Planning Board - Regular Meeting

September 3rd, 2025. Uh, introductions from board. Lisa Laroo, planning member. Vince Messer, board member. John Deio, chair. Rick Lyles, vice chair. Mike Hang, board member. Mark Lean, alternate. Staff introductions. Britney Merrell, city planner. Robert Grant, code enforcement officer. Thomas Kane, fire inspector. Andrew Lllo, deputy code enforcement. Sarah Delin, deputy city manager. Okay, a lot of deputies.

Item number two, preliminary plan review of a major use site development entitled Elder Tractor and Equipment for applicant owner Michael Sauier. Proposal is to construct a commercial tractor and power equipment sales and service facility. The subject property is approximately 10acre lot located at 500 High Street, tax map 11, lot 7 in the commercial zoning district. Is anybody here representing Elsworth Tractor and Equipment? Uh Matt Williams Group. Who? Brian Foster with Ellsworth Tractor and Equipment or Thompson Tractor and Equipment. Michael Sosier. Tractor uh Ellsworth Tractor Equipment. What was your name again? Michael Sosier.

Okay. Uh, are you leading the charge, Matt? Yep. Okay. One question before you start. Sure. Uh, there was some discussion with with I think Britney and yourself about this is scheduled for preliminary. Yeah. Is it sufficient to go preliminary? I mean, you can go to preliminary. There is a risk of us not approving it at preliminary. Yeah. Or do you want to do it as a sketch? I either one is different. I mean, if I would like to have a discussion about presenting as preliminary and then if the board can decide if my argument is good enough. Okay. I mean, there is a possibility that it could come back for another preliminary. Yeah. I mean,

so this is a sketchy preliminary. Is that what this is? Preliminary. What's that? We'll present as preliminary and then we have to come back. Uh we'll come back again. Okay. Go for it.

Uh so yes, this is a construction of a tractor sale and that's a small portion of it's also retail. um supply store off of Route 3 just um south of Martins's shopping plaza. Um the building itself is around 12,000 square feet. Um just get to that site plan and uh so currently there's a gravel pad on the site. Um the applicants are working with uh D to uh well you can see on the existing grid or the grading plan that there is a wetland delineation done. um by working with D to figure out you know how much more wetland can be filled and where the best place for the site has been and that's the location that's presented now further north on the lot um the uh development will run off of um the wellwater and then also have a septic leech field which is in the yeah northeastern portion of the lot um size there and again it's mostly going to be sales of actual tractors um with a small retail component so there's a gravel pad at the entrance um off to the side that will be a showing area, a showcasing area for the tractors. Um there are light poles that are all um 25 ft tall. There is um downward sconc lighting and there's a lighting plan at the back of their plan sheets um you know turn um that shows the foot candles for the plan and then uh there's some landscaping also shown and then detail for that um along the route three side and then also as you come in along the driveway and the showcase area. Um and then yeah we expect there um to be about six employees here. So um using the like automotive sales uh use calculated that it would need about 12 parking spaces but 14 are provided um with one uh ADA.

Uh maybe before we get to questions maybe you can address I'll get a copy of Britney's checklist. Y um a lot of comments, a lot of need on site plan.

Yeah. So I mean I can walk through um most of the information is in the packet somewhere and then if it's not what the applicant's currently undergoing to get that information for the board. Um and then you know if the board prefers it all in one site plan we can provide that for final but most of the information is within the packet materials on the record. Um, just to start at the top, the three letters, um, they've all been requested from the state agencies. Um, I've received word back from the natural areas program, um, that I'm still waiting for, Fisheries, and Wildlife and Historic Preservation. Um, as mentioned, there's a larger lighting plan. I know in the original, um, submission there was like a 8 and 1 half by 11 size, but now there's a full 24x 36 size lighting plan. Um, in your packets, it's sheet L1 at the very back for traffic count narrative. Um as discussed in the narrative packet um you know similar use that's been going through the planning board process currently um so the applicant is currently undergoing um traffic counts at an existing location as the same size in Thompson to figure out the traffic counts for that site and provide actual counts um for the use since the board uh determined there wasn't quite an accurate use um in the IT manual uh for storm water counts. So the storm water plan all the infrastructure is on the site plan um with the covert and then you can see the existing grading where the uh or the proposed grading where the water will flow. Um we're still having discussions with D on the um approval of that plan. Um so far you know there have been some light notes but nothing overall should change but u we'll prov we can provide the storm water c that go with this plan that the EP is approving um for final as well. Uh 91 addressing that's for final. was talk to Larry um to get the uh address for final uh signature block. Uh I know there's no lines so there will be an like an official signature block on final that is not currently in the information. Uh the name of the address of the owner of record is on the cover

sheet. Um the uh name address and registration number seal of the designer. The name and seal number or registration number are in the application. His seals are not yet on the plans. He's still reviewing them. Um but he's pretty confident so far and we'll allow them stamp for final. Uh the vicinity map insight is also on the cover page. Um and there's also an additional one in the narrative um packet. And then the bearings and distance and monuments are all on the survey. Um so we just didn't transfer them onto the actual site plan, but they're on the professionally performed survey which is sealed and stamped. Um the topography again it's on the um not on the site plan itself which we can add that to the site plan um for final but it's on C1 and C3 um which are the existing conditions and then the um proposed grading plans. Uh same with the natural uh wetlands it's on the proposed uh grading plan with the wetland delineation and then tax map and lot are also on the cover page. Um the direction of existing surface drain is it's kind of on the uh on the survey where it shows the way water flows with the blue arrows there but um again we can add that to the existing grading plan um but the proposed surface drainage is showed on the proposed drainage plan. Um site distances we do have that there is a note in the um DOT permit for site distance that mentions that the applicant have to cut back some trees um but there'll be 500 feet in both directions uh right and left in that 35 mile per hour zone the city requires 350 ft of sight distance and that will get added to the narrative and then um we do have a calculation for the parking spaces that I had discussed but you know we can put like 1 2 3 4 and label them all um for final just to show that total out. Um there really aren't any loading areas spec specifically for loading. So the truck will make deliveries pretty early in the morning or late at night um

when there's not a ton of traffic and the shop's not open. So there shouldn't be c there won't be customers parked there. Um so they'll kind of turn around um and there will be a turning template um for final to pull in the um spaces and then back up along the southern side of the property um where they'll get unloaded. And then uh utilities are on the site plan. It's on C2. It's just a separate utility plan. It's pretty light on utilities. And then uh the tabular form for acres, square foot of all buildings, that sort of thing. That information is on the site plan, but we can transition it to the table to all be in one um table form. Um the Knox box locations, uh I that may have been missed on my part during TRT. I did check the application um boxes that I remembered or took notes on that um fire department had requested, but we can put in the narrative where the Knox box will be located too. Um floor drains, there actually is not no longer going to be a floor drain um on the site and then I don't know if that would have gone in the site plan if it's just staying on site. Um it's not going into like a city system or anything, but uh now the floor will just be graded for the water to flow um out the bay uh area and then the handwash stations. And I don't think they were really meant to go on the site plan. Um, but it was a note from the code officer that OSHA may require them. And so the applicant has noted that for their further business.

Uh, before we get to uh questions, Matt for the next meeting, whether it be for preliminary or final, can we have this in a binder, please? Yes. Tabs to Yep. get us to the right section. Sure. I'll be able next time. I think I might have mentioned it to another developer. I I'll open it up to questions. If there was more stuff, I'd have more questions.

Um, from the traffic perspective, I mean, it's kind of like you're going in the right direction. And that's about all I can say. Um if if and I like the idea that you're collecting data at your existing use. I mean I think that's a a smart plan. Okay. At the same time uh it is useful to look at the IT stuff just as a point to start the conversation. So you need to do that. Um and I like the idea that you know your deliveries are going to come at 3 or 4 a.m. in the morning. And um you know I think that while that's a good idea and I you know kind of like it still they'd like to know what's going on in the street at that hour in the morning and what does you know how how does the IT stuff uh look at the peak hour and so forth versus whatever you have here. What? Sorry.

No, no, no. Um just like to add to that. How do we know that those uh morning and late evening hours are I was going to get to that. Okay, I'm sorry. No, that's okay. Uh, you know, so the thing is that that is really a departure from, you know, other folks and so forth and and the way it normally operates. So, it would be good if you would have some sort of, you know, statement that that's in fact going to happen, uh, you know, from typical suppliers or whatever. Typical process. What's that? It's a typical process, but understandable to add more detail to that.

Yeah. So, so those, you know, so the thing is that those things are are really missing at this point. Not saying that you can't get them, not saying that you're, you know, not telling the truth or anything like that, but uh it needs to be there and written down and so forth. The other thing um at that hour of the morning, there shouldn't be any queuing back from that light, but you need to make the case that that is the case. uh because that's where you know that's that's one of the things that breaks down on that stretch of roadway is the is the queueing from that's that's on the kind of the outbound uh side of the road okay going north I guess um you know that it cues back from that light now at 3:00 in the morning probably not so much but you have to make make the case that that's really going to be the case

okay guys asked for the IT counts. Uh, what use would you like us to refer to? I'm sorry. For the IT counts, what similar use would you like us to Oh, there there there are a couple of uh I don't know the the code number off hand. Okay. But there are a couple that uh that talk about like tractor tractor supply or whatever. So, yeah, just find one that Yeah. Whatever is closest, right? Yeah. And we and I don't and I and honestly I mean I don't think that's going to be a big issue but you need to we need to have the documentation.

Yeah. And we and we did an evaluation with the DOT permit specialists. They ran it through their traffic engineers and actually have reached out a couple times to find out what use they compared it to because they were okay you know um but we just you know in order to grant the permit um we used obviously the information for employees and you know customers per day good that are in the that are in the application. However, what they what they reference for a use, we haven't been able to get back from them. Yeah. What? Haven't been able to get back from them in their in their review. I think some people have left and we just haven't been able to get. Okay.

But we we certainly can do that in addition to the the traffic counts we have and our engineer now is is implementing some additional IT reference. So, we would definitely have that. Like I say, sounds like you're going in the right direction and and looking at the right stuff, both the stuff that's actually in it or or fresh counts, which I actually always like better than it. Yeah. But um um you know, we just need to have it. Yeah. I mean, you may ask the the folks from Union Farm what it uh

Well, that that threw a little bit of a curve. that threw a little bit of a curve because the there was some documentation that they what they used and it got questioned and then this was sort of you know a pivot for us somewhat to go that approach which seems to be reasonable and they and they've gone back and done some counts uh at their own site similar to what you're doing similar to us we have which is yay for them too right so it will give us I mean this is a very it's almost an identical store it sounds like same size same what actually happens happens in the building. This is just a

the the back the back section of it is is just assembly maintenance uh you know putting together and and working on tractors equipment and like a service thing or just for sales for service. Okay.

We do a lot of road service as well. Um but that there is assembly of tractors. We order a lot of them you know they come needing to be assembled. So we do a lot of the assembly back there. And how big are the are how big are the units and the trailer trucks and so forth that deliver them? I mean, when I asked that, that that's kind of rhetorical. I really don't want you to give me a number, okay? But what I want you to do is basically show that the way the driveway goes in there is is adequate for the size of the size of the truck. Yeah, we we'll do a a turning template.

We'll do a turning template for that. I mean, we've worked on it. uh we just we pulled in you know just due to the due to some of the some of the D requirements and where that's sort of been hung up pulling in pulling in our engineers sort of came a little bit we had to transition so some of those things we just weren't able to get in this application but they're they're happening good with our engineering yes and and we'll see the results of that inquiry no doubt cool that's about it that's disappointing well I Uh so I I got way late by and going back and going back to the plans where everything was not you know

we we we we went through the approval process in Toppsum we went through the approval process in Manchester with our stores and you know understandably everybody's ordinance is a little bit different but we we in early preliminary we read that the base plan was not necessar the way the way I read it anyways wasn't necessarily that the base plan was one plan with everything on it a base plan was more a a set of plans as long as it was within that. So, I mean, Matt did at the 11th hour sort of indicate that a lot of that needed to go on one plan, but we just you just The other thing is that wasn't our understanding.

I'm sorry. If you if you have gone through this for other sites, okay, and you've collected any kind of data or done analysis for that, I mean, that's that's valid stuff to refer to when you look at this. You say, "Gee, you know, here's how we did this. Here was the here here are the actual vehicle counts or approximation or whatever. I mean that's No, we did we did that's perfectly okay. Yeah, we did have to do that for the Manchester store. Well, bring it. Yep. Incorporate it to the extent that you can. Yep.

