Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Oh, heat, heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

He loves it. Hey, they can take care of the minutia. Yeah. Formatting and all that.

Yeah. All systems a goal. I have no interest.

Okay. Yes. Like I don't I this is not what I'm here for.

You need this. Um 15. You can I can put it back up when we're discussing. Does that make sense? Okay. That's the only copy hard. Oh. Oh. No, no, no. That's okay. Okay. When we're done, I'll give it back to you. Okay. Yeah. The extent of what I do is I go I thought you meant like on here right now. It's I'll just do whatever. We are so good. Friday night spotlight business. This is Sunny. Hey, I'm Sunny. I'm new to the chat board. Welcome. I'm Juliet. Hi. Nice to meet you. You, too. Come on, sit down somewhere. Any seat you want? Right in the center of the

Yeah, right in the middle. Right in the middle. I tend to spread. That's okay. Thank you. We have one more coming, right? Yeah. You guys got some new people. Sorry. Yeah. Yeah. Neighbors. Yes. Yeah. Gardening neighbors. Oh, gardening, huh? No joke. Sweet. We live on three different roads though.

Yeah. Is that good?

That's true. I'm I laugh. You can't handle all my stuff. Bill seconds.

Mine's at 6:30. Okay. You ready to go? Yep. All right. Um so welcome to the February 3rd meeting of the Durham Plain Board. Um this is rescheduled from normally this happens on Wednesdays. Uh but we were lacking a quorum, possibly lacking a quorum. So we moved it up to tonight, Tuesday. Thank you all for making the adjustment to the uh calendar. Um roll call. Um Alan Fton, Julia Kelinger, Brian Stikney, and a new member Shu.

Okay, thank you. um and myself, Brian Lana. I'm gonna cheer. Um so we have a quorum and um let's start by um standing for the theme to I mean 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. Okay. So, our agenda tonight um acceptance of meet uh meeting minutes from last month's meeting. Um informationational exchange on non-aggenda items. Continuing business. New business. Other business. Any amendments? I know I have a couple. Any amendments to the agenda from any of the board members?

I don't. Okay. Um, one amendment is to introduce uh Shiaoshu. Um, and um, just a quick discussion about her her involvement here tonight. Her? Yeah. Okay. Um uh and then and I'd like to discuss roles for um our new member and the alternate member at the end of the meeting if that's okay with you all. Um um and then the other addition I have is uh George had come up with a um weather policy for cancellations of meetings due to inclement weather

and I'd like to talk about that at the end of the meeting if that's okay. Sure. Um, can I make one suggestion? Sure. Um, with Sunny here now at the table, um, should we talk about whether who's going to be voting or talking about the applications in front of us today? Exactly. That's the first. So, we're going to talk about that early. Y Okay. Okay. Great. Great. Great. Um, so we do have a quorum with our regular members. I'm sorry, our elder members. Um, and so I think and if everybody's okay with this, I think um is Sunny, what what do you prefer? Yeah, I uh I go by Sunny. Okay. Yeah.

Um I think if Sunny, if you would refrain from voting tonight. Okay. And just have fun listening to I'm glad. All right. Um and then um at the end of the meeting, we'll talk about your you know, voting and participation at at the end of the meeting. Yeah, definitely. Yeah. I mean, does there's We're 28 pages shy of 500 pages to review tonight. So, um there's a little bit to go through. I'm sure it's a bit overwhelming. I think you were just um appointed two, three, four days ago. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So, is everybody okay with that? Yeah, definitely. Do we need to vote on that? No. All right. Um

Okay. acceptance of the meeting from uh acceptance of the me meeting minutes from January 14th. Um any comments from the board?

I'll make a motion that we accept the minutes as presented from January 14th. A second. All in favor? There's one correction on that. It does say January 14th, 2025. Need to correct the year. Catch. As amended. That'll happen for that. Uh seconded as amended. All in favor? As amended.

All right. Okay. Um Mr. the barge if you'd like to roll intoformational exchange on non-aggenda items.

So, as we as we've discussed, I do excuse me include my monthly report to the town manager and select board which lists pretty much all of the work program that I'm involved in. Um, and in addition to that, um, we did receive notice of the grant application that we sent to the main resiliency program to do an economic development study and it's not official yet in terms of an announcement from Augusta, but we have been notified that the town will be eligible for that money. So over the next year, we're going to be taking a look at u a potential area to do a economic development district working with the Greater Portland Council of Governments. So that's uh going to be coming forward. So

great. That's fantastic. Yeah. Really good news.

Thank you. All right. Next, a summary of the Ivy Ridge sitewalk. Members of the public might want to comment as well. We have that time for the public comment. Oh, right. Any item not on the agenda they can the residents and non-residents. Sorry, I'm still new to this. Any public comment on non-aggenda items? No, thank you, George. Um, okay. Um,

got it. Any non-residents wish you to have public comment? Okay. summary of the sitewalk um that Miss Kapplinger did not join. Um any comments on that? I'm just busting. It was quite cold. It was quite cold. The snow was pretty deep. It was cold. Thank you very much for uh writing that, Brian. Yeah, much appreciated. Sure. Um

so uh yeah the um the um applicants um representative Mr. B just gave us a a updated plan slightly updated um with a a change slight change to the road configuration. Um as as stated here, we walked the center line of the road.

Um it seems like several years ago. I don't know when it happened, but a lot of the property had been harvested. Um, so doesn't entirely meet the purpose or the the spirit of the cluster subdivision. There looks like there's going to be some weird tracks of open prop open land that weave their way through the house lots, but um, nothing we can not much we can do about what happened in the past. Um, so I guess we're looking forward to um their next submission in the future. What was that?

Motion to We live next door. We weren't actually notified of this sidewalk. It's a different subdivision. Oh, it's a different one. Okay. Ivy Ridge. Ivy Ridge. Sorry, honey. That's okay. Ivory Ridge Cluster subdivision is on New Brook Road. Okay. Something that came before us um a couple of months ago. Okay. I'm having a hard time hearing you guys. I'm sorry. Yeah, that's all right. I will try to project.

Um it would have been much worse if you were here last month. My voice was almost but anyhow. Okay. Um, motion to accept the the second. Okay. Make a motion to accept it. All right. Do I vote even though I wasn't there? No. Okay. All in favor. Thank you. Don't let that happen again. It was

um Okay. New business. Uh, completeness review of a preliminary plan application of Durham Heights subdivision at 439 Quaker Meeting House Road, map 2, lot 60. Public comment will not be taken during this discussion. Um, George, would you like to uh start off with your comments? Yes, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, the uh applicant is here before you tonight for a preliminary subdivision plan for a project known as Durham Heights.

Uh they are proposing an 18 lot cluster subdivision on the southwest side of Quaker Meeting House Road. Um you did conduct a sketch plan on this project back in November on the 5th and then uh you followed that with a site block on November 5th uh 16th. Um I have included within the packet u a checklist that I filled out based on the applicant's information. It's basically the first three pages of the full checklist. Uh the applicant filled it out as well from their uh review and and perspective and I did uh go through that. The board ultimately you are the ones that determine completeness. Um, and before you do move forward with any substantive discussion, it's important that you first make a determination of whether they have met the submission requirements, which theoretically gives you all the information you need to make a decision on this application. It does not mean that you cannot add request additional information. But what it does is it gets you over a threshold of uh of completeness which then starts a clock uh calendar clock uh ticking that you have uh within 30 days. If you're going to hold a public hearing, you would schedule that tonight if you determine it's complete. And then you'll have 60 days total to make a decision on this application. Either to approve it. Uh approve it with conditions or to deny the application based on what you have before you tonight and any additional information that you may as a board majority determine is necessary to confirm u compliance with the criteria and standards of the subdivision regulations. So uh last time we did this uh we kind of morphed into substantive discussion and I know it's it's tempting to do that but basically it's very

important that you segregate the two discussion uh parts and this is just simply have they submitted everything on the checklist not to determine whether it's valid or not in your minds in terms of making the case. It's just that they have completed an application that you can now start reviewing. Um so for this part of it uh you can discuss whether you as board members consider that it's complete and then a simple motion to determine that the application is complete is adequate and we will send a notice of complete application or if you determine that it's not complete then we will issue a letter of incompletion and you need to list what it is they have not submitted that's required by the ordinance and we will then uh list that in the letter of uh determination that the application stop. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Okay. Thank you. Um so let's roll through this um review checklist. Do you want an update? Could you please state your name? Joseph Martin with sightelines uh here on behalf of the applicant. Um, do you want me to run through because there have been some updates or is that kind of part of the next step after completing this review? I don't know if you want my presentation now or later, whatever works for you. Um, I think

my recommendation would be to just determine that it's complete or not. If there are things that were noted in the planning agenda notes that you would like to submit, we can do that now. But if it's just a matter of addressing substantive issues of project, they're going to make this determination first. All right. Thanks. Okay. Um any questions from the board on the application? Yeah, if I have one. So on the staff notes under C7, it says as a wave requested for a proposed water supply for firefighting and domestic use. But on the actual application, I don't see a waiver. That's just a typo.

Yeah. Where did you see that? In the staff notes. Um C7 says there's a waiver requested for I thought I fixed that. You're correct. Okay. Yeah, I searched search. I can find it. Thank you. There is none.

No, they're going they're proposing to put in a fire department 120,000 gallon. Okay. Yeah. there. This there's one item. It appeared prior to looking at this that there was a member of the public that was concerned about an item. And just to educate the public on what our process is, usually the planning board, we have the option of uh having a public hearing for something like this. There's some people may not be aware of that and I just want to make the public that are here tonight aware that odds are we will have a public hearing and then they can make their comments at that public hearing.

Yep. Thank you, Alan. Um, exactly. Um, no public comment will be taken tonight and we'll have to um um schedule that at the next time the applicant um submits. some reason I have a note regarding a well exclusion zones 100 foot from septic systems. need to look into this existing structure maybe um

weren't sure maybe right yeah left in place or those guess and those are shown on the plans okay point is that they're shown on the plans whether or not they're correct is next. Yes. Again, that's a substantive issue. Okay. For test pits, I don't have any other comments regarding the checklist.

I do. Um so I this may be substantive and if it is then that's fine. and we can wait but um C2 documentation of legal rights to develop. So I think we have some questions on that. So we do the applicant has submitted as required a deed. Okay. Um I have raised some staff note questions on the substantive track to to uh that need to be clarified. Okay. So I think that could wait until the substantive discussion. would say that what they submitted checks the complete box. That's correct. Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you. Mhm.

That's all I had. Thank you, Juliet. Um, all right. So, I think we're ready to make a motion on whether or not the checklist is complete. I would make a motion that we accept the application as complete. Second um now that I'm noticing this getting back to your earlier observation this is dated 122 2025.

Yeah. Usually takes me about too long. Maybe February we'll have 26. The application does say 26 though. It's easy to embarrass you. They're a year ahead of the curve. What's wrong? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. They they can be deficient for Okay. Uh all in favor?

Thank you. Okay, let's get into the substantiative um discussion and Mr. Starge, if you wouldn't mind walking us through your notes.

