TranscriptPlanning Board Public Hearing ~ March 19, 2025

We're working on it right now, but it is postcess. them. Choose one of them. Okay, we're good. It's on. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, it is 6:30. So we'll do a quick we're going to start the meeting uh first with uh the quorum. So we have Mr. Puran, Mr. Lois, Mr. Durr, myself uh John Talbot. So we have a quorum. Uh Miss Kappinger is uh excused to go somewhere nice this evening uh on spring break. So it will be the four of us. So please rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance.

United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. uh planning board's public hearing on land use articles. And so before we get started, we'd like to just kind of go over set some expectations for this evening. Uh so that uh no one is surprised. Um purpose of the town meeting. It's a required meeting has to be done no more than 30 days, no less than 7 days before the uh town hall town meeting. And so we're inside that window now. And the goal this evening is to inform the citizens uh prior of the land use uh articles and what they're about prior to the town meeting. And what you've been you see at the back of the room are the final drafts. They're not yet approved. Uh they will uh be voted on at the at the town meeting. So couple of things that um are important to know starting out is that what you see are the final drafts.

So there will be no changes that come out of tonight's meeting. So we'll give you the you'll get the information on what they're about. Uh but basically these final drafts are locked in until the town meeting and the vote. So it is the vote of the town that will decide whether they're truly truly final or not. Um so again I said tonight is an information meeting. It's not really a policy discussion. We've been there done that. I think each of these articles, there's been at least 10 meetings, two or three public sessions of some kind. Uh, so there's been a lot said about them. They've been out on the web, but again, this is a chance to kind of get the final uh version of it out there to you. So, please sign in and grab a copy of the the ordinances there if you want them. Okay. So, how is it going to work then? Um it is this is unlike some of the planning board stuff that we do. This is a much more formal discussion. Uh if you

have if you want to say something or talk about the uh the article that is before us uh please raise your hand. I'll recognize you. Is that the mic we're going to use. George, please sit at that mic uh over there. State your name and address. If you're representing a committee or board, please say which of those that you represent. or if you're just uh here representing yourself. Um so all all of your comments

and questions should be directed to me. So if you have a question about something, I direct it to me and I will direct it to the appropriate person. Um and so and this is not a back and forth discussion. So and it's definitely not my feelings will be hurt if you turn to somebody in the audience and ask them for the answer. So uh please direct them to me and we will uh we'll move on from there. Everybody's going to get about 3 minutes. We have four major topics disc uh to discuss tonight uh in about two hours and that includes Mr. Tvar has a nice presentation on what these are about. So we're going to try to hold it down to three minutes per person. Uh I would ask that you be respectful uh limited to the topic at hand. when you come up to the microphone, speak into the microphone. Um, because I think our technology goes back to the uh Spanish Inquisition in the 1400s. And I mentioned this is not a

policy discussion. So, the process is going to be um we'll just read the article language. the town planner is going to do a short presentation and then it's your turn and um we'll have the planning board kind of ask any questions or comments that they may have at the end. So having said that I will find them. As I said there are four articles before us and uh excuse me three articles four topics. So

um the first of the land use articles is article 19. Uh there are uh other articles on budget uh business articles so on and so forth. Um and all of this is on the web on the town website. So if you want to know what the articles are or the budget lines or whatever it may be that's also on the web. So, article 19 to see if the town will vote to enact amendments to the land use ordinance as set forth in the document town of Durham land use ordinance as adopted at town meeting April 6, 2024. Proposed revisions for town meeting April 5th, 2025 part one uh and

then draft amendments to the resource protection district to match the latest state data and give relief from buildings in the RP district. uh to remove areas previously designated as beginning with habitat 6 plus natural resource values and to grant relief to land owners with existing buildings and resource protection. So that's the article that you will be voting yes or no on. And with that I will turn it over to Mr. Tharge. Thank you John. Um this

first set of draft land use ordinance amendments is based on about a year's uh work by a a combination of conservation commission members and planning board members who under the direction of the select board formed a working group and reviewed the newest state data from the main department of inland fisheries and wildlife as well as some detailed analysis that I did looking at the uh impact of the recently revised resource protection district uh on individual buildings within the resource protection. So the findings of that group uh and its work indicated that the the zoning map was last updated in 2023

and that was based on some recommendations in the comprehensive plan to follow natural resources data provided by the state of Maine uh particularly the beginning with habitat program. Uh during the process leading up to that vote on the amended zoning map, there was uh public participation process and significant uh concern was expressed by individual property owners about the accuracy of the state data and also the impacts of the new zoning on people's abilities to uh expand their existing homes and buildings and businesses. So, after a review of the Durham data, the main department of uh inland fishers and wildlife did review Durham's data and did a customized analysis of the all of the resource data that they have and confirmed that the co-occurrence map over estimated the amount of u land in Durham that achieved a rating under their system of six or more co-occurrence of natural resources.

