Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

Are you going to make a meeting tonight? Good evening, Attorney Quest. Hello, Connie. How are you? Very good. Pleasure to see you again. It's been a little while. It has. It has. These things have been going You don't see me. [laughter] So, what does that tell you? They see me, folks. Yeah. [laughter] [laughter] Never good.

No, we don't. We don't we don't have a computer. We have one at the end.

Man of the hour. He is punctual, isn't he? It was like for me. Yeah. No, I'm just saying. I'm just saying he usually shows up like right at the man of the hour. It took me years to get to be that close.

Yeah. Art, huh? Jesus talking about people Yeah. See after the fireworks

takes [snorts] something to be seen early who is supposed to be [clears throat] And the but there's no Zoom on your on your agenda.

There's no Zoom number. Um, I would have them, um, they should just call somebody and put them on speaker. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah, they used to be

What do you need? extension. Do they have to actually speak or is it something that they could have done by say a letter? Okay. It's probably calling in. Yeah. Is there are they at risk of for who? I'm not sure. Okay. So,

okay. So, why don't you um why don't you extend the permit for 30 days tonight without without hearing them and and schedule them for December and then they're not at risk of losing their permit and you guys can then Atwood Atwood was it the request for extension? You should be able.

Oh. Oh.

Hi Andy. How are you? Good evening, Mr. Glides. [snorts] Happy Thanksgiving. Happy Thanksgiving to you, family. This meeting is being recorded.

Thank you. [clears throat] The recording has stopped. Area 58. Are we okay? Yes.

Okay. Very good. Good evening. Welcome to the planning board meeting of November 25th, 2025 in the Carver Town Hall meeting room number one. These proceedings will be videotaped and rebroadcasted by Area 58 TV. If we could all please stand for the flag. I 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.

Hello everyone. The first matter we have on our agenda tonight is a discussion about the MBTA zoning bylaw. This is a discussion and possible vote regarding compliance deadline and proposals for the 2026 annual town meeting, the hiring, use, and communications with consultants and other related issues. Um, we have attorney Amy Quessle here tonight as town councel, but I would like to just say that, um, at the special town meeting, it was very clear how the residents voted on this matter. Uh, I think it's important that we have a discussion about this so that it allows us to move forward. But this particular subject matter on the agenda was recommended by and written by town council, not attorney Quessle, but she's here to assist us uh this evening regarding the subject matter. So, Attorney Quest, if you could please help us. Uh I know that some of the concerns were you know authorizing me or perhaps together with another member to have certain conversations moving forward. Um just guide us direction.

Sure. So um as you all know um as an adjacent small town you are supposed to be in compliance by December 31st of 2025. So, um that that won't happen because there's not going to be a town meeting scheduled between now and then. So, um we are if if the town is looking to get into compliance, your your your first opportunity to do that would be at the spring town meeting. And so um between now and then you have the opportunity to um work with a consultant and come up with a new overlay an overlay that will support only the you know the 200 200 and some units. Um, and quite honestly, I would recommend that um that Carver does what most which which quite a few other towns have done, which is paper compliance, which is and and I think that's what you you attempted to achieve last time.

Um, which is you put your um, you know, you put your overlay over a an existing established um, lot. So established with either housing on it already, established with commercial. Um so different towns have done it different ways. Um for example, Ducksberry did it over existing housing. U Marshfield did it over existing commercial um uses. And um and so that I think as a result of the special town meeting, that's probably the way that that you want to go is to go with just paper compliance. And so to do that, you would need to

um work with a consultant, work with Sherped um or Old Colony somehow to come up with this new overlay and the bylaw. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone on the board have any questions about this?

Aside from established institutions like churches and libraries and such, what is not allowed to be on the map? Um, anything that's any public land, any public lands. So, um, schools, fire stations, police stations, town hall, um, cemeteries, open space owned by the town. Um, um, transmission lines, but not necessarily easements for um, for, you know, for utilities. But um there there is a whole list of what is excluded lands state land excluded in in particular or just all state lands that's public lands publicly owned lands. Okay.

Yep. So anything that's publicly owned is is excluded. Would that go for housing in the town too?

Uh it depends. It it would actually it depends on who owns the housing. If it's owned by say a housing authority um most likely um that would I think actually I think owned by a local housing authority is not excluded but owned by the state would be excluded. Um, what about in regards to one of the issues we ran into with what was proposed was we were proposing a certain number on there 235 um with open space requirements. Uh, and that's that's allowed. So, it it's my understanding that the open space requirement was to get that number down because the first number was in the 800s. And so, um they essentially they took the lot and they split it and they created an open space area to get the number down. Um that is not always necessary. Um and so I think that it I think that EOHLC has said that that's allowed. But I haven't seen any other towns do that. Okay.

I haven't seen any towns do that. Um, so your your better bet is to again find another location, another overlay that would only support the 235,

right? Because part of the issue is in regards to our own bylaws um and density in regards to that. So it's unlikely to be put in a village area in this town. So, it's almost certainly going to end up in a form of residential area and the requirements of the residential area are 60,000 square foot lots, which clearly the state doesn't want to allow that. So, how do we address that if we choose an area that will allow for say 235 houses without it being in a village district and do we is it exempt at this point or

correct? So, it's an overlay. So [clears throat] what you have is say say you put it in your village district you um you have your underlying zoning which allows for commercial um mixed use things like that and it has a it has a certain lot size. Um your overlay is going to be a completely different set of requirements. Your overlay is going to allow up to 15 um units per acre. Um and it will allow things like um you know different kind different types of screening buffering um at different heights even to get to that density. Um but the underlying zoning stays. And so if you owned a lot in the in the overlay, you could decide whether you wanted to build that lot in accordance with the underlying zoning or the or the overlay, but you can't do it under both.

Okay. Um, you finish, what are the issues we're going to run into if we decide to put multiple lots together to form this overlay district?

You definitely can do that. Um, they have to be contiguous. Um, and most likely you're only going to have one overlay, although I mean with Yeah, probably you would only have one overlay with 235 units, but um you could do two separate you could do two separate locations, but um one of them has to have over 50% of the of the area. Now again um if it's in a residential area and say we pick out the 15.2 acres required in that but it's surrounded by other houses. How do we deal with that? Well the other houses would not they wouldn't be part of the overlay is what you're saying.

But there's going to be issues. Yes.

Mhm. So there's, you know, when people buy property, they do expect uh a certain continuence of what they have and their rights to enjoy it. And if we dumped it in the middle of a residential area and it's surrounded by other houses, um, and we have our own setbacks and requirements in that sense, how do we deal with with that sort of uh it's kind of like attacking a neighborhood. So again, um the only real way to deal with that is is is you have to work with a cons you have to work with a consultant and your consultant can figure out if you can provide for say 100 foot buffer or 300 foot buffer. But you have to have a consultant that puts all of this through the model because if you require large buffer zone buffers between the overlay lot and say an adjacent lot uh you have to be able to make sure that you can still do the density that's required by the state.

Okay. Yeah. I don't have any do we have a consultant? Are we still working with a consultant? That's that's the reason why it's on the agenda. the same one or can we use a different one?

Well, that's [clears throat] open for discussion. So, the whole purpose of this is to for us to come together and figure out, you know, are we going to continue the discussions? Will, you know, we we vote on this to move forward uh to have the discussions. Uh, I think we're open to, if I'm not mistaken, um, opening up the lines of communication with the Barrett planning group or entertaining another planning group. That's a possibility. I think that's where a lot of the problems, you know, fell last time is that the lack of communication. There was no direct line of communication. What we were saying was not being appropriately trans

and so that's why we're having this discussion now. Yeah. Yeah. Is it allowed that one or two members of the planning board become the uh go between intermediates? Just two. Yes. Right. Just one or two. Maximum two. All right. But yes. Y and and the only other thing that um the the choice of consultant is 100% up to the board. Um the only thing that I would say is that um the the bear group has already run all the models. they have all your modeling. So, um, might be easier, but again, I'm I don't know the model,

might save some time. I would be inclined to go back to them. I thought they were acting in a professional manner, but it was other outside I would agree influences that we had no control over issues. I think we should show those concerns just so we're all level set the first day. I I think they're fully aware of our concerns, but [laughter] Y doesn't hurt to [clears throat] No, but we overcommunicate sometimes

and I and I think that we did communicate that at a couple of the meetings, but um now [clears throat] in just reflecting back, you you can see why it happened. Um so that's the reason for this discussion tonight and if we want to vote on this and allowing you know myself with another member of the board to have those discussions um you know that would probably be helpful if we're able to bring this to to the spring meeting. My last question is going to be the planning board has the power and authority to um put warrant articles on.

Um it appears that the select board says those have to be in by December 31st. Uh we are not going to be in by December 31st. Under what rules are we under? What onus are we in presenting this and having it making sure it makes it on the warrant? So, we would have to we would have to speak to administration because um a lot of times you could put a placeholder on the warrant. They said no placeholders, but yes, that is typically what we would do,

right? And then um if if I I don't I mean, I don't know for certain, but I would think that the warrant wouldn't go out to to be published, you know, in January. So, if you put a placeholder on, you you should be okay. Um, the other thing is that sometimes when you have an annual town meeting, you also have a special town meeting at the same time. And the special town meeting, the warrant closes a lot sooner, a lot closer to the date of the town meeting. So, we I'd have to talk to administration and figure it out. We usually we usually work backwards from from the date of town meeting. Right. Right. Which is uh so it usually has to be printed around the uh end of u March. Yeah.

For the middle of April. Right. So, so we're not looking to hold up that far, but again, we're not looking to rush anything through. So, that's where we're kind of running into a It would be close to impossible for you to have a new overlay chosen by December 31st. That was a lot of our problem before. We got really due diligence and communication was a problem.

There any other questions? No questions. Would we like to uh entertain a motion to allow myself with another board member if someone's willing to do so to allow these discussions with the Barrett Planning Group? So moved. Okay. Very good. Kevin Robinson says I. Mr. Shay says I. Phillips says I

Marilyn Williams says I the only question I would have is we should probably determine that who that other board member is right now or leave that to you could do that at any at any time up to you. All right. Very good. All right. So that would we don't need to cover anything else in your opinion. Do we attorney? No, not right now.

Okay. Very good. All right. So moving on to the next Very good. Next on the agenda this evening is an ANR plan. The proposal consists of the combination of three lots into one lot assesses map 14-9-0-R and 14-6-R located at 184 Senna Street Carver Mass in the residential agricultural zoning district. Good evening.

Good evening. Um Rick Goodro with United Consultants. He prepared the plan for the uh ANR approval. Uh the applicant, Mr. Roy Doors, uh has requested the three parcels of land he own owns uh to be combined into one plan for recording at the registry of deeds. Okay. Uh there's an existing house lot that has frontage on center street, which is a county layout.

