##VIDEO ID:NYjPBjeyMUk## all right 7 o'clock I'm going to start the um September 30th meeting at the Norton finance committee um I think roll call attendance um we have the end gav gav here Paula here Zack here PA here sorry Brandon here Steve here and I see Trace is on I think that's it for people online I am also here all right should we get started with is Hill Street first what did you say the Hill Street is that the first thing yep um they're still in negotiations so they're not going to make this time meeting so we won't Madam chair what article number was that one the Hill Street article 11 thank you so what do we have up first um first up we have the Elm Street water and sore Improvement and we have Steve Peterson here W Samson to give an explanation to the project sure excellent would it be okay if I sit here and do it the I don't know where I would stand so and we can just have a nice conversation night and Paul are you gonna all right so the presentation is being shared I have a copy of it and I it's it's up there now okay um so tonight um we're back again to talk about the Elm Street sewer uh extension and water main improvements project um there is an article on the uh upcoming town meeting um for this project uh next slide so just is how I want to run through this and I'm working on an assumption that you're all familiar with the project I'll definitely give an overview I can go into as much detail uh as people want um regarding the pro project um I want to take a step back after the overview and and talk about the the issues that have been discussed and debated in terms of uh the support of this project the things that are kind of driving that and what the major um uh issues are I guess and then we'll go back and give some more background information and kind of go through all those issues um all the issues on the project but with a focus on those and maybe take them one at a time you know we can have some back and forth questions as we go or do at the end however you want uh and then the biggest thing everybody always wants to talk about is the cost you know how much does the project cost how recovering those costs uh and then we'll just kind of give a recap you know on the uh the Outreach and and what the next steps are um if we're going to see this project move forward uh in terms of the Outreach um we did just have our third public meeting with the residents of Elm Street um on Wednesday night we can talk about that too so we've met with those people several times now we've met with all the boards more than once at this point um so next slide so just as an overview um it is it is what it says it is you know so it's Elm Street um we're looking to um run an 8 in gravity sewer over the entire length of Elm Street between reservoir uh and East Main Street um including all the properties on Elm Street and Miller Terrace um it's about 50 proper um that will be fronted by sewer and there will be one pump station with the project that we've looked at several locations and settled on uh Library Park um down basically between Miller terce and Route 123 the relative low spot of the road uh and in conjunction or simultaneous with the sewer we are also looking to upgrade uh the water main over the entire length of Elm Street same length from Reservoir to East Main Street so so that's the infrastructure project that we're talking about um and then Paul next slide so why are we talking about it um really it comes down to Grant monies that have been received um you know the planning department the town has been very proactive in going after grants and the design was entirely funded through two different grants um that are shown here Mass works and the economic development bill um we completed the design under those grants uh and then during the design phase we also applied again the town also applied um for a grant to help fund the construction and they were awarded a $3.5 million Grant um for the construction of this infrastructure Improvement project so why will we successful in getting the grants uh it's directly tied to 47 Elm Street you know Reen Barton property um and the fact that you know not only the town but the state would like to see that property improved um developed for more beneficial use um so that's what the grants are tied to that's what's driving uh the project next slide so just in terms of that you know after after this slide uh Paul's going to do uh a few slides about the Elm Street property and we'll talk about that um why the town is pursuing um to improve that uh and it is again it's the Catalyst um for the grant monies um and then after we have that discussion we will go to the cost of the project so there's the you know the capital cost of the construction uh and then how are we going to recover those costs right so speaking to the capital cost of the project uh one thing that we've talked about previously and have moved forward with is instead of just going to town meeting with an estimate we are going to open bids so we will have construction bids in hand at town meeting which will give us a much firmer grasp on the actual cost of the project we'll put a contingency on that in the amount that we ask for at town meeting we have an amount that we're asking for but that could be um we just want to give people more of a comfort level that that is the number uh and and that we're in the ballpark and that we're that we're where we need to be with the money that we're asking for uh and then it really comes down to how you're paying for it obviously you have the grant monies um that are going to offset a significant piece of it um the water work itself the intent is to recover that through water rates um it's an existing water main out there it's being upgraded the majority of of town almost the entire town is on water shares in the cost of that water infrastructure and any improvements that are made to it so there's a large user base um that can support those costs um within the rates and that's why the water work um like any other water Ms now that are being upgraded or replaced in town um is paid for through the water rates as far as the sewer project um the capital cost of the construction so basically the remaining costs you know after you pay for the water you offset a portion of the sewer cost with the grant monies um the amount that's left the intent and the way it's been done in town the way it's done in most towns is the remainder of the sewer costs up paid with betterments and we'll talk more about how the betterments work and how we come up with them here but just for this purposes of this kind of overview or look back um of the costs that are being allocated to betterments 70% of that betterment cost is being allocated to the property at 47 Elm Street based on the significant um number of units um that can potentially be developed there so they're taking that property will be taking the Lion Share of the betterment cost and then the rest of it would be the people that are directly benefit in from bringing the sewer to that neighborhood the residents that we've talked about that are going to be fronted by the sewer um and have the ability to tie into a municipal sewer uh as far as the future operation and maintenance costs um the sewers you know as the water the sewer runs on an Enterprise fund um difference between the water and sewer is there is not a large user base most of the properties in town are not on sewer and will never be on sewer there are certain targeted areas um that are that are on sewer and potentially going to be on sewer in the future um that's another reason that you know I've heard people say you know instead of betterments why aren't you just charging the sewer users for the rest of the cost and that's that's not how the system works the users pay for the operation and maintenance of it but they can't support the capital cost you can't take the people that are already on sewer and ask them to pay for people down the street today so um the rates would go through the road it's just not and it's not how it works um so that leads to the tyin requirement which is another issue that's been discussed um you know there it's been discussed debated at town meeting it's been changed several times but the bottom line the reason and this is a town bylaw it is not a water and sewer um rule it's a town bylaw basically if we're going to spend millions of doll and put infrastructure in a street and expand that sewer so you've got this existing sewer that these users are paying for and then you're going to expand it you need more users to pay for that expanded system so the intent is that why would you why build it if people aren't going to tie into it so that's why there's a tie in requirement and it's at seven years right now was two years you got change to five now you have seven years from when the sewers is approved for use to tie into the sewer and that's at different cost you know so the betterments that's an upfront cost as soon as it's approved for use you get assessed a betterment um and have to pay for the um Capital cost of the construction which again I'll talk about that more in future sles so the consequence of non construct now I think the simplest one is that you know we wouldn't be here if it weren't for the grant this this area was never uh isn't on any plan to be sewered it wouldn't have been um and without the grant Monies it's it would not be cost effective um to to provide sewers to this area so I don't see the town doesn't have the the interest to do it now I don't see it ever getting done so this is the time if if you're going to do it and I'll also get into an alternative project scope because it has come up you know one of the things that's come up is I the the sense that this project is getting put on the backs of the people on Elm Street it's a project that benefits the town but the only people paying betterments of the people on El street so we we'll kind of go into why that is I kind of already explained it they have a direct benefit that other people don't um but we'll talk about another way we could do this if that really is the deal breaker because you know we want to find a project that the town supports and will build and we'll ultimately bring that infrastructure to 47 Elm Street I think with that go to the next slide okay well uh first I I want to say uh uh it's great to be back in Norton I'm Paul dppi I'm the new and old uh planning director planning and economic development director and I want to emphasize the economic development because that's really the emphasis of my few slides here today and I know you know from previous meetings and then tonight you've heard a lot about the what's and the how's about this project but I thought it was really important to zoom out a little bit and talk more about the why and why is this why is redeveloping specifically 47 Elm so important to to the town why we've been working on this for years to see this redeveloped I mean first and foremost it's it's removing a blight right that that's you know the building's in rough shape it's it's not salvageable it was it was deemed to be it was condemned year a few years ago you know we want to do what we can to try to promote the removal of of a health and safety risk um but do it but that's the obvious that's clearly an obvious one but um but thinking about this as a fiscal implication um 47 Elm Street could be potentially a very big Revenue uh property tax earner for for the town um and this you know if some of you might remember a few years ago when we rezoned this property to Village commercial uh the person who the company that was interested in developing the site had presented about 140 units in 10,000 square ft developers still there um we haven't seen or heard anything more about the changes or anything so the numbers I'm going to talk about are based on what was on that proposal and we looked at some similar projects around town that are roughly the same size and if this site were developed somewhere in that ballpark you know we could be looking at5 to $600,000 a year in in commercial property taxes which based on you know our current budget situation is is pretty substantial um this is also important you know for a few reasons one is as a town um there is a goal for the town to have the commercial property taxes uh be at least 25% of the total amount of property taxes coming into the town we're currently at 18% we've been rising but the goal is to get to 25 and other resources that I've read said 25% is the minimum of what you want to be because you're trying to help help offset the cost to the residents because over the years the residents have been paying the large majority of the property taxes in town so that's a big factor um so one of the things I've done since I've come back is looked at our vacant land what's Zone commercial and I'm going to show you in the next slide what's left but you know the the reality is there's not much vacant land left zone for commercial or industrial use um and so we need to start thinking about some other Redevelopment strategies um but we were also looking at other some other bigger Redevelopment sites and again we don't have many we weren't an old mtown like some others around us um for but for example we have the Twee building over on barrowsville um which could be a redevelop and in fact it's being looked at right now by a nonprofit it's been looked at for the last few years and if the nonprofit takes it over we can't tax it and so that would be a loss to us fiscally it could be a great use great Civic use but we couldn't count that toward we couldn't collect any property taxes off of it so um you know redeveloping this site becomes really important as we start we think in terms of trying to grow our commercial property taxes um before I go there though a couple quick things I know uh a year ago our building permit fees were roughly $260,000 less than the year before um when I talked to the Building Commissioner nicka Frady he gave a back of the envelope estimate if this site were to redevelop as what was proposed it could be about 200,000 in fees roughly and then also if we had this this uh sewer system build The Debt Service to the Mansfield Foxboro Norton system would be spread to more users thereby lowering the cost to individuals or individual users so I just want so I've gone to the next slide um it doesn't show up very well and I apologize on black and white but if you just look at the the parcels that are that are shaded in Gray those are the parcels that are currently vacant that are you know could be redeveloped or developed as commercial or industrial there's not much um I will point out that two of the parcels one just north of 495 that's a DOT property we if you may remember we reson that