Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Do I have the okay to maintain keeping it mowed? Because it is town property. Are we on? Joe had said he wanted some trees. His stream is starting soon. He's been doing it.

He stopped me when I was walking and said, hey, you want to help me with this?

I was like, yeah. That would be great. Okay, I see us. Guys, we're live just by the way.

Okay, yeah, we're good. Thank you. How's it going? Pretty good. How you doing? It's nice to sit.

Look right at you.

Kevin texted.

Live and audio is good.

Perfect. Thank you, Chief. All right. A couple minutes. Is there a live stream for this meeting?

Yeah. How can you get access?

YouTube. YouTube.

Durham, Maine. Okay. Yep. Yep. It's just streamed and recorded. It's not like web conference.

Correct. Yeah, we don't have back and forth. capabilities yet.

Great.

We did during COVID and I was a nightmare.

I think every town, I think we're similar.

I think everybody learned some lessons pretty well fast when that was the setup.

Learn how to use Zoom, that's for sure.

Yeah. Good to go? Good to go. All right.

All right. Welcome, everybody, to the July 1st, 2026. REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE DURHAM PLANNING BOARD. A ROLL CALL. EVERYBODY IS HERE. WE HAVE QUORUM. IF YOU PLEASE STAND FOR THE PEDAGOGICS.

PLEASURE TO RECEIVE THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVIDUAL, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

Thank you. All right. Any amendments to tonight's agenda?

Yeah, I would like to see if folks would agree to pull up letter D, item D, which is the approval of road maintenance agreement for a proposed private road off of Meadow Road. Pull that ahead of the Pinkham Brook solar application.

Yeah, that would be a good idea.

JUST BECAUSE I THINK THE LATTER IS GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME, AND IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT. DO YOU ALL AGREE WITH THAT BEING A GOOD IDEA?

I AGREE.

SO MOVED.

ALL RIGHT. ANY FAVOR?

GREAT. THANK YOU.

OKAY.

WE WILL DO THAT. INFORMATIONAL EXCHANGE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. So George could not be here this evening. Kelvin, Mr. Wilmayer is here in his place. Does everybody have a chance to review his report? Are there any comments or Kelvin, do you have any comments on that report?

Nope. On the town planner report? Yes. Yeah, should we do the meeting minutes first? We should does it?

Alright, any comments on meeting minutes from the June?

No, I'd make a motion to approve.

Just one comment. Oh Mr Stickney, did you offer to be an alternate for the?

Um?

Oh, yes, the economic economic development committee. No.

Okay. Okay. So let's make that change. It says that Brian Stickney offered to serve as an alternate. Whereas I offered to be the alternate. So that's one change I'd like to make to that.

Great. Great touch there. Okay. Other than that, nothing else.

Okay, so favor. Okay, town planners report. Any comments to that. The only comment I have, it's as thorough as it as we.

Have gone accustomed to, and we really appreciate that.

Agreed.

I will note that I think it's noted correctly in here as to who's going to serve under the... That's what I saw. Yeah, the board, the new board.

Yeah, economic development. Yes, thank you. Yeah, it is. Okay, any residents in the audience

Audience have any informational exchanges on non-agenda items? Any non-residents? Okay. We have no continuing business tonight. Moving on to new business.

We have a request for approval of road maintenance agreement for extension of Claudia Road, Map 12, Lot 26B. Public comment will not be taken. We're going to do that B first, correct?

No, no, no. We'll do this one first, and then the next one, and then the solar project.

I got you. Very good one.

There's some clarity. I think George brought you guys up to speed. These two private ways tonight, where I have been working with these people for the last several months, and the only condition they had left was to get these maintenance agreements approved by a planning board. And there are some others in the works, but those from now on will go to you for full approval. These just need private maintenance agreements approved. And they have submitted to them, but George was, I've never really looked into. The format that was acceptable and reviewed by the town attorney, and I think that's what his comments to lead to is that there are some. Conditions, so he's recommending approval with conditions. And if you look at those conditions,

Yep, agreed. From what I understand, Calvin, you've done your part approving the construction and the physical layout of it all. Right. So George has provided us with some comments for some administrative amendments to the way it's written. And let's see here.

And Heather is here on behalf of the applicant and I, I guess you are the applicant, but I had her get an authorization letter from the landowners purchaser and seller in this. Transaction to give her authorization to represent both of them if. If, in case the board wanted to see that, um.

Thank you so.

There are nine items that. Mr. The barge has identified as needing some clarification on before. I mean, we can approve it with the conditions that these nine items are are met. Does the applicant have anything to say about these items?

Yes, is it OK to come up? Yes, come on. So I. This format is new. State your name. Oh, I'm Heather Roy. And I'm... Here's my authorization on behalf of everyone that's involved in the transaction. Happy to provide you with a copy of that. This format of this road maintenance agreement, I think, is now in line with the new ordinance. This looks a little different than it has in the past when I've been here to get road maintenance agreements approved. And so first, I wanted to apologize for... the lack of information. The way that we used to do it was that we would come have the sort of the nuts and bolts approved and then backfill the information in after the fact so that we weren't doing all of the work ahead and then come here and have all of the back and forth about what needed changes, right? So I was used to operating underneath that system and I apologize. I have since dealt with almost all of these conditions that can be dealt with prior to the sale being completed. A condition, a contingency of the sale is that we get the road maintenance agreement approved. And so some of this information doesn't exist yet, which is why I filled it out the way that it was. But I have since gone back and done some more work on that. And I'm happy to give you guys this if you want to actually go through these things, or if you want to just approve that with these conditions and let the code enforcement officer slash road commissioner, you know, verify. But I have done more work on this if you guys want to see that.

Thank you.

Yeah. For taking that approach. Being proactive. I think we should just approve this with the conditions that are the nine items that are outlined by George. And Ms. Roy, if you're addressing these, great. So once they're all addressed, then you're good to go.

Okay. Is there anything that can't, you're worried it can't be done?

No.

Okay.

Not at all. Okay.

Perfect.

Is everyone else okay with that?

So I'll be working with you on those. When you check them all off and bring it to me, then I will.

be good with that so so for clarification for myself anyway and maybe for the rest of the board i mean we had three different exhibits we had exhibit a exhibit b and exhibit c and it appeared to me that the the clarification from thomas boy he would um correct me if i'm wrong but it sounds like he did not want to participate in this agreement. Is that correct?

That's correct. So part of what the issue was is that if you look at that very top section, it says tax map lot number served by road, his parcel is served by the road. So I was answering that very literally versus is it served by the road agreement, right? So it's served by the road, but he is choosing to decline being part of the road agreement. So that was where that situation was a little bit difficult to clarify. So George and I have had a discussion about that, and then also with Calvin. And he is choosing to decline, and so he has become a party in Exhibit C that is declined. And then he's been removed from Exhibit A as a party to the agreement.

So he has no voting rights on this, correct? Correct. And therefore, any expenses for maintaining this road will not be incurred on his part.