Yeah, I'll kind of set the stage and then the applicant indicated their interest in updating the board on their application. Uh so as we said they are proposing an 18 lot cluster and uh in the sketch plan stage they had proposed 13 lots and one of the issues that was discussed at the sketch plan was the fact that one of the lots was 11 acres in size and um it included the easement for all the open space and so we were looking at you know what is the plan for this. it like it was eventually going to be extended. So were they proposing a phase subdivision and this application for preliminary approval actually goes forward and proposes 18 lots uh with the recognition that this will kick them into D site location and so they've acknowledged that they will be required to go for that process. uh doesn't really affect the the town's review. Uh but that is just a difference from the sketch plan stage which is fine. Uh another issue that was discussed at sketch plan was the fact that the proposed road came very close to uh Collins uh lane Collins Way at

uh which is that subdivision which comes right to the almost to the property boundary of the of this tract. And so under the land use regulations, the they re the ordinance requires the board to look at interconnections with the wedding uh parcels and when that subdivision was reviewed u that was a criterion that went to the property line. So does not require this applicant to extend the road to to make a connection, but it does at least require a paper street so that at some point in future, distant future, if the town or the properties ever want to make a connection, they can. It could be developed for a pedestrian connection in the meantime between the two subdivisions if the two associations think that that would be beneficial. Uh but what it does is it plans for the future and that's a requirement of the ordinance and they are showing it on their plan going to that future connection. If I may, the the one issue that arises with that is Collins Way is a town approved subdivision and the town maintains that road

and all the subdivisions that we approve now are maintained by the subdivide. So, we would be looking at a town road being connected to a non-town road. And I think there would be a lot of there would be a lot of debate about that. I'm sure there would be there would be debate just making the connection. Uh most towns it's almost impossible to get uh away from deadend streets. So what this is doing is it's looking into the future 50, 100 years from now, cuz there are situations all through Maine, southern Maine in particular, where you've got subdivisions that are stones throw from each other, right?

And uh school buses and other service vehicles have to wind their way back and forth, back and forth where uh from a transportation planning standpoint, uh they call them u loops and lollipops. uh the street layout versus a grid where transportation is and again practically it's very difficult to accomplish that but at least you're making some step to at least try to plan for the future. Um so the other issue that I identified was that uh the applicant according to the deed submitted has already split the parcel between the 17 acres uh on the end which is proposed to be retained by the current the previous owner uh and then the rest of the project is going to be divided into the lots and the open space and I think There there is a question. I'm not sure exactly what the resolution of it is. Whether or not uh I had assumed that that was a landlock parcel that was created which would be a problem. Uh but in reading the deed I noticed that they do retain a right of the owner did retain a right of way along the alignment of this proposed road if the subdivision is ever approved. So, I I think there's some just legal potential snags in this that need to be resolved. And we did bring I did bring this up at the uh pre-application meeting in terms of is that land to be retained part of the subdivision or not part of the subdivision. The applicant in their uh submission state that it's not part of the subdivision, but it shows on the subdivision plan. So, I don't know what the legal resolution of those issues are, but I think it's uh it's something that needs to be looked at. Also, even

with the proposed layout, it only has 50 ft of frontage on the road, and I don't think that you can approve uh the subdivision with a nonconforming lot in it. Section 6.22 says all lots in the subdivision uh require are required to meet all zoning standards, which that does not. Again, the applicant may take the position. That's not part of the subdivision. So, it's exempt from that requirement. My recommendation is you get some legal input primarily from the applicant if they want to make that case. And then you can have it peer-reviewed by the town attorney to determine whether you think whether the town attorney thinks that it's valid. And it may well be.

It may well be valid on the access. All all points could be covered. But right now, I just think there's some legal threshold issues of right, title, and interest. And then right on that same track, um the land is shown on on the subdivision plan. The the owner of that property has deeded part of it to the applicant, giving them right title, and interest to part of it. But it's shown on the subdivision plan. So in some way, shape, or form, the owner of that 17 acre parcel whose land is being included included. You could assume that because they gave the deed and they knew and it's reference. But again, just cleaning up all of this will be really helpful for everybody. The code officer when somebody comes in to issue a a building apply for a building permit for lot 17 uh title attorneys when they're looking at the future transfers. It's very important to just have all these legal uh tees crossed the eyes dotted. And uh I did have Devin check uh the letters that were listed in the notification

and he did confirm that they were accurate. Uh the applicant has submitted uh in the cover letter a point bypoint um response to each of the subdivision standards and we can use that as the basis of findings of fact when you get to that point. Uh so as you go forward tonight, you should look at the applicant's uh justification for meeting all of the standards and just determine as a board at this point whether you consider that they've made a good case. Uh and it's supported by the application. Um, and I did include in the packet some draft conditions of approval which in combi com combination with the applicants uh testimony and submissions as well as any public comment that you may receive at your public hearing when they come before you. If you grant preliminary approval, they would then uh apply for final. They must do that within six months of any preliminary approval. they can get an extension and then they would put their final plan together with state uh permits with uh peer review. And so uh at this point you're just looking to make a preliminary determination of whether you think this application can meet the subdivision standards as proposed or not. So as I said, if you decide to hold a public hearing, you can have a discussion. You can go down through all of the uh the checklist andor the applicant's uh uh response to the checklist criteria. Uh or you can table it uh until you get to the public hearing. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Any questions or comments on George's summer? No. Okay. Um um I see attached to the agenda also is our sitewalk record from when that occurred. Any comments on that? Sorry, what? Can you repeat that, Brian? Um attached is the summary of our sitewalk. Oh. Um yeah. So, um

should we let the applicant Y come up and give their presentation?

Y I'll just All right, I'll introduce myself again. Uh, my name is Joe Martin. I'm a sight lines. I'm a cell engineer and uh I'm here on behalf of the applicant to uh introduce the project and let you know what we've um moved forward from our preapp sketch plan. Next slide. So, the project team uh hasn't changed since we were here for preapp. Uh stone construction is the applicant. Sight lines is the engineer and surveyor of record for the plans and then mainly soils was the uh wetland biologist who did the wetland delineation and then also did the test bits for the uh septic uh systems. Um we are also working with for DP purposes we are working with um um uh geologist and another entity who are creating some additional mass for us but that's not relevant to the the town process. Um so the review process obviously from the the town um standpoint there's sketch preliminary and and final. Um we're here tonight for a preliminary. Um the D we did uh as George noted we did um increase the number of loss from 14 to 18. And um that was just based on the discussion we had at the sketch plan meeting. Uh some of the board members kind of were wondering why we just didn't move forward with the full 18 at the sitewalk. that was also brought up. And then so I talked further with the applicant. We decided to just just do it all at once. And what it really does is it just slows down the the permitting process. Um if we had stuck with the 14 lots and got approval, um we could potentially have started work uh this late summer, early fall, um with the um uh site law process, the it's most likely not going to be able to start this construction till next spring. uh

just based on the lengthy process that DP takes on these. Um we are impacting a little over 11,000 square feet of wetlands as part of this um project. So that does require a NRPA tier one uh wetlands alteration permit. Uh that will be submitted with the site law permit with DP and um that will get approved at the same time as a site law permit. Uh the last one is the main construction general permit that is filed after everything is in place, all the permits are in place and then um I think it's two or 3 weeks before you start construction. you file a a permit with the DP with the contractor who is going to be doing the site work and that's primarily just tied to the erosion control to make sure the contractor understands the erosion control requirements and there's some uh there's some ability for D to um kind of have a a last review of the erosion control before construction begins. Um

is it okay if we ask a question? Certainly. Okay. Okay. Um so you expect to receive the soda um maybe a year from now you Yeah. I mean they have I think with they have three weeks to accept it and then I think they have somewhere 200. It's a it's 200 plus days for acceptance for and then we have been running to they've reached the end of their regatory deadline and then they can just request an extension. Yeah. And if they say if we don't accept it then they just reject the permit then send it back to us. So we have to accept the extension. So

you know ideally it's going to be that but it it it could take I mean I'm dealing with one where it was supposed to be approved last June and I still haven't gotten it yet. Um hopefully this project isn't that was a different there's other parameters to that one but it's just taking very long to get through the DP at this this standpoint and that'll be the first one the big one and then like you were saying I think everything else is going to fall behind it like yeah when there's two permits with DP like a site law and NRPA permit they hold those together and they issue them at the same time they'll actually be they'll be written into the same permit okay got it thank you and the main construction general permit that's separate so that'll be after okay thank you

and then the Army Corp of Engineers because of the amount of wetland wetland impact. Um we'll require a general permit from them as well. Um one point that they will require is because there's more than 5,000 square feet of wetlands impact uh there will be a wetlands uh alteration fee that will need to be paid into the state fund. Um it's based approximately5 to $6 per square foot. So 11,000 you're looking at 60 plus,000 uh inloo fee that we are required to pay. And what that does is that goes into a state fund and that's supposed to be applied to projects within the surrounding area uh for wetland protection or restoration or number of projects they can use it for.

When do you expect to get that or when have you um those takes usually around 3 months and we'll submit those that to the Army Corps permit probably around the same time we submit for D. Okay. Um, so you know, we might get that in early summer. Okay. But again, they don't have any regulatory deadline, so they can take they can take as long as they want. Yeah. And in my experience, they are taking quite a bit of time right now. Um, and it's kind of interesting because the general permit they're on right now, phases out in the springtime, and now there's a nationwide permit that goes into place. So, I don't know how that's going to work if you have a permit in the review process. So, I don't know exactly how that's going to work, but there's some

Okay. Um, and the impacts to wetlands has that hasn't changed from the last time or has it? We hadn't calculated it last time. I thought it'd be around 10,000 ft, ended up a little bit north of 11,000 bas, you know, there was some wetlands with the storm water um systems and things like that that we need to account for. Thank you.

Yep. Um so um the project um is located in the uh rural residential and agricultural zoning district. Um anyone that's on the sitewalk knows that the the property right now is just one single family residence. Uh the rest of it's primarily wooded. There's some areas that have been cleared or kind of scrub brushy or meadow uh type growth. Um so the project includes a new roadway, one road coming off um Quaker meeting house road. um 18 single family lots. Um as George noted, there is land in the rear of the property that's going to be retained by the previous owner. Um and then um the majority of the property is going to be uh maintained as open space, a little under 45 acres. Um each lawn is going to have its own private well uh private subject system. Um we are also extending underground power with the road and that will uh come all the way to the end of the roadway. Uh and we've extended all the way off the edge of the road. So if there's ever an extension of the road, which I don't think there ever would be, but there's ability to tie into that uh underground power. Uh and then um the biggest change from uh the last one was we have finalized all of the grading design, roadway design, and the storm water management system, which includes, and I'll show you on the plans here, but includes a number of wooded buffers uh between the lots and the downgrading of the lots. It also includes uh a number of grass under drain soil filters which are uh what you'd call storm water ponds. And then a few of the lots will require a roof drip line filter around the buildings. I think there's two of the lots that will have pretty much think of a crush stone um uh area around the perimeter of the building that will collect the roof run off and allow it to soak into the ground. Um next slide. So, this is the aerial um Quaker Mini House Road is running kind of uh

southeast to to northwest. Um you can see that CMP corridor that cuts right along the north side of the property and the site is located right in that wooded area just south of that CMP rideway. Uh this is the existing conditions plan. I know this came up at the sketch plan, but I want to show it here as well. So they're that area that's kind of the orange hatched is the um 5 acres of was it called prime farmland I believe it's called um and that's just a requirement the ordinance to map those locations. So you can kind of see it it's majority of the kind of the middle portion of the property. Um there's a good chunk of it that's located within the open space um that we would be uh preserved.

Um just getting back to existing conditions. Yep. Um during our sitewalk um there are quite a few um um stone walls throughout the property that are not located here. Um we'll need to see that and how they're impacted. I think we crossed a at least three or four just walking through the center line of the road and then there were some that were observed to the um if it we're looking at plan north north north um anyhow

yeah there's a there's a good chunk of the the property line itself is uh delinated by a stone wall um especially on the north side and the that little line that's going um kind of um on this on this one. This isn't north, but kind of going north to south on this plan. Um but yeah, there are some stone walls I know around where the building is kind of just um below where the the existing building is. I'd have to see if they survey guys shot those in the field or not. But um is it a requirement to locate stone walls?

It is. Okay. And also be aware of section 5.14 that talks about if the stone walls I think are more than 100 years old. There are special standards for re relocating them or something. So you might just want to take a look. I think it's a 5.14. Okay. Historic good with that.

