##VIDEO ID:https://vimeo.com/1044851476## I don't care. It's all good. Good evening. It's 7:00 PM January 7th on cold evening, and the planning board is now in session. I'll be presiding as the chair tonight. I'd like to invite anybody in the public who would like to come forward for public participation and ask a question that's not on the agenda tonight. Dan Alley, 38 Union Street. Happy New Year, everybody. Thank you. Um, I would like to thank the, uh, planning board and the city planner for, uh, sending a letter, uh, to the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities, uh, opposing the sighting of the Lithium battery storage facility over their aquifer. As a resident, I greatly appreciate all the work that you do, uh, and it's gonna take the entire community of Westfield doing all that we can to protect our city, the bonds, aquifer, and our city's drinking supply. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Anybody else? Okay. We'll move on to the approval of the minutes of December 17th. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. I'll second. Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Thank you. We have no a andrs tonight. All right. The board will proceed to our two public hearings tonight. The first one is a special permit for electronic message sign for 5 49 South Hampton Road. Next Gen Roofing. Come on up. I just emailed you. Good evening. Make sure you state your name, your address, please, for the record, The address of the business or where I live. Um, your name and your address. You are the owner, Excuse me. You, You can do Oh, okay. Randy Goth here. 5 49 Southampton Road. Westfield, mass. Thank you, sir. Floor is yours. Uh, we're, we're here to get a special permit to, uh, to put our sign there on Southampton Road at the location and have a digital sign, uh, that's gonna be changing every 10 seconds. I think that's what we needed the special permit for, is to get the, the, uh, the digital sign to change and not be, uh, you know, one picture all day. And I see on the applications double sided. Yes. Okay. Um, is it just gonna be mostly measuring for, um, your business, like advertising or what, what Do you Yes. Special offers, advertising, that sort of thing. Okay. And it will be dimmed at nighttime after hours? Yes. Okay. Is that taller than the last one that was there? Rainy? I believe so, yeah. I'll call it 16 to three. Thank you. Pretty tall. If I have this correct, it's 72.06 square feet total. So he's actually in that perimeter. Yeah. Yes. Any other questions from the Board? Yeah. Um, what types of messages are you going to display? Um, you, you have a roofing business? Yes. Is the roofing business located at 5 49 South Anton Road? That's Correct. We're gonna be moving to that location right now. We're they're going To be moving. Okay. Yeah. Right now we're on Arch Road and part of our business has moved there and we're, Yeah. So you're going to be advertising roofing Products? Exactly. Yeah. Maybe. So why do you need to change it every 10 seconds? I mean, are you gonna go from There's gonna be some, uh, some different offerings? We're also, we also want to show our, every third slide. We wanna show our manufacturer that we represent, um, as a logo on there. Mm-hmm. Um, and we'd like to have a few different specials running at a time, maybe wishing one of our employees a happy birthday, but that's not what we want to show all day. Um, we might wanna show, But all the messages are expressly related to your business, correct? Not someone Else's. Not, no, we're not selling any advertising space. It's just for our business. Okay. I still think that ten second interval is an awful lot. You know, it, I mean, what can you possibly have? You can have a seal on shingles. You can have a seal on siding or windows. But every 10 seconds. Yes. Okay. I mean, the 10 seconds has kind of become the board's policy. There's nothing, nothing in the other than that. I think we agreed on that for the bank on Main Street long Ago, Polish National, Polish National Polish National, I mean, you're not bound by it, but you typically, typically you set that for these types of Permits. Okay. It's not animated. Right. It's fixed messages like pictures and words, not like cartoon stuff. I don't know everything about that. So I think we can do just about Anything. So the, the, the biggest thing we're opposed to is moving messages. So people are driving by trying to read the message as they go by where the It's scrolling. You don't Want. Yeah. Certainly would take their eyes off of their phone for a minute. So We wanted to pay attention to that. My name is Adam Mixer from Mass Signs 9 88 South Hampton Road. It does have the capability to animate, to flash to all of that, but, uh, much like, uh, an example that I gave when I went through this as well for South Hadley. For where? For South Hadley High School. Same thing. Um, much like the cars and trucks we all drive. Um, how fast does your car and truck go? You know, uh, do you have a speedometer that's up to about a goes up to 140? Do we go 140, right? No, we follow the rules and regulations set forth. But can it do that? Yes. But is the intent to do that? No. It will be fixed messages. Okay, perfect. Because we don't care what it can do as long as it Doesn't do. Yeah. Correct. Thank you. You're Very welcome. I'm good. Anybody else? Good? Anybody in the public have a question? Yeah. I just have one more thing. Oh, go ahead, sir. To ask. Um, you know, the applicant does not own the property. Um, so could we condition it to the applicant Because, um, Again, knows he may find a better building next year and somebody else could come in there with a totally different, you know, approach and the same sign. You have usually done that on all these. Mm-hmm. So, Westfield Bank, the, uh, oil company across the street. So you've always, or have traditionally written that in. So you could do that here as well to the applicant. It would cease to operate where he can't use the sign if he, if he leaves the premises. Yeah. I think it's in the draft decision. It's the condition you've usually use. You not, you don't have to, but you could. So the, the permission would be attached to me, not the property. Correct. Right. So, so I'm working on buying a piece of land four doors down next to hometown structures where I'm gonna be building an office and I'm gonna be moving this sign to there. Does that mean I won't have to come back here in front of you guys? Because that right sign permit will move me. It's Another address. Yeah. If we conditioned it to you. Well, it's to the, it's to the property, so you can't move it from, So we'll have to go through it again. So you could have, if you want to move it, you need to come back. Yeah. Quarter miles process Again. Yeah. We're not that bad. Excuse Me. We're not that bad. We'll see. We don't have to sign up yet, but I already bought it, so don't stop it. So this is essentially just a, this is essentially just a temporary Three to five years. Okay. Not That temporary. This still got three To five years at this Spot? Yeah. Oh, okay. While we're, I mean, the, the, the land remains is raw. We gotta build, it's gonna take a while. Gotcha. Perfect. But I want to be able to move the sign 'cause the sign's not cheap. Yeah. The diamond part of the sign, that's interior. Interior illumination. Yes. And then the, the black part of it is where this electronic message center, full color Electronic message Center. Yes, sir. Okay. Is there any way we can take and get this thing so that after hours, 10, 11 o'clock, you, you, the lighting the, like it gives off drops, down reduces. Oh, even, Uh, there's automatic Dinning within the automatic dinning 11. There's automatic 11, 