Planning Board - Regular Meeting

All right. Um, if everybody could go ahead and turn their microphones on and the if the board could come to order. Thank you so much. All right. Um, good evening everybody. Welcome. Um, at this time the chair would look favorably upon um a couple of motions for our alternates. Motion for uh Mr. West. Okay. There's been a motion to see Brian West as a voting member this evening. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Moved by Paul, seconded by Brett. Any discussion? All right, seeing none. And just uh for parliamentary reasons, um only the four regular members are going to vote on this motion and then each person as they come on can vote on the motions. Um all those in favor say I. I. I.

All opposed, abstensions. All right. The motion passes four to zero. Um the chair will look favorably upon a further motion. Make a motion to see Doug Finnen. Second. All right. It's been moved by Brett, seconded by Brian to seat Doug Finnen. We seated him. Yeah. Yeah. So, um any discussion on the motion? I I guess we have to. Well, uh um to it, I guess. All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Extensions. All right. Motion passes five to zero. Um and the chair would look favorably upon a further motion. Move uh Miss Faria. All right. Second. It's been moved by uh Paul, seconded by Mr. Finnen. Um any discussion on the motion to seat Liz. All right. Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. All opposed.

Abstensions. All right. The motion is adopted. Six to zero. Thank you everybody for for that. Um our fir our our first order of business um is um the continued public hearing for Chapel Tractor uh 251 and 247 Route 125 tax maps 216 216 lots 38 and 39. Um and even though we know you if you could um turn on the microphone and introduce yourself and and we'll get we'll get started.

Yes sir. Thank you Mr. Chairman and good evening. My name is Christian Smith, engineer with Beiel Associates, here representing Chapel Tractor on this project. And uh Ted Higgley, one of the owners, is uh with us here in the audience as well. And I think most of this board showed up to the sitewalk last weekend, um which I thought went very well. And uh hasn't really been any substantial changes to the plans. We've added a couple of notes based on the engineers commentary at the last hearing. Have not published those yet. I figured we would just wait until we have conditions of approval. Um, and I think there was a couple of notes added uh to address the final comments from uh Glenn Greenwood as well. Uh, so with that, I'll just entertain any comments or questions that the board has at this point.

Questions or comments from board members? No, I thought the sidewalk went well. Uh, it's nice to get a visual, you know, to walk the property. Oh, sure. And and I do think that especially with regards to the pond, clean that out will really uh make it much more appealing. Agreed. And the chair had uh two concerns.

Yes. Um thank you for for reminding me. Yes. So Kristen um who couldn't be here this evening just had a couple of comments. Um so the first one um and I'm just going to read verbatim what Kristen said. Um uh given that they are removing a lot of vegetation currently buffering uh from the property to the south and the visuals will change from an old building to tractors. My preference would be to replace some vegetation for a visual buffer. However, Mark was speaking to the abuter and if the abuter is not interested in a visual buffer then it's then that's fine with me. Hopefully they're they're at least able to leave some healthy trees. So that was the first one. And then the second comment, um, just want to double check that the distance between the display area and the road is adequate with and consistent with setback requirements.

And I concur with what she said, but I would um ask Glenn a setback. That's fine. It is fine. Okay.

And did did you have any thoughts on the first comment concerning the um the visual buffer? Uh well, as as I think most of you are aware, uh he is actually the owner of that property is actually Mrs. Higgley's brother. Uh so they will be in contact if he wants a couple of trees planted there. That will not be an issue. And yeah, I don't think uh Mr. Higgley's intent is to absolutely clearcut around that pond. But there, as you folks all saw that that went on the walk, there's a lot of brush uh invasives and some troubled trees there. So, we I'm certain he will leave what is

survivable and and take everything else and certainly make that a condition of approval if uh the gentleman to the south does, you know, is interested in some screening um between that shed and the uh barn. I don't see that we have any issue taking care of that. Most of the stuff you'll be working on the brush that's around the perimeter on uh correct. Yeah. And obviously cleaning the all you saw the blow down that's in the pond itself. Um uh but yes as as well you know clearing some of those trees that are ob now going to be subject to wind throw. Bunch of rocks pile over the north side of that lot. Yes.

Those are going to be used as a border. Well, the there there is, as you all know, the um the rock retaining wall out behind the parking area. So, what Mr. Higgley can use, you know, as base or even further up the wall for those, it's only about 4t in height at the max, I think. Um but yeah, his intention is to use those as he can. And as he mentioned at the sidewalk, he may relocate those um not necessarily as a border, but just as more uh you know, aesthetically pleasing landscape features. I think before you mentioned there was a building between this property and uh the southern property there where

uh those two buildings that I was referencing actually reside on that southern property, but one's a barn, one's a shed, and as somebody pointed out to me in the field, there there is a gap between the two visual gaps. Will it be something visual that you can see so you'll know how far to go out on his grass or not on his grass or Oh, the the uh property boundary is marked uh and the surveyor will take care of that. And I'm sure they're going to have to go out and field stake the uh actual limits of the new parking area as well or the new display area. Yep. Mark, you had not well you were making an uh effort to go speak to the butter. Could you elaborate? I couldn't locate Paul. Okay. Um I've put it down as one of the conditions of approval.

