Planning Board - Regular Meeting

I stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

We'll start with roll call of members present. Gerard O'Connell, Chair. Travis Tucker, Vice Chair. Russell Blanchett, Member.

Diane Plansky, Selecting Director.

Jesse Ngo, Member.

Letha Riley, Member.

Okay, and we also have Jamin Carr from NRPC and Joan McKibbin, our planning board administrator. I just got the notification. I think this meeting was started on the ZBA meeting instead of the planning board meeting on the live stream.

As if it was.

Yeah, as if it was yesterday's live stream.

Yeah, well.

We'll fix it in post. Yeah.

OK. So next, we don't have any alternates to appoint. So next up is public input on non-agenda items. Does anyone have any items to comment on that are not on our agenda? OK, we have someone. Please come up and state your name and address.

George Levash, 13 Pearson Street. I'll try to be quick here. I have a question about the septic reserve area. On every subdivision on the plan in order for acceptance, there has to be a 4,000 square foot septic reserve area. What is the definition of the, what is the septic reserve area? Are there any restrictions on it?

Doesn't DES handle all of that? I'm assuming it has to do with what the state considers valid. I'm assuming it's just that they can prove there's a contiguous area of the lot that can support.

So that's why I'm here. Because it should be very clear what it is. we all as a town us planning board members should all know exactly what it is because it has to be it's part of the requirements and then if the other restrictions on it or what not so I did some research so I brought this to the board in April of 2024, because I thought it should be spelt out in the ordinances. I'm just doing this again. It's a slightly different board, and I'm going to give you some language that the state has and that another town has. And if you want, I can share with my screen. So I'll hand these out to you. Okay.

Thank you, George.

Thank you. so the town of kenny thank you put it to the voters the planning board did um in 2022 and that's the first piece of information that i have there so um can i share this um can i steal you yeah no no no no you're recording oh yeah just so those are we're watching at home all thousands of them Or those that can't find it because it's under the ZBA. Oops, hold on here. Okay, and I'll go full screen. All right, so this is just a little Google Doc.

Can I stop you for just a minute? Are you presenting this because you feel that in our site regs it's not spelled out?

It is not spelled out.

So the next question I would have is in our site regs, does it refer to the state?

It does not.

Specifications.

I don't have the exact language yet in front of me, but I believe it just references the requirement that your subdivision plan has to show the 4,000 square foot septic reserve area.

So it says that you must have one of these but what is one of those and what characteristics make up that so. My contention and it has been in the past is that can't build a structure on top of the septic reserve area and so if you look at the kessington's definition right the septic reserve area is defined as that portion of a lot containing a land area of 4 000 square feet as required by state regulation for leach system sizing reserved exclusively for the location and operation of a septic system in the duplicate area for replacement Okay, so that 4,000 square feet can only be used for a septic system or a replacement septic system. There's a whole bunch of verbiage in the state stuff here. I took that whole 105 section on subdivisions and lot loading, but the important stuff I've put in bold and it says at least 4,000 square feet of contiguous area excluding the footprint of the buildings to be served by the ISDS, which is that's an individual septic system. Okay, so. The reason why I'm bringing this up is. I was arguing that plans for a subdivision of the past had their 4,000 square foot septic reserve area exactly where the House and. drivers were going and I said that that was right and I was overruled you know which is fine I guess I had done some research at that time and mentioned EPA rule regulations and because we didn't have a definition I didn't really have a leg to stand on really think we need a definition so not only can we enforce the rules but the builders and the designers know what the rules are I think you know which you guys should discuss this I know you have working sessions you probably have one tonight I think for something else but I think it should be part of our language where we have the definition of what a septic reserve area is when I was doing research to look at this open space development that happened in the past i went and looked at the plans for every other open space development and the septic reserve area was always separate and away from the building envelope and that was on every single plan i saw so maybe at one point there was the planning board at the time knew what it meant and passed on the information to the developers and now we've lost what it really means and I think it's important that we keep this if you know we have this in our ordinance for a reason it seemed pretty um specific to me you know reserved septic area so that means it's reserved just for septic um but we're starting to play language games and I think we should have strong language.

George, are you saying that we've had subcontractors or contractors build homes on leach fields?

Not on leach fields. The leach field is meant to go inside of the septic reserve area or you could even say that the septic reserve areas was to be a separate 4,000 could be all right. If you know in the Kensington case they say it contains the leach field in room for one more. And the state says you need 4,000 reserve just for leach field purposes. So you know I could show you that I don't need to show you the plan, but you know I could show you the plan where the septic reserve area is right, you know right with houses are. And that's already been gone through and passed so you know it's water over the bridge to say you can't tear down the houses, but I just want to make sure that going forward that we have the right language in place. because or if we if we don't have the right language at least the board has an understanding of what the septic reserve area is in terms of what the state so this and I will say that the state just I call the state inspector yesterday they just changed this language in March I believe so this is new language to the state and it does make it clear though you know what change. I'm not sure exactly what changed. OK so you know the key thing I I'm trying to get across there is that the 4,000 square feet should not be built on right and so in order to have a viable lot you need to have your building envelope and you're part of your building envelope needs to have 4,000 square feet that's available for this.

Yeah, I think one thing about the plans is that they're all conceptual, like a house could go here. So one thing, one possible way of wording it would be demonstrating that there's a contiguous area with the proper slopes that could, when you subtract the area of a driveway and a house, would could and account for the setbacks because there's a 25 foot setback think from the foundation drains and stuff like that right and this is a codicil to this but the currently when you do your open space development you have your yield plan

It would might be nice to make a requirement for the yield plan to show the 4,000 square foot. Septic reserve area in the building envelope on every single lot. That when you would know that the fictitious lots in the build plan can also couldn't possibly be built. A lot of times you might see you know very narrow. building envelopes on these things and there's no way they could put a 4,000 square foot septic reserve area you know so if you made that a requirement on the yield plan then you would get a true representative representation of houses that could be built rather than you know somebody just marking up one acre lots

Yeah, at that point, we have to figure out how much burden there has to be on that, because to do that, they would definitely need to have test pits for the area. Do we require them to have test pits for sections? Yeah, so that would be an expense.

I think they have to do the test pits already.

They do it for the proposed lots, I believe. So the question is, do we require them to put, to have test pits in sections where they are not planning on building, but are counting it towards the yield plan?

Because... But, I actually, okay, I don't think they actually had to go and do test pits everywhere where they had their, but you can see wetlands, and you can see sizes and shapes, and... you can easily tell whether a 4,000 square foot box can fit on the lots. Just a subdivision that I looked at in question.

Yeah, and for what you would want, we'd have to probably set like slope limits and stuff like that because like there was one lot that on the subdivision that prompted you to do this where it was definitely a very sloped lot where it was a very narrow area they would have had to have fit a leach field.

So what I'm trying to to prevent is people taking a large area that may have wetlands are questionable. So we have very little land left in town right and all the good lands gone and the land that they're going to be build on is going to be worse and worse right if it's over 20 acres they have to put in an open space development they're going to do the yield plan. are they going to do a yield plan where you could have actually put in say 15 houses or are they bending the rules and they really couldn't put in 15 but their yield plan you know shows 15. it we should only allow them to put in the number of houses that the land could have actually supported on the one acre minimum right and I think that's the standard we should hold them to and you could not put a house there if you don't have the 4,000 square foot septic reserve area. So it would not be a valid buildable lot without that. So it has to be in your qualifications. Do you know what I'm saying? Every lot on the yield plan should possibly, should be a true lot that you could put a house on. And I can come back and talk about that later I don't need to you know take up too much time here, but I really think we need to strengthen our ordinance so that there is a definition in there and I think in the future when you guys are looking at either subdivision plans or you plans you should take into account what the state is now saying what the 4,000 square foot is and I think that is a equal to my opinion of what the septic reserve areas.

definitely something to bring up in our next workshop that more generalized or or add this to the yeah that's like a i personally i i would like a thorough vetting of the impact of of all that what seems like a simple request and i'm not doubting that probably makes total sense it has a lot of ramifications sort of downstream and i want to know what all of those are whether they be cost, whether they be, I mean, just all of it. The risk return of continuing as we've been versus this. I want to understand all of the facets of it.

I could see a problem with the smaller lots on the open space where if they're putting the house on the 4,000 square foot reserve area, those lots are smaller to start with. Uh-huh. If the leach field fails, then what? Do you have enough room to put it in place?