It has adequate frontage per your zoning bylaw. uh he's in the last few years accumulated two parcels, one from the town of Carver through a tax title taking that was ultimately conveyed to him and then one from a private transfer of property. So the plan here is or the proposal here on the plan you have is to combine these three parcels into one parcel. Okay. Thank you. Did you sign in? I'm sorry. Uh

thank you. And for anybody speaking, if you could um let us know who you are for the minute so she says appropriately who said what. Thank you.

Very good. Does anyone on the board have any questions? Yes. Um, all three properties are owned by the same individual. Yes. All right. And I don't have any questions. Uh, I do think our disclaimer, our typical disclaimer should be put on the uh map. Uh, typically it says planning board endorsement of this plan is not a determination as to conformance with zoning regulations. should be on all ANRIs I think that come before us and it seems to be lacking in this one. With that I would make a motion to approve as edited. Okay.

Hi. Mr. Chase says I say Marilyn Wood says I [clears throat] excuse me.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next on the agenda this evening, we have an ANR plan. This is not deemed to be a subdivision because all the proposed tracks have frontage on a pre-existing public way and no new public ways are proposed as part of this application assistance map 122-2 and 5-1 located at Mayflower Road Carver Mass in the residential agricultural zoning district. Good evening.

Good evening. Uh my name is Brandon Barry with Merill Engineers and Land Surveyors. We prepare the ANR plan in front of you. Uh we are taking a portion of an existing lot, map 122-2, uh and a lot that was created on there, map 122-5-1, uh and subdividing that into seven new lots. Uh the lots all have frontage on Mayflower Road that complies with zoning. Uh they have the required lot area, lot width, uh and upland percentage. So they all comply with zoning. Um there's no subdivisions or anything else created, so we believe it's just an ANR plan. I will tell you that the uh application is incomplete because it doesn't contain the 100t and 65 ft setback buffer zones that are required as part of the application process. weapons.

Yeah, it does. There's no way for us to determine with any certainty whether these are even buildable lots. That's why our disclaimer is so important. Agreed.

I see a little discrepancy in the zoning compliance table to the actual square footage on the lots. I know that some has to do with Upland, but we can certainly um check on those there. Um I know they have been checked again. Um regardless of the discrepancy, the lots are conforming. um even if the smaller number does prevail. Um and we have checked them all from like you mentioned there's an upland percentage but they all are over the required 70% that is that's deemed upland area

and u you're also using part of the cranberry block. Is there a reason why because it doesn't appear that you'd have to uh that is just where the the lot line end so so as not to leave a portion of the lot or back area behind there. Um we're just including those within the lots. And are there any there are no easements shown in those areas either? Uh that land would become part of the the lots that are created. So the cranberry bog would no longer be in in existence. It would not be operational in those sections. No. Okay.

And then you had remaining land. So you haven't shown a definitive area of the remaining land that is from the parcel 122-2. Okay. Um the parcel 122-2 is um in about 250 acres total. Um so we're taking just about 13 of that in the section that we're looking at. Uh that has frontage all along Mayflower with the exception of some smaller subdivision lots at the end. So, uh, roughly, you know, close to a mile plus of frontage, uh, and then area in excess of, you know, 200 acres. So, would you consider that to

that would remain as parcel 122-2 and that wouldn't be its own lot now that you've or created these loads? Yes, that would stay as its own lot and as it own lot, but you don't give any identification to that other than an assessor's reference. Just the remaining land section there. Yes. I would go back to Mr. Sha's comment as well.

We can get the uh revised plan showing the buffer areas added. Any other questions from the board?

Irrigation is going to obviously go away. I know you talked about the bog green. Oh, the um the trench there. Mhm. That that would be going away also or the the trench going into lot seven.

We would um at this point we you know we haven't done a full design on those. So, we would either design around that to locate the house on it to allow that connection to maintain um because I know the bogs on the opposite side of the road will remain um in operation. But that's not something that we fully determined with the owner on how they want to handle that lot there. So, Mr. Sheay, could you just repeat what your um comment was on the application?

All protected areas uh wetland should be delineated and the 65 foot and 100 foot should be delineated. Otherwise, we can't tell if it's buildable lot, if there's access to the lot, or other issues we might have. Okay. We've had the discussion before. It should have been put on the application with all the requirements for it. Absolutely.

So, I don't think we've ever had this happen with an A&R plan. Is there a section in the It's not I know it was not on the application requirements checklist that we filled out to show those. Is it a requirement in the bylaw to have that on the subdivision plan? It is. Yeah, it is. It specifically listed out and we had gone over it with uh on several occasions um that it should have been uh easily understood and put on. So, I'll have to look into that.

So, at the moment, this is incomplete. Oh, that's up to the board to Yeah, I would say so. Get a motion.

To have it completed by Well, they that's up to them. I'll second it. Yeah, very good. Um, if we're going to vote on it, there should be no further charges or issues. Uh, he can just bring it back. um if it fails uh whenever he feels it's appropriate. I would imagine if I may. Yes, please.

Yes, please. Um so with an with an approval not required plan, the only thing that the planning board is allowed to look at is frontage. If the frontage is adequate, um it's not up to the planning board to determine if the lots are buildable or not. That is up to the building commissioner. Right. Um and so um the not including the wetlands with regard to whether the lot is buildable or not, that does not matter. Um but not having the delineated wetlands would only matter on an ANR plan if you think that access is going to be impeded by the wetlands. There is a case out there that says that um wetlands that are along the frontage of the lot um what created elucory access which means that even though they had 200 ft of frontage the wetlands did not allow them access. So, if there's no question that the wetlands um are going to, you know, interfere with their access with their frontage, um well, I guess I would say I would recommend in either in in in any event to have to continue this with the consent of the applicant to your next meeting so he can bring in the plan that shows the the delineation of the wetlands.

Okay. Is that acceptable if the applicant isable? I think the the question was not the delineation of the wetlands but the buffers themselves because the wetland lines are delineated on the plan. Okay. So then um and the only there's there's no wetlands across the frontages that we are showing. So I will withdraw my second. Okay. Very good. Yes. You are you withdrawing your motion? I am withdrawing my motion. And I will so move to approve. Do you want to second it?

Second. Mr. Le Robinson says I. Mr. Chase says I. Elleno says I. Marilyn Williams says I. Just finish signing in. Thank you, Attorney.

[snorts]

Thank you all. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Next on the agenda, we have a public hearing continued where Ham Street Solar 2 LLC requesting a special permit and site plan review pursuant to section 29-3-1, 29-3-6, 29-5-3, and 29-4-3 of the Carver zoning bylaw located off Wear Ham Street and Carver, Mass. assesses map 134 lots 4-2A, 4-2B, and 4-3 in the residential agricultural RA zoning district. This project consists of a large scale roundmounted solar photovic system with a coupled battery energy storage system and uh I don't know if anyone is here this evening, but there has been uh an application to request a continuence on this matter. to December 9th, 2025. No one is here. Are you

I'm not with the project, but I have a quick comment if you guys are open to it. I don't I don't think we can take out You You could It's up to you. Um because they're requesting the continuence, you have to allow the continuence. Um you can't take any you you really can't take any testimony. So, so if if if the gentleman's going to offer evidence, you couldn't you wouldn't be able to take that. Um, but I don't know what the comment is. Is it It's not evidence. It's just a comment. Yes. Okay. [clears throat]

My name is Nick Jens. I live at 107 Street. It was a recently subdivided lot off of this parcel. I believe my lot's still shown as a part of this project. Um, so I'd like to see the plan updated to remove my lot from the project. The So mostly just hoping you guys could pass that along and they could update their plans. We could certainly do that, Nick. Thank you.

Yeah. You just purchased that lot, that home just this month. Yeah.

Welcome to the neighborhood. You're my [clears throat] neighbor. [laughter] All right. Um, so the applicant, thank you. The applicant is not here and has requested a continuence to December 9th. I will make a motion to continue the public hearing for wear 2 LLC off street and car till December 9th 2025 7 p.m. cover town hall room second. Mr. Lake I Robinson says I Mr. She says I.

Ellen Still says I. Marilyn Williams says I. Okay. Next on the agenda this evening, we have a public hearing. Weather vein at Silver Street LLC requesting a special permit and site plan review 7 and 9 Silver Street in Carver, Mass. assesses map 67 lots 4-3 and 4-f in the residential agricultural zoning district to construct four new triplex residential town houses consisting of 12 total units. Good evening. Good evening. How are you? How are you?

My name is Jeff Tatio. I represent uh the applicant. With me is Taylor Corissano from Crocker Design and Jim Bristol um from where the van at Silver Street LLC is in back of us here. We put up um on the board. Uh this is uh 79 Silver Street. It's 9.18 acres. Uh you folks have seen this um a few years ago in a different iteration. Um to sum up what's happened uh here we had um 18 two-bedroom 55 and over proposed several years ago and there were questions with respect to um the well regulations as to the number of bedrooms. So this has been reduced um basically the same concept the 55 and over townhouse but it's been reduced to 12 onebedroom uh units. So, what we've done is we've um used a similar uh array of what we've got for the units. Basically, we're looking at four triplexes and um the units are about 1,000 square foot each. Um and then we also show you can see the small rectangle which is slightly to the east. That would be a barn um which is about 1,800 square ft. just an accessory um for uh lawnmowers uh you know lawn type equipment uh to have there and that's got its own separate uh infiltration. Overall, we're looking at 45% uh open space and you've got a 30% requirement for the 55 and over uh townhouse developments of this uh size. Um parking, we are probably a little overparked. We're looking at 33 spaces, 16 uh garage uh spaces, either uh one per unit, and then we've got four other garage uh which are arrayed up a little closer to Silver