Yeah, I saw um I think that's adequate is fair. um or a note on the on the plan, but I think we can take care of that as a condition. I just want to make sure that Paul is is uh is happy. Yeah. All right. Um other um comments or questions from board members? Um and just Yeah. Yeah. Glenn, I just want to turn over to you. Well, I just wanted to confirm with Christian. Have we heard back from DOT?

Uh heard back from them yesterday. They requested one final little memo uh with four bullet points that he wanted me to address uh specific to to trip end generation traffic vehicles driving in the entrance um into the actual display the new display lot and uh I reviewed that with Kim Hazitarian who is uh actually a PhD traffic engineer which don't even ask me how somebody could tolerate that but he did it got a doctorate in traffic engineering ing and uh works for TEP and he made it very clear that you know because they obviously use the IT codes that are published nationally for traffic uh generation and he said anything we find in there is going to be developed based on unit count or square footage of a building. He's like you have neither. He's like, I would suspect less than 5% of anybody that wants to go to Chapel Tractor might go in that entrance. Uh, so it's virtually going to be a net zero change in in traffic volumes to the store property. Uh, and really the the intent of leaving that entrance is just so people can get in there to maintain in the winter mostly, I would assume. Uh, but you know, if there's whatever any issues that need to be dealt with with the parking area. And so I addressed those four comments, uh, sent it back to, uh, Lucas Miller up at District 6, and he got back to me right away with an email saying, "Yep, this all looks good. I see everything. Thank you for getting that memo together, and I'm off tomorrow, so I expect we'll see the permit either tomorrow or or sometime next week."

So that that should be a condition. It's number two already. Yep. And did we ever act on the waiver? Uh, no. They they act on the waiver or the conditional use. The waiver is in your pack.

All right. Any um further uh questions or discussion from board members? And Glenn, were there any other outstanding comments or There weren't any on mine. And I believe that um we also got the sign off from Terara. So I can bring that up if you want. Yeah, that'd be great. Absolutely.

And then before we dive into voting, we'll just want to go over the conditions of approval.

I'll go with the 30th one. might be too small, right? Yeah. 100. Is that good? Yeah, that should be good. Just let me know when you're done with that. I was 99% sure that this had been all resolved. That's why I didn't put them in your packet. Okay. All right. Folks ready to keep scrolling

and that note will be added to the plan set about already has been Mr. Kennedy. I just haven't published those yet. Like I said, I was waiting for additional conditions that might have to be added to the plans before doing that. Comment closed to be determined by the planning board. We already determined that the difference between um display and parking. I believe we resolved that last. We resolved that uh landscaping again the you know we we'll discuss that with the neighbor to the south and he wants a couple trees put in they right we incorporate that to

drainage evaluation that's the condition that that's the waiver request waivers we'll talk about that comment closed closed. Comment closed. Comment closed. Determine whether playing invasive around the pond. We've already talked about close. Good. Terrific. Okay. The waiver. All right. Yes. So, I think the next order of business would be the waiver. Um, before we go into discussion, the chair will entertain a motion concerning the waiver. Make a motion that we accept the waiver. There a second. Second.

All right. It's been moved by Mr. Finnon and seconded by Brett um that we uh grant the waiver. Um discussion of questions from board members now. We're doing two waivers here, right? Yeah, it's just one waiver. It's it's just one waiver. Just the one provided in your packet reads and the other one's a conditional use permit. Okay. Yeah. I I evidently forgot to change that. I think that's exactly what happened. Changing it from uh two to three. Yeah. No. All right. So, so just to clarify, the motion is on is on the waiver. Uh

it's been moved and seconded. Um was there any discussion or questions? All right. Um seeing none, um all those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Abstensions. All right. Wait a minute. Wait. It was one. Yeah. I wasn't here for the first half, so I Sure. That was an I. No, I'm I'm obaining. So, it passes with six yeses and one extension. Gotcha. I'm just No, we're good. I'm an Thank you. Terrific. All right. Um, now on to um the um conditional approval. So, um uh before we do the motion, perhaps we should go over the the different conditions.

Yeah, I'm I'll give you a moment, Mark. Yes, there's only two. Um, if the butter would like screening between the lots, it will will be provided. Now, don't we have to do a cup? We do. I'm sorry. And that's for the uh the the clearing and the work within the wetland buffer to the pond.

Correct. Hey, what Glenn? It's it's a conditional use permit for the for the access way that is in the wetland buffer. And I believe actually Glenn the the tree the vegetation clearing around the pond as well though I'm not sure if that cutting Noel I'm not sure that's actually part of it but um we we cite it all anyway. Yeah it it we don't really care about that but you you did so you made it a part of the discussion which I appreciate. You're you're welcome. Which we should do in a separate motion. Yes. From a conditional approval. Correct.

Correct. So, the conditional use um uh permit is found at 70020009 in your book and there are five criteria that they have to answer. Oh, I'll bring that up. Hold on. 700 009 uh 00. So 700 0002 009 001 uh

01 is it 29? Yeah, there there we go. Um All right. So, um, do we go through each point in a se as a motion if I recall correctly? Bruce always likes to do Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Bruce isn't here. Bruce isn't here. That was my point in saying that is that you can do it anyway that you really want to All right. Um the chair will entertain a motion of

and the and the reason for this is we only allow that there be vehicular movement in the buffer if there is in fact this conditional use permit granted. And because they're displaying vehicles there, they're going to have to be moving. They're going to have to there's going to be vehicular activity in that that buffer area. And so that's why conditional use permit is necessary. Do we have to do them all separately or can we do them as whole? Our protocol is to do them separate. Okay. Historically, yes. You want to read them because I can't say it.