But uh you know I think you know what the issues are along that road. Uh and you know it's it's it's a road that's you know pretty well screwed up and uh at the same time if you if you really do have your your primary traffic is early or late depending yeah the truck deliveries are essentially that certainly works in your favor designed to come at night so that they're there in the morning when when crews arrive to unload them. Yeah. And then when when you know when they leave it's in the morning and they're always exiting taking a right taking a right to Ellsworth.

But it was I read this and I stopped because I didn't think that we would be no no offense approving it as it were. So it was like I didn't feel the need to look at the rest of it.

So um looking at the and I'm going off the TRT record um that was um done. Um, I'm concerned about a lot of the narrative in here of missing items. Um, and knowing that this is a preliminary and basically the approval is based upon the items of the ordinance that are required for a preliminary. And if they're not there, I'm not sure whether we can approve a preliminary knowing that there are several missing items and several items that have noted that it's um either needed on a plan or etc etc. Um so I don't know where to go with this. the fact that items are missing that we can approve something for preliminary when you got items that are missing.

No, I understand that and that that part is really a whole another discussion when we get to the end. Okay. We have a motion, but I mean if you have specific questions to ask them at this point. Okay. All right. I just that that was just a concern. So, um I had a question for Tom Canniban. Um, in in the narrative it says that you submitted a letter to them. It says there's a letter from the Ellsworth Fire Department stating the applicant has met with the fire department. You submitted a letter to the applicant yet? No, that hasn't happened yet. That shouldn't be in the mayor, but this says that there has been one that's been submitted.

That's my mistake. I should I meant to remove that.

Um, so um so okay, leave it at that. The the other question that I have on this is that it looks like there was an added paragraph to this um item five. It says the building and fire areas of 11,600 square ft do not include the porch areas and also do not include the thickness of the exterior walls of the building. The IBC 903 states that fire areas greater than 12,000 square feet shall be equipped to the sprinkler system. If the authority have jurisdiction determines that the porch area shall be included in the fire area, the architect of record noted below shall be notified for a full project redesign. So the question I have for the applicant when we say porch is this we know that it's an probably a covered porch. Does it have a floor, combustible floor, or is it concrete?

It's just paved. It's just uh Yeah. So, in this area, are you displaying equipment underneath this awning or underneath this covering? No. Tractors, lawn equipment, etc., etc., or is it just going to be seating area? Just seating. Seating. And we do put some of our um customers um equipment underneath. So, you will have equipment underneath. We have a few pieces. Okay. It won't be tractors or anything like that. It might be a lawn mower. It might be a snowblower, but that would be basically it. Okay. Um, so what is your determination as far as the porch area? I'm still looking into that.

Okay. And if I may make my concern to you, um the fact that there is equipment there that possibly has fuel, the potential for fire underneath that porch will impact the building. Um therefore, you know, that that would be a major consideration. I'm glad you're looking into that. That's all I have for question. How big was that porch? It's essentially a It's essentially an awning around the front of the building. It's porch is probably a It's on both sides, correct? It's on both sides and Yeah. Yeah. It's on both sides. So, it's essentially just an awning on each side of the square. Uh you're at 116 right now.

It's it's not calculated in the it's not calculated in the square footage of the building. It's a it's a it's an overhang and awning over the over the sides of the building. And this this designer and uh architect is the exact same um designer that we used. It's the same exact building that we used and they actually added that note in there um after prior Marshall review and everything with the previous building in 2020. Um so, you know, just to encapsulate the the firewall that's in between in between the shop and the front of the building and eliminated that from the the gross floor area. They added that comment about about the awnings because it could be a local um local

get around the back of the building interpretation of whether that was part of the building but they don't consider it part of the building. So I was just adding um Tom as far as the one of the other questions I had and um as far as building access for fire suppression knowing that the building is not protected with the sprinkler system. Have you considered looking or talked about 360 degree or 360 access around the building? Yeah. And what is your determination on that? because I see there is no access to the back of the building, right? So this so the for the building for what it is only requires access to two sides per the code.

Okay. We have talked to them. That is still a discussion that Matt and I are having about the awning and then as well as about access to the building and that's where he's going to do a turning template to basically to determine more about the backside where they're going to do the maintenance and stuff. Uhu. What is that going to be? Is that going to be our stone? Is that going to be asphalt or that kind of stuff? So, I'm waiting to have another discussion with them about it. Okay. So, the fact that that isn't resolved as yet is another Well, it's a it's

it's not an issue. It's it's it's one of those where it's not required for them right now in preliminary. It's something that we need to finalize before final. It's just one of those it's in discussion of which direction, what do they want to go? They have options which which is what they need and that way I can determine Is it going to be is it going to stable? Is it going to be stable enough for me to get a fire truck in the back or not? Okay. But the code only requires two sides which they do meet

and it is stable enough and we you know we we use that the back is the the restriction really here is that to avoid is avoidance of wetlands. So it's a it's a it's a minimization that effort that we're working with D on the minimization of at wetland impact and reducing the the impervious area. So therefore the there's no road road out the back. We haven't we don't have a road out back in our store but it's accessible. Um it's stable enough and we don't have a road on one of the sides of our Manchester store. So, it's, you know, it's uh it's it's compacted. It's compact. It's going to be grass, but it will be accessible by by an emergency vehicle.

Okay. Anything else, I think not right now.

Okay. [Music] Um, I guess I'm going to also uh go with the idea that in trying to do a review, overall review of this, I was left with more questions than answers. Honestly, there was so many things that I tried to piece together without having to read a piece in the narrative and then try to figure out what it meant on the plan and how it correlated. I was having a little bit of difficulty. Um, and the square footage of the porch was a question. Um, I noticed you had um a waiver for buffers or something in there in the narrative somewhere on page 25. Um, we didn't have much about the traffic patterns. C2, the site plan. I I really this I couldn't identify enough things to come up with a big picture of what the what the overall plan is, like the way the drives are in, the way the parking is going to be. I just couldn't get an image in my head to ask questions because there wasn't. Um I'm curious about the outside storage of equipment, you know, under the building, around the building, how that impacts the overall site, um the traffic issues, um where all the different things are going to be like any fuel storage, propane, you know, access to unallards, protecting any kind of fuel. There's just not enough information on

I mean it says new propane tank above ground on on C2.

No, I think that yeah, it does. But I I think it again it goes back to now we understanding that it's needs to all be on one page. But just to give you an idea of the kinds of things that we're going to be looking at, we would ask for, you know, sign placement details, outside storage, traffic layout, security systems, fuel connections and locations, delivery access, dumpster areas, lighting for the dumpster areas and access. Um the screening issue, uh storage of outside stuff, um sale, you know, you're going to have sales of resale and new and is there going to be an area for people to test drive and have good access? um the interior layout of the building, the details about, you know, where's sales, where's service, where's a fire, where's the fire is the firewall shown on the

fire? Yeah, they're in the architectural. There's a floor plan. And where which page? It's on the second plan set. Architectural plans. Oh, there's this this here GS1 S1 S2. Which page? There's structural plans and there's architectural plans to show the floor plan. There's Yeah, I looked through a lot of pages. I got tired. That's the foundation. And I think they're in the other set. This is the structural. This is the structural gives all the details about, you know, all the Yeah, that shows the firewall. All the firewall that shows how it's built.

Prints are on S. [Applause] Yeah. S6 or S8. And these are standard architectural and structural plans. So that's how it's built. I'm talking about just an overall floor plan showing where the firewall is in relation to from room to room. I just couldn't find I mean these are this is again like I said these are all standard foundation and and draw architectural drawings. No, I'm not asking that. That's not question that show the detail on the on the site plan. Yeah, we I mean we normally wouldn't do a a layout of the floor plan on the site civil drawings but

but it shows us where people are coming in the building and out of the building and trucks are accessing. That's normally what we want to have a visual of the operation of the site and how it's managed. parking places in relation to hours of operation. Um if there's going to be any gates that are going to um to prohibit people from getting into the building. One of the things we always want to know relays with fire too is like, you know, if somebody pulls in and the building is closed, is there a gate? Can they turn around? Can they get out of where they're at or do they have to back out onto Route 3? Just all kinds of questions like that that I can't find enough information. So your firewalls on S1 and got a section through it. Yep. It's got a section.

Yeah. So then you turn to S8 and it shows you what that section is. But I want to lay out on the floor. S. Ah. Okay. But it doesn't delineate what room is for what. That's the attic draft stop area. So it's not in relation to like we've had before where it's like one side of the firewall was a sales area, one side of the firewall was a service area, that kind of thing. So I just couldn't get a good picture. just some labels on the floor plan. A floor plan that says where the in and outs are and who's doing what where.

Yeah, I was I was quite certain. I mean, from that perspective, I was quite certain there was a floor plan in there, but in the architectural plans, it's possible maybe this the because we had a set of structural and a set of architectural. Yeah, some of it was redundant information because it's the same, but but it did have a floor plan. So Lisa, if I can add to the doors, overhead doors, um on your application, page five, fire department. Okay. Down under fire department access, the very first thing says building access door locations shown with narrative on the site plan drawings. They're not on the site plans. They may be in the architectural plans, but they're not on the site.

Okay. So, my problem would be that if we ask a lot of questions and we get a lot of answers, the problem is once you give us the information, then we kind of got to start all over. That's where I'm kind of at. Matt, as you're taking notes, you know, maybe I like to site plan some some of these copies of these in the smaller form. I mean, you should be familiar with what kind of a medium size. That's what we would have typically done, but we Yeah. I mean, not top, you know, not smaller versions of all of them. Not to scale when you do that. So, it says to scale. So, I think Matt knows what we're kind of looking for.

Very sure. And I did see the door locations on the site plan, but I just didn't think that was that's not, you know, that's an Elsa specific thing. I just to show flow of who's coming and going, who's leaving and going, you know, that sort of thing. Yep. Uh there uh could you explain a little bit about um there's wetlands that have been filled and remediated and is that still an ongoing process or It is.

Yeah. When we first came to Ellsworth, we we worked with the town code enforcement to to fill the site. got a permit from the town to fill up to 40,000 square feet. We did that as a as sort of to get a jump start on the process. Um once we knew we sort of needed to advance the design, we brought in an environmental, you know, person to to look at the site. They delineated that some wetlands had been filled. So part of the part of the wetland alteration plan with D is to mitigate some of the some of the wetland that has that was filled and D and Army Corps have both visited the site and and you know it's it's progress it's progressing you know it's it's you know it's presented to them in that way. So, but we did work with the town on that. And

Okay. Uh I just got back to the to the entrance. Uh now the entrance there's a divided highway like north of you towards Martins. How close is your entrance to where that divided? That was Yeah, that was a pivotal that was a pivotal discussion with with DE with with both DOT and DP because D wanted us to move the entrance closer to the island so we could minimize impact of wetlands but DOT wanted it further away from the the island which was sort of a influence area for the intersection. So I think it's like five it's it's greater than 500 feet away from the end of the island.

Enough of an area where you mean now or proposed? Yes. I kind of read in that did DOT give a reason why they didn't want your entrance further down towards Trenton? I mean I I didn't quite it it was it was just too much wet land. Oh. You know, so we pushed as far as we could to come up so we could get in the upland of the project of the site. I thought it was just a case of DOT nothing to do with the wetland but just preferred it further. They did but we had to Okay. we had to request to come as far into the upland as we could in order to minimize the you know to be able to build it on the north end of the site. So at this point you are clear of that island 500 ft. Yeah.

Okay. Um, I think there's an exhibit in the in the plans that shows what that is in the in the in the attached narratives supporting documentation. And I think somewhere in there, I can't remember exactly where. Um, you said you'd be moving the dumpster from location to location on site to not have a Yeah, we requested a waiver to not have a

screening around the dumpster. It's a it's you know we keep it to the back of the site often needed often need to move it move it around it's generating cardboard and very little waste um just because of you know bringing equipment in and out of the building so we requested a waiver to we located the dumpster in its typical location we just requested a waiver to have a screening around it so that way it would be able to be moved a little bit from location you know within the general area of where it's located on the back side of the building. Does that kind of movement happen at your other other facilities? It's pretty typical. Yes. And everything is out behind the building. It's it's not visible. It's not visible from the road generally.

So I mean wherever you're going to move the dumpster from place to place is still blocked from general view. Yes. So if that would be on your plan like it would stay within this confine but could move back and forth that might be an idea so that we have an idea of where it's going to be. Yeah. I mean it it Yeah. on this thing. That's just a note. Just a Yeah, we have the We have a proposed We have the dumpster location, but it's that'll be the general location of it, but screening it in just, you know, is doesn't allow for the site to function as we needed to. So, we asked for a waiver on that. Can I jump back for a second? Sure.

