##VIDEO ID:_P_D7TKPNfU## Bo I look very red today oh well hey issue with the camera so I can't turn it on oh yeah that's what my students say Vic Al so you already heard about that I'll find a better EXC oh no no I don't know what it is my computer's not working I don't know Vic I assume you're hearing me okay I normally have a um microphone plugged in but I'm not using it tonight I'm coming across fine yes loud and clear okay this through the chair you're live on hcam TV thank you Bob we're still waiting for some folks I don't see John guch are you here John I'm here okay I'm just Hopkinson public meeting oh okay yeah I was looking for your name all right there's Ron good I think we have three Zach members right now we need four or five to get started John do we have a a official Committee of seven or nine um I believe we have an official Committee of nine okay so we need five so if I'm not missing things we need two more there's Mary Mary I thought of you today in your uh your background I'm rereading Jane Adams 20 years at Hull House and in chapter two she talks about visiting the capital building in Madison Wisconsin and how impactful that was to her back in 186 5 or whatever it was really yeah and then she talks about later on going to get an honorary doctorate at the University of Wisconsin and looking out from that hill and seeing the capital Dome that was to her so inspirational it's a beautiful building it's cool it's got kind of those four wings that come off of it right in the center there's a maybe not a traffic circle but it's kind of surrounded by by roads right it's yeah that's beautiful we're waiting on one more I think before we can get going John did some folks ahead of time say they couldn't make it you were muted I was muted um I didn't get a ton of responses I think Curtis was the only one one that said he could not come okay well we'll keep our fingers crossed John is this potentially our last meeting before people have to resign up or get reappointed it is yes plan board is doing appointments on September 9th so if your term was up I sent you an email okay so everyone who was whose term was up because Zach has some members that are on the at large members for Zach are on two-year terms right board representatives are on one-year terms so all the board Representatives have to do every year hopefully uh concom told you that I got reappointed from concom they did not well I did great I don't know if Kim needs or Anna needs to file official paperwork but um no official paperwork but if somebody on either them or um the chair could send me something okay confirming that all right still waiting on one more everybody John do we have to have five to discuss or just vote um technically you need to have five for a quorum to even hold the meeting okay all right that's kind of what I thought but somebody named Sam just joined so maybe it's Sam say hopefully it's our Sam we'll wait for you to confirm that sorry was that for me yes Sam is that yep that's me Sam seder Sam seder yes it is me sorry joining from beautiful that's five welcome everybody to the zoning advisory committee meeting of August 26th my name is Ted Barker hook I'm the chair of the zoning advisory committee at least for one more meeting and I'm going to read this script for the remote meeting pursuant to chapter two of the acts of 2023 this meeting will be conducted via remote means in accordance with applicable law this means that members of the public body as well as members of the public May access this meeting via virtual means participants May access this meeting through the remote meeting link as posted on the meeting agenda and through the town's online calendar when required by law or Allowed by the chair persons wishing to provide public comment or otherwise participate in the meeting May do so by raising their hand or otherwise signaling their intent to speak this meeting will be recorded please take care to mute your microphone unless you have been recognized by the chair this meeting will not use the chat feature on zoom and John if you could turn that off just at the get-go that might be great the chat feature is not helpful to these public meetings we will now confirm attendance of the members please respond with present if you are on this call Ron Foy present Arnold Cohen Nisha nanoware Madu Chandra sear Sam seder present Rachel rosson Vic pry present Curtis Smithson Mary Larson Marlo present and Kristen borato and staff are you present John guch present wonderful uh John has put out the agenda I will do as I always do and move the minute discussion to the top of the agenda and then we will go into the South Street Heyward discussion and then MBTA communities and then John will give us an update on the new Commonwealth Adu law that's our agenda for tonight um what did I just say I would oh the minutes the minutes I lost track of the minutes uh go ahead what's up Arnold what do you see I would like to move not Arnold sorry Ron I called you Arnold like to move to approve the minutes as submitted I would like to amend one verb although I don't have the minutes in front of me if if the committee is okay um John where we were talking about MBTA again I didn't print the minutes but where we were talking about MBTA I did raise for discussion purposes the Hopkinson Country Club for MBTA map I don't think I suggested putting it on the map at least I never intended to that I meant to say what do you guys think about this um so I wonder if that verb could be changed to in instead of suggested something else discussed raise the possibility something like that other than that was happy with the minutes okay I can make that change thank you anybody else with thoughts on the minutes all right with that Amendment could I get a motion to accept the minutes motion to accept as amended second beautiful here comes our roll call vote um Ron yes Sam yes Vic yes Mary yes and Ted is a yes agenda item number two uh we do have with us Scott Richardson and uh Mr margarit um Scott would you like John to give you some Zoom control would that be easiest for you yes that would be helpful thank you so you can give us an update on where you guys stand right now sure you should be all set Scott okay thank you so what I wanted to do uh not to take up a lot of time but I did want to kind of give an overview uh and some history uh for those who might just be joining this discussion for the first or second time um the parceling question um sorry uh I'm Scott Richardson with Gorman Richards and Lewis Architects uh my client Jim margarite is on the line and uh his attorney David flick is on the line as well so uh the parcel question is basically right here if everybody can see my red cursor uh these lots for some reason uh that I think people are still trying to investigate but that's kind of moot at this point have remained uh Lakefront residential even though they're way over here on South Street so as you can see everything on South Street is either industrial a or um business and then this yellow designation uh designate these yellow grid lines designate a hotel overlay District which has yet to be taken advantage of so basically the RO business is also where Dunkin Donuts and Co restaurant are and so what we would like to do is rezone the parcels right here that are along South Street uh to uh rural business basically kind of a cleaner overview of that you can see kind of the massing of the major industrial and Office Buildings along South Street and the relative scale of those buildings along South Street including emc's corporate headquarters and other uh buildings again this was a former EMC building which has now been sold uh and again 52 sou Street was sold and then there other 4232 South Street buildings were sold this is the uh Price Chopper building here to get oriented and uh the office building uh office retail building there uh at the St Plaza so basically our building we're proposing this parcel right here and the kind of the darker green is uh what we'd like to rezone uh the rest of these property these are a mixed ownership Jim owns most of them there is one leftover lot that's still owned by Bill TLO uh what Jim is proposing would be to donate those Parcels to the town as you can see our building uh proposed is an 8,000 foot footprint it's a little wider than the co and Dunkin Donuts building but it's actually not as long as that building so in general we are if we're looking at the rural business criteria these are the requirements for a rural business lot we need 45,000 square feet we have are proposing that we have 79,000 square feet on that lot we need 200 feet of Frontage we have approximately 280 ft of Frontage maximum lot coverage is 25% we're our building only covers about 10% of the lot front setback from the street is 50 ft required we're proposing 80 side yard is 10 we're proposing 70 rear setback has to be 40 feet from any residential district and we're proposing to be 140 ft from the parcels that are going to be remaining uh Lakefront residential maximum Building height is 35 ft which is what we are proposing a three-story building and parking required is three per th square feet uh what we'd like to propose which means 72 parking spaces uh we'd like to propose 80 uh because we find that office some of the office use uh these days especially uh the office use that Jim is anticipating potentially needs a little more parking than that so we had a couple discussions with the uh town and uh again this is the parcel that we would like to rezone to uh rural business the parcels behind behind here which sorry are not clearly marked would remain Lakefront uh residential and one thought that came up in our discussions was to basically maintain a 10- foot buffer strip along Haywood which would be which would remain Lakefront residential property which means we would anticipate that it would pre prohibit any future uh connection or access to Hayward street from whatever building is built here uh and also provide again that uh kind of that buffer along Hayward where it could be planted and continue the Green Space along Hayward street again our building is about a an 80 by 100 foot building 8,000 foot footprint and we have one entrance and exit off of South Street that gives you great access all around the building uh and again provides the 80 parking spaces that we are proposing uh as you can see our building size and configuration obviously is much smaller than the building diagonally across from it it's less uh it's less in length than the co- Dunkin Donuts building uh and we feel is in keeping with again the whole industrial and business uh environment along South Street uh the building itself uh will be again a three-story building we are accessing just only off of South Street our parking areas and so on are again oriented to South Street and this area back in here that would be donated to the town is again would just be left uh as natural plantings and again we could have buffer air buffer zone sorry along Hayward street another view of the potential building again right now talking about a zoning change uh we're not talking about the design or orientation of the building that would be that would come later if and when the lot is rezoned but just to give an idea of the scope and scale of the building and the fact that we are really just oriented all along South Street uh I think there were a few uh questions that came up so we did have a little bit of frequently asked questions that we had uh it's going to be proposed as strictly office use that's why we're proposing rural business zoning uh not the industrial zoning uh again it be strictly office use um it'll be owner occupied Jim anticipates locating his office uh staff which is which are currently up at 239 sou Street and from some other office locations uh in Hopedale to this building um and again it's basically kind of a n well since it's a business that he's in construction he'd probably be occupying from 7 A.M to 3 pm primarily uh people have talked about well will there be concrete trucks uh accessing the site the building uh only the concrete trucks that would be there to pour the foundation uh but this is again strictly with the uh for the use of office workers uh in the typical cars and pickup trucks currently come to 239 South Street uh for gym Staff All Access and erress will be from South Street only there will not be any access to Hayward street uh we are proposing again fairly significant uh burms an earn berm along the rear property as well as substantial plantings again we understand that's a planting board attribute uh but again since this is an owner occupied site uh felt it's important to make these uh statements and commitments uh on behalf of the owner um some other considerations there um again the real estate property tax is estimated about $75,000 annually and the fixed asset tax and excise tax is estimated to be at $25,000 annually and again whenever you have an office building uh you have residual spending by employees um whatever it is if it's eating you know take out at Dunkin Donuts it's eating at Co it's buying gas it's doing other purchasing other uh things in in the town so that's basically the overview and you're ready