So, the proposed zoning map revisions will remove areas that were previously in that designation. Uh, and it will also, as I'll explain, put a what we're calling a development buffer around existing buildings so that people can expand their homes and businesses without having to go to either the board of appeals or the planning board as is currently the situation. So, this map uh is what the town was provided uh on two occasions. part leading up to the 2023 vote. And so what you see there in green is what under the 2018 comprehensive plan was designated as beginning with habitat six plus uh areas with co-occurrence of natural resources. And so the state did an analysis of all of those areas and found that the vast majority of them did not rise to that level of importance in terms of the value of the uh co-occurrence of natural resources. Uh so this graphic would show you uh what the areas in orange are those areas

that are no longer considered by the state to meet that threshold and those will be removed from the zoning map as a result of this amendment. Uh beyond that there were approximately about 50 uh buildings within the resource protection district. Uh about 15 of those came out of the resource protection as a result of that. uh modification for the beginning with habitat data, but there were still uh 30 or so others that would still be restricted from expansion uh just by virtue of being even partly in the resource protection district. So we did a a detailed analysis of every building we could identify that was within the resource protection district and the working group came up with uh the proposed uh treatment for individual buildings. And the first of those would be buildings in the flood plane such as along the um Androskogan River along uh

Royalsboro Road. And uh those buildings are subject to the federal uh flood management requirements. And so if they were to do expansions, they would still have to meet the uh flood requirements. But the question is should they be uh pretty much restricted from development uh because of the resource protection. So the working group recommended that a uh area within a 100 ft of those existing structures be removed from the resource protection thereby facilitating expansions of those buildings. So that is the the parameter that's being applied for properties within the resource protection district where that are there solely because of the uh flood plane designation. Uh similarly there are lots of areas in town that have forested wetlands and the same treatment would be given to those if a building is in the uh resource protection just simply because it's in a forest was or is now in a forested wetland area. A 100

ft distance would be taken from each of those buildings and that would be removed from the resource protection district with this map amendment. the working group uh took a little bit different approach in terms of stream buffers. Uh that's a more sensitive resource than a flood plane or a a forested wetland. And uh so this building for example but just by virtue of the fact that this building here it's on I think it's on the line with Pel um is just the fact that it's touched by the resource protection district makes it a nonconforming structure which requires them to go either to the planning board or the board of appeals. And so the amendment here would simply pull the resource protection district away from the building, thereby enabling the property owner to expand on the sides of this or rear as long as they go no closer to the protected resource. So that was kind of the resolution that the

working group felt was giving appropriate relief while at the same time protecting the town's important natural resource. Similarly, uh there are a couple of spots in Durham where there are uh high value waiting bird waterfall habitats. Uh this is off the end of uh Snow Road. And so that's an important breeding area for W waterfall. And there's a 250 foot buffer that's recommended by the main department of environ uh of uh environmental protection which really uh buffers that habitat from activi human activities such as pets and other types of activities. So again, this there's the only two buildings that I'm aware of in town that intrude upon that buffer and the proposed resolution would pull the building out of the resource protection and then they could do expansions either to the sides or away from that uh protected resource. So those would be the parameters and when you include removing the six plus co

occurrence as well as those 100 foot building buffers that is uh what is depicted on the draft zoning map that would be voted on as part of um article 19 of the town meeting warrant. Okay. Um with that I will open the public hearing portion of this. So, anyone in the audience who has um questions or comments about uh article 19, uh please come up to the mic, state your name and address, and if a member of a committee, which committee you're on, and you kind of get one shot at there. So, please bring all your questions and comments with you.