Street. And then we've got um one parking space in front of each garage and then I believe we've got five visitor uh spaces. So ample parking um with you know rather efficient array of um you know the the pvious should the impervious um on the property. Uh going through we've asked for I believe three waivers and that would have to do with uh first the having to show all the 10in plus caliper trees. In this instance if you remember um the folks who were here before this is all previously quarried. It's It's pretty much chewed up. Um not a lot of tree cover certainly. Um nothing anything substantial. It's all just second growth. Um and we talked about that the last time. Uh also, uh we would ask for a waiver with respect to section K of your list for the site plan review. Um we don't believe that a traffic report uh would be warranted just given um such low uh density of the residential use with the you know 12 bedrooms. Um and then finally we've got the 40ft buffer which is required in the 55 plus town houses. And what we show is we've got the buildings at 40 ft. Um but we've got atgrade patios in the rear which I think the um closest would be like 31 ft. This was also an aspect that uh we had as part of the plan from last time and I believe the recommendation and the discussion had to do with um the applicant has agreed to um one we're going to retain uh the wooded area. It's kind of as shown on the plans also erect defense and um there's also a grade difference between the abuing properties and then where the um first floor will be of these buildings something like four five ft so it arrays so that that would be a very effective um a very effective buffer. Um the septic and the wells have already been uh discussed

with the board of health. Uh so we've got the septics which are if I may quickly you can see them as rectangles up close to the silver street. So those have already been uh reviewed. So um I think we're looking good on those and give me one second if I will. Um oh septic uh huge improvement uh first because it's the uh 55 and over. looking at the um enhanced numbers for the um for the D for the gallon per day numbers. Before with the 18 twobedrooms, we're looking at a design capacity of 2,700 gallons per day. Um now with 12 onebedrooms, we're at 1,380. So in effect, we've got about half of the daily presumed discharge for that. So um those were some of the questions that um the neighbors asked last time. The other had to do with uh just water consumption uh because you've got everything on wells. Um obviously the numbers kind of reciprocally uh are reduced. So we're extremely efficient from that perspective. Um we've got the fire letter. So we've got some open uh issues with respect to I think we need to um go in and upgrade the truck turning radius which won't be a problem. Um you know and that's certainly something that we uh we owe the fire department. Also they recommend that we have a followup with respect to um sighting and designing the hydrant which we're agreeable to. And then the other one is that uh these will be sprinklered. So um similar to um the other project that we had done um up the street um where we had the uh sprinklers. We've got experience working with Carver Fire Department on those. I'm just going to go through my checklist. Um, one open issue, um, I believe that, um, well, I do know that there's a, um, RDA on there's a quarry

hole which is located to the east where the property begins to go down beyond, um, the utility easements and, uh, question. I believe the conservation agent is asked about the status of that. there is a um determination a negative determination of applicability which remains in place until December of 2026. We've not located that document, but we do have the meeting minutes that confirm all that. We will be following up um to make sure that uh you know we get all those materials to the agent. And with that, uh we have not provided um elevations of the buildings. Uh they're similar. It's basically going to be the same as what we did at South Meadow. Um, also similar to what was shown before, obviously reduced scale, um, given that they're only the one-bedroom, 1,000 square ft, but the same uh same quality, kind of the the high quality um, you know, siding, roofing, etc. So, uh, good product from that perspective. Uh, they're going to have a condominium um, association. So we've got um that which is going to be put in place with respect to um you know treatment of the grounds and and maintenance. Again it's not a large development but it's large enough so that um you know the common scheme particularly around a um a culde-sac which comes into the middle uh that uh that should be something you know which they can put some emphasis on. Uh issues with respect to the last uh peer review. We haven't seen a peer review for this proposal yet, but the last one um we just went through the checklist. Um there was one open issue that oh uh trash collection will be private. Um and then I anticipate at some level that we'll we'll hear from uh the review if that is prepared this evening. And I think we're prepared assuming that it's probably going to be similar to the last

one. um you know, we're prepared to uh discuss any of you know, additional requirements and uh any additional uh conditions that might be uh warranted. Very good. Thank you,

Mr. Binds. Do you have anything on this project?

Good evening. Andy Gle with Fust O'Neal uh town consultant. Um uh we have prepared a draft of our review um for the updated submission. We haven't issued that to the town of applicant yet. Um we're hoping to do that tomorrow. Wanted to attend the meeting this evening and then um make any adjustments to our draft comments. um happy to uh provide a general overview of our comments tonight um and can certainly address or provide any additional uh input that the planning board um would like this evening as well. Um I guess initial comments um we are still carrying that comment regarding the dumpster location and pad fencing. Um know the applicant uh acknowledged that the building elevations haven't been provided yet. Uh we are commenting on that as well. Um uh would also like to see some additional information regarding proposed site lighting um and fixtures as well as uh mounting heights. um recommending a condition uh if the project is approved to reiterate that the road will remain private. Uh I know the applicant has mentioned that in their submission documents would like to solidify that.

Okay. In the decision. Um we have not seen uh from the applicant any landscaping plans or details. Uh since the applicant is requesting a waiver from a buffer zone, I would recommend that the planning board review the landscaping plan uh which you know might help make uh determination on whether or not the planning board wants to approve that waiver.

Okay. Um the uh density seems appropriate based on what the town bylaws are allowing and as the applicant mentioned uh previously they were proposing 18 now they're down to 12. Um there are a handful of minor storm water comments mostly uh regarding collection and conveyance and not the overall storm water management approach. Uh but uh adding some additional drain basins to mitigate risk of localized ponding within the site specifically in the backyards of the proposed units and also uh relocating one of the catch basins that's proposed in the center island. um moving that to the edge of pavement and then adding a separate drain basin for that landscape area just to really mitigate risk of clogging or any localized ponding there. Um and then also specifically regarding the infiltration system for the barn. Um we believe either the slope down gradient of that would need to be revised uh to 15% or less or um the location need to be revised so that uh maintains 50 foot horizontal setback. Essentially, it's just um too close to that um downgradient slope and um just some minor uh detail and plan revisions that we'll outline in the formal review memo that again hoping to issue uh before the long weekend. Um, other than that, uh, happy to, uh, provide any additional input, uh, if the planning board has any specific questions regarding the application.

Thank you. We have any questions that we have for the board? I have a few. Um, let's I'm going I have a list, so I might cover them more than once, but uh, let's just start with, uh, my concern over that you're requesting that the uh, 40 foot natural buffer zone be reduced to what? So the 40 foot we to 32 32 or the patio showing that what you're proposing for buffering along that line is anywhere down to zero.

There's no trees in it today. I think we can handle that with the landscape plan. Um, I know Jim has talked to some of the neighbors over in that area as it relates to some of those items. Um, but there's really not too many nice there's not a good buffer there today since it was quied out.

On page C2, you clearly have existing wooded areas of offsite. Um, and you're asking for this uh the refinement of the natural vegetative buffer to be down at some points to zero in the north west corner where there's an existing well. It looks like there there's nothing there. And then in the north southwest corner, it looks like you're only proposing a couple feet of the natural buffer in that area. Can we get somebody? I can't hear.

So, it's a natural buffer area, [clears throat] not necessarily like a setback. Yep. I I will do my best. Thank you. So, so is it a natural in reality, you're not looking for us to reduce the natural buffer uh buffer line down to 31 32 ft. You're you're asking us to pretty much dispense of it entirely. Yeah, Connie. We'll look we'll take a look at that. All right. And I think we can mitigate that with something. It's going to take a lot of mitigation because honestly with people already living in that area, I'm not inclined at all to approve anything that's less than the required amount of natural buffer space in that area.

Yeah, we we'll get something more to you. I think that that did come up last time when we went out there and we walked it and I my recollection is we were we said what you know we were kind of impressed with the extent to which it was chewed up already because of [snorts] the graveling. So I I thought we reached some um progress on that but we'll get some photos and more if we need to add some more screening in there we can we can work with that too. Yeah. Uh, your barn should also be screened from the neighbor's property. I can see it's outside the 40 foot buffer, but it still needs some screening. If there was any sort of uh

reduction in buffer that I would allow, that would be the area that I would allow it. Now it looks like your proposed well is on one side of the utility lines and the development is on the other side. Mhm. Um how do you propose to get the water from one side to the other by connecting it across the power line easement to the well? Do you have approval through Eversource to do the digging and such on we will coordinate with Eversource. We just did the same thing on a project down in Walpole. Um they just prefer that you cross perpendicular and they work with you on utility crossings um and grading in the easements. All right, we'll need a copy of that. Mhm.

Um now we've taken a walk on this property before and there was extensive wetlands and uh our conservation uh commissioner um Mr. Asen here has some very serious concerns in regards to this. And part of that is uh going in and talking to the conservation board and getting a annotated description of the uh the wetlands cuz when I look at um even just we had walked it before and the extensive there was extensive wetlands down in the the eastern part of the property. But also going back and refreshing my memory, it appears that two holes were filled in in the the northwest corner. Um they show up on uh the satellite map. So I'm curious as to whether what what process have been done to fill those in. So there should be some sort of paper trail in regards to conservation commission or something in regards to that.

That's what I was referring to with the RDA that's out there. But we'll definitely follow up with the new agents, okay? Because you get both the east and the west sides to deal with on that. Um, they also raised a lot of concerns about the where the barn and the well is being proposed, much like Mr. Glind did. Um, what is the purpose of the barn? It's necessary um to allow for, you know, mowers, things that would be in control of the association. Okay. Then what's the four bay garage for? Just for rental extra rental for the units or Yes.

What utilities is the barn going to have? It will have water um and electric. It will have water. Yeah. And electric. I I expected electric. I wasn't so sure about the water. uh that will be prohibited from being developed into residential. Of course, of course. Um we're going to have to wait for the conservation commission to come back in regards to confirming your uh net usable land area. Do you want me to talk about that one more time or do you want me to?

Um m Mr. Glines will confirm that we have a safe distance from the intersection for the driveway. Uh, and I expect you will provide some sort offormational sheet to show how the units vary in style, structure from I'm sorry, from what perspective? Um, well, we we require that the the units be varied in detail, style, form. So, they're not all the same. They don't all look the same. They're not all the same color.

Y because the 30% open space requirement excludes wetlands and buffers. 40 foot buffer retained in its natural state. He'll uh ensure and the building envelopes are are reasonable in relation to the fire department letter. If you don't have that, I'm sure we can provide that and the letter from the uh conservation officer, too. Yep.

And we're going to want to do a sidewalk and make sure that the uh snow storage area is capable of handling the uh what is being proposed. Great. And um I would be very surprised indeed if this board was to overrule our conservation officer in his advisement against permitting lom and seed in the proposed open space. come to this group.

I don't think so. particular

um you were going to provide a landscaping plan to our engineer. Yeah. Participation in this follow. Yes, we will. Okay. Thank you. Get the landscaping in there. Yeah. I don't have any further questions off the top of my head. Great. Thank you, Mr. Robinson.

Okay. Very good. All right. Where is this is a public hearing tonight? Would anyone like to come up and speak on this matter? And one more thing, um, your proposed, uh, top soil stockpile site is in the, uh, easement. That should be included in approval from Eversource because that will require heavy machinery and some digging. Thank you. Thank you. You should see what we're doing in the ease of it's huge. You both signed it on. As long as we did not

as long as they are fine with it. Thank you.

Public. I'm just waiting for you two to sign in and then I'll

Are you signing for me? Sure. Thank you. Can you make a note to have Michelle make sure that both Mr. Gle and the applicant are provided with uh I think the fire department and the um conservation agents letters. Yeah,

thank you. All right. Would anyone like to come up and speak on this matter?

Yes. Good evening. Uh Ron Wall, Six Silva Street. If you could just sign in as well.

Thank you. Okay. Well, uh, you guys will have to excuse me. I the attorney I could barely even hear him. I I was really listening because this has been real real important to a bunch of us in the neighborhood. Okay. So, so four four buildings that they've gone down from a a large amount down to four now. So that's going to be it for the property. Is that the end of the line or is there going to be something else at a later date?