for questions or comments I think so Jim if you unless you wanted to add anything or David if you wanted to add anything add at this point thank you Scott all right well thank you Scott uh here are my hopes for for our meeting tonight uh we'll start with comments only from the zoning advisory committee or questions um and then we'll move to public comments um what I'd like to avoid as best as we can is comments we've heard before for things that perhap haven't changed in the new plan um just in the interest of moving things along if the new plan brings up new ideas or if new things have occurred to the public that that hadn't occurred before then I'm very very happy to hear those um I'd love to not rehash earlier comments if we could avoid that um it's also my hope although it's not required it's my hope that we can have a zoning advisory committee vote tonight um mostly because our um committee membership may change before our next meeting and we may have new committee members who have not been a part of these discussions and that to me is just going to bog things down um however if there are um substantial concerns we don't have to vote today um just to let everybody know or remind people our vote is really pretty limited all we are voting to do is whether we want to recommend the planning board to consider this or not that's all we have um that's our charge um if we vote um no the planning board they could still ask the planning board to hear it and part of that would be well the zoning advisory committee said that they didn't recommend passing it along if we vote Yes the next stage for the applicant would be going through all of this again with public comment again with a even more careful looking at the proposal at the planning board stage um this is the first step in a multi-step process if the applicant was to be successful um John is there anything that I misstated or maybe an important piece I should include as well uh no you didn't miss say anything but I do have a question for the proponent uh because this is a timing issue related to what you were saying Ted okay are you anticipating getting this on for annual town meeting I believe that would probably be the case since planning board may not be able to hear this prior to the special town meeting and I think there's a c I think in fact we have to wait till annual town meeting because I thought we had a two-year Hiatus from the previous yes vote there is a path for the planning board to allow it to come to town meeting earlier than that but the reason I I asked that is planning board has to have a public hearing I think it's within six months of town meeting so even though this would be discussed by Zach and potentially recommended to planning board we probably wouldn't have the hearing until 2025 in front of the planning board just so we're not outside of that six-month window and then have to do it again um because that's actually a state law so I just want to let everyone know about the timing okay um so Scott Mr margarite um Mr Richardson sorry Scott since you were on our committee I feel a closer this I can use first names um I had a couple of questions um and then I'll open it up to the rest of the committee um maybe I missed it before um but tonight was the first night I heard that the property to be donated is not currently owned by the applicant um no that I'm sorry did I misunderstand that there's actually three of the small Parcels that are owned by Jim that he would be donating there's a landlock parcel I believe and correct me if I'm wrong Dave or Jim that is still owned by Bill TLO which actually has no kind of residual value uh but and again we we are proposing to only uh rezone the parel that's alongside South Street to rural business and then Jim's ownership and the three other small lots that are along Haywood would be donated the other parcel that is owned by Bill TLO we have no input or information on what he would ultimately ever do with that piece is that corre map to show us that on the map more specifically who owns what Parcels yes I will find that in a minute because it came [Music] from think I found it hold on [Music] actually let's do this can you see that yes okay so right now these are the parcels that um in green everything in green essentially is Lakefront residential okay this is this is South Street this is co right here yep so the parcels here of which I believe there's five of them are the parcels that we're looking to rezone to rural business then there's this uh abandoned Road here and I believe Jim and again David correct me if I'm wrong these two Parcels I believe you own is that correct correct and this you do not own is that correct yes okay so this teeny parcel here as far as I know is still owned by Bill pepo so these parcels along with this well again whatever you the town wants or needs or can do with this road are available for the town you'd have to try and get in touch with Bill to see what he can do here so again it's these front Parcels here and that's also kind of represented here um previously this was the previous zoning map that Peter beamus had presented and all we're proposing is that right along here we would maintain a 10ft wide strip of lakefront residential and in fact there's no reason for Hayward street to be rezoned it would remain Lakefront residential zoned is that clear so all of the blue north of Hayward would be developed the green space left over is on the other side of the paper Road correct okay um my second question maybe you can answer Scott maybe John um that strip to protect um Hayward from getting a driveway from the building does rezoning it make that an iron clad unless obviously the zoning bylaws change about what you can do or does that just make it harder to put a driveway through there or does that make it impossible can anybody that I can't because another option I think John's thinking oh okay I'm not thinking do you have a direct question for me my question is if that 10- foot I think it was a 10 foot wide strip corre remains zoned Lakefront residential does that make it impossible to put a driveway from the commercial building out on the Hayward Street no but if this was um proposed to be part of the open space donation then that would that's what I thought we were going to hear I didn't I when when Scott when you mentioned it simply be resed um I thought we were going to hear that that 10- foot strip was to be donated to the town I believe that can be the case Jim do you see any issue with that no I I'm fine with that so that would become Town property your proposal is yes yes okay um and if I could just Dave click just to to chat I mean so that the whole intent here is just to preclude or to put anyone at ease or anyone who had prior concerns about access onto Hayward street from this property um but to essentially put them at ease that there's not going to be we're not foreseeing or anticipating access coming off of this off of this uh lot onto Hayward street so um to create it just as Green Space whether he rezone it or you know if in in hearing Jim that he's he's interested in just giving it as a straight donation to the town consistent with these other two Parcels um you know that would certainly answer that question right I I understand and appreciate the intent and and I imagine while the neighbors may or may not be swayed fully I think that it's a step towards understanding some of the neighbors concerns um I if it were a donation I feel much much more comfortable than simply rezoning it and then waiting to see what that may or may not mean after all there could be zoning bylaw changes even if our current zoning didn't allow uh an entrance or egress my last question I just I want to put it out there but I know that we don't have an answer um but to put it on the record I'm I'm really curious why the entire Street was zoned industrial or rural business except for those lots and if it just happened to be that it fell through the cracks that doesn't make me think much if there was a thought out reason for why it was not zoned like all of its neighbors on South Street um I'd be curious to know what that is but it's my understanding we don't know that right now how those be the other map you showed us Scott and you don't need to bring it up again that shows the building Footprints of all the other buildings along South Street uh somewhere along the way someone said we're going to keep these as residential um and I'd be curious to know why but I know we're not going to get that answer right now I see some hands raised if you have an answer to that that question please Circle back when we get to public comment um because I do want to hear an answer but I want to kind of keep the flow that I have um those are the questions I had for right now I'm looking for other Zach members who might have questions or comments and if you're a Zach member just speak up it'll be easier than me trying to look at all the hand you're the chair yes please um I I wanted just to support the idea that donating that 10 foot strip to the Hoppington area land trust or open space of some kind would be much preferable to me personally preferable to rezoning it or not rezoning it leaving it rural business just doesn't seem to do it for me okay do you have anything else Ron okay Mr chair the chair yes Vic yes um thanks uh quick question because I'm the direct uh impacted party of this so if I recuse myself it comes to the voting would that fell off the Cs today I mean or doesn't matter I can still represent it as a board member as well as a private citizen for this discussion no I just want I'm gonna turn to John for a ruling yeah I mean we can't force anybody to recuse themselves um but usually a Butters do recuse themselves just because there's that going to be that inherent bias and if you recuse yourself that would throw us into a problem with with the Quorum except Arnold's here now so I don't think it would oh okay so yeah um I mean we generally recommend but there's nothing to force you if you if you made the uh connection publicly known and you believe that you can be unbiased then that's up to you whether you recuse yourself or not I would prefer to recuse myself and participate as a a part of public comment only for this topic uh since the since we already have the representation for the voting so is that okay sure Arnold excuse me um so if if the if that strip is going to be um deeded to the town what could be done as as part of the deed it could be a restriction that it couldn't be um the driveway couldn't be put put across it to get access to the parcel um you know that if you really wanted to tighten it up you know because just deeding it to the town um U it would be stronger if the if if the deed had some kind of a restriction in it so I I don't know if the U uh the applicants are willing to do that but that might uh uh limit anybody having any doubts that there won't be you know about a driveway going in yeah John if the town owned that strip if the strip were developed commercial and the Tenant whether it's Mr margarit or a future tenant wanted to ask to put a driveway which board would they go to would that be planning board would that be zba so um first off it's my understanding that if the land was donated to the town for open space purposes it's covered by article 97 um and therefore it would essentially be conservation land and probably take a Act of the general court to remove that conservation protection so a deed a deed uh statement would be helpful but I believe if it's donated for open space purposes that's kind of covered as it is that being said um if the applicant wanted to put a driveway across it the it would depend on it would depend on what board help the land held ownership of the land if it was Conservation Commission or select board they would have to give permission for the land to be used that way if it even could and I'm sure there would be a deep dive into whether that would be allowed or not um but my understanding is it would be the board that controls the land that's usually select board or concom would it be fair to say then that town ownership whichever body that is would make it vary exceedingly difficult to to put a driveway through there what would be your adverb I mean it depends it always depends on the board that's sitting at that point in time yeah you can't predict what a select board 15 years from now is going to do right right okay um Arnold did you have anything else no I think it's pretty safe but my thought is that if this goes to a town meeting just my experience with people who oppose it at the town meeting um you might want to make it as convincing as possible that there won't be a driveway and the suggestion I had might be belt and suspenders or something but uh it would uh um you know I just not sure because it' be parcel land you know this presumably the town owns the street already and normally you can put a you might be able to put a dve way you know if the from the street and um if you know you just give a strip to the town you know what I mean not totally clear on whether somebody in the future could uh would be able to uh put a driveway in just like they can from this you know it's just like