one. Okay. And in that case, I will close the public hearing on uh resource protection and open it up to comments from the the planning board. presentation. any other Okay, it looks like we did beat this horse to death over the last six or seven months. So, uh anyway, there's no schem. So, having said that, uh the next step is this will be on it is on the articles for uh town meeting and it will be uh a vote at that point in time. So, we're move on to article

number 20. enact amendments to the land use ordinances set forth in the document town of Durham land use ordinances adopted at town meeting April 6, 2024. Propo proposed revisions for town meeting April 5th, 2025. Part two, draft amendments to apply contract zoning to any large battery energy storage uh energy storage or solar system manager enact and enact best standards uh land use ordinance articles 235 and 19 to require require contract zoning approval for large gauge energy projects and enact safety and other performance standards to apply to commercial industrial scale battery energy storage systems. So these are two new topics that have not been in uh the land use ordinance to date. Both contract zoning and battery energy stories. And if you remember back in November, uh the town at a special town meeting, they you all approved uh a six-month moratorum to give the give us time to come up with

uh standards for uh to apply to battery energy storage, which we've done. Um, and in addition and during that the development of that, um, I believe the town attorney and some of the town staff uh, recommended the use of something called contract zoning uh, be applied

and um, as a as a weapon to uh, weapon is probably the wrong term, but as a tool to help uh, uh, work with battery energy storage systems and uh, large scale solar So I remember a year ago we approved the uh the solar system and solar farm solar energy systems and this uh adds a puts the large systems

underneath contract zoning if approved. So I'll put stumbling and Mr. Tabarge if you would expand on that. Yes, John. Uh as you indicated this is actually an extension uh part of it is an extension of the work done with the conservation commission. Uh last year the town enacted its first standards addressing solar energy systems which are popping up uh all across the state and many communities have enacted moratoriums or adopted standards to address the some of the safety issues as well as the visual impacts of largecale uh solar energy systems. So the conservation commission did a lot of research on that. The planning board then took that and that actually went to a vote of last year's town meeting and the town currently has standards for solar energy systems. Uh so now the town uh during that whole process we became aware of the developing trend somewhat associated with solar energy systems of battery

energy storage systems because solar energy storage systems have this challenge unlike other types of energy where it you can only collect it during times when you have the solar gain and then they looking for ways to store that. uh and one of the technologies that's rapidly developing is uh battery energy storage systems and uh what you see on the slide on the left is a 5 acre project and that was approved by the Gorum planning board uh over the last two years. It's currently under construction and that is a 175 megawatt

uh battery energy storage system not for a solar application but that's just being connected to the grid for uh help help in stabilizing the grid and pricing of electricity is all big part of that. uh and we had received inquiries from private interests about the possibility of putting one of these in Durham. And so that led to the moratorum and the pressing need to put into place regulations that will help the town deal with the particular issues here which uh are most importantly the public safety aspects of uh these things have had a history in other states of having s serious fires. uh and the frequency of those led uh the state of New York to appoint a special task force to look at the safety aspects and we reviewed that research and have incorporated some of their recommendations into the draft regulations that we're looking at currently. So the findings that we looked at were that as I mentioned that project in

Gorum that has just gone in and the Gorum planning board had no standards other than their site plan review standards. So they had no way of dealing with a lot of these safety issues and u and it was in an industrial area that they're putting it in. So people weren't particularly as concerned and they have a much more capable uh fire apparatus

public safety system in in Gorm than Durham has. So for whatever reason they did not look at a lot of the issues and that we're looking at. Uh in addition, what heightened the concern for the town of Durham is that the town attorney has advised that the uh utility scale battery energy storage systems or BES uh meet the definition of essential services under Durham's current ordinance. So the uh anywhere along

those power lines the a prop a project could be proposed and the planning board couldn't even apply the conditional use criteria which deal with scale drainage and all of those issues that we apply to almost every other commercial project couldn't even apply those standards only the site plan review standards which don't speak at all to the issues associated with best. So uh that led to the uh select board proposing and the town adopting the moratorum and as mentioned there are significant safety noise and environmental concerns associated with these that the ordinance has no standards whatsoever to apply to those. So this sixmonth moratorum has given the board the opportunity to pull together something relatively quickly. uh and it's all drafted and ready to go and um we are looking at the proposed

regulatory program consisting of the best standards as the first piece. Uh additionally the town attorney came in who had recommended the moratorum and based on uh work with other communities she saw contract zoning as a potential additional regulatory tool that Durham might want to apply. And what that does is makes any large scale energy project

whether solar or battery uh to basically go through a special zoning process that could only be approved at town meeting. And so that's kind of the other part of this that came at the recommendation of the town attorney.

