Planning Board (December 11th, 2025)

001Um, Good evening everyone and welcome to the Ashlin Planning Board meeting of Thursday, December 11th. A reminder to everyone that the meeting is being broadcast and recorded. Um I will call the meeting to order at 7:16. Um, and the first item on our agenda is always the clerks and chairs report. Um, I believe since our last meeting, I think there was only one email. Um, and that email was in regard to um, understanding what is happening at 501 Pond Street. So, I communicated with Jasmine and this is just a information for the board. I communicated with Jasmine and she said that she would inform that tenant about the progress for that project. So what typically happens um on uh when we do get uh public comment is that um if it is uh really a

002logistical thing, factual information, Jasmine will take care of those to answer questions um that come in from the public. If it's something that is more um where she can't really make the call, it's more um an insight from the planning board, then we'll consult about it about, you know, how how we're going to respond to that email. Um some of them um come back to the board if they have questions. If it's about a um if it's about a project maybe that we have ongoing, that might be information that we relay, you know, in this context in a in a public meeting so everyone kind of understands what the questions what the questions are. It's important to understand that both when we hear public comment, which is kind of the same thing as the email,

003that um the planning board actually isn't obligated in any way to respond to any question from the public or to any email received from the public. Um but we try to make an effort um to do so. Any questions on that? Okay. All right. So, next item on our agenda is public comment. Seeing no one in the audience and >> No one on Zoom, we will go right past public comment for tonight. Um, so both of the public hearings as you know um have been continued um first one and what we have to do is just officially continue them to uh a date certain. So that will be it's the ETH, right? >> Yes. January 8th. Yes. So, our next meeting um our next meeting that we're having, obviously, we could be meeting on uh

004December 25th, though I think that would be probably unpopular. Um so, our next meeting, which would be the second Thursday in January, is January 8th. Um but just for a little information, the YMCA is continuing. Obviously, we have gotten a traffic report. We've gotten more information from GCG, our third party reviewer, and there was information from our um our traffic reviewer going back and forth with theirs. But there is a um a question again about storm water and there was information on that was given about um a waiver for the storm water, but it seems kind of at the last minute they may not need the waiver. they may be doing things a little differently based on some conversations that the Y is having with GCG. So, um in order to figure that out and

005do things all at one time, probably not to have their whole team here again, um they requested a continuence to January. Is that >> fair summary? >> Absolutely. >> Okay. So, and that's um >> didn't they didn't they also send a bunch of questions and like can we review those and like try to answer those questions from that email today? They they showed them in like bold like is this enough and does this give enough information so that we can respond to them. >> Um I I saw the questions in the email. I didn't even have time to go through it because it arrived so late in the day. Um, >> wasn't that before? >> That one was >> like around 11 o'clock this morning, right? >> Yeah, it was 11 o'clock, but it was

006still >> Yeah. No, I'm not saying that wasn't I didn't mean you had plenty of time. You should have read it. No, I didn't mean that. I meant just like >> since we're going to continue it, it might be good to give them the answers to some of those if we have the ability. >> We'll be available obviously to answer any questions that you have, but I can relay them. >> Well, just so we could respond in that email because some of them were like, "Is this good enough or is this not or what more information do you need on it?" You just can't respond to the whole board >> because then that would be open meeting violation. >> No, I I don't mean I thought if we discussed it now since this is the

007>> on the agenda >> their time of the agenda, we can just talk about those to see if there are anything we could answer and then Jasmine can reply to the email >> because it was in the part where they asked for the continuance. So like because we don't have the answer to all this information, can we do a continuance? Some of them we can't answer but some of them we probably could. I mean, I guess we can bring that email up just so that we're all familiar with the questions and what's being asked um to understand. >> Yeah, it was in like response to some of it was a response from that we asked them for um like one of them was about the trees like we asked a little bit more and they

008asked >> like conservation committee and they said or some other part was like they went to concom about it and they said that's not their perview. Maybe that was about the landscaping in the front or something but >> is it easy to bring up that email? Yeah, I guess I guess as a means to give them more information. So if they need to gather more information before January 8th is what you're saying that we could we could say yeah, we could really use some more information on this. >> Yeah. Just >> Yeah. >> Because I feel like, you know, I know there's we're they're waiting on a lot of stuff from other people and they're still trying to decide things, but I don't want anybody to be kind of holding anybody out. So >> it's

009really these the top Um number one, two and three. Number two really isn't a question. Um but the first one that they asked planning board items that you could discuss tonight would be closure on the tree removal removal. They had submitted calculations about the diameter and estim estimated diameter and estimated number of some trees. So they were asking if that was sufficient information or if you require more. They said the YMCA is confirmed that they're amenable to having public buses stop near their front door at pickup and drop off location. I think that question would be is that amendable as opposed to a designated drop off bus stop on site. Um and then the landscape buffer they had asked conservation commission to comment. They stated that's outside of their jurisdiction. I had responded back to

010this email already and what I responded to number three was that even though it's outside of the conservation commission's jurisdiction, the question was if it impacted the storm water runoff >> and if they would be able to be mediation um >> remediation on site and I think that that was within their ability to answer. So that was my response to that question that they I didn't believe they needed conservation to give that estimate to you. >> So number one is really the one that's open. So I think on number one they gave us a piece of paper. >> Yes. >> Did they give anything after that? >> And I recall I responded I think to you. >> Yes. >> With some feedback and and they had said is they they just said well is that

011is that a yes or a no? And I said well she can't make that determination on her own. They have to discuss that together. Right. >> So I didn't give them a specific I said they have to discuss that. She can't one member. You can't speak the entirety. So >> um >> wait I'm sorry I'm confused. Did you get more information after I was at the meeting where we asked them where you asked like >> I remember getting some kind of >> that sheet of paper and I thought they were going to come back with something that said like >> here's a more close estimate because you said like we we can't just draw >> we can find that piece of paper and talk about it. I remember there was some sort of piece of

012paper that went to me I thought to me personally through Jasmine but I don't recall now. It was immediately after the hearing. Was it the same document that was in the in the drive >> like with the little picture of all the little trees? >> This one? >> Let's make sure that's the one >> cuz I thought this came from >> Was this from the white team or somebody else? >> Yeah, >> that's that picture is the original. >> That's the original one that they showed us. >> Ironically, >> but they didn't we didn't have this part. So maybe that's what they're trying to >> Yeah. this many documents back. >> Yeah, the same. >> So, >> yeah. >> So, I guess the question is, do we all understand all of these written items? It

013looks like they're indicating the number of red oak and white pine coming down, the exact number. But I don't I didn't fully understand the percentages underneath. I don't know if anyone else gets that. So when I I think this is the one that I got over email where I was just like I guess for me it wasn't 100% clear, but it seemed like a step in the right direction because I was looking for more specificity about how many trees are actually coming down. And this does look like a nicer summary of the numbers. However, I'm assuming at the next hearing we can ask them to explain like the text underneath the percentages and all that because I didn't quite understand. >> On the left it says total trees estimated is about 317. >> Yeah. So

014it looks like >> 72% it says. So >> yeah, 317 are coming down or be impacted out of the total 440 which is 72%. They're going to replace two two10 trees, >> right? >> And then the undisturbed ones are those ones that are marked on the little map in the orange like all the color. Those are the ones that are not >> will not be disturbed, I guess, >> right? Which are on that back part of the >> Yeah. I mean, I think this is way better than what we had before. So, >> I for one think that it's a step in the right direction. We just need them to confirm that we're reading it right. >> And if all those 317 trees are not 14 in and greater. >> Yeah, they're all the big

015trees that they didn't survey all the I mean, the little trees. >> Oh, they didn't survey the little ones. If you look at the upper right hand, >> right? >> You didn't look at the tiny ones. >> No. So this here total here is 14 in and greater is 440. So this map that you're seeing here is literally the trees that are coming down are 14 in and greater, >> right? Larger trees. >> Those are larger trees. >> They're taking smaller ones, too. They just didn't count it because you they can't count saplings. >> But this percentage is on based on the larger trees, not the >> right ones. All they're telling you is that of the big trees, this is the number that if I'm reading this correctly, what they're saying is of the

016big trees coming down, 72% of the counted bigger trees are coming down and but they didn't count any of the smaller ones. So, >> right >> or bushes or weeds and stuff like that >> just to confirm that understanding >> and what is that getting replaced by? What is the diameter of those two 10 trees? >> So, that would be a good question. I I took I I recalled them saying that they would just plant things that would grow. It's not like they're replacing it with fully grown trees. >> Yeah. Yeah. You know, >> but but yeah, to me, like that's the kind of conversation we would need to have in January. Like, do we believe 210 is enough of a replacement? What are they going to replace it with? What is it going to

017look like? In light of all the little ones that didn't get counted, is 210 enough or not? Honestly, all I wanted was clarity. This document, I think, gets us much better to where we need to be. Now, we just need to figure out what to do with this document. But again, that's more for the hearing. >> So, we seem okay with uh with the document. >> I think that's the type of feedback we can Jasmine could respond with to that line and it's going in the right direction. It sounds like we >> more specific, which is what we are looking for. >> Okay. So, one question I do have about do we care what kind of trees they put in? >> I mean, like as oak or maple or >> I don't think we can

018require anything per law, >> but we can have a conversation. >> You can actually under your landscape requirements. >> They can be they can require them to be native species, which is something but I don't think we can require a number. >> I don't that's here. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> We have no control over number. We can't be like, "Oh, you must replace." We don't have a tree bylaw in >> so we don't have a minimum caliber. >> We don't >> Well, unless you can ask nicely, but you can't enforce. >> We can't come in with all saplings. >> Correct. But it's a conversation. This is why they're using the word proposed. And we can >> speak about it and see if they're willing to do more. >> The reason why I'm asking is because

