Planning Board - Regular Meeting

I will make a motion that we seat Doug Finnan as voting member this evening. Second.

All in favor? Aye.

Nice shirt. Get up here. You're outstanding. Come sit down. Don't call me late for dinner. We'll be late tonight for dinner.

We have a request to continue the public hearing for site plan review for 444 Route 125. They've asked to continue till September 3rd. Would we run into any timing issues if we moved it to the following meeting? Because the 3rd is right before the holiday weekend, and we might have attendance issues. Is that fine?

I'll make a motion to move it to after the holiday.

That would be the 17th? The 17th.

The 17th, yeah. Yeah, they asked to go to the first meeting in September. Okay. So going to the next one in September would be the option.

Okay. We have a motion to continue the site plan review hearing for 444 Route 125 to September 17th.

At 7 p.m. At 7 p.m. Second.

Any discussion? All in favor?

Aye. And just so you know, they did apply to the ZBA, and I did send that out to you today, yesterday.

And that was for the road in the back?

No. The ZBA application is for the bottom of the retention area. Our ordinance states that that retention area should be three feet above seasonal high water, and the state of New Hampshire regulation says one foot.

They're designed to one foot. They've been designed to our standard.

That's what they have? Yes.

And in order to make that site compliant with that standard, they'd have to raise the entire site approximately two feet. Now, what our standard doesn't take into consideration is the construction and the bioretention area being constructed to a proper standard. because you put down filter media, you layer filter media in there. Our standard is natural soil. You don't have to design the bottom of it to any standard except for what natural soil is. So I think that's why the state only requires one foot for a properly designed retention area. So we may want to take a look at that ordinance if we want to change ordinances, but we'll wait until after the ZBA hearing.

Glenn, is there a downside on that?

Not really.

I mean, they're designed to accomplish the task that they're designed for, and it will work either way. Okay.

As long as the water's being properly treated before it goes back into the aquifer, then that's the goal. Who was my second on that motion?

Thank you very much, Mr. Freeman.

All right.

Could we just flag that discussion on that matter ahead until sometime September or October? Give us time before the next. That's in zoning, right? Correct. They'll give us plenty of time to make an alteration to our design standard.

The other one that should be on the table is the natural soil cover over septic.

We discussed that before.

We've had a couple variances go forward and be granted to that standard.

Okay. We have a public hearing for a lot line adjustment, 95 and 97 Prescott Road. You have the... Application in your package and comments from Glenn. And response on the comments.

I'm Kristen. Yes. If now is the appropriate time, I'll make a motion to invoke jurisdiction.

Yes. Anything missing from the application?

I'll second that.

Any discussion on invoking jurisdiction? All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All right. Okay. Sorry, I'm .

That's okay. Do we have someone here to walk through this with us? You can turn on that microphone and introduce yourself.

Yeah, just push the button, turn red, there you go. Now it's live.

Yeah, I'm Mike DeChambeau. I'm at 97 Prescott Road. I think that's lot 37. My mom owns lot 39, where there are Quonset hut on that property. So we want to move that property line so that Quonset hut would be on my property, not hers. And also straighten that back line to go over to the county farm. As you can see her property right now goes around me on the left hand side on the county farm, yeah. So we wanted to straighten out that back line to go right straight across. That was one of her requests too, so.

Anything else you want us to know before we walk through the comments?

I don't think I can answer anything you have. Okay. I think that is pretty simple, but that's what we want to do, so.

Yep. It looks like all of the questions were resolved. Yes? Okay.

that well to be abandoned. I just put that on there because there was an easement that went across our neighbor's property and onto mine. My neighbor's property, they've removed that easement in the last couple months. We're going to remove it on mine as well. That well is no longer being used. It's now the artesian.

Any questions for the applicant or questions about Glenn's comments?

Yeah, Glenn, you made your comments, but it looks like they were addressed on the following page. Yep.

And we threw the recent easement from the county farm where the, you can't see it on the map up there. That was just, that was asked by the county farm when they put the new well house in, why that wasn't moved back off so that we didn't have to have a circle on our property or whatever. But my mom granted that easement a year ago, so we'll have to, when that line's going, part of it will be on my property, part will be on hers, but I'm fine with that. Nothing to be built that's just a well protector. Right, right.

That's a pretty large one at 400 foot. Yeah, they still move a lot of that well.

Yeah. Probably if they moved it 30 feet the other way, we wouldn't have to worry about it, but that's okay.

Any discussion? Do we have a motion?

