TranscriptPlanning Board Meeting ~ April 5, 2017

[clears throat] I'd like to call this meeting of the planning board to order on April 5th, 2017. Um, I'm [snorts] going to I know I haven't hit amendments to the agenda. I'm going to move things around just a little bit. Make sure that we establish our quorum, which we do have. Uh, and then I will also bump up uh the pledge of allegiance. We'll do that.

States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Um, we had a planning board member, Mike Fitzpatrick, who has resigned and wanted to thank Michael for all of his service on the planning board and for the other committees that he's worked on in the town over the years. Um, and to that end, um, we have on the agenda electing

newcomer Brian who's an alternate as a full-time uh, board member. Is there any motions? Motion. Motion to elect Brian to full member. Second. All those in favor? Thank you. Welcome, Brian. Do we get cake? [laughter] Do we eat cake?

Who was the second donut? Ann was. I was. Uh, and we will approve or uh accept the minutes for the last meeting, the March 1st meeting, and everyone should have a copy of those. Thank you, Jill. Excuse me. Second. All those in favor?

Barry Baldwin um has returned with some more uh documents for a subdivision application. if you want to come up. you want to put this up like we had last week, the new the new Hey, Juliet. Yeah. Let help put it on the uh

Oh, yeah. Stand up. on the subdivision project. I wanted to I just if you don't mind I'd like to just go over four or five things that I did. Okay. That are significant. Sure. Then I gave everyone a copy of this and the checklist in order of the things that were considered incomplete. I have kind of answers to everything I did with it. So, it's just easier to for me to stay organized. Uh, basically, I changed the scope of the project by doing a couple of things. Uh,

hold on. Do you have an extra copy of that? We all have one. Should have been on the table. Sorry. Okay. I brought those. I didn't look through everything obviously. There's always one. Thank you. Um, for one thing, I took the 5

acre lot that was in question about being contiguous and added it to the the big parcel. Uh, then to get rid of the with at the end of the meeting, we had this problem with the 40 acre deal. I've done away with that. Uh, I've actually decided to

um do I I actually sold the 22 acre piece that was in the front to the Abua who had already bought lot one and turned this to basically a back lot situation. I don't like to use the word back lot subdivision because there is no such thing. There used to be some confusion on that. Basically, when you do back lots, to my knowledge, you a couple of

things change, but you use the regular criteria for for a subdivision. So, it the only thing that changes is they have to be 5 acre lots instead of 90,000 square ft and they uh the paving issue after the third house goes away. There is no paving involved on backlot uh development. And one other thing, there's only two or three things in that. I have a copy in case anyone wants to look at that back lot ordinance. It's very short. One of the other things is there has to be a 300 by 200 rectangle on the road on this lot. In other words, you have to go 200 ft deep and 300 ft on the road frontage.

[clears throat] Just one of the stipulations for the back lot ordinance. And if anybody wants that, I have that here. Really, it isn't that much. Those are the only differences in in the whole it's a very small three-page thing. I think anybody has any question, I have it right there. Um,

okay. And the other thing I did, you have a you have the a copy there of the two letters that I sent out even though you already waved it uh by regular mail because the green cards didn't come back on those on the uh Lonavoy and Steven Mana for copi

briefly on the road because it came up on the [snorts] road frontage road uh I wanted to try to get a consensus I'm not bringing that to the board to decide. What I'm trying to do is present what documentation I have and that it was accepted as a as a road frontage road. I sent uh I got the video or DVD

or whatever it is, sent a copy to the road commissioner with just a couple of things picked out that were very pertinent to what we're talking about. He has reviewed that. I don't know if he cares to comment on that. also have some of the I transcribed

exactly what was said on that tape in just a few small segments. Um I didn't want I first was going to send everyone that link, you know, but I didn't want to invade everybody's email. So send it to road commissioner. If you want it, he can send it to you. I thought it was more

not my job to be sending everybody. So, it turns out it isn't it isn't available on the website because I thought I understood it was and I tried to watch it there and failed. I'm not sure what it may be too old. It was I think it was 11 years ago.

Yeah. Um did I get the Can you get the August? Is the date on this paperwork now? First August 2012. Um 2012 June 20th 2012 I think. It's in our It's in our Yeah, I'm sorry. I got it right in front of me. 81 2012. there that really, if you watch that tape, it's like um a lot of people talking over each other. I had the whole I had a lot of it transcribed and then I went through it and I said, "This is just going to I just want the pertinent things." I took it all out because you have people starting to say something and somebody else interrupts them to finish it and it's just it was crazy.

I deal with that all the time. Yeah, you do. You have to sort it out and it's hard for the secretary to hear it. Try to take notes. Even when they use uh the tape, they don't they don't do it exactly what's on there. they they summarize put it their own words

and sometimes it doesn't get spelled out what was said on the tape so it's very clear on the tape the I think it would be it might be easier if you don't have to watch the whole tape it's pretty boring uh he could send that to anyone who wants it that's why I provided it to him and it was so it that

might be the best way to go but certainly that tape uh that uh do we have like a time stamp of like where the picks up or I watched. It's about 3 or 4 minutes long and it's okay. Very clear that the uh board considered the legal opinion from the town attorney that it was road frontage road and they made the decision based on that. I could send you a copy of

Is there any documentation from the in the file for this? No, they don't document those kind of things. They they make a decision going to make every decision. No, no, no. Um I want something from our council at the time would be very helpful.

There were letters uh we I think between Kurt Weber. Yeah. There were dates used on that tape. Uh it actually states that we got the letter from June something. You know the lawyer agrees, my my attorney agrees, uh the planner board agrees. Uh and even at one point, you know, if we Russ Jabbo who's the chairman says at the end of it, if we don't take his advice, why do we pay him? Ask him. You know, it is what it is. It is what the attorney says. Uh

just to clarify, I think you showed us the letter from Curt Weber last time, and I don't think it was quite as clear as you're saying it. There was no uh you know, there was no uh actual spelled out determination. There was um evidence, if you will, brought to the planning board. They made their decision on that. But there's there never no one never asked the attorney to make I don't see why he wouldn't or couldn't [clears throat] because he dealt with it uh plenty of times.

It's not the same attorney we have now, is it? No. Curt's retired. It's from his firm, but the same I think his I believe his daughter does it now. She's not doing she's at a different firm. Well, I don't know who the town attorney is then, but what's that?

Conway. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yep. From Marvin. Yeah. So, basically, I just wanted to touch on that. I'm, you know, the it is all there. I mean, it's it spells it out, but as far as a legal determination, no. A letter to the to the chairman of the planning board, from the lawyer, yes. A letter to code enforcement, yes. A straight up determination put on file somewhere, no.

But it is I'm not a lawyer, so I just found the video meeting, which is official and and honestly, I just don't know how that holds up if we were challenged. And that's why I just I'm not a lawyer. I know enough to ask question of a lawyer when I need to. That's all. I just I'm a little nervous. That's all.

Well, what I see of that is if it was determined at that point and I was ready to do what I'm doing now, there would be no question we'd be moving on from that because it it was decided uh believe me, they beat the thing up. They we've been doing it for years. You know, even in one point in that Russ says, "Spare me the lecture." You know, the chairman because I telling I've been doing this. We've been doing this for years. But anyway, I just wanted to touch on that. And what you decide

on that is again I'm only I'm not asking for a decision at this point. As far as I'm concerned, that decision's been made. I'm just trying to provide you with what information I can. that if if Calvin if anyone wants that I think that

that uh recording pretty much spells it out as far as something in writing I don't know you know nothing was ever you're lucky to get it in the minutes written we don't you know on everything that recording is deemed the legal record of the meeting

not the minutes right no the minutes only um are supposed to provide um certain information like motions. Okay. Anything else is gravy. Okay. go next? Do we want to go through the application checklist? Go return to that. That's kind of where we left off.

Yeah. Um, and this overview sheet actually I set it up to and and listed all the things that were incomplete. Mhm. Or and waiver items and I have the, you know, and I have it listed obviously as to how I dealt with it. Obviously, there'll be some questions. I do have an engineer here tonight uh that was willing to come and try to help me with some of the tough questions. Okay. So when we're when we get the engineer questions and

what is the engineer's name and firm it's Jason V a f i a d e s comma p e comma l e d 4 a lead AP yeah lead AP in case you had he's from Atlantic Resource Consultancy Freeport Yeah. Atlantic Resource. Yeah. sorry. What kind of engineer are you?

So, civil engineer. Okay. Roadway. Yep. Permitting, all that stuff. And if you guys want to take this up as we go through, as I understand your position, these are becoming back lots, so they don't have to be brought up to the subdivision road standard.

No, no, no. The only thing that changes is the paving requirement is gone on back lots. It's Do you agree with that? Right here interpretation. Yeah, it's in the ordinance facing. a special backlog basing it on page 28 halfway down the page number two.

Right. Yeah. Right. I see that. But then subdivision has its own. Right. Okay. But Right. But what is Yeah. Each of our pieces have their own road standard. I guess it basically says everything has to be done when you do additional homes on the back on the back lot. Everything has to be followed as if it were a subdivision with the exception of paving. So the paving thing is out the window when you do the back lots.

Right. But we do have a subdivision. Correct. And we're doing it the same way. We're doing it as a subdivision. But when you do back lots, I don't like to use the term back lot subdivision. I'm trying not to because they've had problems with that in the past because there is no such thing as a backlot subdivision. There is a subdivision and there is a backlot ordinance.

performance standards design standards page 81. Uh it's the beginning of that. Thank you for chair right every subdivision ends up being a back lot anyway because the front lots are often sold. Yeah. I I'm not one I'm not sure why these are back lots and two even if they were I'm not sure why the subdivision requirement wouldn't trump it. [clears throat]

It falls into subdivision when you uh regulation when you build the second house on the back lot. way. Uh Oak Ridge, which I did a number of years ago. Same thing. Think you're looking for a section seven. So why isn't private road?

Why is what? So this is going to be a private road, right? It is a private road. It always has been a private road. Okay. Yeah. All all roads are private. Now the town isn't accepting anything and haven't don't plan to road construction.