Okay. Sure. Um yeah, I can I can read them. So, um I'll I'll move um uh a a the proposed construction is essential to the productive use of land not within the wetlands conservation district. Is there a second? I'll second that. Okay. You got Y. All right. Any discussion? Just the productive use being the display. That's correct. Right. Okay. Any further discussion? All right. Um all those in favor say I. I.

All opposed. Any abstensions? All right. Motion passes seven to zero. Um I'll move B. Uh designing construction and maintenance methods will be uh such as to minimize detrimental impact upon the wetland and will include restoration of the site as near as nearly as possible to its original grade and condition. Okay. Moved by Brian. Second. Seconded by Doug. And the detrimental impact being just to restore and clear the brush. Correct. In this in this case where I'm I'm like most almost every other case that this conditional use permit is granted. They're removing buildings, right,

and making it look more natural than it's looked in the last 70 years. I'm just trying to get the ration. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. I. All opposed. Abstensions. All right. The eyes have it. Seven to zero. Um section C. No alternative route which does not cross a wetland or has less detrimental impact on the wetland is feasible. That does that even apply here? No. Well, they can't. Yes. It's with

it's within the wetlands buffer. That's really what you're granting. it's for to drive and park. I should say park in particular. You could say that it doesn't apply because they're not they actually aren't um doing any direct wetland impact, right? They're going wetland buffering. So, what do you think? We can just kind of go I I would just make a motion on it and dispense with it. Okay. Is is is there a motion to dispense or I I think we're just going to go ahead and and vote. Just make a motion for it. Motion. Yeah. Yeah. Is there a sec? Moved by Doug. Is there a second? A seconded.

All right. Seconded by Brett. Um any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Abstensions. All right. The eyes have it. 7 to zero. Um section D. Stream and wetland crossing shall be avoided whenever possible. When necessary, no wetland crossing shall exceed a length of 250 lineal feet and crossings shall comply with state recommended design standards to minimize impacts to flow and animal passage. And again, you're not actually doing a wetland. Right. Right. Make the motion. There a second. All right. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

All opposed abstensions. All right. The eyes have at 7 to zero. And then the final uh I believe this is the final one. It is um wetland boundary markers um of a type approved by the planning board will be set in order to visually delineate the furthest extent of the wetland. There are boundaries already. Sorry, say that again. There are boundaries already. Correct. Or will there be or will the markers were there at the site? Right. I do I do remember seeing those. Okay. Make a motion. All right. Is there a second? Second. All right. It's moved and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

I. All opposed? Abstensions? All right. The eyes have it. 7 to zero. All right. Now, are we on to the the conditional use? Uh the final conditional use approval. Um, if the abuter would like screening between the lots, it will be provided. And the second one is New Hampshire DOT driveway permit, approved DOT driveway permit. Does that encompass everything? All right. Um, would somebody like to move that uh the conditional use? So, that's two different ones though, right? Right. Those are the two conditions for approval. Yeah, those we can vote on together. Yeah.

Okay. There was a motion. All right. Seconded by Doug Finnen. Um any further discussion um or questions from the board. Any comment from the public or abutters? All right. Seeing none, are we ready to move to the vote on the conditional use permit on the conditional approval? Excuse me. All right. All those in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. Abstensions. All right. The eyes have it. Seven to zero. Thank you very much, folks. Yep. Thank you. You're welcome.

All right. Um during um as we start this next discussion, do we maybe want to pass around the consent agenda? So, we'll do that while we're Yeah, we can do that. Sure. Um All right. So, we'll go ahead and pass around the consent agenda and we will Oh, yeah. Yes. No, I was just going to say I'm representing Mr. Fzone on this next one as well. Okay. Terrific. And we've Yeah. Unfortunately, it's still me. Uh I do have a couple of plans for that particular piece of uh land that we're talking about which I can hand out and you know we've got I think three copies so we can kind of lay them out so the board members can look at them for the discussion. Do you need to take this up formally because this is just a discussion or do you want me to hand these out now?

You can hand them out now. Okay.

Thank you sir. upside down. Thank you.

All right. Um, so, um, uh, Mr. Fzone, are you going to come up or are you going to come up or Yeah. Sure. Um, and even though we know you, if you could just introduce yourself, that' be

I'm Joe Fzone, uh, who's going to be developing the is uh known as the Ruo property and the Robinson property. And because this is a new zoning bylaw, we just wanted to discuss our interpretations or things that we see missing so that I don't get off on the wrong track designing something that's not going to work. Okay. So, Christian Christian was going to go over some uh zoning questions and then I was going to come back up and really go over some aesthetic and construction questions to do with the buildings. Okay. And and when the time is appropriate, um I'll read in the comments from Kristen um when the time's appropriate.

Okay. Go ahead.

Yeah, you go first. So, we just wanted to make sure uh because obviously we're learning this zoning this new code uh you know the same way that that you folks are. Um I guess the the the first issue that I found in the zoning which kind of contradicts itself. It appears that the new ordinance describes multif family as duplexes up to eight units per building. But when you go to the next section in the code, um, and I don't think this was a new caveat, it might have been, but it it talks to multif family being three units or more. So, I mean, you you tell us what your preference is, and we will obviously abide by it.

