Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Welcome to the planning board meeting, Thursday, June 5th, 2025. Can we stand up and do the pledge of allegiance? To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. The first item on our agenda is board business. Um, has does anyone have any comments about the minutes from May 15th? Any comments? Can I hear a motion to approve? Motion to approve the minutes of May 15th. May 15th. Can I hear a second? I'll second. Uh, all in favor? I. Okay. Uh, bills. Do we have any bills? We do have bills. We have one peerreview bill from Green International and a year-long reimbursement for training and workshops, etc. for for me. So, you take the budget item and Okay. Um, okay. We'll pass this around. Okay. Uh member input and member update on projects. I just want to say that Lupi will be here next meeting. In the meantime, they're going they are scheduling a uh I don't know if we call it a presentation but an update for the board

of selectmen. So if we find out when that is we any one of us can attend that. Yeah. I was going to ask except that our board of selectman or select board representatives not here tonight uh on it is is why is he briefing the select board on the status of this project before brief presenting to us? I don't know because we're the governing authority on that project, not the select board. And I'm just a little concerned about the president that this is setting. And I would uh if you and that's why I was hoping the select board member representative. I would talk to Jim Dugen because I think this was at his request. When Mark shows up, I may reass him present. Um, one item on here's a town newsletter and we've I I've dropped the ball on that and uh do can we do we have any ideas about something that we could well here's Mark we were just discussing um Go ahead. Yeah. Um, I understand uh Lei is presenting to the select board some status updates on their project and I'm wondering why they're briefing the select board before uh before us because we're the governing authority on that project and uh some reason I guess it was scheduled to brief the select board at Jim's request. Is that is that policy that select board has inserted themselves into these projects at this point? To my knowledge, there's nothing scheduled for locally coming in front of us. It's it's not on our agenda for Monday. Um I don't know why he wouldn't be in front of you guys and just invite invite us to the

meeting. That makes more sense to me. So Darl, I invite you to talk to him today. Just we should just make it a joint meeting and together. Yeah. I mean they they will be at our next meeting. Okay. So um okay, town newsletter. Does anyone have any ideas about this subject? Great. So we did a brief um down update on results of uh town meeting regarding the um zoning articles. So that made it into the June um newsletter. We had talked about an idea for the July newsletter. Was it the flood plane mapping update? These are all just so wonderful, enticing and entertaining items for the Oh, no, no, no. It was the socioeconomic uh report. Um the 495 Metro West Partnership has um published uh their annual um socioeconomic uh snapshots for each community in in the uh 495 partnership uh region. Uh and uh Cooper was going to do a uh newsletter on those results. They just announced that. I think people would be interested in that. Yeah. Yeah. They always put out such a good graphic. Yeah. And um I think I think I've seen that. Yeah. Yeah. Um we did a news flash on it um yesterday. Yeah. So um before we move on um so uh going back to Northern Bank at the last meeting um select board member Rambacher mentioned something about the crosswalks related to the Northern Bank development and so I don't know that there's a next step for us. So, I just wanted to touch back on that, see if there is a next step for

us as to who identifies where the crosswalks go. And since you want that space, I'm very interested in that. I'm sure you are. As I understand it, the flashing lights that we're getting the grant for would not be one of them would not be at that location. There are no flashing lights currently scheduled on 19. Okay. So, and in the past, we've been unable even to get a crosswalk there. Um, so Marin, how do we go about this? Um, I will uh ask town administrator's office if there's any update um on their work with the state. Okay. On this um on their work between the state and Northern Bank. Yeah. On this. Thank you. So, imagine when you cross the street now, you I have been crossing that street for 30 years. And what I would say is that in general people are people sometimes stop sometimes sometimes you have to run when they're not completely speeding you know in that spot but there are people from the neighborhood Adam Street neighborhood who bring their kids over on our dead end street to ride bikes and stuff and they can have a hard time anyway. Um, okay. So, we're not at 640 yet. Uh, any other um board business that anyone has that they would like to bring up? This is also a time where we ask if there's any public input from anyone here. Um, and this is the time to bring it forward. Non-specific to some of the hearings we're going to have. I would like to say that we've had a lot of consolate con

cancellations in our hearing schedule. The 640 uh pu uh stormwater permit hearing for Harwood Avenue lots one and two is being continued while they do while peer review is worked through. The continued public hearing at 64 Beaver Brook Road for Storm Roder review is being continued for the same reason. the informal the 710 informal discussion of the national grid project storm water regulation inquiry and I want to say uh to anyone who's watching that um this is a uh maintenance project for the power lines that go through part of our town and they're coming before us to say hey um you know we want to do this work. Thanks. Bye. And we have to decide the parameters um that they need to meet to um do this work. Um that was not a hearing. It was just a discussion. What we've decided to do uh because the 7:30 public hearing is the one that uh will probably have the most interest uh is to move the we have an ANR. Um the 720 is scheduled for an the ANR at the Nagok Hill Orchard which uh is not a public hearing and we can uh dispose of that. Um and we have a um 7 o'clock 7:00 the mill the 97 and 99

mil road which is the site of the old parley lumber mill uh application and we uh it's not a hearing it's a presentation by light and water about what they plan to do there and we thought we'd move that forward uh in the the the yawning minutes that we had before 7:30. So, that being said, can we go ahead with that? Should ask the two people that are here what they're here for. Yeah. If and and I and by the way uh anyone else who's here, I went through that so that if you were here for any of these items, you don't have to say. Yeah, you got it. Okay. Hi everyone. Um I'm Dave Ketchin, assistant general manager of the Littleton Light Apartments. Thanks for having us tonight. Um as Jeff stated, we are here for the 97 and 99 Mill Road uh battery storage project that we're proposing. Um with me tonight I have Dan Severs uh PE from the Morren Cameron Group and Steve Burn who is our partner on this project with Citizens Energy. Um that's the battery company that that we're looking to go with. So on this project we're proposing we want to install peak shaving batteries um along the 495 quarter part of the parcel that essentially is we're going to use as as peak shaving me mechanisms to help save us cost on our transmission and capacity costs and try and keep rates low. So this is a a similar concept to what we how we operate now with our natural gas fired generators at our 39 air road uh main office site. So essentially during um

peak hours we will dispatch these batteries onto our distribution system to shave our peak load and help us save on power uh supply costs. Um and then during you know off hours these batteries will charge stay charged until until another peak event um comes up. So that's sort of a quick rundown of it. I'm going to pass it over to Dan. He's going to present on the um site and the project and then Steve can and can follow up on that as well. So Dan, go ahead. Thank you Dave. Um for the record, my name is Dan Severs. I'm a licensed professional civil engineer with the morning Cameron Group at uh 66 Elm Street in Dan, Massachusetts. We have the pleasure of being the civil engineer and surveyor for the this proposed battery energy storage system project located at 97 and 99 Mil Road. We have been working with David Ketchin and Steve Burns on developing the site plans for this proposed project. U a little background on 97 and 99 Mil Road. The property is situated along the boundary of Route 495 to the north, Beaverbrook, a perennial stream to the south, and located at the intersection of Warren Street and Mill Road. Uh the property is an industrial B zoning district and is a previously developed property that has been used as such for the better part of the century. It was previously used as a lumber yard and some evidence is still present on the ground today. The property was recently acquired by Littleton Electric and Light Department and is now being used for municipal electric and light operations as well as other um temporary contracting uses such as material stockpiling. The bulk of the proposed work um sorry the bulk of the proposed work associated with the project is primarily within the riverfront area. So, as a previously developed site that was developed prior

to August 1st, 1996, this would be considered a previously developed degraded site. Um, from a from a storm water perspective, according to 310 CMR 10.58 section 5, the proposed work on site is considered a redevelopment within previously developed riverfront area because it falls entirely within the footprint of the developed riverfront area. While we are proposing work within the 100 and 200 foot riverfront areas, the proposed work will increase the natural buffer between the stream bank and the developed site, reduce degraded riverfront area on site by approximate approximately 600 square ft and decrease the overall total impervious area on site by about 20,000 square ft. Additionally, we are proposing to restore an area of gravel road and material piles totaling approximately 4,300 square feet with about 1,000 square ft of that being on site. Overall, the proposed work on site is an improvement to existing conditions and meets the Massachusetts Stormwater Standards and Rivers Protection Act performance standards for a previously degraded riverfront redevelopment project. With that being said, I'll hand it off to Steve. Thanks. Hi, my name is Steve Bird. I'm the director of resiliency for Citizens Energy Corporation. Um, it's a essentially a not for-profit energy company that is based in Boston. Um, founded in 1979 by Joseph P. Kennedy II, oldest son of Robert F. Kennedy. So, for those of you that have been around, Jeff, you mentioned you've been here 30 years. You remember Joe for oil? Joe Kennedy. Yeah, I remember the heating oil. So, same same concept. We are um I've been there since 2018. I'm now responsible for energy storage and micro grid projects, but the bulk of Joe for Oil has become what we refer to as Joe

for Sun. It's a low-inccome community solar program. So, we're still doing for-profit projects like this one um to then fund our charitable programs and our our mission to make life's basic necessities more affordable to those in need. For this project specifically, um we've been working with Littleton Electric with Dave, um Nick, uh Pat, and Scott for, uh probably the better part of a year or two, um to get it to where we are now. Um, we've been working to get the location to be right, to get the system to be right, and we are working with other local authorities to make sure that they are satisfied with any plans that we have in place for uh the system when it's up and running. So, we've had contact with the fire department um for battery energy storage. That's usually one of the uh first people that we contact when we're interested in a project in the local AHJ to make sure that they are aware of the project if they have any questions and we are working closely with um Chief Mccertie and Officer Taylor. Um but aside from that, I'm happy to answer any questions. As Dave said, these are lithium-ion batteries that'll be charged during lowcost uh hours, usually late at night, you know, between midnight and 4:00 a.m., and then they will be discharged during peak times uh to lower the cost to the Littleton Electric Light rate payers. Um, and that's pretty much the the basic use case. it'll be participating in some ISO New England stuff uh off hours when there's no peaks, but that will be uh something that has little to no impact on on what you guys are are looking at here. So, um aside from that, Littleton Electric has more plans for the site. We are trying to we're the first ones to be part of this redevelopment, so we're trying to set it up that the rest of the parcel can also be developed as they see

fit. So we are just one small piece that we're trying to uh keep it isolated and in the right areas. Can you give us an idea about what these look like? These batteries dimensions or I think I saw something. Um so these are 20 foot containers. So it essentially looks like a shipping container. Yeah. Um we have a very similar project we just put in operation in Welssley. Mhm. Um so essentially it's uh they're 20 foot containers. They would have large doors that open and then essentially you see u there are battery modules that are stacked. So if you know what a computer like a data center looks like where you see the computer servers lined up. Those are essentially what these batteries look like when you open that door. Um that's really it. They'll we have four containers full of batteries. We have two skids that'll have the um the PCS, the inverters on there, the inverter equipment um and then some interconnecting equipment to go to Littleton Electric. That's what you see. So the the four on the on my left here are the battery containers. Then you have the two skids and you have the other interconnection equipment. So it's it's you know under 10,000 square feet. Is it 4500? Yeah. So, it's it's a pretty small footprint. Um, but we are meeting all the we're trying to keep it small, keep it condensed, meeting all the requirements uh to go to fences and setbacks. Um, we are looking to make sure that there's uh drive around for emergency vehicles. Um, so we're doing um, you know, we're doing everything everything that we can to make it accessible and for future for future use

