00:00:02,799	S1:
So it is 7:03 p.m. and I am calling the April 28th, 2026 Hamilton Planning Board meeting to order. Um, this meeting is being recorded because we have a member on zoom. I will take roles. So when I call your name, would you please indicate that your present. Uh, Jonathan.

00:00:25,039	S2:
Poor Jonathan, poor present.

00:00:26,839	S1:
Bill Wheaton.

00:00:27,839	S3:
Bill Wheaton, present.

00:00:29,120	S1:
Emil Dahlquist.

00:00:31,199	S4:
And the present.

00:00:32,600	S1:
Matt Hamill.

00:00:33,600	S2:
Madam president.

00:00:34,759	S1:
Darcy Dale.

00:00:35,560	S5:
Darcy Dale present.

00:00:37,000	S1:
And Marney Crouch, present. Um, I note for the, um, all present that Amel experienced a problem with his eyes. And so I am taking two matters out of order. Unless anyone objects. Uh, I believe these two matters are ones that involve him. And then once we're finished with these two matters, he can excuse himself and get some needed rest and shut his eyes. So the first order of business, then, is going to be what's on our agenda as the last item, and that is election of officers. So as you all know, we had an election and we have a new planning board member, Matt Hamill. So Matt, welcome. And so at this time, um, we need to consider, um, who the planning board would like to have, um, uh, elected as chair and as chair. So how are you open up the discussion to the members.

00:01:42,010	S5:
I would like to nominate Marnie Crouch for the trigger.

00:01:45,370	S3:
I second that.

00:01:47,010	S1:
Uh, so we will take a roll call vote, and I think I should not.

00:01:51,010	S3:
Is there any discussion?

00:01:52,129	S1:
Oh. Any discussion?

00:01:53,890	S3:
No.

00:01:54,890	S1:
No discussion. No one else wants to talk. That's the subtext.

00:02:02,420	S1:
Oh, Jonathan.

00:02:03,939	S2:
Poor Jonathan, poor guy.

00:02:05,780	S1:
Bill Wheaton.

00:02:06,819	S3:
Bill Wheaton I.

00:02:07,900	S1:
Am old archivist.

00:02:10,219	S4:
Opus dei.

00:02:11,060	S1:
Matt hammel.

00:02:12,139	S3:
Matt Abel, I am Darcy.

00:02:14,780	S5:
Darcy. Dale I.

00:02:16,020	S1:
Okay, so the next, uh, uh, officer that we need to consider is the vice chair.

00:02:25,460	S5:
May I nominate, uh, Emil Dahlquist as vice chair?

00:02:28,819	S1:
Of course you can. Second, second. Um, Emil, do you accept?

00:02:35,060	S4:
Yes, I accept that. Thank you.

00:02:37,539	S1:
You're welcome. Uh. Roll call. Vote. Uh, Jonathan.

00:02:40,819	S2:
Poor Jonathan, poor guy.

00:02:42,500	S1:
Bill Wheaton.

00:02:43,500	S3:
Bill Nye.

00:02:44,460	S1:
And. Well, do you want to vote for yourself?

00:02:46,939	S4:
I'll stand.

00:02:49,219	S1:
Matt hamill, Matt hamill, Darcy Dale.

00:02:52,219	S5:
Darcy Dale, I.

00:02:53,259	S1:
And Marney Crouch. I Thank you for that. Uh, so, uh, the next item I'm taking it out of order is the special permit application for the property that is owned by Mike Gladstone and Lisa Ting. And so I will ask our planning director to read the public notice that was circulated in the Hamilton Welcome News on April 10th and April 17th.

00:03:22,990	S4:
Uh.

00:03:24,030	S2:
They're planning for a public hearing. The Health Planning Board will hold a public hearing to review a special, permanent application pursuant to chapter 48 of the bylaws, section 9.81, on April 28th, 2026, at 7 p.m. at the Hamilton County's two lane.

00:03:45,909	S2:
Property owners like Gladstone and Lee Ty proposed to replace the existing nine structures We're the largest set. Three characters have won 76. Willow Street Assessor's map 55 plotline 75. So on Town Center downtown residential. Anyone wishing to speak on the matter at the hearing you have materials are on file available for review electronically or in person by contact. Please note that this petition was created. Previous. Notice that there is a Zoning Board special tenant application under outdated sexual health and zoning. So previously this would have gone before the board. And you tell us there was nothing.

00:04:27,470	S1:
It does speak for the appointing. But so could you also represent that the above it that you have in your possession or the planning planning department has in its possession an accurate a butters list?

00:04:40,029	S2:
Yes. And all butters removed.

00:04:42,189	S1:
Okay, so at this point I'll invite the applicant to speak.

00:04:50,990	S2:
Good evening.

00:04:51,600	S6:
I'm Brian Stein with Van Stein Architects, representing, uh, Mike and Leah Oehlers. Um, so, as you know, um, we're on a corner lot on Willow and Hamilton Ave. Um, the lot is undersized for current zoning. There's currently a two and a half story single family home and an old, uh, what we're calling the workshop building. Large shed, uh, if you will. That is about 3.5ft off of the property line on Hamilton Ave. The owners, um, having, you know, just two parking spots and a third driver and the whole now, um, are looking to build a single car garage in place of the workshop. Um, the thought is to essentially keep the existing 3.5ft, uh, offset from the, setback from the property line on Hamilton Ave. Um, and extend back, you know, a normal two car garage or a single car garage depth about 23ft. Um, the reason for trying to keep that setback as it is, their existing rear porch off of their kitchen is is, um, trying to keep a nice shot into their backyard. View from the kitchen, into the backyard, from their porch. If we were to move the garage to be conforming, it would completely block their back porch. Um, so the thought is to essentially keep that front setback. The width of the building is very similar to what is there now. Um, there's actually, um, you can just go all the way, almost all the way down. Um, I'll show you the pictures of the existing building. There's what's not indicated. Was never on the survey. Was that little white structure with the doors that housed, um, trash cans and so forth. So that's even closer to the property line than the actual foundation of the building by about 30in or so. Um, so do you mind going to that site plan real quick? Did I just mean she.

00:07:09,220	S6:
Can we did a little overlay of just, um.

00:07:18,819	S6:
Of the new over the old there. The old is dashed in the light blue. Um, you can kind of see where the, uh, the back porch. What the steps are up the house there. We have a nice, still clear shot into the backyard there. Nope.

Sorry. 00:07:40,579	S4:
Hey.

00:07:44,300	S6:
There we go.

00:07:46,870	S6:
to the back of the garage, roughly lines up with where the house is. The side of the house. And then there's two parking spots. Um, to my right here next to the garage. So the doors of the garage or the door of the garage. Sorry. Will be off of Hamilton. And that was slight error on the north, south, east and west on the on the elevations, but the garage door will face Hamilton. Um, so, as you know, um, this is for a special permit, given we have a non-conforming structure per setback and per the new bylaw. There's supposed to be a 20 foot setback between buildings. Um, which building code requires three or more? Typically five or more years. Um, and we're proposing here eight. The original one was just over 13. So again, it's a non-conforming situation in both both aspects. And, you know, what we're looking for is a special permit. And we as you know, the bar for that is the legal bar. Is is this substantially more detrimental than what is there now? That's what we're here to kind of discuss. Um, and then if you can go back, Mark, to the main application, and I do have a quick rendering of what it looks like.

00:09:16,559	S6:
That's the front on Hamilton Ave on the left. Small dormer up top. Um, there's one small room up top. Uh, stairway inside. Um, and then can you scroll down?

00:09:32,519	S6:
Yeah. The other rear on the side. You need to scroll down a little more to this.

00:09:37,679	S6:
No, we are meeting the height requirement, actually. Are you on the right? Is that the latest, uh, that the latest set that.

00:09:47,009	S2:
The one you sent me today?

00:09:48,809	S6:
I set it up. Okay. Can you scroll down a little farther, please? Because there should be a little rendering in there as well. Okay, there we go. So, yeah, it'll match the house. Essentially, the house is kind of a dark blue slate blade. Uh, then if you scroll up one more. Sorry. The existing existing building has a, um, e height on the main portion of it, of about 12ft. We're proposing Rs is about ten and a half. Yes, their overall roof is higher, but that eave line is kind of brought down on purpose to kind of remain low, uh, as low as we can. But the grade above, uh, the garage door, um, if you keep going down. One more. Sorry. There a couple more. There we go. So this is looking kind of west on Hamilton Ave. Um, there's so many properties downtown, as you know, That have pretty minimal setbacks. So this is on the north side of Hamilton Ave. You know, all those houses are six seven feet. If that off the sidewalk, I don't know exactly where the property line is, but it's probably just past the sidewalk and there's, you know, accessory buildings all over downtown and houses that, you know, don't meet setbacks, don't meet many requirements, coverage, what have you. Um, so we're just trying to kind of maintain what's there and just enlarge it so it works for a single car. Um, and, you know, not have it protrude, you know, halfway into the property. Uh, so I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

00:11:23,250	S5:
Is this a Ford Foundation on the existing?

00:11:25,929	S6:
On the existing? Yes. There is a concrete foundation on it.

00:11:28,570	S5:
Will you be reusing any of that or with the piece?

00:11:33,490	S6:
No, it's a different footprint overall. And the other reason we're keeping it kind of in the same general footprint. And we're not going any farther west, is there's that circle there on the plan is a large tree that the owner is like, would like to keep. It's also probably in one of the in one of the pictures on. If you scroll down a little more we can see the large tree.

Yeah. 00:11:55,740	S4:
Right there that we're trying to save.

00:12:00,779	S5:
Have you heard from any of Butters?

00:12:03,659	S6:
Um, well, we.

00:12:04,620	S2:
Have.

00:12:05,059	S6:
One here.

Um. 00:12:08,340	S2:
I don't I.

00:12:09,299	S6:
Well, Mike, Mike Gladstone is with me here tonight. Um, have you heard from Leah? Yes. Yeah. Um, I know they've talked to a number of their neighbors. Um, I don't know if you've heard anything, um, in the counter.

00:12:22,899	S7:
Positive feedback. Um, just. The neighbors couldn't all be here tonight. Um, but how about that?

00:12:32,700	S2:
Yeah. We use.

00:12:33,700	S6:
That structure.

00:12:34,460	S2:
As part of our Halloween.

00:12:35,629	S6:
Decor last year because it's in such disrepair.

00:12:37,830	S2:
So I think people are not going to be sad if we can improve on that with this project.

00:12:44,870	S6:
Yeah. Since they bought the property, they've, you know, renovated the home looks great now and then. This is kind of the last piece to, you know, to be done on the property.

00:12:54,230	S5:
Will the new foundation be a full foundation?