Okay. I know. That's just the way.

Well, it's unusual. Yeah.

And again, the way that this is now designed, they have the option to opt out. There isn't really anything we can do about it.

And the other owner and the LLC are okay with that, correct?

Yes.

Okay.

Yeah, so by taking them off, that's part of your proactive approach to addressing some of these nine items. Yes.

Okay.

Do I have a motion?

I'll make a motion to approve it. Do the Commission's outline think that? Second. Second. All in favor? Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.

You don't want to stay for fun?

No, I'm going back to the lake.

Okay. Okay.

Now we're going to jump to D. Yep.

Right. So since we've got a change in the agenda, And now we will hear the request for approval of road maintenance agreement for proposed private road off Meadow Road, map 3, lots 34, 34A and 34B. Public comment will not be taken. Again, George has provided us with his comments and Calvin, you've been out there to look at this and you've approved it from your end regarding construction and layout and this one seems a little bit easier that nobody was in disagreement. Nobody decided to opt out of this one. And there are 15 conditions here. Is the applicant with us? Mm-hmm.

Okay. I don't know. Did you guys address any of these things since this was written? Do you want to come up here? Sure. Yeah. You have seen this, right?

Yeah.

Yep.

And you understand maybe you've already addressed one of these.

Well, I wasn't.

you mind just stating your name yeah sorry my name is marcus cook i live at uh 257 meadow road um so we are my wife and i are one of the ones building off of the driveway that's being turned into a private road as well as my in-laws who live at 257 so we're staying in their house right now and my brother-in-law who's going on the other side yeah okay so Do you know if you've dealt with any of that? Yeah, we did look at that. Most of those are already dealt with in the agreement. I'm not 100% sure why they're on that list.

Well, this might have been his initial. I remember you brought him one that he didn't approve because it wasn't the one I retrieved. You had gotten one from your own attorney. Yes. And then we sent it back to you. Yeah.

And then we dealt with all those issues and resubmitted.

So if he has, I guess, is this the one June 26th? Yeah. This is your private roommate. So you've, so yeah, this well after this, so I will have to go through all of this and make sure it jives with.

Yeah. Cause he wanted us to take the template. and then reduce it down to what we needed for our purposes, which was significantly less than the template covered.

I don't know. I mean, if you create this agenda, because this is dated June 26, but a week before, usually.

Yeah, a week ago, pretty much, is when it was publicly published.

We might have gotten this like today.

Oh, maybe that's it.

It's crossed paths. This came in after that.

Yeah, his schedule is a little off too. Well, and then this is a little bit less. This is a little bit off topic, but I got some emails from George yesterday, and it's a scam. The link clarified today basically is a couple of fake invoices.

Yeah.

and clarifications and pre, I printed off some of them. Basically they were trying to get $4,000 wired to an account under his name with town of Durham invoices, town of Durham billing and lettering and everything like that. I guess that offices have run into it before. So we were like, oh, well, what's going on? Because it was basically saying, oh, everything is pre-approved and just waiting for a sign off. then handed us a whole bunch of random fees so that was that's the latest but if there are anything on the actual application that needs to be addressed once i get a bit of clarification then i can definitely take a look at it yeah we'll go through them right one by one before i sign up and they want to issue the if they want to issue it subject to these conditions we can we can

do the same as you did in the last one, when you meet them all, and then perhaps it's already substantially done. Did you end up going with a model that our attorney had?

Yeah, we used that.

You did use that. So your attorney just took ours and put the information in that one, or is it hybrid? Yeah, well, they had us do it.

Yeah. The attorney was less helpful.

Yeah.

Well, I'll make sure it's still expensive, though. Oh, probably, yes. completed with these conditions. But most of those conditions are directly fulfilled already. So if there's anything that's not or needs clarification, we're happy to work with it.

Okay.

So that's where I'm at.

All right. So as soon as you I've paid these invoices.

I wasn't sure if George would be here if you'd want to know or if you'd want to...

I would send...

Yeah, Devin.

We have an IT person.

Yeah, he's welcome to have these as well. It contains his routing number and account number that he wanted us to send the money to.

I believe we sent that to the IT people. Oh, you did already? That's good.

Okay, perfect. I mean, they just crawl these publicly accessible websites for agenda.

Yeah, well, it's crazy the information they have.

That is smart, too. Yeah. Yeah.

people that are waiting on their two like their invoices changed slightly which my mother-in-law picked up on and then was sketched out by there when we get wired so she called the town office and then she found out about it but if it hadn't been for that i would be working in like oh no and this is something we need to pay and included a two thousand dollar refundable deposit so after work was completed that we'd get it back so that's how they upped their invoice Anyway, that's that.

All right. Well, nice catch, and thank you for bringing it to the town's attention. Okay, so we have these 15 items that should be addressed, and if you can follow up with that. I think if we can put a motion out there for approval with these conditions. I'd love to hear one. So moved. I'll second. Okay. All in favor. Great.

Thank you. You guys want these or I guess if they, it already has them.

Oh, we have them right now. Sure. Yeah. Just to make sure I just printed the email.

So, okay. Thanks. Okay.

All right. Appreciate it. Next.

Completeness review of Pinkham Brook GLC solar energy system conditional use application, map 4, lot 85. Public comment will not be taken. Would the applicant like to... Or actually, any of the board members have any questions on the application?

Yeah, I don't think I mean, first, I would like to just let everyone know that I do know fly catcher pretty well. I know Dave Brennan here. Him and I used to work together. We haven't worked together for a while. Excuse me. I do feel like I I could review this application without a bias. But I did want to let you all know.

Thank you. Thank you. No financial incentives.

You what?

No financial incentives.

Not this one. No, but let me know. So are you all okay for me to stick on?

I'm fine with it.

Absolutely.

I love your input.

I wanted your expertise on this.

Okay, so we just want to go through the... checklist and basically want to make sure that we have everything we need at this point to move into a substantial conversation about the project. There any comments on the application itself, I have a question conference, maybe we bring up the applicant now.

I could ask them directly.

One second here, I just want to look at some notes.

And this is the completeness, right? Right.

Yes, completeness, exactly.

Actually, yeah, I could kind of keep remembering that.

Yeah, right. So we just want to make sure, excuse me, I'm fairly new in this position, so I just want to make sure I'm getting everything right here. And again, you're the first to come before the board since we've implemented the solar ordinance. Very exciting. I hope it all goes well and we want to make, I know that you guys tried to get a review two applications in at once, but we really need to be thorough about this and make sure we're doing it right there.

Okay. Any

comments before we have the applicant present on the application the conditional use application um yes i would then is the site 600 kilowatts ac this proposed project versus the two and is there another project i'm hearing that's okay now that

So basically we had submitted both the site plan application and the condition.

Oh, I got you. I got you. So it's not a separate project.

So it is just the six.

Oh, yes. I'm sorry. Jesse Hutchinson. We're a land use consulting firm and we're the agents for the applicant.

which is Picklebrook GLC Solar LLC, which is a company under Norwich Technologies. And I don't know.

