TranscriptPlanning Board Meeting ~ March 5, 2025

for George uh not in there somebody got their phone handy or can you pull up YouTube I'm got YouTube over it's not showing yet it lags a little bit though yeah it does oh there you are it's got It's got subtitles can you hear it can I read them hold them way over there by Mr Ms and I'll see if I can read them appears to be

it looks like it's okay we're ready George with audio audio is the key okay very good okay well we shall begin uh welcome everyone to the uh March 5th 2025 planning regular planning board meeting for the town of Durham uh first thing is roll call determination of a quorum we have all five members here next thing is the Pledge so we have a quorum Pledge of Allegiance

the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for none uh acceptance of the meetings for January 15th and February 5th um any changes to either one one or both of

January 5th and February 5th meanss as presented uh second oh second it's been moved and seconded further discussion seeing none uh please raise a hand to approve 5 Z it is exchange on non-agenda items Mr thear uh just simply the update that we're going to be talking about the final action of the select board on draft amendments to Lan use ordinance so um the an ad was put in the paper today for the March 19th public hearing on the lanus ordinance amendments all of the information is up on the website uh and bulletin board and there will be copies available for people to check so we can discuss the details we get to that item thank you um anybody else on the

town officials want to speak residents are there you're not a resident so you can't talk now non-residents you can talk we're past that can no continuing business so new business completeness review of Ruby Farm View subdivision amendment to add four Lots map map five lot 78 DB public comment will not be taken um what we're here for is we approved this last spring I believe the completeness and the preliminary plat plan uh the time the clock ran out on the validity of that one so uh we're just here to uh uh take a look at uh

reapproved that I guess is that the correct term just summarize the application status as you mentioned John this was before the board a year ago and the board granted a preliminary approval and one of the issues at that time was the status of the original Ruby Farm View uh subdivision the infrastructure completement uh infrastructure had not been completed within 5 years and the ordinance requires it to be done within three years so uh the board granted a preliminary approval after getting input from the town attorney uh basically conform conforming it to a phased subdivision and conditions of approval were included that required completion of phase one uh and verification that those improvements had been done uh and then the applicant would get uh the preliminary approval as well for phase two so uh since that time as you mentioned the time limit of 6 months has long expired for submission of the final

plan as I understand it and you can get uh input from the applicants representative here tonight that all of the public improvements for Phase One have now been completed so now you're simply looking at the uh the amended plan to add the four Lots in the road so uh the application is complete uh and you can take action on that if you feel that's correct and then uh I've also provided you with updated preliminary approval conditions which drop all of the ones related to phase one so that's kind of where it is and then if the applicant gets their extended or new preliminary approval then they would move forward with filing their final plan application okay Mr Meek would you mind just sliding up here and staying and then state your name uh address and your

case your company please uh good evening my name is Rick meek I'm with pterodon consultants and we're in located in New Gloucester okay I defer to the board and and and I think George covered it uh we were here you know a year ago got a preliminary approval and yes the condition was that the improvements on phase one needed to be complete um so I've included in this um application this reapplication um a statement of completion of construction in accordance with the the um section 1.1 of the road construction um all in the affirmative that that it is complete um so we're looking for preliminary approval on you know

yeah I've got a couple just kind of um I guess process one do we have handy the previous prelim approval that we went through no and approved just wondering what what what's different what is there really anything different um I mean that's that is a good question I have the um I have the conditions of approval from the last meeting um or from last year somewhere as far as the plan itself is concerned uh I did notice that one of the approval conditions was there was a Transformer within the uh buffer on uh would we Farm Ruby Farm View Lane and that has been moved over Rick can you alert the board to any additional changes um on the plan itself yeah I think there was one other um maybe so condition number two was the Transformer location three oh the other the other additional information that was noted in there was the location of the test pits um so there was some they they as I observed going through it it looked like

you had Rick uh addressed some of those approval conditions in your updated application correct yes and that that is true so we we showed um on the original submission the subdivision plan we showed well ex well inclusion and septic inclusion zones but did not show the test pits so we've cre um the registry will not record

color which was on that plan so I've created a a new plan that show basically a site plan that shows the same information but it includes the test pits now okay and then the other thing somebody mentioned George or you that the the um

asphalt and all the the infrastructure work is done on phase one that was a condition correct be done I think by the end of September or something like that and then um the only other one there was a condition about uh a plan for solid waste so I included some So currently the homeowners of Ruby Farm um on their trash pickup day they put it at the end of Ruby Lane these new four Lots would do the same same

might maybe some some concern that the town may be switching to a different pickup yeah we can address I don't know whether we I'm dress it now or not yeah it's definitely pending but I don't know if we have much to talk about right now with that I will before the night's over oh really yes oh okay I'm I'm seek we're seeking the same two waivers that we we requested last time uh one regarding um uh water prot you know a water system

for for fire protection um uh we have a letter from the fire department saying that that's not necessary um and the other one was um well to be clear the chief said you could use sprinklers oh yes sorry yes right the pond was the pond yes yes correct sorry usage and the other was uh a waiver for future um access to a budding vacant land and the reasoning was that the a budding land has access

to both Swamp Road and Ruby Farm um Ruby Ruby Farm Lan or the section is that the previous one yes can IET that yeah thank you I appreciate it we didn't approve the actually I had intended to include that in the packet is that is that in the packet the prior conditions I know I mentioned it but I think I might have neglected to put it in the P you put new draft right I don't think I put in the prior one which was my intent I apologize for that no that's okay I just think that this could probably help if we look at this right versus like rehashing everything and you know remembering what we've covered and what we didn't cover as long as not much has changed which sounds like as far as the design goes correct you the I guess I'm Reliant George looked at it so yeah you look there were three changes or two or three changes listed in that Juliet mhm which are the ones that we I think discussed the

