Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Third Edition of your beloved planning board I remind you that this meeting is being broadcast when recorded or rebroadcast on West cat we'll start uh with the board anything for open form no no staff uh just if you could uh anybody who's looking to uh go to annual town meeting if you could uh participate in the survey we have going on just to help with planning purposes uh town meeting will be March 22nd at 9:00 a.m. at West Academy um so want to mark your calendars I believe they'll start checking in people at 8:00 a.m. uh youing for getting here a little early um but survey would help and just for planning purposes um so March 22nd 9:00 a.m. Westford Academy I know the moderator is here as well I don't know if you want to add anything um no F it's probably important to note that that's one hour earlier than this typical for Saturday Town meetings we've been doing it at 9:00 a.m. but just to further encourage people there's going to be coffee in the morning and a pass bot lunch for lunch time okay great uh I'll go to the audience anybody have anything for all right seeing none we have uh a continued public hearing PB 2501 the amend Zing bylaw for the flood plan overlay District jit sure um so we included a couple things in your packet um so we had uh the draft bylaw and reviewed from the flip plan management specialist now Madden at DCR um you'll notice in here the bylaw is is currently would classify as compliant um and everything throughout each section of bylaw either meets requirements or is not applicable to Westford U because of what resources are are not here um so just something that we thought was handy to for everybody to be able to see that we would be compliant meet all the requirements um

she provided her comments the few questions uh we had um for them based on your last meeting um the one item that's out there and this is totally optional for you all um is whether not you want to include the definitions of the zones that are here in Westward um so in the I guess kind of quote unquote cleaner version of the bylaw we just have it in red at the end um Nadia said that we should use the definitions from the a byon language that they put together um so that's what those three definitions are of Zone a Zone AE and Zone X for ex gold verom over there um and then based on your report recommendation whether not you want to keep the definitions in or not there's just some uh elements in there that note the changes of the def definition section um and that it's just there to provide a little Clarity uh to so um red could either stay if you'd like it to stay or come out if you'd like it to come out that's pretty much it we haven't received any public comments in our office umse just turn back the board see if you have any followup questions all right so we'll why don't we go to the board for General discussion and we can discuss the definitions Bob do you have anything generally on this no I had one minor thing I happen to just catch and that is on the historic structure local um that is not something that we would deem to be um was it um deeming protection it actually has to be on the historic register is that correct Joe a question not sure so I don't have a hard answer for you right now um but in general while we have some historic districts unless they are registered

either on the state level uh or there's a restriction of some kind it isn't binding in terms of what we do here for local permitting uh but I do think there are allowances when reviewing flood plan applications to allow for flexibility if there is what is deemed in historic structure so if we can certainly try to gather some information before town meeting in case this question comes up but because I think that's what I think it's a rolling 75 year or older that's our demolition Del years believe which is something if that would apply here so while not um zoning it's the general bylaw or demolition delay just means that if the structure has been there for 85 or more years it's subject to the demolition delay bylaw which starts a process but it wouldn't be fall under any purview of this consideration I think that's an independent uh review process thanks that's it okay johy no nothing D Darren coms all right definitions do we want to keep them in I think they're good idea to keep in Bob yeah I do I agree right I go to the public vote well we could vote when we vote at all close the public hearing the public anybody have any discussion on this all can you get a motion to close the public hearing so mov all those in favor say I I uh a motion to approved the uh bylaw as written adding in the definitions so move second all those in favor say I I I uh do we want a motion to approve this to recommend this town meeting or we'll do that at the end so I guess we're looking for first of all a vote for your report and recommendations uh which really would in turn be your recommendation to town meeting and includes your Capt all right

