welcome everyone today is Tuesday March 26 2024 this is the finance committee meeting I'd like to call the meeting to order at 6:31 with a pledge of allegiance I pledge of allegiance stes stands God indivisible Liberty justice for all for all this meeting is being held remotely in accordance with the governor of Massachusetts March 12 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law GLC 30A section2 and on March 29 2023 Governor Healey signed a supplemental 2023 budget Bill allowing remote and hyd meeting options for public through March 31st 2025 this meeting is being recorded well welcome everyone um we are uh tonight we are reviewing continuing to review Warren articles and then hopefully after we have a presentation we can start to to make our recommendations on some of them um but the first up we have some members of the planning board here and um we are going to talk about the uh planning board articles first so we can um I'll introduce I'm not sure who on the planning board I should give the floor to but I'll let one of you uh whoever's taking the lead introduce who's here and uh thank you for coming thank you uh I'm Jim whiton the chair and with us is Bob daylor the vice chair and our town planner Michael burus and Michael burus is going to lead the um the demonstration of what we're doing so terrific and I'll just ask everybody who's not speaking if you can put yourself on mute and then um did you um were you going to do one article at a time and then open it for questions or did you want to complete your presentation first what was what's your plan I'm open to however the finance committee typically likes to do their reviews okay well we'll try to let's do one article at a time because then all of them together would be too overwhelming um and we'll we'll try to let you get through your presentation unless someone has something quick but we'll uh we'll try to let you go through that first okay great thank you all right so here is an overview of what we'll be covering here tonight the they fall under two buckets first is fixes to our zoning code so we'll be talking about short-term rentals um per guidance that we had received from the town attorney they had outlined that um uses that are not expressly allowed and our table of uses are not permitted and so um we're making a fix to that the congregate living um there is a section in the Assisted Living section of the zoning by law that requires congregate living but it does not define what that is and so we'll we're proposing a definition and regarding lot withth we get some pretty strange lot Arrangements proposed in subdivisions and so the planning board is proposing this amendment to bring lot shapes into a more um more regular development pattern then there are a couple of zoning changes to the first will'll go over is resoning the unrestricted District to the residential and agriculture District we'll get into these a little bit more further because they're a little bit more involved um well before you go can everybody see the screen because it's I'm having trouble it's super small for me and I'm not able to make it bigger can everyone see okay it's pretty small pretty small you can't read it right thank you I didn't know if it was just me oh much better much oh thank you so much much better thank you yeah you're welcome and uh so then then we'll talk about the business district between Fall River and rad 88 and rezoning that into a new zoning District called the Westport Gateway district and finally um some amendments to the Science and Technology overlay District it would be renamed the mixed use science and technology overlay District so our first amendment is regarding the short-term rentals and I'll just give an overview of what is involved in this um this zoning Amendment so as I had said a minute ago uses that aren't included in the table of uses are not permitted and so that has you know presents a little bit of a conundrum for the town just because this has is a use that's historic um folks have have used their homes for in Westport and so to to you know for them to not be able to do that anymore or the town to have to do enforcement something that the planning board wanted to to correct and so the purpose of this bylaw is to allow the use of short-term rentals in the residential agricultural zoning district and the business and unrestricted districts the caveat for the residential agriculture district is that there must be a 7-Day stay in the short-term rental unless that is otherwise waved by special permit and that special permit would be before the zoning board of appeals this bylaw establishes an annual registration requirement that would be administered through the building department um just be a you know a basic form um that folks would have to fill out and that way we can track where there are short-term rentals in town and and there would be some limited standards um most of them are more administrative standards such as requiring a local contact UM you have to be registered with the Department of Revenue um and so on you there would be some restrictions on them such as not allowing commercial events um so you couldn't have like a a conference on on a on a property or something like that and finally there is an enhanced enforcement provision established solely just for this particular bylaw which is um where if the building inspector who administers the zoning code the building inspector issues three negative findings either code or or town bylaw violations in a six-month period that would result in a six-month suspension of short-term rental activities on that property and that's all I've got for this slide thank you does anyone have any questions on this article so this is article 33 yes I have one I assume that this requires something that's being paid for and other words you talk about conferences and so forth a gathering of people with no payment involved I assume would not be subject to these rules that is correct so um you know having uh a group of people to stay in the short-term rental that would be okay obviously you would want to make sure that you're not exceeding the occupancy capacity of that house but that's more of a building code issue than than a zoning issue well I think some might have a party or other things which not a matter of residency but you wouldn't want to have to find that it fell into this kind of a thing on just a normal gathering with no commercial element correct yeah that's correct I don't see any other questions so I think we can move on to the next article thank you all right next up is the definition for congregate living so as I said the assisted and independent living zoning uh by law requires that independent living facilities incorporate what's referred to as congregate living arrangements but the problem is that there's no definition for congregate living and the zoning bylaw and so this has created a situation where we get proposals where the developer is saying one thing is uh what they're proposing is congregate living but the expectations of the planning board are different and so in order to to fix that and make sure everyone gets on the same page we need to incorporate a definition um for congregate living and so just read that read it for btim the definition for Cong gate living will be a shared living environment that combines housing and Supportive Services where residents share one or more common facilities including but not limited to kitchens dining areas bathrooms and recreational cultural personal care or Social Service facilities examples of Supportive Services include but are not limited to Transportation Health Care provision and laundry and meal services residents must have their own bedroom thank you and that's article 35 in our warrant question if I may about congregate what zones would permit that kind of instit of of establishment there's a variety of zone so I can pull up our table of uses right now um but it it is permitted in the residential agriculture District by special permit it is um it may just site plan in the business district just because uh but I can I can that really quick unless so that would mean the people next door can have a halfway house or something and put it under the category of congre living no specificity as to what the kind of establishment under this would turn out to be so the the the congregate living zoning bylaw is intended for AG restricted housing so it would be for 55 plus um and and sometimes even higher depending on what type of um facility they're intending to create so it's more say that or is that policy so it it's it says that in our zoning bylaw right anything else you no I'm okay thank you not enthusiastic but I understand it okay great Cindy go ahead uh is there a limit as to how many um how many individuals could uh be included in one congregate facility this this definition would not introduce any sort of um restrictions on how many individuals could be in the the facility is there is there any other part of the bylaw that would restrict how many people could live in one under one unit with the shared services is there any other part of the bylaw that would cover that no so typically what what we would the planning board's expectations is that in in one of these facilities there would be a concentration of of residents in one space so there there's easier access to provide the Supportive Services that the residents need um there is room for having some more scattered housing around there but the expectation is that there is a centralized facility would that would that prevent that prevents anyone from you know putting four people to a bedroom and have a four bedroom house that's now really compact with 16 people in it and they're sharing you know a kitchen they're sharing all of these things over 55 I understand I understand that part I I financed a number of congregate facilities but I'm just curious as to what how you going to monitor how many people are being confined in some of these units so residents would have to have their own bedroom okay right you did um and I I think the way it would be be monitored is the way it would be monitored for any other sort of type of housing that may be exceeding the occupancy um not monitored but does it also mean that you have any number of bedrooms and therefore have rooming houses and that sort of thing this this is a a separate product from rooming houses or something like that how do we know that if you have separate rooms with a shared facility there's there's a whole zoning bylaw section that outlines a whole set of criteria for the types of um Supportive Services that should be offered the types of amenities that should be offered and so the way that this is structured is it's not structured as a boarding house it's more of a senior housing facility so it's addressed other it's addressed elsewhere within the bylaw that's correct okay thank you the effort is to to make it plain that it's a facility for instance like Laurel meat if anybody knows that so as opposed to uh just Independent Living Without social services or meal services or any of those things anything else Cindy I'm good okay thank you Al you've got your hand up yeah just just just very briefly my mother uh is currently in in Assisted Living so I understand the concept I think it's it it's great and but when I hear the word uh maybe this is my cynicism about uh politics or good intentions when I hear the intention is if it isn't explicit in in in in the bylaw i i i that that's when my hackles come up a little bit my antenna come up let's go because we could all best intentions in the world right now but five years from now with a new group uh all of those intentions could change so I am not opposed to this I am just simply saying that it would be nice if it were tightened up a little little bit to to reflect what the real uh intention if you will of the of this board happens to be so I just wanted to to toss that out on the table there is a set of development standards um in in the zoning bylaw texts that we could have a conver conversation about um I don't know if it's really Germaine to the you know introducing this definition she is it to the zoning bylaw any other questions Al oh Hugh go ahead you've got your hand up yeah I just want to join with out things that are intended but not spelled out in black and white are easy to dispose of if you come in with a plan that nobody thought of it literally fits into things so wise to be care about what is mandated and what is thought about thank you Hugh um anybody else have anything otherwise we can move on to the next article nope all right Michael I think you can move on okay thank you what article is this just to make sure because I think you're going a little out of order than what's in the warrant so I just want to make sure we're following you sorry I um I don't have the article numbers um I was not forwarded the the placement that these would be I think this is 38 Karen thank you so much thank you all right 38 thank you appreciate that thank you so as as I said um earlier the the planning board will will hear some um some kind of