Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Welcome. In accordance with the provisions of Mass General Law, Chapter 30A, Section 20, notice is hereby given that the zoning board of appeals is meeting tonight, Wednesday, January 21st, 2026, here at 700 p.m. in the town hall meeting room 124. Members of the public are welcome to attend this in person at 1 Liberty Lane North or by remote Zoom connection provided. Please note that the in-person meeting will not be suspended or terminated if techn technological problems interrupt the remote connection. [snorts] We do have a board member on the Zoom call. Uh so we will be taking roll call votes tonight. All right. First up is a hearing.

First up is a hearing. All

right. I'll read the notice. Uh notice here be given in accordance with chapter 48 sections 9 and 10 of the Massachusetts general laws and any amendment thereu that a public hearing will be held by the zoning board of appeals in room 124 at the Northolk town hall one Liberty Lane Norfolk Mass on Wednesday January 21st 2026 for the following application. One Pine Street Reality Trust at 7 p.m. 7 p.m. for a special permit from zoning bylaw section 310-10.7. A2.D to allow for the installation of a gasoline and diesel fuel filling station. Reference assessor map uh 19 block 81 lot 13 in the C1 zoning district.

Good evening.

Good evening. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, my name is uh attorney Christopher Alfin from Blackman, Babrowski, Hy and Silverstein. My office is in conquered. With me is the uh project engineer Hal and the project principal Claude uh to my right. Uh we're back again. You may have remembered that you denied a project on this property for the similar use back in October. And you may know that you can't [clears throat] accept a repetitive petition within 2 years unless there's a finding by the ZBA and consent by the planning board that there is a material change to the application or the plan that was originally denied. So tonight although we are proceeding just under or opening the public hearing for a special permit uh and not the variance as you may recalled you denied a special permit in a variance. We are only seeking a special permit at this point in time because we do not need any variances for any non-conforming setbacks or anything like that. But for the purpose of tonight is that we want to go over the changes of the plan that was denied and the plan that is being proposed today so that the board can make a finding that there is clearly in this case material changes to allow the application to go forward. Uh so with that, I'll hand it over to Hal, the engineer, and he can go over the uh major changes that we've made to the plan that was denied and the plan that we're proposing today. Uh good evening and uh for the record, my name is Hel Chuba. I'm a consulting engineer with offices at 112 State Road in Dartmouth, Massachusetts. And um if you recall back in uh I believe it was back August that we appeared before this board for a special permit application and a variance application to install a canopy at the corner of Dunham Street

and Pine Street and remodel the existing structure to be used as a convenience store. Now, the convenience store retail is an allowed use as of right in the general in the in the C1 district. The filling station is a special permit from the zoning board of appeal. uh prior to um submitting this application and I think I mentioned that at the last meeting, I did extensive work with the town for over a year with I met with with the planning uh with I met with uh uh conservation commission. I met with the fire department, with the police department, with the building department and we we kind of developed this plans together. The whole idea around this plan was to to save the existing building as we had the impression that the building was valuable to the town. [snorts] To our surprise, we came to this board and nobody cared about the building and they they you know the the impression we got at that time that we were trying to save money not to take the building down. So we went back and you denied the application at that time. Both the the variance and the special permit. the variance because the canopy was within the 60 foot setback in the front of the of of Denim Street and the use for the building. Uh after that we went back to the drawing board and we developed a plan that would eliminate the need for for the for the V. Richard, if you don't mind,

should we just look at the proposed plan? Sure. We need to switch. Yeah. Uh, so let me stop you here. You're talking about a variance. We're not talking about a variance tonight. We're not here. I'm just I'm just refreshing your memory of I understand, but the special permit is what you're here for. Correct. Correct. And the special permit is whether a gas station is an acceptable use on that lot. Correct. Correct. So, what's the significant change that we need to see about a gas station on that corner? Okay.

Just just to clarify the legal criteria that the board needs to think about, it's not necessarily the use, it is the plan. So, before the board starts to say, well, we don't want to see a gas station on there no matter what. it. The question legally before the board is whether that there's a significant or material changes to the plan that allows a repetitive application. After you make that determination, if you want to make if you want to start having conversations about whether you should be issued a special permit, you're you're happy to have that conversation. But what what's before you is a question of whether the changes to the plan are material to accept a repetitive application. That's what's before the board at this point in time.

I I I don't I don't read it that way. Okay. So, it's your opinion that because it's a gas station, it's a gas station and no matter what Well, the special the special permit was for a gas station, not not necessarily the plan, it was for a gas station. That's what you're here tonight for is for a special permit for the same gas station within the 2-year period. Before they can ask for that, we need to determine it's not a redundant petition because they are procluded from applying if we say it's repetitive and it's substantially the same. So, we need him to tell us how he's about the new building where the new tanks that are essential to the gas station and are of concern due to water supply

which is which is part of the use. But that that's the part of the plan that you know we are concerned about. That's for future reference tonight. We are only looking though at whether or not this is repetitive. So if it would please the chair, could we have him tell us about the new stuff? And Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to clarify that this use is permitted in the Stony District with a special permit. So the board cannot take the the stance of we're just not going to want a gas station here. They have to consider the plan before them and make determinations or we understand the distinction.

We we understand. Okay. 100%. Not the the the question I have is you're I don't understand if the special permit is for a gas station which we denied. You you denied the plan. You didn't deny the use. You denied the plan. We denied both. I thought we denied both. Denied the variance and the use. So the legal criteria is not that the fact that you denied the use that was being proposed to you is that you denied the proposal. So the question before you is is there changes to this project plans in front of you significant enough to reconsider the application. Let's let's have a is that correct?