Yep. So, this is the um overall new subdivision layout. Um the the location of the roadway and the lots are pretty much the same as you saw previously. There were some minor changes. Uh the biggest change is at the end of the road. Lots um 15, 16, 17, and 18. That is primarily what the previous lot 14 was. Um so that has been split into uh four additional lots. Um as George noted, there is that paper street that extends out to um Collins Way. And it's kind of tough to tell with the with the hatching on this one, but um you'll see around the property, especially on the on the lower end of the roadway, lots 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, all have 54T minimum 54T wooded buffers. Um, a lot of them have them between the properties and then on the downgradient side of it. Um, and what that is is that's a storm water a DP storm water um best management practice and it's based on the soil type and the um and the the cover whether it's either meadow or forested. Uh these are primarily forested and uh I believe it's a soils classification B. Um, and so the intent is that the storm water coming off those developed areas, the houses, the lawns would flow from that into these uh wooded buffers and they would be treated by the time they reach the end of that 54 ft uh path out of the uh out of the buffer. Um, to answer a couple of the questions um that were brought up, the the land retained by owner, it's kind of a a quirky thing. So even though it's not part of the subdivision, um because it was transferred within five years of the subdivision moving forward, it it falls under a special classification of land

that is not considered a subdivision lot. But it has to be shown on the subdivision plan because if um the owner sells that land within the next 5 years, then it needs to be included in the subdivision plan. and that gets into a whole legal mess which won't happen because she's not planning to sell the next 5 years. Um, but it's not counted towards the subdivision threshold for state um subdivision law. Um, and that goes for if you u the owner retains a land or you can transfer land to a direct butter. That also doesn't count as a as a as a lot. Um, and there's some other uh exemptions as well. So the question about the frontage uh for the talking about the proposed layout. So the as it's currently designed the land retain by owner only has a 50 foot of frontage on the end of the road. Uh what we did is that very that hatched area at the very end of the roadway is it says area to be conveyed to land retained by owner and that's a little over an acre and that is 150 ft of frontage on that roadway. So that is what is intended to get that um property frontage on the subdivision road. Um

correct me if I'm wrong, but in that area, isn't that where you're proposing a fire pond? Yes. Yep. So there'll be a a drainage easement on that 150 ft of frontage. So it provides the legal frontage, but the actual driveway access will mostly come off the end of the roadway for that for that land by owner. Can you show Does anyone have a thing? No. Can we show um where you're talking the 150 ft exactly where that is? Right there. Yes. But just that first that first square, the rectangle, not the second one. Right. We're just talking second one is not on the road at all. Right. Right. So, it's just that first part that's 150 ft. Is that correct? He's getting a pointer, I think. Okay.

Well, I think that's what I was thinking, too. But that piece is 150 ft. That's what he's saying. That's a plus maybe the 50 that way or something. Okay.

So originally that was not uh going to be remaining. So the intention is too is when the when the property was conveyed um the land to be retained by owner in November um the intention was leave that 50oot rideway from there to Quaker meeting house road until the subdivision move forward um and then we would provide the frontage um on the roadway that's required. So that's kind of the order of operations that we were intending to do and I can write up a summary that I can provide to to uh George and he can run that by

Yeah. Do we want to talk about this now? Go for it. Yeah.

Yeah. No, go ahead. It it appears that what the owner is retaining that should be within the deed to if you want to meet the 150 ft or to meet the 300 foot overall for road plage that would have to be in her deed specifically in her deed. Well, I think the the so pretend the subdivision doesn't exist and you just have the land retained by owner and you have a 50- foot rideaway out to that land. I think you meet the requirements um of the the back lot requirements um of the ordinance. Once you build the sub subdivision road, then the the back lot kind of goes away and then you have the frontage on the road with 150 ft. But originally the deed didn't reflect that. Correct. Where where the pawn where the retention pawn is going to be.

No. So that will be that will be conveyed as part of the the subly approved subdivision as a right of way. No, that where the where the um fire pond is that would be just conveyed as a piece of land that would be combined with the land to be retained by owner. Right now it doesn't show that and so right we're going to need a legal description that get a pointer up there. Oh yeah, thank you. That's need to see it this one. Yeah. Okay. So what you're what I'm hearing is this is part of the land to be retained by the owner. Yep.

Is it currently or is it going to be transferred? It's going to be transferred and that's that note below. It says area to be conveyed to land retained by owner over and the fire ponds going to be located on this. Yep. And there's a drainage easement um drainage and access ement over that piece of land. Easements on this. Yes. So that's the road front right there. Yep. And then the the actual driveway access for that land to be retained will come off the end of the road. Got it. Currently in your calcs um you're not including that 1.03 acres as a land to be retained by owner. You just have the 17 and change if you uh

Yes. Yes. So the land retained by owner in the on the plan as is needed right now is 17.4 acres. You're including the 1.03 03 acres in the cluster subdivision right now. I don't know if I am. I I believe you are. It's not.

So I think what we're saying is it won't be retained by the owner if it should include where that retention point is. Yeah. So it's 18 whatever it is, right? 184 18.47 but I don't know that it doesn't appear that so reflects that

when I did my like my net density calculations the the area the total site area that's included does not include the land retained by owner or the land to be transferred to the land retained by owner. Okay. The deed itself as it currently stands right now only exists of the 17.4 4 acres and then when the subdivision is is approved as part of the approval process that one acre of land will be transferred to the land retained by owner. All right. So that's that's something that I've adjusted because right now you're pulling out only 17.44. You need to include the 1.3. Oh, you're talking about the area up there. Yeah.

Yes. That's that's okay. I I thought you were talking about the net res subdivision all these calcs need to be correct to but if you look at the the so you look at the remaining land that it has and it says 76.77 acres y

when you go down to the net residential density calculations the site area is 75.73 so and I can I can update that note three to better explain that but it has been taken out of the calculation for both number eight the net residential and number 11 which is the open face. All right. Well, I see what you're saying now. It's not it's not clearly delineated there on note want me to keep moving forward and then if you want we can go back and discuss that further.

Yeah. I mean what I was just going to say is um repeat what George said um in his notes is recommend that I could just read this um for everybody. Um uh recommendation continues to be a requirement that the applicant submit a legal opinion confirming that the applicant is clear right title and interest to apply andor that the proposed frontage for the land retained by the prior owner will meet the ordinance requirements um and then we have that reviewed by our legal team. That's my recommendation as well. I agree with that. So we can talk further now or come back. Well, we're not going to approve a non-conforming. Correct. Right. So, this Yeah. Well, that would be a condition.

Wouldn't it be a condition, George? It could be. Yeah. Well, yeah. Could be a condition, but do we want to get too far down? Like, oh, I think that if we if we establish that as a condition, I would say it would solve that problem. It's a condition that they provide the legal opinion or it's a condition that the issue is figured out and dealt with like because clearly they're going to have to come up with a solution and they've proposed a solution. Y question is does it pass legal muster, right? So I guess is it on us now then?

Well, I think I think you can put it on the applicant. They're proposing this scheme to to comply, but it's not clear that it does in terms of the sequencing of these things. And I I disagree that that 17 acres meets the backlog requirements. I don't think it does. Okay. So, what's our what's our plan to go forward on this? I think we roll through this and determine whether or not we approve the preliminary. Oh, okay. So, include Okay. Yeah. You could make that a condition for final approval that they submitted a legal opinion confirming what they, you know, lay out that scheme of the sequencing of this and and their attorney says, "Yes, this meets all the requirements of the ordinance and here's where it meets it." Okay, makes sense.

I might have several other comments on this particular plan. Um um there are portions in the resource protection area that are in the open space that are not in your calcs uh right here in the lower lower right corner. Um those need to be considered in calcs for um uh cluster subdivision. Which ones are you referring to?

Right down here in the lower you have there's a small section that's in resource protection that's not listed there. So that area it's it's kind of an order operations thing and I always do wetlands first because that's usually the largest segment. So you don't double subtract areas. So you take out the wetlands and then you should take out um steep slopes. What I did and then you look at other areas. So the the inland waterfall and waiting bird habitat area is is all wetlands down there. So it's already been taken out of the calculations. I just don't see that in your table because it looks like this is also a piece of resource protection right in here. I believe again that's that's already been taken out because it's all weapons.

Yeah, I don't think you have to double. So you're saying this little area right here. I see what you're saying. So he's saying it's already included in the wetlands because it is a wetland. Deduct it. It's that's why that's

you don't have to deduct it twice because it's over. Now, a lot of times like if you look if you look on the right side of that habitat area, you have some upland area. If that was not as part of the lambert retain by owner, we would take that area out separately cuz it's upland over. Yeah. Over there. Cuz that's separate. But we we've already deducted that from the site area. And like same with the steep slopes, like there's a small portion of the steep slopes that goes over the wetland area and we just only subtract out the steep slopes that aren't part of already the wetland area that we've deducted. Um thank you for the introduction to that. Yes. Uh uh steep slopes cannot be um within the building envelope. So for instance here um I believe I'm too close to the screen here but this is these are your setback lines there. There's a building envelope here. Steep slopes cannot be within the building envelope, nor can wetlands.

I had that as a note as well. Yeah. And they can be within the within the lot, but not within the building envelope. So, and and the way I interpreted that is so the the the uh the ordinance requires when you go to cluster, you can obviously your lot size goes down to 45,000 ft. And then as I read it, you're still required to provide the 40,000 square feet of contiguous buildable area. And that's when I was doing that, I was not including any of those steep slopes within that contiguous building area. But there's a build there's a building envelope that has um setbacks and it the the

So you're just saying the stepbacks would need to be reduced to outside of that those steep slope areas and the wetlands. And wetlands. Yeah. Yeah. Well, the wetlands themselves, those have a a setback associated with them. They can't be within the building envelope, right? Which is the setbacks. Another these are your building envelopes. Are you talking lot eight for example? Yes. That's your building envelope. Well, it's not because is this is this the building envelope line? Is this a setback? That's that's a 100 foot set back from the This is a wetland. Yes.

So you need a set back from the wetland. Can you go to the next slide? Sorry.

What section is that? Do you remember the ordinance?

Eight. So there there actually several different provisions that come into play here. Okay. Yeah, I had a note but I didn't write it down. like the let's see what okay so you have section uh 4.1 A1A which is establishes that every lot whether it's cluster or conventional has to have a contiguous area of at least 40,000 square feet that does not have wetlands steep slopes uh resource protection. So basically if you had a twoacre lot and 80% of it is wet land you can't say we'll get two acres. Y

you have to have at least one acre of good dry ground that's not restricted buildable land. Okay. Then there is uh within the cluster criteria let's see in section 6.33 it talks about uses building envelope is used there as well.

Uh and then there's a definition of building envelope. So the question is, and I shared with Brian earlier today some AI analysis just kind of trying to put it all together. And basically what the applicant's case is is that each of those lots has a contiguous buildable area building envelope not including the wetlands and the steep slopes that there's at least 40,000 square feet. Now I think part of that and Joe you can weigh in. Do does the board consider that you know this this this is ledge that's or excuse me steep slope 20% I'm assuming yes 20%

so they've got this over here and they've got this over here that's not part of it theoretically you could put a driveway connection put a garage up here or something um or build a house up here so the question is is that continuous can I just can we just look at um what section is this? Uh 6.33. Yep. B8. Right. Suitable building sites. No building site in the cluster development shall be located on slopes steeper than 20% within 100 ft of any water body or 50 ft of any wetland or on soil classified as being very poorly drained.

Yeah. And this has come up, you know, this is our third cluster within the past six months or or so. And we the same we've been making the same comment to every developer and um uh yeah the the building envelope so that that language was building site. So I guess question is no building site the building site like this plan right here shows the building locations right? Is that the building envelope or is that the building site? What's a building site? Do we have a definition? Well, I think it's where you site the building.