a couple of years ago to Industrial right now they're they are not taking any action to put it out to bid we keep asking our legislators to help us and right now we just don't know what's happening with that uh the other big site is right up on the Mansfield lineup 140 the TPC property um you'll hear more about that um in our next with our next article um both of those sites are connected to sewer they have access uh they there are two of our really the larger sites remaining the rest of these sites are not connected to sewer which is going to constrain what they can do and um a number of these sites have environmental constraints that are you know going to continue to shrink it there'll be positive Revenue earners for sure but you know we're not you know there's not many of the bigger ones left and I would say that Reed and Barton is one of the bigger ones um so I should also point out with reeden Barton of course if it goes residential there could be things like School impacts so it's not all plus there could be costs associated with it but overall it would be a pretty significant net gain fiscally for the town um we're also a lot of us here have been working together for a while uh uh with water and sewer and some other departments to look at infrastructure as a whole in the town how we can promote Economic Development by making the right investments in infrastructure and again sewer is the FI one um so we've talked about looking how how could we continue to expand sewer down West Main Street and uh how do we connect it at Mansfield Avenue um these are positive investments in our community in fact the work that they did a few years ago on West Main in the Village Center has already led to results uh because sewer is was extended the Oldtown library is now being renovated and now being um you know leased or they're they're trying to get a tenant but that was that library was was was vacant for 30 years 33 years thank you yeah right in 1991 it it they closed it and then with a few things that we did between the sewer and we rezoned it now we're seeing changes there uh I would also point out that we would not have bog iron Brewing had sewer not gone there they couldn't have expanded they've been very clear to us that they would have left so sewer matters you know and we could we could make improvements in you know along major corridors if we think strategically and can make it work um so one of the things we've started to do is look at more tools that's Avail that are available to us and with the hopes that that's additional money that we can use toward those Investments and and with the goal of reducing the cost to the taxpayers and the rate users um so one of the tools is as Steve mentioned earlier as a mass marks Grant but there are other things we want to do I bring bring this up because you know it's my hope that if this project gets approved this will continue this will give us momentum to continue moving forward with you know expanding our infrastructure in the places where it can really help us um and then U just the last thing to build off of what Steve had mentioned about that that mass Works Grant it was $35 million and just to reiterate it was we received it because of the Redevelopment of the big site our my concern is if we don't pass the vote we have to return the $3.5 million and if we do that I don't know what that means for the state but I I would I would be concerned that that would give us a black mark and if we applied for other money down the road they might go we gave you a big Grant and you returned it um as this Steve I think pointed out too this grant covers about 41% of the total cost and I just did some quick math on this you know we're as we're going to town meeting we're ultimately asking for $2.5 million uh to cover the cover the balance of the funding which is $2.5 million and if we're asking for 2 and A5 million a town meeting and we're able to keep 3 and A5 million from the grant that's a return on investment of about 40% which is a pretty good Gainer and with that again if if this led leads to a Redevelopment of the site the 25 million we're asking for could be paid off I should say it it could be paid off within about four four to five years based on the5 to $600,000 return and I realized all that is I want to make clear that if if we approve the sewer there and construct that that increases the likelihood of that site redeveloping I I don't want to say guarantees it I can't say that that's not a fact it's just increases the likelihood of it but if it happens and it happens you know in a way that's was proposed by that uh you know by the company pursuing it then while that money doesn't go directly to the Sewer it's still we would be getting close to $2 and5 million do within four to five years so this is an investment that returns money back to us and I just posed the qu POS the question can we afford to lose the $3.5 million and with that I'm getting it back to you Steve unless someone has questions oh shair I'm sorry anybody have questions this point so I had one M chair Steve um a gravity fed Beyond 47 or Slightly North of there it's it's pretty downhill to get to Reservoir Street is that not being included is it only up to 47 no it's everybody it's the entire Roe it is so there's a there's a little bit of a hump and then it comes back it it dips and comes back up again and that'll gravity feed through that you be that deep for you yeah whatever okay first one the um the 140 units pole at 47 Village commercial um commercial first floor could be residential above and stuff are you're looking when you talk 140 units is that all commercial that it what she had proposed was commercial on the first floor and the rest of it would be second floor and up uh I residential residential part of that I think is driven by the contamination and what level of contamination you have to clean up if you have commercial on the first floor versus residential but again we we we haven't you know we're not anywhere near that point but yes thank you mam chair yeah when was the last time we spoke to that firm uh last week and they 100% interested in the property still they are but they're they're certainly waiting for to see what the town does with the sewer all right but they're still pursuing it have they given you any indication on what they feel however the results turn out if it's a if we don't approve it will they move on to something else or well they've they've been you know until until obviously we get to a point we'll we'll know for sure but the responses I've been getting are if we if we approve it they'll go forward if they if we don't probably not one thing I do want to point out too um you know we've we' we've heard from that one company there have been a couple others who have reached out to us about this this one company devco which is the one that presented a few a couple years ago um is the one we know that's done you know the deepest dive looking into taking over the property because they have to go through bankruptcy courts but I have spoken with two two other companies that have been interested in this site and I I would just put out there that I that I would be cautious about tying this to one developer because of that uncertainty I just look at this as if we if we put sewer there that increases the likelihood of somebody doing something with that site any else question chair so you guys came to came came uh before us last year with this project and it was uh I believe it failed V and I think the uh the primary concern was uh the residents and I watched the meeting the other night with the residents and to put it mildly I think was a training W uh they don't want it the residents don't want it they're going to be hitting with all kinds of uh you know abatement feeds and tiean feeds I think they've made that clear so the there's there's those two issues and the way we left it with you last time was find a way to get relief for these residents and you've come back with the same proposal no changes at all not even not even a penny so we have a situation here where we're doing this for one property 47 LM we have the residents that don't want it and we have the potential because you don't have you don't have any H commitments by anybody Dev code's been kicking this around for years and years and years now that we do this we're on the hook for $2 and5 million that the town's on the hooked for if that's remains empty that means more teachers gone more public employees gone and everything else as we have to pay this note back so I don't know you come back but you're saying you're selling the same thing nothing's changed and you know I I didn't support it the first time I wouldn't support it this time I mean if I was a resident on that street I'm minding my own business and all of a sudden I'm on the hook for 25 Grand or whatever it may be when I'm said and done you don't want to spread it around to everybody else even though it's a benefit to the whole town I I I just for those reasons I can't support it and I advise anybody to what talk to the residents or watch the public forums they had and and I hope that everyone will watch it yes and did you watch it till the end I did okay because I think when we proposed some other things I I feel like it was um mostly positive at the end I feel like the residents understood it and were supportive of it that that was my take on it I defer to anybody else that was at the meeting you can talk to the residents there was very high tensions at the beginning they're very emotional um and I get it um we walked through it which we haven't you know we're going to continue to walk through this here um and I and I will do that uh so we'll go through this and you're right things are still the same but I want to make sure we're understanding it the way it was presented to the residents at this last meeting and you know I could I know Sandy you were at the meeting um and I I would make the differ on how the residents felt about it by the end of the meeting um so I would go I would watch it again and listen to the discussion at the end because when we proposed not putting sewer on the road because that's I I'll jump ahead that was we don't have we can just sewer a 47 and not run the gravity sewer we can move that pump station up put it right at their property 47 Elm and then run the Force main the same way not put sewer in front of any of the properties just run a dig up the road put a water man in run a forest man down the road to the existing system no one will be assessed a betterment other than 47 Elm no one will have to tie into the sewer no one will be able to tie into a sewer they will have to replace their septic systems when they fail and we had that discussion and they didn't like that idea so they can't you know they started understanding you know when we say you know you say we're putting the entire price tag on the residents and let's take a step back on that you know the betterments that were assessing is the only tool that the water and sewer department has to use they can't choose to do it through taxes if if this board the select board the town thinks it should go on the tax rate you know that's not how the other people in town that have been sewered have been treated but if you feel for this project these people should get it for free that's your boat you know that's that's you can put it on taxes right and then you know we can deal with the other people that had to pay the betters or whatever that's that that's a decision but you know if we take the sewer infrastructure out you know that takes to2 and5 million off the project so it's not like in order to sewer 47 Elm we have to put all this infrastructure in and then we're asking the residents to share it they're sharing in the cost of the infrastructure that betters them they get a benefit that the rest of the Town doesn't and there are a lot of people in town that are never going to get sewer that would love to have the opportunity to get S I can't speak for everybody and and I'm not pushing this either way we're just trying to provide you with information you know that this all started with the grants a property that we're under the impression the town would like to see improved the consensuses you know from the the planning board the the master plan the infrastructure is not sufficient to support development of that property that's why you got the grants we're we're proposing um to use the grants to build the infrastructure so so let's talk about what um how that works I agree with Steve on the take on that meeting I think it was much more positive yeah I I think I I was a little I was a little frustrated because I just didn't hear from enough people was it was you know a few people that were speaking um and I guess I just don't know how that would even work if is there a plan B like if this fails at at town meeting and you talked about just going to um the the one property is that an option or at that point do we have to wait for another town meeting to to vote that so I mean my my take on it is and I'll refer to others but we're looking like if this board and the select board both don't support the project the way it's being presented we'd like to come up with a project that will be supported by these boards um and that's why we you know I'm talking about that other option I think the only way I would see that happening is if if that's what this group thinks is best for those residents to not sewer them leave them out of it and again you know we never envisioned digging that whole Road up and not putting that infrastructure in there while we were there um if that's the will of the people will the town meeting that's what we can do so I just I think you get to listen to the meeting again and and what do you do do you then have all these people um you know do you take straw pole and put neighbor against neighbor I mean it was really there wasn't anybody at the end of the meeting that came up and said they were against it I talked to a lot of different people they still have questions and they still have concerns but they get it and they don't want want to miss out on the opportunity I shouldn't say I can't speak for the residents I would just say watch watch the meeting and definitely focus on the end um after we you know had the opportunity for a lot of people to end um and how it went chair Steve the $3.5 million Grant y um would that still be applied to the um alternative project 47 M Street that's still f for that and take care of that side of it and everything as well yeah it's for and with with the high pressure M or the forest main you can't tie any of that with the residential after the fact correct correct and that that's one of the issues in this town I me you have they