almost like the street was just although it's 10t wide that's so it's like I say belt and suspenders and just just at a town meeting uh just to eliminate and make it harder for uh somebody to plausibly raise some kind of a doubt that's all if the proposal goes further something for the applicant to think about yeah uh Sam thanks um I have a comment uh and I know you don't want to revisit previous conversations but given that we are attempting a vot I can't help but uh comment that I I think the applicants have done an admirable job putting together potentially the bestc Imp uh implementation of of this plan is possible I think they've done a great job and and I thank him for that but I go back to some of the our first conversations around how none of this is conditional to the rezoning we can't tie any of the rezoning to any conditions of site plan or or even donating land back to the town or anything like that so um I just for the sake of the vote I I wonder if we're indexing a little too much towards the plan and the site plan review and the way they would go about executing um instead of or I think I think we should at least go back to revisit some of the basics which are you know um resoning this lot uh not being you know not being not being able to enforce any conditions on the owner of the lot with the resoning so I just wanted to put that out there for people's thoughts thanks Sam to the chair um you know before I mov to hopkington I was uh on the planning board for a number of years on Sharon I seems to me that uh it's not unusual for a developer uh who wants to get a zoning change to enter into some kind of an agreement with the town I mean maybe things that's getting too complicated but it um you know there's this is not a big those those are kind of like more major kind of projects that I'm thinking of but I I think it's possible I maybe it's getting a little um too complicated uh to to to have you know to have some kind of an agreement that uh not I because what I think uh um Sam was just saying is seems to be saying is that we're just gonna it's just going to be a vote to change the zoning and uh this thing about the 10- foot strip or conveying it to the town anyway would not be part of that vote um so it seemed that that was his concern uh so I uh I you know maybe I know John think that's a real concern uh uh uh I I do believe that uh it's possible to avoid that that type of concern that you know if if the if you have some kind of an agreement with the uh with the developer though I wonder if there's an order of operations um and I Look to John or or maybe Scott if you have experience with this if the order of operations was first reason own it then I'm with Sam in that they may choose to not donate any land they got it reowned if the order of operations was first get the donated land accepted both the space off the paper Road and the 10- foot strip now ask for the rezoning if that changes the possibility of success or failure um for us right now clearly it's too early to ask for any of that if if uh if we are able to vote tonight and if committee members are nervous about that that's completely valid um The Next Step would be a discussion at planning board and planning board may say you know we have the same concerns you have Sam um and we're not comfortable unless this land is donated first maybe that would be something that would happen at a later step I think it would be certainly premature to ask the applicant before we even vote on you and Zach we want to see you donate the land now I think that doesn't work at all Scott do you have thoughts on any of that yeah I think I'm Dave's gonna chime in too yeah the intent is that the the property that were not developing or indicating to be rezoned would remain Lakefront residential so the 10- foot strip along the Haywood and the rear parcels and the paper Street would remain Lakefront residential and Jim has indicated he would enter into either whatever it is a memor of understanding or a a a development agreement that would indicate that those Parcels that are under his control would be donated to the town and again that could be part of the either zoning exercise or the agreement with the town but uh David maybe you could clarify that better oh just to say and to kind of take a step back to I think John may have brought it up but you know where where we are at this point before before Zach is really just in Seeking a recommendation you know in terms of conclusions uh to the conversation that we're having right now we're certainly going to be having these same conversations before the applicable boards right before planning board um and so you know for making any um any confirmed like agreement as to the donation that certainly is going to be a conversation that happens at that point um and then ultimately going forward to that next step um uh uh in relation to the zoning change uh we've had discussions with the town with regards to and you brought up a great Point uh Ted with regards to a a memorandum of understanding um and that can happen uh uh sometimes and really in why the presentation is what it is now is to take some of those unknowns out of the um out of the calculation like well in advance um so people understand especially those who are in the immediate surrounding Community like what that zoning change would be um the memorandum of understanding with the town would again you know would give them uh an idea of um of what can and can't be done as a result of that zoning change um but it would seem to me you know for purposes of a a donation whatever transaction there would be or agreement that would all be contemporaneous I think with one another um and and that would not be a you know a one night or a um you know that definitely would take a lot of thought um to process through um you know and not just before the board any who whoever the applicable board will be um so I just wanted to add that if that's helpful it's helpful to me certainly um John do you have any thoughts to tag on to that or did that feel pretty good to you uh yeah I think it's still pretty early in the process but I will note that to to Arnold's Point um we've had some developers and in different situations so it's not for zoning change but we've had developers put donation land in escrow with the select board uh and I'm can come up with that conditions that agreement on an approval of the article at town meeting otherwise you know the land does not get donated and then that could be done ahead of time okay we do that with we've done that with the Open Space Landscape preservation developments who are looking to get building permits but can't wait for the next town meeting to have the land accepted so they get it accepted through the escrow process and then that satisfies the requirement okay so that kind of goes to my order of operations it actually gets bundled together kind of um okay Mary I don't want to put you on the spot I see you around I'll come to you in a minute but Mary if you have any thoughts I think you're the last Zach member who we haven't heard tonight if you don't that's fine um my my feeling on this um has not changed from the last time we U met but I think that the proposal has improved um but last time I was in support of rezoning or at least sending it to planning board for the next steps to be discussed um because it just seems completely logical that that the parcel on South Street is business so okay great thank you uh back to you Ron thank you Ted I I just wanted toh congratulate the applicant for putting all of this uh tweaking of the design and uh and also to congratulate the Zach members who have been putting this together and I I think for me personally I've heard enough to recommend forwarding this to the planning board so that we can really see where the rubber meets the road all right well maybe you've heard enough but I'd still like to hear from the public and see if they have some other thoughts as well so um at this point I think the raising hand feature would be helpful so I see two we'll go to Terry first if you could please tell us your name and your address before your comment or question sure my name is Terry de I live on Hill Crest Drive just down the street from from uh corner of Hayward and South I was wondering if some my question is more you have a number for your address or are you the only house on Hillcrest uh 19 there we go thank you okay sorry about that that's okay I was just wondering I had a question about the map I was wondering um I'm not sure who brought up the map but I'm just wondering if they could bring up the map I just want to make a quick Point Scott which of the maps Terry would be helpful um whichever one shows the corner of Hayward and South where the light is and where Co is and it was the last one that was brought up okay hold on uh there was there was another one that showed showed the lots better that's perfect right there so the way I look at at it is that yellow strip is is going to be blocked off basically what from what we talked about so people will not be able to take a left or right onto onto uh Hayward which is great because there's going to be a lot of traffic on Hayward but my biggest concern is where Hayward street is and sou street is is a light there so uh exactly where your mouse is right there yeah there's a light right there and then coming out of the building where it says 80 parking spaces and there's a gray strip which exits onto cell Street in front of the current landscaping business people will have to take a left or a right out of there most people I'm sure a lot of PE it's going to be even 50/50 some people taking a right some people taking a left the people taking a right will simply come up to the light and that's that's fine it is what it is the people taking a left will have to cross like basically three lanes of traffic maybe four to get on the cell Street to go onto the light while people are also taking a left onto South Street from the light does the planning board think that that's a good idea I don't I if if that's a question to me we don't know what the planning board thinks part of what we may vote on tonight is whether we pass this idea on the planning board to consider it right I just I just don't think it's a good idea I think it um it causes a lot of traffic issues right there and it's unsafe right and then the um the second question is more of a question comment lots of buildings on Cell Street most of them vacant I'm just wondering why build a new building and why not occupy an existing building that has again like in that picture just to the left of where it says 80 parking spaces there's a building that has hundreds of parking spaces and is has been completely vacant for over 10 years okay there's also a building down the street from Co that has again probably hundreds of parking spaces fully completely vacant and I'm just wondering why not occupy one of those buildings why why build a new building well again just briefly through the chair um Again Jim was looking for a site to basically build his uh corporate office building uh and has a certain size in mind that works for his use uh this building is about 160,000 square feet and is purchased by a New York uh Reit um who has been diligently trying to lease it uh I think primarily for uh larger uh either Life Sciences or other users and that would be a lease situation Jim is looking to be owner occupied and 80 South Street uh was recently leased to uh someone who's basically going to be occupying the whole building and that's also about 100 some OD thousand square feet so the intent is really to be in an owner occupied uh building not to lease space in a larger building okay what about the traffic what do you think about that scottt so if if I could jump in Mr de sure go ahead question yeah it's it's a very valid question as a as a citizen it's a it's a big concern but I'll I'll let you I'll let you comment sure so through through the um through the phase you in in going before the planning board or or if few were to go before the zba um a lot of times there's there's going to be a request for a traffic impact and access study to be performed where possibly there'd be also a town um a traffic consultant that would review that what's called a TS report okay again part of the idea here is to take all the unknowns out of the equation is possible so we have this uh study performed that would provide um what the foreseeable um amount of impact there could be I.E you know just what coming in going for the amount of regular anticipated parking you know how many people would be going there on a given day for both um the uh you know during peak hours and then off peak hours uh just to give you an idea of okay well what would be you know what would be the difference and you know there'd be this study that would provide what is um the traffic right now what's provided and make the comparisons to these other similarly situated uh buildings I.E say you know the EMC down the street or um some of the other buildings on the um on the Eastern side of South Street believe that's e um and you know make a you know is that is that something that we need to um to look at a little bit closer but at