You need to do it in place, potentially.

Well, if the soil is taken, it needs to be in place.

One could argue that we already have this ordinance and we are not enforcing it. So our ordinance says that every subdivision plan requires requires a 4,000 square foot septic reserve area. Now, if you decide that septic reserve area means reserved septic area, you already have that you need to enforce it. So it's not a change. It's just that you haven't been enforcing it correctly. That that's my stand.

Yeah, if you don't mind, I'd like to look into a little bit more on my off time. Thank you, George, for bringing that to our attention.

Thank you. Okay, so definitely something to discuss our next workshop. And maybe we can put that on the agenda for the next workshop. So does anyone else have any comment on non agenda items? Seeing none, we'll move on to item one on our agenda, Rick Charbonneau to discuss inspections on projects.

Rick Charbonneau, 401 Charles Bancroft Highway. I come to the board tonight not to talk about anybody in particular, any development or anything. um but the point out but let me let me start so i've lived in town for 48 years and i was here before that my wife's lived in town since nine since she was born in 1954 so i'm the agent for you but uh and my mother-in-law and you know what their family has and you know i i was on the planning board i was a road agent i've done things and built a lot of things and developed a lot of the town um Back in the early days when we had Roland Bergeron and stuff, we had really good inspections. I think everything got done, everything got looked at, and things got done according to the plans. Unfortunately, that's not happening anymore. You guys come in, you do a great job. As a developer, you ask me to put sidewalks in, you ask me to put plants on the plan, certain things, so many parking spaces. When I walk out that door, nobody ever looks at that again. Nobody goes and counts the trees to make sure we put the trees in. No one makes sure that we have enough parking space. Nobody, other than the building that's getting built, they're inspecting the building. We have projects. In town that when you approve the plan had sidewalks on the sidewalks on bill you have plans that you approve the head retention areas retention areas on bill you have this just go on and on somebody will come in with a site plan and they'll show you a site plan then they do what they want. We haven't had you know We really haven't had a building inspector that's been a code enforcement officer that would do it. And we've been through building inspectors like crazy. I mean, it's been a problem. So I'm not beating up on anybody. It's a problem. For whatever reason, they're not staying. So I guess I'm trying to come to the board to say, you guys, I don't know how you do it, But in any other city or town, the planning board has somebody that signs off on an occupancy permit. Someone that goes out and counts the trees. Someone that goes out and makes sure there's blades of grass growing. The sidewalk is in before you get an occupancy permit. Or use the property, if you're an expansion, that you did all those things. But right now, it's not getting done. And I'm not, it's just not getting done. We have drainage pipes that the head walls are in, the pipe's in, nobody ever finished a job. I mean, just on and on. And I'm not talking about anybody. It's throughout the town. I don't think it's on any of my projects. I'm pretty fussy about things. But again, nobody's inspecting me. We need to inspect me. You need to inspect everybody. You asked me when we came with Colby Farm to add trees. I'm going to add the trees. I'm going to put more trees in on the plant. But I'm telling you, no one's ever gonna go see what the trees are, count them. Unless you guys come up with a way to do that. And I know you're all volunteers, and I understand that. But somehow we need to come up with an inspection. And we need to make sure that the people whatever, if I give you a traffic study, somehow that somebody has to go out there and make sure that it's right. If you approve so many cars to be on a lot, someone needs to go check that to make sure. Now, if the parking lot's paved, you can go and count the spots and that's fine.

You're putting limits.

You guys are doing a job and everybody's getting something done and we want those things to happen. You're doing it within the regulations, but that's the end of it. Nothing happens from there. Just the way it is. So, and then, you know, I've asked the questions and everybody's, well, that's zoning. Okay. But there's no zoning administrator. The zoning board doesn't do it. So, I like this town as much as everybody, and it bothers me when people aren't doing what they say they're going to do. It just bothers me really bad. I don't get it, but that's what's happening.

So is what you're asking for is a mechanism by which we do that here and not so much the who, but for discussion at some point that we put it in the hands of someone that, whether it be this board, whether it be a planning administrator, whatever. You're asking for the mechanism by which we do that, get that done.

Yeah.

because I don't care what town is you can go to any town anywhere city town anywhere. There's somebody from the planning board signing off on an occupancy permit for whatever it is.

It's a fair point. I mean what when I was filling in in Hudson and that's the reality the site plan comes in before they get the CEO and the inspector looks at the building that I or someone else in the planning staff go out there and trees and look at the sidewalk and count the parking spaces. That's not an enforcement action. That's totally separate, but it is done before the CO is issued.

Yeah, so currently is it just the certificate of occupancy comes in and if the building is good, the building inspector just signs it and there you go?

Yeah, that's it.

That's it. Check all the other stuff on the plan itself.

And I'm going to give you an example because I was involved in them. So Joe put all his trees in. I did the site work for both of them, but I didn't do the landscaping. But Joe did all his trees. Finnegan Fence is a thing. I did all the site work, but I wasn't doing the landscaping. They didn't put any trees. Go look at your site plan. I mean, it looks nice, but you know what? There's no trees.

It's not what it's supposed to be.

You know, but he has an occupancy permit and there's no bond or anything to put those trees so who forces them. You're not going to tell him OK, you got to move out. You know you got to give me a bond now that you know so and I'm bringing them up because I was involved in them, you know, but there's just. Jolt OK and again fences. option is is we could increase the escrow and hold it until the ceo's issue i think i i honestly believe when it comes to landscaping and trees if they're not done at occupancy permit you require a cash bond because a cash bond is going to force them to do the work okay no letter of credits no just a cash bond and you know all the other developers in the world are going to hate me for that

But timing wise it makes sense right because they might not be the proper time to plant trees and I get that you know towns do that also for that I was going to say it's the season.

Yeah, no, I'm I'm for putting a bond, but if you don't get it done because it's too late in the year or whatever sure but put up a cash one because then that way first thing in the spring they're going to be on they want their money.

When I did my house, I moved in in December. They couldn't put a lawn in. Yeah, exactly. Unfortunately, they put it in July. Yeah.

The bank held back on that. So in a house situation, the bank's holding back from giving it. But on a commercial site, you don't have, the town needs the clout because in a single-family house, the homeowner's going to make sure they get their lawn.

Yep.

You know, but the commercial guy gets in there. He's not going to take the draw from the bank. He doesn't care if he doesn't get the money. It's just a draw from the bank. So it's a big two different animals when it comes to that one single family homes and and that.

okay thanks for bringing this to our attention so we would probably need a combination of rules defined by planning and processes

Kim Kleiner and the new building inspector, and he is the code enforcement officer, so is that part of his job? So before we go make more rules, we do go make more rules, maybe there's an easy fix.

Yeah, and do we have any rules that let us hold back on the escrows if it's not completed?

Well, you're only, you're, so, no. Because you, so like, for instance, Colby Farm. I gave you $125,000 restoration bond. The only thing that that's for is to spread the loom back out and spread some grass seed. That's all it's for. Nothing else.

So what about the escrow that the applicant puts up? That's for inspections, to pay for inspections. So I don't know if that works.

No, no. If you have to get money, you've got to hire somebody to do the inspections. So, again, the last building inspector didn't enforce it. I've never seen any since Roland Bergeron and Peter Dion. Jeff Blackwell was pretty good about things getting checking, but Those three, Roland Bergeron was the best, as far as I'm concerned. You can ask Joan. I think he was. He was here forever. He lived in town for a long, long time, and he was the best. The other though Jeff Blackwell and Peter Diane was really good at it. But we haven't had that sense and maybe it can be and maybe the playing board has to meet the bill inspectors say go on countries. I don't know all I can tell you is every other city in town. There's a plane somebody from the planning board make sure that. They got what they what they put on the planet.

Do we follow as a board when occupancy permits are given? We don't know. I have no insight into that process.

So what would have to be done to have occupancy permits come through us?

I mean, they typically don't come through the planning board. It's staff. It's staff. Position. So either it is planning staff or it's building inspector. I think, I mean, Joan's right. We should probably have a conversation with Kim to kind of understand. what's the process and is it an expectation that the building inspector is gonna be taking this on? If the answer to that is no, then I think we gotta think of something.