Transformers to be moved out of the 50ft buffer along Ruby Lane that was done done done erosion sedimentation controls done to some degree would to be on the final plan final plan okay sewage disposal test pits done that was added to the plan yes they were done previously they just weren't showing the plan okay and the rest of them are all standard conditions or ones related to phase one yeah and or shown on the on the final set right like veg clearing areas needed correct um uh noting the limits of tree clearing on the final site plan yeah okay the location of the Transformer was moved out of the buffer but it looks like it's in a on a property it's within one of the Lots yes

typ that's typical and they would just get an easement for CMP would would have an easement for that location um to to replace or service the Transformer so yes project will be completed in this year that's Mike that's Mike's intent yes all the houses constructed no no no just the infrastructure infrastructure and the you know the the Lots ready for sale

accept the one it is on here it's the last item it's the applicant sh submit a plan for solid waste disposal uh with the final plant to bring out containers from 13 homes that are in there right now and we're going to be increasing that by another Well potential of increasing that by another four and the current Solid Waste agreement with pine tree waste also known as cassella they are suggesting that uh trans it's in the existing contract says upon transition they will be providing two residential containers per household in the presentation which they

provided to the town to the select men uh could be a year ago was these were going to be 64 gallon containers and they had to be 3 ft apart in order for that automated arm to to grasp that container and dump it into the hallway uh my concern is even with 13 that's a considerable amount amount of space that has to

be allocated to put those containers paved that there would have been a section there that certainly would have allowed for those containers to be put there versus putting them at the end of the road and is cassella going to back in there uh I have not witnessed any containers out there and is it a safety issue if they're not driving in Cella has specifically said within their contract that they would go on town roads and also any subdivision roads so I'm still concerned about that that they would or would not go on those they would if allowed to and I don't know why they wouldn't be allowed to because we're building the town of Durham builds the roads the same way as we we require

developers to build their roads so so right now the lots are pulling their bins um in front of their house or at the very end of the road at the end bring very the road yeah correct yeah it's a really good point like how is that going right now with that many trash I don't I can't answer that question here's I think a a simple solution is that um I checked with the town manager c as long as cassella said the road is drivable navigable they will go into and they can turn around they will go into a subdivision so my recommendation is that we either make it a condition of approval that you change your I don't know what your Raa says but you have people put it at the end of their driveway which to me is a whole hell of a lot more you know happy days for the homeowners and they will in fact go in there now you might want to check with uh whoever your contractor is I don't know if you're using cassella or if you've got that's

that's that the contractor I'm just the neighbor to the to the development so all their stuff is speak you got to come up here wait I can that one turns on yeah name name Street yeah my name's John faith I'm at 254 Swamp Road so we are the property of butter right beside Ruby Lane so development so when they bring their trash and recycles out it's right on the corner and some of the debris blows over on my corner of the property but most of the time it's all picked up at the end but there was 13 residents worth of cans and B boxes out there so uh as a former trash guy I tried out one of those arms and it's only on the right side so they'd have to pull in if they keep them up at the end and then you'd probably have to try to back out on Swamp Road which is it's posted at 45 but everybody goes by there like 60 with the BW traffic so well I'll go back to my hopefully hopefully yeah they'll be

able hopefully easy issue is if we change the ho I can't imagine a homeowner complaining because is you know if you're way in the back there you got to somehow get it all the way out to uh Swamp Road so um because they're packing it in all their vehicles on four-wheeler trailers and bringing it all out Thursday night or Friday morning I got to drive to the bottom of my hill so if we want to it's kind of up to the board like we can say that we'd like to see something in the HOA agreements or

come back to us and say that what you're going to do I like that idea I just wonder what um jurisdiction the applicant has regarding this I mean perhaps for the four that we're looking at right now but what about the other the older well any anytime anytime a subdivision is brought before this board we have the ability to review it as if it was the initial applic a we can go back and look at everything all over again okay I so basically what I'm saying if if you're saying this only applies to the four I don't I don't agree with that it applies to the the potential of the 17 yeah I I again I it's certainly worth

because there's L to be somebody who says no I'd rather drag it a 2,000 fee yeah I don't know anyone who would do that they would pre I guess I'm just saying are we talking to the right person do we need to add someone else to this conversation [Music] so commercial break once the interruption is over I so very sorry guys uh but I did that once too okay so my thought is I don't do we need to make this a condition of approval well currently it it it was a condition of approval and I'm checking I'm going to check to see if it's on the draft it was not so we could add that back on as a condition number nine basically restore the waste uh requirement for a waste management plan and as far as the jurisdiction of the board to talk about phase one at this point um they had asked for an amendment but I think you've withdrawn that because they've got that's completed now so I think they're only applying right right

now for phase two which is the four laws so I believe if you checked with the town attorney what you'd find is you can uh withhold or deny the four new laws but I don't think you can go back and legally enforce moving the containers of the existing homeowners unless there was a condition of approval on the original plan which I don't think there was wasn't but you could say we're not going to add to the problem by approving four more Lots unless unless you come up with a solution that fixes this for for the whole thing yeah I mean I think that's what I'm getting to is and again I don't think it there's no cost to the homeowners there's no cost to the developer um that you just work it out with cassella when if we make this um condition of approve final approval uh that should solve is cassella picking it up now yes yep so it could be as simple as calling them and saying willing to go up the road and I think that's you know

they their contract allows them to do that I don't think anybody's everever ask because they do go up private roads they go up Bowie Hill right but I think and I asked Boe Hill at some point when I was in there that's because they asked them to do it and so I guess what I'm saying is is sort something out if as a minimum you got to do it for the four new ones but as soon as you do it for the make their lives easier the other 133 are going to be complaining so and you guys probably still control the HOA if there even one has even one been established in HOA yes yeah and we're we're these four lots are going to be part of that HOA so I would say when you amend it at least in my mind it's an easy ask or fix so I mean if if I was a

homeowner over there I'm being taxed like anybody else in town and my tax bill includes pick up of trash at the curb and I'm the curb is at the end of my driveway not at the end of the road that I happen to live on so I would certainly I think we're setting up a precedence here if we don't aggress it and I certainly don't want to become a safety issue either you're having if you're having somebody backing out versus pulling in if they're pulling in and have to turn around they're going to have to go all the way down to the Hammerhead and turn around so why not be picking up trash at each individual hom Drive I mean I think we're we're kind of talking about something that's we think is easy we're not going to solve it tonight or know the final answer so we can kind of leave that condition or I guess read add it to sort it out and if who's ever uh Mr cop or you or who's ever managing the HOA at this point

could go in there and just say and I don't know if it's I don't I don't know or care if it's the town that's picking up the garbage or you know you've got a private contractor you you got a private contract with Cassel to go in there that's that that's the homeowners and the and the developer okay so does that make sense Mr thear is that yes yeah and so that would be adding condition number nine to the draft okay okay thank you so basically it's the same they have to come in with the waste management plan which I guess if you really just want to spend more money you could build big pad and work that out but well then then if you if you went that way you still have to worry you have to be concerned about where is that if the vehicle pulls in where are they going to turn around yeah I think the simple answer is go pick it up at each you know each homeowner's driveway and sort that