019certain trees obviously in the fall have beautiful red colors versus, you know, yellow something. >> Not that I care what colors necessarily. I mean, red to me always looks a little fascinating, but you know, I don't want to get to that kind of >> it sounds like we can ask for the type of like native or non-native. I don't think we can ask for colors or anything like that. >> I think they can definitely give us a species list and usually they give you a list of where they intend on getting them from as well. You can ask like which nurseries are you getting these from. Usually they have to source them from multiple nurseries. So, you're allowed to ask what type of trees and you know where if you're curious. >> I mean, I

020was under the impression that the project is so in the funding phase that we're not going to be able to get necessarily those kinds of details. >> They may not yet nor I think we can we can't really require them at this stage. So to me this was more I recall just be consistent with what I asked them. I really wanted transparency for the public because the original document was confusing to me. I think this is a step in that direction and it's much cleaner and prettier and exactly what I think I asked for but not necessarily what you know the board is good with it. So to me it's just a question of what else are they willing to do is 210 enough. Yeah, I think I I think the questions um would be

021good ones for the landscape architect that that they have um who as I noted at the last meeting is actually a national resident um at least uh someone who works for the the um the architecture firm and is the p he spoke last time about the project and actually several years ago was on our design review um design review committee. he served on that. So, he's well aware of of Ashland in general. So, um but those are the type of questions I'm sure he'd be it's his expertise, so I'm sure he'd be happy to talk about ones that bring color or what what their priorities were in in picking trees, you know, um that would be good education for us as well as how they go about their work. I personally don't know much about

022trees, just the building. So, um, but, uh, so but maybe Jasmine can let them know that it'd be great to talk to the landscape architect, um, to to have them at the next meeting so that we can address those questions. But, but, but there's no other further information it sounds like, that we that we need. Is it >> I mean I I will make one comment which is there is a aesthetic decision we're making with this project to prefer kind of open human enjoyment of kind of lawn space. If I recall there's nice kind of visuals of sort of open lawns for picnicking and hanging out. Um there's also fields obviously. Um, and so we are kind of making a a decision, right? We're kind of removing the more wild sort of spaces where animals

023can hang out and we're replacing it with more sort of people get to hang out and and I'm okay with that as long as we sort of realize what we're doing. And we do have, it seems to me we have a lot of open kind of hangout spots that are not fields. Um, and the proportionality of that we haven't really talked about like how much do we need picnicking lawns or sort of benching lawns versus maybe leaving some of those little trees, I don't know, for bee pollination and little birds >> or just the right type of trees so it creates shade. >> Yeah. >> Exactly. So those types of details we haven't really explored because it's such an exciting project um that it feels like maybe these are minimalistic things. But it did get

024me curious because I remember those nice open visuals and um anyway just thoughts. So maybe it's a a question as well about how um how um the YMCA uses we understand fields like soccer fields and things but how the YMCA uses open areas like and why they choose to have or open more informal open areas. >> Yeah. versus like uh what I would define as more like wild spaces that kids can learn about I don't know birding and bees. So that might look a little bit more wild but is still part of the natural kind of learning experience. So remember, some of this they're not going to be able to answer because it is based on that funding, right? Because they're doing this as in phasing. They have the funding that they have is for

025the early learning um center and I think that's starting. They already have that ready to go and they and I don't think they need anything special for us for that portion to start. I didn't think so because that that building is a separate building. Um, so the I forgot what their the project of the name in the back was called. They're at this point they're no longer trying to get um CPC funds for it. Um, so basically it's the first phase is to kind of get them to where it's going to start, but not where it'll finally get to because again that's going to be based on funding. So, I'm not sure if they'll be able to answer as much of those type of questions as we want. Um, you know, if they get funding

026faster, then they can do everything all at one shot, which will give us more clarity as it goes. Again, I'm not going to speak for them, but I just know that it could be phases. It could be, you know, >> Yeah. I mean, I I think I'd be curious as to about um you know, for someone who's both familiar with the Framingham YMCA, which is pretty landlocked and very familiar with the Hopkin YMCA where my kids went to camp, >> which is very there are a lot of those general open areas as hundreds of kids are out there doing various activities and moving from place to place all day. This YMCA in its location seems to be somewhere in between, >> you know, those two things. And so, um, but it it's a valid question

027to ask like what are those you're taking out a lot of trees. What what are those spaces used for in this YMCA, which is different than a summer camp, >> but it obviously is. >> They're not going to have the summer camp there. At least that's not their intention, right, at this one? >> Yeah. I I'm not sure. >> So, why don't we I think the question to frame is like, thanks for telling us the trees removal part. Now can you tell us on the landscape side what percentage of that will be open fields for sports like sport fields versus open lawn space? What are you going to use it for versus you know leaving some wild things or building you know planting new wild things like give us that breakdown for our understanding of

028your proposal. Um, it would be sort of unfortunate, I think, to have unnecessary lawn space that's not really used. >> Yeah. Also, remember on the sports fields, they're not official sports fields. They won't have any lines or anything of that nature. They're just going to be like like people can use them for sports, but it's not like it won't be a line soccer field type thing, >> which is kind of how it is at Hington. Like they just go out there and play. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's more just like that. >> I think of if you know the Kitty Farmwell um factory that's on Main Street, they hold the cross like practice all the time in front of it. In my head, that's more of like what this is going to be like just kind

029of an open field that people can use and >> right >> if one that gets built. >> Okay. Can can we go now back to that list? Um Jasmine, are we Oh, >> I didn't know we had it in our thing. >> Oh, do we? Where is it? >> Right be for me. It's right after the number one tab. >> Oh, there it is. Thank you. >> The number one tab. >> Thanks to you and Melissa. That's right there. Okay. So, um >> you'd still share it for the people who might be watching this later. >> Yeah. So closure on um so we talked about tree removal number two is the bus stop on the site. I think I think at least at least all I was asking not not a not a bus stop

030covered pavilion or anything, but just the fact that a bus of whatever type, school bus, um local bus can pull up in front of the front door area and let people on and get >> Yeah. The concern was whether it was going to be on the street or if it was going to be in their parking lot, right? And it sounds like it's more like they're amendable to it being in the parking lot, right? >> Yeah, I think it was I think they wasn't I thought it was like by the front >> door. >> Yeah, near their front door it says. So >> cool. >> Okay. Um so as those things develop over time that's all we kind of wanted to know there. >> I think that one seems resolved. >> Okay. Landscape buffer >>

031address >> planning ask come to comment. Um >> I think that's the one that's the one you just you just talked about. Okay. Yeah. If there's enough space there for the basically for the water. Okay. >> Um yeah. And then the the GCG. Um we we got that and it sounds like it's a little still back and forth. Um it seems like most of the items are resolved but certainly not not all of them. So those are the ones that we should focus on as well. So, okay. >> It says, um, draft approval letter for review. They're requesting that the YMCA have the opportunity to review the site plan approval letter prior to it being finalized. >> Please forward when available. When does that just so because I don't know the timeline of how these

032things work. So what typically happens is I draft a decision and then I will send it out to the chair and the applicant for first glance for review to make sure that everybody is in agreement. Nothing is outrageously outstanding and then we'll send it to the board as part of meeting materials to review in advance of the meeting as normal m meeting materials. So you can discuss it at a planning board hearing and then vote on it >> and then we can make amendments of course during that meeting based on conversations. And how many meetings out do you think we are from something like this? >> It generally this in this current situation will depend on where you are with your peer reviews. If they aren't completed, I wouldn't recommend closing the hearing. If they're

033not completed at this time, I'm I can't speak to that time frame. Um they are peerreview engineers still waiting on additional information at this time and the feedback tends to be taking anywhere between three and six weeks for review. >> And just to modify a little bit the process because what I had done in the past is to get sent um a copy of the the draft, right? And really, I'm reading it for clarification, like to have it read smoothly, not to take out or to put in content, but so that we're not kind of word smithing as much as, you know, to make sure it just reads easily both for us and for them. And then to send it to the applicant and to the board again, so that we're not all correcting the

034same. And it is things that aren't clear >> like finer detail things that the board wouldn't be aware of like we have to assign addresses. 30 Memorial Drive was not an address. They chose that address in their application. It wasn't assigned. It's not an address that exists in our GIS. So we actually have to create addresses for them. But we have to reference that in the decision what the actual addresses will be. And so that's why we send it to the applicants town council. That way they can review it from their point of view and say okay yes. So all the things that we need reflected in here are reflected. It's the exact same idea as Trisha reviewing it. It's really just for making sure that everything is how it should be in the details

035of it, not in any way part of the review and the conditions that you're looking at and the criteria that as it stands to site plan review. >> Yeah. And I'm actually okay if if everyone if you guys want at the same time I do. I would just say don't get too married to that copy as I'm trying to edit it for clarity and for readability you know so then if people have multiple copies and that you know that that's when starts when things start to get confusing. So it depends on you know what you want. If you want the copy when I get it, I'm fine with that. But just know that I'm going to be going through with a fine tooth comb to make sure the wording of it reads well, makes sense,

036isn't repetitive. Um, there's lot there's there's a lot of little edits I make along the way typically to get it into shape. So, um, we can we're not there yet, so we can discuss that next next time to think about, you know, kind of what you want. >> Okay. All right. Anything else on there that we want to cover? Um, we're going to look at our board meetings later in the meeting. Uh, we don't have we don't know in conservation commissioner scheduling. Um, >> so but we definitely have our next meeting on the 8th. So >> yes, >> moving into the ETH. Do they think do you think they will come back on 8th because you have to submit the week prior to that all the documents and that's right during the holidays. Um because

037the email says Jan 9th but I think our meeting is Jan 8th. Um >> I mean let's try >> and this one is we are blocking time of all our calendars assuming this we need to give due time for such a big project but this is absolute waste of time. This is the second time that's happened in the last 3 months. Um and realistically are we really going to have people come back on Jan 8th when they have to submit documents one week prior? Is that going to happen? submit what documents >> like for your review for your meeting on 8th we expect that the previous week the documents so that we could review and have enough time to come prepared. >> Well, I think the thing that we're hoping at least is that >>

