Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat up here.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Oh, hey.

Yeah, not really. Well, I wasn't most of my friends outside. Yeah, I don't think I she would not get She would not be okay with it. You're like neither of us.

Yeah. Um I was I got sick early. I got like on Christmas was probably the worst. Like I almost passed out a couple times. Like I had to I lost my voice a couple days before that but I was feeling okay. a little tired but then Christmas but it could have been everything all together and then the coffee started and then started I couldn't sleep and I was getting a little better and then all of a sudden I'm going back up again and then like when I was talking to you that day I was like I just wasn't feeling great

but yeah it got I got really bad I got a little better and then I got fat again but my cough I just started. Ready to go. Ready to go. All right, George. I think we're ready to go here. Must have stepped out. He was there a second. Can you hear us? I didn't lock him in. I promise. I'm just checking. I'm not getting the sound.

Okay. Cold.

Or is that Oh, that's you. I felt the vibration of I'm Can you hear us now, George?

It's just the music. Gotcha. Yeah.

You can have her. You can see Deon says we're live. Okay. Okay. Great. All right.

Um, welcome to the uh January 14th, 26 um, Town of Durham Planning Board meeting. This is rescheduled from last week um, due to uh, some illnesses and a lack of a quorum. So, thank you both for being here. Um, roll call. Um we have Brian Stikny, Alan Furington Capinger and myself Ba. Um all members are present. So we have a quorum. Um and if you mind standing and the pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Um I'm assuming everybody is seeing the agenda. Are there any amendments to our agenda today? I actually have two. Okay. Um one is a um a note to talk about our next meeting date. um which maybe we want to have that sooner than later at this meeting. Um and then the second one is to add a um an item at the end of the agenda to talk about the process of ordinance requests from other committees in the town. So yeah, you want to add those to the end of our meeting?

I was thinking the the the next meeting date we might want to talk about sooner than later just if it impacts anyone's application. Okay. you know, but we can do it at the end, too. It's up to you. Comments from anybody else. I do want one at the beginning, one at the end works for me. Okay. Um, let's see how things go and we'll hold off on both of them until the end of the meeting. Is that right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sounds good.

Okay. Um, minutes from the last meeting. Any comments on those? I would move to accept December 10th meeting minutes as presented. I'll second that. All in favor?

Next is umformational exchange on non-aggenda items.

Uh Mr. Chairman, board members, um I do have two quick updates. Uh the as always my monthly report uh to the town manager is included in your packet and I'm happy to answer any questions you might have on any of those topics. But also we did receive the uh digitized version of the land use what's going to be called the land use code. It's actually up on the the screen right now. And uh so it's about 183 pages which is the entire land use what's going to be the land use code. And uh we've kept out as we discussed with the select board last night any of the minor policy or administrative changes. Those are all not included in this draft. So the only thing in this draft are the editorial uh changes that were recommended by the consultant. So as you look down through the draft it, you know, it's 183 pages, but you see that box there? That's the general like terminology. uh board of selectmen, selectman, municipal officers, anywhere you see any of those terms, it'll now be consistently the select board. Uh so as you go down through what you'll see is that let me just scroll that down. So as you go through, wherever you see one of those boxes, the actual edit editing language, uh the the amendment language is in the box and then what it's going to look like is in bold print. So sometimes it's just going to be a single word that's in bold, but every edit all they're actually an even hundred uh editorial changes are all included in that draft. It's now posted on the website. I will put it on the agenda for the next meeting. And so you'll have uh a couple of meetings to go over that and just see if there's anything you're questioning or uncomfortable with. Uh we did present to the select board last night the uh minor policy changes uh and the

administrative changes the report that we did that you uh reviewed last in December. The select board is good to go with uh with your recommended recommended changes and uh there were there are two potential add-ons. One is uh being at requested by staff and basically I'll show you a diagram what they're looking for. Uh and this actually applies to a couple of subdivisions that are before you right now where the ordinance right now a straight up interpretation of it uh indicates that every lot including the end lot has to have 300 ft of road frontage measured in a straight line

and it's the ordinance is really not clear about that and if you look at the property maps at past subdivisions it's been inconsistently applied by code officers and the planning boards. So uh this this provides the uh clarity to say that the frontage on turnarounds and curved property lines can be counted uh in as long as it is contiguous. You can't have a piece of frontage on one road, piece of frontage on another road and and add them together. They have to be contiguous. So that uh the select board endorsed including that as a seventh minor policy change as requested by the staff and as I said it comes up not just on this but on other applications that the town uh code officer and and uh road commissioner saying this has got to be clarified because it's very confusing. So I will put both of those on the next agenda and we'll be able to go over them in detail. I just want to let you know they have been added to the website and you can download those as well as any others uh from the website and it's out there for the public to review as well.

So next meeting we should expect to discuss this approach. Yeah, I'll put it on as an agenda item and we can also we will also be talking about the process going forward and we can discuss also the at the next meeting. Yeah, at the next meeting that question of where do these things come from? Okay. Okay. Well, then we can hold off on my amendment then. Yeah. My agenda amendment for then. Okay. So, related to this issue. No, no, no, no. You're talking general, right? General ordinance the details as well as the process for getting to the town meeting. Yeah. No, it wasn't about this and then the process for ordinance requests. Scratch it till next.

Yeah, let's scratch it till next meeting. All right. Yeah, that's fine. Thank you. Sure. Okay. Um, are there for any residents for informationational exchange on non-aggenda items? Oh, non-residents negative. Okay. Um, continuing business, a summary of planning board slight walk of Greystone Ridge subdivision held on December 20th of 2025. Um, I have provided the board with my draft summary. I hope people had chance to read that.

Um, any questions, comments? Should I walk through this with everybody? Good. Number two, thank you for uh working that out, Ryan. Sure. Yeah, maybe a recommendation. Should we read your your summary of observation for everyone or was this post? This was posted, right? Yes, this was I don't think we're going to go through it unless we're comments. The important thing is the important thing is because there's no no because there's no recording or minutes at the meeting under state law, you have to do at least documenting who was there uh and when it was done. And so this fulfills the state legal requirement for a record of that sidewalk meeting.

Okay. And I think we'll probably get into some of this in our meeting today application review. Absolutely. Good. All right. Um, next you should have a motion to accept it. Oh. Oh, I'll make a motion to accept the uh the planning board sitewalk summary. I'll second for the Greystone Ridge subdivision. All in favor? Thank you.

All right. So, um, now we open it up to public hearing. on the Polari subdivision plan for Greystone Ridge on Pinkenham Brook 2 35 and 42. Um, and I have a scripted statement that I need to make regarding the public hearing. So hopefully um you all can understand what I'm saying and I'm clear. Let me know if there's any any uh questions here. But um we'll now open up the public hearing before the planning during planning board on the application for a Greystone subdivision. Um the applicant Greystone Ridge LLC and their um representative Pterodine Consultants uh the project located on Blue Jway Pinkham Road in Durham. Uh the purpose of this public hearing is to receive oral and written testimony relevant to the board's review of this application under the town's adopted ordinance and sub standards. This hearing is not a forum to debate broader town policies or growth management issues which are established by town meeting and must be applied by the planning board. The board's authority is limited to determining whether the application meets or fails to meet the adopted subdivision standards. Before we begin, I'll go through some ground rules and procedures for the hearing. Under the pling board's bylaws, um the chair is is responsible for describing the purpose of the hearing and the procedures to be followed. The board may receive oral or documentary evidence but must exclude testimony that is irrelevant or unduly repetitious. I will determine by I will determine the revelence or of testimony or evidence

present. Any board member may challenge that determination by motion subject to a majority vote of the board. All testimony will be taken in an orderly fashion. Speakers are asked to not interrupt others. The chair may impose reasonable time limits as necessary to ensure that everyone who wishes to speak has an adequate opportunity to do so. Um, and I'll gauge that by the size of the crowd and see how many people are here from the public to to see how much time will allow for each member of the public. Um, everybody will be given the opportunity to present their information, submit rebuttal evidence, and conduct crossexamination of other priorities through the chair within reasonable limits to prevent an abuse of this process. For the record, an agrieved party is defined in the land use ordinance as a person who can demonstrate a particularized injury resulting from the approval or denial of this application. An injury shared equally by all residents of the town does not constitute a particular injury. The application materials and staff comments have been made available in vents. The purpose of tonight's hearing is to receive public input on the application itself, not to provide a general explanation of the review process or ordinance requirements. These procedures are necessary to ensure fairness, protect due process rights for all parties, and allow the board to meet its legal deadlines. decision making. I

hope you all understand these public uh public information um procedures and and I and I and I expect that you all will abide by what we've said here today. Um when if you do wish to come up and speak, please give us your name, address, and um speak clearly so that we can pick up your recording. Thank you. Um.

All right. George, if you please start with your staff notes. Actually, for the public hearing, I think we're just going to go with uh taking the public testimony. Uh the other staff notes relate to the uh the um substantive review, and I think we should probably hold off on giving those until you get the public input. Okay? And the public input will be part of the record in terms of your decision- making. So, any public comments that do come, we'll summarize those and incorporate them into findings of fact when we get to that point. Okay. There are any members of the public that wish to speak here tonight on this subdivision application? Great.

Yes, sir. I would like to speak if I may. Please come up and take us.

Which chair? No. No. Yeah. Whichever way.

Please just give us your name and address. My name is James Balffor. I live at 980 Pink and Brook Road. As of next month, I've lived there 33 years. Um, I do have some concerns about the the Greystone development coming in, but I do want to state right off the beginning. I am in I I don't want to try to stop this, halt it, not have it work. It's not my land to do that. But I do I do have some concerns and I'd like to have them addressed. So, um if I go down my list very very quickly, um is is uh where the geography of the road is going to be. Um I have two wells on my property that I'm concerned about. One is a is a deep well um and one is a shallow well. And the shallow well has a wellhouse around it. And um if you look behind that, there's a a a wet hole there. And I don't know if anyone is aware of that, but that is one of the two origins for the new brook that's that starts there. It starts behind that that house, that little wellhouse. um that the the water quality is really is is really top-notch and I am concerned about that as anyone would be. Um with the road being so close to to my line, the proposed road uh there's there's just all kinds of negative um things as from trash to uh the plow plowing sand and salt and everything uh on that. Um that that's that's it's just all all minus minus uh um attributes to to my property.

Um the other thing is is is in this proposed uh development there's no um there's no uh fencing. There's no privacy fencing.

It's right right along the edge. Um, it it seems to me that uh I shouldn't have to bear that burden with with with the property being there and the road being so close to my my property line. Um, again, I'm not opposed to the the the development. It's not my thing. My dad was a carpenter. I understand building. I know that. I'm not trying to shut shut the whole project down. Um the the but the but the big the big concern is up towards up towards the edge of of my property in between the brownhouse on on on Greystone side in my in my house. the proposed road comes down through and there are stakes that come down right through the the the the the small brook that comes through there. Um it runs it runs most of the time of the year. It's been running now since before the the meeting that the the sitewalk and that's that brook is going to continue to run until a after mud season. Um, I've done my own poking around on the computer and uh what I've come up with is this that piece of uh property there falls into the deciduous or evergreen forested swamp. Um, I've looked it up on the D site. I've looked at the looked at the the description. It falls right within that that that description that they have on right on the the DP site. If I can find it,

anybody can find it. Um and the plant material on that matches pretty much what's along that property in that area. Um I will say that's one thing that I do know about is is that is the plant stock and the trees. I've been a licensed operist since 1982. Um, that's one thing that I do know. I don't know what what I don't think it was declinated correctly or at all, but I I I certainly think it needs a second look and perhaps maybe move the road. I'm not trying to put I'm not trying to shut down the the the the development, but that's in the wrong spot. That it's it's about 200 maybe 250 ft, 300 ft maybe. It's in the wrong spot. Who in their right mind would build a road in the lowest point on property? That just defies logic. It just it just defies logic. So, I've said my peace. I hope everyone's heard heard me. I hope they've they've heard me that I I'm not opposed to this. Wasn't my property. So, I can't, you know, I can't, you know, try to do it do it. But that's that's the piece I see that's deficient. Thank you, Mr. Bour.

You're welcome. Thank you for all your time. I appreciate it. Are there any other comments regarding the safe storage application? Are we okay with any comments or questions from the board regarding Mr. Bell for comments? I think we can take it up and post. Okay. Yeah.