So that's it. So there four buildings in triplexes and there's one um that utility accessory bar which is showing as well right here. Yeah. Okay. Now is this you guys have another operation going over on South Meadow. Is [snorts] this affiliated with that directly or how is this going to work? They're separate. They're basically um same development group but they're separate projects but they'll um they'll look like it. So the materials that are used over there will basically be similar we owe elevations. We didn't

Okay. So you're going to have like a like a low income on both areas or is this going to be one area or how's how's that work? This this has um it's all 55 plus and it's got two um two moderate income and then so it's 10 market. Okay. Uh no. Okay. Now we discussed this I've been here several times. Uh what's the final elevation going to be on this property? The final elevation is it looks like about what was it? They they at one point in time talked about going up 12 feet. With tailings?

No. No, it's not. But what is it, Taylor? It's like around 120ish. So, it's around 120ish. So, if I take a look at the two properties this side, um I'd say I believe it's about 4T lower. Oh my god. Do you realize that you're going to have to bring it up six or seven feet to get four feet lower? I'm going to have to request that every time somebody else speaks, you have to identify yourself, please.

Taylor Person Design Group. So, [clears throat] as you come in off of um Silva Street and kind of the same elevation at these homes, you're up around 124 125. Um these houses kind of sit around 120, 121, and then the site kind of slopes off and down this way. As you know, when you look out there because you quarried down like 10 to 12 feet, right? It's all It's all water on that other corner anyway. Yeah, it's ground water. All sit lower than what your homes are at. So, we're So, how much lower? Uh, probably roughly like fiveish feet. What are you going to fill that with to bring it up to that level? We don't need Well,

again, you have to identify yourself every time you speak. It's a pain, but it Wick six. Thank you. Okay, I'll I'll I'll try to remember. Good. I have a lot of questions. I hope I'm not being too much of a pain in the ass everybody. So I I don't understand when if you're going to bring it up that much. You got to fill it with something. We don't have to stand for town property center group. We do not have to bring it up um that much. The site over here were kind of staying at existing grade. It starts to drop down. Um they did initially fill in a little back here because it was kind of sloping off onto this property. I live across the street. It's down. and we're kind of following the grade as best we can. So, there will be a little bit of filling down here. Um, but they own an operation.

So, you're going to have that in a hole. That's like That's a 12ft hole. So, it's going to flatten out. Um, it's just that as you get over here, it's going to be lower. It's not like drastically. Well, you really can't go lower on that end up Ron Wall Street. You really can't go lower on that end. Right. Right. It Right. If we get questions, we can ask them, but we're not we're not here to Yeah. argue over things. But yes,

you've brought it to our attention and uh I believe Mr. Glinds will be able to address that um from our perspective at our next meeting. So he'll we'll make sure that he ensures uh that he takes a close look at exactly what is going on because I understand you're concerned um about the topography of the area as are we because it is the way the area was used in the past. It has created a lot of issues well to that property war six street they they did fill a pond in there an existing little pond that's on well I don't know this there's neighbors that said they've been they got there in the early 70s or was that in late 60s where the proposed houses were

yeah cuz I I saw that they filled something in on the satellite plans and that's why we asked for Yeah. Wasn't that deep. It was probably 5 ft maybe at the deepest, but it was still it was there for for the animals and irrigation when they had the when they were growing garden and stuff out there. Uh yeah, that that's going to be one big question is just finding out what the elevation is going to be because that's that's down in the hole. All right. So So you're going to have Ron Wallwick Six Over Street. You're going to have deep well, shallow well. Um, I don't think we know until we dig it, but I think it would be a deep well deep well.

I I have I have just basic uh surface water, ground water, but most of the other people in the neighborhood have have deeper wells. So, that would be that would be a concern for more of them. Even if they went deep, it probably wouldn't bother me at all. I haven't had a problem in 40 years. I don't want any problems. The next situation is I'm thinking they're going to have to come in with some fill and then compact it. Now, this is going to be an issue. I've run all kinds of equipment. Anything you can possibly imagine, I've run it. And when you get big compactor vibrators in there, rollers and such, things break, foundations crack. I don't know. I mean, most of the neighbors closer to it have poured foundations. Well, that's a heck of a lot stronger than my block foundation at my house across the street, which I'm probably a couple hundred feet away, which I know how it works. I've run all the equipment and I know what happens under under certain circumstances. I that the elevation is going to be the big thing. All right.

[clears throat] Uh, so you're going to be using you you're probably going to have to use them anyways, but it's it's I it would be nice to have some protection if my foundation goes to heck, you know? I mean, I've been here 40 years, so it's in pretty good shape. I try to keep it decent, so I that would be one of my concerns. Uh, they did talk at one time about putting like sidewalks in. Remember they I remember they discussed that once and I was curious whether that was ever going to take place. It was going to go up the silver street and then down like the 58 on one side

which is Jeff Tio. Um that was requested back when it was 36 bedrooms. Um now we're basically at 12 bedrooms. So we suggested this pedestrian demand. Okay. Ron Warwick of Silver Street at now you said there was going to be a barrier. I know five Silver Street and four Main Street are the direct butters in that area. And it was also discussed that there was going to be a fence put up and some sort of foliage trees or whatever. So there'd be a barrier so no I mean these guys are here tonight and that's that was one of their concerns too. So I can save them a lot of grief. I'll just ask the question.

Yep. So Jeff Todio um yes it will have the landscape plans I believe someone's had discussions [clears throat] from last time our intention is to install the fence if they have the supplementary um plantings will actually show that on the landscape.

Okay, sounds good. Uh yeah, I think that I think that pretty well covers it. Uh, like I say, my my deepest concern was if if you're going to bring it up to the elevation, I think you're going to bring it up to because they've already brought in lots of tailings and you you start compacting that stuff. I don't care. You can compact it till the cows come home. When you're coming up that much is was what I think this is going to be. Give it 10 or 15 years, all your foundations are going to be cracked anyway.

Great. So, what I'll um Jeff talk, we'll follow up with Andy, the peer reviewer, and I'm sure he's going to have that on his list to make sure that he's satisfied. Appreciate Okay. I think uh was there anything else I missed or what? What was it? She said traffic. Tra. Okay. On six street. How about the traffic? I mean, it [clears throat] shouldn't be that bad with the versus what it was going to be.

Yeah. talk shield uh responding. Um I think Andy's going to um take a look at some of the site distances. Um for 12 um 12 bedrooms, it's they're not going to run traffic. What they would typically do is look at the closest light. They'll do warrants. This um I would respectfully suggest it's so dimminimous. Um, I mean, we'd be talking about if I would, you know, in the morning when it's time to go to work, you might get one car, you know, every two minutes. Um, you know, when four cars leave and, you know, there no other cars for another half hour when, you know, someone else has to go to work. Um, our experience on small residentials, particularly the 55 and olders, are that it's extremely low traffic usage.

Okay. Ron Walls, Silver Street. So this these were onebedrooms. Yes. Now how many people does that allow in there?

The presumption under the Jeff show the presumption under the well the basically the well regulations is they make you assume two people per bedroom. So each well can support a maximum of 24 people, which is why we're restricted to the 12 bedrooms because there's that presumption of two people per bedroom. So that's that's kind of where title five or the wellhead regulations come out. Um you tell me if it's going to be one person or two people. I just don't know what the family situation is going to be, but I would suggest it's not going to be three people.

Okay. Ron Wick, six silver street. Now the the the well situation. Uh you you guys are actually going to be fairly close to the other deep wells in the area. Like I say, it probably won't bother mine. I've got two point wells. Uh so so under under the circumstances where something happens and one of these wells go dry, what will be their recourse, spend 10 $15,000 to put a new well in themselves? I mean, how is this going to work?

I don't know. As I sit here today, I can perhaps speak with your town council and see if we can come up with for you. Okay. So, I can contact you some other time or Sorry. [laughter] No, it would have to go through the planning board. Oh, okay. You'd have to contact the planning board directly or the administrative board department. Yeah. Perhaps perhaps we could work on, you know, a response that everyone feels comfortable. Yeah. I'm I'm retired, so I I I I'm going to be able to see everything that goes on. It's not not a problem. If it's done right, it's done right. If it's not,

I'll know. So, okay. Very good. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Any anyone else like to get up and speak?

Anyway, you can't ask about traffic again. I am because here's the thing. You have to identify yourself and sign in, please. Come on up and say hi. Hello. Hi there. [laughter] I do ask about the traffic because I Could you just identify yourself please for the Alice McMahon to Silver Street. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry about that. That's all right. Um, I I do live at two Silver Street and right now it is very difficult with the amount of traffic that's on that road to try to get into my driveway or out of my driveway. So, you

I'm up near the lights. So, you're this way. I'm up at the lights. This Are you through the intersection or right [clears throat] on the corner? I'm right at the corner. Thank you.

So, for us, if we take the turn onto Silver Street, there's a line of traffic waiting to get through the the uh the light. There's been a number of times we've almost be been rearended because of people coming around the corner to come down Silver Street because we're stuck there. Um, but right now it is very difficult and I do have two other drivers in the house that will say that for us to get in and out of our driveway because people want to make that light and they'll just sit there and they won't budge or they speed through the light or speed it up to get through the light, right?

Been a number of accidents because of that. So to me, adding these extra because you're going to come right out on Silver Street, unless they're going to go right towards Plymouth, the 44, they're going to be heading out in my area, right?

And that's just going to add to the traffic situation. I I don't see it. I just have a big concern about that. So Jeff Todio um I think what you know if you can ident you know we've identified where um MCM is [clears throat] whether there's anything particular to the site design that Jeff Jeff let's uh we'll wait a minute till it because I we can't pick you up on the on this very well. So unless you're going to speak really loud, I'm going to have to ask you to move back to the microphone.

That's my concern. It is difficult as I say now. Plus you forgot the 55 plus community there, Waterview, which has a number of ambulances [laughter] coming down the street. So there there's a big concern, I think, as far as that traffic situation's concerned. And I think it it it is going to have an effect on us. They may not think so, but I do because you're adding what 12 12 more homes and even if they only have one car a piece, you're adding 12 more cars to that street, right? And that's that's concern. I understand. Thank you.

Thank you. Great. Jeff Tachio uh returning uh to respond to uh Mrs. McMahon. Um I just uh suggest that the peer reviewer will take a look at that and see if there are any you know design components, anything that um you know would cause the problems. I think that I know where her driveway is near the intersection. Um so I'm sure he'll comment on whether it's something that's uh inherent to her property. Um, and then ultimately, if the waiver isn't granted, if we have to do a a traffic review, um, you know, it's it's not going to be a situation where I I I'm positive it's not going to be a situation where they say the introduction of, you know, 12 bedrooms on Silver Street, uh, you know, is going to produce, you know, safety concern or, you know, in any way, um, you know, be injurious to the neighborhood. So, um, I just suggest that you ask your peer reviewer to take a look at it. I I believe I know what the answer perhaps is. Um, and I'll leave it at that. Thank you.

Very good. Thank you.

Would anyone [clears throat] else like to speak, please? Hi, my name is Gay Sedorian and I am directly in front of the hole and my concern is the water. Last time we were here, they said they would discuss it with me if they would cover if anything my wells went dry or anything. And I'd like to know if you've discussed this with your people and what we would what will be done.