And did you do it look at the crash anal the crash statistics? I saw I thought I saw something in there about it. Yes. Did you look at that in any detail? Yeah, let me walk you through it. So, most of the uh crashes in this location are up at the Martins Lake. Um so, past 5 years, I think. Let me just get so I can tell you. Okay. And did you But you didn't close you didn't did not enclose the crash diagrams or anything like that. The actual locations, right? Um I mean like aside from like the little dots on aside from that. Yeah. No, not the actual like location. It might I mean because because I think M. I'll give you that pretty much, right?

I mean, if I zoom in Yeah. on different locations, like some of them are the exact location of the crash, but where there was so many they didn't have like every and and that's fine. You know what I'm mostly interested in is crashes that occur at the end of the queue away from the light. Yep. So, any detail on that? So, do you want just like So, I go all the way down to the coastal car care here. That's far enough certainly, but do you want like more specific? there are like two groups of like four. If if if there are if there are crashes at the end of the queue in anywhere the nearest nearest to where your driveway is going to be detail on those crashes would be good. Yeah.

You know in terms of detail on crashes that occur in the intersection not so much. Yeah. I mean, I want to know how many there are, but but the details are not right. The details of the crashes that are closest to that are most relevant. Yeah. And and they may not I mean, when I say most relevant, they may not be that relevant, right? But no, I mean, if I remember, you need to show that. Yeah. If I remember, I think like some of the one of these was like the deer or two of them was a deer and then most of them are like the rear sides swipe type of Yeah, you those deer they always get in traffic jams. down, right?

But you know what we're looking for? Yeah. Now I do. I'll be with you in a minute. Yeah. Uh yeah. Okay. Um so obviously I mean the the traffic information uh is lacking. Um, another big thing I mean the the storm water even just a you know brief analysis not so much you know the the technical

charts and stuff but uh I mean I think that that's a big reason one of the big reasons that I'm not inclined to approve this as a preliminary. Uh, I think there's just too much. There's a lot of little stuff missing and a lot of several big items missing. Uh, any points from any discussion from the staff?

Um, depends on how black and white we want to be with the ordinance. Um there is little flexibility due to you know what's required per the ordinance for preliminary versus final. Um I first when I first reviewed it I definitely thought this would be closer to a sketch plan than a preliminary um based on what the ordinance states code. I think she said it all. Okay, Don. All right. Uh, we'll open a public hearing if anybody is here to speak their piece on this project. Come up to the podium. Um, nobody's here. We'll close the public hearing. I have another question.

Oh, go ahead. Uh Matt on uh one of the pages here looks um I'm looking 606.7 existing site conditions continued. Um I don't understand maybe you can explain this to me. Uh item N it says emergency vehicle access limited with existing conditions to existing entrance suitable for access. I I don't understand that wording. That was a that was a that was a a narrative on the access to the existing site. Okay.

So, the existing site really has no access for emergency vehicles, but I think that was what it was confusing that what's the emergency vehicle access to the existing site. So, so this doesn't even need to be in here. Probably doesn't. Probably just Yeah, probably just not applicable. Okay. I mean I mean there is an existing site because it's a gravel pad. Well, okay. Superolous words. Thank you. It's in the ordinance. So therefore in the checklist possibly be super then. Yeah. And we did come to sketch plan already and didn't get a lot of

come to the plan with you. No. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. TRD. Yeah. Any other questions? Good. Thank you. I guess um I have a question on how to word a motion to um

to not approve the preliminary plan. Well, if it's helpful, um we can review the ordinance a little bit as to this part of the process, then you can chime in um with your thoughts, too. But basically, um I I want to point out that if it's considered a sketch plan, it would still have to come back for both a preliminary and a final before, you know, final approval. Uh the sketch plan is not tested um review according to our ordinance. Um and it is mandatory for any application to come before the plane board at least twice. Uh the sketch plan reviews do not count toward the mandatory meeting requirements. Um so if they came back again and we didn't review it as a preliminary um and it was a sketch plan, they would have to come back twice. Well, no. I don't I don't expect them to come back for a sketch plan.

Right. Right. But if we counted this as a sketch plan, they would still have to come back for a preliminary and a final. Well, that's correct. Yes. But if So, I'm just The motion was for a preliminary. I can't kind of go back and and now make it a sketch plan. Say you asked me beforehand if it was sketch or preliminary and talked to the applicant and we decided to move forward preliminary. So, you'd find you'd vote as if it were preliminary. Yeah. So, I mean, either way, they're going to have to if if we procedurally it's decline to approve the preliminary plan, they're going to have to come back for two anyway. Yes. Two. Either way, you cut it. They're going to if this is a preliminary and we say it's not good enough, they have to come back for a preliminary and a fine. So,

yes. And I it says something about a sixmon um No, they could come back next month for another preliminary. Yep. It's a pro. Well, it says if a site plan if a site development plan is denied by the administrator planning board, a new site plan proposing the same development for the same property should not be filed within 6 months after final decision. I think that's I think that's if we turn if we get to a final and say no. Okay. Then they can't come back for six months, right? Just eliminated. They can come back next month, right?

Perfect. So, I'll make a motion that we do not approve the preliminary plan review of a major use site development entitled Elwood Tractor and Equipment for applicant owner Michael Sauier and you can add the rest of it for the tax map. Is there a second? Second. All in favor of not approving the preliminary plan. Okay. So, hopefully we'll see you next month, gentlemen. Thank you. Thank you.

Good finders. Where the binder tabs? What's next? We're on a roll here. We're on a roll here. union. Oh yeah. No, no, I agree. No, what happened is that they go ahead and all the stuff that they have to do and they come back the next time and all everything has to be done with no other question and that's happening. I mean,

where is So you like being right in the middle.

You want your folks to sit up front or

So I think this is the final for these guys. This is the final.

Okay. Item number three, final plan review of a major use site development entitled Union Farm Equipment for applicant owner Union Farm Equipment. The proposal is to construct an approximately 12,000 square ft building for farm equipment sales and rentals. The subject property is approximately 13.09 acre located at 215 Down East highway, tax map 16, lot 32 located in the commercial zoning district. Someone here repping So, since our preliminary approval, we made um a few uh I say a few minor changes to the plan with the the the biggest change being um the entryway coming into the site in order to reduce some of the paved area in front of the building. We split this into a one-way traffic flow coming in with a um crush stone area, sort of an I'll refer to it an island in the middle that they could use for display purposes. Um, additionally, we the building we took 10 ft off of the back of the building and shifted it a little bit closer to to Route One. Um, beyond that, there was just some minor changes from the preliminary plan. the the grass storage areas or display areas that we had previously. We're proposing to do those in crushed stone to limit maintenance so they don't have to always move when they're mowing the grass. They don't have to move all the equipment to to do things like that. Um the changes to the traffic pattern and the uh building changes allowed us to add a few more parking spaces directly in front of the building. We've designated an area.

You can see with the different hatch patterns of this area is all proposed for pavement. The rest of the area here around the back is proposed as gravel. Um the intent is to eventually pave that, but we didn't want to commit to having it all paved now. If they decide to need to save some money during the initial construction, they'll leave that as gravel and then may pave it over time. Um I know at the previous meeting there was a lot of discussion around uh traffic that we had. Uh so the applicant um recorded or they had documented recorded went back through their videos. They have security cameras at their other facility in Union. So they were able to document what they had for traffic over a week's period at that site. Um and then we broke that down into uh various types of customers uh their own delivery trucks uh UPS type deliveries and tractor trailers. Um we gave that breakdown in the revised narrative. Um traffic is not it's not a heavy source of traffic at this site. I know previously trucks being the biggest concern. That site saw a little under three trucks per day over the course of that week. And the week is one of the busiest times of the year in the spring when people are sort of getting ready to do yard work and things like that. Um, and it's also worth noting that this store is um about half the size of their facility in Union and they're only uh projecting about 20% of the sales at this store compared to the other one. So those numbers should be high compared to this store as far as what they would see for traffic. Um trying to think uh we did we moved the

propane tanks to the other side of the building. I'll zoom in here a little bit. Um previously the tanks were over on this side. We moved them over here because the mechanical room inside the building got some of the interior floor plan got moved around and mechanical room is on that side of the building now. So we put the tanks over there would be they'd be closer. Um we added based on discussions at the last meeting we've added gates. Um, so those gates would be located on both the in and the out side. So people could still come into the site off of Route One. Um, but the gates closed. There's enough room that they could then turn around in the driveway and leave. So there's no uh concern with having to stop for the fire truck having to stop on Route One to get into the site or a customer that pulls in then having to back out into Route One. This configuration leaves enough space for them to get into the driveway and turn around and and exit if they come when the store is closed. And then we also added some boulders along the frontage of the driveway and the front of the site. Those are really for security purposes so somebody doesn't come and try and drive off with a tractor. Um the boulders would prevent that. I think that's the majority of the changes in and the biggest issue I think that we had before was probably the traffic issue and I think we've addressed that with the revised narrative.

Um happy to answer any questions that uh let me jump in.

Yeah, real quick. The floor plan changes that you Mark Jeffrey from Coastal Main. uh floor plane cages. Just to let you guys know, we have reduced uh the penetrations through the firewall. So now there are only uh three penetrations through that firewall. Uh two are 3080 doors and one is a 6080 door. So to let you know that's been removed and then the access to bring equipment in out of the showroom is going to occur through the front. So, just wanted to let you guys know that as well that that was another change made along with the reduction of the size of the rear of the building from building B went from uh 50 by 120 to 40 by 120.

Saw saw that on the plan. [Music] Uh Sean, the the changes to the pavement you're not putting down, you may put down later. Yep. is is around the whole building. The so this I'll say the darker shaded area. Yeah, that's on the side in the front of the building. That's all paved. Right. And then from that line all the way around the back um for now it's proposed as gravel but with the intention of eventually paving. And that that little other kind of in between area right next to the building wall.

Oh, so that's concrete. Sorry. Right. Yeah. Will if you come back to pave the gravel area, does that change the storm order? No. Gravels, gravel, pavement, concrete, they're all considered the same through D. So, uh, and I assume with the city, it's all considered impervious, so it doesn't change any of our numbers there. And we paved everywhere where there's catch basins, so we don't have to worry about catch basins being high or low and having to adjust those later. So Sean, the the area behind the building uh that's gravel and this for you too, Tom, is this area an area where emergency vehicles can get around? Yes.

Okay. So it's it's a drivable surface acceptable to you folks. Okay. And that back area would be similar to the back area at your union place in terms of uh equipment being parked back there and so forth. Yeah. So there's um it's a drop off area. There's far towards the back there would be some storage. This little area here is a a loading ramp. So a truck can back up to that ramp. You can drive equipment whether it's into the back of a pickup truck or some sort of a flatbed. So um it's not that it's a completely empty spot for vehicle maneuvers. There's going to be some equipment there, but it is a surface and there'll be enough room left to be able to get a fire truck all the way around the building. I

and their delivery trucks when the an 18-wheeler comes in to deliver tractors, they'll get So, they got 18 wheelers back here, you can get firet truck, right? I mean, I always respect that. I mean, that area there to be used by an individual customer who's hauling in a tractor on a trailer. Yeah. So, there's service. There's this bump out here on the side that's um specifically for customers that come in with a trailer. or if they're bringing in something that they need service on, they can if they park there, come in there and pull off to the side and uh and then go in. For the record, that's in theory. People probably won't park there. There will there will be signage, but you know how that goes. Rick, to answer your question, everybody obeys signs. I know that.

Rick, to answer your question, yes, I I we intend to have that back area by the loading dock and whatnot for uh staging of equipment. uh retails going out and service equipment. That's why the gravel is going farther back that way. And that's a solid footing. It will be. Yes, sir. Yeah. Same same basically the same thing that we have in Union. That same sort of surface material. It's going to be built so it could eventually be paved if they want. Got it. Right. Sean on the on the entrance now. So the entrance exit's going to be divided now with a raised medium. Is that so out right at Route One, there's always been that raised Yes. island at Route One,

which stops right here. If you can see my cursor on the screen, stops there. That is just a painted line. I think there was some discussion earlier about trying to separate the in and out. So, that's just painted because this is one way traffic in and then one way traffic out. Okay. I wasn't sure if that was Then you got separate lanes on on the out. You have a right turn and left turn separate. Yes. Everyone. Yeah. So, so no, this this section is not raised. That's just striping so somebody can swing around if they

It may be prudent. Maybe it's on the plan, but the entrance to put some signage to keep people from exiting through the entrance because once you get out to the road, then you you are on the left side of the divide or divider. You see what I mean? As you come in your entrance, as you get closer to the parking areas, maybe have some signage there. Signage here so people don't drive up. Says do not enter, for example. Yeah. Yeah. We could add a sign there. And they either will or won't, right?