So So this this road on your plan, what's it called? Spring Road. Spring Road is a private road. So these are not back lots. Yes, that is the rightway. Spring Road is the rightway to all those lots. But it's not a rightaway if it's a road.

All the roads are in rightways. I don't understand. Right. I mean, they're different. So, rightway is just a right to access. A road is a road, which of course we don't define because well, if you have a rightaway and so you want to build the second house on that rightway, you have to build the road up to the town standard,

right? Then it becomes a you can't build a road without a rightway. And you can't the rightway doesn't constitute a road until you you go for the second house and someone has to build it. Right. So maybe it makes sense for us to decide this when we get into the road piece. But uh I'm not buying the back lot argument [laughter] and we can talk about that when we get there. But um

I have concerns about the road piece. I I really I went up that way and I have concerns about the road piece about the I don't understand the well maybe you know you can let's go ahead go through so I think this is a new application [clears throat] which means we get to go through this entire thing all over again. Um,

do we have a we don't have a separate checklist designed for we do have we haven't interrupted you. Do we need to revise checklist cuz this is we have a blank Jill to give us a blank one. Okay. I have a couple too if you'd like.

And who is going to be the reader? I will be happy to record. You can read it. Okay. I can see it now. I didn't realize it was a new one. And we're starting with blank. No, or are you going to be updating the one and I don't think we can because this is a new plan. This is a new subdivision.

Um, guys think? I would agree. he's so far he's definitely added more lots which is per our earlier review and he's added the wetland impact locations which was part of our request. Um if he was staying with subdivision I'd say keep rolling where we were but if we're switching ordinance

but I'm [clears throat] really not you may want some time to look it over. That's fine. Yeah, I reviewed everything thinking we're really not changing anything except I did what you said. I I I added the contiguous lot. I finished the subdivision off instead of coming back in 5 years as you suggested. Why would you want to come back?

Right. No, I appreciate that. And I did away with the 40 acre issue. I did everything I could to to smooth it out. But the the only thing the backlot ordinances ordinance changes in the whole picture and I that's fine. you want time to look at it, but just that it turns to 5 acre lots. It does away with the paving and you need a 300 by 200 rectangle in that. And I don't believe was there something I don't think there's anything else. It's a very small limits.

so that I think that per the board's request for suggestions of last meeting. Is that right? Not the backlog, but that I use up the whole parcel and that I make it all contiguous and I use up the whole thing right in a one shot.

So, to be clear, we did not request that you increase the No, no, you ask. No, that's not our job. Um, no. So, I guess the question I have because I I think we're still under subdivision because this fits the definition of a subdivision. So, we we can talk about whether the backlot piece pulls out the row requirement, but either way, I think we're considering under the subdivision ordinance. My question is, is this the same application? And if it's not, I think we need to start over with the checklist. If we think it is, then we can just go off of the previous checklist that we had. The biggest change is the increase in lots.

Right. But Right. But nothing changes on the whole scope of things except the size of the lots. The roads in the same place. The And I've done all the the same abutters. It's the same parcel. Same mother. Yeah. You didn't expand

out anywhere. No. Just changing kind of. So, do I hear everyone saying that they want to use the old checklist and just go red like hell? [laughter] I know if I was sitting at that table be like really that is not our question. I mean, it's I'm willing to do whatever you need.

If it was changing the abutters, if it was changing, you know, a different group, then I would I would have more heartburn. But I think he tweaked the plan if it if it helps. be responsive to the ordinance. Yeah, that it's a it's a subdivision application and process and typically other municipalities.

I think it goes by state law. It's a subdivision because of state law. Typically, it's three laws and that it is one continuous application and you he's moving things in the interior, but it's one Well, he did add a parcel.

I did what? You add you added a parcel to the um because you were actually the board was already considering it contiguous. So I I obliged the board, right? You did what you thought I should do. Right. The way I understand our ordinance, and correct me if I'm wrong, but um we're not allowed more than five lots in this district. Is that correct?

Is that true? No. That was back in the days of uh when they had the growth ordinance or not not district but they didn't they have some kind of moratorium mortoriium or the that's what I'm referring to the growth management

um we probably can't enforce that right okay because of the comprehensive plan issue I think it wouldn't fly anyway okay believe that's what she's referring to y yeah it's not great we don't usually open that can [laughter] No back up.

I don't think Mary's going to fill all of these lots so quick that it causes us growth issues in terms. [laughter] checklist. Update the one started. Sorry. Y one. They're actually not all there. Some of these you miss you missed a few of these very we'll see them as we go down through.

Okay. So um the first one I have is incomplete was number 10 which is shows the zoning classifications location and zoning district boundaries and there's no on the plan protection district residential and the big plan is probably [clears throat]

the actual lots are in the transitional. Yeah. And then for residential transition those zones. So what's is all of this? That's all the all. Yeah. So that's the zone valley that dotted line. So that's resource protection.

That's all residential. So complete. Um the next one that was missing was 11. Number 10 is complete. That is complete. Y 11 was boundary survey including complete descriptive data by bearings and distances. And our issue this was the site plan hasn't um wasn't stamped which it's still not. So I

I have the uh stamp stamp this I made sure. Yeah. No, that's good. Yep. Stamp. Okay. Complete. 2017. plan shows location of existing proposed subsurface wastewater disposal systems. And we have a way I had and yeah, I haven't. If I may, um,

try to explain what we have. to wave it. Yes. uh because I can well it speaks for itself but if you want I can read it but basically the these systems are not done until the households are sold the uh house location is decided on and then the system is designed within the proximity of the house so with a 5acre lot it could be where we put that basically what I have to do and I can't I couldn't do it yet the things that will be missing tonight will the uh the soil test, the weather we have, the conditions not possible yet. That will take care of that issue. Uh the other thing that will be missing is the vernal pool on the plan because even though they're on there, we still have to verify in the month of April. Weather conditions do not permit that right now. So from the third week of April, I think there's a six week window or something that we have to that they can be located. can't be done now. So, those are two things

that, you know, I'm gonna hopefully be close but not have 100%. There's a lot of things to do, but yeah, let's go line item by line item, right? Okay. So, are we back to number 16? So, we've got subsurface wastewater disposal systems.

There's this lot one here. They haven't placed anything for that. the one that been sold. They don't have a wastewater disposal system placed. Um, have they started construction on that? No, they are part of the subdivision only because they were it was sold within the past 5 years. That's what puts them in the

They don't have anything there. They have a soil test done before they bought the property and that kind of thing, but we don't have nothing's built. I I have a system in my stuff here somewhere that I did years ago on that lot, but

Okay. It's basic. I don't It isn't there. I I don't think we need it, but you're the board, you know. So, it's an existing system that will continue to be used or No, it's a new design. Okay. To sell the the property. I couldn't sell the property without having the soil test or permit designed. And they went ahead and had the the permit designed before they bought the property. Barry, what are you showing up on lot three up on the high piece? It looks like there's a house footprint area and a field shown on that one lot.

I'm sorry. Lot three. No, that's I don't have any a small map where that's on the right hand side of the road near the top. Yep. Uh the second one in the way in the way in that little one that is where the one vernal pool is on the right right on the property line and there are wetlands. We have to be what 250 ft back. So we have a very small window but enough room to build and get the systems in.

All right. So you you were showing it represent the building envelope in that one location. The surveyor has Yeah. Oh, it has to be in that building envelope. All the building envelopes are marked there. Okay. And it's a weird one, but there's plenty of room.

Okay. just and that wetland delineation I mean the vernal pool probably won't change but it won't be the uh literature to back it up will not be available until it's official in third week of m of uh April okay yeah that's a five acre lot where you can build in the corner [laughter]

so do we want to accept the waiver pits, just the test logs that show the soil classifications, not the septic design because often you don't know how you want to design it to you know where you want to put the house and be a big waste of money to design a system and the house ends up going somewhere else. So

yeah, as long as it shows that it passes that a system can be designed usually is sufficient. But the next one there that will be on the plan next the next plan you see with the ver with the vernals. Mhm. and anything else it needs we come up with.

So it's it sounds like there's going to be another round of updated maps. Very little bit will change. It'll just going to put it stays the way it is unless there's something else else required. Pools and then this other testing.

It's not going to change. They're just going to be added to but very minimal. So are we attempting to accept this as is even though we're getting updates later? I think we're helping Barry get through his checklist, but I think he recognizes he still has some open ideas.

Yeah, I'm not asking for that. I'm asking to get as close as we can to keep it simple for everyone. I've done all I can. I don't expect final approval. Okay. All right. Thank you. You know, unless we were so close and and approval uh and with waiting for something else to be filed, that's been done. But

could it be made a condition? A condition. That's what I was trying to say. You can get uh what do you call it? Not final. Is it final condition? Conditional approval pending the two things showing up and passing on the Well, let's see what we have left missing right now. I don't

So, are we waving the subsurface wastewater disposal systems? Yes, I suggest we wave the sub surface wastewater disposal. Second that. All right. That was a motion. I don't really We have to motion and vote that or it's a waiver, so we might as well.

I think we should I think we should. So, I'll make the motion that we wave the subsurface disposal system designs for each lot. And I'll second that. All those in favor? the soil, which we don't have. That we do want. Yes,

that would answer the questions that were coming up. Uh what? Yeah. And I had that uh will be on the completed enable and on the May plan. Yep. Uh so number 22 is the location of existing and proposed private wells on and within 100 ft of the property.

I have requested a waiver on my waiver letter. Same circumstance as the disposal system. Location, location, location. I Okay, I see one well on one proposed well. Is there more than one or just that one? You know, I think he did that. Was that lot three that to show that we could get that in there and that is basically proposed.

Yep. Um and it shows where a septic system might go, but it isn't tested yet. It'll be done with the rest, but he did do that because I believe so. Yeah. Um, are we sure there are no wells within 100 ft of all of this of the borders?

Yes. And I have that uh was in last month's packet from the I don't know what they call themselves. Water people. Yeah. A lot of people It's in the It was Department of Agriculture and Conservation. Now that makes sense. [laughter] And it shows the wells and depth of wells and traditionally what's been done.