So wouldn't it be bad for notification to come into the planning board as well if we decide that our code enforcement officer can do it, still wouldn't be bad to have that come into us as a memo or whatever. that they're starting to be issued for the plan that you approved on blank, blank, blank date. So that if you want to go take a look at it, even though the code enforcement officer is doing the job, hopefully is what's going to happen there. But that would be kind of interesting and good for the planning board to see what these things look like.

It would be good to have that closure.

Yeah, to know that you did a good job and you did plan it, that you put everything in place and you go and actually look at it and say... And it just seems like a good learning.

And I don't know if it's been a process here, but I know in some towns, the building department sends out a report regularly on all the building, all the building permits that are issued. There's just a list that goes, it's circulated. And then the same thing for COs, all CO applications that have been submitted and it's circulated. So at least in those towns, there's an opportunity for anyone on that CC list Just say, gee, I have a question on this or an issue with this.

You get very involved in the plans. I know you put a lot of thought and effort into the plans. I guess I would probably be really interested to see how they look and how they turn out. And did you learn something there that you can maybe apply to the next thing that you request from a contractor when they come out? Maybe it could be something that is circulated for people to have a chance to do. Bill chips are going to make it one time.

I learned so much from you know that the initial sidewalk that will be good to close a loop when you know these plans move forward. How they actually shape out to be.

You know he or even if there's a couple of board members that want to be involved. I don't know how that can work, but if they want to be involved in doing that inspection to sign off. You know, that's a possibility. I don't know what the possibilities are. I'm just throwing it all out there. We need to do it. Whatever you come up with a solution, we need to do it.

I like the cash bond for landscaping. It would be easy and clean. The what? Cash bond for landscaping.

So we're almost done with this topic. Do any members of the public wish to comment on this?

Okay. Seeing none so no public input again and then even in in the case of like an expansion. So there's an expansion going on things don't get done. Everything gets used according you know into that somehow the board needs to when someone comes in with an expansion plan. There has to be some inspection to make sure before they can open that next phase of their expansion that somebody is inspecting. We're already there we already have a business going and we want to expand it and maybe we're not putting in a building, but we're doing other things and nothing, it doesn't get done, but the expansion is being used without the work being done. But you made it part of your, it was an approval that the board gave.

Along that line, the change of use would be a similar example of something where we should have some more oversight and some more inspections performed where a use change occurs the developer comes in presents their case we approve what they're presenting to us they go off and then do something different and there's no no follow-up on our part of the change of use now changing again without that planning board input

One exception that is out there is that if it's a road or improvements in the public right-of-way, Lou Caron does go out on behalf of the board, and he does do inspections.

Which is how he found the error that occurred?

Right. Yeah, I'm not—so on a town road, we're covered. Okay, if it's going to be a town road, we're fine. This is all the other things, the rose meadows of the world, the— condo projects the commercial projects being built i'm not talking about the subdivision roads luke comes in does all inspections every that that's fine because the town's going to own the road so we have plenty of inspections for that that's good you know we we then we drop the ball completely that's how i'm getting that yeah so i'm sorry i didn't mean to i didn't want you to think it was the subdivision roads that's not that's not a problem

yeah so the next steps would probably be yeah contact Kim Kleiner about her what processes that they know exist and what can be done to with existing is it a reasonable expectation that that the building inspector can do that and if not then we need to have a conversation I just think it's important that

I mean, I'm gonna say that again. I think the planning board needs to have their own designee. I really believe that because that's what everybody else has. Everybody. Is there a city or a town that you can think of

No, it's all staff. There's planning staff and that's part of their duty. And importantly, the internal process of the town is that the permit can't get issued, the CO can't get issued until there's a sign-off. So that's that key link.

Yeah, so the only relevant staff here we have on planning is just Joan, right?

I'll go out and count trees.

There's a lot of probably technical details that need to be confirmed, ideally.

There's also Lou, there's also me. So the three of us, you could probably cover it. Yeah, depending on... If that's the will of the town. Yeah, and there would be some expenses regarding that just as developers get out of it is that yeah Lewis and doing.

I'd love to have Jay come out and inspect. The final thing to count the trees to count the parking spaces because if he's doing it for me and always doing it everywhere and I think that's what it should be doing.

Yeah, I want to see my flowering bushes. You will.

I want to see color. And if they bloom real well, I need to know what kind it is so I can put them in my yard too. I have puny ones.

All right, so that's really, that's all I'm, that's my thought, and I think it should, we need to do it.

Good to bring it, bring the attention to it, yeah.

Yep, yep, thank you. So the next step is to hear back from Kim. So do you think she would come speak to us in person, or we're gonna do that asynchronous?

We'll probably just send her an email. I was gonna say, I could just send her an email and copy to the building inspector.

Wouldn't part of it be, though, for the board to, make a regulation that they have to sign off on a building?

We could definitely discuss that.

How we do it. How and who.

That's part and parcel to the approval process.

I like the idea of the list that goes around so that it hits every planning board's computer. That thing that we talked about a year ago is now done. or wants to be done, what does it look like? What does what we decided as a committee to do, what does it look like?

And there's a question on like liability and stuff like that because usually it's staff and staff have the town's insurance covers. I don't know what that would do with the volunteers because they would be performing. You're covered.

You're covered as a volunteer.

I know.

Because we've been doing duties, right?

Yeah. At least that's what I believe. I wouldn't want to.

Well, contribution is, so I'm assuming planning board was. Yeah.

Yeah.

It falls under the umbrella.

As long as you're designated to do it, you're covered. If you went there on your own, you know if you went there to represent the planning board then or the zoning board or whatever board it may be I think you covered it if you go as to go look because you want to go look and that that might be a difference you know right as long as it's in your official capacity right yep as long as it's in your official capacity okay so yeah hopefully we can get that feedback and discuss it during one of our next meetings Okay.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, so next on our agenda is review master plan chapter three, natural resources and set the public hearing date if it is ready.

I wasn't really gonna do a presentation, I kind of went through it once before, but I know it's a lot. And so

So have there been any changes since our last meeting?

No. So there have been no changes since our last meeting. We did have a lot of specific input, so that's really kind of what I was hoping for. Again, typos, send them to me.

Can we just run through the recommendations? Is that list very long, the recommendation list?

We can zoom right down to the recommendations. Just one thing I did want to note that we did come up last time is more up-to-date water quality data. So I did find... The most recent water quality data for all the surface waters and what the test results are, so I will incorporate those. In some cases, they haven't done a more recent sample.

We're just working on that.

Yeah, which is kind of a thing in itself is we haven't done a sample in 10 years. How do we light that fire ourselves? Yeah.

I noticed that you added DeRocha to the agricultural portion of it. I thought that was really good. That's up to date now.

And Joan had given me some comments earlier that I did include.

Do we have any sections on invasive tree pests?

We do. And I think we've also talked about that, updating that to make sure we have all of the most recent invasives. But yes, we do have a section on invasives.

Which section are the invasive insects on?

I was going to say it's pretty far down. It's after the reptiles and rabbits and things. I loved reading this. Yeah, I did too. I was and I'm not even a conservation, you know, groupie or anything, but like, I thoroughly enjoyed that. I mean, we, we have a we live in a very beautiful place. And it's valued to open space.

You know, it's, it was really fun to read it as well. was reading so many cool things in town that we have that you know you just you got to get out of your own yard to go see a lot of that happened during covid we found a lot more people in the woods a lot of them didn't know what they were doing they're newbies but yeah but we got a lot more people and we still are retaining a lot of those people i noticed a lot more cars are still being parked at the town forest area state forest Stay for us. What is it? It's a state for us. Yeah. Yeah. And also it was false. You still see what more cars and trucks than you used to. Yeah, it's beautiful in there.

And yeah, invasive plants start on page 15. The long list.

Yeah. And then there's like all kinds of

What about the bugs? I was looking through the invasive plants and I spotted an invasive tree on one of the walks I went on. It was not in Litchfield, but I was like, I recognize that from my readings.

Everyone at home is like, if they are watching right now, they're like, what's wrong with these people? They have their lives. Well, we're nerding out on natural resources. It's all good.

Let me find it. I know we have some conversation.

I know I saw some of it.

I'm trying to remember. I think it was under where we talk about forests. I'll find it.