I'm Jeff Martin with Norwich Technologies. So we've hired Flycatcher to assist with environmental and permitting work. We're a vertically integrated solar company. So we do development. We install solar projects and we also have a, division that does operation and maintenance on solar arrays. We're based in White River Junction, Vermont, been around since 2011, but we've done probably more work in Maine than within the last few years than in Vermont. So we've developed probably around 14 projects in Maine, and our construction team has installed all of those projects, plus some projects for others as well. And then Rachel is on the phone here. I wonder if Rachel, do you want to introduce yourself really quickly?

Hi, yeah. Can everybody hear me okay?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay, wonderful. My name is Rachel Shequin. I came to Norwich about a year ago with a little more than six years of solar development experience in Maine and New Hampshire and Vermont, and I'm happy to be with Norwich, happy to be working on this project. It's always fun to work with a with a town that is, you know, running through this process for the first time. So thanks for letting us be your guinea pig.

I can, I can finish out. Dave Brenneman, the flycatcher, as Jesse said, we're 90s Consulting Company. We're here as the agent for Picking Brook's GDLC Solar LLC. We're a 30 person consulting firm located in Yarmouth. Do a lot of this type of primary work, working with local communities, towns, applicants, and try and work with the primary process. Um, and our primary focus is we do work all over the Northeast, but our primary focus is, uh, projects.

Thank you. So, Brian, yeah.

The information presented to us as additional materials warranted before the final action are making sure that it is complete. And I noticed in here, one of them was fire public safety package. Has that been presented? Has it been reviewed by the fire chief?

From what I understand, the fire chief has had multiple conversations with the applicants.

True statement, Chief.

Yes, thank you. I've spoken with Rachel no less than three times on an emergency access plan. I've met in person with Fly Catcher. We've talked about entrance access, internal access, turnaround, gate access, Knox Box, emergency shutoffs, signage. I'll be brief. Contact, water supply, vegetation and brush fire risk, snow removal, pre-incident planning, training. maintenance obligation, and they've been more than willing to provide just today, I think you got a copy, upwards of possibly $10,000 to the town and the fire department to invest in our equipment to protect their infrastructure and investment. That's just bringing the fire department up sort of with our UTV, some specialized equipment, actually for their project. So I've had complete... discussions, review of the action plan and have no questions or quorums for the fireside or emergency actions.

Thank you.

One question I had on the application. There's a signature here that I don't see any Kristen. Didiero? It doesn't appear as, who is that?

Kristen is, she oversees the development team in Norwich. So she's Rachel's boss, direct boss.

Okay. I'm the operations director of Breakaway Renewables.

Okay, so. I didn't see her name on the application as being part of the team, just the signature there. I wasn't sure who she was.

I've got a similar question. So Norwich owns this project now, is that correct? That's correct. Green Lantern may have developed the project.

Yeah, they had the initial relationship with the landowner. Yep. And then we took over the ownership of the project. Rachel, was it 2015?

24 i think yeah yeah i think it was around 24. okay okay great thanks so we have requirements for conditional use in our ordinance under conditional use and then we have separate requirements under the new solar ordinance piece Operation and maintenance plan was that.

So, like, a lot of those components that were specific to the solar energy standards. Yeah. In the site plan application. Oh, I feel like the emergency management plan decommissioning. Okay. And then, like, language addressing the shoreline zone. Okay. Flood hazard is all in the submitted site plan. Again, it was just because it's not concurrent. Got it.

So we have it. It's just in that other one.

Okay. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. George and I talked about this and we felt it was best not to make them concurrent just to make sure. Yeah. Again, because it's the first time we see this. Right.

But if we are saying that it is complete... we're saying it's complete based on both lists, right?

From what we hear. From what we hear.

Yeah. And I know we have it. I just, I haven't seen it. Okay.

Yeah.

Similarly, does your, does the next part of your application, the site plan, does it include equipment specifications? Yes. Yes. Okay. Perfect.

Can I ask a question?

Yes, sir.

Does this application have an Army Corps of Engineers permitting? That is planned to. Because that's going to take some substantial, that could take up to nine months or more to get that if you haven't started it yet.

Yeah, so it's under a new nationwide permit process. So they've been a little bit more responsive lately, but Um, it'd be under that new process essentially just for the, um. There are some associated impacts with the Pinkham Brook crossing itself. There's some wetland impacts. Um, so that would be permitting with the Army for, but, um, we, we also provided like a list of the other approvals that we anticipate. Getting with the project. Okay.

So you don't anticipate any work in the stream bed channel the, um.

Yeah, the crossing's been designed to span to avoid in-stream work.

Because if you do, there's, you know, you've got July 15th to September 20th is your window of opportunity. And then do you have the DOT entrance permit?

We don't have that yet, but that's planned to be.

Okay. Yeah. So you think it's going to pass, though? You've checked the site distance? Mm-hmm. Okay. And so there's that. That and the floodplain ordinance, if we looked at, I guess, some of this is in a floodplain. And if you've looked at our floodplain ordinance, we, the narrative.

Associated with the floodplain or ordinance standards is in the site.

Those would be my 3 issues.

Yeah, and I'll add to that, our engineering team has looked at the crossing and relative to the floodplain standards, and they provided a certification of how the standards are met and designed compensatory removal so that there's no substantive effect on the flood storage.

So the water is not going to take the bridge downstream. Correct. It's still going to be there after the flood.

So they've done the calculations. One of the other things that we're going to require before moving forward is proof that taxes have been paid on this property. Do you know if that's up to date?

I believe so. I don't know, Rachel, if you've had a conversation with the landowner more recently than I have. I know that you've had a conversation with Vladimir recently, but I don't know if that topic came up.

Okay. It has not, but that is something I can absolutely follow up with her on.

Yeah, that's part of a new ordinance that we've just implemented, so that's going to be required.

And I think that we decided that it could be a quick call into the office and confirmation from the clerk that the taxes have been paid for this parcel. Um, definitely want to talk about it with a landowner to, of course, 1, but I think confirmation for us would just be that. Like, email from the clerk that all is good there.

That sounds great. We can do that.

Another item under 5 under the conditional loose. Items that are required to be submitted is financial and. technical capacity. Please identify yourself.

Rachel has a two-year-old.

That's okay. Yeah, financial and technical capacity. I saw the note or the letter from the bank talking about the, it's almost like a Revolving credit amount, I think, but it would be good to see. The estimated costs of the project. Yep, I don't know if that was included in the site plan application or not, but.

Yeah, I don't I don't believe we included a cost for the project is that is. A requirement we can happily provide an estimate based on.

yes yes like a condition right yeah it'll be a condition um i think also i'm maybe i think six million or less but if it's more than that i think we need to see evidence of that increased amount that it covers whatever the cost is right yeah yeah yeah and i'm

That's a good point. One thing that is important to consider is that once we go into construction, we are typically working with another client who is, to put it simply, paying milestone payments towards construction. So we'll have a line of credit that helps us prepare and order equipment. But then once we start construction, it's a private investor who's also helping to fund the project.