So Jeff Tio, um I do remember that and I do remember you and Jim Bristol is writing back to you. So he's going to give you the card. Okay. and just resume those whatever conversations. I do [snorts] remember that. Thank you.

Anyone else? Would you like to speak on this matter? Hearing none. Um I just have one last question. Okay. Um, you're not bringing materials on soil onto the property and using it as a storage site or doing site work over there, are you? No.

Because there were questions raised via the satellite pictures. So that's figure and then Ron back there mentioned that there might be imported soils on the site. Yeah, if I recall, so I'm I'm trying to remember back a few years, we did have these discussions because somebody did say there was a pond and there were um frogs. Historically, um there are quarry cuts that are here and what happened was they dug them down so much that they interrupted the groundwater level and it created these, you know, kind of artificial um pits. Um there has been two rounds of um requests for determination of applicability to confirm that those were not jurisdictional uh wetlands. So there was a first one back before CO if I recall and then the most recent one was I want to say 2023 December of 2023. So the conservation commission has already um been asked to look at um in both instances whether these um whether these water pools are or are not wetland jurisdictional etc. And as of right now um and we have to get our hands on it. The answer is no. And it's no because those are good for three years. The answer is no through a year from now. So, we've we've not spoken to the agent, and I understand that it's a new agent. Um, and we don't have access right now to the um determination, but we do have their meeting minutes. So, what we're going to do is we're going to follow up with the agent and show them everything that we have. But my recollection for the one with, let's say, on the west side was that this was the old quarry, if you remember, it was really extreme. And Mr.

Bristol um did bring in some material to start smoothing it out. So that that's why it's got some smooth uh you know appearance now. But when we do go out there on the site visit I mean we'll all kind of remember just the grades. Another thing that comes up is when we talked about this accessory building um Taylor Corsano confirmed for me this is about a 10- foot grade differential. So when we do go out there, when we look at the buffers, there are those cut grades that do exist. That's what we've meant by um on some of the cut grades, they're just, you know, not only is there no 10-in or greater caliber trees, a lot of that's just scrubby low stuff. So when we look at the natural condition, um it's not what we'd expect just because of the past work that's been done out there. So I'll just mention that. So when people kind of leave here, we have the holidays whenever we're going to reconvene there that you know I won't I just to you know have that image in people's brains. I remember you guys were there before. Not everyone has been there but you know it's a good sitewalk [clears throat] and it's a bigger property than you think once you're out there on foot.

Would you like to come forward, sir? Yes. I'm Donald Clark and I've been there since 69. Been there 56 years. And right behind my property, there's a there's a hole there. It must be 12 10 or 12 feet down. That's where the pond was. There was a pond there. It had ducks. It had frogs in it and I for all I know it could have had fish. That was there when I was there when I moved there in 60 59 69.

Okay. And now they say it's a wetland. It's wetland. All right. There's a hell of a lot of hole there that they're if they fill that up, they're going to do a lot of compacting and it's going to raise hell with the with the wells. the sellers, everything. I've been I've got almost 300 foot joint to this. It was two lots when I bought it and they snuck it into one lot. It's almost 300 foot and they're on on my land there right up to it. Okay. And

there's a hell of a big hole.

Very good. Can Can you sign in, please? Not good. But I don't know. It's that land shouldn't have been taken out of there in the first place. The town didn't do right. But letting them take all that loom out, all the little sand and loom right now. It's actually it's really good for cranberry bogs. It is people going to look at it.

Oh, we're going to look at I look at it all the time. I'm right right there. Like I say, I've been there 56 years. Yeah.

Well, better put a cranberry bog in there. Yeah. And Jeff Todd show it's a lot of the comments um you know we received last time and I don't I don't think there's a lot of disagreement. It was just it was quarried hard and it was brought down to the water table and um we're dealing with what is there now today and we've got a good solution to you know to be able to put in a modest number of the residential um units with a you know with a kind of a modest affordability uh piece with you know very low bedroom count and you know we'll ask we'll ask that Crocker Design tailor from there and then also Um Andy go through and make sure that uh you know it's going to meet um design standards for putting it together. With respect to um Wells, we'll follow up on that. And I know that um from last time and I I thank you u Mr. Bristol did have some conversations with some of the neighbors as well. So I'll ask that that continue.

Very good. And for everyone um he's his car he's got his um cards and I encourage you to uh contact him after this evening. Um this is probably the 12th project that we've worked on together and um we a lot a lot of this goes on. He's really good at at speaking with people and we've had really good results.

Thank you. Thank you. Any other question from residents or public? going to continue. Would you like to make a [clears throat] motion to continue? We don't have any other further comments from the board. Are we going to the 16th of December or I don't think the 23rd is a night that anybody wants to be here. Sorry. Is that first is that first one? Oh. Um, no. We haven't discussed the sitewalk. We were just uh

okay talking about [clears throat] when we might continue it too alliance needs to be part of this. You feel comfortable within December sometime? Uh Andy Lines with Fen O'Neal. I'm pretty much holding Tuesday meeting nights for foreseeable future. So So when are our proposed next? I know they [snorts] were. So, we want to stay away from the week of the 22nd for sure. We already um continued one to the 9th. We'll probably have to have a another meeting. Yeah, we're going to have to have one probably on the 16th, I would have to say. So,

yeah, future meetings. Okay. So yeah, we do have this down for the 9th and the 16th.

So uh I'll make a motion to continue um weather vein at Silver Street. Uh 79 Silver Street, Carver Mass, special permit until December 16th, 2025, 700 p.m. Carver Town Hall one. Good. I'll second that. Mr. Lake. Kevin Robinson says I. Mr. Shay says I. Collins says I. Marilyn Williams says I. Thank you. Does the board want to discuss the sitewalk at this time or Sure. have that coordinated. You want to do that

please? Any preference any day of the week? You said the request for determination was in 2023 of the concom. Yes. So I was on concom at that time. So I don't know I am I able to participate if I was on concom. Okay. Just making sure. Okay. preference [clears throat] anyone Wednesdays and Thursdays. It have to be a Saturday probably because of the lack of lighting unless I can make it during the day on any day. That's right. I would agree it would probably have to be on a Saturday.

So other than that, um I'm good for any daytime. Thursdays, Saturdays, Mondays, and Tuesdays. I mean, I would prefer it to be 9 a.m. I can't do that.

Are you available at all on a Saturday? I'm not available on Saturdays. Okay. If it rains, sure.

I could do a Friday. is available on a Friday morning. You okay? I am. Yeah, I can do that. Could you do a Friday, Kevin? I can do any weekday. Um, that's in the morning. Friday for me. As long as it's in the morning. We're going to the 16th. Do we want to do um 12th? Maybe. The 12th. May I ask if we could do the 5th? I'm on trial um that week of the 12th and Denim. Okay. Do you want to do Friday, December 5th, everyone? Yeah. Friday, December 5th.

Believe me, I'd rather be with you folks. 9:00 a.m. 9 a.m. And uh you'll have the the roads, the buildings safe out. We can make that work. Yes. Yes. Including parking garages, the bar. Yep. Um, do you want the center line of the road stick? The center line of the road is fine. Just make sure we know where the middle of the uh the roundabout's going to go. Sure. And is it okay if we take the four corners of the triplex, not like each individual unit?

You could do each triplex. three units and uh make sure you include the proposed patios.

What are we using for an address? [clears throat] 7 to 9. I think seven is best. I think seven is the closest one. So, seven street. There's an entrance still there that you can see like right where the power lines are. Very good. Great. Thank you very much. Um, appreciate it everyone. Have a great Thanksgiving. Thank you. You

happy Thanksgiving. Okay, next on the agenda this evening, we have a public hearing on Tmont Street Solar One LLC requesting a special permit and site plan review 73 Tmont Street in Carver, Mass. assesses map 121 lot 4-0 in the residential agricultural zoning district to construct solar floating dual use canal canopy and ground mounted solar arrays with associated ESS

good evening okay thanks uh good evening madam chair and members of the board is this our microphone yes

that's our mic [clears throat] Um, for the record, Sarah Sterns with Beiels and Thomas. Uh, with me is Matt Swansberg from New Leaf Energy. Um, representing the applicant Tremont Street Solar One LLC. Um, we also have uh several other representatives as well as the landowner and their family tonight. Um, the goal of tonight is to present the project, um, discuss any preliminary feedback the board or the public may have, hopefully set up a site visit with the board, and request a continuence to our next hearing. Um, and with that, I can give an overview of the project if that, um, is the board's wish, and then we can pause and have a discussion or take questions. Um, I know we also have the town's peer reviewer here as well. Um, so we have not heard anything yet from Fussen O'Neal, but I assume, you know, this like many other projects will be a work in process. Um, so we will, you know, be interacting as the project um, evolves. So, we have a and I apologize. I had my computer with me. We've been very consistent sharing uh digitally on the screens. So, I was prepared to do that, but um I have the backup plan here today. I know it's a little hard to see, but in a minute I'll get up and sort of point to some of the um aspects of the project. So, um as the chair mentioned, this is um the address is 73 Tmont Street, map 121, parcel 4. This is a very large property um about 330 acres. Um if you drive in on Tremont Street in South Carver, you'll see the Edgewood [snorts] um Bogs LLC sign at the end of the driveway. So that's the entrance to the main property, but it is very large and goes well beyond that. Um

so as I mentioned, the applicant is Tremont Street Solar One LLC. Um the primary uh operation on this site is a cranberry operation. You can see from the plans um several bogs um in various orientations. Um what we're proposing um at this point is a multiaceted renewable energy project on the site and I will point out what's what in a moment. just to give the board a sense of what is being proposed here. Um there is a floating solar component as part of this on a um humanmade pond used for their agricultural operation. Um there is a dual use solar component on several bogs where the bogs will stay in production. Um there are several canal canopy arrays and those are similar to others we've seen on other sites as well. Um and lastly a um segment of ground mounted sort of the conventional ground mounted arrays in other areas of the site. Um and so of that it's that makes up all of those components make up approximately 30 acres on this 330 acre plus or minus site. So it is a large project but it's a very large site. So just kind of giving you a sense of the of the scale here. Um [clears throat] I just wanted to mention too that this is a project that the roads family the land owners have been extremely involved in the um thoughtful iterative process of developing this with the renewable renewable energy development company. This has been a discussion that has taken place over not just months but I

believe years. Um so this has been thought, you know, thoughtfully um um discussed and has been refined several times. Um I think I've probably only seen a small percentage of the different iterations myself, but um you know so located in places so that it's a well-sighted project both from um being set back away from other uh land owners and abutters but also so that it is not impactful to the main and primary business which they plan to continue which is the cranberry operations on this site. So, I'll I'll get up and just kind of point out some of the features that I just [clears throat] talked about. You guys again, I know it's a little hard to see, but we, you know, we added the aerial photo just to give you a sense of the openness of the site. So, you know, no tree clearing proposed on this project. This is all very wide open. The only area, this is Kant Street here, just to orient you. Um the only area where there's any site grading of any substance proposed is right at the entrance. And this is the um transmission line that runs through South Carver here, the Eversource line. And the point of interconnection and access for this site is proposed right at that um transmission line off of Tremon Street in South Carver. So this whole area is disturbed. It's used by Eversource to access their easement. So, we're proposing to utilize that area as well. Um, that's really the only area that's going to require any grading um to make a road that's appropriate for um access for the array itself, [clears throat] but also for public safety. Um, so I'm just going to kind of go like north to south. It's if it's

confusing, I can do it a different way, but just arbitrarily start from the top of the page. Um, so we have these little symbols, our wetland symbols. So this site has been delineated. Um, we have not been to Carver Conservation Commission yet. We were, um, submitting our notice of intent imminently and we'll be [clears throat] visiting with them once we get on a scheduled agenda and we'll be walking the site with them, I'm sure. But you can see there's a large area of wetland um, untouched wetland um, on the northern side of the um, power There is one existing bog up here. This bog um has a dual use array proposed within it. There are also um three rows of canopy solar in this area. It's sort of on an island sort of um surrounded by that wetland area.