Are there any butters? Motion. Oh, sorry. You're not on the butter.

Any public comment?

Motion.

Second it.

Second. Any last discussion? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Abstentions? All right. Thank you.

That's it for me?

We shut this off? Yeah. Perfect. Yeah, just push the button.

I'll be sending out a notice of decision next week.

Excellent.

Thank you all very much. You're very welcome.

Have a good night.

We're going to need to record that at the Registry of Deeds, so what you're going to need to do is get me a mylar and a check.

but I will be in contact with you about that. So if you could just contact your, well, I'll contact your engineer right now to get me a MILR and we can record that at the registry leads. Awesome, thank you so much.

And you'll remove the impact fee statement because you don't need that on there. Thank you.

Have a good night. Enjoy the rest of your summer.

All right, next item on the agenda is the request that we received for King Motors for retail registration.

Are you here for that? I'll bring up the site. If you just state your name for the record, turn the mic. Thank you very much.

Zachary King.

Thank you.

Do you want to tell us a little bit about what you're proposing, what you have planned?

So I'm opening up a used car lot at 180B, 125 Brentwood. I have one in Danville, New Hampshire, about 15 minutes away right now. I need more room, basically. So I'm taking over the old 603 auto and truck location. Nothing to do with them, though. Completely new dealership and everything.

And no changes to the site? No. I mean, you have the... Okay. So this is just for DMP.

If you look at the application, I've sort of pre-filled it out with the same exact... I wanna use the word restrictions or rules that were applied to 603 auto. I have that ready to sign and a copy of the site plan to give the applicant.

Thank you. Is this the one that we worked on landscaping in the front? Yes. To get a sidewalk? OK. So Mark will give you that information. But just so you know, there's a site plan on the property, specific number of parking spaces, specific requirements for display out front. We had requested the landscaping, the trees that are out there. And so you just need to comply with that. And that includes not parking. cars closer to 125 than the display area. All right, anything else?

No, we just would need a motion, and I'll have Kristen sign both of these, and I'll give one directly to the applicant.

Any discussion? All in favor?

Aye.

All right, do you have it for me to sign?

There's one for me. And here's one for the applicant with the site plan attached.

You want me to shut this off and do I have to sign something?

I'm going to give you this.

You don't have to sign anything.

Good luck. Yes, good luck. Thank you. Thank you. But you do have to give Mark a bracelet.

Oh, you're really . Thank you. Thank you.

Have a good one, guys.

You too.

Thank you. OK. Consent agenda. We'll save that for later. OK. Consent agenda. What do we have? Do we want to talk about this now?

Is that this thing? I'm like the guy behind the curtain. 20,000 things at once here. So we did that. This is other business.

Consent agenda. Let me just keep going with that.

Within that consent agenda, you'll find a check for SFC, and you'll see a closeout of an account. Which one is it?

Revolution Real Estate.

Oh, Revolution Real Estate, a closeout of that account. The mylar's been recorded, and that check is to close that escrow account out.

Any motion?

for the consent agenda? We don't do a motion for the consent agenda. We just all sign it. Yeah, we all sign it. All right.

Board conversation regarding impact fees. These are all fees covered by the applicant.

Well, he understands.

Oh, I, give me more. You're gonna modify it, I want my money.

So I had a conversation with Jen Rowden on the phone, talking about the presentation that this board would like to have around impact fees, and she asked me questions of what specifics does the board want to, for me to talk about? and I couldn't really answer that question. I didn't have any specifics. So she suggested at the next meeting that you put it on the agenda and you guys talk about it and she'll watch and she'll tailor a presentation geared around your questions.

So I'll say what I'm thinking and you guys can jump in. Impact fees 101. Like basic introduction so we're all on the same page. An understanding of the planning boards role and other parties roles. An overview maybe of what other towns are doing and how we compare to those other towns. And then. We've gotten the question about adding impact fees for roads.

Yeah, highway.

Highway. So a discussion about, again, what are others doing? How would that work? That's what I was thinking.

I'd like to know what research and what statistics they have are, do impact fees really influence a builder going to another town? How does it affect affordable housing? Does it curtail the growth of a town?

My question to her would be how to properly spend impact fees and the justifications that you should use to expend those funds.

So with that said, we should invite others to our meeting to hear that.

Well, what I plan to do is have this meeting and have this discussion and get these ideas out there to her and invite all departments. I will send out an email that we're going to have this discussion on this topic and encourage anyone who wants to learn more to attend.