Yeah, very familiar with that process. So probably if it's split out, then you could just show both of those, right, in an amount at NTP and an amount at, you know, substantial completion or whatever it may be. If you need to do that, that's fine too. So pretty much different pots of money that are being taken from.

Gotcha. Yeah. Any other comments on the application from the board? Okay. All right.

Before we move into the substance of this, we need to schedule a So, I walked in public hearing.

Was where his county look like. I'm assuming some of the better.

So, we can hold the public hearing at our August meeting. um and between now and then um august 5th will be our next meeting full diploma hearing then um but we certainly want to do a site review prior to that correct yeah so what has to happen before that

That's easier now because it's lighter later. This is what I did on a weekend only. Yeah.

Yeah. Let's see.

You need how many days? How many days does he need? Seven? To give notice of it? Of the sidewalk?

That's a good question.

I'm not sure what the... Was it 14?

I can figure that out too. Let me see a date listed here. Do you? No. Georgia's notes didn't include the date.

Sidewalk was scheduled. Public notice meeting requirements and blah shall be posted. Yeah, I'm not seeing a date either. Shall we schedule it out two weeks just in case? Yeah, because I think that should be enough time.

What date did you throw up, Brian? The 15th of July, which is the same time as this meeting, 6.30.

I'm not available on the 15th. I can do the 16th.

Yeah.

I can't do that week at all.

Okay.

Well, I can't do 14th or the 17th. Can we do it the week of the...

What about the 13th?

Can we do it? What about the week of the 20th?

Well, Monday the 20th. Yeah.

That works for me.

Monday the 20th.

What do you think about you all? It's your birthday? Yeah. It's a great birthday. We'll bring the cake. Yeah, we'll bring the cake.

How many candles?

I didn't ask her age.

What time should we? We can push it. It's sticking at 20. 20th of July. What time works? 6.30. Enough time to eat dinner. 6.30.

Bring your bug repellent.

Yeah, you better bring your chick spray.

Yeah. Oh, yeah.

Tuck your pant legs in.

My daughter had like 10 on her yesterday.

All right, that sounds great. And what about like parking off the side of the road there? There's a decent... Yeah, you can pull off.

Pull in? At the end of the field.

Okay. Pull into the field. Okay.

We got that done. Hopefully, George will be back by then.

All right, do we have a motion on.

I think George or a pretty, pretty nice 1 at the end of the notes.

Yeah. Yep. Let's get 1 laid out here.

Who wants to read it go for Brian.

All right, I move that we find the Pinkham Brook GLC solar conditional use application for a proposed 600 kilowatt DC ground-loaded solar energy generation facility at 360 Pinkham Brook Road, map 4, lot 85 substantially complete for purposes of commencing substantive conditional use review subject to the applicant providing supplemental information identified by staff, including permit status documentation, fire emergency response materials, floodplain and bridge crossing documentation, wetland stream impact summary, financial capacity cost estimate, decommissioning information, clarification of project capacity, and final plan revisions before final board action on the site plan review application.

Second. I'd like to add the tax information and equipment specifications. Sure. Start over.

Nope. Second, as amended.

All in favor? Thank you.

Great.

Okay.

We can move forward with the substance of this all. If you all would like to take a seat up front here and make your pitch. Are you ready to go? Yeah. All right.

Yeah, so I'm Jesse Hutchinson with Flycatcher.

Jeff Martin with Norwich Technologies.

Rachel with Norwich Technologies.

And yeah, and we're here to talk about a proposed 600 kilowatt AC ground mounted solar facility that is proposed on approximately 11.1 acres of the larger 94 acre parcel located at the 360 Pinkham brick road in Durham. So we submitted the. Conditional use application form and questionnaire as well as. Narrative that addresses the chapter 5 standards and then cover some project details and. some background information. But essentially, the project will contain a gravel access drive off of Pinkham Brook Road that requires crossing of Pinkham Brook with a span bridge. And then there's also going to be a security fence around the solar panels and an equipment pad that will have the transformers and inverters. And then there will also be overhead and underground lines to interconnect to the interconnection point on Pinkham Brook Road. And we did also include an interconnection agreement with CMP. So overall, the project will be remotely operated during operation, so it's not going to be introducing a lot of new traffic to the area. except during construction, which has been staged to really kind of avoid a lot of deliveries all at once. It's going to be logging, but for any minimal grading, civil work, and then getting some of the conduit and solar panels delivered. So it's not anticipated to really be a huge influx of traffic on that road. Pink Brook Road is a state road, so we do anticipate getting DOT entrance permit. But other than just the remote operation and occasional visits for any sort of maintenance or regular like vegetation management, there's not going to be a ton of use. So I'll kind of like just do a little overview and kind of go through the conditional use kind of criteria. Um, and so for as far as public health, um, the projects not posing any risks to public health with, um, we're not proposing any sewage disposal or, um, generation of hazardous waste and no emissions to air or water are proposed. Um, the applicant will have to get a main construction general permit and would be adhering to the, um, main, uh, chapter 500 stormwater, uh, permit by rule standards. Um, and we'll be using, like, erosion control, uh, best management practices to avoid any, um, like sedimentation there. Inputs to resources there, um, for traffic safety, uh, as I kind of covered already, the traffic's really gonna be limited and mostly during, uh, construction and is unlikely to change, like, increase a lot of, um, congestion on that road.

Will your hours of construction, you intend to meet our land use standards?

Yes, just daytime hours. I think the only circumstances where it wouldn't be construction actually is like only if there was like an emergency, but there'd be nighttime access to the site. Just daytime hours. As far as public safety goes, will be heavy machinery used on site um but there will be signage during construction to notify the public it's not cited in an area that has a ton of pedestrian use that would be going into this it's like cited back from the road um so it wouldn't be anticipated that there would be a lot of public um in the vicinity during construction um and then emergency access um as as the fire chief has stated, we've been back and forth and we, um, it will be accessed, um, year round. There'll be a Knox box for being able to access and get into the fencing and everything in case of emergency as well.

You're not planning to bring any water to the site or?

Um, we're not like providing water, but it would be like brought by the, um, department. Yeah. And to get around the site, um, And around the panels, the UTV would likely be used that the department already has. As far as environmental impacts go, the site really requires minimal grading. And as I mentioned before, we do have to get a main construction general permit and adhere to the stormwater standards. as I kind of discussed earlier, the project access road does require crossing Pinkham Brook to be able to get to the array. So we've tried to avoid and minimize wetlands as much as practical, but it's a large span already for the bridge. And so some of the abutments for the bridge and like the approach is within floodplain wetland.

So you said a large span, what are you?

Like 50 foot.

Okay.

Yeah. Yeah, and then we'll be using erosion control, best management practices, and they'll be in place before construction.