what we're talking about with battery energy storage systems, uh this was a presentation we did last fall to help people. So, the orange box there is the uh approximate size of one of these shipping container size uh battery energy storage units and those are used in those commercial industrial scale uh projects like Gorm. Um the smaller uh green one over here, the midsize commercial would be more for say um there's a project in Falmouth where they just put in I think it's 2 acres of solar solar panels for a particular business and that business could use that type of a system again when on uh periods where they don't have the solar they would have that available to operate their business equipment. And then the small green one on the left is uh what a typical residential property might uh include in their home. One or more of those just for their personal solar systems. So just to help everybody

understand the numbers uh the sense of these uh the average household use is about 30 kilowatt hours per day or 900 per month. If you look at your electric bill and the typical size of those units there on the right picture are about either 10 by 32 or up to 40 ft long. And

those one of those typically is about 1 megawatt hour of uh storage capacity. And uh so that one of those things will power about 33 homes for uh for one day at full uh utilization of their electricity. If it's in power outage, obviously they would try to limit it like you do with your generator or anything. So uh the draft standards for battery energy storage systems uh include establishing three tiers with regulations applying to the home, business and industrial scale with different standards uh applying to each of those tiers. Uh all best systems would be required to meet the latest testing and fire safety codes for all components of it. uh they have the internal the connections the monitoring a lot of safety features have been addressed in the recent code updates based on those uh research by the New York uh task force in particular but others as well uh tier two and tier three either if you

do one of those shipping container size or more then you go through and it's outside your building if you did one say for some big uh business that had a high intense uh energy need. Um that would the the uh unit would have to go through site plan review but not through the contract zoning approval by a town meeting. Uh if you do more uh than one of those megawatt uh uh battery energy storage systems then you you're into that tier three which then kicks in additional requirements including a town meeting vote for contract zoning. Uh this proposal will require

uh one of the concerns that the fire chief brought into the discussion uh was the concern for water for fire protection. And so we got really a lot of good uh important feedback from the fire chief based on the local needs of the fire department in terms of one of the po things he pointed out is that you can require a water source of fire protection but if the wind is blowing in the wrong direction and some one of the issues with these is potential for toxic gases. They may not be able to use that hydrant because the wind's blowing at them. So we put in a requirement for redundant water sources and access to the facility from all four sides. So that's the type of uh very strict scrutiny and and uh input we've gotten and put into these

screening where visual impact may occur and also for important uh decommissioning of these facilities when and if they are abandoned. And this would exempt uh all home applications. And one of the other uh changes that was made as a result of the public input, basically one of those Tesla packs is about 20 uh megawatt hour capacity. And so working with the conservation commission to try to facilitate home uh solar systems. uh the thresh the threshold for allowance without uh site plan review or town meeting was was uh 70 kilowatt hours which would be about three of those packs for an individual home. All they'd have to do is meet the electrical code and safety requirements.

So, uh, then as I said, the the town attorney brought in the issue of contract zoning as an as an additional tool, and the conservation commission had been working on looking at some way of identifying what parts of Durham should have uh allowance for uh large

solar energy systems, such as a gravel pit uh that's been mined out, would be an ideal location. uh putting it in prime agricultural land would not be a good location. So they'd been looking at this issue of where have some sort of mechanism to uh determine where these solar energy systems and particularly ones like the town of Green was propo had a proposal for 600 acres uh in that town went uh into high high stress uh

response mode when that proposal came. So, uh, the the town attorney recommended considering contract zoning, which says for any of those large industrial scale, uh, to come into Durham, they would have to go through a town meeting vote after an extensive process of negotiating. and the town would be able to put more restrictions on it through that mechanism than it could under traditional zoning and would be able to uh look for added public benefits such as addressing any deficiencies of the local fire department capacity to deal with this type of of development. So the select board had uh recommended moving forward with a contract zoning and a lot of discussion was over whether solar should be included or should not be included. And where the select board came out as a kind of a compromise is to say any solar farm of 20 acres of development area or more would have to go through a town meeting vote. Anything under that would

just go to the planning board under the regulations. contract zoning is that concern for anywhere in town right now. Uh the as I said the conservation commission had been looking at suitable locations and both the solar energy systems as well as best have potential benefits for the community from a tax standpoint but also in could uh significantly impact the town's rural character which is one of the highest priorities of the recently uh adopted comprehensive plan. This provides a mechanism to look at them on a case by case basis. looking at the comprehensive plan, looking at the potential benefits to determine if it is in the best interest, and it'll be up to the voters at town meeting to just make that uh final decision. Uh they would uh applicants would propose for a specific piece of property or set of properties for a contract zoning. uh they would put together a proposal. The staff would