Oh, so yes, you're right. It's not building envelope, it's building site in that particular commission. So the question is do they have 40,000 square feet building envelope area out you know at least 40,000 square feet contiguous and then do the building sites are they located like you could have the 40,000 ft but locate the building on the steep slope you can't do that I see so these things all work together to determine number one does the lot itself meet the requirements and then is where they are proposing to put the building on the lobby.

Additionally, in the spirit of what a cluster subdivision is is retaining most all or the better part of the natural charact characteristics of of the of this overall site. Um I think that needs to be considered as well. I don't know if this answers any of your questions.

Yeah. But we do show and it doesn't show up in these plans just due to the the the clarity, but we do show setbacks from the the wetlands, the 50ft setback. Um I don't have a note here, but we could certainly add one that you know no buildings can be located on steep slopes as identified on the maps or whatever. Um I didn't include a note that said that, but that could definitely be added. I mean, that's not a major deal. Um yeah the be great to have a definition of building site. So you may recall we have a bu we have we have building envelope envelope we have building

yeah um yeah to me the site is the lot the envelope is when you exclude the um when when you use a setback. So you're saying the site's bigger than the envelope. Yes. Yes. Well then no the building site is smaller than the hole. The envelope is everywhere it could be. What we were just talking about is the structure is the site, right? Like the house. That would be one interpretation. One interpretation. The house, the grading around the house. That's the building site. Now, to me, this is this is 12 is the site. Then you take out the setbacks

and what you're left with is the envelope where you could build. Right. Exactly. That That's my opinion. And if you want to get a legal opinion, you may, but that's that's how I interpret it is a site is the the other four call it four edges of the lot, but the envelope is what you take out of the setbacks. And you're in this you have building envelopes defined as that solid line inside of the lot, right? That's your building envelope. The building envelope would be the the Yeah. any areas that are outside of those those areas that are

I just like this is your building envelope right there. That's right there. Six, right? Well, those that solid line is is the buffer is the wooded buffer. Oh, okay. Where's your How about lot eight? Okay, look at that one. This is your This is outside the 50 foot set back, I assume. Yes. So, where's your building envelope? Right there. So the envelope would be anywhere inside of that um or outside of that the hatched area like um you know where you see the the septic test pit there. So the these are wetlands right? Yep. So then there needs to be a setback from this wet that's this

but again you can't see but there is a 50 foot um setback from those wlets for the buildings. You've had building envelope on here defined.

We have the the setbacks associated with the side, the front, the rear and the uh the wetlands. I mentioned wetlands. And then um like the setbacks where it where a setback interacts with a um like a like a wetland or a steep slope, then we terminate the the setback location of there. So you can't locate um buildings within that area. Another alternative is we could add like a 5ft setback line to those steep slopes just to provide some you know space off of those. So the building I don't think would be anywhere within those setback areas.

Yeah.

I'm not sure that's the intent of the ordinance. Sorry. On Deer Creek Crossing, there were a couple of lots that had quite a bit of wetlands. They barely squeakaked the 40,000 contiguous. And uh there was concern that the development of those lots, as constrained as they were, would end up eventually getting wet landfill. And you may recall that for those lots, you required an actual site plan for the individual home sites. And that might be an option on some of these questionable lots to actually have a site plan for the lot that the planning board would approve to verify that it meets the requirements as they're going to build it. And then if they wanted to change that, they could come back for an amended subdivision. So if any of these lots are particularly questionable like I think lot 10 Brian you're struggling with and whatever other ones you could again assuming you get over the hurdle of of how do you interpret building envelope building site then you may need some legal assistance in making uh interpretation. Uh but if you get over that to say yes, it can meet the ordinance, but it really makes a big difference where the house is put, you could actually approve a site plan like you do a commercial site plan for those particular lots and make that a requirement of the subdivision application.

And would it be an option as well again if the board chose to have that pushed down to the the code enforcement level? We deal with a lot of stuff with um municipalities where those type of individual site plans for lots get the as part of the building permit process. They'll submit a site plan that reviewed uh by code enforcement. Well, again, you don't have to have the the construction plans. You just have to have the grading the grading site. You know, where is the home site? And so, for example, is it going to be pushed right up against the ledge or you know, you would do a site plan to show where the building's going to be built on that and the planning board could delegate that delegate that to the court officer or not.

Yeah. Would you be able to show that like say lot seven like on a grading plan like cutting out the hill make it flat? Well, that gets back to uh Mr. Illinois's concern that the purpose of clustering is to preserve site features, right? And the board may or may not approve it depending on what seven's a great example. Um I'm just saying if you if a developer not say who you are, please Max, owner of Stoneax. Thank you.

Yeah. uh if a developer sold a lot down the road, say to somebody else and they wanted to put their house up on the hill or vice versa and the site company comes in and makes that well I think that's the reason to have it set out for those lots that the board is concerned about. If you have a plan that meets their satisfaction, then they either build it or they come back and try to convince the board that an alternative is acceptable. Right. Yeah, I I sound like a broken record here, but the spirit of cluster is to leave that slope as is.

I guess my question is typically the reason to avoid steep slopes is because of concerns about erosion or stability. From my standpoint, I don't I don't see a steep slope as a as a positive feature. uh you know, wetlands, you know, uh vegetation, um you know, streams, all that stuff is stuff you want to protect and and keep. But I would think the steep slopes, the reason they're not um considered quote unquote buildable is because of the concerns related to erosion and stability and things like that. And if you could address that with grading or the retaining walls or whatever you decide to do

in this case with the cluster subdivision, we're trying to retain as much of the natural features as possible. Yeah, I think the natural piece is the key word there. It is key. It's totally key. Y desirable or not. Yeah. I I just keep going back to this um this definition of the building site. And I just if we don't we're not what is that? Like do we need a legal opinion on what that is? Yeah. I don't think your ordinance contains a a definition of building site

because if the building site is as you recommended or suggested that it's larger than the envelope then this doesn't he's saying property line itself that's what you're saying I think I look at it as property site is the property line the envelope is what you take out of the setbacks is where you can actually build when you take out setbacks But the ordinance says building site.

I would agree with with well I don't want to call it George's interpretation but what he said that the the site is where you the building is actually constructed. Now when we say site like we're drive like I we're doing a site plan yes that generally refers to the whole thing but a building site to me infers the site of the building itself. Okay. So then what's building envelope in your opinion? The building envelope is where that building site can be located. Well, so that's when you take out the setbacks as to where we do have a definition. Yeah. I mean, yeah, we do have agree with what I'm interpreting it. That's how I look at it

because like if if the building site cuz I think that says no areas of wetlands or steep slopes can be located within the building site which I think if you looked at the previous um uh u subdivision that approved that was not how that was interpreted because you have properties that have wetlands or steep slopes included as part of them. So, doesn't doesn't our code enforcement when they're looking at a building site before a foundation is even dug, they have to go out and improve where that is located. Correct. Just in terms of setbacks. That's all they look at.

We have to hand in like a plot plan is what you call it. When you put in for a building permit, you have to provide a flaw plan, show setbacks right away, the what you're building, your house, attached garage, and then you have to draw in all your setbacks from property lines. You have to show budding properties and then we get to public and then yeah, they do come out and make sure that is where you're actually Yeah. construct it. Yeah. So why why isn't that responsibility on the shoulders of CEO?

Because this is going beyond a conventional home site on a twoacre lot without subdivision. When you get into subdivision, it gets more scrutiny. There are more parameters such as wetland setbacks and then cluster is even more scrutiny and the planning board is delegated to review those issues. I think what's going to be very helpful is um if you can just highlight or color uh what the buildable land is, whether it's called um building site or building envelope. Um just color it and note what's the square footage and we can review if that meets the code.

Yeah. The only I'm just I keep going back to the definition because if and the way I'm reading it is the way you are were referring to it in that what we're trying to do with cluster is that the sites cannot be built on steep slopes, wetlands, poor drain soils. Um but that is the envelope. I think that was the idea of the ordinance when the ordinance was drafted. I think it was to say that um cluster lots cannot be developed where there's wetlands, steep slopes and poor soils.

So even if they even if they show us the setbacks and stuff, I think there's the the issue of the definition of a building right here. I mean the definition of envelope is to contain other things, right? So the envelope will be the the biggest portion of the site. What's your what's your name? Sorry, I'm Darren. Darren Lebec. Hey Darren. I'm actually supposed to be sitting up there. Oh, hey. Sites. Um, so just by pure definition of of the word envelope, but again, I don't know if that's envelope contains the site. Is that what you were saying? Envelope is a container. Okay.

So here here's a a previously approved cluster subdivision where we talked about this. And here's a building site. Wetlands on either site. The setback. This could be wetland or ledge. Yep. This is the envelope is how we discussed it and approved it. And this is again another cluster subdivision. So once you take out the setbacks, that's the envelope. in the envelope cannot contain wetlands or slopes greater than 20%.

Look at that. Look at that comment right here. This one 50ft wetland building site setback difficult. So again, that's cut out, right? So yeah, you did that. So we we do have those setbacks shown in all the on all the individual laws, but they're in that you have slopes, steep slopes and wetlands and probably poorly drained soils within the envelopes. Can we can we see what you're talking about where you where you show that? Um I don't think you're going to be able to see the the definition needed. I don't know if you can pull up the PDF. Maybe that would have better. That's what that is. That's the PDF. Yeah. which was she

um maybe zoom in to like 14 or 16 those lots

more. I think that's that's that's good. So you can see the the dash lines within those individual lots and those have 50 feet off the wetlands. Yeah. Um so the steep slopes themselves. So So right. So that doesn't work. That doesn't work for this slot. Is it just this area like this? Yeah. No. So that that solid dash line you see that's just the 100 foot set back from the uh positive set from the from the uh but but what we're saying is this cannot be within the building envelope.

Yeah. I mean we could add a we could add like a one foot setback that wraps around the perimeter of those to to remove those but those are not considered as part of like the the calculation for the 40,000 ft of contiguous. Understood. Completely understood but they can't be within the building envelope. Again, again, that could either be accomplished with a setback line wrapping around those or just a note saying no building with seven. Seven's a really good example. It's it's going to get tight. Yeah.

Um and and now that I'm looking at this, so you see where it's actually crossing a roadway and I'm assuming you're going to blast that out. What do you mean crossing a roadway? Right between 10 10 and five. Yes. It won't be blasted out. No, the just a huge bump. I do not think these are I do not think these are any of these are ledge. Um just it's a slope. Just a slope. Just a slope. Yeah. I mean you look at um wells in the vicinity of this and uh ledge is approximately like 80 ft down. So I highly doubt there's any ledge up there. Um

all right. Just just understand that's important. The whole premise of cluster subdivisions is retaining these natural features. Yep. What about poorly drained soils? So the poorly drained soils have a usually it's a it's a there's different soils classified within the the state. Usually it's like Pete that type of stuff. Y um there's nothing in this site that would be classified have any poorly drained soils? No, not that meet the classification of of the there. I mean, I would consider wetlands poorly drained soils, but those are obviously already mapped on the

Okay, got it. Yeah, thank you, George. George, could you pan closer to on the road, the the existing rower, please? And I think George, this may be a question for you, but um can can this actually happen? Can you have uh this zone outside of the actual property here and here.

Well, just understand that the well exclusion zone is simply provided to meet the state uh law setback that you cannot put a septic system within 100 ft of a well. And so what this plan and the requirement in the ordinance is intended to do is to identify on each lot areas where wells cannot be located. That's the intent of it. So it's not extending the rights or responsibilities of this app can be on their property line. It's just saying that's the 100 foot. I mean they you could cut that off and show it on the plane. It's just reference.

Yeah. But it's like when you know as a single you know if you own a a lot undeveloped lot and you want to put a septic in and you want to put it right up on the you I think you got to be 20 ft off your your property line 20 or 25 ft you it's up to you to check to make sure there's not a well on your budding property within that vicinity you know um so you know whether it's this plan or an individual lot you're still held to that 100 foot setback.