So you'll be getting a DP permit?

Yes. Okay, but not Army Corps? No, yeah, in Army Corps we would, but it's been spanned to try to avoid in-stream work with the stream because then there's just kind of more... Okay, no impact to the stream? Yes. Got you, yeah, okay.

And what are your thoughts on timeline on those two permits?

So we kind of have initiated consultation, but they're hoping to go into construction potentially this winter. So hoping to have those permits by essentially. Yeah.

Okay.

But they're kind of, we're initiating consultation now. Yeah, construction start.

Yeah. And your idea is to clear trees as needed during the bat window.

Yeah, that's why you're trying to start getting that on the earlier side outside of the bat. And then for scale and intensity of use, it's cited in the Rural Residential and Agricultural Zoning District. But it's really set back from the road and there's a lot of natural forest cover that will provide like a visual buffer and will also essentially the only visible components will just be the access road like entrance and it'll be very similar to the surrounding landscape like looking like a driveway and

So it sounds like you are going to maintain the existing buffer that exists today.

Yeah, so we're not proposing like new plantings or anything. It's just going to be, there's already forest that will just be kind of used as a natural buffer. And then for noise and hours of operation, construction will be during the day and is not anticipated to exceed the noise standards for the town. And we have cited the equipment pad that would have the transformer over 400 feet from any abutting property residences and the road, Pinkham Road itself. And that's on our site.

Will the specs for the transformer include the noise that it generates?

Yeah, it should include the noise level on that spec sheet.

Okay.

It's relatively low, right?

It's very quiet.

It sounds kind of like a refrigerator rotting in our air conditioner. Yeah. At the site. Even when you're standing next to it. We'll just leave that.

Absolutely. Okay.

Regarding the buffering, so looking at the site plan right now, yeah, it does look like... you're saving the tree or you're not cutting the trees pretty much all the way around the project, except for the road. And is it like, you're just gonna cut very parallel to the road going in, right? So the only spot that wouldn't be buffered is like that entrance area. Okay.

Yeah. The applicant also has a, lease agreement on the property and so we provided the deed the lease agreement and owner authorization as well as um exhibit one and then the financial um capacity letter which we can um provide more kind of information like a cost estimate cost estimate it could be that good i have the overview of what our application covers

as far as conditional use goes but i could answer more questions and we do have also um site plan site plan nice if you want to look at it um i did see note of an old uh utility line did you look into that to see if it was abandoned formally it was like i'm talking i don't know when but there was a note in there, I think it's on the survey that says like legal should review and confirm it was abandoned. Rachel, can you speak to that?

Yeah. On the site plan, it was extinguished per deed. It mentions the book in the page number there. That was the former utility line easement. It has been quit claimed.

Okay, great.

Yeah.

So it has been, yeah, extinguished.

Yeah.

Okay.

Speaking of extinguishing, does your site plan information include detailed decommissioning plan? Yes.

Is that stamped or kind of prelim right now you want to review?

Rachel, you know if it's the decommissioning plan is stamped?

We don't have a So there, as far as what's included in the site plan, there is not a stamped decommissioning plan like in the plan set, but we do have a decommissioning plan in our site plan review. It is not stamped. That was drafted by Flycatcher.

Yeah, we plan to submit to DEP.

Do you need that stamp when you submit to DP?

They don't require that? Okay. Okay.

Can I ask a question? Do you know what page?

Do you have a site plan on here?

It's Exhibit 2.

Oh, it's Exhibit 2.

They also have a big one here. It might be helpful to put it up there or something.

I'm all the way up to page 241. I don't have to roll. I don't see it. There's a good one in California.

Oh, wait. Oh, dear. I haven't seen it. It's...

Calvin, if you go to page 85 of the PDF, there's a site plan that shows the new drive and the layout of the panels.

Is that in the 241 page?

It is, page 85 of 241. There you go. Try that.

Hundreds of pages back.

Takes a minute.

OK, there it is. You've done the topo and

We had it all surveyed, topoed and everything.

Was it Krebs and Lansing that did the survey? The survey was Verdantis. Oh, Verdantis, right. Krebs and Lansing was their engineer. Yes.

Do you have a detail for the construction entrance? Is there a detail on the plan? Is it probably in your erosion control if you look? There's one that's zoomed in on it. I know I required that for the CMT project that came through town. Construction matting or crush stone. So they're not dragging mud out over 125.

It might be one of the last ones.

The motion control plan has a construction entrance detail. And this is a permanent... It's not something you're removing. Obviously, you've got to get in there and maintain it, so it's staying in place.

Correct. Page 86, Calvin, the next page, upper right corner of the sheet.

Yeah. It's wider than my screen.

right here orange minus stone uh it's just okay so you got four inch minus crushed down and it would be how long do you anticipate the construction will last um somewhere between four to six months okay okay so I see a lot of these get put in and no one maintains them and the stones fill up with mud and they just keep driving over. No one ever digs them out and puts new, the mud gets into the foliage stone, fills up the stone, and then they just, you may as well not have a construction entrance. So you will have some condition that you'll maintain that on a weekly basis or as needed, no less than, I guess it would be something I could look at I don't know how you, the planning board, we're going to work the condition, whether it be to my satisfaction or. But I just would like to see that not getting tracked out into the road.

Oh, I'll, I'll add this with the, this. Stormwater and standards at the state level require the under the main trust general requirement require those construction, which is we maintain our periodic basis. My tracking out on the road is not allowed and not compliant. I know, but they do.

They just walk away and think it's over. So, okay, that's good. I'll review that in more detail.

Yeah, these are good comments. Thank you, Calvin, because we're just looking at this at high level right now. We'll get into approvals after the site walk-in, after public to public hearing.

Okay.

Lease, no, sorry, size of the project or impact. I think in the application it says 11.1 acres. But in the lease, it talks about 14 point something acres. But is it?

Yeah. So like initially, and maybe Rachel, if you want to speak more to.

Yeah. Yeah. I should cover that. So the lease with landowner is for 14 acres and it will remain that way just based on the structure of the lease. But having the right to that area is, you know, we don't need to clear all of that to install the system size that is slated that we're planning. You know, the 11.1 acres is 11.1 or 11.4. I'm sorry. The 11.1 acres that are currently slated to be cleared is just enough to prevent shading, stay out of wetlands, and just minimize the overall impact. So although we do have the right to 14 acres, we are only reserving the right to use the 11.1.

Got you. So your LOD is 11.1 and then your, is it at least shown up on the site plan, the lease area?

No, not on the site plan.

Okay. I think it'd be helpful to see that in your next iteration. your lease area is and then your easement right you have a is your easement separate your access easement separate from your lease yes okay yeah if you could just show yep okay it's in the same document yes it's all part of the same agreement but it's um yeah just considered an easement instead of a leased area okay so in um like if we did a title search it would come up separately or what is it still part of the lease It's still not like a separate.