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, if it pleases the chair, if you can tell us about some of the specifics that are of interest to us, I think that would be helpful. Yeah, go ahead. We'll get If we could have the proposed plan again, Rich, I just don't want to waste everybody. No, I know. I hear what you're saying, but we got to we got to let him tell us what he changed. That's the plan you want. This is Chris. This is Chris M. Can you hear me? Of course we can. Go ahead. Could we just could to to refresh everybody, could we just go back to what we said in the letter re rejecting this uh proposal? What were the reasons for rejecting it the first time? Can we just go through what they were?

Correct. Sure. We denied the variance. No, let's read it. Let's read it. Let's read it. Yeah. Okay. Oh, we got another screen. Or was that one always there on the other side of that?

You see this?

Yep. So in accordance with the Massachusetts General Laws chapter 48 section 9 section 10 and section 3107-76 zoning board of appeals planning board and permit granting authority of the North Fork zoning bylaws. A special permit and variance is formally denied to allow installation of a gasoline and diesel fuel filling station and variance of section da da da da is to allow a 22 bytes. So there are two they're yes they're in the same letter but they're separate

right correct no disagreement. So the so the denial was an installation of a gasoline and diesel fuel filling station for the special permit. Mhm. Is that significantly changing? Yes, because there's plans that show a different type of gas station. Okay. There's a new building. Let's now see what you have. I had to start from ground zero. Gotcha. All right. Go for it. Okay. Thank you. We need to go back uh Richard to the to the revised plan if you don't mind. Oh yeah, please show us the proposed. Well, this is the existing conditions. That's that's what's there now. The

next page or next sheet I think it is, right? Sir, [clears throat] so with the revised plans, we're demolish an existing building which is within the 200 ft river bank also. Mhm. And if this is an existing retainer wall in the back of the property. So this area is all paved here. Yeah.

We're we're constructing a smaller building which is 2,300 ft² versus the 3600 ft². So, and we're reclaiming 2,000 ft² of previously impervious areas to green space. So, we're improving the degraded area within the 200t buffer of the of the room. Your concern was the gasoline station for the fueling. As I explained before, the two the the uh proposed tanks would be double wall fiberglass in the ground with monitoring 24-hour monitoring and those planes I can get documentation from the manufacturers. Those things don't fail. Also, we pulled the gas away from the uh from the river, further away from the river. That was a concern. Another concern was the fueling. Now, with the drainage system, we have a drainage system that would if you Richard, if you can go to the next one that I show, a closed drainage system on on the property. So, we're we're not relying we're not reusing any of the existing structures on site. Some of them don't have the oil water separators in the catch basins. So all the new structures will will have oil water separators inside of them. Plus they would go through a 2500 gallon of uh oil water separator that has the volume to to capture any leak on the site if there's any leak from the pumps. All these pumps are are uh equipped with automatic shut off uh uh shear uh equipment in case of any leak that would the most you would get probably from the pump would be 20 30 gallons of leak before the the pump shuts itself off. So all that

containment we were concerned more maybe on the fueling from from the fuel truck if there's some kind of catastrophic uh uh leak on the site. We do take all the runoff from the site into series of gas bases that are equipped with oil water separators. Then we go through the 2500galon uh oil water separator to shut off valve before it goes to the infiltration system. So in case there's a leak, all the employees would be uh trained to access this shut off valve and and turn it off. That what would happen it would all the whatever is in the system will will block anything from going into the infiltration system. it would back up into the system that has a capacity of to store 4 4,250 gallon on site and the biggest compartment in the in and the fuel delivery tank is about 3,000 gallons. So, uh that's another feature that we added to the just to to address your concern about the prox proximity proximity of of the of the uh uh fueling to the uh to the river. Uh plus, I mean, beside the the the building, it's a much safer access to the site in and out. There's plenty of parking. We're not asking for any relief from zoning bylaws, not you know, parking or lot coverage or so. We're increasing the the green space. We've taken care of the the fuel concerns and uh the the building is smaller and would put uh much improvement to the uh river and uh we think this is a much better plan that

what we presented before and it should address the concern of the the zoning board. Okay. What what's the setback on the canopies? Just cuz I can't see that far. Uh this is the setback line. So we're behind the setback line. Uh I believe the front setback is 60 ft. You have a zoning table up there. Yeah. at the top.

It's 70 ft. 73. So it's it's it's about 72. Thank you. And the original the previous proposal was within the setback. It was closer if you I have it I think 22 ft that's what we asked for 22.5 if I recall can

so the setback and what I'll call the containment system with the as a lack of a better term. Those are the two major and and the building is being demolished in a new smaller building. Those are the major changes in the view of just so I understand and add imperous area that yeah decrease the impervious area if you meet the criteria a minute. Okay. Um so the significant change that [clears throat] you've shown on the plan is that the canopy is now outside the set outside in the set

meets the setback. Correct. So it's beyond that. Um as well as they've removed the nonconformity with the existing building that's in uh one of the wetland buffers. Floods on one of them. They have uh put some storm water and they've upgraded their storm water and their uh detention system and their oil separation. They have moved all of the hardcape and vehicular surface back from the roadway and pedestrian circulation. I'd say those are the substantial differences or differences whether or not they're significant is up to

So around the around the paving you have like a burm or something so that any water that Oh, absolutely. Yeah. I'm asking Cape C. What are you doing to screen headlights for those four parking spaces up front here? other side toward the road towards that piece. Yep. Yep. Yeah. I see that. I see you have a little bit of contour two feet,

right? But uh I'm sure you know the area, right? And that was one of the thing the landscape is staying. We're not touching actually we're increasing the landscape around this area too outside the 200T buffer. But again, we can put that's [snorts] when we go to the site plan view, all these things will be looked at. Lighting, landscape, pedestrian access from that sidewalk to the convenience store. Can you page sidewalk to convenience store? Yeah, right there. What are you showing? What are you showing as far? He's she's moved moved it up to the uh the same view where we can see the trees. What's being referenced there?