can I get a motion to approve the report and recommendation move second all those in favor say I I anything else on that Jeff that's right all right first item for General business PB 923 W Place Mr Waterman good evening Matt Waterman uh representing to Brothers um for the record um we're here for the window play sub Vision on netting Road um this is more of a housekeeping item um we've been working with t brothers and the Board of Health um to update a couple of the Lots um with their current house Footprints and layouts um and in turn it affected the lots that are subject to aggregate nitrogen loading which was tied into some of the language that was included in the planning board's Covenant um so we're here tonight simply to have the board upd the Covenant to clarify these changes um as approved by the Board of Health um there's Board of Health restrictions on Lots previously on Lots 14 15 16 and 18 those are lots that have septic systems within the zone two um that kind of circumvents the property on the easterly side and then actually across the front along nutting Road not all lots that are in the zone 2 have septics in the zone 2 so not all lots that are in the zone 2 are necessarily restricted um it's just the lots that have a septic system that's located within that zone 2 um and previously that was four Lots um working with the board Health to update the nitrogen loading permits it's just a way to ensure that there's a restriction on the number of bedrooms they put a restriction on the open space which kind of mimics the conservation restriction that this board put in place um that

demonstrates that they have adequate room to to support the bedroom counts on these Lots um which they do have that um capability to do um so this is again housekeeping because we're updating those four lots and in turn actually one of the Lots the septic got removed from the zone 2 so it's actually only three Lots now um and this revision to the Covenant clarifies that um and one lot um it was determined that it was not a five bedroom it was actually a six bedroom so there was updating some of the information for that um we do have Board of Health approvals they've issued the permits or they're in the process of issuing the permits we did include correspondents um in your packet from the Board of Health um clarifying that or noting that um and our goal is to just get this Covenant updated with the board so that when we do record all the updated legal documents we can update them all together um with the Board of Health legal documents all right great thank you I'll go to the board with any questions orless Joe do you have Dad no just overall that it is a reduction of the number of bedrooms under this restriction so seems to be lesser ask on the board up up no jo jo sorry straightforward all right so we uh can I get a motion to amend the Declaration of covers and restrictions on to reflect a new nitrogen restriction and easement for Pb 12 1923 uh window Place second all those in favor say I I thank you Mr War thank you very much okay next we have a presentation from the clean energy and sustainability committee

good evening hi good evening thank you for having us for having the opportunity to speak this evening I'm Tom toer I'm on the C member of the clean energy and sustainability committee with me is Beth Perkins and Mike berinsky yeah okay so I believe that the presentation was in your packets it was and so I don't want to just belabor those points I would uh I think it would be useful to to review some pertinent points uh that are in the presentation and um then provide plenty of time for questions and answers so the background of Cesc and the climate road map I don't think we need to um Bel that um it is was an action of the town meeting in October 2020 to initiate these uh measures and the clean energy sustainability committee was formed as a result of that next Jo on the Y uh so the question is why should we adopt the specializ code and I think the key reason is that commitment to environmental sustainability and climate action is one of the seven outcome areas in the town strategic plan and this is consistent with that and is expressly uh meant to to address that um it is a key step of our Western climate road map the buildings constitute 58% of carbon emissions for the town and of course the most effective way to to be able to to

address the emissions that come from the building sector are by code changes that impact future buildings uh the um the code the entire specialized code emphasizes Energy savings and load reduction rather than other measures um and we think that's important both because of the uh the principle impact of that but also because of uh challenges to the Grid in our town which have recently come to light and so these the specialized code is well aligned with that next J so I don't think I need to rehearse any of this but the specialized code constitutes the last the top of the pyramid the base code which is shared by um you know all jurisdictions uh does have Massachusetts amendments and that's applicable to the entire town uh the entire State the stretch code is applicable to the hundreds of Massachusetts communities which are currently clean energy communities and then the specialized code is one which would apply to communities that opt into that code uh affirmative action by the town is requireed required in order to implement that that's been taken by 48 communities so far cities and towns in the in the common thank you next um this is an ey chart this is just to see whether how good the new monitors are which is they're pretty good but uh one reason for putting that up is to note that among the towns the 48

jurisdictions that have adopted the special Iz code are many of our neighbors jumer Carlile Aton bford and other names that that I think you can see there next a few fun facts fast facts fast facts I think that's more app not too fun um but fast fast facts uh the first is that the specialized code would apply to new construction only so Renovations or additions however significant obviously if it's a significant renovation or addition that would fall under the jurisdiction of the stretch code and those measures would have to be met but the specialized code applies only to new construction um for all electric homes there are no differences between the stretch code now in effect in the specialized code and that's meant to encourage all electric construction and uh that also doesn't make any changes to what is in the current code as far as EV charging the third is that there are available rebates and incentives for Mass Save there are also some 45l tax credits uh currently available which are incentives for energy efficient Construction to help to defray some of those costs over on the right side for multif family which is I think of particular interest to us because of our desire to implement uh projects that are that are in the MTA commun overl District um