What do I see? Because putting them on the plan right again until you do the septic system, right? You don't they don't make any sense anyway. They may have to be moved cuz they have to be 100 ft. I make a motion that we wave the requirement for the wells to be shown on the subdivision plan.

I'll second that. All those in favor. and this number 25. Yeah, sorry. 25. And our notes were that there's no provision for utilities or utility easement. I believe that's uh done. See note nine on the plan Yep. It says utility easements will be granted to central main power company the town and others for the installation maintenance of poles and any other future associated pertinances.

invoice for and that's for the construction of the new service. Not in on the road. No. Oh, this is just uh was more or less just to show you that I have uh taken care of the issue of being able to get power to that first lot.

So that was the engineering that was the engineering charge. No, that's the wire and and the all the the uh whatever you got to pay CMP to get this thing done. I It's actually underground and I have to dig it and install the conduit.

Mhm. And but they you can't do anything until you get approved from them. So, subdivision itself. That's just showing that I can get power to the first lot which I had to do for that sale in that first lot and this the other normally when I when you do selling lots uh some subdivisions are going in and put the power in. They just add the price to uh to the cost of the lot. Sometimes when you buy most of the time the the last subdivision I did uh as you sell a lot they pay a section of the power to get to where they need to be or if someone has paid for the power past them they have to chime in and pay a part of what the last person paid. That's how CMP deals with it.

Okay. So where would the easement be in the on the in the 50oot rightway? It would be Did you say it would be underground? Yes. No, it may be underground. It may be poles. I'm thinking underground. Okay. So, should we note that it's in the roadway and just say state where it is?

It states that, doesn't it? In the It may be even in the on the plan that it's in the I was just looking are really tough to read. I'm sorry. I don't see it. Maybe it's in the notes. Maybe it doesn't show in the road. I mean the note just says utilities will be granted

if it helps on the I think this is a further item but we typically show that on a plan and profile it shows up in the plan that I will be doing. Awesome. Y so you you'll actually have a location. So why don't we just wait on that item until we

call that incomplete for now. [laughter] That's easier than us. Leave that incomplete leave to be provided next. All right. So, I'm going to call that N. I'm going to put an E on that for my own. And what happens is the utility CMP gets a copy of our plan and that recorded plan and they know that their line is within that share. It's a 50ft rideway that they have access to.

Perfect. Because they need they need an ement too, right? Yeah. For to be able to put power in. They need an easement. Yeah. They they own the ability to maintain their lines. So, 27, we still don't have vernal pools. We'll get that later.

Yeah. And I've got a couple notes on this one regards [snorts] to the wetlands and the vernal pools. Um I see the delineation report that you submitted um looks like it was done in 2005 for the wetlands. Yeah. Yeah. Um I think typically they're about a fivey year period. So, I would what I would recommend maybe is have your person that's doing the vernal pool survey

do the wetland delineation as well. He's going to be out there. She I I think he's kind I think it got redundant because that was done a long time ago and I think he's done that again. I don't know if he calls it the same thing. I don't

Oh, maybe he updated it. There's another uh form you're going to find that he did. That was something I just put that in the packet because Oh, no. This is great to have. Is there another delineation report? I believe there is. Yes.

Okay. Yes, there is. No, that's the same one. There is. Is that the All right. Well, which one are we talking? Cuz the one from Mark Sensei. That's the old one. That's the old one. So, there's a new one. Yes. I think I've missed the new one because he It also references a plan by Cal Kulvin, which is not the current plan that we're looking at.

No, it is not. Okay. No, there is. I'm sorry. There's a lot of stuff here. Oh, I know. Uh Isn't it in your packet? This is This is the only one we have. Yeah. 2006 2000. Yep. 2005 2006 investigation control. Isn't that the same thing?

Nope. No, it isn't. No. Okay. Then I'll have him update that. Yeah. If he's going out in the field. I thought that was the same. Probably do another delineation. Um Okay. Uh what was that? 20 27. 27. that you did supply us, it mentions the response from the ifn stating that this area is within significant wildlife habitat under NERPA

um which is scheduled to be formally adopted back in 2006. no permanent developments to occur in within the wetland itself and within the buffer and that is done on that map and not so what I would recommend is or ask you guys if you agree is to get another response from IFNW regarding this just because it's 10 years 11 years old the response

I actually think that they relaxed the rules on this and I think you actually I think it's going to work in your favor I get an update it might in 2010 or so they revised it and backed it off from moderate value to high value only. So,

right. So, it might Yeah, it might work. Who knows what it's going to show? But I think that would be I guess so. While we are on wetlands, we had we started the conversation, which is a little bit ahead of the card ahead of the horse.

Yeah. Sorry, I brought it up cuz it's um with the wetlands. We are having the conversation whether this feeds into the runaround pond drainage and the Collins Brook uh piece the newbrook and which goes into Collinsbrook and this is all part of that wershed that is considered a not threatened what it's

well it's narrow it's urban impaired stream but it's this is another classification with main D um for this watershed. So this is in that zone which may trigger some D permitting requirements. So maybe asking for a D response or

I think so I think we had already required that be determination. Yeah. Okay. We asked whether or not actually whether or not we need permits and we'll we'll answer to some of that when we get to that portion I believe. And then one more thing with the wetland delineation, if we could show like maybe a colored, it doesn't have to be on this one either, just another image of the wetlands that he finds on the site. And then there's the buffer with that. So because right here it just shows

I don't believe the a buffer is required but it is marked and there is a yeah it's it's required for this specific nerpa area the 250 foot buffer which he includes in there but it's you we can't see the delineation between the two so it would just be good to see

where yeah I know what you have to convey that to my survey if you do it the sum of this I apologize no Sorry. But if you do find that other wetland delineation report, this is my scratching or anything you want and it was done within the past five, six years,

you know, that might be fine. But if he's going out there already, you can do it. Okay. But just a matter of putting it on the plan or checking. Yes. So the update for Yeah. Asking for an updated wetland delineation. You feel free to write on this one.

So 28 is the contour lines. Same. and these are at 4 foot intervals. Oh, that's the interval. Yeah, request. All right, we talked about that. that at the last meeting and it seemed to be acceptable if I put it in writing for a waiver.

Okay. Make a motion that we wave the requirement for I just have a question before um and this may not be related but um our ordinance states that you can't have a build your building envelope cannot contain greater than 20% slope. Um, so I see a couple of lots that would need a either a I don't know if you'd request a waiver or if you'd have to change the lot lines for some of those.

The building envelope, right? Or the not the I don't believe there's any of that in the envelopes themselves. Lot seven for sure. Looks like you have slopes greater than 20%. Up top. Which one? Seven. What up? Up top. And I'm not sure if

going to make I'll make a note on that. not lots two and four uh also. So you just may need to be a little more creative with your building envelope there. That's all. I wonder also. Yeah. What's that? Wonder for the you may need to be a little more creative with the building envelope rather than the 12 or whatever what are the typical setbacks you're showing just to get out of that 20% slope.

Okay. I think you gave more than what we really needed just to show that we had room enough to do it. But you may have to tighten up the billing envelope to stay out of the slope. Is that what you're saying? Confirm that it's not 20% or

Okay. Depict show the 20% areas on the plan. And I wonder if for the site the twoft topo might be beneficial to see but I think the engineer is going to need if the engineer can engineer the road with what he has for topo. He can't with 4 foot intervals. Correct. This

Well, here's the really good news. I can create an interval you want based on what he's got there. We just create a surface and pop it up. So So we can do two foot. So it wouldn't be any extra cost to you to do that. Okay.

All right. So on the road design we're talking about, right? Well, no. I can do it for the whole lot. Let's just I got to do it anyway. He's going to do it anyways to do his work to do his to do that. Yep. There we go. Well, thanks for doing that. [laughter]

All right. So, we're going to leave that incomplete. Leave it incomplete. So, we're not in the way. Leave it. Yes. Uh just I want to make sure that you understand the 20%. Okay. Which number was that though? Uh 28 28 28.

Do you know where that is in our ordinance, Brian? Yes, it's um uh page seven of the land use ordinance. It's amazing what computers can do. What I'll do is I'll identify those from the surface and then we'll real easily be able to cut them out if they're on the building envelopes.

Can you deal with that 20% issue? Yep. Yeah. Awesome. Um so 29 is culverts and drainage ways. There were none shown on the plan. I do see Colbert show. That's going to be I believe that's going to be part of the road profile, wasn't it?

Yes, he's he's he's showing them in all the low spots where the road is going to cross. Those will show up in the plant and profile as actually sized in and as they would appear in the ground through the profile. So that'll all be great.

So we'll get that. Got so that's incomplete. Yeah. Yeah. Um, site plan shows the location and type of any easements or restrictions. We had wanted a utility easement shown, which you said you get us. Um, and deed restrictions.

Barry, you had said you were going to do some deed restrictions. Yeah, both on the plan, I believe. Not [clears throat] modular, no double wide, no prefabs. And that so that's the only deed restriction you're going to have in there. Okay.

Right. So that's still incomplete because we're going to get the utilities on the plan, right? Mhm. 32 flood flood plane shown on the plan. I see a note that says there's no flood hazard area within any building envelopes. But is there a flood zone,

Kelvin? Do you mean the 100red-year flood zone? There's It states on the on the notes that it no part of it is in the 100year flood. I didn't I didn't verify it, but I assume that your engineer your surveyor must have checked it.

Is that something that's something your engineer engineer could check on the stamp? I don't know. Yeah, the note talks about the building envelope specifically, but our requirement just says if any portion of the subdivision is in a flood plane area.

It says area of flood zone is land adjacent to Libby Brook. So, well, it is not super descriptive. [laughter] No, it doesn't. But it it does it does sound like there is a flood zone adjacent to Libby Brook. You can have that information.

