2026-10-05 - Planning Board

All set. All right. I'd like to call to order the planned meeting for October 5th, 2026. We'll start with the COVID meeting statement. Pursuant to Governor Healey's directive extending temporary open

meeting law provisions until June 30th, 2027, the board committee meeting, planning board meeting will be conducted in a hybrid format and will be recorded. Any per person in attendance making an

audio or video recording of this meeting must notify the chair at the time. Recordings will be accessible to the town's website and YouTube channel. Please be aware participants attending via Zoom

will have their audio video and audio disabled. If you wish to engage in the discussion, raise your hand. If the chair acknowledges you, you will receive a popup message allowing you to unmute

yourself. For agenda, YouTube, and Zoo links, um, please visit www.suttonmma.gov. All right, we'll start with a roll call attendance. >> David Mason, I here. >> Here. [clears throat] >> Wesley Stanh

Hope here in person. >> Bill Talon here. >> Mike Eaggan here. >> All right. All right. And just a note that David, you'll be acting full voting capacity tonight. We'll start with the first public

hearing. >> Yeah. Sorry. >> Someone who has their hand raised already. Where >> Dan >> Dan out in Zoom? >> Dan. It's on there. It's way on the left. You can barely see. >> Dan, do you have an

something? >> I'm ready. >> Dan. Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. >> That seems suspect. >> All right. Well, thanks, Dan. >> Dan's gone. >> There might be an issue there with that. In in accordance with

the provisions of master journal law section 4015-873 scenic roadway law and public shade tree law as well as bylaw 15 of the Sutton general bylaw scenic roadways the planning board and tree warden

will hold a public hearing on the application of Maxwell Realy Trust Milbury mast. The applicant proposed to remove trees along the road at 354 West Sutton Road for the proposed driveway and alter 25

ft of stone wall. All right, Mr. Chairman. Um, we just looking for the All right. Um, Margaret Bacon is available. She is on Zoom. Um, I'm going to pull out the applicant or pull up the applicant

materials and she can interject as necessary to answer any questions you may have. Um, so let me share materials for this application. All righty. All right. So, this is a proposed house lot at 354

West Sutton Road. As you can see, there is a stone wall across the front of the property. And so there is a break proposed in the stone wall right at this location here. Um 18 to 20 feet wide. and

three trees are going to need to be removed along the frontage to accommodate the driveway and visibility in and uh entering and exiting the driveway. Um there's really not much more to say about

that. Um and um the tree warden is here. Um Nick Rebecca um if you want to hear his feedback on the potential tree removals. >> Sure. Welcome, Nick. >> And I will pull up the photos of the trees as

well. So here we go with those. All right. So, come on. Let's go. All right. So, on your screen, um you can see the three trees that are proposed for removal. Um this one, that one, and this one. This

is the approximate center line of the proposed driveway. So again, it looks like these are all visibility trees that are being requested for removal and proximity. Whoops. I don't know what happened

there. Um and proximity [clears throat] to um the driveway location in terms of messing with the root zones. So um as you know, if you're too close and in those root zones, you're just going to damage

the trees anyways. All righty. So, I'm going to stop sharing now and then let's have um >> Okay, I stopped sharing. >> Just state your name and then >> Good evening board members. Uh Nick Repa, um

highway superintendent and tree warden for town of Sutton. Um, I do not contest uh the removal of these trees. Um, two of them certainly are not specimen trees by any means. Uh, they're very close to

the road. I did uh go out and observe and there is there is some uh one of the trees has what appears to be um cavities at the bottom of them. Uh the other two being with their location um the roots

are probably very close to the road and are probably not probably not long for the world anyway. >> Okay, >> questions or comments? >> I have Nick. What's a specimen tree? >> Well, something that's

been cared for and maintained uh through through the uh the duration of its life, >> right? >> As you know that this town has some significant tree problems driven around the roads. working. Someone's

working pretty diligently on West Sutton. >> I don't know if it's a highway department or mass national grid probably. >> I think it's a combination of both, >> right? >> Jen, what's the um how do we

quantify >> well >> value of a tree? There are some trees that actually have a schedule of values for certain uh trees below a certain inches and above a certain inches. Unfortunately, we don't have

that in Sutton where you're removing three cheers here and one of the one that's um in better shape I think is the 36 >> the closest to the driveway >> 36 inch oak. >> That's 36 in give or take. >>

That's pretty. >> So, you know, is that you know a donation for you know two or three standard trees, you're never going to buy a 36 inch oak unless you've got a lot of money um to buy it and install

it. So, um you know, a reasonable thing would be, you know, the price of we usually plant um two to three inch diameter breast height trees for replantings like Arbor Day and other replantings. So,

maybe the cost of two or three of those trees um may be appropriate um for the value of these three trees, particularly the It's in better condition. So, those run around $200 to $300 >> each. >>

Each. >> Okay. >> So, >> yeah. I just have a quick question. Nick, nice to see you again. I I saw Nick out on a paving job near my street. So, >> it's nice to introduce myself to him. Uh where these

trees are in this picture is the wall right behind it like is that? Yes. So part of that will be that's the part of the wall will be coming down where the trees are pretty much too. Is that uh >> um

actually you saw the center line I can show it to you again if you like. Where you saw the center line of the road is the photo of the trees. All right. So this is a tree. This is a tree. The center

line of the road is here. I don't think it actually hits either of these trees, but it's definitely in the root zone of this tree. So, and the stone wall is in there. So, you're going to cut create an

18 to 20 foot break um between the trees, but you'll at least be hitting the root zone of this tree and probably will be in the root zone of this tree. And both of these are going to be um sight

distance issues. And then this one as well, I guess, um, is a site distance issue, um, as well, which is why it's being requested to be removed. >> Okay. I I know another thing we always ask is, were

the stones removed, they're going to stay on the property? Is that >> that's >> that the plan hopefully >> if that's your condition. Yes. >> Yeah. I would second with Bill about, you know, maybe

trying to donate to the tree fund or something in lie of taking down, you know, just to keep trees in town going. So, >> I would support that. >> Is the applicant are we going to address the Stonewall

too same time? Here, >> Margaret is available and she's been unmuted. So, um she is the representative of the applicant. If um you want to let Margaret kind of confirm the amount of stone wall that

will be being removed and add anything. She's she's available. >> Sure. Can you hear me? Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh for the record, Margaret Bacon, Civil Site Engineering. Um I'm sorry I couldn't be

there tonight. I I'm out of town, so I'm I'm doing this on my phone. Um but uh where we have the proposed driveway was an area where the uh going in from uh Sutton Road into the lot was the flattest.