10, 11 blocks. Also A general rule of thumb, uh, I've measured them with light meters at particular specified distances for the size of the sign. There's guidelines to follow for that itself, of which I've done separately and even, which I did for South Hadley High School as well. Same thing was that, uh, that I was able to measure it with a light meter and bring it down to within ambient light conditions after hours to dark. So that, that way the sign is not causing you to tear up and, you know, blind you as you're driving by. But yes. So ultimately it can be programmed within the settings by each half hour increment. Okay. To bring it down that way manually or, uh, it does have automatic dimming built within it as well too. And, And by ordinance, all signs are supposed To be mm-hmm. Extinguished by 11 O'clock, which would go to zero When it would be blocked. And then a timer around the, uh, upper dining portion as well. Okay. Yeah. Sounds good. I know roofing, I don't know sounds, Any other questions? I just wanna make a comment. Um, I, I, you grew up in Westfield. It's good to see a local kid really grow, start a business, grow a business. I remember you bouncing around the little league fields with your brother Jared. And, uh, I want to Compliment you on, on running a good business. And it's good to see that you're expanding even more. So thank you. Congratulations on that. Appreciate that. Yep. The little empire. Yeah. Uh, anybody in the public would like to, uh, speak in favor or against A question? Come on up, sir. So you have a question? Yes. I I, I thought we were still, uh, having the, the board ask questions. So, Nicholas Morgane, 34 Prospect Street City counselor at large. Um, I, I thank, uh, uh, members Salo for asking the question about the, uh, the, the light, um, how bright it is. 'cause even at the, uh, at Bolens Field here in Westfield for, uh, baseball games, that the light goes, there's a dimming setting on it after the sun goes down. Um, so out on the road, of course, that's very important because of traffic and driving bright lights can, I'm very sensitive to it. So I understand that. I did have one question of fact, uh, for the board. Um, the, um, the timing of the, of the light. You, you mentioned, uh, member McEwen. Um, I don't see that in the, in article eight in our zoning ordinances. I don't see the timing. So you specifically would set that as a, as a, for the, uh, for each sign as it comes in front of you. That was, that was my question that you, you set that, uh, tonight for, for the, uh, timing. Yes. Yes, ma'am. I am Karen fan Ward, one city counselor. As this business is in Ward one. I am speaking in favor of it. Um, I do like the conditions that you're speaking of about changing, you know, dimming it down after hours. But I do speak in favor and supporting a ward one business. Thank you. Thank you. I am Ralph Thresher, 1 6 3 Elizabeth Avenue in Westfield. And I am also, uh, in support of watching NextGen grow. They do a great job. I've seen their job sites and how diligent they are at, uh, making sure that the work is done correctly. It's great to see a roofing contractor that actually tries to abide by the rules. So, Congratulations. Thank you, sir. Anybody else? Just for curiosity, would you wanna change the seconds? Is that what you're looking at doing, Phil? Um, No. I'm okay with it the way it is, I guess. Okay. Uh, I, you know, I'll just make a comment. Not directed to the applicant or anything, but, you know, not everyone should have one of these and, and it seems like they're becoming more commonplace. Um, and I think if you have too many of them, you know, along any particular street, you know, it's kind of tacky looking. Um, but as I said, I'm not holding it against the applicant, but I think it's something we should look at in the future. It's limiting the number of these that go up. Thank you for your input. Okay. I actually have one more question for you, sir, on your sign. By any chance, are you putting anything up there as far as, uh, financing on your signs? 'cause I do notice there, there are businesses that will put in there for financing. Um, I'd have to look into the legalities of it. I mean, sometimes we do advertise payment options, but I know we have to be real careful with that on social media because we can't look like a financial institution. Yeah. Um, but we do let people know that we do have payment options and different solutions. 'cause roofing's expensive and a lot of people need That. But that won't be like on your lighted sign, it would be more on a contract. I'm just trying to figure out more where else you would use that lighted sign for More to draw attention and, and offer specials. Like, uh, for instance, like maybe, you know, free gutters with the roof replacement or gutter covers or something like that. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, There's No other, um, questions. I'll just move on to the draft. Okay. You have a draft conditions. Um, one, the subject is approved only, only as in accordance with the submitted plan, accompanying the application as prepared math signs and conforming to the ordinances to set back requirements for signs. Two different messages may be displayed, provided none is displayed for less than 10 seconds, and there is no scrolling, flashing, or animation. I got that right. And three, the illumination level shall be dimmed during evening hours as commensurated with the missing daylight. Four, the special permit is issued to Next Gen Roofing and shall lapse upon its use or substantially similar use ceasing to operate at the property. You understood that earlier. Okay. Draft findings at the Pacific site is an appropriate location for an accessory. Ground sign with electronic message panel to the sign will not adversely affect the neighborhood being in a commercial area. And as conditioned three, adequate and appropriate facilities will be available for the proper operation of the use. Four, the plan as approved conforms to all other rules and regulations. The board notes that lighting extinguishment is governed by the ordinance. Is there anything else you guys wanna add to this? No. Phil. Phil, is there anything you wanna add? No, I'm not good. Okay. Do we wanna make a motion then to close the public hearing? Make a motion to close the public hearing. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. All I need is a motion then to approve the special permit. I'll make a motion to approve the special permit for 5 49 South Hampton Road as written second. All right. Do a roll call. Ray. Yes. Bernie? Yes. Phil? Yes. John? Yes. Richard? Yes. And myself. Yes. Congrats. Thank you. Here you go. Detained. You've been here before. Next on the agenda is a zoning amendment for the battery energy storage uses. Good evening, Madam Chair and, uh, board members. Nicholas Morgan Alley, 34 Prospect Street, uh, Westfield City Council at large. And, uh, this is a, um, this would be a zoning amendment to, uh, articles. Um, two section two dash 20, article three, section three dash 1 33 and three dash 1 75. Uh, my thanks to Jay Vinky, our city planner for meeting with me, and, uh, coming up with a, uh, a plan for this. Um, this was, um, this has been a, a, uh, a heated, um, topic among the citizens of Westfield, um, concerning the Battery Energy Storage systems, uh, facility that, uh, wants to, uh, move into Ward One. Um, and this would be, uh, on the Water Resource Protection District, and very close to the aquifer, of course. Um, many residents have spoken up against that at the DPU public hearing, uh, and commented about that during public comment. Uh, there were many letters sent in to them as well. The city council passed a resolution in December, uh, opposing