okay let's begin it's 559 almost six just about there um this is public hearing case 2024a 530 Glendale Road agricultural ground mounted solar facility continued from May 22nd 2024 I have some things to read that I'm sure you're heard before some of the legal documentation that needs to be read so let me begin with that let me introduce the planning board members myself Pat coin the chair Christina rodor David deur and Joe sevilia and Joan Joanne fiori is our coordinator the statement of authority the planning board is established under chapter 48 of the general laws of Massachusetts and acts in compliance with chapter 48 under the zoning bylaws of the town of hamen chapter 41 governing the submission and approval of plots of proposed subdivisions and the rules and regulations governing the subdivision of land in Hampton Massachusetts this is a continuance from May 22nd 2024 on the application of Glendale Road Development LLC for a special permit under Section 7.16 solar energy systems of the hamton zoning bylaw to allow the construction of a 4.92 megawatt ground mounted solar facility coupled with energy storage and Associated access driveways site grading and utilities located at 530 Glendale Road the facility will be an agricultural ground-mounted system where the interior arrays will be maintained as pasture Fields grazing cheep cattle and chickens managed by ledge Valley Farm who is already established at the site information related to this application is on file in the town clerk's office and is available for review by the public during normal business hours for the board Madison Pixley chair hamton planning board published in the wilbrand hamen times February 8th and February 15 2024 we have the applicant on Zoom Roy Walker he is from Zero Point Energy consultants and also his attorney Adam Costa is joining us this evening can they hear us and I assume everyone can hear sufficiently thank you so it is the planning board's understanding that the applicant seeks to withdraw his petition without prejudice the board must vote on whether to Grant the applicant permission to withdraw without prejudice if the planning board votes in favor the applicant can restart any time if the planning board votes against granting permission the applicant can still withdraw but does so with prejudice and must wait two years to refile Our Town Council Rose Crawley has advised that it's not unusual for a special permit applicant to be withdrawn without prejudice so that being said for this evening's purposes I need a motion and the applicant yeah we can ask the applicant if there's anything to add at this point uh thank thank you Mr chair again for the record Adam Costa with me tman and Costa representing zero point and and Mr Walker who's joining me by zoom and joining you by Zoom tonight as well um thank you for your you you've stated all of that um accurately we are requesting to withdraw the application uh without prejudice as I think uh board members are probably aware we made applications um both to the planning board and to the Conservation Commission for uh the solar project uh the Conservation Commission proceedings uh proceeded over the course of several sessions of a public hearing uh but just last week we uh the public hearing was closed and we were uh denied an order of conditions by the Conservation Commission so we have a number of options as it relates to that denial we can choose to revise the project and resubmit to the commission uh we can choose to abandon the project we can choose to uh file one or more appeals under the wetlands protection act or the town's local Wetlands bylaw uh we've been discussing uh those options amongst ourselves uh but the reality is that we know one way or the other what we are unlikely to be doing is to be proceeding with the same project in the exact same form as it has currently been submitted to the planning board so uh we did Talk Rory and I about continuing these proceedings um in an effort to to gain the board's approval only to later come back and possibly modify that approval but to be candid that seemed like a bit of a waste of not only our time but your time and the time of those who have uh who attended the first session of the public hearing and who would be required to attend uh few fut sessions of the public hearing as well so uh the right thing to do the most efficient thing to do seem to be to withdraw the application uh and and again go back to the drawing board and and and what the future might bring we don't currently know um but but at this time we don't intend to to pursue the current application or the current project in its in its present form okay thank you attorney Costa so at this point I would ask I need a motion and a second to Grant the appliqu applicant's request to withdraw without prejudice someone to grant them um I move that we approve the applicant's request to withdraw his application without prejudice I'll second that in a second V well what are there going to a chance for some questions or is it with this P what's the protocol if there were questions it would be more procedural you know these are questions to the board or if you had questions to the applicants no I have uh a procedural questions okay right let me see if I understand this the applicant we if we uh vote to draw his position is petition without prejudice then he can ref they can refile it any time right and if we vote against granting the permission the applicant could