And I would definitely encourage to the treasurer, since they have to reconcile all that, and so they can have a better understanding of it, because I know we have a new treasurer So I think it's worthwhile for them to understand how they reconcile that, how they have to use them within a certain period of time or you have to turn it back to the developer, whoever did it.

Agreed. How does it work right now? So are there separate line items for the impact fees for each of these categories? It doesn't go right into the general municipal fund?

No, actually by state RSA, it has to maintain separate. You cannot put it within your municipal budget.

So it's like a separate checking account?

Separate, yeah. And only the select board? can authorize the use of those funds, correct? That's correct.

Yeah, it usually comes as a request, and then usually we look at the town administrator and go, do you have the money in there? Can I spend it on that? Because you have to make sure you can spend it the way that, you know, a lot of times they come and they say, I want to do this, and it's like, well, no, you already have it, so therefore you can't buy it. It's not new, and impact fees typically have to be used for new stuff, so.

within your packet, I did include the RSA, which I hope all of you read.

That was very helpful. Did you send us the impact fee draft or not? Well, actually, what the board voted to accept there in 2022. That's extensive. I'm not trying to be a smartass, but most of those questions are all answered by that document. It came by email.

Yeah, that's why I sent it out.

I want you guys to have a better understanding with the tools that we already have. One item of interest, and maybe the RSA spoke to it, what kind of a schedule is a town required in terms of reviewing and updating and re-voting the impact fee schedule? I know we're 2022, so we're only four years out. Is it every 10 years? There really isn't a standard, but it should be based on what you're... You should do it periodically. Periodically. when you look at your capital improvement plan, that's your guide. So if you have things on your capital improvement plan, which again, this board votes to accept, we oughta make sure that those items are mentioned in our impact fee ordinance.

No, they're not mentioned in the impact fee ordinance, but an impact fee has to somehow be reflected by what you include in your CIP.

It's part of that report that we adopted in 22. It lists every department and what those expenses, forward expenses are. Right, right. Right. Maybe I said the wrong thing, but that's basically we want to be laying out those costs. Correct.

Within the RSA, it actually states that you can't have an impact fee without a CIP. Sure.

Now, one thing I want to clarify, and I think I brought this up at a previous meeting, so I apologize if this was clarified already. I think it might have been. But I seem to remember that we weren't sure if maybe there was a disparity between our ordinance and the state RSA concerning the timing of the collection of impact fees.

There is, yes.

Okay. Obviously, state law trumps our ordinance, but that is something that we should address when it comes time for warrant articles, probably.

You can ask. But if they say, no, I'll pay when I get my occupancy permit, then that's the way you have to do it.

And that's what the ordinance that we adopted states, clearly states, that the impact fee is paid at time of occupancy.

No, then you're... I urge you to read your zoning.

I did. I read what you sent us, our impact fee analysis done in 2022, and it clearly states right there. Yes, I agree. That differs from what our books say. That doesn't reflect what the books say. Obviously, state law.

State law, yeah.

He probably was using state law.

And you can also do alternative methods of payment as well.

We just did that.

Yeah, exactly.

We just had a concession to do that.

One other question we talked about a little bit is I understand that typically there's a professional person who does this. There's like one in New Hampshire. If we could update it ourselves just based on inflation. There's been quite a bit in the last few years. So without having to go out and hire somebody to do the whole thing, can we just stick with inflation? Right, for a mid check-in.

Just like you guys did, Bob, with the revaluation, the statistical, that went over really well.

I would not be in favor of that. I think if you're going to change that impact fee, it needs to be accompanied with the methodology. And I'll give you a few examples why. If you take a look at the way Fremont has done their school impact fee, which they hired Mark Frugere to take a look at, and they completely eliminated it for the reasons being that they paid off 28% of their bond of the school with an impact fee. And you can no longer justify saying to a person, you need to pay a school impact fee when you've already paid 28% of the bond from impact fees. just simply throwing money at it or an inflationary rate doesn't truly reflect what's happening within your municipality.

No, but if you're hiring somebody on the outside and you have that cost involved, that cost could actually exceed the inflation rate that you're trying to maintain. So it's not, it's a burden on everybody else. And when you say, you know, Fremont does this and hired somebody and their student rate is going down, well, doesn't common sense come into play where the board itself should come back and say, do we need this anymore? You would think.

Okay. And my only response to your comment, Kristen, is if it goes to court, you're so much better having students someone who has already gone through the court vetting process and having their work been established as appropriate analysis for your impact fee structure.