No thank you. Yeah. I um lot seven. Um what are the do you know what the are you looked into what the rules are about locating a well or or or abandoning an existing septic system?

Yeah. I mean usually you just dig up the septic system. I don't My guess is that's a an old uh septic system that's probably just stone. I bet I I it might just be a pipe that um runs out. I looked through the the state um registry that they have for septic systems is not listed there, which is not uncommon for older septic systems. Um, but based on the discussions with uh the property owner, uh, Max, we approximately know where it's located. Um, and just when they do that, they'll need to just, I think, just abandon it. I mean, as long as there's no effluent entering it, the there's no concern about pollutants from it. I mean the the primary concern you're related to with septic systems is things like uh nitrates or something like that that's are flowing out of that while you're putting um eff there's no effluent going in there then there's no you know it's not like a um you know like a landfill that continually leeches stuff over years and years and years. We could I could reach out to the state um um department that uh licenses of those and see if they have any language about abandoning those and what's required if they just say stop using it.

Well, I assume at some point you'll have an ISDS engineer involved in the project. But um you know when we when we did our when we performed our site walk, people were living in that house, so they're still affluent. Yep. Um, and you know, Brian had mentioned or brought it up during the site walk that it's just something that that raised a little bit. I don't know if it's a concern, but just something we'll bring up and discuss. Yep. About what the um how to treat that um a lot of times what they'll do is pump the septic tank if there's one there and then just fill it with sand.

The leech bed. Yeah. and the leech bed. What we've done replacements where you like um a se a new septic design is completed on a property and you have an old septic here and say this is where the new septic has to go. It's like a requirement that shows it's a standard size like leech bed like they're 40 by 60, right? So you can determine that by excavation. Yep. And then they're standing. So there's like a foot of stone and that and then 6 in of bedding sand. So when the excavation contractor goes in, they'll they'll be able to mark that area out and know what area and how much fill to remove from that. Would that be part of your demolition of the existing home?

Yeah, I would say yes. Once the once the home is demolished, then the uh old septic will be removed as part of that demolition. I would call that all one thing. Yeah. Then that waste is always it's actually called to a treatment facility in Wisconsin area.

I can get you that exact guidance at the state issues on that. Okay. Thank you. So, how do we get sidetracked here? Um, Juliet, thank you for sidetracking us. Yeah, you're welcome. I'm here for you. Any uh we'll let you continue with your presentation here.

Yeah. Um I think in terms of changes from last time Oh, go to the um two slides down. Uh up one more up one more. There you go. So so this one. So uh this is the grain design which obviously at this scale you can't really see much but uh you guys can view the the fulls size plans you have. So the as you come um along the roadway the roadway from Quaker meeting house from Quaker meeting house road on the road on the left side, you come in and left side, you come in and you see the you see the first um grass and drain first um grass and drain soil filter soil filter located just to the the um located just to the the um uh high side uh high side of the roadway and there's of the roadway and there's uh go a uh go a little bit further. There's little bit further. There's another one another one here. I don't know if cursor here. I don't know if cursor

where did these where did these Yes. So those are two grass soil

Yes. So those are two grass soil filters. You continue further along the filters. You continue further along the road road right there. So the as you come um along right there. That's the third uh grass under drain solo filter. And then all the way at the end of the roadway. That's the fire pond. And then on the back side is a much larger under drain filter um that will collect uh the storm water runoff as well. So the design of that end of the roadway is there's a um not a huge area, but there's a decent chunk of area that drains to that turnaround area. Um there's a culvert there that will extend across the road that'll discharge into that fire pond that has the 120,000 gallons um of fire protection water. And then that will fill up first and then there's a spillway that will be activated when that reaches a certain elevation and that will spill over into the soil filter where that water will receive some treatment and then um will under drain out through um a under drain system that will discharge right to those wetlands right there. So the intent of that is to be allow that fire pond to um be filled first and allow that to maintain um the water that needs to be um there'll also be a dry hydrant as part of that. Well, actually I I actually showed a dry hydrant on that and I thought some towns require those, some towns don't. I don't know what the

Yes,

you do. Okay. So, it does have a dry hydrant there um that will be right off the edge of the roadway that the fire department can connect into and suck out the water they need to for fire protection purposes. So, there's also for storm water um there's a number of wooded buffers like I talked that are either in between two properties or on the downgradient side. Um, and then there's two lots, I believe lot seven and lot nine that those um, houses will have those roof roof drip line filters. And those are really added because we were when we did this plan, we're really tight on meeting the the thresholds for sight law treatment standards and we just need a little bit more impervious air to be treated. So we just I picked those two uh lots for the houses to have those and that got us over the threshold we needed for treatment. So that's why those two and those are two lots that because of the configuration of the roadway and the the drainage swailes that run or the wetland swailes that run through the property, it was difficult to capture those lots and treat them. So those are two lots that previously weren't treated, but now at least the buildings are treated. So

dictate the size of the house. It kind of it's it's we base it on a footprint of 2500 square feet and um it's kind of what it is is it's a three foot wide um stone that wraps around the perimeter. We could size it for larger. I don't know, you know, I don't know if you want to. We could provide some restrictions on those two lots that they can't the the houses can't have a footprint of over 2500 foot. I don't know if but wouldn't the restriction or wouldn't the requirement be that it has x amount of imperous surface around the perimeter or you mean x amount of crushed stone

the right amount of like you can make the house whatever size you want it has the right amount of crown around it yeah that's right okay yeah we could we could do it that way I have to figure out the language for that but yes

because it is based just on you just need to provide uh a cert certain um cubic footage of storage per area. So, it's just a straight calculation. Okay. Um other than that, um you know, we do show um potential building locations on each lot. Um, I think if it would um help the board visualize um we could look at providing um a site plan for some of the lots that are more of concern um that have like steep slopes or you were a question about lot 7, you know, uh making sure you can fit something on there. Um, I don't think zoning in on any particular lot is helpful other than the fact that you would show what the building. That's my opinion.

And, you know, we're we're you run into this a lot with these larger subdivisions is you want to show a lot of stuff on the subdivision plan and it just gets very busy and I wish there was a more clear way of showing the building envelopes on each lot have a separate plan that shows it. But you'd want be but you'd want that to be part of the recorded well eventually you would transfer whatever part of it needs to be recorded but just for illustration purposes like some of these other plans. Yeah.

You could show a plan with just building envelopes with like the one that Brian just showed from another subdivision. Yep. Yeah. Yeah. Simil similarly um with the tree clearing lines um we don't want these lots to be clearcut. Yep. Um so so it' be helpful to see that as well. The ordinance says that the lot should not be clearcut. Yep. You need you need a um Yeah, we need to see the tree clearing lines. Yep. Yep.

Okay. Yeah, it it if they want to apply for a cluster subdivision, these are the things that need that. If it was a traditional subdivision, not cluster, rules change a little bit, but that's not what we're reviewing here today. And I just want to go back. I was doing a little research just now. Um, sorry, regarding the poorly drained soils on the site. And it does appear that there are two that are poorly drained. The scantic and then the bitifer peaky peaky moss or lom or something.

So those are it looks like you know I mean they're they're wet soils. So they're going to be around where the wetlands are. So there are poorly drained soils on the site. They'll might want to consider that as well. I will take a look at that. Um okay. I think above and beyond the wetlands. Okay. So, I don't know what we want to do with that, but consider that next time. Absolutely. Yeah. And that was part of the building site definition.

Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. It was it had to do same thing with the steep slopes and the wetlands, right? It said no steep slopes, no wetlands, and no poorly drained soils. And it does appear that two the two soils that are the Bifford Mucky Pete and your Scantic silom are very poorly drained. I'm assuming that's from the Cumberland County soil survey. This is what um yes what you provided is what I'm looking at soil series. I I'm assuming they're in the open space the wetland areas. But what' you say? I'm assuming they're in the open space. the wetland are used.

Well, no. So, the soil's mapped and the soils come up to pretty much the proposed road. I would say everything's south if that's if up is north. Everything's south of this road right here like uh you're you're looking at a map in the soils of the soil. Yeah, I think that could be he Yeah, the applicant provided it. Yeah. Um it's this one. It's like this. So it's your SCA and it's your Yeah.

But yeah, just something to think about when you look at that. Yeah. So on the on the um it's a it's buried in the stormwater report but there's a pre and post development um stormwater pre and post development wershed plans where we map the the soils. Yep. Um so there is BO there's BO lots of BO um but it's all located in the lower wetland areas and the scantic It's tough to tell the lines. I'd have to see where the Scantic ends. It looks like the Scantic is located down in the wetland areas as well,

which is all of this. No, like down in this area. Um, yeah. Yeah. And maybe we could have the third party reviewer look at this as well. Um,

this is all scantic right in here. I think that's more this area. But is it one of the stroke? Uh, yes.

Yeah. So the SYV is Yeah. So the majority of the the area up near the road is in Sutton LOM. Yep. Or sorry, Sutton very stony. So D the letter D means poorly drained. So you have is your Sutton is B slash D. Yes. So B slashd. So it depends on the materials of the what it's made out of, right? Like whether it's clay, depends on the profile of the of the soil, right? So if it's um and typically where it is where these steep slopes come down, they flatten out into these marshy areas. That's where you're going to have the D where it performs as a D.

Right. Right. for where you have like when we model um these storm water uh plants any areas that are classified as wetlands we model as a D because they function as a D soil whether they're in a type A so soil type B soil um they function as D soil because they don't allow or they allow minimal infiltration into the soil so maybe showing that just talked about more site plans but maybe showing that somewhere

on here. You're good. So to go back a little bit, but if we showed a plan that had just the building envelopes on it, so it cleaned up everything, very easy to see where it was, where it wasn't, but that would need to be transferred to the bu to the subdivision plan at some point like the demarcation of that or the

not necessarily. Okay. I think the board is just trying to verify visualize it. Okay. whether these locks meet the building envelope, building site, building setback, all of the the requirements, then an analysis plan, I guess, and from that they may determine that for particular lots, they will not approve them or they want a specific site plan for to development on that law because it is so tight and that could be on as a detail.

Yeah. In a previous cluster, um, we talked about just like flagging those areas on the site so that uh if you sell the sites off individually, the contractor knows don't don't go past. Yep.

Are we done with the presentation? Um, yeah. What I'm leading up to is holding a public hearing. And once that is established, I would say that we table, it's been recommended that we table the application and review of the draft approval conditions after consideration of any public comment. I guess I do want to before we do that, I want to add one note by you. you would just do quickly and I'm just hoping that in having that public hearing all the other information that we're requesting would be available at that at that time of the public hearing.

Okay. So, should we list um you're you're all set with your I was just going to do one quick I I I just thought of it. Um so, when you said public hearing, it reminded me. So um because we are doing a a site law permit with DP, we are required to have a publicformational meeting which we held last week or week before

um we had about 15 um people show up uh some of some interested parties. Um they had a number of questions you know all common questions traffic um clearing you know how much are how close are they going to be to my property um things like that. There's a lot of concerns brought up about speed on that road, but you know, we informed them that was a, you know, an issue to be brought up with the the town rather than us. You know, we don't control, uh, speed limits. Um, but overall, it went very well and I, you know, I don't think all of the abuters were happy that this was moving forward, but, um, I think we were able to address most of their questions. So,

great. Um just going through the application um regarding solid waste standards. You're asking for guidance from us on um or guidance from the town I guess is what you So I'm just going to read what your step says here. Section 6.20 solid waste standards. Uh based on the limited extent of the project, it is not anticipated that it will result in the m municipality exceeding its contract with a nonispos waste disposal facility, but we will defer to guidance from the town. So um

the reason is that we we don't have access to your contract with the solid waste. It would need to be dealt with from the HOA, the town that deal with some waste on this on private roads on the right. But the the big thing about that is the contract is changing because they're going to an automated system and so now is the time to talk to an automated system. You're looking at 64gallon containers that have to be 3 ft apart. And there have been there could be potential issues with a subdivision unless unless the contractor is allowed to go into the subdivision into each individual household,

which Cassella did say they are willing to do that willing, right? But I don't know whether the the people within the subdivision want that. But first, our roads are built to the same standards. Subdivision roads are built to the same standards as the town roads are. So, far as I'm concerned, it doesn't make a difference on what road you're traveling on in the town of Durham. But safety issues going in on a subdivision versus having to put 36 containers close to the Quaker and Meeting House Road would be a safety issue. Unless you had a specifically designed area at the beginning of the road to collect those containers.