I was nerding out with my brother-in-law because we were talking about his sandy soil, and I was like, wait, there's a page called Soil Scare. And I pulled it up, and he looked at all the layers. But I was out walking with my son the other day, and I thought I spotted some type of a heron. And I was like, I haven't seen one of those before. It was just a very slow, graceful-moving bird.

And I was like, it must be that.

It was. And now I know.

Assuming bottom page 36 looks relevant.

Yeah, I was going to say there was a section on 52. That's plants. No, that's shore land. Well, maybe there isn't both.

I thought there were.

These invasive plants.

I'm going to have to remember where. If not, I'll make sure it's in there. But I thought we had it in there.

I thought I was reading about them. Oh, there's the bar. OK.

If I can't find it, I'll make sure to include it in the conversation, because it obviously is key.

Invasive plants you're looking for?

Invasive insects.

Oh, wait, wait, wait.

Did I just find it?

I know we have species.

47 talks about invasive birds or competitiveness among birds.

This is quite an extensive document. I looked at it and I go, oh, 85 pages? Okay, I have time.

That's what Gemini is for.

I use my eyes to read. I wouldn't want to take a quiz on this, though. It's really nicely done now.

Oh, because remember I told you about New Hampshire bugs. Yeah.

So maybe just table it until that.

Yeah, all right. I'll make sure to add it. It might not be a conversation in here, is it?

Yeah, and I can probably send you some wording specific to hemlocks. Okay.

I'm assuming bugs that are eating hemlocks.

Yeah, they're killing them. Yeah.

Yeah, not as bad as a stupid porcupine.

There's a few of them that we should be talking about, so I'll make note of that.

Sounds good because yeah like with hemlocks they're good understory ones and they provide a lot of habitat for certain creatures.

And do some of those come as a result of moving firewood from different places?

The ash borer one is well known.

Yeah, they say not to.

The hemlock ones are transported in different ways. But if you transport live trees or if you don't sanitize shears between, like more relevant to commercial shears.

Cross contaminate. Yeah.

And yeah, the health of the hemlocks has definitely gone down over the last 10 years in town.

Mine came back. They said mine was done after the, we call it the porcupine, actually legitimately ate everything of the tree, and it was a huge tree. The porcupine went away, and all of a sudden the tree is just coming back really nicely. Nice.

So, yeah, I think that's the only major thing that's missing.

Yeah, that's a key thing, so I'll make sure to insert that, and then I'll reflect it in the recommendations as well. Looking for like a list of kind of invasive insect species that are causing threats to Yeah, and just a little description of the impact and things like that, what we can do to prevent them. Yeah. So yeah, I'll include that as a discussion. And I'll also add that under the recommendations.

If you found it useful too, I know on the NHBugs website, they also have kind of like a GIS mapping ability to see specifically where they are. There's not a massive amount of bubbles in Litchfield, so it might not be that useful, but it also might be for the future to evaluate kind of, yeah, 10, 20 years down the line.

Sounds good.

So they have a map that shows... Yeah, if you just go to the nhbugs.org through UNH. Yeah. And then it was... Was it the 2025 New Hampshire Forest Health? Yeah, the 2025 New Hampshire Forest Health Program Report. And then if you scroll down, you can kind of... see specifically. And those are all specifically 2025. But I'm sure I'll poke around through it. And there might be some way to collate different years. Thankfully, we don't have too many bubbles on our side of the river. That's good. I see real certain.

Crown dieback. Or the red oak.

The only question I had specifically on this chapter was I know towards the end we make a number of recommendations, a lot of which kind of have action items for the Conservation Commission. Did conservation folks have any kind of input or thoughts? Or is that too much?

No, I haven't heard anything from them. I should bring it up again at the next meeting. I'll just print out the recommendation section.

They did a big report that I noticed was noted in here as well.

Yes, and some of those recommendations come out of that or adapted from that.

Yeah, and unfortunately with like the invasive insects and invasive plants They both it cost money to take care of it because you'd have to pay Or have a volunteer remove them or you have to pay or have a volunteer apply control measures

But I don't think you could do that on a homeowner's lot, remove them, unless the homeowner wanted them removed. But burning bush is a big one.

The local nurseries, like the Ross Lupin, I didn't know that was invasive. I've got a beautiful... a false indigo plant in my front yard.

They don't let you sell it. They won't let them sell it.

I don't know if that's on the list, though.

It was. I was shocked.

Burning bushes all over the place. That was a really bad one.

um pears pear trees and now i noticed that there's pear trees going all the way down my street that were never there before from my little plants that my little trees that i didn't know were invasive when i bought them at the local hardware store yeah yeah for homeowners i think the main

recommendation is education and resources are out there.

So people know, but sometimes they're already sold and people Oh, yeah.

I cannot convince my dad to get rid of his burning bushes.

Terrible underneath the smell of everything. Like, Because they're really attractive. They're beautiful.

My neighbor has like 15 going down the property line. Yeah, my old house.

So many of them. They're so beautiful.

The cool thing is they sell sterile burning bushes now. Yeah. Sterile? Yeah, they don't multiply.

That would be cool if you could tell my peat trees to start... Because they're all the way down the road. And now I'm like, jeez, I have to go cut those down now. Or I'm not my property. You should actually have asked Rick.

It's the... Yeah, but still with the... There are still, like, townlands, stuff that have invasive species. And, like, ornamental bittersweet's a big one that's problematic.

Yeah. That's up and down the river. It's impossible to confirm.

I remember people picking it and making wreaths with it 15, 20 years ago. We were making beautiful wreaths for our front doors with something that's caused so much damage. People just don't know because by the time we find out and start telling people, it's too late. It's in the population. It's very hard.

And with pests like hemlock woolly adelgid and scale on hemlock, you have to inspect the needles, see if the pest is on them. Like scales, you see little tiny specks on the bottom of the needles and they're just there sucking the nutrients out of the tree. And then there's hemlock woolly adelgid, which a few times, like twice a year, you see a wax-like substance at the base of the needles. It looks kind of disgusting. And generally, once you see that, the trees start to look a little sick. The needles are darker.

But you can motivate a homeowner to check for that because they don't want to pay to have the tree removed because it's sick and dies. That's expensive. So you can send that out and say, if you own a hemlock tree... you want to watch out for this because it could kill your tree, and then you're going to have to have it removed.

And education is also important because some of the ways of treatment need to be, probably best to do it with a professional, and that's unfortunately expensive. But if you do it yourself... Yeah, and a lot of arborists want you to just take the tree down, which is unfortunate how most arborists, I tried, it's hard to find arborists that are not there to just take the tree down. Like, it's hard to find ones that just care about the tree health.

They wanted me to take my hemlock down, and I was like, wait a minute, see what happens.

And with the insecticides you have to be careful because that's what kills bees if you don't do it right. If you can't do it, you can't do it near any flowering trees.

I don't want to touch things like Roundup anymore.

No.

This stuff, and that's an herbicide. This is an insecticide.

I don't touch them either.

And what I ended up doing was I dug little holes around each tree and poured a little bit of the insecticide in each hole. And that did take care of the hemlock woolly adelgid. Wow.

I'm going to call you, Jared.

You should start a blog. Tips from Jared.

Exactly. There's a whole garden and Facebook page.

Yeah, and my parents' property has like 20 hemlocks, so I had to calculate how much of the insecticide to do, and I had to compare it against the limits on how much insecticide you can use on a lot. So yeah.

Yep, he's nerding out again. That's good. All of you out there to benefit from. I want to know where to start.

I don't have a green thumb. I'm barely outside to do this. I wouldn't even know where to start when it comes to taking care of like.

Cold yard.

Actually, you can look at our natural resources chapter, 85 pages worth and probably counting.

It's going to be longer than that after we add this section.

Okay, so we're going to be well over 100 and, you know, it would be a great service to the public.

Yeah, we should probably have sections on common pests to look out for and pictures of them, and at that point you can research how to take care of it.

I remember when I was living in Boston, there was a huge PSA on the Asian Longhorn Beetle. It was on every subway train, every public space. just educate people what it is, what it looked like. I was like, I never even knew that was a thing until I saw that PSA.

Education is very important because most of the land is owned by homeowners. Not maintained by the town. Okay, so we have a few amendments that we've discussed, so I don't think we're ready to set a public hearing then.

But yeah, I'll take care of these and bring it back for the next workshop.

Thank you, and I'll try to get to sending you some potential wording.