let North Cottage putting their own Force man up Main Street instead of saying at the time to them well what are you going to pay for that give us that money we'll use it to put sore down the street that everyone can you couldn't tie into with this build correct right that's why we had no sword to tie into and we because that line wouldn't handle us and then um 274 East Main Street put in their own soil line next thing you know the condos across the street their systems were failing and they wanted to tie in but they couldn't because it was a private so line and it just doesn't make sense to dig up a road and not put in the full infrastructure I'm can anybody does anybody know the last major residential project like this were the residential tiin and betterments was that the process followed historically it is so we just did uh West Main Street the betterments um so they were assess betterments at 16,000 per unit um the win AET is 15 years ago now more than that least more is Pine Street was that in Pine Street well the me I mean the Grove area goes way back was one stre so yeah the the weat the pump station at Wheaten and the system through there so I mean this it is pretty common I mean towns do it all different ways some towns do put it on the tax rate they say we're going to suw the entire town everybody's going to pay for it that's not what Norton's doing not everybody is going going to get sewer most communities and I all the communities that I've worked in um use this model here this is this is how you this is how it's done I think the tough part is our bylaw is set up for this right this is this is the what so to say the taxpayers will pay for it would go against the P law correct no the bylaw is different that's about tying in so they wouldn't could you just could you say they wouldn't have to tie in or could you pay for that you have to change the B so so there's the betterment for The Upfront Capital costs you know and it's for whatever the remaining amount of money is not covered by the grant not paid through the you know not the water piece you know whatever's left um is either is again that's the only tool available to the to the water and sewer board is to assess betterments um and that's again an upfront cost I think if we finish going through the presentation we'll cover all of that and how that really works so Steve the betterment cost is done right out of the gate based on theage front of the house it's um basically is it it's not based on footage it's it's a uniform unit method so it's equivalent to a single family residential home so that's right out of the gate then if they have to time within seven years that's an additional project I'll thank you madam chair um I just want to talk about the 2.5 million that would be the town's responsibility so we would borrow that money Mike is that correct if that passed at town meeting Tech technically we'll be borrowing for the whole project but getting the 3.5 the payments in the grant but 2.5 would be money that we would have to spend out of our budget to pay back right yeah I think my main concern really is that that issue there with you know the constraints we have in our budget right now and then not knowing for sure that this is going to be a tax um generating revenue for us and we're going to have to pay it back that 2.5 million I think that's my worry um I just feel like it's a risk I think it's a risk I'd love our town to take in a way I'm on the fence about it because I know you know we need the economic development but I'm really worried with the state of our budget and the way it's been um having to pay that back any other questions from if we walk through the next couple of slides that'll kind of explain the money's better just thrill in a little bit more for the stuff we been talking about so this next slide um kind of breaks down uh the total budget and cost right now so um and again we're going to p in better on this by having a bid opening um a couple weeks before town meeting so we'll um we'll have more than an estimate we'll have actual um unit prices from the contractors based on the estimated quantities out here um so right now the budget at cost of 8.4 million is broken down basically water at 2.4 and Sewer at 6 million based on the the layout of the system um so if you look at it in terms of um if the 2.4 is going to be paid with the water rates as we discussed and the mass Works Grant is going to go towards that sewer work that's the 2.5 billion that we're talking about so that's what's left that needs to be recovered through different needs I can go to the next slide so that's where the betterments come in and this is what we talked about before so the for the betterment assessments we use the uniform unit method uh which breaks all the improved properties down by equivalent dwelling units with one edu being a typical residential home you know so most of the the properties along the way out there are single family residential homes they'd be assessed one betterment unit and the biggest thing um that's driving this is the amount of units being assessed to 47 Elm based on the the biggest and greatest use potential of what that property can be um with the sewer so we're looking at a total of uh anywhere from 209 to 219 edus based on that buildout so just that range using the high-end cost that we have right now that that top of the top of the range budgeted cost div by the total edus we're looking at a range of $1,500 to $122,000 per equivalent dwelling unit so again we mentioned the the last job was West Main Street those assessments were 16,000 uh you go back 15 years uh the win AET area those were like 11,5 correct um just to put it in perspective the other properties that that have been assessed betterment in town um the way the betterment works um again it gets assessed you know when construction is complete and we have all the costs in hand and all the edus we calculate what the vment is um letters go out that the sewers approv for use people have the ability to tie in and they get assessed benit so they'll get it let's just call it 12,000 you know it could it could be less and that is one of the things that came up in the meeting one of the concerns people have is not the language doesn't cap that they're concerned that obviously there's could be more if the prices go up so we are talking the intent is to make it clear in the betterment language that the betterments will not be any higher than 12,000 we would have to go back they can't be any higher than 12,000 um so at $112,000 um they can pay it in full when they get the bill so they get a bill you can pay it you can ignore it if you ignore it then it automatically goes on to their taxes um and it can be uh and it is a portioned over 20 years um the betterment laws are um up to 2% higher than the going rate or 5% so we're assuming the rate is going to be 5% for the betterments uh and at 5% over 20 years it's about $950 a year see that range 925 to 965 so that's that's what the costs are you know for one unit if we didn't have the Grant and we approached it the same way um the betterments we wouldn't be talking about it like I said so the betterments would be you know 28 29,000 uh per edu and much more per year proportion over time so it's just kind of shows you the significance you know what the uh the grant does to those costs so the actual Elm Street and Miler terce residents account for 64 of those edus know again mostly single family homes we do have uh there's an apartment building out there with 12 units so there would be 12 edus there are several there a couple two family homes there would be two edus um and so the 64 edus adds up to about 30% of that remaining share 75 million is what's coming um from those fronted properties that are again improved by the project and then 47 Elm itself accounts for 145 to 155 edus uh and based on that their assessment is 1.75 million U which is about 70% of that remaining share so that's how the better set up does that does anybody have any questions on that kind of talked a lot about that so if you're going to cap it at $12,000 and you have overrun costs that goes back to the taxpayer that would have to be assessed to the 47 yeah excuse me may I speak [Applause] there's someone a resident of Elm Street that is trying to make a comment or ask a question yes here's the comment I just heard that you guys are mischaracterizing the meeting that we had at the water department the other night about these betterments we are dead set against this plan you plan to keep 1.7 million if you sell it on our back if and our assessor was trying to blow smoke up our butts telling us that sewer helps our homes it does not and in fact he was using gross numbers saying that it would cost $40,000 for a new septic tank that is grossly wrong I spoke to an in town septic person and it would cost us just as much to replace our septic as the burden that you were putting on this street it is grossly unacceptable and for that zck over there to myth characterized and said we were okay by the end of the meeting is outright lying thank you I think I Kevin did you have a question um yeah Madam chair so if the 42 questions if the 47 Elm Street property does not get developed does that mean that the veteran charges for the residents remaining um 64 edus that their bment charge will basically a little bit more than double no where will the extra money come from so right now nobody owns that property 47 somebody has to own that lot that's bogus the town owns it why is the town putting septic in why are you trying to make the residents put it in can I ask that that the that we let that question be answer please um so I think to your to your point that 1.75 would just be eaten by the town correct and unless if no one went there it's yep it's a lean on the property is is what it is and until that uh is paid is a liability of the town that is correct and if it is ever paid you don't plan on giving it back to us res it one other question mad um the 2.4 million water rates what is a percentage increase on I'm assuming that applies to every water user in town and what what percentage increase would that be to the regular rates what's your budget now as far as water vs I can speak on this Frank Bon superintendent of water ins there's no intention to increase the water rates right now based on this project uh based on our previous rate study we were approved to do about $2 million per year in improvements for the town without having to change the carbon rate schedule that last study was done prior to co 2019 uh so we are in the process actually right now of doing another rate study for both Water and Sewer to make sure that our funding is where it needs to be because the cost of everything has obviously Skyrocket everybody's paying more for they' never used to so there is no intention of raising culate EXC excuse me can we we have someone talking right now just one followup mam chair if you don't mind go ahead um but either way if you don't raise the rates that 2.4 million inevitably is going to be taken out of your budget whether you can't uh do infrastructural improvements or eventually you do have to raise the rates thank you did I see someone the board down excuse me in addition to the Royal scin that you're trying to give us we will also have to pay double to Triple our water bill for that so we are not for that all right thank you um did someone did I see someone here no I was just frustrated with the interruptions yes Paul uh what's your most recent interaction with the potential 47 Home Street developer well they they certainly said they they are interested and they that their business organization has grown another partner has signed on to it I mean what they relate to me is if we go forward they will go forward I mean they're they're sounding very interested in the site so that was I'm gonna ask you raise your hand if you have a question excuse me I'm gonna ask that you raise your hand if you have a question please okay we're going through the chair tonight I don't know how to raise my hand I'm on my phone here okay I well someone else was was asking a question right now so we need to hear the answer of that first so is there any chance that they could come up with some kind of a commitment I think that's part of our concern here Paul it's it's a chicken in the egg thing you know it's it it is and it's something we've been asking it's not something we have that we can require but we've communicated to them that that if there was something that they could do contribute toward the the project something I we haven't heard a response on it yet uh because we've communicated to them that you know we've heard from boards we've heard from the public they'd like that they'd like for the developer to step up um I wouldn't again they haven't committed to it um I wouldn't want to rule it out at this point but they're they are definitely waiting to hear what we're doing we and it's not going to pass the town meeting okay we we need to go through the chair please and if you have a question I'm happy to answer a question after other people have had a chance to speak well excuse me chair person how do you let the people stand up and lie straight to your face um I got a question about the um is the select board has not voted on this yet okay is it possible that they that they might go I just remember the last time we were here they ended up pulling it is it possible that they might end up going with the plan B that you had um mentioned um I don't know we'll probably discuss it Thursday night at there yeah a lot goe have you discussed the developer that lean like they know that there would be a large lean on the property like they that's been part of that discussion they were aware okay yes cool thank you the plan and the plan B still takes care of the 47 Home Street just means that everybody else will start taking care of their own stuff system Madam chair yes what would be that projected total cost for that plan B you mentioned do you know uh yeah six to six and a half six to 6 and A2 here's a question have they removed the for the ti I I don't think we remove the forest tiin but we think we're talking about possibly not allowing tiin at all they is the town the T the town correct right town meeting we haven't had town meeting right but I mean we can't change the bylaw it's not on the town meeting warrant for this for this town meeting so well if the CR allowed this to happen why are they trying to transfer the burden to the resident that's the question here and you wonder why the citizens don't trust the leadership so there is I think there is another option that we're that we're discussing as well so I think um do we want to vote tonight or do we want to wait and see what the