Okay, we'll leave it incomplete. Engineer. Okay. Which number? 32. 32. 32. Um, that we just Okay. So 33 is higher moderate value wildlife habitat by by&W shown on the plan. Incomplete. We're going to try and contact if W again.

site plan shows um areas designated critical natural area. I'm sorry. Can I back up for a second? So you want it what updated for Okay, just a letter. You might need to send the wetland delineation report, but just like this um you submit this your new wetland delineation report in vernal something did away. Is that the

This is the old one. That's the old one. Okay. just submit this to IFNW. Okay. And they'll review it. I see what you're saying. Okay. Thank you. Just get a response back. Okay. Um, so the next piece was critical natural areas from the Department of Agriculture and I haven't seen anything on that.

How did they get that? Did they What is that? Just look online maybe GIS or something. I have it on the plan. I don't know. It says it's on the plan. I'm not sure what my survey I did with that. Just a note 13. Yeah. Is that something you can just find on out online? I think you can do a GIS query.

I think you might be able to. I think it's online. I bet, right? Yeah. I guess we can. And that's all when you write to IFW typically that's what they do. They just check their database and then they Yeah. They send you a letter and say,

"Right." So, I make a motion to state that's complete. Okay. Number 34. Number 34. Was that a motion? I mean, I usually see some type of letter response from IFW with these, not just a note on a plan, right? Oh, no. I do. Yeah. Who's

Nobody yet. So, for 33, we're asking for the response back from IFNW. Okay. 34 is Department of I. I mean, I guess I think it's a different department. Yeah. Different different agencies natural regional natural areas agency. Yeah.

We could ask for a response back from you guys. That's usually what I would always had to submit for permit is some type of response from the Department of Agriculture. Yeah. Yeah. That's what we said last time. Just get a letter from them.

I I agree. A note on the drawing doesn't hold much water. No, it doesn't. A response. Yeah. I can help them with that if you Okay. [snorts] Okay. So we're asking for a letter from the Department of Agriculture on that. Okay.

So for 34 letter nothing really changes. So the motion is incomplete not seconded. Incomplete. You want a letter? Yeah. number 36 that will be done by the engineer. Okay. So that's going to remain incomplete. So we wanted deed proposed deed restrictions which on the plan and any rightaways.

comments trail 38. Yes. 38. Yes, we have the we have those deeds. We don't have the the rightway delineation and language that would be submitted when that's actually created. what we'd asked for is the most most recently recorded deed for the parcel, a copy of all deed restrictions, easements, rights of way, and other incumbrances currently affecting the property.

though. If there was a restriction that you can't like if his property was encumbered by a deed that said you couldn't put residential houses on it, then he'd have to that would be something pertinent to this application. So if you deeds included that doesn't include any restrictions I would say that was

and Hubers they don't have a right away are from this. No, different accesses. Different access. All different access points. Just want to make sure. Bowen Road. time. I don't know. [laughter] Okay, we're calling it complete.

Complete. All right, we're calling it complete. 38. 38. 39 we've already talked about for the test pits. So that remains incomplete. 40 um sufficient volume of water. We had wanted a letter from the fire chief. Okay. So we'll call that one complete. 44. Homeowner association documents. We would want to require documents including a road maintenance agreement. Did get a little bit. Um, it's a little bit of a weird road maintenance agreement.

When was that with the I'm sorry. With the fire chief. Uh, fire chief was 40. 40. Yep. And now we're on 44. Thank you. quick. Sorry. How what's the distance between turning into the lots and then the last? Do you know the top of your head? How many is that? miles.

a half a mile. No. maintenance agreement? Uh, yeah. It's weird. You need to look at it. I got it somewhere. Um, I mean, it doesn't say who's responsible for upkeeping the road. just says that folks will contribute to it. So, usually there's either a an association created,

it's also not clear on the plan who's retaining um title to the road. So, maybe I'm the only one, but this is a weird road maintenance agreement. we don't like it when we get to considering the substance of it, but you guys tell me. It's actually one I pulled off. And I know you're going to say, "Well, if it was done that way before, doesn't mean we're going to do it now." But I pulled it from another subdivision that was done.

Yeah. I mean, road road maintenance associations and things are inherently terrible and they always fail. So, I don't necessarily want to set it up to fail. As my lawyer would say is all they are is a legal uh document anyway. and you got to end up fighting the stuff and either an in agreement or you're in real trouble anyway. So, most of the stuff isn't worth the paper it's written on.

Well, but we should at least try to have the paper that's written on and and I didn't I'm not saying it's not necessary. I'm just I mean, I think we're it's complete as far as this application. He's provided something, but it may

Yeah, I can see where you might have some concerns. So we'll call a complete understanding that when we consider the substance of this, we may hate your road maintenance agreement. Which number is that? 44. Okay. Um do do we have any direction we can provide before

just to make sure we get something a little more we have a sorry um we have some subdivision is only for all of us. The state of Maine actually has pretty good guidelines for that. They post on the if you look in the like the state of Maine road maintenance agreements typically in the storm water um site and it gives you templates and basically you just provide when you when you would sell a lot they understand that they're part of a association that pay you know they set up a fund or whatever. It's there's different ways to do it and it's all typically it's post you know as long as it's there someone's going to maintain it like Barry was saying it ends up devolving it the people fighting always anyway no matter how well

turns into road no matter how well you do it somebody's right um but I think there's a lot is there a lot of guidance in our ordinance about it there's no guidance in ours but there is some I mean what can we enforce then

so there is a state so we have to do our job in making sure it meets the performance standards. Okay. Um which we'll go through when we get there. Uh but I mean at a minimum it should talk about So I don't think there's going to be an association formed. So, it should make it clear that, you know, Barry or his predecessors, not predecessors, successors in interest are going to maintain it and they're going to be assessing it and these folks who buy in agree to basically pay what Barry charges them.

Basically, what we do with the one I I did previous is we have a meeting. I'm actually part of that association. We have a meeting once a year, decide we're going to do the road and everybody contributes an agreed amount equally and we fix if it needs it. We fix the road or do whatever.

So are you going to create an allowing? I'm not sure. Uh that depends what people want to do when they they they buy. I mean I think we need that upfront. I think that's part of No, I won't I won't be I don't believe unless it's again it's something it's a legal issue that you can have a law or a rule and and unless someone is willing to follow it, it's a it's a legal issue. It's a court or what do they call it? Civil,

right? But our goal is to make sure that roads are taken care of moving forward. And so we have to make sure the pieces are in place to at least give you the best chance of that happening, right? Like I I get it. that I've been involved in road association disputes before. This isn't going to help you at all. Um,

but does it? So, if you want to leave it, that's fine. We'll consider it. And if it goes to a performance standard, that is what it is. Um, complete. Um so 45 we had asked for ownership information of the roads as well as

ownership improvement management of facilities and improvements will be privately owned including drainage facilities Which one are you looking at? 455. Yeah, we had discussed that at the last meeting and you asked me to remove that from the plan and we did

remove remove from plan. Uh you road assistance. It says the notes of road assistant uh road association will cover that. Will cover what? Uh whatever that requirement was. So I think what we had said was that we're going to need ownership information over the road. Was

Yep. Which was a copy of all covenants and restrictions and include a note on the plan that the road shall be retained by developer, which we still don't have. Yeah, it kind of goes in concert with your road maintenance agreement. All right.

Note seven says proposed spring road is to remain private and will be built private road standard, but it doesn't say who's going to retain ownership of it. Typically, you don't want to retain ownership of it because if something happens and you're responsible for it down the road,

if you choose to do a private road and the town's not going to take ownership of it, somebody has to. But usually you do 1/8 interest to each lot owner, but and you could retain a rightaway over that, but you wouldn't be responsible for it if something happened. If there was an accident, [snorts]

so do I need to write something like that up? Would that help? I don't know. So, whoever is going to own the road, we just need that written somewhere. So, if you're going to keep the road, then we need that written that you're going to retain the fee to the road.

So, that would typically show up in a sample deed. So you'd have a proposed deed for each lot that you'd include in the package for the board to review and it would say however the road's going to be dealt with be included right in each deed. A proposed deed for lots one through eight.

Would it be part of the uh road maintenance agreement? Is that that would the road maintenance agreement would be part of that document? It would be part of that document. Yeah. I can give you some samples. Okay. Okay. So we're going to leave that one incomplete. 47 uh [clears throat] accurate and cost estimates timeline for construction and sufficient capacity financial capacity. So he submitted an estimate but I think until we see the road design from the engineer can't necessarily

construction timeline. We really need to see the scope of what the engineer recommends for road construction. So I say at this time that's incomplete until that portion of the work is So 45 is going to remain complete. Yes.

45's incomplete. 47's also 46 incomplete. Right. Um 48 storm written storm water management plan prepared by a professional engineer. I see the erosion sediment control plan. Damn it. But that's that's not addressing the [clears throat]

storm water. Your note says engineer engineer the storm water be if it's triggered if you I was going to say you might want to just hold off on that one because if if one is required there will be one. If one is not required you'll get a letter from me with a stamp saying that disputes.

Okay perfect. So 48 is incomplete. Uh 49 erosion and sediment control plan. I think that'll come with the road plan. I mean submitted some information now on the plan. I think it should all be in the plan. So we'll leave that as incomplete. Uh any portion identify as higher moderate value wildlife by ifw the site plan indicates appropriate measures preservation.

Just back to what we were discussing and earlier on skip questions. These two these questions tie back to the ones with from before stuff that drives us not in our ordinance. So 50 and 51 are incomplete. Um applicants provide an estimate of the amount and type of vehicle traffic.

or something or a note on that. Uh yeah, I'll I'll take care of that for you. Okay. What number was that? I'm sorry. 52. 52. That's real simple. 50. 53 is a list of infrastructure improvement with cost estimates. Sounds like we'll get that

later. So, that's still incomplete. and permits. We were concerned about NERPA and storm water permits due to the Libby Brook piece. Um, so that's still incomplete, right? That my document will provide you guidance on all that information if

all right so I move to find that the application is sorry I just want to ask a question on the engineer's plan. Um, so if I remember correctly, um, Barry's proposing that he's also going to include in his maintenance greater hill farm road, the private piece of the road or you're only going to do the ex design for this piece coming up to here. I'm struggling with this piece of road from your new, you know, from your new subdivision to the pavement.