creative approaches to achieve Frontage and lot wids um and and so in order to try to um get get a handle on having more regular lot shapes at the front of the lot so where the lot um is is intersecting with the road essentially um this standard it's a lot of words up on the screen but essentially what it's saying is that each lot that is um up for the creation of a new lot will require that there is a 100 by 200 square lot area at the front of that lot so like as I said there's quite a bit of words here but that's essentially what it's saying thank you does anyone have any questions on this Hugh go ahead yeah I'm not quite sure what the problem is this is trying to fix I understand Frontage but I also understand that there are times when there are buting properties and other things that will make it necessary to jiggle things around so they fit or where you want to do things and keep the frontage in place I'm a little unsure why this is a fix maybe looking in looking for a problem why is this necessary Jim Jim White would you like to to to chm in on this one just because I've I've only been with the the town for a year and a half and so you have a lot more experience in seeing the types of subdivisions that come through I think you could speak to that muted okay all right uh in some instances uh for instance you have a road coming off of a main main road a new road that's being created and uh there's a culdesac and they use the frontage of the culdesac almost in the same shape as the culdesac to go around to give it the Frontage that is available to to create the lot and we changed this in the planning board uh not CH not in the planning board of the town meeting we had it changed oh maybe 12 years ago 14 years ago to require that you have 50 feet uh a 50 foot circle could go from the frontage to where the building is and we continue to get lot uh Lots presented to us that have uh as little as 10 ft wide to to get uh the adequate area and Frontage and um to the to the point that uh it's impossible for the homeowner to enter their L from the road and get to their house without going on somebody else's we do have ways to deal with different situations where there's a lot of land in the back and not enough frontes in the front called flexible Frontage and we're not trying to circumvent that we're just trying to make the lots a little more conform uh some communities require them to be much more than this and this is just a step I believe to make it more uh make neighborhoods that you want to live in and not neighborhoods that you really don't own anything until you get to your house and as Jim said there would still be an outlet for some of the situations where you need to have a more of a more of a malleable Frontage situation and then you could apply for that flexible Frontage with the planning board and so I I I think this is makes makes sense uh I I believe that it is uh good planning uh I believe that it would be in the to the benefit of of all in Westport great thank you Jim um Al you've got your hand up yeah so so Jim if I can if I can follow up pardon me on a couple of quick points um who feels that this is the best for the town number one the other thing is what's the difference between 50 100 feet um 50 ft is enough room to bring a legitimate um driveway into a back piece of property and so what what was thinking about that I mean I have no skin in this game I mean it is it's it's nothing to do with my property or anything like that but it ju it just uh you know what what's what's the saying it it almost sounds like there is a h solution looking for a problem I think that's the uh the word or the the phrase I should say well I I I won't say which subdivision this is because it's not correct because it will come back before us but we've recently had a subdivision proposed had all these spiders of of bots coming off of a long road um and it it just does not fit into the neighborhood where it's going to go and it really creates a problem for the butters to this subdivision uh because all of the traffic goes really along one uh one driveway for nine lots and it really is um it it is something that it is what I think what happens is the engineers that come with plans think of it as a geometry puzzle and it's opposed to creating a good neighborhood and this is just a step in the direction of trying to create good neighborhoods in Westport as opposed to solving the geometry quiz for the developer so could quickly follow up Karen on this so so you have a neighborhood where this is a potential challenge is it is it worth putting a bylaw across the entire town for one particular neighborhood is there another solution it just it just uh Al this is Bob Naylor it it just so happens that we had a recent submission but it isn't a unique problem that we get curved curved roads which are allowed and then people um have been and they put the required 150 foot Frontage but they put very skewed angles and they quickly neck down the lots and so you get these very you get these lots that have have the required Frontage the required area but the way um they they don't end up with any decent front yacht that that the effective width of the road of the of the lot sometimes is just enough to get a driveway in and and it ends up with very odd shaped looking lots and we're trying to to make sure that a house sits with a front yard as as the uh as the the zoning intended okay thank you thank you and I I just want to make a point um we appreciate all of the information that you're providing to us because I'm sure members of the general public are listening but I want us to as a finance committee to make sure we're focusing the articles that will be recommending are ones that are Financial in nature and this one does not sound like get Financial in nature so I appreciate the information but um I'm not I'm not sure how much further we need to go on this um unless someone feels that it's Financial in nature then we can continue all right let's oh Hugh go ahead no I was taking it down sorry oh okay thank you you all right um thank you Michael we can move on to the next one let's see what article this is before you go hold on I bet Michelle can figure it out quicker than I can this might be a tough one don't even unrestricted District residential agricultural District I think this is 36 oh unrestricted yep I think you're right that's it do you think it's 36 okay do all right I think this is is article 36 okay thank you again um is there way to make it bigger uh this probably about yeah better as big as I can make it okay so this isn't that right here that the map is an outline of the unrestricted district and what this amendment would do is it would um replace the unrestricted district with the residential agriculture district and then the Zone by uh excuse me and the zoning bylaw would remove all references to the unrestricted District the reason this is being considered from or being proposed from the planning board is that the unrestricted District allows industrial uses um and so currently this area is completely residential it has significant amount of wetlands um there's some agriculture land here here or the land is undeveloped so and as it stands now there would be no there would not be any non-conforming uses created by this Reon also this area includes an aquafer protection area planning board doesn't think that allowing industrial uses um in this area would be appropriate with that aquafer protection area and as I said there are sensitive environmental features like the wetlands but also the bread and cheese Brook um which has a a tmdl for nitrogen so again trying to trying to create or not create but continue um keeping this a cleaner environment um for the natural features and for folks drinking water and I'll turn it over great thank you any questions on that okay I see no questions so we can keep moving right on okay so the the West Park Gateway District um one second Michael we've got to find your article uh 37 37 thank you so much thanks so the Westport Gateway district is is the it's intended to harness the Investments being made on Route Six and using the zoning as a tool to try to translate that development into um different types of land uses that can diversify the the town tax base and so you know zoning is just one tool to guide development so so while we can't provide necessarily Give A fine grain prediction of which type of land uses might give here we can we can through our zoning bout put some parameters um around those potential new Investments so the the Westport Gateway District um what it will do is it'll provide additional development potential and flexibility for new residential and Commercial Investments um it will have a more defined um revie development review process through uh the the site plan procedures and oh it's also intended to complement the Mast doot upgrade on Route Six they'll be reformatting the way that the traffic patterns work including pedestrian upgrades and as I said capturing the growth from the route six sewer project so here are some highlights what this zoning district will do um one and as I said there I kind I guess I kind of skipped ahead there there would be a defined um development review process that would um just typically require a site plan review um this district will also promote flexibility for commercial uses and so um this gets back to the issue that we had talked about a little bit earlier with short-term rentals where if the bylaw does not reference the specific use it's not permitted and so in this bylaw section what we would like to see the planning board would like to see um is that if there are similar uses outlined in the Westport gate or if there's uses so with the uses that are outlined in the Westport Gateway district and someone wants to propose a similar use the planning board finds that to be a like enough use um that could be something that that could be brought before the planning board and so the example I use here is um a coffee shop versus an ice cream shop similar types of uses but it may be precluded if you're not allowing that flexibility otherwise um next next is to expand commercial residential and mixed use mixed use development opportunities and the development intended to be oriented around pedestrians in order to complement planned Mass doot Route Six upgrades as I had said a little bit earlier some of these elements include requiring connections to sidewalks requiring parking to the side of rear structures uh having some architectural standards that would improve the corridor's visual appeal and requiring more landscaping and and development more generally an important part of this bylaw is that there will be a requirement to buffer development in the Westport Gateway district from less intensive zoning District so that would be the residential agriculture Z District would also require that there are traffic studies and and mitigation measures implemented with the development and the development would be cut to a smaller scale so that scale would be around it would be three stories um so if there any questions about this one this one also kind of gets into the next one as well with the Science and Technology overlay District but um we can talk about them at both times however you all want to do it so I've got a quick question in term how much land is undeveloped so how much is to be developed still so I actually have a slide later on um there's not a ton of completely undeveloped land um and in fact in this in the Westport Gateway District I think there are essentially two main Parcels um that are undeveloped right now they're used for agricultural purposes and they're about um 56 Acres total there are other other Parcels that are developed they would you know probably with with the well with the route six sewer upgrades they would be underutilized for the kinds of services that they would have access to and those would fall under the category of like lots with um surface parking lots that are just being used for storage so without much land to develop how would it really help commercial opportun ities where where are those commercial opportunities the commercial opportunities could be in um different you know in different um different commercial developments that are looking for for new tenants so with more commercial uses being available potentially fill those tencies faster um and also this would um hopefully encourage some Redevelopment opportunities as well because as I said said there are a number of of um a number of properties that if the sewer were to come in would be um under underdeveloped property for the kinds of uh services that are right at its front door great thank you Hugh go ahead I'm just gonna say I'm not all sure about some of the the parking lots that you refer to I think of the ones at whites Etc down the way those are part of the businesses that are there that're aren't going anywhere you know the fact they're parking lot do seem to me means there something that's subject to Future development as they're part of an ongoing business there so those would be fall under the category of Redevelopment