038that we will have that draft decision >> um to start looking at whether they're here or not. We're going to start looking at the draft decision and going through, you know, like I said, we have to have text on all the findings. we have to have the special conditions and it takes a while to do that. So, we can tell them that we're going to be doing that and they should probably have at least part of their team there. >> I I also don't think this is 100% on them, right? Like when we talked today, just I had to sign the paperwork saying I watched the video. You mentioned that fire was giving responses today and somebody else was giving a response by the end of today. >> So sometimes I I think we need

039to put them on a date so that other people respond to it because if we don't give a date >> then they don't >> you know >> for us for waiting on town things too. It's not just waiting on >> sure >> their their own company doing stuff >> but they the fact that they didn't have those responses they knew it last week. Right. Right. They did know it last week and they asked Jasmine if you I mean if Jasmine if you can give us the timeline of how many times you've asked for some of this responses to come back I I think we need to like it can't just be it's not all on the company like some of it has to be like the town has to do what we have to do

040as well. >> No I understand I'm I'm just are we it's is it realistic for eight that's where I'm getting at. It's not about uh kind of fingerpointing at this point. It's just that is it going to be realistic? Are they going to have all the peer review done? We going to have time to review them? I guess we have the documents so far. >> Question. Mike Carter, who's the civil review, is waiting for volume calculations. I I can't guess how long that might take for him to review once he >> sounds like things are taking a little longer than typical. >> It it it has been >> and the holidays is just going to get worse. >> And I think part of that is the is the 40bs and the work in the zoning

041board of appeals. But I guess my point is that um is that I think that besides those things with conservation hanging out there, there's still when I was talking to Jasmine, I was a little bit surprised that they withdrew because I thought we still had a lot to talk about with um with um uh the traffic report and uh the rest of the GCG comments that we haven't gone through to kind of see where we sit on things. So to me the ETH if we have a draft a comp complete draft document to look at including our findings and how we want to word them we have a lot to talk about even if there's even if we're waiting for some information >> okay >> to finish up that's my that that's where I think

042things are now unless if things get too let's see because um the soccer feels they've they've waited until the second meeting in January, right? They're continuing to >> No, I believe it is the second, but let me double check that before I confirm. >> Can you do that as we >> um because if if they're going to if the soccer fields are going to be back the second week, the second meeting in January, then um then it makes sense for us to get going on this the first. But what I'm saying is I think we can continue whether their team is here or not because it's still our work, you know. So >> they did request through January 8th. >> That was January 8th as well. Okay. All right. Well, I still think we should

043continue it to January 8th given that one of them may uh drop out. >> Okay. I can make a motion. Um I'll make a motion to continue 30 Memorial Drive YMCA hearing to January 8th. >> Is there a second? >> Second that. And roll call vote. >> Anna Tesmanitzki I >> Dino I. >> And Trisha Kendall I. >> Okay. So next on our agenda is 55 Tilton. If there's anything for you guys to talk about I will leave the room. But it seems like we're just continuing that again to January 8th. I don't know the reason why. >> We're waiting on their peer reviews to come in. So they don't even have their initial peer reviews yet to begin. Well, I think they have traffic, but they're still waiting for their civil and storm water,

044who we are going through a different company this time for civil. So, >> Okay. I'll make a motion to continue 55 Tilton Avenue special permanence. I plan review to January 8th. >> And a second. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Deep. >> Anna Tespodiski. Sorry. >> Paul Moscino. I >> Angel Cazadian I. >> All right. We're continuing for January 8th on that one. >> Table Palm Street for now. So, >> yes. Uh the next thing on the agenda is uh a decision review for the 501 Palm Street natural gas modification. We're going to hold we're going to table that until the very end. Um because Anna is a butter and steps out for that one, so she might as well do it at the end. >> Um let's just get through before we come back

045to number six. Let's just get through all of our regular >> business reports and stuff. Um um Scott, anything from CPC from last time? >> Um the last time we met was right before the town meeting? Uh we haven't had a meeting since then. We had some items coming to town um the town meeting. One of them was um taken off the agenda and the other one's passed. So >> great. >> We haven't had anything since then. It's also the um and just so you know um and you and I might have talked about this before but so the board knows as well we have a member it's required for the planning board to have a member on the comm community community preservation committee so that if if in planning board we see opportunities to

046use some money that that's okay for the planning board member to say, "Hey, you know, it would be great if this project went after some money for the on the CPC or vice versa, right? To try to connect projects that we see with the money that is sitting there." And that's kind of why the planning board member is on that is to kind of facilitate that kind of communication. >> Yeah. Actually, um well, one of them that did come was they had to back out, but was the why for that money and he was originally asking for that for the spring and I was like, "No, no, no. let's do it. Push it now so that you can we can get in front of the town and try to get you to have funding quicker

047because I that have been good. Now, there were some legal stuff that came up with financing and whatnot that they couldn't do, but um that did come forward. Um, I did mention to the 55 Tilton project about using CPC funds for affordable housing to maybe subsidize one or two of the units, but it didn't um, after doing some more research, it still made it kind of unaffordable, you know, for the project because it's not a big project or anything of that nature. So, um, there's definitely opportunities and if people have ideas, I'd love to bring it forward because we do have I think there's five categories that the money can be used for. Historical um, nature like forest, they use a lot of it for purchasing the land to add to the town forest. There's

048affordable housing. Um, what's it recreation? There's also space. Yeah, open I think open space is the forest one, but um, >> yeah. Yeah. And then there's like an admin one where we can just kind of do general things. But it does come with some rules that go on there. Like there has to be an easement that basically says if you use this for something else besides what the is intended for, basically we can get our money back or or like it's an easement on the property. So >> yeah. Yeah. >> So it does come with some little red tape, but could be a good way to get some money for a project depending what they're doing. >> Yeah. like the they changed the dirt in the softball field um for the high school. Um now

049they use CBC funds. Wasn't a lot either. It was only like 25 grand, but they did the project. So >> yeah, so it's good for everyone to kind of have their ears open for that kind of because there's a lot of money sitting there, you know, uh that can be used >> when when the right project comes along. Do the design firms come with cost estimates when they come to you or is it more CPC figuring out how much they want to allocate for a project? >> Uh, no, it's usually they come so like um they're doing a project now at the cemetery across the street um trying to find old burial areas and clean it up and stuff like that. and they came with they brought their own estimates of like what they would

050need for a ground penetrating radar. We tend to be like ask for a little more, you know, just like get the right amount you need because you know costs go up, you know, by the time it gets approved and you get it over there and you want to have a little wiggle room and there's always a we always have a caveat on there if you don't use all of the money it gets pulled back in. So yeah, so they they come up with their own estimates that they present. >> Yeah. It prevents applicants from come for to come back for small amounts of money that they didn't anticipate and instead give them a little bit more and any extra money gets returned. >> Yeah. So because we we we approve or put it forward but

051it has to go through the town. >> So it's every six months. So if you wait, you know, if you brought one now for December, you're waiting till May for it to get approved. You know, just prices go up. So >> yeah. All right. Thank you. Uh, Deepa, anything from Metro West Regional Collaborative? >> Um, I think we had one I want to say few weeks ago which was on historic preservation which was a very good one, but I don't think any more scheduled for the year. So, right after the holidays. >> So, in those meetings that's regionally just people talk people talking about how they're different towns talking about how they're dealing with historic preservation. Uh this one MAPC kind of presented um big picture of historic preservation and how some communities are dealing

052with it. But >> okay >> and then people share experiences but it is a good conversation. >> Great. Yeah. And again this is we have a um Yolanda always rep um recommends that we have someone there that for that information that things that might tie back into planning board that someone can bring that to the table. And then we have comprehensive plan which was successful at town meeting. >> Yes. Very exciting. And what I would say the next steps on that are is the select board and planning board have to work together to create an implementation committee. Out of the comprehensive plan process, my recollection and Trisha was there as well with the discussions we had with the consultant. There seemed to be some understanding in the room of the fact that the implementation committee

053ideally would not be as large as the comprehensive plan committee. I recall less than 10 members um was my recollection. >> I think five to seven >> five to seven less than 10 people. Um and the concept would be that the planning board with the select board would create the implementation committee soon. Um and ideally would seek membership from the comprehensive plan committee so that if anybody on the comprehensive plan wanted to participate there could be continuity in people on the implementation committee that were part of that if they are interested. Obviously we can't force anyone and then obviously opening it up um to a wider public application process and figuring out what kind of applicant we need on the implementation committee. Um, so all of that has to start. My my recommendation to this

054board because the comprehensive plan is within our jurisdiction is, you know, we there's benefits to us at some point. I think this is on the agenda to talk about that and see if we can come to some resolution. The alternative is I'm more than happy to reach out to Yolanda on um on the select board and try to kind of put it in writing like what I just said and sort of put it in memo form. um assuming she's interested and Trisha thinks it's a good idea so that at the next planning board meeting we have sort of an outline that Yolanda and I maybe can agree to and then ultimately we should go to the select board have a meeting with them vote for it and start the application process to create the implementation

055committee and the sooner we do that in January in my opinion the better so that we get it out of the way because we're going to get really really busy um and we need to get that implementation group going. Um, so that would be my recommendation as the next step. Either we as a board draft something or I can reach out to Yolanda and and sort of put together a very brief summary of my recollection, her recollection and then present that to both boards. >> I'm definitely okay working with Yolanda. Um, >> or if you want to, that's fine, too. I mean, I I've been on the comprehensive plan this whole time, so I'm more than happy and I can certainly show you my recollection, which I think we just agreed to. Um, so I

