Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Okay.

I'll call to order the City of Ellsworth Planning Board meeting for September 2nd, 2026. Smack that again.

Yeah, hit it again.

Introductions, please.

Lisa LaRue, Planning Board Member.

John DeLeo, Chair. Rick Lowes, Co-Chair, Vice-Chair, Vice-Chair. Mike Hange, Board Member.

Mark Devane, Alternate.

Staff, introductions.

Brittany Merrill, City Planner.

Robert Grant, code officer.

Thomas Canavan, fire inspector.

Andrew Lutterlow, deputy code officer. Matt. Matt is also here.

Okay. ITEM NUMBER TWO, ADOPTION OF MEETINGS FROM THE JULY 1st, 2026 REGULAR MEETING, JULY 1st, 2026 MEETING, JULY 21st, 2026 SITE VISIT, AND AUGUST 5th, 2026 REGULAR MEETING. ANY ADDITIONS, DELETIONS? NO, I DIDN'T SEE ANY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT.

MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT.

SECOND. SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? WE DID. So Matt is the voting member of the... alternates tonight Before we get to item three if anybody here is for here for item number four Which is the anchor in campground just to let you know that's going to be tabled. So There's not gonna be any action on that. I don't know if some of you here or for that. It's gonna be table There's no public hearing on it If you want to sit around for item number three, that's fine. If not, I just thought I'd save you some time with sitting here

I was wondering, Board Chair, if I'd be able to make some comments on the process, not the application itself.

Absolutely not. No. Just going to table it, and it's up to the council to tell us what we're doing next.

Wouldn't it have been nice to tell everybody ahead of time so we didn't come for something that we didn't table?

That would have been up to the council. Item number three, preliminary plan review of a major subdivision entitled Boulder Creek Subdivision for applicant and owner Little Duck Pond Forest LLC. The proposal is to create 11 residential lots. The subject property is approximately 1,662 acre lot located on the Colon Road tax map 93 lot one in a rural zoning district. Anybody here representing Boulder Creek Subdivision? Okay, the floor is all yours.

And I appreciate your time. And just as you spoke, Little Duck Pond Forest is proposing this 11-lot residential subdivision on Nicollin Road there. We've followed the TRT direction, updated some plans and the narrative there in regards to this. We've provided the requested mapping that was needed, some documentation, peak hour traffic information that was requested follow-up on, some floodplain information, and then coordinated fire protection requirements there. We also completed some additional deed research on the Nicollin Road there and have some information on that. And then...

Yes. Okay. Apologize.

Yeah.

Yeah. as long as it's okay with the board.

Yeah. There's a couple documents in here.

Yeah. Late documents. I just wanted to pass it out.

I mean, where it's for the preliminary, I think you might as well get them tonight.

Sorry about that. Thank you. Okay, go ahead, John. Thank you for that. And then also the request was to provide some financial capacity there, and we just recently submitted additional information on that requirement, so.

So why don't you just present what the project is and speak up a little because there's a lot of people here and these don't amplify your voice, so I'm sure everybody behind you would like to hear what you're saying.

Yeah, absolutely. So again, as you mentioned, it's an 11-lot subdivision there on the Nicklin Road in Ellsworth. The lots vary in size, but they're larger. We've provided a soils evaluation and went through the technical review to fulfill the requirements there. And yes, no, no plan building just to sell the lots as land. So no further development on them other than the land itself.

Okay. And was it you that wrote the supplemental narrative on the Colon Road access?

Correct. Our company did it. One of our surveyors did some further research on that.

Maybe you could just go over that, because some of the board members might not realize that the Colon Road is not, in the true sense of the word, a public road. I mean, it's basically a private road open to the public because of an easement that the city owns, I believe, down as far as the boat launch.

Am I saying that right, closely?

Yes.

So maybe you could just go over a little what you have written in the colon with access. Yeah.

And that research we did there, you're exactly right, as mentioned.

Hold on a second. Oh.

It's in the narrative. What section is the narrative in?

The two pages that you gave me. I thought that's what you were doing.

That's what I thought. What section do you mean?

Yes, I'm sorry. So that narrative goes in tab three, and on the page there,

THESE TWO PAGES. I DON'T THINK WE JUST, THE REST OF THEM WEREN'T CUT DOWN.

YOU INCLUDED THOSE TWO PAGES THAT YOU SAW IN THE NARRATIVE.

OH, SORRY. THAT'S IN POINT NUMBER 11 IN THE NARRATIVE, BUT THAT'S JUST IN ADDITION TO THERE. YEAH.

SO THIS ONE SHEET AMPLIFIES SOMETHING HERE.

YES, SIR, EXACTLY. I'M CONFUSED.

I'M CONFUSED.

WHAT IS IT WE'RE MISSING? SOMETHING LOOKS LIKE THIS. OKAY.

DO WE HAVE COPIES OF THOSE? THE ONE-PAGE SUPPLEMENTAL NARRATIVE IN THE COLIN ROAD ACCESS THAT YOU WANTED THE BOARD TO CONSIDER TONIGHT. YES. I DON'T HAVE PHYSICAL... APPARENTLY, I'M THE ONLY PERSON THAT HAS A COPY OF IT.