out and that's you know we going forward in subdivisions that's something we but I again I think I said I know they do Bo heill because I've didn't passed it on a Thursday after I passed it tomorrow and this is just a preliminary approval yep so by the final approval we'll we'll do

like confirmation as to uh the ability of the board to review things once a revision comes in on a uh subdivision whether we we can look at everything or is it just can you put conditions on phase one correct well we're not reviewing just add on to his question we're not technically reviewing phase one correct am I missing something we put conditions on phase one before we went to phase two but we're not necessarily relooking their plan or I mean that's a clarification question just right that's I mean that's I'm I'm not suggesting that we do any of that but I'm just want what it is an option okay I think we beat garbage I mean you got the mission side back up there Mr M and say yes please that you you will yes I heard you clearly okay that will be that will be a condition okay anything else go away we got I guess another part two if not I would accept a motion for what we have to so there's two parts of

this first is complete application and then second is a reinstatement of the preliminary approval so make a motion that in fact it is a complete application second I did somebody make a motion I'll make a motion that it's complete you making a motion I seconding you motion all right thought that was perfectly I forget things okay so moved and seconded are there any further discussion seeing none please raise a hand if you uh approve substantial

completion one 1 two three four and since your hand is up Juliet withhold the plans I'm I'm counting that as approval okay the next thing is um complet rev is done substit review of Ruby Farm subdivision amendment to add four Lots map five lot 78b Public comment will not be taken so uh Mr thear that's kind of Follow That same process Mr thear if you well I think we've pretty much gotten all the issues out on the table in terms of the substantive issues of the project okay can I can I just pause for a second I just want to make sure I'm following what we're doing here we just did we just approve prelim no no just determined that he's they've submitted complete application the completion so still on the prelim approval yes stage okay what George is saying is we've covered all the you know covered everything so I will is anybody want to ask questions or comments are you saying

if not I will accept a motion to approve the preliminary plan for uh Ruby Farm View what is the real name to that thing Ruby Farm View Ruby Farm View uh conditions right do we have to read the condition you can get the motion on the table and then talk about that okay can I agree I'll second that okay it's been moved in second and further discussion and we do have the original uh conditions is this where we want to add the garbage thing or we've already done that uh you would have have ADD it right now okay I I will while we get to the motion I will say that we should include Lang if anybody's looking for the draft conditions I believe are on one page 119 and 120 of the packet okay

it's deleting the ones that have been completed right so just I'll walk you down through them uh I'm assuming you're going to have a peer review on the engineering plans and the cost estimates for construction uh they've got six months from this approval to get the final plan in uh the you mentioned Juliet the vegetation clearing to be shown the final plan um the applicant has to submit the approved street name for the for the extension um and then they have to uh note on the plan limits of clearing for the individual lot owners attention and then they have to get the uh Engineers cost estimate for the infrastructure that's proposed for this phase and again that would be peer reviewed and provide a proposed performance guarantee for completion of those improvements and then uh that has to be in either in the form of the uh Town attorney's template for an irrevocable letter of credit or a cash deposit in

the past they use bonds uh and if they're going to do that then whatever they're proposing has to be reviewed by the town attorney at their agreement which would say no lot sales or building permits until all the infrastructure is completed like you did on U Deer Creek Crossing and now your prop closing or at least have been discussing adding a ninth one which is reiteration of the need for a waste management

or is that kind of already been yeah you would you would uh water you can either do it now or when they come back so okay you had gone through the process with reviewing the criteria and the facts for that so I sorry there's two waivers yeah yeah

okay I'd like clarification on the request for a waiver the requirement to provide for future Street into connection with adjacent Parcels is that an indication that there may be a an additional phase no the uh the requirement is to provide connection to AB budding properties that may be develop in the future what we're saying is we want to waiver from that requirement because the abing property has Frontage on Ruby Lane

and Swamp and other towns that I've worked for the I the idea is to get away from every street in town is a is a dead end so most plans most subdivision regulations require and and you actually required that on Deer Creek Crossing so there's an extension of RightWay off the end of there to connect to the large parcel that goes back out to Hollowell Road and I think even over to sto what would that be Davis Road Davis Davis yeah so that's just long-term planning and not ending up with everything in town new development being a dead end so that's a requirement of the town that they're asking a waiver from we we talked about this before and I think the diff the difference on Deer Creek was deer there was no other um access

access to that to the back they you know or did this does not provide for the interconnection opportunities that that one did potential yeah and they do have a connection into if I'm understanding it correctly they the the budding property there is a connection off of Farm View Lane did I understand that correctly Ruby Farm View Lan potential access yes when Ruby Farm view comes in off of um off of Swamp Road it it's paralleling that that side property line so so by by position the a butter has

access to Ruby no because unless you give them EAS have you given them an easement they have Frontage on that road so is it this property right here this one okay think so this this property here is what we're okay we're required to see they're here right that's what you're talking about and here yes so they AB yeah but you have to give them in this case probably the HOA has to give them access if you have a 10-ft strip owned by Ruby Farm View there's no 10-ft strip do they let me ask this is there a legal access from whatever that property is to

get Ruby F view I guess that would be an attorney's question but uh to me they the way this was developed they have a they have Frontage on on Ruby Lane now but I guess I'd like right probably not the place to discuss it tonight let's postpone that discussion but I would like to know that they have the legal right to connect to Ruby Farm View easement whatever it may be because sure as I'm sitting here 10 years from now some homeowner Ruby Farm View I said be glad to give you that give me $100,000 right been there done been there to receive that notice so and the other issue is the separation between that road well if it came in onto rubby Lane that would be all right but if it came out onto Swamp Road those two right beside each other would not be a workable that's that is also a good point so I guess I'd like to Mr M I'd like to confirm that we're not I hear what you're saying it would be

nice but uh show how it would how that property would be developed legally yeah agrees but I think even if it's only a foot or two U that could be a very expensive foot if at all I have a question for the abutter that's here no no cuz no offense but he could be before this ever becomes a real issue although he doesn't look like he's dying but so John the question um to the applicant is to um confirm that the adjacent land owner has access to Ruby Farm and to swamp or just I I would say