least to give you you know what would be the overall impact as a result of um of having access in and out of that that primary um um entryway yeah um no I I can definitely appreciate that and I hope they will do a study because it's also people coming off of sou Street going toward the light and taking a left into that into that that lot right but I can tell you right now that studies aside just common sensical empirically looking at it right um very congested in the morning people driving fast not policed right um it it's going to be Ed it's going to cause issues in the afternoon and the morning it's not going to be safe I mean it's studies aside I mean any Resident can today can tell you that and and I'm one of them it it's a concern and I and I I can assure you this will would certainly not be the first time that we'll be discussing um traffic among you know among a lot of other um parts to this build okay yeah right um that's all I have I I I appreciate your time thank you very much um I think right now we have five hands from residents so we'll try to get through these um it is almost 8 o'clock uh going in the order I see them on my screen right now Reba and Xavier hi yes this is Reba panel I'm at 83 Downey Street in hopkington uh so thank you first off for showing the um uh all of the the details I appreciate this is a lot more fleshed out than last time we were on the meeting so appreciate all the work that went into this Scott um my concerns really have to do with the the actual rezoning of the property um from a residential property to a commercial property uh really the the biggest part of that is uh I don't think anybody here is uh unaware we're currently in a housing shortage uh nationally uh Massachusetts alone we uh are currently needing to build 200,000 additional housing units by 2030 um that's only five and a half short years away um and Massachusetts also currently has the lowest vacancy rate in the country for housing units um so that's a concern I I'm I guess I'm just wondering why there is a push to try to rezone residential housing uh property to commercial when we are currently experiencing a housing shortage um in addition to that uh just according to the board of assessors of hopkinton's uh according to their website the Hopkinson fiscal year 2024 the tax rate for residential property is $14.61 cents per $1,000 of value for the property as opposed to commercial industrial or personnal which is $460 uh per $1,000 of value so an additional dollar um so please feel free to correct me I'm not I'm not in the uh the zoning or uh building uh field of work but it sounds like if it were to stay residential and we to build residential property there there would be more housing units for to to help solve that housing shortage problem and it could bring and generate more tax revenue to the town than if it were to be rezoned to commercial or otherwise so I just want to be sure if I may Rea was that a comment or is there a question you're hoping to have answered uh mostly a comment um just really for the uh the Zach board to to take into consideration um when you're you're considering bringing that to the planning meeting okay thank you um I will say if people haven't looked ahead on the agenda speaking of housing it's our next agenda item with the MBTA communities act so um if that is of Interest stick around uh um if I mispronounce a few of these names incorrectly I'm sorry I'm going to guess it's pronounced Misha gasic very good you got it right um I'm Misha gasic and I live at 15 Amherst Road which uh is part of the community that's impacted directly and um I just have a a very brief statement and then two questions please um I have been to the town me meeting previously about 6 months ago when residents uh voted against this zoning uh request from residential to business and I've also been at two additional meetings where this topic was raised again I I walk my uh Pomsky in the woods a lot and there's just in terms of nature there's three bald eagles there's deer there's Fox there's a bobcat um there's coyotes and an osprey nest as well um in our Woods at our neighborhood and um I just don't think we need another parking lot um and I recommend the this Advisory Group uh follow the wishes of the previous town meeting and the votes of the residents to protect this neighborhood um from further business encroachment and uh just in terms of questions I'm curious when the parcel was listed for sale was the purchaser aware that this was a residential uh zoning uh property and then the second question uh is just Why does this keep being brought um continually uh over the past six to eight months um when the when the residents keep uh voting against it thank you uh Scott or or David do you want to answer the first question which which was what the first question being uh in terms of coming to the purchase uh and information regarding the zoning District that it was already in I um I'd have to I don't know the answer to that question um but uh I think to the second question you know the idea of and now seeing you know that there's an interest in donating Green Space to the town um to be held in perpetuity as well as now this 10 foot buffer to be held um in perpetuity as green space and then to have this remaining portion of this lot which I would submit you know if if it was further down Hayward street okay but if it's where it is right now quite consistent with what is along cell Street there's and coupled with the fact that this would be an owner occupied um commercial building um it's uh it it adds you know to what is already along cell street so just in terms of the first question was this zoned commercially was this communicated as being zoned commercially when you purchase this property was it um advertised as such and when you purchase the sign all the documents this was zoned commercial in your opinion no the uh the land owner was aware of the current zoning of the property uh he looked at it and thought that it again is just an odd um kind of uh use for the property and felt that it would be worthwhile to Endeavor to seek a rezoning um there were a couple of uh I wouldn't say unfortunate but just just a manner in kind of the previous applications uh they were a little rushed and uh we feel that we have taken a step back and actually that was almost a year and a half ago um and we have rethought a more Optimum uh use for the property and development of the property um however the owner is well aware that if in fact this does not get rezoned he does have a re a residential property that interestingly um you could only build maybe two houses on these on these Parcels um because the Zoning for a Lakefront residential is actually an acre which of course all of you that live on the lake are not in compliance with the current zoning um so bed in to the zoning because we've lived here um I just think there's a lot of commercial real estate um in in Milford and you know very close proximity even on the street um and I just I question you know why why this was even purchased in the first place um but I Jim any other any other thoughts Jim at that end on the other hand I think covered it yeah I think we covered it just you know made sense to purchase it and seek to reone it and that's why we're on the call tonight you know hoping to move it along but um I I knew that some I I I sorry I I also know that I could develop it residentially if um if I chose to do so so it was an investment in some land and we we're hoping it'll get approved through the zoning meeting tonight and we'll just keep moving forward with the plan thanks I I would just um expand slightly on part of Scott's answer on this issue coming up again it was I believe a year and a half ago and that got to annual town meeting through a citizen's petition it was never presented to the zoning advisory committee and therefore it never was presented to the planning board um it had because of that very little support from the town side as far as I know from discussions and this has been a much more deliberate and careful process and I think uh regardless of how the vote turns out appropriately careful and deliberate um it's not the same proposal and it's certainly not being done in the same way uh moving along again if I mispronounce I apologize rustem yes that's me uh R Rik of 35 C Street I across the street over there so uh we wanted to listen to the some historic di right so why was noton or why stayed residential uh over the time so it happened in 2005 when EMC was going to build a 52,000 Street Building and we have a document of that time planning board where the citizen and the AMC got together and discussed the pro the proposed project and uh conclusion of that planning board meeting uh that because people complained and the people they lived on those uh Parcels over there and they complained they did not want the uh commercial building just behind the uh the backyard and the condition to let the MC build the building was uh to solve that issue somehow and obviously they did right so and because the building was built and the planning birth of that time was happy uh and people and and ended up that people were displaced and on our street on he Street down there we have some family that were displaced to there by that time and we can ask if we want right so uh what exactly happened but EMC kept that land a residential and EMC created the but zone between the building they never used and other part of the street so that was 15 years ago and everything change planning BG is different the town is different and so on but it was contract of that time and I'm trying to say that whatever was uh not in the document uh it's it's forgotten right it's forgotten and we don't recall that and coming to that our situation and donating the part of the land and the that 10 ft strep along the street uh without recording somehow that right so and finally we will get in same situation after 10 years so in some nearest Future um so and we can dig in other other documents regarding that 20 05 and why the decision was and what was the promises of the EMC of that time and we sent a request that Freedom Act uh a while ago we have not rep did did not get any reply yet uh from the town uh because they rer that could be some other documents in remote arive so anyway I don't know if if it can affect somehow decision about if we want to Res and how um we want to proceed with the data obligations to donate to the town and how it should be recorded but it's this is from the history um is that it yes and I have a question uh a few times during our Yeah in our discussion uh we heard today uh that uh we discussed with the town and what does it mean I mean the uh proponent of Ronan they mentioned a few times we discussed with the town Scott David if if if you use the phrase we discussed with the town oh yeah yeah sorry uh I get it um yeah we had a review with John and others just to say what else John GIS yes I'm sorry I just want to be sure that public you're talking about Y what else what we what might we be able to do to make this more uh more palatable to the to the community to the residents and uh since we were proposing to donate the parcels that Jim had uh ownership of the thought was well how do you prevent uh further encroachment or access on Hayward so the thought was through some discussion was basically to develop this 10 foot additional buffer that would be donated to the town as well uh or and M be maintained as lakefront property zoning um so that so we kind of move forward on that as you've seen um does that you know does that solve everything no uh is it a viable idea I think it Denley is a good idea um and Jim is is uh open to that so that is really kind of what the result you know you're seeing the result of some discussions um yeah thank you I appreciate that you like doing everything that make it working uh but finally whatever that um whatever I mean the sequence of the donation in ronian right so let's say uh if it comes I mean in what way should it come to town meeting because for the donation found also should vote for that right so does is possible even to make that conditional on that or not so and once like or they one might pass another may not pass and what happens after that right so is it any reasonable and legal segments of the action uh that could be done in this case or once it resed you I mean the owner can decide anything and can do anything there and okay yes yeah promises is good I just I I I I tend to trust uh people and uh to proponent but finally it may change it could be sold and everything right so after that isone the question is about the right legal sequence of everything sure if I could uh answer that um so one of the other um conversations that we had was whether or not you know the vi the viability of something like a memorandum of understanding under this scenario um and whether or not that was a good option um it seemed as though it wasn't um because of control you know not maybe something that is a good idea now might be might not be consistent or helpful for the town sake and for the community sometime further down the line so um but in moving forward and speaking with the applicable board that's where