And it is. We've narrowed that up so it's it's 16 ft wide. Plenty wide for any sort of truck to get in there, but hopefully somebody would see it and realize that it's not the width of a two-lane So, with that, I was looking at that. Are you okay with that? Okay. I'm good. I like you. I like what you did with the videotape and whatever. I mean, that's that's that's a good way to go. So, I like the narrative and I'm you convinced me. So, I'm good.

Good. Good. Thank you. I wish more people would take the initiative to actually do some counting and so forth because relying over reliance on the models is over reliance on the models right so this is good or as good as it can be given it's on root line I guess I should say anything I'm saying thank you Matt I like Mark did a great job. I think they've got it. See, they all want to buy a tractor now, right? Did a great job.

We have one worn out, but we need a new one. Not allowed to ask it in session. I'm sure at the grand opening they'll be glad to talk to you all. Um, I was just curious. You gave a long list of all the little changes and there was a lot of that made sense and were improvements of things we talked about. Is there one is there a location where all of those changes are are noted because it was hard to go back and go like where was that? Yeah, that was there. No, I we in the narrative we listed sort of what the major changes were the changes to the entrance and and changes of the building building size and shift but we didn't go through and list.

So when you move the propane tanks which I understand the reason why are there protective ballards now in front of it in front of them? Uh there's rocks. Uh boulders. The boulders. Okay. I just want to make sure what that was. And and um what I'm not noticing it. Where did the where did your dumpster go? That stayed in the same spot. So that is um right over here on this side of the building. Oh, though you have the two That's right. You have two yard dumpsters and they're staying in place. They're not They're not moving. Okay, good. But yeah, I mean basically all the things we had questions about um they got resolved in my opinion.

Really couldn't find anything major which is good. Uh uh on page two of the application uh what legal interest does the applicant have in the subject properties uh checked off purchase and sales contract but you actually own the property and when we're here for the preliminary it was purchase and sale they now they now own it. Okay. Um and your traffic passed bricks muster storm order. Um the minor conflict was taken care of. There it looked like there was a couple little minor changes in the storm order but everything

Oh yeah. I think there was a typo or something in the initial narrative. Yeah. No. I think that any comments from staff happy guy happy far happy. I will open this to a public hearing if anybody's here that wants to make a comment or ask a question. If not, I will close the public hearing.

Somebody like to make a motion. Make a motion to approve the final plan of a major use site development entitled Union Farm Equipment for applicant owner Union Farm Equipment. Second. All in favor? Okay. Let me just let me just say it would and this is kind of on the record, off the record, but I would think it would be really useful for the city

um and and developers if they're willing to play to look at some of these intersections and so forth down the line after um you know the things have been opened and so forth with the idea of saying well okay you know we expected this many cars and we got this many or trucks or whatever or we expected these kind of maybe these kinds of problems at at at the intersection of of the driveway and um you know type it up. Okay. Well, the DOT does the annual traffic count. Yeah, but that's Well, that gives us a baseline. Well, it gives you it gives you a base of what what happened.

But, you know, some of these things are really, you know, not so much this one, which is our low volume thing really, but some of the other sites uh have, you know, they're they're close to being troublesome and I get that they don't actually become trouble break, but it' be good to have some sort of record. Okay, they want us. We're going to take a fivem minute break because they've got some site plan they like us to sign so they can leave start building the building. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you for being responsive. Y [Music]

I would and look at the sight distance you're going that way right that's good

item number four final plan review of a major use site development and a new or existing subdivision entitled Aldova Plaza for applicant owner JC Cowboys Realy LLC. Proposal is to construct a two-story mixeduse building with four commercial units on the first floor and three res residential units on the second floor and a standalone observation platform. The property is approximately 1.49 acre lot located at 99 Bangor Road, tax map 59, lot 50 in the urban zoning district. Someone here representing JC Cowboys.

Yes, sir. Good evening. Robert Frank from WBRC representing JC Cowboys. The applicant Toby Misho sends his regrets again. He's on vacation this week, too. I'm starting to get a complex. Did he buy you dinner? No. No. He owes me double. He better put the the It's in the material in a binder this time. I hope. Is Mr. Tran with us tonight on Zoom? Yes, he is. Okay. Hello, everyone. Hello. Welcome, Mr. Tran. Okay, full is all yours.

All right, so tonight we we do bring back uh plans and in the cover letter uh dated August 14th, we did outline the uh changes that came about uh from the uh previous review. Um I think I could zoom in here and explain a little bit. So, we did eliminate two. We had to eliminate two parking spaces on the row abuing Bangor Road. We were able to move those over. We're now at the um we meet the the standard for parking. We're right at the limit. We're able to put in the divided exit lanes for the median and two 12T exit lanes. Um that works uh from a standpoint. We did reach out to our traffic consultant. What she said was she didn't say we don't recommend. She said we don't normally recommend it. So my mistake at the last meeting. So sorry for pushing back a little. She did say though that during the 95th percentile there there could be three cars stacked there. So having two that'll help. Her only thought with those is sometimes one car exiting can block the sight distance to the other with three three vehicles at the peak. It's not an issue. Now, we did add and designate a a striped area at the rear of the building. Oh, that did not work. Let's try this.

Oh, I see. Does say that ought to be great.

What have I done? I hit the wrong button here. There we go. So, at the rear of the building, we did designate an area for uh RV and delivery given the frequency of of either we felt that one space would satisfy that request. Uh we did I did I personally went out and did new site distance uh exiting site distance as I went home from the last meeting and we now have uh not the at least but the actual 530 ft to the east and 605 ft to the west and that was set back at the new location of the drive 10 ft. Uh on the same site plan, the layout plan in the upper portion, you will see a dimensioned uh subdivision plan, if you will. Showing the subdivision on the second floor with all those dimensions for that space that would be for for rent. And that's essentially the the the majority of the change that that happened at the last meeting and the narrative was adjusted to reflect the 44 uh spaces that are proposed. Uh we did not designate uh tenant spaces as of yet. I know Tommy may want to speak to that a little bit once things get up and running to see where folks

felt comfortable whether behind the building or or set off to one side. The other item is snow snow storage. We did lose some of the temporary snow storage up front. Um given the estimated usage change from peak summer to winter, um they'll now be doing temporary pile and removal. Um what little storage we have will probably be um there there isn't much left of permanent snow storage, so they'll have to be trucked away. And we did bring uh due to the subdivision portion, we did bring a myar copy as well as the papers for you folks as well if we're uh granted final approval for your signature this evening.

That's it for change from the last meeting. Looking at your uh the site plan with the elevations and and knowing I drive by that lot pretty much every day. Uh I it looks like there's going to be a fairly significant on the reduction of the height of the property like especially on the south side of the south end of near this nearest the bridge. Right. We are flattening out that that hill up a little bit so that there's not a sight issue.

Yep. Here we go. There still remains a small elevated space here, but basically it's set back from property line back. Um, one question I have for staff on Bridget Winslow's letter says, "Given the development will require fire suppression, I recommend that a flow test be conducted to verify available pressure and flow conditions." Is that something that has been done or no to be done?

That will be done when they when they start building out for the sprinklers. They it's required to do a flow test of the hydrant and then from there they'll design the system to figure out whether or not they put need a fire pump on their property or not. That's after okay that's an after thing. An additional pump doesn't need to be on a site plan or Okay. I think that's all I had.

You did what you said you did, which is good. You know, we got the I mean, I don't know what else you can do to make that site any more palatable from a traffic perspective really. I mean, I think the exiting with two lanes is is thought was a good idea then. I think it's a better idea now. Um, certainly sight distance is not really a problem anymore than anything else along there. Uh, I would note that on page five of the something. I guess it's the traffic thing. You talk about uh route one and it really should be route 1A, but that's trivial. It was all 1A on all the other ones, but not that one. Um, and I would again point out to the city and the cons the traffic engineering consultant pointed out the issues that are happening all along that stretch of road and while this may not be a huge problem this particular site, it obviously makes it worse. I mean, it can't make it better, right? And the left turns in are, you know, are still going to be problematic. Um, and again, this is a thing that I think that the city, maybe with the developer, should keep an eye on once it's open and up and running and seeing what what goes on because, you know, traffic along Route One 1A, sorry, is increasing. This is increasing. It's not going to get any better. And at the same time, you can't fix it unless you do major major work through there, which I don't think is going to happen in my lifetime, which is pretty short actually. But Don't say that.

Anyway, thank you. Thank you. I think it's I think it's a pretty good response. Actually, I got a question for you on on page six. Oh. On the existing no build 2027, bill 2027. Yes. Why it got better? No. How does Oh, why does it go in existing 2025 goes from 327 and to no building 27 to 781? Is that uh I don't know why it's that much because the other ones don't. Yeah. Is that a

And I mean that and that's at North Street. I I don't know. I don't know. But some some of the some of the anomalies in terms of whether the level of service increases or decreases with the build. Uh I mean these are simulation runs and sometimes the simulation answer goes up and down and whatever. Uh it's a little bizarre, a little disconcerting sometimes when you add traffic to the intersection and the level of service goes gets better. Uh you know, I just just the way simulation works and the way models work and why you shouldn't put all that much faith in them sometimes. I mean, you is is that a misprint for the numbers or

I don't I don't believe so, Diane. I mean, that that comes right out of their their data. I know that. Um yeah, I don't know about that one. I can't explain it. I mean, it was just so extreme that I just figured it was a tight Yeah. I mean, it doubles it, which seems unlikely.

Yeah. Uh I the only other thing from traffic standpoint and this is more to the to the city. I mean once it gets built I think the city should be cognizant of the fact of you know if people start parking on the road u because there are it kind of goes in cycles because sometimes apparently some of the leaf peepers that come to Ellsworth must not have trees that change color in their hometown because they'll they'll stop and park on that bridge on both sides of the road. Yeah. To take pictures of the river. Uh, I I just, you know, from the city standpoint, something to think about. Maybe they'll park in the parking lot.

So, John, recently, the past couple years, you'll have noticed PD's been putting out signs, no parking, and they've been enforcing it. Yeah. Because, uh, we had a couple instances ourselves trying to get through there. So they they kind of improved upon

but kind of concerned too about you know motor homes you know if they don't think you know cuz you see everywhere along that stretch you know even my uh friends and family you'll see tractor trailers parked on the road you know when it's built maybe some old parking signs up there you know if it turns out to be a problem. One one question I do have. We had talked a little bit about I mean I see where you put the the uh RV parking in the back there. Is there was did you put any signage out that said like you know additional RV spaces in the back or anything like that? Uh not additional. Um there should be on the layout plan.

Is there something there? designation. Um, you see it there? Well, it Oh, yeah. No, no. But the question is, is it is there sign back here that says an RV to go back there? Um, we certainly can have signage or make it a condition that signage is there identifying that striped area as if it's not painted, it would be on a sign. If it's not painted right in the space, that'd be good. I mean, that's not something we can enforce really, but helpful. Yeah. I mean right by that that right turn in somewhere right as they get on your property have some type of oh directing around the back right

well as they pull in they're going to make that left in front or go to the back. So right there if I were driving the RV I wouldn't make the sharp turn to the left coming from the uh from the east. That's for sure. I'd be taking the the widest curve I could. Oh absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But the thing is they won't know that that's even a possibility. I wouldn't even turn in here if I had an RV if I were smart enough. So, um, Tom, do you have any idea as to where you're going to put your sprinkler connection on this building? Not back where the RV parking lot park is. No, I believe it's right by tenant 4. Okay. It's right by that stairwell right there. Okay.

Is where the We've got our riser room back there. Yeah. That's where the connection, the FTC connection is. All right, that sounds good. And thank Diane for all the computer ops, but you love it. Really appreciate that. Well, and you must see a lot of these stack up because I don't think they were able to count till after June 15th to get real seasonal count. So, the summer used to be a little easier for you guys and winter was busy. Now, it's maybe flipped around. [Applause] Okay. Um, one question on storm water. part of the property, if I remember correctly, ties into the city storm water system. Is that am I remembering that correctly?

I don't. It heads off in three directions. I know there is uh towards Bangor Road um an existing inlet that we are uh putting, you know, road protection on during construction and allowing that natural flow to continue. Was there was there a storm water line that comes off your property then ties into a line that goes under Route 1A

there? Yeah. On our grading plan, you'll see there's a the temporary inlet protection here for the basin and then on the utility plan uh where is it? We've got cross cover here. There's a gamble here. I can't read that. The reason I bring it up, I mean, it may be prudent seeing as the city now has a nice handy dandy vacuum truck that prior to that's being open that that storm water line is inspected and cleaned out.

Right. So, the the city line crosses over here. It originally ran down through here. We do have a new cover under the drive that allows it to uh continue. And you can see that basically the drainage way goes down and then allows it to cross. And then there's a little bit here that actually comes forward. The rest heads to the back. And then some over here heads that way. So I think it just be prudent to inspect that line. I promise that's it. Going that way. I'm going that way. Mike, I'm all set. Thank you, Mark. All set. Feel free to talk nerdy to me. I'm a storm water guy.