that George has a good point that there is in fact access from from either or and show that the abing property can have access without using this one of those two without using this road Y and so that's probably a question for the swamp is a Town Road so the road commissioner and um the developer I mean

he may still own that in which case it's a simple Crea an easement come of deal that that'll we we need to discuss it further uh uh next time and and I guess we'll do both waiv I'm fine if we want to go ahead and approve the waiver on the the Fire or

the sprinklers but probably both of them can wait till next time and in agreement to want to do one of two 50 50 get 50% done let's go 50 I think we should include the waivers in here well the way you could hold off on regranting the waivers until the final plan cuz you want you're going to have have expired if they would W have expired so okay so I'm fine do we want to go ahead and approve fire tonight or at least disapprove it vote on it sure okay then given that the fire chief is fine with the use of sprinklers that L of upon I will make a motion that we approve do we have that verbiage for the waiver handy George I don't think I printed that out we can just summarize it as the waiver of the requirement for on site water protection okay yeah the app okay uh I my motion is that we weigh the requirement for an on-site water source for protection uh because of the use of uh sprinklers second it's been

moved and second and further hand to approve 5 [Music] Z so if if we could on that that road thing I was burned because somebody thought we could do something long ago and I just don't want to have you know get that that contest down the road going

you should charge him $100,000 but okay so I've lost track of where we are so I need a motion reinstatement of the preliminary approval statement I will make a motion that we approve the reinstatement of the preliminary plan with um the uh conditions of approval

that have been provided plus number nine which would be uh for them to come up with a um Solid Waste plan second moved and seconded any further discussion seeing none uh please raise a hand to approve 5 Z thank you for your time well thank you thank you for resubmitting everything by the way that's very helpful expensive but helpful do you it

I'm not pinning you down do you have time when you might come back in are you close to final plan well we certainly need to uh submit to peer review get and respond to any of their comments so that'll be the pending question I guess go ahead get all your DP I mean you're ahead of you're head the power curve in a lot of that stuff you know fish and yes wild life and I so you've got a good good jump on it okay so thank you we'll be back when we when we can be back we'll see you when you get back thank you okay thank you thank you for coming in you want to stay and learn about land use articles if not I you go home and and beverage your chice and watch it on

we're going to have a public hearing on it okay and because the mailer I got didn't I don't remember if it said there's public comment or not so I there is the public hearing will be the next one right for the land use articles make sure that we're on the same wavelength that the yeah yeah because I was just going to worry about the stream coming out how they're going to do their leech fields and all that stuff cuz on that oh you're talking about for the I'm sorry we're talking about different things yeah for that for that four that's going along the edge of my property I got a stream that comes right out of there so I just wondering how they going to do that well we haven't really decided if we're going to do a public hearing or not for the final plan um looking around food for thought I was just wondering how where I would bring that up or if they were going to cover it I don't know why we wouldn't

but well get a crowd like this kind it take forever please do that and then uh you know reach out to us and say you know because you'll be able to see the plan uh and you know just if you want to do that or we can have a public hearing if we want it is six and one for for the four Lots normally I would say no but since he's here yeah know just cuz you know like across the river the road I shouldn't say we got the property that was going to be ball fields but there's those vernal pools but yet we got this Wetland and the the Pete Moss bog that he's wrapping around on both sides so I here's what I would tell you to do and you may solve your problem is talk to Mr Meeks or I think Mr cop is the developer cuz they've done the Vernal pool search they've done the wet ones and they may be able to answer your questions save those plans are on the website for tonight's meeting okay and you can see all the web mapping and you either way

you know either way if you still have questions or uh show up and we'll let you we'll probably let you talk sure think so the 13th no uh this will come back before us the first Wednesday in April which is anybody know that whatever the first ones April the 19th is land use articles that'll go before the town town meeting all right thanks for you guys thanks for coming are you a fireman or do you yeah I just want to make sure don't steal a fire engine I Ste fire I want to see the fire engine driv it out the door okay I'm sorry I'm killing time here so um the next thing on the agenda I believe is the land use articles and

the reason I asked George to put this on uh tonight's agenda was to kind of do a quick review and catch us up because we haven't uh it's probably been a month or so we now have the final um select board approve things so at the end of the day there's really no we can't make any changes I mean there are now the final draft um but I wanted us to be familiar with it because on the 19th of March at 6:30 p.m here at the fire station for those who are listening uh we will have a public hearing then we can we can answer so ask some of the questions and uh be prepared to to answer them at that point and I think this came down to the wire George uh attended the meeting last night and

uh at least on historical they were still discussing potential changes as late as last evening but I think we're done um and so George if you want to give just a quick history of uh oh I guess the biggest thing is now there's three articles resource protection historical commission changes and they combin re um

contract zoning and best remember we had a discussion about what happens if best fails in contract zoning passes or vice versa and so they combine them into one article two different sections of the land use ordinance but one uh if if one fails they both fail or actually it's just one vote it fails okay so Mr did you have a question

I'm curious if anyone can speak to why they combine why they're combined uh Mr tar has been talking to the lawyer my guess is because they think that that solves the whole issue of one passes one fails yeah it's kind of like uh the same deal that we went down on the resource protection originally proposed to put it into two separate ones have separate votes for whatever reasons and then the

decision policy was decision was made to combine and that's the same thing that's happened here so it's a it's going to be an up or down vote so that you don't end up with and there's arguments both ways that you don't end up with best standards without contract zoning and vice versa and so if it fails what happens to an application so if it fails then the current status which is that the town attorney's opinion is that it is a permitted use in the resour in the rural residential and agricultural District so virtually anywhere along the power lines out side of the resource Protection District they could come before you with simply a site plan application and there are no standards to deal with any of the best issues so that would be our argument to pass it yeah well that's a great argument I can see both ways yes it's our argument to pass it but a reason to not combine them too you know yeah absolutely I I don't I

don't like it combine them yeah like and you will recall we had started out since last year just to you know re uh visit how we get here we started out with the select board giving direction to the Conservation Commission the historic district commission the planning board and you were tasked with uh coming up with the best standards which we came to the conclusion last August that uh this is just something the town really needs to take its time and make sure it gets it right so you went to the select board recommended a uh moratorium and then uh that that be the issue that put was put on this town meeting ballot which was a moratorium that was back in August uh around uh September October