you start to C and Town Council that's where a proponent would start to craft what an agreement could be with the town that would take the unknowns out and and put in those contingencies that you um that that you raise um uh so when it does ultimately go to vote everyone understands that not one you know with that approv it's not just going to be the straight approval maybe if there is going to be property that goes into perpetuity as open space that would happen you know in some way you know and it's encaps you know it's captured in in a a written agreement or some something in writing with the town so everyone understands what's going to happen so they understand what they're voting for and that's what um that's what it should be so hopefully that answered your question thanks um I see three hands from the public left and I think given the time we're going to limit it to these last three hands uh Vic speaking as a member of the public thank you uh my name is vikas 33 hward Street uh of kington um I just had want to call out few things uh one is that you know there's a lot of discussions with a lot of conditions uh are saying that if or else but we cannot Zone something on this unknown areas if it happens or not I mean once we Zone it there's no control of it and I've called this out even in the last meeting or previous meetings so that's one thing which the Board needs to take into consideration because just like we're going thinking that this is the best possible way but once it's Zone tomorrow the planning board or the town might come back and say that you know the this is one and secondly also want to like to thank uh John working out with margar to make sure that put together a better plan to appeal and how to we can get this worked out but the few concerns which I have it is that as on today if somebody misses a right turn on Duncan they come to my driveway they take a uturn if there's no access and due to the busy roads there's still a chance that people might take a left come back to herard street again there's a U-turn going back that would clog it going on the plan what was presented one concern which I see it and the lastly which I just want to say is that you know I know that the parcels which are being donated by Margaret however there's one parcel which nobody knows what it is so I'm not sure if that tomorrow if that gentleman comes back and says that you know hey I need a path or whatever the paper part which is there right now the road is there make it official then you're pretty much opening up again the same thing uh they can still have the access from that back road and back into the Hayward street so I just want to request the board think through it and just uh taking this one and oh and one more thing T I know during that you know why was this has happened only once no this came back previously also before Margaret I believe twice this was came for resoning and it went through the Zach and planning board and was pushed back as part of the T meeting only once it came as a citizen petition so that's all I just want to say thank you thank you it looks like Kathy is unsure how to hit the hand button so I'm gonna let you put your hand down and I'm gonna go to Kathy now this can get tiring yeah hi um this is Steve Lang at um 23 Hill Crest Drive and I was just wondering do we know who owns um Pine Grove Lane is that right of way or Pap Road or whatever it is who who owns that and what was The Proposal um for that does that get donated is that going to get [Music] rezoned so I think I can answer part of that uh it's not a road that exists right now I think it's one that we often call a paper Road and I have experience in my neighborhood with developers in paper roads it looks like two of the three Parcels that abut it on the West are owned by Mr margarite the third parcel the one that is furthest North on the west side of that road is owned by I I don't remember the person's name but that's the the parcel that is owned by somebody else they would be the ones that have access to the paper road but but who what how would who owns the paper Road itself John and is that get rezoned or is that is that going to be rezoned business or it's not in the proposal right now to be reson business no it'll just stay there as a paper Road John yeah so the paper Road concept is is a pretty confusing one even for people in the industry um it's not a road it was probably a road at some point on a subdivision plan back in the 1930s there are a ton of those types of roads in in the residence Lakefront so it's still private land I don't know I mean I can look and see who owns it I don't know who owns it off to my head that would be a question for the assessor um but it's not actually a road it's just a road on a plan at some point in time somewhere yeah Mr chairman uh it's probably an easement um so whoever AB buts it or whoever it leads to or you'd have to look at the the titles but it it's like a right away even though it's a paper Road that's I think that's what it is you may have to you may have to to look at what and that's a very good point Mr Cohen it maybe that you could look at if you were able to locate the deed to that property and find out whether or not the initial granor and if there was a you know initial granter of this entire area if they had an intent about what that road might or might not be or may be silent as to what it was um the the properties about it would uh would be the owners of it you know if just the fact that it's a p called a paper Road I think it's probably any you know some kind of an easement that you you know somebody theoretically could build a build a road on it if they want Scott yeah just real quick um basically the lots that are left over there are not really buildable Lots once all those houses were removed because none of them meet the zoning requirements for lakefront property okay I'm trying to move us along so there are two hands left um Stephen borin yeah hi I'm Mara Michael Steve's right here we're at 118 Hayward street we're new hopkington residents and this is my first board meeting attending welcome I hope you're enjoying it loving it um thanks for welc welcoming us and the question that I have you know I I really have appreciated all the time that's been put into this and the time of the comments of the earlier residents public speaking we were just talking about that paper Road and I appreciated the donate the concept of donating the land along Hayward street and we were just talking about like there's a lot of uncertainty related to that paper Road what if Mr margarit you know would consider donating a buffer to that paper Road as well to give folks certainty should this go forward into a project that there wouldn't be a driveway there because I think we're all very concerned about the traffic on Hayward and even now with cars coming off very quickly out of Co you know we've seen a lot of near accidents there thanks okay I I think that nod from Scott says yeah that's worth considering I think that's what I'm reading there um did we get the address of Ste oh I'm not sure did we get your address sure yeah we're 118 Hayward street thanks thanks Parker you get the last public comment on this for tonight hi Ted uh Parker have three oelo drive here in Hopkinson uh with permission may I share my screen I'm okay with that John can you give him permission up thanks continuing with the requests of the chair to only adhere to public comment that has not been mentioned at previous meetings can you see my screen yes so what you're seeing here is a map from Hopkinson according to the Harvard collection start zoning map dated back to 1831 wow we'll come back to this in a moment here but if we go back to the most uh to the history of this parcel that we're talking about in question as best I could find was a map which is a Harvard collection dating back to the zoning map of 1967 and this is you can see dated at the top here and as you can see if we zoom into Lake masok and actually let's look at the legend first anything that is labeled rlf is zoned residential and if we Zone in these big chunky borders are industrial and the parcel in question was zoned residential in 1967 which is right here if we go f farther back to the old town of Hopkinson we'd only have to look at the complete history of Hopkinson uh and see that in uh pardon me in 1920 the Henry gasal Howard Land Company created North Pond Terrace which were lots that are now affixed next to are now fixed next to North Pond here and those Lots abutted North Pond so since 1920 this has been zoned a residential area and if we go back to that map that I shared initially which was the map from 18 where' it go we go back to the map that I shared originally it was just the map from 1867 you can see that this area in question was actually zoned a meadow let me go find this again one second please did you pay the $33 to purchase the map I wish I I wish I did apparently that's the technical issue we're having right now suffice to say I guess you'll just have to take my word for it I'm more than happy to share the um map afterwards here we go if we look at the property in question right here that R4 Bears back in 1831 zoned this map a meadow so whether it has been since 1831 which this was supposed to been open space or whether it was rezoned residential the board today in voting to rezone this specific parcel is going against the sense can you see what I'm showing by the way or did it stop no I can it's the one with de up in and and the lake yes right here the board would be going against over a 100 Years of conventional wisdom and most recently in modernity at least uh if my math is correct uh 50 or yeah 57 years of conventional planning history and resoning this so just wanted to share that food for thought for the questions of gee why is this residential it's because folks back in the60s back in the 20 1920s and even all the way back in the 1800s wish that this either residential or open space if I could Parker our body has no power to reone anything again the vote that I hope we have is simply to recommend whether we want the planning board to have this discussion um if our vote if we're well feeling comfortable having one is no then it will not be recommended for a planning board discussion if our vote tonight is yes all that happens is all of these discussions begin again in Greater detail then that has to get planning board approval before it goes to town meeting on a warrant so there are many many many steps between tonight and anything happening to that land so I think it's worth making sure we understand that um through the chair yes just a point of clarification I hate to rain on Parker's parade on this one zoning wasn't adopted in hopkington until the 1950s so it wasn't really zoned Meadow back in 18 31 it was probably just a classification of the land use at the time um but we didn't have zoning back in hopkington that L I appreciate you clarifying that John I think if we look at the tradition of mass there was a Tavern that was affixed next to the front of the subdivision as well it was removed uh I think about you know to bun of the AA residents and whether you want to call it zoning whether you want to call it mapping I think the historicity of the property in and of itself is what I'm just trying to get across and I mean to the applicants as well I appreciate the thought you've been going that you put into this I mean I think about the history I think about the 150 year old trees that have been there probably since the 1860s as well um but John appreciate the point of clarification all right I said we were gonna end comment but I'm going to allow one more Mr berghorn if it is quick please thanks very much Greg berghorn 33d Road uh down by the lake uh we've been here more than a decade um I didn't hear any clear explanation for why all the other unused res business properties down south street are not being considered instead of this land that we would like to remain residential in our area down by the lake uh it's it's really not that complicated um I don't understand why we're having all this conversation about it it's it was residential it was purchased as residential um and we as part of the lake mpog residential neighborhood don't want more commercial space it's really very simple are you for an answer I I think we did hear an answer from Mr Richardson um but I can try and then Scott if I get it wrong I think the answer is the other properties were not appealing to the applicant tonight the applicant purchased this land knowing it was residential and thinking it was a good candidate to be rezoned the applicant knows it may not get reowned but for what the applicant was looking for owning his own building on his own land this made sense as a purchase to then go through the process that we're going through now is that accurate Scott and and yes yes y so there's lots of commercial property on South Street I'm sure not of it's not all of it is just leasable I'm not a real estate agent but I would think that there's plenty of opportunities in the very near neighborhood to do this kind of thing um on a non-residential area of the lake mpano neighborhood it's not that complicated okay um