Bess, uh, for the short, uh, the acronym for Battery Energy Storage Systems. Um, and that was a unanimous vote, I believe, on that. Um, my motion on December 19th, it was to amend the city ordinance, uh, that is before you tonight. Um, because these are, these are new businesses. This is something that, um, fairly new. We haven't seen an energy producing business like this. So when something comes up that's brand new, you have to really look at it, uh, very carefully. And it's, everybody's on a learning curve with this. And there have been, uh, there's a lot of information that has come forth on what these battery, battery energy systems contain, which is lithium ion, um, and what they can, what can happen if they fail by fire, especially. Um, so there, uh, and, and I will save some of the, uh, some of that comment for, uh, some other people that are here tonight to, to comment on that. Um, so the, the ordinance, uh, the the first section defines, uh, what the battery energy storage system is. Um, a standalone use of land consisting of one or more devices assembled together, capable of storing energy in order to supply and distribute electrical energy at a future time. Not to include those accessory systems designed primarily to power a non bests principle use or use and accessory to it, and not the electric grid generally. So basically, this business draws energy from the grid at a low rate. They sell it back to the grid when they need it and sell it high. So buy low, sell high. That's how they make money, I suppose. Um, and the, uh, second part of the, uh, the, the first ordinance change, uh, or rather, the second one would be, uh, three dash one 30.3 from Article three. And that is, um, would be an added, there's 13 items there. This would be a item 14. Battery energy storage systems, provided any structure storing a generating energy or other electrical grid related op operations with no other accomp occupancy type is located at least 150 feet from any property line. Uh, and that would be the, um, the special permit in the industrial A zone. And the last one would be thir three dash one 70.5. That would be the Water Resource Protection District. And that would, it would be added as a prohibited business, uh, as item 18. Battery Energy storage Systems would be prohibited from the Water Resource Protection District. Um, the, uh, the concerns that we have, uh, there were a lot of me, uh, comments on December 9th at our city council meeting. And I can, uh, detail a couple of those. Actually, before I get to that, let me, let me just talk about the current ordinance. Uh, the prohibited uses some of the businesses for the prohibited uses, uh, businesses that generate, treat, store, dispose, hazardous waste, chemical manufacturing. These have chemicals in them. Electronic component or semiconductor manufacturing. Um, self-storage businesses are prohibited from our Water Resource Protection District, because you really don't know what people are gonna put in there. Right? Motorized vehicle or boat service or repair businesses, petroleum product dispensing, petroleum fuel oil or heating oil, bulk stations and terminals, underground storage and petroleum products. Outdoor open storage of salt, deicing materials, manure, fertilizer, dumping or disposal of any hazardous material or hazardous waste on the ground. And water bodies. Um, that one in particular raises a bell as you, when I talk about the what happens when they catch on fire. Uh, stockpiling or disposal of snow and ice removed from highways and streets, wastewater discharge. Um, and I'm just summarizing, I'm going through some of the highlights here. 'cause you, and, and I appreciate the meetings that you have and everything you do for the city. And I know this, these go, these meetings go along. So I'm, I'm trying to just glaze over the current ordinance, but this one would be added to all these businesses I've just mentioned. Even cemeteries are prohibited from the, uh, water Resource Protection District. Um, and then the special permit would just be that they'd come in front of you if they wanted to build this thing in, uh, industrial. A uh, in the, uh, back to the December 9th, uh, meeting in, um, public participation, our, uh, um, city Council, Dan Alley spoke, uh, in opposition of this at great lengths. I won't go into details 'cause he's here tonight. Jessica Britton of 36 Kame Street, spoke in opposition of this, uh, stating that it's a huge liability and potential detriment to every living thing in, in and around. Uh, he, she said in Westfield, um, Ralph Thresher of 1 63, Elizabeth Avenue also spoke in length. And he's here tonight. So I won't get into details on that. And then Frederick Connor, he's a town counselor in West Springfield, uh, spoke in opposition. And there's a lot of chemicals that he listed. And the what happens, so if these facilities catch on fire, you've got hydrogen fluoride gas, hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen chloride, sulf, sulfur dioxide. Those are all, uh, very dangerous to humans and animal life for that matter. Um, and then you've got fluorinated, phosphorus compounds. Uh, these, when you add water to the fire and all that water goes in the ground, you've got PFAS in, in your ground. And we, we, we've just, you know, somewhat, we didn't clean up the aquifer, but now we're filtering the water because we've had this problem with the PFAS, right? Um, on the north side. Then if, uh, just the, um, the other compounds that are inside the batteries, lithium based compounds, lithium, hydro oxide, hydrogen gas, uh, it's a risk to aquatic and human life. Cobalt based compounds that contaminate soil, water, and air, and nickel based compounds. Uh, nickolas, toxic heavy metal. It poses environmental and human health risks, manganese based compounds, toxic heavy metal, again, contaminate soil, land, and air. Um, so all, all of these things that I've mentioned can be released during various stages of the lithium ion battery lifecycle, manufacturing use and disposal, recycling and disposal fires and thermal runways. These are not green. This is being, uh, sure passed off as green energy. It is nothing of the sort, it is toxic to all life. Not just, uh, humans and animals, but plants, soil, water, everything. These are bad news. Uh, and for, for a company to want to come to Westfield, um, and put this thing in proximity to our aquifer that we've already dealt with, with ex, I haven't seen as many people in the city council chambers at a city council meeting, as I saw when we had those PFAS public hearings and people were coming into, uh, in, they had, they had, uh, posters and banners and, and they, it was, they spoke up and we were able to do something about it. Um, but it's a shame that we had to, uh, and all because we didn't know about firefighting foam that was so dangerous. This is a, a thing that's supposed to keep us safe to put out fires. Well, these are supposed to be green energy battery systems, and they're supposedly safe. And they just sit there in, in a field maybe the size of, uh, maybe four or six refrigerators kind of stuck together about that size on a concrete pad. And there's, you know, dozens of them out in this field. And they sit there and they're attached to the grid and they draw power and then they send power back. And, um, anyway, uh, I think I, I think I've exhausted, um, Nick kind of giving you a, um, can you Summarize amendment that you want us to recommend? Because I think we all agree with you. So it's just a matter of summarize what understanding the amendment you're trying to get us to support. Yes. Okay. So, yeah. So again, the, um, the first thing is to, to define the battery energy storage systems. And, and you