Uh and that limited the amount of great cutting and grading I would have to do. Uh and unfortunately th those trees uh those two trees uh that the driveway is going to be about 12 feet wide. But, you

know, after you're done cutting into the slope, it's probably going to be 15 ft wide and the some those stone walls will have to be removed. And those, as was mentioned, the the roots of those two

large trees, I'm sure, will be impacted. So, I I don't think my client would have a problem donating to the uh the Arbor uh day tree fund. And if you want to keep the uh remnants of that stone wall on

site, uh I'm sure he can uh either just, you know, beef up some of the other stone wall along the front or but keep the stones on site. That's what the board would like. >> Yeah. Typically, I'll beat

Bob to the bunch. um keep them on site but also retain the the existing style of Stonewall. >> So don't otherwise mess with what's left, >> right? Don't recreate the wheel and uh a whole different

genre of Stonewall. >> No, no. Leave Leave the Don't touch the the original the rest of the Stonewall. Um, and all I, you know, with with the stones that are to be removed, I mean, they just put them

along the, uh, some of the other areas of the stone wall that maybe need, you know, beefing up a little. >> Yeah. >> Rebuilding. >> Does that make sense? >> Totally. >> Okay. >> All righty. Um,

Margaret, I don't see the third tree on this plan. You know, it it's it's not it's right to the left of that driveway. Okay. When I went back out there again, I realized I didn't have it on the the

plan, but right where that driveway is. It's right to the left. >> Okay. So, yeah, the one to the right is super obvious, and the other one that's being removed, I assume, is the other one that's

shown on this plan, right on the right ofway line. >> And then, correct. And that one there was in the right way. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Any other questions for Margaret >> through the chair?

I I'll I'll make a a motion. >> Okay. >> So, so that we're clear. Um because we're we worry about our stones. We don't want them leave leaving town. Um so, uh you know, that's those are the rules. and

uh to make um a $400 donation to the uh tree tree trunk. Uh >> would appreciate that. >> 400 or 200 200 for each tree. >> Um two Yeah. Um new trees cost $200 to $300. They're taking three trees. >>

Oh, you doing three? >> So I mean at least one of those is in pretty good shape. The other two are kind of okay. So up to you. >> Well, I I'll recommend to 300. >> Yeah. So $600. Um >> All right. >>

Uh will we need trees? >> Okay. >> That's my motion. >> I'll second it. >> Well, let me uh so stones on the property. >> Same. How about same style? >> Same style. um the tree removal company since

they're going to work in our right of way, they should also be licensed and insured. >> And um um what do we got? >> And then uh don't forget to get the driveway opening permit for the driveway from

Nick. >> Yeah, road opening permit. >> Road opening permit. >> Any additional necessary permits? And just want to double check too, have all the taxes been paid on that property? >> Oh, Margaret.

Yeah. Um, they had not paid their taxes on the review form. U, Mr. Kvero is going to come in on the 29th and pay them, and I don't have confirmation of that. Do you know if those got paid? >> I don't

know. And I I know he's done in Florida right now. I I'll try to reach out to him tomorrow. >> So, we're uh do contingent on payment of taxes as well. >> Sure. >> Yeah. >> Yep. Okay. Not a problem. >>

Okay. They may have been taken care of, but um I don't have confirmation of that. >> Okay. >> Okie dokie. So, all stones removed stay on the property. The applicant shall obtain what' you say

necessary additional any permits like the road opening permit. >> Yep. >> The um when you remove the stones, if you replace them on the existing stone wall, you don't recreate the stone wall. You keep

it the same style. Y >> $600 to the public shade tree planting and maintenance fund. >> Yep. >> Um tree removal company licensed and insured >> and >> and payment of taxes. >> Okay. >> Correct. Yep.

>> And that's >> that was Bob's motion. >> Bob's amended motion. Who's the second on that? >> I can second that. >> Thanks, Dave. >> Call for a vote. >> Dave Mason. I >> Bob Larus. I >> Wesley Stelp.

Bill thalot I >> Mike a I >> thank you for coming in >> hey good luck nice to meet you [cough and clears throat] >> I'll make a motion to close this public hearing >> I'll second that vote >> on it >>

David Mason I >> Bob I >> Wesley St. got >> no action items. 26R Oak Road. >> All righty. >> Come on up. the plan. There we go. Rotate this around so you can see it better. Okay, this will look

familiar to you. You'll recall Ral and um Ralph Monarius from Alpha Omega came in with Mr. window a while ago to talk to you about um whether you would give them an alternate access ruling on this lot

and uh the board um declined to do that. So he went to the zoning board of appeals and asked for a frontage variance in accordance with the current standards for variances um that give a little bit

more um flexibility than the old standards. Um Pam, um can you shrink that box so we can see where the frontage is on this? >> Okay, >> I don't know what's going on there. I swear my mic is not on.

Okay, [clears throat] cool. So um so this is the veterinary building right here at 38 Oakurst Road. This is the office light industrial district. So she's retaining um more than the 200 ft of frontage

she needs. She's deeding over 50 plus feet um for frontage on this lot in accordance with the variance granted by the zoning board of appeals. this strip of land in addition to this blob of land here

will be attached to this rear lot creating a fully compliant lot um which will be um developed under the office light industrial use table in the in the near future uh through the site plan review and

special permit process. So this is just the form a plan. So this is just to add take land from this lot here and here and give it to this lot. So it's a conveyance of land from one lot to another. As

you can see, the existing lot frontage lot retains compliance. So Mr. Windle can answer any questions. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them as well. Um I had one question left on my

checklist and that was whether or not the there was a pin to be set there. And if you zoom way in, you can see that the pin is to be set on this in between corner and they've been set everywhere else

that they should be. [clears throat] Chen, is there a um road width difference between industrial and um regular road for a suburban? >> Road width? Yeah. What do you mean? >> Um >> like a right

width. No, no, no. Like, so this is 50 ft. Like what's Gilmore Drive? >> Gilmore Drive right ofway. >> No, not right away. The road >> road itself about 30 ft. >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. So,

there isn't It's the same for regular subdivision as it is uh industrial. >> Well, industrial we usually like it to go a little bit wider, but it's not written in the sub rules and regs right now. >>

Right. I mean, obviously that's the handle of the traffic of trucks and so on. So, >> absolutely. Yeah. your turning radius and those kind of movements with larger vehicles. Yep. >> Do you think

that'll be an issue, Chris, with um >> No, >> that was fast. >> Well, we have even Gilmore Drive is probably the widest road in Sen and we still have it's 53 feet, so we still have quite a bit left.

>> Yeah. >> Well, you got it done. >> Awesome. Couple couple hoops, but good. >> All right. Any other questions on this form a plan? >> Any questions yourselves? >> No. >> Mike. >> All right. told

you. >> I'm going to stop sharing >> questions myself. >> I'll make a motion to approve form a plan dated 92526 showing reconfiguration of two existing lots including establishing legal frontage for

the land at 26R Oak Road period. Endorsement of the plan shall be held until 106 to ensure no appeal is filed to the related ZBA decision. If an appeal is filed, the applicant agrees to withdraw its

form a application until the appeal is settled. Period. >> So that appeal runs tomorrow. So that addition to the motion was cautionary because as you know, if Chris didn't agree to withdraw his

application, he could get a constructive approval. So he has agreed to withdraw his application if an appeal is filed. One is not anticipated. >> Right. A second. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. Vote.