Okay. Um I'm amazed that you've got your uh post-development flow so much lower than your pre-development. Wait, hang on a sec. I don't think they're greatly they Yeah, they went Okay. Yeah, they went down. So, we're equal on SP1. went down on SP2. So, what kind of maintenance on this under drain filter is needed? You mean the gr the grass under drain? You got the grass under drain, then the roof, you mentioned roof drip line. Yeah. So, the roof drip line is basically a crush stone drip strip that'll go into the under drain system separate from the roof leader. Okay.

Yep. Um, I mean it has a filter fabric layer near the top. If I've had one at my house for 22 years now and no gutters, which is nice. So, hasn't had any issues yet despite um I'll just say something someone I know near and dear that I've been married to for 28 years with a lot of bark mulch near the drip strip. But if it were to plug, um, you'd notice it and basically peel it away and put down clean fabric and clean stone. Okay. So, the uh under drain rock trench filter is that just it just passes through then. There's no like collection outlet. It just passes through this filter,

right? It it basically Yep. It takes it away from surface runoff and basically gets it into a like a recharge. Yeah. Very cool. Cool. All right. Okay. Me again. Um, I asked you last time and honestly I don't remember what you said and I didn't write it down when I asked about um the parking spaces that are up to um the Bangor Road at and you have 10 foot landscape buffer. Is that such that they can't just like zip out onto I asked about um if you're going to have like concrete? I know you answered it. I just don't remember what you said. And I didn't I don't believe I shared this. David Woodward's quite happy with his landscape plan. It meets your standards. It's pretty heavily

vegetated. Vegetated. Um. Okay. So, it's visible and there are going to be tree barriers. Yep. And it's set back behind the property line so it's not uh if it's maintained and doesn't overgrow, it's not going to be a sight distance issue. Okie do. Um, and then on CP 101, you show that that little tiny storage room. We talked about that last time. And last time I guess when we talked to Mr. Tran he was saying that it might be management it might be storage but then when you look at AE2 the architectural plan it has nothing listed there for that little room. So my only question see that one shows storage.

We we label it as storage but on the architectural plan it doesn't say right. And so my it's double-edged sort of questioning that we we want to make sure that that room is not approved for any kind of commercial rental or any other purpose other than for storage or for incidental to the management. But if you label it storage, then it might not be reviewed correctly for just as like incidental. When the building plans are from a a use standpoint, it is not a residential space. So it doesn't and not commercial, not going to be rented out to anybody for any purpose or any reason. It's just incidental to the structure as it stands for management or storage.

What I think is Tommy may spend some time up in the storage room getting away from hub. I don't know. Yeah, we just you don't want to box yourself in too tight with just listing it as storage when you deliver your architectural plans. But for us, that's what you've noted it as. And so correct, just, you know, it's that's what it would be limited to. It would it would carry through. That's correct. Okay. It's a pretty small space. It is. It is tiny. Hey, New York, that would be like an apartment. So, you know, what do you want? Um, and then my threebedroom apartment.

Yeah, three-bedroom apartment. Then my other question was um I had asked about um the railroad being very close to your property and even though it wasn't listed as an ab butter because of the way the property is a right of way and it's there but did you have opportunity to protect yourselves and get a response from the railroad as to whether or not they had any other because your building's so close to it. Like I said, I I would hate to see you get in a situation where they were unhappy, where we're not crossing into the rightway. We've we've done that multiple times on on that. Uh

I'm not saying you are. What I'm saying is I've seen in other areas where the the setback distances for the for railroad is way different than it is for municipal building and sideyard setbacks and things like that. And I've seen it hurt applicants that weren't aware that they had that's why I asked you to go through it for your own benefit. We're not requiring it, but for your own benefit to stop you from having a problem. No, I appreciate that. Thank you. I mean, I would think that when you met with MDOT that I mean MDOT owns that that railroad, they control, right? And so if there was a concern from MDOT, I'm I'm sure

Yeah, I think that was the question last time. It was like who it's listed as main central but if if DOT is the one that owns and operates it then hopefully they would have advised you before you get started. So that was its current use is lower recreational. Yeah. They can change their minds though. They that's that's that's what happened in the situation I was aware of that the railroad was considered like a dead railroad bed and then they changed their minds. They decided to refurbish it and that's when everything became a real problem. So, I'm just trying to keep trouble from happening before it happens. But it's just a suggestion. Thank you. Otherwise, that's it. Thank you for the binder.

I said they better have sent out a binder this time or I'm not even coming through that door. They did. That's the serious stuff. Any issue, any anything from staff? Stop. I will open the public hearing. Fire happy. I just have a question. Come up to the My name is My name is Judy Blood. I'm a near neighbor. Um my question is what is the commercial space going to be? Oh, Tony. You're muted. He's muted.

Hello everyone. Um so the plan in terms of commercial space for us would be a luxurious nail salon uh and possibly right now um sort of a a a fast food sort of like I would say a bunme shop or uh it's similar to concept as um like a Subway uh where you know people basically select what type of bread and what type of meats they want. Um and you know that's right now the two retail um shop that we're thinking about. This is three uh four commercial units.

Right. Right. Uh but you know the other two uh we're going to um put it up for rent rental um to see what type of commercial tenant would be interested in. But we I I've you know uh went to Ellsworth and obviously I have family members that live there and whatnot and we just felt that the city of Ellsworth didn't have a very luxurious nail salon per se and um we want to bring that um sort of luxury that you know it not just for the tourists but really for the people of Ellsworth to be able to especially you know women u and sometimes males uh to come and just basically escape and enjoy themselves. and have a place that they can really sort of relax. Um, and that's one of the big um, you know, vision for this plaza and obviously also to hire a lot of the locals there as well to to uh, you know, increase employment and whatnot.

And just to clarify, Tom Tommy used the term fast food. It's actually a fast casual. No drive-through window and there's sit down. It's not a not not I guess a subway is probably a fast casual. Well, they don't have drive-thru. So, so no sit down. There is sit down. Yeah, sit down. No drive through. No drive-thru. And I just wanted the question. I didn't I didn't know what the first one. Sure.

So, my my other question is in regards to the observation platform um and the standalone observation platform. How tall is that? Is it used to sit down and eat your your um fast casual food or is it um to pay a fee and go look over the river?

Um so at first the vision for that was that uh my wife uh we went and toured the site and uh we just found that the area was very beautiful naturally uh but there wasn't like sort of a space for us to like take pictures and whatnot. So, we thought like perhaps by creating this deck um area so that people can um obviously take selfies or uh take pictures and we'll have signage up in terms of Ellsworth, welcome to Ellsworth, Nova Plaza, whatnot. in a way um that will help uh sort of create social content and media and then increase sort of a social awareness of the of the the city as well as the area because a lot of people know about Acadia Park and um Bar Harbor and whatnot going through it. But um you know in in me speaking to a lot of people they're they're not so familiar with Ellsworth but they know about Acadia Park and they know about Bar Harbor. So I just wanted to create an area uh where we uh the the the people that are passing by they can you know take pictures of it. We do have a place where uh people can eat uh right next to the plaza but mainly that area where the deck or the observation deck will be just for uh pictures and for Instagram and social media more so.

So it's a deck and not a tower. So an elevated platform. an elevated platform. Okay. Yeah. Elevated platform. Thank you. Yeah. You're welcome. I'll close the public hearing. Anything else from staff? Anything from the board? My mother motion. I think the job well done. Make a motion to approve the final plan of a major use site at Holland and a new or existing subdivision entitled Nova Plaza for applicant owner JC Cowboys Realy LLC. Second all in favor.

Thank you. Thank you Mr. DR. Thank you so much. Thank you. Sign another five minute break for some signatures. Another break and sign a site plan so they can get digging [Music]

for the gohead. Okay. Item number five, revision to an approved major use site development plan entitled Main Street LLC for applicant owner Dustin Lawrence. proposal is to revise a plan previously approved by the planner board to change out the previously approved buffer trees with boulders. The subject property is approximately 3.6 acre parcel located on Route 1A Bangor Road tax map 143 lots 2 and 4 in the urban zoning district. Is someone here representing the applicant owner? No.

Mr. Lawrence is not on Zoom. So that's that. So then I would say we table that uh if he wants to come on another board another meeting. I'll make a motion we table it. Second if you second tables second. All in favor of tableing it. Move it. That's what I like to say. Okay. Item number six, cannabis ordinance review. Who? Oh, that's we know who's problem this.

That's all me. I guess the the both of us have worked on it. So many here. You got the you got the I'm deputy over here. I'm just barely I stop. This is class. I got to reread this thing all over. So, what are we doing here? Like,

so yeah. Um, I was just letting letting duty go. Um, I gave all of you the most recent version of the ordinance. Uh, everything in red on that was added yesterday. Um,

keep going. Okay. Nothing to see here. Um but um there was some talk at the previous meeting you all were at or most of you were at about um limiting the area that it could be in that that we could allow these stores in. Um, also, uh, the idea of making the cannabis ordinance match up with the, uh, alcohol, the liquor ordinance on, uh, setbacks from places of worship. Um, we decided after some deliberation amongst ourselves that the easiest way to do that was to create a cannabis overlay zone uh, that restricted basically to the commercial district. and that um because it is in the commercial district that if it's if there happens to be a church within that setback that we would have otherwise that the church understands they're in the commercial district and that's part of being where they are. Um if we had um gone with a a place of worship setback uh and for instance hypothetically if somewhere in like in the in the main coast mall that would shut down about half of the commercial district with that setback uh to having a store in that that whole area. So that it it was one of those things we wrestled with back and forth. Um, we added a lot of other stuff um after the deliberations. Uh, I know one of the hot topics is going to be the um proposed $500,000 of of uh improvement or build or any of that sort of thing that that that we we're want we want to require of any applicant to get them into the lottery. Um, and then I don't know what you may have to say about the impact fees that I added yesterday.

I can I ask a question? Absolutely. Oh, good. Uh, somewhere there's a table of impact fees. Is that correct? There. I mean, not not in here, but in in in your fi file someplace, is there a list of what other impact fees we charge? So the only other impact fee that we charge is that also in the commercial district is it's for trip ends. It's is to pay off the myri, right? Okay. That's the only other one. That's the only other one that I'm aware of. Okay. Uh we do have like way we have a sewer fee that it's based on gallons. Yeah. Yeah. It's on usage, but that's about the Okay. So I have all that I have that stuff. Yeah.

I I personally have that stuff from the last time we talked. Yes. Okay. So I can I can explain if you want with the impact fee. I can explain how we derived the No, no, I I read it. I'm good. Okay. There was some changes last night um based on the council workshop to the impact fee section that they wanted us to make it not so um prescriptive what what the impact fees will be used for because there's regulation about what impact fees will be used for. So, just to kind of put it more generic in there, um, from an accounting, uh, you know, process, this is standpoint,

the impact fee section is still being reviewed by our legal counsel, by Scott, who was here at the at that meeting. Uh, he's hopefully going to have it back to me by the end of the week. But it gi given how how recently that was added, I haven't had it legally vetted yet. Bob, is there any um uh indication of what what I feel is a substantial impact fee? I mean, but I you know, I don't know really uh that other cities, towns, whatever. Uh how much will it re re um restrict or people's applying for these positions?

I did some research on that. The reason we we went with that um there isn't a lot of data for this for Maine for impact fees, but um not that we always wanted to follow Massachusetts, but Massachusetts does this a lot. Uhhuh. Um they typically have done a 3% of the gross income for the store for the year. Wow. This is based off 1% of the average for 2025 of what store what adult use stores will make statewide. Mhm. They're going to they're going to average about 2.2 million in gross sales for the year. Uh I round it down and put it at 20,000.

Pretty good. Um and is there any concern about the fact that we're comparing essentially rural semi-ural Maine versus Massachusetts? Uh there there is that there there is that um uh risk with that. Yeah. Uh we also get four million tourists every summer that come through that. So there and every single one of them I I'm sure some of them might go the Bayside road, but almost all of them go right down High Street where these stores are going to be located. Okay. Most of them went. So where Portland has a pretty high impact fee, right? I don't know if they have one for cannabis.

They uh they have a they have a high uh license fee. They don't have license because they they created an entire department to to regulate it. How much was that? I can't remember off the top of my head, but it's I think it's like $10,000 per store, something like that. That's what I remember.

That's just the license fee. I don't know what what else they have for impact fees or or anything. Well, Bob, I had sent you the samples from other states, and that was the thing I thought was very interesting was the the impact fees were huge. They were in the $20,000 range, and I tried to look at cities that were touristy in nature and of the similar size as Ellsworth. And I I pulled stats from different towns in New Jersey. Now, nobody wants to be in New Jersey. That's why I left. But but because of the amount of money that's being made and the fact that it does impact the city as far as you know traffic and police and fire and all these other things that that this is a pretty average impact fee. It's actually pretty low.