select board if they end up pulling chair would recommend table it for now table it okay right Plan B is Plan B just doing 47 Elm yes yeah that would be Plan B yeah that would be wise Madam chair yes do we have any kind of estimate Paul what it would cost to demolish that blight out of there there was an estimate done about 5 years ago it was about a million so I mean what I'm saying is we're going to be on the hook for two two and a half million2 and half million dollars minimum yeah I think it would be I think we may be better served at at at just tearing the thing down and planting grass there you know and you know and see if somebody comes around down the road you know exactly exactly if we if we were to do that that much work on that property we'd be considered uh person PRP of the person responsible for the cleanup and we do not want that do we have any idea what that entails has there been any studies done they've had phase one and phase two P right we've had a couple phases we as we're not the property owner we we can't go on there and demolish it we would as Mike said we would have to become owner and then we would assume so we looked we looked we looked for demolition funds it's the the state funding for it requires an owner or someone who has Ian we did some demolition work to it already when when the the walls were falling into the street well because that was an emergency um we spent half a million dollars over there right yes and that but that was the uh the town had to go to the bankrupt Court to get to get authorized to remove it and it went under as an emergency because there was real concerns that those buildings would collapse onto cross street and it was documented that that that those buildings were coming were were going to come down pretty soon so that's how that's how they were that's how that was uh qualified so we could spend it without assuming responsibility right only for that yes very limited what we could do with it so Madam chair we just heard from our biggest critic that she'd be all in favor of just having the 47 alternate plan go through which I think does take care of the blight does um add the infrastructural improvements at least for that property and brings in some much needed tax revenue for years to come after that stuff so I say we wait till we hear what the second have to say about it but um but if the residents truly don't want it then they're going to yep yep no but um but again I'm just saying to me that's the worst case scenar your plan B but y you really have to go with one or the other to town meting is that is that correct we have to go with one or the other to town meeting we can't it's not like we can get the option at town meeting correct we have to be able to same well we could we could amend the AR someone could amend the AR oh at the at the town meeting got you not going to vote on one and get and fail and then present another one it would be it is we would only vote on one or the other it would be amended on town meeting for to vote on yeah you don't get the option of finding out and then proposing another one so um thank you man the so my concern would be down the road if if we move forward with either option and the zine put on the existing property um and this interested party backs out for some reason now we're trying to sell a property that's going to cost a million probably double that to clean it up plus another 1.75 million that has a lean on it I think it's going to be hard to get a new developer to come in under those uh situations personally Excuse me chairperson yes gu deie I want to know what the fincom the select board and every board is going to do about our to just standing up there and mischaracterizing the meeting from the other night he lied to us about the override and he just lied straight to every one of your faces that that meeting went well when it did not go well we were all very upset so my question is what is going to be done about Mike Unice I I don't think that's a conversation we should we're going to be having right now Madam chair it wasn't Mike units that spoke about the meeting the other night it was the Samson and Jan yes but he show up and said the meeting was okay when it was not okay anyone else have questions can I ask this person a question sure um Debbie were you you said when you joined that that you heard that something was being mischaracterized were you here for that part of the meeting I don't think that's relevant sir the facts are the facts I'm done any other questions okay so we'll table this to our next meeting and hear what the select board has to say anybody feel strongly about voting on it now okay all right thanks thank you all right the zoning bylaw next is that Paul again and me you you punching um so I'll wait for PA's already on it okay so those you don't me know me I'm Tim Griffin I'm the chair of the planning board um you should have a hand out in front of you or in screen walking through our presentation regarding the what we're calling the Great Woods overlay District um there is an agenda there I won't spend time going through the agenda run through all of this here um but the overall timeline of this process this is a process that has started in early 2021 when the state adopted the multifilm only requirement for it's known as the MBTA communities law um in October of 2022 Norton was designated an adjacent community because we do not have an MBTA station but we are adjacent to those that do um you'll walk through all these timelines we've been working with sered our regional planning agency to comply with the state's requirement which we'll get into in a bit um if you're Wonder not sure if you can see it on the black and white here but you'll see a bit of a highlight over parts of the timeline and orange um the board wanted to highlight that those are periods of time where call was not or Paul or planner was not on staff with the town the board was working with sured doing our best um we've had a number of public meetings about this over the last several months um going on to the next slide here um we're adjacent Community what does that mean for compliance um requires one zoning District which allows multif family unit multif family development by right meaning it cannot be subject to a special permit period um it must allow at least 15 units per acre must be at least 50 acres large and it can't be subject to an age restriction or it must be suitable for families with children um so obviously by right 15 units per acre 50 acres that's the state's requirement to nor um you do the simple math there you get 750 units on paper uh and we're going to why that is just a paper requirement as we continue here uh what is required and what is not required it doesn't require the town to provide the land doesn't require a time to actually produce the housing can't force the owners of the land to sell it to anybody or do anything with it um doesn't require the town to provide or pay for any infrastructure and it doesn't require any building types that don't align with what the town decides are the Aesthetics at once so there's no requirement to develop at all we just have to provide the opportunity to develop over time um more than half of the state falls under this bylaw in one way or another and by a number of communities keep EXC excuse me chair person Miss Winston I'm going for a presentation I'd prefer to go through it and you can ask questions at the end if you don't mind okay thank you um so if you're not sure how an overlay District works that's the next slide here overlay District goes on top of the base zoning land under that can be developed under either the existing zoning or the overlay so when we get to the zoning map there is nothing stopping any development from happening along the properties as it zone right now um so the purpose of the district is to comply with the requirement a would we be talking about this support does the state need more housing yes um um is promoting housing a good thing a lot of people would say yes would we potentially this with a 10-ft poll if the state wasn't making us no I'll say that I've said that I think at every meeting where we've talked about this um so State selection the guidel the site selection for the state guidelines um the state is requiring basically us to plan for plan for development we should include encourage projects of a scale is compatible with the existing areas and minimize impacts to sensitive land and we'll go through all of those factors that we looked that on this next slide as you can see it's a long list and there are slides that follow this that go through each of these so I won't spend a whole lot of time but you can see each category is either a push where meaning if there's this here it tends to push away multif family development if it's a poll it's something that would generally encourage multif family development um so the way that sured helped us look at this they took the entire town and divided into 10 acre grids we're looking at 50 acres so you're looking for a block of at least five squares together and if you scroll through we looked at the climate resilience factors and Paul you can just scroll through these a little bit to give them a time anybody who's on Zoom to see um and the color coding kind of gives you a key about where it should go in theory can I interrupt you for one second yes just to clarify something when you say they all that has to be one plot of land 50 acres or it can be it can't be five it can't be so it's got to be together it can't be okay thank you uh Water Resources you can see where suitable maybe not as suitable quality of life that tends to be schools Library things like that priority areas if they're priority years in town the town has listed as areas they want to develop infrastructure roads sewer sewer is a big one as you just heard um and then overall in that last map um I'm not sure how well it comes through on the black and white print out but you can see some areas clearly stand out as bright red not a good spot dark green better spot um and then on next side you can see the parcels that are shown here and one of these is the TPC property uh then sorry no I moved so you didn't move my no my image came out um so TPC property uh at one point we did include the New England ice cream project in this Zone in this overlay and this this should have taken it out I I didn't so my apologies no um and then it includes the multif Family Properties across the street from there and then stops uh right before you get the commercial building in 40b next to the McDonald's the one the new construction correct it does not include that it did include that in a prior iteration so you may see it included in the Highlight here at our last the board to made a decision to tr that out my Apes I should have taken that what about the oil company next door that's out them too and one meant to be in the Avenue yeah so those those were the decision the board made that decision to uh reduce that and I'll get into that in a little bit all here's a question I'm still going through my presentation Miss won I'd to be able to continue um so why did we choose the Manfield Avenue site we went through all the map it wasn't the only area highlighted in dark green um one the area already includes existing multif Family Properties with multifamilies across the street and the 40b down the road even though it's not included in this District um putting 50 acres of 15 Acres 15 units per acre in an area predom dominated by a single family um the board felt that would go over as well as a lead balloon not surprising um Norton Center was one of the areas surfed highlighted uh we didn't think that was appropriate due to traffic congestion concerns in that area um 123 again we could have picked a location wrong 123 in some way shape or form but again a lot of that's predominantly single family um and we chose specifically once we zoned in kind of on the 140 area um we chose to specifically exclude what I'm calling the roach Brothers Plaza um because I wanted we wanted the board wanted to maintain that and encourage that to be retail commercial Etc um that was a discussion we had we chose not to include that as the as our as our choice um and we chose to we could have chosen not to include the existing multifamilies on the other side of 140 um we chose to include them one right now they're in a commercial zone so they're currently existing non-conforming laws um so including them in this Zone would in theory allow them to a expand if they want to or not have to apply for variances every time they want to do something um so that was again a choice that the board made we could have chosen not to include them we chose to to include them to give them some kind of a benefit with this in theory on that page with those thoughts those are those look like those are included between that and the water spot all the way through the water ined uh in terms of the lot Maps do those Parcels go all the way to the water I don't think they do not they not just just the actual condos that correct yes um so highlights of the tech the bylaw um one it meets the requirements the state is laying out parade um the goal when we laid out all of this if we putting in a lot of multif family residential units one of the concerns the board has was getting our affordable housing ratio out of whack um we're currently above the 10% threshold so we can say no to a 40b for lack of a more eloquent term we put in a lot of multif family without having an affordable component or enough of an affordable component we dip back down and then we're opened back up to additional 40 BS without really having a whole lot to say about it um they're targeted to promote affordable units and mixed use so again commercial revenue and kind of top of the shop Concepts um they have a maximum of three stories out of the gate uh allows additional stories if affordable housing and top of the shop is provided so they would need to meet both to get both bonuses they're independent um but again seek to encourage smaller multif family types smaller lot sizes and smaller Frontage requirements um and again we're looking to protect protect existing adjacent uses uh with a general large vegetated buffer requirement to for example the trailer park and other uses around there and the next chart you have a quick table of the dimensional standards from the byw um one that I'll point out to here if anybody really wants to look at setbacks we can talk about that all today um but the state requirement is a minimum of 15 units per acre our maximum is 16 units per acre I do want to touch on master plan the next slide um master plan was adopted in 2021 um those bullets encouraging smaller housing typologies Etc are