zoning advisory committee does anybody have any other questions or thoughts thanks you're welcome um zoning advisory committee Mary was that yes go ahead Mary yes hi um I want I want to say that if we had any power of being able to keep Parcels forever nature you know all the trees still there um a heck of a lot of us on all of the boards would do so um the only way to do that is for a town the town to purchase parcels and turn them into conservation land um so um so all of you who have mentioned the the nature in the area and so on it's it's you know it's admirable and I certainly feel that very well um but from just the town perspective of does this make sense as residential or business it to me makes more sense as business um and it's um and it's it's never been a choice of do we want to develop it or do we would we rather keep it as nature because that's that's not an option for us to consider so thank you yes to the chair yes was that Arnold yes go ahead and so um like I said before I in another town I was on the planning board elected three times you know for more than 15 years and this is something that you see all the time that developer wants to do something and need some kind of relief from the town and know that the abuts are against it uh and uh you know I mean my observation sometimes you know they they make arguments that um you know they just don't want it in there you know and they and and the U uh you know it seems like the tra you know the issue about the traffic or uh you know that that there's some Wildlife or something in there it's um I I don't know if it's that strong you know and it seems to me that you know the other the towns and I think Hopkinson is the case um you know they they're looking for um you know we have to pay for you know all the expenses of the town and the commercial property it's going to generate more taxes uh and it won't and it also if you build houses then there'll be you know more the schools will be more crowded and there might th those are the factors um you know I'm not uh one thing uh you know and and you know you mentioned that we have that uh uh MBTA bylaw where would change the zoning in different parts of the town to have more houses the uh people who live there they're going to oppose that they don't want there to be houses you know you know here here somebody wants something commercial on a street where there almost everything is commercial on the street uh but you know one question I I would have and I don't know whe the developer can uh or the owner can say this but or or maybe John can say that his the town met its uh still subject to 40b do we have a 10% affordable housing in uh Hopkinson and uh you know if not then theoretically a developer could put could move to put in a 40b which would uh I believe would override the zoning and maybe bu you know build uh 10 houses an acre or you know uh so uh you know that I mean that I I don't know whether that's uh something that's a possibility here if uh if the person who bought this property uh can't build this uh commercial building that he wants to do um Vic are you speaking as a member of Zach or are you still a member of the public because I've tried to close public comment um it's more of a public because I accuse myself as a member of uh this one so but then if if you'll allow me then I I'd like to say I closed public comment no okay thanks D sorry Vic um any other Zach members so um my sense is from zoning advisory committee m members we are comfortable voting tonight uh all of you are on camera could you give me a thumbs up or thumbs down if you're comfortable voting okay I think that's unanimous um so again our vote is simply to recommend whether the planning board should now take up this discussion or not that's all the vote is we're not approving any rezoning um I'm going to say for myself and not everyone has to make any comment of any kind but I just want to explain my vote uh I'm really appreciative of Mr margarit and his team for working with us to this point if this proposal as is we're at town meeting I would vote no as is but that's not what we're being asked to do I think it is in a good place to move to the next level of discussion and at the planning board I hope to get a lot of the answers that were brought up I would love to see the traffic study I think that is a great concern I'd love to know how the land that is proposed to be uh donated will be donated before everything is rezoned all of those things are important to me um but those aren't going to get worked out here so I'm going to do a roll call vote but I'll call myself first um and given what I've just said I am going to vote Yes to pass along to the planning board a motion first oh you're right I'm sorry can I get a motion everyone knows can I just ask a clar clarifying question real quick yes what we're what we're voting on specifically is recommending the latest iteration as in specifically those those lots in the front not an earlier version right that's what we're recommending that's my understanding John is that your understanding and the applicant I mean yes that's the assumption but if you want to clarify it the motion can say uh the proposal and I don't have a date on it the proposal dated let's see June 17 2024 is what you're recommending okay so could I get a motion on the June 177 2024 proposal in a second so moved T okay now we can have the roll call vote I'm sorry about that we don't have many votes in the year that I've been chair it's been a lot of other discussions anyway I Ted Barker hook vote Yes to pass along to the planning board um Ron yes Arnold yes Sam no uh Mary yes and Vic you're recusing yourself that's right I think that's the full vote was that five to one John um I did not capture all of them can we just go through again just so I know Ted is a yes Ron yes Arnold yes Sam no Mary yes did I miss anybody and Vic ising himself four to one okay one to one y okay so members of the public um look for that on the planning board and please attend the planning board I will be watching because I do want answers to some of the questions you rais I just think those answers are better more appropriate at the next step than they are here in the zoning advisory committee um I will certainly be checking out those meetings I encourage you to as well um applicants Mr margarite Scott and Nick thank you very much uh for working with us and I will be looking for you on hcam in the coming weeks and months thank you very much okay you thank you for your time thank you welcome we have according to what I've called the Cino Rule 25 minutes um to get our meeting done by nine o'clock and we're moving on to MBTA communities um John if we run out of time do you feel comfortable putting the update on um adus till the next meeting or is that something we need to move along more quickly no so that was that was just an informational thing uh I think Ron had asked me for it so I thought it would be good to share with everybody I wasn't even going to give an overview um oh okay not on the agenda so we'll put that on the agenda for the next meeting so that we can know what that means and what if anything we need to do I don't know if that requires some work for us at all um I think we we do need to reconsider some stuff and I don't know if it needs to be at special town meeting since the state's date is February next year right so quick answer on that is no there's nothing we have to do right now because we don't know what the regulations are going to say okay we know generally what the bu we know what the law says but that doesn't give the regulations or the guidelines so okay we don't necessarily know how our bylaw would have to get tweaked if at all okay okay we're moving on to our MBTA communities discussion and John and I talked about some things ahead of time and part of that included me giving John the stage to give us an update on some of the things we talked about at our last meeting right so I'm going to pull up the newest version of the map that we discussed all right so what we've got now is three different areas to be considered and this is not what would be proposed because this is um significantly larger than the required 50 acres and the 750 units uh this is just for discussion purposes so everyone knows where everything is so we've got Indian Brook condos over here we've got an slightly expanded downtown district and the Walcott Valley condos um so I'll just going to zoom in over here on the downtown district can explain how we expanded a little bit so um we really only grabbed these two extra parcels and then what are those two just if we were on the street yep so this is The Dominoes and this is the santand there and this is the gas station this is the police station so it's the two properties in between the gas station and the police station um this is just a vacant parcel that I believe was part of the town's proposal for a parking lot behind Town Hall um this is bills this is Town Hall this is six Walcott um so this is just a strip of land and then I want to say maybe this parcel is well uh but really nothing too significant in that expansion and that's just to grab a little bit more area um to see if we can get over that 50 acres with a smaller second subdistrict so that we wouldn't have to do a third subdistrict uh in order to to qualify so that's the map and now I think the best thing and I gave you a PDF but I I think the um Spreadsheet will be the best because we can play with it just want to make sure I'm grabbing the right one all right so this is no there all right so this is the model that the state has provided so that you can do the calculation using all the properties uh get your numbers and figure all of that out so this is going to be higher than what we would propose because there are three subd districts um but this is just we can change this and play with it just to get a little idea of how certain numbers affect it so right now with the downtown uh District being expanded you've got a potential for 227 units um and I'm going over the downtown district just because that one is the least changed um a dwelling unit per acre of 12.2 and a total unit capacity with all of them included 1,42 but that will change uh so just to refresh everyone's memory the three criteria that we have to meet are 50 acre minimum of a total area zoned 750 unit capacity and a 15 unit um across the whole subdistrict uh District area uh dwelling units per acre so we're really looking at this total column to see how these numbers come into play so if we were to do 5 if we were to say Walcott Valley has a capacity of 530 units and then downtown as the two subdistricts we would be just over uh 757 units so we'd be 750 unit would be the threshold we are seven units above that for the capacity um the acreage would be over not quite large enough you'd be at 34.8 Acres um and then the dwelling units per acre would be significantly higher uh so you would definitely meet that 15 units per acre with the Indian Brook you've got 485 units 227 not quite 750 um but you would meet the 50 acres because it's 32 and then 20 uh and then 17.6 uh we could play with that and see what it would be but I believe you would be at the 15 Acres so we wouldn't necessarily meet with that meet the requirements but you can play with it um and that is District three so in District three you can sorry going checklist parameters so in District three we have it set because this was discussed previously in iterations um of having a maximum of 15 units per acre so that's the max you would be able to do and that we set that because that's what the requirement was for uh downtown or for uh MBTA um if we up that a little bit so I'll just show you how it impacts it so if we're looking at 485 units for that District this is the Indian Brook condos Indian Brook cond scho yep so 485 so if we change this to 16 I was not going to refresh 518 518 so just by changing that one number allows for more units so if Indian Brook and downtown were the subdistricts that Zach wanted to move forward as an option you could tweak Indian Brook to get to the level uh and you could also tweak downtown because downtown's also at 15 units you could tweak that to get to the required capacity the acreage would remain the same and the dwelling units per acre would go up but it would just basically only help uh the town meet that that requirement um so I just wanted to bring that up because there was a little tweak that we weren't really playing with uh in in the last iteration that would allow some of these districts to be used if necessary we didn't have to do it in the last one because we had at 15 years per acre we had the lots and the size and all the other criteria being met as it was so we didn't have to tweak that number but um just an extra thing to play with if Zach wanted to look at it and and I just want to go back really quickly if it was only districts one and two the way you've drawn it now were at 34 35 Point something Acres 34.8 34.8 so we're well short of the 50 yes I mean you could expand downtown even further right right we would need either or expand those one of those two or both right okay so that's kind of where we're at right now um Windsor