Would there be an impact fee if if let's say that the somebody wanted to redo completely the you know where Hanniffords is, would they be charged an impact fee? Yes. So like if if they were if they were going to go into the main coast mall for instance. Okay. Is that is that is that the question? Yeah. I mean what have we been charging other people other land uses impact fees other than what's in the triangle?

Oh they were coming in to use this use as No. Ju just the the well other than the sewer which is sort of an impact fee. It's a you know it's to tie into the public sewer. Uh the only impact fee that Ellsworth has is in this in the commercial district and it's affected. So we don't so we wouldn't charge anybody at this point and and again I think we probably should be but that's beside the point but at this point we wouldn't be charging anybody else other than what's in that triangle and a cannabis place an impact fee of any sort. Well well technically we'd be doubling up on the cannabis because they'd also have to pay the impact fee for being in the commercial district.

Okay. And it sounds to me like it's a syntax not syntax. Well, I think that the the thought from the council and others that you know we've talked to since that you know this this was voted on by the Oh god, I need you got you got to take your mic. Hear you. Sorry. You got it. Thank you. Um you know

she's going to repeat everything now. This was voted on by the by the residents. um we have to try to figure out a way to implement this ordinance or create an ordinance to implement and that um if we're going to allow these this use in our our city that we want um somebody that's has um a track record of operating one of these facilities and that also is going to make an investment into our community. um that it's it's different than just a tire store. Is it different? How different is it than global beverages or a bar?

Well, I mean, that's wasn't our charge, though. No, no, I didn't say it was your charge, but but I'm talking about equity and fairness in terms of developers and and whatever. You know, we get a we get a lot of from people who say that we're Okay, that's a technical term. I used to be an environment. You just have to be careful of our language. I used to be an environmental engineer. That's a technical term. In any event, where was I going with this? It's it's kind of like stay away from the technical terms.

Yeah. You know, you can the in the what appears to be to me the compared to other uh establishments, the inequity of this appears to me if I'm going to an extreme here, folks, but if somebody wanted to make a Supreme Court case out of this, they probably could. You know, are we dis discriminating against this vendor which at least in this state is a legal operation and saying, "Well, yeah, but you're not like the other operations because you're selling cannabis versus selling alcohol alcohol

or or tires or whatever else we want to say." you know, I mean, I got all kinds of remarks on the original, well, maybe not the original, but the the latest one

that we got for this meeting, and then all of a sudden, we get shoved a brand new thing with all kinds of updates on the the impact fee and and some of the stuff in in the one we just got last week, specifically Uh, article eight. Uh, yeah, article 8. This was never discussed, I don't believe, at any of the four meetings we've had, but that the applicant, whoever gets the application, gets the licenses, is going to have to invest a half a million dollars in their store. What other business that we try to attract to Ellsworth do we tell them they have to invest half a million dollars and actually list out specifically security system $50,000 to $100,000 HVAC and odor control 75 to 150 are we requiring the the transfer station to have $150,000 worth of odic control.

No, but I think uh and none of this was ever discussed in however however many meetings we had with the council. But doesn't it say that they have to either invest it or have the ability to invest? So that it doesn't say they have to. It just says they have to have the ability. Is that what that means? The way that's

Wouldn't that mean that they would have to have the 500,000 available? the ability to to to show a bank, you know, says they could borrow if needed to to renovate a property to make it up to code and to meet the criteria that they have the ability to do that. So, we don't give them a license and then it turns out they only have $20,000. They can only put paint on.

But that that same argument applies to almost any other land use as well. Mhm. It feels I think what we're all at least for myself and perhaps others it feels discriminatory because this happens to be cannabis versus alcohol versus shoes versus versus versus versus

I look at it differently in that um that to to me I mean I understand where you're coming from but in I'm looking at it that when you read a lot of our ordinances which we are going to be reviewing a lot of them need to be brought up to a different standard, a more clear standard, a lot more criteria. Um, just, you know, so that this is the new ordinance. This is what we're looking at. So, if we keep this suppressed to what our old ones are like, this is the way we our new ordinances should reflect this newer mindset so that we the city benefits and we make things that are to the higher standard. That's that's kind of how I look at this is the

I agree it should be to a higher standard and so forth and they should be up to date and I'm with you there. But in terms of you know the kind of money that you have to be ready to have available to you andor spend is not like the others even when they are brought up to date. We're not going to go through I mean we might go through and look at impact fees which I think would be a good idea. Y okay but there would be equity across the board. what is the real impact here and so forth, you know, and and I I think this personally goes above and beyond. I think it really does discriminate against certain land uses that just because we can, which is right. Do we have this for the medical marijuana ones? Is it

No, none of our ordinances have any of this stuff. No, it's the same. Well, there's the the impact fee in the one spot. The the the med the medical marijuana stuff is is has very little in it. It's in in chapter 56 and there's very little in there compared to what we're asking for for this. And what is the what we're asking for in terms of these numbers? What is our what what's the justification assuming we go ahead? What's the the justification for each one of these numbers? 3,000 for this, 5,000 for that. Where's the rationalization for that for the impact fee?

That that was to try to delineate um how the money could be used. That would we and I I think that was probably a little we were getting a little too granular on that. And to the point the council made last night, um they would like to see that be less so that we we would take that money and they would have have the defined uses, but there wouldn't be uh necessarily how you know a solid dollar figure on on how it was split out. So we I think you got the other end of my question.

Okay. My question was, how do we say that this aspect of things, whatever, is $3,000 versus another is $5,000 of impact versus another that's six and so on and so forth. Well, I think I think that's what I don't know if I'm misunderstanding. talking about the investment portion, the the things are laid out that say I'm talking about the impact fees and we say that on page five public safety and law enforcement is $9,000. Well, how do we know and public health and safety programs are $3,000

and etc etc. I don't want to belabor the point, but how do we establish those numbers in some empirical way to justify them? Well, the justification for the numbers came as Robert described bon 1% of the the average gross sales. That's how the total impact be and then I believe he just kind of broke them down based on some of those programs. But the what we haven't updated because we just did this last night at 7:00 that we haven't adjusted this that it's just going to be a $20,000 impact fee.

I I I didn't want to adjust this again after we showed the council last night and then give you a different version than what they saw. So I left it the same and those impact talking about just talk about the public safety and law enforcement seems that's my forte. I mean who came up with those six items? Th those are the most common commonly used things for impact fees for for this sort of thing for for cannabis. So So can I can can I ask a question?

Um so can you explain to me um this is um uh where's my where's where did this go here? Adult use cannabis store or facility. Is this just a location where they can go and buy this stuff and take it home? Correct. Okay, let me give it a minute. Is this also a location where they can manufacture, cultivate? Okay, stop right there.

All right. So the impact fees that you're that you're talking about here on the back on section in article 8 uh item BI have to do with cultivation, manufacture and and and processing. It has nothing to do with use

because when you start looking at odor control and when you start testing equipment and lab space that that's that's you're talking about a manufacturer and a cultivating facility, not just a store where you can go in and buy the stuff to use it. Um, the place up on the hill was actually a place where they literally manufactured THC's and actually extracted material to sell there. Um, I know that because I was in that place. They had specialized hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment to do that. Not only that in the if I'm not mistaken in the ordinance there is a place in the ordinance it talks about odor control for these facilities. So we have an odor control portion in the ordinance for manufacturing etc etc. A use doesn't require these specialized pieces of equip. Now they may want to have security. I understand that. Um and ADA compliance and whatever the fire department's going to require, but not specialized HVAC and lab equipment. I don't believe that's required. that talked to us did he he was a

sale only and mentioned that they do test their product that's coming in they have to so they will need some kind of can you just but it doesn't require a large lab to do that just says lab space doesn't say large lab but it the issue is they don't necessarily need they need a space to run their equipment driver's trying yeah so the the there's nine things on that list that doesn't mean that you you these are things that you can use that that go towards that 500,000 doesn't mean you have to have an you know the lab testing space or the HVAC that's just something that you could put in okay

um and I think most of your 500,000 on that list would you would be in sight prep and construction cost to build a new building you you could I I think you'd be hardressed to build much of a building for under 500,000 these days but but the point is that somebody might come in and say hey here's an existing building that's all set ready to go. I own it, but you're going to come in and build, you know, sell weed and you know that in that capital cost is going to be way lower than 500,000.

But I wanted to ask another question too. How much and without naming names of developers, we recently charged a new development some or were negotiating some impact fees. How much were they roughly? Uh the nearest thousand. Yeah. 20 in the 20s. So in the 20s when we I assume that we have paid or I'm sorry that we have charged other people in that area in that triangle development fees as well. What what's the range on those? Do you have any idea? Yeah. Depending on the size I I so of course so I got Beck with Hill. Yes. It all goes on how many new trips they

No no no I understand that. What what I'm asking is what's the magnitude of the of the fee? It depends on how many new trips I get. Yeah. No, but we have charged them to somebody. Yeah. So, I mean, we paid we just charged somebody 20,000. I don't I don't I don't believe this would come to the same uh scale that the the recent person that we charge or recent business that we charged would I don't think there'd be anywhere near that many trips compared. No, no, no, no, no. I'm just talking about the absolute We charge them a development fee. Correct.

20K. You want to charge these guys a development fee? 20K. All I'm saying is that in terms of development fees, that's, you know, it's in line with what we've charged other developers. That's my point. But these are different fees. I'm just looking at this is really just a a payto-play kind of thing. But but the $20,000 fee you're talking about went towards building Myrick Street and Route Three and Route One. But I'm asking Well, and these these development fees are used for other things presumably. Yeah. But but that are attributable to

there are allowable uses for impact fees in state statute, whether it be transportation, parks, public safety. There's a whole and that's where that list came from. And we just did research on what the other other um cannabis impact fees have been used for in other places and that's how we came up and how much they have been in other places. Yes. But we are pulling back from that list and having it be a flat fee that can be used for public safety, parks, schools, um uh drug enforcement, things like that. It's not going to be prescriptive to how much can be used for which item. No, no, no. I get that. I mean, I get that.

Okay. And I think the reason behind the impact fees the um minimum dollar we were moving base away from a merit-based system. Okay. And we were trying to bake into our application process per the um workshop merit. So that's where that those items come from. So if we have we have all I think agreed to three to start with three licenses for this type of um use. So instead of doing the merit-based doing the lottery system and having the application have criteria in it that people have to meet in order to get into the lottery. So because if we were doing it merit-based we probably would have a criteria of what's going to be your investment in in the facility and we would score them based on that. Well, we're not doing that. So, we have to have some sort of minimum to have people enter into the lottery. So, that's where that came from.

But I think we might be facing a sematic issue here, at least in my point of little head, and that is calling them impact fees. Some of the things that are on the list, um, numbers one through four. I'm I'm trying to find figure out how the the opening of a cannabis shop could impact these kinds of things. In other words, it's more like what you're talking about is uh a tax to benefit the community, not the impact of the business that you're establishing.

But that's what an impact fee is is a tax benefit. And that's these are list right from the or from the law of what impact fees can be used for regardless of what use is generating the impact fee. So you could have a Chick-fil-A come in and say we're going to charge them an impact fee and use it on any one of these things. It has it's has nothing to do with cannabis. It has to do with the legal um statute that lists out what impact fees can be used for. So if I come in and try to establish any kind of business uh some donation or whatever to uh youth prevention and education initiatives,

the municipality gets to decide what the impact fee is going to be used for. That that's my understanding that we get to decide what the impact fee is the what the highest and best use of the impact fee is going to be for. It still has to be related to the impact of the use. I mean, so for example, the statute. No. Well, in Bar Harbor, for example, when they started charging impact fees for, you know, how many people docked and so forth or whatever, you know, those fees were could only be used for parking and Well, I don't know. That might have been a different free structure that impacted. They That may be something they self-imposed. What's that?

That may be something they self-imposed. That could be. I thought I thought I thought I thought it was it came down like if you charge a fee for this that fee can only be used at once you collect it for those kinds of things. I'm I'm not familiar with their ordinance, unfortunately enough. Yeah, I'm only talking about the legal guidance that we've gotten about state impact state the state law regarding impact fees, but it has to be a demonstraable impact of of this thing.

Mhm. Now let me ask you in in that same section article 8 number eight evidence that there are no taxes fees assessments or utility bills due to the city by the applicant including all persons or entities that are owners officers members I don't know what a member would be managers or partners of the applicant. So basically, if somebody has a sewer or water lean and they're a manager, I'm not sure what a member would be, but they're a manager of this facility. Then I guess you can revoke their license.