All right. Um, may I have a motion to close public hearing? Go ahead. I'll make that motion. A

second. All in favor? Thank you. All right. Um, so now we're going to run into the uh review of Bloom subdivision on Grace Stone Ridge Road, map two, lots 35 and 42. At this point, no public comment will be taken and uh Tom Fanner, Mr. Barge has been so kind as to um take the score to save my voice for another day. Thank you. And I normally do give

just to kind of set the stage for the review for the board as well as the applicant in members of the public. And I would point out that uh you could either have given the opportunity to the applicant's consultant to respond to the uh comments that were made by the member of the public, but they can certainly uh respond to those during their uh presentation to you as well. So you should give them them that opportunity to to uh address the points raised by Mr. Balffor. So I reopen.

No, no, you don't need to do that. Um you you could do it either then or now. they that's part of the record and your decision is going to be made on it. They have the opportunity to give you uh a response to those uh facts and questions that were or issues that were raised.

So uh the again the application is for a 13 lot cluster subdivision off Pinkinbrook Road and Blue J Way. uh the board uh determined that the application was complete at the December meeting in terms of having all of the submissions required for a uh substantive review and decision on the application. Uh you conducted a sitewalk on December 20th and you scheduled a public hearing for last week, but that obviously got delayed until tonight and you've just uh concluded that step in the process. So based on the prior uh discussion with the board, the applicant has made some changes to the package uh the first is the driveway for lot two uh is no longer coming up Blue J Way. A direct uh driveway access will be provided to the new road. Uh secondly, that will be uh a circular uh turnaround driveway for access to the fire pond that's proposed and my understanding is the driveway for lot two will come off that uh to access uh the property of lot two. They have given more details on their building sites on the cluster lots as as indicated in the ordinance that you discussed last time. And they've also on some of the sheets shown the the proposed limits of clearing. Um as again indicated by the ordinance uh they have adjusted the frontage on lot 13 I think it is the last law to create that frontage which is what we were looking at with that proposed amendment. Um and what they have also done is submitted uh a waiver to allow the road not to be built within the entire length of that rightway. uh and they've included some rationale for uh approval of that waiver

in their waiver application. They've also submitted a waiver application for the narrow narrower road on the wetland crossings and uh they provided with you with a report that outlined those changes that I just summarized. Uh the next step is for you to review the complete and revised application and to determine at a preliminary level whether or not you think that this project if it goes forward to this final approval stage will be able to meet all of the st criteria and standards of the subdivision ordinance. So at this stage you don't do findings of fact on all of the criteria and standards but the conditions of app draft conditions of approval follow right down through and uh provide steps that the applicant needs to make to document compliance with all of those standards. So, I did include a draft set of approval conditions for you to review after you get to the point of having your substantive discussion. And if you uh feel that the project can meet uh or if it fails to meet on any of the criteria or standards, then you would indicate uh that at this point. And then uh you can add to uh the proposed conditions of approval based on your discussion. That's just a draft that covers all the bases, but you're not limited to that set. And you can amend them individually or you can add additional ones as well as you see fit. So, with that, um, I'm prepared to answer any questions. And as I said, it probably would be appropriate at this point to give the applicant and the team the opportunity to respond to uh any questions on my analysis of it uh

and or to respond to the comments that were given during public hearing. Thank you.

Yep. All right. Well, if the applicant is prepared to um step up and did bring my own set. Um, we did make some changes that didn't make to this plan, minor ones because we had to get our surveyors out there and with the holidays it was tough to do that in a timely manner. But we did have a few things um that we wanted to share including uh that wellhouse that wasn't shown initially. We got that on there and as well as the trails. I believe that was a comment from the sitewalk uh to see some of those trails um on there. So we did make sure those showed up. So make sure that that's clearly

now for this is it appropriate to go through the entire like spiel existing conditions proposed conditions or is it fine to just address them? I think it would be most effective to just hit the points that are under discussion as opposed to reviewing them. Perfect.

Um good evening everyone. Um I'm Matt Pelter with Terterodine Consultants here uh for Grayson Ridge LLC. Um we're just I'm just going to kind of talk about some of the changes that we made based on our last discussion and then also respond to Mr. Belelffor and and some of his concerns to make sure we're on the same page. Um we can um keep this moving forward. Um so couple of big changes. Um let me see here. Anything here? Um, I also want to point out uh we did get an IFNW letter um about the microp pits. I know that was we didn't have that. I believe they didn't have that last time. They did confirm what we thought which is it is a vernal pool. It's not a significant vernal pool because it's man-made. Uh so we have that letter and that will be provided at final

um for you for you to review. Terms of some of the things that were changed um do want to talk about the fire pond. Um during the sidewalk, we met with fire chief was there as well. Um didn't have any initial concerns with what we were proposing. Uh we were proposing 120,000galon fire pond. Um that's going to be in the general vicinity of where the existing pond is. It'll have to be expanded um in order to meet the size requirements. Um that part of Blue Jay Way will be discontinued where it crosses into that lot two. And then as was mentioned, lot two will then connect into that new access road that we are proposing which will be 24 feet wide. Um 20 foot lane, two foot shoulders. Um the fire chief seem to really like that. Uh doesn't have to deal with backing up or at any of that which is something they don't want to do. So they can just kind of go in, make the loop, fill up at the dry hydrant and come out. Um so no initial concerns. Um but we are going to we do have hydro geologists going out there. He's going to go out there in April. Um, and I want to get this right because I am not privy to what they actually do. Um, but they are going to look at the recharge rate and perform a pumping test um, for that area. Um, and that will determine, do we need it larger than 120,000 gallons? Do we need to have a liner for, you know, dr if there's infiltration to make sure there's enough water in there. So, he's going to perform all those actions in April. Um, so we do have that lined up. Uh

I wonder how this should go. Should um we continue and let um the applicant just talk and then we come back with questions or should we like when we're when he's talking about something we have question stop there. What's your your thought on that? Maybe address them as they come. Yeah. Conversational flow. Sure. Okay. Yeah. Thanks. All right. So the hydrog if I if I may the hydro geologist is coming out in April you said um now that could determine the size or the design of the of the pond. Yes. I I think we still have plenty of room to fit in there. Um we can always make it a little deeper. Okay. Um so I I don't have concerns.

So it'll be more details, right? That won't need to be figured out. Yeah. I don't think it needs to be for for preliminary, but it is something we'll definitely want for final. Absolutely. Okay. Yep. Well, I think that's a very important issue, especially for the recharge when we look at last year how dry things were. Yep. You have to make sure that that can maintain. Yep. Yep.

And another kind of a related question that's going to come up with a couple other items is the uh review of our third party engineer or your third party engineer. When is that? When are we starting that? So, I believe once we get comments from here and the hopefully the preliminary plan is approved, we're going to start that process to get the third party engineer involved because um we've already submitted the storm water um permit. Um and oftent times if there are updates, we we send them minor updates if we need to. Um but that's been a very long review process as of late. They're very behind. We wanted to get the information in as soon as possible. So, that would kind of go in tandem. They're looking at that now. It's been accepted. Um, and then we're going to do a third party review involved and it's kind of going to be a back and forth if the third party has comments and we going to work with D to make sure we can keep it moving along because they they are they are going pretty far out in how they do the reviews.

Got it. And so that this uh review of the third party engineer will happen between this prelim stage and the final, right? Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you. Yeah, because we I don't think we we and maybe that's a discussion that uh we can't submit until we have permit in hand. I think that was a discussion that we had talked about in sketch that we you want that before we meet for for final. Um so, uh there might be a way, you know, an extension involved if we know that the permit isn't going to come, but our goal is that's why we got it in earlier is that we wanted to kind of get that process going.

Can I clarify? I think you're talking two different things. I think you're talking DP, storm water review. I think you're talking town peer review of the plan. Yes. But don't they review storm water? Well, typically the the town uh engineer, which is Laurel Palmer, uh they will review everything, right? Storm water, uh erosion control. So, DPS, as I understand it, their storm water permit is more limited. Oh, yeah. Than than the peer review. So, I just wanted to clarify.

Yes, I am talking about the the bigger third party. We have advised, it's not clear in the ordinance when that peer review takes place, but I'm encouraging applicants to uh get their final plan application put together and then submit it to the town's peer reviewer where they go through make any adjustments, corrections, uh and then when it comes to you, it's ready to roll as opposed to coming in,

losing time, going to the peer reviewer, making changes and coming back. So, it's it's flexible, but our recommendation is that as soon as they get their preliminary approval, apply to the state, finish the engineering designs, and then submit it to the town's peer reviewer to go over. And if they were in the draft conditions of approval, there's a list of things for peer review, and you can add to those if you decide to do that. Add to the what? Sorry. Add to the draft conditions of approval. So, oh yeah, if you want to add a peer review, engineering peer review, uh then we can discuss potentially making that adding on to the list of things for the peer reviewer to look at. We've done that in projects.

Yep. Thank you.

Okay, good for now for me. Any other questions about fire polic um not only the big changes um the proposed limits of development um we've included those in the site plan um they'll also be codified in the HOA documents which are will be submitted at final and they'll be on the subdivision plan so they'll be legal. So um we have a similar project in a different town where we had a limits similar to this and we actually had our surveyor go out and mark those limits so that so someone who comes in will know where you know they can't just like clear the area they have to to follow those. So uh very similar um and we've put it to 20,000 square feet. Usually if you use 25,000 um but this kind of limits the scope and limits the impervious area. It only helps the site to have less. Um so and those limits you see are uh approximately 20,000 ft². Um so that's one of the big requests especially with this cluster subdivision to have that more um uh solidified. Any questions on that? Um so the proposed right away. So we um that was mentioned last time again the confusion with where that 150 foot frontage came from. Um as you can see as you mentioned they're kind of clarifying that in the new code. Um so what we did is we actually extended the rideway for the road um without extending the road. So extending road more purpose area make the road longer. obviously didn't really want to do that, but we do want an area for um snow storage and I think it was mentioned in the sketch. So that provides a really nice area where the front part will be snow storage area where they can plow it up to that point. And then additionally, we had a buffer. So a a ditch turnout buffer. Um you can't you DP doesn't want you to put

snow in that buffer. I mean it will just damage it. Um obviously water will need to get to it. So that kind of actually works out very nicely where we have a flat up area where the snow can be stored and then we have a ditch going around it that will collect storm water from the road to get to that buffer and then move move down. So I think I think we have justification to do that. I think if we were to move lot lines around, we're then encompassing part of the wetland in our lot which isn't I mean they wouldn't be able to impact it but it's nice to be in the open space instead of on a lot. Um and I think it it just works out. I think I think we have justification to uh extend it for the stove storage and the buffer and to get that frontage. Um is there any questions on that?

No. Um do we want to talk about whether we want to review the waiver and the other one or whether we want to wait until the third party reviewer comes back with their comments first? I'd prefer to wait until the third prior review concludes their review. I agree with that. Yeah, agree. You agree with that? Okay.

Yeah. So, we we have the waiver requests in. Um again, I think we have justification for that and the curb. I mean, we need the storm water a few areas in there. It's not only the crossing, but it's also um to help facilitate getting into buffers, which are a requirement for DP. So, I think we have just we have justification. I um so I'm not uh too worried about the weight. Thanks. So those are really the big changes from our first meeting. Like I said, um we were able to get the pump house and the trails in Oh, do you have

I wanted to Adrian fine. I'm also with Terodine. Um one thing about the waiverss is you brought up both. I know we haven't talked about the narrow road one yet, but that does have some implications for our environmental permitting. So, it'd be nice to at least discuss with the board tonight. And even if you're not going to grant the waiver, just see if you're comfortable with it pending um the third party reviewer being comfortable with it because the road would have to be wider if you don't grant that, which would mean more wetland impacts, more storm water, different permit submissions to D, which we need to make before final.

Yeah. So, we do kind of need to discuss that waiver um ahead of final um and talk about it some tonight if if we can. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Want to focus on that. Um George, is it possible for you to maybe zoom in on the detail here and begin to let um folks from Terodon walk us through? Yep. Um so what they're requesting. Why don't you stop me on the sheet with the location?

What sheet? So there's going to be they're actually on all three of the sheets because there's three areas where there's curves. So if you go back to the the first one um so roughly at the turnaround uh the beginning of not the turnaround but the the loop right about there. Um yeah, right about there on the north side um to I can't read that. Let me open that. Actually going to go right up.

Oh yeah, I'm just I'm just going to stand up. This is way easier. didn't bring my laser pointer. So, we have a rain garden right here to help uh with uh storm water treatment. So, the curb goes about here to here. So, essentially takes everything from this part of the road and gets it into that rain garden and treats it and then discharges it. And there's a culvert right here that just helps facilitate storm water offsite and on lot one um to get follow that existing drainage pattern to get into the ditch which gets down here to the main DOT culvert. I go to the next one. So wait, so sorry. What what is the request that you're you're asking for here? The waiver that we're talking about.

