersection that's not welcome to Hamilton, um, and so all those types of uh. Uh, components of the form-based code can uh improve

the public space. It can improve walkability and uh. I think it could have a very positive impact on the town in the long term, and who knows what will happen in the long term. I mean it just it's always up in the air. So was there anything else we needed to No.

Did you want the one person has made a comment online, I guess, um, the form based code and, and it's protection or lack thereof on the on the Asbury Street overlay district. So should we just read those aloud for I'll read them for public um for public record form-based code.

Uh, doesn't do anything for the Asbury section, correct? And then form-based code provides structure in downtown, but there's no protection for Asbury, correct. It gives the state control over zoning once we approve 3A. The EOHLC has approved has to approve it. We have to assume it will it all will be built, so 3A has to

be looked at in totality. Yes, question mark.

00:54:21,130	Well, we did change the metric on the Asbury Street. I believe. Yeah, there is no form-based code on that's conventional coding, but we changed that metric but there are limitations on reduction in the, uh, in the size of, yeah, of the buildings, yeah and square footage. It's just a question of the word protection again and how

that might be interpreted. Well, on, on Asbury Street, um, that overlay district is, uh, well. I think I think the word protection is kind of a reaction to conventional zoning where people are just continually surprised at what's what gets built, and I'm not talking about Hamilton, but in different places that I had no

idea it was gonna do look like that or it was gonna be that big or so I think the idea of protection is kind of a continuation of that. kind of a very common held theme that zoning does very little to to actually uh. And maybe and maybe that's maybe that's a point we could

bring up in the presentation, which is if you consider protection to be limiting the size of buildings so that they're similar to what you're used to controlling where parking goes, controlling, um. The position of buildings in in relationship to one another so they look similar to what you're used to on the whatever frontage we're talking about.

If those are protections, that's what form-based code does. I, I like your comment though. I think you're right on, on, on the word because it has connotations. Yes, so I, that's why I think it should be defined and that's why I'm saying maybe part of the presentation should be to to say.

If you think the word protection means, then form-based code does this. If if protection means something else, then yeah, it's not neutral right at all, you know, so if you said um protection for me is not a single additional family may move into Hamilton. If that's that's your definition of protection, no, there's no protection here.

Another family could move into Hamilton. So, but if your idea of protection is, you know, no big box buildings, no sea no buildings floating in a sea of asphalt, no triple wide curb cuts with cars backing into strollers. If those are protections, yes, right now you do not have those protections.

All those things could happen and and form-based code actually prevents those things from happening, not in theory but in metrics. But in the inverse, I took my kids fishing over in Tobacco last weekend. And I thank God for the special permit process and this board for having been able to not allow that development to move forward.

So in my mind, protection is a special permit process that's managed by an elected board of very intelligent individuals that helps to do what we did. I mean, in my mind we're taking away that protection, so I think. That's the, that's another inverse way to we're, we're not actually taking it away.

00:57:30,199	Well, we've recommended it though. We've recommended to comply with it well, but, but. We've recommended to comply with it. It's just another way, but, but that's irrelevant. I think it's just again the way you define protection, find it in a special permit process, or do you find it by? Well, we also, it's not as if

3A doesn't have, um, site plan review. Uh, you have to get a building permit. And you can't get a building permit if there's no water, uh, you, you know, so there are and there are components, and then you have to comply with the Wetlands Protection Act and all

sorts of other things you can do whatever you want, wherever you want. Uh, it's not, it's not that loosey goosey. I think, I think one of the biggest issues is that of going this route with a form-based code is the predictability. That is the one thing that is missing in conventional coding

and yeah, it's good if you have a planning board which changes over the years, uh, who might be on top of it. I wonder how many planning boards would have done at 133 Essex what this board did, for example. Um, I think it was an extraordinary amount of work.

And uh what I'm getting at is that For me, the whole idea of of a process that begins with public engagement and envisioning to create something that you'd like to build and make that predictable in a code is really a strong argument for getting things that you want and that's really what you try

to do in this code. I think to a large degree succeeded in the character aspect anyway from my my own standpoint being in front of other boards as an applicant over and over all year long. Um, I notice the wide disparity even within a township going through the years I've been doing this for about 40 years

watching like a conservation commission have really strong skills and then it gets reconstituted another in another term and there's no skills and then it goes back to some skills and then it goes back to zero skills you can't predict any of that stuff. So, so when you have when you have a more defined.

Code and especially one that's in a sense visual. In other words, you can look at it and see whether you're complying. You can look at the numbers and see if you're complying. You don't have to rely on expertise to define whether this fits in a special permit criteria, which is often somewhat.

Objective this this creates this evens the playing field so that when your your your skill sets go up and down you have an even playing field of rules that's that's the because I I had the same professional experience in front of design review boards, uh, zoning boards, uh, talking about a

project and you could get any kind of response out of this committee off the wall kind of comments that really are insignificant. They're off target they're whatever. And you've got to respond to it and What I came around because um. To believe in something like design guidelines because And

by doing that, that requires that you put something in front of people to look at that says this is, this is what we're talking about, you know, for guidelines. And they're, they're advisory, they're not regulatory, but the idea is that uh Uh, you can't rely honestly on special permits.

What, what a special permit will probably do is prevent the real disaster. If you look at all construction as a um as a sign curve, you got, you got peaks and valleys. In the sign curve on the top, great ideas, great projects to approve on the bottom, and not so good and.