for the site as well. Uh, will there be any lighting for security or work? We are proposing to put lights on. I think there are four, one on each end of those poles. Okay. And we ask, well, we have a bylaw about night night sky lighting, so we presume they they're not going to be like 100 foot pylons, you know, blaring down. No, whatever. Okay. Whatever you guys suggest. We we have um in other spots they're on the containers. These are proposed not to be on the container. I'm not sure if we'll have security. We have security at half of our half of our sites now. Um not sure if we're going to need security here. Um, but yeah, I mean, however, however you guys want to let us know what your we can look up the bylaw and we would meet those requirements. Yeah, it just means that the the light is directed toward the ground instead of toward off the site or glaring into neighbors. Um, questions. Anna, so um you talk about the lithium iron lithium ion battery. Is there any concern about um the need for fire mitigation? I mean are these the kind of batteries that you have to worry about? Um we will have an emergency response plan in place. That's why we reach out to the fire department up front. This is um the way that citizens and we have done our projects is we use fully designed and engineered solutions. So we work with an integrator. We're not piecing this together. Uh we're going with a solution that's been tested. It's ULcertified. It's all we are doing as much mitigation as we can. Okay. Um similar to EVs, you know, there is the the risk of that. There's a risk of that with a with a regular gas car as well. Well, I don't want to I don't want to minimize that, but we are doing any and everything that we can to mitigate that. Um, essentially what at a very high

level, there's a a battery management system that's going to be in place that as soon as something with voltages or temperatures kind of goes outside of a range of what the manufacturer suggests, the the rack will shut down. Okay. So we are uh fully aware of that and the last thing that we want as a as a company is to be on the news for you know having one of those fires. But yeah, we don't want that either. The mitigation itself is it's still evolving. You know, we are we work with local companies. Um Jensen Hughes, there's another company called ESRG and they're always trying to help us and help the MLPS with how the emergency response should work. So, we do a full emergency response plan with the fire department. We do fire department um we'll set up for them to come down in their companies. Uh Welssley, we did like six different visits where they just came and got to know what the the site was, what our suggestions were for uh any response that would be needed. Um and then also kind of identifying at Welssley, they're right next to one of their substation buildings. So, that was more important than any of the equipment that we have. you know, we both are insured, but that equipment was more important. It it would cause a much bigger outage to the town. So, that's the kind of thing that we would be looking to do that type of training. Um, this is on a site that, you know, happens to be near the highway, so there'll be, you know, other mitigation there. There's still a lot of trees around though. So, that's part of the reason why I wanted to ask. And then the other one you mentioned security if needed. So, are you talking about security so there isn't any sort of trespassing or tampering? Is that the kind of security you were talking about or something else? Um, well, we just put security up sometimes depending on the area. Security cameras. Oh, security cameras. Okay, that's really it. So, we can our asset management team um or our 247 knock uh

operation center can have eyes on the system to see if something's going on there. People are there. Um, you know, we have a pretty robust system to make sure people check in and check out of a site, but there's no checkout. That could be, you know, is there an issue? You can check the camera. All right. Thank you, Martin. Well, um, this I'm glad that if the batteries do explode, they're near 495 and not near um the creek. Um there is conservation land on across the creek and and by that zigzag line up at the top left. Um that's conservation land and um I was just wondering if um I mean I I'm involved in another project where this where there's a 40ft setback off of conservation land that's I think a no do not disturb. It's highlands like that. It's relatively dry. So, I'm just wondering I'm just wanting Light and Water to acknowledge that that it's that and and to um work with conservation um about how to treat that border. And one um suggestion is not really part of this program is that I've recently run into a situation where trees were taken down and they needed to be replaced according to conservation and there's a lot of empty space there and I was wondering if you and conservation could work out a deal that for places that can't don't have the room to plant new trees if they could you could have a place that would be designated for people to put replacement trees as and then it would sort of naturalize that side of talking about outside of this. Well, yeah, outside of the perimeter, but on your property in the in the flood plane just you're talking about not not this project specific, just on the property. On the

property just cuz you're here and and we're talking Yeah, it's something we definitely could consider. Um that I I would have to go back and, you know, check with our board on that and and Nick. Um but that's definitely something we could consider in the future. Uh we are working with conservation on this project specifically. Um so that's we're still working through that process as well. Um I don't anticipate trees being removed. Um but if there are no I know conservation has, you know, has policies for replacements and locations, right? But but I I I hear what you're saying and and aside from this this project, I I know where the conservation land is. um to the south of the brook and and yeah, we I acknowledge that and and the other observation I've made is that that Bever Brook does flood quite extensively the two bridges under Mil Road and under 119. Yeah. And I think I mean they act as dams, right? Yeah. Which I'm sure you know. So I I think that's we were trying to um place these outside of the 100 foot flood zones very strategically. So hopefully we're being clear of that but you never know. Right. I understand that. Thank you. Can I ask uh what is your how long have you been doing these and what is your experience with them? I've been part of Citizens since 2018. Prior to setup, I worked at National Grid and I was part of a joint venture between National Grid and Extera. That's where I got my feet wet with battery development. So, I've been doing this since about 2016. Uh, we have three standalone storage projects in operation now along with one micro grid that includes battery energy storage uh down in Connecticut. Um, so those have been in service and in operation since

2021. one in Holio, one in Welssley, and then one down in Philadelphia in the Philadelphia Navyyard. And then we have a micro grid in New Britain, Connecticut with the Daughters of Mary. Okay, Darl, do you have questions? Uh, just a few. I've been I think I've been working through the thing here just to get oriented correctly. So, you're outside of the flood the FEMA flood zone. That's the It comes up, not down from from the piece there. But can you address the there's a the red line about the 100 100 foot and 200 foot riverfront area piece there. You seem to be cutting through the 200 foot area. So if I I'm just trying to there's this there's a very busy chart. Yeah. So the um legend for conservation has it so we show the 100 and 200 foot riverfronts is red. Um we are outside of the 100 foot riverfront area. Um, and we are proposing to reduce impervious service on site overall. Um, so I guess what is your question exactly? I I was just making sure I understood the diagram properly here, but you you said about um fire department access. I I don't it's hard to again this is a very busy chart. So what what is the fire department access down to those batteries? So there is access from um Mill Road onto the site. I guess that'd be to the north north corner of the property. Um, and on the I believe the third sheet, you maybe has a better look at the the area around the proposed enclosure. Um, where you can see we've um proposed grading around there to make it accessible for emergency fire um vehicles or um whatever vehicle that needs to make it around there to be able to access from the whole um enclosure itself. Can can you can you show me where that is on

this diagram? I just see I I these two lines here are are those the axis that you're talking about or those just those just look like they were um so I think you're pointing to the the markers uh there the distances between Yeah, that's what I mean. So I don't I don't see an access so the access is the entire enclosure. There's no like um defined access route if that's what you I believe I believe on page two in the lower corner where those two measurements are. That's the access between the the enclosure the fencing area and the existing buildings. Lauren, go back to page two. Yes. Now in the lower left right hand corner that shaded area is the gravel. Oh okay. So that equipment stays outside the fence. The batteries are first responders. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. 100%. All right. Okay. All right. That that answers that question there. Um, does any of the um produ uh any of the equipment produce sound noise either high pitched or you know the inverters the inverters and the transformers will have some noise associated with them and the battery containers will have air conditioned units but they're they're sound but they're low volume. It's not um the reason why I'm trying to differentiate that our first group of projects are actually walk-in containers which with giant HVAC's on the roof. So those have a lot more sound. These are more you're going to hear something turn on within the container and turn off but the inverters and the transformers will have some some sounds associated with them for sure. And do you have a frequency sound level profile of those to make sure that they don't won't annoy the abutters? Um if I can get that I don't have

anything. Yeah, I think that's something that to make sure we address that um we're not creating something, you know, it's both the low pitch, you know, high frequency stuff and the low frequency stuff that is I can get that but they the neighbor should not hear physically unless there's something wrong and it winding loud and well that would be the alarm going off. Um, but anyway, I think making sure that the sound, you know, that we have something about sound uh in that. And then I guess this would be for not necessarily you directly, but you said improvements to the site. What What's the plan for all of this hodge podge of old buildings? Um because with them all there, it doesn't look like the site's getting cleaned up at all quite so what's the plan there? Right now we are um if you can see the the big garage um sort of in the center of the plan. We are currently uh we've designed a plan and are hiring contractors to redo that um garage building um to sort of give a phase lift. We're going to make some changes internally to it. Um the rest of the buildings on site we don't have a a firm plan for yet. Um, so those those will be just standing as is for now until we come up with a plan for them. So, while you're here, um, from Light and Water, a couple tangential issues to this property have been brought forward. One is when we did our recreation plan a year or two ago, this site was identified as a leadin for kayaking, canoeing on Beaverbrook, which does occur. And I'm just putting that out there. It's not I acknowledge it's not part of this project, but I want you guys to know that there's some expectation that

this site would be used for that. I mean, you certainly can't use the river front for anything else. And then there was another issue about the as the beaverbrook goes through underneath 495 and I don't pretend to know what that's about, but but these are some issue while when this is in play for a site plan, you know, these type of things are going to come up. Okay. Okay. I will take that back definitely. and and likewise I consider the plan for the rest of those buildings in terms of cleaning up the site and uh reducing the impervious Yep. I would like it kind of to see what the overall plan for that is. Yeah, like I said, we don't have that right now. Um so, but once we have it, we'll be sure to share it. That was part of our challenge to get it to where it is because Littleton Electric doesn't they their plan to us was that the buildings that are there are going to stay in place. There is some area right where our site is that has like a want to call it a shed. It's like a half shed that'll get removed. So everything will be clear around there. It's on the 495 side but the buildings themselves the larger buildings that's outside of the project. I understand the scope of your project, but the scope of the site's work, I think we should have a clear plan so that we I'm uncomfortable continually to improve little micro changes not knowing what the overall plan for the site is. Okay? Because it's hard to see that it'll end up with a net improvement versus micro changes that sounded good, but when you look at the context, none of the buildings changed, none of the impervious changed, right? You can't see that from tiny little one project at a time pieces there. So that's more towards Littleton Electric and White Light and Water. Not I understand your scope. So is this project tied to that plan? Because like I said, we don't have

that plan in No, but the but the the point Mr. Baker's making is make a plan. you know, I mean, well, particularly as it's going to start relating to um storm water and any other changes there, having an understanding of what the overall picture and plan is so that we can understand how these small projects are contributing towards that bigger plan. Okay. Uh is is in my mind very significant. Okay. And it may be more of a conservation commission issue also because this is a pretty uh um sensitive site. Okay. and some of your uh the exist you know there's one existing building that projects into the 100 foot buffer um and maybe you should think about how you dispose of those buildings as a negotiating point as you go forward with some of the other development on the uh Mark I had a question about the containers um are they explosive proof or they just regular containers no they they'll have D flag panels If there is ever a a thermal event, it should be limited to a battery rack, a battery module or a battery rack. Um they the containers that we have at Welssley, which is version one of this, this is the next generation. They have D flag and they're explosion proof. Yeah. So they'll if something happens to the batteries, they'll be contained inside the containers. Yep. The issue is the same with an EV is putting the putting the flame out and is it out when you put it out. And so those are those are the those are the things that the industry is addressing and struggling. Well, I would assume if it's inside the container, the it's going to go out very quickly because it's going to be very little oxygen inside there.