those require passive house uh which is an exemplary standard and passive house is extremely energy efficient um construction the specialized code does not prohibit mixed fuels uh but does impose some offsetting requirements uh which is something I think this board is used to dealing with um if you choose to build a mixed fuel building it does require pre-wiring for electrification so for each appliance that is powered by fossil fuel for example if there's a natural gas furnace uh the wiring has to be in place so that an electric alternative heat pumps could be installed without having to tear the walls apart and that's we see as a consumer protection measure and on-site solar is also built into the requirements for mixed fuel to offset uh some of those um fossil fuel utilizations next for new residential buildings the specializ code again only applies to new buildings all electric again no new requirements uh because a question has come up in some of our other meetings it's important to note that the specialized code does allow for backup generators uh for an all electric house to improve resilience for multi fuel buildings as noted pre-wiring and solar there is a distinction between homes that are large homes over 4,000 square ft where the amount of solar required is enough to offset the fossil fuel use in terms of a direct offset for smaller homes there is

there are modest requirements both of those solar requirements are subject to uh site issues if their the code does not require um for example any cutting of trees or anything if this if the site is shaded or if the orientation of the house is iside reasonable limits Tom it says appliances what about vehicles in like a garage do you is it required to pre-wire for electric vehicles that's required in the stretch code the Str okay that's no change for the specialized code okay for new commercial buildings and that's also uh next Joe also it would apply to municipal buildings including schools it's similar uh for all electric there is no additional requirement uh for mixed fuel pre-wiring and rooftop solar I would also note that the current Westford guidelines for municipal buildings which have been adopted by the town meet the requirements of the specialized code so there would be no changes to the to the Western guidelines required um estimated increases in residential construction costs these figures are from Mass doar uh who has provided some studies of this information for electric of course there's there's no changes for renovations there are no changes for a large single family mixed fuel more than 4,000 square ft they estimated that the additional cost would be 24,000 after incentives and with an annual Energy savings of about

$2,273 for a single family makx fuel less than 4,000 square ft uh that's somewhat smaller 13,446 after incentives with uh somewhat reduced annual Energy savings I would note that those upfront costs uh include the cost of solar there are other options for adding solar um you know at least solar with a power purchase agreement and so forth but those would be the cost uh as they are and their estimate is that for uh all buildings there would be less than 2% increased construction cost offset of of course by potential energy savings for large Apartments next show uh or condos 12,000 squ ft² or larger um they are required to meet passive house under the stretch code there are three compliance Pathways that are provided a targeted pathway an ER pathway or hers pathway or passive house is the specialized code simplifies that if you will and says no it's got to be passive he um and the only additional requirement is for mixed fuel pre-wiring again for future electrification as with the others passive house is of course a a very focused energy standard uh that that is intended to significantly reduce energy use and while preserving uh very comfortable and Healthy Living environment we have a little bit more about passive house estimates are provided

by um doe and also I think by passive house Institute uh is that heating loads can be reduced by as much as 90% And total energy used by about 60% I would note that one of the other Pathways that's available under current code is the ER or hers pathway you know building the house to meet a her requirement um hers is an annual energy rating so it doesn't really address Peak clads passive house specifically addresses Peak loads and so one of the big benefits of passive house is that it does significantly reduce Peak loads on the net on the on the grid and other Studies have shown that that's the one you're talking to oh yeah okay um I didn't even notice that I guess I need to wake up yeah I'm trying to I have notes here like a sports par except they're all on the same channel I know um there are significant uh improvements in indoor air quality uh with the passive house and it's been shown that passive house construction can maintain temperatures much better if there is a power outage uh they cool off much more slowly in colder temperatures and they heat up much more slowly uh during summertime temperatures okay now we can