opportunities and I'm thinking more further um in the Eastward and in the direction of Route 88 um there are some storage Lots around there and I know that there is there is an owner of a property six area who um is using a lot for sort of Machinery storage or vehicle storage that who is interested in redeveloping that property there are a number of uh in this Hue in the section um uh to the east of U of Sanford Road and on the north side of the road there are a number of uh small Pils that have dumpster storage on them truck and Equipment storage uh there are some that uh have temporary School Bus overflow parking those type of uses which which are clearly underutilized and sort of around the corner on the north side of uh Route 88 on Sanford Road there are a couple of U large undeveloped parel which are in U section 61a they're they grow Calon on them um so there are that's the the the Le France properties and the pieces that are at the West the Far Western end of the Gateway those are all developed and it's unlikely that they would get redeveloped in the future well there's a rumor whether it's true or not I don't know that somebody owns one of those areas used for parking or something who has a 15 an apartment building in mind that would devastate the school I wonder what control there is over what actually gets built in that area well you know a project like that would all come with with all of the controls that are in the zoning bylaw for um you know limits on height limits on nothing with the it's not height and limit I'm talking about it's a 50 and I don't know true or not but the r is a 50 unit apartment complex which would forget the physical dimensions it would calleda lots of people and lots of kids and lots of expense for the town and for the schools is there any control over that in terms of sizes densities and so forth you uh from what I understand there is uh the owner of the former Yellow Freight yard south of Route Six uh and uh across the street from the Edgewater Apartments and I think that that owner would like to build another type of Edgewater apartment complex which is I think for older folks also I just want want to note that single family homes typically are going to have a higher impact on on school en enrollment and they will typically create a higher service delivery costs as well because they're they're more spread out um single family homes and and many communities typically will have um more students brought into the school district um then you will have with a multi U multi-unit development especially when the market is starting to change quite a bit where um there's an aging population and folks are looking to downsize um from from from their home so yeah I just wanted to add that in there Al go ahead so there are a couple of things that I that I I I want to bring up one of the things and I I clearly I don't have a life because I spent a lot of time listening to the videos of the different committees and what I hear about all the time is uh the the the the revenue stream for uh Route Six uh sered was in the $4 to $500,000 range if if I remember correctly you know I I could be off a little bit but I never hear about the expenses I never hear about the cost Associated the both the the fiscal and the social cost of of of the uh the proposal for this trunk line I also never never hear about why we are are as a town spending potentially $35 million on a trunk line uh to benefit a few uh a few developers that are going to put in housing now I don't have a problem at all of course nobody does with clean water and and storage I you know this isn't you know my battle about that but there are so many un answered questions regarding this who's going to pay what is it 20% is it 10% is it 90% uh for the town and I can go on and on and on which I will not do which I could do but I won't do it there's just so many unanswered questions about this this the zoning tied into the um uh you know this trunk line if you will which by the way the article doesn't even consider it a trunk line say what you want but it it but the the lawyers apparently decided stick to this article though we could I I could go on and on yes oh no appreciate it thank you good good for you for for pulling me back um I just I just think that there there are so many unanswered questions about this uh that that uh that that need to be answered from a fiscal perspective Ive uh for the town to make a an informed decision and I don't think we're getting it thanks Karen thank you no and and I just you know I want to just add on to what uh Hugh Hugh mentioned and ALU did too so if there is such a such a 50 apartment complex that could be built I would um also feel that that could have a significant can impact on School enrollment so uh whether whether or not they're apartments and yes more families will will live in single family homes but people can't afford single family homes and if an apartment's available um I don't think we should be pre ignoring the fact that a 50 apartment complex as this example would not increase enrollment so I think that is something to be considered um and that is a concern I have in part with this article or uh the next article is really talking about um how it's going to impact the town and services as well uh could I I say something here yeah we're talking about this article which is the Gateway District right and what this is doing is taking the existing commercial Zone in change it into the gateway District between 88 and B River and that is the the basically the the most commercial area that we have on Route 6 and what we're doing is just relaxing the requirement so that we could get more businesses to to invest there the serid report from I don't know years ago suggested that if we had water and sewer the lots that are there that could be redeveloped repurposed or any other lots that were not built on uh you could within 10 years get an extra $400 to $600,000 per tax revenue based on eight years ago uh that would pay for that section of the sewer cost on ongoing 20year basis and what we what we want to do is you know our commercial area in town is the same in Central Village as it is on Route 6 as it is on 177 which is which there different areas they shouldn't be that way but that's what town meeting has has approved over the years and what we're trying to do is to make it uh make this area so that we can take advantage of Route Six being redesigned by mass Highway uh and to make it a little more enticing for small businesses to either reinvest in what they're already doing or small other small businesses to come in uh this area is not going to be a big box store area uh we don't have any place like that in Westport it won't develop like like dark and I think this would be a win-win if we got that kind of Revenue increase and it would be I think at very little uh impact cost of the town thank you thank you Hugh go ahead I don't have any trouble the commercial side of things my concern is the residential and the impact that both Al and I were talking about in passing if it's purely commercial no problem thank you Al I'm H thank you anyone else on this article so uh just I just want to ask a question to just to follow up Jim so if the purpose of the developing here is this is the most crucial commercial zone are there no are there are there no restrictions being placed in this article to limit residential and kind of encourage commercial or are we allowing residential as well residential is allowed in the commercial districts in town just as it residential area and as you can see on Route Six there's a mix of residents and Commercial as there is in Central Village I mean so uh if somebody wants to do residentials more power to them I mean they still have to comply with all the zoning regulations and our bylaws and site plan review and all that stuff great thank you Cindy go ahead well is it isn't in true in fact that we we're we're supposed to comply at some point in the near future future to have dense housing you know a housing density plan to satisfy the rail issue that if it's in that one mile Zone near the Skateway District it would satisfy the requirement for us to have that um housing density plan that that that is required by the state for that you know there's only one Community that's really put their hand up and said no they're not going to do it um I don't know what the outcome of that will be um but uh in fact if there if there is some residential in there it would help us satisfy this you we we can't keep it all out all the time so so Cindy if I could respond to that uh that is to do with the MBTA station laws that the state has in place uh to date because F River doesn't have a station yet we're not required to yet right ball River will have an operational station in trains by the end of this year next year I believe that the legislature will include us in the requirement so we would be required uh as a an adjacent MBTA Community correct so the question will be are we an adjacent Community or all toown at J and there'll be different requirements for those and those would they won't take into account that we have multif family housing we have to we will have to Z that allow 15 units per acre uh by right and uh as as you said Cindy Milton is the only town that has said no uh I'm sure that's going to court uh I've heard Governor Healey they gee I guess Milton doesn't want any state aid so you know so if we don't do that uh and we're going to have to do that next year if we don't do it this year uh we're going to need to make a place in Westport it doesn't have to be we don't have to build it all we have to do is have a place where it's allowed by right to have 15 units per and it could be 750 units or it could be as less as 375 right and this is this is not a piece of legislature that goes under the radar I mean they are very Vigilant the MBTA in the state is very Vigilant about this they will they will do it yes yes uh and and and in addition to that I mean you know we would benefit from the new growth of the valuation but we will probably also see an assessment on our um state aid for the fact that we're benefiting from the rail station once it's open so it's also going to cost us some additional funding from the state because of the uh of the benefit of having that it it's supposed to increase the property value in the area so therefore we get an assessment for that that adjacent uh adjacent rail station hopefully we could get some offsetting tax dollars uh evaluation at least uh in New in New Growth that would help offset some of that if if that were to come U come to fruition right and the state uh we could fight it just like Milton is but you'd have to fund the lawsuit right we don't have any money to do that right and we would lose considerable state aid too I mean if if right so I mean not just we would get when we have it but the stuff we already have yeah I think it's an important point to make sure that that people understand that that is very real it is it is and we've been following it for several years um and have been in touch with dhcd and other groups in the state to try to figure out are we an adjacent Community or will we be or we a small town adjacent great thank you um Hugh go ahead just going to say that Cindy and JM are unfortunately right on the numbers the state has no interest in the future of the town of Westport and they will do to us whatever they choose to to impose their decisions right thank you for the comment Al go ahead yeah I would I would just like to Echo that and and and add on a bit that that the state is uh source of funding other than the the the taxpayers of the town to at a you know a state mandate that will end up and with with no changing everything you know and I go back to my earlier comment about sered talking about four to 500,000 of tax revenue for the town what is the what's what's the cost what is the cost on the other side everybody loves to talk about revenue revenue revenue but nobody wants to talk about the cost what about the new uh you know fire station that will end up having to be put up in in the north end of town because that one 50 years old crepid and and all of this new building and on and on and on so I'm I'm just saying that you know there's a lot of unintended consequences to to this decision it it it's just not a uh you know you know a net positive all the way around and I don't think anybody whether it's the planning board or any other uh group serad have have really you know bored down into the cost benefit ratio the return on investment of what we're talking about the infrastructure Comm so um I don't know um well I Karen I don't know if you want to talk about the trunk line but I can give a a few minute rebuttle to Al's questions if you like or I can just skip it if you can make it brief I think that's a very important article and I would appreciate uh if you have some words to say but then I would like us to get back to the the last article which is uh another very important one for us to discuss Okay so the the $35 million for the trunk line is just for the trunk line it it isn't