00:12:56,789	S6:
It'll be a it'd be a frost wall. No, not not a basement. No, it's for a garage. So it's a slab with a frost wall.

00:13:03,669	S2:
So I have a couple questions. So first off, the new bylaw limits curb cut sizes in that district. And the other thing is that there's fairly specific wording in the bylaw about not increasing nonconformity. Um, and so I do appreciate the importance of use out the back windows. And I do also appreciate that this for that area. This is a fairly good sized lot, and I just wondered if any alternatives analysis had been explored. To number one, limit the curb cut so that it follows the current uh, bylaws and also uh uh, not increase the nonconformity. Um, so in terms of, uh, whether the proximity to the existing building, the proximity to the street and.

00:14:02,720	S6:
Yeah, the proximity to the street is not any further.

00:14:05,559	S2:
I understand. Right. But the building is, is is taller and wider.

00:14:08,879	S6:
It is taller. It's not it's not any. Why is.

00:14:10,759	S2:
Increasing the nonconformity.

00:14:11,960	S6:
Not only wider, but it's um it is, it is taller. Um, but as you know, with single and two family structures, there's much deference paid to nonconformity, um, versus commercial structures, um, in case law. Um, so to your point about looking at alternatives, um, in relation to the curb cut, at least obviously where the curb cut is now. The structure would, given its length to fit a car, would be over the setback or even over the property line. If we were to move it over into where those two cars are shown now. Um, so that was, you know, again, as also if we were to even flip the garage 90 degrees and, you know, again, pull in and kind of turn to the right, it's super tight.

00:15:01,250	S2:
Um.

00:15:02,289	S6:
To do that and to be able to back out and then we, then we lose, you know, essentially kind of losing a spot and the ability to back out without moving other cars. Um, if we were to, you know, push it farther down, uh, to the left on this plan to the west. Um, a you're losing kind of the main part of the yard you're into where that tree is that they're looking to save. We we're trying not to get any farther towards that tree if we can, if we can avoid it. Um, so if we were anywhere West that we'd lose the tree. Um, and then obviously anywhere on the kind of southeast side really isn't an option given setbacks. Um, you know, so, yes, we looked at all of that and we like, well, you know, the tree would be gone in many cases. And if we were to keep the kind of the curb cut as is, um, then the garage.

00:15:58,419	S2:
Would be all set.

00:15:58,980	S6:
Up. Stop the line.

00:16:02,539	S2:
Or the the the question would be, can the garage be at a different angle to the street? Or in other words.

00:16:09,539	S8:
If they're rotated at clockwise 90 degrees, then it wouldn't be as convenient. People would have to come in the existing curb cut and go in the garage that way. But if that's.

00:16:20,179	S6:
An, it would have to get pushed farther to the left to be able to like back out safely turn out. Um, you need typically 30 to 35ft is what you want for something like that?

00:16:31,299	S8:
Yeah. Well, if you have those other.

00:16:32,659	S6:
Two and then you're closer to the tree as well.

Right. 00:16:38,500	S1:
Well, Jonathan's point, I think it might be instructive to, to just highlight the provisions of our new town center code that apply to, uh, this subdistrict. So the purpose and intent with respect to nonconformity is as follows. The purpose of this subdivision subsection is to regulate and limit the continued existence of uses and structures established prior to the effective date of this bylaw, or any amendment subsequent thereto, that do not conform to this bylaw, such that all building structures or land, in whole or in part, will be used or occupied in conformance with the sect section, meaning nonconformity may continue, but the provisions of this section are designed to curtail substantial investment in nonconformity and, when appropriate, to bring about their eventual elimination and or lessen their impact points of put surrounding conforming uses to preserve the integrity of the town center district in accordance with the intent of this bylaw, and it goes on. Section 9.8.1. See Non-conforming structures A non-conforming structure may continue only in accordance with 5.1 of the bylaw and the provisions of this section, and the provisions of section 5.1 are not inherently inconsistent with what I'm going to lose. Repair and maintenance. Normal repair and maintenance may be performed to allow the continuation of non-conforming structures. Reconstruction after catastrophe or demolition. The nonconforming structure is voluntarily demolished or abandoned. Any replacement structure must be conforming to the Bible. Uh, and then I'll just read the other. Uh, applicable provisions, modifications to non-conforming structures, which constitute a substantial improvement shall not be permitted unless the structure is made conforming to the requirements of the bylaw, or if nonconformity is renamed by issuance of special permit by the Planning Board upon a finding that such modification, alteration or extension shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming structure to the neighborhood. And, uh, just for your application, substantial improvement is designed as any repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or improvement of a non-conforming structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50% of the assessed value and the structure before the start of construction of the improvement. And so basically you are coming before the planning board asking the planning board to approve a multiple nine, the not just through demolition, but you're asking the continuation of nonconformity, uh, from uh, with respect to the setback and also the separation of buildings. And, uh, had the separation of buildings is a somewhat of concern because, um, the fire code requires a 20 foot separation.

00:19:52,369	S6:
No it doesn't. Well, fire code is doubting, uh.

00:19:57,170	S1:
That. Excuse me. I will try and spy.

00:20:00,809	S6:
It's five. It's five feet with. No, um, you know, fire protection of, you know, one hour reading and then like, that part of.

00:20:11,809	S1:
I'm sorry. I will find.

00:20:13,490	S9:
This.

00:20:14,089	S1:
Oh, here. Um, it's section 4.1.5. No accessory building located closer than 20ft from any dwelling or main structure on a. Lot, unless both structures conform with regulations relative to fire safety.

00:20:30,579	S6:
Right. And the building code requires five feet with no extra fire protection. That's like a one hour rated wall or minimal windows or what have you.

00:20:41,420	S1:
Could you explain to me how? Shall be located.

00:20:44,180	S8:
For me.

00:20:44,660	S1:
Issue. No accessory building shall be located closer than 20ft from any dwelling or main structure on a lot, unless both structures conform with regulations relative to fire safety. That says 20ft. I don't know where you're getting five feet, but do both structures conform with regulations relative to fire safety?

00:21:07,259	S6:
Right. That's what I'm saying. So in the building code, five feet is what is required when there's no, you know, rating on the buildings. Right. So if you were 3 to 5ft, you have to have a certain fire rating on the buildings.

00:21:26,710	S6:
Both.

00:21:27,589	S2:
If I may, I think the issue.

00:21:28,710	S6:
Here is what does the bylaws say? Not what the code has been assigned to. Different. Right. And a standard.

00:21:35,269	S1:
Right.

00:21:35,670	S6:
And so I think I think what you're finding in two areas in the bylaws, the 24 is a minimum. It's in both the tables as in the accessory buildings.

00:21:47,670	S6:
Right. But where are the existing the existing 13. Yeah. The existing is 13. Right. Right. Like I said, we're not conforming on both that and existing on both that and the front setback.

00:22:00,349	S1:
Well, is there any reason why you can't locate this? Is there any reason why you can't build this structure in a manner that would make it conforming? And if that means moving it up further toward, Um, uh, Union Street or, uh, further back, uh, you haven't really presented the planning board with other any other reason than preservation of a trait. And I drove down Hamilton Avenue on our way to this, um, planning board meeting, and I noted that this is the only garage that is as close to the street, um, uh, on this street. So most of the garages are conform to the setback requirements in the new town center code, except this one garage.

00:22:54,079	S6:
There's a there's one down that's about ten feet off. Um, I did that one, too. Um, no. You're right. Most of the garages are set back from the street, but most of the houses don't conform either.

00:23:06,079	S7:
Right.

00:23:06,319	S1:
Well, that's.

00:23:07,480	S6:
True, and this is a this is a corner lot, too. Right. So that's that's.

00:23:10,599	S1:
The trick of this zoning bylaw is not is to eliminate nonconformity as if there's demolition and that there's no getting around it. You're demolishing the existing structure. So as I said, the only reason that you're presented for continuing nonconformity is the preservation of the tree. Am I correct?

00:23:36,240	S6:
Generally, yes. It's also just proximity and property line. You know, again, part of it would be another another curb cutting somewhere to existing buildings. And again, like, you know, if the structure wasn't here already, your point is completely valid, obviously, because we'd be somewhere else for the property or wouldn't do it.

00:23:59,240	S2:
It's not.

00:23:59,880	S6:
Um, but since it's here.

00:24:01,359	S8:
In, in terms.

00:24:02,119	S6:
Of deference is given unless it's substantially more detrimental. And I think that's what that's what the law says, is that you have to say, is this substantially more detrimental than what they're saying.

00:24:12,609	S2:
It's it's a lot more. It's a lot more than that.

00:24:15,569	S1:
Well, I think that that definition of substantially detrimental has to be viewed in the context of what this town center code is intended to do.

00:24:26,089	S6:
No, I think it's what's there. It's already nonconforming.

00:24:33,569	S6:
And is it substantially more detrimental than what they're there? That's that's the bar legally so.

00:24:40,849	S2:
So it is a larger building. It's a taller building. And it's just yes, it's the same distance from the property line. And there's also the issue of the curb cut, which is again in the bylaw. So um.

00:24:53,329	S8:
Well, the curb cut thing again can be ameliorated by rotating it 90 degrees and sliding it. I don't know what that direction is. And then you would have enough room if you slid it ten, 15ft. You would have enough room to pull the car in that way.

00:25:12,619	S2:
You could also rotate it off axis so.

00:25:14,859	S6:
You wouldn't lose the tree.

Yes. 00:25:16,180	S2:
So you would rotate it off axis and not lose the tree.

So. 00:25:18,819	S8:
So it would be you. I mean.

00:25:21,460	S6:
That would be.

00:25:21,900	S8:
It would be the same building. I mean, just rotating it and sliding it a little bit more pavement between the two existing parking places.

00:25:30,299	S6:
And if I may.

00:25:32,019	S8:
That would.

00:25:32,539	S6:
Not.

00:25:32,859	S2:
Allow us to have two cars parked in the driveway at one time and pulling the.

00:25:37,259	S6:
Other far.

00:25:37,819	S8:
Out. Well, it depends on how far you slide it.

00:25:42,940	S6:
Well, but then if you don't make the curb cut any wider, then it makes it even harder.

00:25:45,900	S8:
You don't need a curb cut because the car is going to be. Cars are going to be basically coming in and out on the existing curb cut and then making a right turn into the garage.

00:25:56,859	S6:
You're saying push it back to the west farther and that the curb cut stays the same? Then you've got.

00:26:02,460	S8:
The curb cut stays the same. You come in the curb there, make a sharp right turn and go into the garage.

00:26:08,349	S6:
Right. But then you can't park two cars then in the drive.

00:26:11,910	S8:
Yeah.

00:26:12,829	S6:
Right.

00:26:14,829	S8:
If I move them or, you know, parked them later or whatever.