both um it's scaling fast this is a report of what's currently happening in the Commonwealth um and the as you can see from just a curve the number of projects that are being built or planned under passive house is increasing uh fairly strongly and of course it doesn't it looks like the peak tails off but I think that's more planning Horizon than there is a decrease in actual interest in the passive house and it's notable that a third of the projects are lwi Income projects it would be interesting to see that with a percentage of the the total new construction because I think it might explain that tailing off better to see if a percentage of all projects are passive are now passive houses for multif family construction I don't have those figures yeah in front of me they're probably available but I don't have those figures in front of me the this is an example of a current project in global um it's affordable housing in passive house uh as well and uh this project represents those same benefits of passive house as an earlier slide passive house and costs um I I have to admit that that there's seems to be a dichotomy between you know what the V and share of the evidence that we're looking at and a

couple of outliers but do as a the state Authority on these matters and we have a sampling of the communities that they have in their data but there are three or four times as many communities in their in their sampling um estimates that there's a 1 to 4% increase in construction cost for Passive house and that's before incentives and so incentives can help help to reduce that and it also includes um both mixed fuel and all electric because passive house doesn't require all electric construction you can build passive house with mixed fuel the emphasis is on energy reduction rather than a specific way of providing that energy to the systems in the in the home so 1 to 4% and and I think the 4% is generous this is an updated slide and like many updated slides it raises some questions as well as answering some but the uh the stretch code and specialized uh appendices to the stretch code were recently updated uh two weeks ago February 14th Happy Valentine's Day to the Commonwealth uh with a a significant relaxation of some of the requirements per standards and so forth and announc new passive house uh incentives available from Mass Save now if you add up the stuff on the in the green box well it has to come up a little Yeah well yeah um and the stuff on the right those those numbers don't tally and it's and I try to get a more definitive answer to this but the figures on the

left are both preconstruction feasibility type that are for this the project rather than a unit and the energy modeling is an allowance per unit that may or may not be used and the $750 is is an allowance for pre-certification and then up to $3,000 for certification and the sum of those is more than 3750 37 750 seems to be the allowance per unit and I wish I had a better answer for that but but I don't again this is a very new change so I did attend the uh the briefing on the new change and they buzzed right by that and so why should Westford adopt the specialized code again it's part of our it's a major part of our strategic plan it is in step with the clate road map noting that buildings are our largest source of emission and code is the way that we have to address that and I would also note that it requires passive house for those large projects we have all been very recently brought up short by National Grid telling us that they don't have power at least in some parts of the town and that's a serious issue that's a serious issue that predates specialized code that pred predates stretch code that's a serious issue and we strongly support the town's efforts to secure assistance in performing the studies that allow us to fully understand that and then to make plans to mitigate that

passive house itself is we think think a real potential mitigations to some of these issues and I would just offer one data point the hers rating and I I think hers rating is u i don't have to explain what that is yeah so the hers rating uh requirements for the stretch code or for the specialized code are between 42 and 45 for certain applications and other things like accessory dwell units a little bit higher than than that but the the strictest requirement under the specialized code is a hers 42 rating which is a very efficient again that's an annual rating but that's a very efficient rating passive house is estimated as when annualized as a 34 her 34 so it's a Sub sub very substantial reduction in the energy usage of those projects and we have a last slide on the grid this is again a doe slide um and but it has pertinent information the their studies found that the specialized code um does not increase uh the load nor the peak load for most building types that's not necessarily a comfort to us when we have circuit that seems to be saturated in a zone of of importance for the town but you know there you have it across Massachusetts they predict about a 5% increase in Peak electric for that's those really derived from the stretch code now in effect rather than a specialized

code there any measures that could mitigate that 5% Peak increase yeah I think the special code well I mean well that slide I think is about it's the question is what happens to the grid when we Electrify everything so that would be the effect of all of our building codes um okay I mean that that wasn't clear to me there it was reading to me like specialized code could result in 5% at Peak but overall a reduction no and that'll teach me for reusing do size I guess what is a do we are Department of energy resources so this is all the state providing this information it is the state providing the information and the other big change which I'm sure you're aware of but uh do has jurisdiction over the energy codes which are distinct from the building codes the 10th edition is of course now out 78 CMR and that's still under the jurisdiction of the I can't remember all the's building and when does this um the the the article has this going into effect when the the the date on the TIC on article 20 right now is for it to go into effect on July 1st of 2026 about a year and three or four months from now in the course of the discussions uh around this has there been any feedback asked for or provided by some of the developers in town some of the larger developers on what they would actually do uh in the case that this was to be passed and that this was the building code because I think the question has been answered what the increase in cost would be in a mixed fuel home but practically speaking if I'm a developer right and and these are the standards

