TranscriptPlanning Board Meeting ~ May 4, 2016

applications complete on this one. Is that right? Correct. Finish finish the application. Paul, did I make the cut last night or I get get hacked? What's that? I get hacked last night or I make the cut. You made the cut.

Oh, dang. They haven't accept I thought they were going to accept them last night. I don't know why they didn't, but evidently Ruth wasn't ready, but there's 11 of them there. I've got two more to come. Um, I leaned on Nado today.

Oh, good. I'm actually starting to get kind of excited about it cuz it's looking like a good group. The comp plan committee. Oh, good. The what committee? The comprehensive planning committee. Oh, good. I think I think we're going to be sitting seating soon.

We'll get some kickoff stuff done and kind of get the everything formatted and pick officers and bylaws and then probably take a break for most of the summer and then start full off with some training and stuff in the spring.

Who's facilitating that? I just you guy in the hat. Are you doing that on your own? I'm I'm winging it. You want to help? NO. TOM, come on in. I'm I'm put on the agenda. Good. Hi. I was a bad Okay, good. I'm glad to hear it. But

I would have been pretty some frustrated if it was me, but he's working, so I would understand. the wall for the rest. Yeah, I guess they don't need a bigger town hall, huh? We had I keep expecting to show back up again, the study at least. Or

I I'm waiting for someone to do it. What happened to the plan of everything? It's in the back. It is in the back. Yeah, it's still here. It's a nice plan. halls, they put assassin and codes by the front door? Quick escape.

You're the two that everyone I think anybody coming in and you're the you guys were the first ones to go down and everybody else gets to hide under their desk. I don't know how many town halls I've been in. You go in the door and codes and assessing is right there.

Yeah. So, Where are you going to put him? When he asks about additions to the agenda, I'm going to ask to have Tom added for amendments. Okay. Yeah. I need the board to make a determination on something is all. It's not It's not an application. And I just I made an interpretation and I want you guys to give me your your view on it.

Do we have the authority to do that? Yeah. Yes, you do. The ordinance gives you the gives you the authority. Why don't we let that get in there to do that? Well, he has he has an existing conditional use permit. Yeah. Right.

So, I know you don't want to do it, but neither did I. We'll just go back and forth. Thanks, man. We can spend a lot of time doing that. I can't wait. Um, to call the meeting to order. The planning board for uh May 4th, 2016. Are we being recorded?

Thank you. I guess so. Uh, first we 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. I'd like to welcome our new alternate member, Juliet Kaplinger, to the board.

Hello. Hopefully. Welcome. Thank you. Um, addition to other business to continue with ordinance review. Why don't we do that later? I agree to that. I mean to sit down some minutes. All right. We'll do those are part of the amendments time.

Okay. All right. We'll uh the public hearing for January 6. Your name spelled incorrectly. Oh man. Glad you noticed twice. Right. I know Bruce um with the spelling changes. I'll move to approve the minutes. Yep. I'll second that. All those in favor.

What did you say? I said with the spelling changes, I'll move to approve the minutes. And um move the minutes to the end. Yeah, we can. Yep. Can I add an a an amendment to the agenda, please? Yes, we can. Uh Tom Kushman's here. um has an existing conditional use permit for his um his business on Hollowell Road. Uh the permit I believe was issued by the planning board in 2009. As I understand the ordinance, which I'd like you guys to look at, they have uh

I think it's 18 months to to begin the development work necessary for the conditional use and three years after that, a total of three and a half years to complete the um infrastructure work for the conditional use. Tom has been asking asking to get some fill brought in to uh continue to work on the parking lot that was in under his conditional use permit. And I told him that I thought the board should have to determine whether or not his development part of his conditional use had expired and would have to come before the board to have this additional work included.

So So should we add that to the end of the agenda? What's that? Should we add that to the end? Um I wherever you want to put it, but that's basically the the um that's the skinny. Well, what gives us the authority to extend a permit?

Nothing without it without an application. But I wanted you to determine if his per if the if the if the development of his site has expired. His conditional use hasn't, but his ability to develop his site may have. And if that's the case, then he would have to bring forward an application.

So is this expanding a parking lot or improving the parking lot? Improving paving just adding fill gravel to things up. It gets muddy in the springtime. I I was the conditional use permit so that I can have a parking lot. It says that I can have a wood lay down storage area. Um, and it's just a muddy spring. I'm just improving what's already in there.

So, it's already there. So, you're not expanding it. You're not adding to your draw. Well, that gets a little tricky because the ordinance requires anything over 500 yards of fill to be brought in has to come before the board unless it's handled under an an existing permit like a conditional use.

More than 500 yards of fill. Yeah. I believe if I can add the conditional use permit says as long as I'm not changing my course of business I can continue doing that business. Yeah. This isn't affecting your business. It's affecting your ability to develop

before for my trucks and I had a wood lay down area. You're just improving that. There was no stipulation of the size or I mean it's it's not getting any bigger. It's just the same size but just being approved. handle that in the agenda. Got folks who have been on the agenda for a while. Maybe we should handle those first.

Yeah. do you feel this is just a cut and dried issue or I just wanted you to make a determination if it's held under his conditional use. He needs to if it's development beyond that and he needs to come before the board cuz anything over 500 yards is no game. If that's the case, he has to bring in an application for more fill if it's not held under his um if it's not covered under his

there was no with my initial application there was no limit to bill or exculation. And I did look up under the 2005 ordinance and the same the same restriction was in the 2005 ordinance. So where is that in our new ordinance?

I'm looking for it. I hadn't find anything anymore that I could find anything. so page 70, approval of the conditional use and any building permit issued for the development within the scope of this article shall expire. The work has not commenced within 180 days, which we're all set. And if such work has not been substantially completed within 24 months, sounds like this is substantially completed, right?

Yeah. just never finish the driveway or No, I mean it's just you're just trying to improve it. Just trying to improve it. Is it going to be on the property? It's going to be more than 500 yards. Paul, where's the language that

have to be, 1500? I don't know. It would not need to come back if it's already covered under the land. It's stunning. It's on the fill part under the um page 47 not covered by other permits requires 251 to 500 is the code enforcement. Anything over 500 is the planning.

approval? 09. 09. 09. Yeah. I know. This feels like a new improvement without seeing enough of the previous application to see what was in it. Yeah, that's that's my issue. I don't have the paper in front of me. I don't know. doesn't sound it doesn't sound like maintenance with that volume of material. Unfortunately,

I I can understand what you're trying to achieve, but I can appreciate what you're trying to achieve, but I think, you know, it's been almost seven years and so it's not actually an amendment to his conditional use. He just come to you guys with an application for fill.

That's all all you need, right? What's I mean what's involved with the application? Just a I guess it's just a request application to what you're doing but I'm not sure what else is required. There are no there's no performance standards

for well I mean it's a conditional conditional use that's all so you know is the bill going to harm water quality and I mean most of the stuff won't apply but we're you'll have to go through the exercise anyway. Three three meeting contact all the butters.

God I mean you'll have to contact all the butters. Hopefully it's a one meeting and nobody cares about 500 yards to fill in your driveway to change in the next version of the ordinance. We should just give that to Oh yeah.

Oh code. So yeah. So that's that's only with respect to bringing in bringing in from offsite onto the property is that defined? We should not be doing that way. Can I move earth from one side to another? yard stipulation. Is that an annual thing or is that a lifetime thing or

to hit 500 yards because anything under that requires the code officer but I don't understand the time restraints. I mean is it once a month or is it once a year or I can only ever bring in 500 yard more than 500 yards if it's a conditional use permit. It's the fill covered under that particular permit.

Yeah. So you could give him up to 500 yards that give him permission to pull four 500 yards in. Anything over that's your guys. I said he could do the first 500. And I was fine with that. How many yards are we talking about?

1500. 15. Probably 1500. It could be. I mean, yeah. I don't Why do we have a definition? Grover's got about 10,000 yards to move. They're looking for places to put it. Pretty much right away. broke or is this about No, it's about this.

This is all in the ordinance. It's took this one question. Yeah. We're going to have to We're going to have to have an application to do more than 500 yards. Yeah. I think We can do that next month. I think it's clarifying the process.

That doesn't help you this month. Up to 500 yards. You can do Well, that's fine. I guess I just need a little But I would like to know how I mean with respect to 500 yards if that's annually or Well, I guess we we probably should put a cap on how many yards.

It would be under the scope of the permanent value how much he wants to bring in over 500 yards. You tell us what you want to do and we'll tell you if you can do it. Yeah. So once the permit No, I mean so I think if you added 500 yards over 5 years, you'd still have to come to us when you're hitting that 500 yard mark if you want to go over it

or 10 years or whatever. Is that written in the order? But if you's I can read that there's no time frame given. So, if you're bringing in 500 yards, okay, as part of any project or over time, I don't know how else to interpret that.

I don't either. Yeah. I mean, if you told us you were going to bring in 2,000, we'll give you the permit for 2,000 and then you can do the work however long the permit lasts. I know what we already started. Yeah. Uh, Pinkham Brook LLC. Do we do we need to make a formal determination for Paul or we just moving on?

Yeah, we're sure we consider it. We didn't really consider it. We didn't have an application. How can we consider? Nobody. He's not going to bring in the application. Okay. We had a list you were working with to to finish your review.

Yes. Okay. Um, you have the list with you. I have a list with me and I have our packet that we submitted which we responded to all the the different things. So, first of all, let me introduce myself. I'm Jim Seymour, civil engineer with Sebago Technics, uh, representing Pink and Brook LLC, uh, who's proposing to put 195 ft tower off of Route 125 Pink and Brook Road here in Durham. Um, at our last meeting, it was my understanding, uh, Mr. Brown represents Sebago Technics at that meeting that there was a little bit of confusion because we didn't follow the the new ordinance. We had the older ordinance. So, we've gone back um within my application here. I have added um how we responded to each one of the performance standards as they apply to the new ordinance. Um and at that last meeting there were some questions with regards to um what the setbacks would be uh

required. There's a question about uh execute transfer of the lease to Pinkinbrook LLC so that the applicant has right title interest in the project and we have provided you uh a transfer document for that. Yep. And with regards to the ordinance, uh we've gone through the ordinance and it appears to us that this falls under other commercial. Um clearly in the new ordinance it does not meet the industrial use. Um but with the commercial use, the setbacks would be the same. Um what we've discovered also is that it would be a,000 ft um setback if there were no buffer. What we've done is we provided you with a buffer this evening of 100 ft around the perimeter of the the tower compound area.

Um other items on the agenda that came from that meeting were uh need to add all driveways on the plan which we have done underneath that. Um amend the lease to show the 100 foot buffer which we've done. Um, and we provided an aerial photo as requested um, to give you some setbacks and locations of the houses. With me is also Grant Austin from my company who will be able to show you. We did run a balloon test out there to see what the visual effects were from neighboring uh, public rightway and other homes that we could access in front of the home, not on the property. So, he can uh, give a little more presentation if that's something the board would like to hear.

Yeah. Okay. I'm just finish this and then we can come back. Yeah. Okay. Absolutely. Um, we have applied for a highway entry permit uh from the main department of transportation. I believe a copy of that was included in your packet.