It just seems like having an inflationary standard built in is pretty common.

So let's have whoever we choose to do this do that.

Next time, recommend that we do that.

And have that be part of our methodology.

Because it's hard to project, especially if we only wind up doing it every 10 years. Right. Yeah.

Okay.

Because usually the improvement plan is, what, a 10-year look, actually?

No, the CIP is a six-year look.

Six-year?

So we should do this soon. The assessment's every five years. We need an estimate. Are you in touch with him at all?

Am I in touch with Mark?

Yes. Did you find out what the going rate is?

I will, yeah. I'll do that soon. I'll do that so that I can send something out to you guys next Wednesday. Okay.

Can we use impact fees to pay for that?

No, because it's not new, it's just revisited.

Capital, capital. I think you need to do some reading. That's what I think.

All right. I think you knew that.

I think we answered Jen's questions. Jen, if you have any, need any clarifications, call Mark. And are we thinking September 17th?

Now, is she planning on coming in to do a presentation?

Yeah. She's going to watch this and take your comments and tailor a presentation to your needs.

In the original document we adopted in 22, there's discussion of different ways to assess impact fees on ADUs. We just do it per billing permit. But you can also do it on square footage. So maybe her thoughts or Glenn's thoughts on how What kind of change we might make? Is that something we should do? Is it better to let it go as it is? And then my question of the night here is, how has the Board of Selectmen been addressing or applying impact fees to ADUs, say, in the last year or two that you've been on? I know going back six or seven years, they were not.

I haven't been here a year yet. They were.

Going back six or seven years ago, there was a decision by the current board at that time not to charge impact fees on ADUs.

We didn't, if it was, so we didn't charge impact fees on certain ADUs, and that was like, we had a situation where senior, you know, mom and dad basically, they put an ADU on for mom and dad to live, and it's attached to the house. We didn't charge an impact fee for that one. That was the only one I remember waiving. They came before, they were in town for, like you, A thousand years, right?

No, not quite that much. But anyway, how does, so that makes sense. So somebody comes in, I don't know if that's according to our regulation, but I can see the board having that thought process, but you have to understand that older people like me, something happens to us after a few years. Somebody can rent it out, yeah.

Right, and Mark made that point this afternoon when I was talking to him, because it could be based on bedrooms, too. Because if you have a single bedroom, you're not going to have the kids going to the schools.

But just to be fair to everybody, it seems like there should be some more uniform standard than just saying, you guys are old, life expenses.

That was Ken Christensen was the chair of the board. I don't remember that discussion. And then, yeah, I mean, because everyone has a life expectancy, including us. So I remember... It's on, I can actually, I know exactly where the house is. I drive by it every now and then.

It's on Lake Road.

Somebody across the table knows where it is. What you may consider would be a bedroom, meaning if you have an ADU, that's a single.

That's a three-bedroom ADU.

That's a single bedroom. How much impact does it have on your school? Absolutely none. So you may consider waiving the school portion of that impact fee.

So can we add that to Jen's list? She's listening right now, my friend. Yeah, I mean, there's going to be a fair way. There is.

Well, and going back to our whole discussion last year when we were writing the ordinance, there was a lot of discussion about ADUs being viable options for living, period, not special use cases and things. And we set the limit at 1,100 square feet. So they're dwellings.

But it just seems whatever is fair is the way it should be uniform enforcement of that.

Yeah, there should be no exceptions to it. It's kind of like a building inspection.

No, it should be charged. It is a lower fee. It's a two or more structure fee. It is a lower impact fee than your standard single family dwelling. And I think rightfully so. They do not, in my opinion... uh... justify that type of impact as as i previously stated you know a lot of your single-bedroom how many children are you putting in a school system in a single bed you know what it would answer is not i'm not suggesting any hard and fast schools but yeah whatever the rules are they ought to be incorporated into your methodology applied consistently uh... and we should probably look at if we're going to have different types of development than we really had in the past like in our

commercial district, then we should probably look at that, too, when we have Mark.

I would say, yeah, and then you also probably want to know, is there any exceptions to those rules, right? Like, where should we, where would we legally be required to deviate from whatever the schedule is?

I think within the RSA, doesn't it state, Mr. Greenwood, that you have to have a waiver process? Yep.