review it, look at the ordinance requirements, uh talk to the select board in terms of priorities and then uh the applicants would file a formal application and the select board and planning board would review that uh against the comprehensive plan, have a public hearing, and then the select board would decide whether it's something that they would decide to put on to the town meeting for a contract zoning vote. So the draft amendments as I said uh any be best battery energy system or a solar farm of 20 acres or more would only be allowed as uh through the contract zoning process. So that is the proposal for contract zoning and best part two article 20. Okay. Um I will jump in here

just quickly before we go to that. Uh it's important to note that the best and contract zoning are tied together. So there's two different uh issues, if you will, but one vote. So excuse me, uh a vote on article 20 is a vote for both contract zoning and battery energy storage. So if somebody likes contract zoning and not best and votes no, then neither one pass. Um so just for if or vice versa uh so it takes a it's not a yes vote but an agreement on both uh both topics. So with that I will uh turn it

over to the public open the public hearing and anyone who wants to discuss comment on ask questions about uh I guess we'll do either contract zoning or battery storage together since it's one vote. [Music] Brookside Drive. So, just for clarification, the town vote, sorry, I'm looking at you, Gallen. The town vote is u voting on the ordinance. Can you just clarify what the town vote is? Is for at the town meeting? At the town meeting. Sorry. Yes. Yeah. the vote at the town meeting for article 20 if it's a yes vote then both the contract zoning and battery energy storage will become part of the land use ordinance. So, um, is that voting yes, the town, if the town votes yes, which would be on both because it's a combined unit, um, is that are they voting yes that we want to

have contract um zoning and the um the storage the battery storage come into our town. Um, sorry. Yeah, I to be clear it I think a yes vote would approve both of them. the contract zone yeah would it contract zoning would be established the standards for best would be established but with this system as George said for for big systems then let's just say green had 600 acres of solar farm they had a mechanism in their system to stop that with a town meeting vote we don't miss we don't have that or a plan commission planning board vote so but the fact that you put best into the land use ordinance doesn't mean that it's automatically going to be approved. Was that your question? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Okay.

Hi, I'm Mike Friendly Run around Pond Road. Um, my question is what's the rationale between requiring putting BES and contract zoning in the same warrant? I think it would be safer to separate them because I'm work you've done on it, but if people have concerns about contract zoning and they but they, you know, don't want contract zone but want best to pass, they're kind of stuck. So I think it would be safer if they were separated just so we don't have a situation where we have no ordinances at all to protect you know sighting of best. Thank you. Okay. I will take a shot at that and go back to my opening comment which is what you see is what we're going to what we're going to vote on at this point. Um and uh I g guess

and I'll let somebody else jump in at the end, but I'm personally comfortable with tying them together because my concern with best is that if somebody comes in with enough information and that being a developer or whatever u and

we there's not a reason I'm not saying we the planning board doesn't go out of its way to find reasons to turn things down, but we're fairly limited to what we can say yes or no to with the planning board and even the best standards. Uh, and I think it'd be in my opinion be very easy to meet those standards. I I don't want to go into this too much tying it to contract zoning and George may have covered it, but you can say no at any point in the process with contract zoning. So, it doesn't mean that just because they file that it will be approved. So, I don't want to go too far into uh the policy because we're going to vote on on what we've got now. So, okay. Is there are there any other questions or comments? Ma'am,

want to clarify if um the vote, you know, if we approve contract zoning, that's going to apply to that's going to only include best and it will also include solar under contract zoning as the warrants written now. Is that right? Yeah. And before I answer that one, it it's a vote for both best and contract zoning. So, if if it's a yes, it's a yes for both both articles. And the answer is yes. There is a table of use that is

part of the contract zoning article that includes large scale solar project. So contract zoning at this time if approved would include BES and solar. Um, so I just want to clarify um that and I just want to express my concerns with only including those two types of development under contract zoning. I see it as um anti-solar and anti-renewable energy in our town. And I think that we should have if we're going to adopt something like contract zoning, it should apply to other types of development in our town like um potential large warehouses coming in or other new gravel pits or even large subdivisions. Um and we're probably going too far down the policy discussion at this point, Jess. But and I guess I would say that um this is the first step for contract zoning. It's not to say that down the road the select board and I can't speak for them but it is in this case uh it is the first step in the use

of contract zoning but there may be the potential say in 2026 on the warrant to potentially include other types of large development. Um maybe so like I just want to see if you know that's going to be Yeah, I think that's probably not a topic for this evening, but that's something to address with the the the select board. All right. Yep. These are my my only comments. Thank you. And I'd like to commend both Jess and Michael were extremely uh helpful with uh resource protection and in the battery and solar development. Any other questions from the audience about uh best andor contract

zoning? If not, I'll close the public hearing and ask uh the pen planning board if there are any. Well, there's one thing that I certainly appreciate with contract zoning is that any large project, it'll be highlighted to all the town's people. It won't be just going to the planning board. So all the town's people will be able to review that through the town meeting process, which I think is a plus because some people may say there's a lot of things, some people's opinion is that things go on behind the scenes. In this particular case, it would not. It'll be right out there for everybody to analyze and vote on.