Okay. Yeah. There's, there's also one of the things that you, that is also not visible as like a landscaping easement kind of around the, the lease area that the project does crossover into. So you'll see that when we, when we make the revision as well.

And, but that's part of your leased area in your lease.

In the lease, but it's a vegetative easement. So it's, Yeah, that's just difference in language. And we can't put solar arrays there, but we have the solar array right there, but we do have the right to trim trees for shading or mow or whatever we need to do to keep vegetation away from the solar array.

Okay, great. And then one more question on easements is easement with CMP. Do you have an easement with CMP or not needed for the poles and the equipment We do not have it yet. Okay. But you're working on it. Or you will have one. You'll need one, I guess.

Yes, we'll have one because there are going to be CMP calls on the landowner's property.

Okay.

And it's, you know, the easement is, you know, utility and access easement. So the landowner is aware that those will be there, but we don't have the document with CMP yet. That is, we'll get that once we get a little farther down the design process and know where exactly their calls are going to go.

Yeah, understood. And that easement will be between CMP and the landowner, right? Okay, yeah. That'd be great to see it too on the site plan. Thank you.

So would it be proper to have signage identifying the project that's close to 125 Pinkham Brook Road?

I think it would be.

I look at that as an educational presentation of sort.

Were you planning any signage on the project? Do you ever do that?

Well, maybe you don't, unless you're concerned with security issues once a project has started.

Yeah, certainly signage. Okay. I was just going to say during the construction period. I'm not sure about during the operation of the project if we would have signage up there. That's not something that we typically do. Although we have had projects where we will have a sign, you know, solar, by Norwich Solar, something like that.

It's almost, like I said, it's an educational, letting people know what's going on with the property. You certainly don't want to have security issues.

Yeah, my only concern would be, like, kind of inviting people onto the site with the signage. Well, do not. Yeah. No trespassing. No trespassing next to the sign that identifies the property.

It's just a thought. It's not a requirement. I mean, it's not something we require when we're proving or evaluating subdivisions either.

Right. you might have contact info on the fence, right? Which I think is helpful.

Yeah, but that's setback.

Yeah, far from the road. We'll just let them contact the codes enforcement office.

One more question. This note on this plan says 75 foot setback from the stream. I'm not talking about... Pinkham Brook, right? You're talking about some other intermittent stream there, perhaps? Because Durham ordinance requires 100 feet from extreme protection district tonight. I haven't looked at the zoning map there, but there's a note right here that says 75 feet from stream setback. And I know we ran into this in another project where Durham decided on 100, even though the state's 75. So Just want to make sure. I think it's that one.

That's an intermittent stream. It is. That's not under the Shoreline Zone. No, none of the Shoreline Zoning Organs. But from the Pinkham Brook, you're going to stay over 100 feet, right?

Except for the crossing. Right.

Yes.

Right. There's no infrastructure plan within the Shoreline Zone.

The shoreline zone setback that's shown along Hickam Road at 100 feet. Yeah, that stream is 75.

Yes, and the stream that the co-enforcement officer is talking about is over here. And this is 75 to a buffer, which is relative to the state's permit standard.

So yeah, in the wetland delineation you did, you found two perennial... I'm sorry about that voice. You found two perennial streams, right? One of them is... Pinkham Brook. Yep. The big one. And then one of them is the tributary. Yep. And so your project is staying away from that.

Correct.

And so I think the other streams that were found were intermittent, so aren't classified as needing that protection. Right?

That's what we're seeing here. Yeah.

On that note, floodplain. So that's the kind of heavy dashed line surrounding Pinkham Brook. Is that correct?

or no that's the set that's just the sexual and zone oh okay um it might be on the other plane okay we do on one of the plans we it shows the flood yeah okay i think it's c 1.30 okay do you have that in those aerial

have that overlay, overlay that plant onto an aerial photo so we can see what it would actually look like in person. We can, we can have that additive plant. So you'd be able to see where the trees, you could set that right into an aerial photograph. I think that'd be helpful to see how it's going to look out there.

Yeah, we had, we had an earlier version of the plant set that had, that included an aerial background, but it made the line look hard to see.

So then we go from that one back to this one. Just a pretty picture is all the other ones.

Okay.

What did you say the floodplain shown on which sheet?

It was C1.30. Okay.

The FEMA. Oh, found it. Thank you. Yeah, yeah. You got it. Okay. So it does kind of follow it, right?

Generally, it follows Pinkham Brook. Okay. I think it might be helpful if others agree to show that on your next iteration, along with the setback.

You know what I mean? On the same?

Yeah.

On the overview? Yeah.

Okay. I think that would be helpful. I don't want it to get too busy, but at the same time, I think it would be good to point to it.

And that's the female?

Okay. Yeah, and the only area that you are in or impacting is that road, which you're spanning most of. Okay. The rest of it is outside of the floodplain.

Yeah, it's just at the crossing. And most of the bridge is actually spanning the FEMA.

Right. Most of it, yeah. Yeah, but it's just the above ends that are within the...

I mean the wetlands there.

And I believe that is actually on there. It's just really hard to see. Is it the pink line? It's not the pink one. There's a dash dot line that kind of follows the pink line.

It's also gray. It cut to me.

without like really looking closely, it looks like a topography line. So we'll clear. I will just make a better color.

Oh, I see. Light gray. Yeah.

Light gray. Yeah. It's in the legend as well. But yeah, it's very hard to see. But we'll clear. We'll get that visible.

Okay.

Curious as to when you develop a project like this, the choice of putting an array arrays like this in a wooded area versus in a field. What are the pros and cons behind that? Why would you select something like this in such a wooded area?

Rachel, you want to take that one?

You know, there's pros and cons to

To both, right? Placing in the woods requires clearing of trees and existing forests. Placing in a field occupies sometimes usable farmland or, you know, hay. Like I believe that Helen used to or still does hay in her field. And, you know, so it's agriculture versus forest. going into a place where, you know, there are existing trees is a little more appealing for the reason of just, it's not in people's faces. There's not as much of a visual impact. And it's usually a little more tucked away from neighbors. So it's just less of an impact to the people nearby.

Yeah, I noticed a lot of, there were a lot of project that have been performed around the state up in the Augusta area or Belfast. And as you're driving by them, they can become an eyesore. And that could be part of the, certainly the pros of not having an eyesore if people interpret it that way.

Yeah, I know some people who see the runaway going in the woods, they You know, there's people on all sides of this. That's kind of what we found. But, you know, one of the things that comes down to is the landowner that we make contact with Helen says, I have this property. It's in the woods. I would like to use it to develop solar.

Yeah, that's what I was just going to add this. I worked with Helen in the beginning. And she was adamant about putting it in the woods. She did not want it in the field. So that was really a landowner-driven decision in the beginning.

Thank you. Noticing that the base flood elevation is 146.7 and the bottom of the bridge is 147.7, only a foot above the base flood elevation. So you've got a foot between the base flood elevation and the bottom of the bridge. That doesn't seem like much.