Sounds good.

Any further discussion on the master plan? Okay. We'll move on to review and comment on stormwater regulator assessment.

I do have new handout.

Is the power not working? Can you unplug it and plug it back in, please?

I realized it was getting no power.

Yeah, I was sitting there going, I'm at like 30%. I'm thinking, we're only on agenda item two. We got a long night. This could be a problem.

Try it now.

Pick one and pass it along, please. Oh, there it is. Thank you, whoever did that. Appreciate that. It always works here, too.

Thank you. Unplug and replug. Thank you.

I'm going to pass something.

So just by way of a bit of a reminder, the town is an MS4 community, meaning we are required to apply for an MS4 permit and meet all of the requirements associated with that. one of the requirements is to go through a regular regulatory assessment and so the town is working with a consulting engineering firm cei so they have done that and they prepared this report with a series of recommendations for changes to our regulations and these change suggested changes span a wide range of our regulations. So they include amendments to the subdivision regulations, site plan regulations, and then the various appendices that we have, mainly the stormwater regulations and the road standards. And then there's actually one suggested change, which is in the cluster section zoning ordinance. So what I did is go through their recommendations and adapt them into the actual wording of our regulations. So at our last meeting, we walked through that and discussed some of the changes. uh yesterday um i met with the town's internal review committee which includes uh police fire road agents um and you know to get their input and their feedback and uh you know long and short of it i think there's an appreciation that we have these requirements and we need to meet them i think it's fair to say that um you know if they had their druthers they would keep the roads wide easier to maintain, easier to go down. But I think there was a recognition that this is the direction that we're going in. But kind of based on that conversation, there were some modifications to these changes that I made or suggested making so I figured I would walk through those because we kind of walked through the rest of these so what I did was the changes from the existing language are shown in red and then the changes that I made you know since the last time we saw these are in blue and so you know I'm going to start on the first page in your packet which is shown as page 12 again the recommendation from the consultant was that we consider allowing underground utilities under pave sections of the right-of-way if necessary. That's something that the road agent definitely does not like. For pretty obvious reasons, you don't want to have to tear up a street. One option is we just say, we're not going to do that and not stick that change and what I thought might be a reasonable compromise was just to add the language at the end of the section with approval from the road agent so that there the road agent does have to approve it beforehand maybe you have a circumstance where that road's going to get resurfaced anyway or you know for whatever reason he accepts it so I thought that was a reasonable compromise yeah yeah for that um like I I think there would be a duty to show why that would be required I think so too because I think really you should um avoid that at all costs in this case it's supposed to be if it's necessary um to allow for the use of the swales yeah And I think even in cases like that, if you put it in an easement area on the private property, I think you should exhaust your possibilities.

Yeah, because the utilities are generally just buried pipes and conduits. So I think the only part that can't be in the swells are probably the above ground parts, like the transformers and stuff like that. I can imagine them working around that and making that work.

I think in general they can too, but at least this way they've got to work it out with the road agent.

It's really expensive to expect the town to pay for the road being ripped up for utilities.

And generally speaking, it's the builder that puts everything in in the correct orders. The only concern would be if there's a maintenance problem or a where something needs to be replaced where they would have to then rip up the road. Otherwise, it's just underground and just stays there. But yeah, you don't want to have to, if the conduit gets damaged for the internet service mainly, I can't see anyone justifying ripping up the road to fix the internet.

I can't imagine it either. I think it's pretty unlikely.

So that would increase the chance of it getting abandoned, which we don't want that to happen.

So the next similar change was on page 17. So in the middle of the page, it's use of permeable materials. And the way this section reads, this would be a new subsection. And it reads, use of permeable materials, such as porous pavers, pavement stones, and pervious pavement are encouraged for road shoulders and parking lanes in residential neighborhoods. However, the use of conventional paving is required for travel lanes. One of the concerns of the red agent was he also feels that driveway aprons need conventional paving. They are in the right of way. That makes sense. So I added driveway aprons as an exception, and he felt the same for mailbox pull-off areas. yeah that need to be maintained so um the way it reads right now again is uh except for you know you know conventional paving is required for travel lanes so i just added those two other exceptions as well okay that seemed reasonable And again, concern was expressed about the road widths. I did not suggest making changes. We are really kind of in the middle of the pack as to what the consultant was recommending. So that I kept as is. But and again, I think they prefer them wider. I think there was a willingness to live with it. There was more concern, though, expressed around the cul-de-sacs. So the recommendation of the consultant was that the cul-de-sac widths be reduced to 70 feet and from the current 75 and The concern really from fire as well as road agent is they really want that wider radius to be able to turn. So it's one thing if you've reduced the pavement of the travel way, but keep the width of the overall cul-de-sac at 75 for that turning radius. So that seemed reasonable to me. And so before we, I didn't show this in blue, but before we had the 70, oh, and by the way, I'm starting with page 19 of 21, and that's the diagrams. So previously, if you look at the kind of the upper right where it says 75 foot minimum, the last draft you saw, I had those struck and I had 70. I just put it back to 75. Again, that's just a reasonable compromise, I felt, not a big pavement impact. And I think that was the last change I made coming out of that. conversation, so kind of just chatting. And now on page 523, that's just the language that we added, referencing the clearing should be minimum. really a lot of the recommendations in here are they're not mandatory they're an allowance on page 10 uh you know an allowance for vegetated green roofs and repurposing storm water there was some concern expressed about vegetated green roofs structurally i agree realistically I can't see people putting vegetative green roofs in in this field. It just doesn't make a lot of sense. They're very expensive. But nevertheless, it's in there. Nobody has to do it. Your page 29, this just talks about open drainage systems. And generally, there was support for open drainage over closed drainage. from the road agent because that is easier to maintain. Structures are more difficult and more expensive. So that was one of the changes in here I think that was received well. Going on to page 34, again this is really language about open drainage systems, storm water retention. Finally, page 40, what says page 40 in the bottom, this is just a changing to the parking standards, going from effectively four spaces per thousand to three spaces per thousand. That's a very simple change. There was no concerns expressed around that. And then on to page 71, language related to low impact development, stormwater management practices. that's again no concerns were expressed around that and finally the last page is the recommended recommended language to be added to the zoning ordinance in this case it's in the open space section of the ordinance so once again that's zoning so In light of that, if we do want to look at things like other requirements in the open space ordinance, like around the yield plans or, you know, in the 4,000 square foot windows, et cetera, at least as they apply to open space, if we're going to put this on the change to this section on the ballot anyway, that's kind of an invitation. Maybe we look at other portions of that also. Sounds good.

It's good to see that they're open to allowing the narrower widths because I was imagining.

They weren't real big fans. Yeah, they're not fans.

That is not their preference.

So that would mandate even subdivisions at 20 feet wide?

Yes. Not counting curbs or shoulders.

the pavement.

Yes. Are there any examples of roads that we would know that are narrower than the design standards that we currently have?

They said Cutler Road is 21. And I think some of the older ones might. Some of the senior housing is 20. Yeah. Maybe Gilchrist.

Is all of the senior housing 20 or just some of it?

I'm not sure.

We could look back at some of our plans, though. Let's see.

A lot of them were done at the same time. No, they weren't all done at the same time. A lot of them were around the same time. Around the same time. Around the same time.

We could take a look and see. And of course, that does not apply to arterial roads. It's just residential streets. So there's no change proposed for arterials.

Mm-hmm.

Not like we're going to see too many work.

The only place I can imagine if this is that somehow something ends up being developed on the land from the circumferential highway that there is no it's a fallacy to say that there is no more open and because there is I can think of some big chunks out there that.

And plus the second person you're right.

Right.

I think all open lands, a big open land journey, was it all contacted by conservation?

Was it what?

I think it was all contacted by conservation.

The one was that I'm thinking of that we never got an answer on.

Right. There was nothing we didn't get an answer on.

I should make one point, though, to Joan's point. These regs don't say you can't exceed 20 feet. They say the minimum is 20 feet. whereas the minimum is now 24. So if somebody wanted proposed wider streets, that would still be allowed.

And looking at the geometric standards, I know it says the travel way width, the shoulder width, and then the pavement widths. Right.

Or does it say minimum?

How does travel way width matter when compared to just the pavement widths because I know there's on arterial roads it's often painted but there's does that matter in this or is it just this much pavement for each lane?