straight from the master plan so again with this we think we're continuing with the spirit of that Master Plan account um I've mentioned the state um the state has specific penalties laid out for non-compliance and once we get that slide up there I'll go into this a little bit the Top Line uh those are all the programs that the state has said if you're not compliant you don't qualify for these programs you'll see Mass Works Housing Works housing choice and other programs um we've got multiple grants from these programs over the past few years um I believe the sewer project in El street is another one of those grants um the second list of bullets which is much longer is other programs that the state may consider counting against you for non-compliance these were not written in the initial Rules by the state um but to put it bluntly the state has decided that um if towns are not in compliance with this Fout they are going to swing a big stick and essentially any discretional funding that they have you are on the naughty list um that's the way they're treating it there are aspects of this that are currently going through state court with other towns that is tied only to that second bullet list of those additional programs that the state is withholding from at least one other town the first list of bullets is not being challenged Mass works and stuff we're not compliant we don't qualify period um we take a look at the compliance model here um and Paul this hasn't been adjusted for our to account for our most recent town meeting correct so um some of these numbers have gone down since the board's recent sessions but I'll talk through it since from a high level perspective we're still talking about the same thing so when we feed all of our dimensional requirements and everything into the state's compliance model this is what comes out uh and the number that you see here on the top is 1722 I will say that in the most after the board's most recent session that number is down to what Paul so about, 1400 and it may go down further um one of the factors that is here if we'll go to the next slide um the title needs to change a little bit but it says why do we if we need 750 units why does this say 1,700 um one the P the PT the PGA property is large so the if we include that entire lot by Nature we're going to have a lot of units um at our at the board's next meeting we're going to have a meeting on the 8th um to review a concept where we look at a a an overlay District only includes part of that lot um in all likelihood even if we do go with that approach the number that we propose at town meeting will not be 750 or 751 um the state is requiring 15 Lots allowed per acre they're also only looking at buildable Acres so the model is based on I don't know what a wetland is the state will care what a wetland is so we when we go to town meeting we are going to be proposing a number that is higher than 750 um because of how the state looks at the acreage involved um and if we decide and we talked about could we take out the units across from across the street and do the entire tpce of property yes that would be an option we could do um but we felt that we wanted to include them for the reasons that I've already laid out uh and will we really get to 7 00 units no um there's a lot of restrictions that prevent any site from reaching the maximum including setbacks including parking requirements we've laid out specific require parking requirements in the bylaw based on the number of units um there's a whole bunch of factor wetlands and everything else the compliance model doesn't even Factor this yeah if you go into the next slide Paul that has you can see estimated Wetland study of that TPC site and that's old and not flagged so um it could be larger than that on the site when it actually goes and gets flagged um so again summary the state is requiring compliance by the end of this year um I will say the board did try to work with sured to get this to Springtown meeting and sured was not able to support us on that timeline we want had two bites at the Apple we didn't get it um I went through how we cited Silver B District um and again the requirement is only to up the opportunity for development um it doesn't mandate construction it doesn't require anybody to build doesn't stop any from building on the commercial zoning that's there now we know it's one of the commercial sites that's left in town um there's a school of thought that if we force action on this property maybe we'll get something else we don't know um but if multif family is developed we develop this bylaw to promote Active multif Family development in a place that made sense um we've had some comments of why did you put it this property this property is too good of a property to put this um I understand that um I also understand that if we propose putting this somewhere else in town where maybe it may not in theory make sense to put a multif family property um we still have to bring that four time meeting and say we're going to propose an overly District that allows 15 units per acre right here that could be on Hill Street that could be on Pine Street who knows where that would be um I know that we're proposing a lot that does have sewer which a lot of the town is not um we didn't want to propose a district that we didn't feel make made sense um we've all heard ideas of oh they told me that area would never be developed because of x y and z um I may have heard that a few times at my meetings um so could we have tried to comply with the law and make write it in a way that nothing would ever be built maybe um but we didn't think that that was worth the risk how we went about this so the TPC being led share of the overlay is that devalue their property is it um something that they've been discussed with or anything put it's been discussed with them Paul I don't know how I've met with them they they were fine I mean they you know I made it clear you don't have to do anything with it and it's actually owned by PGA charities but they did say that you know they there may be plans for them to use it down the road but they didn't know they didn't indicate what but I wouldn't this would not I I wouldn't say that this would ever devalue because if you've been around golf courses you do know you know you know that there's residential around it I've never seen condos at a golf course what are you talking about but that was originally going to be an industrial park correct pretty much a um it was a water park way back the day oh yeah Boulevard was to bech right and it's Zone commercial all of these properties are have a base zoning of commercial and any of these properties could develop them as commercial then Al other than this site they're all developed and so Tim yards it's 50 acres of buildable 50 buildable land is the requirement from the state so if you have a lot of wetlands involved then it takes us out of yeah and also legal lens 1992 yeah so the model that we're working with what we're going to proposed town meeting is going to have what I'm going to call a margin of error to account for the weapons and it'll be far less than 100 it looks like on paper now we we still need to have our meeting where we riew where sured draws that line through the TPC property um basically the the driving force being how close can we get get it 750 and have it make sense at the same time we're also going to review language from sered to if we are going to split the lot um to make sure that we include language to make sure that that split zoning isn't something that somebody can take advantage of in a negative way pres right is that um I generally assume that developers will do every they can to make money so I'm a cynic in that way if you did split lot for TPC would that allow it potentially elsewhere fall in town there's a lot of split Lots around town that's not uh there's a lot of split Lots existing nonconforming lots and every other thing that probably doesn't make sense well putting in on the TCP doesn't make any sense whatsoever you don't put that kind of housing on on Prime real estate and your numbers should not go over the 750 period it puts burdens on the schools and our services so I don't know what the planning board is thinking coming anywhere over what is necessary and the TCP are you crazy that should be Prime real Esty you don't put something like this there absolutely ludicrous M yes um is there an affordable component on yes yes the affordability would be required at the base level and then we have bonuses for additional affordability that's part of the MBTA requirement that's part of what we developed the NBTA doesn't care but I assume that every Winston the board speak first and then I'll if you have a question I'll take you little bit okay I would assume that every town if I have to include multi family I'm going to make affordability part of it because they see the same things that we would do in that we don't want to open ourselves up for more 40 BS if we don't want to Paul are we actually at the 10% of actual built 40ds or just approved 40s because there's a big difference as far as the requirement correct that that may be built now because there's a period of time time when you approve a 40b that the state expects you to have your certificate of occupancy for building and we haven't approved a 40b in a couple years so it might be built but we're just CU I know you had a strawberry and all yeah okay yeah but that got approved not as a 40b but it's still an affordable housing development but uh we're at 10.0 something perc so we're we're still there but we want to you know we're trying you know as Tim mentioned you we want to make sure we stay above that but we're also looking at how can we proactively address the housing the housing affordability that I mean not just affordable housing but what can we do to help young families that are trying to get a place of their own and so incentivizing um more affordable units we felt was a good way to go and if that adds some other units along with it that's fine because those might be you know not affordable by the state's requirements but they may be more affordable than anything around there thank you wait patiently thank you for all the hard work on the uh on the on the planning board I did try to watch some of it but I can't say what it was going on for hours and hours and hours exciting stuff this is the fin committee and you know our number one responsibility is the finances of of the community so if any portion of these apartments wherever you put them get built and let's say you have an influx of two three 400 kids into our school system you will absolutely devastate them they don't cover if you're going to get a couple thousand dollars per apartment that cost $118,000 plus that's if they don't have special needs to educate our students it would be a financial disaster for this community not saying anything what it would do to strain the water system what it would do to have police and fire what it would do to everything else there's no way not even close these apartments would pay for themselves the state doesn't care I get that so let me finish and then you can you can uh challenge me all you want no I'm not I'm not to do that um so for me I and I watched some of the thing we oh you're going to lose the grants you're going to lose this well if you're going to stuff 500 kids first of all if you're going to make this look like Chelsea or Somerville with apartment blocks everywhere that's not what most people live here let's get down everybody moved here for a reason they want to they wanted I grew up in the city I come here to get away from the city and that's just creating another Chelsea as I would call it uh second you put that many kids into into our school systems the money you get from Grants that's peanuts you're going to have a multi-million dollar problem year after year after year the tradeoff I would say keep your grants please you're going to give us a couple million dollars in Grants keep them exactly so what I would say for me if it came to me and I don't claim to know anything about about planning to be honest with you um but I would say okay I would sit down with my board and I would say and I would sit down with my planner and say Here's my toolbox full of roadblocks give me all the roadblocks possible cuz I don't want one unit built let anything else it has sewer immediately disqualified it has water immediately disqualified and and go on and I don't know all the tools and Tool points this in any way shape or form is is a finan and I appreciate everything you did is a financial disaster for the town because everybody knows you will know get the revenue to cover any of it to cover any of it I mean very small portion on the dollar so I don't know where you go from here and I would also yeah and I you know and I I got what you're saying but I wouldn't give him pass you know I would give him 750 units on the dot and not one more and that and that's and that's too many my my view oh I say one the grants of the first wave the state has also said they will prosecute so this is not oh we're choosing the grants over doing this that's true um so we're not just that's not a binary Choice the state is requiring this we're asked to comply by the end of the year um period what we have for town meeting is this District these abutters and property owners have been notified as part of this process um so discussions about put it somewhere else in town are not something that we can consider for this town meeting so so I would still like to see you PR it down if you can got to be a next meeting is to him just to because again I think the big wave that I'm seeing in the background of people talking to me is that if the state requires 50 and 750 let's find them 50 acres of works and 750 units of work if you can even if means a third of the TPC instead of two3 of it or something like that just to try to make the numbers work at least 10 because it's tough to it's tough to sell it higher than the St we're going to get it as close as we can understanding as I went through that we're going to have to when we propose this the number is not going to be 750 or 751 because of the wetlands um and I'll lay that out time meeting as best I can um so you don't have a final plan for us at the moment I would assume that you have draw a line a third of the way into the TPC and assume the rest isn't there um that is an uninformed guess that I will make here um we are waiting for um for sered for their analysis based on GIS data and all of that Paul do you think I'm in the ballpark there or do you think it has to go further back my thinking it's bigger it's bigger okay but till we see till we see it you know we want to just deal with facts