General note, I think you know, Calvin, this spring when we had substantial rainfall a couple of days on Pinkham Brook, just down the road from this project, it was flooding right over the road. It was like two weeks ago.

I'm just noticing that you've got base flood elevation. How did they determine that base flood elevation? Did they find a marker out there, or is that assumed? It's likely based off of the topography. So it's LiDAR? Yes. So that wasn't all that accurate, I don't think.

It's actually surprisingly accurate, depending on how it was taken and where, and what you look at in live data. All right. I'm assuming we're going to have this peer reviewed anyway, right?

Yes, we are. Yeah. And I think that aspect of the project will be reviewed by the Army Corps of Engineers as well. Is that correct?

Correct. But we could have Goral look at that. I think that's smart. And that's who we're using.

We've got one front of the base flood at the bottom of the bridge. That just to me doesn't sound like it's, seems to me like it would be on the water and flood.

It will be peer reviewed. Okay.

It's a good call out there. I've got another question. I was wondering if you could talk about your maintenance of the site post-construction, what that would look like. And then also another part of it is during construction, a little bit of grading is required. So topsoil would be collected in an area and then laid back. How would you go about doing that?

Yeah. First, just speaking to your question about maintenance. Yeah. um the project is monitored remotely so generally speaking there's there's no one on site um but it you know there will be mowing that would occur probably twice twice a year um and then yeah there's minimal grading required on this side it is a pretty pretty flat site but no topsoil will be removed from the site be maintained within the LOD and then yeah okay like put back or something if Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. If you have any, I don't know. Okay, great. And one more. What kind of fence are you proposing here?

Yeah, it's like the eight foot tall. It's like wildlife. Yeah. Yeah. I think with the gap, the six inch gap.

Those details provided at the site.

And I think that the fencing may also be on one of the details at the end of the site plan.

And that one's on C3.2.20.

Another question on CMP.

Was there any further studies needed by the utility, or has this been given the green light this one has approval okay great and um the construction their side will wrap up when you wrap up or around the same time like no delay on their part i mean yeah we try to coordinate it with with cmp so that's no long lead like you're looking at like another year before you can get online or anything like that we don't anticipate anticipate okay yeah great

Hey, another question.

Have you considered an open bottom stream crossing instead of a bridge? Why did you choose a bridge instead of an open bottom box culvert?

I believe because the span is too wide for an open box to work.

I've put in several open bottom box culverts that have streams that are bigger than that in the town, but I just don't know if it was a cost decision.

We'll look at it.

A lot of the crossing design will be driven by the standards of the record.

So you're doing a pre-constructed window to build two abutments and then set the bridge in?

That's the current plan, yes.

It's low graded, so if I have a truck full of water, I can go over it.

We did discuss that, yep. their construction trucks would need access to that. And I gave the weighted rating of our tanker truck with the most water or a brush truck, and we'll have the specs previous to that, but thus a donation for UTV or other equipment provided to protect it, is what I recall.

Is that going to be plowed in the winter for you to be able to get in there?

So I asked about plowing. probably the entrance, they don't contract. They only contract with, I believe, mowing, but we did talk about plowing, but in lieu of plowing, they would provide special tracks for the UTV for access.

Sorry, just one more thing before we get off the road. The utility, they're okay with just the pull in, excuse me, pull in and then back out. Or they're okay with just going all the way down to that hammerhead and then turning around there and coming out versus having a hammerhead earlier? And we're okay with that? Do you know what I'm saying? Yep.

We are right after that sort of left turn, if you will. Yep. There is enough room for trucks to pass. We talked about that. Or to turn around there. Pull up.

Yep.

Oh, oh, oh. Okay, I apologize there. Yes. Yeah. Sorry. I see the pull off. Sorry. But I was just talking about vehicles going in. If you want to get back out, you're going to go all the way down, turn around there and go out. I just wanted to make sure that the utility is no issues there with them.

Rachel's been the one in communication with CMP, so I've let her speak to that.

Yeah, we haven't discussed that. with CMP, you know, their plans to access sites. We have sites similar to this where, you know, it is a one-way road, sometimes not even with pull-offs that, but at a, you know, they end at a hammerhead and the utility is able to make it to the end, turn around and come back. Yep. Great. Thank you.

Yep.

Is there a question, Sonya?

Yeah, there is a requirement for invasive plant species survey.

Have you guys done that?

Yes, we did a pre-construction survey this year. That was submitted with the site plan.

We got it. Yeah.

Questions? Rights. Regarding rights. Maybe you already did submit this. I haven't seen it yet, but showing Norwich has, owns the LLC, like an article of organization or anything like that. That shows that. We have like a standing. I saw the, yeah, the very beginning, but it doesn't say anything about like Norwich specifically or, you know, how Norwich is related to the LLC. I think that would be important to see. All right.

Is there a statute of limitations on journal pool surveys? We've done the 2021, right?

Yes. Yeah.

So I don't know if the new one is, another one is warranted. I just don't know if there's a,

Typically, the agencies will. If no, nothing has been submitted or registered with the state, then I'll typically require one every five years.

OK.

This is actually done 22, right?

Yes.

Or maybe no couple of visits. April of 2021.

Oh, maybe you had to go back. Did you have to go back out there?

We went back and confirmed. Yeah, because initially it was just like Greek. Well, it was done in 2021 in spring. During the green season, um, we just see the evaluation was done in 2022. yeah. And it's not a full survey results from the previous. Okay.

So sticking with the wetland delineation, you guys had surveyed section here. Yes.

Are you planning to do something with that in the future?

Our survey included a subset of the landowner's parcel where we were initially analyzing where we could put uh some solar development we didn't know exactly where so just so we could have a sense of where the resources were we started we've got a much larger area than was actually where the project is going to go so as it sits now norwich has access to this lease area but that's all we have access to for development of this solar facility

Yeah, I didn't see this as being owned by the party that we're leasing from, but I did notice that it was contained as part of the wetland delineation area. And I also noticed that this section was not included in the wetland delineation area. The property line hits the centerline of stream, but that section was not surveyed part of the wetland delineation.

It could have been at the time that we were working off tax parcel data whenever we would do a survey for the wetlands and then the land survey actually would find where the property lines really work. So it's possible that there was some discrepancies between what was surveyed for the wetlands and what was actually part of the property.

But that is part of the overall property. Not what that you're leasing, but the overall property includes This strip here.

So are we saying a wetland delineation should be done on all parts of the parcel?

It's deficient right now for the entire parcel. Matt, I don't think we should.

Sorry to interrupt. If it's not proposed in that location, I guess I like it. I wasn't involved at the time of the delineation, but sometimes if they know an area is not going to be used, then you don't always include it if it's well away from where they're proposing development. And just due to the layout of the parcel there, where it's following the stream, if you were to do access, it would be a lot longer and probably impact more Welland. So sometimes it just cuts off an area where you already anticipate that there could be resources that you're not going to want to impact. So that could have also been part of it. We do see that sometimes where it's like, we know that there is a huge well and that we're there. We're not going anywhere near that part of the site.