So are you saying that the Cassella would privately contract with the subdivision or would it be part of the town? It would be part of the town but it would be it would be the subdivision having an agreement with Cassella to go into the ready to serve notice. Oh, depending on the timing, the time this comes back for final approval probably will be passed to June meeting where we'll have a new standard of new ordinance.

Um, and that will require and you could just do this which is to go to Cassella, give them your subdivision plan and ask for a letter from them saying if that is approved and built according to the town standards, they will pick up that each lawn. I think that's what the planning board's looking for. That's going to be in in the ordinance when it gets revised. That's if it gets approved. If it gets approved, which which it No, when when it gets approved. When when it gets approved. Can I ask a clarifying question? May you please say who you are? I'm Heather Roy. I'm uh an administrative liaison to the project for StoneX and the engineer. Thank you.

Yes. Um so let's say I'm I'm doing the whatifs, right? If that doesn't get approved, is this it would would it a way to handle this situation be to include in the HOA document that what gets recorded as part of each deed that they're dealing with Cassella through that. It couldn't be Cassella though because it might not always be Cassella as our contractor. They could contract with another company. The town won't pick up the trash. It's up to the HOA to deal with the trash. But the town does pick up the trash right now if it's brought out to the end of the road. So

I think that's the issue. The town the planning board is going to have an issue with

putting all of the containers for that out on Quaker meeting with its traffic safety issues. So I think the and so I think it's fair game for the planning board to look at. You need to have a plan for where those containers are going to be. And you either have Cassella or whatever contract the account goes with. I think that's pretty done deal. It's just how we're going to do it. Uh either Cassella picks up in front of each house or you create on this property an area for containers and have a private carrier come and do like you would for a commercial or

I guess sorry. I guess what I'm looking for is if the HOA documents said that as part of being part of this HOA, they allow permission for a con a trash contractor to travel the length of the road to to collect trash that I think that and with a capacity letter from Cassella saying they're willing to put in SER basically. Yep. Okay. Solves it. Yeah. Yeah. And then or or the other alternative is is they just privately contract with a private waste hauler that will just pick up individually at each house. Yeah. Yeah. Whatever the plan is. Yep. Thank you.

So, that was the defer to the town because I wasn't exactly sure when it said exceed the municipal contract. I didn't really know how to deal with that. That goes back to the old when they were closing landfills and they had to take the trash to Northwalk and so D said under the state law you couldn't approve a subdivision unless you could show that the town has capacity and they were actually shutting down development in towns that what they had zon compliance that's still in the law doesn't make sense anymore but

that's that's the standard So, Mr. Chair, I think that we need to make sure that we're covering the specific conditions that we're requesting the applicant book. I agree.

Um, I also have one more thing. Sorry, one thing generally, it's kind of a bigger thing and maybe it's application specific, but peer review. So we um I think we can do peer review at any point during the project. Um typically we've been doing it later in the project, but it may be the applicant's best interest to have it done earlier than later so that you could get information back sooner if something comes up. Um, so I I don't know if that's something that you would want to consider having done. I mean, sounds like you have to wait at least another year to get permits, you know, like so just consider that.

Okay. If there's, you know, would you want the peer review done say now and then after permits? No, I'm just saying considering you get the permits from D. Yeah. Yeah. Like maybe you want to have the peer review done now, right? like coming up too of the the scope of the peer reviewer because this is cuz it's it's kind of like how many cooks do you have in the kitchen um you know you get 10 engineers in the room they're not all going to agree how um storm water should be designed so this is going to DP it's going to be reviewed we are hopefully going to have a um a third party stormwater uh reviewer because the DP reviewers are so overwhelmed right now

and they have contracted with a number of um third party reviewers which speed up the process. Um so this will be peer review the storm water will be peer reviewed storm water and erosion control. I don't know if the town I don't know how that would work if the town's going to have their peer reviewer also review the storm water because then we're trying to review it to meet the the state standards and then the peer reviewer standards and just ends up being well the town goes with the state standards. Okay. So the town peer review will just be looking at the town standards that aren't storm water standards I guess. Well they also we go by the D standards. So and the consultant goes by

some projects don't get a D storm water permit. So the town engineer if you he sees that the D has approved it then he'll probably accept that it meets the D standards. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly right. What you're saying is eventually we're going to require a pair of Yes. Yes, we are. I mean, I am going to heavily suggest that we do, but when I think there's a number of issues that you've got on here that we can, I think address before a public hearing or at least bring to the next public hearing. Okay. And at that point, I would think would be a good time to get that peer reviewer involved. Okay. Um between kind of the preliminary and the final standpoint. And then

again, we're going to submit to D hopefully in the next few weeks. Um they won't look at the application probably for another 3 months. M um so we have some time if the peer reviewer requires some modifications and we have to update the plans we just kind of swap out the plans with D they don't even know so um that's what I would recommend as well between prelim and final have that done yeah that's my thought so okay and it is on the applicant to submit right to Goral Goral Palmer we use Yep for ro Palmer Oh, you did? Y I used to work with them a lot, too. Not for them, but with them. Cool. All right.

Sorry, Brian. Um, sure. Do you have a motion that you'd like to make? Is that what I hear? I do. Well, we need to come up with a public hearing date. All right. First of all, and a lot of that is how that would fit into Georgia's schedule. Let's start with that. You would just be a regular March meeting, wouldn't it? Sounds good to me. It's easiest. That date is what? Wednesday. Wednesday. First Monday. Yeah. Same date as

it is. Juliet, what are you making? Oh, good. March 4th. Establish a public hearing on March 4th. What else do you want to add to that motion? I can make the motion. I guess the the biggest the biggest concern I would have is what uh the do we have any draft approval conditions? It would be nice to have them available. They're in the packet.

Okay. So, I would make a motion that we hold a public hearing on March 4th and we will table the application and review the draft approval conditions after we consider any public comment. Do we feel like we covered everything here? Well, let's go through the list. Um, we talked about a lot, but sure if we cover We have a second on that. Then we can talk about it. Okay. I'll second that motion. Okay. Yes. All in favor? Oh, what do we pre all the conditions?

That's Yeah, we talked about everything we want. That could potentially be a condition, right?

There there's anything else. There's one thing I did want to at least one thing. Um, so part of or no, the inland waterfall waiting bird habitat does fall within the subdivision. It's actually the open space because if the land owner retains will retain most of it, but there is a part of it within the open space. And in our ordinance, and this is more of a conversation question for the board, in our ordinance, we we talk about potentially requiring a report to be prepared by a wildlife biologist in order to assess the potential impact of the subdivision to the habitat and to any species. Um uh the applicant received a letter back from the main department of inland fisheries and wildlife um talking about this this habitat area um and I think the concern could be species in the you know waterfall waiting bird but also bats um so be we don't see many projects that have this designation in a subdivision ision. Um, so just a consideration if we want the applicant to dig further into the review of the habitat and species.

No, thank you for bringing that up. I I forgot about it. Um, George and I talked about it earlier today. We did receive a letter. I think you all were copied on that from Oh, yeah. The conservation commission. I wanted to bring that up as well. Yes.

It was not part of this um um uh package today. Um but that will come up. We did receive a letter from the conservation commission regarding uh the bat the species habitat in this area and um that we need to pay attention to when construction activities occur to not disturb their presence. That will be part of the the waiting water foul and waiting bird habitat will be part of the D site location permit review and the that impact uh clearing limits will be part of the army core as I understand it.

That's correct. Yeah, I have some more comments on that stuff as well, but I'm just focusing on our ordinance that states that if that um this habitat is located within a subdivision that the board has the option to require a report to be done by a wildlife biologist. So, I just wanted to see what all thought about that. It's page 76 if you want to see the ordinance. Can you clarify what you're looking for? because that's it in the open space way down the corner. Yeah. So, yeah, I know it's only a little piece of it, but it does say if any portion of a proposed subdivision lies within this habitat area

and of course it's it's it's up to the board's perview, but you know, I would say that it's it's because of its location and I mean, you're exact distance, thousand feet plus away from any development area and that it's going through a thorough state and federal review process. Personally, I don't think it's warranted. Okay. I think it's pretty well covered by the other agencies, but again, it's up to the town's perview. Yeah. No, we have received comment from the public. Yeah. Um, regarding this as well, so I think it's something that would require.

Okay. Also, another just a related question. Um, have we started construction? What are we doing on site right now? There was some limited clearing for where the road's going to be and that's kind of to so they'll be able to stage um for the project when it hopefully when it does get approved we're able to move forward. Okay. So so would you say we have started construction just limited clearing? Yeah. Okay. Okay. And are we doing any sort of um uh forestry practices like um harvesting? Are you selling the the trees? We're not selling the trees. You're not selling the trees?

Okay. Um I mean, right now is a great time to cut the trees, right? I think the window Yeah. October through May. Um that way we would avoid all the the bad stuff down the road. Yeah. That way it wouldn't like get approved and say spring or whatever and then you couldn't start until a year later. Yeah. So, is your thought to clear all of the areas that you need to clear before May this year within reason? I mean, you can't there's always a little bit of clearing here and there once you actually go to position a house, but for the infrastructure, yes. Okay. Clearing for the infrastructure. Okay.

So, the the majority of it was done outside of the it's bent breeding season. I don't know season. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Uh so outside of that time frame yeah the bat breeding period is May 15th to August 15th. So that way that stuff would all be done when so whenever the infrastructure starts on the project we don't have to there won't be like a six-month delay because obviously May through say August that's probably best time to do so cold out right now but that

I'd also just like to point out that regardless of subdivision approval or not, the land retained by owner is having a house built out there. And so whether or not the subdivision gets approved, that will be the access to her eventual house that's out there. Okay. But would that need to be approved? The road's going to need to be approved by Well, it would be a drive home if it was just But would it need to be approved by the DP and all of that because of the wetlands and stuff? It just be a building permit. Oh, okay. Because it's just a building permit on a one track.

So, is that kind of what you're saying is that you are going in there and working on the road for this? Well, so yeah, we were going to talk to the planning board about it because regardless whether we put a subdivision here or we not put a subdivision, if we say, you know what, not worth it, or something like that, the planners do still build the land retained by owner, I'm still going to build her a house there. And this is going to be where her driveway goes regardless. Yeah. Um, it's just if it's we build it 16 ft wide or we build it 20 that but that's where it's going to go no matter what. Isn't it a nonconforming lot that this whole property the 17 acres

I think that's if the subdivision does not get approved that lot is a non-conforming lot they would have it right away through here. Where's the frontage? Are you saying on frontage on the road? The 17 acre lot has no frontage on a road. I think the question is if that would meet the the backlog requirements. I think that's one of the questions one of the questions that George brought up and that's the kind of one of the things I think we need to get fleshed out. Absolutely. Okay. Yeah. Okay.

Okay. So again, the tree clearing happening right now is um for not for construction reasons, but for there's been no disturbance. There's been no um uh say no fill brought in. Yeah. No fill. No. Yeah. It's just been the clearing. Okay. It's just in and clearing in the winters. It's a lot less damage stickers and the big machinery cuz the ground's frozen right now. So they're not making rots. Yeah. Oh, it makes the most sense to do it this time of year for sure. I just um Okay. And then one last thing, the main department of inland fisheries and wildlife in that letter, they are requesting a couple additional things. Uh vernal pool report. We did have that submitted to them.