I'm trying to build 18 homes I think I'm not probably going to plan for mixed juice unless I have buyers coming to me early in the process who want that I'm probably going to only build to me the code standard and what I guess one thing that comes to my mind is doesn't this come across as a I guess a reduction in choice to potential home consumers where they now only have the choice of a fully electrified home so what happens if someone buys a home that's built to the new standard it's all electric and they wanted to you know bring in a different fuel for one of the appliance major appliances in their home is that allowed under this code or would that not be permitted uh I think that would be a question would have to be asked by The Building Commissioner not by I did get what you were say were you saying that the house is already built so it would be a renovation or it's a brand new house so I'm I'm a developer and it's 2027 and this code is in and I'm going to build 18 homes but I only have two people who want homes and one wants mixed mixed fuel and one is fine with all electric strategically I'm probably not going to build many mixed fuel homes because that's going to ultimately arrive in a higher price point like like I think 24,000 was the number I saw so I'm probably going to build build all electric homes if then down the road I Market these homes there could be somebody who's like I love the house but I wish I could have a gas stove or I wish I could have a gas dryer whatever I guess I have two questions well one just philosophically doesn't this limit consumer choice because now it's like harder to find a mixed fuel home in Westford right that's kind of a philosophical question I don't necessarily need an answer to that but more importantly if I then buy this all electric home and I want gas for my for my stove let's say am I allowed to then like install a propane tank myself so that I can have a gas stove is that then forbidden by the code or is is it not clear what the code would allow in that

I would build I would I would answer that partly by we POS the question about fireplaces and woodstones yep which is different but along the same lines yeah and the answer that we got to those specific questions was if that homeowner wanted to add mix fuel to that Home Design yeah that would put the building into mixed fuel category oh okay and so to do that they would have to make sure that the pre-wiring was in place and the requisite amount of solver as depending on the the size of the home was provided on site but they could do that the other homes would not need to do that they would obviously be wired for the electric but they would not be required to provide on-site solar right okay but I think it's there an 18 house subdivision in house nine right in the middle of that wants gas yep the logistics of that to get gas from the other into the development right to that property where they can tap into it right so that's a large multif family yeah if you want a gas stove which would be my first thing I'd want is a gas Stone right it's not easy to put gas in in a large multif family unless it's already been pre- plumed exactly so it's the other way around they have it so if you have if you meet the stretch code right if you have a mixed if you build a mixed use fuel mixed fuel you have to put in the plumbing for going to all electric at some point yep yes whereas if the other way around is not required that right the other thing um following up

Mike on your question about one July 2026 because I asked Jeff this afternoon how would that apply with somebody these MBTA projects that are starting to come forth and that's it's not that's anything that apply for a site plan review prior to that that's not the critical point it's the build when they apply for a building permit building permit if it were to occur after that date require that they comply If This Were to pass it town meeting unless they volunteer to comply on their own to answer your question I did speak to several Builders and they felt that this would be a detriment to affordable housing town the cost increased cost of construction now they have some numbers in here again that came from the state and a lot of those numbers consider the uh Mass Save incentives if you heard on the radio lately about the gas bills have gone up so much because their Mass Save is out of money and so they money comes from utility bills to fund Mass Save to give the incentives and yeah so now that's why the bills have gone up so much could I just clarify sure say because um I don't with all respect I don't think it would be fair to say they ran out of money they were every 3 years years they propose a budget for the next three years and they proposed a budget of5 a billion dollar right so as you know legislature Governor are all upset about the high energy prices and the increases on fees so they um dropped them down for the next three years they dropped the budget down to 4.5 billion they still their budget for the previous three years was was 4 billion so they still have a 12%