Yeah. I mean, according to the state definition for multifamily, it's either three or in the case of workforce housing, for some reason, it's five. Oh, interesting. I've I've never understood why the state has those two. That that's bizarre. But yeah, I mean, I don't I don't think Mr. Fzone has any real heartburn either way. We just wanted to be clear that if the minimum you want to see is three, that's that's where we go. That is the appropriate townhouse type. That's the appropriate one to use.

Okay. A and just to give you folks an idea, we're probably going to be looking at a mix of townhouse multif family and garden apartment style buildings. Um so that that's our thought process at this point, but I mean bear in mind everything you see on that plan is either tax map boundary or uh NRCS, which is the county soils mapping. Uh Joe has had a um professional soil scientist go out and do the wetland delineation um at this point. I believe survey is working actively on picking that up, but they're also obviously going to do the boundary survey, the topographic survey. Uh once we get all that together, we can kind of start doing some preliminary layouts. um and you know then decide okay well where are we going to look for test pits for septic receiving areas uh obviously there's going to be a minimum of one uh community well uh for water supply uh and you know we'll just see where we end up I mean uh just to give you a hint our initial numbers based on the county soils mapping we don't have piss or sight specific soils which can change a lot we don't have a formal bound boundary, which can also change pretty significantly from old tax map boundaries. Uh, but we were coming up into the neighborhood of the property being able to sustain just based on soils loading about 120 give or take units, not buildings.

So, Christian, are the lots that we're talking about 30 and two, 30 and 24? Yes, 30 and 24 are owned by Mr. and two is owned by Mr. Rice in inconveniently placed for Mr. Falzone. Oh, the uh the cemetery says that's the that's the cemetery. Yes. Yeah.

Which has a statemandated 25 foot no disturb buffer around the entire exterior of it. So that's uh we're well aware of that law and we will be obviously adhering 30 is the uh park right the what is it that rule correct yes yes and the park has been excavated out back it's all clear yes yeah that's also that that was some compliance issues going on there and those will be resolved during this process

yeah they certainly will and and Mr. Falzone has already been proactive to that front. Um they have gone out with the soil scientist uh and done kind of a grid test pit pattern where the clearing had taken place to find out if indeed there was stump dumps, there were brick or concrete burial areas. And I think they've got a fair handle on exactly where those locations are. And it's my understanding, Joe can give me the uh the vaudeville hook here if I'm incorrect, but uh my understanding is that the owner prior to the closing taking place, where those were found, that material will be removed, disposed of legally and properly, and actually filled with refilled with clean fill.

Yeah. And there'll be wetlands delineation there as well, of course, in any way. Well, that that's been done. We just don't have the survey data. I know that that that possibly I haven't seen it yet. I've been waiting for that report. Um possibly some wetlands in that back corner may need some mitigation potentially. Potentially. Yep. We'll we'll have to see what the boundary is, where the clearing went, etc. Um but that you're absolutely right that southwesterly corner if you look at this NRCS soils maps did show up as a hydric soil which is typically wetland soil. So Yep. Yeah. And that all will be mitigated and uh taken care of during the process.

Yes sir. Uh let me see if I had anything else. Joe, am I missing anything else that I wanted to speak to? Oh, the only other thing is as we move forward on this process, uh we wanted to uh query the board as to whether or not you guys would be comfortable that you know as we're going through the design process making design decisions that we are able to uh to confer with with Mark and Glenn outside this forum just if we have questions on how things apply and what we're finding that kind of I mean I think it kind of keeps you know this board apprised of that with with these two gentleman's presence at every meeting. So just wanted to make sure you guys

and if you had any questions Mark you'd go to the town engineer. Oh abs abs well the the conversation that he's talking about is very common for us to do. We talked to a lot of people uh in a preliminary basis to make sure that they're on their track to compliance. And if we have any questions about what you guys want to see, that's why they're here today is because we wanted you to give the opportunity to have the hear the say on what ordinances you created and your interpretation of the ordinance. Yeah. Particularly because we're the first ones in under this ordinance.

It's a learning process for everybody. So, I can't um emphasize enough that I hope we have a formal design review on this set of properties before Oh, I I I think Joe does that almost invariably. Almost all the time. And I hate for this to be the first time he didn't do it. Oh, yeah. It will not be not not something this this complicated.

Absolutely. Absolutely not. Yeah. and and you know the reason for the board's uh knowledge of why we would would you know want to have these conversations and such is uh things do come up and it's like well this might be a little gray let's see if we can make it black or white and typically talking with the guy that interprets the ordinances and the regulations is a is a great way to do it. Um, some municipalities boards do get fussy when you have conversations outside their noticed hearings. But anyway, I dwellings would be 120 units 120 units

that I mean and bear in mind that's based on tax map boundary and NRCS soils, but that's based solely on soils loading capacity for septic systems and the and the state's criteria for one. Well, Well, what whatever well you see, there's going to be two. That's Amanda. You got to have redundant. That Well, that's the initial plan, but you never know. Just seems like a lot of wellings for one well or two wells. Yeah. And that may be the case. Uh and if that is the case, we'll have to locate other ones.