>> David Mason. I >> Bob Rogers. I >> Wesley Stanop got I >> Mike Gagen. I >> Okay, >> thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good luck, Chris. >> Get you those sign plans tomorrow. Everyone do. >> Okay, the

next one is 16 John Road plan consideration. So, uh, we've got a request to continue this discussion until your next meeting, which would be November 2nd. Um, it's not a public hearing, so you don't

actually need to do a motion to do that. Um, but as you noticed from the letter from Graves Engineering, input of the fire department, input of the the building commissioner and my email, and if

you've visited the site, there is a lot going sideways on this site and nothing is ready for asbuilt approval and there are quite a few zoning violations that need to be resolved. So, um, they've

asked for a continuence to your next meeting because of town meeting on the 16th. Your next board meeting is November 2nd. So, hopefully they can get much if not all of this resolved by the 2nd. And

then the only thing you need to be thinking about between now and then is if things are not resolved, what you request, what you will want to do. You can request enforcement on certain things from the

building commissioner, zoning enforcement officer. Um you can give additional time with um for certain things with um consequences spelled out in terms of noncriminal disposition which is ticketing

for every day. A violation continues to exist. So just um keep in mind what um hopefully everything will be resolved, but there's a lot to resolve. So if it's not, what do you want to happen? So other

than that, it's just if you have any questions or you need me to ask any questions of town council relative to this or anything else. I don't anticipate any, but um whatever you need to know, I can

find out. >> Okay. >> I have a question. >> Yep. >> Um just maybe reach out to them and it seems like there's a lot outstanding, >> so I don't know that we want them to come back >> with half of these

items completed. >> Yeah. >> So, I don't know if it's surprising that they even >> Oh, yeah. >> went went for it, I guess. So, >> yeah, it was very odd. >> Seems like there's a lot left to do. >> I

know they did reach out to the building commissioner today and he had a blunt conversation with them. So, but I'm happy to follow up with them as well and and let them know that um you hope they will

not be walking in with um a substantial amount of these things not resolved. >> Will there be like official site visits between now and that meeting so that there's check-ins and know that >> I can

certainly do as many check-ins as you want me to do. >> Not tons, but it's just be good to have one or two. >> Absolutely. Yeah, that's not a problem. I know um all of the people who have commented

are going to be on the site over the next month um including probably Graves Engineering which unfortunately will cost them some additional money >> but it is what it is. So I'm just going to move

this or reschedule this again for your November 2nd meeting and I'll keep an eye on it as requested. and through the chair. Can we um if you ask them obviously uh it's not a good situation, but I I'd

ask them to uh over the month uh could we just um hear about the progress weekly? >> Sure. >> I'd like to hear that a week from now, I mean, we've hired somebody, whatever we're going to do, but just

make sure there's a plan as opposed to hearing nothing until a month from now. >> Sure. uh we'll request that they provide a weekly progress >> weekly how well they're doing and then uh you know

people got to do that but we make sure and if it's impossible to do it I want to know that before the meeting um if that is the case then when can it be done >> right >> all right >> all right >>

thank you logical [clears throat] >> happy to do that >> okay UGPG truck traffic discussion So, per the notes, um, Mr. Mario J, who lives at 86 Boston Road, um, and I have been corresponding back and

forth a little bit in the month of August, and he's expressed some concerns with, uh, continued UGPG truck traffic on Boston Road between Providence Road and Route 146. Um, as you'll recall, thei

Unified Parkway definitive subdivision decision contained the condition that once complete, UGPG trucks would not turn left onto Boston Road when exiting this roadway. Um, a rep of UGPG has been asked

to attend and address the concerns. Um, so Mr. J is here. I don't know, Mario, if you want to provide any more detail. Um, and then Matt Picarski is here from UGPG or representing UGPG. Mario J86

Boston Road. Hi. >> Yes. I I just um >> my understanding when we did the when we had the the hearings a couple years I don't know how long ago it was a while back >> uh was that the truck traffic was

going to be rooted in to uh 122A or entrance there uh and then they'd be leaving from Boston Road and turning right. Um, we just had the road paved as you probably know driving on it and uh um I

thought part of conditions there and I remember distinctly talking about we couldn't stop the employees that would be working there from driving anywhere on Boston Road but I was quite certain that we

talked about trucks not traveling down from Heritage Plaza down Boston Road that they should be able to use that 122 is it 122 am think >> yeah Providence Road is one and the same 12 >> Providence

Road entrance to come in and going out through Boston Road and taking a right turn to the highway. That's the way I understood it. >> But at this point, I guess Jen said that the the uh that entrance

isn't even open yet. So, I just trying to get a handle on what we're doing here. Trying to limit some of the truck traffic. >> That was all correct. Matt, >> that's the first. >> No, it's not.

[laughter] >> Good evening. V Picarski, director of construction development with the craft group. Um, with regards to the truck turn restriction that we concur with Jen's uh, interpretation of the

condition on there, the only restriction we agreed to was the prohibition of truck traffics coming out, truck traffic coming originating at the site, coming out Unifi Parkway and then taking a left

onto Boston Road. um that was the only u condition that was agreed to and reflected in the in the decisions that were that were issued. Um since [clears throat] that time and through, you know, we've

been before the board a couple times. We had a couple extensions just with the duration and things not playing out the way that they were initially anticipated that left turn um restriction hasn't

necessarily been in place because the unified parkway wasn't complete. We are on track to complete Unified Parkway. It's actually going to be probably the last section is going to get the finished

pavement within probably the next week or two. Um, so generally speaking, we'll have the ability at that point for any trucks originating from either 40 or 42 unified in the future when that

building's actually constructed to be able to go out if they were heading in a direction. And the discussion back in December of 21, I think it was 2020. And then the I think the decision was January

of 21 when we had this conversation was along the lines of trucks that either are uh trucks that are originating from either building 2 or building 3, which is 40 and 40 uh 2 Unified Parkway. If they

were going to 68 or 38 uh Providence Road, then they would certainly use Unifi Parkway to go up and access those buildings. Conversely, if they're coming from 68 or 38, logically makes sense for them

to come out of those buildings, whether they're going to either 40 or 42 or even back to 223, which is the headquarters location, they more than likely come back and go through Unified Parkway anyways

to to access that path. So, those were the conversations that were had relative to to uh to truck movements through the streets. And then obviously as I alluded to in my uh communications to Jen with

regards to Mario's original question relative to truck traffic, we have in talking to Frank Diverus at Unified, there's probably anywhere from 12 to 15 or so trucks per day that originate from 223

that go to destinations, I'll kind of call it north and east of 223 that do use Boston Road to get down the Providence Road to eventually make their way through Upton heading out towards 495 as an

example. Um, so that that truck that truck traffic will, you know, is using it now and will continue to use it. That's originating from 223. So obviously all the trucks are branded, so I think it's,

you know, looks obvious and they're pretty identifiable going through there. Um, but the trucks the the the volume that's coming out of building three right now is very dimminimous. It's one to two

building one to two trucks per day that would actually be coming out and taking out left out of there. Um but that will ne nevertheless get negated when um you know we complete the road and get that

which our covenant right now has us having a completion date by December 31st of this year based on the last extension. So we are on track to do that and looking to get final acceptance of the

subdivision road um through the board before the end of the year. >> Jen, can you pull me? >> I can. >> I'm visual person. And I just hear a lot of numbers here growing out. >> Come on. >> Yes, I will

pull it up. >> I know the area. I know where Mario is. So like I I know his concern taking a left, but when you talk about all the building numbers, I just want to see what they are. And I know the

concern of taking a left. Yeah. >> Quite a correction. I'm not I'm not concerned with the traffic coming from left. I'm trying to understand the traffic coming from Heritage towards 146. That's the

traffic I'm trying to understand. I actually haven't seen trucks coming from down this way. They probably have. There's been a couple. But I'm I'm trying to understand the traffic that's coming from

the Heritage Plaza road headed to 146. That's the one I'm trying to understand. Or is that coming from a different location? And because that's the case that basically the point is the Unified Parkway

traffic doesn't turn left, but there's trucks still coming from Heritage Plaza to 146. >> Just so I'm clear, it's just on Heritage Plaza. Is that Are we talking Providence Road? >> Proidence Road to