What what special permits probably will do is take a little off the top and a little off the bottom so you kind of get the middle strata which is better than not having it so it is better but if you really want something predictable you

have to write a code to to get you that if you want it to be exactly the same, you write the code to do that. And just remember with the with with the special permit process there was an appeal. and, and I, I, I'll never forget Robin said to me she had

never seen a decision like the one that we did in 133 ethics, but that didn't stop the appeal and on appeal in in the superior court there was going to be a trial de novo. And at that point. We would have had to as a town uh called witnesses and the

whole nine yards so the special permit it in some sense it's, it's a little overblown because we do have discretion but when push comes to shove, uh, that appeal process can can tip a special permit, but to, to Amo's point, when you have something predictable when you have these specific metrics, then, then that's what has.

To be followed, it's pretty black and white and and we did put in a little flexibility and uh too so that if you have a really good project some of these things can be waived but it it actually provides much more certainty and much less chance that you're going to the town will be dragged into some

type of expense, um, appeals process. And every board afterward is looking at the same data, you know, so and then if the town decides it needs to modify some of that, you modify your bylaw Um, there's two more questions. to fix it. What happens if Harbor Light sells and the 3 and 3A units go

in instead of Harbor Light? What happens to our affordable housing metric and are we out of compliance? And then the other question is, is form based code really a protection? Like, is there proof that it will be upheld in a 3A zone? Sorry, traveling can't get on the phone.

Well, just, just right now the articles article one in particular is 3A compliant, so. That's a fact. We have a form based code the executive office. Can only look at the 3A component and and see whether or not it's compliant and um. Mark has uh presented the drafts that Utile has done to

the executive office and they have not he Uile ran the uh. Uh, the models that that the executive office has produced and and our zoning complies with those models so the fact that the form-based code is incorporated in that is not relevant really to 3A compliance and then in some sense the executive office

would have no interest in in in um. challenging that. Why? And what's as of right is the use, not a particular building, not a 10 story building. You know it is the use of multi-family housing as of right. How you put it together then is up to the town, right?

And, and, and I, I know this is has been said before and it does tend to, uh, uh, annoy people, but the 3A is a zoning requirement. It is not a building requirement. So right in the regulations there's the recognition that this housing may never get built and in the regulations

there's a recognition that the towns do not have to do one thing with respect to their infrastructure to facilitate 3A housing right in the regulations. So, uh, you know, the day after 3A passed if it were to pass, is not. By definition, uh, the, the, the, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, run on

development in town, it, it, it doesn't work that way. It's just, it's just. A zone where there's that potential, but a lot of these communities, they're they're built out. They're built out. I mean, I don't know about. I, I don't know exactly where Ipswich put its zones, but you know where the Ipswich train station is.

That whole area around there is pretty much built out. Right, I wonder though EPSCO is, I think, becoming available, so, uh, do we have something else or is that it? It was a thank you, um, so unless there's, um, I think we're just circle power outage and Ipswich and I can. What what about the power outage?

You keep having power outages? The Raleigh and Ipswich, so it's the National Grid substation in Georgetown that it keeps faulting. Wow.

Interesting. 01:06:37,570	That's a joke. It's straight out from the minutes.

01:06:43,730	Norton. Be in trouble.

01:06:48,469	OK, so this is our last meeting before uh. The, I don't think we have another meeting before the 14th. No, so we were kind of looking, we wanted to only a few members here, not everybody's not here, but just to get kind of permission that because there will not be another planning

board meeting unless you want a special one before the 14th. I think Pat really wants you're OK with. You know, Jonathan putting together the. Thrill slide show and Jonathan's doing it and thank you yeah yeah. And, and I

01:07:26,469	I personally, uh, really endorse the the form based code. I think it's, it will really aer to this town's benefit and I think it's really significant that that we chose a really unique and proactive pathway to uh have a vision for our town's future. Um, unlike any other town, right?

I love it that we're doing it different, um. I'm just looking at the meeting schedule. So right now we have a meeting scheduled for the day after the special town meeting. So you make a motion we cancel the meeting on July 15. I second that motion.

01:08:08,030	Marty's not gonna be here so I'm not going to be here, but you don't wanna critique my performance the day after postgame wrap up. I urge you not to go forward with that because my recollection is that we might have that really nice gentleman with the uh a little cell tower.

01:08:27,569	He may or may not be coming in, so, uh, but he would be just as happy to come in in the next one.

01:08:35,569	The next one is August 5th. 0 wait, so July 15th, August 5th. Sure he's fine. Oh, I wish we could, uh, just check with, uh, Mark to see if there was anything that he's holding on to in terms of time sensitivity. That's I'm happy if you want to do that and let Mark.

I mean, we've had meetings added. We can, we can we can cancel it though why don't, why don't we just leave it and if there's nothing, if there's nothing on the agenda that isn't a continuation or something that has to be heard within a certain notice period, I don't wanna jeopardize that, uh, uh, then if there's nothing.

That can't wait then then we can go ahead and I have no problem, uh, continuing that because we've we've done yeoman's work these past couple months. I mean we've had, I think I've been the last 4 weeks the last 4 weeks well, and then, and then you've attended how many select board meetings and we

should have a continuance till September. No, just kidding. I second that motion. I, I was wearing my Pat Norton hat. I know I love it. So, uh, I'll communicate, uh, with Mark and, and, and see about July 15th, and, and, and that sounds perfect, and he may

be able to move if anything's there there no I think that's smart if, if there's something time sensitive, he can get a, a, a, a waiver from, from any, any applicants. So, um, now we have the most important motion of the evening motion to adjourn. Yes, all in favor. That's unanimous.

So we also have to put away all the gear. It's on us, yes, yes.