Cool. Okay. Data centers. So I have been approached a couple times by local citizens concerned about the potential for development of data centers in towns. My initial thought was we have things on the books for site plan review that looks at... vibration noise all of those good things uh water um i not really electricity demand i don't think that's i don't know how you deal with that but i know we have limited space for development but i wanted to bring it to folks to see what you think and if you think it's something that we should consider adding restrictions on or parameters around anything

I know a lot of the data centers that are being developed right now are going into really cold climates because they need to keep them cool. And so one of the ways to keep the electrical use down is not to have all this air conditioning running to keep all this electronics cool. So a lot of them are going and are being put into colder climates, such as Alaska or further north, or Norwegian countries. There's a ton of them in Maryland.

They're pushing in Northwood.

Yeah, they're all trying to do North.

No, Northwood. Nottingham. Nottingham. Nottingham. Nottingham. It was pulled because of public opposition. So they have to stay really cold, though?

They don't have to stay cold if you're willing to pay the cost for keeping them climate-controllable.

Well, the downside is make sure they just put it wherever sources because it's the most expensive electric company we have. Well, I've had this.

But the land is probably cheaper.

I've had this inquiry as well.

Yeah.

But the other, one of the reasons why they use so much water is to keep the temperature down.

But don't they recirculate that water? People seem to have the idea that they cool the plant with fresh water and then it's blasted off to the moon or something. Don't they just recycle it in a closed system?

I thought it was evaporative cooling, so I think they lose a lot of water.

So there was a proposed project in Nottingham that was pulled because of public opposition. So the Nottingham Planning Board actually voted to to put a moratorium on data centers because of this whole experience that they had. So sort of my thoughts on this, I personally do not want to see data centers in Brentwood. With that said, I also think we should be careful about not drawing attention to ourselves and potentially making ourselves a target. If we start to put forward regulations that seem to be really heavily targeted at these data centers, could that maybe paint a target on us? Or are we better off just kind of like,

Using the tools that we have.

Using the tools that we have. I honestly don't know. I'm just kind of throwing that out there, something that we should consider.

When you see, there are stories on that on TV. These are big, large acreage, 20, 30 acre facilities. Brentwood doesn't really have that.

I don't see us being desirable.

It's hard to envision a scenario where it would be feasible.

Down Pine Road, and it's got the big aquifer down there.

That is true.

And I think earlier.

There was plenty of water. That water goes to the Atlantic Ocean. You either use it or it goes into the Atlantic Ocean.

Part of this, I think, is it's hard to predict. I know we don't have open spaces. That would be immediately obvious. But would it make people who are concerned about it, would it reassure them? that we've thought about it and that we got something in place to protect the community.

Yeah, we could have some neutral person from RPC or some organization come in and talk about it, you know, the pros and the cons. I mean, I don't know anything about data centers. I was going to say. But we know a couple things. We know the Chinese and other countries are building these like crazy. So for our national interest, I don't know that they're really bad for the country. They're probably something that the United States needs to do to keep up with modern technology. As far as trying to ban data centers, Glenn, it seems like it'd be kind of a complicated regulatory action to single out, I don't know how you would describe a data center in terms of the- If the goal is to prohibit them, you can just simply change your zoning ordinance and prohibit them.

Just list them and- Just say that that was prohibited.

I've had a couple of people ask me about this, and I'm sorry, I went to a Red Sox game last night, so I sound like Peter Brady today. But there are so many factors working against New Hampshire communities being good targets for these. I mean, the data center industry is really looking at places where you're not looking at two levels of regulation. You're looking at local regulation in New Hampshire and state regulation, and they're looking for states where it's just state regulation, where they don't have to worry about what the locals are saying. And we have a lot of local environmental rules in this town that are sometimes then duplicated or exceeded by state rules. I don't think that we need to spend a lot of time worrying about this in the community of Brentwood.

And I do think that some of these companies may have seen what happened in Nottingham and kind of said, is it really worth the headache for us to try to push this when the community is not going to stand?

And are they really seriously looking at the most expensive electric rate in the country as being the place to locate? No, I totally agree with you. I understand the energy load is a huge issue here. Well, New Hampshire isn't the state to come to for that then.

Well, and we don't exactly have the most stable, at least where I live, the most stable energy. Electricity supply.

I look at it as kind of a feel-good assertion to say we're going to outlaw them. That's what I'm thinking.

So let's do this. We'll table it for now. Everybody kind of read up a little bit. I don't see the harm in adding it to the list of things that aren't allowed. that we already have, and especially if that would be responsive to what people's concerns are.