We we are Yes, we can submit it to him. We already had one done. There was no vernal pools found out there. Yeah, Alex did it right. Yeah. Um, I think he said in his report, unless he went out again, he said in his report that he didn't do it during the right season or something like that, but he but based on what he saw. So you you outside of the vernal pool season, what they do is they go and they look for potential vernal pools and he didn't find any potential pools out there,

right? But yeah, I think he just needs to submit that to MDFW. And then um also it does seem like they didn't get your tree clearing limits. like they don't know where you're proposing to to clear trees and again this has to do with bats so I think it's important that you update them with this and so you're already clearing trees so you know figure that out but okay motion

is there anything else anyone Oh god. Yeah, actually FEMA location, the flood plane. It's just this same location right close to that habitat. Yes. In the southwest, southeast, I mean. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

Just to confirm, the motion is that we hold a public hearing on March 4th, 2026. and we uh withhold making any decisions or approving this preliminary approval until then. still after considering any public comment. Yes. Okay. And I believe you second this. I got all in favor. Should we go through the conditions that we've this should we do that after the Yeah, you just table. Yeah, we did. We'll do it after the the hearing. George,

when would you need material for that march? Like so if you already have a standing application, when do you need like a week before? At least a week.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. All right, we'll take a short break and get back to the next agenda item for right other businesses.

Thank you guys. Thank you so much. Welcome to board. Thank you. Serve. Same to you. This is one of our shorter meetings. I saw last one went to like 9:00, 9:30. Yeah, we had two like substantial. Yeah. No, we've had um some pretty full agendas. All summer was nothing. And then boom, subvision. Right. A lot. Yeah. We got nice winter walks in the woods.

Surprising that one was not well attended by the public board members, right? I think a lot of people are not aware of this. I saw um messages on all things during people are not aware of this that are going on. I don't know how it's just the news blast website really, right? Yeah. You you you know you make your public notice about whatever the legal way is to do that that's that's what's provided. So So do you all know the ordinance by heart? No.

No. You guys sited the Stonewall like what? Oh yeah. Um the top two are mine. The bottom two are yours. I think is the most senior member. I am not. I am not. I think Alan is I think those are your two longevity.

Uh put him back on your I think right there. I think you when I came back I've never started on board with you until until you just came back. I was either um uh I guess it was 17 or 16. Two of us are expired. She was here before I guess maybe. How long have you been on board for? Um I moved here uh 10 years ago. So probably nine years. Yeah. Awesome. Yeah. Join the group. Sure.

Okay. Um so planning board discussion of public process for the draft land use ordinance amendments. George, I'll let you take it from there. Yeah. So, we've been working on these ordinance amendments since uh April of last year after the town meeting and

pretty much have uh prepared draft amendments on three trackcts. The first is the codification of the ordinance which includes uh 100 editorial changes recommended by the town's consultant. Uh those are it did that's why the fact it was so long because between them including the storm water the entire storm water report which is not usual for preliminary and the entire draft ordinance that's why it came out to be 500 pages. Not quite.

Yeah. But um so in the codification version that was submitted by the consultant um I did go through and put a box in wherever the changes were made. So you can skim through those. Again these are all editorial changes uh changing the title like it some places it calls it select board of selectmen and so it just has consistent terminology. those kinds of editorial changes. Some of them were required like updating the uh flood plane management to meet the state

requirements those sorts of things. So but no policy and no administrative changes are in the uh codification piece and separately we have all gone through a long process including some public uh meetings of uh proposing some minor policies like the solid waste pickup that we talked about um and also some administrative changes like having three weeks to prepare for this meeting instead of two weeks that we have now and answering Mr. Martin's question of how soon do those have to be in before the meeting? Right now it's one week, right? There isn't. There's nothing. Think of bring it in at the meeting.

So the um the admin the codification will be one warrant article on the town meeting warrant. uh the minor policies will be a second warrant article and the administrative changes will be a third warrant article with the latter two going before the codification. So if the minor policy changes are approved they'll be incorporated into the recodified ordinance. If the um administrative changes are approved they'll be incorporated. If neither are improve approved then just the codification will change the current it'll keep the current language for all of those things. Um, so that's how we've kind of structured it so that codification, which the town is invest invested in, doesn't get affected by any controversy over any of the policies. And pretty much all through this process, the board has pretty much said, look,

let's just deal with easy stuff. Let's not do any big issues uh like we've done in the past with battery, energy, storage, and solar and those things. So, it's pretty much on a

farther ahead of the curve than we've ever been in terms of the process. Select board has approved uh putting that before the voters. They're pretty much good with the language. Um we have this meeting and the next meeting if you want to take a look at the codification piece which you haven't really delved into. Um and they're pretty much good to go. Um, so I did include in your packet the schedule which includes uh you start at the town meeting and work backwards to toward us. And you typically have your formal legally required public hearing uh no more than 30 days nor less than a week before the town meeting. And that's not a time to people come in and say, "Oh, change this, change that." is just to say this is what's going to be you're going to be voted on. If you choose to, you've had public meetings in the fall. If you choose to have a second public hearing earlier where you can make changes on any of these policies like the, you know, sprinklers and fire and subdivisions, you want to put that out one more time, you could do that. And I put kind of in the schedule, uh, I think that was in March. And then the legally required public hearing would be in May just before the town meeting. So that's the process. The whole package is very much ready to roll. So hopefully this is just a brief in that's where we are unless you have questions.

Um all right. So we've all seen the administrative changes and um what's the other one? Minor policy. minor policy changes several times now. Nothing's changed there. We've had one public hearing on both of them. They were public information meeting, not formal public hearing.

Okay. Um this is the first time that we see the codification changes. So, what I'm hearing you say is um we can comment on them tonight and next month. Yep. any comments on the codification um changes that were proposed?

I know there's a lot to go through right now. No. Um all right. So, we can let that linger for another month. Okay. If you guys want to take some time to look at those, come up with some comments and then and then we'll we'll talk about schedule. Where was this? There you go. So, George, you're proposing March 18th public hearing for all of it. Yeah. Okay.

If you feel that that's needed at this point. And again, if you take public comment at that, you could still make changes at that point. I'd prefer to hit it up as soon as possible in case any snags come up. I 100% agree.

All right. So, March 18th and I'll send out my typical email to everybody prior to that meeting. Make sure we have a quorum to discuss that. And George, you're going to have you already confirmed whether or not this space is available? No, I'm not. Okay. Um, so tenative March 18th, land use public hearing number one. Okay. So then the 14th of April is when the select board would vote on the drafts. Public hearing number two, May 20th, and that will be the final public.

Yep. Okay. I don't have any issues with those dates. Check their fine for me. You said March 18th on my calendar right now. And May March March 18th for the first one. Yep. May 20th for the second one. Um and in between those two the select board will get a chance to look at them in in April. Yeah. So I mean if you get p you know all of a sudden 50 people come out and say don't do that. Yeah.

Uh then you could go back to the select board and say we had another public hearing and you could educate the select board. Or on the flip side you had two meetings in the fall. you had this public hearing. Everybody seems good to to go with it or no no furer. So just added it's really an added opportunity for the public to have input so that when you get to the town meeting and invariably we'll have somebody stand up and say I never heard about any of this and all you can say is look we had four public hearings. We couldn't do more than that.

Okay? And of course that the town meeting will describe it all again and there'll be folks that um weren't ever notified. Um um so Sunny and Dang, you have this information now. Um there were a few things that we decided to kick down the road just so you know. Um, one of them is about uh was noise ordinances um campground.

Yeah, there were a few things that people came up and said, "Oh, change this, change that." And so it was mainly it was a minor thing about one of the agriculture committee members wanted you to go with state definition of campgrounds and not review for campsites. Yeah. Uh so that that got kind of said no that's a that's a policy issue we're going to put off until after codification. Right. But the bigger one was the noise. Yeah. So there were a few things there were more than what's in the package that we had considered and discussed and decided that yeah this is needs more discussion. Let's just get these easy things off the table right now. Y so that's coming down the road after town meeting. The whole thing is a yes or no, right? So

yeah, all these things that sync the whole thing and Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Um, so hi. Uh, wait, what? Let me go through the agenda here. Uh, what's the Oh, okay. Um, any other other discussion on those issues, the Lo stuff? Oh, not for me. All right. So then we had uh Juliet, you had a few things you wanted to discuss, right? Yeah. And George Yeah, George summed it up perfectly too in the um I think that's the last that's the next piece, right?

Then you wanted to talk about the role of the human plane members and the storm. Exactly. So let's let's stick with uh your summary of Juliet's questions. Oh, so your questions were u how much and some of it came up in tonight's discussion of the project.

Uh the extent of site disturbance that may occur prior to subdivision approval examples tree clearing test pits. Secondly, how much disturbance may affect outside agency reviews? More discussion of that tonight. And then thirdly, whether the plan to work when it can and should require peer reviews. Um, one other thing that I had I had mentioned um is about violations with an applicant, prior violations with an applicant. Um, I think I saw something in our ordinance about that, but I couldn't find it just now.

Well, the town attorney has pretty much said consistently if someone is in violation of the ordinance. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Currently, yes. I meant past like previous. Was there nothing there? I thought I saw Okay. All right. Great. So, you didn't bring it up. So, that's fine. So, yes, those are the three. Did you get a chance to review George's comments? I did. I did. Yeah. Um, so should I start with what I'm thinking? Sure.

Okay. Um, the extent of sight disturbance that can occur prior to subdivision approval. So, yeah, the biggest thing that I I've seen, not just with this one we just saw today, but others is um clearing of trees before approval of a subdivision or site plan approval. Um, but George, based on what you sent over, I and I did a little more research too in Maine, it does seem like um there's unless the town or the AHJ has more um more strict uh rules and rags, there is as long as the site is not started construction, they're okay to go in there and

and clear trees. Yeah. Um, so I guess that's that. And then there are a couple places in Durham as you ride around you, people will suggest, oh, we're going to put a subdivision over here. No, people are managing their forestry area and a lot of these cases that's what goes on because I have approached there was one that was on uh corner of 125 and Meadow Meadow Road and I I knew the person that owned the land and

I approached him personally. He says and I am managing the land. I have no intention of putting a subdivision, but don't say no. He is not a developer. He is a builder. Mhm. And what he did in cleaning up that piece of land was outstanding. Yeah. Was Wally Staples drain? Staples. Wally Staples. Yeah. Yeah. Wally Staples. Yeah. Yeah. And George, you brought up a good point too in your notes that um you know, a lot of these projects are getting reviewed by other entities and they need permits and so like tree clearing bats, right? That's going to be reviewed. So if something comes up, if there is a violation,

well, you know, they'll hear about it from them. Yeah. So, um, but one more thing I did want, um, folks to know, page 71 under violations enforcement, E, letter E, no development prior to subdivision approval. So, development of the subdivision without board approval shall be a violation of law. Development includes grading or construction of roads, grading of land or lots or construction of buildings which require a plan approved as provided in these rags and recorded in the registry of deeds. So I think the trigger there is the road, right? Construction of a road or even like grading or grading. Yeah. Site grading. Yeah.

Whether it's subdivision or site plan, right? Yeah. Okay. So that was that piece of it. That's and that's the fuzzy line to me especially on this one. Like to me I consider start of construction when you start clearing land. Yeah. Right. Like the example you gave about Wall-E Staples, he's just managing a has no intention of but this is like an active subdivision application and the developer is starting to cut a road through. And what he said, George, I think you stepped away, was that would be the road to the 17acre lot. Yeah.