any money to go into the neighborhoods and that will come in later years the and I just want to be upfront with that I mean the trunk line will sewer the water and sewer the entirety of Route Six uh but it just for the for the town for future thoughts uh is just the trunk line to be able to get into the neighborhoods and provide clean water for people that live on small lots that have contaminated Wells and we're going to have real problems in the near future with p uh because even on Sodom not sod on Sanford road right now we have wells that have past public Wells that have past in them and we're going to have trouble fixing that without this long-term uh the federal government is about F the EPA is about ready to change the metrics on P from 19 parts per million is the threshold down to four and that is really really hard to get if you have p in the groundwater number two um if we don't uh deal with the nitrogen in our esary uh like they have done this year on the cape they have e the de has made a rule that you have five years to come up with a plan uh a 20-year plan to remove the nitrogen from your Ester and if you don't come up with the plan then you have five years to upgrade every single septic system to a denitrifying system and if we had to do that in Westport uh at the tune of 20 to $40,000 each for every every single septic system times probably 6,500 septic systems if you do the arithmetic that's a lot of money it's like 200 and some odd million dollars uh and then you you finish that and you still don't have clean water so the the trunk line allows us to stay out of D's crosshairs and that's the reason that they let us off the hook because the people in the Board of Health sent them a long long report on what we're doing and what we're planning we've already spent uh I don't know Bob dlor can tell me I don't know how much we spent on sewer plan so far but I think we've spent close to a million dollars or more uh we are going to get almost a million dollars from representative keing uh as a as a earmark uh we can get money today from the from the state revolving funds at 2% loan uh for 20 years and if we do it now it's a lot cheaper than doing it 10 years from now just look what happened when we did the fire station and the in the police station the first the first iteration was a combined uh safety uh thing and it it failed so we did several years later the fire station and then several years later the police station and all told that cost us millions of dollars more than it would have if we' done it the first time and I think that this that's our last article right yes that's our you saved the best for last all right yeah okay so the mixed use science and technology over overlay District this is the former Science and Technology overlay district and um it's very similar to the Westport Gateway District in some aspects um and so one thing that I just really quick wanted to mention on this on this map here it's identified in a red circle on the left side of the map um it is proposed to pick up a couple of parcels at the southwest corner of Route Six in Sanford Road and so the mustad as we've been referring to it um it would update the permitted land uses to include residential um and contemporary commercial uses so there's some some uses in there that need to be updated like um uh call centers is one of them for example and so that's not really uh so we're updating those uses to um be more contemporary and then consolidating some of the uses into larger categories it will also allow for the same sort of use flexibility that the Westport gate Gateway district will have and so um yeah so that's really just a quick overview of that one again it's kind of similar an approach as the Westport Gateway District um I do have another slide just talking about development in the in the route six area because it you know in the previous slide it's it's pretty big land area that is shown in that overlay District but there are some pretty substantial development constraints in that area that um after discussing with the planning board that they they would like to have referenced um in this meeting and so um just really quick there are some environmental challenges for development um especially on those Parcels on the south so south of Route Six those large Parcels um you would have to have some flood not only uh Wetland but flood plane Crossings and so th those Crossings would substantially increase costs to development it's also worth noting that um in some of those those Parcels again the the large ones to the south of Route 6 um Chris Capone he's our conservation agent he's familiar with those properties and while there hasn't been a full Wetlands investigation of those properties he from his familiarity with them he he does think that the the wetlands delineation would be expanded um another challenge for this area is access so there's the cost of road construction um some of these Parcels don't even have Road Frontage so that presents a pretty substantial challenge for development and regarding utilities the developer and and our um as things have been proposed with the route 6 sewer project developers would have to incur the costs for utility expansion so if it's you know going onto their property or down down a street that's not connected yet they would have to bear that cost again with those larger Parcels to the South they do increase in elevation um and which would require pump stations so we bring this up because although there's a large land area involved in this rezoning the underlying land has some characteristics that will render many will render projects in feasible without a substantial multi-million dollar upfront investment and infrastructure so I circled where we we think between these two rezonings where we think development is is likely to occur um those are those Parcels that I was referring to earlier that are um either uh underdeveloped or undeveloped and those would be the prime locations for development so this is to say that you know kind of rezoning that the entire science or former Science and Technology overlay district is looking to a window of you know a lot further along down the line in the future um for when utilities may be available in this area um Bob or Jim I don't know if you have any anything else to add um between this and and and the previous slide uh just that the access to these Parcels that are the big ones or would have to come through Route Six and would also require uh purchasing some property on Route 6 because they don't but Route 6 um the big ones uh there is some possibility of accessing uh a few of them a couple of the big ones from Briggs Road but here again you'd have to buy a property and do it uh and it would make it even harder to get water and sewer in there so there there's a lot of constraints um I cannot see myself anywhere number anywhere the number of residential unit both Cindy asking and if we got three buildings like have been put in in Lincoln Park I would be surprised um and so I I think that the possibility uh as we have discussed is probably more commercial development because they have the money to be able to do that uh and it would be uh I think low impact to the town uh and as uh Cindy was saying we are really going to need to designate some area that can accommodate uh Zoning for 15 units per acre for the M MBTA stuff uh and I think this is a better place to do uh you don't have to build it you don't have to enable it to be built you just have to zone for it and just a quick followup to that point Jim um one thing when you're doing your MBTA housing allotment Wetlands do not count in that calculation so it actually has to be developable land right but there's plenty of Uplands in there but it's hard to get to right great thanks I think Hugh you've got your hand up for a question go ahead yeah a couple number one in dealing with the Gateway District Jim said quite rightly we don't know what the mandated numbers would be for for intensive housing because it depends upon what it gets classified as at some point in the future but let's wait until we know what we're dealing with because we don't want to give an authorization for 700 houses if it turns out it should be 350 and I assume that some limitation can be built in once we know what the Mandate is number two I don't see why we need to reone this route six this um swamp area at this time at all everybody's saying maybe someday in the future it might be used for something well I would say let's find up somebody wants to do a project and it's perfectly appropriate to consider that project and how a resoning e that time when something concrete to deal with could be appropriate but now as a blank shck no hippy says there's no nobody's going to do anything in the near future about this because of the topography Etc so I rush to to uh create a blank check thank you Hugh Cindy go ahead so in in my professional career my position was by and large I did financing for large scale Builders all across the country both for Senior Living multif family housing single family housing builders Health Care issues ETC and one of the primary um uh requirements in in many of these developments now granted some of them were certainly much larger than this but even on the smaller scale ones that required uh particularly with multifam uh units that for for each number of units uh built um they need to provide open space for uh you know for playgrounds for children to have Bob Bob dor could you put your your thing on mute because I'm getting feedback from your I got it okay good all right thank you um that they provide some additional open space for every certain number of units added to this so it cuts down on the number one on the density but it also provides a better quality of life for the people that that live there and additionally although this was an area you know in many areas where land was much less expensive than it is here it required the developer of that parcel of that large parcel to either a make a substantial payment towards education uh the the uh future educational expenses and or set aside land in that development if there's sufficient space for um public use for public school use or for some other municipal use that uh whether it be a public park or or whatnot so there's a great number of restraints uh in addition to impact studies for traffic for wildlife for environmental impact all of these things were included uh in the zoning right up front my fear is that yeah this is you know this is a start to Gateway and someone goes in there and they you know they secure uh they secure the the viable permit because we're kind of Skin and Bones on this just starting out until we think of all the things that need to be added and then that then that developer is grandfathered in and he gets away with he she whoever whatever the company might be gets away with being able to put it in Skin and Bones until the light bulbs go off uh you know let's face it we're a town run a lot of volunteer committees you know that we we don't have the full-time you know Brain Trust that we can go to every day uh in many of these cases I mean you know Michael does a great job but and you know you've got a short staff in the planning board the whole town has short staff and we're we're run by these nighttime committees that meet for two three hours a week so it there's so many things that could be added on to a a a a developer and the requirements that would benefit the town uh in the long run and still satisfy the goal uh that we you know if we need multif family housing yes there is a loow income requirement that that should be necessary I mean let's face it mean Route 6 is not a bucolic little area that we're trying to destroy here there are a lot of parcels there that would really benefit from having an upgrade and maybe even multif family housing is the answer but they need to add something to it they can't just put it up without giving back and giving back in a big way so you know I I I I really oppose this only from an economic standpoint because I feel that there are so many more things that we can extract from a developer uh that wants to do this that would benefit the town in the long run so it's um I think there's a lot of things to think about in this great thank you Cindy go ahead Hugh I just want to say Cindy said what I was thinking much better than I could have said it thank you I uh I'll I'll re I'll agree with that too but go ahead Al go ahead yeah same same thing cind Cindy did an eloquent job of of pulling out of my brain what what I what I was thinking I think that there this is um a is premature it's not a negative but it's AE it's premature and there's a lot more that could be could be done and extracted from from this uh uh from this proposal so I I I can't I cannot support it think so in its current form yeah go ahead thank you I I guess some of my questions really are so my understanding this this original Science and Technology District was initially created commercial because we thought that would be an optimal place because there's enough lamb there for commercial development