Hopefully. Hopefully. I can't say for sure. Have you had any fires in your existence? We have not. Okay. But like I said, we we try to go above and beyond on the safety mitigation portion. I know it sounds like a sales pitch, but um we were putting gas detection in before gas detection was part of the the whole uh requirement. Um so these are going to be fully design engineered and have more than what NFPA 855 requires as we start. So is this a situation where we would want to request a letter from fire department acknowledging the circumstances and their approval? I mean we're yeah they're part of our permitting process. I think when we go through the construction part they there's a Massachusetts has a pretty rigid uh fire narrative requirement that we've done at both Holy Oak and Welsley. So sure they are 100% involved. Yeah. Yeah. Just to make extra sure. Um I have one more question. Sure. So this is really for for Dave and maybe Martin. So um back when parley lumber was changing over before there was some talk about the historical significance of the lumber yard and that there apparently was a sign that said parley lumber. Has anybody seen said sign? Is it anywhere to be found? And if it is, should that really belong with the historical society? Um, I don't know off the top of my head where that might be. Um, I could try and find out though. I'm not sure. But if your guys find it somewhere within those buildings, then I I'm sure that the historical society would probably be absolutely and let's say maybe there's ultimately room for some kind of on this site was XYZ. I mean, I remember someone

telling me it was one of the at the time it closed. It was the oldest continuously operating mill sawmill in the state. Um, so times change, it's no longer there, but you know, you could go and get rough saw and pine and you know, so anyway, thank you for doing that. Yep. Anything else? No. Well, thank you for your presentation. You will be before us with a No, no, this this is the this is the site plan and storm water is not required. It's not okay. So, we've given you um we'd like to um incorporate, you know, lighting. Um what else? noise, some kind of noise representation. Now, it's against 495. So, you know, um I think this is a very appropriate place for this kind of thing. Um and I think it's a very appropriate property for you guys to have acquired. Uh but it would be nice to get some additional community benefit beyond the light and water for conservation, for recreation. Now, we talked a little bit about historic clean up of the site. Well, yes, that's part of whatever plan. I'm sure you'll make use of whatever you can. Um, and uh so that's our feedback and it's not necessarily officially part of this project. Um, so the board should take a vote on the site plan. Do you want to do that this week or do you want a drafted uh draft decision? How do we feel?

I'm willing to approve it with the conditions that we've talked about. Uh do you want to make a motion? Make a motion to approve the site plan with the conditions that we've noted about lighting and noise and possible recreational use of a waterfront. and a letter from the fire department. And a letter from the fire department, but that would I think would happen anyway, but just to make sure. Um, can I hear a second? I'll second that. All in favor? I Good luck. Thank you. Yeah. Let's save some money. Oh, you did good. You stretched that out, too. I say we stretched it out. Um, okay. So, can we do the ANR now? That was scheduled for 7:20. I don't think they know the building for I don't think they know storage. [Music] the advocates for recreation and service. Um so if you recall from town meeting uh town meeting pass article what 14 transfer care and control of uh lot 107B which is on the right hand side of the plan um from select board to conservation commission. And this if you would sign the uh myar and like two copies of the plan that would be helpful. So we have the application uh signed by town administrator and uh the ANR plan from the engineer and a recommendation

and request from the um conservation commission to uh move this forward. [Music] That's it. One, four pages, right? Um, yeah. One of them's Miler, I hope. The back one. Yeah, the back one. [Music] Is there going to be access to this lands [Music] down to the pond or I don't know. Um I haven't heard any of the discussions about how it be would be used. Um I know that the conservation commission has had a lot of active plans on how to utilize the various properties but not part of that conversation. You can't you know use the comm. Yeah. It wouldn't be an activity that welcomes residents to the edge of the pond. Recommend you take a vote on it. Pardon? I would recommend a vote. A motion to approve approve the ANR of lot 107A on Nog Hill Road. So moved. Second. All in favor? I I Okay. Um, while we're on there, just think, why are they cutting the trees down? The apple trees. Um, uh, apple tree light. [Music]

That's That's what this Well, how come some and not all of them? um those that have contracted the blight disease, those have to be removed or it will spread even further. So you say so it's just funny that they're all like one whole swap in. Yeah. Yep. And so you'll know um if you read Cooper's uh newsletter about the the new um operator oper Yeah. Thank you. the new operator um for this portion that was leased um that the town leased to I'm not even remembering the name. Bransfield. Bransfield. Yeah. There's actually somebody who's going to try to restore the orchard. Um no. Um Bransfield operations um grows um trees in containers for sale. So uses containers on site and um does irrigation within those containers and then eventually sells the the So we bought some of the land there just to grow trees. Mhm. Yeah. Yeah. Leased a lot of the um a lot of the APR property to this operation. Bro, we just collect it. What kind of trays? You need the top. Uhuh. Top of a pen. Oh, she has. What kind of trays? Um, there's a long list. Yeah. So, it's a nursery operation. Oh, yeah. [Music] Um, know that the orchard working group spent a lot of time developing the proposal and reviewing them and choosing this operator. We still have some time before the scheduled

7:30 hearing. Uh Mark, you were on the working group, weren't you, about the orchard? A little bit. A little bit the end. What at what at how did we end up? I mean, we have an operator who's essentially going to So, Bransfield Tree Company, we signed a lease with them in February, March time frame. They're growing. They're ready to come in. They're leasing all of the APR land which is 40 some acres. Um they're going to be growing their main business is going to be growing trees in pots. They're also going to have some fruit trees, some blueberries, that type of thing, paw paws and that. So, um going to take you know a couple years for them to be fully operational on on a lot of those things. Great. They're also leasing the upper barn but not the lower barn or the house. So, and what do we think is going to happen to the parcel 107B? It's general municipal. We haven't really talked about doing anything with it. What about the house? We're going to at some point we're going to do something with the house. Store it and change let it sit there. You can't sell it though, can you? Not without meeting up. [Music] It's uh very expensive for the town to rehabilitate it. So, we'll be looking to do something probably in November or at the October time meeting or the following May. It hasn't been decided yet. Well, thank you for all your work on that. Okay, we have uh 12 minutes. Uh and since this is a noticed hearing,

we can't uh we you can't start um unless Tom you you could you determined you could do your presentation about the agricultural use laws uh outside of the hearing or before the hearing starts. I know we should do I serve at your pleasure. Um but it wouldn't be part of the hearing. Yeah. Well, I think we should we should tie it up here. Okay. I'd like to actually let them present and then Yeah. Okay. That's okay with you. We're meeting July 9th. Uh July 10th. Everybody that good for everybody? I think we looked at that. It's a Thursday. The second Thursday [Music] any update as to when they're going to start paving the roads at the park? Probably don't know that. Oh, I'm not part of those discussions. That's not That's between [Music] right meets us. I'm sure they're waiting till schools. DPW just posted their street repair their street. What about Foster Street? How about that? is moving forward along. Yeah, I can tell you. Yeah, it's

closed. I have to I have to I can't ride my bike up the hill. I have to go around. Um when do they think they're going to put the sidewalk by the fall? Seen the construction schedule on that? There was so much work to be done with all the utilities and the full depth reconstruction and all the legs we take out of the widening. You notice they're finishing the sewer, you know, toward medical. Oh, yeah. But they got to go to that page. Should have actually he probably doesn't know anything about that. [Music] Yeah. Nothing. Strength and numbers report that I was talking about earlier that was going to focus on for the July newsletters. Yeah, this is just is the graphics from that. Um, so I can do a quick comparison to this report from last year's. Um, we're growing just a little bit slower in this 11-year period than the if you were back one year. Um, let's see. the housing cost burden, the rental burden in Littleton, which is about the parking off to the side tan color remains extremely high. Yeah. Um we built a few more structures um housing units

since uh 2000 um you know with the extra year compared to last year. And one thing I did notice is uh the number of people employed in Littleton uh total um which is this same here average monthly employment is down just a little bit from uh a year ago. So but the number of business establishments is actually up. [Music] So, um, Framingham State works with the 495 Metro West Partnership on gathering statistical information and preparing all of these reports for each community in the region. I just think it's it's it's exciting. It's exciting to me when it comes out. Gives us a snapshot with some good graphics, interesting graphics. Did we continue these ones? Oh, yeah. Actually, you Oh, yes, we Thank you. Thank you, Cooper. Um, we, uh, so on continuing. Uh, I'd like a motion to continue the public hearing for Harvard Avenue lots one and two storm water permit. Do I have a motion? Some second. All in favor? I. So that'll be continued to the meeting of June July 10th. And we've got a suggested time of 7:30. 7:30. Okay. The uh item three, continue public hearing for 64 Beaverbrook Road, Storm Roder Review. Um do I can I have a motion to continue? So move second. All

in favor? I I So that one will be continued till Thursday, July 10th at 7:50. We have something going on before this. Well, we'll have a continuation of this hearing, and this update, right? Sewer update from I don't know. I'd move it. I'd move it and probably national thread. I'd tighten it up because in July to be sitting here twiddling our thumbs. We're important people. No, it's we've got a date certain anyway. We'll we'll work on this schedule. Y This would be interesting. [Music] [Music] [Music]

[Music] know what's going on. So, Were you you're I think it was a little bit before your time, but when you look at the the 37% 1959 or earlier, I mean, were you aware of a lot of building going on? We historically early on a thousand people every 10 years like like after the war. Yeah. No, even even when we first got it when I was first on the plane, it was like we only grew a thousand people every 10 years. Well, it hasn't really picked up. It hasn't. Still this Littleton doesn't have a lot of When I When I first moved here, it was like almost seemed like it was was more than seven between seven and 8,000 and now it's 10,000. No, it's and Dian Corey seems to say that you hear different numbers, but it's taken 30 years. So, a thousand people a year. Yeah. Every 10 years. That's the way we s 54 was like the average number of building permits when we first when I was first on the board. That's not a lot of houses. We had no apartments allowed, you know, so you got very little. Maybe and we haven't really had sales office. Yeah. Well, maybe I don't know. Well, yeah, but that's about it. That's where our growth is going to be. There's not a lot. Yeah, because it seems, you know, the 20 epic temples. It's going to be interesting to see what happens with this ceiling of this project. He he hasn't solved it. He said people just scratch their head and go like,