Okay. you know, and and as those are determined, if we are determined we're going to do more than one location, one more than one groundwater extraction location, uh the size of those protective radiuses change because it's all based on how many units you're serving and daily flow. Yeah. Okay. But we won't we won't have that answer until we get in the ground and see what mother nature wants to send up. It's quite premature to do that. Yeah. Yeah. That all could change with septic loading for the potential commercial development that'll be there as well. You got to figure out those uses and figure out the septic loading, figure out where all your septic systems can go. We're very very early in this process

and and that's intentional. I mean, we wanted to get you guys, you know, get in front of you guys with this at that stage. Aliz, you had your hand. Yeah, I had I had two different things. One is how many acres is this? Uh, a total of all three is 30. 30. Okay. And my other question or my other comment would be if you're having the outside conversations, I do ask that you have them with Mark and Glenn at the same time. Absolutely. Not just one of them. You know, I don't wouldn't want all the decision to put be put in one person's hands. But if you were going to confer with them outside of the planning board that it's just you have both of them there at the same time invariably. That's how Thank you. Yeah.

Uh Paula, you would next and then we'll go Doug. the the and I I understand it's an estimate of 120. Uh is that both u both uses commercial and residential? That was our residential calculation because we can't really do the commercial evaluation until we know the uses or have an idea of what those want to be filled with because retail is obviously a lot different than a dental office which is a lot different than a you know business office or a you know real estate office or something like that. So until we have kind of a handle on that, which again will come as as all this progresses, uh we will be able to figure that out. Basically, what we boil it down to is here's the gallons per day of septic this property can handle based on the soils and then we back it into the number of bedrooms based on 150 gallons a day per bedroom is the is the state criteria and and Brentwood does not have anything more restrictive than that as far as it's concerned but obviously those commercial uses will get indeed backed out of that total number.

Yeah. has to be state would not approve it, nor would you folks. Right. So, so um but but before I I go to Doug, um because we're on the subject of commercial, I'll go ahead and just mention Kristen's comments because her comments were uh concerning the questions that Mr. Falzone had about uh the commercial uh commercial development. Um so um the her first comment was just clarifying it's 50% of the of the total gross square footage on the first floor of the development. So there's really no ambiguity there. It's not correct. Yeah. Y

um and she also commented um um if he's asking whether the commercial mandate can be met by placing commercial use on both stories of one building. My answer meaning Kristen's answer would be no. I agree with her. I also that is not consistent with my interpretation. Um, we voted on the commercial mandate based on the idea that the first floor commercial would help create some diversity of housing, um, potentially smaller, more affordable rent rental units, and then also the intent of the legislature and allowing towns to mandate commercial. And the first floor was to help recreate or be or be consistent with traditional New England town mixeduse development with apartments above retail. And I agree with her interpretation. I think the first floor is what was the intention. Um and then the unit limits are uh a maximum within the constraints of environmental wells as well as septic requirements which you were talking about.

Yeah. No. Um so so I just wanted to mention her comments on the commercial development. It is 50% of the total gross square footage on the first floor. Um and I agree with her interpretation of that. Um uh uh uh Doug, you you need to come to a microphone, Mr. F. Apologize. Do you want me to I can set you up with a handheld if you'd like. Why don't I do that? Yeah. Yeah, I think that Oh, this guy just turn it on. Yeah, just turn. I got it. I say that and then the green light wouldn't come up.

Hi. Um it's very typical wherever we go to a medical facility an office that you can have office on the sec second floor office still brings in the same amount square footage usage. We talked about at hearings that we can put this space anywhere on the site if multiple Yeah, that's a misinterpretation of what we said. It it's it can be in any of the buildings on that first floor. First floor. We were always consistent on first floor. We never said second floor ever.

Okay. But I'll give you a perfect example with with dictates. When you say in a garden style building, you can only do 24 up to 24 units. And it says it can only be on two stories. When I go to build a townhouse,

when I go to build the townhouse, I'm not governed by limiting two stories. I'm governed by 35 period. Doesn't matter what you did not figure out. That's why that's why you had multiple meetings and what's the difference I'm fine says You have to remember there was no challeng This was the reason why you wouldn't be able to take out.

So I I mean I I I have to say I I really strongly disagree with with you saying that like our legislative intent doesn't matter. I mean, how how can you say that courts always take legislative intent into account when they're when they're looking at the text of legislation? This is a a brand new zone that you went through. I'm not saying I'm going to do what I'm saying is if I invest two or three million building and I get a commercial use that specif 25 or 50% of resid

it's nothing like that but But yeah, um that's why I'm here. I appreciate that. I do. Yeah. Glenn, would you address that? I believe that our language is very clear that the commercial activity happens on the first floor. Um if I'm I the state law specifies I think it specifically says that. So yeah, do we have the language? If Joe thinks that it doesn't say that and um we believe that it does, then perhaps it is something that gets adjudicated in court. But we never there was the language says that the commercial activity takes place on the first floor.

And just so you guys don't have to hunt, I just located it. Uh the the specifics to the I have it. It's right here. Yeah. D3. Oh, where? Oh, wait. It it was it was Wade Wade. That's that's the language that the voters of Brentwood voted for. You're in C. So where's D4?