Boston Road. Right there where that plaza is, right? So he's talking about going east on Boston Road. >> No, I'm talking about going west. >> West. I'm sorry. So can I just conf just just to my

edification here? >> Did we not address that in the original condition? Is that what you're saying, Matt? We never addressed people from Boston Road. >> We >> we never conditioned you can't go west on

Boston Road from Providence Road from 122. I think the conversation centered around all of the unified sites. So there's a uni unified uses part of this building um which is this is Providence Road

Route 122A. So this is Grafton. This is Melbury. This is 122A also known as Providence Road. This is Unified Parkway that cuts through. And then this is Boston Road. All right. This is Buttonwood. So

I think we talked about traffic coming from this building. We talked about traffic coming from this building. If traffic's coming from this building or this building, I think Matt just touched on it

that if there's traffic coming from here and here and it's heading to Unified Parkway or even out to 146 once this is open, there's no reason for trucks from here or here not to use this entrance and

come back. Likewise, building three and building two when if built, the traffic from there would come out and take a left, not come back this way. Um, and then I think Matt said this is 220. I'm

sorry, that's market 32. Sorry. >> No, that's right. That's 223. >> That is 223. Oh, look at that. See, that is this is market 32. um traffic from here already 12 to 15 trips go this way and those

will continue to go this way unless of course I would think they're going over to this building um or even this building then they could cut this way if that made sense but >> which they would do. >>

Yeah. >> But if they're going here and then cutting out through Grafton towards Upton or one of those other places, they would continue to go down Boston Road and make that right turn. Um, so it

sounds like Mario's wondering about the trucks that are coming this way on Boston Road today west. Where are those coming from? Are they coming mostly from here and here? In which case, once the road

is open, >> then we don't have to worry about them. or are they rooting back from some other facility that cuts through Grafton and then it makes more sense for them at least right now >> because they

can't get through this one to cut this crappy corner and take Boston rout >> from what I understand I can't say definitively because I didn't ask that question to our operations folks my understanding

is those that's they basically it's the reverse track of them going out it's the trucks returning so those 10 or 15 that are originating from 223 and then heading out to points kind of north and east

via upd into 495 are likely returning on that same path coming back >> and they're not under under the opices of the the unified parkway agreement. Is that it? >> They're not under those opaces.

Whether once this is open >> they'll continue to turn at Boston Road which is a horrible intersection for anybody or whether they'll consider it more convenient at that point to use these beautiful

truck radiuses up here and scoot up a little further and use this roadway. Okay. >> I think that's what we assumed was going to happen. >> Yeah. If you're coming back from this direction, going to

146, >> going 122, you would use the 122 wigs. >> Even though you're going an extra however many feet that is, you know, 500 to 1,000 feet, you you'd use that because this roadway is designed for

trucks. If I could though, I also feel like because I've seen a number of trucks coming up from Grafton on 122, take a right-hand turn on the left-hand turn on the Boston Road to go to 146. >> Yeah.

>> And they're not all marked >> unified. I mean, it's just trucks from many other places. >> So, it's it's just becoming more and more trucks on this road, not just >> this is a public >> unified

trucks, you know. >> Yeah, it's a public roadway. The only >> I think I think the one thing we I'm sorry that we had talked about like you said was coming out of unified not taking a left going right

right to 146 you know and I've had a couple of occasions where I'm coming towards 146 and a truck comes out it does take a left and I think the thing is when we first I thought it was going to be

designed where they couldn't physically take a left because it was going to be a little kind of a little valley in the middle where they could only go right like you know what I mean but but I know as

you designed moving a tree, the nice table you have, you know, it change a little bit. So, I get that. But I I have seen a couple, but not many >> take that left, but I just see more trucks overall.

Not necessarily just, you know, I mean, I I don't he can't control that part of it. I mean, I don't but but I do think when that second exit opens on 122, that will alleviate a lot of the unified, you

know. I think >> I'd appreciate and again if those trucks are coming from a different location there's nothing we can do about that. I'd only ask the courtesy and I also want to point out Matt was

great with the tree situation or with the lighting situation on buttonwood and putting up the trees. So I I you'd be great with working on that and it's a way better situation than it was a couple

years ago when it looked like a nuclear treatment facility at night unfortunately. But um so that's a lot better and I appreciate it. But I would ask for the courtesy at that point to think about that

as an option than to for trucks to try to use that road. I know it is a little bit out of the way. We just had the road paved and if there's nothing else that can be done then there's nothing else

that can be done. Appreciate the thought. >> Yeah. Maybe just from a logistic side of it going through past 50 or 60 homes versus an industrial road is just a safer logistical >> Yeah. just for your

own truck's sake going through here >> going through here >> the extra two or three mets on a nicer wider road it's just a safer place versus a more of a residential road >> and you'll have less >>

complaints I could take it back to to the to the unified team and you know as a suggestion to them to see how they're routing I mean obviously it hasn't been contemplated at this point because the

road hasn't been completed so they their drivers may find that a preferable route and want to do that for all I know but uh >> when do you think it's going to get the the plan is to have the roadway

um it'll be completed before the end of this year. So, we're going to have a paved one in a few weeks and I got to get together with with Jen and we got to go through and get Graves out there to do

all the final inspections and and whatnot. So, everything's been complete. There's a handful of trees that just they haven't survived. So, um my co colleague uh Chris Wheeler is actually going to be

going out there tomorrow with the landscape contractor to walk the site, confirm all that stuff. just you kind of I'll call it punch list items to get addressed and then we'll look for a final

acceptance >> is the anticipation once it's complete it will be opened >> so this is where things deviate a little bit um >> good question >> because I I don't want to we'll see a beautifully pave be

>> yeah use that >> so so the plan the plan at this point is to we're going to complete the road per our obligations of the site plan approval and the subdivision covenant get it open. We're exploring

and looking at right now. So, I have good news and bad news. Good news is [clears throat] building two is actually on an accelerated u schedule now. And I just received word literally last week that

we're going to be looking to start construction of that sooner rather than later. I'd say probably within the next six to 12 months. It ties in with a lot of other moves that u Unifi has happening at

other locations. And as usual and as as I've explained in the past, it's kind of a shell game of moving from location to location. But in any event, we're going to be proceeding with that. And with

that, there's obviously still some limited materials that are going to have to be moved from lot one down. So with the construction activity, even though we're going to finish the road, the preference

is going to be to keep the road closed. However, because we want to accommodate and keep the, you know, live up to our obligation as well for that left turn restriction and try to reduce the truck

traffic that may be other going otherwise the unified trucks will still be access through there. So, some type of gating system to put in there that could be restricted to just, you know, use some of

unified uh related trucks going through there. >> So, we I don't know the specifics of that yet. I got to figure out power and all that stuff to get a gating system in place, but we'll figure out some

solution to make this work. >> But that might be a good step, you know, I mean, for your trucks and, you know, general public, that's fine. You're still working. You don't, you know, may not need to

access that. But >> correct. >> Yeah. And that takes away the I mean, because you the road you got approved is one mile long >> and if it stays closed, you in effect have a really long deadad road.