the the town attorney suggest convinced the select board given the exposure potential exposure of the town to do the moratorium as a special town meeting that happened on November 19th and at that point the select board uh asked the town attorney to draft the contract zoning and ask the planning board to do the uh best standards so we were on track with two separate and that's how we prepared them that's how we treated them um and the town attorney uh her

opinion was it's better to combine them for a number of reasons and the select board agreed with that position and that's where they ended up that's but I think George mentioned it it's we do have the moratorium the moratorium I haven't counted but it it probably the original one expires in April I guess i' count six months from November but then the select board has the ability to extend it another months yeah so we have basically until November of next year to come up with if if it fails and hopefully it doesn't um we still have time to to redo it we'll be able to take the town's comments and say whatever it may be that uh yeah if it fails because of contract zoning then you could have a special town meeting and just propose the best standards yes and the moratorium will still be in effect because the moratorium stays in effect until one of two things happens six months expire without select board extension or the

town adopts adopts standards and with if this passes the standards are included correct okay all right thank you so question that will probably come up so your first question if it fails um uh a best developer couldn't just come in the next day and submit an application we're still under a moratorium correct right we just yeah so the other changes uh there were some fun uh substantive changes to the drafts uh for the uh solar the remember

that the planning board ended up after taking input from the Conservation Commission of what level of scale for solar Farms would be included in the contract zoning requirement the planning board ended up at 10 and the select board increased that to 20 as part of their final change they actually use square feet right yeah it's the translation of 400,000 square ft of panels which translates into about 20 acres of actual Development Area we the planning board had been at uh 175,000 ft of panels which translates into 10 acres development remember the um the um figure that we were looking at it kind of had like um do we have that no because after we went through that with the whole thing on solar we came to the conclusion of because you have to figure out is it this way is it this way just measure the surface area of the panels it's simple it's easy and that's what we've been using and the Conservation Commission planning board

and the blood board stuck with that to say okay the the standard is not 20 acres the standard is not 10 acres the standard is 400,000 square ft of surface area of the solar panels but 400,000 square fet is how many acres it's about five acres four four between four and five acres of actual panels but really what you're saying uh how do I say this it's about 40 acres right is it 400,000 square feet would be

about 40 acres of land 10 I'm not talking about the all the buffers and no no no 40 400,000 square feet is about what it 43 per acre right it's just under 10 acres p panel is that what you're asking yeah so I'm trying to understand this the we in here it says 20 acres is in the in your not is that the summary that's the notes that's the notes that's right it's just so that everybody so what's it going to say what's the ordinance saying it's in it's in the packet okay soorry yeah the final drafts are in your packet okay can I just point out that there is a typo on that on page 133 in the backet um it says am yeah it

says 400,000 here but then in text it says 175 still miss one thank you for number three and number four we can make those kinds of changes yes are okay change things but also in this contract zoning thing is this is the solar split out no so that's

in it too yeah yeah so if this fails if this fails the ability to use contract zoning where did you see the size of solar projects it doesn't we continue with existing uh standards the only thing this does for solar it says I don't want to quote it it says for

solar well we talked about 400,000 square fet so if this goes away there is no the the categories that were created earlier stay the the only thing that changes here is what you have to where you have to go to the contract if it's this size you have to go to through contracts only 400,000 square ft so we're saying 400,000 ft of solar panel surface area

is the max without a without a town meeting boat without contract and so that's really like less than 10 acres of solar panels just the solar panels correct so really that could be more than 20 acres total like I know we're talking about 20 acres but that is a very like fluid thing that's why we went with the that's why we went with that okay so 400,000 square feet so when a developer comes in they're going to have to explain to us show us how many square feet of panels they have right we'll have to certify that in their plans yeah interesting okay thank you and and just to kind of review kind very quickly George you might want to do that um the 4 if it's 400,000 or greater goes to contract zoning and there is a process for that y you know it's a zoning it's me the select board and the planning board and our role in it is pretty limited to it does or does not match the comp plan I mean we can comment about we

don't like that we don't like where it is or whatever you actually you can make a recommendation for to modify or against but I thought that was based solely on the comp based on the comprehensive plan you can make I think we'll probably have to have a meeting when it comes to this if it comes to this on like but one more question about the solar surface area again is this flat like

yeah if you lay them on the ground measure the the surface area so it's not cuz in the field they're not like this they're like this you measure them flat on the ground so it's going to be okay got it okay so there was another change that they inserted and that was you remember the discussion about changing the standards in the v through contract zoning so the the board the select board reviewed that whole issue of should you allow a reduction in the standards uh and you remember you had quite a discussion about that so for example one of the companies that gave comments ra raise the issue of they're not sure you can do a best and meet 55 45 uh decb day and night standard so uh

the select board after reviewing that whole issue came came out with given that every any any best over that size is going to have to go to a town meeting vote the standards will apply for anything under that without question uh but the question is should the town meeting vote be able to go higher than the 5545 and the select board ended up with saying uh yes if it's approved as a contract Zone provision and that is they

ask for spec that to be specified in the best standards which that is the other change from so where is that can you point us to that yeah so that is on packet 5.8.5 yeah that see that phrase It's highlighted unless otherwise specified in a contract zoning agreement they they wanted that language in there just to clarify how that so what this means is that the standards fit for what what is our size for storage again this is for tier three which is anything over one of those shipping containers which is one megawatt we're saying one megawatt one megawatt or greater over excuse me I think it's

more than one shipping container so if you had one shipping container which like say some high-tech uh small like The Sawmill they wanted to have a one megawatt for whatever reason they add some new technology and they're doing things in there uh they could add one of these and they'd go through site plan review and you'd treat it like you did the outside generator okay so anything greater than one megawatt hour anything under that our standards apply anything over that me the standards tell meeting vote can be changed and you start with these standards mhm but you can depending on where it is that sound going from 65 55

to 65 during the day 55 at night if there's nobody within a quar mile that may be acceptable and you'd write that into the contract zone or you might require them to have sound mitigation on one side of the project where one side's facing the power line the other side's facing a neighborhood through the woods and you could make them put the sound barrier on one side but not all sides okay you'll have that flexibility with this language but it specifies that can only happen through a contract zoning agreement and George are we going to take the notes out well we're going to leave the notes in for the public process of uh going up to the public hearing but for the actual warrant articles we're going to take all those notes out for what gets attached to the warrant articles so I think we ought to start our meeting next the public hearing and say the notes will not be on the final warrant so so