We should be responsive based on scientific fact and not just a feel-good thing. I mean, it's a feel-good thing. People say, I want to just ban it. I want to ban a lot of things. But is there any justification for it? Ultimately, if there's no justification for it, a court might fine for a property owner that would say, hey, town just can't outrightly ban one industry.

Well, and you're going to probably find that a lot of the stuff becomes litigious anyway, right? So I know Barrington just or Nottingham just put the moratorium on it. But if there was nothing prohibitive for them from doing that, they could literally just go get an injunction.

It doesn't matter what they want to do. Well, see, that's why I'm saying, do we want to draw attention to ourselves here?

Because sometimes somebody's eventually going to go, now I need to do this because I have to prove that I can do it.

That's the thing. And then to create a court precedent. So that's why I'm sort of wary of putting a target on us.

So sometimes you're kind of stepping back and let's see where this all plays out.

try to find a landmass in Brantwood 20 to 30 acres in size that has no wetlands on it whatsoever.

So the other thing that we could do is take a look at our site plan regulations where we talk about odors and vibrations and all those things and see if there's anything we want to add to that list.

We've had many hydrological studies done on proposed developments in Brantwood, and if the waters are concerned, that would be the first holdup or the first hurdle for somebody to do that. Okay.

Think about it.

Where'd that come from? I'll make a motion to approve the July 16th minutes. Second.

Any changes? It's a long meeting, eh? Second? Oh, sorry, you already seconded. Second. All in favor? Aye.

Aye. Abstain.

Any other business? So we have in your second packet the original application from Premier Towing for a repair registration. We had our building inspector. go out and the applicant provided photos if you remember he has two designated parking spots according to his lease so the question is you know Chuck said that particular spot looks satisfactory, but as we talked about last time, that's just part of a larger property with a site plan. I think there's still concerns about the area immediately adjacent, and I still have questions about two spaces for a business that has three trucks and will have cars in addition.

That's a legitimate concern, isn't it?

So the building inspectors or code enforcement officers' final analysis was that they are out of compliance with the approved site plan, period. Now, the Board of Selectmen had sent them a cease and desist based on the discussion we had here implying that the board felt that they were in noncompliance. So the next step was that the code enforcement officer went out. He did his review. He issued the report. You know based on the fact that selectman that issues a cease and desist I don't think a cease and desist was ever issued by the select board So so it wasn't so the only thing the planning board could really do would be to revoke The site plan approval well, I think that all that's in front of us right now is whether or not to sign to

the DMV request.

But seemingly more importantly, to look out for the taxpayers and the residents of town.

Well, this just went out yesterday.

Okay, so then I'll bring that up after we discuss this. So I'll make a motion that we deny this application. Second.

Further discussion? All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Mark will keep us up to date, and the select board representative will keep us up to date on the violation.

I will contact the state of New Hampshire and tell them that this particular application has been denied. And the applicant can, my advice would be the applicant can reapply when the entire site is compliant.

Should we make a request to the property owner of that site to come in for further site plan discussions in terms of... On the minimum...

He is, if you would read the notice that went out. This is a notice that the building inspector sent to the property owner, to the association, which they all own the property.

The action is really against the association. It's not against one member, but it's against the association because it's the association that has the current approval to operate on the site.

That is correct. If you could just read through that and if there's something that you disagree about it, then we can talk about that.

I think at this point we want to let them receive the notice, talk to Chuck about it, and then go from there.

It seems like he stated his thoughts and his... No, what he said was that this particular unit is compliant, the building inspector. But there were other issues on the site. Correct.

So how do we make that next step? Instead of just pushing under the rug, we know there's...

If you read what was sent, they're going to contact my office for what they are not in compliance with.

Could you update us the first of September to see if you've been, to tell us the board? Sure, sure.

What I'm saying to you is that this is a process and it's not an easy process and it takes time. So this notice of violation has gone out from the building inspector who is the code enforcement and they've been instructed to contact my office for compliance. I will work with them to get them compliant.

In the future, we probably have a date certain when we ask for their compliance or their approach.

Well, you would just report that. See, this is an interesting quandary, right? So you would report that to the proper authorities. You know, this board can recommend that the select board issue a cease and desist. They can recommend that this go to the code enforcement officer. And we can take it from there until at some point when negotiations break down, then you could go into more serious action as in a revoking of a site plan. Am I correct, Mr. Greenwood, to say that?

We've told them that they have to acknowledge that they've received this within seven days of it going out. So that should spur them to start action on this.