And so we don't want to go there. No. So >> we wouldn't want that. And it's, you know, it's signed right now for I got to figure out the gating system. The north end is pretty easy. I think the

southern end >> I don't want to have a gating system where it's restricting and trucks are backing out onto Boston Road. So it'll be inset some distance. Right now I'm thinking it's going to be

probably near the current where the gates already exist to get into building three, the first turnoff on the right. Maybe just beyond that. Um might make most sense. >> You mean a truck like a truck

that's not unified goes in because they think they can cut through? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Correct. The last thing I want is have that backing up and impacting the flow on Boston Road. That would be

not a good situation. >> Um so we have to study that a little bit more and figure out the right solution with that. >> Um but that does a bunch of things and again as we've talked [clears throat]

about this in the past without a user on lot one I mean that lot is open. So this is kind of the the making the best of the situation we're in right now as far as you know if the road were to be open

and then anybody from the public could go through there that whole stretch is open right now. I mean we already get people trying to drive in and go off wheel you know four-wheeling and stuff through

there. It's just not a great situation. We've had very early conversations with the town back in the day when we were talking about this. you know, when it opens. The police chief at the time had

concerns about just speed enforcement, things like that along there. >> Um because it is a pretty long stretch of road that's, you know, quite wide. >> Um so by putting the gating in, we can obviously

meet our commitments and our obligations, but you know, still work within reason based on the circumstances that we're dealing with right now. >> Seems reasonable. >> I'm uh I'm not happy to hear that

trucks come out We can actually take a left. Um, can we do something? Maybe some stones from an old wall. Can we put something so they're going to get stuck? Don't have Is there a way to make it so

you can't make a left? Or if you do, you're going to get stuck. You're supposed to go right. And you know, how do we how do we make people that are being stupid? It reminds me of uh um in Brazen

Square with all the lights and all the chains Cambridge Street they say still getting stuck but you know is there a way to do something that they just can't go left over there >> I think geometrically

from a design standpoint it would be really challenging to do something at the intersection one the intersection is complete but aside from that we still have to we want to accommodate the ability for

cars to take a left out of there so that's why it's set been configured right now to favor the right-hand turn movement. >> I think the only reason you see any left turn uh left turns from truck side

of the rail is because there's no other option. They can't exit to the north. So, as soon as we get that roadway open, that addresses the issue and there wouldn't be anybody taking a left out of

there. >> I would I would agree with that, too. You know, it seems like the few that I've seen, it's probably going to that other property on Providence Road, and that's the only way they can get to

it from there without Yeah. >> looping on 146. That's >> correct. So, that road is going to be ready in December. If I have if I if I get my contractor No, don't hold me to it, but I'm hoping by the

end of this month we're going to be >> So then it could potentially be open in December for your trucks to pull out that direction. Never take a left turn again. >> Oh yeah, certainly. Yes. From that

in December by Yeah. by the end of the year 100%. We'll have a gating system in a solution in there, >> you know, to so that we can because it's kind of a twofold. So we had I don't even know Jen how

we actually I know we we talked about this in this interim condition and that left turn restriction in there was just kind of if it's the right term or not but it's a gentleman's agreement in terms of

under the understanding of the limited amount of traffic without the completion of the road then it would be you know it's contingent upon the final acceptance of the road the condition goes into

place. We've been grateful for that accommodation through the time that it's been out there, but you know, the time has come for us to finish the road obviously and get it done and and you know, abide

by the original condition. So that's what we're looking to get. >> I don't know that there was a gentleman's agreement. It's just you can't >> Okay. >> The other end of the road's not open. So

[laughter] something needs to go that way. There's only one way it can go that way. >> Yeah. It's a practical matter. >> It's just a practical matter. But yeah, there needs to be an end point at which

we no longer have in effect a dead end roadway. Correct. And it's open at least for the traffic that's being generated all along it. >> Correct. >> So, and ideally for those two other sites at least

or traffic coming this way ideally. >> Matt, did you did you say if I I apologize if I missed it. When do you think the whole thing is going to be open without the gating and everything else? >>

Without gating, you mean? >> Yeah. Um well then once the gates are in that's going to be just the the kind of standard procedure. I think the biggest caveat on that will be what happens with lot one

in the future in terms of so >> so there'll always be a gate there >> at this point for the foreseeable future. Yes. >> Until what's when will it go away if it what are the circumstances that would

that road? Well, I mean, at the end of the day, it's it's a private road, so you know, it's from our perspective, it's going to be dependent upon the user that goes in there, what ultimately happens

um with that development. And, you know, the uses we looked in the past were more intense users in there from a traffic perspective, how that plays into it. I mean, it's it's really um there's just

there's too much uncertainty right now to say exactly what's going to happen. So, the gates aren't Yeah, the gates aren't something that, you know, >> because this is the first time I heard about

gates, correct? >> Uh, it was discussed early on with in our initial subdivision planning, but yeah, from a the gate, this is literally like a most recent in light of the fact that we need to get the

road completed. We have to respect this condition. We want to obviously try to reduce the truck traffic yet still, as I said earlier, maintain and uh limit liability going through there, snow and ice

maintenance, everything else. the access to lot one. Um, you know, the gate is is the gate system has felt like the the best way to kind of strike the right balance between all the competing concerns.

>> I mean, I don't I don't personally see a problem with that. I mean, if it's it's private property and you do want to make sure other vehicles aren't coming on and like you said, just kind of going

around the open areas. So I mean, you know, I guess the anticipation was at some point it might be public. So even the public could be coming and say, "Hey, instead of going all the way to Boston,

I'll cut through here and, >> you know, kind of a cut through for other people as well." But >> obviously that would be after your whole, you know, your whole project is up and functioning, you know,

so I get that. Yeah. >> Anybody else? Are you happy you came in? >> Me? >> Yeah. You're happy? >> I'm always happy to be to this building. You know that. Got a long run here. >> But But you showed up.

>> I just don't want to be in that site anymore. That's all. >> Smart man. >> Yeah. [laughter] Maybe someday. I appreciate it. Appreciate whatever you can do. Um just the last thing I'll say from this

whole conversation was if you remember way back then I was lobbying that we should have it be a town road and just take it for you. So that would be our responsibility and they would be able to have

traffic coming through there. I know that didn't work out that way. You know, it's it's a cost factor for us, too. But in the long run, that to me was still an option that we should maybe look at

somewhere down the road. >> Appreciate your time. >> Appreciate Thank you. Thank you. >> Nice to see you. >> Thank >> we'll see you before your covenant expires. >> Good night. Okay, >> here comes the

fun. All right, so >> two quick ones. >> Um um the chairman asked that I put a discussion for ballot seven question on the agenda tonight. As all of you know, it's not a local initiative. This is a

state ballot question, which normally we wouldn't put ballot questions on for discussion, but this ballot question definitely has a potential to impact development within the Commonwealth. And um so

uh there's a desire just to make sure people all the the hordes of people who watch planning board meetings are aware of the ballot question and that as kind of the you know the growth kind of end of

the arm of of Sutton government that all the board members are aware and that we take a look at it. So, I'm gonna share some materials with you. Um, all right. >> All right. So, pay no attention to

these notations. Um the ballot question basically says that in any area where you allow single family homes, so that would be in three districts in the town of Sutton. The R1 district, which as you've

heard me say about a thousand times, is 91.7% of the town. The R2 district and the village districts, you will you could not prohibit you would have to allow lots as small as 5,000 square feet with at