um you know I'm trying to understand why why we changing it to residential why are we not holding it for commercial development and again say re reiterate the same things that we've been saying it seems premature we don't know what we need to do for housing so why are we changing looking to change the residential requirements now U and Hugh mentioned it's a blank check and that's what this feels like to me and I've asked you know I asked how many Resident how many dwelling units could go on this property I'm just looking to understand if it were fully developed residential how many dwelling units go could go on this property well um you know I I um objected the idea of the blank check idea um you know I'm I'm I'm holding the uh you know the the zoning article and it talks about the open space the interior Landscaping the buffer zones from residential all of the requirements the requirements for the developer to pay for all the infrastructure for the development um this is this reads um as a person who works with developers all the time I None of the developers I know would read this is a blank check number one and number two the idea is a chicken the chicken and egg idea is is uh is this is this something which is a good thing to do but not now um you know I I have two thoughts on that the first is this does allow this is a place where we could put the uh zoning density that we know that we're going to have we know that the MBTA is going to require a place in this town that allows 15 dwelling units per acre now we don't know the the actual number of units that would be required because it depends on whether or not we know that we are going to be an adjacent Community later this year we don't know whether or not the MBTA would see us as a small town adjacent or just a regular adjacent community and that that that doesn't change the density requirement we're still required to have 15 units an acre it just requires fewer units so that you know we are acting this planning board in proposing this is acting proactively for something that we know when we proposed it the station was supposed to open in Fall River last fall so this was going to be a need that we had this year so when we started working on this this was a a this year need not a next year need now the station didn't open last fall and is opening sometime this summer but um you know so this is this is where we put this and we put it here because it's not directly on the road it's not directly this this site is constrained all of that light blue green colors that you see essentially pinches off the site you you can't gain access from 88 you're not allowed to gain access from residential areas on Sanford road so you have to commit in either from Briggs or you have to come in from 888 and you have to buy some pel because there's no open land you can get into so that so that you know if you look at what is the the the probable development that you could end up with reasonably easy that is if you laid out at the front end you know several million three four five who knows what the cost is going to be to buy a unit when you absolutely need to buy a property on Route Six but the but the price is is going to be up so you're laying out all this money at the front end and if you look inside that red circle of that's reasonably what you could get so that if you built something in those open Lots behind um uh you know behind the you know the the businesses are right along Route Six you might get two or three hundred units in there and that's essentially where we're going to end up with an mvta requirement so we we anticipated the station to be open we crafted something that was as as best we could zoning compliant with the MBTA housing requirements and we look at at multif family housing in that area then there's another question of what is the character of the multifam housing and how many school kids this idea that it's loaded with school kids I think um we will we we have an obligation to provide some some information about that but I know that at least further north the multif family housing produces very few you school children it is essentially you know being filled with two Market places young people starting out they can't afford to buy a house and um you know retirees empty nesters that are getting rid of their homes and moving into a new apartment or a condo development and they're not producing many school children and what we're trying to do is we don't have any examples we can point to in in in or we don't have many examples we could point to but but I think we can get the information for um I would say the the stuff that they built in Lincoln Park is probably as close to an example we can get and we can see how many school children they produce so we have some factual bases other than apartment buildings are loaded with with children so we we looked at a place where we could be compliant we could protect the town and the town's ability to get you know the state aid and would have as minimal an impact as it can in the in the in the North bouth Community and and so Bob just as a followup so when when a developer figures out how to gain access to that property can't the whole property be developed exclusive of course of the wetlands yes they could it's it's a matter of the the economics of and if you if you look at the map that we have here you can see there's this little there sort of an area directly behind Route Six that you know you could get into then the next step to get to the South it it this scale that's a road that's um you know two 2,000 ft long and it has and it has no development on it so so you're thinking this is underground this is underground utilities water seore you're talking a a road that's $800 to $1,000 a foot and you're got to build you know 1, 1200 1,600 ft of it before you get to where you want to build that's a significant constraint well you know I think some of the some of the challenges that I have with this one right now is why now why not later right so think about think about our route six residents and everything that is being asked of them in this in this town meeting there it's a substantial change every direction that they're tur into and then probably don't even know this is happening or they're still focused on the water and sewer and their $10,000 betterments and and everything else and we're doing a substantial change to the residents on Route Six and I I don't understand why we think that's fair to them to do all of this all at once well we're we uh at least uh I'll speak personally my intent is not not to harm them but to help them we have examples where where people who are living on fixed incomes in those houses are doing septic system upgrades for $4,000 and and and and we're doing nothing to help those people and we're doing nothing to help you know the the people that that have you know wet backyards and poor drinking water and cess pools and can't expand their homes you know that that this article has nothing to do with that right no it it doesn't this is this is all this is all regarding the the SE The Sur is the sore in water is not intended to hurt people but in fact to to help them and and to benefit the town in a more broader sense great thank you go ahead Hugh you've got your hand up I just gonna say I remember Ronnie Reagan said the most dangerous words ever heard I'm from the government to help you that's what we're doing right here number one doesn't make any difference whether they're school children or not the state doesn't care the state has a number based upon an intensity per acre whatever falls out from that is our problem not theirs and that's why we don't want to Zone a bunch of acres for intensity when we don't know what the Mandate will be we need to Zone the numbers that we are imposed Upon Us by the state after we know what they are in terms of volume number two the as I say we need to know what they are and I guess number three is we usually don't think of zoning articles as something that have Financial impact this one potentially does as the predecessor does so we should take a position thank you h i i 100% agree this absolutely has a financial impact um go ahead Michael you've got your hand up yeah just on some of the discussion about the MBTA zoning um well we don't know exactly what wh if or when will be incorporated into um the MBT area and what those expectations might be I think we can look at what standards are already in place in other towns and get a pretty good indication of what might be required of us so the town would be likely considered an adjacent small town and that's because we have a low population density so they base that they base there's two criteria that they look at they look at your base population size and your population density if you have a small population and it doesn't go above a certain threshold then you're an adjacent small town if you have a low population density but you have a larger population like Westport does you're still considered an adjacent small town so I I think you know development patterns may change over over the coming year or so and but I I don't know if that'll change that substantially um and I don't know if the statute will really change that that substantially so I think we'll probably have a good indication that we're going to be an adjacent small town so what is required of an adjacent small town is that they have 5% of their um they need to be able to accommodate 5% of the total dwelling units at a density of 15 dwelling units per acre and so the the way they take that calculation is out of your your housing unit estimate so in 2021 our housing unit estimate was 7,713 so 5% of that is 386 dwelling units and if you do 386 dwelling units of at 15 dwelling units per acre that would be a 26 acre zoning District again that zoning District cannot be um it cannot be in wetlands and it has to be at least over five acres of it must be contiguous so you couldn't break it up into different parts of town um this is this is the lowest this is the most intensive level of housing that might be required from a community that's Incorporated in the MBTA um zoning area so were it to differ it's only it's only GNA go up thank you Michael Hugh go ahead I don't see any reason why we have to guess what the rules will be it isn't this year will be a future and we can then deal with what is imposed upon us when we know what we have to do I understand that fighting with the state is a pure GRE we will lose but we don't have to do more more than we are required to by our our L and Beacon Hill number two Michael analysis are probably pretty good we could do that as a minimum but may or may not pass muster we should do no more I don't see any reason why we have to do it now before the question is anwers as to what we actually are required to do thank you Hugh anyone else have any questions on article 34 uh Al go ahead and then Zach quick comment I I I would Echo what what Hugh said you know let's play the cards that are that that are dealt let's let's not you know hypothesize about what may may come down the road thank you Al go ahead Zach yeah I would just I know you touched upon it but what's the purpose of the line um with the conservation agents thoughts on a full investigation what you know would initiate that and is there a cost to that so the point in bringing that up is that the developable area um on those large Parcels is likely to be less than what you see on these Maps just based on his assessment of the the site conditions um typically we wouldn't pay for that to be done that would be something that a developer would do where they to bring forth an application um in fact they would address that with getting a Wetlands delineation at the Conservation Commission is there any way we can make that a preliminary requirement so we don't have to pay but we could understand what the actual land's assessment is like another piece of the puzzle before jumping into this zoning change um we may not they may not be able to because it's private property right now and we would have to work with the landowner who's currently trying to sell that property which could impact the you know the the the the the sale price of that of that property so I don't know I mean is it possible in theory I I think so but um It's Complicated when when you start start having to work with someone who's trying to sell a property thank you just you know just another question we the previous article was the Gateway District when we talked about there's some availability for apartments to be built there so we may have already addressed our potential need in that District so why do we need to do both now why what's again what's the rush on this now if the Gateway District goes through let this one pause until more information comes up that's you know I don't understand what the rush is now this one was specifically selected when we were working with our um we were working with a consultant on this project a little over a year ago and uh this one was specifically selected for housing to be incorporated with the MBTA zoning why in anticipation that changes