056think it's a few sentences of bullet points, you know, five to seven appointment, reach out to the prior board, see who's interested there, figure out, you know, those people obviously should be part of it if they want, and then opening it up to the public and figuring out what kind of person together. Yeah, I I think it's a matter of if you if you can work with Yolanda to come up with a kind of framework that that can be discussed by both bar boards to see if it's it's acceptable and then we can go from there because I agree that we don't want we don't we have this thing now we want to use it >> right >> on day one right we want to start right away >> yeah and I can reach out

057to her she might be too busy around this time but I can tell her that ideally if she and I can talk informally and I can bring something to you guys like these are the bullet points Yolanda kind of remembers I don't even know if she's interested But I I'd have to ask her. Um >> yeah, do want check that out. >> Yeah, I can do that and then we can go from there. >> That sounds good. >> All right. Um >> or Brandy, whichever one, you know, whoever is available from the slug board. >> Okay. So then we have ongoing and new projects. Anything on our horizon that we know about? >> Nothing right now. >> Okay, we have enough going on right now. Um especially with CBA. um housing production plan. Um >>

058have you has anybody reached out to any of you for interviews? >> Yeah, >> I was called. >> I had I had reached out I think I'm going to do mine next week. >> Okay. So I believe they've wrapped up their interviews. They should have already >> I think mine was supposed to be yesterday and I reschedled it to next week. >> They are still wrapping up their interviews. So they we've been collecting data on the town side providing that to them. So they they're moving on track for everything that we set. They're on schedule. So they should be >> Who who was chosen to >> Jim Goldton? Jen Goldton. Jam Goldton. >> I'm not sure that was his question. >> Yeah. Who was chosen to be interviewed for whatever this is? >> Oh, it

059was a large list. So it was the entire planning board, the entire select board. Um members from >> And they just chose randomly. I'm not sure if they we gave them a comprehensive list and I don't know if they interviewed everyone on it or how that >> I wasn't interviewed or reached out to. >> Me too. >> Interesting. >> If anyone >> I can ask them. I'm not I'm not positive how that process works on their end. >> Yeah. I mean, if you guys are I I didn't know either. I just I kind of assumed everyone was getting an email or whatever. But if you would particularly like to give feedback, I don't know how their process works or how their funding works, but you know, maybe give your name to Jasmine right now so

060she can tell them these people are actually interested in participating because you could give that to Jen Goolson, right? >> I can absolutely. Um I I don't mind giving a few names, but I would be I would like to hear her process first before I try to implement how she does it. >> Right. I'm not sure how they do it either. >> What is it? >> So it it's you're aware of the housing production plan and that we're updating it and why we need to update it. So the housing production plan is essentially how we determine how growth will be how we would prefer grow to see housing growth in Ashlin and it's important that we keep in mind affordable growth and that option so that way we once we maintain safe harbor status we

061have a goal to keep us there but also if you don't have an active housing production plan you can't claim safe harbor um if you're below 10% SHI because you don't have a housing production plan to prove that you're meeting your growth goals. So, you can get safe harbor for one year to three to two years in a 40b without having your subsidized housing inventory met by meeting certain criteria. And if you don't have an active housing production plan, you lose that right. So, our housing production plan expires this in 2026, it expires in May. So, it's critical that we update it. We've signed a contract with JM Goldson to update our housing production plan and we'd sent a calendar probably in November, early October, late no um late October, early November of how the

062process would break down the timeline. There's going to be a joint hearing with the planning board and the select board to review the plan and draft and then a second one to approve it after that. So the process right now is that JM Golden collects a lot of data from us. We chose them because they just worked so closely on our comprehensive plan. and they had a lot of that data already. So, it saved us actually some cost without having to transfer a lot of that data and right now they're in the interview and data collection process while they're working on a draft document and once they have that draft and goals identified then they'll share it with the boards. >> Yeah. So, it happens every five years. Um Brandy and I Brandy well you

063know Brandy um uh were on the on it the last time and so and we used a a different consultant the MAC >> MAPC yeah >> like a different >> Yeah that we used the the last time >> and it will be a public session as well. So we have you know an open session open to the public. It's very interactive. So it is like a public process. >> Yeah. So, so this time, um, you know, since we already have the comprehensive plan that a lot of that information feeds back into it. Obviously, since they were the consultant with the comprehensive plan, they know all have all that background information, but it's a document you want to have on on file with the state for I think there's a lot of beneficial reasons to do

064that. So, it it's a five-year process and it's the time is just up again. So, >> yeah. Cool. I would I would have liked to have been interviewed for it. So >> they asked for the we provided a pretty comprehensive list. I don't know how I can I can ask them how they did their selection process. I'm not positive. >> Yeah, that'd be great. If I can't be interviewed, I'd like to at least know why. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Why some were chosen somewhere. >> It might be that they just chose the chair and vice chair of every committee. But also >> two people who are they're familiar with >> I understand that. I I think sometimes I have different views on >> but but that said no >> but that said if they have

065opening in there because there is a certain funding mechanism that they'll do so many interviews but if there's openings to that >> I think it's fair to say if there is an opening Scott would like to would enjoy that conversation is that is that possible >> and it's not your only opportunity for the conversation you will have other opportunities to share your thoughts on on the process but the one or not >> so you also have to remember certainly We as a planning board are vital participants in reviewing this document. So everyone's opinion in this room is going to be part of the process. >> Do you do you give your opinion based on you as a national resident or you as a planning board member >> as a planning board member? >> Yes. >>

066Or if you want to do it as a resident, you're always welcome to as a you can stand up. >> I have not had my interview. I assume I'm doing it in the capacity of a planning board member and a comprehensive plan member and I'm guessing that's why I was chosen because I'm vice chair of the planning board and I was on the comprehensive plan for three years. >> The question they ask is obviously they obviously have to do with your experience on the planning board. That's why you that's why they got your name right. But it is your individual opinion. It's my opinion about how I think what what I see the issues being what you know it's not taking a survey of the board and expressing opinion it's my opinion based on my

067experience but it is just one opinion then that comes like like Jasmine said it will come before the whole board to discuss as well but it is something like you said if you would like to be able to offer your opinion as a member of the planning board as a resident of Ashlin then Jasmine can ask if There's they have some openings for that if they're willing to >> open it up for a few more. So, I think that's valid. >> I'm sure they will. >> All right. >> So, okay. And the next thing on the agenda is well just uh updates updates on 40bs and shi nothing has >> 40bs are getting >> we'll be clo we anticipate closing two of those hearings. >> Yeah. So, if you haven't uh >> but just for

068common knowledge, you don't get any type of >> safe harbor or anything until building permits and occupancy permits are issued. So, a common misconception is that it's approved, so we're safe and that's not accurate. I just want everybody to be clear once it's approved, we don't actually have any type of safety net until they have building permits in hand. >> You said building permits, then you said occupancy. >> You get different types. So you get a 12 month safe harbor once they obtain building permits. You have 12 months for them to ask for occupancy permits until you lose safe harbor and then another 40b could come in and apply. If they obtain their occupancy permit within that 12 months of receiving their building permit then you get another two years of safe harbor from that

069regardless of it's if you've reached your subsidized housing inventory. Until you reach your occupancy, you don't qualify for subsidized housing inventory. So if it takes longer than a year, >> yes, >> for them to go from building permit to occupancy, which I imagine it would take longer than that, especially for some of these big ones. >> We're reopen to 40bs, we're susceptible during that time if nobody's pulled occupancy and we haven't reached subsidized housing inventory, >> right? But but you also have to remember that we have three of these going on. So there's multiple building permits, multiple upgy at like 70% completion or something sometimes depending on >> and is it do they is it every time they pull a building permit we get another year? >> No, it's from the initial you >> From

070the first building permit and then most of these buildings will will only have one main permit because they're going to be doing the foundation first. So they there will be other permits but this is what starts construction. So you get 12 months from their first building permit and then the occupancy you get from the first occupancy. So anyway these are if you ever want those meetings are on same weeks as our meetings um but on Tuesday evening. So, um, if you want to tune in or or come. I haven't been to very haven't been to as many as I should have been, but >> a lot going on. >> Um, meeting minutes review way back to no well, it's not that far back. November 6th. Those are at the very back of the binder. This

071was the meeting where uh Angel joined our board. So quick public quick uh beginning part of it is um with the select board and then we had the YMCA u public hearing which was probably a lot of the meeting. Um then we have the Pond Street Extension, sorry, Oregon Road, Cell Tower. Um, on page three, lines 116 117, I'm being quoted, but I don't I don't necessarily remember saying it. It the sentence doesn't quite make sense. Miss Tesmiski stated in regards to connectivity that if we're paying for a connection by seeing trash in a generator, she's clearly against that. I think what I think I get it like a little bit where I must have been like the significance was whatever connection we're going to have if we end up with the result of seeing

072the trash that's a problem because I think the way the path was going to be built. There was like a connection issue that you brought up Scott and then the response was well if we do it this way we'll see the trash. >> Yeah. It's very unclear statement. How would you like it? How would you like it restarted? I don't maybe something like I stated that choosing a path or connection that exposes the trash would not be >> Acceptable. I think that type of sentence would be better. >> Yeah, >> because I was like, I don't even know what that is. I mean, maybe I spoke this way. This was the zigzag. >> This is the zigzag ADA >> sidewalk they were going to put in. >> Yeah, that >> or they didn't want to

073put in, but they were asking us. >> Yeah. And I will say the next sentence is also sort of run on where I'm like, am I really talking about a bus shelter and solar all at once? Very hard to imagine. Um it just seems a little runon. These minutes felt a little bit more choppy to me than former minutes, but I'm not going to like I I'll let it go. It just felt a little bit like things were being squished together. Um, but I'm okay with it. The rest of it was not that bad. Other than that, I have no changes. All right. Any other changes? I would just make one change on line 34. Um this is uh with Angel's appointment that it just says um um when a when a board member has