And the other issue, and I talked to Mark before the meeting about this, is the other issue is the entire site plan is for the entire association. It's not just a specific unit owner. Absolutely. So they can come and ask us to do something. Problem is they have their own small governmental agency. association with the chair and everybody else that's part of their own association, their own little condominium complex, that they have to address that first before they really jump into us. So if there's a problem with the whole site plan and they're just a member of the site plan, they have to get their entire collective together to come and fix their issues before they come to us and say, can you sign something?

Right. I'm just trying to put some pressure on to make sure that, in a reasonably timely manner, that action does take place, because I can see it. It's almost more than many years. What will happen is nothing is said. nothing's followed up on, things will just continue as they are, period.

So if they don't acknowledge receipt, and if you look to, the fire department has a lot of issues with them as well. So I imagine they'll also be following up because it has to do with safety. So if they don't contact Mark, contact the fire department, fire next meeting, then we can talk about our recommendations to...

The select board for a cease and desist and correct me if I'm wrong When he came in to speak to us he made a comment in reference to Being a condominium Association, but separate units being sold independently now one Yeah, so when so my question is do the guidelines on then are eliminated for these issues about parking? No.

There's only one site plan.

So he's got to follow that site plan. If I buy a condominium, I'm adhering to their bylaws. Well, the bylaws, it's one building site plan. It just happens to be four separate units or multiple units within the condo association. That's why I said there's two different government governing bodies.

But their condo association requirements don't impact us. They state that they have to comply with the accepted site plan by the town. Okay. So there really is no wiggle room.

So when he stands there and says, I've got three vehicles, I'm authorized two lots, I'll park one in the garage.

he's that type yeah okay and how does he work on a vehicle and i think the you know regardless like if it was broken down differently it sounded like the same owner owns the whole building and there's stuff all over the property it's all about the money so when it comes time to to delete their or to take back their approval

that's when the money issues start coming in, and that's when you'll get some leverage on them, begin to improve.

Right, and that's the other thing, too, is since they have that bylaw governing their own little governance in that association, in reality, they should be getting together and coming to an agreement on what's going on in the entire lot. They're not doing that.

To comply.

They're all working individually instead of working collectively. When they bought a condo, They agreed to work collectively.

Their property's worth so much money, X number of dollars.

Yeah, let's, yeah, come back to this. And the person who came in is also not the owner and doesn't have control over the site.

Right, right. So part of the problem is when you lease one of these units, when you rent one of these units, you should be handed the condo docs You should be handed the site plan. These are the limitations of this site. And maybe that's not the applicant for you. That's not the renter for you because he can't stay within the limits of it. That's where this all stems from.

All right, so let's... Yeah, I do think we will. Yeah, let's move on. So we've got one more thing on the agenda under other business. In your packet, a report from BAG Land Consultants on the Rulo property and removal of debris and site restoration. Okay. Is there anything that we need to do at this point, or is this just an update?

No, I've just included that within your packet, so informative, so you're up to date on what has happened with that violation and has come to its conclusion.

When a new development plan comes in, they'll be made part of the record of the new application.

Yeah, it's already a file in my office.

We have it now, so it's already part of the public record on the property.

Yes, it's already, yeah.

So one other thing I wanted to mention is we have conversations sometimes we all observe things we drive around and we say hey that doesn't look great and somebody should look at that and. But we don't really do anything formally and it kind of comes up again, so I think we want to start if if we see things that are pretty obviously out of compliance, we should formally refer them to the building inspector.

If you see something, say something.

Well, the problem is we've been seeing things and saying things, but then not writing it down. So if there are things, I think we can give Mark a list. We can vote to turn that list over to the building inspector. And I think it's a matter of fairness, too, because people are coming in. We don't want to discourage people from coming in. They need to come in and update things. So we should, if we see other properties that are out of compliance, but they're not coming in for something, I still think we should take a look.

In Kingston, the planning board has a process of a notification of noncompliance. And it's a one-page form that the planning board fills out if they agree as a board they're seeing something that needs to be addressed. And it gets forwarded along to the board select committee.

So you're not saying, contact the building inspector separately if we see something.

Yeah. Do we need to? Well, in order to make things streamlined, especially if it's coming from this board, my recommendation would be it should be, you can memorialize it by sending an email to Mark, and then he can basically get it, work with Chuck, and get that addressed. If you send an email, you've basically memorialized your concern, documented it, then let Mark But you have it as a board.

Yes, that's what I would prefer if you had a motion.

Because you need to involve the chair.