increase to their budget for the next 3 years but they didn't get the full amount that they were looking for so you know we you know we feel comfortable with the incentive programs that are listed in this document yep but yeah they got a lower increase than they had asked for for the next three year plan great well thank you for that clarification I would also note that dpu has mandated and the different large utilities are putting their plans in place but they have mandated that the utility publisher rate for homes that are heated with electricity and H heat pumps uh that would be a lower rate and that lower rate would be on the delivery charge not the supply charge um during the winter cold weather months that that homes that were heated with heat pumps would would have a reduced rate so that's also some small mitigation I just think for the viewing audience as well maybe it' be good if we could get in the habit of calling out acronyms the first time not everyone is familiar with every acronym we're thrown out there so yes all right um J you yeah I one thing I I would like to add is um from the affordable housing perspective we we I personally looked at this a lot and um I although I know there is an increased cost to developers which is a problem there is also if we do go to passive house a reduction to the occupants and energy costs which is also a very big concern that we're starting to see affordable housing is even though you know folks in affordables can't afford the utility bills so um something you know just to keep in mind that it's a pro for it as opposed to a well I think the other to keep in mind though is

we're going through sticker shock the past three or four months here with these delivery charges that are just skyrocketing so I think unfortunately the numbers that are in here are based on prior year data in terms of uh fuel delivery charges and and Supply costs so unfortunately not sure these numbers hold in the current model we're in so there needs to be something done although that I'm hoping that this is just a temporary blip but but in the face of increasing energy costs the uh the objective to lower overall energy whether it be natural gas whether it be electricity or propane if we put in that super good envelope like p po we're going to bring those costs down you'd have additional savings but there are people right now who are dropping their electric or natural gas usage and going with pellet stoves because they don't have that same uh increase in delivery charges that we're seeing for the other fuels so that's my only Point um you know both electric and natural gas we've all seen our bills both had very large increases in delivery charges probably pretty equivalent so it's it's a tradeoff so don't a question that's not maybe directly relevant but I'm just wondering because you folks are so much closer to this topic than I am so is the state doing anything or can Wester do anything around the cleanliness of the energy that we're sourcing from National Grid or the other sources right because you know I think we think about electricity as this clean option but at the end of the day the energy is being produced somewhere and and there are cleaner methods to produce that energy than others is that something that has come up in your research at all in terms of abely abolutely what is what are the

mechanisms that like w has the state has there are state state rules on the content of the delivery and it's subject all providers are subject to these rules so that the different classes of different categories and its complex in the renewable portfolio standard in the Commonwealth right now it adds up to about 57% of the power is classed as renewable okay that includes class one the best class two not quite as great you know class two from refuges which would be you know like the incinerator all the Renewables uh is 57% and that's mandated to go up 2 to 3% per year to 240 when the class One requirement will be at 40% uh yeah 2040 when it would be 20 the other thing I have to say is Westford own Municipal and residents and businesses can participate in Western pop and Western pop uh the standard default is plus 10% over those so that would that would put you at 67% and there is a 100% option okay and of course folks who have solar on the roof or who participate in community solar yep also are buy buying through the renewable energy credits system a a cleaner Supply uh than the state prevailing but thank you for that so the GD is getting greener yep by any other big project it can't get instantly right great thank you there anything no I guess uh who who came up with the definition of the specialized code was that done at the state level

yes that specialized code was set by again by Doe which has Juris iction for the energy code so both the stretch code which is a challenge um and the specialized code those those were authored by uh do there was very extensive hearing process but uh those are from the state department of energy resources thanks I had one minor Point Tom in the briefing between slides seven and nine um in slide seven you mention the the square foot area for a large house and then you reference a large house on slide nine it would be nice if you kind of defined large to be this so that when you get later in the briefing especially I'm assuming this briefing is going to go up on the town website before town meeting yeah um just mention that that's a very good point thank you all right well thank you thank you for your work thank you for your presentation all right thank you of course if you have questions later we're always happy to to help great thank you for the thank you thank you okay moving on uh General business item C review of annual town meeting warch discuss whether to take positions on any articles um we did have correspondence from a resident concerning uh article 16 on the uh select board to accept easements of the Stony Bridge Project I will say that I don't know that it's appropriate for us to take a position in this article since it's a Scenic Road uh and that will come before us um you know if if this is uh if this is voted in I don't know if the board has any thoughts on that what what is the concern of that Resident I didn't see