Yeah. But those are detail what I mean this is going to go through the planning board and also it's going to go to your peer review who's going to be looking at this too. So our scope is our scope. We just need to determine different scope is to determine whether this is significantly uh different design. That's that's our scope isn't it? Yes. Yeah. The terminology is a material change. Correct. Um, and I would just add to the board just to add some comfort, we also going to need the planning board's consent because any tour you have a new application, you also need the planning board's consent. The um doesn't mean I'm not getting my wish list.

I mean, [laughter] I mean, I I I it significant change. I mean, you're tearing you're tearing down the building, you're putting a different building up, you're making it smaller, you've changed you've moved your everything else. Um it doesn't change the um the the fact that we've got the 200T setback right going through the middle of the lot doesn't change that that's still there. You the river is still behind you. The I mean all these factors the the normal factors the abutters the open well that's next door on the the lot next door that's all still there. Um, so the the idea of why we should have a gas station there. I don't see a huge significant change as to I mean, you didn't move the river. You didn't move the the the the 200T buffer. You moved buildings and stuff.

You made it so you didn't need a variance. You made it so you didn't need a variance on the plan, but it's still a gas station. Still on a It's a Yeah, it's a nice corner lot, but it's a tough one for a gas station because of all the this the the water infiltrations around there, the the river, the the everything. I mean, to me, that's that that was my thought process on a gas station there was whether there's a river there. I mean, we're we're talking about human life and safety and and if we've got a a significant oil spill or something, sure, you've got entrapments and everything else, but it's still a gas station. And it's still some sometimes as you as a lawyer and as you know sometimes it's perception is more more the the fear than the actual thing that could come about. You made a comment about a double wall tank they don't fail. Then why are you monitoring it 24 hours a day? Because there is a there's a there's a there's a potty of it. That's why you you monitor it. So the possibility and the proximity to the aquafer and the river I I I don't see this as a significant change.

Would monitoring well make you feel better? No. I'm not sure if that's not our jurisdiction, but No. And I don't I don't Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you for concern. No, I get and I understand and we understand your comments and we'd like to address those and maybe we can have more technical conversations about those issues and certainly it's going to be up to the board ultimately whether they want to grant the special permit or not based on that legal criteria. But for tonight, we are just looking for a finding that there's at least enough uh material change here in a plan that's being proposed to allow uh the petition to move forward. That's all we're looking for. I don't know how you can I don't know how you can say no

material to move forward for a variance change but not for the special use. But he doesn't need the variance any longer. So they've taken all that away. I we haven't addressed the gas station in the aqua. So I think the question tonight just like council said is there a m we find a material change enough to get this back to the planning board and then if so back to us for a more substantive review of things issues that you all kind of touching on.

I I don't I mean you're still cuz just Mr. Mr. Chairman, if I just interrupt, if if this was to be in in court for some reason because it wasn't allowed as a repetitive application, the court is going to say, "Are the material changes to the plan, they're not going to talk about the use." So, I would just, you know, if the board wants to make the points that they've made about the special permit, that's fine, but we're looking for just a finding that there's material changes to the plant. That's what we're looking for. I and I I I would 100% concede that there's material changes to the plan.

Um and I would also say that we we should probably continue this to to next month. Um and see see if you can answer some of those questions that we have on the special permit side of life. Not just but I do I do see yes you came back with a completely different plan for the actual lot. I do agree with you on that. I don't think does anybody else disagree with it? I don't disagree that no Mr. Jim, we if we could get a formal vote on that determination or that finding that

anybody anybody from the the the grand stands have any questions as to whether it's a significant change or insignificant material change material material change the the I mean I do I I hear what you're saying the plan has to be so they can come Yeah. Um, somebody want to make a mo I is it a formal motion? I'll make a motion um that we find the that the applicant has brought forward a new plan that's with material changes to meet the standard that it is a material change.

Yeah, I'll second that. All in favor say I. Let's um we have a name. I Joseph Estiano Chris Chris Mav I David Axburg I Tim Martin I Joseph Kardashi I All right so thank you significant material change and then I guess Mr. Chairman, we should also ask for a continuence. Um, and and the idea is that we're going to go to the planning board, get the consent of the planning board, and then we'll be back here before the board uh to to make the argument that we should be granted a special permit.