If they're in a rears on their water bill for an employee, I I think that may be over. I Yeah, that that may be over. I' I'd say 14 on my list. Yes. Uh the I I would I would probably make that owners only. And we had in the not too distant past a city council member that constantly had tax lans. We can change that to owner. Just owner. Well, does an owner of Hannifford or does an owner of friends and family have the same penalty if they're in Well, what what I what I I think the intent of this is is that if the business itself it owes

I understand that the wording there wasn't perfect. That wasn't something that we reviewed. I like that it's owners and partners. Anybody who's financially culpable, I like that. But the manager is an employee and a member. What the heck is that? But again, isn't this like trying to bring this new ordinance up to a higher standard? It has nothing to do with what we do for Hannerford because that's pre-existing old stuff. We're trying to make it better. The the problem though is that you're initiating this whole thing, you know, on cannabis on cannabis and and it's a

at a minimum to me it's a bad optic. I mean, if you if this was just part of an overarching impact fee structure that we were doing citywide on any kind of development, you know, that's different. To your point, Rick, I I think that if we um if the city said we're going to review impact fees for all businesses and yada yada yada, and that includes the cannabis people, then that would make sense. But to have an impact fee for

and I've been with impact fees for years and the council know it's going to cost developers, businessmen too much money. They've never seized that opportunity to offset some of the costs that these developments have on schools on police on fire. I mean sewer is about the only one that gets money from a development.

Okay. So, if we were doing this on merit-based, because I think everyone can agree and I understand um I understand this thought that that this is discriminating against this use, but this use is different. Okay, it's not federally legal. We are trying to learn from other municipalities that have 50, 60, 70 of these stores that are with very little regulation and um performance standards and design standards that I think if could do it over again would do it over again to have more restrictive um design standards. So, we're trying to learn from that. And if we're not going to do performance uh merit-based, how would you suggest we have what would you have in an application to have the highest and best performers and best business um practices be brought into this use? How would you select that? Well, that's what I mean. Well, it's it's the same problem that is faced in any number of things, you know, how do you how do you choose which kids get into your college, you know, and you know, because it's merit-based or performance-based and it and it's a real problem to do that.

So, how are we picking the kid that gets into this college? Well, right, when we're not doing it merit-based because that does open us up to litigation where our lottery with really strict a strict application criteria does not. Right. That's that's the the council we've received. So I'm hearing you. So what's the solution? That's well how many what percentage have any rough idea of the the towns in Maine? Do it on merit versus just a straight lottery. Uh we were advised by our legal council that that the lottery was a much much more uh legally safe way to do it. Yeah. unsustainable

which is the important no I I didn't do any research after he after that was the the recommendation from legal I didn't go into any research on how how many towns do it may but I mean other things I mean not to get into all of it but in article nine it says this has to do with license expiration renewal u if a local license for a location lapses including it has to if they want to reapply has to seek and obtain planning board approval, site plan approval. But I don't find anything prior to that, right? That somebody applying for a license has to come to play.

You say it say what what number one planning board approval comes in about halfway through this. Article nine is which number on article article nine page six. Uh yeah, what number number three? Okay. And it's also in um article 10 paragraph two and but at the same paragraph at the same token there are places in there where they talk about um site plans being reviewed and approved but they don't say who reviews and approves site plans. I mean there's a lot of

stuff that's going on with this that needs to be fixed. Yeah, a lot of vague stuff and you know the problem is you know kind of assessing some of these other issues in that context as well. Well, it definitely can tighten up the consistency of things like that of like the site um approval, who's going to approve it um and make it consistent through all the articles. But I'm still getting back to Sure.

You know, the meat of this is the application process versus which allows you to enter into a lottery versus the merit which we've been advised to not proceed with merit-based. So we are putting merit criteria in the application and that is what you're you're seeing here and that merit criteria is to be able to enter the lottery. Is that correct? Yes. For three. So, selection. If if there's more than three that Right. If there's more than three. And I would highly anticipate more than three. Yeah. Do you Oh, yeah. Yeah.

They're just waiting for us to Yes. They're the little lighters and stuff just ready to go. Oh, yeah. So in article 4, it does does the state issue um um licenses for different activities concerning cannabis use? Yes. Yes. How do we know what they are? They're manufacturing statute. So if they don't have if if what will the state issue these folks? There's a because they have to go to the state for their license, recreational use and adult use.

So they just need to come with a use license, not a manufacturing. Correct. They come with a manufacturing license. That's the wrong type. Not allowed. They can't. Yeah, we don't have that. We're not allowing that. Right. And it's opt in. So we can do that. Right.

I would suggest not necessarily the conclusion but maybe we think about this in another vein which is the RFP process. You know the RFP says you can submit a proposal and these are the criteria it has to be and maybe for this this application your application has to say this that the other thing and so on and the selection criteria are done separately. Did you fulfill all the requirements of the out of of the RFP? And if you did, then you know we can now I'm making things up, but we can find a way to evaluate them based on your successful um your success at in terms of fulfilling the requirements of the RFP.

How is that not merit-based though? you're still applying a score and you're still applying like this group of people is going to read, you know, let's just say it's us. We're going to read those RFPs and yes, some of them are going to be checks, right? Like yes, no, you did it, you did it, you did it. But then there's subjectivity in there about, you know, financial um capacity. Like somebody might say they have financial capacity of 500 and some might say 5 million and we're going to, you know, pick one of them based on that. So it still has subjectivity that opens up us to risk and vulnerability. But however you package it, you still you're still doing you know what you're saying is that

you know what he's saying is give us an RFP and you know we'll evaluate it in some way. Yeah. And but but but the thing is that you know what and what you want to say is that you are kind of pre-qualifying these people. You're looking at a proposal that they're making. You're saying this looks okay. We'll put them in the lottery. Is that correct? You're saying we've established standards and this applicant, this applicant is committing that they're going to meet our standards before they can go in the water.

Okay. So my question really is or no well not really but one of my questions is what are what is the list of things that they have to be believe it's do because I was a little confused I say it's under cost component analysis and the fact that they have to invest at least $500,000 but but investing $500,000 maybe or have the ability to do it isn't much of uh guarantee for anything other than the fact the guy has a bunch of money.

So, well, it's it's all of article 8. It's it's that they have to get their conditional license from the state uh before they can even apply for this. So, they there are a lot of hurdles that they have to meet from the state side of and you need to by the way have a flowchart with all those hurdles. So, it's actually understandable. Just saying. But to the so they have to they have to go into the state pay for the license of state come back to us show that they have ability to to to come up with5 after they've paid the state for the license and if they don't come up with $500,000 they're out of the lottery. Is that

well presumably they would they would already be able to do the 500,000 before they even go to get the if I mean if if they read the ordinance they'd say well we can't do that. So there's no no point to even apply. Um I'm not saying that's the perfect answer to that question, but in the reality of the situation, 500,000 you have you you you need to be able to say, you know, there's a reason why you have to be able to come up with 500,000, right? And and the answer is yes or no. I mean, why does no other business that comes to Ellsworth have that requirement? I I know marijuana is different, but

because Yeah, that's because But you want to know something? I I'd be willing to bet that 99% of police officers would rather deal with somebody who's stoned than drunk. But that's not that's not what we're regulating here. That's not what we're looking at. That's not what we're trying to protect our community against. We're trying to protect our community against people coming in that don't have solid business plans, make solid investments into our community, that run a cannabis store and that just leave, that put up, you know, Bob's Cannabis Shack and then abandon it. That's what we're trying to avoid.

Back to the RFP process because I've participated in the valuation of RFPs for a fair amount of my time in the real world. Um we sat down with our own set of criteria you know that went and it for instance Bob's cannabis shop you know is is that enough you know or is does Bob's cannabis shop have to have or do we expect it to equal Joe's cannabis shop which is really a classy operation, you know, and Joe can say, "We do this, we do that, we we we we guard against uh illegal use and so on and so forth where Bob says, "Hey, anybody comes in, you know, help yourself. I'm being silly, but there are ways of looking through the RFP process at what a company, let's just say, offers or doesn't offer. Mhm.

And then making the decision by by some committee and saying that okay, this committee is looking for these kinds of things and this business offers it, these businesses don't. And the one that offers it wins. The one that doesn't loses. And do the state regulations cover the stores operations? how how it's set up. Yeah. Yeah. They they require security and all that stuff too. Um hours of operation, that sort of thing. And and the state does inspections and they must be coming in look for correct

something specific. Yep. And and so the the the state the city's also required to do an annual inspection. What's that? The city is also required to do an annual for like the the dispensaries. I mean, it kind of seems like draw on what the state requires to set up the city requirements. It doesn't seem like you have to reinvent the wheel. And I I know we're going to disagree, Sarah, but I I think the council is going way overboard in how and their prerogative. It's their prerogative.

You know what, John? I don't agree or disagree. This isn't I don't this isn't my fight. I'm simply the voice for what the council has been saying and that's it. like and what the conversation has been and I so I mean if it were up to me I wouldn't have any but that's that's not what was voted on. So I mean but I I almost think that that's their goal. I mean I think with what they've come up with in the first draft and now the second draft they want to put up so many roadblocks that I think their goal is to have high quality

businesses running this operation. I think and to your point about the RFP, we do RFPs every day for you know consulting services and um different equipments and things like that and I totally understand that you can set them up to evaluate them and have them you know with a committee and all that but this is what our legal council is advising us to do is to not do this. The all of the businesses that we heard in the workshop said do not do merit-based because you set yourself up. But that's that's all I'm just repeating.

But the merit list was pretty stupid. But that's beside the plan. My question is it's 8:00 and I'm going to sundown soon. So what exactly do you want out of us this evening or what are our options? It's the tonight it was was to give a recommendation to the council on what to do in a couple of weeks when they when they go to uh vote on it to pass it or not. Okay. So, is that going to happen? Are we going to vote on that?

I'm sorry. Excuse me. I'm sorry. I I apologize. Good. Good evening. My name is Zach Branwine. I I uh you all were having a good discussion and I didn't want to interrupt. Um I I'd like to offer just a brief public comment on the ordinance review and and uh if that's all right with the board and I can explain who I am and what I'm doing. It's scheduled for a public hearing, so I'll open it to a public hearing.

Okay. Thank you. I I I very much appreciate it. And um as I said, my name is Zach Branwine. I represent Cure Leaf. As you may know, Cure Leaf has a store, the corner high um and has been a medical uh cannabis retail operation in the city for over 10 years now. And um uh what I wanted to comment on was uh an issue that I think I I heard um the deputy city manager raise uh briefly which is um we've submitted a proposal to Scott Lever the council who's advising the city in this matter um about an addition to the ordinance that we think might be wise. So, um I've heard it mentioned that, you know, the goal here is to limit the number of cannabis retail operations and locations in the city. Um you know, the three adult use licenses that you would authorize under this under this ordinance, it would result in five retail locations, the two existing medical retail locations and the three additional adult use locations. And so the the language that we have proposed to Scott Lever and we proposed to the planning board and the um city council is to allow the medical operators in town who've been in town for quite a a while and are well established and have relationships with the city to convert or to apply for a convert their medical licenses to the adult use retail licenses or to apply for an adult use license at the locations uh adjacent to uh where their medical retail operations ions are. And so that's the language we wanted to propose. Um that's with Scott Lever. I'm happy to answer any questions. I'm sure we will be back before you talking about this language that we would um advocate to be included in the ordinance allowing the existing medical retail operations to convert to adult use. And I really appreciate your time today. I I didn't mean to interrupt. I just wanted to you were all headed to a a conclusion there and I just wanted to offer public comment very

briefly. So thank you. Thank you. Close the hearing. Don't close the hearing. Oh, don't close the hearing. Okay.

I'm Raymond Williams, 56 Hancock Street, Ellsworth, Maine. I don't think you are in any position tonight is my first thing I'm going to say to make a decision on this proposal because this is nowhere's near a final proposal. And what you should be when you make a recommendation one way or the other you should have the whole final proposal before you you have this gentleman said a proposal that he is working with a city attorney and the city attorney he mentioned I haven't heard that guy's name but have you with Reverend Winch also okay we're working

it's all right so so you know ready you're in no position tonight to make a recommendation That's my opinion and whatever you want to do you can do. But I basically I because at times earlier meetings this spring and summer I wasn't able to come and I should have come but I watched them and there were some items that never got reached for discussion in these proposals and the first one section is oh not section four prohibitive act section and six licensing authorities. And that is a section that I think is very important because reading it, it sort of implies that the P that the city agency and person issuing the licenses doing the processing but also issuing the final license will be the city clerk and not the city council. I feel very strongly that the city council should be the ultimate licensing authority. I know there are people in city government that want to get the city council out of doing licensing just from remarks that I have heard and it's not it's not code enforcement and it's not planning and I don't really think that it's any city council members but I there are people that have that view and I think that this whole article six has got to be revised to make it clear that the licensing authority and the person granting the license is the city council. Also, could could I ask you in the draft that you have received, the latest draft that you've received, how

many pages of definitions do you have? I think one page one and a half uh one and a half to one and a half. So, you have one on you have Okay. Because when I when I got a copy, I didn't have the second page, and I wondered what was missing. Well, we didn't have the the two drafts are different. They've added other definitions to the second draft that we just got tonight, too, Raymond.