Correct. because it won't do any good to plow and maintain the subdivision road if you can't get [laughter] to it right. I think I I will put incorporate language to in my maintenance agreement and not in the ownership of the road but certainly in the maintenance agreement that all parties would be involved in the the cost of plowing and maintenance.

Okay. So, I mean, I'll tell you what. I I took a ride up there earlier this week, and that road starting to road coming down from the utilities down over that steeper piece of grade, which isn't on your site plan currently, but is your access way to your site plan. And it's a

sticky issue because it's your private road access, former town road. I don't know. Is that part of is the engineer going to look at that section and and make any recommendations at all for that section? No, that's something I'm gonna have to deal with because I don't own that road. The association's not going to own that road. We all have a right to use it if I'm wrong straight.

So, who owns that road? So, when that's eroding, it is it is the same as uh according to my attorney and the town attorney agreed same as [clears throat] 136 out here. It's no different. So, just go back. So is your is are you asking for an assessment of that road from an engineer's perspective?

I don't know if that is part of your contract or not is is will it show up on your plan or is your plan going to start right here? Right. It won't because I mean that I don't think that that's there's a survey for that where I can assess. You know what I'm saying?

I have he doesn't own it. He doesn't own it. Yeah, I have something else on that road from a planning board a year later, uh, August 7th, 2013. Uh, motion made by Arthur Langley moves that Mr. Baldwin has made the planning board aware of the high chip created by the pipeline, which precludes him from doing 8% grade, even though it's it is close on the road. The board is aware of this problem and has no concern. The board has discussed this matter and for and for the need of an engineer does not see this as required. Voted for yes and one

no vote. Is there an application and your vote? No vote. Was there an application? No, it just when when things come to the planet board be discussed. The problem is uh I come in to talk about the road and find out what I can do, what it is, what you see it as, and then the board changes. Uh when far as I'm concerned, this is legal precedent. As Jill said, it's on the the uh recording. So, they made a motion and seconded it. It passed. As far as I'm concerned, it's a done deal.

Well, I think the hard part is they didn't necessarily have the authority to make the motion and pass it. And that's exactly the reason is the board changes. So without an application in front of us, we shouldn't be voting or giving guidance or anything like that on it. Otherwise, it's just an advisory opinion. It's not binding on the town. It's not binding on the the board. I mean, I don't know how you want to deal with the issue of Granhill Farm Road at this point.

I I honestly don't know. I'm just I'm concerned that, you know, we're going to ask Mr. Baldwin to build a road that has the appropriate erosion control and the appropriate base so that we can get a fire truck in there to to serve the citizens that buy that lot. But then they can't get up the hill to the power line because that road washed out. So that's what I'm that's the quandry I'm in. You know, I I'm trying to

meaning I have I have agreed to bring this road up to Okay. the town road dirt standard. Okay. And be responsible for maintaining it. We're going that's because I think you had indicated that in your application and that was just why I was asking of are there any improvements planned to that road because I'm seeing ch problems with it in it current condition.

The it hasn't been fixed. It isn't built. Okay. It's been used. Uh CMP went up there and did their what do you call that? MPV. The big thing with the power lines and they did damage and I've had them come back and if you look to the left at the top of the hill, they put some very minor erosion control methods in there that obviously

Okay. So, you are going to make improvements to that road to try to minimize I'm going to bring that up the same standard as this road. Okay. And the only exception is where I brought it in front of the board that I can't there's

right there's ledge there's exposed ledge. I know exactly where the ledge is. So I understand I can't touch that and I can't touch it because the pipeline is under it. Right. No I I totally get that. So the board realized that and it creates a hardship that I can't fix it. That's the only thing that I'm not going to do. The rest of that 20 two and two

y 18 in of gravel. You're going to drain it. You're going to have covers and try to get the water to not channel down the road. We do. Yeah. I don't want to deal with that either. I have dealt with it for a long time. I mean, I've used this piece of land. I've logged it. I operate off it, you know, my business. Okay.

No, I'm fully aware of what got to happen. So, we can we can drill into the details when we get your plan, but I just Yeah. Well, I just wanted to raise that question. Better the I I actually had CMP come up there and fix because it wasn't a problem before they did the the uh upgrade.

I had them supposedly fix that. They didn't. It washed out again because they fixed put the erosion in and then fixed the road and it washed out again. They didn't do it properly. For one thing, there's no major ditch on that side of the road at all. That's something I got to do to build the road. I got to put the power up through there. That's all going to get constructed at the same time.

Okay. You know, sounds like we're all headed in the same direction. No, that's a great question though. Should we kind of include that part in this? Like I I know you said you weren't really planning on it, but it sounds like you're going to be doing almost exactly maybe not as strong of of upgrades here as you are over here,

but should we include that as part of this or can we? I don't here's what I suggest, right? He doesn't have the legal right for me to produce a document for improvements on that road. But I am willing to as part of the memo that will accompany all this stuff give an opinion on that road

with some suggestions on how to fix it and maintain it which will be pretty well written which he can just thereby use and construct it. Something that you guys will have something to fall back on and say oh an engineer has

it's not a great situation for any of us to be in. I mean, I would just Calvin's road is Barry's road, is it? You know, [laughter] it's it's everybody's road. If you want to use that road, you can. It's open to everybody. It's not just

uh that road is open. You can't keep people out of there. Anybody can go in there. I'll offer a solution that might not solve the legal problem, but will solve the real problem of how to making sure the road stays. I mean, I'm working with CMP. If you noticed on the left, how that's real steep

where there isn't a ditch, it's been filled in. I'm working with them as I did. I don't know if you remember, but just before you hit the power line on the left side. Mhm. I there's different ownership than CMP. They allowed me years ago to take all the stonewall out of there, taper that hall, restore that bank, put the stonewall back. I'm working with CMP to get them to let me do that on their

on that. That's the plan. Okay. So, I'll be honest. Well, I don't have any legal, as you put it, you know, I don't have a legal ownership. I don't have the authority to And that's the concern is at some point down the road if somebody pitches a fit and decides they want to fight over that road and it is their property and it's not a discontinued town road and it's lapsed to the butters or whatever's happened to it, your subdivision has no access. And it sounds like that's a risk that at least a previous planning board was willing to take and we can have that conversation. we consider the merits, but it's not a great place for anyone to be.

I'm not ready to say that part, I guess, until we maybe have some advice from the town attorney on that portion. We should we should bring it up. How do we, you know, yeah, from your point of view, it may be ambiguous and it was for a long time with the attorneys and I spent a lot of money getting that straightened up. So now, as far as I'm concerned, it isn't. What I was trying to do is just give you the facts about what they decided. And I

I purposely tried to stop short of asking you to make a decision on this because it's been done, you know, and they've already spent the money and I I agree to fix something that isn't even mine so that it works better for my project.

Yeah. So Ann moved that the application is still incomplete. Do we have a second? Second incomplete. All those in favor? All right. No. Thank you. See you again. See you in a month or so. Barry, you'll be coming back or planning to come back in.

Yes. And you understand. I realize I'm expected to come back with 100% believing it's 100% complete. So, it's really tough to do all these things at once because Oh, no. more question. So, I'm just trying to get it closer and closer.

No, that's great. I just I'm not I'm not asking for to finish this. Okay. So Ann was recorded. Okay. And I will I'll do up the decision like we did last time. It's a little bit and working off of the old one. Yeah. It'll be a new one for this today's date.

Okay. It's kind of like what I did in my hand [laughter] Thank you. I I made the change and then put the date for five. If you want to do it up, that's fine. All right. Then I'll just I'll figure it out and I'll send it to you guys.

stuff. I know, right? And Gwen, how do you pronounce your last name? It's actually Huitt, like Jackson. It is. [laughter] I'm glad I didn't try them. We've heard it all. [laughter] Oh, started with an H. Yeah, that's me.

Yes, we've been to every board. [laughter] I'm doing good. I'm trying to find this documentation that Jill gave us that I've now mixed up with all my other stuff. Looks like this one. That help gave it to me. Why don't you help your mind?

I know. She just gave it to me. Oh, okay. I have another one. Look. Do you want me to throw that up here? Do you mind? Oh, sure. Sure. Where? Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. It's a nice place. I like colors. change anything.

Okay. Nothing. I got colors on this one, too. [laughter] Easy. correctly. It looks like there has been a piece of land that you have purchased. Um, no. I was looking at No, we're we're looking to um get that piece of property from the town.

Okay. So, acquiring it from the town, right? It's I think they didn't know they even owned it and it was just a little turnaround I think for a um a school bus a long time ago. And what it's doing is it's detouring us from if you on that one you can see where we're trying to put campsites in

and the camp. Yeah. And I'm sorry I did not highlight the little chunk that we're trying to get from you guys. Yeah, it's that triangle. Um it detours us from having the setback in order to have two, you know, two or three the sites. [clears throat] And so um the town agreed to give the property to us at the price of whatever it was going to cost to turn it over to us. Um because we have paperwork on that old paperwork that said um it was to be maintained and have a fence around it. And as it stands now, it's an old, it looks like they just dumped, you know, it's an old dump spot and the fence is just rotten and is sticking out of the trees with bumped wire and everything. So, um, it's, you know, kind for a campground. We just we don't want the kids over there scratching themselves on all that and it's just a big junk pile. So, um, they did agree to give that to us. So, we I don't know what's going on

with that, but that was supposed to have been addressed. So you guys want us to grant your conditional use conditioned on getting that chunk? It was supposed to be Yes, we should. Yeah, they should have did that. The last two board meetings that we that we came to, they should have did that. They should have just made a conditional use that we got this piece of property because this is only we're only looking at three sites at this point in time. So, um it's a setback for 100 for 100 ft and then our sights would be the three sightes coming off of this would just be over that. So, we would have to main uh acquire that little pieshaped chunk to be able to put those three sites in. So, we got a conditional for the campground with the uh

with with the agreement to come back, right? with the with the agreement. They agreed to give that piece to us with the price of however much it was going to cost to transfer that over. So that was supposed to have been in operation.