at hopkington I think is we've all realized is a very tricky situation that um you know it was developed as a 40b and to Arnold's question earlier we are above our 10% so we're not subject to 40b at this time um Windor was a tricky one the there was some agreements between the town town and the developer it's a 40b so that's a state technically a state level permit um and then Legacy Farms was also very difficult because it was part of the master plan special permit for Legacy Farms and you really can't pull that out uh so looking at new new properties if we're not looking at The Preserve or the carbonis and adjacent properties we're looking at Indian Brook and Walcott Valley which Zach had identified at the last meeting this is where we stand in terms of compliance with MBTA okay [Music] um Zach members reactions s chair yes please so just a just a clarification sorry to make you repeat yourself but you're saying if we were to bump up the uh number from 15 to 16 units per acre uh we with two with District Two and Three we would meet both the acreage and the number of units that we would need um so you wouldn't quite meet the number of units because you're at 515 and 227 which not great at Mental Math but let's 745 yeah you're just short but I mean if you bumped it up to if you bump downtown let's just say make downtown 16 instead of if you make downtown 16 then I'm sure that'll put us over the top and you're at 246 so you would have that 750 okay and then you would meet the acreage and you know we'd have to take out Walcott Valley to see what the um the density per acre would be I can do that now I just don't want to mess up this this District um but we would have to see if that meets the 15 units per acre and then kind of tweak accordingly if we need to but that's also something planning board can do or we can do it on Zach but this is for all really all intents and purposes like Zach would be identif ing the district and planning board would be responsible for kind of tweaking it to make sure that it complies sure yep thanks Zach members other reactions I'll say I I was I was hoping Walcott Valley would give us more acreage um if we are choosing just Rand not randomly but if we had to pick what makes more sense for the Town between Walcott Valley and Indian Brook I would say Walcott Valley John you determined they are condos not Apartments yes they are condos okay um but if the acreage doesn't get us there it doesn't get us there and we would have to do some significant expansion of zones I think Indian Brook frankly is in while it looks like we can get the numbers there with downtown in Indian Brook although we don't know the density but I think it's in a a lousy location quite frankly um I think it doesn't have any connection to the mwta buses or the trains um without a traffic study in front of me my guess is the traffic from Indian Brook would very quickly go out onto the Lumber Street um traffic mess that we have there between Price Chopper and Lumber Street um but at least that is one where it looks like we can make the numbers work although I really don't like that property um those are my Reflections does anybody else have Reflections or questions through the chair go ahead yes I I think that um The Proposal that we put before town meeting was a really good proposal at this point I'm looking to recommend to the planning board a proposal that meets the criteria that keeps us out of litigation and I think you know districts two and three combined together would would meet that uh requirement so I John I I just want to congratulate you on coming up with some good options that we can push forward to the planning board thank you other folks maybe give you a moment to chew on it I don't mind a little silence for a moment [Music] I will just add that perhaps having to convince uh voters on two districts districts instead of three would potentially have a higher chance of passing two districts instead of three yeah right um members of Zach is everyone um clear comfortable with our having moving having moved past the Windsor apartments and the Legacy Farm South Apartments is anyone still wanting to push that Zach members no um I mean I guess the only thing I remember from our last meeting is there was some chat about Golden Pond land being included but I I think I I agree with Sam if we just start cobbling together three and four Parcels that's an ugly mess as well um but I suppose I'm not sure what kind of time crunch we're up against but I suppose if we wanted to see Walcott downtown and Golden Pond what that would do uh what I know of Golden Pond is there's a lot of wetlands over there that would not be developable so I don't I don't know if it would add the 15 Acres that is missing I don't think that's a great answer I don't think we have any great answers I I I kind of agreed with with um Ron that our first proposal was a good one but we've been asked to come up with a second one and here we are anybody else have thoughts they through the chair yes I mean I understand Sam's comment about the three districts but um the carbonis property is 10 acres the two aens road is 4.7 acres and the 278 Cedar Street so the three properties Carboni and the two adjacent properties on the Eastern side of 85 up there from the first proposal correct they total about 15.7 Acres um again I don't know if all those Acres would be eligible to be counted so you still might be a little short but it is about 15 Acres let me ask the the committee if we could choose just between Walcott and Indian Brook um I I tried to make clear if I had that choice I think Walcott is better for the bad options we have than Indian Brook what do other folks think because if if there's a strong preference towards Walcott maybe we explore the lead John just gave us I I've always liked anything actually close to the MBTA so yeah I mean to me that's the state forcing this on aside you know the part that I do like is anything that's actually close to the to the MBTA makes sense to me so yeah uh so if there's a way to actually include that um I I would be interested in exploring that through the chair yes please and just to add on to what Sam said you know yes number one is close to the MBTA stop number two would be close to downtown so and wcot Valley is wait I'm sorry Mary you lost me what is number one in your accounting number one would be number one desirability would be close to the MBTA oh okay you're you're kind of listing your priorities okay and and you know I agree with Sam on that um and number two priority would be close to downtown and Walcott Valley is is closer to downtown than Indian Brook I mean Indian Brook is still you know a good long walk but a walk walk away um but uh yeah so you know marginally yeah but um but I still agree you know that two partials is probably easier to sell particularly because you know PE people have a tendency to come out just for their own neighborhoods and vote against things in their own neighborhoods and don't really think about the rest of the town at all but um yeah is there a scenario where it could be the maximum that's close to the MBTA Plus downtown only I don't know if you've ever explored that or is that is that just not enough acreage probably are are you suggesting the Eastern side of 85 the carbonis and neighboring downtown yeah the Lots you're looking to reconsider potentially plus just downtown if we needed to expand downtown I don't think that gets us there John am I right I don't think it does but I was curious if we ever looked into that no I don't believe uh it would get us to where we need to be downtown is I think if it did we probably wouldn't have included The Preserve in our first proposal probably yeah downtown is relatively small it's only 18 Acres so you'd have a lot of acreage to make up so then we're faced um well wait maybe I we're not faced with anything yet um Arnold do you have any thoughts that you want to share or you digesting I don't hear anything from Arnold um I was mute IAD I think John was uh John's proposal is okay I think that would be I I don't know if John proposed he just offered those three those three Pro those properties that were on the chart so carbonis and neighbors plus Walcott Plus downtown is that what you're leaning toward if these are our only choices um yeah well I thought there was something with that Indian Hill and uh well right there's Indian Brook but if we we could do and it looks like we could make the numbers work all three parameters it looks like we could do Indian Brook and downtown only my thought is Indian Brook while it gets us there for the numbers is in my mind the worst choice of what we have on the table right now as far as its location relative to mass transit uh public transit relative to traffic problems in town um get there with those two or we could go carbonis and neighbors plus Walcott Plus downtown yeah yeah I I don't have any strong opinions on it you know like I say haven't been in town that long um uh I think that uh in a way trying to pick these things like trying to throw do you know closing your eyes and throwing do darts at the the map almost uh but uh so uh I'll go with what the majority say okay John um and and there are planning board members on the call too um what are we looking at for timeline we're we're up against the 9:00 unofficial close of the meeting deadline but we don't have to keep that um do you want to say what it would it make sense for us to keep going for another half hour tonight to see if we can move something forward or um I'm trying to understand the calendar better and I believe tomorrow select board is possibly going to make a determination on the town meeting dates and I believe it it's being being proposed for either November or December or maybe two dates in December so we have a little bit of time um and if if Zach is leaning towards having Walcott Valley and potentially carbonis I can run through a scenario looking at how those as they currently stand would fit and if they don't meet the criteria in terms of acreage maybe they're an acre short try and expand downtown a little bit more cover one more downtown property here too yeah uh and just see if you know those three districts would be an option because if we know that Indian Brook in downtown work that's an option and then we can try and make Walcott Valley in downtown work including the carbonis property um I I don't see picking up another 15 acres in the downtown district to just make wott downtown unless you want to make it just one District but you'd be picking up probably a lot of properties on a street B Street and C Street right you know if those are those the type of properties that you want for multi family so um you know happy to have another meeting we can schedule one R have time for that I think I think we do um if the town meeting is going to be in December even November you know we've got at least two months and I think we can get something uh before the planning board to add to warrant considering I don't believe the warrant has even opened yet um so we should be able to move okay Zach members are are you comfortable asking John to come back one more time with carbonis and neighbors or maybe we don't need the neighbors I don't know um Walcott and downtown and we'll see what that looks like then we can weigh the two choices we've come to which is those three properties three zones uh um districts versus Indian Brook in downtown does that feel like a plan and then maybe next meeting I'm not sure about the bylaw language and things like that but next meeting we might be able to come to our best recommendation on a map I'm looking for nods or something okay um we do a planning board members does anyone want to chime in for a quick comment um as long as you're here but I really don't want to extend our meeting very much longer Jane sure so I brought this up I think we got to get your address and stuff like that sure Jane Moran 70 East Main Street and uh speaking as a private citizen so I mentioned it at a planning board meeting a few meetings ago suggesting that Zach recommend two different plans similar to what happened at with the solar plan when we had because I really like the first option that you offered last year and then if you could come up with a second option and then propose it um in an two different articles so that the town's people could actually look at various recommendations and thought processes behind it because there's a lot of work going into all of this and we really need to get it past and um would you consider something like that so John had um mentioned that there's something some language that Town Council is recommending and I'm wondering if it would be appropriate to share that information now John or not yeah so um they don't have any specific language to recommend but they we have I have discussed with them of doing two separate articles uh because there has some been have been some planning board support for the previous iteration so um talking about Town Council whether it should be two separate articles that town meeting would be asked to approve a discussion to to discuss both articles at the same time because that's not technically allowed in town meeting unless