So, he's actually saying that he's creating a road to a non-conforming lot. So, Andy's crossing wetlands. Um, right. So, yeah, there's I have some issues. I guess I don't know how to resolve them. Yeah, I think it's really has to do with the AHJ. Like, we could make it a thing here, but right now it's not a thing. You can you can adopt like the town could. Yeah. Back when we did update the shoreland zoning, the town had to make a decision. Are you going to regulate forestry? Yeah. And the answer was no. Right. Town does not want to get into hiring a forester to regulate all the tree cutting that happens in town. Yeah. Some towns do. Yeah. But it's a big deal to try to do that.

Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. And then the second one um how such disturbance may affect outside okay we just talked about that outside agency reviews um and the third one is the timing and topics of peer reviews of project submissions so I brought that up today too um and George you had some good notes um and I just some review so I think it's completely our decision right the town's decision on when we want to have these peer reviews completed but maybe we do give it like the option to the applicant on when they want to have it done. I think in the past we've done it um during final review, right? And that's like late stage pro like if something comes up during peer review that's the end of the game, not end of the game, sorry, end of the you know like there's not much more time they have to fix whatever it is. Well, we've been what I've then been what this analysis included was saying to the applicant, get your peer review done before you file your final plan, which is what you were saying, right?

Which is exactly Yeah, it's on them. The ownerous is on them to get it done, not us. Um, but yeah, I just I think so make all like the engineering changes you got to make make them before you come in and it'll just go much quicker. Yeah. Resolve the issues with the town peerreview engineer. And again, the town engineer, it's like he was saying, too many cooks. Yeah. Right. The town engineer that does the review was not a cook, right? He's an inspector. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, I think maybe it's on us to like maybe bring it up during the application review and and let them know that they can do it whenever they want, but it's on them to do it, right?

To submit it. Yeah. And we were submer to them. I mean, you can't force them to submit it before they fin file their final plan. If they do, if they just you just table it and say, "Come back when you're ready." It's in their best interest to get it done soon. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. I think it's working. All right. Yeah. Great. Well, thanks for the conversation. Yeah. Great questions. Really, thanks. More next week. Next week. Um, stay tuned. See you soon. Stay tuned. Thank you. Sure. So, um George uh sent this to me um

earlier this week or last week. Um just a and it wasn't part of this package. So, I'm distributing it now. Um you can take a look at this and we can talk about it next meeting or we can talk about it now. Um it's just a um policy regarding um inclement weather. I know we had so two meetings ago it was really icy out there. Oh, yeah. Right. Um, I don't know that I could have predicted that 24 hours before that meeting, but um, anyway. Um, but then the site visit you had was super super cold, right? I know you're a delicate flower.

No, I mean, would that have been that would have been um like an example, right? When it was scheduled, there was no more on the last meeting. This policy proposes that the decision be made by the chairman at 3:00 on the day of the meeting. Okay. So, you start checking the weather forecast. Check with the road commissioner the day before the meeting. Yeah. You know, if if there's a winter storm watch um and and or a warning, but the chairman makes a call by 3:00 on the day of the meeting and then we go into we already know what we're going to do and where see we're like I'm calling him, you know, he's who makes the call and and who do we tell? Yeah.

This sets out all the procedures. Most towns have this. Yes. In place. And so this is what we've done elsewhere. So it would get probably a uh news blast on the Tom the town website as long as people have signed up for that. Correct. Yeah. Because a lot of times people will be calling town hall or looking to see and they'll say we don't know. There's nobody Well, or there's no one there. It's after the fact. Yeah. Well, you do what you can and we This says a notice would be put on the door here um on that date. Um

so Brian, you let you let the town office know if it's canled or rescheduled like once you decide you you're the one that tells them and then it goes out. Is that right? Yeah. after communicating with Brian and I will work together and get the word out, but we'll have clear his here's what happens and you'll know what happens. So you won't be wondering and applicants will know too. Okay. It would be good to do it if you if you're okay with this to approve it tonight because then we can run with it for the March meeting. Absolutely. And I like how you say it'll be the next Wednesday, right? It'll be the next following Wednesday, whether it's a public hearing,

whether it's a meeting. Yeah, there there is a more detailed um addition to this. I can I I'll forward it to the board. I just wanted to give you the one pager summary. Yeah. No, this um it has all the specific right steps. Okay. Great. Um should we talk about sick too in quorums? Like this is weather focused, but like if people are sick, like because we have more members now, which is great, but like should we let folks know by a certain time?

The one thing that Brian has been he's been requesting whether we're attending meetings and I always respond to that. I don't always look at the site every day, but I always respond to that thing that I'm coming or Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Then you could use the same procedure. Yeah, we could. Yeah. Yep. 3 p.m. meeting. Yeah. Must have three people and if not the following Wednesday. Yep. Three. Three is the quorum. Yeah. Right. Okay. Yep. And Wednesdays are good anyways, right? With our schedule, with our town calendar. There's nothing else going on. Generally, they're good. availability of this space.

Okay, great. I love it. I would make a motion to approve this inclement weather meeting policy and add in the um the sick policy as well as discussed. All in favor? Thank you. Um, since there's nothing else on the agenda, I would move. We Oh, wait. There is. You said one more thing and that was 10 things. No, no, but it wasn't even me this time. That's not even me. It's lying.

I'm guilty. No. I just want to welcome um Darren Le and Sunny D to the um to the board here. Um, Sunny, I understand you're a uh full-time member and uh Darren, you're um an alternate member. Um so, correct me if I'm wrong here, George, but you're both welcome to come to every meeting. Um but I don't think you can vote at every meeting. You can vote at every meeting. One of us recuses ourselves from something correct. If any of the regular those are the terms regular and alternate

if any of the regular members are not able to vote for conflict of interest or uh they're not here then you as a chairman appoints the alternate to vote in that place for that meeting. Mhm. Um yes. Thank you. And will you both get town email addresses that they tell you whether or not? No, they they said they're not doing that anymore. What? Really? Yeah. Oh, right. Cuz we have Gmail. Yeah, we have Gmail. Yeah, but it's still it's still a town. It's still a You will be added to the planning board list. Okay.

So, you will be assigned an email uh your name and at PL at at Durham. They will get any town email, but it'll be part of the group. It won't be uh you know, separate. So, you have to make it. Oh, you make it till just talk to Deon at the town offices and he'll get you cut out. Oh, interesting. Because when I um when I did my all they said they're not doing Yeah, they're not doing emails. That's just the select board. Okay. So talk to Deon at the

Yeah. Like mine is my named Durham. I didn't know what home. So I made a separate Gmail account. I let them know here's the address they put me on the distribution list. Yeah. But you have to you have to set up your own. That's right. Okay. Yeah. But Devon will help you do that. Okay. Then he will add it to the list. Yeah. So once that's established, um, as we discussed earlier, a few days before each meeting, I'll send everybody an email confirming whether or not you're available. So then De Darren, in your case, you'll be able to know whether or not you should expect to be voting at these. Perfect. I won't be available for the next meeting. I'll be away.

Okay. Well, there you go. I'm available the next meeting. Perfect. Um, so, uh, regarding the Durham Heights subdivision, you both were here today. Um, like going forward, we're going to have meetings where we're voting. Um, what do you think about having their participation in this one? Because you can go back and watch like the videos. We've only had one other meeting previous to this. We have the site visit. I think it might bode well that we allow them to do that if we need it for this Durham Heights subdivision specifically.

No, I I Well, my opinion, I thought tonight was a good time for each um Sunny and Darren to just sit back and kind of watch the process. But I would expect that um you'd be fully up to speed, probably up to speed for the next meeting. Um, I know it's it's a lot to process for sure. Um, but um, we got a month to do it, so there's plenty of time. Yeah. Yeah. Cool.

Right. Both of you will need to get the MMA training. We town will pay for it. Uh it's basically you can usually do it online, but sometimes it's good to go to one of their local events like at Bwick where they have uh members of MMA staff attorneys and uh pling board members of the air code officers and they pretty much go over the ground rules for boards of appeals and planning boards of name. Um talk about some of the recent legislation. Um I did is it Daryl or Darren? Darren. Darren, I did provide you with a copy of the MMA handbook and I can get one that to you

uh that'll basically, you know, all kinds of stuff in there, but generally as you probably perceived, I try to brief the board on the issues and so don't feel like you got to memorize that book,

but it is helpful to know. And then the other required training is uh freedom of access to information. So basically uh you cannot have conversations with anybody outside of this meeting in terms of an applicant uh or a and a butter and sometimes like if your neighbor's there uh and if you do have a conversation it's okay just disclose it to the board and just say look somebody cornered me at the you know get and go and I this was this was what we discussed and I told them I can't really discuss it with you. uh uh because basically it's what they call exparte communications and it's not fair for the developer to have a neighbor lobbying a board but you're like a jud a a jury you're quasi judicial so uh rules of courts to some extent apply u so you should avoid having any conversation outside of meeting with anybody that's a party

uh including ourselves right yeah you can't all talk to more than two of you together it's a public meeting and you have to advertise it. So, what I do, and I don't know if this is correct, George, is if I have an idea for like an agenda item for the next meeting, I'll send it to the entire group and say, "These are some suggestions." I won't have any questions for anybody, and I won't want a response back. It's just like letting people know topics for the next meeting. So, I think that's okay. The best channel is to go through me. Oh, okay. Yeah. Anything like that. So, go just to George. Go right to me. Okay. you want to add something to the agenda. You have a question. Okay. Uh if it's just an individual question of questioning something and then I can circulate it. The thing you don't want to do is start going back and forth.

You don't want the back and forth because if you go back and forth, then you're conducting a public meeting and you have to have public notice. All right. Well, good. I'm glad I brought that up. So, just to George then. Yeah. Okay. And same thing if if anybody anybody uh like Brian sometimes somebody will write an email to the chairman and say I want this or I want that or I have these comments. We basically politely tell them channel all those communications through the town plan and I circulate it to everybody. Okay. Yeah.

Just to add to that um there's a point where you might need to recuse yourself from the meetings. So if an applicant is your neighbor, um that's a or you have a interest. Thank you. Yeah.

Yeah. Let me just clarify that and this is the type of thing they discuss at the MMA training uh sessions. So recusal is required if you have any 10% financial interest, you or a relative has a 10% interest in the outcome. Um but beyond a and those are you know not very often that you have to recuse yourself but if you feel like a jury or a judge that you are biased for some reason like it's your cousin that's doing the development application or your neighbor you know or something like that. Yeah.

Then then you can you can and should disclose it. Mhm. So what you do is if you think there's a question of either a conflict of interest or a question of bias and basically bring it to the table and put it before the board and ask the board do you feel comfortable? Mhm. And if if the board is because this sometimes happens the board's comfortable applicants uh comfortable with it then you don't need to recuse yourself

but disclosure is always best rule. those trainings in that handbook that you sent. Does that have instructions how to sign up for trainings? I haven't had a chance to read. Oh, what'll happen is uh MMA frequently sends me uh the notice of their next training whether it's FOA or planning board of appeals and what I'll do is contact you say do you want to attend that some of them are online FOA training you can do online so okay u do those but if there is a cost the town will cover for you

and sorry Devin at the town office. Last name Garno. Garno. G A R N E A U. Very good.

Can I make a motion? I'll second. All in favor? Thank you both. Thank you. Appreciate this. Exciting. Welcome. Yes. Well, no. busier time than I came on. Good. Then I came on it was just quification that was the fun stuff.

Yeah. Oh, you didn't even

Yeah. Down to the end of the road. Oh, we caught trash. Yeah, I was wondering if we can do that. I asked Alan, what about like a party or something? I don't know what you have done for take away yet. Still open. It hasn't been finalized. You want started? I think it's in the spring. I was told in the next 6 months and Caitlyn asked him too and she was told in the spring also. Yeah.

So, it has well the whole whole thing where Ron April 1 is going to be issuing the 64gallon containers, but you're going to get one to trash. I