should have it on your share drive, the section two dash 20, the definition. We do have it. So it would be to add that. And then, uh, section three dash one 30.3 would be the special permit use. And that would be to add it so that they have to come in front of this body, um, in front of you to, if they want to put one of these systems somewhere in Westfield, in industrial A, they'd still have to come here. And you could set, it says Before City Council on Planning Board, Uh, Yeah. Drafted as a city council special permit. Maybe Jay VINs can, can, yeah. It's drafted as a city council special permit. Oh, it's drafted as special. Okay. Because I, yes, as I understand we're making a recommendation For you. Okay. So, so they do not have to vote on that section. Right. Would be before City Council, the way it's drafted. Okay. Mm-hmm. Um, and then, uh, I misunderstood. I thought it was both, because it's kind of a zoning thing. Well, the zoning, the change, the zoning goes above, but the actual special permit, if it's enacted, would they go to city council for the special permit? Right. Okay. Thank you for clarifying. Uh, and then the um, three dash one 70.5 would be to add it as item 18, battery Energy Storage Systems as defined, uh, to the prohibited list of businesses that can be placed, uh, in the Water Resource Protection District. That's under, um, article three of our zoning ordinances. So this may or may not not apply to the present proposal 'cause they're seeking a zoning exemption. Uh, partly because our zoning ordinance doesn't really address these issues. Um, so the board should kind of look at this generally as this use, not, not necessarily to a specific site. Anybody have any questions? I only have one thing that I'm gonna throw out there under the special permit because of what's going on as, as now. But I only have put some thought in this, and this may be crazy or not, but I was thinking of doing or suggesting a 500 foot buffer zone from any war, war water resource area. 'cause if it's too close, Um, Because this stuff is so dangerous and lethal that I would like under that special permit I to put in there for more of a safety guard, a 500 foot buffer. Personally, I think 500 feet wouldn't even be enough. And I believe that one in East Hampton at Long Island, some water, it was over 2 million gallons of water. And that would leach Yeah. Well beyond 500 Feet. He said they cleared Correct. Cleared out out a mile, huh? What's that? They, they cleared out a mile, Right? Correct. But what I did notice in these, when I was reading them, there was no buffer zone. But all I'm trying to do is add something in there to, to try to strengthen something. It doesn't, it may or may not matter because of the fact that these go on fire, they do more destruction at a much bigger volume. But it's just an idea that I thought of when I was reading all this stuff. I didn't see any of that. So I'm just presenting it to the floor. So, Nick, is this a draft or is this the final? I believe this is a draft, correct? It's a draft. So, so we could Add we be Making a report or Recommendation, we could add that. Yeah, I think we should recommend the 500 foot, a 500, at least a 500 foot buffer. I think it makes sense for Fisher permit. Oh, your thoughts are, if you I would say minimum of 500. So Minimum I would, I think a thousand. Because if we say 500, somebody's gonna be at 5 0 5 and says, well, nothing prohibits me from being here. That's True. I I have no problem with that. At least something will be put in there. 'cause I have not seen that in any of the others. That's why I was asking at least we can strengthen this. So I think that's a good idea. Yeah. But one thing to keep in mind, so this is already a special permit. So the city council in this case would enjoy some discretion in, in that use in considering how far it's from something. Mm-hmm. Um, if you're, if you're effectively prohibiting it in the ordinance, that's gonna give fodder to someone to seek a zoning exemption saying that it's not a practical, Um, Possibility. I think it, and, and I understand exactly and what you're saying, Jay, but I also think it lets 'em know that we're thinking and we're, you know, opposing something a little stronger. It it is just out in the open. I can't, you know, like I say, can't force 'em to do that. But it's an, it's a, it's an idea that I haven't seen anywhere else. Oh, I'm sorry, dude. I wanna, I wanna open to the public here in a second. Yeah. Does anybody else on the board have anything else? Okay, go ahead, sir. I was just gonna add a, a quarter mile is 1,320 feet, so a thousand is close to not even a quarter mile, but yeah. Does anybody hear on an objection to that? It's, it's their amendment. We, and we're gonna make a recommendation. I think we should put a thousand feet in our recommendation. Okay. Um, I'll open up. Do you have a question, sir? I, I did. Can you come up, sir? Sure. And then you state your name and your address again for me, please, sir. Thank you. Hi, this is Ralph Thresher, 1 6 3 Elizabeth Avenue in Westfield. I was the one that found the article regarding the East Hampton, uh, New York Battery Fire. I'm sure all of you have read that. It's quite interesting. Uh, my, my question is that, uh, you know, basically it's more of a statement on the 500 versus thousand feet. Personally, I would say go for a mile because when you have 2 million gallons of water trying to extinguish a fire, and it's really just kind of cooling it down to the point that it no longer will keep burning. You know, it's, you've got 2 million plus gallons of water, and I'll correct Nick. Basically what you'd be looking at is, you know, the size of a Kelly box, right? What they do is they take and they stick these, uh, battery units inside something similar to a Kelly box, and they will literally put six or eight of them on a site. And that's how they come up with, you know, and they're all tied in properly so that they've got so much, uh, as far as the electrical energy that they can turn back out. But unfortunately, they're also right next to each other. So when one starts burning, it will go to the next one. You know, and like in this particular fire, they had a sprinkler system, a water, you know, water spray sprinkler system. It's totally useless, you know, puts a lot of water out there. Lithium ion batteries have PFAS in 'em. It's a, you know, a bi floral, blah, blah, blah, you know, all kinds of fancy chemical names. But ultimately it's PFAS. And what happens, like in the East Hampton fire, literally, you know, we have our airport, we know what the contamination was, just multiply at times, hundreds, you know, because that's what they found in East Hampton. You know, their entire water supply was completely destroyed as far as, you know, having the amount of PFAS in it. And the way that the, they work with these systems is you'll get a company that ultimately is owned by BlackRock. You know, BlackRock is a huge investment company, as we probably all know. Well, the way that they do this is they want to make it so that that particular company, oh, we've got $10 million in umbrellas insurance for you sounds great. Except for how much is it gonna cost to clean up a contamination when the fire occurs? And it's not an if the fire occurs because what they have found, as much as they play games with the statistics now, they say, oh, the percentage of fires with these battery energy storage systems has decreased over the last few years. Except for, you'll see that the number of fires are increasing on battery energy storage systems, except for they're now counting the smaller systems, such as if you order a Tesla system for your garage, you know, and you put it in your garage so that you have a battery backup system, they count those into the statistics now, you know, at least from everything I'm reading. So they're conflating, you know, all these percentages and saying, oh, it's not anywhere near as bad yet. Every one of these fires, you know, like in 2023 with New York, as you read, you know, they had eight battery energy storage systems in the state, and four of 'em went up in flames just in one year. You know, lithium ion batteries are only good for so long, and then they will self destruct. It's just the way it appears to be going. I also have another interesting statistic for you. If you get an opportunity, take a look at, uh, duke University. They have the, uh, I forget the name of it, Pratt Engineering School. But they've done substantial amounts of studies on PFAS, battery manufacturing, battery disposal, uh, anything to do with it. And they're just showing that water supplies, you know, virtually anywhere close to any of this that's going on, the water supplies are heavily contaminated. So, you know, that's why I'm, I'm saying, you know, make it a mile, make it 10 miles, you know, just keep 'em outta Westfield. 