Is that identified as C on the map? C um yes. Thank you.

Yep. Um, [clears throat and cough] and this this is just for presentation, site, and may be slightly different from what you're looking at. Um, so there's a road connecting uh these the rest of the property through this wetland area. Um, these two segments um these are existing upland bogs. This is not a bog, but a previously disturbed area just north of the easement. These are two proposed conventional ground mounted arrays. So no dual use, just kind of a everyday solar array. That is also where the equipment pad is housed. Um this is proposed in a location where it's sort [clears throat] of set back away from um any of the residential abutters on Tmont Street. Um and just you know at a place where it's accessible um for service. Um so ground mounted and dual use. And then coming across the right ofway, [cough] you can see in the dark uh rectangles here, this is a proposed floating solar component and then two fog proposed dual use components. Um again, really just a lot of Oh, and the canal canopies. [snorts] Um sorry, those are kind of hard to see, but um through the existing canals that are built between the bogs. So those are [clears throat] sort of the components um of the proposal and again just various iterations to get to this point to allocate areas that require the least disturbance both you know to the land itself but also to the farming operations as well. Um I just I want to note too that um we will be submitting an additional and this is probably for um Mr. lines particularly. We will plan

to [clears throat] submit a supplemental plan set with um more 40 scale sheets so that it's the details a little bit easier to review as part of your work. Um as we're preparing the conservation commission plans that we realize [clears throat] that a little more uh detail would benefit just given the scale of the property. So that will be submitted to the board and to Fuss O'Neal as well as the conservation commission. So, we're all looking at the same plan. It's all going to show the same information, but just broken up um in a way that's a little bit easier to digest. Um so, I can turn it over to Matt Swansberg from the applicant um to fill in any holes that I left. You didn't leave many holes. Matt Swansberg, uh project developer at New Leaf Energy. Uh thank you for having us this evening. As Sarah mentioned, we've been working with Edgewood Bogs uh for going on five years now to develop this project. Um I think what's really important to note here is that Edgewood Bogs will continue to own the property. We're not proposing to purchase any land from Edgewood Bogs. We will be leasing the land from them. Um, the goal was to incorporate solar on this property without impacting the core business of growing and producing cranberries. Um, so we went about this in a way to identify areas of the property where the uh the landowner can continue to grow cranberries where we're not in the way, but we can incorporate solar to generate lease revenue for Edgewood bogs. Um, this is a long-term commitment for Edgewood. They've been doing this for three generations or four generations at this point. Um, and they're going to continue to operate this farm um, for the the foreseeable

future. Um, so it took a a long time to get to this point where we have this design in front of you today. Um but working with the land owner, we're very confident that when solar is designed the right way, when the time is taken um to work with a land owner like this, we can incorporate solar on a working cranberry farm like this. Um we also have with us Have you excuse me, have you been successful at that? Have we been personally successful? Yeah,

this will be my first project that I think uh when we all get back together after it's built, knock on wood, this will be a successful project. My company, New Leaf, is currently in the development phase of these projects. Um, but what we've really leaned on are the experiences that other developers and installers have had with this type of project on Cranberry Bogs. So, you will see this through to the end, correct? you will not flip this.

Uh so my the the New Leaf business model is twofold. We choose which projects we own and keep on our balance sheet. At this stage, we haven't earmarked this project either way. Um we do sell projects to long-term owner operators and independent power producer. Um but that decision comes much later on towards the end of our development cycle. I think you probably know where I'm going with this question and why I'm asking this because of recent developments in South Kavver of a solar company coming in and now well they purchased the land. So I'm glad to know that the Roads family will continue to maintain this and and own this and they're very well respected. But my concern is whether or not the dual use can even be accomplished.

Sure. um because another project fails so miserably and I would hate to see something like that put on cranberry frogs and fail at it. Yeah. [clears throat] And and because I almost think it's it's it's a project that was designed and a concept that was designed and and I don't think the people that were behind it actually knew what they were doing. So, and if if I could add one thing too, Madam Chair, um for this project, seeing what others have gone through on various types of dual use agriculture, whether it's bog or other um commodities, I think a lot has been gleaned from past projects like anything,

right? Um and I will say for this project uh the development team has sort of taken a different tact and I have been part of other dual use projects and it has been approached differently. Um this is a very experienced team that's been put together. But the biggest difference from my perspective is that um we've met with the town and I meant to say this in my opening statement but we have met with the department heads at the town um as a group and then from there have met separately several times both at town hall [clears throat] here and on site with Carver's wiring inspectors to talk about specific design elements that may have not been included or were overlooked or unknown. own in some of the early stage projects.

That feedback and discussion has been critical to the specifics of the design elements, the safety, the discussion of what can be done to um encapsulate certain aspects of the electrical design, things that may not have been thought of in in early projects. Maybe they were, but I think perhaps not at this early design stage. So, I will say that that has been um kind of a different take on it. Um we've worked with both Carvers um electrical inspectors and walked the site with them, talked about various aspects that could be incorporated, talked to the landowner about it. Everybody's on board to make this work. Um particularly the dual use aspect of it. I think the canopies, the um conventional ground mount, it's it's been done. It's fairly straightforward. We've seen it several places in several communities. Um certainly the dual use and the floating are still relatively new concepts and getting that input and having those very frank and open discussions both with um Carver Fire Department and the inspections office has been uh instrumental and and this company has changed some of their standard designs to reflect that input. So and that's what's being presented as part of this project with the landowner support and input as well. So it's just been a very collaborative discussion both on the municipal side whereas some of sometimes more often than not the inspections group doesn't see these plans until they come to their office at the preconstruction stage not necessarily at this design and permitting stage. So we've really tried to like frontend that discussion with this [clears throat] project because it has so many elements. It's complex. It's you know it's diverse. We want to make sure we're incorporating that now. And you know,

we've gotten the feedback from the town that let's keep doing this. Let's keep having these conversations even while you're working with the planning board and conservation commission. And you know, I think everyone is committed to continuing doing that. Right. Uh Matt Swansburg with New Leaf. One other uh point that I want to make um is that I think one of one of the major differences here in addition to us leasing the land from Edgewood Bogs, Edgewood Bogs is also going to be harvesting. They're going to continue to grow. So, we're not bringing in a third party uh to to harvest the cranberries. It's critical for Edgewood Bogs that this works.

Well, I I would think so because everyone knows what their cranberry box look like. Maintain. They're beautiful. So, I can't imagine that they would [clears throat] do this, you know, and and destruct their box in any way, shape, or form. So, absolutely. Um, we also have, and I' I'd love to just take a couple of minutes. We have Ian Ian Ward here also from Solar A Services. He is our dual use consultant and has probably the most experience in this room with dual use, some of the trials and tribulations and lessons learned um that we've sort of incorporated here. Hello all. Um Ian Ward, solar agricultural services. Uh

I got you. Thank you. Um so it's it's interesting for me to be back here in front of you talking about a dual use project. Um because there are a lot of lessons that we've learned from the first goound that we had years ago. Um, and those are very valuable to incorporate into this. What I would consider, this is like version three. Version one, just to set the stage, version one was what you're experiencing now as we are on the projects in South Carver. Version the failed projects with challenges failed. Yes.

Uh, still not still to be salvaged, I would say. Um the version two are ones that have been seen in towns like Kingston and Plimpmpton where there's there's lessons were learned from version one and and version two is is that much better. Version three is what you're seeing or what you see more details in here where there's [snorts] it's an iterative process. This was a new program. uh the state department of and energy and department of a resources and UMass collectively have been studying [clears throat] this over a number of years now. So there's a lot of information that's going into this that the roads family is benefiting from. So what our our role in this is to is to help parlay that information because there has been a sometimes less consistent um parlaying of information. So that's been our role. Uh this would be going through the same process as a smart 3.0 O is called now. So you go through the clean energy extension. This application will go through the clean energy extension which gets reviewed by the department of agricultural resources and gets approved by the department of energy. So that same process that you've seen other dual use projects go through is this process as well. Uh from a from a marketing cranberry marketing and and a and a compelling like is this viable perspective. This is the best project that we've been involved with thus far. So happy to answer questions from a from a agricultural perspective um today or in the future and the roads family I'm sure can also answer questions.

Very good. Does anyone on the board have any questions? Not specific to agriculture. No.

No. I do have questions though. Um, so you're requesting to be waved from the um screening requirements, but as we've already seen with our post child in South Carver, uh, it turns out that that's a very bad idea. [clears throat] Um, so come up with some concepts in regards to that. Um, that's that's my first concern. Is all the uh wires going to be underground? I got you.

Hi. Uh this is Brandon Smith. I'm with New Leap Energy civil engineer. Um so as far as for the wiring, um you'll see details on the plan. Um the majority of the wiring will be underground. So from the dual use arrays, uh they'll be dropping underground and basically they'll be with underground uh in an MV trench all the way to the equipment pads. [clears throat] Um and then from the equipment pad area here underground all the way to the interconnection area will there'll be above ground such you know similar to a typical uh solar facility that I'm sure you've seen before with interconnection equipment um on pole pole mounted.

How many uh telephone poles are planned to be put in at the interconnection site? I believe it is eight um separate poles here. um not counting the point of interconnection. Could you uh more accurately um for our next meeting put them on the map where you're planning [clears throat] on putting them? How many you're planning on putting them? Um [clears throat] I'm not sure where we are on the the the 65 foot and 100 foot um as they're not really clearly [clears throat] marked on this.