But we could look at that area.

So could there be vernal pools in that area that were not looked at originally? I hear what you're saying. What I'm hearing is you can pick and choose what you want to survey. So if you're not doing anything here, you could have said, well, we're just going to cut that off and not do any surveying back there. look at that parcel, but that is part of the overall parcel. I mean, they found a vernal pool here. It's outside, right? Yeah.

Like when it comes to vernal pools with the state, typically they're more concerned if you have like a significant vernal pool. So like any area is within 250 feet. So if it was a real like concern, Could probably like, look just that areas within 250 of the proposed development to look for. Potential point, because we're not.

Season anymore if that was like a.

Where did we, it's a good I think it's a great point. Brian, where did we, where's the, sorry. I'm trying to see where it was delineated and where it wasn't delineated. in comparatively to the parcel. So we just have this, it's just a survey.

Okay. That's part of the wetland delineation report. Oh, okay. It shows in the map, well, there's a plan there. It goes down. Yeah, if you also look at It's page 136 and 135.

Okay. So that section wasn't included. Is that the only section? So if you take that line, the boundary southern line, and go straight up? Yeah. That was delineated and that wasn't delineated, I think. Right, Brian? Is that what you saw?

Yeah. This part was cut off.

Yeah. Okay. And how far away is the road? I see what you're saying, Brian. Is it more than, is it 200 feet for vernal? Like say 250.

250 feet from significant vernal pools.

So say they found a vernal pool right in outside that area. You know, it would be a 250 foot buffer. But I do, it's like the premise of it, right? It's the,

Yeah, I'm just questioning why that wasn't included in the wetland delineation report, everything else. And then I was very curious as to why this was incorporated and if there are plans for future expansion or you're trying to put a road in there in the future.

No, it was solely because at the time, whenever we so blankly didn't know where to put potential solar development, we looked at a number of different areas, the landowner, was willing to allow us to review so that they so that the original developer of the project could try to figure out where they might be able to develop something or even if they could at the time. So once they had that information, the study area was developed based on like those areas that the landowner was willing to give us access to. And then we reasonably thought we could overweight natural resources based on sort of some of the office analysis that we did where we look at an aerial photograph, look at soil maps and then sometimes we'll work with developers to help them refine sort of where their study area should be on a particular property. So if we have like a 200 or 300 acre parcel, we're not going to look at the big swamp that's off on the north end of the property because we know that's not really useful for development. So we'll help refine the study area and then within that, once we go out and we actually do all our natural resource studies, then we'll start to WIDDLE DOWN SORT OF LIKE WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT CAN GO BASED ON THAT INFORMATION AND IN THE CASE I THINK OF THAT THAT PINK OUTLINED AREA WAS THAT LIKE NOTED BECAUSE WE NEVER WANTED THAT LOOKS LIKE THAT RUNNABLES ONLY YEAH YEAH WE ONLY LOOK WE WE ONLY LOOKED AT THAT FOR POTENTIAL AND AND THEN AT THE TIME THAT THE THE MAIN OWNER AND THE DEVELOPER CHOSE NOT TO PURSUE ANY FURTHER SO WE NEVER HAD ANOTHER JOYFUL EFFORT OUT THERE UM I think I think at the time that was driven by the interconnection had to be from making book road. So, for this particular project, we ended up focusing on. That this upland area along the book. And then working with the landowner to figure out where. Where they would allow this to be developed and then working with utility. Sort of drove us to this particular location.

Just looking at the, like, scale here. I think it's about 300. Yeah, I think it would be over, like, if we did find something that was, like, could be, had potential to be significant based on out-of-season determinations. I think it's further away than you would have, like, a buffer for it.

Yeah, I'm measuring 450 feet, Jessie, from the access road to the area that the wetland delineation is.

That cuts off that that will triangle.

Thank you, yeah, yeah. Doesn't include the entire.

Parcel so just wanted to know what's going on now. What else?

I'm all set with my comments.

Anybody else? Wait just a second. I think I am. I'm talking this whole time.

I have a question. It says it's going to be fenced with six-inch openings for wildlife crossings. What kind of wildlife is going to go through six inches? Is that a squirrel crossing?

Yeah. That's like what? Yeah, they can be surprised what a groundhog can get under. Yeah, that's like what the inland fisheries and wildlife. Yeah. Six inches? Yeah.

I don't want to be afraid because I know with COVID, we try to stay poor just so a kid can't get their head through and then hang. So I'm just thinking, do you're going to stick his head in there and get stuck and not be able to get up? We find their carcass in the spring. I'm thinking six inches might be too big. I might rather see four.

Yeah, I think that is kind of like standard practice.

That's what they do, yeah. Mm-hmm.

I think it's the minimum that the state requires, so I don't think we can go any smaller than six inches.

They let you go to seven if you use a certain type of fence, from what I read, and it corresponds from fishing wildlife.

And the power, is that, you've got power going in

Do you need power getting into the site? Is it underground?

So it's underground until the stream crossing and then it would be co-located. Yeah, above the crossing to the interconnection to be able to interconnect the project to the grid.

So without having this superimposed over an aerial photo, it would be safe to say you probably won't see this from the road, is that? Yeah. So I think that's awesome. But they usually would be pushing them in that direction this time they came in with it.

Yeah, this area here is a higher spot, and then there's a decent slope that the road travels down to the brook. And then there's a slight rise, but it's not as high as up here at the road.

I'm sure you would have much rather have put it up by the road, but it would have been much cheaper. We put up bridges. But I'm much happier to see it back there.

Yeah, I understand the decommissioning bond. Requirement, I think it's ahead of our building permit. Your receipt of the building permit, we'll get a bond that amount. To hold as a performance guarantee. Yes, and you nor which plans to own and operate the project for the lifetime, like, any. plan on selling anytime soon or?

Yeah, we typically, um, typically we own about a third of the projects that we develop. Um, so then two thirds, we will sell to a third party. Um, we don't usually determine that until closer to, um, it's time for construction.

Oh, okay. Okay. Just know that there's something here about it. There is change of ownership.

Yeah.

Yeah. And I think it's 90 days, within 90 days of that change to notify the CEO.

Yeah, we're going to know who to get a hold of or something. Right. The deer gets his head stuck in there. I'm not going out there. All right, I think I'm done.

You all have anything else? I'm good.

All right, cool.

Yeah, we're going to table any motions or findings of fact until after the public hearing in August. Do we need a motion to table? I would say we should. George put one in his notes.

Yeah, I think it's a good one.

Yes.

I would entertain one.

So before the sidewalk, you're going to have the road all staked and the bridge area staked and the area for the solar panels all staked up so people can see what they're looking at?

Yeah, that's a great point. We typically ask for the sound line of the road to be staked and flagged.

So we know what we're looking at when we're standing there.

Yeah, where the bridge is. would be great to see and perhaps points along the fence too.

Do we have enough time between now and the 20th to do that?