And I think that was primarily it other than we just went through each one of the performance standards uh to match the current ordinance. Yep. I don't know if if you want to go through each one of those or you want to hear grant first or

uh I think the first thing we need to do is determine what the application now y um we have a copy of the entrance permit we have a revised read that? I did. Um gives Pink Brook LLC right title and interest. I think we met that.

Um I'm still stuck on the financial uh capacity. The warranty in here uh it says shall be assigned all duties, responsibilities and financial obligations. It doesn't say is assigned or accepts that assignment which maybe I'm being too technical but

that's my job. So if you all are happy with that then you can outvote me. Can I make a comment? There's also a performance bond to the landholder in addition to that to finish your concern was finishing the project. There is a separate performance bond within the lease to provide coverage. So we've covered it two different ways.

Do we have a copy of that bond? Um the bond hasn't been created yet. We don't have a building permit. So you've agreed to bond it, correct? Yeah, we agreed to bond it for and that's um that's helpful. The issue is that doesn't help the town because we can't enforce that private bond.

I don't I don't follow you on the your question. The bonds in effect whether you exist or not. Well, we exist. We're going to exist, right? The issue is whether you're going to exist and that's that's doesn't matter if we exist. The bond is insured because of insurance,

right? But the bond doesn't protect the town. The bond protects the land owner. So the town itself has an interest in making sure this project is completed in accordance with code and all of those great things. Correct. And that's in effect through the land owner.

Yeah. But that doesn't do the town any good. It completes the town. It completes the project and the tower if which is what your requirement is. No, it completes the project if the land owner acts on the bond. The land owner has no obligation to do that because they're not the applicant. They have no obligation to the town.

That's not how the bond works. It's not at their trigger. The bond is if we do not perform, right? But the we do bonds all the time. Yeah. No, I I get what bond is. You get that, right? I do. Um but there's someone who has the right to act on that bond if there's a default, right? So you default and the

homeowner or the the land owner in this case the church gets to say all right I'm going to go against the bond to get this project finished right the town has no right to do that the land owner says the town can request the land owner to affect the bond

sure we can request it but we have no rights under the bond correct that's my issue that may be true right care of with some additional language in the bond or If you want to give us a performance bond, you can make you can make them

a party to the bond. Well, that's what I was wondering. That's Yeah. I mean, if you give the town a performance bond, I think that takes care of my concerns. We would make them a third Yeah. a third party. Yeah. And that's done all the time, too.

So, we could put that as a condition on the application that we get a performance bond. Yeah. Yeah. And continue with the application. I'm fine putting that as a condition. Yeah. Okay. So, what else were we missing in the application?

Was that the request of the applicant? That wasn't the request of the applicant. What else? Do you want me to do that so you can worry about it? I have another one. I don't have the uh somebody going to move to find the application completed at this point.

Well, that's what we're doing. I'm just going to check and make sure that we the location dimensions and ground for elevations of existing and proposed buildings. Do we have that? Don't we have that? Um, do we have that in our original?

Yes, I thought we have that. I think we have that. All right. So, I think that one's complete. Yeah. Yes. location of intersecting roads and driveways. We now have Yeah, I think we get the rest. That doesn't apply. Okay. So, location of open drainage courses, wetlands, stands of trees and other natural features.

we now site plan any buffer required by this ordinance will also be shown on such plans. So, we have that plans. Okay. So, I think that's complete. Um, location that's not applicable. lighting. That was incomplete and we've addressed that in the in our narrative. Uh the only lights that will be on the facility will be on the shelters themselves, which will be just outdoor lights, full cut off.

Okay. Yeah. You guys good with that? Good there. That's good. One thing, um, map 3, lot 87. You You still have that as, uh, Don and Penny Williams on this on sheet 205, right? Yeah. We didn't do that. Was the sheet that we

supposed to be Kevin Native's property. Is that right? Correct. as well. That's it. That's the one. That's the one we're looking at. Yeah. Change. Quantity, location, storage and containment of hazardous material of petrole petroleum products in excess of 50 gallons intended to be stored or used on the site

and I believe at the meeting um there was a discussion about converting the um fuel source for the backup generators to propane and we have done that as well. Okay. So, we'll make that a condition. Uh, So, we have the highway entrance permit and you need like a FCC permit for this or

we will need approval from the FCC and the FAA and those are both pending I believe in the application now. Okay. So, we'll make those a condition. Yeah. Typically a condition. They're really not permits or licenses, right? They're licenses.

They're review from a aircraft and lightning point of view. Okay. As an evaluation, right? Licenses aren't required until we have a client. Okay. A true license or permit. All the rest is are you going to interfere with traffic patterns on aircraft and lighting?

Gotcha. So, in other words, until you until you guys actually get a someone signs a lease to put up antennas that these two licenses will not be coming forward. Is that correct? Is that what I'm hearing? Which two licenses?

The FAA and the FCC. FAA doesn't give a license. That's what I'm trying. I mean, what I'm sorry, they the FAA will ask will give you you can go on and you can get the FAA is the first step you got to do, right? If you can't put a tower up at FAA, right?

Yeah. Then you got to get approval from that and then you go to FCC. the broadcast and and they do a review, right? And then uh and that's we submit we've we've closed out the FCC. Yeah. That's Shipo environmental stuff.

That's done. And then the last thing is what they call an ASR, which is an antenna signal registration when you go for the antenna and you can make some preliminary request even without a U. Yeah, I'm just trying to get a timeline idea. If these are going to be conditional and I have to permit you guys with the structure, if you know if some stuff isn't going to come until you get a lease,

you know that I need to make sure that I keep the stuff in line as a condition of the permit that these things come in. I need to know the timelines in order to know what to expect from you in that. Yeah, I guess my my issue there there is no timeline because there is no license there. There's nothing there's

all right. There says applicable state approvals and permits. Right. Right. So these are we get a building permit from uh when we go to put a antenna up as well. That's generally each antenna requires a a building permit.

Yeah, you will you will need a building permit. You can put the structure up under a building permit. No, I understand that. I'm what I'm I'm just trying I'm trying to if the board's going to give you a conditional use permit, usually the the satisfying of the conditions lands in my office.

Okay. And then I need to do followup as the conditions have been met in order to finalize your Yeah. Finalize your approval. So if there's if there's stuff coming down the road as a condition, I'm just trying to get an idea what the expectation is so that I know when those thresholds will be met in order to satisfy the the application.

I understand that. Okay. It's the condition. There is no condition from FAA and SEC. That's what I'm trying to make. Okay. There is none. So I think what you what you want to say is that uh prior to a user coming on the tower, you'll have to they'll have to forward you the FAA and that's the time we get the uh

the user is the one that that's what I need to know is when can I expect that particular information through this process of your doing this this that would come after the tower is erected and then the first user comes to get a building permit. That's when you would ask for them.

Okay. All right. That's helpful. Thank you. Thanks. That's where's it? Okay. Hi. What else we got? Um, schedule of construction. Mindy had there was some questions. Accurate and complete cost estimates of development time schedule of construction and sufficient financial information for financial capacity. I think we've solved that through a bond.

Yep. Yeah, that's all. So, I guess with that, I will move to find that the application's complete. Second. All those in favor. application now. findings? Uh, we have proposed findings, don't we? Yeah, I prepared some findings for you.

We have pretty good findings. Sure. Who wants to do the official record on the proposed findings? suspense. Yeah, I don't need to do that cuz I have I have I have an I have a criteria thing with some space here for writing should someone need to add additional information.

Okay. Yes. Do we want to hear what they have to say and what anyone else has to say? So I think I think the biggest issue one of the big issues in my mind is understanding the scenic impact the landscape buffering. So it'd be great for them to present rather than us picking at that.

Probably did. Yeah. Very good. We uh what we did um uh typically what we do for a for a um for shed analysis um whatever you want to describe it as is we'll simulate the um the location of the tower with a uh with a balloon float which we did at 195 ft which is um the proposed height of the tower. And um what this aerial gives you shows you the location of the balloon. And what you're going to have to do is follow along with the with the u attached photos. Apologize for the size, but they get uh they get grained out at the uh margin.

So um I guess depending on which way you you you view the tower of the project, uh the photos might be a good or a bad thing. Um, what we see here is, I believe the first two, and I've got the locations highlighted here. Photo one and photo two are down here on the uh west side of the tower. Um, in probably the closest proximity to the to the balloon flow. Um, that's according to, you know, based on these visual photos, that's probably your best chance other than possibly uh photo four where you're going to see the uh the tower location. Um, due to private property, I I took the photos at the end of each uh driveway or rightway in the direction of the tower. I can tell you there's a fairly good buffer here in front. This is an old Maine ortho photo. This is from the state of Maine um geological survey.

Okay, this isn't a current Google map. We took this from the state of Maine. So, this is pre-cut. So, this has been, as you know, thinned out a little bit. Over here, we have a substantial buffer on this western end of the site. I'd say it's most uh open across from Collins Way, which I do have a photo of the intersection here. And as you get down, um, this this photo for the Crawford residence, map two, lot 29, sits perched up. Now, certainly they're going to have a view of the tower. Um, and as you can see from the photos, the balloon is at the the the pinnacle of the tower, the top. So, um, in most of the photos, you're seeing that the that the that the uh top elevation of the tower is going to be below the tree line. Okay? And keep in mind these photos were taken um I want to say April. So this is before any of the any of the spring summer fall foliage comes out.

Most of the trees left in there are pine though. Most of the of the deciduous trees have been gone. Um as it goes on you are going to see you are going to see more growth. Um, so to walk you through one and two, one's from the Moore residence here at the end of the driveway. You can clearly see I've denoted the red circle is not the balloon. The balloon is in there. It is in there somewhere. Um, and I'd be happy to provide the board with um with with a digital uh package of the photos uh for enlargement.

How big was the balloon? The balloon is roughly little bit bigger than my wingspan. 56 feet standard weather balloon. Thanks. Um, at the end of their driveway. And if you know the property, their residence sits down. This drops off in grade a fair amount as you get down to the to the north and northwest of Collins Way. Um, photo four, that's from the uh at the end of the Crawford residence driveway. I would assume as you get up into the residence, particularly in the residence second floor, you're going to have a pretty good shot of the tower. Um,

the N1's, the back ones are back Quaker meeting, right? Yeah. Down here. Fairly difficult to see based on distance. As you get further out, the uh the balloons um going to sit pretty low along the along the horizon. Do we know what that distance is from Quaker meeting?

Oh, quick scale 200. So 2 4 6 800 800,000 ft. Thank you. So, how much of the vegetation that we're seeing will be cleared in connection with the project? No. None. None. I mean, are you referring to this area here? Yeah.

I mean, what's when we were out there, we're basically what's down is down. We're able to do what we need to do with what's existing out there. The access road is essentially there from the hall road, from the logging operation. Um, and where the tower is going is just a cleared grass area now

where they landed the logs. They'd already cleared it when they did the logging. Okay. The second packet is I believe there was a request um I was passed along from the last meeting to get some photos looking outward from the center of the tower. These photos were taken in the north,southeast and west direction from the tower.