If I can jump in Sarah St. Thomas um [clears throat] related to the um zones that you're Mr. Those will be clearly marked on the supplemental set that's coming to you in the colors um denoted by the conservation commission. So it will be a lot clearer in the supplemental plans coming. Um to your first question if you'd like me to just sure touch on the your screening comment. Um, I'm going to have to if you're going to sit there. [clears throat] You want to come over to the hot seat? Yeah. Sit [clears throat] over there better. [laughter]

Um, [cough] Sarah Sterns with Bees and Thomas. Um, just to respond to Mr. Shea's um comment slashquest about the screening discussion. Given the distance of the only visible portion of this uh project off of Tremont Street, the canopies, and I'll just point to them here

most likely. So, this area, and it's off the screen, but Tmont Street runs this way. There's a guard rail at Tremont Street here. And obviously, this is wide open. This distance is approximately 2,000 ft, half a mile. So, we thought it would make sense when we do our site visit to have those staked out and look at it from various viewpoints with the board to have a discussion about what would be the best option there. So, you know, we did put the request into the application, but obviously the applicant is open to having that discussion. It I think it just is going to make more sense to all of us to do it on site and then pick it back up in our next hearing as well. So the far eastern side by term street where your proposed uh interconnection is going is is going to be fully screened.

Uh that the grade at the um Eversource transmission line is conducive to um low to no visibility of this project. Again I think it will help tremendously to go out there and see it for ourselves and make a decision on that. And if there is something that is required, you know, we can certainly work that into the plans, but I think it makes sense for us to look at it together. There's a lot of grade change over there. Um, so I think in a helpful way.

All right. Um, trem should be marked on this. I mean, kind of left it out. Uh but more than that, where is your frontage and how does it provide accessible access to the building sites? Um we're off the page with the frontage on this exhibit, but there's significant frontage for this property along Tremont Street in several locations, including the access point

for the point of interconnection. There's access at the 73 Tremont Street drive itself that takes you to the entirety of the site, but also at the point of connection. There's frontage there where the road is proposed. Isn't that owned by NSTAR? No, there's a there's a small um triangle, I guess, if you will, uh owned by this property owner where the access road is proposed. Yeah, you're going to be have to give us a little more uh information on that. and uh the width, the access,

and um yeah, you're going to have to show that um this site is accessible to both portions of the site are accessible from your frontage as well. Yep, we'll do.

Um, this board has not approved any sort of battery energy storage within 100 ft of any wetland or 200 feet from any river. So, I would make sure that that's sorted out. I because it's hard to tell because you I can't tell where the 100 foot buffer is, but it should be well away from it. It should be burned and it should be contained and at the moment that's uh that's all I have and also you should uh all your buffers should be shown from other properties too.

Yes, we've we've clarified the 200 foot setback in our next iteration of plan so that it's easier to see. Any other questions from the board?

So, Mr. GL that if this proposed access, [clears throat] can we just take a very close look at that? Thank you. Uh good evening. Andy Glind with Plus O'Neal Town Peer Review Consulting. Again, as uh similar to the previous um application this evening, we have a draft review memo uh that we're hoping to finalize. Um most likely won't get this one out this week, but um as soon as we can the following week to give the applicant time to review and respond to the comments. Um and I guess I um again I can run through a couple of the initial comments we have at the moment. Um uh one item I guess really more of a um definition clarification that's come up previously in town. Uh currently the town uh bylaws don't specifically define floating solar array. Um, you know, Fuss O'Neal uh included some language regarding um what our opinion is on that uh and whether or not the local bylaw is applicable to a floating solar array under the ground mounted um article 3-6. Um I believe uh the planning board previously agreed with that opinion but you know it's up to the planning board if the like legal council to make a formal um determination on that as it seems it may be a recurring um component of future applications in town. Okay.

Um the um handful of items uh will be deferred to the fire department and as usual, Fuss O'Neal will continue to coordinate with the deputy fire chief uh to make sure that Fuss O'Neal's comments are consistent with the fire department's comments uh regarding u emergency access uh safety and uh ground fuel control. Um we uh also share the planning board's concern with um proximity of the battery storage. Um you know I I um will solidify that in a written comment but we believe given the um size of this site um there are more suitable locations that may have um you know more horizontal separation from uh wetlands on this this property that um can be considered. in the middle of the array.

The um array height has come up um where uh the current details do call for uh anticipated uh maximum height. Um but obviously there's uh it's a reference point given the actual finished grade of the um beneath the panels. And then for this particular project where there's multiple uh array types proposed with the tracker panels uh standard ground mounted and canopy um we're going to recommend that the applicant and the board agree to maximum heights for each panel type. Um and you know um in the past uh there's been an agreement that there's um you know maximum height that's written in the condition approval is higher than what the applicants proposing just to give a little bit of flexibility in the actual um undulating topography out of site especially on bogs. But um we would like that solidified because that will also come into play with the screening assessment for the different array types as well as make sure that there's a clear threshold if the applicant uh during their building permit process makes any changes to those proposed array uh mounting um approaches that there's a clear threshold on when they would need to come back to the planning board for a minor modification. Um and then another review from this board. Um also um recommending conditions for all array types specifically regarding the um footing design or any type of subsurface component. Again the applicants including a uh typical detail for each array type. Um but given experience and um as these projects get progressed to

the building department, want to make sure that there's a clear uh material that the planning board approved um and that you know any changes in the materials would need to come back to the planning board um if that is revised later. But certainly understand you know when the applicant um you know if [clears throat] and when they get approval from this board uh there's a lot more engineering and design that needs to go into their project to um you know uh work with manufacturers and select uh the appropriate mounting equipment and you know for this particular project they'll have to do uh that I think four four different times. So, um, but I, you know, appreciate what the applicant and the property owners are trying to do and, um, be flexible on, uh, what type of mounting approach, uh, to use for, uh, the rare, uh, varying site conditions here. I just want to make sure that, um, each one of those array types has, you know, some guard rails on it so that um, uh, you know, the applicant and the town are very clear on what is approved and what would need to come back before this planning board. Very good. Thank you.

Uh, if I may, Madam Chair, Sarah Sterns, the Fields and Thomas, one more thing I [snorts] neglected to add. We did actually um receive some preliminary comments from Carver Fire Department this afternoon right before the hearing. So, we'll pass [clears throat] those along if you haven't seen them or I'm sure Michelle will in the office. Um, very reasonable requests. Um and you know in typical fashion discussion of access and as well as the battery storage with some suggestions for um revisions to plans which we will absolutely incorporate into our supplemental set as well.

Very good. Any other questions from the boarding member as this is a public hearing. Would anyone like to come forward and speak on this matter? [clears throat]

Hi. Um, Katherine Harelson, Community Land and Water Coalition. We're a Plymouth-based nonprofit grassroots organization. And actually, my comments have already been answered, but um, we were simply going to ask about the wetlands on the property. uh looked like there according to page four of the site plans, it looked like the work was within the 100 foot buffer zone to bordering vegetated wetlands. And um just going along, we didn't see any sort of notice of intent. So that was going to be the question. Is this going to go before the Carver Conservation Commission? And then the second question is regards um to the bogs themselves, uh their status in regards to the Carver regulations when it comes to wetlands. Are they going to be considered wetlands under the car cover carver bylaw or are they going to be considered um upland? So, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. any other questions or comments, please. uh Matthew Rhodess face to Edgewood and my family as well. So I'm not sure where to start because it has been almost five years that we've been looking at this and I think it um I think it's important for everyone to understand that farming is an unpredictable yearly task and that if we are going to continue farming we had options. We sell house lots. They're gone forever. And we've seen several proposals tonight. Sorry, I have some dental work, but that that doesn't come back. And that's not our intent because our intent is we're almost a hundred-year company. We're going to continue. We have our own processing facility, our own brand. So in consideration for what we did for solar for the next generation and maybe the generation after that is how do we bring in other revenue because you can't continue to support next generations without further building your company and the solar seemed like an idea that might work. And I was skeptical five

years ago, but as we worked through it, and I've been to every single project that's been built and sat and watched the sun and went to the harvest to see and make sure that they were picking parameters. Our intention is we're going to invest in these acres, hundreds of thousands of dollars to revamp them and sort of take a hybrid approach to where the solar will be. I believe it will work. I believe that we need the fruit. So, we weren't It was very clear from our family standpoint that one, it's not going to destroy the visual aspect of our property. It's not going to be near any road source and we have to be able to grow cranberries. So, if we dry harvest or wet harvest, we have a facility that can do that. So I just think it's important to for everyone to understand farming isn't guaranteed and you got to come up with other ideas to maintain the farm. So if you want to keep farming in the community, there has to be a logical approach. In the five years that we've worked with the solar company, safety was a major factor. And I would say that we've we had the opportunity to say what we wanted and that's how things were developed in the design program. And I think that all of that put together seems to make sense as a small portion of the property to be able to and it's not a forever thing. Remember this is a 20 25 year project. So, it seems to make sense and it seems to make sense to help another generation get into farming and not sell our house lots. And I think that's important. I

think it was important for you to hear that from a farmer's standpoint. I appreciate that. And I I do know that if you're considering putting it on your property, then do you feel that it's going to be successful? I appreciate that. And we do and it's taken a long time to convince our group that everybody's points were considered. Right.

Thank you. Thank you. Just me. Oh, okay. [snorts] Coming back.

So, I guess for next steps, um if if the board would like to come out to the property and have a look at it, discuss screening as we talked about. Um, one of the thoughts we had is that, um, prior to our site visit, I know the board typically likes the projects, project components staked out for visual access, but trying to mimic the heights. As Mr. Glind mentioned, we're talking about various heights and setups throughout the property. So, we thought we would try to stake it out and mimic at least approximately the heights of each of the components for a more realistic simulation. And I think that will help in all of us for all of us to look at it and see what the relative height may be for each of these um particularly along the you know sight line of Tremont Street that we talked about earlier.

[clears throat] Does um does the boy have a preference on a day for this? How much time do you think you'll need Sarah to do this? It might be a week or two. Yeah. Yeah. just because it is a vast area and to get the survey crew out there and set up. Um, and you know, I mentioned to you we're going to be submitting a notice of intent with conservation commission. So, you know, I think we're a little bit flexible with time. Okay.

Um, just I know we've got holidays coming and you have abbreviated meetings and that sort of thing. So, um, you know, I think we could do a site visit within a couple of weeks if the board can find a time, but you know, we could potentially continue to the board's maybe first January hearing to come back and pick up the discussion. I think we can accomplish a lot in that time from now till then. I don't know if anyone has any preference. My concern would be [clears throat] 13th. I think it's listed as the 13th. The 13th. Yes. My only concern would be the weather. Yeah. So perhaps we could do the site visit sooner

and then incorporate what you know any additional screening or changes to the plan and resume the conversation in the public forum in January. Okay.

Any suggestions? We get the 12th again. We could do that portion of the 12 together. That's what it's going to be. two weeks. Well, would you like it? [clears throat]

No. Oh, yeah. The That's right. Yeah. The following the 12th. It will take a while. 12. I am. Yeah. We're saying 9:00 again. Sun's probably be up by then. Okay.