You're almost um if if it if this ordinance does not pass um would you please explain what happens to Bess because we're under a moratorum right now Mr. Chairman. Okay, excellent question. Um, and thank you for trusting me as well. Uh, anyway, it we do have a moratorum 6 months uh right now approved by the town of the special town meeting. At the end, if this does if this does not pass at the end of the six months, the select board has the option to extend the moratorum for another six months. So, let's just say that it doesn't pass. It would be up to the select board, the planning board to I think figure out why it didn't pass. What was it that the town didn't like? They didn't like best. They didn't like contract zoning. They didn't like the the pieces together and then come up with a plan B and bring it back to the town uh for another vote, a special election or however that may be. So

there would be I think an additional uh six or seven months to to work it out. And did you have anything? No, my only comments are policy related. So I'll say the town meeting. Okay. Uh well I'm going to say something policy related I guess to build on what Allan does. This is the the contract zoning if best alone gives us tools to work with the developer but it doesn't give us the ability to you know to say no if they really truly come in and show that they can meet these uh these requirements. So contract zoning if it is a really bad project for the town gives the town the ability to do that and it also brings in

contract the contract zoning process or best excuse me and large solar has potential for large uh tax advantages tax payments. So I will stop saying policy things and and close it out if there's nothing else. If not, let's move on to and again it's one vote for both uh both items. Article

21 to see if the town will vote to enact amendments to the land use ordinance as set forth in the document town of Durham land use ordinance as adopted at town meeting April 6, 2024. Proposed revisions for town meeting April 5th, 2025. Part four, draft amendments to revise the process and the standards for projects involving historic properties land use ordinance articles 512 and 19 to bring Durham's historic preservation standards and regulatory process into consistency with state law and Durham's comprehensive plan. Okay, Mr. Marge, if

you would please. Yeah. The third uh set of land use ordinance draft amendments deals with historic preservation. Um and this is a set of recommendations from the town attorney uh and the select board being as opposed to the planning board of the conservation commission. Uh so just to give you a little bit of background uh the town currently has one historic district, the Southwest Bend historic district that was established around 20045 and uh within that district that has about 33 buildings. Uh only three of those are have been determined to be of official historic significance. Uh uh

there are five other buildings outside the district which would be the uh the Bliss Farm in the West uh Durham Methodist Church, the Osgood House down on Royalsboro almost into Freeport, the uh Friends Meeting House and then the Shiloh Temple. Those are outside of the district and those are currently controlled by uh not by this the historic district but by a 1500 foot de facto district that was applied uh around the other five properties. And under this current ordinance, any project within a quarter of a mile of those other five would have to uh be reviewed for historic significance and impacts, potential impacts, whether they're historic or not. and the town attorney and I think everybody involved in the process agrees that those uh 1500 the hund 1500 foot

buffer around those historic properties doesn't really passm muster with anything. Uh and so that uh would be eliminated from the uh current ordinance and the focus would be on the properties themselves not everything within a quarter mile of it. The other problem with it both for that in particular but even for the southwestbend district itself, the town has no record of its formation in terms of documentation of the historic uh surveys or public

participation that met the to meet the requirements of the ordinance. And so the town attorney has uh has pointed to the potential that the town may not be be able to enforce its regulations because of questions about how the district was formed and whether or not like with the resource protection question of the accuracy of the data. there's really not enough uh solid objective data on historic uh qualities and character of those properties to sustain any type of a legal challenge that might be brought against the town. So uh the proposal after reviewed by the town attorney and re as recommended by the select board will eliminate the de facto 1500t historic districts around the designated historic buildings. It will repeal the Southwestbend Historic District that does not meet documentation requirements for designation as a district. It'll focus the regulations on those official there are eight in town right now, those