Okay. Um, I believe the northerly view you can see some shading of the of the residence, but I apologize. This was done fairly early in the morning, so you do have some sun on there. Um, that was really and and in fact going out there really that was what I was seeing the numerous times I've been out to the center of the tower. um driving up Quaker Meeting House Road headed east you lose it pretty quick and then as you know as you go down Pinkinbrook to the west starts dropping down in grade

of the immediate local impacts of the tower so the buffer you control the 100 ft buffer that is shown around the tower correct there There is no control of the rest of the forests that are protecting this sighteline that are preventing us from seeing this balloon. Correct.

Correct. As it stands now. Correct. As it currently stands. I just also want to point out as Grant mentioned that the the balloon that we're using is 6 ft and the top of the tower itself is is relatively narrow. I mean there will be an array up there of antennas. Um, but the fact is that uh the tower itself is this is a lattice tower, so it's not opaque like a monopole. Um, so it does allow a little more less visual intrusiveness if you want to use that word. Um, cuz it's not

How big is a classic array antenna? Uh, 10 ft. 10 to 12 feet in a triangle each side. What about the um Bloomstein residence which then stuck the bottom portion? Yes, I got one from the end of the driveway there and that's photo two. That would be the bottom photo on the first page. So you as you can see I'm standing right at the mailbox of 9006

air address. And um again, you've got pretty good cover there with both a mix of deciduous coniferous vegetation there. I mean, this area, you're right, this area predominantly is is pine is is soft wood. I just think that um you know what we see a lot of time with these towers is um as Grant mentioned is the angle that you're looking at the tower. So if if people have vegetation you know near the property line then that can be you know as good as anything that can be on the site as far as blocking the visual effect of the tower. Uh again this is um

like I mentioned it's not a solid opaque monopole. It is a lattice so you know you can see through it. it does blend in a little bit better with the woods, especially in the spring. So, um, you know, we have provided a 100T, uh, buffer will allow that to grow up over time. So, at least from the public way, you won't be able to see any of the compound area or anything like that. Um, you know, once that tower is up into the tree line, it's difficult to always difficult to uh to hide it. Um, you will be able to see it, but I think it's such a short window that you'll see it on Pinkham Road, Pinkham Brook Road. Um, that it will have no intrusiveness to to the public much more different than a telephone pole really.

Yeah, I'll skip board. Yeah, you need to come up and sit at the table. You can I'm Skip Bordal. I'm the guy that lives right across the the way from this tower. And my concern is is that at the proximity of the tower right now, only about 300 ft off the road. I'm going to look out my front door and I'm going to be looking at that tower. Uh,

perhaps moved back a little bit, the line of sight would drop down and it wouldn't be nearly as bad. But, uh, there are there aren't that many trees in front of where the tower is. It's a pretty clear shot to the road. Then the only trees that halfway blocking it are mine that are on my property. and that and a lot of those are hardwood and majority, you know, better than half the year leaves are gone. I'll be looking right at that tower and I think that's that's going to have an adverse effect upon upon my upon me my property values.

these balloon. Do you want to see photos? So that's um the photo taken from your driveway. And I I'm going to be I'm going to be looking at that. You know, 195 ft is awfully tall, right? Well, that's about where the rents are going.

So, I don't necessarily have, you know, I'm not against the tower. You know, we all have cell phones. We know we need them, but uh it sure would be nice if I don't have to look at it every day. Especially coming out the front door. It's one thing at the end of the driveway.

Crawford's the one that is carved out there, right? Yeah. And then as I read the uh you know the ordinance you know under article 6 section F10E screening shall be defined as eliminating any view to humans standing at ground level of the residential use or from windows of a two-story building within such location.

your cuz it looks like your house is tucked back as well. Yeah. might. Yes. So, are you saying you'll be able to see this from your house? Yes. And not just the drive, right? when the leaves are on the trees because I do have, you know, some tall trees in my front yard, but right now before the leaves come out and all through the winter time, it's all bare.

Is there any other public comment pro or for or against? I'm four. I'd like to point out to you, sir, that that land was logged off three years ago and it's going to have to grow for the next 25 to 30 years before it can be harvested again. And so it will improve

as time goes on. I'll probably be dead because because the ones in in all in front, with all due respect, all in front was was the logging area where they stacked all the logs. That's all wide open. You know, there aren't that many trees, you know, that would be blocking, you know, the view to my house.

I understand they won't grow back. Um, just for the record, I measured it's approximately 650 ft from the tower to his home. I mean, it's a fair distance and we do try to rather than drive that driveway straight in so that you know, we do try to hook it so that it's not as visible from the public way as well.

But when you hooked it, I understand you you went you you went right into the clearing. Yeah, I just have a question. Um, there are some fur trees uh that can be planted that grow very fast. Um, and I I don't know if that's a possibility and something that could could assist with this problem.

So, it sounds like the proposal is currently to leave the buffer as is and not do any additional plantings. Is that right? leave it in its natural state and allow it to come back naturally. Correct. And the buffer, the guaranteed buffer that we have is only that that's depicted on the plan. So,

and I think the rest of it is outside the lease area, which isn't even our in forest management, right? It's in tree growth. Rest of the properties in tree growth. So, it could be logged again in the future within the lease term

and it could be removed from tree growths. Sure. penalty was paid. Sure. I don't want to pay that penalty. Has tree growth? That's not my problem. That's the problem. Yeah. Okay. Any other comments? Um Sarah Sprogel, I'm uh from the church

friends meeting. Uh, so I mean I'll just say that we our our interest is we wanted to set it back as far as we could. So um I mean we're our intention is to be as helpful as we can in uh protecting the neighborhood and um

uh we don't have an you know we have good intentions to um be as protective as we can. So, further back then? Because there's it looks like there's plenty of room to go back. Uh, I think we we would not have any problem with that, but it's um

No, we were trying to avoid cutting any of their their big trees. There there is a limit on how far it can go back. And I believe that once we go back even further into the lot, we do get into some some wet areas as well.

Wet areas, but we get into some pretty big trees. Yeah, there's some definitely some very large trees. Yeah, Yeah, Dave Barto, I remember the meeting. It may be possible that we could go to the left a ways. So, it wouldn't be a direct line of sight to his place. Um, and there may I have to look at it

again. There may be more shielding. I know there's some high ground over to the left as you go in that there's a couple big trees there. We looked at those. You we tried to put the road so we wouldn't even hit any of the trees.

And it's I mean we may have to cut a couple more trees, but when we start doing this, then we shift it to the left. Somebody else is going to have a a clear line. And unfortunately that's you know I I wish there was a perfect space but to to avoid cutting the large trees which which I understand was the primary focus was to leave the mature trees that were there. Once we do kick it to the left we do start having to get into clearing some more of the large trees.

So what will be cleared with the project as proposed? Um nothing will be cleared. It's just a matter of grubbing the ground and putting down the road and the road improving the road improving the road and putting down the area for the compound

cuz I believe you just mentioned that there may be some trees that had to be cut. Did I misunderstand? They moved it. If they moved it till that is that correct? Yeah. If it were moved, probably some other trees have to be cut. But

the site can still be logged in the future. Yeah. Not for 25 years. 25 or 30 years. Do we have a forest manage forestry management plan on this property? Yes. With tree growth. It would have to happen. Right. Well, I'm sorry.

It should. We could stipulate an area, you know, that's would be serving as a buffer that wouldn't be cut even though may stay in tree growth. Uhhuh. That wouldn't be cut as long as the tower is there between the road and the tower.

Yeah. Between anybody's Okay. buffer. No, that's good to know. In addition to the buffer that Yeah. We'll work on approval criteria. um, do you want me to read their proposed findings and we'll vote on them? How do you want to do this? Okay. So, our first criteria is will not result in undue water or air pollution. We've got our standard in the ordinance. Um and the proposed finding is that the proposed site as designed will not result in either undue water or air pollution. The site will be designed to minimize impacts from a new gravel driveway. The tower and compound area will consist of crushed stone surface which will promote infiltration. Nearly all the surfaces are non- petroleum based and there will be no air emissions generated by the site with the exception of an emergency generator. What does it mean when it says nearly all of the surfaces are non petroleum based? There's no guarantee that they may not

use something like um reclaimed asphalt. Okay. Which is it's used in some aggregate basis. It's inert material but still has some petroleum but it's considered inert by D. criteria A. I have a second on that. Second. All those in favor

Yeah, but I didn't see it. It's backwards. I'll give her this back for some reason. water available for the reasonably foreseeable future needs of the proposed use including fire protection. The proposed finding is this facility would be unmanned and therefore will not require a water service. The tower is a metal lattice structure. The equipment compound area will be primarily metal cabinets, fencing and masonry shelters with a built-in fire suppression system within the equipment shelters. I will move to adopt the proposed the

second proposed finding. I'll second. Yeah. All those in favor. unreasonable burden. I supposed to say on an existing water supply if one is to be utilized. This criteria shall include use of an aquifer and the applicant must show that its use will not harm the wells of those currently relying upon said aquifer. The proposed finding is there will not be an unreasonable burden on the water supply system. No water services required for this project. The applicant will require sublesses to use either doublewalled self-encclosed fuel tanks or propane fueled systems for heat and or generator service.

Have a second. I'll second it. All those in favor erosion or reduction in the capacity of the land to hold water so that a dangerous or unhealthy condition may result. The proposed finding is the site will be stabilized in conformance with the erosion and sedimentation plant provided with the plan set. The compound area for cabinets and/or shelters will be stabilized with a crushed stone surface. The site is generally level to near level, thereby will not generate fastoving flows which can cause scour erosion or sedimentation from the proposed development. The site will be protected with erosion control measures until baron areas are firmly established with new vegetation. Um I will move to accept that finding.

Second it. All those in favor see it. All right. E will not cause highway or public road congestion or unsafe conditions with respect to use of the highway or public road existing or proposed. The proposed finding is access for this project is in the same location as the existing driveway installed for the recent timber harvesting of the property. A permit application has been submitted for the review of the entrance off Route 125 by the main department transportation. Improvements will be made as outlined on the design plans once the site has been constructed. Service calls by the users will be minimal consisting of one or two visits per month. I will move to accept that approval criteria. I'll second it. All those in favor?

Very good. All right. F will provide for adequate sewage disposal in conformity with the state planning code and all other applicable regulations. As a site is unmanned. No sewage disposal is required or proposed. I will move to adopt that

proposed criteria. Second proposed finding. All those in favor? Very good. G will not cause and unreasonable burden on the ability of a municipality to dispose of solid waste and/or sewage if municipal services are to be utilized. The proposed finding is the sublesses will be required to remove any waste from the site and no septic systems are proposed. Therefore, there will be no unreasonable burden on the ability of a municipality to dispose of solid waste and or sewage on the town for this facility. Um, where the site is unmanned, there will not be routine solid waste generated. All solid waste due to service calls will be removed by the vendors or the subissy. So I will move to accept that with a change to make the second sentence make sense.