I don't believe there was anyone else in the audience that had any questions or comments. So, we're looking at continuence to the 13th. The what? Continue to January 13th. Um, first, uh, before we do that,

we're going to have, uh, the entrance way staked out. uh the bogs that are going to have this over staked out as well as uh the areas are we covering in the um battery storage area as well as the interconnection area. Yes.

Okay. So I will make a motion to continue the public hearing on Termont Street Solar to January 13, 2026 7 p.m. Cover Town Hall room second. Very good. Mr. Lake Robinson says, Mr. Shay says I says I Mary Lyn Williams says I. Thank you. And just to confirm, site visit December 12th at 9:00 am. Correct. Yes. Okay. Um I can send a an email to Michelle with a meeting place if we need. That would be great. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you all.

Thank you. Have a good night. January. Happy Thanksgiving. Thank you. You, too.

Hi there. Next in the agenda this this evening, we have a request for extension for special permit Atwood solar project 223 Meadow Street assesses map 82 lot 1-1 in a residential agricultural district. Good evening. Good evening. Um good evening. I'm Keith Phyis from Daryl Everett on behalf of the applicant. Okay.

Um in this instance, uh you they received the special permit. They did extend it for one year already. perhaps overly optimistic uh about the speed at which Eversource moves. Um it does appear that uh you the group the group study did take 3 years from 21 to 24. Currently uh Eversource has provided updates that uh the upgrades are expected to start in Q3 of 2026 um and would be completed um in early 2028. Uh so in an effort to uh you keep this pro this project moving and not have to come back for additional extensions we are requesting an extension for three years which would put it to the end of 2028. Um as soon as the work is being performed by Eversource we're ready to pull permits. Um the landlord's getting paid rent. I've already negotiated the you know the pilot agreement with Joe Ro and attorney Matt Thomas. uh we just need to wait to plug in a number um before it can go before a town meeting to get approved and we can't determine that number until we know what the equipment is and the value. Um but uh we're all in on this project. It's just uh the group study and delays on behalf of Eversource have um caused delays on being able to pull permits.

I didn't think anyone was going to make this application tonight. I thought it was being done by Zoom. He is on he is on Zoom. Um he has been texting me all night. It the video has been in and out, but he doesn't get any audio. Um I told him if there were questions I might have to phone a friend and dial him in. Um but he he's been uh very anxious about his inability to be here. Um so he asked that uh I come up and and be in the room to answer any questions or discuss. Very good. Thank you. Does anyone on the board have any questions?

When does the uh when does the current permit expire? I believe it was due to expire on the 22nd of November. Yes. The request was made in October. It was made in October. I understand that. But just like last year, it appear it was the same thing. And you were warned last year. don't show up after it's expired because we approved it on the 26th and it expired on the 20 22nd and there's a lot of problems with that.

Yeah. I I also read them the riot act on this one. Um my understanding is that Veterans Day uh you know the holiday ended up being a day where the meeting was pushed. They did request if a special meeting could be had last week to stay within that period. Um, you know, unfortunately, I think it it is a bit unreasonable to ask the the board to have a special meeting for that, but I know it was important to them to try to make this meeting happen before that date. Um, and I think that's part of the reason why I'm getting a lot of anxious texts because they understand it's um it's something that going forward I've advised them make your request two months in advance, three even if you ever need to. Don't, you know, don't do this anymore.

To be fair, it was made in October of 2022 and it should have been handled a long time ago. Like when it first came up, this should have been an issue. But Miss Questly, your your thoughts on the subject? How can you extend a permit that's expired? Um, I am looking at your um is there anything in the in the zoning bylaw that requires that um a request to to extend be submitted 30 days prior to I mean usually that's in there. I don't know off the top of my head I don't I don't even know that we address it.

I don't even know if you address extensions actually. I mean, it would be it's up to you guys. Um, if the request to extend came in prior to the expiration um, [clears throat] you know, you could use that, but as Mr. Sheay indicated, they've already it's already happened once that it Good evening. Can you can you hear me?

Well, discussed with the applicants. Last year we had about five or six on the same night and it and it was uh and most of them were cutting the wire pretty thin but I seem to remember that maybe one of them had expired. So we can only move forward on on your recommendation I think on this. This is deep on how to handle this because I for one would agree with attorney Quest that you can't extend something that's already expired.

I would agree with you, but I and again I I see that they they put it in a month ago and I'm not entirely certain where in the fault lies at this point. I do believe that this will be the last extension that will ever be requested for this project. I know that doesn't move. Should we approve it, it will be for a year. Okay. Then in that case because we want to make sure that this is not the way business goes that this happens repeatedly.

Keith, can you can you hear me? And you're looking for your special per is it a special permit to be extended? Yes. Um and the site plan.

Okay. So with regard to the special permit, it says unless otherwise noted herein, special permit shall lapse if a substantial use thereof or construction there has not begun except for good cause within 24 months following the filing of special permit approval. Um so this board in my opinion could uh determine that there has been good cause up until today. Therefore, the permit has not lapsed and that you can extend it for um you can do an extension. Um but then let me just check on site plan also because that's under well actually I know for a fact that your bylaws say that if it's special permit and site plan it everything gets wrapped into special permit. So um so I'm assuming it's it would be the same for the site plan. Um so that is one way Um that is one way that we could cure the fact that they applied in October and there was no meeting because of Veterans Day. Um which would be that they're the good cause would be that they are waiting on um I can't was ever source or not professional I can't remember which one but um they're waiting on the utility.

How's that? um and therefore it hasn't lapsed. But that would be up to you guys. I'm looking towards madam chairman at this point council of logic to say we can we can extend it retroactively follow the fact that expire was told for that I'd be much more comfortable with that kind of a a reasoning right the reasoning here is that it hasn't lapsed because there's good cause that they couldn't start construction right

that also begs the question why They ask me for an extension then. Well, have you started any construction or are you just talking about the interconnection? So, um the construction like pulling the permits uh you don't typically do that until you're ready to mobilize and actually do the work because then you run into issues with pulling permits and then not actually doing the work. And so, but you can do the work without the interconnections, right? Uh you can't finance it. So no, you can't get a bank loan to actually finance the project. So you'd have to put in 100% of all of the cost of panels, racking, civil, and you know, that's not something that the industry

So that then just becomes a financing issue, but it's not impossible. Yeah. Yeah. It's not a physical impossibility [laughter] to pull the permits and actually do that. It's just economically it is impossible for this project. Okay. It's a little bit of a gray area here.

I I can give you certainty that next year a an extension request will come in in June. Um and I'm happy to put that on the record. uh because I personally will draft it and submit it if they don't submit it in June of next year because I agree it's it is um yeah being somebody who has served on a planning board in Warren Rhode Island I understand that you guys are here doing a lot of very important work spending your evenings and to have you guys have to have this discussion this evening it's it's not fair to you guys and I'm going to make sure that going forward the request comes in several months in advance So that this isn't even a question.

I I still feel that an attempt could have been made to initiate some sort of construction. So to say that the the lapse was just solely due to the interconnection. I if I remember correctly, wasn't it around 13 or 18 acres of clear cutting forest? Isn't that what that particular site was? I I don't know. I I if you if I can call him, I can Hamilton will have the answer. That's all right. That's not necessary.

Yeah, clear clear cutting. Yeah, clear cutting wouldn't um be an issue. Um if if it were like pouring pads or starting to put in racking, um that would be a tax credit issue. um you know the when you start when you commence construction it must be completed and interconnected within four years or you lose any of the federal incentives. Um and a large part of how these projects can get financed and built is in reliance that you know you'll get funds from somebody that's buying those credits to actually fund construction of these projects. So, you know, there are certain things that could be done construction-wise, like clear cutting maybe, but

So, nothing's been done. I don't know um what's been done. I know that they haven't poured like concrete pads. Um that I know for sure because there it'd be an entirely different discussion on, you know, viability if they had done something to commence construction from the IRS's standpoint. Any questions on behalf of the board? Can we set conditions on an extension?

Sure. It's a decision. It's a discretionary decision on your part. So, sure. I would say that they put it in in considerable enough time. Um, we have excused others up until NSTAR and Ever Source have finalized their interconnection plan which is already finalized. So, everybody's had their last shot at the pie. Uh, and I would uh I would I would say we uh I would make a motion to continue it till November 22nd, 2026. Um, but the condition I would request is if this is the clear cutting of over 5 acres of land that a a forest cutting plan be filed with the appropriate state agencies.

As such, you said continue to extend, right? Pardon? You said continue. You didn't extend. I meant I meant extend. Yes, I know what you meant. I was sure there's a lot going up on up in here, Mr. I can I can I can smell the wood smoke all the way over here. I Yeah, I could smell it, too. But uh I I made the motion. So that was the motion. Okay, very good. Do I get a second? I'll second that. Mr. Lake Robinson says I. Mr. Sheay says I. Ellen Seilla says I. Marilyn Williams says I. Thank you everyone.

Very good. Thank you. Mr. Glind, thank you very much for we couldn't we couldn't do this without you. Thank you. Thanksgiving and merry Christmas. I won't see you. Merry merry Christmas, too. Um, while I get you here, could I have you resend that information on over on how you define the floating bog so we can actually do something? Yeah, same language we're including in the memo for

the comments that will be coming out for the project that was heard tonight. Give your mom my best. Thank you. Bye-bye. Have a good night. All right. mixed in the agenda. We just have uh notes and I don't have any notes other than to wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving. Happy Thanksgiving everyone and we don't have any town planner notes. Any further discussion before we go on to the minutes? All right. Work on your patience for this coming week though. I hope everybody works on their patience. has been saving it up all week for this weekend.

That's right. I will make a motion to approve the minutes of 8:26 2025. I'll second that. I I just have one amendment to this. So, one change. We have to go through the minutes first. Yeah. Um on the minutes, I have to point out that the bottom of page one, Chairwoman Williams asked Mr. memo. If he were to build a single family house, would he stay in that location? And I said, would it stay in that location? So, I will request that that be amended. I will amend it as edited.

Thank you. The second on that second. All right. I say I. Mr. Sh says I. Ellen says I. Marilyn Williams says I. And I will make a motion to approve the minutes of September 9th, 2025. 99205. Second. I just have two I'm sorry. No, don't you know we are opening it up for discussion, right?

I have two small revisions. Um there's a typo on the first page and then there's a missing word on the second page. Um when it refers to Mr. Gordon, his name was misspelled. I'll take care of that. And then um the word asked was missed under the deadline of 910 2025. That goes in there. Other than that, there were a few things missing, but they may have been fairly insignificant. Um so I would just have those changes be made. I would uh change my motion to as edited.

Thank you. Second. Second. Okay. Very good. Mr. Lake Robinson says I. Mr. Shay says I. Owen Sillo says I. Marilyn Williams says I next meeting is December 9th, 2025 I believe. Yes, it is. And I will make a motion to adjourn. Very good. Thank you. Mr. Lee says, Mr. Chase says I say Marielen Williams says I thank you very much and have a good evening. Thank you for coming tonight. Amy, are we gonna see you every every time? Not that I'm complaining because No, unfortunately