00:26:17,630	S2:
There's quite a bit of distance between the property line and the the edge of the pavement. So the backs of the cars are a, you know, a good car width, um, inboard of that. So they're there. I think that what you're hearing from the board is that the lot is large enough and flexible enough for thought, for more.

00:26:41,430	S7:
Or.

00:26:43,069	S2:
A more conforming approach to the bylaw than having multiple nonconformity be increased.

00:26:53,269	S6:
I agree to a point. You still have the same structure. You still have the same generally setback off of the property line. Give and take a little bit.

Right. 00:27:03,710	S2:
But what I'm saying is you have the choice of Also you don't. It doesn't have to be perpendicular to the street. You could angle it. You could. As you slide it, you can move it further away from the away from the the the property line. You can still maintain, you know, not have a corner aiming at your at your view. There's what I'm saying is there's, there's enough area there to explore different options that are less that don't increase the nonconformity as much on multiple.

00:27:31,039	S6:
Levels as much.

Right. 00:27:32,200	S2:
But and you might be.

00:27:33,839	S6:
The question is, is this substantially more detrimental than the existing. And I would argue no because there really isn't any wider. It is deeper, which can be because it doesn't matter a whole lot here it is a little taller. Sure. Um, but I.

00:27:46,519	S1:
Think what the planning board is, is encouraging you to consider is a way of making a conforming structure.

00:27:52,400	S6:
It's not. Well, it's not going to be conforming. I think everybody realizes it's not going to be conforming.

00:27:56,000	S1:
Well, conforming in terms of the setback and separation.

00:27:58,839	S7:
Well, not.

00:27:59,519	S2:
Absolutely. It could be conforming.

00:28:01,000	S7:
It could be a choice.

00:28:01,920	S6:
Not because you don't like it that you don't want to conform it. I think that was that is the issue there. Well, part of it is attachment pointed out really can't meet all dimensional requirements, but it's not your preference to do that. And you could just say that. Yeah, yeah. We have the zoning code which is pretty clear. And there are three violations standing there and widening. It is another one that widening the curb cut where you're allowed to actually one curb cut per property in this area. And it's got to be 12ft wide. That's it. You your grandfathered parking in there. So I could stay where it is. Uh, I don't I get around the other haircut without going in right adjacent to that parking area. So I think Bill had a good idea to rotate it. And again, these are these are choices that have to be made. And from our perspective, I think the real critical thing is it's not are you doing detrimental to the community? Because I don't think that's the issue. The issue is, are you following the bylaws? No, that that actually is the issue though. And doing that is.

00:29:08,980	S10:
That is the that is the issue. In a nonconforming situation, I've been to many, many, many, many zoning hearings, including in Hamilton. And it's it is the bar is what is there now and what are we doing. You're already nonconforming, right? The bylaw.

00:29:26,380	S6:
This is not writing codes on the block. You've got the codes in front of you and the detrimental part of it. It doesn't come in. It's a CBA issue, but it's not the planning board in this downtown district.

00:29:39,140	S10:
Well, no, it is a planning board issue now. It was a VBA issue. You're right. Um, until it's the law. But the law doesn't change, right?

00:29:49,500	S1:
What I would, would hope that you would do is take the opportunity to consider what the planning board is suggesting and and come back to us, if you can, with a structure that make more of an attempt to make a conforming structure instead of just reproducing the nonconformity. This is our first application under our new Town center code. If every application is just it's not it's not more detrimental. We might as well rip up the code. I mean, because if you replace an old deteriorated.

00:30:23,859	S8:
You're not making.

00:30:24,859	S1:
It one. That's the that's always going to be the argument. And I don't.

00:30:28,619	S8:
Think we're not increasing its nonconformity. The current structure is non-conforming in the sense that, um, it's too close to the property line on the front. Um, so the proposed structure is not increasing.

00:30:51,059	S1:
The preparation is.

00:30:52,180	S7:
Twice.

00:30:53,420	S2:
The building is taller and the separation is different.

00:30:55,940	S8:
So that, that, that, that, that that does not have to do with non-conforming.

00:30:59,950	S2:
Actually it does.

00:31:00,509	S10:
Well, though.

00:31:01,190	S2:
It does.

00:31:01,630	S6:
Require.

00:31:02,069	S10:
The separation does. But again, it's.

00:31:04,029	S2:
And the plate does and the position does. And the curb cut does. Those are all nonconformity.

00:31:09,829	S8:
You're not allowed not under 22ft.

00:31:13,470	S2:
Yes. But it's a it's an accessory. It's in a nonconforming position in an already nonconforming.

00:31:20,750	S8:
But it's already nonconforming.

00:31:22,349	S2:
And you're increasing the nonconformity. If it was the exact same volume, you wouldn't be increasing the nonconformity.

00:31:26,950	S10:
Which you're allowed to do.

00:31:28,430	S2:
But what you would be doing, even if you didn't, even if you replicate it. Why is the why.

00:31:33,309	S8:
Why is the height of the existing building? There's a little shed. Why is that nonconforming?

00:31:38,950	S2:
Just let me go back to one.

00:31:40,990	S8:
Employee says you can't have.

00:31:42,309	S2:
One important part.

00:31:43,230	S6:
You're close to the front.

00:31:46,269	S2:
Setback is two.

00:31:47,789	S8:
I understand I'm talking about the characteristics of the building that make it nonconforming. It's too close to the front property line, I understand that. And. But it's not true at all.

00:31:59,839	S10:
No.

00:32:00,759	S2:
But if you make it taller, you're taking a non-conforming building and making it more nonconforming. If it's already nonconforming.

00:32:09,440	S8:
By virtue of its height.

00:32:11,319	S2:
No.

00:32:11,960	S8:
It's okay. So I'm saying you take each.

00:32:14,599	S2:
Outside the setbacks.

00:32:15,680	S8:
Each aspect of its nonconformity.

00:32:18,119	S2:
Yes.

00:32:19,119	S8:
Okay. Is not being made more nonconforming.

00:32:24,359	S1:
It's closer to the existing building.

00:32:26,880	S8:
Yes. And closer to the existing property. Closer to the existing property.

00:32:32,240	S10:
Fine. No no no no you don't.

00:32:35,279	S6:
Your shop is.

00:32:35,960	S10:
Gone. No, actually you don't. That is not. That is not true. Legally. In a situation like this.

00:32:41,880	S8:
Well, you could, you could be.

00:32:43,599	S10:
But no, that's not what case law says. So in a nonconforming situation.

00:32:48,480	S8:
The existing.

00:32:49,240	S6:
Dwellings challenge it. That's good.

00:32:51,559	S8:
Yeah. No, no. Closer to the existing dwelling. Okay. that I can see. You can fix that by just moving at five feet.

00:33:00,289	S2:
Which I also understand is the way the bylaw is written is if they literally replicated this building in shape and in kind, just made it a new building, that's a substantial improvement. It's more than 50% of the, um, the market value of it. Therefore, the bylaw says it needs to be conforming, even if you were replicating it. Exactly. And in this case, it's not being replicated. Exactly. There's additional nonconformity is being added in the curb, cut proximity to the primary building and size and height.

00:33:38,609	S6:
The only one that really is a question of how the curb cuts the issue, that you're making it bigger when it's technically not. Well, that might actually be nonconforming. Now, I'm not positive, but.

00:33:47,930	S8:
You can't undo.

00:33:48,529	S6:
Something just because you take something down in a nonconforming situation and you rebuild. It doesn't mean it has to follow the new bylaw. That is not what case law says.

00:33:57,660	S2:
That's what the bylaw says.

00:33:58,740	S6:
The bylaws, but not case law on this for a single family or two families in this point.

00:34:02,940	S2:
Maybe it's maybe.

00:34:03,819	S5:
It's this.

00:34:04,220	S2:
Isn't a challenge.

00:34:05,299	S6:
It is an accessory structure, but it's an accessory to a single family dwelling.

00:34:08,619	S1:
Right. Well, so so I am offering you the opportunity to go back to the drawing board and see if you can address the concerns of the planning board, or whether or not you, you know, are going to stand on the principle tonight.

00:34:22,900	S7:
And we will have to.

00:34:23,940	S8:
There's no interest in making this to you. There's no intent on doing that.

No. 00:34:30,659	S7:
Yeah. No no, no.

00:34:32,420	S6:
Not even big enough.

00:34:33,219	S7:
Really?

00:34:36,500	S6:
No. It's one just single room up top.

00:34:38,739	S7:
For.

00:34:38,940	S8:
Different guidelines. Might come to play.

00:34:43,260	S6:
Well it wouldn't, not really, but, um. But it's not. Yeah, that's not what I look at because the two.

00:34:51,909	S7:
I mean.

00:34:53,829	S2:
Up to you. What do you.

00:34:54,429	S11:
Want to do?

00:34:56,949	S7:
Let's just leave it up. Like the song down the value. Like we're.

00:35:00,750	S6:
Right here asking.

00:35:01,429	S2:
For a.

00:35:01,670	S6:
Special permit.

00:35:02,349	S2:
So we.

00:35:02,670	S6:
Know we're asking.

00:35:03,550	S8:
For soon.

00:35:04,630	S1:
What we are suggesting is that you consider moving the building, the accessory structure back from the street and farther away from the dwelling unit to make it comply with the dimensional.

00:35:20,469	S7:
Width we have. We have pieces that.

00:35:22,829	S2:
We did look at.

00:35:23,630	S6:
Many options.

00:35:24,510	S7:
And if they don't.

00:35:25,590	S6:
It is true what the gentleman I'm online says that we that's not our price. Right. So if we are.

00:35:31,190	S7:
Going to do this project.

00:35:32,550	S6:
Replace this.

00:35:33,230	S7:
Building.

00:35:33,630	S2:
Which.

00:35:33,869	S6:
Is.

00:35:34,110	S2:
In.

00:35:34,349	S6:
Somewhat disrepair, it's a very awkward building.

00:35:36,909	S7:
That we inherited.

00:35:38,349	S6:
We're going to improve upon it. We want to maintain our yard. We want, I mean, so if that's not an appealing option to us. So I don't think that we would come back with a new plan that I met close to one trip. We would probably just link the structure as it is and figure out something else, quite frankly. But you know, this is where we're just trying to address this building that is sort of in disrepair. And I was not aware that we couldn't even just I was assuming we could just repair it in this place. But it seems like I have disturbed that that's not even a possibility for us, given you, you.

00:36:13,869	S1:
You can repair the existing building, but if you substantially improve it by over 50%.

00:36:22,030	S6:
Anything, you don't see anything to do with anybody.

00:36:24,309	S12:
If we look.

00:36:25,869	S8:
Yeah, yeah.

00:36:26,670	S6:
Yeah.