Second. All those in favor? Very good. undue adverse effect on the scenic or natural beauty of the area, aesthetics, historic sites, or rare and irreplaceable natural areas, any deer wintering areas identified by the main department of fish and wildlife or other agency or any public rights for physical or visual access to water bodies. The proposed finding is the applicant filed a request with the main department of fish and wildlife to review the project site for natural areas. The response provided in the application form um indicates that there is no significant wildlife habitat areas in the vicinity of the proposed tower and telecommunications facility given the facility's relatively small impact relative to the parcel size that is being constructed within a previously cleared area for woodyard and that there is still an appreciable stand of mature trees to provide screening of the facility located 300 plus feet into the

wood lot or into the lot. The project will have no adverse impacts to the natural beauty, aesthetics, historic sites or natural areas. New understory growth will provide excellent screening and thereby the project will have minimal scenic impact. There are no known public rights for public waters located on the site. So were we concerned with the natural beauty of the area?

Photoshop would actually you could actually photoshop the tower in so that just seeing the balloon you would actually see the tower on the photo. The problem is is that given the distance from it, it would be very narrow and

you wouldn't be able to see it. You barely can see the balloon. So you would barely I think one thing that we might you might want to consider maybe as a add to that condition would be the um the statement that the gentleman from the friends just made with regards to that they would agree to not clear the trees between the buffer as provided and and the public way as long as the tower is there. We could put that on as a condition further give you protection that they won't come in and clear

easement on the property, right? An easement or or a legal restriction. Yeah, restriction. concern is, you know, the we're using criteria. We're using land that isn't part of the true application to provide our screening and our buffer.

Um that isn't in any easement or means to protect that. That's the that's the piece I am struggling with. So we could require that as a condition. So it basically be a negative easement for the land between the tower facility and the road.

And you could do it so many feet off the center line of the proposed rideway in there now. So you have a a protected corridor. So right now it's 100 ft either side of the of the way in. Expand it to what? 300 ft either side.

Well, there's no 100 ft. There's no requirement now. It's just 100 ft around the perimeter of the the tower itself, but you could take it 100 ft both sides of the rightway. That would be a reasonable, but that wouldn't screen like the Crawford House for example, Crawford, whatever that one is that sits up,

right? and then another 100 ft from the rideway would be like that. So go like this. So they essentially have volume here. Something about that. Plus there's 100 foot already established around that. And then if you went 100 off this side be something like that.

You could go. But that doesn't help the folks further down the road, right? So they log off all the trees between. Sorry, I can't. My eyes aren't that good. Or you could just do it so that maybe the other easy way to do it would be just to um a line that's parallel right through here. Parallel their property line and

Brook Road. That whole corridor would be protected. Maybe up to the spot where you got the um sideyard set back to protect Mr. Bloomstein here. Uh nope. Other one down to his property line here. Down to where you got the sideyard measurement. Is it the same on yours? This one?

That one? Oh, right here. Yeah. So, basically that little L if that's protective would that take Oh, from this one too. Yeah. That you could just make it I don't know. I don't want to take all your wood lot away, but if you could just make it basically right through the center of the tower

all the way up through here so that it comes out like this. Yeah. And frankly, there's not even any development up, you know, other than the Crawford house. So, that doesn't worry me as much. But that would give them would take the Crawfords, you know, 250 ft almost, no, sorry, 350 ft of

buffer from the edge of the compound to the corner of their property line. Yeah. Um, so that would protect it going forward. We still have the issue that Mr. Bordo believes there's not sufficient screening now to protect the natural scenic beauty.

Again, you know, we didn't, you know, we at Pinkham have not taken those trees down. We did not It's the nature of the the structure itself. Um, and it's very difficult to to hide 195 ft in the air. Um, the only thing we could It's going to take some time. I mean, you just can't buy full grown trees. Even if you were to plant something, it's going to take, you know, years for that to get up high enough so that, you know, the angle would block that tower.

I think the vegetation that's out there is going to grow faster than anything that you put in the ground. Balsam furs would be about the fastest thing that you could grow in there. And I don't know if it's wet enough to support it. that would take at least 15 years for them to reach 80% of their

and there are some there is some young growth starting to to take off because it was in the unders story of those larger trees. So, it's starting to grow pretty well. Likely the best thing that's going to happen is the overstory is going to expand because the trees around them have been removed and you'll get you'll get a canopy more of a canopy expansion than an understory growth because the understory is not going to grow up any faster than anything else. Other than that, it'll be thicker.

The assessor keeps that and I'm not sure where it is right now. So I couldn't put my hand on it. I mean I if we have a negative easement protecting it that doesn't it is what it is. buff you know buffering a 195 ft towers certainly we understand is challenging. or depending the only way to do that is the large trees that already exist which we've kind of covered what those are going to do. Are we concerned about buffering the ground level equipment the fencing and the stations and that from view

I would think that the ground the understory is going to cover that up. Well the other thing is I mean right now the criteria we're considering is natural and scenic beauty. that doesn't mean that you can't ever build anything,

right? And again, you know, we tried to put a a chainlink fence there so that, you know, at least the uh the concrete or the um natural looking square shelters are all blocked from visual as well. And it is placed back 300 ft. And as you've said, a lot of the understory is going to shoot up there and block that from public view. And as the and as the grades work, um you really don't you don't see that ground level as as well as you do as the upper levels of the tower.

So, it'll be a chain link fence that's on the plan. It's fully enclosed with a and that's for security as well as so I'm going to move to approve this particular to adopt this particular criteria with the condition that um Pinkhambrook

obtain a however they want to do it but probably it's going to be a negative easement that that um the the vegetation will not be cut for the life of this lease that extended? Sure. You post it. So, it would be from the Crawford sideline out to a line that was going perpendicular through the tower down to the sideline would be

so it would just be this area from here to here to here. There's already a circle in there. What are those dimensions? Is the life of the lease sufficient? Should we say while the tower it is the tower has to be taken down at the end of the lease.

Yeah, that makes sense. Yeah. So for the life of the lease is the lease actually say the tower range Thought that's what part of that performance was for make sure it did. Yeah. So it would just be it would just be this right here right there plus 100 foot radius this this bubble.

we can put that in as a as a D restriction to go with the as long as the piece is in effect. I got a silly question. What color is this lattice? It's a neutral. They they call it sky gray. It's a neutral galvanized color.

So, it's just kind of a light gray silver color. It's never going to rust. It's going to turn No, it does not rust. It stays. It's not going to It's galvanized. Galvanized. And it has to be It's part of their agreement. They have to inspect that so often to make sure that there is no rusting for the structural stability of the tower itself.

So, it's going to be gray. It's not going to be red and white. Nope. Nope. And that's part of the reason that we've gone to 195 ft. Um, typically anything under 200 feet is usually either strobed or as you mentioned colored. So, um,

stuff on lease land, right? Yeah. So, this tower is going to be galvanized gray. And that has been determined by many practices over time to be the the best neutral color. Um, we we've actually gone in and we've painted them white and

sky blue and in in reality they stick out more than the than the natural galvanized. that has branches on it. Yeah, those don't work so well either. No, they're fiberglass and with the repetition of the wind, they they break off and

it look great when the other issue with that too is that it causes the operation of the tower some difficulty because it cavitates the tower and shakes all the animals. Yeah, it doesn't have that many branches on there. It does not look like a tree. I'm sorry.

There's one in Bassel. Look, it's ugly. No, it's not. They're not. They look like dying sequoas. Yeah. All right. So I have made a motion to adopt it imposing the condition that there is a some sort of deed restriction or negative easement restricting cutting any of um the existing vegetated buffer

during the term that the tower is up because it looks like the lesser can take possession of the tower under lease under certain circumstances and I don't want them cutting it anyway. Second. Okay. All those in favor. subdivision ordinance, comprehensive plan, land use ordinance, and all other ordinances if any and if applicable. The proposed finding is the proposed project is an allowed conditional use and has been designed to conform to the town ordinances and comprehensive plan. and particularly applicant has replied to each one of the performance standards required for the conditional use per the 2016 version town of Durham

land use ordinance. Um do we so we used to have two different sections to go through. Do we still have that? Yes. Okay. So I'm actually going to move to come back and consider that later. Okay. Can we do that? Second. All right.

Move on. J. The applicant has demonstrated adequate financial and technical capacity to meet the standards required by the ordinance. The applicant has the proposed finding is the applicant has provided a letter indicating that they have financial capacity for this project. Northern Pride Communications will be constructing this project. Northern Pride Communications celebrates its 20th year as a successful and small business firm providing management and support services for towers of many types. NPC provides a wide range of tower and communication services such as the initial feasibility planning, permitting, acquisition, construction, management, outfitting, installation, demolition, maintenance, inspection, and program management services. They have installed tower equipment and or led these services for all major carriers such as AT&T, T-Mobile, US, Verizon, Sprint, American Tower, SBA, Crown

Castle, and many more industry leaders. We regularly answer the call for radio and TV broadcasters to make emergency repairs and implement new insul installations. Site locations include overseas as well as most of the continental US and Canada. The Pride Communications Inc. provides services for towers such as cell communications, signal broadcasting, radio, beacon, ACE, navigation, airports, and other similar small and large structures both freestanding and discreetly encapsulated in buildings. They have completed more than 10,000 tower services projects. Additionally, we provide similar services to hundreds of sites for the federal government, including Navy and US Coast Guard as a small business subcontractor with hundreds of site services to state agencies, too. Recently, they conclude a multi-tower installation under FAA funding for the state of Vermont VR agency. A letter of assignment and

warranty from Northern Pri communication to Pinkham Brook LLC has also been provided for the board's review. So, I will move approval of that criteria with the condition that Pinkham LLC obtain a performance bond that names the town of Durham as the beneficiary.

Second. All those in favor? Whenever situated in whole or in part within 250 ft of any pond, lake, stream, or river waters will not adversely affect the quality of such body of water. Unreasonably affect the shoreline of such body of water. The proposed finding is the site is not located within 250 ft of a

pond, lake, stream, or river, and will not adversely impact the quality of such waters or water bodies. I will move to adopt that finding. a second. I'll second it. All those in favor. L will not alone or in conjunction with existing activity activities adversely affect the quality or quantity of groundwater. The proposed finding is this project will have minimal impact on existing activities and is not anticipated to have adverse effect on um

quality or quantity of groundwater. the site will remain mostly vegetated or promote infiltration and groundwater quality and quantity will remain the same as current conditions. I will move to adopt that finding as well.

Second app the FEMA maps flood boundary blah blah blah whether the site of the proposed use is in a floodprone area. If the site of the proposed use or any part of it is in such an area, the applicant will demon determine the 100red-year elevation and all of that those good things. Um, and the proposed finding is according to information provided by the FEMA flood insurance rate map for Durham parcel number. The subject site is not located in FEMA designated full plane. So I will move to adopt that finding as well. Second propos

spawning grounds, fish, aquatic life, bird, and other wildlife habitat. The proposed finding is the site is not located in a resource protected area or near an open water body and will not have any adverse impact on spawning grounds, fish, aquatic life, bird, and other wildlife habitat. A letter from the state of main inland fisheries and wildlife department has been provided stating the state has not mapped any essential habitats or fishery habitats in the proposed developments affected area. I will move to adopt that finding as well. Second all those in favor.

will not cause noise, odor, glare or vibration to disturb the peaceful enjoyment of adjacent property. Um the proposed finding is this project will not cause undue noise, odor, glare or vibration on adjacent properties. The site is proposed to be unlit other than entrance lights and the equipment shelters unless mandated by federal review. The tower has been designed to an elevation under 200 ft.