on this um CH I just want to just this isn't an aha moment by any stretch but we're talking typically with multif family multif family tends to have fewer children than compared to single family homes so that's not always the case but typically it is that fewer units will have families with children versus a single family home um the other thing just when I was looking into the research of this when I was comparing the student enrollment in 2024 this was from the Department of Education comparing it to 2000 Norton school enrollments down by about 650 students now I know that's not what you were saying you're you're you're concerned that and we still can't afford to educate them well it's just so at least so people are aware that and and I've worked we're working with the superintendent on this as well so um she did say though that uh she did tell me that some recent uh work with their demographic shows that they're they think they're going to start to see an uptick in student enrollment there's a lot of building you got you got the 40 be there you get right behind us down here there's all kinds of houses going in there yeah and that might be more of a a national Trend again because for 20 years throughout the country student enrollments have been dropping in many places soth you know I just I just I mean I realize you're you know talking about I would say probably a worst case scenario but in point taken we need to you know we understand that these types of developments will have an impact on the town but it's also that there are positive impacts again we we could be creating more affordability for people more residents could bring more business to our local businesses so they I just ask you to think about the tradeoffs of this it's not all bad it's there's a lot of good that could come out of it no it's pretty bad especially if you want to put it on PCP my just one thing um I don't know if this there hasn't been any decision in the Milton case yet right no so we were all under the impression that this was like you know if you have this housing you can get grants if you don't have this housing you can't get grants but but the state's interpretation now is no you have to do this so what is the Milton case exactly Milton case go ahead so Milton is challenging a couple of things one uh they're challenging how they were designated they were designated to think as Rapid Transit because they have a trolley that carries like 40 people yeah State Infinite Wisdom yes exactly I will just leave it at that GATRA that could that could follow the same so they challenged that and the state hit them with a hammer of that entire laundry list of things and that's what they are they're asking just to be redesignated in a different level um but the way the state has responded to that has been if it's discretionary funds that we have control over you better not count on it um to put it mildly there's another I think Holden I think has basically just ignore the state at every turn um they'll again they will also probably be uh prosecuted at some level by the state along but most areas that have been cited are being maybe all the towns should get together we have question be Reed and just adding to to Tim's point to the the Milton case they're also challenging the Attorney General's assertion that they can they can take away discretionary funds because the general law said those four grants Milton's not disputing that the mass works the housing works but they're disputing those the ones in the bullet underneath Community planning because that wasn't in Mass General law that came out of their guidelines and they're disputing that a guideline they're saying a guideline is not regulatory so but the attorney general has said it is and so they're going to play that out as well but that cake will not be baked by town meeting so um can I I you a question right yeah I'm just CU how many Butters have you contacted uh that would based on whatever the zoning requirements are which are well 300 ft so I um I actually reached out to all of the individual properties that were originally on here either through letter or through uh um visits like I met with New England ice cream I've met with uh TPC um email correspondant uh through the mobile home park which isn't a butter and then we were required to send out notices to a butter so that's properties within 300 ft which also included in this case some properties up in Mansfield including Xfinity Center right and how many have you heard from and what's some of their comments we from we had one property owner across Street who came to one of our meetings and spoke um and you've had correspondence with one or two others so the we we had people who attended at our last our meeting last week but none were were a Butters so so the area of where this is most impacting we haven't really heard from anyone there the one the one property owner he owns multiple properties he said he wasn't in support of this because uh for some of the reasons we've heard here today that we don't want to see commercial land be you know have a chance to have it own or or built as residential but that's been it from at least the abutters I I will say that we you look at the timeline in the chart of the amount of time that we've spent looking at this probably it's got to be a year and a half year and 3/4 I have more fingers than I have received public comments during all of those sessions combined you spent a year and a half and and you come up with a plan with 1,700 instead of 750 I I would encourage you to participate in the next planning board meeting Miss Winston thank you um how about you do what's right for the citizens sir just another fact at this point that of all the communities that have submitted up until this date 85% of them are have adopted and are in compliance 85% were like us we hear yeah we we're the remaining there's a lot still in our in our situation where they had until the end of the year but there's only maybe 10 communities that are non in compliance they're getting the attention but like anything else if it if it's negative it gets news but most of them have passed and and we're found compliance and oh sorry he's been patient over there well I said a good example um I've got a hand out if it makes it a little easier there's been a lot of talk about numbers so I thought I'd put some together they they I might be all wet I'm not on the fincom and I'm not privy to some of the numbers that you might be privy to um also the last time I was involved in the budgetary project process um I'm sorry can you just um identify are you on a butter can you give us your name for for what can you give us your name for the minut oh uh Jim shabot uh 56 Mansfield Avenue um the last time I was involved in the budget uh the town manager's name was Lindberg and that goes back a while Walter Lindberg yes sir so so Jim are you on abutter you're on Mansfield now no no I'm down the road um I am an abutter to a 60 unit apartment complex on 6 Acres that was going to be across the street the board did vote it down but it's in court and I'll get to where they might win um just to clear something up quick uh two well first let me agree with Tim twice because that's important to show agreement when you can um he talked about Milton and obviously his story about Milton differs from the media his is the accurate one um the state does have a big stick up to in including zoning is not a right of a town zoning is given to us by permission from the state should the state decide the state could create that zone for us pass it by special legislation and say have a nice day so fighting the state bad idea um another point of agreement is uh I hadn't realized you've been initiated well in the I was told that property would never be developed that's a false statement in almost every single case I have seen the craziest things get developed and I would never tell anybody that something couldn't be developed um quick point of clarification the zone does not need to be contiguous half of it needs to be the rest of it has to be in at least 5 acre parcel so it could be split up quite a bit there has to be one 25 acre parcel guidelines 5B oh we're still in agreement so we're okay uh my my concern lies in the area of philosophy um you've got a list of pulls and pushes and and they're accurate there are things that will encourage development there are things that will discourage development and my concern is that we do have to meet the state guidelines we don't have a choice but I believe we need to do it in a way that puts Norton's wants and needs goals and Investments first while complying with the state we don't want to thumb our nose at them we don't want to play some kind of funny game where we think we beat him and I mean that the guidelines take a quick a few pages they're they're going to be able to tell if we in fact I I believe once we pass it they have to analyze it and approve it right MH yes so it's we can't be cute we can be careful we can be cautious my big concern is the the PGA property and I put together some numbers um for methodology it's a 68 acre vacant parcel there's a potential of 1,088 residential units if we assume no wetland if we deduct the wetlands areas I believe it's reasonable to assume a th000 units may be cited here it might be 900 it might be but um for for a comp East Main Apartments is a comparable project for comparison reasons it consists of 188 Apartments it's currently assessed at $ 43,6 184,000 and I believe any uh multif family over six units is taxed at the commercial rate um of 1384 which yields $64,500 or $3,215 per unit annually a th000 similar residential units would yield 3.2 million so that's on the plus side of the balance sheet I didn't take the whole budget I just took educational expense because that's the elephant in the room that's the big number that's the one that we it's not only a big number it's a number we can't get away from the state established a foundational budget we have to fund it if we don't fund it we're going to risk Chapter 70 funds which we literally can't do that's probably the same predicament so according to census data and I've reached out to a couple of people to verify we've got 65 6588 households we have 2376 registered students between that's between the Norton school system southeastern regional Bristol Agricultural and those that are placed outside the system for special needs or I I believe we we also participate in school choice sending kids out so that that's true a total number and it's a number that we have to pay for and that's what matters um this yields a student household ratio of .36 thus we could expect 360 students to come from the additional th000 resid iial units I do agree that multif family often you'll see less young people at the same time affordable you're going to see more um we also have the Mandate from the state that says they must be suitable for families that's written three or four times in the guidelines so I think we can argue up and down but I think level is probably a reasonable assumption um that would be an estimated uh cost of 5,356 440 annually for the educational cost of 360 students this is derived by dividing the school voke and egg budgets of 36 m540 328 by 2376 to derive an estimated sorry Zach $1,379 cost and I'm excluding Capital expenses and other things because you know we can increase without increasing Capital what you missing what are you missing you did your homework here but what are you missing I'm not missing anything sir fixed and Shar expenses which are 2ir of the schools when you add it to that you'll get closer to the 18,000 of them but we're splitting here that's there's also the argument um that you can absorb some with no additional cost and I believe that I I don't know what the ideal student teacher ratio is and I don't want to throw a number out there because some people are going to get mad that it's too low and some will get mad it's too high we'll take your numbers as conservative so let's one one to one J whatever that number is if you have five students less than that number you can add five for free the sixth one cost money and I guess that I would look at someone who's making sandwiches and say you've got the capability of making 1,200 sandwiches per day and you're only selling 900 wow there's 300 sandwi sandwiches a day with just the food cost which I'm going to guess is a third all right it's less than that isn't it oh okay but you're only paying food cost the rest is profit 1,220 sandwiches and that ain't good until you get to the next one so I I do realize that but we're looking at numbers that I think exceed the free but they fall short of affecting fixed costs I don't think we're going to have to build another school I could be wrong on that I didn't think we had to build a school when we built the middle school and now it needs a roof um so what happens there is we end up with and this is not what we will end up with this is the risk it's a risk we're taking it's not for certain but the risk is a deficit of $2,336 440 which reduces the available per student funding to $4,525 and I didn't put the number there but I think it was roughly $600 a student less that we have to spend on each child I I've got 50 cents for a word I believe that would um produce a deleterious effect on the students at the same time that brings us very close to funding below the foundational budget we can't do that we have to fund at least to the foundational budget what we would have to do is take money from Public Safety whether we can or we can't we would have to because if we go below the foundational budget we lose the Chapter 70 funds we're sunk so the way I'm looking at it it's a risk that I don't believe we can take take I think we can minimize it I I agree with Tim that for this town meeting if we don't go to another special town meeting before the end of the year which is a really tall order we need to look at this site I don't think it I I can think of a bunch of sites and I named a couple before I got cut off but you were right to do so um that would have been better but the best we can do at this point I think is to make it safe um um I've done I've come up with a couple of different plans or whatever if we need to I believe we can come up with a an amendment to offer on the town meeting floor to make it safe even then Town people might vote it down but I think our best way to make it safe is to include as much developed property as possible in that area and cut the TPC piece as much as possible and Madam chair are we stuck to that property though as far as the basis for this town meeting it's not like we can't do something over by wash I would say those Property Owners haven't been noticed so that they would not