'cause as, uh, the gentleman that runs Westfield Gas and Electric says it's not gonna do us anything, you know, and so what good is it? We get some tax money out of it and then they have the fire and you know, we end up with a polluted water supply. And now we've got, you know, our, our, uh, surrounding towns that rely on that aquifer as well. They don't get to use it. So with that, I want to thank you all. I appreciate, you know, just appreciate you listening to me and, uh, feel free to get ahold of me if you need to for any questions. I'm always finding more literature on this 'cause it just drives me nuts the way people wanna Thank you, sir. Destroy us, sir. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, counselor. So this a question for that, right? No, this is a presentation. Alright. Dan Alley 38 Union Street. And, um, my question is, is more to the, uh, to the board, what does the, uh, the map of industrial a districts look like, um, that is not over the aquifer, the recharge area or other protected areas and other sensitive areas such as residences, schools, wetlands, and natural heritage areas. And where in any industrial a districts are you willing to put a, um, battery, uh, energy storage system? And if the answer is none, um, of our industrial aid districts, then a battery energy, a storage system should be a prohibited use, uh, industrial aid and not just one requirement, a special permit. Thank you. Dan. Can I ask you a question? Um, and I'm asking, 'cause I know you're looked a lot into this. My concern with your proposal is, my biggest fear with this is that the state is behind this. There's nothing in this proposal to do anything to prevent the state from coming in and doing whatever they want. Right? Um, And I'm not sure we have the authority to say that, but I'm saying it. Well, that was the whole thing. I mean, some of us voted against this last summer. Um, some of us were knowing, you know, kind of what was behind this. Um, but the company didn't play the card that they were gonna, what they were gonna put there until September 23rd when they filed with the TPU. Mm-hmm. That's how you're basically playing poker with somebody that cheats, by the way. Um, and so some of us, you know, had an idea of what was going on. We had to remove, remove our city council meeting so that city councilors could actually go to that December 5th hearing. Um, it never was the intent for the, the residents had no a snowballs chance to even hear anything about this or respond in that public two week public comment period. When the city councils were at, and many of the city councils were there at the college on December 5th, um, they were shocked. I mean, the immediate response was, what the heck? Right? Because when this was just an an an easement, which is a by by use, you know, do you wanna run cables across the street? You know, um, how could you object to it? Right? Same thing with us. It was, you know, the purview that we were under. Like I said, some of us had a better idea of what was really going on there. And, um, and so, um, a lot of counselors, you know, are really upset because of the way this was time. Um, you had, you know, an application that was hand delivered to the city, 5,000 pages, um, on December, I mean on November 19th. And the city council and the notifications did not go out till, um, November 26th, which is a Tuesday before Thanksgiving. And the city clerk checked was legal and all she was required to do was put a notice down in the basement of city hall and went at the library. I don't know what you were doing on Thanksgiving, um, that weekend, but we certainly went there. Those buildings were closed half the time. And so one of the things we face right now is what you're pointing out, John, is very, very much true. We, we need to do everything we can. I thank you for the letter that you guys sent and all the work that you're doing, the resolution that we were able to pass and the hoops we had to jump through to do that in the same two week period of time. Um, I've actually downloaded all the documents that went to the DPU, um, from everywhere. I have all the documents, all the letters, all the interventions, all the groups and that sort of thing. That was done in two weeks. And still, and here's what is important is, so I would say half the city doesn't know what's going on, right? I mean, just 'cause of the holidays and whatnot. And now I'm hearing from people that said, oh, well, you know, the mayor said, you know, he's against it and that sort of thing, and we're okay. Right? And, and no, the reality is, um, unless we really, um, make a stand and, and, and, and either the governor backs down or the DPU says, you know what we do, placing this over, partially over the aquifer is not the right thing to do and squashes it, no matter what we do does not matter other than as a community, we all need to do everything. And anything has this proceeds, it'll be about a six month period of review. We wanted to just have it decided by the end of 2025, by no stretch of the imagination that this over, okay, we need to do everything we can as a community, as a group working together, um, to make a strong stand. Because when you read that East Hampton, um, they said, you know, we were sold a bill of goods, you know, and now their water was like, really trashed. Okay? And without water, you're not gonna have a city. Okay? And, and we're, we're blessed and blessed people for what we have. And so, um, you know, and, and so like, like I said, like the residents, um, this is, we, we got a heck of a fight on our hands, okay? So at each step of the way, um, let's just work together, let's do everything we can. Part of it's gonna be educating the public and saying, no, this isn't over. Just because the mayor said, you know, he's against it. And the planning board really did their part. And that was the, on December 17th, you guys moved right on it. That's amazing. Thank you. Um, you know, this was unbelievable. You know, I mean, when we changed that city council meeting, I mean, none of the city councils even had a clue. I, you know, my daughter got married the day before Thanksgiving. The fact that we even knew about that was, I mean, we, we could have been totally broadsided by this. John, did he answer your Question in a Dan alley kind Of a way? Yeah. Well, yeah, because that's the reality that we all faced, right? I mean, we were elected and we're responsible for the city. And you guys have done a great job protecting, you know, the city. And the reality is, unless the department of public utility, so all the government just says, you know, this, you know, this is a public relations, this asset, this is wrong. Do not put this over somebody's drinking supply and move on. And I can understand why they want to stick it there. 