074to recuse themselves from a it should be a special permit project and not just any project. That's the only thing I would add. Any other changes that anyone's noticing right is there a motion to motion to accept as amended. I'll I'll make a motion to accept as amended the November 6, 2025 minutes. There's a second. >> Second that. >> And a roll call vote. >> Binket. >> Anna Tesman. I >> Paul Montasino I >> and Trisha Kendall I. So that is done. Um draft schedule for our next upcoming year. I don't we don't typically actually look at everything um you know the whole actually you had a calendar in here right after the meeting minutes. Yeah. So is anything on this? So the very last page in the binder is our meeting schedule. Um, it

075typically is pretty >> I'm not going to be in town on the ETH. >> Um, >> do we know because I've already did my video >> one time for Tilton. >> You can only miss one hearing in order to vote on it. >> Right. That's why I'm asking. >> Can you attend via Zoom? >> That counts. >> I'll be five hours ahead. I think midnight. >> I can ask them if they would like to continue again. >> Well, I know he doesn't want to. I know he's waiting. >> He may want to for the vote. >> Yeah. >> For him to be able to have a five member vote. It's usually we leave that up to the applicant to decide if they'd like to move forward with a four member vote or a five member

076vote. >> Well, let's make sure we have um is that everyone is going to be there on the >> Let's make sure they have material to begin with. They may ask for continuance anyway. I mean, I know >> why don't we make it about them because ultimately we need all the stuff, right? So, >> yeah. I mean, I'm I'm around I won't be on a cruise ship this time. I'll be like >> in like a place with Yeah. with internet and whatnot. >> Um, so I'd love to I don't want to miss that one. I don't want to miss any of it, but >> So, it sounds like if they don't ask for continuance, we will explore how they feel about a four member vote. >> Yeah. So I said five hours. It's like midnight.

077It literally starts at midnight. >> Europe. >> I mean the rest of these meetings it's hard to know so far ahead of time. >> Yeah. I would say looking at the first quarter it's fine for me, >> but I don't I don't think we can really predict our future. >> No, it's just this is the general schedule and if anybody knows it's gotten pretty ahead of time or >> sometimes, you know, I'm I'm going to South Africa with my family in August or something like that, you know. >> Yes. So, and we do have um only the one meeting in listed for November because the 26th is the day after Thanksgiving, which is a holiday. So, we actually can't meet then. And December 10th and then the next the second meeting is the December 24th.

078So, when we get to that time of year, sometimes we manipulate our schedule for we really need to get things done. >> It's literally a year away. So, >> and approving these doesn't set them in stone. It's just a preliminary approval. We'll put them on the calendar. You may change these dates. >> Yeah. In fact, I don't think we've we've kind of just all like, "Yeah, it looks good, but I don't think we've ever voted on it before." >> I don't think we've ever voted. I don't think we need to vote other than informally. Go for it. >> Yeah. So, it's good. Let's list it as is. And uh we'll keep January 8th as it is for Well, we've already continued it to that date. So, we'll have to um we'll see where we are.

079>> Yeah, we'll see. I'm actually going to be in France, so I don't I thought it was London, so it might be six hours. I don't know when the switches, but >> and sometimes if sometimes what happens if if we lose a member or something is that we re we relist it, we revertise it and it resets everything again. >> I don't know that has to be a discussion with the applicant because there's a cost involved, but >> yeah. >> So, we'll figure it out. We're not asking you not to go to France. >> So, >> okay. Um, upcoming meetings January 8th. We've talked about that multiple times. Now, we're not going to adjourn, but we uh Okay. So, um, >> you guys just have 501. So, >> I guess I'll leave for the >>

080just leave >> and you guys will close without me. >> Well, actually, >> oh, we have one more item. We're back to item six, but only because it's on there. We don't have to do anything with this tonight. >> But I thought if we and and we ended up talking about the YMCA more than I expected that we would. So, um that's why we kind of have this in here. Um so, this is getting outdated now. Um obviously there's some things crossed off. um is a list that Kate started and then I um reformatted to kind of keep track of what things we had talked about that we should do, what things that we are in the middle of doing, um just goals that we that we have. And so, um, >> yeah, >> what

081what I'll say is I've been talking about the downtown hotels forever. I know Scott is interested. It sounds like you're also interested. So, now we have three members of the board who are interested. Um, I think the three of us working together would violate open meeting laws, >> but two of us working together would not. So, uh, why don't we I mean, Scott and I were going to start to like do some research independently and then pull it together into memo where I was going to start doing that. I think the best course of action is to just like pick one or two items on this list that interests you or if you have other things to add, but to me that's kind of my I keep coming back to that item. I think that's

082my next thing after the comprehensive plan implementation. >> Yeah. And we'll have to ask a little bit because even um I don't know exactly what the requirements are, but two board members can definitely can definitely informal like talk about hotels and whatever. Um but um you know it wouldn't be a formal designation by the board that hey this is you guys's job because once we do that you're now a subcommittee that needs to have that needs to have public hearings public meetings. >> Yeah informal. >> So if it's an informal exploration on your own you might do it you might not. That's fine. >> Um >> I guess what I'm saying is after we're done with a comprehensive plan implementation that is my next tod do. Okay, it's >> the hotel thing. So, I will

083own that for next year. If somebody wants to do some research and casually forward it my way, I'll take it. Um, from what I recall on this topic, it's fairly straightforward. Our current zoning prohibits hotels downtown. So, it's as straightforward as looking at the bylaw and removing the prohibition. But it's more complex than that because once you remove the prohibition, you do need to come up with some design concepts of what should hotels look like downtown, right? Um, and so most communities that allow hotels in downtowns contemplate that. And there's oftentimes resistance in the community to a hotel concept because there's a lot of assumptions about what hotels can do and what kinds of quoteunquote problems hotels can bring. Um and so design becomes very very important and what it looks like and all that.

084Um and there's policy items such as you know will there be increased crime? Will there be increased tourism in a way that brings on challenges for the police department? Is there going to be quoteunquote parking issues? Is there going to be I don't know some sort of inappropriate behavior that hotels attract? public will sometimes fear all those things and they all need to be talked about the planning board so that if we do change the zoning on this we are doing that transparently and and you know openly and we understand the the concerns the public might have. >> Yeah. So I would say do you know obviously >> so those would be the things you would see in a memo. >> Yeah. just um and whenever you're ready we'll >> we can talk about >>

085we'll put it on the agenda as a you know and and advertise it you know so that people can come in and and we can you know >> and it was born originally from the concept that the hospitality industry is one of the most growthoriented ones in Massachusetts um and it would be a good counterbalance to the fact that this community seems currently fairly much against the Airbnb concept at least this board seemed to be anti-airbn before in the prior version of this board. Um, and so if we're not going to kind of regulate Airbnbs or sort of motivate an allowing of them, um, this was and that came up in the context of accessory dwelling units being utilized for rentals. We had this deep conversation as a board with Marcelo against that that idea

086of opening it up for rentals. If you have accessory dwelling units, they should not be for rentals. um at least that was the the feeling on the board and so the hotel thing is a way to counter that. >> So let us know when you want it on the agenda. >> Sounds good. >> I I just wanted to inform the new members, >> but in looking at um looking at the rest of the things on here I I I think again I can go through this and take and take off a few things. We have the I'm just going to let's just, you know, run down them kind of briefly because there's really not that many left. the tree bylaw. Um, that's a sustainability thing. They had come before us several times about a tree

087bylaw. I don't know if they're currently working on it. It's not something the planning board I think it seems to be more in their court that we would work with them offer advice. Not that there has to be agreement. Um, but they were in in 2020. Was it 20 a year ago already? Has it been since you you weren't here? No. >> Right. So, it was before the spring. We had we had met with him several times. So, I don't know where the status on that on that is, but we kind of it's leave it on the to-do list. The accessory dwelling unit um bylaw is done, though we will um be looking at that in in terms of the in-law apartment um which needed to be pulled from um the last town meeting that

088will come up again in the spring. Um so uh the two um after that are obviously done done or um off our radar. Zoning for downtown hotels that was Anna. The bylaw review is something that though I'm having trouble getting motivated with it is something that I was going to and still intend to do having been on the board for I don't know seven years now. Um, I just want to start going through the bylaws and kind of nitpicking, not the change of the bylaw, changing the bylaws, but finding where there's inconsistencies, where there's two um definitions of the same thing, where some kind of punctuation makes you question the understanding of the bylaw, those type of things. And we've come across them through the years in the various bylaws. So, it's a very like

089just nitpicky kind of editing that I'm going to be kind of taking up. Um, and maybe I'll have something for Springtown meeting of these little tweaks to try to get things uh into shape. Um, site plan review timelines. That's actually something we already did. That's checked off the list. We just uh we just tweaked our the timelines that we had control over so that site plan review aligned with special permit. before they were two different timelines which didn't make a lot of sense and was hard to keep track of. >> Did we break a warrant? Am I losing my mind? >> Yes, we did. >> Oh, wow. I really lost. >> It was like a oneliner in the meeting. So, >> I remember now. >> Yeah. >> Um there was some there was a bigger

090bylaw that we were talking about at the time. >> Um design review committee. As you know, we we don't currently have a design review committee. And so, um, one of the things we want to work with, um, town council on is a different kind of design review committee. I think what we're, >> we had brought up last time that it would probably be it's it's hard to get architects and we only have a limited amount of them in um, in Ashland and other people who are focused on design to sign up for three years on a design review committee. It's a lot of hours and you can't tell ahead of time if you're really going to have that time. So, the idea was that Anna had that we that we have a system set up

091maybe of ad hoc committee is that when we have a >> when we have a design project that we can get three people from that roster to do a design review of that project and then they're off the hook again. And um I didn't talk to Lisa about it, but I think Jasmine did. And there seemed to be that there there may be a way to pursue that. It may require a bylaw change. But that's something I think we need to pursue. I think that should be to me it's one one of the more things on top of our agenda maybe for this year is to to look into that. So did >> and that's important because >> Angel has a little insight into that because her husband was on the design review committee, >>