necessarily been informed to show up to our hearings or show up to town Med that hey your property is going to be discussed also you you spoke to the um the multifamilies and not going back to the water um it it wouldn't matter because that land is owned by the town behind them and town own land is not allowed to be counted as part of this 50 acres so even if we made the zone to include it it wouldn't be included in the actual calculations and obviously since it's Town owned I would be really surpris you're not looking to build Apartments there are you no didn't think so I'm ask a question thanks for coming up here and doing your homework um Jim and so my question based on what I just hit what's that I was s you're welcome so my question is so what happens if just thinking this strictly off the top of my head you cut it down to 25 acres up here at Mansfield a and then you take some land that could never be developed like the end of Union Street where theack landfill is or where the dump is what is it Hill Street is it Hill Street where the dump is what is it Hill stre Hill Street yeah where the dump is and you lay a section in there because you said he said he can divide it I'm just saying or even El Street here where you got a radioactive site maybe somebody wants to develop it if you if you Zone it you know you don't have a buyer right now I don't know I'm just throwing it out there those are and I think your numbers are his numbers are very conservative because he's assuming there's no special need kids coming in and everything else very concerned was beat I'm not going toble with Jim Jim's numbers I and BR do I think he's overestimating the number of units maybe a little bit do I think he's roughly on the he's roughly speaking what I know is going to what I agree with yes my board was tasked comply with the state requirement so that's what we did the only thing I would add because we haven't seen it and that that's fine I but it all sounds like the numbers are when everything comes together at once that everything hits that typically doesn't happen things get built out over time and as we know with with student populations they grow they shrink you know it's not like you know our favorite subject of sewer where you know that's a constant that's not with with students and so you will have Peaks as the town will and it'll have declines as as it's been doing so I I just I I when I'm hearing this like oh the numbers are interesting but I'm like is this all at once that it's hitting because no we don't want to be on this trajectory we've been on this trajectory it seems for years where we're taking stuff away we're taking stuff away and now to it's just kind of added gas to the fire and maybe it's a slow burn maybe it's diesel uh but it's you know it's that trajectory we want to get out of this trajectory somehow uh but the rest of the potential penalties for not moving forward could be very pricey too in the longall now are you taking both articles at the same time or is there going to be another discussion on the actual because you got two articles one for the the map and one for the language well they haven't finished everything up so for me if you're asking me I would say we wouldn't vote on it today till we see the final product can I can I raise a concern um the do the 9th was right we have final final we're meeting on the 8th so we'll have time to make that one the the map changes I don't know if we're because our next meeting is on the 7th right and then the warrant do 14th so um are we planning we would have to meet again um that next week the map would that part would be different the article won't change the art the language will the the text the bylaw text language will not change the map could the idea being that if sured comes back looks at the wetlands and says your line for the TPC covers 85% of the lot our decision would be does that move the needle for us to make to do that and we'll have to make that choice but the language we're not touching the language done just article 20 that might have some and what it could be you know where that line is and whether we choose to include it or so you might not be able to vote on that one until the night of town meeting the night of town meeting okay question Peter I'm on 157 minutes is my property not affected by that it is not is that you're saying it is not thank you go ahead yeah I would would like to address the language there's a couple of things in here that to me are concerning one is the if you look through it the minimum lot size is 5,000 sare ft and 75 ft of Frontage P you on Jimmy I don't know oh okay what's the number table of dimensional requirements table of dimensional requirements one two three fourth page have that uh that we don't have numbered Pages no it's not numbered I'm just going by I just I mean in the warrant for our our packet we do have the table just keep strolling ah 175 d236 yes yeah the minimum lot size is 5,000 square ft I'm kind of concerned about what that looks like because now you've got I mean we're talking about this is we're looking at like what's next to McDonald's popping up maybe but couple things one I don't know wouldn't be bad you could build press forward Acres put in a bunch of Roads little tiny Lots um little tiny houses I I don't know if that's leave that to other people to think about it but I don't know if that's what we want um my thought would be the minimum lot size should be roughly maybe 990,000 or 120,000 it's either a decent big quality project or the minimum it's not the maximum it's the minimum it's not the maximum corre correct so you wanted a minimum of 990,000 or 120 something that would ensure that if we do get project it's substantial um you no I think it's I think we've made I think I went through in one of the slides we leaned toward trying to encourage smaller buildings where it made sense while still complying rather than a bunch of giant buildings in certain areas I could see but wow there which is the other thing you you're running into a danger I mean but would the property be worth that much to have it if it's at 5,000 I don't think the TPC is going to break their property up and have not the TPC across the street across the street ah I don't know um I believe those are condo out so there might not be much of a chance of anything happening over there just by Logistics they could expand but getting four people to agree good luck that's the bulk of the project huh that's the bulk of the project we play right well the bulk is still the team PC place um but it just seemed it didn't make sense to me and the other one is the this density bonus we got three story buildings if you give us affordable you get four if you put shops on the bottom you get five we want five we want four Tim did address this at some of the past meetings and that's out of the master plan right like that's it's a lever to pull to get a more commercial or be more affordable and keep us over that 10% threshold um so we have to allow 15 units per acre the way you do that is you go up a little bit when it comes to the financial impact I look at that as the positive I would agree I would agree I'm most concerned about on at this table not a big I just wanted to raise the concern sure um the other section is where are we 175 2310 affordability requirements and we're imposing once you get over 10 units we're imposing affordability requirements and I've got a letter from November 17th of 23 from attorney Mark barowski to the planning board um you guys have hired a consultant Mark is one of the best land lawyers in the state so he did a good job this he's about it he's talking about affordable housing and he's suggesting that we got to be careful um and that is I will say that's the reason that we're going through res zoning recodification process with me right in that there are portions of the bylaw that I'll say in his opinion leave the Town open to potential legal action in cor way correct and I believe and and you know what I want to be polite and I don't want to say much because you can't comment and it wouldn't be fair for me to speculate too much that wouldn't be fair but the 60 units across from produce Barn I believe we could very well lose because we've gone too far with our affordability requirements and their develop their their attorney is no dope but um um he cited a case it's U Wall Street development Court versus planning board of Westwood which Westwood got a little bit too tough Westwood started requiring and basically the developer sued him and this the land Court came back and said you know you can incentivize but you can't force at the bottom of all of this everybody talks about 40 BS like they're really bad things and let's get ahead of let's get above 10% well that keeps us always above 10% with 40b style I mean let's face it a five-story building with shops on the bottoms a 40b it's the same thing why don't we stay below 10% and let them come they're not that bad and leave the zba and the Selectmen with worrying about that and leave the planning board worrying about the meat and potato stuff and that's I guess that's the end of my concerns and I appreciate you hearing me out and I won't yell at thank Youk and I do see a hand raised in the meeting I'm not sure that's intentional or I think that's okay can I can I gu okay go I was just going to point out that once the the this language has been reviewed by serpent Council uh to review it against 3A and they made a few minor changes but that wasn't something that they commented on so you may be very right but they didn't flag it as as a concern on the and and we've also been in coordination with the zoning rectification process to plug all of this together in theory when we come to Springtime meeting yeah and we have another fun discussion but here's an entirely wait wait wait wait you're in really good hands so yeah Mar great Madam chair I want to ask so you can put this overlay District to include existing structures like across the street for example yes so it doesn't have to be developable land it could be already developed yes we're including a number of developed properties right now yeah so to to the you mentioned East Main Apartments could you just Zone that property uh under this uh requirement 1924 Acres complying with the guidel .24 Acres how 19 19 Norton Glenn is 23 uh eure I think that was low 20s complying with the state requirements you can put it wherever you want um we went through a whole site selection process is put us where we are here for the purposes of October town meeting this is the only property that was noticed correct so but you but you could if for some reason it fails you could go back and start picking existing developed sites that are already have that density requirement built in like the East Main apartments for example they don't they could be anywhere it doesn't have doesn't matter what it is now it can just be anywhere um so why wouldn't we pick something that's already have the people in it we in our inial we had dice cream and the 40b in the property we needed additional lots to get today needed more if you I'm sorry I should go through but if you can split it out as long as you have at least half the 50 acres on one lot you could find other lots that add up to the other uh yes you could you could do this you could pick existing multi- developed dense Residential Properties and if you went back in time nine months I could definitely do that yes okay and youe so what's stopping say I own the TPC and somebody came to me and said hey don't you go build a golf course someplace else we'll give you $100 million and we're going to make this whole place stacks of condos under this plant we'll stop it and doing that just a not the T the course the one lot in front of the course I thought it goes back into the course it's allig Woods it's the part that makes the driveway look nice and fancy like nobody's there and it's just them you know okay just I personally if I'm that golf course I keep that driveway looking pretty but I'm not a golfer so so that that's we're not get the golf course itself is not part of this over it's just I thought it went back into that into that that parcel goes pretty far back goes pretty close to Oak Street they could they could choose to develop the front portion just a little bit they could put a stack of condos there sell them to people who want to live next to a golf course and stop and not do anything else they could keep it as is they don't need to sell it to anybody they could develop it as commercial they could put in something that fits with their aesthetic however they want there's nothing stopping them from do it now or in the future so for me there's a lot of open issues so my question is it po a town meeting would say it fails what happens next uh I assume that the select board would look to create a special to try and become compant by the end of the year what happens if it rolls into the Springtown meeting I mean is it inant we would be out of compliance um I'm not I'm not sure what the uh the the state waiver or please be nice to us policy is on this um I would assume that we would need to be making significant good faith efforts and show that I don't think it's like a bear attack where we can let the state attack hold them and we're still safe I think they can attack multiple targets but the they would but if you're you're working towards a solution I would think that they would give time that that would be the Hope thing that's what's we're operating under now is we're operating under compliance because we have submitted a commitment to work with them on the guidelines when you say end of the year you're talking not year question yeah I was just going to say to go back to the golf course thing um I understand a lot of the concerns that have been brought up but I've been following this at the planning board meetings for the past few weeks or whatever and my and feeling on it is from a financial perspective you get more taxes from nice property condos next for Golf Course were we talked about like some of we not we it's one of the things brought up at the planning board meeting somebody suggested maybe they would have like Golf Camp or whatever like all of those things stores top of the shop housing next to golf course that's nice housing that's like seems to me to bring in more money than if we put a bunch of development in places that don't make sense to try to disincentivize it and then we've got development places that aren't walkable don't make sense for the residents and make the town overall worse and those things don't end up being top of the shop or having commercial or what have you and then we those end up being a a revenue hole so in my opinion I really applaud the planning