Yeah, that's essentially what it is. It would be 10 feet for each lane. Maximum of 20 feet.

And for the existing ones, it's 13 for arterial? Yes. So that includes the area past the fog line?

13 feet? No, I don't think so. That's the travel way.

Yeah.

It's that the TV is very wide, it's very wide.

Why is it 13 feet that's the Albuquerque center that allows room for bicycles and cars to pass with each other talents pretty wide, but how does that matter when the payments.

It's just not they're just painted lines. Why can't that be like the I would stand like like state I was in the coffee.

I'm not saying it's not a very high standard. It is, but we just didn't propose a change to it.

Yeah, because 13 feet seems excessive. I agree. And this is a regulation, not a zoning. So would it make sense to lower that to 12, but obviously keep the pavement the same size?

Because we certainly could.

Yeah, because I know 13 feet is not good from a traffic commie perspective, is the opposite of traffic commie.

We had the meeting yesterday.

5 of 21. I can certainly suggest it at 12. Yeah, I mean, that exceeds turnpike lanes.

Yeah, what size are the turnpike?

I think they're now 11.

I'll just go with 12. I would support going with the same size as a highway. If it works on a highway. I'll double check the DOT standard. It might be 12. because you have such big vehicles nowadays I'll double check that though because I don't see any downside to narrowing this except for maybe the plows will run over the fog lines with their plows more so that could wear the paint down that's the only downside I could see

allowing the fog lines is a good idea.

Yeah, so exactly.

To clear the whole pavement. I'll double check the DOT standard, though.

Yeah, 11 or 12 feet probably would make sense. And smaller is better from a traffic calming perspective, because you have the same road size. It just makes people a little, it just feels less like a highway. Because if it feels like a highway, people go closer to highway speeds. There are parts of Albuquerque that are straight enough that you could theoretically go highway speeds for short periods of time and risk safety.

I measured Pinecrest today because I was convinced that I have a quarter-mile drag strip past my house, but it's three-tenths of a mile.

Yeah.

Well, Litchfield's Finest parks themselves out by the straightaway up there, up near the golf course. So I can attest to that.

Someone actually latched their lights at me on Albuquerque. I was like, you dog, you should slow down.

yeah um but yeah i've ran i ran recently on pinecrest and i was definitely like wow that's a lot faster than i'm used to the cars going because i usually run on the non-arterials i won't walk on there i i could do the the loop through my neighborhood i i won't walk pinecrest

I won't walk Hillcrest either. Yeah.

I mean, you're taking your life in your own hands.

I only did that to add long-held drives to my loop.

Okay, that's brutal.

Unfortunately, I can run off to the road for most of it.

So, yeah.

So, yes. Thanks for the proposal.

Yeah, absolutely.

So, I actually just had a brief question for, I think, forgive me if I'm missing it in here, but did we add, like, a definition of LIDs to Appendix D?

No, but, you know, that's a good point. We should add it to the definitions section.

That was really all I had.

I'll do that.

What are the deadlines that we're supposed to follow with these updates?

I don't believe there's a specific deadline that I heard. So I think we should do it within a reasonable time.

So this year.

Yeah, you know, I mean, I'll make these changes, get them back to us. Before the summer's out. Yeah, because before the summer's out, I think that'd be optimal.

So yeah, by the end of the summer, we have the proposal for the regulations. And then by the end of the calendar year, we have to propose updates to the zoning part. Right.

But it isn't like what we have to do the stormwater before and we had to comply with EPA's requirements and get them in by the end of June. We're not quite under that same gun. So yeah, I'll get on to these.

Okay, thank you. Okay. So everyone done commenting on the regulations? Thank you. Next, we have the 10 year Transportation Improvement Program.

I think I put the NRTC memo on the portal. I just thought this was very interesting that you should be aware of it. Take and speak to it.

Well, you'll notice the one that they removed was the most expensive one.

But they said don't put any new ones on, go back to the old one.

Yeah. So this is what happens every two years is, in normal times, what happened every two years was we as a region have a sub-allocation of, let's say, $7.5 million that we can use to support new projects in the 10-year plan. And so typically what we do is go out to the communities, planning boards, select boards, and say, hey, do you have any projects? And those can be traditional road improvements. They can be bicycle, pedestrian, sidewalk improvements. Um, and so that's the normal process. Um, but I think everybody is probably aware of the 10 year plan is severely constrained financially. Um, they're not accepting in the last round, um, D O T, um, proposed eliminating all new projects, uh, from the last two-year session, and in addition to that, removed several projects that were in the already approved tenure plan, pushed them out of the tenure plan period. So given that reality, what we're being asked to do now is not solicit any new projects. I'm going to put a little asterisk on that. Um, but what we're really just doing is confirming if you have a project that's in the 10 year plan now, is that still a priority? So that's it. Um, we still are interested if you have, you have communities have other projects, um, but it's not going to be for the 10 year plan. So the reason I had asterisk is, um, if community has a project currently in the 10-year plan that did not get kicked out but it's no longer a priority there's the opportunity to substitute so that's the one caveat so and there are that's not Litchfield but there are some you know communities like Nashua where they have many, many projects and there's a good chance some of them are no longer priorities. They were put in years ago and there may be different priorities now. So that's the opportunity. With regard to the current 10-year plan, unless something happened this afternoon, it's awaiting a decision from the governor. And who knows? But there is a possibility that she vetoes it, in which case, and I guess just backing up on that point, so the 10-year plan that was put forward to governor and council are through the Gasset, I should say, that came through the Gasset process, eliminated, did everything DOT said, eliminated everything, except that Councilor Wheeler added one project for Hudson, and that was what was submitted to the legislature. So that kind of made it all the way through the legislature. And then, apparently on very close vote, at least in the House, So the 10-year plan was ultimately approved by the House and the Senate with toll increases added to the bill and with additional moving around dollars and funding, the top priority project from every region was added back in. So in that case, that was a national project on Ledge Street. So that's what's gone to the governor.

I thought she vetoed toll increases.

She said she was opposed to toll increases. So the strategy was to add it. to the bill itself so that it's not separate. So we don't know what's going to happen. If the 10-year plan is vetoed, I'm still not exactly sure what that then looks like.

But right now, we have nothing in that 10-year plan. We did have stuff, but it's been moved out. Everything's been moved out of the 10-year plan.

Which is something that I think we want to strategize around maybe. Especially that...

Corny run the light.

And that came up yesterday's you know meeting amongst that too and you know that the challenges around that including public safety challenges are real and so if we can't get that back in the 10 year plan, maybe we start thinking about going after some grant funds to try to get that done because it is an important project and if I'm hearing you know, concern from, you know, particularly, you know, fire department. And, you know, because we do have mutual aid agreements.

And we have two multi-use or one multi-use, one large subdivision, the condo division, and then we have another one being proposed.

Plus the gas station.

Plus the gas station. And then behind them, the multi-use that's being proposed by tomorrow.

So it's a problem.

It's all in that one area.

We want to advocate for that and do anything we can, I think, to get that project back in.

Yeah, like there are not too many places in Litchfield that could use a traffic light, but that is one where it would be pretty nice.

Yeah, I think people come out of the S-turns, if you will, coming from Manchester, and then all of a sudden they hit the straightaway, and it's like, whoo!

The only other one that does, Albuquerque and 3A did, except now that there is the additional turn lane that takes care of that.

It's just hard to take a left.

It's hard to take a left. The other one that does trigger the warrants is left-hand turn movement from Page Road on the left. Oh, my God, that would be amazing.

That's a horrible place to be. Is that technically Hudson? It is in Hudson, yeah. Oh, yeah, yeah, it is in Hudson, but it's like this much of it. Yeah, it's dangerous, though.

If they didn't have that light at West Road, you'd never get out of there. The light at West Road gives you some kind of break.

Has an assessment that has a sense of intent been done on that page road intersections recently took a few years ago and it triggered that one. How is that realistically going to get done.

It's yeah, it's

It's tough. Obviously, it's a cost issue, and it really is. It's DOT's jurisdiction.

Is Page Road a town-maintained road?

Page Road is a town-maintained road.

And then 102 is a state. State.

They would have say over whether or not a light rain would happen.

How many times?

Yeah, I don't know. It's been approached, yeah. Yeah. I mean, in general, they prefer not to have them.

