PET-2025-3 : Petition for National Grid to install 1 JO Pole on E Emerson Street

Transcript (~12 min @ 1:28:40)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 1:28:34 Speaker 11: The, this is, uh, for a new, a new building, a new project that is gonna be in 6 81 Main Street. So they need, um, they need a new transformer in to install this new transformer. Instead of breaking the road, we are proposing a new pole to avoid, uh, breaking the road. So we, we can install the new pole, we can do that crossing by overhead. And then just from the sidewalk to where it's gonna be placed. The new transformer, eh, it will be like a, a smaller trenching.

▶ 1:29:12 Speaker 7: Okay. So this is not, this is on the corner of East Emerson and Yes. And Main Street. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Repe.

▶ 1:29:21 Mark Garipay: Just a quick question. And this may be for Jay. Is this, uh, this is right around Caruso's?

▶ 1:29:27 Speaker 2: This Yes. Caruso's building? Yes. Yes.

▶ 1:29:28 Mark Garipay: And this is as a result, hopefully of something moving forward down there?

▶ 1:29:34 Speaker 2: Yes. Okay. I'll make a motion to recommend Second. Second

▶ 1:29:39 Speaker 7: Motion recommend made by Councillor Garby, seconded by Councillor Stewart on discussion Councillor Hamilton. Thank

▶ 1:29:44 Speaker 5: You. Um,

▶ 1:29:46 Ward Hamilton: so I'm looking at the petition and we had an item either identical to this or similar to this in the past and this drawing, and maybe it's not a problem, but last time we pointed out that this drawing shows a building that doesn't exist.

▶ 1:30:08 Speaker 11: Yes. It doesn't exist right now. Is that okay? So in, in the way that National Grid goes, is that before we, we install the service, uh, we need like, your approval. So it's, it's, it is only like to be ready when they're gonna be ready to do it.

▶ 1:30:25 Ward Hamilton: Okay. Thank you. And so, last time when this came up before us, the question was where is this project? And at that time, um, the, what we call the Caruso's property was owned by somebody else. Mm-hmm. It sold last fall, and I'm not aware of,

▶ 1:30:47 Speaker 5: and I, and Ms.

▶ 1:30:50 Ward Hamilton: Mass is here, she can, or somebody could correct me, has site. Is this, is this Insight plan review right

▶ 1:30:58 Speaker 5: now to develop the site? Not yet. Okay.

▶ 1:31:02 Ward Hamilton: So we're gonna cause the disruption. This is like the same thing as last time that we talked about. We're gonna do, we're gonna, we're gonna cause tremendous disruption at this intersection to put in service for a project that isn't even, and this isn't your Yeah. Please don't take this personally none, none of this personal. So I, I don't know what makes this situation different than last time when we didn't approve it. So if, if no one else on the council has a problem with it or thoughts on it, then I guess I stand alone. But last time our rationale was there's no project that's been approved. This isn't, um, you know, on East Rock Road or whatever's a Poplar Street, this is pretty busy area and this is some pretty disruptive work that's gonna take place. So, um, I have a concern that we're, we're doing this before having a project. Um, and so, uh, I'm gonna vote No. Thank you

▶ 1:32:12 Speaker 7: Councilor Vandiver.

▶ 1:32:13 Kimberly Vandiver: Thank you. Um, what is the, um, I, I understand you're asking for the approval now, and I heard the other counselor's concerns about the timing. Is, is this something that you intend to do immediately, or, or you mentioned,

▶ 1:32:28 Speaker 11: So actually this is like a really old project. So I, I I, I don't know in what stage is the project right now, but I think that the, the less concern would be like the pole and the trenches because I think that it is a really busy, busy area underground talking. Like even if they gonna have the service, they gonna have to break the whole road and everything for the water supply and see where and everything. So I, it was just like an old, old petition that we request and we want to take advantage to coming here. And if, if even some point, if he don't want to do the job with, we is not gonna be doing it because he needs to pay in advance to make national agreement, install the poll and everything. So maybe he hasn't called me like maybe like a year, so I don't know if he's gonna be continuing doing it, but if he calls all calls, call National Grid a, eh, what happened with the petition? So I at least I have now a response to, to,

▶ 1:33:28 Speaker 7: To Say Counselor Hamilton.

▶ 1:33:30 Ward Hamilton: Thank you. So this drawing, this petition is dated July 3rd, 2024. Yes. And that entity no longer owns this property.

▶ 1:33:40 Speaker 5: Okay. Um, so I,

▶ 1:33:45 Speaker 11: Okay. I'm

▶ 1:33:45 Speaker 5: a no vote. Thank you. Yeah.

▶ 1:33:47 Speaker 7: Councilor Repe.

▶ 1:33:48 Mark Garipay: Yeah, just, um, to, uh, director Proa Ellis and, um, Ms. Masser, if she's still with us, um, is there anything going forward with construction on this road and during this construction season with the culvert?

▶ 1:34:06 Speaker 2: And, um, where are we,

▶ 1:34:08 Speaker 9: We are very hopeful that, that something will be happening with the culvert this construction season, but it's not definitive at this time. And I would say, um, in terms of the approval, I mean, one option perhaps is to do the approval contingent upon a successful site plan approval, um, for the redevelopment. Similar to what you just did with the con com for the other application. Um, or I'm not sure with these public hearing petitions what the process is if it gets held. But I don't think, given where we are with this project, from my perspective, I don't see any harm in holding this until there's a successful project or having it be contingent. It's not gonna hold us up in any way with proceeding with the culvert.