board for trying to do a good job here as far as the sort of feeling and spirit of Norton goes which I think a lot of people definitely are very sensitive to like you said I us I lived in the city before I moved to Norton and I moved here for a reason most of the folks who live out in the woods down in chly or whatever nowhere near this like this area is already already developed so um I don't know I think it's a great spot as far as as as far as if you're in between a rock and a hard place goes just because I think you mentioned Hill Street right somebody me I mentioned Hill Street Yeah you mentioned the dump on Hill Street we just had a project apply to go into a commercial property on Hill Street that was at our last meeting um there's an industrial Zone lot and they would have 90 box trucks coming in and out of there and the residents there are not pleased with theal traffic impact um you want put a whole bunch of multif Family Properties at 15 units an acre on there you're going to have even more cars filed on those roads too um um there's not a place where you put this on the map where people are going to be great I really want that right next to me um maybe there is but no but but you can put it on a map where it's becomes a developer becomes an appealing to them to devel but the state is part of their compliance review what serpent has told us is they're going to be looking for that if they think that you've put it a community has put it in a a place where it just doesn't have a chance you could run the risk of being non-compliant I just want to just restate too that you know we we've reached out to a Butters and you know it's not it hasn't been a hot issue with them I think like like Hill Street I mean I know we've just thrown places out there are areas of this town that you will get people out and if that's your goal that's okay okay but you might find those harder to get approved than this area I'm guessing but I I you know I've worked with enough areas of town to know that that this is um this area you know we were you know we didn't know what to expect that's why we did a little more Outreach and people haven't come about but that might not be true in other areas but I think Paul the the main issue is is you know the financial impact to everybody whether you live I mean I live out in the woods in the other end of town it doesn't affect me at all but it's going to affect me in other ways you know my the units will be the same no matter where they go the financial back is going to be spread to everybody all corners of the town and and that's that's the bigger issue I believe thank you so so it sounds like and I don't want to put words in anyone's mouths but you had said if this didn't come down from the state we wouldn't touch you with a 10 foot poll a lot of people have said they don't believe this is a good idea so you know I'm looking at all these charts and it's saying suitability put it you know the best place why not and I know it was kind of brought up why not put it in a couple of places that are already developed and those owners will not sell then we're not going to have the units you know you had said well we're going to get the units we'll put them wherever we're going to end up getting them why not be strategic about this and put it in areas that either won't be sold or they're already developed I I'm getting the consensus here that everyone's in agreement that this would kill the schools right I mean I just I I feel like uh for now at least that would be my I guess suggestion but if I can ask if we say the overlay goes to property a and the state accepts it can we change it later on at a town meeting we can change Whatever by that's yeah it's no requirement that we as long as we remain in compliance then we're in compliance there's nothing that keeps us from changing where this is cited the rules around it or any other zoning by law at another time meeting okay I just didn't know if it was something un you know there's no requirement that we have to maintain this for five years in the same Zone obviously if somebody applied while it was the zone that would be the that operate under but if we okay I yeah I guess I just we're talking about concerns as well not hitting the end of the year I I would almost think it would be wise to find a couple of properties where we know they're not there's no chance of either them being sold or being developed how do you guarantee that well someone had brought up the the East Main apartments right who's going to buy it and then develop it it's already developed you're saying just go over an area that's been built that no chance of correct okay okay and I'm just saying because we're all saying 10t pole this and that it's not good In fairness you're doing that yeah yeah other than the TPC parcel everything else is built on and one ice cream is probably not going anywhere anytime soon so and I don't want to minimize what the the planning voard has done I'm just trying to take everyone's concerns and whatnot and try to come up with a solution I tried to put in place that made sense with the existing uses around it and that's can I can I ask if if this you said we can come back and change it but if this if this were to fail you could can come back to the same place correct isn't that like isn't there a rule that you can't you try terms of zoning bylaw changes in terms of the it have to be a significant modification to I think the location would be a significant modification yeah yeah but you couldn't go back to this location so failed and we couldn't find a better location you couldn't try again it's this is it I would say that I'm there's probably a way for it to be significantly different I don't know where that line is in terms of citing it here under a different set of guidelines or rules or something like that um I would tend to lean if um to what you're saying that if this isn't if this is voted down at town meeting then I would probably not propose it to town meeting again and would you definitely be looking at a special then by the end of the year I don't alternative unless somebody else has another idea I definitely think we need an answer a solid answer to that question for town meeting at town meeting because I think that's based on the dozens I've been to that's definitely going to be a question and what the question of if we're not in compliance then what as much as we can lay that out I know there's and and some people feel like it's Scare Tactics but I mean spelling out as much as we know or what the different outcomes are if we're not in compliance I think is really important because those are the types of things that people ask when they're hearing really emotional and um an entire neighborhood or lots of people show up that are not in favor of something and there's not a lot of information to indicate exactly what the impacts will be the risks will be um it's difficult for people to be swayed so I would just say as much as we can to answer those questions it's really important to at least try I I think there are a number of headwinds on this discussion one is it's a lot of units and people don't want to look at that impact financially one or two it's a lot of multif family properties Norton has historically been pretty much single family dominated so you're adding in a lot of units in a methodology that Norton generally doesn't like to approach that we put it as far away from other single FAL houses we could um third one is this is a state mandate and shocking people don't like to be told what to do by the state um I don't get to have that luxury our board was we were told comply with the state requirement this is what we proposed so I am aware of any number of those coming up at town meeting we had one of our board members vote against it on that third aspect just I don't like the state shoving this down our throats I'm going to vote against it and that's fine can can I ask whoever that is to mute please anyone else questions I think we should table it as well until the follow stuff is done mam chair and we'll look at it again sub meeting so it would have to be if we're waiting for their meeting it would have to be the night of town meeting is that when you want to wait to vote on that the AR language too the the language is not being touched so do we want to vote on the language have to read it have to read M chair make a motion that we uh see at the town will vote to amend the nton zoning bylaws chapter 175 of the general code for the purpose of adopting ratifying and incorporating therein the following new bylaw entitled greatwoods overlay District as follows or take any other relative action there too as presented in our warrant in hands seconded second is that is that enough information for the motion okay all right let's Go Down Kevin yes Gavin yes Bonnie yes Paul yes Zach no Steve no Bron can I ask question it this has nothing to do with the map this is just the language right okay um yes yes and Trace are you still with us yes yes and I also am a yes mam now that you voted um because the language greatwoods o district is in the article doesn't that kind of tie into the map indirectly the location of the map at time meeting would not change um which is District we all have a special alter the language if prod a new Zone and special will alter the text to I think there were two not all right and then we'll table the map to meeting and good luck with your meeting thank you thank you thank you do we uh not meeting because of indigenous people thing they try to make changes modify so that's we have all the information nothing can change that or some can change it on the floor yeah okay I ask that you reconsider article one we have two more bills that came for the C agent department for the c97 and for the fire department 9898 so that is for Paul might understand some of this stuff landline phone incoming call alert um and also um for pack traffic delated yeah we don't have it in the pack so we don't have it in the packet could you just read the numbers one more time yep um so for for the co account number 001 54157 $49.75 and for the fire department um account1 22 570 8.98 and I asked not enough money wor about $40 um that that's it's still coming from free cash I just noticed it wasn't free okay because we still hav 200 something after the signature page after sign I I don't think it's been turned back yet though right it's the extra it's the it's the balance that we can spend um revenues in the revenue expenditure sheet you know there was there was a bottom line of 200 something, how does how does that factoring what was that was that turn was that it it wasn't turn it was when the budget we didn't quite spend everything right in in the spring and we had some left over is that just going to get turned back into free cash it would have been turn back okay gotcha okay Madam chair I make a motion we amend our prior article one motion and add the uh two additional expenditures the 001 54157 for 4970 for the council and aging and the 001 32057 for 9898 for the fire department and have that come out of free cash Madam chair I think we have to vote to reconsider the article first and then thanks noing it can I just amend it no I think we have to make a motion to reconsider article one second all right a motion a second um Kevin yes Gavin yes Bonnie yes Paula yes Jack yes Steve yes Brandon yes Paul yes Trace yes and I am also a yes to reconsider all right and then motion to add to the free to the article one the two additional items the Council on a for [Music] 4975 out of article 001 54157 and then 9898 from the fire department 001 22057 both to be taken out of free cash you want to say have total of $1,884 21 $1,884 21 correct all right do I have a second second all right Kevin yes yes Bonnie yes Paula yes back yes Steve yes Brandon yes [Music] and discussion y just uh I still the select board's meeting this Thursday to go over to meetings issues mostly um and I'll be going over use of free cash um I gave you some ideas I I'll be bringing up um one thing that still has to be added is uh departments told they have till 12:00 tomorrow to finalize come forward have any operating budget amendment that they need uh so we'll be finalizing that tomorrow I'll bring that up with the select board Thursday night and bring it to you next Monday do you know what the requests are so far um right now it's over 900,000 and what how many departments have't you heard from smaller departments I heard from schools police fire Madam chair yes this for any new positions or strictly operating budget supplements um I know side I told everyone just expenses don't be looking to add people um I know uh in the town clerk we're going to be looking for more money because we're going to have to have a full-time town clerk um I thought you already had one Mike didn't you we we did but she's not coming okay so you back to the dver bo uh so um we'll have to add that to the budget and Mike do we have a number on the the town hall demo with if that's going to be out of free no I want to um hopefully uh tomorrow we have a construction meeting so uh I hope to have that for uh Thursday night okay that the redoing the wall to support the fire but also any the renovations within the firehouse um that will have nothing to do with any Renovations inside the firehouse it will just be um tearing down the existing town hall and making sure that that wall um is done are you saying there's not enough money in the current construction budget that you may need some free cash um I don't think there need any free cash I don't know what I'm waiting to see May if they do they may it may be minimal so would that need to be voted on if they have it within their budget um no it wouldn't happen um what what we'll be looking at is we have a number of articals um that have been have happened through the process and um there's like over 100,000 there if needed I think what um maybe have need to be voted is um if the senior Senate came in under will they uh Tom meeting vote to authorize that money to be part of the tear down of that building so I'm waiting to see the way that we're going to word it but we also have money in articles um that was done for site evaluations throughout the process there's like three or four articles where there's like $100,000 available to else questions so just to clarify so the select board will be able to review all of the department budget amendments on this Thursday so prior to our meeting on Monday okay anyone else questions we have where are we at minutes um I'll check with they in okay when she usually is pretty I hav great any other questions all right I'll take a motion to adour Second all right Kevin yes Kevin yes Connie yes Paul yes Z all right thanks everyone