Should I continue this for next month or wait? Have you already Hang on one second. Have you already reapplied for your your permits? No, the plan. No. No. Okay. And so I don't think they have an open hearing with us. So maybe two months two month continuence. Yeah. You pro you're probably going to have to refile. It's not really even a continuence. No, he needs to refile with us. You just had a hearing with us tonight. Yeah. We considered you have to re you have to reapply. He applied for a special permit and the notice was for a special permit. Yeah. You have to reapply with these plans to us for the special permit. No. No. So we we

you've already applied with a special permit. But we didn't actually. So what we actually need what the statute says is that we can't get a favorable action until you find make that finding. Yeah. Yeah. But we already we declined your initial application. We denied that application. So that No, no, we replied that. We reapplied if that's what you're asking. It's a new application. That was what I was asking. They've already So I think we should do a continuence for two months. Two months, right? And if they move it to the right, then move it to the right. Right. Yep. Right. Which which date will that be? March 18th. March 18th. I'll make a motion that we move the continue the hearing till March 18th

for the uh application for u one pine. All in favor? Let's take a roll call vote for continuance of two months. Before you roll call it, could we request, uh, I understand the hair that you're splitting regarding the use, uh, but the underground storage of hazardous chemicals is pertinent to the gas station use. So, we are going to want more information about that. Fair enough. Thank you. Sorry, Rich. All right. Joseph Bastiano, I on the motion. Chris Chris Map I. David Axburg. I Martin I. Josephine Cordah I. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. See you in a couple months.

Sorry I was late. I couldn't find my glasses. I I valued I valued seeing in the dark while driving. It was This is my community service to everybody else tonight. [laughter] 7:30. Where? It's 7:30 on the nose. We can go. We have a new hearing notice. Uh in interest of time, I want to know the board. Let me wave a reading of the hearing notice. I think that's okay. Sure. And so does the applicant wave the reading of the notice? So for the new Yeah. Yeah. That's fine. We have to still call it though by address.

Okay. that I have the um properties located 90 92 96 100 100R Pond Street assessor map 19 block 69 lots 27 28 43 55 58 and 61 in the C1 and C1B zoning district. So this is for a special permit of solar, right? And I need I made the motion the second, right? So I may wave the reading. Need a second. I'll second. All right, Joseph. Roll call. Yeah, Joseph. I Chris. He's trying to say I. Yeah, I'm trying to say I. I was muted. Okay, that's it.

Chris M. I David Axburg. I Tim Martin. I Josephine Kurdi. All right, you are open. You have the floor. Sorry. You want me to use the microphone here? Use some microphone. I don't I don't care if it's the desk one or that one. You want to preface by saying we've all watched this at the the planning board hearing. There's a pointer there as well if you want to use it. Excuse me. Use a pointer. Pointer. Oh, you see right here? You didn't. Okay. All right. Most of us have seen the planning board hearing, just so you know. That was my first question. Yes, we did. Yes.

Yeah. So, my name is Daniel Serber. I'm the director of development with NextG Grid. Um, we're before you for a modification of an approved solar facility. Um, we refer to it as 100 pond, but you heard the all the parcels that it's on.

Um, the change that we're looking for is is on the publicly owned I mean the privately owned portion of the land. There's no change to the the publicly owned portion at all. Um we are here because there was a change to the existing tower on site. Um that uh communication tower is being taken down and replaced with a slimline pole. Uh that was approved by the planning board. I'm not sure if it came here to the ZBA. So you guys know it's it's being replaced with a slimline pole that no longer needs guywires. Um we were keeping clear of those guywires for a few reasons. ice mainly. Um, and we can't develop under them because of easements, but now we can. Um, so we're increasing the the size of the array uh by 2,200 panels uh to fill in that area. Um associated with that we're adding trees uh additional screening trees and we have made um some modifications to the storm water system that have less to do with these new panels and more to do with the fact that when we went in there was a substantial amount of uh ledge

you think. Yeah. Yeah. [laughter]

Yeah. So some of the underground features that uh I'm sorry I'm joined here by Brian Gation of BSC Group. some of the systems that he designed uh weren't feasible. Some most of them were, but we had to increase the size of a uh drainage pond. Um and then this new power needs somewhere to go. Um we can't increase our AC size with the current interconnection. So, we have to put that into our battery storage system, which is where the majority of the public interest has been. Um I see that everybody I think everybody here was at the planning board. You guys watched the planning board meeting. I have virtually the same information on the batteries as I gave there. It's a 7 page dry description of all the safety things of the batteries. I can reread that. Okay.

No need. That was hard the first time. Yeah, it was hard the first time. Uh I I tried to keep a smile on my face. But uh um the only new information that we have then um is we did receive the plume study as you heard me say. Um, I have a short conclusions page at the back of that study. I I'd like to read that. Um, that should only take a minute or two. So, I think I think you could read that because it wasn't it wasn't discussed there.

Uh, so conclusions based on the conservative dispersion modeling performed, the following conclusions can be drawn. Carbon monoxide was identified as the sole toxic uh constituent requiring evaluation for short-term exposure. Um under the worst case uh meteorological conditions modeled uh carbon monoxide short-term exposure limit exceedences are confined to a localized region approximately 25 ft of the exhaust point. Um, no carbon monoxide short-term exposure limit exceedence is predicted at elevations representative of typical human breathing height. That's because the vents are up top. So, that would be far higher than any human standing. Um, the vertical upward Oh, here the vertical upward release configuration and buoyant plume behavior significantly limit ground level exposure potential. Um, that's cuz carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide are slightly lighter than air, so they always go up. Um the results indicate a low potential for adverse public health impacts associated with short-term toxicity during a postulated thermal runaway event. Um the findings of this assessment support the conclusion that even under conservative assumptions, the potential off-site toxicity impacts associ gas released from the proposed BES installation are limited and transient nature, the study provides a technically defensible basis for public safety screening and informed stakeholder communication. Thank you.