Okay. But did you have a draft that there were some second page of definitions were missing earlier? I mean, the first draft just had not even a page of definitions. Half a page. The the second draft. Yeah. I'm not sure what happened. There was a printer error. He got the same thing you did, but the the the definitions I don't know why they they were missing. Yeah. There's twice as many definitions now as there were. And in and in an original draft that came out before your workshop in July, it it had both of them. But the what came out and I got last. We didn't have the second page. It somehow got deleted. It stopped at C.

Yeah, I'm not sure where that came where a definition in there of local licensing authority. I think that definition should be changed from. It says this shall mean the city clerk or the city council. I think it should just mean the local licensing authority is the city council and that the city council ultimately grants after you go through the uh the lottery procedure that and whoever comes out of that that the city council grants the license after there's also been a public hearing on each of those proposed licenses too. the the original draft if you will look at it of article six on licensing authority sort of talks about uh and I and I know what I think was that the procedure for doing the lottery would be run by the city clerk which that which that probably is fine but it wasn't clear who was granting the licenses and it looked to me that the licenses ultimately would be granted by the city clerk because then there It g it had an option for a public hearing in here, but I went through it and I couldn't exactly figure it out what they were talking about. Says that the public a public hearing on an application for an adult use cannabis door license shall be scheduled

after a local license has been awarded. I think Robert pointed out to me that was probably after the lottery was over, but it wasn't clear to me what was going on there. It sounded that one reading of that could be taken that the city clerk could decide to have a local license but wasn't necessarily required to have one and a hearing and I think a hearing is necessary. Also the uh this article six has to be drafted so that uh it's clear that city council is licensing authority and I won't get any further into that but that article six is one of the things that I noticed that the various hearings and workshops in the past no one has ever gotten to discuss what article 6 says and I think it's important also So, a second thing which I just more or less come up today looking at things and then listening to uh the some of the comments that have been made tonight by members of the planning board. Uh uh and it's mentioned in here uh is it now? Oh, site plan approval and the like is the way the overlay that is is in here. And that's the thing that one of the things that I think that really gets it to you because the overlay is an amendment to the zoning map. And in the zoning ordinance in your chapter 56, is there things in there that would require your approval of site plan for any of these objects? Is this a is this a major use or a minor use or whatever kind of uses you have that is there anything in there that would require

planning board approval of site plans? I don't believe so. Staff determines if it's a major or minor use and then a major use would automatically go to planning board. Okay. So yeah, so a minor use goes through the code office.

There are triggers for that. I think maybe that this these marijuana proposals, especially with the amount of money if certain people want to have spent on them, I think they should be subject to major use approval, site plan approval by the planning board. and that whatever needs to be amended whether it's in this cannabis ordinance or whether it's an amendment to chapter 56 that that has got to be even if even if it's a minor use that you could still ask for pl for it to go through plan correct I I could due to uh some certain circumstances that I deem appropriate I could still send those to planning board so you probably you could probably make that happen

correct without a major change anything. But the thing is, you would have to have some performance standards for us to to rule on on that application. I mean, and there's no performance standards for a recreational marijuana store. So, I mean I think if you if you Yes, you you could send it to to the planning board, but it's like okay, do you then

you know, you deal with storm water, you deal with traffic on a building that's already built and somebody's using just, you know, let's say Dais is going to put in, you know, that commercial space. Uh let's say they go in the air. I mean, you know, if a bookstore went in there, it wouldn't come to planer board. I mean, but if recreational marijuana, you said, "Okay, it's got to come to planer board. There's got to be some rules and regulations, some performance standards that we

Well, the only standard. The only plan thing the planning board could act on is the things that the planning board normally acts on like things like setbacks and whatever whatever you know circulation and traffic and like that but there's nothing that's particular peculiar to or specific to marijuana usage building whatever. So it it would go it would just be the the usage of the site as a general business, not because it's pretty much I mean as it stands now unless in this ordinance you put in more things that you could objectively review

and I'm suggesting that maybe you want to consider that either in and that some of these things could be the items that are in article 8 now and which could be utilized for that to develop to have for site plan consideration and for uses. Yeah, there there could be there could be in this ordinance and you this new guy a bunch of lists. I mean for example a silly one I thought but who knows about opaque windows. Okay. So I mean that's a measurable thing. Are the windows opaque or not? You know and and the planning board could have that in their list of things that they look at. Yeah. for this particular use.

And wouldn't in most cases if somebody had a bookstore before and they're going to turn it into a adult use facility that would generate a lot more foot traffic and vehicle traffic and so the bookstore may have only had six parking spaces allotted for it in that use. So that would be a higher use and that would click off for you the ability to make it a major. Correct. it that it would be up to my determination of what what would require a higher level of review. Can we finish his public comment so we can kind of think about next steps? Y. Okay. I'm I'm about I'm I think I'm about done. The other thing I'm not going to comment on on your what are those stand things called? User fees or

impact fees. Impact fees. I I whatever you want to do on that you can. Uh, I I think I won't I said I was going to comment, but I and I've had this discussion with with Robert too that I'm getting to now. I think the license fees for this and I know that the license fee for down on Main Street is a,000. What's Curly's license fee? $1,000.

$1,000. I think basically the way this is set up which I think to have go have the lottery first and then issue out of licenses to whoever comes out of the lottery and gets drawn out of the lottery. I think you've got should have a two-tier fee. You should have a basic fee to enter the lottery which uh and I have talked to Robin and I talked about some high ones but now I'm thinking maybe fee to enter the lottery should be probably at the thousand $1,000 fee would be fair because there isn't well because to even get into the lottery someone's going to have to do a heck of a lot of work but $1,000 fee but ultimately once the lottery is held and the And I'm not sure you really want to consider, you know, one, two, or three. I think three is the max, but I think maybe if you just want to sort of one or two because you're still going to have the two the two uh medical medical ones anyway. Those aren't going away. And they shouldn't and and people who run them, they shouldn't go away. It's you know, they're here. I'm not completely sure that what uh uh Mr. what this gentleman wants to do is what should be done because in particular as to the one on Main Street, Main Street isn't in the area that uh

correct is hope is hopefully is it hopefully Main Street is not going to be zoned for these things. I I agree with what proposal is completely. Uh uh the Shaw the Shaw Mall area and then the commercial changes only. It's still grandfathered in. Yes. No. Yeah. So existing non-conforming use. Okay. But but and then I think there should be for the uh when the ultimate license is issued

because it's going to require you know a public hearing and whatever that there should be an additional fee from those people but and substantially more than another $1,000 fee or just $1,000 fee. Uh, and I think then I don't know whether that's in your guy's Bailey wick or whether it's in the council's Bailey wick, but uh, no one knows both of one. Well, that's the thing here. So, I basically think that uh, uh, let me see. I don't think there there's probably other things that I should just basically as I said earlier in some of the earlier Raymond I don't think these issues have been covered the way they should have been and I think

you're not in a position to make a dec well you can you can do whatever you want and uh I don't think you're in a position to make a decision tonight. I don't think the city council is in a position to make a position and I don't think they're going to be in September at the council meeting which is only 12 days away from now. Thank you. Thank you, Zach. I'll give you one minute and I'm closing out the public hearing. He doesn't want further appreciate the board's time this evening. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Close the public hearing. There you go. Thank you. So it doesn't feel as though we I'm sorry I'm not we collectively sorry that um okay if you don't want to play with us I do but I I don't have a name plate up there um down there

that there's it doesn't feel like we're heading in the direction that there would be a recommendation from the planning board this evening to go to council on Okay. So what does that mean then? So, how do we what do we need to do to get there? Um, because it's difficult when staff is hearing direction from city council and then direction from planning board that's different and we're trying to marry that together. It's difficult for us to I mean, and we only get so far in a workshop, a jo a a joint session. Um, so a couple we could have you all we could email I believe this is okay, but correct me if I'm wrong. We could give you the most recent draft. You could mark it up, give comments. Rick, you gave comments. Correct.

I did. I I value these I value this greatly. I'm going to take it home and read it. We could compile that, take it back to council, um, review it with council, uh, and come back with another draft and kind of, I guess, find out what the non-negotiables are for council that they're not that they really are not they they want to move forward with so that you all know that, too. Um, and then bring it back in October. And the bottom line is that though one possible outcome as a bottom line is that we say oh 51 we reject this

and you said that council and council can do with it whatever the hell they want. the I mean we don't have to agree necessarily

but I think the intent spirit of how this whole process is gone is that and I even think at the workshop last night um there was understanding that there were some changes that were made at the 11th hour. So there might be some discomfort in um making a recommendation to council based on those changes. So I think it's anticipated that they're not going to be voting on this in September. So what I would like to do is compile your information, take it to the September meeting to discuss it and get feedback from them on your concerns and then come back in October with a new draft. Sarah, I have a question. Yeah.

What is the impact um of not having this ready? Because I know everybody was gearing up for that September because that's when we were supposed to have it ready. What what does it do to the process to the overall timeline or just for the next meeting? I mean, just I mean, I know they were aiming for it, but legally, is there like a reason we had to have this done in September? No, it's just it was it was to keep the timelines keep the timeline moving on all this. So, a September approval basically lets us use January 1st as a timeline for the uh submitt. Okay.

For you because you um where where the office of cannabis policy requires or they can take up to 90 days to give that conditional license. We need to get at least give that long if not a little longer so people can get their submissions to OCP. Okay. Um but there's nothing required since it was it was voted in November. There's nothing that requires ordinance and therefore they can do whatever they want. Right. September we shot forward six months ago. Okay. All right. So if we miss it by a month, but the other thing that's occurring in the backdrop, and I don't know what impact this has, is there's an election in November, and you're going to have three different council members as of the first week of

hopefully we'll have it voted on by done by October. I I I'm just saying if you if you put it off at all and then you then you have three. Is that a reasonable approach though that you all can send Robert your comments, we will compile the themes and take those themes to council, get feedback from council and incorporate them into another draft and bring that in October. Sure. So great. We're we're submitting those comments individually. I think we have to. No, I'm just and um please don't copy each other on it and all that because that creates creates an issue. So just please send to Robert individually. No, can we and copy me?

Yes, too. The reddraft gets to us not the night of the meeting. I wish it had as well. We tried. Yeah, because I have like 30 notes that I'm like, what is this? What is that? And and it would take an hour to do just that. So I like that idea. Oh yes. So yes, and we will respect that request. Um apologize for the timing of this one with the workshop. Is now let me just ask then is this one we got tonight. Is that the one that you really want us to comment on? No. Or is there something else out there? No. I I haven't made any edits to this since yesterday.

One that has the impact fee in it. I mean I guess we probably need to update the impact fee because it's not going to be structured like that. So, we will give you an updated one because we also have the lawyer. I mean, I I really enjoyed spending four or five hours today doing it. Yeah. And I'm sure you enjoyed it or you can get it to us. Yes, we can email it to everybody. Um, word or but we don't we don't email to each other.

So, the wrap is up. I make a motion. We table the cannabis review ordinance, the council recommendation and people once we get the final draft and or submit comments to Rob and then we'll meet again. Britney wants to be CC has go through me. No, we're going to send you a new draft. We are going to send you a new draft. We are going to send a fresh clean draft. We need your comments though by close of business on the 10th. That means we're making the comments on what we got tonight. A new draft that we will send you Monday.

We will send you out an email. We'll send you out an email on Monday with the fresh draft for you to review. Please reply to me and Robert or send us a new email with your comments. We can we can apply CC BCC to everyone and we and but I will just say the new draft isn't going to be much different this than this one. So you can go ahead and start commenting on this one for some of your things about like the U manager. It's just the the impact fees. That's the only section that's going to change. Yeah, the the only significant changes potentially will be the impact fee section. That's it. So I would start commenting or developing your comments, but we will send you an updated one.

I lost the council mess again. So, but you're getting that before the That's the point. I I I will I will I I'll I'll put my foot down and there will be no more significant changes other than whatever the lawyer. So, you made a motion to table it and we'll do what they said and and I'll second that. I'll I'll snap comments and make them quick. No, no, we we'll table those for next month, too. Yeah, those are tabled too. Okay. I need a good motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor. All right, Britney.