"Why would I?" What's the How big like 1500 ft is above? Well, I mean, it's a like 3,000 So the one to the No, no, no. No, it's like 900, but I mean it's part of So it raises the cost. So he's really bummed. I would do it as if you already had a house and you wanted to add like a garage and put something above it as an income producer. That's probably the only thing I could see. Yeah, but then you have to deal with I know. Well, I could move both. My wife could stay at home. Have you talked to M and Jen? I got this sort of runaround between the two of them. She's very easy to deal with. He's a pain in the ass. He was like, you know, we should, you know, get together and blah blah blah since December. And then I said, I can't do it. And then I Are you going to Booth Bay? Are you going up to I haven't heard from him. I will if you He bought He's supposed to That's what I did. No, they've already done. Oh, they're already done. He closed, I think, yesterday. Well, they that was part of the selling this one. Oh, yeah. Z 10:31 exchange. Yeah. Anyway, okay. It's now 7:30. Uh we're here to open uh the public hearing on 600 Great Road, commonly known as the Garry's Farmstand site, an Acroer District special permit and site plan review. Uh we'll open with a presentation from the applicant. We have our town council here to give us a tutorial on agriculture use law. Uh so with that,

good evening uh Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Thank you for uh having us tonight. Uh for the record, my name is Adam Costa. I'm an attorney with a firm of me, Tyler and Costa with offices in Newport, Milis and New Bedford. Uh representing uh the applicant before you, Matthew Kazoski, and specifically Tender Crop Farm. Um, as was indicated in the introduction, this is a site that I think you're probably all familiar with. Uh, been historically known as the car's farm stand site. Um, we began our process of uh, due diligence a few months back and uh, communicating with your town staff and preparing to make applications. Um, we viewed the use of the site as an agricultural use. Agricultural uses, as I suspect you all know, are subject to certain protections under Massachusetts state law. specifically what's often referred to as the do amendment chapter 48 section 3. It provides protection for uh historic and traditional agricultural uses. Also provides separate protection for farm stands uh in this district. Also explicitly allows green houses which is an additional use uh that has historically been made at this site and is proposed to continue to occur in the future. Um based upon the communications we have with staff we were directed to make the applications that are that are before you tonight. one application for site plan review and a second application or related application for a special permit because the site is located in the town's aquifer protection overlay district. Um it is our position that as an agricultural use and I'm I suspect we'll get into this a bit as we dig into the substance of the application. Um the stat the language of the statute is specifically that agricultural uses can't be prohibited, unreasonably regulated or subject to a special permit. And there's actually ensuing case law um that suggests that they also can't be subject even to site plan review. What they can be subject to is they can be subject to some sort of a municipal review process that allows for reasonable regulation of the use. Um in this case, we're viewing these

applications as the attempt by the planning board to reasonably regulate the use. And we're we're certainly welcome to subject ourselves to that regulation. Uh we think we've put a lot of effort into the proposal that will go before you tonight. Uh that'll be presented shortly. Um, and I think you'll see that it uh offers a number of improvements to the site. Um, but also some changes to the site from the historic use that was made by by Gary's farm stand. Um, Steve Sawyer um and Eileen Graph, consultants on the project are both here with me tonight as well. I'm going to make the introductory remarks. I'm then going to yield the floor to them to present the plans um and answer any questions that board members may have, unless you prefer to hold your questions until the end. And then I'll attempt to sort of address uh in summary form. I'm not going to walk through uh sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph the materials that you've presumably read. Uh but I'll present in summary format why we believe this project and this plan satisfies your site plan review criteria as well as the standards for the issuance of a special permit in the aquifer protection overlay district. So with that uh the next slide uh simply says some of what I've just stated to you. This is a proposal for a redevelopment of a site that is located both in the residence district and the aquifer protection overlay district. Uh situated on the site today is uh or are existing green houses as well as a retail building. There's also a hot dog stand and a food truck that have been on the property for some time as well. Uh the next uh several slides are going to uh show you the sky uh and I think in a moment show you different uh photographs of the site that were taken um just a few weeks ago. So obviously the site uh is nonoperational at the time. Um it was a largely a seasonal operation anyway, but um will not be operational moving forward, hence the the anticipated sale of the property and reuse of the property. Um, as we scale these down, uh, you'll see, I think there's one, maybe one or two before this.

There we go. So, that's the reference that I had made, as you know, to the existing retail building. That's the exterior shown from the front. Here we go. Uh next photograph just shows I think a different angle as we saw a moment ago of that same retail building. These are some of the green houses uh located on the site today. Um you can see there's also a substantial amount of pavement on the site as well. Next photograph, different angle of the retail building uh from the side. Next photograph will show you uh sort of as if you spun around uh 180 degrees from the photograph you just saw. different angle of that same retail building. Next photograph shows uh the back of the retail building as well as uh one of the the multiple green houses on the site. Again, some additional uh pavement on the site that exists today. Uh next photograph, different angle of that same building. Next photograph, a closer up version uh of the photograph you saw a moment ago showing that greenhouse at the corner of the retail building. Um, you can see that the green houses are in a general state of disrepair today. Next photograph. Again, just another photo of the greenhouse. Uh, there's a another greenhouse located adjacent to the retail building, I think. Here we go. So now you can see uh the greenhouse, but you can also see um the the restaurant that was referred to, the food truck that was referred to uh sort of on the right side of the photograph there looking kind of at the back or the side of that that truck. We're going to see a different angle in a moment. Uh another view of green houses uh with the the pavement uh leading up to them. Uh this photograph shows the interior of the green houses as they exist today. just uh portions of the site. Um you can

see there's areas that are fairly overgrown today. Uh here we've got um the hot dog um stand as we referred to it in the materials that we submitted. Uh there's also a woodshed um advertising um firewood um as you can see there to the left of the of the hot dog stand. There's also a couple of those uh those uh clothing and and book donation um bins on the site as well. Um and the next photograph is going to show you, I think, yes, just a different angle of that hot dog stand, but you can see there are a couple of sheds that are being offered. Uh if you zoom, you don't have to, but if you were to zoom in, you can see there's actually signage on the sheds indicating that it's advertising the sale of sheds um from the site. If you I think there's a phone number to call. You can also see that there's a couple of picnic tables on the site for individuals to to sit and and and eat if they choose to do so. I think that may be the last photograph. It is. So, um the next several uh pages of the of the presentation are showing existing conditions plans, a zoning plan that is going to identify uh the standard or or status of zoning compliance today um as compared to zoning compliance um as the project is proposed. uh and then a full uh development plan that is going to identify all the particulars in terms of site design. So with that uh I'm going to yield the floor to to my consultants who can address these plans uh in a generic sense and again I will defer to you Mr. Chairman as to whether the board wishes to ask questions about the site as the site plans are being presented or whether you'd prefer to hear from me on uh the the site plan review standards and special permit criteria first and then open it up to the board for questions. I leave that leave that to you. I think we'd like and for the benefit of the people here to see the whole presentation and then we can talk about how it fits into the site plan review. Sure, we'd be happy to do that.

Good evening. Uh my name is Steve Sor with Millennium Engineering, Inc. Um this is the existing uh conditions plan which was uh created it was uh surveyed and created by another company winter GEC uh is the licensed survey on the project. So this plan depicts the the overall existing condition showing the locations of the the uh green houses in the retail building along there's some bins for storage of aggregate material uh in at the left lower corner of the parking lot. the location of the hot dog stand in the upper left area of the uh parking lot. Um and also there's the general curb. There's a large curb cut on Great Road which is a state layout and a large open curd cut on Lawrence Street. I think we'll jump to the zoning plan. Uh so the zoning plan shows the addition uh the addition to the additions to the to the site. So you see in the on the right side of the right side of the plan there's the existing retail building with the canopy is going to remain in place. Um the darker brown is the addition uh building addition that's going to basically displace two green houses. And then in front uh against the parking lot there is going to be a new greenhouse uh that's going to displace the third that the third that third greenhouse will be demolished with a new greenhouse proposed the the bins actually on the site plan. Uh at this point let's jump to the site plan. So, here shows the new uh site layout. Uh right now, there's no striping out there. Uh as part of the renovation uh redevelopment, we're proposing to stripe the parking lot to give some formal uh formal layout for the parking so you can park more efficiently. Also,

you can see we provided handicap parking. uh there's no handicap parking, so we provided the required amount of handicap parking uh right up against the retail building. Uh finally, there's a new we're going to provide a new uh loading dock at the bottom uh of the bottom of the building. Uh the access to that will be off of Lawrence Lawrence Street. So, the trucks would enter, pull forward, and then back down uh into the loading dock area where Protos would be unloaded. Uh and from there the truck would exit would pull through and off and and circulate through the parking lot and then out onto Great Road uh Route 119 as far as the new truck uh circulation. Uh the other item this uh with this is we'll be proposing a new septic system. Uh you can see that in the open field area there's a a rectangle there. That's where the proposed leeching field is. We haven't formally designed the the system itself yet. uh just for the fact we would wait to get through the planning board process before we submit with the board of health. One thing we did do just to confirm the viability of the septic is complete test pits on site. Uh we completed the required test pits for the design of a new system. This the soils we found were excellent. Uh sand and gravel uh they excavated down to 11 ft with no groundwater uh no apparent groundwater encountered. So, it's optimal for a uh proposed septic system. Uh we need to work through the proposed flow based on a um bas depending on the use. It's probably going to be somewhere around 1,000 gallons per day. We're thinking uh that can easy easily be accommodated. Uh one item is the part of the new building. There's going to be a butchery uh butchery added uh in the well actually it's not a butchery, but the sale of meats. It won't be butchered

there, but it'll be u a a sale of their produce uh which is homegrown meats. Uh as part of that, there's there'd be floor drains and such. So with that, you'd need pre-treatment prior to disposing the so the runoff or the sanitary flow to the septic system. So there would be a grease trap involved with that. So you'll see just off the building, you'll see there's two small rectangles. Uh one being the grease trap and one being the uh standard septic tank for uh for standard uh septic flow. And then finally, I guess on this well, one thing on u on this plan, you'll see there's a bunch of uh circles along the south property line to the residents of the south. The proposal is to provide a upper body hedge uh for screening uh that property from the loading dock in the facility. And then finally, the uh dumpster would be relocated. You can see there's a shaded triangle. It's roughly where the dumpster is now, but it would be uh located just at the entry uh off the entry on in um off of Lawrence. And that uh dumpster would be enclosed. there' be a full enclosure, solid enclosure to screen that uh from Lawrence Street. And uh that should do it. Actually, let's go to the next slide, please. So as part of um to adhere to the aquifer protection district, one thing that we are doing here is for the building uh we're proposing uh additional um infiltration chambers. So we're going to capture and infiltrate uh storm water from the roof to recharge groundwater. That's one of the important aspects of the aquifer protection district. And

then the other item uh that we'll be doing is that entire the shaded area is the new pavement. That uh shaded area will now be that entire area will be captured uh captured through a drain at the bottom of the loading dock. One one item that's a little bit tricky here is that the loading dock we we end up dropping the elevation there. So the the grade is about 4 ft below the floor. So they have a level a level area for unloading of produce uh at the loading dock that creates somewhat of a a hole or a swimming pool down there. So the water has nowhere to go. So we capture that in a in a trench drain and then we pass it through. One of the important items of the aqua protection is to pre-treat the water and uh pre-treat the water. So we're going to implement a they call it a water quality unit. It's a high-tech treatment device um that will settle all the solids, settles the solids out and floats any oils and such out so you have clean water uh discharging to a infiltration basin. So you'll see there's a rectangle just south or just below the loading dock and that's a large concrete uh infiltration basin. And one thing that we had to do with this where the water has nowhere to go is we had to oversize it. Um, this has to hold and infiltrate 100% of a 100red-year event um and infiltrate it back into the ground which is a much higher standard that is usually provided for storm water. But uh due to the location of this with no no opportunity to daylight or for any overflow to run we had to uh handle the storm water in that manner. Uh I think that that basically covers it. Um as far as the you know going back to lock coverages uh in the zoning table uh I believe the the

lock coverage is in compliance. It's I think on the first sheet there. I don't know if you can zoom into the table. up in the upper right. There we go. Um, you know, this so the site has a required it it has a required frontage, required area. It meets the setbacks. All the setbacks. The lock coverage you can see currently is uh what is that? Let me zoom in a little more. I haven't had it committed to memory. Black coverage existing 52.5 proposed 60. There we go. Yeah. So allowed is 60. We have 52.5 and then the proposed is 55. Uh one item of note here on this zoning plan was um that this is provided by the surveyor and he you'll note that he didn't actually when I I had completed the design plans after he completed this plan. So we didn't pick up the loading dock but so but that I added I calculated what it would be to add that pavement. That's one thing that Littleton has which is a little different than other towns is they include uh they include pavement and lot coverage. Some towns it's just building but Littleton includes the pavement. So the actual including the loading dock it's bumped to 59%. So we're still under the we're still under the 60%. And then as far as building height, uh 32 feet is allowed. The existing is 16.3 and then the proposed is 29.5. So all within the zoning regulations. So with that, the the site as the proposed site as designed complies with with the little Little Littleton zoning rigs. And before Eileen Graph speaks, I just want to add there there is one um one