are coming down the pipeline to um get them Incorporated sooner rather than later I guess we're just repeating ourselves why an anticipation let's wait until the reality was the Gateway even a discussion at that time a year ago when the overlay was discussed the Gateway was was discussed in fact the we we looked at a variety of different zoning districts um east of Route 88 as well and um it just kind of decided that the the project was getting to be a little bit too expansive um and it was probably not necessary to Zone that far out um towards towards Dart math so we decided to keep everything um concentrated to these two areas and and we felt that the the Gateway the the Gateway District does allow residential uses but not at the density that is compliant with the MBTA density requirements so we thought in in the putting that in the um the mustad area where it could be away from the streets and away from you know the uh immediate Gateway visibility in the town that we thought that putting the density there was the the place to do it and not directly on Route Six thank you go ahead Al sorry I just wanted to say that I think all of us all need to do is go to map Geo uh Westport Mass and you know put the overlay map for the wetlands which I have done a number of times and you see how many wetlands are in this area I you know yes it needs on the ground boots on the ground uh study but from a cursory uh you know look at the area it's pretty obvious I mean it how how many wetlands are there in how little area and you can go parcel by parcel by parcel uh and and at least get a an overview of of what is and is not developable and what what the constraints are I mean you know any a rocket science is as they say it's it's it's pretty pretty pretty clear and obvious that's what we did do Al that's what you see on the map in blue and green you know Bob I'm sure did but I also I I also know that I've looked at it extensively and I see one hell of a lot of green uh you know on on that map and and I I see a lot of challenges in that first let's call it third of the section that was uh you know from call it Sanford road to to Route 88 for for you know a heck of a lot of development so um anyway we should have lunch someday yeah it's it's a date go ahead Hugh I just wanted to say Mr dater said I think I heard properly that the the um Gateway District would not allow for sufficient density to deal with the state in that area so why are we providing for residential intensity at at all in that area if it would not qualify for what we are mandated to do we thought allowing some uh residential uses in there would provide an an economic use particularly in combining the small lots that are directly on Route Six um you know it still allows all the the commercial the commercial uses uh but we we we thought that we should have a mix on both sides I thought the whole idea was to promote commercial use it it is but we see we have so little commercial activity it it is it is difficult to forecast what we could do even even with as as as you see here you know so we will provide for multi family housing in the area which does not qualify for the state mandate because it might be a nice thing to do no be because it allows economic use for Pils which are which are sitting clearly underused I don't buy that one for one minute I'm sorry all right um are you all set here yeah that's that's about it thank you Jim you've got your hand up so did you have something to add yeah I just wanted to talk about the Gateway District uh I understand where everybody's coming from on the Science and Technology change to the uh the mixed use science and technology uh two things one the underlying District it's an overlay District both of them and the district itself is residential so if it wanted to be developed residential today it could be um and two uh with a Gateway District um we really need to change the commercial aspect of our route six Corridor and right now uh not so much in this area where the Gateway district is but all the rest of the thing the the the most use and the best use use car lots and that will change if we have water and sewer the reason that you get used car lots which don't provide uh any jobs or much in the way of tax revenue uh is because we don't have water and sewer it's the only thing you can do down there that brings any money and the the the type of commercial development that we get in the area between uh in the exist where the Gateway District would go now is uh a lot of homegrown small businesses there's a bank or two One bank I think um but what we require there is 60,000 square feet for a commercial lot on Route 6 in our current commercial district and if we have water and sewer there's no way we need that kind of quantity of thing you could have coffee shops you could have uh a lot of different things that would be beneficial to the residents in that area of town that are not being done now because there's no water and sewer and two because the lots are too big and I think that you know approving the Gateway district is a step towards making sense of our commercial zoning uh as I said before the commercial Zone in Central Village is the same as on Route Six and that really doesn't make any sense at all and you know I think we're not going to get overdeveloped like uh Dartmouth um and so I I think we for instance uh we have one fairly large development on Route 6 East of 88 and that's CBS and when that came before the planning board and somebody bought up five different lots to put CVS there and when we had the the um the first hearings on CVS somebody approached us at the desk and said well we have a a citizen petition and we thought oh here we go they don't want this development here but it was a petition to for us to allow it they thought we weren't going to allow the CVS people want stuff like that and we had we had a lot of trouble trying to get them to put the parking on the side instead of the front and it makes much more sense to put it on the side or the back then in the front and that's what the Gateway District calls out is Mak sense of the development pattern and the pattern will happen over the years and it would be good if we had some kind of idea of what it should look like so that's that's why I think we should approve this District zone thank you thank you any other questions on any of the planning board articles I see we're out of questions um thank you um okay so uh we appreciate Bob you are are also on the infrastructure committee and so uh there may be a water and sewer question I think we've talked a lot about um that in the exchange but Michelle I think you may have had a specific question that you had emailed me today that you watched a presentation of which point and maybe you can ask Bob your question directly since he's here sure thank you um there was some um I was at the neighborhood association uh presentation uh where they had the select board candidates as well and I'm just wondering with that whole um we talked about the D and the EPA focusing on the cape and taking their eyes off of Westport right now with the whole nitrogen upgrade and if the trunk line gets approved does that mean that they won't mandate the nitrogen upgrades and that that takes away from that I got it you're on M mute Bob you're on mute the uh Michelle the uh the the town has an obligation um to meet the water quality standards in the Westport River because EPA and D have assigned um have designated the the Estuary as impaired Waters of the United States and have set um tmdl limits for bacteria and for nitrogen so the town has an obligation to meet the water quality standards in its Watershed so that's that's just that that's sort of an absolute now we made an argument and and that that has stood on the cape as well and we made and and because DP never in took enforcement actions once they they had um designated impaired Waters the conservation law Foundation sued the state to say that you have an obligation to you know to meet the water quality standards of the Clean Water Act so they started with the cape and they were and and we have the same all allegation and because we made that is the Board of Health and the planning board made an argument that we had an integrated Water Management plan that we had sore in planning we made all new uh septic systems meet nitrogen reducing we were taking these steps to meet those requirements therefore you know that you could let us um alone and that we would work on doing that they agreed with those arguments the Cape is now under enforcement actions and every town is expanding their water insur to meet the the Estuary standards and that you know we we have that same obligation so at some point um they will come back to us and say all right now it's now it's time for you to implement a plan and either everyone in the town um you know spends whatever that's going to be at sometime in the future but right now upgrades are running in the $4,000 a unit neighborhood um you know that we will we will face that or we will turn around and do what we're doing now which is to pursue um providing water and sewer in Northwest boort we believe if once we are so close to meeting the limits the required limits that that soring Northwest Port takes enough of the load out of bread and cheese Brook that will meet the water quality standards without having the whole town having to reach in their pocket for $40,000 so that's that's that is the the obligation the obligation is absolute they just um are not not making us uh not taking an enforcement action against us now because we said we were acting so um it it is it is not an obligation that we can dodge it's just an obligation we could delay if we don't do it now we'll do it in the future when it cost more okay but so but it's still but it's not a guarantee we're going to do this we're going to do what we can to help but it does does it mean it will be an absolute where we still don't meet the standards that they have set forth no we we U we we have we have to we have to do it and doing the trunk will not meet the standards but once we reach into the neighborhoods it is very likely that we will you know based on the prior studies we could remove enough nitrogen load to meet the standard in the river but the trunk alone will not do that okay right and has it been and I apologize if this has been put out there or the question has been asked so the trunk law I know it's different phases what what how how long from today how far from today does is the whole project like where it goes into the neighborhood estimated uh that would be done over 15 or 20 year period if if we if we developed a if we developed a plan that we could afford in reasonable bites it is something in that n it there something in that time frame so fair to say they will so that they'll come back you know once they're done with the cape they'll come back to Westport within less than 10 or 15 years from now and require right or or is it we'll have a plan and maybe they won't because they see this plan in motion should it get approved yes I I mean I I I think the the the actions on the cape will be everyone doing it now they're doing the S extensions each of the town has raised money you know every town that has a SE system is already taking actions so I think this is probably three to five years from now EPA and D will come back to us and and the and the question is will will the steps that we're doing now allow us to uh you know to forall a townwide enforcement if we don't do it we certainly will do it then understood understood thank you good questions Michelle thank you and I just want to follow up to Michelle's question and Bob you um partly answered it so the 35 million is for the trunk line only certainly will not solve the clean water issues that the town has there's other phases that will need to happen in order for that to happen and you're estimating over a 15 or 20 year period what I haven't heard is how much is that going to cost the town so I think it would be fair for the towns people as they're voting to determine whether want to vote for this or not to understand this is a bite of the apple and they should know what the whole apple is going to cost uh that that is a fair question and um we we have with the kleinfelder engineers we have estimated in today's dollars this is a 60 to 70 million undertaking now having that is over 15 years we would that's the kind of investment that would um provide sewer and water in the dense Northwest Port area but that that's not the towns share you know grants and and debt forgiveness on loans and all of those um activities come off the top of that cost and it it varies from year to year I mean and right right now because we had the availability of opa monies right now the the design and the permitting and everything that has been done to date um has not come is not reflected in the tax roles so it has not you know that has yes it's Federal grant monies but doing that and doing the earmark and and pursuing you know represent representative Kings earmark for federal monies all of that comes off the top of that 60 