00:36:27,230	S8:
It.

00:36:27,909	S6:
Was much at all. You're telling us we're going to put it in the middle of our yard, which is not appealing to us. We felt we validated this, this law, this property for the yard. So, uh, I don't think we could come back with an alteration or or a different plan, so unfortunately, that.

00:36:49,000	S6:
And we do value this. I know you do. You made a comment on that. There's been a lot of trees in that part of town that have come down over the over recent years, and the.

00:36:57,119	S8:
Next time I.

00:36:57,960	S6:
Do that, that's a sad development. Added value.

00:37:01,079	S8:
So they would be kind of sort of two more.

00:37:03,199	S6:
Years.

00:37:03,920	S8:
Of the properties.

00:37:04,880	S6:
If you throw further away.

00:37:06,000	S8:
They can move it all the way back. Their last crisis.

00:37:10,880	S6:
Yeah. I think you really have to look at the whole village area and like, what does it feel like? Right. Like this building that's been there for I don't know how long, but like, there's so many houses and accessory structures that are really nonconforming. I have one that I rebuilt three years ago with an Adu that's seven feet off the property line. Right. And, you know, there's there's multiples down there, you know, is it out of character? Right. Is it out of character? No, not down there. It's not you know, it's like, can I speak again about it? I think at some point we should have taken a public by storm album.

00:37:52,170	S1:
Yeah, well, if you wish to speak, you need to identify yourself for that.

00:37:57,369	S5:
Wait a minute.

00:37:58,530	S6:
Uh, Sean Farrell, 15, Hamilton, AB. And what are, like, chunks here? Uh, for me, this is the best plan for the neighborhood because it keeps the existing kind of non conforming, and the rest neighborhood doesn't actually see that the nonconformity has increased a little bit. I don't even think it's enough to really raise any eyebrows in the neighborhood that it's. It's bashed a little bit farther into their property because it looks at the same footprint almost. It'll look like the same structure in the back. It will beautify that area of the neighborhood instead of a little bit of the. I saw that that little building has become lost. The door is falling up. The front of it is just kind of sad that it seems like they might not be able to do that. I think it would be more true to the neighborhood if they moved it. Did the additional period cut or changed it, so the drive was on the side of it when then they would lose their other few parking spaces, and then they would only have really one car space that they would have to move other cars in and out. It just seems more hassle. This will.

00:38:54,380	S8:
Result in more cars.

00:38:55,539	S6:
Parked on the.

00:38:56,059	S8:
Streets. They were trying.

00:38:57,739	S6:
He and I was on the street. I think that's a good point. Mike just said there's a lot of cars parked on the street. I park on the street where there's a lot of cars parked on the street. It's a tight street and I think that would increase, especially on that quarter. Cars parking on that corner of the street where people are trading in and out of that street. Some people use to cut through. So I think it would be actually kind of a detriment to the neighborhood.

00:39:20,219	S8:
I do want to reiterate something.

00:39:21,659	S6:
I just think again.

00:39:22,780	S8:
Sorry, that's I've heard that Brian mentioned there is.

00:39:26,099	S6:
Not.

00:39:26,860	S8:
Showing up on this person driving a.

00:39:29,179	S6:
Four foot, including the English, not building out a three foot filled out on the front of this building, which is the door is falling off that. We also have heard we didn't put it out there so the new building would actually be inclusive of 3 to 4ft further back than the existing structure. And there's also another build out of the side of it that was tacked on. So it was a glassblowing studio, and they used very creative on what they did. So I just want to reiterate that, that this structure would actually be ultimately free farther back to the street and the current structure that does that build out. And the front of it is not shown in these plans. There's no foundation. There's not. It's not. That's actually a good point. It is because it's like right on the street.

Okay. 00:40:12,469	S6:
So it actually is much farther back.

00:40:14,869	S1:
Do any members have any further questions or are there any other comments from anyone online?

00:40:25,070	S13:
Yeah man I wouldn't want to recommend suggest pull the pull the that new building all the way back to the rear property line like a lot of other houses have, because then you're just increasing the amount of asphalt.

00:40:38,469	S6:
Right. And it's right in a corner lot. Right. It's just. That doesn't make sense. I've been sliding it over it by pivoting it. We would have probably 50 to 60ft of basketball in the driveway. It's part of the house that we had to come in at an angle, as has been suggested, as an alternative. We wouldn't want that. And it would not be a ceiling.

00:41:00,000	S6:
And it is a special permit. So you guys can as little as you like. Right. Which I would hope you would side with the neighborhood.

Wait. 00:41:12,119	S1:
Any further discussion? Well, I'll. I'll entertain a motion with respect to this special permit.

00:41:22,000	S6:
So there's just to be clear, there's no interest. And possibly take me a second look at coming back in a week.

00:41:34,159	S6:
Yeah. Yours? Yes. And we finally got to a point where this is something that we thought could work. So we had explored other options. So now I don't I don't think it's taken away.

00:41:44,210	S13:
I mean, a lot of room service from.

00:41:45,809	S6:
The three, the sightline yard, all those things are critical to us.

00:41:53,449	S6:
I appreciate the opportunity and the guidance and the opportunity to do so, but I don't.

00:42:02,929	S6:
Think that's always a problem when you get a lot of projects that come in, give.

00:42:07,690	S13:
It to.

00:42:08,769	S6:
The owner with the best intent, wants to improve the property and.

00:42:13,769	S13:
Give it.

00:42:14,090	S6:
The brand building what's there now? It wasn't supposed to be. The issue is that can every single lot support every single type of construction that is proposed by, you know, by an applicant? That really is our problem because in a lot of cases this could work. I think, uh, Because we didn't see any kind of alternative or demonstration of all the disadvantages, the effects. That's a problem because we have to look, I think at the time about what are they saying? And they were done for good intention, I think, to to capture some of the characters. Uh, Bryan says he's he's right. Uh, you look at that whole area of that street and it's almost regular. Not random, but it's within a tolerance. And that's why an a 20 foot setback was required in the code that it isn't an absolute line, but there is some variation required. The problem in this zone is that there's small properties. So you have much tighter constraints. That being the case, again, I think uh, to now take a look at every single property that comes in. Who wants an addition to try and make anything happen that the particular owner wants to have in. There is a real problem, and I don't. And you know that, uh, as as much as I think that the planning board here wants to accommodate these sorts of things. We like to have people want to improve their property. Certainly in the downtown area, we're all trying to support this, but we're not giving any really support, any good argument except, well, we don't want that or that's not that story. And there's too much asphalt there or something like that. So I don't think there was a legitimate attempt that we've seen here to show that, uh, that first of all, it's impossible to do it because it is possible to do it. The problem is, if you do it that way with a building that size. Uh, I from what I understand here, you're just not going to like it for some reason. Uh, so it's not the conformity that's the issue. It's. We want to conform it in the manner we would like to see it, which is fine. That's your prerogative. But, uh, it's difficult for me anyway to kind of support something like that in the planning board just to go against your, your zoning code, because it just opens up a precedent. Again, the next person that comes through. Yeah. It's true. And they actually did it. Why not do it for us? That's going to be such if you just ask them nicely that density or whatever, you know. I appreciate all the work that's gone into this, but, um, it it's not for me, uh, propelling argument really to, to go forward with this. Well, if, if, if all of the reasons stated, all the not to properties that are really clear, there's no ambiguity to language. And, uh, you know, you take a building. Yeah, you demolish it, you start from scratch and now you follow the code. So I, you know, it's just not that, uh, it's not a matter of do I support the, uh, you know, the the owner of the property to make improvements? I certainly do, in ways. I just hope you could do it in conformance with the code, but that's so that's my position on it anyway. So again, here we.

00:45:27,630	S14:
You know, if this garage, if this workshop wasn't here, right, we wouldn't be here. We couldn't do this without a variance, right? This is different, right? This is our. It's already non-conforming. There's a difference in the law. When you have a single family. Two family, you know a lot, and you have already have a nonconformity. You don't have to bring it into conformity with bylaw if you already have that nonconformity, even if you tear it down and build a new. It's a special it's a special permit. It is true in case law, no case law.

00:45:59,519	S5:
I just.

00:46:00,199	S1:
Want.

00:46:00,559	S5:
You.

00:46:00,960	S14:
I understand that case law for these types of situations, is it substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood? Is the bar that we have to meet here? That's it. That is it.

00:46:14,320	S1:
I think that before we get to that bar, you have to show that you can't make it conforming and you just don't.

00:46:21,639	S14:
That's actually not true. That is.

00:46:23,119	S1:
You don't want to make it conforming.

00:46:25,320	S14:
No.

00:46:25,760	S6:
If it's just like Zeba has their hardship. You can't claim that.

00:46:29,570	S14:
That's very.

00:46:31,849	S6:
You know that. That works in every case. That's a tough. That's a tough, right?

00:46:36,690	S14:
Oh, yeah. Yeah. Those are. Yeah. Variance is a different bar than this. Yeah. But you can't get a special permit in a case like this if it's not already non-conforming.

00:46:49,449	S6:
But when you take it down, it goes away.

00:46:51,090	S14:
No it doesn't. No it doesn't. Not not. No, it does not. You you are allowed to reconstruct and have the nonconformity with a special permit. That's why we're here.

00:47:01,849	S15:
Yes. Yeah.

No. 00:47:03,329	S6:
I believe in exactly the way it is now. In the exact.

00:47:06,329	S14:
Same.

00:47:06,530	S6:
Place. If you're rebuilding, if you're demolishing it, that's the way the wording is.

00:47:10,929	S14:
That's not case law.

00:47:13,969	S6:
Does anybody have.

00:47:16,809	S6:
The facial.

00:47:17,449	S13:
And special.

00:47:18,409	S6:
Features.

00:47:19,050	S13:
He gave?

00:47:19,610	S14:
I don't think it should have been reviewed with town council.

00:47:22,090	S13:
We obviously should run it back, but it's not the issue of special.

Permanent. 00:47:27,380	S14:
Right.

00:47:28,579	S6:
Um, you know.

00:47:29,820	S16:
What I might recommend is there's no holding this for a week. I mean, talk to Robin. You can have it here at the next. Anything if it's.

00:47:37,340	S13:
Yeah. It's like, do you have a special turn to tell you the ground little I.

00:47:40,619	S14:
Love yeah, I love for her to clarify for everyone what the legal bar is in this case, but what.

00:47:47,099	S16:
Do you think you've been sneaking your argument. It's that's the only bar that that's just, you know, that the mental market, the planning work.

00:47:54,980	S13:
Argues.

00:47:55,699	S16:
For increasing these different components of this work. It would be some tensions. They can make that play. Well. It's a fairly subjective.

00:48:05,539	S14:
Well, the substantially to a point.

