The primary focus of the meeting was the deliberation on proposed regulations for data centers, emphasizing concerns about their potential impact on the community. Board members debated the feasibility of limiting the number of data centers and establishing size restrictions. One suggestion was to restrict data centers to a maximum aggregate size of 5,000 square feet, with the possibility of subdividing this area into smaller centers. However, there were doubts about whether this division would attract commercial interest. The board considered the comparison of data center regulation to the issuance of liquor licenses, indicating that the town could independently set limits on data centers, unlike solar installations, which are subject to state law.

Integrating solar energy into data center operations was another point of discussion. The board considered whether data centers could power themselves using solar energy, which would require significant land. The idea was to treat solar power as an accessory use to the primary function of a data center.

The conversation also touched on the classification of data centers as municipal uses, with some participants expressing confusion over whether they should be considered as such. The board discussed dimensional requirements, including building height and lot size regulations, to prevent over-concentration of data centers in specific areas.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to the interaction between the Planning Board and the Board of Health, particularly concerning water usage associated with data centers. Members highlighted the need for regulations to prevent excessive water extraction and potential groundwater contamination. The board acknowledged the importance of noise regulations, suggesting that they could fall under the jurisdiction of the Board of Health, especially concerning data centers and battery storage facilities.

The board also considered various battery technologies for energy storage, including alternatives to lithium-ion batteries, to mitigate environmental impact and safety risks. The discussion included the potential for imposing restrictions on battery chemistry to address concerns about pollution and fire safety. Participants emphasized the need for flexibility in regulations to accommodate future technological advancements without compromising community safety.

The meeting also addressed procedural matters, such as the approval of previous meeting minutes and the handling of executive session documents. The board discussed the importance of clear communication and documentation in the planning process, particularly when addressing issues like energy storage and community safety.

Toward the end of the meeting, the board shifted its focus to the Approval Not Required (ANR) plan proposed by the Plazas, who sought to divide their property into three lots. The primary challenge was a shortfall of 10 feet from the required road frontage, raising questions about the possibility of obtaining a variance waiver. The board advised the Plazas to explore options like acquiring additional frontage or considering open space design, which could provide flexibility in meeting zoning requirements.