clarification or correction I'll make, which is that everything we're proposing as new construction uh complies with your current zoning bylaw standards, dimensional standards and otherwise. Uh the existing building is according to that plan and I'm I won't make make you m to zoom in again, but you can see it is marked on the plan that's on the screen right now. the existing setback is 28.7 feet from the from the right ofway from the great road right ofway and it's required to be 30 feet. So that that does not meet the front yard side setback but that's not a consequence of anything we're doing on the site that's the existing structure that's on the site. Um so whether you want to say that it's grandfathered by virtue of it existing and us not extending that or simply recognize this as an agricultural use in which case you have the flexibility to vary those requirements anyway. Uh doesn't really matter. Um but we're not doing anything to either increase uh or I guess decrease that setback uh or increase the extent of encroachment into that setback or even extend the setback a further distance along that same line. Uh you can see from this plan here that other than uh general interior renovations. We're not making any changes to the existing structure. the entire proposed addition to that structure and the green houses that are shown and shaded sort of that that golden color here. Um those will all comply with your your zoning setback requirements. And with that, I'll hand it over to to Eileen. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Um I graph. So if we could actually just go one more slide, I'll help um convey the architectural changes proposed. And as already mentioned that original the existing building is is the long structure on the right side of that site plan. And now if we go to the first architectural drawing we can see that right there. Awesome. Uh if we could go to the plan first and then or just to help orient. So in this

plan um what we're looking at is on the left side of the drawing is the existing building. you could somewhat see a layout of a grid in that building to help to help sort of uh denote where the existing building is. Um but then it's got that wraparound covered porch. And so that existing structure is staying. We're we have no changes involved there other than renovating within. And there would be some um window fenestrations and door openings that that would be changing and and probably sprucing up of some of the siding, but as a form that structure is is pretty much staying intact. And to the right of that, towards the rear is our addition. So, we're we're adding on to to help uh supplement the functions within this um within the building, extending some of the retail space, adding the function of the bakery, the butchery, um adding the refrigeration needs that that they have um in this facility, and then also uh supporting uh the employees that are there. So, um uh so break rooms, etc. Um all on the back side there um on the back right is where top right is where you would see the you would have the uh loading dock um as described by Steve earlier. So that's the area where the trucks will um go down a slight ramp um so that the produce can be um um um unloaded at the same level as the building. Um so that's the intent there. um in the dash line towards the street that's showing the the general footprint of where the new green houses would go. Um and then if we go to the next slide we can take a look at what this building looks like. So on the top right on top drawing you will see the original structure again that gable um um structure with the covered porch is the existing building and we're propo our proposal to the right of that is the

addition um the the roof line of the addition uh falls below the the what exists today. So so the original structure is still the tallest uh with its ridge and everything else proposed is below that. It's a one-story structure. Uh we proposed to do architectural shingles on the roof. Uh the siding on this building would be a barn board uh uh board and batten look. Um uh similar to what uh the owner Matt has done in his other um farm stands. Um and then windows likewise would be you know divided lights and very traditional in its look um and a transom level to let the light in but provide uh more function on the interior. Um again I mentioned there's some changes to places of entry for better flow. Um but but otherwise the structure the original structure as mentioned is staying intact. Um and and to note um generally for so say square footage in case uh that's of of question the existing structure in footprint is about 4,32 in square ft and what we're adding is about 9,240 square ft. And again, this is to help uh the the function of the farm stand um to what uh Matt really knows um currently in the in the three in the three properties that he has right now and how it can best function. So, he's using those as models and that's what's guiding us to know how much uh he he want he needs to add on. And with that, I will h happy to answer questions at the end, but I will pass it back to Adam. Uh thank you Eileen. So if we go to the next slide, I just have a few more. Um these are more text than um than plans and drawings just meant to sort of

summarize for you uh and for the public who might be in attendance um what we've already stated in the written narrative submitt that uh that we made uh to the board uh with our with our formal application. So um your site plan review criteria we've identified them uh by letter as they identified in your in your bylaw. Um the first here is that internal circulation and egress are such that traffic safety is protected and access via minor streets servicing single family homes is minimized. Again we believe that this proposal as was just described to you improves the general layout of the site. Um today the site does not have marked parking spaces. It's sort of a free-for-all with a fair amount of pavement. Um, we've tried to improve that overall layout. Uh, provide for uh line parking spaces. Um, you know, one thing we we talked already and I suspect we'll talk more about imperous surface coverage. Uh, the requirements of your bylaw, what exists today, what is proposed, and as was just stated, we are proposing to increase um that coverage, that lot coverage in so far as Littleton incorporates pavement into that calculation. Um we have we have flexibility and so we can certainly entertain a discussion about attempting to further reduce that coverage number through for example the use of gravel in lie of pavement or the use of permeable pavers. We are already incorporating and I think it's referenced in one of these criteria or the responses to one of these criteria. We're already incorporating a strip that surrounds the building. I think it's a 5 foot wide strip um of um permeable pavers. uh we could extend the extent of those permeable pavers or again we could use a more per permeable surface. Uh we think that the the relatively minor increase from the 52.5% to a number closer to 60% 59 and change um uh is is uh minimal but again we have some flexibility within the site to make adjustments if necessary. Um site plan

review criteria B is uh visibility of parking areas from public ways and residences are minimized and lighting of these areas avoids glare on adjoining properties. We've uh designed this site to keep the addition away from Great Road Lauren Street to keep it more central to uh to the site and similarly we've tried to associate parking uh in the immediate vicinity of the proposed farm stand. Um, as you saw, we've proposed some screening, and I guess this gets into criterion C, major topographic changes and removal of existing trees shall be minimized. We are minimizing vegetation disturbance. U, we're making some topographical changes that we think improve the site. Uh, we have proposed that row of arrivite along the westerly property line. Um, you know, we've attempted to work into our presentation tonight some responses to the feedback that we've received, um, particularly in the few letters that the board has received from neighbors. Uh we haven't addressed every one of those comments. We we are certainly prepared to do so tonight. Um but I saw one of the comments for example and I think it spoke to this westerly prop property line was a request for a fence. Um generally when we design certainly something of an agricultural nature uh in a more suburban or rural community, we prefer to use live screening vegetation as opposed to to to fences. And my experience over the past 20 years is that generally that's what neighbors prefer as well. But it's not a one-sizefits-all. Some neighbors would prefer to have a fence and we have flexibility there if we um we need to discuss alternatives for example to the row of arborite but we felt that that would provide uh the best visual screening uh of the site from that property. Uh next slide. So criterion D adequate access to each structure for fire and service equipment is provided. Again we're improving the layout and there will be adequate access surrounding the site. there is sufficient area uh site plan review criterion E utilities and drainage in the vicinity uh are um are or will be made to be adequate based upon functional standards of your subdivision

rules and regulations. Uh we have submitted a drainage site plan. You just got a preview as to to what that shows. Uh runoff will be treated and infiltrated and as I mentioned, we've got this ban surrounding the property of permeable pavers that will further help uh to infiltrate uh storm water. Uh and then lastly, item F in your site plan review criteria, methods of storm water control and treatment, uh as outlined in your low impact design and best management practices manual are utilized. And you can see there, uh we're collecting, treating, and infiltrating new paved areas. We're removing a portion of the existing pavement and replacing it with those permeable pavers I just referenced. Uh we're directing some of the clean roof roof runoff uh to infiltration chambers and we're making uh other drainage improvements to enhance groundwater recharge throughout the property. Uh the next slide addresses your uh your parking requirements. Um again uh this first bullet just highlights the fact that it's an agricultural use and so the parking requirements need to be complied with uh in a reasonable fashion. We are proposing 71 parking spaces that will be marked in a manner that they are not today. U we believe that that'll be sufficient for the demand. And again, we're basing that off of and our client is basing that off of uh having operated for many years now uh three other locations of Tender Crop Farm. Um and uh based on that experience, understanding the the number of parking spaces that are generally necessary to handle both routine and peak demands. Um, and then the applicant is proposing, as I said, to to stripe the parking spaces uh to improve uh not just the layout, but the overall flow and maneuverability of vehicles on the property. Uh, then we get uh lastly to your aquifer protection overlay district special permit where you've got a series of uh criteria. I think there's uh five criteria in in in total. The fifth one is sort of multifaceted. Uh the first requires us to list all all chemicals,

pesticides, fuels, etc. that would be toxic or qualify as hazardous materials as that term is defined in state law. Um that's not particularly applicable. We're not using hazardous materials other than routine amounts that would be used to to fuel for example tractor that might be on the site. Um to the extent that there is going to be there are going to be herbicides and pesticides used on the site in connection with uh the uh farming operations, those will comply in full with the with the uh the state law concerning the the the pesticide control act uh concerning the their their use. Um item two, a description of potentially toxic or hazardous waste. Uh same same deal. We're not generating any toxic or hazardous waste. Um and so we don't intend to have to store any and then subsequently dispose of it. Um, criterion three, evidence of approval by the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering or DP of any industrial waste treatment or disposal systems and of any wastewater treatment system over a capacity of 15,000 gallons per day that won't be applicable to this project. Uh, same standard with respect to underground storage of toxic or hazardous materials, which is not a component of this project. Um, analysis by a qualified engineer. Again, we've provided stamped plans by a registered professional engineer in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Uh, continuing on the next slide, uh, these are the special permit criteria, your general criteria for any special permit in the town of Littleton, be it an aquifer protection overlay district special permit or otherwise. The standard uh says that special permits shall only be granted if there is no significant nuisance, hazard or congestion created and so long as there will be no substantial harm to the neighborhood or derriagation from the intent of this chapter. That language mirrors in large part the standard in chapter 48 section 9. Uh again, we don't believe there will be any significant nuisance, hazard or congestion created by this proposal. Uh we think it's a general overall improvement to the site. Um and we uh as stated believe that it satisfies uh the zoning bylaw and to the

extent that there are deviations from those requirements it complies with the do amendments protection of agricultural uses and farm stands. Um and then finally uh revitalizes an agricultural an agricultural use um and the production and sale of farm products will comply with state statute. So, uh, for these reasons, we are before you again requesting both site plan approval and a special permit for park development in the aquifer protection overlay district. Um, we tried to limit the length of our presentation. I know that wasn't especially short. Um, but again, we didn't work in answers proactively to every question that we've seen in advance so far. Uh but we're happy to address anything um that that the board may ask of us that the public may ask of us whether it be relative to the agricultural uses of the site or specific to the design layout and anticipated operation of the site. So we we would have two um separate but intertwined sets of questions about the agro agricultural use and the actual site plan. four. Do we want to ask questions now or wait or have Tom do his presentation and ask them? Okay, Tom, we've asked our town council to be here uh who has reviewed case law and the I I should explain there's the actual law and then there's the case law as develops over time when people bring um challenges to the law and so we are going to have Tom talk to us about this universe of law relating to agricultural use. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh members of the board, Tom Harrington, Town Council, nice to see you all. So, we know that

for your purposes, you're here to do site plan review and to uh review a application for the Aqua Overlay special perm. That's what's before the board tonight. I also understand however that the agricultural component um of this project has raised a number of questions. So I'm going to do my best to just address the agricultural component. I think it's important to understand that once this board does its work and assuming uh approvals are issued, it would then go to the building inspector. the building inspector would issue the building permits for the for the projects and the the buildings on site that that the applicant would like to um construct. As part of that, the building inspector and I don't want to I want to be careful because he has not done his analysis yet. I don't I don't want to do his analysis for him and I don't want to put him in a corner. But I will tell you he's going to do kind of a three-part analysis. Is this project allowed under the zoning bylaw? That's one. And we do know that um agricultural is allowed in a resident's district in Littleton and in this residence district in Littleton. And that would include farms and green houses. So in so far as what we see would fall under the definition or or you know kind of the the general definition of farms and green houses, he would likely approve it. If he sees something different, his next level of analysis would be is this a pre-existing non-conforming use? So has the applicant secured the right to do what's on site because it's already been done? Again, I'm not here to do his job for him. I want to leave that