00:48:07,940	S6:
But what it says is put the thing here.

00:48:12,900	S14:
But you're kind.

00:48:14,860	S6:
Of looking up. This is the Alden code in terms of how you interpret it.

00:48:19,139	S14:
But the law but the law didn't change.

00:48:21,420	S6:
Built to a prescription.

00:48:24,789	S14:
I think that's what needs to be clarified. Yeah. Because it's that that's that's not.

00:48:29,429	S16:
Angels, right? It's you know, this is the the first crack of this apple. Um, but we had that very long meeting with Robin about there are these general laws that govern.

00:48:40,349	S14:
That's correct.

00:48:41,630	S1:
It is. And I and I understand some of the law that you're citing. But this new code as, as Amos says, is very prescriptive. So it's it's clear in what it says. So how the law in a different context applies to this code. We might want to take a look at and if you're willing to come back in two weeks, um, you know, it may be one.

00:49:07,190	S16:
Week, one week.

00:49:07,989	S1:
One week.

00:49:09,349	S14:
Yeah. So I think Robin needs to address how section six of Mass General Law super Solvers supersedes essentially this.

00:49:18,510	S1:
Well, the attorney General approved this.

00:49:20,349	S14:
But I understand.

00:49:21,150	S1:
So. So they're there? They're very aware.

00:49:24,150	S14:
No, I understand that.

00:49:25,269	S1:
Massachusetts law says when they approve these vials.

00:49:28,550	S14:
So that section six specifically talks about nonconformity like this. In reconstruction, what have you. Um, and yes, certain towns, they, you know, limit certain things, but in this case it doesn't say or section six doesn't say, oh, now you've got to follow this particular bylaw when you reconstruct something. That's not the case with section six and generally not.

00:49:52,909	S1:
Well, we'll get that clarified if you're willing to come back in. And is it a week mark made? Huh? Make it.

00:50:01,869	S5:
Yes.

00:50:03,150	S1:
Are you amenable to that?

00:50:05,590	S5:
Yes.

00:50:05,869	S1:
Okay, so I'll entertain a motion to continue this application for.

00:50:10,710	S5:
Suspension.

00:50:12,190	S1:
Till death.

00:50:16,989	S1:
Do I have a second?

00:50:17,789	S16:
Second?

00:50:18,909	S1:
Okay. When I call your name, please indicate your assent.

Jonathan. 00:50:22,000	S16:
Poor Jonathan, poor I, Bill Wheaton.

00:50:24,760	S13:
Billy.

00:50:25,159	S1:
9 a.m..

Dahlquist. 00:50:27,639	S6:
Kimball.

Mr.. 00:50:28,679	S1:
Matt.

00:50:29,039	S6:
Hamill, Mattie. Emma.

Light. 00:50:30,679	S1:
Darcy.

00:50:31,159	S5:
Dale, Darcy. Dale I.

00:50:32,920	S1:
And Marney.

Crouch. 00:50:35,519	S14:
Okay. Thank you.

00:50:37,880	S15:
Thank.

00:50:59,800	S13:
You. Shelton was there and just I just. Just just just email this attorney.

00:51:07,000	S1:
Okay? The next item on our agenda is, um, a site plan application by, um, Select Energy Development, LLC, and it's my understanding that the applicant would like this matter continued until June 2nd. Do I have a representative here?

00:51:29,969	S16:
Is there anyone here on the zoom call from the school district or trying the applicant set?

00:51:37,250	S13:
Uh, I'm.

00:51:38,090	S6:
A citizen on it. Mr..

Select. 00:51:43,610	S5:
Yes.

00:51:44,690	S13:
Down here to speak to say, brother.

00:51:46,969	S1:
Oh, the continuous data.

00:51:48,570	S16:
Yeah.

00:51:49,210	S1:
Yes. And I believe that one of the butters might have a conflict because. Andrew, how are you here? Yeah.

00:51:56,530	S17:
I am here. Um, I'm not available on June since. So, uh, any time before that. Anytime after then. I'm available by June 6th.

00:52:06,329	S1:
That's June 2nd.

00:52:07,449	S16:
June 2nd.

00:52:09,929	S17:
But your second. I'm not. I'm not available that entire week. Uh, from the.

00:52:18,619	S1:
Yes. Yes, please. Thanks. I don't know if you're amenable to a further continuance to, say, June 16th.

00:52:25,860	S13:
Before.

00:52:26,260	S18:
We vote on that. Um, can I make a comment? Sure. Okay. I'm Bob Knowles, 201 Main Street, Wenham. And, uh, I've been in the solar industry for a long time. For 16 years now. Um. Renewable energy, Massachusetts RTM, LLC. We developed very large ground mounted solar projects across the Commonwealth. Uh, I'm a partner and co-founder of that, uh, company. And, um, in partnership with Sun Carpet Capital in New York City. Our financier. Uh, my other job is, uh, as one of the co-founders, founding partners of the Hamilton one. I'm climate action team. And under the auspices of that organization, it was three and a half years ago that I went to Steve Clermont, uh, one of the, uh, the director of development for select and said, how about if we do a parking canopy at the high school? And it was three and a half years ago that we did a sidewalk, and we all agreed this would be a great project. Uh, and it falls under our zero carbon by 2040 mandate that both towns and the regional school district indirectly are abiding by. Um, it was a year ago, June, that I had I organized an all hands on deck, uh, meeting with about 12 people, a handful of state reps, uh, three National Grid reps, and a lot of other people from Hamilton, Wenham. And at that meeting a year ago in June, uh, and select was there as well. Um, it was at that meeting that I really urged National Grid to pull the project out of their Capen Group study, which had been mired in that study for about two years. They did that. They agreed to that, which allowed the project to move forward starting last summer. So this is this project has been a long time coming. Um, I here's my suggestion on the lighting issue that I hope you all will consider. Um, I wonder if it would make sense to issue, uh, the site plan, review the permit contingent upon, uh, you know, satisfying Miss Gyros, um, uh, you know, lighting issue and allow the project to proceed. There's some timing and financing issues that that are at stake here.

00:54:56,880	S1:
Three good idea. So we can do that.

00:55:00,679	S13:
Okay.

00:55:01,039	S1:
And and, uh, you know, it may be subject to a condition with respect to the very specifics of the dark sky compliant because at the at the last meeting there was a discussion of the temperature of the lights. I think your proposal was about 4000 Kelvin. And I know that Mr. Lowe would like warmer colours, but then we can consider the colour rendering index for the light. Yeah. Number of lights. Most importantly, that the lights are turned off when they're not needed.

Um. 00:55:36,679	S5:
Just a.

00:55:37,320	S18:
Quick question. Why? Why is there not a plan here tonight to review here?

00:55:43,760	S16:
Not with the applicant?

00:55:45,400	S18:
No, I am not. I am, I am representing the Hamilton Woman Climate Action Team of 501 C3. I have nothing.

00:55:52,559	S16:
And you.

00:55:53,280	S15:
Know.

00:55:54,199	S18:
Nothing. I have nothing to do with select.

00:55:56,760	S1:
Oh, okay. Then you're really not in a position to speak to the continuance. Excuse me, but you made a good point about the condition.

00:56:05,119	S18:
I have more points, but go ahead.

00:56:06,480	S6:
I would say.

00:56:07,000	S1:
The applicant is not agreed to either. Go ahead.

Sir. 00:56:16,889	S6:
Applicant.

00:56:18,409	S1:
Yes we.

00:56:18,969	S6:
Can. We can hear you.

00:56:21,210	S1:
Can you hear us?

00:56:22,730	S6:
Yeah, I have to. I am the body and the. And I agree with that. You have been talking to me today with.

00:56:36,530	S6:
The plan. In front of me tonight. If that is so, then two more weeks before I can. After I give those photometric lines. And it will not really matter if that is the reason why we are not going to be ready. Because you.

00:56:58,769	S17:
Could.

00:56:59,210	S6:
You run your entire report in order to put it in the course.

00:57:05,980	S1:
Could you get the, uh, the plans to, uh, the planning board a week before June 2nd?

00:57:16,059	S6:
If you want for me to. I would, but I do not look for permission to use quality in our experience. Is the building competent to review, if you would like that allowed? Right. Under state law? Um, but again, you don't want to sign the law. But I mean, here's what it means, that Bill to commit to you in terms of third party, one can often be used in late in to document that. But we are thinking that we are going to survive. Every point like this could not have it played in house play, it was duly played.

00:58:10,829	S6:
But your requesting to continue to June 2nd. Is that correct?

00:58:22,590	S6:
Are you still there?

00:58:30,110	S18:
Yes. Can I speak for him? Off the record, I guess. On the record? Yeah. The answer is yes.

00:58:46,469	S18:
Could I make one more point, if that's okay?

00:58:49,829	S5:
Yes.

00:58:50,909	S18:
There is a lot of time pressure on this project, including the iron rail. When I'm project on on July 4th, the Trump administration is basically Terminating the federal investment tax credit. 30% of the project.

00:59:07,840	S1:
Right.

00:59:08,280	S18:
On that date. So we're under some time pressure.

00:59:11,320	S1:
Okay. So so here's what I think is is what I'm proposing that we continue this to June 2nd. Uh, Mr. Lowe, I think that, you know, even if you don't have the photometric plan, I think that you have successfully identified the issues with respect to dark sky compliance. And so if by chance, we get the photometric plan before you leave on your vacation, uh, we'll try and get that to you. But I think that we understand your concerns and that we can allow this project to move forward, um, subject to conditions, um, that, uh, about the dark sky compliance. And if we do, in fact, need to have a further hearing on the photometric plan. We can actually accommodate that, but I think we would all agree that it would be quite a tragic to lose the financing of of by delaying this beyond June 2nd. Would you agree with that?

01:00:17,329	S17:
I don't have any problem with your peers. I think what's the default week? So I really do not see a reasonable, um, that I will try to review whatever, I guess, before that week. I thought I could meet with Bob, perhaps if I could make the people select so that I fully understand what the proposal is at that point. And if I can make any comments in writing for consideration by the planning board. I don't I don't wish to hold this project up at all. I understand these financing issues. I find it pretty amazing that the Buttars were not involved in any of these prior meetings. The first thing we saw was two weeks ago. And now it's going to require a whole, you know, six weeks for for the information to be provided to the right, letting us. All that being said, I'm I'm fully agreeable to what you're suggesting.

01:01:18,340	S5:
Well, okay.

01:01:18,860	S1:
Am I right that I summarized some of your concerns that the work that the lighting, the the number of light fixtures, the fact that they have to be fully shielded. Uh, and and the sensors. Yeah. Motion sensors, uh, motion sensors probably would be the best way to go, as opposed to turning them off at a certain time. Then the motion sensors really make a lot of sense. Would they be?