So this is the this is the curve waiver. So this will be 10 ft uh with no twoft shoulder. It'll be 10 ft traveling in order for you to put in your BMPPS, your storm water BMPs in order to Yes. in order to direct. So, because we don't want storm water to flow just off cuz it will get into the culvert um and then won't be treated. So, we need to we need to treat this. So, storm water will hit the curb, flow into that rain garden, and be treated that way. So, that's what the the curb is there for to help because we if you did need the wider road, what would it look like? Um it here it would just it would just be a little bit wider. This the storm water would just flow out and then get into this. It wouldn't be treated. So um but you need to treat it. Right. So how would you treat it?

So this is less about the width of the road and more about the fact that we need the curb. But that's not in your ordinance. So we have to ask for a waiver in order to add curb. So you're adding to the size of the road. You're just adding curb here. Uh, no. Because we're still keeping it at 10 feet because it so it' be 10 feet lane curb and no two foot shoulder. So there everywhere else there's a two foot shoulder and then it stops. We have that curb to facilitate storm water. The next one is more for wetland impacts. This one and then another one is for storm water management and to make sure we treat based on what DP wants.

Um, any other questions with that? No. No. Are you good? Um, here. So we have curve that is roughly at this point through to here on that side and then same thing from this point through to here. Um and this is really for both storm water management and for reducing the impacts to the to the wetlands. Um we have 12t lanes. This goes out farther. Um and it just makes more of the impact it makes the impact worse. So um this is pretty common we do often with with these types of crossings. Um, so we have 10 foot wide lanes with the curve and it goes two to one slope down to reduce the impact as much as possible. Um, and then the last one, the last one's here. So we have curb um on this end here all the way to the end. And again, this is more for storm water management. Um, we have a buffer here, but we can't just let storm water flow here. it has to get into the a device has to get into a um dish turnout um spreader and get into the buffer. So, anything that would flow this way wouldn't be treated and we need to treat that. Um so, what this does is the curve will help get it down to this point and then into a ditch to this buffer here.

What lot is that? This lot the last is lot 13, but it's across from So, we're talking this is like open space, right? Yeah, it's open space. Yeah. And also, George, if you wanted to go to um C5.1, it shows the section details. Yeah. Up there at the top, um it shows that's a typical section which has the road with shoulders. It's okay. There you go. Thank you. Get over there.

Yeah. making you do some switch to a different view so we can move around easier. Yeah. Okay. Now, technology is wonderful. Yeah, I think it accidentally switched. There you go. Up at the top up here. Yeah, there we go. Oh, there we go. It likes to do that. So that's um on the left.

Yeah. So that's a typical road section. So it's got the 10 foot wide lanes with the two foot shoulders, three to one slopes. That's pretty much that's most of the area everywhere uh for the road on our site. And then the some of the areas this one's showing and this one's showing both the curves. So this is more of the wetland crossing uh for the road section, which is the um 10 foot wide lane with the curve. Um and then down. Uh there's also a a crossing one as well for the next sheet.

Over there to the side. Oh, there it is. Um it's over there. Right there. There we go. Yeah. So, this is more indicative of the wetland stream. Uh the wetland crossing that says wetland stream, but that's one of our typical. So for the wetland crossing um where we're showing the 10ft lanes curb and then the two one slip down u to reduce wetland impacts and that's what you want to have the peer reviewer look at those details just make sure everything standard engineering but also we're decreasing the this this waiver would decrease the width right of the shoulder's gone shoulder

the lanes would still be 10 still be so I'm thinking like They'd be fine as long as they have access, right? Like there's nothing impeding them on the sides, right? Right. So, they should be Yeah. Okay. I have a question. Can you go back to the last um storm water BMP request change? The the first sheet that we looked at. Uh the LA Yeah, the last change the one year um the end near the turnaround. Yeah. 13. Yeah. Maybe. Yeah. Lot 13. So, George, if you could go back to the Maybe the 32. Yeah, right there. Right there. Okay. So, what is the reason for this request? This specific one.

So, this specific one, we need to treat the storm water um at least part of this. And uh we want the curb here to help collect. So, any storm water that's going, as you can see, the contours is going to go into here and then be treated. Y um anything else is going to hit the curb that's about right here and flow down this way and get into this ditch which leads to that BMP to treat. Um

and that those are numbers we need to hit for DMP for treatment. Um and we don't have a lot of room in the beginning with 50 foot rightway to put any we don't have any room to put any BMPs because of of the room that we have. Um, so here is we're we're kind of creating a a situation where we could direct it with a curb to a VMP and then in the open space and uh off the property. So that's kind of the why we have a curb at this end point because we can't let it flow this way because it won't be treated. Got it. So if we didn't approve this waiver then you might not be able to get your permit.

I I think we think this is the best solution. And we think this is the least impactful solution. Um, you know, it also reduces the impervious area. Um, it's at the end of the road, but you know, there's still the turnaround here. This is still the proper width, and it's still uh 10 foot and two foot shoulders. So, 10 foot lane, two foot shoulders on this side. Yeah. Okay. It's just those couple of areas here that we just really need to facilitate storm water management so we can get treatment. Okay. Thank you. Sure. Well, the untreated water would come down into the turnaround or you're hoping it

uh No. So, you mean like so it it kind of collects into this into this point here? We have some um spot grades to make sure that it's built at a point where it all flows to where it needs to go in the ditch. So, that's something I think they're peer reviewing. That's covert. And this is a culvert under here. This is a low point. Um so, it kind of collects here. um and it comes down into the wetland area out. Yeah, I think this is something that the third party reviewer would really like to look at. So, I mean my my suggestion chair is that um yeah, we can talk about how we're feeling but at the end of the day really like to hear from Coral Palmer. Sure.

on this. Yeah. Go back to the first example or the first one we looked at um the beginning of the road. Sure. So, can you talk about what happens from the rain garden to the culvert? Where does the water flow from the rain garden to the c? You know, so this stuff or you talking about everything that flows down here? No, you talking about it hits the rain garden. Yep. Then there's a culvert there and the water pushes plants south.

Yeah. So, there's going to be off offsite water here um that gets into this culvert and that's to help maintain that existing drainage area that I think we saw when we were out there. It was wet. Um this helps maintain that connectivity and gets into a ditch and goes out for the road itself that's being collected into the rain garden. It hits that curb, follows along the curb, and gets into the rain garden here where it's treated and then goes out into the curb down to uh route 125. And then in any of your plans, are you showing any of the the existing culverts that are there now?

Yes. So, we that that was one thing that our surveys picked um got again um that they unfortunately didn't pick up the first time was that culvert that was in this this vicinity. Um so they did pick it up and put it um is on there is it is on the survey plan. Can I take a peek of it? Oh shoot. We have now when Yeah. No, that so they weren't able to get out there in time because of the holidays to make those updates. Um but that's something that provided uh in final or any updated plan sets. Um but that would that would be provided. Can you point out where it is on your plan up there?

So there it is. So, just about this area here. And which way does it run? Runs down. There you go. Yeah. The culvert runs that entire length or just Oh, no. Oh, the culvert's kind of like it's it's travels. Yeah. It's like somewhere in this area and then it and then the drainage goes down this way. So, it's running in the same parallel to the road. Yeah. Okay. Yes. It's on it's on a cross like you would expect it. It is running because it flows this way. Yep. Right.

And what we heard from the public, Mr. Belt for was that potentially is the start of New Brook. Yes. Uh I do have actually we did I do have comments from that if we just want to get into that now or if we have other I think it's appropriate now we're talking about the road and how that possibly could affect Mr. fell for two wells,

right? I mean, we were we were all out there, Alan, you missed the sidewalk, but um yeah, there's there's I thought maybe actually two there. Um but significant amount of water flowing through right where the road is intended to to go. Um, and so one of my comments was, you know, did your wetlands folks even look at this because it looks like something that should have been flagged right from the get-go. Um, and then and then looking at where your proposed coverage is, it looks like you're pushing water toward the adjacent property owners um, lot. Um I I see that you're going to try to handle that through grading to get that water to stay in the ditch. Um but it's definitely a concern especially with the existing conditions out there. Yep.

For me anyhow. Um so we did talk to our scientist Eric Lee my bestwood. He did go out there and he did survey that area. So I'll just kind of kind of summarize what he gave us. Um so he went out there in July. um at the time the trees were actively drawing water and the site showed no wetland hydrarology that he went there in July you know it was a drought um he addresses this so there are a couple different indicators when you look at

for a wetland and it's very important to to talk about there's a bi biological wetland and then there's what army corps classifies as a jurisdictional wetland those are very important distinctions so when he went out there the indicators for the soil to him even during the dry period under carriers are really strong did not signal to him that it was a jurisdictional wetland. So he felt in his professional opinion that it did not constitute being flagged. Now when we went out there got to remember it's winter there's frost it's not going to be as well draining at that time. Now there are indications from Mr. Belelffor that it still flows in other times and that's probably true. Um, but in Eric Lima's professional opinion, it just didn't meet all the qualifications for Army Corps that made it to be a jurisdictional wetland that we would need to like we would do our work with. Doesn't mean there aren't biological indicators out there, but in terms of our work and how he delineates, he did not feel that it was appropriate, but he said he said it was it was marginal. It was close, but he aired on the side of it did not meet those uh indications. Same with a stream too, right? Like no indication of a stream.

No, he would have he would have picked those up and and flagged us that that was a stream. If we were putting our road right through a stream, that would have been And so these are Army Corps um indications, indicators. Now, what about main? Is there anything that you have to consider for like main wetlands? Uh no. So Army Cors is how they use to delineate those. That's the federal level level. So they kind of they look at both uh uh the vegetation, the hydraology and the soils. Yeah. So he was saying soil was lacking. Yeah. The soils didn't him indicate that it was um and that is that is his professional opinion um as a wetland scientist. So do you have that response? Uh we have we do have an email with that response. Um we do we do have

that would be great to submit to file. Yep. um pretty pretty crazy that yeah, it's important to to remember and you know he did identify in his email that he sometimes get demonized for this where every every wet spot doesn't make it a wetland you know there are a lot of wet spots out there um but it doesn't mean it's not close it doesn't mean so he the plants were there I I don't I according to his you know there there were some indications of that. Um, but again, I'm not a Yeah. Yeah. I couldn't I couldn't name Yes. It's not my not my field. Okay.

Um, and I do want to uh I guess I can address the rest of Mr. Belffor's comments to make sure we're moving this along or unless we have Do you want to talk any more further about the I'm wondering if we could get um Coral Palmer to look at that as well. Yeah, because they do look at the Yeah, they've looked at that. the wetlands and the permits, wetland permits and things like that. I would I agree. I think I believe um they perform a site visit for us. I don't know. They might not need to if if they can get Eric's um response, the what you just mentioned and his wetland delineation report. They can look at that and then let us know if they want to go. They might not need to go on site

if you're out there. Yeah, it's Yeah, it's wet. I did he provide um photos, Eric, in his delineation report? He does a pretty he does a pretty thorough one. It was dry. It was he did it during July, but but yeah, I would agree. Let's have Let's have the third party. Oh, I definitely agree. Okay. Yeah, good point. Yep.

Um Yeah, sure. If you'd like to address more of Mr. Fal's comments. Yeah, absolutely. Um, so, um, as well as the hydro geologist who is reviewing our fire pond, we're also directing him to look at the area around the wellhouse. Um, so when the road goes by there, um, we did put it on there. We did indicate it. Want to see it again. It was it was late. We weren't able to get it in. It's a small box. Are they both shown? Uh, we I don't know if we have the

There are two there. Yeah, there's one outside here, the deep well. Um I think that that might be hiding behind the note potentially, but the they I believe we have the deep well house uh already surveyed as well. But um actually on this note, I'm so sorry. I had this as a comment. Shouldn't we be seeing all wells and all structures that are either on the property or adjoining Yeah. the property like as a requirement of the I think number 17 if I'm remembering the numbers right. So there are a few that are shown on there um that were picked up on I don't know what that property is but you can see the the W um and on those properties as well.