or 70 million great thank you Jim White you've got your hand up go ahead yeah I just wanted to say that the other benefit for getting water and sewer will be for those people who have a cesspool because if they have a Cess pool I believe that the Board of Health will wave their forced upgrade to a Title 5 system uh if they are going to get sewer in the near future into the neighborhood so it it won't help people out of the greater Route 6 area but there's a lot of people in the greater root six area who have cess pools uh and I think that it to to pay a betterman of $10,000 is a lot cheaper and a lot easier to deal with than losing your backyard and paying $40 to $60,000 because you have to have a raised system and you don't have any room for it and in most most of the small lot most of the small Lots can cannot make completely require you know compliance systems and would end up with very difficult retaining walls and mounds and you know if you have a six you know a 4,000 6,000 square foot lot you you can't you can't be compliant thank you does anyone else have any questions I see no other questions this might be the long um presentation from the planning board that I've had since being on the committee I agree I think I'm not sure that's good news or bad news but I'm not sure either but anyway thank you for your time thank you for coming we appreciate it there's a lot of complicated articles on this warrant so um it is yeah bring some coffee to town meeting all right thank you all for coming we greatly appreciate thank you so much all right thank you maybe something a little stronger than coffee at that just saying I know okay so um all right it is uh 8:25 that went far longer than um I anticipated but we do have some we're running out of time in terms of that we need to start um making our recommendations on some articles so um the some of the big articles on the planning board the ones we just discussed tonight we have the water and sewer and then we have the budget are really the three big ones that um probably require some conversation amongst us uh we can it's up to the committee we can start to go through all of the smaller articles and let's just get those out of the way and just so we can make some progress on on doing some recommendations how does that sound to everyone I would suggest we do that suest we do that I would leave feeling good that we actually accomplished something we if we can say we can like if we can bang those out and go to like nine o'clock I'm willing to do that all right let's do it just one question you have no guests uh invited for next week correct so there'll be no other speakers right for next week that's really what takes up a lot of time yeah the only other presentation we have not had is the CPC with Betty sled so um that's up to the committee that's pretty quick I mean it should be pretty quick yeah it's not controversial in any way and it's you know it's not something that the finance committee has a say in anyway so it's that's part of but um but yes that would be the only other presentation that I can see and so if we start to just go through all the art articles right now we'll see if there's another one that someone goes whoa wait let's uh take a look I can say there are not a lot of things GPC report and there maybe some things that are dropped off but Betty is organized and not verbos it so that's fine y okay so let's um so let's do that we're gonna go we're going to skip article we're going to skip go right to Article Five right now and that's the Capital Improvement planning committee for um the uh Capital Improvements we've discussed that uh that's been in the in the uh Five Capital plan does anyone are we all clear to vote make a recom anyone raise just to make sure we're all working off of the eighth draft correct correct the eighth draft okay just make sure that because there are some article numbers that had changed so everyone should make sure that their copies says the eighth draft on the top yep mine doesn't say that just on the front page is the only place it says it doesn't say it but I remember I think that's what it said when I printed it out okay all right so um I'm sorry what number did you say to start with five article five which is the capital Improvement projects so would anyone like to make a motion to approve this article so moves I will second I I I didn't I didn't initiate the motion because I'm the liaison for that so I'll be H I do not have my notes here in front of me but I could get them as to what items are being included in that it is $1 million even uh from free cash um and you can see there what they are below um replace fire Network firewall uh is actually a recommendation that comes up in our audit uh to make sure that we've got good protections from um you know malware and uh as well as any kind of um uh you know cyber uh hostage taking um of our uh of our equipment the police department did request three Cruisers we have notched it down to two uh Cruisers um the fire department has requested a forestry and brush truck they do not have the ability to go Offroad with any firefighting equipment currently uh and this is a um an item that they very much um needed and and wanted it's a it's a pricey piece of uh of equipment um the chief made a very good case for it given the dry weather that we've had in the dry Summers and the challenges that they've had over the last couple of years in fighting some of those fires that uh have broken out in in the Woodlands um highway department needs a pickup truck that's not a big surprise with a small trailer uh attached to it so they can haul some um equipment that goes along with it uh there are two items here for um the uh schools um uh I can I can provide to you at a future meeting the long list of um of all of the items that were requested in total uh to the capital Improvement planning committee not just from the schools but from all the other departments as to what the long range plans are the largest one of those is a new fire Tru for um the fire department which is probably now already two to three years overdue uh unfortunately the current price of the new firet Tru is in the range of $900,000 and it takes about a year to get it after you've ordered it um so the schools here have um the macumber school and Elementary School um bathroom upgrades uh to not only meet um standards but uh Ada standards as well to make sure these are upgraded you have to remember the macumber school was built in the 1950s and very little has been done to it similar to town hall if you've ever had the uh embarrassing notion to use the restroom in town hall um and a maintenance truck uh as well um for um for the schools so it can't clim to $1 million uh even right and just to to follow up so that was we were provided a five-year Capital plan back in January and so I think some of the other requests that didn't make the list are also as part of the fiveyear plan so they're in correct right right I couldn't I couldn't remember if you got if the cipc was included in that or not it was y right that's right it was okay any questions for Cindy no but I I I will pull back based on what Cindy said I'll pull back my motion to approve based on the fact that I am the Le liaison for the uh fire department oh I don't think you need to otherwise we're all related under somebody so yeah mine was more direct mine was more directly related so okay fair enough so I I'll keep it on the table and I and I'll second I don't have I don't have a problem with the second terrific does anyone have any further questions on this any discussions if not we'll we can go to a roll call okay so when I do these roll calls for all the meetings I'm going to call your names in the same order so you know it's coming and it' be please State your full name and yes or no so this way it's it's clear for everyone uh Hugh Morton Hugh Morton I thank you Gary Carrero is not here Christopher Thrasher is not here Alise Al I thank you Cindy Brown Sydney Brown I thank you Michelle Orlando Michelle Orlando I thank you Zachary Zack La breu I thank you Duncan law Duncan law I thank you and Karen r i thank you hey we got one done Bingo on a roll we got one done our first one we're we're on a r all right article six this is to allow the town Treasurer to borrow this is a one we've talked before it's a very standard one it's in the article it's in the warrant every year can I get a motion to so so so mov thank you so Hugh and second thank you I'm gonna any discussions roll call Hugh H Mort I Gary is not here Christopher is not here l l Le is I Cindy Brown Cindy Brown I thank you Michelle Michelle Alando I thank you Zachary Zach La Brew I thank you Duncan Duncan law I thank you and Karen r i uh article seven uh so seven eight nine and 10 are all um budgets for Enterprise funds would we like to do them all at the same in one motion can we do that Hugh I think so I move in favor thank you of approving all so we'll do an article six seven8 n I'm sorry seven8 n and 10 together good thank you any discussions on those no so I will do a roll call Q Q Mortin I um Aly Alie I thank you Cindy Cindy Brown I thank you Michelle Michelle Alanda y thank you Zachary Zach La Brew I thank you Duncan Duncan l i and Karen r i thank you all right article 11 is the revolving fund for the fire department and all of the other revolving funds we could have done that one with it too [Music] um so every year we have to reestablish the funds right so we have to put the dollars there so they can they're authorized to use the funds in their revolving account so I move in favor of approving the reauthorization of the evolving accounts as indicated second thank you um that's article 11 of article 12 and 13 oh I don't know about 13 no not 13 oh yeah right not 13 article 11 and 12 y sorry together thank you for doing that um so uh no any discussions no all right so article 11 and 12 together Hugh Hugh Morton I Al Al Le's I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle Alando I Duncan Duncan lot I Karen Rouse I thank you what's that oh you missed me I miss Z I missed Zach oh my God I'm so sorry Zach I said it Zack no worries I'm trying to race to nine o'clock we've done a lot tonight I know um okay so we're gonna skip over Article 13 for the moment because that's the community preservation and we have not had a presentation on that so that would be nice to do um article 14 Let's uh let's hold on that one right because that will probably be a longer discussion than we want to ENT 14 15 and 16 right yep y we're gonna skip we're gonna move right on to article7 which is thank you so moved second thank you um any discussions on that no okay uh Hugh you more i l 's i Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle lindai Zach Zack Le Bru I didn't miss you this time Duncan Dunc law I and Karen Rous I thank you all right article 18 this is The Prudent investment rule we talked about um so moved thank you second thank you any discussion roll call Hugh Hugh Morton I Al Al Le I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle Alando I Zachary Zach La Brew I Duncan Duncan law I and Karen rals I thank you um Article 19 is the resending of the 211,000 from a previous warrant article that is no longer needed I move to recommend second thank you any discussions roll call Hugh Morton I Al Al I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle Alando I Zack Zack AB Brew I Duncan Duncan La I CH Rell I thank you article 20 uh this is a standard one for the board board of assessors to um add 20,000 for their revalue program so moved second thank you any discussions roll call Hugh Hugh marttin I Al I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle excuse me Michelle I thank you Zach Zack Le Bru I Duncan Duncan lot I and Karen Rous I thank you all right article 21 I'm not even really sure this one has a financial interest at all um implication so this is one that they were changing from a regular septic to a nitrogen septic um all right they were just expanding the use of it correct right I don't know that we it's it's there's no what do you think Hugh you're you're the expert on this yeah I'd say postpone it until next time because I'm not certain exactly what we're talking about all right we'll skip we'll skip over article 21 for now okay and article 22 also right right okay all right so we're gonna move to article 23 so moved thank you second any discussion what is 23 I don't have it in front of me oh 23 is to vote for the appropriation of 29,000 from receipts reserved for the purpose of purchasing to roll off with you thank you Hort and I thank you Al I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle oando I Zack Zack La Brew I Duncan Duncan law I Karen R I thank you all right all right so article 24 25 and 26 are related but um I don't know if we wanted to we can probably take them all in one because the article 24 was splitting it out into two separate articles so it got split the 93,000 is getting split into article 25 and the 9,000 is getting split into article 26 so this is an uh from a previous uh previous town meeting where the article was was two in