092right? >> Oh boy. It's like two lawyers in one house. >> Yeah. Many years ago. So um >> so in his in his insights when we get into that process might actually be very useful if you can. >> Sounds like we have a roster member right there in your house. Great. >> Yeah. So um so anyway that's what that's what that is now about this kind of transition. Um some of these things are just meetings like we have found over the years that it was very helpful to us to have um Jim Adams the the school superintendent have a meeting with us tell us about how um what we do on the planning board approval of projects how does it affect schools like just to just to understand and gain that information. We had one

093with the fire department, right, and understand their take on things. So that was very useful. So a number of these, the water, sewer, ash, and cultural council and the historical commission. Um, and we've met with the historical commission about about more specific projects, but it really is about understanding what they do and how what we do relates to what they do. I think we had one with concomformational session. So, and we can we can have them again as as obviously we get new board members. Zoning board of appeals is another one. They've been a little busy recently. The fiscal economic impact tool. I'm not sure where that um is ending up. the the town has a tool that was developed years ago um by a consultant um who maybe was working at the with the

094town at the time to try to figure out what the economic impact is of various projects that come into town, right? Putting in a bunch of factors and spitting out a bunch of information. Um the question was um to try to be able to compare our economic impact tool to other ones out there. But what Peter found was that there wasn't a whole lot out there and that more more often towns were like you have an economic impact tool you know what is that about right um so um so I'm not sure how that will be I'm not sure the best way to pursue that actually I mean the consultant is someone we have come across in other projects right he I think has his own consulting firm at this point >> was the tool

095I forget was going to tell somebody in the town what is it when a project comes alive >> what do they what does it mean in terms of the taxes that pay because that's something that >> many towns have >> they do >> it's not new and anytime a big commercial project comes in town >> it's automatically kind of links into that page and any community member can actually see how it impacts them. >> Yeah. I'm not sure. >> I don't know why we were told that that's something special. I don't think that's true. >> Yeah. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. Um >> I mean, there's lots of different versions of it. Ours might be a little bit more >> from what I recall, our ours is kind of more refined and has other

096pieces in it because it was for a particular >> set of projects. But what I do recall what Peter was looking at is I think he was talking to either Framingham State or >> some kind of entity because there are economists who do these things regionally as part of the Metro West community. Um so I think Kate was asking if I recall Kate I think wanted to make sure that whatever was developed is accurate or maybe updated. I can't quite recall her focus point because there is we do have it. We have this tool already, but I think it was about updating it. >> I was gonna say it's probably very out ofd. Jasmine, in your experience >> in the towns you've worked at, have you used some kind of spreadsheet program tool to to

097understand a potential project's impact on taxes and other resources? >> No. And honestly, that's actually a very to be to be frank, that's a very far overreach of your purview of what the board can do. You can ask for that information, but it's not it's not something that is within your range to necessarily during specific projects. You can like a general >> No, no. This would be used for specific projects and I'm pretty confident our bylaw allows for some consideration of those, >> right? And that's tool. That's when you'd have a peer review. and you'd have a peer reviewer. You would ask the applicant, "What are these analysis?" And then you would hire a peer review at the applicant's cost to go through and say, "How does this financially, fiscally impact us?" Because you don't

098have that data on hand right now. >> I don't know how the tool was developed for the planning board. I don't think it was I but I don't remember. have >> that's not anything anybody's >> but ours but our bylaws but our bylaws do I mean this has come up very recently even in terms of the YMCA right that the the bylaws do refer to >> right as long as it's tax implication um so again we're wondering you know if other towns >> we usually other towns do it on a project by project basis you don't have a large database that has a collection of all of that data >> right that's what we're that's what we're talking about >> the project specific. >> It's basically an Excel spreadsheet. >> Yeah. >> That is specifically

099used for a project. >> No, nobody there there's no one specific metric for that that any community that I'm aware of has used. I mean, you can't there's so many different variables about it. I don't know how you would even go about doing that. >> It's a calculator. >> It's an economic >> I understand, but I don't know how you can't use that same calculation for every project. >> Well, just because you plug in specific data. Yeah. Well, maybe >> but again, that's usually something that you can ask the applicant to provide that information. >> Well, here's what I'll say. Here's what I know. The town of Ashland paid for it. It exists and the town of Ashlin found reliable and reasonable >> and it was used literally and therefore I think as a good

100faith point, >> we already use it as a community before. Therefore, it's valid and the statute allowed it for that particular project. >> Um, and we have it. I think Kate's point, if I recall, was that it needed to be updated for current use because it was fairly old. >> Um, she is a member of the public. She still exists in Ashland. >> Oh, of course. >> I think it might be helpful. I can reach out to Kate and have her refresh my memory as to what she was seeking from Peter. I think Peter had started quite a bit of work on it. I recall he was working on getting more information. >> Um, and I'll see what she remembers. I'm more than happy to continue Peter's efforts if he reached out to the economists

101in Framingham State to try to explore how to update it. I can send that email. >> I'd like to look into it because there, you know, again, there are costs associated with some of these things. I don't know anything about it. This is the first I'm hearing. So, I would like to at least have the opportunity to explore and understand before we make any movement or effort on it. >> No, I was under impression you knew about it already. >> Yeah. So, let me let me gather some information. Let me it it's I'm sure the thing is sitting somewhere on the computer >> maybe in some secret file. I will I will ask Peter where to find it have you know and and what the thing is even called and then we can go from

102there to see what it's you know to see what it is. >> Is the point of looking at the economic tool to decide if a project is worthy of a positive vote or a negative vote? I think I think that it was to try and I don't remember which project we were really looking at it closely but it was to try to kind of verify what the applicant was telling us about the project like it's going to generate this much money it's going to have this many students in the school it's going to whatever and it was our way of saying hm well on our tool it kind of says something differently or it doesn't or it you know whatever. So, um, but the tool was developed for Ashland. I can't remember why before my

103time. Um, and then kind of stayed on as a as something that we could use then. That's why it's likely very out ofdate with its numbers and assumptions. But I do know that we have talked to that the person who created it since then who I believe now has his own consulting company related to this. That information again I'd have to get from Peter. I don't remember. >> I think um Peter was one of them who was using it. Other thing I I in my head was our Michael. Michael had access to that economic development. >> Yeah. So anyway, that so that one needs a little research to see if it's something that >> can be. >> And Peter, if you did not get it, was our previous town planner. So we talk about Peter

104as if all of us know it. >> That's right. Talk about Peter as if he's still. Um, okay. Next on the list, comprehensive plan. Oh, okay. We're we are done with that because the next one is comprehensive plan implementation. That's the one that we're looking at now, which we've already talked about. So, that actually is already rolling um about how to do that. Planning board process. This is always up for good discussion. Not tonight, please. How to make meetings more efficient. Best practices u for long projects with long continuence or repeated continuences perhaps. Um review of decision document templates. We're always trying to kind of make them better, more clear. Um yeah, codification standards for outdoor dining, sustainability, those are some things we had worked on in the last five years. Just things that came

105up that's with our like our sustainability best practices list. It's just a suggestion. It's not a part of the bylaws. Um and how and public engagement. So these are just kind of general things about how the planning board can improve itself. The next one, Charles River flood plan bylaw. That uh was done in the spring. Yeah, I think that one was done in the spring. Um changes to projects after planning board approval. This is something we a few projects in in fact in fact it's typical as you know right that um projects always change during construction whether it's a house an addition to a house an interior renovation or a big school or a they're always going to change in process because that's just that's just the way it works. So how do we as

106a board if we approve one project how do we know when a project has to come back to us for a certain scale of change that's what Angel you'll be when we get to discussing that again your experience any experiences you have in that regard will be really really useful like when does the building inspector make the call as they often do on little things and when when can they not make that when does it come back to the board? So, that was on our list. Um, zoning changes to height. This looks like something very specific. Oh. Oh, this looks like something related to um the MBTA zoning bylaw. And if that is true, yeah, I think this is rated to MBTA zoning. So that's done. Change to the parking space dimension. This has come

107up recently. Um the our the our zoning bylaw asks for a 9 by20 space. Oftentimes this is considered large versus a 9 by8 space. So, we've always meant to kind of relook at that and see if 9 9 by20 is really needed versus 9 by18 looking at sustainability and big cars and amount of paving and that kind of thing. And then scenic roads. Um I think we've always meant to go back and to do a little work on scenic roads, better notification of tenants that live along them. Um like Deepa, don't you live along a scenic road? >> It's a be our old story. >> Yeah. Right. Um that we've never gotten back to revisit if you know or what we would want to revisit. >> I definitely want to revisit that one because I

108I believe my first hearing with this board there was a scenic road tree that was removed and we I believe we voted to plant it and we never did. Um and then Marcelo I think wanted to explore that more of creating more formality around that because we do have at the time Peter did believe we had jurisdiction to authorize replanting. Um so this issue is sort of a also in the back of my mind for 2026 because I feel like we voted for something that actually never happened. I'm not sure it never happened because there was a discussion at one time that we were never going to plant it back in the original place because of all the roots. >> We would plant it in at some point somewhere, but I don't recall ever hearing

109from Peter that it actually happened. I remember bringing it up a few times and he would be like, "Oh, I'll look into it." >> So, um I still remember and uh before before my term ends and I run again, we'll take care of that damn tree. Um so that's still on my list. So anyway, this list is going to be cleaned up and shortened, you know, before our next meeting. But as you see questions, especially with fresh eyes on the board, why aren't we doing this? Why don't we look at this? Like those items should be added to our list and see which ones, like I said, what we want to start addressing when we have downtime between what our obligations on projects. So >> I do have one comment on that. I think the