somebody doesn't say Hey where's the note I want to you know where I looked when I saw it just you know it can be there for the public hearing yeah but we ought to tell them that's not going to be on the final and you've bolded them the only thing the town attorney say is make sure that whatever gets attached to the town meeting warrant that gets voted on doesn't have those notes on it right y so that they don't become part of the ordinance yeah and I think we just ought to tell people that's going to there for clarification for them during the public hearing any other comments or questions on uh this process let's take with contract zoning at this point anything else on contract zoning yes so can we we can go ahead no you go we can change some text there's just a a section in here that talks about notifying um the public drinking water supplier there's no public water there actually are there's the school district

oh everything within I can't remember if it's a quarter mile or 2,000 ft any development well when uh Deer Creek Crossing came in they had to get they had to notify the school district so yeah okay um and and I'm not sure we can make those kinds of changes okay I mean I think we there's probably a line Mak correcting mistakes tyo is one thing but 175,000 but the verbiage we may not be able to change no I didn't know that about public water I wouldn't have brought it up um and then getting back to the noise um section you listed at 5.20 mhm will that so will right now it's 5.19 so will it change if this passes to 5.2 and it says right in there it'll change yep um so what was the siment of

sentiment of the um other Town boards and committees last night um like Conservation Commission I'm not even going to answer that because I'm I'm not happy with what they did but George may take a shot at it well I think that the Conservation Commission was not aware of the fact that a week ago the select board uh took their input and changed the proposed threshold for contract zoning requirement for solar Farms which had been and they came into the planning board and said it's not fair to put this on solar Farms when you don't do it on gravel pits and at the very least allow it at 20 acres and so the select board reviewed that a week ago Tuesday and came to the conclusion and they voted unanimously to increase it from 10 acres or 175,000 Square ft of panels to

400,000 it was pretty apparent last night that the Conservation Commission was not aware that they had done that and so they came in and asked complete removal of solar Farms from the contract zoning requirement but the select board heard their arguments and made the case that look uh a 600 acre solar farm would

would have as much you know concern for the town as a 15 acre battery energy storage system so in the SL and part of the Conservation Commission argument was there were other ways to address that issue and they were concerned that this is going to be a dis discouragement for solar Farms period uh and that you know they had been doing an analysis they talked about Topson fee mitigation system to discourage it in certain areas encourage it in others and Joe Roy of the select board basically said look we can continue that review but at this point in time until something like that is put into place the contract zoning will protect the town against a mega solar farm coming in and all we have is the is the performance standards so there were arguments on both sides uh they also pointed to the Fairly robust buffering standards that we've put in uh but the select board came out pretty much in unanimity to keep it in there

but raise it to 20 acres okay and can you remind me if um you know it is decided to continue you're working on the uh sighting of solar larger scale can it can't be pulled out can it sure oh it can from contract zoning well you could amend the ordinance sorry that's what I meant whenever whenever they come up with the alternative you could pull that out of the contract zoning requirements okay so if yeah if it is decided to keep working on sighting for like whatever it is it can be amended yeah and the other thing is the planning board some of the planning board members had talked about well should we be applying this to other major forms of development like huge subdivisions or very large commercial projects yeah I knew you could add things I thought that for some reason you can well I I would caution and it's this is not tonight's or this year's discussion but contract zoning is more than just kind of

controlling the development there are things to be gotten out of contract zoning and so if you're talking about a very large solar project or a Walmart Warehouse or whatever it may be um our ordinance doesn't in the planning board doesn't have a mechanism to say what I guess the lack of a better term what are he going to do for us I mean what you know what are you bringing in how will this benefit the town yes thank you better way to say it so I don't want to I would not recommend giving that up because it's a heck of a tool to help with the tax base so if it fails we keep a moratorium on best but the any solar projects could move forward without that tool yes I correct me if I'm wrong but yes yep so what it does is it makes us uh

liable in my mind for the 600 acre or 500 acre green project which the that town had the ability to turn it down we don't have that so I mean they came in with a proposal for 500 acres and because I think it was a rezone I mean I think they they were had to do a rezone we don't have that so it if somebody comes in with a 500 acre solar or 500 acre Walmart Warehouse um our ability to say no is fairly limited which contract zoning gives us kind of an unlimited ability to say no we're don't want 600 acres yeah or we don't want it here or whatever it's going to be so okay I'll be honest contract zoning changed my mind completely about this because I think it gives us more control over it certainly the financial piece of it I'm sorry that's my so box on that one anybody else have anything on contract Zone I just don't like that we're combining them I'm just going to voice yeah it's I guess it's too late now um but I

think the good news is you know if they say no we have the ability because they don't like contracts only or because they don't like the best standards we do have the ability to go back and separate them and that was a big factor in the select board's final decision but it that fall that fallback protection it would wait another year no they would have to they would have to extend the moratorium and you could do a special town meeting to come up with Plan B yeah I would certainly given that there may be somebody who's interested if it fails I would certainly be one who pushes you know whatever it failed for if it failed for contract zoning U but the argument you know that the best standards were were relatively well received I would certainly try to in Institute or get the town to vote for for that um I'm the ultimate pessimist but I I would hope that that we can convince the town the select board everybody else can

and what you're doing is the would convince people that contract zoning is a good deal because I think the argument that I heard as well it it gives the select board you know it's the perennial gives a select board too much power but it gives them no power I mean it's still at Contract Zone zoning has to be approved by the town at the town meeting so there's still that that um control at

the at the legislative town meeting so as you're talking to people that may be something that if if you're Pro contract zoning say you know the select board is only going to make a contract zoning seeing nothing how about best because we're on that that du I mean we put a you all we put a lot of work in on George on the best standards are there

any trying to go back and look at what the changes were here the only change was that caveat that the standards cannot be reduced unless uh part of the contract zoning agreement that was the only change that they made that that would help you with the your decision or advising people are we in a spot to advise well we can I guess better way to say it is answer questions in form yeah in form I know you can give them you in my opinion give them your advice on whether to vote for it or not maybe not as a planning board member but as a I mean I will certainly give my opinion that kind of a shock to you but well when we when when this um public hearing