Yes. Above ground level that does not require aviation warning lights. So what does it mean when you say unless mandated by federal? So is there a possibility? There is a slim possibility, but based on our preliminary assessment, if it was in the proximity of an airport, they still could require warning lights. or if it was in a flight cone of a of a path of a a licensed airport. There is none in the proximity of this. So, it is clear

FAA has already determined, right? It doesn't need lights. FAA has already determined, right? That was part of part of the original application. You have to say, are you going to light it or not? Does it require lights? And we said, no, and they've accepted that in that.

Do we have that approval? Why don't we have the approval? I think they do get No, it comes electronically. I don't know. Make that a condition that we get. I would like to see that. Um, so I am going to move to find that this is met so long as there are no additional lights other than what has been described in the application.

Yep. And you can you can forward us the Yeah, we should be able to get that online, right? The I don't know if that Yeah, whatever we got online preliminary check, but no lights. So, if additional lights are at some point required, they'll have to come back before the board.

We don't want lights either. No. change. All those in favor the ability of the town to provide municipal government or educational services. The proposed finding is this project will not place an excessive burden on the town as it is uninhabited.

Uninhabited. Yeah, I'd like to know what is inhabiting that town. Maybe some squirrels, some squirrels, a few sparrows, who's living there and requires no municipal services. It will provide additional tax revenue for the town. So I will move to find that uh to adopt that criteria that proposed finding.

Second. All those in favor? Good. So Is that what we need to make? We need to skip one. Did we skip one? Yeah. Yeah. We have Well, we have to go back to I because we have to find it meets all of our other fun stuff, which is this whole Yeah.

Thought we had fixed this, right? Fix this. How do we fix it? Why didn't we fix it? When we rewrote the stupid conditional performance standards? I mean in theory there should expand no 55 the general performance standards.

No the conditional use performance. Sorry. Do we have to go through those as well? How do we fix this? Why didn't we fix this? this was the same thing. No, but they're not. They're close. They're the same. I've responded to both of them. So,

trying to get them to be the same. Well, that's just it. I saw streamline things a little bit. This why? No, I think actually I think we did because they said these performance standards are all specific to particular types of use, right?

Okay. So, we just need to go through the conditional performance, right? And the building when they start to do the construction, I use the general general performance standard manage that. So we did 55 55. They're in this packet. Yes.

On which one? Oh, in the first one, right? Oh, in the second one. Is it in the second one? Second one. It's in the second one because I I updated it for the new ordinance. So where? might be missing it too. we just went through, right?

Okay. You went through a lot of them, but No, we went through a through O. Now we're going through one through whatever. All right. Only 19. Do I really have to read these? All right. Air pollution. Pass it off this. Did you finish up I on

No, that's we can't finish I until we go through this one through. Yeah. one. condition using the zone, right? Yes. Okay. All right. Um nice. Trying to be reasonable here. Okay. Uh pretty bad. Uh so air pollution. Yes. one.

So I read this all on this one. That's what I The proposed power and telecommunication project will not produce emissions of gaseous materials to cause the soiling of any material beyond the lot line and will it have detectable load such as emissions

will cause any health effects on normal persons residing within a radius of thousand ft from the lot lines. The project may house emergency generators which will have exhaust well within the parameters as allowed under this performance to second.

So I will move to adopt that criteria. I'll second it. All those in favor lead all applicable um water control standards of the main department of environmental protection and not degrade any surface of subsurf subsurface water supplies below the state's primary drinking water standard nor will lower the quality of the water below the state state's secondary drinking secondary drinking water standard. The proposed project will not by reason of activity alter the quality of any surface or subsurface water in such a way as to adversely affect any fish, plants or animals that might live in uh live in around or drink from such water. The site is of minimal impact and impervious service and promotes infiltration to mitigate service runoff impacts.

What makes the site impervious? surfaces are um hard surfaces such as concrete, metal, pavement, things like that. Okay. So, you're going to have gravel, right? It'll The only thing that'll be in purpose will be just the roofs of the uh shelters themselves.

Um I will move to adopt that proposed binding. I'll second it. All those in favor? A water supply number three. The proposed site is an unmanned facility as does not require a domestic or firerevention supply of water. Move to adopt that finding.

Second. All those in favor? Soils. The project site is utilizing an existing uh cut woods road and will utilize the cleared 76 ft x 76 ft area for the press stone enclosure closure. Soils are noted on the Andoskagen County medium intensity as polace fine sandy lom uh 0

to 8% slopes uh soils are uh suitable for construction of facilities and will require limited erosion control practices. We do not expect to have any geotechnical issues for the bearing capacity of the soil for the tower construction.

I will move to adopt that proposed finder. I'll second it. All those in favor? Uh soil erosion. The design of the site minimizes tree clearing and soil disturbance as it follows an existing woodlock hall road. A specific uh soil erosions and sedimentation plan have been provided discussing sil silt fence insulation and lom and seeding disturbed areas immediately after construction. In addition, the site will not alter existing tree coverage. So will allow for uh the lot to reveate from the select cutting practices undertaken prior to the project proposal. Based on photographs and balloon tests, we feel that we're already there uh there is already adequate screening for most of the public locations. And this will also assist in avoiding any erosion of surface from one um a 12-in diameter culbert is

located to connect uh connectivity of the surface water along the driveway. No adverse runoff rates or impacts are anticipated with the design construction of the site of this tower and communication facilities. I will move to adopt.

I'll second it. I'd like to see a 15-inch cover. 12-in covers don't work. And I understand that and and we typically do that on road sections. This one is again a very narrow. It's a driveway essentially. The only reason that this is even there is because there's just two lowlying areas on both sides of the road. Personally, I don't think that u you'll ever see much of anything going through the culver. I think it'll go down through, but we just put it there in the event of uh winter conditions that you know the ground's frozen. But if you want a 15, we can put a 15. It'll just have a little less cover over it.

What do you think Ben has respond? Uh the it's we're trying to do a standard throughout town of 15inch covers. 12-in coverts have been problematic and I I'm not sure h having not visited the site that should that fail what it's going to affect. I mean it's not like it's in the ditch out by the road, but um you know it's been relatively well understood that 12in culverts fail.

I don't think at a much higher rate than 15, but I don't know how much fluid's running through this one. No objection to going to 15. Do you have any objection to going to 15? No, I have no idea. We'll just agree to the change it to 15.

I will move to adopt that proposed criteria with the change to a 15 um inch. those in favor to let us access circulation. The site will be accessed uh by a 50 foot I'm looking for the foot port foot right away and easement for uh utilities and the tower facilities. Uh a turnaround has been provided at the gated area into the fence compound for service vehicles uh to easily turn around. facility does not require a street or road for access and as such the driveway has been designed for minor commercial traffic with a

3 in say a minus 3. You can't go minus. No, hopefully not. I've never seen that before. It's mud. See mud. Uh minus a 3-in finished course of gravel and a total sectional depth of 18 in of gravel. But some traffic will be light with only a few monthly visits uh to the unmanned facility. Uh we have filed for a highway entrance permit with the main DOT and have shown uh the site distance as 720 ft to the west and 900

plus feet feet uh to the east which far exceeds the maximum requirement of 425 ft for a 45 m per hour zone. Uh service vehicles will be standard pickups or one tons and very infrequently such as the standard driveway width of 12 ft that's appropriate

The bottom of the page is a um I believe that they are not paving the entrance that this will have to be waved. So it says on the bottom of page 60 I all commercial entrances regardless of traffic volume may be required by the planning board to be paid. It said maybe. Okay. It doesn't say shall. I'm sorry.

Maybe. All right. Thanks. And I do believe that this will be under that jurisdiction will probably be under the highway entrance permit. They typically will want the apron paved to the 15t I think is what the they want it 3% to the property line.

Y. So that's all basically handled through MDOT. Okay. Thanks. Sorry, it said May. I didn't I thought it said shallow, but I didn't want to miss it. Um, well, so if that'll require 15 ft, we could require 30. Do you guys see any reason to

No, not really. Then I will less asphalt. Move to I'll move to adopt the proposed finding. I'll second that. The title fixed. All those in favor? solid waste uh from the facility uh will only be generated by service contractors upon initial uh installation. All contractors or the Pinkham Brook LLC will be responsible for picking up any service waste. Otherwise, the site is unmanned, will not generate or sold solid waste.

I will move to adopt that proposed finding. I'll second it. All those in favor? shall be preserved in its natural state uh in so far as possible when constructing the tower and accessory structures, parking areas and drives by minimizing tree removal and grade changes. Uh the site is adequately protected by natural vegetation and the applicant has agreed to a 100 foot wide

buffer to uh further allow natural preservation of existing trees in lower ve and lower vegetation to naturally screen the site over time. All materials used on the structures will be neutral in color uh to further not adversely impact the visual field. Given the distance of nearly 300 feet from the front property line, the site's curved approach, um, it makes for a nonlinear view of the site compound to assist in hiding the site from public view. So if you guys look in our specific criteria,

no industrial commercial buildings uses should be established in you know any closer than,000 ft from a residential use unless a landscape buffer strip is provided to visually screen the building or uses. Screening shall be defined as eliminating any view to humans standing at ground level of the residential use or from the windows of a two-story building within such location.

cannot provide screening, landscape buffer maintenances, walls, tree plantings, hedges or combinations thereof. minimize the impacts of any kind of potential use. Mhm. As eliminating any beauty. Yep. I don't know how we're going to

circumstances of the ordinance and the intent of the ordinances is typically no no commercial structure except the tower can be over 35 ft. So in that consideration except for towers it would be reasonable to expect an applicant to have the capacity to screen it from view. When you come to a 200t tower I it's just not possible

in that particular case. I would have to say that from my opinion that um provided every effort is made to do as much as is possible I don't think it's possible to meet the intent of the ordinance based on this and under the circumstances of the exception for height I think that this particular situation does fall into that category. Don't we have the authority wave something?

Can we do that? What do we do with that? Yeah. Radius, elevation, height thing that the tower thing or No, no, no. You looking to see if there's a waiver criteria for standard. Yeah, we did put argued about that. We did.

But did it make the cut? Did it not make the cut? Amended language against my uh Yes. The conditional use shall not be approved if in a judgment of the planning board the applicant is not able to reasonably meet one or more of the standards. In all instances the burden of proof

that? The planning board may wave any of the general performance standards based upon a written request of the applicant. A waiver of any general performance standard may be granted only if the board finds that the standard is not required for the proposed project to be in compliance with the approval criteria.