So two two sites here. You say three sites. Two sites. What? Yeah. Two sites. Whatever it was. Sorry. So if I remember it was these two sites. [clears throat] You couldn't meet the setback, right? Yes. So, you're going to acquire this property and what you're asking for

to So, we granted you a conditional use for everything but these two sites, right? That's what we did last time. Yes. Right. So, now you want to amend the conditional use to include these two sites, which we can't give you because you don't own it, but you want us to put a condition on the approval,

right? So you're sort of putting the cart before the horse and you want us to Well, last time we were here, it was supposed to be being trans, you know, that paperwork was supposed to be being done. They agreed to give that to the town had agreed or the board or whatever to give that piece to us at again at the price

of whatever it was going to cost to get that done. Well, that I believe is when um the you know the last guy had left. If I could uh just give a little insight, the state law says that if you have a purchase and sale that that is legal standing to apply to a planning board for an application. So talked to uh Ruth, town administrator, and she said that we could just use the minutes that shows Did you find those minutes?

Yeah, you you everybody's got that shows. So I'm not even sure the selectman can deed this out. It might need to be town meeting. No, they can deed it out. They looked at the pro that's a a policy and they could so we've adopted at a town meeting that they can

they have the right to dispose of certain properties. I haven't I haven't read discretion surplus surplus property at their discretion. Okay. Yeah. think it's uh 50 by it's it's dinky. Really really small. Yeah. Really really small. This is not

anything major to to the whole road. This whole length of the road I think is like an acre and a half from the middle of the old school house road. And that's the little piece of where it is. It's probably I don't know 20th of an acre or something like that. It's It's not very big.

Am I missing? Do we have the selectman's meeting piece? Yeah, that's what I the appeals board. You didn't even know that they even m they even even had ownership until I brought them this print and said they own and then they said, "Well, you can't put the sights in because we own that piece." And then well that brought the question is well you know obviously this is a discontinued road so you can't discontin a road if you own a piece of property on it. So, is that really a discontinued road? And we go on and on. Another one of those,

you know, so I don't I don't want to create, you know, cuz that gives me road frontage, you know, we're we're we're [snorts] creating a whole different thing here, you know. So, you know, [laughter] and I'm going to myself from this right here just cuz I'm

I just are my neighbors, [laughter] right? So, I'm just going to sit. So, Juliet's recusing herself. I am. Thank you. town and create a deed for this and then come back again. So So Ruth said it's in the it's in the minutes. So the state law says that to apply to planning board for to get for for a code on issue a permit that there has to be standing to prove standing and purchase and sales agreements have been deemed by the courts to be suitable uh to sufficient for a stand to prove standing. one of those.

Well, and R said, well, the minutes the minute shows that there's an agreement between the parties to transfer the appeals board said that they should go to the selectman's meeting, but we don't have the selectman's saying the selectman approved that.

Well, she said that you had it, I guess. Did Ruth said you had the minutes from the from myself from the select because I know I talked to Ruth, she said it was all set. It was just waiting for So I mean you could you could you could as I said you could approve it based upon the condition that the land be conveyed.

What's was it that was it the November 29th meeting? I'm not sure I don't know what packet what packet are they in like just wondering if we can find them quickly this go to another meeting. I I don't have to carry paper.

They're going to have to go back around the boards again. No, no, no. Well, um I don't know. I thought they would be in the package here. Has anyone seen them? We just have the peels board. Yep. Yeah, I saw those. Yeah, I didn't. We don't have anything. Oh, I see. I thought you'd put that in here. So, no, that's just the appeals board.

If so, I guess let's raise the question. If we had the minutes from the selectman's meeting authorizing Ruth to start the transaction, would we consider that sufficient consider application? doesn't even I know tax on the past couple years as it is [laughter] now. So it's not

we you know petitioned all the neighbors and they thanks for it's just you know it's not it's nothing of value. No. It cost me more to convey it onto this property than it's than it's worth. The only thing it is for me is using my two sites,

right? So, I mean, I guess I'm comfortable considering it and making it a condition. I'm trying. Okay. And I got a hair. I [laughter] was just one. I don't know how to pick one. um you know and and it'll need to be recorded and all of that.

Okay? Because it's not your fault that we can't get we can't get out of our own damn way. application. So, this is an amendment to the conditional use permit they already have. Right. Right. We've already Yeah. This was this was Paul's idea to go through this whole scenario all over again and I asked if we could do something different and he said no we have to go through the whole thing over again for those two two sites.

So I just repeated everything basically we had last time. So yeah. So I think the issue for our consideration we've already given them a conditional use for all the sites except two. So I think when we're going through our um our criteria we're just considering the impact these additional two sites have.

Oh there are factors. They're already existing sites. The only question I would I would have is to do you get approval from the Department of Health and Human Services for these extra two lots. You have have they seen the plan for the amendment?

No, we have to go we have to uh submit the whole thing and we don't have uh permitting for that. That that's a conditional for the existing permit that we have. [music] But you do have a permit existing. This all went to DHS and got approved.

No, that was the condition of the condition that still isn't done yet. is you build it, they come, you know, and then they say, "Hey, this this that and then they give you a permit." That's how that's how the DHG DHS Dhs

because they have very strict rules of I mean the last one I did in 2012, we actually did go through the whole put all the plans together and they approved them. There's so many feet each lot has to be from a bathroom all that all that stuff is very very regulated. So

yeah, um they have to approve the number of sites and then you get licensed every year. Yeah. But you're approved up to a certain number of sites now. Yeah, we we do all that now. Yeah. Expansion. We are a campground now. So,

okay. So, I just would say that you' condition that upon DHS approval, right? Mhm. And it already is with the other one, but we could do that with these two, I guess, as well. Did you make up a checklist for anybody we can start to use?

I have an application checklist. I don't know where it came from. Say we don't have anything new. It's on page uh if you just use page. I know, but we have to fill one in to give it to Jill. So here [laughter] I think Jill was thinking

I don't know where it came from, but really you had it. It's yours. I [laughter] think I did the last one. All right. I have the I have the last one. Page 67. Campground. Does that matter? Well, this is the one we did back in October. I don't have the performance standards though. I only have the application checklist.

I mean, honestly, they've given us a pretty good No, I know. Totally agree. Summary. I think we could change this into our findings. They're two different. We don't have them physically. They did not get printed. What are you looking for?

here. Yeah, that's what I had. We'll get in trouble. We do much when Jill's not sitting there. application checklist? Do without Jill there. In trouble. I leave that to the chair. Taking a minute. [laughter] All right. A fully executed and signed copy of the application for conditional use.

You got it. The A site plan with date, scale, point north drawn to sufficient scale to allow the items listed under the approval criteria but not more than 100 ft to an inch. Yes. Complete. Owner's name and address, the name of the engineer, surveyor, or both preparing the plan.

Yes. No. Yes. I think so. Thank you. We met it the last time around. Frankly, it means it this time. It should [laughter] be pretty easy, guys. Just looking for consensus. Name and address says of all abuing property owners, the applicant shall include a copy of the letters.

Your ears. Yes. Okay. Ears. I was trying to pull up on my phone. It wouldn't work. There's a new application. Do we need new notifications? We got all the new notifications. You have new notifications. Oh, good job, guys. [laughter]

I think this is going to lead after the fifth time. You guys are school now. We're like, "Hey, we got it all down." You know who your neighbors are now. Anyway, can you just give those to Calvin? Is it all of this? Because they came in later. Okay.

Yeah. Perfect. You looking for those? Yep. Thank you. The originals? Yeah. There is there. [snorts] Do you want the originals? You want the copies? These are the I'll take the originals if you We'll take the copies then. Yep. [laughter]

Trade you. All right, keep warm. Keep going. People without the chair here. [snorts] I [laughter] know. So, can we just shortcut the application checklist and just move to the performance standards? You want to deem the application is complete because it is

I kind of do. It's the same application, right? Right. I basically just followed the whole If I had suggested that, I know I would have gotten a dirty look from across the table. [laughter] an hour earlier. Turn into a pumpkin at 9:00.

This is just the town the town ordinances and stuff like that. But this is protocol that we had to go by, you know. No, I know. You guys know all too well. Oh, yeah. You guys know. All right. Well, we shouldn't make a motion until the chair and the secretary are here.

pass it when he's on they say yeah after they do the research to make sure it's legal for you don't need them. We'll just make it a condition. I mean, either they get it or they don't. Right. Right. If they don't get to land, they're not going to they're not going to put the lots in anyway. So,

decides we don't own it." [laughter] Sorry, guys. It was transferred to the RSU as part of the school's land. [laughter] for the RSU schools. And the RSU schools is a town of Durham. I have the deed. deed's in [laughter] there.

Okay. Yeah, I found the deed earlier. Oh, good. Yeah, I've already been down there and debunking that one [laughter] cuz I didn't want to go to the four other meetings. You know what I'm saying? I hear you. I get it. No, it's back to the four other meetings.

If the school is no longer uh no longer used or or accessed or whatever, it deeds back to the deeds back to the school system which is the RSU and the RSU is part of the town. of the town actually maintains ownership of that piece piece of

Oh, actually, no. I think you're going to need to get it from the RSU, which is which is the three towns. Yeah. You better hope it doesn't you better hope it reverted back to town ownership, not school ownership. There's a log in front of it.

No, I get you. Somebody will tell us what's going on. Let's just make sure we write it broadly enough. Yeah. The issue is we have no road frontage either because this was changed to a road here. So, now people across the street own this. So we couldn't get road frontage here and then we couldn't get road frontage, you know, if somebody owns that, we couldn't get it here either. So we have no road frontage to do anything with. So it's a pain in the butt to, you know, just figure everything out. [laughter]

Yeah, you guys might need to go to the RSU. it's all right. We threw another wrench in it. The town may not own it. What? Yep. So, we're just going to approve it with I was told told by the town that the town owns it. I don't know they own it. Maybe the RSC doesn't know they own it. [laughter]

Probably not. Yeah, I would not I would not move over to January now. So, the thought is we go through this and just make a condition that they turn over the deeds whenever they are able to sort everything out with whichever owned it. They get

that you get title recorded title to that. Exactly. Yep. That's easy. And I really hope the town does not deed something and doesn't own it. It'll be, trust me, it'll be a quick claim without covenant. [laughter] Real quick,

meeting I was just listening to it sounded like they were going to be they were just talking about doing some research into it. So, there was no decision on that meeting that they So, while you're out, we quickly blew through and we were ready to deem that this application is complete.