Um, so we have given this to the chief. Um, [clears throat] I I find him to be extremely intelligent and educated on battery storage, so I'm sure he'll um update you on what he thinks of the information in there, but he's not here today, unfortunately. No, we we didn't ask him to come either because he'd already done the planning board and there was a lot discussed there and I think a lot of people who have interest were either there or um have been able to see it online. Um we didn't want another house to burn and we Yeah. No, honestly, it's it's a um it it the the batteries tend to be the biggest concern with everybody and anybody. Um, but

I mean you from what I understood from the planning board, you're not changing the footprint realistically of the storage sheds or anything else and you're just adding more cells inside that storage container or whatever of some sort. Um, so whether you have 17 or 70, it's still it's in the same footprint. Um,

zoning wise, it's a special permit that you're coming for to to be granted. And um, in Massachusetts, it's considerably favorable to allow these to be put on. So, it's just an amendment. It is. It's just an amendment to what you already have, which has already been approved. It's a one megawatt decision. So go ahead, Mike. That's my point is we're not here to size it or do anything about sizing. We're only here to allow the use to put it on the ground. Correct. We've already done that. Correct. Okay. Um I don't think we have any anything in this.

No, I agree. Um we have nothing. [clears throat] If someone wants to go from a building to the ground, they need to come see us. We don't ask if there's 70 on the roof or a 60 on the ground. So we've already given the use of having a ground mount. So I think that this is just in an amendment to in it's a modification and in because they listed the size, right? Only because they listed the size and because this area was had a different scenario to it before. So now they have

So in reality there it's still all a budding. It's all still attached. It's all still everything. So um I I do want to open it up to the floor and let let a couple people speak. Tom Council did want to Tom Harrington.

Tom just wanted uh Good evening everybody. Tom Harrington Town Council. I just wanted to offer kind of a friendly suggestion and that is Tom. One sec. Okay. [clears throat] Thank you. Uh again, Tom Harrington, Town Council. Nice to see you all. Um just a friendly suggestion. Um I'm I'm with you on waving the reading. Uh I watched the planning board hearing, too. Um so it's a lot of information and you don't you don't need to hear it again. My advice, however, would be that you submit in writing what you didn't read so we have it as part of the record. Mhm. So, the the the plume study's already been submitted uh to the record. And do you want me to submit the actual speech itself?

Yeah, that's Yeah, sure. I'll send that to Richard. Good idea. Now, let's open it up to the public. Now, remember, we're we're we're the zoning board. We're not making determinations as to how it's being built or why it's being built or anything else for that matter. It's whether this is an acceptable use under a special permit in the town of Norfor. So that's what we're here for with an additional comment that state law does limit us somewhat with this type of use to reasonleness. And so tonight is all about whether or not it's

but we really do want to hear the public concerns or comments because that could help somebody else somewhere down the road. But we are going to limit times. So who's first? Yes sir. State your name and the microphone and then and address. Name and address.

Jack on the floor, please. So I'm a little confused to be honest with you. And my confusion results from several different documents I've been reading. I understand this is a an increase in the size of the solar array. It's an increase in the size of the battery storage. Originally on the plan, I think you guys approved, there were three square concrete pads. Now, I understand it's two 32 foot long pads. One uh container is completely full. The other one's about half full. Did I Did I get that right? There's two there's two battery containers and I'll get you that information planning department, but one is totally full and we're I'll get you the information how many cells are in the second unit.

Right. That's kind of what I said. Yeah.

Um and then um there's some additional um footprint for that. And all through this document by BSC, it says this does not mean it's an increase in scale or size. I I I don't know how they can say that in so many places. This is not an increase in scale and size. We're increasing the the array. We're increasing the battery storage. We're increasing the drainage ditch because of legitimate concerns, but it's not an increase in scale and size. But it doesn't fit together. The other thing that doesn't make sense to me, and maybe I'm I'm missing something here, but they keep talking about carbon monoxide, just carbon monoxide. It's going up into the air. Well, the plans I saw said that there was a butterfly valve out the side of this thing. Did I have Did I read that right? That picture. There's a butterfly valve.

I'll answer. [clears throat] Can you Can you pose your questions to me, not to him, sir? Okay. So anyway, there's a butterfly valve on the side. In addition, they talk about carbon monoxide everywhere. Well, TUV is a certifying agency in Europe, similar to like UL. They did a study and one of the documents they have is the gases that are emitted during a thermal event. And this document he just passed out kind of confirms it. It's not just carbon monoxide. 30% of it is CH4, which is methane. Very flammable gas. It's what we use to cook and stuff in certain places. You got cows in your house?

I do.

There's hydrogen. That's another 10%. I I think that's pretty flammable, too. Hydrogen and methane. And they say it's going up, so it's not, you know, it's it's taller than a sixft person, so it'll never you don't have to worry about it. There's a thing called wind. and wind and turbulent air can make that come down from up in the atmosphere where it's going up. It's a hazardous material. Also, your document that you put out, it's the uh called the special permit granted notice of decision and that was uh recorded July 21st, 2022. It says all negotiated lease terms between NextGrid the conditional approval you gave it under the condition that all negotiated lease terms between Next Grid and the town of Norfolk will be here to incorporated by reference. The problem is we have a contract, we have a lease agreement that the town signed and we have the site plans and we have what's going on. The lease agreement says that in paragraph uh two or the air on the leased property or nearby the site plan and the documents are in direct contradiction to the contract that the town signed with nextgrid.