least 50 feet of frontage. This is a very typical 5,000 square lot that you'll see out there. 50 feet wide, 100 feet long. So again, this is from a different graphic, but these things kind of

highlight things that would come into play on a lot that's relatively small. You know, what would the setback be? would existing setbacks still be in place in which case most um they they vary by

those three districts but the existing setback is 50 feet each of these blocks is 10 feet so a house couldn't start until back here and then the rear setback is 40 feet so pretty much your house can

be 10 feet wide so um these are things that were not addressed in the ballot question kind of how do existing dimensional um things play in side setbacks slot coverage and the like. So, um I wanted to

give you a visual example. This is uh Eckles Village in Blackburg, Virginia. Um this uh development requires seems odd, but that's what they told me. 4,999 square feet of standard single family for a

single family home and then 3,000 square feet for condos. So this is the actual village that you see here and this is a a street shot within the village. So you can kind of get an eye for the the

density um we're talking about um for 5,000 square foot lots. And I I I chose this uh village because it's a Virginia village. You get a lot of the same vernaculars in terms of architecture as you do

up here in New England. Um, so >> you're telling us that's regular zoning, not cluster zoning or >> No, this is this is uh Blackberg in various three different areas of um this uh town. This is their

standard zoning. Um they actually have one that's uh 5,3500 square feet. Um but yeah, the 5,50 that's proposed would be required, like I said, in all towns in the Commonwealth um that otherwise allow

single family homes. So, I just mentioned to you a question that was not answered in the ballot language was, do dimensional controls like setbacks and lot coverage still have to be met? Um because

that gets pretty tricky. Um, so where are we talking about this? In the town of Sutton, the other main requirement in the ballot question is this is only for areas of a community where water and sewer

service, public water and sewer service are available. So when uh we we folded in central Mass regional planning to kind of help us do a rough analysis, um Wes and I uh went over with Matt France kind

of the preliminary Excel spreadsheet and it has some some things that need to be adjusted in it for us to get a number that's closer um to reality. But um I wanted to at least give you a visual to

think about here. So in Sutton, there are three primary areas that have water and sewer. And these blue lines, this is northeast Sutton. This is Route 146. We just talked about Boston Road through

here, 122A here. And then you're coming into the denser subdivisions from the 1980s and 90s up in here. Um, and Leel Estates. Um, for reference, most of the lots in Leland Hill Estates are around

10,000 square feet. So, you're talking lots about half the size of Leland Hill Estates. Now, granted, as you can see on this, um, map, they're longer and thinner as opposed to wider, like square. So,

um, but here is a typical lot in the denser subdivisions. Um, you know, Peach Tree Drive, Tip Cart Road, Wusid Drive, Okimo, most of these subdivisions. This is a typical lot. Um, this one has 32,000

more or less square feet. Under the ballot question, that square footage could yield up to six lots. and it has 136 feet of frontage. Under the ballot question, that could yield up to two lots. So

basically, under the ballot question, with water, public water and sewer, this much frontage and this much acreage, you could technically have two lots. But when you look at this lot and the way the

house currently is centered, would you really knock down that lot house to put in another lot or is there a way to squeeze 50 feet over here somehow and Mickey another lot to put another house back

here? So, so there's a lot to be considered. So even when we get a number from Central Mass Regional Planning, there's certainly going to be some caveats to that. So this is typical for Wilks. Then we

have Manchog. This is a standard lot in the village of Manchog. This is about 10,400 square feet. Under the ballot question, you could get two lots out of that. 102 feet of frontage. Again, you could

get two lots out of it. But when you look at this practically, where are you putting another house? But that also speaks to the density and the development style um that occurs or is mandated with a

5,000 foot lot. And then finally, um South Sutton. So this is Route 146. This is Gilmore Drive. And these are the lots along Barnett Road, Quavin Path, and over um off of Lackey Dam Road. This is

these are some larger lots. A lot of these this lot on Barnett Road is 3.63 acres. Under area wise, you could have 31 lots in this much area under the ballot question. And with the 299 feet of

frontage, I rounded up by a foot. Sorry. You could have six lots here. Now, this is a much bigger parcel of land, but still um and this this house is very much centered, but um you could easily put um

you could probably easily divide this get yourself another three or four lots. And if you put in a subdivision roadway in here, you could try to get yourself, you know, north of 20 lots um as well.

So, some considerations, some things to think about. We already saw in some of those pictures, would the placement of an existing structure or lot configuration even allow division or maximum lot

divisions? Would buildability requirements like 60% upland still apply? wetlands, easements, etc. will also affect the ability to divide lots. Owners could put in a subdivision roadway and create more

frontage on larger parcels. There's really and and then lastly, what I and Wes uh working with me are trying to do is provide you with the best information, factual information we can, but on things

like this, obviously, there's no way to know whether a current or a future owner would want to divide land. So, these are just factual things about Sutton and about the base requirements of the ballot

article. what these that size lots kind of looks like on the ground um in an area with architecture kind of similar to ours. Um just so you can think about that in terms of how that affects your

community um if that is passed. So and then of course last but not least is your zoning map. So that would apply in all the white area of town, in all the green area of town, and in all the purple

area of town. But again, only where there is water or sewer. So that's why I gave you the closeup water and sewer of these areas. >> But what's to stop uh development going putting in water and so on?

>> Yeah, they certainly could. As you know, um we have plenty of sewer capacity. Um in the Wilks system um we have some new water capacity um and they have certain amount of capacity in reserve as

well that they haven't requested. >> No, but you can put in your own water. >> Yeah, there's always the ability. Absolutely. I mean sewer is not a finite resource. You can always build whatever. Um

the ability to sink more wells. Obviously Wilks has been trying to find and sink a new well for a while. So that's a little little more difficult, especially if you're talking a large amount of homes.

But yeah, I mean there's it's it's it's that has to be I shouldn't say it has to be, but that might be something you want to consider that yeah, water and sewer exists where it is now, but there's

nothing to say something couldn't be made profitable enough for somebody to want to expand water and sewer and pay the price of that. >> And the setbacks are the biggest issue. Um, >> right. And the

ballot question's silent on that. That's the problem with a ballot question is they often >> give no guidance. >> But to not everybody can just >> Mike and I just can't write up some crazy ballot

question. It has to be approved by the attorney general. Uh, every single one of them. >> And some of them get shot down. This last one, I think they had several that got shot down, but >> I would I

would have hoped that someone in the attorney general's office would be smart enough to realize setbacks and safety with the fire get a fire truck in between these ones. It's >> well, like I said, >>

mindboggling. >> This is a This one you're looking at right here is 10,000 square feet, which is what we negotiated and modeled um Leland Hill Estates on. That was a 40B development as you know and

when we negotiated with John Burns on that we said look you're still in Sutton and we really don't think you should consider lots that are any smaller than areas in Sutton that have the smallest lots.