analysis to him. But that would be his second level. His third level under the situation where maybe he doesn't reach an affirmative conclusion on those one or two of those questions would be to look to the Dover amendment. The Dover amendment tells us that the town cannot unreasonably regulate agricultural uses uh in its bylaw. And it has various definitions. And I think and I understand that I think some of the concern in town is is this farm stand going to kind of dwarf the agricultural use on the property? And in response to that, I'd say assuming I'm not doing the building inspector's analysis for him, but assuming he issues the permits, um I think the the comfort we take is from the Dover amendment. And the Dover amendment regulates what can be sold on site. And it boils down to this. um from June to September or during the harvest season if otherwise applicable, the primary cop crops raised on the land account for 25% of the sales either volume or gross sales or and this ore I'm about to give you is what I understand the applicant will be relying on or if not measured seasonally at least 25% of the annual sales either volume or gross sales dollars are of crops raised on the land and at least an additional 50% of the crops sold are raised on other land in Massachusetts. Moving on, the land must also be at least 5 acres or it must be at least 2

acres and generate at least $1,000 per acre in gross sales dollars on land not zoned for agriculture. So in looking at this, I think the the kind of there's the component that I think matters here is the ongoing regulation of the operation, right? It's if the building inspector decides that this is allowed, it still needs to live within the strictures of the Dover amendment. So that's going to mean, and I'm going to use some kind of gross examples here, right? But that's going to mean that at the end of the year when they tally up their sales, 25% of those sales must be of produce grown on the land. And an additional 50% of their um of their yearly income must be from crops that are raised in on other land in Massachusetts. Right? So, they're either going to show us by dollars that 25% of the dollars we made were were based on products grown right here on the land and 50% were grown on other farms in Massachusetts. or there's a volutric measurement. And so I'm going to use a gross example here. And that example is if there were four aisles in this farmstand, one aisle would be dedicated to produce grown on the land. Two aisles would be dedicated to produce grown on other farms in Massachusetts. And then there's the fourth aisle. So that's that's general examples of the um kind of the volume way of looking at things and the dollar way of looking at things. That's that's what the law tells us when

someone comes forward with an agricultural use. Those are the controls we have. Littleton does allow agriculture as a matter of right in this district and is also a right to farm town. So we have that built into our zoning bylaw. I'm going to stop here, answer any questions you have or any questions that the the um uh the audience has or we can have Adam come back up. But I think it really boils down to that. That's what we're looking at here. So, let me So, when you say the land, you're talking about the site, man. The site. So, they have to generate 25% of their sales on site, correct? And what is this June to September thing? So that's that that's in the that's in the Dover amendment. I don't want to focus on it because it's my understanding that they're really going to rely on the second part of that, but it's a two-part. It's a um the do amendment says that during the months of June, July, August and September um of each year or during the harvest season of the primary crops raised on the land the owner or leie 25% of such products for sale based on either gross sales dollars or volume have been produced by the owner or leie on the land on which the facil facility is located or and then the ore is what we discussed the 25 and 50% component and I believe that's what they're going to rely on for Hannah questions. I mean understanding that this is complicated and we might be going back and forth. So I actually have a question that I would like um town council to to address in terms of what our role is, you know, in terms of a site review and what we can and cannot do under the rules of a site review. So that it's difficult to speak in a

volume. It would be easier if you could identify what you would like to do under site plan. I know you've done many site plans in the past. So I think you have a pretty good idea of how site plan works, right? Um I think I'm doing it more so for our audience and so from that standpoint, you know, what is it that that we as a planning board can do within a site review? Right. We can Right. So, I think I think um Attorney Costa had a slide that spelled out the bylaw um requirements for site plan. If we want to put that back up, it's uh I looked at his slide. I think it's accurate. So, so I think I I think that um what Anna is getting at is that the actual determination of use is not something that we determine. However, it is seem related in the sense that one of the things about site plan is the size of the building, the number of parking spots, which goes back to, you know, the activities in the um thing. So, how I have a I have a question related to the same thing that may be a little pointed. I think one of the terms that I heard during the presentation uh I don't think you touched on it was that we couldn't impose unreasonable regulation. What what become what are the parameters that start defining unreasonable uh there doubling the size of the building adding 100 more parking spot you know what what types of parameters are we talking about before that we hit that metric of unreasonable I think that ties together these questions that we're we're we're talking this might be something to you know understand a little more what the applicant wants to do through your question and answer process and understanding what you want a little more. I I can't give you a number. I

can't give you a metric. It's it's very much um you know it's very case law based. So we need to understand what your concerns are and then we can respond with are they concerns that we can cover under site plan review or are they beyond the scope. So, you know, since I still have the floor, I believe the the number one question was raised. I I appreciate your example of this aisle is for what's grown here. These two aisles grown elsewhere in Massachusetts and the fourth aisle, who knows? But how will we know if 25% of it is actually produced on site? How are we going to know? What is a reasonable manner for us to that? That's a zoning determination. That'll be for the building inspector to determine how how he wants to do that analysis in conjunction with with how the applicant wants to respond to that. But the law is clear that they need to demonstrate 25% of the crops are grown on site either by volume or sale and 50% come from farms in Massachusetts. So that's 75%. How we get there is still an open question and and is is part of a um kind of an ongoing analysis that the building inspector could do. But do you mind if I jump on to your question for a second? So you you use the volume example, but you know my I had a slightly different interpretation when I read volume because some products are sold by volume, right? And I don't know that there's a particularly good definition of volume, right? You know, um, cubic yards of soil, cubic yards of grain, things like that. But I I imagine that the types of products they're selling there are more by unit or by weight of which the volume doesn't really doesn't mesh up uh there. So is is I guess which way would we be you know

trying to interpret that uh there since it's not a volume based products that I they haven't said what they're selling but I'm assuming they're selling farm stand type vegetables and stuff and the meat would be by weight not volume uh things like that. So to me it's leaning that the volume ex analogy you use probably is not applicable to this this so again and I and respectfully that's not for this board to determine that's for the building inspector to determine how he wants to analyze it and how he wants to um what data he wants to collect to satisfy himself that they're meeting that criteria. There's certainly some wiggle room within the criteria. Um, but I, you know, it's I I think the we need to understand more what they're doing to allow him to determine how's the be what's the best way for him to analyze to make sure that they're staying within the the restrictions of the back. We'll get around to the whole board, but I want to talk about this intersection between site plan review and agricultural use. And one thing that is not demonstrated in your presentation is what part of the site will be used for agriculture and what you commit to being used. You have a leech field in the middle of the area where you're going to be doing agriculture. Um so and of course green houses are considered to be agriculture. I think we would need more detail and more diagram of the amount of the site you're going to devote to achieve this agricultural use. Um, Barkley. Well, you done? Yes. For now, I yield to Yeah, we can we'll keep going. To continue on that, I'm very skeptical about one greenhouse providing 25% of the sales, however, measured in in a store the size

of Idle Wild that's going to be placed on that on that site. I'm I'm very skeptical. Um, I don't know. I mean, there's no indication that they're using any of the other property for for it. Just says brush. Brush is not a marketable commodities that I know of. Um, so I I'm I'm very skeptical and I um there's a lot of questions about, you know, the details. I mean I mean you know there he says there there's no there's not going to be it doesn't look to on the site plan like there's going to be any tractors there. I don't I I really don't know what's going on. I don't know what's I'm sure that there's going to be pesticides used in the greenhouse. I don't know what they're going to grow in there. Um so I just think that there's a lot of issues to to to we need a lot more details of what this process is going to be. Right. Certainly, those are excellent questions for the applicant. Yeah, Darl. Um, sort of just limiting it to the to the Dover amendment. I think I think you I jumped in on I think got clarification on on the two questions I had for that. Mark, I I have two concerns. My first concern is Can you speak up, please? Sorry. My first concern is the internal circulation. Um, we haven't really seen how the tractor trailers and trucks are going to get to the back of the building. All of those for the Well, it's off Lawrence. It's off Well, that's what we need to talk about whether or not we want it to come in off of Lawrence Street because they're going to run through the neighborhood to get to Lawrence Street to get to It should all come off of 119. Um, so we need to when they get back up, we should they should show us how they propose to get the trucks to the back. The other thing is what we're really kind of all talking about but we're not saying is what's the intensity of use

that's going on there a butcher shop is that Gary's Farm didn't have a butcher shop. There's going to be a bakery in there. The hot dog truck and everything else that's that's really not a farm issue. That's a town of Littleton um zoning thing to allow trucks. We're not I'm not concerned about that. But I'm concerned about the leap from going to a sort of benign farm stand to something that's going to be a little more than a farm stand and where do we come in and um I understand it's going to be building inspectors but we need to really address what's really going inside that building not just fruits and vegetables pumpkins in the fall Christmas trees we all know that stuff's all coming okay they're going to put some green houses up and grow some flowers and things like that and um that kind of stuff I along along the lines of cup and cup or something like that. But what's going to happen inside there? There's going to be food for processing, um meat for processing, food for u cooked for distribution. Is that going in there? Is there going to be a little sit down area where you can actually eat inside of there? Those are the kind of things I'm the questions I will we need to find out once we we get an idea of what's going on. I'm not a concern. I'm a little concerned about 71 parking spaces there. If you're going to have 15 I think I think the round numbers is 14,000 square ft of retail space there. If you're going to have I guess what's in the back of my mind is what goes on at ID Wild is that's what's coming here. How are we going to address the ID Wild is not a local farm stand. It's more than that. So a little concerned about what the intensity of use is out there. So, we're addressing our comments to you, Tom, and we know that, you know, I'm I'm but we you know, the applicant is taking notes, but I think we should

ask those questions. That's my point. Absolutely. in regards to a do and um well I'm trying to decide to because there are definite just site plan review issues that I have with the project. Um, I think your answer to uh item A, um, which is the applicant proposes an improved layout of the parking lot area. Well, I beg to disagree. I I don't I don't know if it's improved. You just put stripes on the existing paving, which was ad hoc based on whatever Gary's thing. Um, my main concern are the curb cuts. Lawrence, the the property along Lawrence is one giant curb cut. I think we would be totally remiss in not um they shouldn't come down Lawrence Street. No, I I'm not sure I would allow even the loading from Lawrence Street. And uh then there's the issue of the way the parking lot dumps onto the intersection between Lawrence and uh Great Road is a mess. Um, it's confusing. That roadway is very small. Uh, I don't like I I don't think there should be just one giant curb cut on Great Road. Uh, it's confusing to people going in and out. I think the number of parking spots. I'm with Mark. What does that mean? How many for employees? How many for this? How many for that? you're I I think you could you know we use the term farm stand and this is really pushing