And and the the I can also read the the language of the state law. 50% of the first floor first floor and and in the in in the law it clearly says um may require up to blah blah blah ground floor space. So both the state law and our um ordinance I think is very clear also as I recall it was if you had two different buildings you could have 100% in the first floor. I remember oh yeah absolutely and then the other one had nothing could have nothing. I remember that discussion. I'm reading this as as clear and unambiguous. Okay. Okay. And that's fine. I've also show it to me in writing and take it. I've also provided

What is in writing? It's right there. Joe, that 50% you talked about is 50% of our total footage. No, no. That's not what it says. D4. Yeah. first floor 50% of the first floor as retail space. I I mean I'm trying I don't think there's any reason for us to argue this point here. I we're very certain that we understand what it says and Joe's very certain that that is not what it says even though it says it right. So well so that we're we're in the upside down world.

No, that discussion just becomes one that he Yeah. Yeah, I I I think we should reel reel this part in. Um, when it comes to the 100 foot buffer setback, Joe, I also sent you the meeting minutes of when that was enacted by by Miss Aldridge. Okay. And I and I'm not saying earlier Yeah, you you are you are correct in saying that, right? But it was changed

and the board voted on it and so did the town's people of Brownwood. So I I think we've adequately addressed those points. Were there other points, Mr. Talzone, that we did not that we haven't addressed yet? style buildings states not so I understand but still I just want to verify that Y

yeah, sure. Um uh so uh garden style apartments uh maximum of 24 units and a two-story structure breakup building um massing with a combination of varying exterior features such as siding materials, color, window sizes, shutters, varying roof lines, uh dormers along with porches and decks, excuse me, but the 35 ft is a townwide height restriction, right? It is. Yeah, correct. So it doesn't matter if it's Right. Are you trying to say you could get pictures of the roof? Yeah. Could Were you trying to say that you could get three out of 35 ft? You can get three. Yeah.

I'm just saying I can't exceed 35 ft in anyway. That's correct. Yeah, I agree with your interpretation. Correct. That interpretation is not uh consistent with the town of Brentwood as a whole. There are many residential structures, mine included, probably many people in this room that are at 35 ft. Well, I have a walk out basement, so it's definitely 35 ft to that to that roof line. So, I'm just saying what I'm saying is it's not out of character for the town of Prim, right? It's really in character.

My next question was duplex.

Correct. Correct. Correct. 35 ft. What I what I was saying is could you put three stories in 35 ft was my question because a lot of times Yeah. My brother house where they have a bonus room. Right. Right. Yeah. Technically, you'd call it two and a half because you're really only

Yeah. And I think I cancele

on the first floor. Correct. That is your That's your decision. So like some developers, they may decide that in the building that's in the front they put their commercial space 100% and then the rest of the development you know it's taken care of. Now I as you know it was time.

Correct. I can I can leave that. Well, you cannot put multif family development there. You can put and I'm asking you in residentiality.

What ordinance are you reading from, sir? Is that the workforce housing ordinance? Yeah. You have there's a minimum acreage to that, sir. Right. Right. has to be 10, but if it's five, you can you can do it with a special exception, I believe. Yes. I mean, I recently saw that. Mhm. That's basically all. Okay. I I just want to clarify that that the question you had about the 25% of the 50% was that just a type like I didn't understand that well

question at all I have 80% of all my res on the first and all that all that garages is 80,000. I have my body, right?

Well, I I think the confusion was was the 25%. Yeah, I worded it. I I think we understand each other. It was just the wording of your email and it it confused Kristen a little bit, too. But I think we cl I think we clarified that that that you understand it's 50% of the first floor. So, right. Yeah. You you could potentially have two buildings exactly the same size and put all commercial under one, right? And residential in the other. You're you're meeting the the word of the law. Absolutely. Oh, go ahead. Um Doug,

Mr. I have a question for you on this particular piece of uh property. Could you give me a visual of what you're thinking? Is it more like three pawns with multif family? Okay. Three ponds is all single single family, right? I know. We've already got Yeah.

Yeah. But what we enision I guess I don't know. So when I history with deals all then he went the building. So when I signed the contractions after he spoke to me and when we built the big There was a valley. He said, "How big was the valley?" He said, "Not real big." He said, "10 of cinder,

maybe they have pictures. They show some metal. You can get I said, "Okay, you have to pay which is coming to you next week." and he started to say an acre and 3/4 and a halfick. When I say bricks pieces and crush, okay, we're going to get He takes them all. He has expensive. I'm I'm I I I'm just I'm I'm not trying to be rude, but just I'm going to kindly

ask that we kind of get get to the point get to the point. Yeah. All right. So, you'll get that report next week and we'll we'll see what we're going to do with that report. If I'm going to send that report to our town engineer, I'm going to need a check for someone to pay for that. Whether that be Ruo or would that be you? So Ruo and I'll get it clean up. Yeah. And he wants to get out of town. And I'm guessing anywhere from 500 to $1,000 would be appropriate. Okay.

Because if they're going to review that report, I'm you know, I think 500 would be fine. But I need I'm going to need some sort of payment for that submission and then it will go to code enforcement. All right. Um um again, I'm not trying to be rude. It just it comes naturally to me sometimes. What can I say? Um so, um I'm just not sure how appropriate it is to get too into the weeds of a project that's not technically before us yet. So, I'm going to ask, do we have any further questions or comments specifically about the questions that Mr. Fzone came in here with? Seeing none. All right. Well, um thank you, Mr. Falone. I really do I I I know we were kind of hard on you, but I really do appreciate you coming in. It was Yeah.