▶ 1:34:59 Speaker 2: Okay. So, um, I'll, I'll withdraw. I'll withdraw.

▶ 1:35:03 Robb Stewart: Yeah. Madam chair, Madam President. I'll withdraw my tape. Okay.

▶ 1:35:06 Speaker 2: And I'll withdraw, um, withdraw my motion. Okay. And I'll, yeah. So

▶ 1:35:11 Speaker 7: Council Williams, do you have a question?

▶ 1:35:16 Speaker 4: Yeah. Um, I have heard

▶ 1:35:18 Ryan Williams: that this building, having changed hands is going to have a different design. Okay. And, um, thinking through Councilor Hamilton point about why we would approve something that is outdated, I it's possible that the new building may require a different approach to electrical service. I'm, I'm understanding that they're currently in discussion around commercial property with some residential, um, and I have no idea what the build out of that will be or whether they'll require it. So I, I think that we should probably, we should probably reject this. Um, and I'll, I'll make a motion not to approve it. I don't know how to do that.

▶ 1:35:57 Speaker 7: Ought not to Pass, not to pass. I'll make a motion.

▶ 1:35:59 Ryan Williams: Ought not to pass. And, and, and when we have a better plan, you know, we come back and we talk about it because the, the, I'm not comfortable, um, voting yes conditionally to like a site plan that may be completely different and requires, you know, lots of changes. So,

▶ 1:36:17 Robb Stewart: Councillor Stewart, thank you Madam President, Madam President, I, I will, um, support a past contingent upon a successful, um, whoops.

▶ 1:36:32 Robb Stewart: Where they, um, are approved to go and build. Um, uh, I would like to see this move forward 'cause I would like to see, I'd like to give every impetus for this area to get developed because it's been sitting there for ages undeveloped, and it's, uh, and quite frankly, an eyesore that we need to, as a, as a consulate influence how we can get that to move forward. So I would not, I'm not comfortable voting against it to, to further delay it. I'd like to be rather, uh, something where we can encourage the progress. So that's, that's how I'll be voting. I will not support the current, uh, motion, but I would support a motion that has contingency built into it. Thank you.

▶ 1:37:19 Ryan Williams: Councillor Williams. Um, so through the chair, I agree that we should be doing this to help out the, uh, that we, that we should, um, want to develop the property. A hundred percent. I just don't know how hard it is for National Grid to resubmit the application with the new site plan in hand, having new information or, you know, how how tough is that? Like if we vote this down when the developer gets through the site plan review process, which could take, I don't know, you know, months. Um, are you guys gonna be able to like, bring this before us and we can move it through in two, three weeks?

▶ 1:37:58 Speaker 11: So, uh,

▶ 1:37:59 Ryan Williams: Or will it cause you problems if we, if we kill this? No,

▶ 1:38:02 Speaker 11: Don't worry about that. So I can redesign the job because if it's gonna be like a, like you say like a new design, so I would prefer to like to design it again.

▶ 1:38:12 Ryan Williams: You'd prefer to design it again? Yeah.

▶ 1:38:14 Speaker 11: In this case, yeah, because like, I didn't know that now he's a new owner and so it's true that I haven't spoke with them like more than a year, so probably, Yeah, he's Gone. They have like a new, a new idea. So yeah, I would prefer to redesign in that case.

▶ 1:38:29 Ryan Williams: My only, my only concern is that, that we don't kind of put the approval in the pole location and influence the developer to say that the facade of that side of the building can be this or that, or can't be this or that because the wires are already approved in that location, you know, to kind of give a more of a blank slate. And it doesn't seem to me like it would be a challenge or a delay. Um, so I'll stick with my motion and, and see what the will of the council is.

▶ 1:38:55 Leila Migliorelli: So there's a mo motion to ought not to pass made by Williams, councilor Williams, seconded by Councillor Hamilton on discussion. Councillor gpe.

▶ 1:39:04 Mark Garipay: I just want if, if you're okay with redesigning it, why is it? I'm just curious. Why is it in front of us now? Yeah,

▶ 1:39:10 Speaker 11: Because I, because I just submitted like time ago and I didn't get a hearing like a year ago.

▶ 1:39:18 Leila Migliorelli: Okay. Just to follow up on Councillor Ante's comment, that's kind of my question too is that now we have sort of, this is sort of the second thing in front of us in which we don't have like a full plan as to what it's being used for. And I don't know if this is a, a national grid situation if this is a city situation, but it seems like if we are applying, if there was an old application for a poll, um, if there's some type of communication that could go between the city and national grid, um, so that we're not having to tell National Grid when they're here, that this site, the plan is changed. Um, I, that would just be my comment moving forward. Okay. Um, motion on the table. Ought not to pass May by Councillor Williams, seconded by Councillor Hamilton. All in favor of not passing. Aye aye. Any opposed? Aye. Okay. So, um, that is 10 pa uh, to not pass one, uh, dissenting. And so that, that passes. All right. Moving on to one Jo Pole on Sylvan Street

▶ 1:40:28 Speaker 7: Center.

▶ 1:40:33 Speaker 11: And this is for a, a new development that actually will be in 1214 Sylvan Street. They are pretty much ready to go and they are needing definitely the service right now.