Is there a zoning question? Uh yeah, this this thing I read was from the was from your site approval. That was from our site. You're right. So the question I I'm just asking where the question is if it's coming. The question is why what why is it okay that there your condition isn't being met your condition that says lease terms between next grid and town will be here to incorporated by reference. You said that's one of the conditions of the site approval. It was it was approved. yet they're not they're not conforming to the lease agreement and and the lease terms and it's your document that says that okay

so my question is how can that be how can that be not 100% sure so I will take that under adisement and bring it back town council is here they can answer that's a contractual issue with the board of selectman that one's Not necess you based your approval on that contractual agreement. Well, we we we yeah we authorize so we authorize that the use for that lease agreement and they have to adhere to that use under that agreement under these conditions. Under those conditions. Correct. Now town council.

Town council. Uh just briefly, in my opinion, the project before you, if approved, would not violate the lease. Thank you. Thank you. That's helpful. There you go. um that we're we're here we're here for zoning purposes and not lease purposes, but um we did approve the use under the form of the lease and that's what we've done and council says it's not changing. Anybody else have any other questions? Not hearing any questions.

Anybody online? Anybody online have a question? Any question? I think Brian, you have a question? Give us a hand. No. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. One one other question. It has to do the street. Sure. The Pond Street access road from Pond Street to Sharon A. Uh is there a document that says that's not needed? Now, I do believe I do believe the police and fire and andor fire have put forth something that said that it that only needs to be a dirt road, not necessarily a full passable road. They're not going to access it for

emergency. Yeah, they're not using it. It's only It's only considered use for maintenance maintenance and fire on the actual site. Correct. There will be no cut through. It's not a cut through. It's not a cut through. It's not a cut through. We have a document that says that's not necessary. Yes. Yes. Several plans filed with the registry. So, but the original lease that was a change. That was a change from the original lease. That is correct. Still says it's necessary. Yes. Contract. Yes. They applied for a modification and it was approved. Correct. Y.

Yes, sir. I just want to point out that we we wanted to create that road and the town came to us and asked us to eliminate that. I just want that to be on the record for that that that change did not come from us. No, that's the police the police determined that it was it was definitely not a benefit to them to have that cut through to Pawn Street. um the amount of time it took them to go down the road and everything else, it gates and under the gates and all that, it was not worthwhile. So [snorts] So the contract would have to be modified to eliminate Well, it can be modified with a a simple I think that's a very

um amendment or or even a agreement. I don't think it's a I don't think it has to be a a full lease. The town the town discussed the change with I think you're good. I think we're good. So I appreciate um Yeah. Any other Yep. Hello Terresa Fernold Fruit Street. Um I just have Fruit Street. I'd prefer not to say since people are driving through my um property now, stopping in front of my home and making gestures. I apologize for that on their behalf. It will be in the minutes though.

Okay. People know where I live. Trust me. Actually, multiple people there know who I live where I live. Okay. Um I'm definitely a North Fork resident. Okay. I'm I'm just letting you know. It will be in the minutes. Wonderful. So then I won't speak. Oh, I don't I don't want my address out there. Okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's just there's that's just what's required in the public record. I'm sorry. It's okay. Anything else? Anybody else? So, apparently I can't ask a question. That's a shame. Well, you can't change that to make an exception so she can ask a question. as someone who's being harassed and has

I mean I feels like she's being threatened then I I I don't think Secretary of State issue honestly Teresa I think you can ask the question just ask the question just ask the question at this point I remember what it is but

so one of the one of the issues is in as no one here is opposed to solar It's just the um adding of the batteries. So, I actually found the original um the original site plan did not have batteries on it. The original town warrant never mentioned batteries. Um it was also during COVID when people were not, you know, readily coming out of their homes and into public places. So, and the only other solar um project that we had in our town did not have batteries. So therefore, no one would have any idea that batteries were even being proposed. We actually have the original um contract which does not state batteries on it either that it that came into the draft. This is the draft. It came in later. So, [clears throat] we have all of these criterias, you know, that we're basing everything on, except we needed the town's permission to do it. And the town's permission was based on incomplete information. So now we're approving these batteries and we're approving um through the planning department and we're approving the zoning for them, but they were never actually voted on through the town.

So So let me just let me answer you a little bit, Teresa. The the batteries themselves are not on the leased land. It doesn't matter. We we So So let me I think it does matter according to the lease and according to what the town approved. The town approved a solar array and that's what is on the leased land. The battery storage is on their private property. It is adjacent to it but it and it is from the solar array but it is not on the leased land. I agree with you but they are connected in the fact that because there's so much solar they are now required to have the batteries.

Correct. So they are connected. Okay, let's let Mike No, you go ahead. I was just going to say, you know, and I appreciate the question, the lease doesn't control what the tenant can do with adjacent land. Correct. And I just want to make that for a minute. I if you read 2.8, excuse me. Sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead. So ma'am, if if that was a commercial building there and those panels are on the roof, this would not be in front of us no matter what the battery storage capability was. Just so you do realize.

Oh, I know. I actually know someone who tried to put a battery who tried to put um who tried to purchase it and he was not allowed to build what he wanted to build, which was just a parking lot because the zoning laws stated that you have to have a building. primary on that property and it was denied for him but yet it's been approved here. Primary use is so solid now. It's different. I'm just saying. So what we're here for is to get them the availability to take it from a roof to the ground. That's the only decision this board needs to make.

I understand there's no board actually responsible for the totality of it. That's one of the biggest issues.