Well, they think it's still all farmland, and it's not. It's like, come on.

The DOC has become opposed to whites.

Yeah.

Well, there's not enough room in those places for roundabouts, so that's the only other option.

So Hudson would really be the one who would have to advocate for it, at least go along with it or advocate for it, even though realistically it's Litchfield's issue. Yeah, it's Litchfield's issue.

Is there ever a time when the state becomes responsible to act? I'm assuming there would have to be a large duty or a large evidence of a safety issue.

I think that would really be the trigger.

Multiple tragic occurrences.

We've got those. You hate to say that that's what drives these things, but it does. We've got those. So yeah. And even then, it takes forever.

Yep. Okay, so that's in your plan update.

Thank you any other comments know something after the governor you know, he tells it or not.

Yeah, yeah, you know, there's a lot of folks looking every day to just kind of see where it's but but still these items that we have are not on there, but we could put them back on. Or not? No.

Darn. It says please don't.

You can always ask, but we just know, and that's the guidance we're getting, is we're not adding new projects. I mean, it's really the combination.

But that was an old, those are three old projects.

Yeah, I mean, if we, any project that we have in there now that's still in there, we should reaffirm whether those are priorities.

Well, like Corning Road was taken out.

Corning Road was taken out.

There's nothing in there right now. I mean, that's what the letter says. Right. The letter says three projects that have been discussed in the past.

So, yeah.

Okay.

Are there other towns that have projects about that size that really don't need those projects that we could maybe barter with in some way?

That's where you kind of want to be in the plan and in the queue because it does happen that one of the really nice things about Corning Road is that the town is willing to pay 100% of that. But what does happen in some communities is the tenure planning process is so long. And most of these projects have a 20% local match. And there are absolutely communities that as it is coming up, they can't come up with a match. Either they can't come up with it because they just don't have the capital dollars, or, and I've seen this happen in some of our communities, they go for a Warren article, Warren article isn't approved, they usually say, okay, we'll give you another shot at it next year, next year comes around, voters don't approve it. So that happens, and that does free up money. So that's a way.

I would imagine that if we can somehow get back into the plan and the timeline is coming up, that would be the time to set up a budget item or a fund that the town would contribute money into every year leading up to the project.

Yeah, well, and for Cording Road, we don't have to because they were paying 100%. So that was very nice because they accepted that, they recognized it was an issue and it's a state road. So that is wonderful. But yeah, I think getting it back in the plan I think is really key.

It's going to take time probably for the current items in the plan to be completed and funds to be opened up for future years, right?

Right. I mean, there either has to be a revenue increase which the chances for are great. Maybe this toll thing makes it, so maybe. Gas tax increase, I don't see that happening. I guess the one push I would have is we do have, I think it's a, I believe it's a half increase that was a temporary increase for 93 widening and that is going to sunset. Extending that would be relatively painless because people wouldn't Wouldn't see an increase, but I don't think that that'll happen either. Not right now. Who knows what the future will hold.

Maintaining roads is expensive, unfortunately.

Yeah, and I think across the board, we've seen at least a minimum of a 30% increase in road construction costs. And that is a real driver, on top of the fact that toll revenues have never increased. gone back to their pre-pandemic level. So we are collecting less. Gas tax is the same thing. Not only is the rate flat, but we're not collecting as much. So yeah, that's the reality for now.

Any other comments on the 10-year plan? Okay. So we're done with the main agenda items. So next is correspondence.

That was just FYI that when they put a tower up in surrounding towns, they have to notify 25 miles out. So that's all that was.

How tall is the tower?

90 feet. Self supporting lattice.

I just hope we get good better service as a result that would be nice up in both anywhere yeah it's high enough 190 feet maybe we will

I hope the cell phone tower is progressing next to the state forest. We need that. Next is... Any other business? So there's an approved reclamation bond amount for the Colby Farms.

That was Lou's letter stating what Colby Farms bond amount should be, and they have already brought that in, so. Do we need to vote for that or no? Because that's already. Well, if you went over Lou's letter and you're happy with what Lou suggested, then I think you probably don't need to vote. with him with what he's another FYI item.

OK. This looks good. Next return of Windsor drive escrow.

Yes, they have on this. These started in 2012. He's I talked to Mr. Moore and he's not planning on continuing any more development now. So he has $1,600 in the escrow amount and then he has a $17,000 bond amount. He would like it all back.

What development was this for?

From Windsor Drive.

Windsor Drive.

Windsor Drive extension. Because the first part was built quite a while ago and then he extended it. Windsor Drive won't extend it. Hanover Court could extend it to his property, but he's not doing that anymore. He let his grandkids do it.

And all the engineering's complete.

Yes. Lou had a final inspection on sealing the cracks and Other items that were done a while ago.

OK. Sounds good. So in that case, would someone like to make a motion to return the Windsor Drive escrow of $1,602 plus interest and bond amount $17.027 plus interest?

So moved. Second.

We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of returning the escrow and bond amount plus interest, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Those opposed, abstain. Motion passes 6-0-0.

OK. Next up, we have committee reports. So I think we have several committee reports. Who would like to go first?

We had a meeting last week with Jay for the circumferential highway exploratory committee. Is that what it's called? CHEC. CHEC. C-H-E-C. We have a new acronym. We went off our previously advertised schedule because we wanted to make sure it was really important to involve the right players. And in this particular instance, we really needed Jay Mankara's Advice and counsel, I don't know if that's the right word, but to really talk to us about the implications of a number of the choices that were before us for that committee. And we had, I would call it a informal yet productive discussion whereby we better understood the parcels that were available to us and that and more importantly what we could also do with them or not based on the rules that DOT follows and will follow in this process of, I don't know if the word's returning them from their previously apportioned use. But we identified a few parcels that we felt that were critical to have from the town's perspective, yet wouldn't necessarily involve an outlay on the part of the town substantially because it, one in particular, could be seen as a municipal use with regard to our right of way. Stop me at any time if I'm not characterizing this correctly, but I think the to do after that was Diane Plansky over here who's our fearless chair was taking the information back to the select board to report to them because we are under their direction the select board's direction as to you know, determining what, if any, parcels are priorities for the town. So I don't know, Diane, if you have had a chance to talk to your select board yet.

Our next meeting is next Monday. We didn't have one this Monday. So I'll be bringing the discussion that we had forward to them, along with what we had talked about, possible costs and... and discussion and see how they feel about what we know and what they want to know now. So yeah, it's important to me that we keep checking back and not wasting time. There's a lot of really smart people in that room and I want to keep them moving forward. I don't want to waste anybody's time.

So is this a situation where if the committee recommends purchasing some of these lots, that Boris Luckman would then have to make a proposal to go to war?

They would accept or reject our... Yeah, it's not as simple as purchase, necessarily. It might be that, but it might also be... I don't want town people to think, oh my God, what are you buying now? You know what I mean? It's a thoughtful...

discussion around you know what makes the most sense and what could happen in that area exactly what we want to happen in that area and how do we get a commercial presence in that area yeah that doesn't have a big slice of cost to the people that live here for infrastructure. So that's kind of why I got real involved in it and why I wanted all these smart people. I could get on that board to talk about what we could do to get some money into the town as opposed to just spending.

Yeah, and we talked about, relevant to this board in particular, We talked about with Jay's guidance about looking at this strategically such that if you could activate one mechanism by which you're as a municipality, you see something as the right of way feature that might be critical to us. We could then have some conversations as time goes on once it's apportioned for us to be able to maybe rezone in that area, to redefine, because some of that zoning, there are, as you can see down in the lower part, there's lots of overlapping or there's an overlay district in there with a multifamily. It might not be appropriate. It was at the time when when we were going to have a potential for a road in there, but it may not be now. So it might be a unique opportunity to say, okay, we might want to consider it as a board to then take that opportunity to look at how to best zone that to then attract developers for that area for specific uses that we talk about as things that we want in the town.

It's pretty complicated how to do it, but it's... Yeah, and it seems like it's kind of a multi-step process. By not doing it, we're going to be sitting there and watching what's done to us as opposed to at least knowing what's there and doing anything that we can do. So it's kind of... Yeah.

Getting a road through there would be the best scenario for economic development.

There is a very good spot to do that. Yes. We've talked about that.

Yeah. Yes. Through some little pencil lines.

Yeah, because otherwise you'll just end up with developers on each end just doing clusters of their own thing probably.