Okay. Yeah. But for some reason this one wasn't picked up before. Yep. For for some reason that wasn't picked up before. There's another one too. Yep. There there's another one that's farther down. Um but is it is still I mean in terms of relativity it's close. Um but we'll double check with our surveyors on that as well. Um uh I think the the shallow well is a is more important because it's very very close. I mean they're both important but I think um we're going to have a hydro geologist go out there and look at it. Um and he's going to give us recommendations on what we could do um in order to protect that well, protect the water quality. Um so that is something he's going to do. Yep. So very important. So They're both both equally important. Yeah, they're both equally important.

Yeah, they were conveniently shown on the other properties but not on Mr. Balffors and I think we need to see that for sure. Yeah. Yeah. So, that's something that we'll we'll double check with them to make sure. Also, the structures though, right, George buildings. Well, I don't think that the ordinance is necessarily uh clear on the details on abuing properties as opposed to within the project sites. Number 17. Yeah. Says the location, names, and presents of existing streets, highways, easements, building lines, parks, and other open space on or adjacent to the subdivision. Does not mention wells,

right? Well, but we just talked about how it's very important to show the wells, but also the building, too, though. I think that's saying we should see the build. Well, is a wellhouse a building? No, no, no, no. I'm talking about his house. I'm talking about Yes. like we should see where the structures are. Absolutely. That's what I was getting at there. Okay. And in terms of if there are specific issues

where the criteria or the standards are saying we need to determine what the impact is going to be on an abuing property, you could certainly ask for additional information. Okay. I think it's important that some of that additional information I don't think um limits how we do preliminary. I mean, those are those are things we can certainly get and especially when we work with a third party engineer as well. They're going to go out there and review the wet area um review and the hydro geologist going out there review the impacts to the well. I mean, those are all going to continue to move forward. I don't think um not having the buildings on there specifically um impedes that. Uh it's just something that we have to keep we have to make sure is on there and um consider in our design. I'm sure Cor Palmer will certainly give us uh notes that we have to we have to address if they find anything.

Yeah. And similar are we showing anywhere the um drainage patterns and the um like the not the aquifers but the waterheds on the site. Do we show that on any of these plan sets? Like the way water's moving like I don't think it's on these plans but they that went to D. Okay. So it's probably Yeah. And it would go to Goral Palmer. Yeah. I was just going to say I bet is going to want that. Yeah, that's more of a storm water type of plan, not on our typical these are more like construction and

Yeah, and we mentioned it I think in one of the drainage ways direction think I think it's in one of our items on the prem checklist but specifically for Mr. Balffor the water flows this way. Your idea is to capture it on that side. So, uh, so in general, um, yes, sorry again. No, it's okay. It's good for me. So, in general, there there's this giant there's this piece of the waterhed that's kind of just flowing this way towards this property right here. Yeah.

Um, there's that culvert in here that's taking some of that water and and funneling it down this way. There's some of that water that's kind of going this way. So, one of the storm water BMPs is using to treat and gather all that storm water kind of ga gather it in a ponding situation, treat it and try to get it away. So, we're not like just sending a culver directly into his house. That's that's kind of why this is built this way. It's kind of long elongated. Yep.

The contours suggest that it will just flow away from his house. And that that was by design. Um for this piece that's going this way, I mean, yes. I mean, there's the culvert here. Um it's kind of in the same parallel to our road, but um there's still drainage pattern. It's still heading south. It's or I guess this would be whatever direction this is. Uh northish um is still heading down here. So yeah, so there's some that's going to be um continue to flow this way, get into um the drainage channel, get to this culvert, and still get to the same place. Same with this. I mean, yes, it's being blocked by the road, but the water's still going to get to this culvert. I mean, you can kind of see in the co in here the I mean, this is still this is still still all getting to the same place. We're we're trying not to flood his property. That's why that there's um the ditches here to get into this point and then get down. Um this is not meant to grab any of the impervious area. This is really just offsite area. That's what this curb is for. So, it's not getting in here and then into here and then untreated impervious here. So that's what the curve is for. This is really meant to direct offset areas that are already existing um to get to where it needs to go. So in general, the drainage pattern is the same. It just looks a little different. Um and that was by design to make sure everything is flowing properly. We're not overloading um culverts because part of it was we just sent everything down here. Instead of having this culvert, you could potentially overload this one

and cause some uh flooding issues. So by doing this we kind of keep the same drain drainage pattern um and have it all go to the proper place and then whatever goes on this side will get to here. Um and anything obviously upstream that's why this is quite large. This is also 36 embedded culvert just like the wetland crossings. Um pretty big culvert cross culvert but we think it's necessary because the water coming through here and the water that's coming this way. Are you thinking there's going to be an increase at all or about neutral? I don't think there's going to be an increase. Okay.

Okay. Thank you. You got that. I guess the last thing cuz we didn't really talk about it as much was the showing the trails on the plan. I know I talked about a little bit, but we did show them. Um and again this is from an update um because we're now together in time. Um most of that trail will be maintained or just it stay there. There's a couple lots that are impacting the beginning of it. But there's actually something when we're checking where the survey is there's actually a 20ft easement that goes to the Brunswick's road uh that they'll have access to which is very unique. Um that goes all the way I believe it's I live in Brunswick so I didn't should so I should know. I think it's Lunt Road. Whatever that road is

Lunt Road. Okay. So it's actually that that trail actually connects to that piece um and gets them access all the way to the road 20 foot eastment. So um I think it plays into what we were talking about the the point of a cluster. You have nature you want to maintain that you have some there are already existing trails on the property that are going to stay um except for the little bit that where the lots go. Uh so I just wanted to point that out. Great. Yeah. And so for visibility I think this goes through what seven actually I do have it six. Oh in the open space initially. Six and seven. Okay. Yep.

Then there's also some trail that wraps around into the open space over here. Yeah. And this just wasn't in our set that we had. Right. Yeah, that and then the this whale house and the culver they they for some reason weren't picked up. So it was

like I said difficult around the holiday. It was like right around the Christmas and New Year's times. It was they're busy people. So we made it a priority and but they were able to get it. So again that will be provided in later submissions and obviously Gora Palmer will get essentially our final plan and anything else we need them to review. Um, anything else do you want to address? Now,

I don't think so. Um there is the and I will bring this up um just because I think um it was a comment by spell for was the the the fencing area and that's something that uh our client is willing to do um to provide a little bit more shade especially in that area where it just kind of comes in pretty close. Um I don't know if it's necessary for the whole thing cuz it's more wood in here, but essentially where his house is pretty close up at that corner. Um fencing or screening is something that is is pretty easy. We're we're happy to happy to do that. We have space. Say that again. Sorry. Will you have space? I mean, it's for this like for a fence.

Uh I mean, we would have to double check. Uh I I don't know actually uh if there's an or I haven't looked recently if there's an ordinance requirement for how far a fence has to be for the property line. Yeah, I don't know about that either. I was just curious because your road butts, right? Yep. the property line, but I I love that you're you're offering this um to talk further about. Yeah, we we'll certainly we we'll make it work. We'll we will we will you know I I think it's important. So I think that if there I don't think there's any mechanism that would prevent us. We're just going to make sure that we do it correctly that there's um we're able to do it. Duly noted.

Yeah. Um and if uh they would um like a tree buffer something you'd some you'd consider? That's that's something we have to discuss, but we're we're open to like what needs to you know providing some sort of screening concern I have with that. I have a tree buffer on my driveway arborites and the deer love them. Yeah. And all of a sudden 4 feet up is gone. Yeah. We could discuss species discuss like yeah working you know it is tight and there is a ditch there and making sure storm water doesn't go the wrong way I think is probably the most important thing

the key compon key component is working with Mr. Bell for on that and what uh works best for him. Yep. Absolutely. We're we're willing to work with Mr. for I mean, you know, it's be good neighbors, right? So, we're we're just trying to trying to do put a good project out here and and and make sure we address things that we need to. Great. How much room do you have to push the road? We'll just call it plan north here. Uh none. None. We don't have zero. We don't have room to really push it. We're we're the grading is already very close to the other property line. Um Yeah. It's a 50ft rideway.

It's a 50ft rideway. So we generally put in the middle of a 50ft rideway. Um so pushing it. What about beyond the rightway? You mean in in here? That's someone else's property. Someone else's property. No, beyond No, beyond the rightway to to the pan west. Oh, you mean the rain garden and the

I mean there's there's technically room. Um during the sketch plan, we talked about the fact that the town is moving toward updating our ordinances to more or less require a buffer in a situation like this. And um we had hoped that maybe you would be the model applicant and um we didn't get any response from that. But anyhow um if there's any possible way to push um that road further, we'll call it again plan north um to assist Mr. Belffor's concerns um to get a more more of a vegetative buffer in there as well as a fence if that's something that um um the neighbors um amendable to uh I think that would be that would help the project uh quite a bit.

Yeah, we understand the buffers. I mean it's just it's impossible to do that here. Like it's just there's a 50 foot ride away there. It's just it's impossible to make that work. Um, if you just take a look at it, you hear what I mean? Yes. Oh, no. No. In in terms of like in terms of that point. Yes. In terms of like getting like a 25 foot buffer or anything like that, that's difficult for us to achieve. We I mean this is the corner of the buffer. So, there is technically room to put some fencing here. It gets more tight down here and it's just the way the the grading works. But here there is certainly room to put more screening. Um, I think this is probably like

Thank you. like I'm good at when these are 10 feet. So, this is probably like maybe like six feet or so. Um, so there's some room to put some buffering or screening already there, but we will we will take a look. Um, we will take a look at it. Yeah, this is we can look at that section to see if there's anything we can do. You know, it is tight with the storm water and the braiding, but we'll we'll look at it. Yeah. And that section in particular, I think, is closer to the house. Okay. Um, I mean this is where it would be good to see where the structures are. Um, but I think Mr. Bumpur, if you can correct me, I think that the main property is right here, right? The main structure. No, the main structure is like

Oh, I'm I apologize. Okay. Yeah. All right. Right there. Okay then. Yeah. Yeah. This is more wooden than one of the the wells down in here. Okay. Okay. There there is a structure of Juliet out further call it land west. It's a um garage open shed kind of thing, but the main house is Yeah. toilet. Got it. Does get pretty low and where the culbert is getting closer to road getting pretty low. So clear.

Um I have a question for uh tree clearing. Um I am seeing that in the new plan set the one that we have um one and two though but one is that let's see those don't show clearing because those are existing. Yeah. So we're not we're not the only reason you'd be clearing there is for the road. Yeah. So we so we show the tree clearing around the the road and the same thing for two except for the um the fire department access to the fire pond and we show we show the the clearing around the fire the access. That's what I mean. Yeah.

Not around the fire pond yet. Um that is open already, but if it changes we we can show that. Okay, great. And then the access to lot two. Yep. Is is that coming off of the roundabout? Not roundabout, but this thing. Yes, that is connecting right into there. Yes. Okay. Okay. And the fire chief did receive information about that, I believe. So, yes. I would have to double check, but and we're going to continue to work them to make sure, you know, all of the both the loop and the pond satisfy all their requirements. Okay.

And and there will be most likely signage to make sure there's no block in on the the access road. Um because that that is important if there's something there. And there will be signage to make sure that there's no blocking.

Um, can I keep going with my comments? Absolutely. Honor roll. Um, okay. So, I heard from you that the vernal pool was um confirmed not to be significant from MDFW, which is great. Um I think you were you mentioned that you were going to update the agency with your um proposed tree clearing plan. Uh yes, we we have not sent it yet, but we will. But you're going to still do that. Okay. Yeah. Mainly because bats, right?

Yeah. I mean that that will come with with Army Corps. So that that's more of an Army Corps privy. They tell us that there are bats. There are bats everywhere. Um and then we then we go through the Army Corp. So, the Army Corps will get that and there might be restrictions on clearing depending on time of year, depending on what they find. Um, that's more of an Army Corps um piece that we send.

Yeah. I just I noticed in I brought this up before in the MDFW response back to you, it does say that you submitted the plan sets showing tree clearing, but I think that what you had submitted was prelim to this. So I think maybe there's more tree clearing than what they have seen. We can just we can send an update like hey we've we've added this and okay um that will go through our core process as well. So yeah. Okay great. Uh let's see the US Fish and Wildlife Service you'll have to consult with them.

Uh yeah I think that's all again through the Army Corps US consultation and Okay, that's it for my questions. Thank you. Alan, what's up?