officially designated historic buildings. And as part of the process, uh, the the select board, uh, included a requirement that any commercial project or a subdivision, uh, coming in on any property abuing any of those eight historic properties like Shiloh Temple, they would have to go through an advisory review by the historic commission and the standards uh, uh, for mitigation of impacts on those properties would be considered. Uh the town attorney has also recommended revising the standards and procedures to follow federal and state requirements for for a historic preservation program which all they have what they call certified programs in the state of Maine. U and so she's recommending that the town come into line with the way this is done in most other communities. Uh also uh the historic commission

currently is a regulatory agency like the planning board or the board of appeals. They lack the resources necessary to uh to administer that in a legally defensible manner. And so the town attorney is recommending that the historic uh district commission be transformed into an advisory commission like the conservation commission where they will have important input but they won't have that responsibility of issuing and defending permits. Uh and this proposed set of amendments will assign the clear regulatory authority for issuing those permits to the code officer and the planning board, but we'll have mandatory reviews by the uh historic commission for looking at those details uh as part of any permit for any

project on the eight designated historic properties or any subdivision or commercial project being proposed on an abuing property. property and these changes will streamline the review process and and this program will still go far beyond uh what most towns in the state of Maine similar to Durham. Most towns don't do any of this. Uh Standish simply has a demolition uh notification requirement, but they do not have any of these protections. Uh so this is still very uh

ambitious in terms of Durham and it is supported by your comprehensive plan. So we feel that this will uh bring it into alignment with all of the requirements for doing it right. public hearing and uh Keep turning that on so I don't make noise. Okay, I will open the uh public hearing uh and ask anyone who would like to comment to come up to the microphone, please. And it's on because I can see the red arrow. Sir, name and

live at 1731 Royals Bower Road, which is the Nathaniel Osgood House. It's one of the National Register properties that this is going to cover. You had a nice picture of it. Uh if you go back, uh it shows it in the background. In the foreground is a house I also own, uh which is the Brazilia Richards house. It's not on the National Register. I'm not sure whether or not it's eligible. That's one. First question is how does one determine whether the main historic preservation commission deems it to be eligible? Is there going to be a list? I saw two properties that you've listed there, but how would I go about finding out if they say yes, it is so that suddenly this is, you know, applicable to it. That's my first question. My second question is trying to get clear who the reviewing authority is and the permitting authority is uh because the appeal the final appeal is only from the reviewing authority not the

permitting authority. So I'm confused. If I'm going to, let's say, do something that does require a building permit, and that was what would then trigger this, I would be going to the building inspector. Uh, is the building inspector, the reviewing authority and also the permitting authority? So, I'm confused about that. And then my final question is, uh, is this intended to apply only to the exterior of buildings? Um, I've been involved in historic preservation for probably 50 years. I was president of the main historical uh society, the president of uh Greater Portland Landmarks, and have been on the boards of other similar things. I've never known to have an ordinance apply to the interior of a historic structure, but as I read this, there are sections that would appear to apply to some change to the interior. If I needed a building permit to, let's say, move a wall and maybe that wall had an old door

on it, would I need to come in and get approval from the historic commission? So those are my three questions. I only had three minutes. So I try to get those three in within the time and I didn't know whether the time you will take to explain it takes up some of my three minutes. I wish we'd shorten uh you're good. I would Yeah, those are the those are three areas. Yeah. Okay. Um Mr. Deparge, I'm going to ask you. I think you're probably most familiar with the the process. Yeah. Uh, and I would say they normally wouldn't do it for an individual or an individual house, but I think it's important that same process is going to apply to anybody else down the road. And so I think it's a good time to say what applies to somebody else's house down the road versus just this gentleman's. Okay. So the first question was how is the eligibility for registration on the national register of historic places done and as was done for

your building uh that's currently on the register what happens is you file an application there's a process through the main historic preservation commission um and they will look at and part of what is kind of uh makes this pro process a little bit more

non-commonensical than other other regulations like resource protection for habitat is that the historic preservation standards as you may know were originally done as a tax incentive for historic preservation. And so rather than putting reg you know the what kind of stimulated the whole process was the tearing of tearing down of the uh train station in Portland back in the 60s and so the federal government was pressured to try to save those types of very significant historic structures. So they put into the federal law a tax system that said if you are preser spending money to preserve something like the north station then uh the town the state