So that's why the lots in Leland Hill Estates are at least 10,000 square feet because that's the smallest average lot you'll see in really any village concern. There are exceptions to every rule, but

so yeah, you look at this one and you're like, "Huh, how are we doing two houses on that?" And even this one, >> I think what you'd see though, I would more guess that somebody would buy it and then

put two houses up instead, you know? I mean, it's >> like could be >> you could. But Jen, wouldn't the um >> from what I read about on the state website that the local zoning in that district >> would

follow unless the town decreases it and they couldn't. >> What do you mean? Like it's not enough. >> We have a 15 foot setback in in R40 and they want to create a lot. Um they still have that 15t

setback. So So more than likely they'd have to create a lot larger than 50 ft wide in order to build the house. Yeah, I didn't see that in the ballot language. I thought it was >> I read it pretty

good and I thought I read that. All right. >> And I also thought I read I'm not sure if you you could limit ANR lots like creating lots or if it was just for existing lots that were like pre-existing

that couldn't be built on at this time. >> Oh, that you could utilize them. No, it was definitely for creation of new lots. It was definitely for creation of new lots, but I didn't I didn't see any

language on maintaining the setbacks. I thought it was silent on that. But again, I gave you the actual ballot language. It's on the town's website as well. So, take a good look and and um keep it in

mind. There's nothing the town can do as a whole. >> The pro the problem is when there's so many ballot questions, I don't know what the latest nine or 10, >> people don't know most of what some

people just Oh, yeah. whatever, you know, just kind of really not knowing what they're hitting. >> And I assume that was Wes's point in putting this on. >> Yeah. The goal of this ballot question is to

provide 5,000 square foot sites for people to be able to override local zoning across every municipality in the state, >> which creates more housing, which is what >> the state is after to have more

housing. And it's like in in this you know should have local ability to zone and plan for the proper planning because every municipality is different and has different requirements but this has a a

blanket solution for >> every municipality >> which is kind of an issue. >> So the information about the ballot question is on the town's website. We've had the discussion here to try to bring

awareness to the public. Um and um if you have more questions, I'm I'm happy to actually look into um the two questions that Dave raised and just give a refresher on that if anything's um different

just so we have the most accurate and complete information out there. So at least Sutton voters, if they choose to watch planning board meetings or or take advantage of information that's out there,

have the ability more informed than as as Mike noted than a lot of people are when they come into an election with ballot questions, especially when there's quite a few. >> Good. >> So, um the ballot

books that Massachusetts always produces, which are actually pretty good, are there's stacks of them downstairs. Feel free to grab them, though, they should be mailed to your homes as well. >> So,

there's that one. On to the next fun one. All right. So, I attended an online session um about Amazon Prime uh drone deliveries um Westboro. So, last mile facilities, as you know, there's all

different kinds of of uh Amazon facilities. Last mile facilities are the ones where the vans dispense from. They're basically to that last quote mile of the delivery. So, they're not, you know, ones

just taking from this Amazon center and sending to that. They're the ones where they they leave there and they go to your house, that last trip. So, Westboro um in Westboro they have a last mile

facility and Amazon has applied I'll share this to the screen has applied to the ability to do drone deliveries from this facility. So, that's the site plan amendment that they're requesting right

there. um is just converting this portion of their parking lot to the launch area and with the equipment materials that they need. So this is the service area. It is a 7.5 mile radius as the crow

flies from the facility. And as you can see here, where are we? We That's us right there. Are we in >> a tiny that tiny little corner? So, if you live on Chase Road in a tiny little piece of

Blackstone Street, um you could opt in. This is an optional service for Amazon Prime customers or just Amazon customers. There's a three tier pricing structure right now. Um if it's worth if you're a

Prime customer and it's over 50 bucks, it's I think that one's free. um you're a prime customer and it's under 50 bucks, it'll cost you$2.99 or$4.99. I'd have to take a look at my email. And then the

highest cost, not a prime customer, um it's like 10 bucks. So, you have to opt in. You don't get deliveries if you don't want to opt in. And I have given you a copy of this spreadsheet, I mean this uh

PowerPoint presentation. So you can see there's discussion about privacy, uh the FAA, um and all of these different things. So um again, this is really just to raise Sutton's awareness. Part of this

presentation was this is not going to touch the ground anywhere but in Westboro. So it raises another a number of interesting questions. Um and I've written some of that down for you. So um while

there are eventually potential benefits in terms of reduction in on-road delivery impacts, there are many questions about tradeoff impacts. Questions persist about what can be seen or heard of the

roughly five foot square. So that's a typical Amazon drone. It's about five foot square. Um these drones carry up to five pounds, nothing more than five pounds. um um what can be heard of the roughly

five foot square drones from a typical 200 to 400 foot um flight path. So they they go straight up from the facility um up to 100 ft vertical liftoff and then they ramp up to their flight height which

is between three and four usually. They do a straight line path. They ramp down and then they drop down to, as you can see, 13 feet. And there's sensors. If you try to catch it, you don't get your

package because if you're in the 18t circle, that's required on your property. A 100 foot high, 18 foot wide circle is required on your property. Um, not drawn on the ground, but you know, just clear.

[snorts] um if you try to catch it, if your dog's in it, if your kids's in it, if anything's in it, um it doesn't get dropped. They it goes right back up and goes back to the facility. So, what can

you hear? Um what's the frequency? What's the duration? Including more direct impacts in adjacent to individual delivery locations. Um the FAA has reportedly approved the use, but the FAA does not own

US airspace. They regulate navigable airspace. Until now, it has been widely accepted that federal authority preempts local restrictions on aircraft, including that local jurisdictions cannot set

altitude limits or no-fly zones without FAA coordination. But drones are a different animal. Adding to the confusion is the 1946 Supreme Court decision that still stands, US Fushes Cosby, that

established that landowners hold rights to the lower airspace directly above their property sufficient to enable full enjoyment of it. Therefore, many questions have arisen about the individual or

community's rights to prohibit drone use over public or private property. So, making the public aware if they're not already, sharing this presentation, which does um try to address a lot of different

questions. Um and um the town manager actually attended the in-person meeting there, so if you have additional questions, he can answer them. But the presentation was pretty thorough. >> Yeah. What I

thought was interesting, at least is presented in the news, was they had a big meeting and everyone that went was against it, all the people, >> but they came up and they said, "Well, we just have to

go to the planning board and if they okay, we we're doing it. You can't, you know, >> it never touches the ground anywhere but Westboro." So, it the question becomes regulating your airspace. Who owns

it? Who regulates it? Who has the permission? But there's got to be um yeah a lot of tests done on it already that you don't really hear about. >> I mean dropping a package 13 feet like what if it

kills a dog? >> Yeah. >> Like I mean know that I didn't realize I thought it was going to go right to the ground and >> like you know obviously just drop it like >> No. And that's what I said. >>

That's even worse. >> Yeah. And they they um and they talked about that. Um here it has a perception system to detect humans, animals, and obstacles. And if it detects anything, it goes right back up

and goes back. You have one chance. When it clicks on the perception, thinks there's anything in or near that 18 ft, you're you don't get your package. Have a nice day. That's that's how they

described it in the session. >> Well, like you said, you can refuse it, but what if your neighbors one of these get eight deliveries a day? >> Yeah. >> You're sitting out there and eight times this

thing. >> Well, first off, they're spending a lot of money on deliveries by drone. [laughter] And again, it's five pounds or less. So, >> but again, obviously that's a test area. >> 10 years, they

could do 50 pounds. Absolutely. I mean, this would be the way to go. Absolutely. Eliminate all the >> You always start here and end up here. So, yeah, you got to keep that in mind. So, again, this is

just >> making people aware again. And but this one, my question for you is, does the board want to seek the opinions of all of Sutton's residents on what they think about this uh or just the ones

that are immediately affected? And if you do, how do you want to do that? Because we send out a lot of surveys and they're not but again, it's not, you know, it's not relev I shouldn't say relevant.