'cause they got basically got the electric grid right there, but it doesn't work. Okay. Um, they could just, they could shove this down our throat and all the talk. Now you paid attention to the zoom meeting we just had, pardon my French, but they basically, you know, we had all the representatives of the company blowing smoke up our butts. Um, well, they basically could just, you know, shove this down our throats. Um, and so thank you. Yeah. Dan, How long has the city known that this was gonna happen? I mean, because there was a, an open house at the ELs. When was that? When exactly. I mean, they talk about availability of transparency. Um, but this is far from, I mean, well we've known about this for, for a while, haven't we? I mean this, did you go to the open house at the, at the ELs that they had there and there were, I mean, I think they had one in July and I don't, I didn't know about it. And I, I mean, okay. They really haven't worked to inform people, um, you, because they've even admitted that that hardly anybody attended that one at that at the out. So where it was in July wasn't, it Wasn't really well attended. There was no question about, and I, I have not spoken to any resident of Westfield that think This is a good idea. So, and I can tell you the frustration with about, you know, a third of the city council at the time in August when we voted on the, um, easement for the transmission lines was a lot of the counselors didn't understand the danger. Like December 5th when they were there and they knew what it was, they were, they were not happy. But you're playing, like I said, that card wasn't played till September 23rd when this was filed with the TPU as, as to what they actually wanted to put there. If that was made clear in August, there was no way we would vote against easement. You know what I mean? But nobody knew, you know what I mean? So that's what they're, that's what you're up against. And Ralph's Exactly. Right. I mean, that's a $15 trillion company at top with layers of liability to buffer them from any kind of liability. So this is an all hands on deck. So hopefully I've answered your question to stay tight your shoes and keep fighting. Thank You for a battle. Yeah. And um, but what my question to you was basically look at any of our industrial aid districts, you know, and with the, you're talking about or any of the things that would be around it, a school, the residents and that sort of thing. Would you want to put this in any of the districts? Because if it's no, then maybe the audience for the, on the, um, on the second part of his, his, um, suggestion there, instead of a special permit, it should be a prohibited use in industrial a not just the water resource area. Okay. Okay. So Thank you. Thanks Dan. So Here's the kind of regulatory conundrum with this use, because they have the ability not, and this just this year generally not the specific project. Um, a proponent can go to the state and ask for an exemption from the local zoning. So regardless of anything you say here, so if you, if you're not addressing it, they can go to the state and say, this city doesn't really allow this use, or it's not clear and we need his zoning exemption. Maybe that's a good argument. We go to the other end and then we just prohibit it or make a five mile buffer from everything effectively prohibited. They go to a zoning exemption. The state can say, well, it's not practically able to be put here, we'll give you the exemption. But if we're somewhere in between, which is kind of what this is, where there's an avenue for local permitting, um, it's kind of hard to argue to the state that you should get a zoning exemption where there's a route established locally for review. So I guess, um, again, there's always that possibility that any zoning won't apply to this type of use. Um, but the more prohibitive it is, the more, I guess likely it is that the state would issue an exemption anyway. So I think I still think a thousand is a good recommendation. And while I agree that a mile is a great idea, I think somebody's gonna go into Boston and say, this is unrealistic. Can you gimme a waiver and we're gonna get it? I think at a thousand, it makes it look like we paid close attention and we really want to protect our water the best we can. That's my opinion. Okay. I was just, I'm just looking through the prohibitions in industrial a right now, you things you just can't do in this town. And they've got such things in here as paint, manufacture, paper manufacture, plastic manufacture, a quarry, rubber soap manufacturer, a stockyard, that thing, that battery thing is, it's a take much worse, worse than any one of those. And those are already prohibition. It is, but there's no ability for the state to override those. What was that again, Jay? So they, no one can go to the state and say, I wanna put paint manufacturing in Westfield override your zoning. There's no authority for that, as opposed to this public service utility. There's something in the state law that allows overriding a local zoning. So that's kind of a difference between those, Those Uses in this. Well, okay. And the state may be able to override this thing, but if you look at what we're not allowing in there anyway, this is much worse than a lot of 'em. And as bad as everyone in here, you know, it's, to me it, it shouldn't even be allowed by special permit. Well, certainly the board can make that recommendation. Um, but again, it probably gives, gives more credence to issuance of an, of zoning waiver from Boston. I'll be honest, I don't, I don't like this at all. I don't like having the idea of these coming in, but I understand what they're doing. Anybody else? Do you have anything? I have a question. You don't have a question? I have a question. Okay. Alright. Well, you guys are board just for recommendation. So I, I think we should support the proposed amendment and I think we should add, um, a thousand foot buffer zone from residents. From residents or from the water resource District, from the, I'm sorry? From the water resource area? From the water resource area district. Okay. I, I kind, I do like the thousand feet, but you know, if this comes down, uh, to an application and the city, you know, hires their expert to review the thing and the expert determines that, you know, a thousand feet really isn't enough in this situation, it should be 1100. You know, you know what I mean? It's, we're we're just arbitrarily picking The thousand. Yeah, well, I mean it's, it's, it's still a special permit. You know, it, it's still That discretion, but yeah, this at least sets a, a starting point. Yeah. You know, my feelings, you know, personally are, you know, you think of the flattest spot in Westfield that you can come up with, you know, say it's some athletic field. Well, if you put a couple million dollars or a couple million gallons of water around that field, then it's in the valley, you know, it, it doesn't, water doesn't flow uphill. You know? What are you suggesting? Uh, I, I don't know. There's gotta be some way we could possibly prohibit it. It's, it seems like all these, you know, state mandated things lately, um, you know, never end up in the beautiful communities they end up in, you know, the industrial blue collar communities Out here in the sticks. Yeah. And I'll tell you, I'm, again, I read the what's already prohibited there, and there's no way this should be allowed. This should be part of the prohibited not, you know, I like the a thousand feats of it