Yeah. So, I make a motion to find that it's complete. [laughter] Actually, I'll second that. All those in favor. [laughter] [snorts] Well, you're going to get scolded now. All right. Right here. So, where would we go if the RSU owns that?

Superintendent's office. That's it. Well, I would start there. Yeah. Yeah. Becky Foley is the superintendent. Becky Foley. Okay. They're on West Street Free Port is where the office is. Oh, okay. January we started the budget.

Should we tell them to stop? Jill, you can stop researching it now. For now, we're moving on. Thank you, though. Who's that saying in there? Done. gone. the performance standards. So we don't have a performance standards checklist. At least I don't have one.

So the humids gave us this. What was that that said? So is that we're moving on. We're going to we're just going to make a condition to use that they have the provide a copy of the deeds when they are sorted out. So we have deemed the application complete. It was moved by Ann, seconded by me.

Perfect. And it was unanimous except for one that we did last. The member was refused. So we can cross reference at least the questions with what they have provided us. Right. It's kind of open. I had your roll application in here, but I must have taken it out.

I've got the approval. I've got the approval criteria. At least my handwritten. I was the one who was keeping the record. So, okay. [snorts] I've got it from from last time. Do you want me to keep record? Are you going to Is that a extra copy that we can write on for the new one?

I mean, it's just it's from my notes from last time. So, it's not it's got notes on it from before. So, it's not But you can write on it if you want or I can write on it. Oh, you want to go through the checklist? Okay. It's in front of me.

All right. All right. Approval criteria will not result in undue water or air pollution. Actually, if you'd like to share that, I will make the exact same motions that we made last time. You can read my writing. [laughter]

What have you got for a paper? Well, the old one from We have the one from last time. We don't have a new checklist. Unless you've printed one. No, I don't know what to print unless I'm told. All right. That was my bad. Sorry.

So, we're going to use the same checklist we had from the last time they appeared in front of us. Well, just give me a minute to catch up. Okay. It was October 5th is when they were here. Okay. I think that's the one I gave you, Calvin.

What's that? The October 5th. I'm just looking at I mean, it's just the generic approval criteria for it's their they wrote out that criteria, but we're using Yeah, they Yeah, they've written out their answers here. So, we've mirrored the same thing you guys have. I think [snorts]

might as well just both. will not res result in undue water or air pollution because they will have sad. Yeah, Mike's not going to be able to second it. Um because uh because it will have adequate septic design. They're only adding two sites and it will be a minor increase in vehicles and campfires. Oh, wait. Somebody has to be writing this part down. Whatever you're saying, right? No, it's right here. See? Sweet. Does anyone want to second that?

I'll second that. All those in favor. reasonably foreseeable needs of the proposed use, including fire protection. Will not cause an unreasonable burden on existing water supply if one is to be utilized. This criteria should include use of an aquifer and the applicant must show that it's useful not harm the wells of those currently lying on said aquifer. So I'm going to move to find that this is complete. The additional or met the additional two sites will provide minimal additional requirement for fire protection and they will have a drilled well um that'll meet to meet the fire protection needs.

Second. All those in favor soil erosion or reduction in the capacity of the land to hold water so that a dangerous or unhealthy condition may result. Sorry, I took that away from you again. Yeah, that's me. Again, we're only talking about two additional sites. Um, and there will be minimal the sites are already existing, so there'll be minimal work to be done to cause erosion [snorts] issues.

Second. All in favor? congestion or unsafe conditions with respect to use of a highway or public road existing or proposed? complete. Again, we're only adding two sites, so minimal traffic. And um there's also leisure lane that comes off of 136.

Second. All those in favor disposal in conformity with the state plumbing code and all of the replicable regulations. So I move to find this complete. They've provided us with an HH 200 and we'll also get um HHS sign off on all of this.

Second. All those in favor will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of the the municipality to dispose of solid waste or sewage if municipal services are to be utilized. Was that did I go to the wrong one? fire [snorts] protection I thought. But

we already do fire protection. A lot of the questions are redundant. They just asking the same question in three different areas. [laughter] Page 55. Yeah. Sorry. Page. Um which should I go through this part? Yeah, sure.

Okay. I'll just keep up. Uh the proposed development have adequate fire protection. I move to find that will have adequate fire protection. Um because there's a source within one mile. Then they will have a drilled well for water source as well.

Second. All in favor will not have an undue adverse effect on the scenic or natural beauty of the area. aesthetics, historic sites or rare 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.

historic sites or rare and irreplaceable natural areas or deer wintering areas. Um, and again, the clearing is minimal. Second. All those in favor? It's in conformance to the town's comprehensive plan and all other applicable town ordinances.

last time it was just that it was just those sites that we were talking about and then we Yeah. So, I'm going to move that we address this one through the imposition of a condition that the Huitts or the LLC obtain um sufficient ownership of that little triangle piece in order to meet them. It's very technical description. Um

exactly what it [laughter] is though. Talking the same language facts. [laughter] That's funny. I second the acquisition of the triangle piece. [laughter] Proof of the acquisition of the triangle piece. All those in favor.

That's funny. Okay. The applicant has adequate financial and technical capacity to meet the standards required by this ordinance. Couldn't tell you even what that says. that piece is met. The additional expense of these two sites is minimal.

Second. All's in favor. 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. Um, I find that is not within 250 ft of any of the relevant water bodies.

All those in favor? Will not loan or in conjunction with existing activities adversely affect the quality or quantity of groundwater? I don't know what that says. Not discharge says will not affect because not discharging anything.

Oh, I'm going to find that this one is met because um they'll be appropriately disposing out of waste of waste water and will not be discharging anything into the groundwater system. Second. All those in favor? The applicant will to determine based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's flood boundary and floodway maps and flood insurance rate maps whether the site of the proposed use is in a floodprone area. yada yada yada

[laughter] Okay. I will move to find that this that it's not in a flood plane. So it meets this criteria. Second. All's in favor will not have an adverse impact on spawning grounds, fish, aquatic life, bird, or other wildlife habitat. I am going to move to find that this criteria is met because there's minimal impact um on wildlife habitat and there's no water.

Second. All those in favor vibration to disturb the peaceful enjoyment of adjacent property. I'm going to move to buffered in because there's a noise order. Okay. I'm going to move to find that this standard is met because there's sufficient buffering um and they'll anyway be subject to our ongoing noise provisions.

Second. All those in favor? will not place an excessive burden on the ability of the town to provide municipal, governmental, or educational services. met because the cameras wouldn't have small kids going to school. Did I really say that?

No, [laughter] this will it was late at night again. This will not add students to our um school to our schools and there'll be minimal town services required. All those in favor. Sorry, sleepy. Just trying to keep it simple.

criteria. Our approval criteria, right? Sorry. Approval criteria. Do we have We also had um camp I don't have a copy of that. We also had campground requirement criteria that we went through last time. Do we feel want to do that again?

Sign it. It was in our It's in our ordinance. Sorry. 67. It's on page 67. Okay. But I have a retype. So I'll be right back. What? Up page 6768 into one of these. Oh. Oh, perfect. Okay. Awesome. [laughter] Rolling right along. I think last time we just kind of read through it and then

anything that about last time. I'm not going to be here next month. meeting. I don't see any reason why we couldn't as long as we announce it. I don't have space available. I don't know who uses this room on other days, but [snorts]

I don't think there's any other groups that meet on Wednesdays, right? Only zone board of appeals if there's a case, right? Ready and recording. Yay. Thank you. to record? I'll record. Okay, I'll read it. I don't know that anyone's going to understand my chicken scratch. Well, you saw mine,

but there's space for your motions to write right in. Thank you. Thank you, Joe. So, do you want me to read through? Last time we didn't make motions on each of these, but maybe that's cuz we were getting late towards the end, but So, you want me to read through it?

Sure. Okay. Campgrounds will conform to the minimum requirements imposed under state licensing procedures and the following in cases of possible conflict, the stricter shall apply. A campground must be constructed on at least 20 acres of land and all camping units or structures shall be located at least 1,090 ft from any property line at least 400 ft from any residence.

Uh I think that's supposed to be a period, not a colon. Sorry, I'm just looking over here on a where that I think that's its own Oh, that's the end criteria. Yeah, I think it's supposed to be a period, not a colon. Okay. So, campground shall conform to the amendment requirements imposed under state licensing procedures and the following.

I don't know how. All right. Let's just do under state licensing procedures. How's that? This is Ray from our ordinance. So, I Sorry. Well, here's the ordinance. Yeah, I've got the No, it's it's she's it is exactly the way it is written in the

exactly the way I know was Yeah. Okay. So, I'm going [laughter] to make a motion to make this a condition of approval that they have to obtain all necessary campground licenses from the state. Second. All those in favor.

typo. Campground must be constructed on at least 20 acres of land and all camping units or structures shall be located at least 100 feet from any property line and at least 400 ft from any residences residents except residences belonging to the campground owners. So I'm going to move to impose a condition that they acquire the triangle piece.

campsites uh shall be laid out and screened in such a manner that none are within view from public roads, navigable rivers, existing residences including from the second window floor windows thereof or approved subdivision lots. Any combination of evergreen planting, landscaped earth and BMS or solid fencing may be used to achieve the screening standard when cams would otherwise be visible from the locations described above. I'm going to move to find that this criteria is met because they have sufficient um vegetation and screening.

Second. All those in favor? finish. No. Good. No overnight sleeping shall be allowed in vehicles except for recreational vehicles and trailers. Right. That's we Did we not even consider these last time? We did not make motions on each of them.

So, I'm going to move to make that a condition of the permit that no overnight sleeping is allowed in vehicles except for RVs. Second. All is in favor. 10 sites and sites for recreational vehicles shall be laid out so that the density of each developed acre of land does not exceed 11 campsites per acre.

How many campsites we have total? Three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10. That's uh it's a it's bigger. They're bigger than that. So, an acre. An ac 11 campsites in one acre. Yeah. Yeah. That's how many acres do you have?