Can I ask just one question from the the new batteries that you're installing. Um, you have you said you had you already had a full container. What is the lifespan of these batteries and I heard your testimony about the new batteries going in. I understand that chemically these are much more stable. They're less reactive. They don't want to bond with everything if they have a catastrophic event that they can't induce. Um but what about the existing batteries and when do they get upgraded? Are they being upgraded as part of this or what is the plan with that? Because the technology on the batteries leap frogs every year. So even if we had contemplated this when the lease it's it's changing rapidly. So that's kind of my question is how often do these actually get swapped out and you know

Yeah. Um it's a good question. So none of them the the ones that purchased are the original ones purchased and none of them have been installed. So this isn't this isn't a swap out. The site's under construction now and no electrical equipment has been installed. So they all be they all be like the same flavor of battery life. They'll be the exact same BYD battery. All the information has been provided. Um they have a I just assume they were already on site doing their thing. No, they have a shelf life of 10 years and then they'll be replaced. We have a 20 year contract with utility. Um, yeah. So, that's what we're expecting. Thank you for that. Do I have any other questions?

Thank you guys all for coming and asking you questions. We appreciate that. Um, I think we may want to just continue this because the planning board has another meeting um that coming up that still has some bearing on what's going on. Re the peer review and everything. So, I think we may want to Are they holding for the third party review on the batteries for the fire chief or is there anything that in addition that the engineers are doing cuz the engineers punted on the batteries and said we're not qualified for this. So, I don't know if that review is coming. I'm just asking process wise.

No, I I I I think it had to do with the whole site because I think it was the civil side of life. Okay. Um storm water and all that. So, um, the battery I think I just wanted to ask which in one sense because there's more than one. I mean, we could we could stop them from ever having to come back here again and do a decision tonight and and you're not going to take away the ground. No, my only thought is I I in all likelihood the proposal is not going to change, but if it goes back to planning board and peer reviews it and I know this is highly unlikely if there's a change to that plan again and we've already closed this hearing. Okay. Then I just hate to just to help the applicant. Yeah.

It's not going to affect you. Yeah. It's not going to affect us either way. It'll be one week delay from the next planning board. We did get Beta Group's peer review back uh yesterday. It was in our It was light. It was not not a heavy lift, but there will be a a slight tweak, I believe, Brian, right, to the storm water design. Uh, small, but if we close the hearing, you might have published the whole thing again. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's all I'm trying I understand. The bigger point is why make him come back. I'd rather not have you come back. I think that's why we just to get through a choppy process. Nothing changes at all. I can come back on Zoom. So, right. Yeah. So, just one month. I think we take a motion to come back in a month.

Yeah. I'll make a motion that continue the hearing to um February 18th. 7 o'clock. 7 7 o'clock or 7:30. 7 7 7 p.m. Need a second. Hear a second. Second. All in favor? Roll call. Joseph Sebastian. Chris, what happened? Yeah, you got it. Just say what happened. Just say just say David Axburg. We just need your vote to continue to continue to next month. I don't know. Maybe you can't hear us. Can you hear us? Can you hear me now? Chris, can you hear us? I don't need you for Tim Martin. I That's so good.

Okay, we can hear you. Yeah, just continue. All right. So moved. Thank you. Thank you guys. Appreciate it. Thank you for all coming. Ask council a quick before you leave. Which way is it? Which way are the it's the language incorporated? Does the lease talk about a future planning board and ZBA decision or that like incorporate that by future reference or is our decision reaching backwards to incorporate the lease or is there zero connection between them? I would assume there's zero connection. Okay. No. So, it's I I think you incorporated police terms, but I don't think police

anybody on the Zoom call, we uh we just lost the uh the lead. Oh, so we're we're out of touch with you guys. We've got a screen that just says NCTV. Oh, well, we can hear you. We can hear you fine. Chris, can you hear us? I don't think so. No, I think though they they are seeing the icon, but the Okay, thank you. I would Yeah, I would treat it. Yeah. wondering if there why we had done it previously. So, it's just NCT. Yep, we're good. Thank you. Appreciate you coming. Do we have any appointments? I see none. No, no appointments.

We have any deliberations? No, we continued everything. We have an update. Can we have an update? Well, just a quick update for you. The last week was a site visit for a proposed 40B entitled the residence at Pond Meadow at 373 Main Street. It's um 84 down down at Cam down by Cam. Oh, side behind Comey's Pond and then up near uh by Wee of the Electric. I know where you were. Yeah, there's a mobile home up there. Mobile home. Yeah. Yeah. And uh and it opens up to about the property, huh? How big is the property?

I think you say 12 acres, I think. I I know the I I know the person owns the one next to it, too, actually. Yeah, I see them. I see the mobile home when I drive by. There's a home there. It's Is it really the residents singular at Meadow Pond? Is it just one big house and everybody's living together? Might be one big building. is co-housing. It could be a um it's not one big house. It's not one big apartment. Wait, how many? No, they're townhouse. They're ownership townhouse style. They're two, three, four com units attached. Really? How many? 84 in total. Yeah, that's what I thought. 84.

So, it's just a for your information. Uh yeah, now the race is on. Who can get it in first? You can see perhaps see it cuz you go to safe harbor, right? Of course. Yep. Yeah. How many buildings was it? Do you know 84? You said 84. They'll probably stick with probably 22. I'd say he said four building. Oh, four per building. Yeah, there's two. There is a one single as well though. There's one single in there. Yeah, that's only what that How many affordable? % I can't do math that fast, Rich. 25% of 84 is 21. 21. Oh, that a number.