110design review process is really important to figure out sooner in 2026 because >> any big project we have having that roster of people will be extremely helpful. For example, this landscape tree issue with the Y. >> We don't have expertise on this board for landscape type of items. So that would be a perfect roster design review type of item in my opinion. >> Yeah. >> So I think the sooner we do that the better. Obviously the implementation of the comprehensive plan, those really feel strongly priority for me personally, those two things and obviously the hotels thing because I'm getting tired of saying I'm interested in it. Um I'm just sharing kind of what I view as a priority. >> All right. So, um I'll be revising the list. If anyone has anything to add, feel

111free to just send it to me and we can put it on. These aren't these aren't things we voted to have on the list. These are people's ideas and they get put on the list. So, um >> could we rep prioritize it? Maybe like stick some of the stuff towards the top. >> Yeah. I mean, this is this is not a they're not in priority order. This is in as we thought of them order is what it is, >> right? So, um so that but that priority column >> in the middle is where we should highlight. >> Great. >> Okay. So now um now we just have the the natural gas modification letter left. That's 501 palm tree. So we will say goodbye to Anna for the rest of the evening. We still have a

112quorum and she can't um she's um >> I'm in a butter >> a butter to that >> and I trust you guys will be able to close the hearing without me today. >> I think so. Um, so on the letter, uh, just so you know, um, uh, Jasmine had, uh, um, >> thanks, Anna. Happy holiday. >> Um, um, uh, town council, was it? It was Lisa, right? >> Yeah. Lisa me, our town council, um, reviewed it and but when I was just reading through it earlier, um, I noticed that, and I'm sure Jasmine and Melissa being in a rush to put this together, that the findings were really mostly from our, um, our medium minute notes, right? And so I wanted to make it a little bit more narrative. Um so um what what basically

113what the um the the second part of it is written by Lisa and I didn't change that part right those four points were listened by these are just the findings of like our understanding and what I wanted to make sure of in writing this memo which typically just gets written and we sign it but I wanted to make sure that the reason why we were allowing the gas was very clear because we're not just saying, "Yeah, sure, use the gas." Even though in the original the original approval, it's all electric. They came back and they asked to be able to use gas. Um, talking about how they're going for these deeper discounts. It's not just 25% at 80% AMI, right? They have some really deep discounts here that they're applying for with a different kind

114of funding. But to make the numbers work with the electricity cost so high right now, they wanted to put in basically a dual fuel to allow for gas for domestic hot water only, not for heating and cooling until those until electric costs come down and then they will switch to using electric. So, I think it was the three of us in the meeting at the time. We voted to approve that. But in the um I just wanted our I wanted the logic of the decision in there and it wasn't just that we were going against our original decision that it was to be all electric, but the I wanted to put in there the argument they were making and thus the reason we allowed it. Does that make sense? So, if you look at if

115you have your copy of this, I don't know if people have it or if it's >> everybody has a copy. >> I don't know what number it's under. >> Remember the agenda is three, >> but the um >> Oh, yeah. It's under it's under three. But so the the yellow is just in the findings. um which is our summary of what happened at the meeting and those are the parts I clarified. So we had so you just summarized our thoughts. Yeah, most of it was in there and I kind of just went through it and um like for instance it um it it said that they seem happy with it. This proposal checks a lot of box checks checks a lot of boxes, right? It was from it was from the meeting minutes. It wasn't

116our findings as a board in our voice, right? Yep. So that's why I um that's why I left most of it in because it is a summary but but changed it. And I also looked at the um I also just looked at for the numbers looked at the document that they provided um about their proposed plan. >> Is this the same as that? No, the these No, what you have is my version is what is shown on the screen is Trish's edits, right? >> So, you have my version that you received and then on the screen are Trisha's proposed edits. So, you'd be voting on what's proposed or discussing what's proposed rather than that has >> Yeah. The yellow is where I changed it. >> Okay. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> Because you see what

117I mean in the in the original text. It just >> Yeah. No, that's much clearer. So, and then um for the um when it says about the rates um I went back and I used the things that they had on their uh what we what we approved the last time um market says market rate approximately 15% workforce approximately 25% affordable approximately 60%. that workforce was up to 120 AMI, affordable was up to 60 AMI. Like that's what we that's was from this document. >> So should that say the board made the following findings? Is that the right? >> Yes. This is what was discussed at the meeting. So these were the findings that you made. >> This information was shared by them to us. >> Right. >> It's not we discover we didn't discover this.

118>> But there that's how the decision is written. Every standard condition, a standard decision is written. These are the board discussed it and you found that after they presented you, these are the facts of what they showed you. It's pretty much these are the facts of the case. These are the findings. These are the facts. This is what the facts of the matter are. >> It's the typical wording we use in our decisions. Like the findings are things that are kind of like are the facts, you know? >> Okay. We usually put things like sustainability. They're going to use lowflow toilets or like the things they told us they're going to do. >> So, did they set a threshold for what that electrical rate needs to be to kick back or is it just >>

119vague? It's basically as soon as um and this is in the bottom portion of it. This is Lisa. So, >> no, this is actually I wrote this and Lisa approved it. She didn't write it. I wrote it and she reviewed it. So the the um the following the deliberation part is really the those are really the conditions. Um so it number three says if at any time electric domestic hot water becomes more cost effective than propane gas the property owner shall convert the building. >> I'm sorry. What we're reading up here is what you wrote. What is here is what you wrote >> and it's not everything yellow is different. >> Okay. Well, all right. Let me let me explain again. This document went out. I was reading it today and the first part of

120the document where it says findings, right? The first part of the document, the one, two. >> Right. But I read like the first three lines of the yellow part are exactly the same words. >> Right. Right. >> Right. Section. So one through the first part one through six right these are the findings these are the things basically came out of the meeting minutes like almost word for word right and if you read those I don't think this is how we want to present ourselves on this document right it doesn't sound right right so I modified one through six that's my yellow I'm indicating the parts that I changed to make sound better >> but you you like the applicant has applied for that whole thing is exactly the same up until the word the applicant.

121So that's what I was just confused by like if you didn't change something then like I just wonder like you changed the applicant to >> it was wind development. >> I got the highlight of it wrong. Right. >> Okay. But that paragraph is where I started to manipulate. So from the state and then you has so Jasmine wrote um tax credit funding from the state and then you added and noted that the state has previewed their application and seem happy with it. >> Well, that's what they have and seem happy with. I keep wanting to change and seem happy with it because it seems a little weird. >> Um >> but but who has that? What? >> The applicant wrote that to us. >> Is that where they where that came from, Trisha? The applicant.

122>> It's It's on It's on the copy you received and say seemed happy with it. It's in there. >> I would like personally to still take that part out because I think it sounds weird. >> Right. >> It's just in a different order, though. >> Yes, because I revised that paragraph. The yellow I I guess I didn't fully My maybe my Like I'm just looking for the changes and I'm not like that's what I'm having a hard time seeing. Like if it says see they seem happy with it two sentences later but you moved it up like I guess I'm trying to understand the difference from what you wrote and what is written there. And that's what I'm trying to understand. >> And so is this has five six that has only five. Um, and

123it feels like maybe better to look at that copy because this is very confusing. >> Do you want me to print this for you as well? >> What's the So, besides the overall tone change that you want to do here that that's what you're asking to do. >> Yeah. I mean, if everyone can see up on the board. Okay. So, let me Okay, I'm just going to read it. No, read I'm going to read the one on your on the thing. In connection with the financing and funding efforts as presented, the applicant continues to work to advance the construction plans and specifications for the development of the project. Right. That's the same. >> Yeah. >> And granted this this is what someone recorded in the meeting minutes. That that person wrote it. The meeting minutes

124person wrote it. Okay. Because it's from the meeting minutes. >> Then and I guess this is the same. The applicant has applied to EOHLC's lowinccome tax credit funding and are waiting notice of award or no award is waiting award. Okay. And then I took out letters that say I took out a little bit of text that wasn't needed there. Um and just said which is expected to be announced by late summer. Right. Then it said when development is seeking. I changed that to say the applicant again because why are we going back? We should just say the applicant and be consistent, right? The applicant is seeking lowincome housing tax credit funding from the state. And then it says drawings are 70% complete. The NOA was released last week. Doesn't have anything to do with what

125we're doing here. So I took that out. So, um, so, uh, tax credit funding from the state. There's a whole line of stuff that does not make sense here. >> Wait. So, I I thought that the drawings being 70% complete and the NOA was released last week was important because the date >> I thought it was >> because the the date of the full application is due on March 19th, which is a month earlier or later than it normally is, which is no, it's a month later than it normally is. So, that's pushing out the time of when they're going to find out they're getting approved, which is why they were asking for the extension because they asked for two things with us, right? One was the change in natural gas and one was change

126of the date. >> Correct. >> So we've already approved the change in date. You signed that one already. >> Okay. But it was at the same time though. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> Okay. Well, if you want something put back in, we can put it back in. >> I I'm just >> Okay. >> I'm just trying to I'm not a picky person when it comes to wording. So, I'm trying to understand the purpose of this. >> Yeah. I didn't think it was relevant to the gas. >> Yes. Yeah. It makes sense with the extension that we talked about, but for the connection situation, I don't know if drawings status is important. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So anyway, I'm trying to get it to something that's just shorter and clearer so that we understand why we're giving

127them the ability to do this. And to me, that ability is because we're allowing them to do the gas. I thought because of the deeper levels of affordability that they're offering us >> and we're touching on construction plans and specifications in the first line just so that that change of utilities is going to have an impact on the drawings. Hence we are having that as an opening sentence. >> It just was the opening sentence and it seemed >> No, I'm wondering now. Do we need that now? >> Okay. So there's not a ton of change in the actual first paragraph, >> right? And I added in >> Well, I think the way this is reading past that is I I could not understand what was being said here, but that's a little more crisper if

128you will. >> It has all the same like the like the last instead of saying Mr. grant says the applicant, but it's the same square footage. The 60 at 60% AMI is all the same. The 15 at 20 25% workforce is all the same. So, we just kind of moved around some wording to make it seem a little smoother and got rid of the EOlc and got rid of the NOA was released last week. >> Yeah, this one feels like more meeting minutes like Mr. Grant stated complete. So I think that's a cleanup that has happened there. >> I understand. So then the actual point about it changing to or to for it to emphasize the fact that it's going to be the electric cost is is high and going to be switched to that's