That's a lot. We have 86 acres. Oh, god. Yeah. Okay. [laughter] We're on I think 25 or whatever or something like that. I mean, that's that's really tight. That's like passing a cup of coffee to you next time. [laughter]

Okay. I move to find that this is satisfied. Second. All those in favor? Campsite shall only be allowed on land as defi defined as moderate or slight according to the county soil survey of the USDA soil conservation service.

time? was our approach. Okay. The last one. These are existing sites being restored, right? Existing developed land. All right. So, I'm going to move to find that we wave this require we can't wave requirements, can we? We're saying the soils are adequate. They're existing redevelopment of the existing developed previously developed land.

All right. Don't give me your motion because All right, I'll second it though. [laughter] Let's see. We go back to this one. Um, let's see. Move that we find this uh meets the standard because this is previously developed land that these sites will be constructed upon.

I seconded it. All those in favor? recreational vehicle tender shelter and utility service buildings shall be set back a minimum of 250 ft from the normal high water mark or any pond or river. I'm going to move to find that this is um satisfied because there is no pond or

river within 250 ft. Second. All those in favor. RV, tent, shelter, or structure for human use will not be permitted in a resource protection zone notwithstanding the provisions of article 5. A campground may conduct non-intensive recreation, primitive recreation, open space uses, and resource protection zones and may build peers, docks, and marinas as associated uses to the campground so long as those uses comply with the applicable requirements of this ordinance. I'm going to move to find that this standard is satisfied because it is not in a resource protection zone.

Second. All those in favor? A campground shall provide water and sewers systems, sanitary stations, and convenience facilities in accordance with the regulations of the state plumbing code and the main state of Maine Department of Human Services. In no case shall fewer than one toilet, lavatory, and shower be provided for each sex for every 10 camping and tent sites. I'm going to move to make um the

HHS. it's already approval a condition to deal with these. Second. All those in favor. A time limit is placed on the occupancy of anyone camping space on a continuing basis as follows. 12 weeks for the period May 15th to December 15th of each year and two weeks for all other times. Only camping units defined such as defined herein plus a towing vehicle shall be permitted with any camper park temporarily or otherwise. So I think we made this a condition last time as well.

Mhm. So I'm going to move to impose this condition on the time limits of condition of the time limits on the permit. Second. All those in favor clearing within 250 ft of runaround pond, the east branch of the Royal River, Chandler River, Garish Brook, New Brook, Meadow Brook, Dire Brook of the or the Anderson River. Clearing of trees and burn to other vegetation is permitted for approved construction and landscaping.

shoreline, a clearing cleared opening or openings not greater than 30 ft in width for every 100 ft of shoreline may be created in the strip extending 50 ft from the noral high water mark and paralleling the shoreline etc. I'm going to move to find that this is satisfied because it's not within 250 ft of any of those water bodies.

Second. All those in favor. application with the following conditions. They obtain HHS approval of the campground and all um sewage disposal facilities. They obtain and record adequate ownership of that triangle. no overnight sleeping shall be allowed in vehicles except for RVs.

Oh, come on. Yeah. [laughter] and that um occupancy of anyone camping space shall be no more than 12 weeks for May 15th, December September 15th and two weeks for all other times. All those in favor? Just making sure you got

want to hear if that's okay. Mhm. All right. Well, good luck. Yeah, I thought you get this sorted out. Yeah, I have it right here. The uh I have it. It's It's the uh the school district. Is it? Yep. And I was told the town owns it, the school district. So,

could you share a copy of that with us? You guys have I think we have it actually. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, you guys have it all in your packet from October. It might cuz it's an RSU. Yeah, I don't whatever property goes. The whole transfer. Yeah, the whole transfer of school to I don't know how those deeds are written when they form the RSUs.

I'll let you guys know. I'm sure I'll hear because the chair's [laughter] my name chair of the school. Where's my neighbor? She's going to be like what talk about moving? Yes. The next meeting. Yeah, there was a couple. You guys are all set. I'm just throwing things. There was a couple of questions about I lost my job. Um, meetings. Juliet had a question about

Yeah, I wanted to recommend maybe a workshop if anyone was interested um regarding maybe reviewing the subdivision requirements of the permit application and what we will require of the applicants. kind of all get on the same page, you know, like as far as like the site plan goes, you know,

guys, for you know, contours and um you know, specifics regarding like um um this I can't think right now cross-sections, you know, like specifics and then, you know, wetland delineation reports and um letters for the agencies, you know, so we're kind of all on the same base.

Touch base. All of us touch base on that. Yeah. Yeah. just like kind of a a quick, it doesn't even really have to be long, maybe like half an hour or something if you guys were interested because I have a feeling we're going to be seeing a lot more subdivision applications, more hefty applications coming forward,

you know, maybe sometime in May or June or something. So, are we looking to bring somebody in to facilitate from a engineers perspective to help us or are we just looking possibly? I was thinking more internal kind of decide between us like all what we would like to see or we could try and have someone come in. I

mean I think the ordinance is pretty specific in terms of what it requires. So I think I think that has to be our starting point and then based on you know the application. Yeah. Maybe just like going we can go through the ordinance that section real quick and and say okay you know let's require this going forward.

Well I think we need to base it on the application in front of us. I don't think we can say I mean so you know in one case 4foot contours might be absolutely fine and another it's not so I'm I'm not sure what we'd gain from the

yeah the work so sometimes they're not always everything's not standard I guess right I think it's all you know and the real struggle is some of our applicants are going to come in with a knockout technics engineered package in a binder and it's going to be like wow and

um in our town we're also going to have folks who are going to try to do it as grassroots as they can so that's the struggle I think it seems like the applicant today he now has an engineer on board I think what we see next

time he comes will hopefully be a lot more complete now that he's brought in a professional to work with him on it yeah I think the other hard part is that our ordinance contemplates a pre you know basically a premeating with the code officer and poor Calvin's sort of

standing in [laughter] very kindly, but a lot of the stuff that we're now handling at the board level should be handled in that premeating conference. And in theory, we I mean, we should not be considering subdivisions at three or four meetings. That that's not the way it should be working. Um,

yeah, the way this was written that I was reading it earlier in the subdivision section, it says the planning board makes a determination if the application is complete, which is a little unusual, but usually that is determined before it goes to the board.

Yeah. Right. Well, is unfortunate. [laughter] So, and and so I mean just hearing the contemplations of the selectman and others, what we don't know right now is we is what our code enforcement officer is going to be and what skill set he's going to bring and how many hours they're going to have in town hall right now.

We should cheer him with Freeport. They're hiring. Yeah, I know. Freeport's going to need full time. That's pretty full. No. So, so that was just my recommendation for me, but I could, you know, definitely agree not to have one and just kind of go, you know, application by application and see how it goes. And you can do that.

I just need some basic help and what to review here because obviously I was reading something that I don't even know why it's in here if I shouldn't have been referring to it uh on this growth management and establishment. Well, so what that goes back to is that was and something that was established, but you can't do much with it without a current comp plan and as you know the comp plan we put forward in 2012 was rejected and we don't have a

current comp plan. So um that's where that one that's why we're all kind of like we're stuck. So, we're going to have to alter the ordinances after the comp plan is drafted to reflect either make that current or take it out or whatever. So, they they there's a state statute that provides you can't have a growth ordinance unless you have an updated I think it's every 10 years comp plan.

So, it's on the books. We just can't enforce it. Okay. Um can I just bring up another topic? Sure. Yeah, one that I addressed with you. Thank you for answering my emails over the weekend, but it seemed to me that how can you sell a lot before the it says you can't sell a lot before the lot's been subdivided and and if it doesn't have utilities going to it.

So, I think the issue is that it wasn't a subdivision when you sold it. So under state law and our local ordinance, it only becomes a subdivision when you divide it into three. And there are a lot of exceptions for that. So when he sold off that lot, he had only divided into two. So at the time he sold it, it wasn't a violation or anything like that.

And there was another parcel that he broke off, but it was a family to his son, which is yet another part of the state statute. Should we be requiring that? No, it's on the other side of the CMP line, so it's not contiguous. It wasn't. So,

but isn't it the same lot with just a easement running through it? Well, that's not an e CMP owns that covered it on the we had that conversation. Yeah. So, the deed parcel is a separate lot. May meeting? So, yeah. So, [clears throat] I'm not going to be available for the May meeting. That's scheduled for the May 3rd.

3D That works better for me because then I can attend the hearing for planning board. But yeah, so that's a Wednesday. Wednesday, May 10th. think anything you confirm that the room availability Wednesdays are usually open except for

yeah not the 10th no I I don't usually staff those meetings if they needed I I staff a committee for the city of Portland they don't usually need me so unless stuff blows up. Do you want it at 7:00, Mindy? You want to go at 6:30? Start.

We'll do seven like usual. Okay. You're the last hold out to 7:00. What's that? Is it This is the last hold out for 7:00 meetings. Yeah, most of them move to 6:30. Oh, most people have pushed it to 6:30. That's maybe a conversation, a bigger.

It's not a big conversation. Keep our normal time. Okay. Just amp time to get out of the big city. I guess at some point if we'd like to push it to 6, 6:30 is a little more challenging for me, but yeah. So, so I can make either work, whatever.

Leave it at 7. Yeah. Yeah. Do you are you good with saying the 10th or Yeah, it should be fine. I mean, okay. Do we want maybe like another day that week and like if Wednesday doesn't work for Ian? It should work cuz the problem is we get slack and slack and then

t are they usually on Tuesdays? What the first and second Tuesday? Every other Tuesday. Every other period at 6:30 period. Okay. [cough] Triple it out. Mhm. will be Wednesday, May 10th at 7:00. That's good. So, stuff will be due.

Stuff will be due. It'll same. It'll stay the same. We will. Yep. Because we're giving them an extra week pushed out to the 28th because we'll be meeting a week later, right? Right. So, I'm going to have another conflict which is not going to work that way.

Oh, okay. application will still be due. Okay. Same Friday, April 21st. Yep. Okay. [clears throat] Okay. Second. All those in favor? [laughter]