We wave any of the general and that's where this is in as general performance standards. Correct. This is in conditional use performance standards. Oh, which is different. That's true. the design standards may be considered, but the applicant shall provide clear and convincing evidence that the proposed design will meet the performance standards. In all instances, the burden of proof should be on the applicant to present adequate information to indicate the statutory criteria for approval and performance standards have been or will be met.

town? I was going to suggest that you know I know that the tower as you mentioned is you just can't hide a tower but we have taken measures to you know hide the commercial structures within the compound. Yeah. which are the primary use is the compound. The tower is kind of almost accessory to that. So,

and it's gray. It's not right. Right. It's not fluorescent orange. What if a tree a buffer were applied to the one a butter that had some concerns on their side of the road rather than near the tower so that some elevation might um might offer him some relief.

I mean he's not here I think. Yeah. Well, I'm not sure what to say about that. Yeah. As I recall, he has quite a buffer in the front of his house, but it was mostly decidious trees, not canerous trees. And his concern was winter time. He seemed to think it would be screened in the summer.

Would some Yeah. So, what would the screening have to be if it were at the property line to meet the Probably have to be some spruce or furs, right? And we'd have to have his permission to do it. I'm afraid he left early.

right? There's a few. I mean, yeah, I went by the site. There's certainly a large opening. Yeah, the prop currently in the proposed area. sidewalk? I kind of feel like that is with this one might be what we have to do in order to

would it assist if we planted I'm just wondering you know I mean would it assist if we planted some trees along the access road going in so it kind of staggered the view of his from his property. I mean, it's a little hard to know what to do without standing by his front door and see what it is he's talking about and looking at, you know? I mean, that it's hard to know that if the if it's been reasonably met without that.

Should be noted that these properties as you get down away from Pink and Book Road. Lower too. Absolutely. Lower than elevation. So my photos are from the edge of the property boundary. You know the perspective provide the property that I'm literally on the rightway from Pinkham Brook.

Um I from recollection believe have a hard time seeing the resident at least the lower Yeah. But the trick is, of course, he's the one that's been here and been vocal, but there is another residence there that I think still falls into this requirement even though that gentleman or that owner was not here to speak.

Um, we can wave this. Um, when we move stuff around, we didn't fix the language. I think the intent was to allow us to wave performance standards as long as we felt they met. But right now it says we can only wave general performance standards, not conditional use performance standards. So I'm not convinced we can make this, but I don't know what you guys think. This is ours to interpret

with the language on the bottom of 55. Yeah. This is not a piece I would I'm excited to wave. No, I think we'll have push back on it. The weird part is is you put them under the conditional use performance standards. We moved stuff and it was not well done.

Well, it was, but maybe we need to skew that a little bit. You know, maybe that's something we need to do for next revision. Next revision. How does everybody feel about a site visit? Um but yeah, no, I don't I mean unless we can rely on Unless we're comfortable relying on the balloon photos. That's all we've got.

I appreciate the balloon photos, but I had shown me a whole lot. They're showing me a balloon at 195 ft. They're not showing me the buildings. They're not showing me all that tower from one to 195 ft. We're not going to see that either.

Well, we're not, but we we could photoshop it as mine. Um, you could do visual sims. So, here's here's what I'm going to do. I am going to motif to find that this piece is not met. If you all vote me down and want to say walk instead, I'm fine with that.

have from the applicant and the very strict wording of our ordinance, I think this is not going to be completely screened from view from all particularly the Crawford residents, but from all residential uses whether that criteria makes sense or not. It is what it is.

It's almost impossible. Yeah, I hear you. So maybe the board of appeals can help you out. But um so I'm I'm going to move to find that this criteria is not met. If there's no second, then I'll second it. I'll second it. I can't I can't go. I can't say it is

I just don't know how anyone could have ever meet any criteria for commercial use. Then it's I wish I wish it was worded different. Exactly. It's an impossible standard. Yeah. So, you're going to say it's not accepted. But if our legal counsel looks at it

if you can show us how it is. No, we would say show us how you can meet that is probably what the lawyer would say. You you've you've created a standard that you're free to do that. It's not free to appeal to the board of appeals.

We look at that. We just can't do it. Yeah. You this board can't. But there is options for you with which to appeal these decisions and you're you and your attorney are free to base that on anything you'd like. Yeah. My suspicion is here negate the ordinance, not appeal the decision.

That's easy. It's again it's that's your you and your council have have those rights. Yeah. I guess I would my question would be it'd be back to that page 55. I just don't understand why under the conditional use performance standards you'd be referring to general standards when they don't apply to conditional use

does say the performance standards in this article it says where are you looking well the first words the performance standards in this article Right. Our intended to clarify and expand standards of the section. John doesn't want to go down the waiver route either.

I mean, allow us to wait this? Well, it says performance quite a few times. General performance. Yeah. I mean because and there's a specific section that is called general performance standards. Yep. Yeah. I think trying to find a way around part should have been in general performance.

No, it just didn't get updated to reflect which part. Yeah. You want I think what you want to do is refer to the same language that was in the performance standards and applying to the conditionally use standards and the word general never got removed. Seems to be

far from a perfect document. No. Um, but I'm just saying that because it's listed under the that under that section that I don't I don't know what happens. So, we've got a motion in a second. Why don't we vote on it? If it gets if we split on it, then I don't know, but

what need you want to see it again? Right. So I I have moved to find that this approval criteria is not met because it is not um fully buffered from all residential uses and it falls within the thousand foot range and I second it. All those in favor

I don't know what we do now. Ju just one question. Is there a waiver process? Yes. Can we request a waiver? Well, we can request a waiver. Correct. Yes. Because that is step one to the process is the applicant request the waiver.

Right. That is Are you requesting a waiver for that in our I am now? Writing it up. Write it up. I think we're all in the same position. We just put it away. Yeah. No, I mean the issue is is whether we have the authority to fix this for you.

Okay. Um Well, we pass it to the appeals. Fix it. I shouldn't say for you. I don't. Yeah, we should just fix it. town. But What's everybody's feeling on this? Well, we're supposed to now That's correct. Okay. Okay. So then we need another motion.

Do we have another motion? We'll also fail then we're Yeah, right. politics. Where's Cindy when we need her? We could do this all. So, all right. Is there an alternative motion? alternative motion. Well, I mean, we could go to a sidewalk.

Would it be But what is what is a sidewalk going to buy us? Well, I don't think it buys us anything, but I don't like the idea. Yeah, I agree with you. Well, so you're not going to make that motion. Well, I don't know. standing down at Skip's front door and looking out to see if you could actually see through all that vegetation. I'm not sure

to see it through on the Crawford residence and that's what the told us. I mean that it is what it is. Yeah. I mean that's not going to change down there. A tower that large you're going to see some part of the tower. You're not going to be able to block it. So So I guess you know if

we could but it's going to look a lot worse. tower, right? Cuz I mean there are means in here of fences and trees and other combination thereof. So the question is are we screening? Because I I think if you stand at I think what is it Crawford's you're going to be looking at the fence you're going to be looking at the equipment for a fair amount of time for sure.

You see it is lower the right. where you can That's why I was saying the balloon with the house in between. Yeah, we could plant trees, you know, along that side of the road and and then plant some around the outside of that fence. Well, the other the other suggestion there there's

we have done for other clients is you know how uh a chain link fence you can actually weave a green that that screens that's a screen that a lot of people have uh requested that blocks out screen the building. You never block out the tower.

It will it will blend in the the chain link and screen any of the stuff inside the the compound because but the buffering the goal of buffering is minimize the impacts of the potential use parking loading unloading operations you know

and all that is inside the defense compound. we doing? Do we that going to It doesn't fix it for me, but if it fixes you, then it's straight away. It's not going to buffer the tower and we can move on with our lives. Yeah. I don't know if we're talking about buffering the building,

but I don't think we get to the tower. I don't think there's any physical way of doing that. Right. So, are you making a motion to require that they screen the building? Screen the building only as a condition and that it meets the criteria.

Mhm. Okay. So, is somebody going to second that? I will second that. Nice. Thank you. Would you kindly just repeat your motion? There something about green is greener way. Yeah. And the process of writing it down. Weaving green vinyl.

So they So the motion is that they will provide adequate buffer for the facility. Not including the tower. Right. Yeah. Right. We're talking screening or buffer? They're two different things. There there's landscape buffering. Buffering as defined in our ordinance. I mean there's much buffering and screening as you can possibly do. So you want the word buffering. Is that what we agreed on?

Yeah. Part of the concern was certainly as they looked at the the fence, is there a way to green green the fence? Yeah. That's what you talked about. Well, that's the green weaving Right. Right. So wait, what was your motion or what was the condition that we all just

He wanted the screw the final slats in the screening. You want the fence filled in, right? Yeah. Okay. Right. I thought we were actually asking for trees buffering. Well, in addition, right? I thought we were asking for I I'm not

the the the vinyl thing. I don't know. It looks just as ugly as the chain like fence. Would you like We could landscape buffering. I think is is acceptable to a single row of uh balsam furs along the perimeter of the fence

on the sides of the residence and public way. Well, maybe that would even a little better. Okay. Do all three of you agree that was the motion that we just voted on? Yes. Okay. So we've gone from plastic to woody product.

Exactly. Yeah. We've gone now natural now. Something a little more natural. Yeah, that's fine. Okay. Rolling right on. Yeah. We have not disc historical and archaeological resources. You have not discover dis discovered any listing of historical sites or pending historical sites based on the state historical preservation postings. We have submitted a request for review with the main state historical preservation office as part of the FCC review of the tower facility. We must conduct a nation environmental protection act review to include not only the state historical review but also the Indian tribe review of for the burial site. Uh we have uh received various confirmations from the Indian tribes nationally that they have no known no known burial sites or history of any native former communities in this area. Uh we are not disturbing any property, stone walls or markers and there are no known burial sites near the

immediate construction zone of the tower. A cemetery on the same parcel is well over 750 ft from the construction activity. The site is now readily visible from the public way for more than 500 ft from the site. A balloon test was conducted and photographs taken providing evidence of the site's buffering even after selected tree cut to the site. A 100 foot buffer has been shown uh on the plans by the applicant to maintain a natural a natural wood barrier.

That that 100 foot has been ex extended though, right? Right. Yes. or SD restricted from Yeah. Crawford's to uh Crawford's to Boomstein. Yeah. Boomstein. Yes. Yeah. Okay. So, we're going to have to word that in. Word that in

uh the extra buffer. extra buffer that we're doing actual deed restriction for no cut. Yeah. So we've already got that as a condition. Yeah. Okay. We get that written down. Yeah. So I will move to adopt that. Number 11. Proposed. Yeah. Finding

I'll second it. All those in favor? 12. Natural resources. The site does not contain plants listed in the federal or state list of end endangered species or other rare exemplary plant features uh will be advers uh affected adversely by the proposed use. A letter from the main department of inland fisheries and wildlife dated March 25th uh 2016 was previously provided confirming that we have not mapped any essential habitats that would be impacted by the proposed development.

I will move to adopt that. We'll second all those in favor. I'm sure it won't diminish the public's ability to get to the water. and technical capacity. A letter from the TD Bank dated March 22nd, 2016 was provided previously submitted uh to the town providing evidence uh that Northern Pride Communications had a $400,000 line of credit for the site construction. As per a request of the planning board, a letter of assignment and warranty has also been submitted from Northern Pride Communications to Pinkham and Brook LLC.