Um, couple of comments I have here. Um, lot three, I think it's lot three. Um, what are the chances of flipping the lot with the um drainage basin? Um, I think that's something we'd have to discuss with our client. Um, I don't see any, it depends on how it would affect storm water management. So, that's something we would have to take into account because we do need to treat and that is um, located at a place where we can um, get the treatment that we need. So, that if we flip it, that will affect that and make it more difficult to get the proper treatment. So, I think it would be challenging. I'm just thinking of more of a risk to the neighboring property owner, potential risk property owner. Um I think it would Yeah, it' be advantageous to try to keep that uh further from that existing lot if possible. Um I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at it. Yeah, if you just flip those two

um you know it sounds easy. What are you asking, Brian? Can you can you explain or Yeah, so right. We won't have to I'm asking if they can you know there's a better if they could if they put the build lot here and the basin is Oh. Oh, the storm water basin right now where this this is the Balffor property here. Yeah. So, there's a risk that water flows that way. And you know, of course, there's another property owner here. I just think if we could flip these two or if you flip those two um it would be a better design in my opinion.

You know, we could look at even if it has to stay on that side, you know, still pushing it farther away. We have modeled this in the 100redyear storm. So, and it doesn't over top and there's a there's a fail safe for that. Um so, it's never going to over top over to that property. I understand we're still going to look at it. You know, I think it's important to to look at or have one more comment on that one. No problem. No problem. Do we even have proof that you guys own that lot? Yeah. Well, it's still in the works. Yes, it's still in the works. It'll be happen before final, but yes, it's still the works. Um, just because Mr. Name, please.

Oh, Michelle Harrison. Sorry. Sorry. Michelle Harrison, one of the applicants. Um, just because Mr. Belffler is here and because I'm kind of passionate about the basin storm water versus lot three and keeping lot three where it is. So me as a homeowner, I specifically wanted lot three further away from you to try to give you some backyard barrier. And so if I and if we're if our excavation crew is doing their work correctly and the storm water management works, which we have plenty of professionals that check that, then

this shouldn't create more water. So I would I'm just curious for Mr. Belelfur, would you prefer to have like the storm water as your backyard or a neighbor? Well, the the engineer gentleman up front, black shirt, I'm sorry, I forget your name, but when we did the did the the walk around on the 20th, we spoke about that in the in the spillway. Um cuz my concern was is that spillway is going to come and just run water right onto my property. And you you advised me that that gray area that's that that's up there is is actually basically like a like a septic. pits and it's not it's not

water ground water isn't going to flow onto my property. Um but within this speaking I like can if I can change it for just one second is the the cover that goes across the road uh on the road on the straightaway is that going to be ditched right to 125? Are you talking about um at the beginning of the the road? No, the one that's halfway up the exist diagonally. Where is that water going to go?

Yep. So, there's a there's a ditch in here and then the natural ditch comes into here and gets to the mandate tea culvert that's down in this area. Well, that along with the water quality of the of the of the uh the wellhouse and the the water behind it, um I'm kind of suspect about that that coat going across there. Um and and coming doing the natural thing because it will flow into that to that wet spot behind the the wellhouse. Don't know if they're suspect of the the quality of that water.

Fair. No, I I think that's I think it's a fair point. And again, I'll point to that's part of the reason why we have this curb here. This is only meant to gather storm water that's already headed in that direction. So the water here is already heading here. We're just We have a road in the middle of it. Exactly. So this is meant to That's why the curbs here. So we're not The goal is not to have storm water and untreated water get into this culbert. the storm water will travel along the curb and get into this treatment cell which will then put it on this side. So that we're we're trying to make an effort here to not put water that was or impervious area runoff that wasn't there before.

So that's that's an an overflow cover so to speak. Uh it's more of like maintaining drainage patterns culvert because there's already it'll convey the existing storm water that flows across lot one and lot two in their existing conditions today which will remain the same um to that culvert and across but but the way the way it's there is going to be for when there's extreme rain or or a lot of snow and that most of the other water is going to come down on the other side of the road and go to 125. It's going to go down here. Yeah. Yep.

So, can we circle back if it's okay to what you were talking about? Uh Mr. Belffor, uh is it okay that we talk like this? Um Brian's uh recommendation is for um the applicant to review whether they can switch the storm water basin and lot number three uh footprint, building footprint. Would you prefer that they keep that development the house further away? I I I think that would be the the the the perfect buffer right there the the way it is. I mean I I appreciate your your your your candiness with it. But yeah,

I think along with what you said that that that's a that's a perfect buffer to that house and my house. Um yeah, under the circumstances. Yeah, fantastic. And there will be, you know, the way we've situated the differently the road as it relates to your house. That obviously would have been our first choice. So that's why we kind of try and order a buffer on the back side.

Well, you know, when when the previous owner of of the place, um Bob, he came over to my house. We were standing in my in my driveway and he was telling me this was going to go on and he told me that the road was going to be almost split the difference between the two houses and to sneak around and not cut down as many trees as as needed and go and go up almost the way it is. Um and then and then there's this. So, you know, I mean, that's why I'm here trying to find trying to defend my little piece of heaven. Trust me, I respect that. But where did he have the road going? Uh, Blue Jay. Blue Jay. Blue Jay Way.

Oh, gotcha. We did we did look at that. I think we we talked about it at sketch um in order to get uh with with me and my driveway. He had that the road going further towards the existing house. Was it lot one there, the first house? Oh, he had it he had it out kind of split the difference there coming out and then jogging out and coming around. Um, okay. He was out looking at it. I I I asked him about uh, you know, you talked about hiring me to cut it and he goes, "Oh, well, I've got I've got someone else to do that." He goes, "I know that's what you do." And and we talked about all that between the two houses

and that was and that was a mute point right now. fighting for my life with this. That is something you asked us to look at and we said we'll look at it as well. So, yeah, that going a little bit more. Yep. And and one more thing I just wanted to say about the pond is, you know, we did situate it in such a way so that there's going to be a forested buffer, you know, if there's forest there today between the pond and Mr. Balffor's rear property line, that will be maintained. um the extent of grading is the extent of clearing here. And um so we situated it that way so that it wasn't right against the property line. There's probably going to be at least 30 feet, if not more, of trees before the pond, which is more than you might get if the lot was right there.

Okay. Would you mind showing that forested buffer in your next set of plans as you have with the house lots? Oh, yeah. We we could show a buffer. We usually show them in in terms of how our, you know, for DP and and things like that. Um so that's why it's not shown this time but we clearing limit you mean clearing limit. Perfect. Yeah. Yep. Um okay one last comment I had and then I think we can move on here. Um the transformer um that you have shown between I think it's lock six and seven. Um uh we're out. Did you say transformer? What' you say transform? Uh, no. Over farther.

Move further down the road. It's between six and seven. Right on the road. Yeah, the other end of the road, George. It's like close to the front. I thought it was back on the No, it's it's closer to where we just were. It's over here, right? Somewhere, wasn't it? Where's the transformer? Right. C23 C-2.3. drawing drawings he does as that anyway it's shown on the property of either six and seven or six okay

um any chances that could be moved from more neutral location so it's not on a property line and maybe uh in the right of way maybe or yeah let's take a look that's that's pretty typical of how CMP keeps putting that there Yeah, if that's typical of how CMP sites those um so it's within and it's within typically a 10 by 10 easement to CMP lower left there's one down there so it's also within what you're not supposed to clear Oh yeah

um and it's on the lot I'm just asking whether or not it could be moved to a neutral Yeah, we can we can certainly take a look. I think like Adrian said, usually we that's typical. We usually have an easement like a like a CMP ement for that. It just means more clearing of the lot of the of the of the natural characteristics of Fair enough. Uh yeah, we can take a look. Okay, we'll take a look. All

set. Thank you. I do have a question back to the tree not clearing around the storm water basin. Um so we talked about having that buffer the tree buffer. Yep. Now, is that something we want in perpetuity or like in the HOA like No, they can't ever build anything in that buffer or like they can't yeah clear the trees or something like just kind of a discussion here about that. Uh I mean

you say you know we say yeah right now in a couple years they won't be cleared but what about like five years down the road or I guess it is in the open space and we do show the clearing limit around the basin as it currently is. But I think you just want to like a more clear kind of patch that shows like what that distance is but we do show the limit but it's an open space but it's an open space. It's completely open space. All of that. Yeah. Even outside the tree like all of that. Yeah. So then you're not clearing an open space, right? Like that is perpetuity like Yeah. Yeah. really it's just the areas for storm water that we need particularly that area. Yeah. Okay. Never mind then. Then it's already covered. Okay. Great. Thank you. Shows right there. Yeah. There you go.

That's what I was talking about. Okay. So that So that whole area there it's already shown. Yeah. It's all good. Good. Good thing Good thing we're It's good to have discussions about this. Yeah. Thank you. make sure we're on the same page and do look at those final plan requirements for that.

Okay. Um George, where do we proceed next from this? Uh if you consider that the applicant with the discussion tonight will be able to meet the subdivision uh standards criterion standards with approval conditions. If you're confident uh that the project will eventually uh be able to get approval under findings of fact for all of the different issues. Uh then you could look at the draft preliminary approval conditions. Again, going through those, you may come to a conclusion that it can't, but your that would be probably your next step would be to review the draft conditions of approval and see if they address all of these points. And if not, then you can add additional ones and those are in the packet.

Yeah. Should we just run through these? Starting on page 44 of the packet. Yeah, as we discussed, Brian, to save your voice, I'm more than happy to summarize them. Appreciate that, George. Yeah. Um, Julie.

Yeah, I think you should. have like a a set stop time um usually or midnight going to be the same day. I think we try to you try to we try to go these things are all important you know I mean we're all here and we just it goes faster as the night wears on

over there I just know you have another subdivision coming behind you so I'm like oh god I can't yeah there's been a train of subdivisions lately is season. We need houses.

You have affordable housing. Yes. True. If you could make my engineering a little a little less expensive, I have a better chance of getting you an affordable house. That's a contract you need to deal with. We need to deal with these guys in their contract. I try. I beat them up. Trust me.

It's a problem for a big problem. No, I appreciate like we were I was parapil last Wednesday. I was I think I forgot to put that in my notes. That was good though. I think that's important. So, does everybody have the draft conditions of approval with Oregon? Yes.

Okay. So uh first one and again these are all pretty much standard conditions of approval based on the requirements of the ordinance uh for preliminary and final employment. So the first one is the peer review and currently what's listed for peer review are the road construction design utilities storm water management the fire pond which is proposed and the sedimentation controls and the peer engineering cost construction estimates for all of that. I think you've also discussed some additional potential peer review uh to that potentially could be added would be the hydraology uh study as well as wetland delineation.

Yep. Yeah. Um and sorry and specifically with Goral Palmer is um for wetlands um yeah to review Eric's uh delineation but uh definitely take a peek at that northern piece that northern section that we all talked about near Mr. Yeah. Yep. We have not seen any cost estimates yet. So that's something that will be provided to gold pro gold polymer as well. Yep. Okay. Thank you.

Yes. Yeah. And that leads into the second proposed condition of approval is uh the board will look at perform a performance guarantee for the uh those improvements at the estimated costs provided by the uh project engineer and peer reviewed by the uh town's peer reviewer. uh for access road and construction, electrical service, fire, uh storm water management and erosion and sedimentation. Uh third is the uh they have to apply for their final plan within six months of this decision if you make it and uh they can request extensions but if they file for an extension it has to be before the expiration of the 6 months and typically you give an additional you give an additional 6 months and they show that they make doing good due diligence and applying to the state and outside agencies. Uh

um I'm sorry George can I ask a a process question here? So are we saying that these items we feel that the applicant is uh doing a good faith effort moving towards completing or are we saying that we have reviewed the engineers construction cost estimates? No, you have not. That will be a requirement for final approval and if they do then that'll be part of your determination that they have financial capacity to do the project. Yeah. Yep. Okay. Thank you so much.