Anybody can send something to the board of selectors. Any of you. when you're out and about can go to the Board of Selectmen. If what you want is to have the Planning Board do it, it really can't be an email. It has to be something sent from the Planning Board to the Board of Selectmen saying that the Planning Board is taking issue with this. In Kingston, that notification says what the zoning violation is. It's written in so that when it comes to the Board of Selectmen, they're not, wondering what the violation is. We've already told them what we feel the violation is.

And sometimes it's obvious, right? Like that auto place had a bunch of cars out by the road. We all knew that they weren't supposed to be there. Sometimes I'm not sure. Like there's a business on 125 that has several trailers now and one that seems to be kind of permanently set up. I don't remember. I don't know if I was here. Yeah, I don't know if the site plan allowed that. So somebody needs to check. Whether that's Mark or.

Which is completely easy to do. Yeah. So don't you send an email to Mark to put it on the agenda and then talk to the board and then submit it?

I think it definitely should be some sort of verified statement from the planning board if you're doing it as the planning

And a motion, and a second, and a vote.

Right, it can't just be an email if the desire is it's coming from a group of people. Correct. Because you can't all just become the signatories on an email. Right, if I'm going to submit.

If you send him an email and he keeps a list and then he comes before the board and says these are the things that came up.

If I'm going to submit. That's something from Bruce. Bruce talked about this. And that's the benefit of just having a form that's easy to fill out and we can have it filled out before the discussion even happens with the board. and vote on it and then we have a date and a time and a motion that said this is how the planning board is feeling about this issue is there a chance of getting a form

Is there a chance of getting that form to look at?

Yeah, I can send that out to you on Monday.

That'd be great. If you, Mr. Greenwood, if you would be so kind as... I'll send it to you. And I will reformat it and re-letter it.

Because it does actually, it works well. It's a process that works well.

I don't think you want to fill out Kingston's form.

No, I think that's great. You've got many eyes, different people on the planning board, but that doesn't observe a resident's right to know. Not at all.

This is just because we talk about things, and I feel like we're all like, yeah, somebody should do something about that. I get frustrated.

So two weeks ago, it was a very obvious violation over on Crawley Falls Road that's been going on for way too long. So I wrote a letter to the Board of Settlements. I've always asked that you give a signed complaint letter. So I cited the zoning requirements after talking with Linda Mark, the items that they were in error with, and forward that on.

And you got a cease and desist.

So that works too.

If I'm going to submit a form... If I'm going to submit a form to any other board on behalf of the planning board, it has to be on behalf of the planning board.

It can't be an individual member coming in and talking to you.

A citizen has a questionable right to address. In fact, we're going to get one next week, too, on another piece of the board.

Because code enforcement is the board's select response. I can do a bad.

Everybody wants to be everybody's friend.

I think you found your person and reporting person. Yes, our champion.

So for tonight, the one that I would like to put forth to the select board is the abandoned trailers under the power line on 125. Did you already do that one?

That's the next one? Any board could actually write it. I'll back off on that one. Okay.

I would say you push forward with that, Mr. Stevens. Go on, Mike. Go, go.

The one with the power lines? Yes. Push on. It's all part of one big lot.

Less paperwork. There's two Sanborn lots. Yeah, that wasn't the one that we. So there is a violation on the first lot, but the containers are on the second lot. The thing that finally ticked me off was I hear people are always joking about Brentwood, and they're saying, Bruce, you know, we want to come to town or suggest somebody come to town, There's not a reference point, because you guys ain't got no post office. But we do know how to address people and give them directions based on the three containers that have been sitting on the side of the road.

They're slowly sinking. OK. So do we need a motion, or are we just going to let Bruce?

Well, I'm going to do mine. But I think as far as a general process for the board, we ought to adopt exactly what you said. But again, any private resident can write when they want to write. So to speed up a little bit, I didn't do that.

OK. That'll be faster.

But there should be a template in place

We're going to get the one from Kingston.

We're going to work on that.

So look at that on September 17th.

Keep in mind, when you have a concern, that has to be followed with a zoning ordinance. They're in violation. They're in violation of what?

Right, yeah. That's, yeah.

So you have to look that up. On this notice of violation, you have to spell it out.

But some of it is site plan. Like, they're not, yeah. And that's where we need to verify. Yes. We don't know them all.

In this case, this hypothetical situation. Hypothetically speaking. There ain't no site plan. Right.

Learn something new tonight. Okay. Any other business anybody wants to bring forward?

Motion to adjourn.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

All right. Who was my second?

Turn off your mic.