the definition of a farm stand in both in both its use and its size and listen you know Darius was there for a long time. Um, when you look at when you look at the uh website of the applicant, there's retail. Well, I the the the comment about um we need to know more than what's going how many square foot of retail is it going to be? Is it going to be 20 by 20 or is it 400 ft or is it going to be 2,000 square feet? And the more retail you have, the harder it is going to be to overcome the definition of agricultural use. Um, so um I if if I went through the site plan review, see major topographic changes, fine. Um, fire access fine. Uh, I do think it is a residential zone. You do need to and you've shown some um consideration for the abuters. They're two residential abutters. Uh you know the I I agree with you. I think Arb Vide is fine. Um however, if the Abutters wanted a fence, I think we would ask for a fence. There are reasons for that. Number one, trash blowing in from the dumpster which is located near the, you know, the residential use, which might, you know, you could reconsider that. I'm concerned about the the the noise of changing out the dumpster right next to someone's home. Um, there are you have a large site, you can find some other place. Uh, I'm a little I I can see how the loading dock makes sense, but I'm concerned about the um

the location next to the uh ab budding residence because that will be noisy. It might be early in the morning. We have in the past in site plan reviews um conditioned them on hours of operation and if it stayed there we would probably limit the times that it it could be used because of noise. Um then there's things like lighting. There's no there's no description of what lighting you're going to have uh on the building on the parking lot. We need to know uh signage. there's no description of signage. Um what we have a signed bylaw. Of course, there's things that we'd like to see that aren't necessarily in the bylaw, but uh so all in all, this is not a complete application for us to consider a site plan approval. Okay. I'm not I'm not yelling at you, Tom. Can I? No. Um, are we done with Tom? Can we Tom? You You can sit down. I should have been I should have asked you to sit down. You weren't really yelling at all. Okay. I'm sorry. I have three kids. I can show you what it's like to yell. Um, so I I I appreciate the remarks. I mean I I guess a a question I have I mean you're you're not wrong that um you are entitled to ask you as board are entitled to ask for further details with respect to things like lighting and signage and we can get you those details. I have answers to some of those questions but I suspect you may want a more comprehensive plan that identifies lighting locations on the building, any lighting of the parking lot. I can answer questions in terms of the times at which lighting will be used and signage and whether the signage will be lit, but if if you want supplemental plans, we can provide that. But I I suppose a preliminary question I have and I think it ties into something that

attorney Harrington said is, you know, I've got in my notes the various things that that board members have remarked on, but as we started progressing in that discussion that was just had over the past 10 or 15 minutes, I heard questions starting to get asked. Initially, it was, you know, internal circulation. uh concerns were raised about the uh lack of uh narrower curb cuts whether it be on a great road or elsewhere and what that means in terms of the safety of entering or exiting the site. Those are certainly um fair questions in the context of site plan review. But then I began to hear questions about what's the extent of the retail use within the site because you see on Tender's website that in other locations they have three of them there is a component that is a retail component. You started asking about the extent of the bakery use or the butchery use and things of that sort. Um, I can give you answers to some of those questions, but it does seem to be delving into exactly what your council suggested was beyond the purview of the planning board, which is the extent to which this is a quote unquote traditional farm stand as we came to know them 20, 30 years ago, which of course is different than what exists today in many locations. Let me just say that maybe yes, you are correct, but we have a community here that wants to know what's going on there. We have existing farm stands which we know and love that we want to know how they're going to be affected and we want some kind of indication about what is the actual agricultural use going to be. It's not simply enough to say greenhouse. That's all you've indicated. Sure. That's all. Also it gives but we don't we don't I mean I don't think we can get into auditing weights and volumes and all that kind of stuff. Maybe maybe the building commissioner will, but we don't do that with any of the other crime stands. But also, it gives us an insight as to what how much parking you're going to need, but what you're really proposing out there. That's I think where we tie it in. Sure. And those tie-ins are are entirely reasonable. So, question. I agree. We can't figure out how many pounds of meat you're going to

find and what percentage of that. We're going to need to rely on 25% of whatever you produce on site is going to satisfy that first level to to for that farm stand. I think we can all safely get that our hands around that part of it. But and and parking is an issue which relates to the retail activity that you're going to have there. Mark brought up Ottawa. IDal has a huge parking problem and they have to have remote parking for their employees. Sure. Yeah. So, Mr. Chair, to add on to what um Mark was just saying. So, part of what is in our purview under site plan review uh is traffic and circulation. So, addressing potential traffic impacts. So, one of the things that has happened over the last say 10 years is that Gary's farmand traffic has been reduced as a result of of the operation getting reduced. So, we don't have any idea what a true 71 parked car traffic situation would look like. So from that standpoint, I think we need to address what the traffic impact is going to be as well and in our hands. And we need to acknowledge that Lawrence Street is a residential street and that right now it's completely open to in-n-out from the farm stand. And um I I would suggest that even if you provided 71 spots instead of just striping the existing try to do you know normal development standards and reduce the level of you know reduce the area of parking um and to get 71 spots you have gigantic you know there's just big areas of and and the other thing I would say is that you need to in site plan review and I think it's within our purview to look at

the food truck and Ed's weenies because right now that's just a free-for-all of people parked here and there. Sure. And to just address that last point, I I I don't really anticipate those uses are going to continue on the same Well, that's fine. Um but then say that, you know. Sure. Okay. And if you do uh think that you want to accommodate them, maybe work a little harder to make a place for them. Um so, okay. Now, um so I have one water related okay question uh there. Um, so 3 weeks ago we had quite a nice little rainstorm and there's like 3 to 6 ines of standing water in where you call right near the area called drain and grass which is also the lowest point on the lot. I don't see anything in this plan that really addresses how you're going to deal with the existing standing water issues in the site and given that actually everything actually slopes towards that spot. Um I I was not a I was not aware there was a existing drainage issues there as part of the proposal. Obviously we'd want to mitigate that. Um what you we'd have to do would analyze the drainage area there and and implement either in there's the site's so flat it's really difficult to you really can't put a drain in and daylight it. You have to grab it infiltrate it on site. So what we'd have to do there is put a drain in and get the water into the free flowing gravel underneath underneath the um you know the free flowing gravel. So we'd have to look to do drainage improvements there. Then also if you know if we I'd be looking there'd be wholesale changes if we were

going to implement better circulation more efficient parking um we'd be we could saw cut and remove some of the pavement to formalize the parking. You don't need that massive width. You only need 60 ft for a bay. I'm not sure what's there, but there is opportunity to reduce paving and still maintain 70 71 parking spaces or maybe even more um with the same amount of pavement or if we and I think relative to how the site is being presented there dealing with the the significant issues and then creatively you there's an opportunity to creatively address the Lawrence Street access and that and that drainage, you know, with either a bigger green space that that actually goes down Lawrence Street in order to be your your basin uh there. But but the plans as presented are are just we're going to build a new big building and put some things in it uh here. But that relative to drainage and water, which is a it's in a water aquifer district, I think that has to be much more clearly dealt with and it's not dealt with at all in this set of plans that we have. You you have dealt with it. You have infiltration basins. Not not relative to the fact that there's huge standing water after a storm. We did not we basic Yeah, I I do admit the existing conditions. We we just let it lie. Uh we did address the new building with infiltration and the new paved area with infiltration. But we will look at, you know, given the concerns, we'll look at providing a a more efficient access to the property and then protection to Lawrence Street. Also um at this point we have many community members here and I would like to invite um people to speak. We usually have a twominut um limit and I'm doing this for your benefit so that you can

hear what concerns are. Uh we have a two-minute limit and I'd like people to not uh to to make well also to make their point that might be different from the five previous points. Um so anyway that being said uh who would like to speak? Yes. And state your name and address. My name is Dave Harwood. I make a 24 and it seems apparent that there's going to be a requirement to prove the 25% 50% uh requirement. Um, and they'll come up with a plan that I'm sure sounds like it works. What's What if it doesn't work? What if they is there going to be a a compliance that they have to report uh where they get the 25% and 50%. And what's the consequence if they don't make it is that well I that's a point um I would say that we don't audit any of the farm stands in town. Uh there have been historically farm stands that would have failed the audit. Um so I don't know I think what you could it's a build it's a building it would you know it's time to explain to us it's someone like yourself you know making a complaint to the building commissioner who would then determine what the uh but you do have historical data. They have three other sites. They could probably share not with us but probably with the building department. Their percent of their sales on those sites how they were how they relate to the do, right? So we could ask for that to relate. Would that make sense, Tom? Yeah, it may make sense. I And again, I it's not our purview, right? It's the building commissioner's analysis, and I

I want to not prejudge for him, but it's certainly something we can talk to him about. Next. Yes. So I live at 49. So So you were a director about butter. Yes. Yes. So um you know let me just start with like saying first of all like um you know we love our farm stands. Um you know that's the defining character of our neighborhoods. But the proposal that's as is it seems like um you know it goes beyond the typical definition of the agriculture use uh like you know the most I think concerning thing is the you know as the planning board pointed out like you know lack of information and transparency in the uh proposal um a lot of information missing and then it's a you know whatever the information it is And it's it's clearly indicated that like it's a expansion of commercial use. Uh a lot of building expansion. Um you know there is a retail operations. We don't know the size how much uh loading dock that's definitely a concern. like as is operation right now. It's like you know there's a traffic privacy and noise concerns and there is no you know information how that's going to be you know mitigated or how that's going to be handled during the business hours as well as during the constructions. Uh and there is definitely a you know health and environmental concerns as well like this is all as is if it works as as planned but even then like you know what we are hearing with the you know rich field expansion the butcher shop and you know um water quality and the uh storm water management and all that information um you know it's not very clear based on

the proposed plan and also the u you know residential character the defining character that we have if there is too much of commercial activities there then I don't know how um you know that plays with the residential zone that is exist today thank you thank you next Mark Ranacher 205 Hartwell um I have a couple comments and a couple questions um First, you said the existing farms, we don't audit them and they don't comply necessarily. I I didn't say they don't comply. They don't none of the existing farms use the do amendment. They use the agricultural bylaw which you says five acres and it's a completely separate set of laws. I wasn't referring to the two neighboring farm stands. I was referring to a farm stand that no longer exists. Right. My my question for the planning board is the existing farm stands that we have there um all operate till 7 or 8:00, right? This is a residential neighborhood. Can if this does go forward, can we put time restrictions on their hours of operation so that you know there's not lights till 9 10? That is traditionally something that we have done on It's not something you've talked about so far, but yeah. Yep. Got my notes. Yes. Katrina Parks Hagber 156 Hartwell A. We live in the neighborhood behind the farm. Um, one thing as we've talked about under your purview is traffic concerns. And I think coming off of Hartwell with traffic trying to get off of Springbrook, which is across the street, can sometimes be very challenging, especially during rush hour time frames during the day and even non-rush hour time frames during the day. given the traffic running east or west on um Great Road. And so one

concern I have with the increased traffic just within the new property is what um what can be done to help mitigate the traffic concerns right in that congested area of time so that residents can get out onto 119 safely and people can get into the property safely. I agree with you. It's not clear what that would be, but I think that it's it's making in my view limiting access from Lawrence Street and um defining more well defining the access onto Great Road and it might be creating an additional access onto Great Road that's apart from the existing one. It's tough. I mean, because I go to these farm stands and Saturday morning, it's crazy, you know, and I I don't live there, so I don't know what it's like during the normal day, but it's something to consider. Absolutely. And then my second follow-up question is Hartwell is a no truck road, although trucks go down it, although they shouldn't. So, delivery vehicles going down Hartwell to get to Lawrence to for ease of backing in would be the ideally be looked at as well. I agree. They should do no truck traffic. I agree. Especially on hardwire. So just for it's within our purview to say uh please look at the great road access thing. It's currently listed, I think, as 200 ft on the drawing. That to collapse that down more towards a standard 50ft or whatever this typical entryway is and move it away from the corner of Lawrence is things that we'd like to see that would make this a more desirable plan. It would address some of the concerns within the limits of the existing property. I mean, I'm better internal circulation. Yeah. But I mean I'm I don't want to