this is we are in a planning board yes capacity here we are right much as we've done yeah the last couple years yeah okay but I think I don't think there's anything wrong with giving your opinion about whether you think it's a good idea or not and if not why you know why you you don't or you know say hey look at down the road I'd really like it to apply this for other uses that contracts own on that one it would be better just organizationally if the planning board has made a recommendation you've all voted on that that probably would be during the public hearing held by the planning board it would be better not to inject personal views on it pro or against because you've already made the recomend Commendation uh now when you get on the outside town meeting floor wherever that's a different issue so yeah I agree bite your lip and suck it up I think like what you said informing right educational this is what this

means yeah um how would you somebody asked you know why we should do it that would I would say that would be my recommend I V again just not why I think you should do it these are the arguments for for Resource protection I think we've put a lot of time in that so if you get a chance before now in the public hearing to just go back over it um and I have

prepared a slide presentation for all three of these we'll just run through and give everybody including yourselves a just a review of what what it is and what's involved I I don't think it hurt I would certainly encourage you to encourage your friends to to sit at home with their favorite beverage and watch it on TV so you know the advantage of

the public hearing is to get the word out I think so that people have the uh you know I I didn't I didn't know as the one gentleman who came to our meetings I didn't know anything about this um it's kind of deal so try to get the word out to those folks and certainly uh there's a lot of that going on with with blast and everything else okay moving back to Resource protection do we have any questions on resource protection I I think it's they if I remember right George they did not they being a secondy made no changes to what what we proposed so don't need to worry about that so that jumps us to um the his in the historic what it still

is but what the historic district and so George you want to cover yeah and you folks have not really been involved in that whole process so I can just give you a overview of what's involved in it um the uh the town currently has a

system that is uh Way Beyond what most towns do in terms of historic preservation for towns of this size and really doesn't fit what you have for historic resources in terms of there are eight scattered uh properties where the buildings are either listed on the national register for for historic places or eligible for listing uh you have a historic district that the town attorney has indicated um well actually for those eight there is currently in the ordinance a de facto historic district within a quarter mile of any of those buildings it never went through the process called for in the article 12 so she's absolutely clear that that is not legally defensible to be requiring someone a quarter mile down the road to go through a historic preservation review for a property has no impact whatsoever and and the ordinance requires any historic district has to have at least 51% of the people within

the district agree to put those regulations on their properties the the old one place where that process has been considered officially is the Southwest Bend historic district and the current regulations are really not designed to deal with individual homes they're designed to deal with districts like places like downtown Cy Maine uh Kennebunkport where they have almost every building on the street is a is a national register or eligible here you've got three out of 34 buildings in

that entire District have any official designation so the town attorney is concerned that this doesn't pass muster for a historic district according to the guidelines for establishment of historic districts so the other problem that I identified three years ago is that right now you have three competing jurisdictions on these issues you've got the historic district for the South West Ben District you've got the code officer for all eight within and everything within 1500 ft and then the planning board if a subdivision or a site plan review comes in in the historic district you now have jurisdiction and the and over the past three years there just been constant confusion and many conflicts between these jurisdictions and so it's the whole system is just confusing and it's created a lot of administrative chaos and put burdens on property owners that they're shaking their heads saying I don't understand why the town is doing

this so the town attorney has reviewed the recommendations that I've made for the past three years to streamline the system and bring it into compliance with legal requirements and so she drafted these regulations uh and presented them to the select board which basically it would retool and focus most of the stuff into to 5.14 and clean it up to follow

appropriate standards and give Clarity and then the second part would be to have the historic district commission which is only for the Southwest Bend make them a townwide jurisdiction of advisory input so that the historic district commission would no longer act like the planning board in issuing permits it would have an official advisory capacity and under the uh regulations for the eight properties themselves any construction alteration any project requiring a permit from the code officer would have to get an advisory opinion from the historic commission whether it's in the current District or anywhere in town and they would have 45 days to advise the code officer whether to issue a permit or not based on the standards in section 5.14 which are the National Interior Department SE um you know you can't put like a uh a bow window uh with with vinyl siding on the front of a historic building that type

of thing uh so they would simply provide the advisory opinion to you if it's a subdivision uh property involving one of these properties uh or the code officer you would be the code officer planning board of the permitting authorities and the historic district commission provides You by a requirement that they provide you with a advisory opinion before any permit can be issued so that's that's the basic framework of what is proposed the select board took the draft that does all that and added one thing and that is that for any it it retooled and refocused the whole program to be on the a properties not in a district around them or another District but it was limited to activities and permits on the property themselves so concern came up and the select board had a lot of discussion about what if something comes in next to them and so where they came out with a compromise was to say that if someone's

just building a single family next to that historic property they don't have to go to the historic district commission for review of their single family project if it's a subdivision or a site plan for commercial building that will retrigger the historic commission advisory process

on that note George can you tell me where that that is in here where that is subdivision in or buing is on page so on page 150 of the packet what section it's Section 8 uh 6 2 for subdivision yep and section 8.6 k for site plan

packet yeah the highlighted do you see two highlighted paragraphs K we're talking about k uh8 6.21 b 2 and 88.6k so really a site plan review approval anything that triggers that The Windgate subdivision on royalsborough road at that time one of those propert the abing properties was was thought to be eligible it's not but so if that came in

and was eligible the planning board would have to look at that and mitigate impacts just like they did y but the site plan review is what triggers like you said or or a subdivision application that's the first one yes okay yeah okay um

of it am I seeing that it says site plan review approval well subdivision is up above that if any portion of the subdivision B2 oh okay two yeah is so that's the subdivision section got it got it got it got it y thank you

this then you would have to get an advisory opinion from the historic district commission before you can make a decision okay and you wouldn't be bound by their advisor opinion case that what they were proposing did not meet the standards or would be detrimental to the historic character of the abing property and you went forward and granted a subdivision approval that would basically give an opening for a developer to sue the town to challenge that or a butter who did not want to see the subdivision go in whichever way you went okay

them with was uh it would not be good to have the confusion that was on that was there last night when they started show me where that is I can't find that what P you know it seemed like maybe there was two different versions of that so and during the day I had specifically tried to avoid that but I'm not blaming you or anybody but but that will you know juggling too many balls that will turn people off you know pretty faster than anything if if it's I've got a different version than you've got de so just getting back to that last K that was added for the meeting last night um and I guess if I could just use the example that was thrown around last night um across from there's a proposal for a gas station to go in across the street from a histo an historic property mhm so