Yeah. Um, no. I really appreciate you coming in to clarify these. You do this really well for a living. You gota get out and quite honestly, Mr. Chairman, that that kind of feedback, it's exactly what we're looking for. That's that's what we need. Particularly me. No, you can get outdoors before it dries out. You hear the rain? Yeah. Yeah. I was just thinking to myself, Joe spoke about 10 minutes too long because it took me a couple to figure out that that was actually rain pounding on the road. And you saw what it did west of us. Oh, yeah. It's been miserable. I think I I heard there was actually

a supercell up near Rutland, Vermont. I don't know if a tornado actually spewed out of it, but but it that must have been bad. This is this is a bad front. In any event, thank you very much, folks. I appreciate your time tonight on both fronts and uh we'll see you soon. Thank you. Thank you. All right. All right. So So next we next we have um next we have the consent agenda that um we'll pass around in inside the consent agenda. You're going to find one check for SFC for the uh chapel tractor review. But there's going to be some checks here from Mustriano Group because I'm going to take it out of his escrow to record that site plan.

All right, let's go and start that. Well, um, thank you. Um, all right. Next, um, so we'll pass around the consent agenda here. Um, next order of business is approval of the April 2nd minutes. Is there a motion? Thank you. Bye, Christian. I'm looking around thinking byebye. Thanks. Okay. All right. Um, do we have a motion on the April 2nd minutes? All right. Is there a second? I second. All right. Um,

all right. Sorry. One moment. put the date here on this one. Okay. Yes, there is. Yeah. All right. Okay. So, the the April 2nd minutes have been u moved um and seconded. Is there any discussion? All right. Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. I. All opposed. Any abstensions?

All right. So, that passes with two abstensions. All right. Um the consent agenda is going around. Um next order of business is approval of the um April 11th sidewalk minutes. Is there a motion? Make a motion to approve. All right. It's been moved by Doug. Is there a second? A second. Seconded by Nate. Um any discussion? All right. Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. I. All opposed? Abstensions? All right. Um, it passes with one abstension. Sometimes they shut off just their time on timers.

All right. Um, so the motion was passed with one abstension. All right. Who abstained from sidewalk list? Thank you. All right. Um, any other business uh to come before the board at this time?

Um, I just have um uh an update for folks just uh on the legislative front. Um, just a couple of things. Let me just pull up my notes to refresh my memory here. So, um the House is going to be voting next week on the bill um that would um um uh increase tolls on outofstate um easy passholders. Um it passed the Senate unanimously by a voice vote. We we already talked about that. Um um it's going to be coming up before the House next week. Um the House uh committee voted unanimously unanimously to pass it. Um it is not on the consent calendar though because it probably just would have gotten pulled off anyway. Um so you know we'll see what ends up happening there. It has bipartisan support but that's really no guarantee of anything. So

to raise the tolls correct on that on uh non New Hampshire easy pass um if that would pass it sounds like it's going to it goes to AOT and she'll veto it but they've got enough to override her.

It's unclear. So the the thing is it in theory, yes, they have enough to override because the Senate it passed unanimously, but it was a voice vote and once they once the governor vetos it and they have to vote to override, it has to be a roll call vote. And so we'll see what happens because there are a lot of Republicans that may have been comfortable voting I when they weren't necessarily on the record opposing the governor's position. But once it has to be a roll call vote, we'll see and the governor is probably going to apply some considerable pressure on some of these senators. Um, you know, I I I want to be optimistic, but I also want to be realistic that once these senators have to go on the record, um, it could change the calculus for them. Um, so, you know, we'll have to, you know, we'll just have to see see continue to monitor that situation.

Just the north and south one. No. So, is it does impact all the tolls, although the different tolls are impacted differently? I would have to pull up the actual bill because there have been a couple of them. They're all No. No. The the the increases vary depending on the toll. It's not it's not a one size. It's not like a one size fits all the current for the Yeah. From New Hampshire South. I'm not I I would I would have to pull up the um the the R. It's $2. It is $2. $2 free with the uh or out of status. But when in Maine, the real screw off that's four bucks. That's in Maine,

right? If you go to exit Mark 18, you pay four bucks. If you come back, you pay another four bucks. That's eight bucks to go 36 miles. As previously stated, if I'm going to get an easy pass, it's going to be a main easy pass because that's where that's where the saving Yeah. See, that's where the savings is. Yeah.

So, um so like I said, just, you know, providing some updates there. The other bill that is going to be voted on next week is um and this bill actually surprisingly the house the committee recommended that the bill be killed, but again we'll see what happens there. Um it's the the bill that would um allow um municipalities um to reduce local speed limits from 25 miles an hour to 20 miles an hour. This was a bill that the RPC is prioritizing because the slower that people go, the less um fatal these crashes are statistically. Um it passed the Senate on a bipartisan basis. Um so we'll see what the what and I I do believe the governor supports it. We'll see what happens with in the House vote next week. And then the last one was the um uh the one concerning um uh oh gosh, what oh the um the distracted driving. Uh thank you Brett. The distracted driving one. and that did pass and and uh all signs are that the governor will sign that it was a priority for her. Um so those were the legislative updates. Um Brett, were there any other RPC things that you want to touch on?