Not a math major. How jammed [laughter] in How jammed in does it look? It's pretty. That's subjective. Up pretty good. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It We've had some really tight two ponds. It's challenging because there's there's no municipal water there. Oh, good point. And the pond. So fire protection is We have a pond. We have a pond. Pond would be good for you. Oh man, how are they going to do storage tank on singles?

You can you normally when municipal water supplies from what my understanding from past anyway was six units on a well. Doesn't constitute you having to do it like a treatment or anything else. You can not a public water supply. It's still considered a semi-public water supply but not a public water supply. Okay. Over six units it becomes a public water supply. They are proposing a package treatment plant. Of course they are. Where else are they going to put some Right. But it's also within the zone two. So it's a tertiary treatment plant.

How many bedrooms? It's in the zone two. 80 84 units. That's like it's [clears throat] all right. Okay. 50 beds. Okay. It's not not sure the feasibility of the project. So, but that's just the initial Yeah. It's a it's a local developer as well, right? Yeah. In the from the Rahobit area. Yeah. But it seems like it a lot of costs associated with that that don't seem recoverable. But anyway, it's it's been submitted. So yeah, in the process of submitting initial comments and

Okay. So how many 40B hearings can open right now? There's zero. You don't have any. No, no, no. How many how many eligibility letters are out there? There's three, right? One, but how many hearings can take take on? One, two. Oh, well, it's up to 200. I think it's two if 200 units you can you can for a major project. Yeah. 200 cumulative. There's 200. You have to you have to pause one. Right. Right. That's what I'm saying. Safe harbor. Okay. Well, safe harbor. That's different. No, but you have to they control the number of hearings we have to handle based on that size. Okay. I got it. Yes. No. See? Yeah. Anyway,

but it's a t to be determined though. Yeah, I was thinking back to the the one on the first one we did on Main Street. It was so tight and at least they have a mun water. But the new new uh administrator start yet? Yeah. Uh Tuesday 20th yesterday. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, we got some minutes. Okay. Um yeah, the minutes they were another beautiful set, I will say. Yeah, they were. They were all I've looked at them too. Right. There's one more correction I mentioned, right? Approve the minutes. Yeah. I'll make a motion that we a month ago, right? I'll make a motion that we approve the minutes for December 17th, 2025 is drafted. I'll second it. He can second it.

I can I watched the hearing and I I I did. All in favor? Um roll call vote. Just best I Chris Mafi. David Axburg. I Tim Martin. I Joseph. Thank you. Um on the planning board meeting because I didn't just listen to the um solar solar they are talking about doing some changes for changes for the center for zoning. Yes. Um have any of us heard about that?

No. On the B1, they're looking to change some of the the lot size criteria and frontage criteria. Shrink it, obviously. Are they riding with the state law proposal for 5,000 square ft? No, that that that's nothing to do with business. That's only residential. We'll see how it happens on that. Well, passes. Yeah, we'll see if it passes. But I'm just saying if that uh I'm just asking if that's the target that they're shooting around. No, no, this is for mixed use stuff.

No, this is for mixed use and everything. And it and and it actually what they were talking about sounded good and reasonable. Um and probably something that would be worthwhile and buildable. Um we should allow mix down at 115 and uh 1A. all those like you got you got the that butcher shop like that whole second floor could be second floor and third floor apartments. I mean all those little strip plazas those could all be and I don't know why they're not like I'm going to return my house to industrial use and make barrels again. We need affordable

that that that I don't I don't know. But I know in Walpole the mixed juice ones that they've done, they're having a hard time renting the business side of it. Of course they are. We already have the business side. Yeah, we have we have the hard part already done. Like come on. Yeah. I I don't understand why they're having a hard time doing it outside because walk center is flooded with little shop fronts. I mean, it's flooded. Yeah, we want to build it because landlords don't want to deal with it because when you residential and commercial tenants mixing together, someone complains and it's not worth the money to them because they got the residential units. But I didn't say that.

They do it only because you have to mix, right? And then I get it. They're not as interested. Like I mean, you could take the old North Power, same thing. Commercial on the first floor. Take the old Laughlin building. Yep. Like all these places that the old Cliff's package store, why is that not mixed juice? Why is that not mixed juice? And we allow somebody to go back into the first floor. I mean, that used to be a gas station. I don't know if anyone else remembers, but that was a gas station and you go in, it was a liquor store and Old Cliff was there and

Cliff was definitely there [laughter] for that. Um, but yeah, I think mixed juice is like I I I see it in all the towns and I just can't believe we're not taking any advantage. At least allow it. And then look at this building right across the street. You have all that second floor office space unaccessible to handicap. There's not an elevator in there. That should all become residential. Move that commercial stuff over here and get rid of this empty lot. I mean, let's get rid of the moon. Where's the town plan? Let's do something with the old town hall. Yeah.

Let's start let's [laughter] start with our own assets before we before we take over everybody else's. Shall we uh shall we uh close? Yes. A motion to make a motion to close Yeah. Make a motion to close the hearing the meeting for the January 21st 22nd. All in favor say I. Roll call. Joseph. David Axburg. Guy Martin. Josephine. Chris, before you go, I have a question for you. Where are you in the world right now? I'm in Vermont. You're in Vermont. Okay. Second question.

Second question. Last night, I drove by the River's Edge at approximately 7:30, 8:00. There was a ton of cars going on over there at your place. You can hang up at my house. [laughter]