I will move to adopt that proposed criteria given the um condition that we already have with the performance bond. I'll second that. All those in favor? Number 14, noise. Uh the proposed site uh is unmanned and only um uh HAVAC units for future equipment shelters will promote noise. The uh given distance of the site to property line of these noise levels will be much below the allowable 45 del limits for nighttime use. Emergency generators tested uh during intermittent times during daytime hours once a month could also pose a short level of noise. uh but uh those two uh

would not reach the daytime limits of 55 dB during daytime hours. The generator uh would be used only in emergency situations during power outages and could be deemed exempt uh from the noise standards. Uh noises from construction activity will not commence until 7 a.m. and will shut down at dusk during weekdays. There may be limited activities on Saturday and no construction activities other than emergency situations would be expected on Sundays.

So are you saying the generator noise would exceed our No, but not muffled. They have mufflers. They have mufflers on when they would be used only in an emergency. Right. Well, I don't even go there and find that it's an emergency situation if they're never going to exceed the 45. Well, they do

decimal levels overnight. Just in your noise standards that generators are exempt. So, well, I don't think it is that generators are exempt. I think that emergency activities are exempt. Well, they won't reach that level.

They won't reach that level. Okay. So, then I'm going to move to adopt this taking out that last that last sentence in the first paragraph, but I'll move to adopt the rest of it. I'll second that. All those in favor? Number 15, odor. Uh, the proposed site will not emit odors. Thank you very much.

All those in favor All right, Mike. Yep. Move that and I seconded it. 16. Uh, lighting. Uh the site will have no lighting on the tower as the site was intentionally left below the FAA uh mandate of 200 ft um AGL height requiring lighting. The only lighting on the site will be for the lighting of the main doors uh with a full cut fixture of each individual equipment shelter. Typical wattage is 100 watts or equivalent and typically LED lights are now used on pre-fabricated shelters. No flashing, strobing. Our safety signals are anticipated or required for facility.

Um, I'll move to adopt that proposed. I'll second it. All those in favor? 17 explosive materials. Boom. Uhoh. Uh the only explosive the only explosive or combustible materials uh liquids, solids, gases to be stored in bulk as defined as greater than equivalent of 200 gallons above ground on the site is to serve the emergency generators for each shelter and the telecommunication use. The AG tanks are located at least 75 ft from any lot line and such materials will be stored in a manner and location which is in compliance with the rules and regulations of the main department of environmental protection rules and regulations of the main department of public safety and any other applicable federal, state or local reg uh regulations that in effect.

I'll move to adopt that proposed criteria. I'll second it. All those in favor? Uh number 18, signage. Uh no sign for the tower or telecommunication facilities will be eliminated with flashing, moving or uh animated type lights. Only small signs indicating warning of

Yes. Warning of devices. Think wearing. Yeah. Warning of devices and the individual uh FCC regulation numbers will be posted on the site. These signs are typically installed on the fence compound to the facilities or on the shelters. It's our understanding these signs will be are exempt from the town's signage standards.

I move to adopt that. I'll second it. All those in favor. And finally, number 19, education services. The proposed site is unmanned, not inhabited, will have no impact on it in its development or cause the population of Durham's elementary school to have any increase.

That one as well. All those in favor? Todd, you seconded that. Second it. All right. So, going back to Ish. Yes. Um having gone through that um the only other condition I wanted to add is that all other permits and licenses will be obtained

and they will be if they plan to put a ray on there. So as long as they have their entrance permit, right? So what what was what was that now? They want to have proof that all other licenses and permits are obtained for the construction of the tower.

Yeah. Yeah. They won't be your license to put the array up won't be right. Yeah. The tower is okay. Just the array you have to have the FA. So your driveway entrance permit. Yeah. Gotcha. Y. Okay. Um so with that additional condition, I'll move to find that. Oh that I will move to adopt the proposed finding and I second.

So with the the four conditions I have are performance bond naming the town, a negative easement or deed restriction for the trees in the area we discussed. Um a row of balsam fur to be planted to screen the fence in the facility and all necessary permits and licenses must be granted before construction as approval. Um, with those four conditions, I will motion approve the permit, the application.

You mentioned the performance mode. Yeah. Okay. Yes, that was and yes, I missed it. Sorry. approve this application? Thank you very much and thank you for your time and assisting us getting us through this lengthy process.

Thank you for your excellent proposed findings and conclusions. Yeah, nice job. Nice work. Very nice work. Work on those typos. Not the only engineer that like reads my stuff later. I'm like, I'm cringing over here. We'll wind up with it. Okay.

We need to put the conditions on there. Oh, yeah. Yeah. There'll be another. So, what are we signing this for? Um, the conditions aren't on it. I'm not signing this unless on the paper. Yeah, they're going to be on there.

They have to be on the They're going to be on the permit. They have to be on. This is just just what? This is just for this, right? But there this was approved with conditions. Right. So, we're not going to sign it unless the conditions are on the approval.

We just have to have the conditions on that paper. Okay. So, the annual type of month. Yep. Yeah. Yeah. We get we just sign it at the next meeting. The original thing is the reason. Yeah. Yeah. I won't have to sign it. the last two hours.

Well, I don't own a typewriter. So, if you have No, I'm only kidding. photosite photos on there too as well. I wonder if we're going to get any push. my appreciate your work. Nice work, guys. Really nice. Do we get a document that says approved contingent?

Yes, you will you will receive a sign a conditional use permit from uh catch up on the clerical and I will see when it gets to you and then we're assuming we go for permit for antennas. You'll come to me for a building permit and and whatever else. You're going to need electrical permit and various other things as well. We'll discuss that when we get a chance. We'll get you whatever permits you need to build the top.

Yeah, I think all the electrical will be run. It's just a hookup of the shelter. Well, there's whatever that you usually have an electrician do all that. Yeah, the Yeah, the electrician will have to pull the permit for the electrical work, but you'll need an electrical permit and a building permit,

right? So, come see me. So, we can wave the plumbing permit. Well, only if you don't need plumbing. The state rules apply to all plumbing and waste water just or ask for a waiver on the You can plum it if you want. Not sure what you're gonna do.

Clarify. Good to see it. That was a big thank you. Nice job. You're welcome to start. I like that. Like how the hell you block a 200 foot? I didn't realize. And you we only have a 35 ft. Is it 35? It's either 32 or 35 ft is the is the max.

What's your uh fire ladder. That's what I live in Markwell. They dictate it by the fire ladder. Yeah, we have a ladder and it probably only goes up to 32. I think it's 80 ft. That's a big one. I think it's 80 ft. But we got the right guy here.

Yeah. Don't want anybody getting fried at the top of it while while they're working. Thanks a lot everybody. Thank you. Well, nice to meet you. Glad you're still awake. Barely. Barely. I'm sorry. This had to be done. ended

Um would you like to step up and tell us what you are proposing to do? Well, it looks familiar. That's makes two of us. We don't. Sorry. We can't guess. Wow. I guess I'm applying for a permit to um get some film. You have to sit up with the microphone so the people can hear.

You need to sit up. Yeah, you need to sit up on the I can do You can do it. front of you, I have no idea what you have. This all This is all we got. Yeah. But I see you have something about a Grover. Yeah. Yeah, we got So, I don't have that. So, I have no idea what that's at.

Sorry about that. I meant to give that to you earlier. they're still being taken from the bridge construction by a DOT contractor and placed on this property without any permits. Is that right? Correct. Yes. fact permit.

or is the filling It's all done. It's all done. Yep. Between Paul and D, they basically put this sc to him and he's left. for? Yep. That's the one from the state of Maine, right? Yeah. Have you have you applied for the He's sending me the stuff in the mail.

Jeff had said he hadn't he hadn't received the application yet for a permit by rule to the D. So that's that's still outstanding. supposed to mailed it to me. Okay. Yeah. it's just basically applying for a permit Must be including this. And I'm not sure about how this works for future use because it's also I had written in there for the new Brook address also. So I'm not really sure. This goes back to kind of what Tom was saying at the beginning. How long is this? If this is like if I was to get roadside fill from the down. I started thinking about exactly the same thing cuz I remember the notice that went out and ask if they want to fill.

Yeah. I mean, if I if I was to get fill from the roads, that would be like a summer long permit. So Rover has already up and left and the site is all been erosion controlled. It's all been sloped. Well, it was it is now.

It is now. Yes. We had we didn't we didn't get 500 yards. I can't dis I have I have no idea to determine how many yards they had been trucking it in for a while. According to Grover, there was more than 500 yards brought to the site. I I can't dispute. I don't know. I I don't know what was there before it started. I came on site after the fact. So

really this equation right now. What's that? Yeah. So doesn't matter. At at this point I was using the clause that the board should review this anyway. Yeah. Because it's my choice to send it to the board if I feel that that I want

Sure. a broader review. Um so according to the application here have some at 662 Newbrook road. And how much there? We're not going to get anything. Oh, we won't take it to Newbrook either. Nope. Okay, he's done. Okay, he's done. So now I'm going to rely on getting fill from the town from roadside ditching if Calvin will do that.

Well, up to 500 yards is my approval. That's right. Okay. Up to 250 yards doesn't require any approval, right? other than you still have to, you know, you still can't violate D rules and stuff, but you're the whole issue with that is is D's been there a thousand times, probably nine times because the neighbor's son worked for D and every time we did anything they called and it had never been an issue. So why would we ever think it was an issue?

No, I I understand that. But the one thing that we were trying to violate any rules, it was just it had never been an issue. So, all right. So, let me let me fill in for this. Um the DOT Glenn from Glenn Filberrook who's the DOT site supervisor here at the bridge had made a visit over to the site. It was understood by Grober and by Mr. Tibo that the site was he approved the site. Now when I met with Glenn over there and Jeff from the D Glenn said he didn't tell him to fill the ravine. So there's some hearsay going on here. I'm not exactly sure what has gone on. When Jeff and I met at the site and Dan had come, I think it was the first time we were there, Dan mentioned that there had been some residual disputes with the neighbor involving the DP. When Jeff asked for documentation to verify that, Dan said he didn't have any documentation to verify that. Jeff said he was going to look at the see if there was anything in

the files in um in the Portland office. So, so far none of that has surfaced. So, I can't I'm not trying to deny it. We have nothing to verify it. at this point. So the circumstance at the site was is that the fill that was going into the ravine had encroached upon the National Resource Protection Act 75 ft buffer zone from a defined stream. He hadn't encroached on the 25- ft, only on the 75 ft. We caught him. We caught it in time. Grover has gone over and stabilized the site. They pulled the slope back to reduce to reduce the degree of grade on the slope. Um, they put down hay. They've done what they needed to to mitigate that properly. So, the site's stable. It's been properly mitigated.

And that's where it all stands right now. Because I Grover told me there was more than 500 yards taken in. I have no way of knowing because I never saw the site before it went in. I wanted to have these guys come before the board, get an after the fact permit so everything's cool here. Um and they still need to comply with the D permit by rule. Uh there has been no action there has been no enforcement action taken by my office or D at this time. If the permit by rule is handled in a timely fashion, this issue will be done.