Uh we took a lot of time to talk about the the uh the mission statement and uh the goals for the RPC going through 2040 and um there it's a lengthy document. It's almost 10 pages with a variety of breakdowns and and going through and getting the the um what we consider to be the priorities from each member. Um the one thing that came out of it is that yes, it is lengthy. Yes, they are going to consolidate many of these things. In some cases, some of the categories may go away. So it's it's definitely a work in progress, but it's uh I I think that as you look at it, you know, there's a lot of things in in there that easily could be, you know, uh taken and combined with with other uh priorities within it. Um also, uh this is on a good front and and um it's the the shortage of funding that we have right now with the 10-year plan. Uh what happened is the South Road project got booted off. Well, now you know we have uh gotten a consideration and there's a short list of four projects that if the money does become available then we'll be added back onto the project list.

So this vote on the uh the tolls is extremely important if you take a look at that project because that is going to help cut down on that big shortfall that they have and it's also important for the EPING project that impacts Brentwood uh as well. And you said that was a $400 million shortfall. Yeah. So, so what ended up happening there was um the executive council at the very last second added in a Manchester project the around exit 6. Um and the council knew that there was no money for that project, but councelor John Steven who represents Manchester was really pushing for it. It was his first meeting back after he almost died. And so I think a lot of people were kind of like, you know, we're not going to say no to to this guy right now. Um talk off.

Oh, no. This was he's okay thankfully. Uh he he thankfully yeah actually this this is a good plug for CPR. So counselor John Steven he collapsed uh some good Samaritans gave him CPR and he sur thankfully survived. So that that's a good pitch for learning uh it was hands only CPR actually. So uh learn hands only CPR you could save a life. You never know. Um but in any event so he was really pushing for that exit six project. Um, and I know it sounds like I was being facitious, but I do think that there was some they wanted to be differential to him because I mean he literally like went through like a lot and it was his first meeting back. Um, the house ended up pulling that project out because there was just there was just no money for it. Um, so that was the the the shift there.

And that Epian project before you get all excited, this is something that it's just in the engineering stages right now and that's where most of the money is going. Um they don't even think that any type of construction would start till after 2028. What's going up there? You know, you know how it kind of bottlenecks right now? It's a matter of expanding out on the on the 125 up there. Yeah. Right up. Yeah. Yeah. So, so that that's uh basically in a nutshell what we did at RPC, right? Are there meetings once a month? Once a month. Once a month. Yeah. Yes. Doug.

Um, two questions. Uh, Town of Brentwood, uh, we, the select board, have received and approved the following payment. Is that it's attached on the, uh, our in our notes here for uh, $37,5368 and payroll taxes. Where is that? No one else has it. specific. I don't know a page you're holding. That's not part of our packet that I made. Sorry. You got a select board packet. Yeah, that's I think

or something came out of the printer that was in the That's Can I have that? Can I have that? Here's a secret page. Probably have more than one. Well, I have another question. you don't go far because it's in reference to you. It could have come out of the printer. Oh, okay. Yeah, we don't have it. None of us have that nice picture. The other question I had, Mark, is you wrote something underneath Kristen's comment and right here. Yeah. No, I think that was multiousing. I think that was just forwarding email off an email chain.

Okay. Yeah, because it didn't complete. No, I didn't because it wasn't relevant. That's what I Well, I read it. Sorry. Well, but if you read F if you also read Fzone's email, then you would see it was the same the same. It might be late at night. You know, you are correct. Okay. You know, the 35 ft though, he's going to have to have a pretty lousy pitch in the roof. He's going to three stores. Well, it's going to be one of those little, you know, very It's going to have to be if you wake up, do a hip style. All right. Is there any further business to come before the board? He'll propose.

What was this? Don't forget the anonymous submission. Yeah. Where did this come from? It's not anonymous. Everyone look to your left. Well, on this side, look to your left. On that side,

I would like to suggest to the planning board consider purchasing a two-sided sign on a stand with large lettering approximately two to three feet not to exceed to be determined by the planning board to read suggestions uh sitewalk here today, sitewalk here or just sitewalk. This will not only help the planning board members and guests to easily notice the location of the sitewalk. The sign could be used for ZBA in future sitewalks also. And Mark didn't do this in color, but the suggestion was a yellow background for a sort of caution just to let you know that the sitewalk was going to be located on the site and it had a red border. Mark's got a beautiful rendition of what I'm talking about. And after reviewing this with Mark and Mr. Greenwood, this has never happened before, nor do they feel it's necessary.

Well, I would think if if Doug is going to go to all the sitewalks and take his sign and put it up, I think it's a great idea. Well, that's a good good comment, Liz, because Mark does not want to be held responsible for the So, is this because I almost ran you over? That might it might be that that and uh another incident. So, Jess almost got um um Steph almost got reared. That was Yeah. Yeah. Um so, anyway, it's only a suggestion. I didn't know if it was applicable, but I did review it with Glenn. He said, "He no, that you reviewed it with me and

you did use four-letter word towards I said that I have not ever at any sitewalk in any of my towns with a four-letter word had a sign associated with the sitewalk." Okay. So, just a thought. I'm sorry. This was at one o'clock in the morning. Well, it's not about I did in theory. It's just in practice and it's a little complicated. Make a motion to adjurnn. Second. All right. All All in favor? I I um opposed. Abstensions. All right. The motion carries. Uh and please uh remember to turn off your microphones. Have a good night, everybody. Yeah, no kidding.

It is refreshing to see as