It's not advisable for five people to make a decision for an entire town, right? [snorts] Does the board want to seek additional information or input from any particular sources like council or

anything or take any other action related to this potential use? So, is there something you want to do? Is there opinions you want? Is there input you want? I mean, if we had input, what would we do

with it if we don't have any legal interest in be able to stop it, >> right? And so that's that's the only thing I thought of >> getting hopes up that we could actually stop it or change it, right? >>

So I really feel like the only relevant questions out there and I assume Westboro, Shrewsbury, the people in the towns who were at the meeting are asking these questions of their council. So, >> so

it's really almost being in >> gathering the advice or gathering the information that keeping our ears to the ground and knowing what kind of legal advice could be out there for when a drone is flying

over your house, what can you do? What is your legal interest over your airspace? >> How do we find out that type of information to be able to help people? >> Right. And that's what I thought as well

really. What's the >> what's the legal end of all of this? Um I read the article I think I read the article and paper twice. I still didn't grasp it went in front of the planning board >> and then it

then people went to the the uh select board to to complain but then it made mention at the end it wasn't going in front of the ZBA. >> I I don't know if it had a use special permit. >> Okay. But it

didn't explain, you know, like most like most paper articles, if you know something about a newspaper article, >> they don't capture the gist of everything. >> But this can be closer than we think

because you have the the Amazon center down in um down in Oxbridge. >> Is Oxbridge a last mile though? >> I don't believe so. >> Let's say it's not a last mile today, but it could be a last mile

tomorrow. >> Yeah. Greenwood >> and you know Greenale Mall is >> Greenale Mall is Uh, so these things could potentially be closer than we think. >> What a child out it is. >> No, that's not last. >>

Is that a last mile though? >> I thought it was. >> No, >> it's nearly big enough to be whatever it wants to be. >> Yes, it is large. So, it it could be it's not right. >> So, yeah. So, that's where I

figured you'd want to go like what's what's the leg, you know, all these communities are asking their council what's the real deal? >> What's the what's the seven and a half what's the rule with seven

and a half miles? That's that's the FAA. >> That's an FAA, >> right? >> And I believe >> who says that's not going to be 15 miles. >> Well, I also have a feeling or or I got the gist from the

presentation that the um part of the FAA thing is ensuring you have adequate battery life to get to a location and from a location. So, I believe the seven and a half mile was also tied to guarantees

of battery life as well. And FAA It's basically uh dawn to dusk. Um and you can't fly. You can only fly dawn to dusk. And there is a limitation on wind speed. Like so if the winds are above a certain

amount, you can't go out. And if it's raining a certain amount, you can't send it out either. But yeah, batteries get better every day, >> right? Technology gets better. >> I don't have a drone. I

can't imagine owning one, but people can own one. So if you own a drone, are the rules going to apply for you, too? Can you drive? No. I mean, this is a business. There's rules and regulations there.

Well, if you have a drone, just individual want to fly around and drop visit go places. Can you drive drones wherever you want to right now? I don't know. and drop off something. >> Just get delivery

over people's health. >> Oh, you can >> I can do your meeting folders to you. Awesome. [laughter] >> Just if if if a business can do this stuff, then an individual can do it. >> And if that's >> or it

should be that way, might not be, but >> if that's not the case, >> um how come? So, who who has the upper hand there? I don't know. You know, people I mean, we do our parade in Worcester. There's a

couple people grow up with drones and take pictures of the whole parade and >> it's kind of a little un you know >> you know if it's not a law enforcement or you know type of >> but yeah they can they

can go over your house and look down at your house the whole time >> they're small ones they're not >> like they're not this is >> yeah and they did spend a good amount of time on the private privacy

aspects of this and actually um >> shoot it >> you can watch the actual meeting >> pigs video is out there if you want to watch the whole presentation. >> Yeah. >> So, keep our um reach out to the

other communities, see if they've gotten any legal advice and just >> just keep listening. I mean, it's got to be out there because it was big news and, you know, kind of got a lot of publicity of

that went down. >> Oh, absolutely. >> Yeah. And Yeah. >> And those are relatively wellunded communities within this >> like a green root type of movements between communities on it. So, um, >> or

grassroots. Grassroots. That's >> grassroots. There are some grassroots groups. Y >> must be an Irish thing. Yeah. >> All right. So, those have been our two items to hope that or help Sutton residents

and voters be informed. >> Yeah. Think of all the car trips it'll eliminate. >> Well, yeah. I mean, there is an upside eventually, but there's tradeoffs. So, I mean, I know when I was a kid, I

couldn't wait for the day when we were the Jetsons, but with our flying car, but I was thinking like a six-year-old. So, [laughter] [snorts] all right. Administrative items. >> Meeting minutes. >> You

good with those? >> Motion that we uh approve the minutes from September 14th, 2026. >> Second vote. Dave Mason I >> Bob Rogers I >> Wesley Site got I >> Mike a good I >> All right. Um we have no

hearing filings for 112. Um um but we'll continue the John Road discussion and I will probably have the first draft of the subdivision rules and regulations changes to you. >> I I'm sorry. Can I go

back to the meeting minutes though? >> Oh yeah. I just want to make sure I my first two pages of meeting minutes made it say August 23rd. >> It's possible. >> But the third the fourth page says

September 14th >> like on top you mean? >> Yeah. >> Oh, that's weird. >> So I don't know if I'm actually seeing the right meeting. >> I'll check the headers. >> Good catch, Mike. >> So I was just

looking for the 20 the September one. I'm like I don't see it. What page three says? >> Page three and four says one. >> Page one says August 23rd. I'll ask what I signed. >> The first two pages. >>

Huh? Is your signature version the right version? >> I see September 14th. >> And are the headers correct too? >> Oh board. >> No, like that right here like on page two. >> Oh, we get it. That's UPG

>> December 14th. >> I was looking at UPG >> and also MIG MIG has >> killing me. All right. So, >> you're right. Sorry. >> You have the real minutes and they're correct. >> Yes, they are. >> Okay.

Good. >> Sorry about that. >> That's okay. >> I saw my signature in 2021. >> All right. And then, um, notices of interest. Um, I just was letting you know about the Milbury solar install, which is

pretty cool because it's up the upper Blackstone water pollution abatement plant. I assume it's tied to its operation. It's about a half just over a half acre, 351 kilowatts DC. So hopefully that'll

be tied directly into that plant and be part of the power source. >> Okay. >> So, letting you know about that. Um, there were some other towns that were doing bylaw changes. I called each of the

planners, asked them what they were doing, and all of them were really more housekeeping stuff. Nothing that would float your boat, but the file is here as always if you want to peruse it. >> Maybe I

missed, but are we for the town meeting? Are we presenting anything? >> Um, you will be doing the chair will be doing um the um motion on the ADU. >> Okay. >> Amendments. >> So that meeting is in two

weeks. So be there. And I won't say a B square just be there. >> Right. So that's the only thing that we have going for that evening. >> Would you like a motion to adjourn? >> Absolutely. >> Make a

motion we adjourn. >> I'll second it. >> It's almost 8:30. >> Dave Mason. I >> Bob Les adjourn. >> Wesley Stan I. Bill >> Tot. Mike Gage. Hi. >> Hope you feel better.