D permit by rule? It needs to be the need. I would think that the only thing you could do would be put some condition on it as far as a timeline for submitting the application. I don't think it's reasonable to hold them responsible for how long it takes the EP to

um but then permit by rule actually has a sundown once you make the application anyway. Okay. If I remember correctly, I I believe basically there there's a permit by rule timeline. They have to respond in a certain time period.

Yeah, I off the top of my head I don't know if it's 69 days. I think it's 60 days, but I can't remember. Right. So, there is a known timeline to that piece once the application is submitted. So, we're going to give you a permit for doing what you've already done

and that's it. That's all you're not going to do anymore. Is that what I understand? I would like to get some fill but not to fill the ravine anymore. The gully to bring the property up so I can use it for my cow pasture.

Mhm. So, is this the ravine that the stream runs through? I don't understand. There is a seasonal I don't know. It's not a It's a spring coming out of the bank and it dries up in the summertime. That's what the whole deal was. It's running right now. and I found a snail in there and a little water bug.

There are three criteria that the D uses for stream determination. I'm just trying to figure out what you want to do. All I want to do is So this there's a spring and whether it's a stream or not, right? We don't know. But that's what you want to fill in.

No, not so what's the ravine that you're talking about filling in? We're not We're not going to fill in anymore. No, you're just talking about later going to Calvin and getting some roadside fill under 500 you put in your field.

So there's a different hole in your field. There's no feet. There's no hole anymore. It's just I want to bring the ground level up some. I got it. Okay, that's all I want to do. Okay. So we're talking about a different area on your property.

The same area. Same area, but not it's not further encroaching on the encroaching on the ravine any further. So this they they want here not I don't know. They fill the they fill the area in and it still slopes towards the ravine. They'd like to work it back and level it off some more at some point.

So, what we're talking about tonight is just sanctioning whatever is taking place today. They want more from See, that's why we're not going to get anything from Grover anymore. No, no. But you want Phil from like I don't care where it comes from. I just care that gets put on the property, where it gets put on the property, how it gets put on. So, it sounds like you want an after the fact permit for the fill activity that's already happened. You want a going forward permit for filling in the pasture not in the ravine, right?

And you want a going forward permit for additional fill at additional property. Is that right? Yes. Got it. So this further further filling is going to be more than 500 yards or less than 500 or I wouldn't think it'd be more than 500 yard. Depends on what Calvin can give me if he's willing to give me any if he's local.

So I don't expect him to go from Quake and Meals Road to my place when he can dump it closer. if he's in my area. So, correct me if I'm wrong. I as far as coming before the board for Phil as an application, the application is supposed to define the scope of the fill that they need and what they're going to do with it. Once they've completed that part, they've completed that part. Any further fill or any other operations they want to do, if it's under 500 yards, falls either 250 is no oversight,

500 is code enforcement. If they come if they want to do an additional or greater than 500 at any other spot, they would have to come forward with a defined conditional use explaining what it is and how much they want to do. So, at this point, as far as I see it, the prudent thing to do here would be to complete the after the-act permit for what has already been done and stabilized. and any additional uh bill that would come up in the future would have to fall either as no oversight or code enforcement andor a new conditional.

Right. But I think the problem is that this looks like it wants to be an application for a thousand more or for two separate this looks like it wants to be two separate applications and that's why I'm struggling. I would agree with that.

Yeah. cuz he's because of this because of the new book that was written up on the intentions to get more fill from the bridge that was written up when this happened. The time the timing That's right. That's right. And the bridge is no longer.

So I'd like to tell you that that's null and void because now I'm going to rely on Calvin. Okay. You still have to if you're going to rely on Calvin for more than 500 yards, you still have to come back to us, right? So, are you withdrawing this application?

That's up to Paul. No, that's up to you. This is your application. I tried to withdraw it yesterday and he said, "No, we had to still come here." So, it would be Well, you still have to come here for the after the fact permit,

but because this this talks about two new filling activities. So, right now I've got three issues to deal with. One, I've got the after the fact permit, which either that's what that was for. Well, but that's not what this says. So, here, let me

So, one, we've got the after the fact permit, which if you don't come before us and you withdraw that application, he's going to write you a notice of violation. So, that's that application. You want to stay here. Then, you've got an application for further filling. I don't care where you get it. But if you want to do 500 more yards from it,

anyone else, that's a second application. And then the third application is for the filling on 662 Newbrook Road. So you want to intent of that was for the after effect. I get that, but that's not what it says. So do you want to withdraw the permits, the applications for the future filling?

Yes. Yes. For the future. Yes. Okay. That's right. So now we're just talking about the after the fact permit, right? Correct. That's right. Got it. Sorry. It's all right. So that's all right. Don't worry about it. We got it. We got it all now.

Yeah. Okay. That was for the heat of the moment. Well, I know we had to do it quick because it was Monday and the Monday it had to be in and it was like 3:00 in the afternoon and they scribbled out a paragraph and we threw it in there so we could get it before the board meeting.

Okay. So they withdrew this one, but the the after the fact still applies. We still need to satisfy that. And so all I have on the after the fact is this, right? Yep. That's all we have. Yes. Okay. I don't know what to do with this.

I don't I just Yeah. Well, I didn't know what to do either, so I threw I threw you guys under the bus. I'm sorry. I knew that I did not want that proficiency. That's another thing that's going to get crossed out. So, is there a fee for the permit?

Yes. Yeah. Close. Is there a fee for the All right. What zone is No, it's less than Yeah. If you have to come before the board, there will be a fee for every application that comes before the board. If you're just coming to me, there's no fee in the in the ordinance for under 500 or 500 yards. I just need to approve the site for it to make sure I don't know what

wetland, streams, and various. I don't have much of an application. What are we going to do? You don't know. This is really So, how many yards were dumped? I have no idea. I would think they've been growing. I can tell you that they only hauled. They never hauled steady for any day. They hauled for a couple days here and there. So,

we weren't home, but I have no idea. I don't believe it was 500. I bet around there. I can't say more and I can't say less, but they didn't haul a whole heck of a lot. No, they had a bulldozer. So, it doesn't really matter at this time anyways, I don't think, because we're still going to go try to get this permit and they're all done.

erosion control It's all done. Is done. It's been stabilized. It's been stabilizing coming back three times to the planning board. at least one too. Yeah. Yeah. To be honest with you, if you want to I ain't going to say table it.

You can worry about it later cuz we're all done anyways. You know what I'm saying? Cuz if you're unsure what to do, it ain't like I'm waiting for an approval. You table it. Yep. I guess but I'm not waiting for an approval to dump more. So,

yeah. No, I get it. Cuz one of the one of the conditions is likely going to be the the D we're waiting for anyway, right? Yeah. And we don't have a butter notifications. Like we don't have any of that, right? We have nothing. But it doesn't I I guess I'm confused as to that it would I I'm I'm as confused as anybody when I look at this ordinance. And all it did it says conditional use, but I don't understand how conditional use our conditional use criteria would apply to this at all other than just the water quality stuff.

Right. Well, that would be we can find that they're not applicable, but I think we still have to go through that exercise. Well, now I know that and I'll make sure that we do that in the future. But I was I was uncertain as to how to approach this one cuz it didn't

Well, you could na most of it. Okay. But, you know, water quality water quality erosion. All right. So, do we want to do we want to table this till next month and then go through the whole So, I mean, I guess next month and that would allow him to get his permit by rule application in and

so I guess give us an application rather than table it. I'm going to find that the application's incomplete. Yeah. Okay. We withdrew it. No, you withdrew the other two. You This is still This is still an application. But you didn't have any application.

We don't have Sorry. We have this we've got enough here to to find it incomplete and then we'll have to sit down and work through what it takes to make it complete for the next meeting. Just come back next month. I got Well, we could take the conditional use per application, right? And

I'm not going to do that plan and all that. So, you found it's incomplete. I move to find that it's incomplete. No. And who second it? You're not going to make us do a sidewalk, are you? needs to be processes before and I just think it's ridiculous.

Well, that is ridiculous is understandable, but that you comply is is I'll for complying, but I'm not going to hire a surveyor and have all the site planning and elevation and all that crap on it. Well, and that's fine. You can request a waiver, but the fact that it took me 10 minutes to figure out what the hell was going on shows you why. No, I mean, this is your project. This is not his project. The fact that it took me 10 minutes to get out of you, all three of you, what was going on shows you why we need a sketch. Well, you had Phil dumped at your property. You know that you're in control of that. So, draw me a stupid picture and ask us for a waiver that it has to be stamped by a surveyor. But we can't make a decision based on this cuz I have no idea what happened or how it happened or when it happened or what this stupid stream is. So,

if you don't want to come back for an with a application, that's fine. That's your choice, but he's going to write you a notice of violation. So, I mean, we don't want to be unreasonable, but we need enough to know that you've complied with the ordinance. So, that's your option.

That's fine. I'll do it. I'm just I just know what I went through when we built our other building. It was like four months out with surveyors and all that crap. And this is just I would not suspect this will be anywhere near as complicated.

No, I don't I don't see this needing survey. Go through the It shouldn't be anywhere near as so I moved to finance incomplete. Mike has seconded it. Oh, all those in favor. Do you have He doesn't have an application. There's a conditional use. There is a conditional use application. I didn't have an application for Phil, but I do have a conditional use application. Yeah, I

we get to use most of it's not applicable, but there are strong things that do need to be done and that's fine. Can we So, can one of you get together with me tomorrow and I can go over with you what we need to do? I can't. I'll

All right. Well, sometime in the next week or so and we can prepare for what and go over with you so help you understand what we need to prepare for it. All right. and we'll just we'll get it taken care of. All right. Your hours on your business card,

I don't know if they are, but they're they're on the website tomorrow only on Thursdays and it's 8:30 to 4:30 Monday, Tuesday. 6:30 tomorrow. Yes, you could come in tomorrow. I'll go check my appointment calendar. Give me a ring in the day.

I'll call you. Okay, thank you. me do that? Sorry. I was doing the same thing and then I said, "Wait a minute." Cuz it probably easier over the same page as what you guys need. piss me off. He's going to violation. Um we need to approve our April 4th.

Thank you. Well, that's what I wanted to say. I wanted to come across the table. Hey, if you ever need a big mouth, the Italian is here for you. If anybody moves, I'll kill them. So, she can say whatever she wants. I'm being recorded, aren't I?

You are. Mention that, but All right. So, um I will approval of the minutes. Is that what we're on now? Yes, we are. Sorry. All right. All those in favor? All those in favor of getting it done here. Wait, didn't we have some?

What was on the agenda? Where's my I'm trying to get out of here. Um, through all this stuff, we did the public hearing, right? Discussion dates to continue with ordinance review and recommendations for next year's revisions to ordinances.

Wow, that's a big one, right? We need to start the We need to start the group going again. Yeah. Um, how I think a bigger conversation and maybe not tonight at 9:30 tonight. Yeah. Is who? Yeah. Cuz we really need we really need to straighten some stuff out in this. So

yeah. So we'll table it to next month. We need a clear waiver. We need a clearer way to wait. I know we argued about it some we talked about it. It just didn't get did didn't get fixed. All those in favor?