one and it had to be split out I move in favor recommend 24 25 and 26 we'll do together yeah right is there a second second I'll second that yep second thank you uh if no discussions I'll move to a roll call Hugh H Mort i al L Le I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle Alando I Zack Zack Leu I Duncan Duncan laot I and Karen Rous I thank you um okay so we are now on article 27 and that was to close out an article five from the previous town meeting that was for uh the Westport elementary gym floor and now it's to to be used for their parking lot the move in favor second uh any discussions roll call Hugh Hugh Mart I Al Al leaz I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle Alando I Zack Zack Le Bru I Duncan Duncan law I and Karen RS I thank you all right article 8 was to uh there's some property underwater I made a note to see if the town will transfer 15,000 from the beach enter fry Beach Enterprise to purchase some cherry and web Beach land so moved second uh any discussion roll call Hugh H Morton I Al Al Le I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle Alando I Zach Zack Leu I Duncan Duncan law I Karen RS I thank you Karen before you go to the next article I think just the for the benefit of of the public in case they're they are tuning into this to hear our roll call votes on this I don't want them to get the impression that we're just kind of going over these articles very quickly it's like oh these are okay we've had discussions about these articles at length previous meetings and prior me meeting so I don't want anyone to think that we're taking any of these lightly that it's just like oh yeah that's fine that's that's fine that's fine we we've gone through these articles at length in Prior many previous meetings absolutely so I just want to make I just want to make that point now not at the end in case there are people watching to to see how our votes are turning out that we do spend a lot of time on these thank you I'm sure by now they're tuned out of all all our votes at this point be fast forwarding yeah good point they Haven if they haven't turned turned out by now then they should be a member of this committee there's probably whack out there that's still L right right H all right uh article 29 is to see if the town will transfer 49,000 from the beach Enterprise to replace the cherion web Beach fence it's for for the fence as well as a vehicle and in a vehicle yes right so move second any discussions roll call Hugh Hugh Mort i l l Le I Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle orando I Zack Zack Leu I Duncan Duncan La I thank you and Karen Rouse I article article 30 is to see if the town will raise an appropriate um from the municipal waterways fund $30,000 to purchase outboard motors for the marine services department so moved second second all right roll any discussion no roll call H H Morton I Al Al Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle orando I Zach Zack La brw I Duncan Duncan law I and Karen Rous I uh let's see article 31 is to um for the town to purchase there two landlocked parcels and put it in the possession of the conservation committee it will remain open space this was one that Jim talked to us about last week so second second thank you um any discussion roll call Hugh you Morton i l l i Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle Alando I Zack Zack I Duncan Duncan lot I car Rous I article 32 is the U municipal light board uh looking to make an elected board by by the way last night's uh select board meeting they um they took into consideration with no vote uh to include uh the word fiber in in the naming of this of this committee it' be a municipal fiber and lighting committee evidently for legal purposes the lighting plant thing has to be in there because that's part of the legislation but we can add to it we can't subtract from it they took that under consideration it was brought up by Shauna can we hold this off until next week yeah I think so yeah sure absolutely yep we'll skip right over that okay now we have the planning board articles do we want do we want to resonate with those for a week and then hit those next week yes I agree please y yep there that's there's a lot a lot to um absorb there the part I I I will also just make mention what while we're just talking about this the part that concerns me the most about these zoning articles is that by the time these come up there are about 12 people left in the audience and so these very important issues are usually decided by a very small number of people yeah yep you're right yep okay uh so we can move ahead to article 39 it's a lot of pages to get through so that's Personnel bylaws again I'm not even sure this has any Financial implication right there are not in fact the Personnel Board is not even we're meeting next week on this so uh the Adams in here are all fine but the Personnel Board has not finalized U many of these things I have a meeting with um with uh the Town Administrator tomorrow to make sure we've got all of our eyes dotted and our tees crossed on this and then the Personnel Board will meet to finalize this uh next Wednesday so we can um we can hold off on this yeah but even even so do they does it have any Financial implication none whatsoever okay so and it looks like article 40 doesn't have a financial implication either so that's the uh the the Mobile gas station is looking to get another license yeah only like $500 implication is is the thousand a year um right permit fee or whatever whatever it might be I mean I'm personally against it um but I don't think from a fin fin committee standpoint it has uh any right I agree with that it doesn't have sufficient for the town standpoint which doesn't mean individually we could can't take whatever um sense we wish to do right okay thank you so can we entertain a motion for articles 39 and 40 to say that we make no recommendation on those and can you I don't have in front of me Karen y so article 39 was the um Personnel bylaws that were being changed and article 40 is the is the liquor license one I move no recommendation I'll second that yes thank you uh if no discussion then I'll go to a roll call vote Hugh Hugh Mort i y i Cindy Cindy Brown iando I thank you Zach Zach Lau I dun law I'm thank you thank you can I'm trying to write the everything down at the same time so yeah thank you you and me both right we're getting well trained we can move ahead it's not easy at nine o'clock at [Music] night all right so we are on article 41 which is to see if the town will authorize to acquire some property it's by the transfer station um donation my trip in Suns so moved second second any discussion roll call um I'm sorry uh Hugh Hugh Mar I thank Cindy Cindy Brown I Michelle Michelle orando I Zack Zack La Brew I Duncan Duncan law I Karen r i thank you article 42 is uh this is the article that was by petition it is to approve the layout of Rita Lane I believe I believe we need to postpone this I don't the select board has not I don't believe come to a final decision on this oh okay let's SK over this one then yeah okay article 43 is to see if the town would vote to establish new special education stabilization fund I think that we need to discuss further next week uh yeah I agree okay your thing um article 44 is to see if the town will close out in article seven from the 2023 annual meeting um so it's putting money from that wasn't needed for the Westport Elementary Master Clock paging system and putting it into the stabilization fund do we want to hold on that one the same stabilization fund yes all right so we're gonna hold on that one so we're gonna hold on article 44 um article 45 and 46 we cannot do yet because we don't know how much free cash will be available to fund either the stabilization fund or the capital stabilization fund so um we'll have to wait till our budget's done before we know look at that look at that accomplishment and it's 85 it's 8554 so good timings into the mix excuse me is it when we get to the uh the CPC could somebody remind me and kick me in in in the butt to say you cannot vote on this because one of the one of the uh uh amounts of money is going to the Historical Society okay so I have I have to uh to right okay sure thing we'll we'll try to we'll try to remind you broke help me out all right so before we wrap so we have some so we certainly have all the planning board articles that were in front of us today we have the water and sewer articles that we also need to vote on and we have the budget so as you sleep tonight and think tomorrow if there's anything else that you need for information let's get me an email so we can try to get information for you because because we really want to be at a point at next Tuesday's meeting that we're going to vote make our recommendations on all those articles um T would it be easy enough to send everybody a copy of the current state of the of the warrant I think I can find it but I might not be able to so an email just a a copy of current sure thing it's in our it's in our Google Drive for tonight's meeting but i' be happy the Google Drive and some things I find and sometimes I don't sure email would make it easy sure thing I can definitely do that and um I think we're still on the eighth draft I don't think the select board we there's some holes that need to get filled so we can we can make our recommendations on article one and article so there's you know we need they need to get it finalized for us too yeah that way we'll know we'll be as c as we can be right I can I can I have an email open email up right in front of me right now who wants who wants a copy of the warrant via email me please okay what's your uh email you you want to just send it to the thcom so everybody gets it okay special copy Gunner 590 at charter.net please okay yep I see your name right here um okay all right all right done thank you okay so if anybody else again has any questions let me know and then um this way we can come in with all our thoughts on uh some complicated articles we have in front of us z z yeah I just have a quick question to confirm for my own edification here when we vote on these articles it's simply uh agree or not agree that wouldn't be the appropriate place to like make a suggestion or a recommendation is that correct well we recommend in favor or against well if you right so we make a recommendation if if if in our and if you have something in particular we can certainly go back and revisit what we did if if we recommend but we say well but I'd like to change the wording to this we can make our recommendation subject to changing this word to this or something like that right right Hugh motion like I'll give you a quick example like for article 44 if say we were to vote against the remainder being allocated to um the St the stabilization fund like if the stabilization fund voted against could we say on no on article 44 we we recommend that to go to free cash yes or we could recommend we could yes and and he was the expert that can help us with the mo the motion would then read that would we would change the article from special education stabilization fund to free cash or to the capital improve Capital stabilization whatever we made the motion to change well ex actually right you're both right but also we would have to talk to Steve in passing because the Motions go through him and a r and so make sure we're all in the same wavelength as to what he should say yep yep and we'll um Jim Jim hartnet is very helpful so he'll help craft our motions for us and so this so that will we would make a note to him if we had a change of that nature thank you that answers my question good thank you and if there was any sorry if if there was any on any of these that we um already made recommendations if there was something we can certainly go back and revote on it if if um if if that was anyone no for what it's worth there wasn't and honestly the the one that it did we we're going to talk about next week so I just had a question preparing for that so y perfect okay well nine o'clock mission accomplished 59 there's a couple of articles that we haven't discussed that excuse me I I know that I I've got some modifications or questions about so that was that was that was a really good question of how to approach that right yeah well we've got we've got all the hot and heavy ones for next week let's hope we have full attendance because that you know bring your popcorn yeah because we were we had two two you know members missing tonight but there we didn't vote on anything controversial so I think to the all the important articles I think it'd be helpful that we're all present but um if you're not there next week we're gonna vote anyway because we have to so hope you can be there all right so um if nothing else I'll entertain a motion to adjourn motion to ajour motion to adjourn at nine o'clock good job Karen good job all right I gonna go for fun um so Michelle Orlando Michelle Orlando I thank you uh than I uh Duncan Duncan L Zach Zack Leu hi Cindy Cindy Brown Al is I did I get everybody see I went out of order and I missed me Karen I