mince words in terms of that we just give you know something abstract and we're looking for something to improve there specifically. I agree. And why don't we just have input from the site engineer about you know what we're saying is that the intersection of Lawrence and Great Road is tremendously congested and it is a burden on the neighborhood and that's how we one of the considerations we make in this site plan review. So what are the things we could do along Great Road and whether that in you know it's a state highway I don't know what that involves but you had this gigantic curb cut kind of be made into two an entrance and an exit and you know things like that. Um yeah so based on the meeting tonight there are improvements there would be that would be an access permit with mass dot but it's they you know I've we've done that rearranged they would prefer to have that I imagine mas dot would would embrace the fact of narrowing up that and making it a more u more concentrated in and out not this massive opening there there there's certainly some leg work required of course when dealing with mass totally understand. Um, having said that, um, most instances in which I've been involved seeking access permits, you're asking for an additional curb cut or a new curb cut. Condensing and limiting curb cuts, I would I think I suspect will be a simpler process, but not without it red tape. But I appreciate, Mr. Chair, you asking for some specificity, Mr. Baker, you providing specificity, you know, narrow it from 200 feet down to 50 feet. But I also appreciate some of the flexibility because as we begin to go back to the drawing board and look at how we can rearrange internally some of the parking areas that may provide a certain flow of traffic that would pair up well with a 50-ft entrance here versus there or multiple points of entrance as you had suggested. And that's just a

representative thing. It's not directive right uh there. But it's just things that I don't know if they've been in your your calculus of thinking at this point to encourage them to become in your calculus. Anything else? Anyone else? There was Okay, go ahead. Hi, I'm Margaret Sto. I'm your closest neighbor. So, I've been with Gary for 40 years and I know the abide sound like a good idea, but I would prefer fans after what I've had to put up with for the last 40 and I love Gary. Um, I'm very concerned about the noise. Gary's sons did not run the farm stand, but they had some kind of a I don't know, they went to farmers markets and they were constantly delivering things and the dumpster was being dumped at 5:00 in the morning. I am surrounded by farms and I am up at 5:00 in the morning listening to the dumpsters. Yeah. And I wasn't happy and I didn't say much to them because I figured, well, they've been there 40 years. What What am I going to say? So now it's it's time for me to speak up. I've been quiet long enough. I really have. And I'm sure you've seen the property and what it looks like. It's It's disgusting and disgraceful. Um, that bothers me. The dumpsters are a big thing. The loading dock and and trucks coming in that way really makes me very nervous. The traffic, it's treacherous to get out of our street. I mean, you take your life in your hands every single day. So, I can't even imagine, you know, what it's going to be like when you add all that other big truck traffic to to the situation. I love the idea of your farm stand. It looks beautiful. I think it's way too big. It's so close to my property. Um, I don't know, maybe I'm being too personal, but this is what these hearings are for because I love the idea of it, but I don't know if I like all the other stuff that goes with it, unfortunately.

Next. Anyone else? There was Yeah, right in the back. So, I'm at six corona. So, I worked next to his uh So, we've been there, you know, the first owners of the of the house. So, they've been there since 97. And while Gary was in full operation, we used to get all kinds of bad smell, all kinds of traffic, trucks of Gary going back and forth and um and anything that went on with Gary. Even walking around right now in Lawrence, like she was saying, MRG is my neighbor. She said walking on Lawrence is impossible. Walking on our Coburn Lane is also not possible. I have two dogs, so I walk every day. The amount of traffic is already increased without this magnificent or big building that they want to build over there. So my biggest concern is the size of the building that's going to be there which is closely close to like an idle wild and then the area that has some um agriculture like was Gary used to grow some eggplant and tomatoes and zucchini and what have you that is not going to meet the Massachusetts law chapter 40 I when I read some of the laws just like you guys have you already know about it I don't think that can ever meet but I'm not I'm not I don't know anything about agriculture more other than going to the other stands. Secondly, we have beautiful stands across the street from us. We have um theaters and then we also have um Springbrook. They're selling the produce that they're growing right over there behind and they do not have 71 parking spaces. I've never seen they're ask they're all gravel and even if there is some uh they're selling maybe some some special event in the at theos I know they have to park on um on the road. are you know some special event during fall we have to have that traffic congestion but I still don't understand why they need 70 odd packing spaces for what and again for such a big operation that's going to be selling butcher like butchering and what do you call it all the other products that they want again they'll be getting from their other somewhere else other than Littleton or

even in the radius of Littleton I don't think they're going to be getting anything from here that's going to benefit any one of us so this huge building is being is it's really I really read the plans which I'm wrong you don't come to town meetings but I think that the the honorable members of the planning board would consider what will happen to all of us who are right there in the middle of this one thing I want to um um bring up based on your comments is about the smells right to farm we have no jurisdiction over that um unless they were you know running a diesel exhaust, you know, repair shop or something like that. But anyway, thank you for your comments. Anyone else? Hi. Hi, Matthew. Matthew Nord, Star Hill Road. Um I'm a little I'm still I I recognize that 20 the 25% is not the purview of this board. But I just want to um acknowledge that what you are doing if if you say we cannot enforce this. We cannot make rules about the 25% is essentially you know throwing poor Henry to the wolves to do a job that you admit he has never done and we have no infrastructure or funding to do. Um, I think that relying on the the uh applicant to self-report on percentages is like the wolf counting the sheep and I would not I would prefer not to do that. Um, and we are going to have to find a way to um equitably audit this and it's not going to be free. So, I just want to acknowledge that and make sure that everybody is uh is aware. Well, I think one thing that the applicant should take away is we want some credible even if it's just a diagram

of some credible way of showing that there will be agriculture produced on this site and right now that doesn't exist. We need a site plan that's going to reflect what's going on there. how much of it is going to be in-house agricultural and I do not think we need to you know count items but right now it's not credible that the agriculture use will be met and and it may be I mean there may be characteristics of the site that allow that but right what we're seeing now it's not shown at a minimum calling what potentially is the largest cultivation area of brush area. Well, that's an existing condition. No, it's on the final plan. It is. Okay. So, and there's a leech field in the middle of it, you know. So, I think, you know, there's some formalities just in terms of, you know, making sure that what we're looking at actually reflects what's going on there because I don't want to see an acre of of brush. No, that that's fair. I mean, I think the representation was made that the leeching field was not fully designed, so it was just an approximate location. But your point is well taken that, well, let's make it less approximate if we're going to be using portions of that type of agriculture. Uh, the existing conditions plan did show the brush area. I didn't realize that that terminology had carried over to the final plan. I don't think that was the intent. On one of the final plans that I saw, it was not on there. There were just the symbols showing that it was an area that was grass or agriculture. But if it's on the final plan, then that's our mistake. It shouldn't be continued to be labeled as a brush area. It's actually that's from the X reference. It's the I I understand. I understand. But but you know, we're relating to drawings. Um yes, Madison Palmer there. If you take this the lot size, 2.9 acres, and you take half of it

and you put a building up and you put pavement in, that's going to leave 1.4. And then you have a septic system that's going to take up probably another quarter of an acre at least. There is no way that he can raise 25% of the crops to supply that farm stand if you have 70 parking spaces out there. There's no way. Yes. Thank you. I think that's a valid point. I think when when you come back, you need to show us based on your other farm stands how you propose to get this so that we have some sort of level of confidence that you're going to make cuz obviously you're going by the do bylaw. So you have to show us that you can at least meet that criteria so we don't have to have an accountant. We don't have to have Price Waterhouse live in Littleton so we can find out what we got. So if you could show us how you've done it at other locations, I think that would give us a better and I agree with Mr. Mat, it's you're going to be hardressed to based on everything else you're trying to squeeze onto the lot to show us that you can I would like to add just one thing though. Um I know we haven't audited those things in the past or looked at it, but I I think we have to let the residents know that if that is what the basis of what they're going to have approval to operate under, it will be incorporated into town operations. that we're not going to make a have a law and a set of regulations and then no mechanism within the town to to to do it. And if we need to work with the zoning enforcement officer or the support of selectman in terms of making sure that that activity is properly staffed and funded, then we need to do that. I think it starts I think it starts with a leap of faith that they have to prove to us that they have the potential to do it. But we shouldn't let the citizens think that

we're not going to check and that's there's ambiguity. It's going to be we being the town. It's going to be Henry's job. As town council said, it's going to be Henry's job. This is this is an issue. We're not going to deal with it at this meeting. Mr. Chair, I would like to say that I am appreciative of our board actually talking about putting these kind of um uh measures into place. so that we can count on the fact that it will be done, that it will be enforced. And part of it is because after being on this board for seven years, there have been times where applicants come forward and they say, "I'm going to do X." And then they come back and say, "Oh, well, you know, we really didn't think we had all of the information." And so we kind of had our conjecture when we came before you. And then the town is the one that winds up eating it, whatever it is. So, I really do appreciate the fact that we're doing this right now. So, let's just put something in the past. Well, Matthew's point, well, it's money, you know, what what is this, you know, blah blah blah. But uh in the past we have usually used and I don't think we have any um format that we can do this but we've used a special permit process where you know every 3 years a special permit would need to be re you know renewed at which point you would have to demonstrate that you have met the conditions. I don't know if we can do that in this case, but it's a mechanism that we could consider. And Tom shaking his head because we don't have a bylaw that allows us to do that anyway. Yeah. Nor, if I could, and town council can correct me, but for context, I also represent three dozen communities across

the state, so I'm often giving advice to boards like yours. nor could you have a bylaw that does that. Right? So, we're we're coming in under the agricultural exemption. So, all that we've been discussing in terms of the 25% standard, the the 50% standard, growing on site, growing off-site, growing growing by the owner, growing by other Massachusetts farm owners. These are not provisions of your local bylaw. These are provisions of state statute. Right? So, you couldn't adopt, you would have no authority. The AG wouldn't approve a bylaw that attempted to further regulate agricultural uses in a manner that subjected them to a special permit process renewable on three-year terms only if and when the applicant proves that it's in compliance with the state statute. Having said that, we're still required to comply with the state statute and there still is a need for enforcement by the by the municipality. in the context of a site plan review. We just need more information to understand whether it's even possible to, you know, regardless of how the place is operated. I've heard that and and we will we will provide supplemental information for your next meeting. Thank you. Great. Now, would you be ready for the our next monthly meeting or would you need more time? Um, you meet on a monthly basis, so four weeks. Yes. December December. July because at this point not that July at this point um I think it's time to continue the hearing to a time specific and whether it's uh our July or August meeting July 10th. Is that what you said? Yes. So So what I will say is this. I I I as you know because I've represented it in in our filings, uh I don't represent Gary or Gary's family. I represent the prospective purchaser of the property. So there's some urgency in moving the process forward. My client would not be happy with me if I said, "Let's kick this out to your August meeting." Having said that, I'm not going to require you to add it to your agenda if we're not prepared to submit. So, we will seek a continuence. We can add it to our agenda and you can notify us. We will uh whether you need a further continuation, but we'll put it on the agenda. You can

also come before us with revisions that you've done. Maybe that they don't get it all done, but at least show us where you're going with this. Hey, we'll do that. That would be good for and so for everyone here um especially the abuters you will not be noticed further. So um you know check the you know the planning board website and July 10th is the next time we will have a hear we will continue this hearing. 8:10 8:10 So um may I have a motion to continue this hearing to July 10th at 8:10? So moved. Second. Second. All in favor? I. Thank you. Thank you everyone for coming out and thank you for the applicant and thank you to Tom. Okay. Let's uh do I have a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjurnn. Second. Second. All in favor? I