01:01:45,420	S6:
Could I.

01:01:45,739	S14:
Just.

01:01:45,980	S1:
Add.

01:01:46,619	S14:
Add to that list?

01:01:47,699	S1:
Yeah, sure.

01:01:48,380	S14:
It's well.

01:01:49,340	S19:
It's cut off angle and also the installation detail. So if it if it has a big lens protruding and it's tipped at an angle. Again, you're staring at that lens from a distance. You need to see how it's installed, what angle it's installed, and whether it has a protruding lens or cut off like.

01:02:06,940	S1:
So we understand that that it's a solar array is is not far from wetlands. And we want to make every effort to reduce glare and, and all the concerns that, um, that you raised and I know I transmit it to the planning Board, a program that was held at the Hamilton Wenham Library about.

01:02:29,699	S5:
Um.

01:02:30,300	S1:
Dark skies and, and, and I know the American Medical Association has had, has, uh, pronouncements about.

01:02:38,340	S17:
Uh.

01:02:39,139	S1:
Uh, really inappropriate lighting and how the lighting is better for human health. So there are many reasons to for the planning board to look into this closely. So if you have the opportunity to provide us with any more input, that's fine. But I think we also are concerned about this lighting here as well. And and we want to make sure that in projects going forward in Hamilton that that we're sensitive to these lighting issues because the, the, the toll of um, of so much inappropriate and can egregious lighting is is taking its toll there. It's hard to sing the stars on the eastern seaboard anymore. So, uh, what we'll do is we'll, you know, we'll continue this matter, uh, to 10s.

01:03:30,590	S18:
So it you can't or you don't want to issue a permit we can be contingent upon.

01:03:36,989	S1:
We can issue a site plan with, you know, conditions relative to the lighting. Thank you. So we will not. You know, I don't think there's anyone here who wants to hold this project up, so. Thank you. So I'll entertain a motion to continue the site plan. we build.

01:03:52,960	S5:
I move.

01:03:53,480	S1:
To.

01:03:53,760	S5:
Groups. I move to continue the site plan review to is it June 2nd? Second?

01:03:59,400	S1:
Do I have a second?

01:04:00,320	S19:
Second?

01:04:01,440	S1:
Um. So when I call your name, please indicate that you have sent Jonathan.

01:04:05,400	S19:
Poor, Jonathan poor.

01:04:06,519	S1:
I will, we will. We know Dahlquist may have left the meeting. Mark rambled.

01:04:12,119	S5:
Back.

01:04:12,360	S6:
In.

01:04:12,599	S1:
What?

01:04:13,079	S5:
Darcy Dale, Darcy Dale.

01:04:14,760	S1:
And Marney Crouch, I think.

01:04:16,760	S18:
Okay, so you're not just to be. Just so I'm clear, you're not issuing the permit contingent upon your condition. You're you're moving the meeting.

01:04:26,880	S1:
To June 2nd. So we will make a determination as to site plan weekly June 2nd. And if we have to issue a condition with respect to invite again.

01:04:36,519	S5:
Okay, okay.

01:04:39,039	S19:
That's what they were.

01:04:39,960	S6:
So they're.

01:04:40,599	S19:
Just creating.

01:04:41,719	S1:
We're just.

01:04:42,360	S5:
Doing.

01:04:42,760	S18:
Okay. It's awfully tight. But here we go. All right. Thank you very much.

01:04:47,320	S5:
Thank you okay.

01:04:50,369	S17:
Thank you.

01:04:52,289	S1:
You're welcome. All right. Next item on our agenda. The HTC is promoting a project in the town center. And Rick Mitchell is here to talk about the pocket park that is proposed for the corner of Beirut and Railroad. And this project really played the meeting for the master plan implementation letter. Because the planning board in the HTC, you know, are looking at the town center. And we were unaware of these plans for the pocket park. And we're looking at, um, potential grant applications until one stopped for growth. And we talked about potential that getting support from the HTC. So except for the util presentation. The next three items on our other business are kind of your one discussion.

01:05:55,340	S6:
Say.

01:06:04,420	S17:
Ten.

01:06:13,260	S1:
Get up and look at pretty pictures.

01:06:15,659	S6:
I can I can move this up so.

01:06:21,980	S5:
I can get.

01:06:23,380	S14:
Whatever.

01:06:23,820	S6:
You want guys.

01:06:25,780	S5:
Well.

01:06:26,420	S1:
I think what you see.

01:06:30,699	S1:
I looked at 10.6 of those 11 by, by the way. And, uh.

01:06:36,539	S5:
Where is it?

01:06:39,940	S1:
Rick asked me in a phone conversations whether this pocket park would require site plan radio and, you know, I can't say bye at one. I'll just say the purpose of site review is intended to allow the town to review an application by a property owner or the legal representative of the property owner, and impose reasonable conditions on developments be allowed as a writer by special permit, which by its nature or location as the potential for significant impacts on traffic circulation. No public safety, no public utility.

01:07:17,989	S5:
No.

01:07:18,670	S1:
The environment or net positive and neighborhood character and appearance.

01:07:25,469	S1:
It's a pocket.

01:07:26,269	S5:
Full of yes.

01:07:27,230	S17:
So hopefully we kind of sneak.

01:07:28,989	S6:
In under the.

01:07:30,829	S1:
Well, if you if you come back for site plan review. We haven't really filed an application for site review, so I can't say well grant it. Um, but I, I can't imagine why it would be denied. Okay. Kevin, you know that. You know, I hope cause I'm going to be driving across it. No. They are. It's a disaster.

01:07:51,559	S6:
So just some. I handed out that for a small.

01:07:54,840	S14:
Version.

01:07:55,159	S6:
There's a larger version with the mercat here has called a, um. This is a piece of property that's below the rubble. Uh, it's, uh.

01:08:08,400	S1:
Oh, yeah. There's the back.

01:08:09,760	S6:
Yeah. I mean, it shows the bank, the. That's the building that was crosses the pet store.

01:08:20,359	S1:
It's big. And then the and the the the post office, then.

01:08:23,560	S6:
Post office.

01:08:24,279	S1:
Is going.

01:08:24,640	S6:
To be post offices next door. Um, yeah. This is not going to happen because they actually own part of that. This was a oh. So it's going to move back to here.

01:08:38,720	S1:
And this is the existing plantings here.

01:08:42,039	S6:
Um, I believe so. I guess so. This, uh, this whole area is owned by a condominium trust. Um, so we've spent the last three years negotiating with the condominium trust, uh, to get a 30 year license for this, to use this piece of property for public. For public use. And then the idea is that the, uh, HTC will invest in, um, up to $250,000 to take that piece of property and move it into a small park pocket park, with the goal of making it an attractive area for people, hopefully to stay in the downtown, um, possibly do some more, uh, shopping or come, uh, staying downtown and enjoying it more and trying. It's part of a 3D application plan that the HTC has been working on. About three years ago, we applied to the State Mass Works program, $2.5 million street scheme for all Israel. They have condemned below street and then below to Asbury redoing the sidewalks, light trees, upgrading pedestrian. But that was not funded by the state. So um, we decided to focus on something that we could actually control. Um, so this is what we're proposing when it's not the final, final plan. Hopefully by next Wednesday, we're going to have a final plan, uh, with construction and bid documents that we'll be able to put out to bid and get real pricing on. But when I talked to Marnie last week and said, hey, we're putting this together or, you know, I don't know what the procedure is. Does this require a site plan to do or doesn't it? Um, so anyway, I thought I'd come before the planning board and sort of get a determination of what was going on in. Um, this right here is going to be a brilliant bench. And then this will be the Eddings chairman. It's a patio area. And then, based on comments, um, they've asked for on the patch, we put in some of their seating benches.

01:11:10,979	S1:
So that was some flowers.

01:11:12,979	S6:
Those will be added to a landscape barrier from the parking areas. The whole point is to try and make this, you know, separate from and there'll be new tree plantings.

01:11:26,140	S1:
Flowers, flowers, flowers.

01:11:28,979	S6:
Um, I don't think there'll be flowers here because that's an issue. I mean, all right, as it goes.

01:11:40,069	S6:
So we want to make it maintenance free.

01:11:42,869	S1:
Yes, babies have guards of light and no star.

01:11:47,550	S6:
People come in and cut flowers and take the flowers. So we.

01:11:52,109	S1:
Walk their dogs.

01:11:54,029	S17:
To that.

01:11:54,470	S1:
Point.

01:11:54,829	S19:
So the limit of work is the existing sidewalk. So there's.

01:11:57,550	S6:
No coupe. That's an outside. No.

Yeah. 01:11:59,510	S19:
So if so, if in the future somebody wanted to the sidewalk or make a bump out or alter the parking, it wouldn't really affect anything. We could dovetail.

01:12:09,989	S6:
Actually on such a kind of minimum trust deck. Basically this is Dave Cutler. Yep. Yeah. Uh, he is 1% in the balance. Uh, in majority is the veterinary clinic at the bank. MMT Bank has been the most difficult to deal with. Um, because we're dealing with somebody up in Buffalo, New York. That's. It started off. It's like, oh, well, you need to pay off your rent. So I said, we're investing money to improve a piece of your property.

Property? 01:12:43,319	S1:
How much? How many square feet is this? I mean, it's not. This is not.

01:12:47,319	S6:
It's about 40 by 40.

01:12:49,119	S1:
It's not usable for anything.

No. 01:12:51,800	S6:
Yeah, so.

01:12:52,640	S1:
But it would be terrible for parking lot. And so.

01:12:57,239	S6:
The.

01:12:57,560	S17:
Bank owns.

01:12:58,520	S6:
This. This is the bank. Is the bank is a is a sheriff shareholder in the condominium trust. Okay. Okay. I think.

01:13:06,600	S1:
Did you say it was.

01:13:07,239	S20:
A quarter of a million?

01:13:09,479	S6:
That's what we're. We haven't put it out to bid. We did a preliminary estimate last fall, and then, you know, it's sort of what we had. And the numbers came in around 200. So we're guessing.

01:13:21,720	S20:
You've done a cost benefit analysis on what how much traffic it will bring in or what else. Any kind of ideas.

01:13:28,800	S1:
You'll.

01:13:29,319	S20:
Be getting for that too.

01:13:31,319	S1:
So but the other thing, you know, because you're against lawns, hobbies, you know. Yeah. You know. Yeah. And we have drought. Well, we have three endings.

01:13:43,449	S6:
My guess is, well, that's one of the elements we're looking at is, um, irrigation because, you know, it becomes more and more expensive as you add these elements to keep it green.

01:13:55,289	S1:
But with the. So water bans on just.

01:13:58,810	S6:
Right. So right. Then we get into water bans. Well then we couldn't stand it. It was our landscaping. All stones.