Yep. Uh let's see. Uh the fourth one is the it's already been discussed the D for any storm water permits for uh NURPA storm water uh and wetland alterations. And again, you use that as a finding if they get those permits for determination that they are not causing problem environmental problems based on your criteria and standards. Uh number five is the erosion and sedimentation control plans which Durham has adopted basically the D standards. So the peer reviewer will look at that if they meet the D standards for storm water and erosion control they pretty much automatically meet US standards. Uh we talked about the clearing limits. uh those need to be shown on the plans and referenced in the deeds. Uh and part of that is because the storm water assumptions are based on limits of clearing. Uh number seven, standard condition approval is that they are to submit the road name and I see it on the plan right there. That has to be cleared by the addressing officer uh that was code officer to make sure it doesn't have conflict with others. um as well as they typically put a numbering patches on the road to help uh that process. Uh 6.18B is a repetitive but it covers the standards for the road design meeting uh appendix one of the subdivision ordinance. Nine is the note on the final plan about the clearing limits. U and it includes all those areas that need to be looked at. You mentioned the transformer well locations also should should be considered as part of the clearing limits. Uh 10 again reiterates the cost engineer

uh engineering cost estimate. Uh number 11 is the D storm water permit issued and that any easements for any parts of the storm water system uh need to be shown on the plans the final plan. Um 12 is the homeowners association documents which the town has provided uh a set that has been prepared by the town attorney that meets all the ordinance requirements. If they use that template, they're good to go. If they want to vary from that, it's allowable, but the town attorney would have to look at that and make sure it still meets all the requirements of the ordinance, and that would have to be done at the applicant's expense per the ordinance. Uh 13 is the determination from the planning board that their proposed plan does meet the CR cluster criteria. And then finally uh proposed condition of approval number 14 is the uh issuance or or uh provision of what the applicant proposes as the performance guarantee and again with the uh performance guarantee template provided by the town. If they use that standard format for an irrevocable letter of credit that's acceptable. If they want to propose some other form of guarantee, then that would have to be reviewed by the town attorney at the outlet's expense.

Is there anything anybody would like to add to that? um clarification that anything that we talked about um adding to the site plan um all the wells, the structures, all of that. I think that might just be kind of I don't know if we have to add that. If there are deal breakers, you could put them as conditions of approval. If they're just ones you you've put them on the applicant on notice that you're going to revisit those issues and this does not hem you in uh to uh these conditions of approval. If during the final approval process you can u make additional requirements. Okay.

So so should we add um any uh language about the buffer on you can you can if if those are deal breakers you can put them in as conditions of approval and then they'll be aware of that. I don't like the word deal breaker but I think I want to add it as a condition of approval. Sounds nicer. Yeah. Um what would we say? Oh, we see we see some sort of a buffer whether it be vegetative or and fence or both. Right. It should be under item number six which is section 617C plan assumptions are required buffers

shown in the recording panel. Required buffers slashfence address buffers as discussed at town at Yeah, buffer could be a fence. Right. Right. Right. Buffers and fencing as discussed at preliminary plan meeting. Is that okay? Yes. Yeah. I agree. Um Michelle has a question. And again, that doesn't lock either the applicant or you into any final resolution. says that's going to be discussed and has to be resolved.

What about the hydro geology? Can it be or instead of and I thought that was uh buffers or fencing. Well, buffer I think can be addressing but addressing having you address buffers and fencing which have been discussed doesn't lock anybody into any solution. just says that's going to be reviewed. It just says we're just gonna look at it. Yeah. I just don't think that they're doing trees and Right. Yeah. There may not be enough room to do both. Yeah. Right. Right. Yep. Whatever you're happy with for they've already all put in. I I actually could say just buffering, right? Because doesn't fence That's what it does say.

Okay. So, let's just leave it as buffering. We don't need to say fence. We could just say buffering. Buffering includes veg, includes fence. So you're saying this is included under number six. We're not adding a new one. 617C required buffer is shown. Okay. So yeah, we just like Yeah, we're stating that it's in here already. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We'll look at it. What about the hydrogeeologist thing? You're going to have that peer reviewed. Yes. But um you what? That's in number one. Number one. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Yep. 1 acre. Okay, great. And you're speaking about the existing covert the study that they're going to do to make sure that the the well isn't going to be impacted negatively for Yeah.

And and he's also going to look down by the wellhouse. We we will brief uh Gorl Palmer on these specific issues that you want them to look at. Okay. Great. Okay.

Um what we talked, you know, we mentioned permits in here. Um, consultation. Oops. Well, yes. And so I am

I am I will make a motion. Awesome. that we grant preliminary subdivision approval for Greystone subdivision as uh listed with the draft conditions of approval, but we'll exclude the waiver requests at this time. I'll second that.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Have a good afternoon. Can I have those plans? Are you have a copy? Can't have this. Okay. Next, new business. Uh the skeptic plan review of subdivision at 335 North Road. Map five, lot 61.

George, if you'd like to walk us through a comment.

Uh you Mr. Chairman, I'd be happy to. So the application is before you tonight for sketch plan review and uh again this application is similarly uh for a cluster uh approval which involves some additional analysis and process. Uh the record uh the submissions indicate that they're dealing with a a 44.2 2 acre uh parcel that part of the development area and they are proposing that the applicant retain a 2.1 acre parcel with the existing farmhouse uh out on New Brook Road. They're proposing 12 new lots off a 1600 foot dead-end road depicted on the conceptual site plan up there, which I will point out has been updated in terms of the uh wetland configuration that I brought up in these agenda notes. Um they're proposing 26 acres of open space. They are uh they have met with their submissions the minimum requirements for sketch plan review to get you uh before you tonight. There is uh some of the features identified during their site inventory include the large wetland areas uh and the vernal pool buffer. There is uh farmland significance farmland soil on the property that uh could come into play in terms of your determination of open space. There are no limits on developing farmland currently in the ordinance or state law. Uh the board may wish to discuss whether the proposed open space configuration reflects intentional preservation of natural resources or whether portions function primarily as constrained land after the lot layout. And that's really

a cons key consideration. This is not about just reducing roads and uh making smaller lots. uh it really needs to work together with open space and that is a discretionary uh uh part of your authority as the planning board. You can uh determine that it does not meet the fully meet the intent or it does. That's that's your determination. Um I did uh bring up in their initial submission the question of the wetland boundary a straight line. They apparently did some additional surveying work to show that uh that delineation uh was not correct and they've they've adjusted that and we can have them explain that tonight in more detail. Uh their consultant, one of their consultants indicated the potential need for a highintensity soil survey. We've discussed that in the past. typically with two acre lots, conventional zoning, you don't need that. Um, unless it's in an area with uh that has poor drainage and generally large wetland areas are indicative of that because of a lack of topography. Uh, and so in terms of if there are questions of of wetlands, soil suitability for on-site wastewater, then uh a highintensity soil survey may be appropriate and you should discuss that with the applicant tonight. They have identified a vernal pool. They've not determined whether it's significant or not. Uh per D standards, they're showing a buffer around it in case it is. And I've pointed out in my analysis that couple of those lots, it covers at least half of the lots. Uh and so that is is something to be discussed by the ward with the applicant. um two of those lots particularly would be impacted by that buffer and uh the D

is my understanding of the rules does allow up to 25% reduction of the buffer uh and so that would be potentially something that they could look at. I did point out that probably having a straight boundary if that is the solution would be better than uh a circular curved line for determining where that buffer is the limits of it. Uh but I also showed that with some adjustment of the lots in their configuration that uh the open space goals could probably be better met. But obviously that would hinge upon and I suspect some of the layout that you see is trying to get at least uh 40,000 square ft of contiguous um uh open uh excuse me developable land not restricted by wetlands or other other features to meet that minimum buildable area for each lawn. Um I did also talk about u I was working for Falmouth when they first uh developed their conservation zoning where this was a big issue worked through a lot on a lot of projects and uh there's this process that was developed back 30 years ago uh called conservation subdivision design process and it's typically a four-step process developed by a landscape architect uh named Randall aren't. So the first step is to inventory which they've done. Second is to identify the optimum development areas and open space areas based on the resources that are on site uh opportunities and constraints and then to identify optimum home sites. In this application they have actually uh identified the proposed home sites to take maximum advantage of the open space

that's corrected excuse me created. And then the third step uh uh actually the be the fourth step would be to actually then put lots around those house sites and get the get the road access to them. So uh this is kind of a condensed uh version of that process and I did show in just doing a quick analysis. I'm not a landscape architect. I'm not an engineer, but uh just showing how either a landscape architect or an engineering firm can do more detailed analysis and trying to uh have the open space as uh contiguous as possible and I'm anticipating that part of their open space calculation showing that at least 50% is preserved and no more than 50% of that is wetland uh includes includes a requirement that the 50ft strip going out to Newbrook Road is part of that open space calculation. So, uh again, those are all factors in trying to determine whether or not the intent of this meets what the ordinance is talking about in terms of the cluster. And again, it's purely discretionary on your part. I showed an alternative layout which may or may not be workable based on some of the engineering uh analysis that they've done. But what I hoped to show was that there are other configurations that may be able to do a better job in terms of meeting the intent of the ordinance. Uh relocating the road access uh to the closer to the current uh farmhouse would preserve that tree. Uh not sure how to describe it. Uh it's almost like a peninsula of trees that comes along the field out toward New York Road.

That's Yes. And uh so less there would be less impact where if that house were located uh in that open area where the existing MDOT curb cut is then that tree um grove would be pretty much undisturbed and provide good buffering for the rest of the project. So uh and again the lots may or not be workable but I think there are other alternatives that could be explored uh beyond the concept that's been presented to you tonight. That was the main point I was trying to make, not to design uh the project. So, uh as far as the um uh and then one of the things I did point out is that the more even though the farm soils are going to be cut up into these house lots under either scenario, there is a large uh unbroken forested habitat block. uh and so preserving uh that forested block as opposed to the farmland would be a a tradeoff in terms of the cluster benefits. Um, as far as the process that this that we're going through with sketch plan review, as stated in the ordinance and my notes is that the intent is to try to work through some of these general ideas and get everybody on the same page in terms of moving forward with what the ordinance requirements are going to be. You can't make any decisions at this stage, but you can have a a very open discussion with the applicants to try to get clarity on what their intent is and what the board expectations are. And that'll hopefully facilitate a quicker and less expensive design process when they move into the preliminary stage. Um, if they are uh considering any waivers, as we talked about with the last project, now would be good time to at least get them on the table, not to discuss, not to determine whether you

would or wouldn't grant those waivers, but to make you aware and have them consider the likelihood that you know that would be something that could be waved. Finally, the sitewalk uh at for cluster subdivisions is done at this stage before they get too far with the layout and design process. So, there's some features on this site that warrant uh board uh review. So, with that, I would uh close my comments and answer any questions you may have for me or you can move on to the applicant's presentation. Okay. Any questions or comments on George's summary? Nope.

Not at this time. All right. Um, sure. Let's ask the applicant come up. Yeah. Mind introducing yourself? Sure.

Good evening. I'm Craig Burgess with Acorn Engineering. Uh, here tonight on behalf of RV LLC. Um so going into this this uh subdivision concept that we prepared we had two primary objectives and that was um to preserve that existing barnside as much as possible. That's actually that's going to be an out parcel that will be retained by the owner. It's currently registered as like a wedding venue. So we want to make keep that lot as big as possible. Um and then the other objective was to protect wetlands to the greatest extent and we did exactly that with this subdivision layout. So the the way that we designed this is to do our best to completely avoid wetland impact or or minimize it. This subdivision layout completely will avoid all wetland impact even with the lot development.

I don't see that much nowadays in Maine. Um, so I'm proud of how it turned out. And it also as it goes up to to the uh north side of this, it starts to go along like a ridge line. So the roadway will actually be built in generally the area of the high point on the parcel. The wetlands on the north side can continue to drain north and it eventually works its way over to Newbrook. The wetlands on the south side drain south. So we're not really breaking up the wetland connectivity very much with the roadway.