129why they're seeking the hybrid one that comes in six. >> Yeah. So, so five and I I combined five and six into one. So that's kind of like okay here number four said number four says what we wrote in the actual decision >> right but it's it hasn't changed right that's exactly what >> right because that is what was written in the decision >> cool >> and then five and six >> five and six >> you combined into >> right so because the cost of electric and gas aren't equitable thus they are asking to to make for us to make this change. >> Okay. >> Right. So that's why that's why I got rid of I combined those two. >> It's basically all those five points are just a trying to a summary of what

130was presented to us relative to the gas. >> And this is more decision and not meeting minutes. So it makes sense for some of those lines to have disappeared. >> Yes. I mean literally it is the meeting minutes in here. Yeah. which is why I wanted to clarify it actually into a decision and not >> meeting minutes that >> you know. >> Okay. And then nothing has changed after the 56 change. >> Right. The the other the other four points were written by Jasmine, approved by Lisa. I mean, Lisa probably read through the other stuff as well, but she's what she's um concerned about is the amending of the decision, which is these four points, which is what we're actually signing off on. >> And what does that what does us approving or not approving

131this do to them getting their approval? >> We've already approved it. It's already voted. Our votes are already me, you, and Deepa, we approved it. We voted yes. >> So, changing of this wording doesn't really affect anybody in any way. Except for the >> It's I just wanted instead of instead of >> I understand what you want. I'm just trying to make sure that the project moves forward and that doesn't cause any pause. There's no pause. >> No, they're probably This is the official Yeah. The official signature >> besides us having to print another two pieces of paper and assign it. There's no >> And I understand again I'm I'm talking about the logistical piece of it. There's no like >> they're not waiting for it. >> Nobody's holding this back. Okay, cool. No, >>

132got it. They knew they do need this signed to apply for their funding. So the verbal approval isn't enough. So they do need this signed tonight. >> Okay. >> We we have to sign it. >> But so if you make the changes, we can print it and sign it right now. >> Yes. It's already done. Already printed. >> That's what I >> having not been here through any of this. Just is this clear to everyone that that allow of change to natural gas is pending all of these affordability cuts. if that gets reverted to something different that this goes away. >> So for me reading it, I don't I don't necessarily see that, but I haven't been involved in >> that's more in the original decision. So this is a modification that they're requesting. So

133this will really only reflect what was requested in the modification, but the original decision does have language that reflects that type of agreement. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Well, and I mean it's um the deeper um the gas should be I mean I think I understand what you're asking like >> I understand the trade-off inherently in what we're doing. I just wasn't sure if it was clear here having not been involved in other conversations. If you're saying there's another thing that already made that very clear that this trade is based on these cuts and if these cuts you don't get the funding and you don't make these cuts it's electric. >> Yeah. No, that that is I mean >> so the point three on that deliberation kind of hints to that if until somebody else

134is not reading it that way. Um that tells you that it goes back to electric which is the >> three just says it goes back to passive house which passive house does allow an exclusion for hot water and cooking. So that doesn't say >> wait where where is the passive house note I >> on >> no the next deliberation following deliberation the board voted in favor of >> right >> that section >> if it becomes if it becomes um right if it becomes cheaper they have to go back but also if they don't get the funding and make these deep affordability cuts in theory it would go back that's the part that I didn't think was clear which could be have been made clear in an original decision that I don't I'm not privy to.

135So that's the only thing I would >> What did did Lisa comment on that? Because that was my question as well. >> She didn't make any specific comments. I said would this you know hold up with the legality of it and she read it and said yes this should but I can if you want to add that change that language in some way. Um but I would sign it tonight regardless and have Lisa review it afterward um so as not to If the applicant doesn't get this funding because they don't have this decision that's >> right >> um doesn't look great for the town. Um I think it's just that um it's it's instead of following following deliberation there's another line that sometimes we use um about um like in light of the above conditions

136and after deliberation. So that so that it kind of says that um >> I don't see how that change I I can change it. I just don't see how that changes the intent of the decision in any way. >> Well then then let's think of something else. Right. >> So but but my question was exactly what Angel was. >> So I'm not I don't Okay. When they took over from Tras this is what they what the condition was. Didn't we kind of approve it right there? There is no question of them changing anything. >> The affordability requirements were established in the original decision. This modification >> had no bearing on the affordability component whatsoever. They were only asking to change from hot water to gas and we're saying yes only under the condition >> that

137it remains the more affordable option. This >> this modification didn't touch the affordability component of this application that that still stands in the original. So who voted on here can undo >> the requirements that they have to do for affordability. >> But wait wait wait wait wait. So the original the original document was 25% affordable at 80% AMI. Pretty sure that's what it was. They asked for another modification which is right here. um they asked for a modification that would allow um deeper discounts. So instead of 25% at 80% AMI, they're putting in that um no less than they wanted to be able to allow themselves to do deeper discounts and our original didn't. It said 25% at 80% AMI, >> but the modification did >> the mod right. So now they can, >> right?

138>> But the but the question is they they don't have to though. They can if they want to and if they get the funding. So the question is if they don't get the funding and they do 20% at 80 AMI, does it have to go back to all electric, no gas, because you're not doing deep discounts? >> But the modification overrites your original. It's like an amendment to the original. Yeah, like saying original. >> What do you think was overwritten? >> The tax. >> No, no. Yeah, it was, but it's only up to like >> So, you think the base affordability is not enough to give them the exception? You're saying we will not give you this exception if you don't give us this additional discount is what you want to get. >> I I

139thought that's what we were agreeing to when we >> No, I I interpreted it as they were asking for the ability to swap because the prices are too high. by the way, here's what we're also doing. We're also aiming to do deeper discounts. We're that so that was like a by like here's this extra thing because they can get better financing or something like they they said what they were going after, not that it was we're we're giving you this to get this. That wasn't my interpretation. >> And I didn't think that was what you meant by when you were changing this. We were only documenting that this project is bringing all these additional deeper discounts. Hence, we're justifying this. That's what I understood that as. >> Yeah. Like I I >> That's what we're

140trying to do. Maybe that's what you maybe you add some language here. What? So, let's say they didn't have the deeper discounts and they just showed up and said, "We're going to do, hey, can we do gas on just the hot water because it's cheaper right now than the electric is. Would you approve it?" I still would have approved it. I'm just telling you this is what I would have done, right? To me, them doing this extra affordable housing was just icing on the top because I understand why they're doing it. They're not doing it just to be nice people, right? they're getting better financing or something out of it, so that's why they're putting it forward. To me, that wouldn't have changed the decision. Are you saying it would have changed your decision? >>

141No, not necessarily because I know how expensive things are right now. It's not for heat. It's just for the water. >> Right. So, >> that was just my interpretation of what I thought happened. So, that's why I was asking for clarity. >> Yeah. So if I think if you feel the same way as I do on that and I don't know how you feel then if that is the way then I think we should just move forward with it as with your modifications. >> Okay. >> Um if it is something that you think was a this for that then that's a different discussion. But I I didn't interpret it that way. I thought they were just telling us hey by the way we're making it even better >> and this is what we're going after.

142>> Yeah. I I think that's fair. I think that's fair. I think, you know, >> right? >> Yeah. >> I mean, maybe they kind of muddled it up because they said the two things all together and the date thing all at the same time. Um because it was kind of a lot >> considering it wasn't here for the original. You know what I mean? That >> Yeah. And then this kind of goes dates back to some of these old applications and amendments already as I mean this has to be some level of trust factor. It's >> Yeah. And it is a it is a passive house, you know, so it's it's a high >> which is definitely better than Yeah. >> All right. I think what your men's men's you have seems like a good

143>> Okay. So I guess we're good. Do you okay with like that? I thought >> I get it on that. Y I was just >> I don't like doing work if I don't need to do work. So like you word smithing something to to get which I get and I like that there's somebody who's like that on the board. So like I love >> that's my pet peeve sound like but you said you wanted to do like bylaw changes I'm like nope I'm glad there's people who do that like and and I do things that you don't want to do so you know it'll work out. >> The thing is like for myself I have I like my worst study in school is always vocabulary like I'm not a high vocabulary person. when I was

144teaching and would give academic papers, I I did get compliments because people said that they could understand what I was saying because I use small words because I just don't have a great vocabulary. And so it bugs me when I'm reading something and I don't it's not clear. I don't understand it. I want it to be clear. >> Yeah. If this makes it clear, then we're good. >> So that's my that's my feed there. Do we have to vote on amending this or do we just >> No, usually we've already done the voting and it's actually was unusual to what I said to Jasmine. >> I I kind of like to see that document first and she's like, "Really?" I'm like, "Yeah, got it." So, thank you for humoring me, Jasmine. >> Do we have

145to sign three copies? >> Do we sign three copies or one? >> No, you just signed the one. They only need one original copy to file at the registry and everybody else can suffer with copies. Yeah. >> So, I'm really hoping someday the state will change our record retention schedule to allow us to have digital copies in place of our two paper copies that are still required. >> Awesome. >> I have a >> I'm actually listed. >> I don't know. I got excited. I thought she was getting the mallet. >> Oh, she never brought up. >> I' I've never had a chair ever use the mallet ever. Only at town meeting. Has anybody ever used the mouth? >> All right. So, we're good now. >> I think we're good now. >> Are you accepting a

146motion to >> close the meeting? >> Yes. Are you going to make one? >> Yes. A motion to close the meeting. >> Is there a second? >> Second that. >> Add a roll call vote. >> Deep eye. >> Scot. Paulino. >> I. >> Angel cazedian. I >> And I like want to go home. >> I like to do it at the closing. >> Happy holidays everybody.