Yeah, and we talked about what would compel a developer to build a road to get back there and what, you know, what types of things could we... enhance the zoning conversation because, you know, you need to think about this. And we talked also about the survey that was done in town, you know, and talking about what the towns folks say that they want. So, you know, we're trying to balance all that information, be sensitive to what we've heard and, you know, clearly the town has invested a lot of time and energy into these things you might as well use that information accordingly so so that's what that's what we've been doing and i think so far so good so nice so i'll be bringing that to to the select board next meeting um that's definitely something to think about for future workshops because we have we have four zoning districts in that area right now it's kind of a mishmash yeah

It's very obsolete at this point. It needs to be re-looked at. Our zoning board rep wasn't there. The chair of zoning is on that committee as well. She wasn't there. George is on the zoning board, but not as on top of what all those zoning regulations are. We did a lot of research that we didn't really go over because we kind of did it. There was some on the portal.

Were mixed-use developments mentioned?

I think they're in there.

Yeah, I mean, we didn't really even get into that, only because there's so much back in there that we were looking at it from a framework standpoint first.

There's a lot of wetlands in that area, and it also includes an area across the road that goes down to the river, which NRPC, and there's going to be some involvement with that as well. And we have some people that we can talk to about getting in there and possibly managing that area.

I think it's more at the visioning stage, yeah, rather than the specifics. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

But every time we talk, new things come out. It is an informal board, which is probably what I'm qualified to run. But, I mean, there's so much information comes out. There's just so many people. Jay had been a part of the town for so long. Rick Charbonneau was on that board, and he's been on that committee. He's lived in town for so long and been so involved in everything that we're getting a real historical perspective of why some things were done as well. So it's a great community.

Yeah, some things were done for very specific reasons back then. And while we're, of course, sensitive to that, it may not be applicable in what we're seeing today and what's before us now. But we want to give... thought to why it was maybe thought about that in the first place, because there might have been some really good reasons why. Right.

And that would be Laura's bit on the zoning proposal. Yeah. I think, do we have anybody have any other questions about what that committee's up to?

Thanks for the update. Thanks for all your hard work, and it's really interesting to hear about.

It's, yeah. It's a lot. I mean, it sat out there for so many years that we just thought it was going to sit there forever. And yeah, I kind of hoped it would. And now we have to figure it out. The select board, we approved Kenneth Daigle as our building inspector and code enforcement officer last meeting. I think I'm going to ask Kim or Joan, could you ask Kim to have Ken appear before the board so that you guys could meet him? I don't know if you usually get to meet the building inspectors, but I think it would be nice if you did. And we could also talk to him about maybe some of the stuff Rick has had to say as well. We're already talking about budget at the select board. Seems like we don't even get a breath. And we're talking about that already and planning when that's gonna happen. The big thing that happened at our last meeting was the engineer found that a two and a half acre lot at a construction site that was no touch wetlands and no touch buffer. was cleared of trees and so they came before us. So that's a, you know, kind of looking at Rick, listening to what he's saying about checking about what's going on. Lou found it by accident and then it had to come to the board and I got a bird's eye view of what happens when those kind of mistakes are made because It doesn't always say what the ramifications are for doing things incorrectly from what the planning board has said. Do this, do this, do this, do this. And I got a bird's eye view of what happens and I feel like the select board was fair and did a good job working with them to keep them going and to protect the town. So that was interesting. And we have our next meeting. I think we're not non public at six, I think we do think we're going to just open up at 630 next Monday. The Heritage Commission, you're going to be back on the 250th committee? Yes, yes. You'll be back. That'll be good. The 250th committee is doing really, really well. They've got just about their two-day schedule for entertainment on a stage there with music, and they've got just about that all filled, which I wondered how they were going to do that. They've got hot air balloon sponsors. They've got... The veterans doing the, they're calling it an agricultural experience. It's like a petting zoo, pony rides and hay rides with carts and stuff. But that committee is doing a great, great job. Really, really pleased with them. And then there's a Heritage Commission meeting on Thursday that'll be out as well. Just this week. And that starts at six. The 250th will be after that at 6.30.

Okay, thank you.

CIP, capital improvements, nothing new. We will meet August 3rd as our next meeting, and then town presentations will be after that. Also, if no one else is going to pub it, I think the Strawberry Festival is what, the Sunday, correct?

Saturday.

Saturday, from 10 to 2 at the Historical Society, so for all the folks at home, come get your pies, your grinders, and such.

Yes, sausage and...

Okay, any other committee reports? Okay, thank you. So next we have the approval of the June 2 2026 minutes.

Short read. Yeah, I was shorter. Like three pages. All right.

Definitely summarize a lot. And I think it was appropriate.

Yep. Yeah, he does a great job on those minutes, doesn't he?

Yeah, he's excellent. Yeah, he really does a lot. Mr. Chair, can I make a motion?

Yes.

That we approve the June 2nd planning board minutes from 2026.

OK. We have a motion. Do we have a second to approve the minutes? We'll second. We have a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of approving the June 2, 2026 minutes, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Abstain. So I think that's 6-0. All right. OK. Anything else before we adjourn?

I have no agenda items for July 7.

Oh darn.

Oh no, darn. The one that was going to be July 7th got moved to the 21st.

Okay.

Well, and if something did sneak in, you can't now because we're already past.

Okay. So we will see you when's that? The 21st of July, right?

Nice. It's my birthday. Oh, nice. We're free. That's special for you. Yeah, thank you, guys. Thank you, Joe. We did it for you. Everybody on this floor is so nice.

When do you think we will end up discussing the items discussed today?

Oh, don't think about it. No, we're not doing July 7th because you want to talk about bugs. No, it's not happening.

We could do it first meeting in August.

First meeting in August, yeah.

Georgia's comments and whatever changes on bugs.

Because we'll have two items on the 21st.

Two items on the 21st. Okay, and then we'll have to discuss. The Martell case that, this is interesting, that did not get accepted here got their variance last Monday night. Last night.

So that'll be one of the two. Okay.

Yeah, that was a pretty straightforward one.

That's what they all say.

Are there any things we can do about the cleared wetlands that they have?

Yeah, it's like conservation are working on it diligently. Getting a restoration bond and getting a forester and arborist and whatever's going on there.

Okay, what about in this lot that I just mentioned?

That's the lot.

That's the one.

Okay, so when was that discovered?

April 30th. Happened over the winter.

Months and months after it happened. It never was reported.

Wasn't there a timber tax paid on the lot? Yeah, there was timber tax. How come that didn't trigger a question of what did you cut?

Because the person who is doing the timber is somebody who does it all over the place in town. It didn't really strike anybody as being unusual.

The timber tax wasn't on the whole area that was cut. That wasn't included in the timber tax because it wasn't supposed to be cut.

No, I thought they included it. George went in and investigated it.

I think so.

I would double check that, Jody, because I think that they paid the full timber tax on what was taken.

Oh, and what was probably on what was taken, right? And that was the group. And that was the area. But it was a lot of pine, so it wasn't a lot of timber tax.

There was a lot of, when you walk through there, you can see.

I mean, it was a lot of, I mean, as far as taxable wood.

You can see the oaks and the maples are starting to send.

Hundred trees that shouldn't have been taken.

Yeah, so by the time they have, they propose the plan, they'll, will that plan have the.

The plan's already been approved.

Yeah.

And so this was after the fact that they came in and logged it. The sill fencing wasn't up, so the logger evidently didn't know where the beginning and end was.

Okay.

So that's a good example of what it's talking about. Is being on top of that we're getting the work done the way it's supposed to be. And well, but that's different, though. That's different when you're talking about iterations of the building inspector who's going to approve just the buildings. I'm not even sure that would have hit the radar for a building inspector.

No, because things would have to be at the end, right? So what you're talking about are iterations along the way, and I'm not so sure that's even in our purview.

We found it. It definitely probably should have been picked up by us. Maybe not planning, but building inspector, if we expand that a little bit.

It's only an interim built inspector. Right.

Any other things to discuss before we adjourn? Okay, in which case, let's not like to make a motion to adjourn.

I will.

I'll second. Motion to second. Any discussion?

All those in favor of the motion to adjourn, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, abstain. Motion passes 6-0-0. Well, thanks for watching the June 16th meeting. And our next meeting will be.