Um and so that that was ideal for us is to really preserve the natural features on the site to minimize the overall disturbance. So this is a roughly a 1600 foot long roadway serving um 12 lots. I think we're fairly efficient with how we designed it. Um the other layout option that George presented involved about another 800 feet or so of roadway. So this option definitely provides overall less infrastructure. The 12 lots will all be served by individual subsurface wastewater disposal systems. Test pits will be completed on each lot to show that there will there is septic suitability. Each lot will also be served by an individual well. Um, I went ahead and I looked at the main database for the wells. All the wells around this area have a pretty good yield. Um, the the site entry location that's actually the applicant went ahead um in in the past and there's already actually a main DOT driveway permit. So, there's suitable site distances at that location. Um, we will reach out to main DOT just to inform them that this is now will be a 12 lot subdivision. So, that's that's uh one of the one of the due diligence things that we'll need to do moving forward. If the planning board is in general agreement with this layout is that we would reach out to main DOT to have them re review the entry. They will check site distances when they're out there. When I did a site visit earlier in the fall, I checked site distances and it does exceed town standards at that location. Um the way that the open space was designed was in a way to preserve that big wetland out back. The 50 foot um the 50ft strip on the south side, it it was more intended uh it

wasn't intended to really pick up that open space. It was really just to make sure that this remains a a 12 lot subdivision and that the adjacent owner really can't use that frontage for additional um lots in the future. Um so it it was included as part of the open space as it's shown here. Um the wetlands are roughly 46% of that open space. I I did take have a chance to look at George's comments and and we're in general agreement that there could be some changes to the lot lines to better preserve the non-significant vernal pool and that other wetland area to the south. So we so the applicant is open to shifting those slot lines a little bit on the south side to to uh make the open space just a little bit bigger. um that would mean that the overall wetland percentage within the open space will go down and I think that better meets the ordinance requirements for for open space and creating usable areas, more functional areas for the overall subdivision. Um this project will not require a main D storm water law like the the other subdivision that you just saw. It's because less than 1 acre of new impervious area will be created. approximately.92 acres for the development of the roadway only. The developer once the roadway infrastructure is in place, he will sell those lots to the general public. Um so the the way main D works, the way that the rules are written is if you sell those lots off to the general public, you then don't have to count the lot development area as part of that calculation. So u moving forward what we plan to do once we get into the hydrocad storm water modeling we will set overall development limits on the lot to ensure

that our model is accurate to what will actually be built out there. Um but there is an exemption through main D for single family lot so that that lot development area doesn't count towards the impervious area um total. So um we will we are proposing to meet the basic standard. So that's the erosion control standard through through main D. Overall um because more than one acre of of development or disturbed area is proposed about 3 acres. This project is under the jurisdiction of a a main construction general permit. So the how main D they rules have changed a little bit over the last year. They no longer require a a storm water permit by rule. Now the way it works is when a contractor is on board to construct the roadway, you file the notice of intent for the main construction general permit prior to construction. Um so we do intend to file that prior to construction. Um but that will really look at erosion control that is designed and where it will be put and and for this size for this size project I don't see too much of an issue from the state's perspective for erosion control. Um the the erosion control for the roadway construction will be really just silt fence that will be installed either adjacent to the roadway or the storm water best management practices. um wherever those end up being for this project. We do intend to um send storm water um to level spreaders intend to discharge runoff as as sheet flow to the to the various uh locations where it goes today. Um the wetland to the south, we've already looked at some of the storm water, the wetland to the south

drains south. So that would be one of our study points is where storm water collects and it leaves that wetland to the south area. Um there is some there is a bulk of the runoff does drain towards that larger wetland and that wetland you can see where the unnamed stream is. That's where that wetland kind of funnels through and eventually it becomes that unnamed stream where it crosses New Brook Road and eventually into Newbrook. Um so with the preliminary subdivision plan that we do plan on moving forward shortly after the sitewalk in this meeting um it will include a full storm water management report that looks at the different study points where runoff concentrates to make sure that runoff from the roadway and the lots. Um we will include the lots as part of our storm water analysis that the peak rates of runoff do not increase at those study points. Um, one of my comments for the board was whether or not you're going to require hydrogeeology assessment as part of this project. Um, George just discussed uh the potential need for a highintensity soil survey. I know that that was something that was listed um in my cover letter saying that it would be provided, but I'd like to have that discussion whether or not it's actually going to be or required by the board. Um these are larger lots um around 40,000 or or 45,000 or more. Um there will be test pits, multiple test pits done on each lot to look for uh septic suitability. So there will be an abundance of soil information collected just for doing two test pits on each one of these lots. Um, as far as the turnaround design, at one of the iterations we had was the the hammerhead flipped in the opposite direction. We moved it we mirror that to

the other side so that the turnaround area is not is not affected by the driveways in any way. Um, the the placement of the homes, you'll notice that all the placement of the homes could e be easily done without impacting the wetland. Um, I think that there's a couple close areas up in the top one. That one gets a little bit close, but there's still a good 40 ft 30 to 40 foot buffer around that house. Um, in those type of areas, the intention would be that the we'll we'll identify on the plans that the lot clearing will not extend into the wetland and there will be notes on the plan uh that would prohibit any wetland fill on those lots. Um the intent is no wetland fill on the lots whatsoever and that will be made clear to the homeowners. Um how I've seen that done on other projects where there's an abundance of wetland is uh the placement of signs along the wetland edge where in areas where the home may be be close or the lawn could potentially encroach within that wetland. So there could be signage placed on on along that wetland edge. Um, also identifying it as like a no disturbed like wooded buffer area on the subdivision plan so that the homeowners when they get a copy of that subdivision plan, it's very clear where the where the the the wooded buffers to remain um undisturbed are on this site, but the intention is to to not impact the wetlands at all. Um, and again, there will be no uh true wetland culvert crossing just because of the way that the wetlands drain. And I and I do feel like this layout does a good job at preserving um how the wetlands drain and um making sure in the future we'll make sure in

our plans that we have the notes and and no cut wooded buffer areas. We plan on adjusting the lot lines generally per what George suggested with with the what the lot lines coming in a little bit just um so that it better preserves those wetlands. As far as the non-significant vernal pool that will be revisited in the spring 2026, late March or early April to see if it is actually uh significant. But the intent would be that at a minimum that wetland buffer would be impacted no more than 25% um with a with a permit by rule. So we don't know if we're if we're at that point yet, but we do intend to adjust that lot line on the plan bottom right a little bit up a little bit so that that vernal pool is at least out of those lot areas. Um, and the reason for the discrepancy with the original plan that we submitted was when the wetland delineator, Alex Finemore, went out there, he what he did is he pulled up the available tax map parcel data um and he used that and and that parcel data was a straight line that was actually about 50 feet to the south. So when when he used that line um the wetland didn't extend all the way to that northerly property line limit. And then when we presented it initially, we didn't um he we were still waiting for him to go get out there and collect that additional wetland data to actually better align with the actual boundary survey that we now have on mainstate datim. Um so we were able to get that shown on the plan to show how this larger wetland how it actually um what it looks along that norly northerly side of the property. I guess with that I'll turn it over to the board with any comments. Thank you.

Thank you.

Right. Any comments, questions? Nothing yet. Alan. Not at this point. Oh yeah, of course. Um, so let's talk about the percent of wetlands um compared to the total project site. Uh, George, you brought this up in your um summary. So what is the what's the uh what should I say? Threshold there. Well, 50%

50% no more no more than 50% and currently we're very close to that 46 46% then that will go small when we make some of these lot line adjustments that will that will that will be okay okay great um George I hear you about like you know was this designed in a way to avoid impacts versus open space considerations, right? Um it's hard to know. Um I do really appreciate the fact that there this plan is no wetland impacts you said, right? Yes. There's no wetland including

the house lots. Correct. Right. Which is fabulous. I mean that's you know even with the road all of that. I I really appreciate that. Um not sure about the open space piece. Um it does seem like the lots are a little large, right? And we talked about that and possibly at least decreasing the ones in the right corner. Um we can go back and we can look at that minimum buildable area of 40,000 square feet and we can shrink up the lots a little bit more which would give more land back to the open space.

Yeah. Yeah. Because I think George, the biggest thing about the open space is that most of it is wet, right? like um and I don't know I haven't seen it yet how wet it is like what kind of a wetland it is but yeah that is the thing for sure doesn't really meet the requirements of open space just because Right right yeah that random strip on the bottom yeah yeah okay so there's that um in the wetland delination that Alex did um I don't see any photos were those omitted no those were recently uh submitted electronically to George it wasn't include as part of the hard copies. Okay. Okay. But we do have that information. Great. So,

it wasn't intentionally. It was just not originally part of that wetland report and now now we have it. Understood. Um, have you has the applicant talked at all to any of the neighbors yet that aren't included in the project, specifically this one. I think there's a house right here. Right. I'm not 100% sure. Yeah, that clearing you can kind of see in the aerial there. I believe it's a little bit down cuz they did a lot of they did a lot of the clear cutting that was back here two years ago. Okay. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Just based on the conversation we had with the last applicant, um it would be interesting to hear. I think it's going to be a very similar situation where the road is very close to their physical I think that's the the the houseing a 50ft buffer along the property line. Yeah, that was the other that was the other benefit of how the open space was designed is that area will be fully protected which is awesome. I see that too. That's great. I think the house is right here. Yeah, very close to the road. Yes. Oh, I think it's like somewhere like right right here. But yes, you do have that buffer built in, which is great. Great.

But just curious if you'd heard from that land owner yet. And I I can ask the applicant. I don't think that there has been anything initiated yet, but um yeah, I can clarify that. But yeah, the buffer's the buffer's great there. Um and and I think some of that open space like we can create more usable area by by adjusting the lot line here and given more space back over here which will increase the upland area within the open space.

Um so you said it's not going to require D stormwater permit will require the main general permit. Okay. Um and you mentioned the PBR potential for PBR. So the the permit by rule, the NERPA permit by rule, if we do encroach within that, if the the lot development area encroaches within that vernal pool, then it is in fact a significant vernal pool after it's looked at in the spring, then that would require a permit by rule for up to 25% disturbance. Okay. Within the buffer

within that 250 foot buffer. Great. But you were thinking of excluding that area. Is that correct? We could. I in looking at the lots, you can see that there's plenty of room around those homes and even in the backyards of those homes where that may not be needed. Right. Okay. The permit by rule might may not be needed if you shrink them. Right.

Right. Okay. Uh we just have to keep that minimum 40,000 square foot buildable area and then um we could we could also just we could the the setback line the building envelope lines would trim up against the setback and we would define where the no disturbed wooded buffer areas are. Also, the rest of these setback areas that you see here um will be they won't go through those wetlands. So, um we will be intentional with where the building footprints or where the building envelopes are located and those will not be through those wetland areas and we're going to make it clear that there's no wetland impact on the lots.

Okay. Okay. Just a couple more. So, you said storm water permits not needed. Um but I think you said you will be uh developing a stormwater report. Yes. Yeah. Okay. It's good. And that storm water report will show that there's no peak rates. The peak rates of runoff don't or like Yeah. Don't change at those study points. Okay. Um because this will also need a third party reviewer just like the other one. Uh not through D. That would be No, no, sorry. Through through Palmer. Yeah. Yeah. So he'll want to look they'll want to look at that. Does the town initiate that peer review? How does that work? Uh what you do is submit your final plan application and we encourage you to send that right to Goral Palmer.

Okay. So that it expedites it. Do you know who at Gor Palmer is the contact? Uh we can get you that. Okay. Um and then you mentioned the highintensity survey. Did anyone recommend did someone recommend that or No. um it was put in there, but I I um typically it's more important when there's so you could so with a with a subsurface wastewater disposal system, you go down to a 20,000 square foot lot in Maine. That's the rule. Um we have 40,000 45,000 square feet or more for each of these lots. Mhm.

Um there will be an abundance of soil information collected by the by Alex as part of the septic design. Mhm. So we will know that there if there's septic suitability on each of the lots. Um we know where the wetlands are. I don't think that there's much of a benefit to the highintensity soil survey, but I'll I'd leave that up to the board if they want to see that. Okay. Something we can discuss. Yeah. And I think one thing you can do is look at what those soil uh tests show. If it's really high water table, then that would be indicative. On the other hand, if you got 2 feet to the groundwater, then probably not. Yeah. Okay.

In the upland areas, the the available um medium intensity uh so county soil survey indicates that there's sandy lom on site, which would be a good draining soil. Um, and that's where that's generally where the roadway is. It's where the wetlands are, which which we know are poor soils in that direction that we're trying to stay away from. Okay. Um, is there a lot of grading needed for the road? We haven't got into that yet. Okay. There. So the site I know that you don't have contours on this plan. So that's when when the board goes out there, you'll see that it's generally flat.

Okay. Um there are no steep slopes at all on the site. There's no gullies or ravines or anything of that. Okay. So the intent would be that I'm going to design this roadway so that it generally follows the contour of the land. M and the way I do that is um design the road to after the contractor goes in there and grubs about four to six inches off the land off the existing ground. Um I want that roadway ideally to be 2 feet above that. So um so it just hovers right above the existing ground without any major cut or fill.

All right. Uh last question for me right now is fire and I apologize if you talked about that already. Um no I have not. Um so the so the homes will be sprinkled. So the wells will will serve the the fire safety system for each of the homes. Okay. And I think that's the preferred method here in Durham by the fire department to have sprinkler systems within the homes.

So there will be no sistern system or or wet pond or anything of that nature for fire protection. And then we'll coordinate also with the fire department on that hammerhead turnaround. Um the way it's shown on this plan is each dog leg is is 50 ft long. That's a like a conventional um design for a hammerhead turnaround. So we don't see any issues with that. You might not know this yet, but what size house are we talking here? Are these like um you know the big three floors? I don't even know. I think these will be like your standard um ranches and colonials around

um 1,800 2,000 1,600 to 2,000 square ft maybe. Okay. Um as part of our preliminary application I can I just I was just curious like subdivision this will be. Yeah, this this won't be an affordable housing or workforce housing. This would be like standard um market development. Yep. Okay. Thank you so much. From Neil. Yes, I am. Thank you. Where's the stream on the site?