that was to for us to take a position you yeah if you want to get up and speak yeah we give you a minute I'm the resident if you have any questions okay great if you want just give your name and address and so what are your concerns with the project I brought it to you because it's a scen road and I'm under the impression reading the scen by law that you would have people so we don't have we don't have jurisdiction on anything until it's been approved by town meeting okay so the letter that you go up that think you sent it in responded that to me has approved this twice what happens is every time nobody says anything those votes get cited as reason to continue forward I bet if you asked a 100 citizens that what they voted on at town meeting no one would know that they approved two pieces of this because one of them was within 22 other line items was one article out of you know 20 OD it articles to at so if you just let it go it it becomes a snowball so maybe it's later I'm happy to come back here a little bit but at the end of the day there's a Scenic Road with a mess register for protected bridge and the response back keeps coming well it's not safe but in 2020 I have so you know what this isn't right for us to discuss and I think you're doing the right thing by bringing to boards mention because some of us didn't have any idea of the concerns here so I think you're you're doing that but I don't think it's right for us to discuss it today to whatever no no no no if this gets approved it comes back before us absolutely we have we need to discuss it so I don't know if this helps but I my limited understanding is that

the design is not yet at 100% it would be I think premature to apply for a Scenic Road permit if the project is not um fully designed like if there are changes between whatever percent they're at now in the end then that could require them to refile again for a similar permit so again I think you do you're getting keep saying those than we're good it's it's going to be as it is yet because it's not safe yet the analysis of the bridge says it is in all primary structural elements are sound so you know it's a little bit of a conflict it's not and you know know where the bridge is of course I do okay see there's no truck traffic that goes through because there's an 8 foot train bridge I'm well aware what would you recomend so I would recommend that you keep doing what you're doing and and get to before boards and get to town meeting and voice your concerns I mean it's it's you have an opinion and it's a valid opinion we just can't act on it at this point there not nothing we have no jurisdiction there's nothing we can do even though just seen it gr it's but it's it's got to go properly before us so yeah I do you you know get talk to Western cat see if you can get them to broadcast your your your information just come before boards and give presentations just like you're doing now okay all right thank thank you uh we have article uh 19 and if you folks think there's anything else that we should be talking about please let me know but I think we should vote to uh update the flood plan by law since it's our agree we did really

already other there was some stuff in yellow was there any purpose just have the leatest war was together I'm not sure why I guess it could be other eligible expenses maybe they'll list them I'm not totally positive on this particular one I think I think when watching one of the select board meetings um a resident noted that in the past some expenses had been used for more than simply roadway maintenance and so this was to clarify that there were for other there are other purposes that fall under that category so I don't know that this is the the final language but I I think it has to do with that so that it was clear that it was more than simply maintenance of the existing roadway we can ask further so so can I ask so on things where there's xes I assume numbers are going to be filled in there that correct article six yeah so typically what yes so the the math will get um finalized there are still some that particular one they're actually to ask to dismiss because the bids came in and it fell within budget so was a placeholder at a time where they waiting to see how the bids came in and what the Delta may be but they actually came within the budget so they're going to to tell me to dismiss this article I'm amazed that it's 1.6 million for a feasibility study for Robinson school doesn't that seem crazy amount of money do you yes it's not not rebuilding the school and I also ask on article four is there going to be any efficiency

projects I believe perhaps in the I don't know if we have the motions doc I thought there was a specified dollar amount okay not sure if it was 200,000 I'm not sure I don't want to throw a bad number out there it was 200,000 okay we have like an All-Star audience here so this is great thank you wel of which comes from monies that have already been received from Grants and this would facilitate facilitate being able to do that right anything else we want to discuss you good all right so uh review of draft minutes get a motion to review the draft minutes for January 21st 25 and February 3rd to 2025 motion approve second all right any discussion Bob no Joan no comments all those in favor say I do we wa do we individual we can do both right okay all those in favor say I I I uh we do have correspondence from the wonderful folks in gron about their adus bylaw Amendment for accessory dwelling units if you're interested have anything else all right motion to adjourn so moved second all those in favor I