is fine, but I don't even think it should be there just because it, you compare it to what we've already prohibited and it's worse than a lot of 'em. Are you saying that are already prohibited? That we don't want there? So take out the, you're suggesting not even put the special permit in. I would take the special permit as May. No, you can't do it, period. It's a prohibited thing in all zoning areas. You know, you, you want to do it in the, in the water protection area. I think it should be in all of 'em. I just don't see it. It doesn't fit, it, it fits into the prohibitions as far as I'm concerned with. You read 'em and it's, it fits right in and it's just right at home. Well, I don't like this anymore than you do, but I understand what they're doing. Um, anybody else? So I, because of the fire, I don't like this in, in any area of the city. Mm-hmm. But to have somebody to come in and try to put it as close to the aquifer, and I'm talking about this particular one, um, it, it's insulting that we're not paying attention. I mean, that's a ticking time bomb that they're trying to put over our aquifer. It's, it's terrifying that the state's behind it. I've always just been trying to figure out why, why such there's so big community they've gotta be servicing somebody. Yeah. I I wouldn't say the state's behind it. I say they're going through the process to permit and potentially issue a zoning exemption. Well, they appear to be leaning one way. Well, So, But again, I think the more, if you're gonna implement local zoning on it, the more restrictive it is, the more likely or the more case they can make for a zoning exemption, The more what The exemption would. But I mean, you can certainly send a message by prohibiting it. All right. Line for the recommendation. What do we all decide? Leave is, um, a thousand foot buffer zone or more than that. Phil, do we take out the special permit? What do, what do you suggest To do? Can I, can I back up a little bit? Yes. Um, three dash one 70.5 18 is prohibiting it from the battery energy prohibiting a battery energy storage system On the water resource. Yep. So the thousand feet we're talking about? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. You get Where I'm going? Why? That because of what's going on right now. You you get where I'm Going? Yes. Okay. So what I, I, I think at the end of the day, it should be prohibited in the water district and it can't be within at least a thousand feet of the water district. So under the special permit, do we all agree at least, um, a buffer of a thousand foot? I'm go with it. Yeah. Phil? Mm-hmm. Bernie. Aye. Yes. It's You're looking for some kind of a motion. Well, To start With. Well, The recommendation and all I'm asking is adding some tea To this somehow. Well, okay. I, my recommendation would be to abandon it entirely just based on the fact that what the, they're asking for there. This best system fits right in with everything else that's banned throughout the city. It's worse than most of those places. I'd rather have some of these places next door to me than this thing. So that was my question earlier. Do we take out the special permit and wipe that to make a recommendation and remove that? Or does that stay and we just add in the buffer? That's what I'm asking the board. What do you want to do? 'cause this is a recommendation. We'll just go on for them council, as soon as are going back and forth on this. Well, I Mean, you've got three councilors here, so I think the sentiment of the board is clear. So I mean, ultimately they're gonna draft it. Um, Jay, if we were a thousand feet away from the water area, but we were in industrial a I still wouldn't like this is, is it by Right. And industrial, if it's not a water issue As it's drafted to be special permit. So it's not by, right. Okay. So we can still, So yeah. City council. So if someone wanted to do this and they were outside the water resource area plus a thousand feet, and in industrial a, uh, they could go the city council for special permit with usual special permit discretion. Uh, There's no guarantee of issuance, but I don't like the special permit at all. But So are we gonna resolve this? I I, I, I don't like the politics of this and politics are involved that I think Jay's right, if we make it too restrictive, it's gonna make it easier for them to get some kind of a blessing from Boston. Mm-hmm. So I, I, I think our best shot is to go with this proposal, add a thousand feet, and then take each individual account as they come in the future and make it painful. That's what I think. Yep. All said. Was that a motion? So, huh? It sounded like, oh, now I gotta make that into a motion. Yeah. So he was gonna say it sounded like a recommendation to me. Yep. You make a motion to ver recommendation. Oh, here we go. Uh, I'd like to make a recommendation to, uh, Uh, Support the amendment as, uh, presented and add a thousand foot buffer of the water district area And with the special permit. Is that where it's going? Yeah, That's already draft that Way. Okay. Go ahead John. I think that's it. Okay. I just wanted to make sure That's exactly Right as written. Plus a thousand feet. Okay. Okay, sir, I'm waiting on a second. I'll second. Huh? Oh, yes. We need to go to the exec. Yes. I'm sorry. Did you make the motion? It's been seconded. I seconded. Yes. Okay. And we're all in favor? We're all in favor? We're all in favor. Sound Like it? I lost my train of thought. All right. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Thank you. You're all set. Thank. Okay. I apologize. I thought you guys were you wanna come up? Okay. So, um, Dan Alley 38 Union Street. Um, so I'm in favor of amending the zoning ordinance for industrial a, um, To restrict battery energy storage systems by special permit. And asking the planning board to consider such a, um, facility has a prohibited use. But I understand where you're going with that. Um, everyone should want clean energy, clean air, and water. It is common sense that clean energy should not pose in a significant threat to our environment, first responders and residents, or our cities drinking water. While we should all welcome any technology that makes energy cleaner or more efficient, the technology should not pose an unacceptable risk to our cities or surrounding communities drinking water supply. There have been too many fires in best units, in places such as East Hampton, New York that were sold a bill of goods and had their water, drinking water, uh, contaminated. These catastrophic fires release highly poisonous gases. There is no assurance that a failure will never occur in one of these lithium battery storage units. And there's no insurance that we will ever be that will ever make Westfield whole again, should a catastrophic fire in one of these large number of units and there's 219 of them, by the way, that these, these facilities required to operate. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Anybody else? I'll just quickly say that, uh, definitely in favor of the amendment, um, in favor of any strengthening of the amendment to make it even more restrictive. Um, and I speak not only from a super majority of the council, I think it's everybody, uh, from the city council, but also many, many residents that I've heard testimony from that have emailed me, called me, spoken to me, and, and other counselors as well. We've all heard from residents. Um, so I'm in favor of this amendment, uh, for the citizens of Westfield, as that's what our elected duty is to support our citizens in this matter. Thank you. Thank you. Karen. Karen Ward, one city counselor. Yes. I'm in support of this amendment. Um, I'm actually, I support the 1000 feet that you have proposed. Um, I absolutely support the prohibiting in the, um, water resource protection. I would love to see it prohibited completely in industrial a since most industrial a zones are in ward one. Um, but it sounds like that's quite, not, not really advisable, but if that's possible, I would really love to see it completely prohibited and not even under a special permit. Um, but the very least what you're proposing tonight, I completely support and I think as a recommendation from you as zoning experts to the city council, we'll have a lot of weight in the whole city council meeting. So I thank you. Thank you. Yes, sir. Hi, William Monki, ward six city counselor, 37 Hillcrest Circle. Uh, I, I also support a, uh, an amendment to very careful as to where, uh, battery storage facilities should go. Uh, I missed most of the, most of the meeting 'cause I was somewhere else at a, uh, next door at a meeting. But, uh, I really appreciate your consideration. Thank you. Thank You. All Right. We have a agreements anybody against. Okay. My apologies for moving too fast. All right. Since we don't have any recommendation, We, This will conclude our public hearing. Okay. Okay. And we will move on to other business. So the first one we'll be up is the zoning change for Abu, which I have to say, Jay, you've done a phenomenal job. It's a lot of work. Kudos to you. It's a lot of, a lot of wordsmithing involved. So I think this is the third or fourth time we've, we've talked about this, but, um, basically we've already talked about it. Uh, I think it's coming back and forth. City council on the 16th. They had tabled the earlier version because the state issued new regulations in December after we had submitted. So, um, this revised version, which you've basically already seen, but the current current one is on the share drive. Um, that would just replace the earlier version. I don't know if we need, if we need to talk about it anymore or, or if everyone's okay. Jay, do we have any, uh, jurisdiction as to, um, whether, uh, a DU becomes a condo or not? It's unclear. Yeah. The state specifically didn't address that in their regs. I would say if something's accessory an accessory unit, it has to be inextricably linked to a principal unit. And how can that be if they're under different ownership? So I, I think we've always had it drafted that they need to remain under common ownership. Um, most or many accessory dwelling unit laws, special permits that existed before this whole state thing did have that provision in them. I think Worcester, Worcester did. It's not clear how the new state law would affect that or not. Can, can we put that in there and Have them it, yeah. It's in kick it out. It's, it's in there. Okay. Um, other than that, it's fabulous what you did. Thank you. And this will go to the council, correct? Yeah. I mean, I think last meeting that we talked about, just replacing the, replacing it with the, the updated version, which is this. So I think big change made that decision, but if everyone's okay, we just, uh, reconfirm that and submit this updated version to counsel and then it'll come back to you for a hearing. Again. Consensus noted. Huh? Consensus noted. Yes. Yes. Okay. We all good? Yep. Bernie Ray. Good. Okay. All right. Next is the rental registration ordinance. So that was referred from City Council. Um, I'm not quite sure why It's not a zoning ordinance, it's a general ordinance. I don't think there's any specific role for the board on this. Uh, unless you want, Uh, Wanna offer some input or some response to city council. But I don't believe there's anything you need to do. Is this just like, um, a draft that the council's put in for registration for short term rentals? Is this what this is Doing? Not short term. Just basically long term. Long term term. Yeah. So there's a, so there's a city would have a database of all these rental properties. Alright. But it's not short term. We already have short term zoning. Right. Just Long term. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you for correcting me. So is the other question I have, is this more of a courtesy for us to review? Because this really has nothing that I can see that has anything to do with zoning. Is it just more of a courtesy? I'm not sure exactly why it was forwarded referred to you, but if you have comments, um, we can relay them. But they're not just looking at you for any feedback, they're just letting us see it. That's what I'm understanding. Correct. Again, I'm not sure why it was referred. Okay. It seems that way. Yeah. Which I appreciate, huh. Which I appreciate. Oh yeah, I agree with you, John. Okay. Any questions on this? Mm-hmm. Okay. So we will move on to the cannabis social con consumption establishments. Um, I think, uh, Someone Wanted to talk about this. John, you thank, So, uh, the state's issued these new regs. I'm not sure how this plays out. Um, Westfield's ordinance, general ordinance, not zoning. General ordinance prohibits onsite consumption. So, um, going by in any local regs, this wouldn't be allowed in Westfield without that ordinance change. I'm not sure, but again, I'm not sure how this materializes with the, with the state. I don't think it would affect the zoning. I think these could still be categorized as a marijuana shop under the zoning. Um, again, there's a local or, uh, general ordinance that would not allow onsite consumption. I know from what I have read, um, on the state that the legislating, the legislation is putting the regulatory, uh, framework in place and we're still a few years out before the governor signs it. Yeah. So these are draft regulations. Um, and if, if you look through 'em, it doesn't, can't really see how it, I mean, these are governed or regulated highly by the state anyway. So I'm not sure what, what a local role would be other than if, if, uh, you know, we wanted to look at our zoning or change that general ordinance to allow onsite consumption. But it's probably, Why would A ways away would We have to change the ordinance to allow it? I don't think, I think the zoning could be interpreted that they, this would fall under a marijuana shop use. 'cause administration of marijuana is, is covered under that definition. But that's the zoning piece. But the, there's a separate local general ordinance that governs these more specifically. And that one says onsite consumption is prohibited. So that would need to change by city council, uh, to facilitate this in Westville. Okay. And I guess the question is, why would it have to change? Well, if, if, if it, if it was desired. If it was desired. So it's, it's not another one of the state saying you will change your rules because we don't like 'em. Is it, I don't read it that way. Good, Thank you. So The, the reason that I brought this up is I just wanted to make sure we tightened up our ordinances just in, 'cause you know, the last thing I want is some out of town guy come in with a bunch of money, buy a building and find all the loopholes and find the buy, buy right way to do it. Then we're stuck with it. So I just wanna make sure we're on top of it. Yeah, I mean, I would envision, you know, if this were to proceed that this is more the downtown type of use, which obviously these are already not allowed downtown in any, in any form. Um, so I guess, you know, we we're already, we already have a no set in place. So if, if we were to accommodate this, it would require some local changes. Okay. Works for me. Anything else? Any other input? Nope. Does anybody have anything else to bring forward? Thank you ma'am. No. Does anybody wanna make a motion to adjourn the meeting? There's a good one. I'll make a motion to adjourn. Second. Okay. Second. Huh? You second? Second? Yep. All good. Have a good night. Vote on that.