Um that is that is in the top left corner that blue line there. So it's it's Oh, this is this is not what we haven't yet. We haven't received this plan yet. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Um so that's considered subsurface water. Um that needs to be added to your calculations. Okay. Actually surface water. I'm sorry. Sur surface water. Thank you. So the stream stream

width. We'll we'll have to have Alex go out there. He'll look at the stream width in that area and we'll make sure that's subtracted in the net res net residential cup. Okay. Um similarly um where are the ledge outcrops? The report states that there are several exposed areas of ledge. That is a good question. I'll have to Alex's report stated that. Not sure whose report but somebody uh it is stated. Let me see if I can find What we'll do is we can show those on the

I think Brian we discussed that and in the general characterization of the regional ge geology I think it did mention that in the plane the coastal plane uh that's one of the characteristics of so I'm not sure that it was sight specific or was it was a generalization so you you just yeah know what we talked about was something different okay yeah it had to do with um coastal. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. There there was something in here about that. In other words, just look at it whether it's a detailed uh analysis or whether it's a generalization of the types of soils. Yeah. I wish I could find it, but there are somebody didn't know that there were

I have walked the site. I don't remember seeing much. while you're looking into that. Sorry, Brian. Um, it's a whole another Never mind. Whole another topic. And um is is underground power going to be Yes, underground power will extend from Newport Park Road.

Okay. Um, additionally, um, I kind of I kind of agree with George and I think some of the board members here about, um, it looks like there's just wetlands that's being taken out. And I think that maybe there's a if you could look at a different layout to to show how it really meets the intent of a cluster subdivision, which is to preserve as much of the natural characteristics as possible. Um and and and um not have all of the wetlands be open space. Um again, just think of consider the intent of the cluster.

Yeah. um with the layout. Um I think there's another there's there's probably a couple of ways that this could be redesigned um to better apply a cluster subdivision definition to this to this parcel. Um, I'm not I don't remember the the landscape architect that you referred to earlier and their methods of subtracting the unusable parts of of a lot, but um I I have an architecture background and I did the same thing, you know, in design is you've got a box and you've got to take out for stairs and elevators and toilets and all that and then you're left with whatever's left to be creative. And I think this is the part of the project where um we rely on the engineers to be very creative um and come up with some some alternate solutions or at least a couple of um solutions to meet the intent. Craig, other than the uh issue of the layout that I just offered as a you know, just an idea, having more road uh you know, obviously if you get a cluster approval, you're automatically building less road uh than you would with a conventional layout uh because each lot only needs 150 ft of road instead of 300. Is there anything inherently uh unworkable from your your engineering perspective of going with a road spur up this way? I mean, this is pretty much the same layout that you had a little bit shorter on this end,

but just to access this area here and have this be a lot. Is there anything in in terms of topography or Yeah. So, wetlands right there to to the with the left of your cursor. This shows the 13 would propose, right? But those wetland plenty of land outside of the wetlands and it's really not that different a configuration than I think your layout is. Um that roadway generally fall it with this one though that that out parcel land that's currently that that barn we were trying to keep that as large of a parcel as possible

is that this is no different than that that's the parcel you're talking about right with bar right but the roadway is like another 100 oh by bringing the road over here yeah so that was that that was undesirable by the applicant is to have the roadway so close to the barn because that's trying to be preserved as like a as like a nice lot and to keep the integrity of that barn lot in place. Um so we really want that roadway as far down as possible to better preserve that that barn lot. Um,

the prior owner had a wedding venue that was using pretty much this whole field area. Is that planned to be used for wedding venues? Did you say no? That's why we we ideally wanted to keep that lot at least 2 acres in size.

I think we can modify our layout so that it's closed. So this this this layout here also has a lot of wetland. And I think if you go back, we can modify if you go back to art plan, we can modify that layout so that it's closer to that other one. Um we can pull the that lot line up closer through here. Mhm. But as I had shown on this concept,

this lot right here is already at the minimum 45,000 square feet, but we can try to try to pull as much of this area back into the open space over here. These this lot line could come across through this way as well. So pretty much as I had shown, right? Yeah. And

that would make a huge difference. And I think I think if we make those modifications, we're pretty close to even that other alternative that you suggested. I think we're pretty close to I think regardless of how we look at this that the open space is going to have a large percentage of wetland just the fact that there's that large wetland complex in the north side. Um I think I think we can get something closer to this which is better in which is more in line with that alternative concept. Um and in looking at your house proposed house location structure locations and your setbacks um keep in mind that and I'm just going to use this previous subdivision as an example here where the the wetlands there needs to be a buffer around the wetlands to create your building envelope. So even though you have these setbacks here,

th this there needs to be a setback from the edge of this to pull your building envelope even tighter. Does the town have standards on for a wetland setback? So what I've seen in other municipalities, South Portland just revised their ordinance uh to consider stuff like that. D I believe uses you got to try to stay at least 10 ft from for any disturbance. Um, so where that house, we can pull that house a little bit further from the wetland and Durham has no special wetland buffer requirements. It would be whatever D is.

So it's really just where that lawn area in the back of that house extends to. um 50 ft from a wetland would be the building envelope if you will. So So let's say that's 50 ft. Okay. So that's that's a that's a standard. Yeah. If you look at the cluster of subdivision um rags y um under suitable building site the the building site which is right is the building envelope um

yeah it's it's number eight in I don't know what page this is Georgia I know it's it's going to be one of our you're talking about the cluster standards and the land use ordinance yeah right so so you need to create this 50ft buffer from the edge of any wetland to start looking at your building envelope cluster which is which again is it's it's shown here okay y this was a cluster as well so I'm looking at that standard and yeah it says no building site so

I think how that building is shown now we can we can better define the building envelope so that the setbacks are you're 50 ft off those wetlands. Yeah, we can do that. Yeah. So, where that where that house Yeah. I think that is close to that 50ft mark. So, what we might want to do is pull the house a little bit closer toward the roadway. I just want to bring that to your attention because you know, we're going to want to see those buffers. No, thank you for bringing that up. Again, it it's it's the intent of cluster subdivision. and maintaining as much the natural characteristic as possible.

Those are the only comments I had.

Um, okay. Sidewalk. Actually, sorry. Sorry. You talked about this the straight line of this wetland that was because something I can't remember. They used the property map and stuff. They used the property. Okay. So, he's going to go back out when he goes back. He's already got he's already Okay. We don't have this in our package, but came in the day of the meeting. Yeah. Right there. You see that? Oh, that's that was the way it was, right? And um is it the This is the way it is now up there, Julia. Okay. So, where is this? What is this? This is the revised based on the survey. The wetland is that we don't have yet. We don't have yet. You have.

Okay. Got it. Got it. Got it. Got it. Thank you so much. Okay. And that's an unnamed stream, huh? That flows right into um Newell, I believe. Right. Yeah. It crosses Newbrook Road and then Newbrook kind of swings around. Yes. Tributary. Yeah. Yeah, but it's unnamed, I guess. Like it's not on the topo map. Um, okay, great. Okay, sidewalk. Sidewalk.

So, we're still struggling with daylight. Um, we don't need to deal with hunting season. Um, any suggestions? But it should be a Saturday. I I honestly weekends work better for me. Great. Okay. All right. Um we need x amount of days right ahead of time. 7 days is adequate. Okay.

24th does not work for me. Um 25th though maybe You can do both or the 31st works for me. I'm only one out of us. 25. Either day. 25 or 31 work for me. Me also. Yeah, 25 is better for me. Okay. All right. Let's hit it on the 25th. You think that would work for the application? 1 p.m. Yeah, that seems to work. I think so. Okay. 25th at 1 p.m. Eth barn. at the barn. Um

or the MDOT entrance if it's plowed. Oh, yeah. Existing. I don't think Yeah, it's it's not it's not it's a uh probably the barn and uh I can if that changes I can get back to you. Okay. If you could flag this line of the road, that would be helpful probably. Yeah, that's that's that's a good point. Do you think you can have that flagged? Yes. Well, it may it may move, right? But we Yeah, but it would be good to understand where just give you some frame of reference. Exactly. Yeah, that would be appreciated.

Yeah, that's typically what we've done the past few walkthroughs and it works really well to get our boundaries right. Another option too is if uh nowadays you can load this onto like an iPad or something like tablet and you can actually have the whole thing as as you walk know exactly where you are on site. So often times I bring something like that so that when we're say we end up in the wetland we know exactly where we are on the site. Yeah. It would be helpful if you could bring um printed copies of the map. Sure. They don't have to be huge. They can be small. But

yeah, I can bring something similar to this. Yeah. Yep.

All right. I think we're all set here. Yeah. Thank you so much. No, thank you. Appreciate the feedback. Okay. And uh we'll see you in a couple Sundays. Sounds good. All right. Yeah, please let us know if that didn't work as soon as possible. Okay. We need to get a public out as George said some days prior. Okay. I can if it doesn't work, I can let George know tomorrow. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Uh you want to talk about next?

Yeah. Yeah, please. So, the next meeting is proposed currently for um February 4th. I um I think we'll be at a work conference. Um but I would really like to be here. Um and I think with only four of us, we run the risk of, you know, not having a quorum if anything should happen. So, um, if folks are amendable to it, I looked at the schedule. I think the 11th works for the town schedule. I will be in Florida.

Oh, fly up the next day. Well, we're going to do it in Florida then. We'll do it offite. I will be out of state. Forget where I said. Are you Are you gone that whole following week? that I'm gone from the 7th to the 24th. Wow. Okay. Okay. All right. With that being said, hold on one second. Let me look at the schedule. Did you guys know also that the A committee meets the same day in time as we do? Yeah. Yeah. I was going to go visit with them. But anyh who, um, let me look. Is there any possibility of doing it on the 5th, Thursday? Well,

I don't know what's your Yeah, I'm gone that day, too. Okay. Um, let me But I don't want to make it like about me. We need George. We absolutely need George. So, I am fine with having to skip this one. That's absolutely fine. What about the third? Yeah, I was just going to say, what about the third? There's nothing on the calendar for the third or the second. No, I can't do the second. My daughter's the third. Third's fine. It's also an issue of if this room is available. Um, select board would not be meeting on the third, but it may or may not be taken by some other meeting. So, we have to we'll have to clear that. Okay. So, you want to try for the third? Would Could we Could we try for the third? You okay?

So, either third or fourth, right? Yes. If the third doesn't work, fourth is fine. I just won't be here. Yep. Okay, great. Thank you so much. No, we want you here. I'd like to be here. The third. Yeah. And George, you'll let us know, I guess. I appreciate that. All right. Can I make a motion? Just have one. Oh, this one's going um Durham Heights. Nothing's come before since then. And they're clearing the the road right now. That's it's not a it's not a violation. They're basically tree harvesting. if you want to someone wants to challenge it. Yeah. Okay.

And they I know that they originally had said when we on a sidewalk, they wanted to it's dangerous parking on the side of road there. I mean, it's deep ravine, you know, we walked. Yeah. Yeah. And they just wanted to be able to get a driveway in. I think they're doing more than that, but it's timber harvesting. Yep. Okay, great. I just didn't know if any That's my interpretation. I don't know. As long as they're just cutting trees, it's if they start doing grading. No, they're I think they have from what I have seen going by, they have cut a lot of trees and they've put enough gravel in to get a pickup truck off the road.

I agree. I just want to No, I know people when you you go on Facebook and all the comments that are out there. Oh, I'm not those people never show up to those people don't show up to meetings. They just complain. Watch the hot watch the hot mic. Okay, I'll take a motion. All right, I will uh see those people show up to meetings. Put it that way. Motion to adjurnn. So move second. Everybody approve. So be it. All right. Thanks. Thank you all. Yeah. Thank you. Good meeting. Yeah.

Sorry to keep everybody's I don't know why I'm apologizing, but what it is. Don't apologize. You're supposed to show. Stop saying sorry. Did we ever post the sitewalk summary for that one? Sorry, I know we like saw the bluring one. Did you ever post that summary? It did. Facebook, too. Pull that up. What? Yeah, that all comes out. Well, you have to do that every time. Always looking for volunteers.

Wow. No, I don't mind. Oh man.

Oh This is mine. So when did you say that this uh solid waste is a presentation to the Yes. on the 27th? Yep. Sure is. Yeah, one went out uh just noticed yesterday.

Good job. Yeah, good job. Thanks for being here.