01:14:08,010	S20:
Cactus.

Yeah. 01:14:09,649	S6:
You know. So yeah, we're gonna put in turf like Astro. Yeah. No, no, that's just I'm just good.

01:14:17,050	S21:
That's good.

So. 01:14:18,810	S6:
Oh, that's to be determined.

01:14:21,010	S1:
Yeah.

01:14:21,649	S6:
Um, there may be an exemption for public parks. I own about watering ponds, or it may just turn brown.

01:14:29,890	S1:
This place Where are you? Not plant trees. You've got a lot of them. I mean, they won't get established that way.

01:14:34,890	S19:
Is it creative to collect its own water or does it work there?

01:14:37,810	S6:
There will be some water on site for watering because these trees are gone. These plantings will need to be watered for the first couple of years.

01:14:46,050	S20:
Where's the nearest hydrant?

01:14:48,090	S6:
And so.

01:14:49,890	S17:
That's right.

01:14:50,289	S20:
There.

01:14:50,609	S1:
Oh, there you go.

01:14:51,729	S19:
So has there been any thought about having it collect its old water? Like in, uh, Portland? There's a lot of streetscapes where what they do is they, they use it as a sort of a stormwater drainage strategy, a rain garden. And so that it sort of, it sort of waters itself a little bit. Well, that's just it's mostly it's grading. Yeah. And then creating some sort of useful way to collect water.

01:15:14,609	S6:
And we haven't gotten into that level of detail.

01:15:18,529	S19:
Um, but that would certainly make for more filling and.

01:15:21,210	S1:
Say, you know what? Before you finalize everything given the water band, you know, because it's a problem. I mean, it's just a just one. But you do have to have irrigation to begin with because the trees will die. They have to be.

01:15:34,779	S6:
White.

01:15:35,260	S1:
Right? But they're worn over time. Um, yeah. There may be an exemption for a park like that, I don't know.

01:15:44,539	S6:
Right. So anyway, we wanted to, you know, and we're going to just, you know, one of the things we're looking at doing is cutting granite bollards and would still be a chain, you know, like a black chain can be or so I think it was. Help. So let's give it a chilling of enclosure problems. So I just wanted to give you a heads up what's coming. Um, and then, you know, get a sort of a read from you. It. Does this require a site plan?

01:16:20,380	S1:
We'll look into that. My initial, um, assessment is Maybe not. But then if you did like the most cursory application imaginable, I can't imagine why it wouldn't be approved. Yeah, yeah. I mean, it's still so long.

01:16:38,590	S19:
It's like, if if it doesn't require a segment, I'd still encourage you to come in for like a non-binding discussion.

01:16:45,750	S21:
Oh, yeah.

01:16:46,310	S6:
Well, that's why I'm here.

01:16:47,229	S1:
Yep. Yeah. This is, like, non-binding. Last question.

01:16:49,430	S19:
You have a final thing?

01:16:50,829	S6:
Yeah.

01:16:51,029	S1:
Yeah. Wouldn't you be happy to just, you know, that that got your lines and then and then, but you know, I as a practical matter, I just I cannot imagine for the life of me how we can say no, no, no.

01:17:04,949	S20:
When, when will you be construction begin? If everything goes according to plan.

01:17:09,989	S6:
That's, uh.

01:17:11,590	S1:
Oh, great. I should say will be. Should the site plan review if you support or grant application.

01:17:18,029	S21:
There you go. We're springing up.

01:17:21,270	S1:
I hope. Mark, what's the status of that a week. thought we were going to try and get.

01:17:26,880	S6:
Some Mac Grant adaptation.

01:17:29,039	S21:
Now this is.

01:17:30,319	S19:
One stop for growth.

01:17:31,720	S1:
It's one stop for growth.

01:17:33,960	S6:
Oh, it's the one stop roll out.

01:17:35,479	S21:
Yeah.

01:17:36,079	S6:
Like like mass warrants that we applied for.

01:17:38,760	S1:
And this is a planning grant though.

01:17:41,039	S21:
Yeah.

01:17:41,560	S1:
For the public sphere and also how the public sphere impacts the private sphere. It's more, you know, looking at the you actually wanted money for, um, you know, actual construction. We're looking at planning how to bring the Crosby's marketplace. Uh, pedestrians across the street so they don't drive.

01:18:04,880	S6:
Yeah, yeah.

01:18:06,960	S1:
And how to integrate the parking so that there will be shared parking.

01:18:11,159	S19:
Make this safer to cross.

01:18:12,479	S6:
Oh, no. I mean, that's what that that grant application was just wonderful and sad and traffic comic. Two economic islands separated by state highway and drive their car. You bet. From one end to what?

01:18:26,729	S19:
From one lot to another.

01:18:27,930	S6:
So we're on the same page? Yep.

01:18:29,770	S1:
So? So whether, you know, I would hope that you would agree, actually.

01:18:34,409	S6:
Do you need any. Have you written the grant?

01:18:36,890	S1:
No. We we we have it.

01:18:38,930	S6:
Because I'll be happy to share what we wrote because I think it would help.

01:18:43,250	S19:
Yeah, I've learned from it.

01:18:44,449	S6:
Yeah.

01:18:44,970	S1:
So it's the Massachusetts Downtown initiative. Capital grant program has two components. One is planning and then they have implementation. So we hope to get the grant for the plan because that encompasses much. It actually we hope to incorporate other pocket parts.

01:19:04,369	S6:
Yeah yeah yeah great.

01:19:06,770	S1:
So if you have some spare cash that you could contribute to learn.

01:19:11,489	S6:
Well this is probably going to eat up a big piece. I know that.

01:19:14,729	S1:
Even if it's a small.

01:19:16,050	S17:
Amount.

01:19:17,050	S1:
When you go for the grant application and we say the HDC has precedent.

01:19:23,939	S6:
When is this? When is this?

01:19:26,340	S17:
June 3rd.

01:19:28,140	S20:
Early June 3rd.

01:19:29,699	S1:
So.

01:19:30,939	S6:
Oh, okay. Can we just endorse it without money, or do you not?

01:19:35,460	S20:
What?

01:19:36,020	S17:
Yeah.

01:19:36,380	S20:
Of course.

Yeah. 01:19:38,020	S1:
But, you know, it's I'm not going to put a dollar amount on that because the support is critical. Okay. And so even if it's even if it were anonymous.

01:19:48,939	S17:
Though.

01:19:49,380	S1:
Like $10,000 or ten.

01:19:54,300	S1:
Even whatever it would be, you have the cash. I know you do the town meeting. Oh, yeah. So I'm not you know, the object is to work cooperatively, not whatever. But that would go a long way to to.

01:20:09,460	S19:
All right.

01:20:09,819	S1:
Well, meet our mission.

01:20:11,539	S6:
I'll put that.

01:20:12,100	S1:
On a mission.

01:20:12,659	S6:
Right. Put that on the agenda for Wednesday is meeting.

01:20:15,579	S1:
Oh please do. And ask for 25. So when your members.

01:20:22,710	S6:
So. Okay. So, um, anyway, so we'll hopefully have a final play on next week that we can, uh, what do you want to do to come back at a future meeting?

01:20:38,189	S1:
You do I do the the do what? You know, just for the fun of it. Do us sorry. When we do.

Welcome. 01:20:45,789	S17:
And online.

01:20:47,510	S6:
Yep.

Okay. 01:20:48,829	S14:
Oh.

01:20:49,710	S19:
Email me and I'll.

01:20:50,590	S6:
Help you.

01:20:50,989	S19:
Out.

01:20:51,350	S20:
Yeah.

Okay. 01:20:51,909	S6:
Yeah. I've never done this stuff before.

01:20:56,069	S20:
After being on the planning board for years.

01:20:58,710	S1:
I don't think we have to talk about traffic and whatnot. And you have the little bollards from running or anything. So it's it's it's really just a way of public.

01:21:09,390	S20:
Tugs be allowed. I know everyone runs from the vet and takes that to. But you.

01:21:15,390	S6:
Know, we're helping.

01:21:17,670	S20:
With the.

01:21:17,949	S17:
Question.

01:21:18,470	S19:
Sorry. And we don't have a digital version of this, but, um, they're talking about improving this piece of land into a no.

01:21:27,350	S17:
And I understand that, um, and I think it's a fantastic project. My, uh, my question is, is whether there's any lighting.

01:21:36,229	S18:
No.

01:21:38,710	S20:
Okay, good.

01:21:40,069	S17:
There's lighting down there in that area. That's pretty egregious. And maybe it's the bank lighting. I don't know that there's some lamp posts that are unshielded and they're on all night long. So. And if those are not part of the pocket park, that's that's great.

01:21:56,310	S6:
Yeah.

01:21:56,510	S1:
Yeah, lighting is on my radar.

01:21:58,270	S6:
So no, no, I couldn't agree more. But I got to tell you, and, uh, the bank, the, uh, the first one we're dealing with is the actually probably one of the worst people I've ever dealt. Anybody is just rude and, uh, um, and and and inflexible And so.

01:22:17,640	S14:
Anyhow, the.

01:22:18,199	S18:
Farthest.

01:22:18,760	S6:
I stay.

01:22:19,319	S17:
You can talk further about that. No, that's that's right. It doesn't have any lighting with the pocket park. So that was about as smart as she.

01:22:27,039	S6:
Yeah.

01:22:27,239	S17:
I thought you said, hey, this whole project is okay.

01:22:30,600	S1:
Yeah. So so, you know, that's that's what cooperative like for this grant application. And, uh, you know, I have a letter to Joe about trying to get boards and commissions to me regularly, because if we had not, we could have been working collaboratively on these things for the last year.

01:22:53,399	S6:
Well, that's one of the biggest problems is everybody is operating against sidewalks.

01:22:58,680	S20:
Yeah, that's not good.

01:22:59,720	S6:
Because sort of the other piece of this that would go along with what you're talking about is we have been working for over a year with Joe and called Tim and, Um, to get into the capital plan, a phased approach to the redevelopment of this and Willo and Zillow to Asbury. The what? We had proposed to mass works but didn't get.

01:23:26,449	S1:
Clear sidewalks.

01:23:27,369	S6:
And stuff like streetscape and pedestrian safety, um, on those areas. Um, so that what you're talking about would be perfect to get everybody on board saying, okay, you know, um, given the demands of financing in this town, you're not going to get 5 million or $10 million to make it happen. But can we do it in a logical bunch of gutters? Plan and grand. That would substantively reinforce what we're trying to say. Okay, let's do the railroad. And then, you know, two, three, 4 or 5 years. Willow, you know, that's kind of.

01:24:08,569	S19:
It's under but it's under a large.

01:24:10,170	S20:
It's.

01:24:10,409	S1:
Under a larger planning.