you get that permission of town meeting or create one article that has both iterations and the motion to approve that article would change based on um which scenario would be preferred so I guess it would work as you know there's two options within the one article somebody at town meeting could move to approve one of those scenarios and he could either get voted up or down and then I guess if it failed you could try the other option or we'd have to see with Town Council how that would work but Town Council thinks it would be cleaner in terms of discussion purposes to likely make them one article and then work through that process uh as one article Jane can I get a one clarification on your your hopes or request are you looking for two new proposals or the one that you had last year which I thought a lot of planning board members really like that and a lot of town me meeting members obviously like it so you're looking for us to move one forward that then you guys can put a the original well perhaps I hadn't thought of it that way but uh that would work um I mean I I'm comfortable doing either but I also don't want to give you guys work that you think we should have done so right now we have two squishy proposals that we're talking about that are not the original I don't think we want three squishy proposals well well we have one very hard proposal the original right and then tonight we were talking about two squishy ones which we can try to firm up what I'm wondering and maybe other planning board members have have an answer as well are you asking us to provide one alternative to you or are you asking us to give you two alternatives to the original and then you can pick from the two new options no I think the the first one uh but I I'll let it up to your uh committee and obviously the planning board meetings but I know that a lot of planning board members like the original one that we had so that if you could come up with an additional one okay that could kind of morph into all of the things that you like currently okay which I heard a lot of good things tonight great thank you for all your work Matthew you're welcome uh thank you Ted um I wanted to ask to confirm it looked like the Walcott and C uh the business district were destroy um and I just want to make sure that I believe the guidelines say that half of our land area has to be contiguous so as we're looking at the options I just wanted to understand if that was a concern especially as we think about pulling in smaller Lots from carbonis Etc John so through the chair Matthew can I have your address oh oh yes thank you six Black Thorn Circle sorry black black thorn thorn all right um so the requirement is that any subdistrict or the district as a whole has to be at least five acres so you can do multiple subd districts as long as they're five acres you can't do like a one acre parcel as a as part of the district and then a two and a half acre parcel elsewhere you have to have at least each subdistrict has to be at least five acres so carbonis as a separate subdistrict would meet it because it would be almost it would be 15 Acres at least 10 um and then downtown is 18 and then all the other ones are similar or higher is that all you have for now Matthew um yeah that's all all I had for now but just following up from the questions with with the Jane raised um I I think obviously the as many really good hard uh options that can provide the planning board the better but um I think we'd rather have one or maybe two solid uh suggestions then in addition to the original in addition to the original okay so no more than two but if we were to pass up two you'd be comfortable with that if we were firm on one you'd be comfortable with that uh in addition to the the existing one I I don't think we can really ask for much more than that given the time mind that okay again what I'm trying to balance is what work should we be doing and I don't want to shove to you guys more work than you think you should have but that we could come up with two in addition to the original and if you felt comfortable we could certainly pass both of those along I I know the that the chair and other people are on the board too so maybe they have different opinions um but I I personally would like uh proposals or options that Zach feels comfortable with um rather than getting a lot more later okay um 9007 does anybody else have any thoughts planning board or otherwise if you're planning board you got to give us your name and address Rob uh thanks Ted Rob Benson 178 Spring Street hopkington so I think um I think it's a hard this this topic is a hard conversation you guys have been doing a great job and I fully appreciate all the effort you've put into this I look at it from a kind of um what is the I come from the perspective of what I believe is the will of the town and if you like so in the past 10 years we've added a thousand over a thousand dwelling units in Hopkinton so we're at about a total of 7,000 uh roughly dwelling units in Hopkinton which is significant and we get no credit for those units to be added to town so um in that same 10 years we've added 250 million in debt debt exclusions which goes to everybody's property taxes for uh fundamentally all that 250 million is uh for schools there's been other debt exclusions but 250 million towards schools so I think and I believe I I firmly believe it's a going to be um the residents don't want a proposal where they believe it could actually be built in the next 5 years so I am a strong believer that they the residents the voters uh want a path of paper compliance um and so that's what I think the charge would be and I understand planning is a long-term uh Endeavor but realistically if we put forward a plan or proposal that could be developed uh 750 units could be developed within 5 years um um I don't think the town would vote for it um I wouldn't vote for it so that's that's where my head is I think we need to be thoughtful in uh properties that could be redeveloped in 20 to 30 to 50 years potentially um I don't think the proximity to the train station is of uber importance um that's where my head is at today I think we we got to listen or we got to internal like feel what the community wants and I know there's some people there's there's some people in town that want higher density housing that because they feel it's going to be lower cost and that will allow them to either downsize in hopkington or stay in hopkington or or somehow it will benefit them because there'll be more units in Hopkinton which will under uh lower the prices I don't really like theoretically that may be the case but I don't really see that as a driver that should guide us I think the the current voters by and large and I think it's it's well over 50% would be opposed to like a large scale development project on the town with the impact it would have on their taxes so I think that should be kind of our gu guiding principle so it's not just to put a put to from my perspective I know you guys want to put a forward a plan to the planning board that we can vote on and decide on but like from my point of view I don't want to put a plan before the town meeting that's not a good plan so um that's I think I think I share the views of all the every planning board member we only want to put forward a plan where we think it's a good plan so I know there's time considerations as time crunch as time crunch where we're kind of um running out of time and that's because it's such a hard problem to solve and it's not an easy one to solve or or we would have already done it already and so I totally appreciate that but just take that into account when you're uh discussing and debating that just to put a forward to a plan for us to the planning board I don't think the planning board wants to put forward that to the town meeting unless it's a good plan it would be my my commentary so thank you for all you guys have done and I appreciate all the work okay thanks for that um 911 any last words can I ask a question yes please too so we were talking about options to consider I'm assuming I'm taking the charge to put forth a a a plan um but I'm assuming somewhere there's a decision being considered that we perhaps don't comply with this is that not true or and if it is where would where would this be happening so there there's definitely other towns that have taken that route uh if you're asking to me I I don't know sorry your meeting sorry sorry Ted um I I would say my answer is this our charge is to come up with a plan that complies with the law that's what we are being asked to do um if a voter chooses to vote against it because they don't want to comply with the law and roll the dice that's up to the voter but I don't think it's our job in the planning side of things to say our plan is going to be nothing our job is to come up with what we think is the best answer that complies with the law and best as has been indicated is going to change depending on what how different people rank their priorities right for some the first priority is close to the MBTA for some that's not a priority at all we don't have one person making a decision on a recommendation either from us or from the planning board but I think it's our job to come up with a plan that follows the law and if the town chooses not to follow the law law either because they don't like the plan no matter how carefully we work on it or because they they want to make some anti-government stand they're welcome to do that as a planning board and a zoning advisory commission it's our job to offer a plan that meets the law so just a clarification you're saying Ted no matter what a plan will be put forth for town meeting vote from our meeting from our group no matter what we will pass along a plan for the planning board to consider I hope the planning board will then put that forth at town meeting but that's outside of what we the zoning advisory committee but I think that's what I'm asking outside of Zone I know what our charge is and that's what I'm following I'm asking is there somewhere else before town meeting where another option is being considered which is not to put forward a plan at all and would that be the planning board to be the select board like that's yeah I I don't know I I guess Rob I know if you guys are considering a path that offers no plan I don't I certainly haven't heard the board of Selectmen think that that's a good idea I try my best to listen to planning board and board of selectman meetings as much as I can as often as I can and I haven't heard from the town government point of view let's explore doing nothing I haven't heard that but maybe I've missed that part Rob do you have thoughts from what you guys are doing I I agree with Ted is we want to put together the best plan possible that would pass like my ideal state is we put together a plan that's so obvious this is a good plan it's a unanimous vote at town meeting I think that's going to be very hard to do to be uh very transparent but that would be my like dream scenario we put together such a good plan we have good explanation and rationale of why it's a good plan and everybody buys in and agrees and it's a unanimous vote but there's the select board can discuss this at their their meetings I don't know to be truthful I don't know what impact that could have um we can we at our planning board meeting we have nine members they could vote to um we could put together a plan and the members could vote to not to recommend it I don't know if that they could vote not to put it on the warrant so both of those things can technically happen where yes nothing got to town meeting so I know those votes need to happen at the planning War meeting um to even get it on the warrant one vote to get it on the warrant one vote to either recommend or not recommend whatever plan is put forward so those two votes will happen does that answer your question Sam yeah thank you okay okay there's a very small opening still in the window if anyone has a final comment or question no okay so John um is it clear what we're hoping to see for our next meeting whenever that maybe yeah so I'll try and put together um I guess two different iterations I don't think there's much to tweak with the downtown Indian Brook right that one's pretty much have a cleaner comparison of that plan to Walcott carbonis if we need the neighboring properties as well right um the two District versus the three District uh and we're throwing away when we throwing away Legacy we're throwing away Golden Pond uh and any other things we kicked around just to see how it felt yes okay could I get a motion and a second from committee members to close our meeting at 9:17 motion to adjourn there's a couple seconds which one do you want John I think I heard Mary's clearest okay all right we have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting roll call Ron yes Arnold yes Sam yes Vic yes Mary yes and Ted Barker Hook is a yes as well thank you everybody for your work on both of our discussions tonight um I feel good about tonight's meeting I think we've moved some balls forward so thank you everybody thank you John for everything you do for us great job thank you good night everybody