the federal government will give you a tax credit uh as long as it's being used for commercial purposes. Uh the state also has a tax system. So in terms of determining whether or not a proposed project that will get tax dollars qualifies for those tax dollars, you have to meet certain preservation guidelines. So what local municipalities have done is they've taken that tax qualification system and adopted as a regulatory program the same standards. And that's what has made this very very somewhat confusing to try to administer it as a regulatory program because a lot of it is just very subjective decisions on what's important historically. Uh city of Portland right now is in a big room about the children's museum and there are historic preservationists that say this is the one of the most important buildings in the city. Others are saying no, it's uh its historic significance was altered to the point

where it's no longer significant. Trying to regulate something like that is extremely difficult. And now when you take that down to a town like Durham compared to city Portland with all of its resources, it's doubly uh difficult to do this and do it in a way that meets all legal requirements. So first thing to recognize is that determination of eligibility is done by the main historic preservation commission and they have expert historic

preservationists evaluate the property to see what is its significance from a historic standpoint in the town like Nathaniel Ozgood. Uh what is its important architecturally? Was it a time period like the uh the Greek revival time period or the federal period? What what time period was it was it done in and how much modification has been done to it since that time that may have pretty much uh altered to the point where it's no longer recognized or eligible. So that's the process. Now, under this ordinance, the historic commission would review and make recommendations to the his main historic preservation commission. So, so you can you can apply yourself. Yep. And then they would make a decision or the historic commission could say, "I think that house should qualify." And they would then apply to put it onto your property. I believe that the state uh main historic preservation commission has indicated that the town as an entity

whether it's the historic commission or any other uh can file a nomination for it. Now, obviously the the town would most likely not do that if the property owner were not in favor of it and would work with usually it's going to be an individual property owner like yourself that's going to say, "I I would like to take advantage of that." But the what prevents a lot of people from doing it is you cannot get tax breaks if it's just for residential purposes. There's no tax break. You don't get any money. I've never received any money for any tax break. So, so don't fool yourself on that. No one would want to put this onto themselves. I did it because I believe in historic preservation. But it's But you've answered that first question. So then his time does not count against your three minutes.

permitting authority versus the reviewing authority. They're really the same thing. And why that language is used is because depending on what permit is being reviewed, applied for, certain permits are issued by the code officer, certain permits are issued by the planning board. So like say the uh the Bliss Farm in is a conditional use application if they were to put another building up or make modifications to it. So that would go to the planning board for potentially site plan review. If it's residential, then uh only building permits would be uh would be reviewed by that. So, it's kind of a technical term that's used by the lawyers. Uh but the reviewing authority and the permitting authority typically are the same entity. Yeah. I couldn't find either mentioned in any of the of the uh ordinances. It's

just it's not there. So, so I'm my only concern is that if the only appeal is from the reviewing authorities's final decision and the permitting authority says you can't have the permit, I've got no appeal. Yeah. So whether it's the code officer or the planning board under this ordinance and we can get clarification from the town attorney, but basically the the permitting authority reviewing authority. So for example, the difference is the code officer issues an actual physical permit, building permit. The planning board issues a conditional use approval in a notice of decision. So is that a permit? It definitely is a is a regulatory review. So that's why they use both terms. But I need I wouldn't need to go to the planning board if I'm only changing the position of a window. I just only go to the code enforcement officer. is is that officer the reviewing authority and the peritting authority. I think it would help Mr.

Chairman if there's some clarification of that because as it goes on um you know there are chances that people are going to be confused as to who's who you can appeal from. So all right now interior exterior this ordinance there's language in here I can point you to that indicates that the uh exterior is the concern. Okay. is is the only part that's covered by the ordinance. Okay. Yep. Answered my questions. Okay. Uh I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Nice to meet you. Well, thank you. Thank you for for doing that. And I think to your point about clarifying that is something we can look at and and tweak as we're getting into uh the next round. So, you know, not this year, but down the road with cotification and other things. But thank you. Are you interested in joining the historic? I drafted the first zoning ordinance of this town and when I got up to present it to the town meeting, I was called a

communist. So, so you know, I I've been involved in town and I know uh I might at some point I've got things on my plate right now that really limit I travel a lot and uh I just can't always make meetings. So, I hate to commit to something that Please consider and I've been called worse than a communist.

historic uh planning Okay, we made it under an hour. Um, with that I will uh close the public hearing piece and I will just kind of remind everybody the 5th of April at 9:00 a.m. in uh Durham Community Schools and the 4th of April is the election and

I think that at Eureka. So uh if there is nothing else um we shall accept a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Anybody else want to talk about it? If not, please raise a hand, we're out of here. Thank you all for attending.

things for April this meeting. Uh Mo Hill came in, Repova coming in, and