if so that would be adjacent to correct right so that's that's when abing is the legal term okay so then the review would be against the standards here cor so I just have a comment is that in the standards if I wanted to apply these standards um to that property that's adjacent to um I'd come to this SE section c and two which lists

you know height proportion blah blah blah um there's some text in here and it sounds like we can't make any changes but what it says is all new construction Renovations or improvements on connected with or on the same lot as a historic resource shall be visually related to the historic resource and then it gets into all the design issues so it seems to me that it there's a conflict there with or on the same lot

as well yes and no again the town attorney took these standards which are right out of the national uh Interior Department standards so for whatever litigation there has been in the past on these issues and there is a lot of litigation U this is a lot of this is is aesthetic and it's very subjective so I mean the city of Portland right now is in a big Brew about the Children's Museum uh and the old one or new one the old uh the old Children's Museum next to the art Muse art art museum and you had the I can't remember if it was the city council or the historic district commission were on opposite one said ter down the other one said you cannot tear it down and just and it's just so I attended a training session for this several years ago while trying to help the historic district commission and these were all of the people in Maine that are dealing with this and people that have a lot of experience okay so

the people from the national um organization put on this training thing with all of these quote experts in the in the field and the regulatory process and they gave a a case study from a project in Alabama or someplace where they had uh somebody was going to uh do modifications to a historic structure and they were going to put up some parapet fencing along the top of an addition that they found pieces of it under the under the the uh deck or the porch okay so they they talked to people

that had been in the you know lived there in the 19 1950s and everybody had them and they went through this whole process of making the case why they should be able to do this and at the end of it as a as a exercise they had everybody vote like you're on the commission and out of the 75 people they were evenly split or whether they should be able to do that or not and it's all subjective and that's the problem with this is you're getting into a lot of subjectivity that's laced with subjectivity but it has been upheld by the court if you follow the Interior Department standards so that's why the the attorney is being pretty sticky on this to say yeah I know that doesn't make a lot of sense in this case but those are the best standards to apply if you want to accomplish this so the way this would probably work out is if somebody were going to put a gas station across the street from a historic structure I don't

know if you're familiar with the Free Port McDonald's MH I mean that's been done for 30 years where you have them modify their design so that it fits better with the historic structure as opposed to say you can't do it but you can require modifications and in that case they probably see that that's a good good way to approach it and it might require

saying that there's an issues with the um standards in construction and proportions and Heights just that this says they only apply to something that's on the same lot right and K says no it's going to apply well it just says it they have to have an advisor opinion doesn't say you have to meet the standards it just says you have to have an advisory opinion they can review that and and make the case to you putting that gas station with the square box everything you know low budget slap it in right across the street from Union Church is totally incompatible with the uh with the abing property and they may require them to make

I had is again under c um and again I I understand that we might not be able to change this but f and g are the exact same say the exact same C standards two if you go down to under two f and g they're both the same what page uh 14

that repetition one was deleted and that's fine to delete I'm not sure how that got back in here in here can you remind me what the comp plan says is there anything in addition to Historic resources that the comp plan lays out I think it there was something about yeah the uh the greater Portland C Council of governments back in 2017 uh 2016 17 before the 18 plan went

through and did kind of an inventory of historic properties in Durham so if something is mentioned in the comprehensive plan even though it's not been listed or is eligible for listing then theoretically that would subject it to this okay okay yeah and I saw that just for if anyone's wondering I that's in the section k if any portion of the site is in or AB budding to a property that has been identified in the comp plan or designated as a historic resource in section 5.14 okay thank you you know Brian what I think happened was somebody it might have been the select board picked up on the repetitious rhythm of spacing of buildings or one of those and it's like

we missed the one right beside it that's also repetition so thank you for picking that up it's kind of funny that it says Rhythm repetition anyway yeah rhythm is pretty consistent in a few parts yeah any other questions or comments

will you know just kind of review them beforehand uh and when we go through this we'll do it uh as we did last year uh we'll open it up everybody gets if they have comments they'll get three minutes to make their comments if there's a lot of people when they get repetition I'll I will start shutting them down quite truthfully we haven't had a lot of people for anything lately so I don't know if we will or or we won't but it is a good opportunity to uh to get that word out there and um then

the to meeting is the 5th of April the land use articles at the very end actually they've been moved up have they so we'll talk about them early then yeah well about Midway probably people leave they don't they vote on certain things they don't audiances half the people have left well they were like 31 is they got moved up you've got the budget and then you've got the Artic land use or the art ordinance articles and then you've got the business items okay at the end um in that case it's only probably going to be a couple hours uh last year we were done in like two and a half hours right I think we finished for whatever reason um so anything else on uh land use articles questions comments uh you can be supportive with your friends encourage people to to come to that they're on the website I mean we obviously going to have to make some changes and good catches by everybody um but you know get

the word out there uh to people and um I I guess our next meeting will be on the on the 19th there um any other business I'm not going to be able to make it on the 19th okay but then our next meeting is the second right is that is that the first Wednesday of April yeah the next meeting will be uh that Wednesday the 2nd of April uh looks like I don't know if we'll have uh Ruby Lane in there um what

else is going to be on the agenda here um so I would this is an opportunity on television and everything else that I think you all know that excuse me Tyler Hutchinson resigned um work he just had a lot going on and um he uh he sends his

regrets of not being able to stay on but I would like to thank Tyler personally Tyler got on the board just before I did um I learned actually learned a lot you know from him he was a great uh those of you guys who are new and weren't here uh he was a great help and and he always had good uh good comments plus typed our minutes at the time before George uh came on fulltime there um so I wish Tyler well which means uh in the future and U which means we have an opening on as an alternate so if you know folks who uh might be interested the alternate is it would be great if we had somebody who could attend almost all the meetings um the reason for that is that when they then come on and um have to vote if if we don't have a quorum or whatever they're prepared and also you know there's a lot of work coming up there is in the next couple of years codifications going to come along before too long uh the comp plan uh is closing

in on its 10year life so there will be a lot to do and the more folks we have that uh you know help out with that the better so keep your eyes open for somebody else if nothing else I will George you have anything else nope what's to a Jour second been moved

and seconded any further discussion not please raise a hand there's never further discussion when we go to do that we're done turn your foot bikes off