still withdraw but uh with prejudice but must wait two years to file so we're we're if we vote on with uh without prejudice I think my next next question would be to uh the attorney for the applicant on uh if if we if we vote against granting permission is they're still going to withdraw is that my understanding who you Mr chair excuse me could I could I address that through you yes you can thank you sure thank you so so I'm not sure that we would still withdraw so the the objective here would to be would be to give us an opportunity as I mentioned before to go back to the drawing board and to consider options for this site if there are remaining options in light of the Conservation Commission action uh it may very well be that if we opt to let's say appeal the conservation commission's denial that that appell of process both with d and eventually in the courts uh could take more than a year or two years in which case the nature of the withdrawal of this application more or less becomes a mood point but um one one option that's available to the board or one outcome that is possible that wasn't mentioned at the outset of this meeting is we're seeking a withdrawal without prejudice if if the board votes against that and and determines that it won't allow that withdrawal to occur um I think that what we would probably do certainly what I would advise my client to do is simply require the board to make a decision on the merits um now without us further Prosecuting the project and without you um having you know further further meetings on on topic I suspect that would be a denial and we would then appeal that denial which simply means more litigation for us and more litigation for you I think in recognition of that reality uh it's the reason that most boards in my experience will allow these withdrawals without prejudice to occur Africans can actually withdraw without prejudice even without the permission of the board up until the time when the public hearing notice is is placed in the newspaper but once the public hearing process gets underway the statute requires that we get permission from the board which is which is why we're asking for that another point to make is that this concept of of two years where there's a freeze between the date of a decision on the merits in other words with prejudice and the date of a future application it's not that the applicant is prohibited from reapplying within two years it's that there's an additional statute it's part of the zoning act chapter 48 section 16 that speaks of what is referred to as repetitive applications and in an effort to avoid a circumstance where an applicant is making repetitive applications it requires that there be specific and material changes to the project but if so long as there are specific and material changes an applicant can still reapply within the two-year period so it's really in in many respects practically speaking even the legalities can be somewhat confusing um there's not a whole lot of practical difference between a withdrawal without prejudice um and otherwise but but it's it's routine as you've acknowledged I as I think your town council's acknowledged it's routine for applicants to ask for withdrawals without prejudice uh so they're essentially put back in the position they were in when they be began the application process and that's clear to me now whe now the question my next question is procedurally how would it be clear for the residents that are gathered here for them to ask a question before we vote so they're clear or is that not appropriate when do they get to ask it they could ask a question before we vote they can yes is everybody on to the board little complicated complicated basically we're going to grant them this and they're going to have to fight the Department of Environmental Protection then they're going to come back to us and start from step one I do have a question so toow 29 so if they're going to start this process over then all that would have to be in the paper of but have be notified again okay yeah and they significantly change this so they can try to get it that's why people are notified that was my big concern thank you well can't they can't I you gotta have start the chair 56 road so does this mean when they start over that it's with a brand new plan or the plan that was submitted it's they stated he stated on the thing that they're going to come up with a new plan for the future so it may not be as large scale might be a smaller scale they're going to redo it so they can kind of go around the conservation for the land now I'm prepared to vote now Mr [Music] chairman do I do I need to redo the motion we redo the motion please I move that we approve the applicant's request to withdraw without prejudice and I will second that roll call call okay Pat coin yes Christina broor yes David theur yes Joe civilia yes thank you okay Z the motion passes with for all without prejudice thank you we appreciate your time tonight I need a motion to no all right so we're going to close the public yeah I need a motion to close the public hearing I move we close public hearing uh for case 2024a I'll second that all in favor I I'll I'll type up that denial decision within the next two weeks and file it with the town clerk you'll get a copy thank you Joan thank you chairman thank you thank Youk huh withdrawal with okay withdraw okay withdraw withdraw we did we did we did close the public the public there's no Mee yeah I