01:24:11,699	S20:
Step wise.

01:24:12,619	S1:
Yeah. Yeah. So I think that this is very constructive. And, um, we we have to vote on the letter that I drafted. Um, and, you know, but I, I will have to Mark is amenable have, uh, Mark actually hand-deliver the letter to Joe and he can make the representation that you or support of, of these kinds of, uh, semi-annual meetings to get boards and commissions working together and talking to one another about what they're thinking and what they want to do.

01:24:48,739	S6:
So can I get a copy of this grant application or can you send it to me? Sure. Because I've got to toss to the boards and say.

01:24:56,380	S1:
Oh yeah, yeah yeah, yeah.

01:25:01,420	S1:
Yeah. Can you do that? Can you get it to hand? We are looking at this, uh, actually I kept a clean copy. I can I, I don't have the actual application, I don't think.

01:25:13,390	S6:
Or I can find it online just if you send me a link or something.

01:25:16,630	S20:
Well, here's since.

01:25:17,310	S1:
This is the.

01:25:18,430	S6:
Summary.

01:25:19,350	S1:
Yeah. And then you have to make sure you get the right one. Stop the gold application. You have to put.

01:25:27,470	S6:
One community, one stop.

01:25:29,630	S1:
Yeah. But there are different applications for different.

01:25:33,270	S6:
I just need to know what I'm talking about. Pop that. Can I click this? Yes. All right. Good. Thank you guys. Thank you. Nice to be back.

01:25:44,750	S17:
Yeah.

01:25:45,989	S20:
This year we got this hit.

01:25:48,310	S1:
The most difficult one. This special permit.

Yeah. 01:25:51,869	S6:
Well, yeah. And especially when you're dealing with the first one because it's like, okay, so what do we do with this? This then how does it fit into the context of.

01:26:02,189	S1:
You know, all the other applications were difficult. But I got this one right.

01:26:07,520	S6:
And I think I can sympathize that disaffected. Money for the actual consultant and not develop.

01:26:18,840	S20:
Right. That's true.

01:26:21,079	S6:
All right.

01:26:23,000	S20:
That's right. Thank you.

01:26:25,760	S1:
Okay.

01:26:26,600	S20:
Uh.

01:26:27,840	S19:
Marty, before we move on to much further, do we want to sort of frame what the question is to Robin about that, um, special permit application so that the question is clear?

01:26:38,079	S1:
Uh, yes. And that question is in view of the prescriptive nature of the town center bylaw. And I mean, the language is really, um.

01:26:54,479	S6:
So, so.

01:26:55,640	S19:
To me, the question is.

01:26:56,920	S20:
First.

01:26:57,800	S1:
I mean, it says must.

01:26:59,319	S19:
Yes. So the question is, is is the only standard not substantially more detrimental? Or is or is there a stand? Is there? Is there a standard embedded in those must statements in the bylaws? Otherwise they are meaningless, right? They're really meaningless.

01:27:16,210	S1:
In other words, is there a predicate to getting to that question of substantially more detrimental? Do you have to establish that there is no. Well, that you can create what you want through conformity.

01:27:35,409	S6:
With conformity, right.

01:27:36,810	S1:
With conformity. So in other words, you know, you want to keep the trick, okay. That's your choice.

01:27:43,010	S19:
You want to keep your view out the back.

01:27:44,250	S1:
Court, break down and move that that the wise back you can make it.

01:27:49,850	S19:
Don't tear the tree down and just move things.

01:27:53,210	S20:
Like.

01:27:53,810	S1:
Yeah, whenever there's a way around.

01:27:55,850	S19:
There are many ways around it.

01:27:57,170	S1:
You have to show that there's no other possibility than to Have a more non-conforming structure and that's what they're doing.

01:28:09,770	S19:
So how do we. So can we frame that clearly to Robin so that we have a definitive answer we can try. And what I'll ask him to do is at least zoom into the meeting.

01:28:17,810	S6:
Next.

01:28:18,130	S19:
Week.

Okay. 01:28:18,970	S1:
Yeah, I mean, I can I can explain that issue and send it to you. And, you know, because I have a problem with the word reconstruction a little bit, a little bit, then demolishing and rebuilding.

01:28:32,050	S19:
It's not a gray area. It's black and white. The reconstruction that's black and white.

01:28:37,649	S1:
Well, you know, the language was repair, reconstruct whatever. And so it was a little to me, reconstruction is not just reconstruction, seems to me.

01:28:48,210	S22:
So it's a it's a new building. It's a new building. It's on the same they proposed to put it at the same location, but it's not using the foundation again. Right. So it's a new building demolition.

01:28:59,689	S6:
Yeah.

01:29:00,970	S1:
It doesn't really even fall under the other statute. So I really shouldn't be talking about this when he's not here. So I will bring that issue. But that was the issue I think the planning board is trying to articulate, and he was jumping to the conclusion. But if we just jump to that conclusion, is it more substantially more detrimental then there's no standard anymore, because if you tear down something that's falling down and put something new, you satisfy the standard. But that's too easy. So the intent of this town.

01:29:31,699	S20:
Center.

01:29:32,220	S19:
So, so you'll, you'll craft something to give to Mark and Mark.

01:29:35,619	S20:
Yes.

01:29:36,300	S19:
Let's put it in front of her and then maybe she'll attend the next meeting. Yes.

Okay. 01:29:41,939	S1:
Okay, so, uh, let's vote on the letter to the select. Did you have a chance to look at us?

01:30:09,829	S20:
Thank you.

01:30:14,069	S1:
John, I thought you had something to.

01:31:15,520	S19:
I guess my question or comment last time was you can make it kind of a wish, but how do you make it a mandate or a habit? Well, it's what's the what's the trigger?

01:31:27,119	S1:
Well, we have the town manager, assisted by the planning directors, you know, envisions that the town manager scheduled the meeting and then it's up to the attendees to to actually implement it. But just talking.

01:31:42,960	S17:
Of it.

01:31:43,680	S1:
Is half the battle.

01:31:44,720	S20:
Yeah.

01:31:45,039	S19:
It's not just being in the same room. Yeah, but but the issue is who who, who instigates it, who.

01:31:50,920	S20:
Who schedules it and.

01:31:52,159	S1:
So schedule. So this will go to the, um. Um, it's been lost in the new chair of the select board, you know.

01:32:01,130	S20:
He didn't. He didn't, um, run. Oh. Bill Olson I'm sorry, bill Olson. I don't know, I didn't.

01:32:08,409	S1:
At their meetings last.

01:32:09,529	S20:
Night.

01:32:09,890	S1:
I think he's probably still the chair, so I'll double check that. But, I mean, I, I yell at a paragraph at the end. He's like, we paid all this money.

01:32:18,090	S20:
To.

01:32:18,250	S1:
This master plan.

01:32:19,930	S20:
And we did all the work. People showed up. Yeah, and I.

01:32:23,210	S1:
Put it on a shelf and forget.

01:32:24,689	S20:
About it.

Nope. 01:32:26,449	S1:
You know.

01:32:26,850	S20:
So.

01:32:29,250	S1:
There are no other comments with respect to this letter. My thinking is, let's get it off my vows about what it says. We gotta get started on having some meetings here so we're not tied short with, um, uh, you know, a pocket part that. Well, I mean, it's a good idea, but we could have other things. I think we might have had some input in the meeting. You do. You know, it's it's cool right now, you know?

01:32:56,899	S19:
Well, not too late, but it's.

01:32:58,420	S1:
Like you don't want to step on it. No, no, that's counterproductive. But, you know, I what, 25,000 times was.

01:33:06,819	S20:
I think that's a good number.

01:33:09,819	S1:
We'll see what they come up with. So do we want to take a vote on that?

01:33:13,819	S20:
Yeah, I move that. We vote on the Hamilton Planning Board letter, um.

01:33:19,380	S1:
To the.

01:33:20,260	S20:
Select board.

01:33:21,579	S1:
About a.

01:33:23,380	S20:
Oh, yes.

01:33:23,939	S1:
Um, implementation.

01:33:25,420	S20:
Of the Master Plan 2024.

01:33:27,380	S1:
So a second.

01:33:28,220	S20:
Second.

01:33:28,619	S1:
Um, so I can say no longer with us. So all in favor?

01:33:32,579	S20:
Uh. That's why.

01:33:33,539	S1:
So I will get that off.

01:33:36,020	S20:
And I think it's really smart to have Marc hand it to Joe and look him in the eye when you do it.

01:33:45,619	S1:
See how what we can do. I have this. What's today's date?

01:33:50,180	S20:
Twice the 28th.

01:33:51,260	S1:
Bring it. I don't have enough space.

Oh. 01:34:05,539	S1:
Okay. I can send the. I'll send the email.

01:34:11,020	S19:
Okay.

01:34:18,300	S1:
So now we have minutes.

01:34:24,659	S1:
So I think on the ten minutes, I had comments on the minutes. Is there any discussion about the minutes quiz.

01:34:43,180	S20:
Do you want me to make a motion?

01:34:44,659	S1:
Uh, I think there was one correction.

Um. 01:34:57,989	S1:
I made the correction. Okay. Yeah. She can make a motion.

01:35:02,310	S20:
Okay, I move that we vote to approve the minute meeting minutes of April 7th and March 24th.

01:35:08,750	S1:
And that would be subject to.

01:35:10,550	S20:
The subject to the corrections. And, yes, of course.

01:35:15,670	S1:
That I have made, uh, most of which are not substantial. The only da I saw, and actually Darcy picked it up. No, I did not attend the March 24th meeting, so I had to make a correction. Uh, as to the, um, his comments about the groundwater protection ogre Lake District, they occurred at a prior meeting. And so I made the connection, and then I just had to type away, too. And and.

01:35:46,350	S17:
So.

01:35:47,350	S1:
So do I have a second?

01:35:48,680	S19:
Second?

01:35:49,800	S1:
Uh, so, all in favor of approving the minutes from March 24th and April 7th? Uh, subject to corrections? Um, I don't think, uh, I think.

01:36:03,720	S17:
It's a county committee.

01:36:05,439	S11:
Maybe to it.

01:36:07,399	S1:
And then, uh, last thing. You don't want to lose sight of the GPO date. Uh, did you ever get any comments from Pat knowing about that? Um.

01:36:17,960	S6:
Yeah.

01:36:19,359	S19:
Um.

01:36:20,439	S11:
I do agree. But I will put it on next week.

01:36:22,880	S1:
Yes. I just don't want to lose Trent, so I can't really. So that's about it. But hold it. Oh, so I don't have no point.

01:36:36,439	S1:
There's only one thing left to do. Oh, I'm gonna make a motion that we adjourn. Yes. Do I have a second? All in favor? Aye. All right. We're done. Oh, that was a good meeting.