OKAY, I DON'T HAVE PHYSICAL COPIES OF IT. No, and physical copies of that, it's kind of mentioned in the narrative, but that, I'm sorry, I should have had more physical copies.

There's nothing in tab 11. Is that where you're saying it's supposed to be?

Yes, that's where we would put it.

It's not there. Why don't you just... Go ahead with the... Do you have a copy of this? Yes. Absolutely. Why don't you tell the rest of the board basically what Nicole and Road Access amounts to. Absolutely.

So just kind of the summation there of it. Get that in front of me. Just because there is, you know, some specifics there I would like to read so it's clear to everybody. I'll open that.

Can you read that?

Go ahead. Just read it out loud.

Sorry. It's taking me a second to find it on mine. Can you just read it for us? Yeah, sorry, just getting that. I apologize. Thank you. So just based upon the deed information reviewed, Little Duck Pond Forest LLC owns the fee simple in portions of Nicolin Road where the roadway adjoins and passes through the property, so where it's abuts there. A two-ride, 33-foot easement over Nicollin Road was conveyed to the inhabitants of the city of Ellsworth as evidenced by the deed recorded in the registry under Book 909, page 57. The city has historically maintained this easement by plowing, sanding, and grading the roadway. And based upon its recorded conveyance and the city's longstanding maintenance, the roadway has functioned as a public way serving those properties in existence along the Nicollin Road, including Little Duck Pond Forest property. THE DEED RESEARCH PERFORMED TO DATE HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY PRIOR ROAD ASSOCIATIONS ESTABLISHED FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR LOTS ALONG NICHOLIN ROAD, AND NO NEW SUBDIVISION ROAD IS PROPOSED AS PART OF THE BOULDER CREEK SUBDIVISION. THESE LOTS ARE JUST OFF OF IT AND WILL BE GIVEN AT EASEMENT.

OKAY. SO, I MEAN, BASICALLY WHAT IT BOILS DOWN TO, I'M SURE OF ALL THESE PEOPLE that it's not a public road in the sense of other public roads that the city has that receive full maintenance. I mean, the city does do some maintenance on it, and code enforcement can talk to what they do if you want. But, I mean, that's been an issue. Yeah. Going back 50 years, nothing that your company started with, but it's an issue for the people that live down there because there's a lot of houses, camps down in there now that would like to see a road taken care of. But I won't get into the depth of the discussions that the council has had going back. I mean, I've been here 50 years, and that discussion goes back 50 years. Okay.

It goes back longer than that, probably. Oh, yeah.

Oh, absolutely.

What was the question?

I'll just maybe put in the plain words for the board and everybody that lives down there knows what the issue is, but how the city deals with the colon road.

Okay, so once you get to the train tracks, it's no longer paved. When you go down the hill, it's paved. The city owns that section. Once you cross the tracks, it's technically a private road, which even I wasn't aware of. I thought it was public. It's private after you cross the tracks until you get to the boat launch, which is a couple of miles. The state pays the city to maintain that to keep access to the boat launch. but it's technically privately owned. What we are considered to have is light maintenance, but that could consist of fixing any of the potholes. We grade it a few times a year. Mud came up through it a couple times this spring. We fixed that. We also do the ditching. It has some fairly new round rock ditching all along the Nicollin Road to the boat launch. We just did that over the last couple of years. It's more than light maintenance, really. It's

And it's the city's intention to continue to do stuff?

Yes, the state reimburses us. I'm not sure if it's in full. I'm not privy to any of that, but I know that the state does reimburse the city to maintain that section of the road down to the boat launch, which this subdivision is entirely within that section. So that part of the road is maintained by the city.

Is there anything in the DEEDS THAT YOU'RE CONVEYING OR WANT TO CONVEY TO PEOPLE THAT COVERS THIS OR DESCRIBES IT IN ANY WAY?

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING IN THERE. I DON'T RECALL SEEING ANYTHING, BUT IT'S A KNOWN THING. WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION FROM... SO IT'S A KNOWN THING. YEAH, NO. BUT IT MAY NOT BE LEGAL, RIGHT? NO, IT IS. THERE'S A DOCUMENT THAT WE HAVE FROM CITY MANAGER TIM KING We had one from way all the way back then talking about this. Okay. You know, how it all worked.

So there's precedent and there's a paper trail that the city, DOES THIS WITH SOMEBODY ELSE'S MONEY IN. YES.

AND IT WAS BRIAN MOON ALSO, I THINK, WAS THERE A MEMO IN THERE FROM BRIAN?

NOT A MEMO, BUT WE HAVE AN EMAIL FROM PUBLIC WORKS, AND THEN WE DO HAVE A CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN DAVID COLE AND THE ATTORNEY DISCUSSING THAT.

AND THERE'S NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MAINTENANCE OR ANYTHING THAT RUNS WITH THE NEW DEEDS THAT YOU'LL BE DEVELOPING?

We're not proposing any sort of anything new there.

Okay, but there's nothing in the deeds of property that you might be selling, these lots, that speaks to this at all. Is that correct?

No, there's no type of road association.

Yeah, no, there's never been a road. Once you get past the boat launch, there's a road association. But before that, there's never been one, to my knowledge.

And this is all before the launch, right?

Yeah, all 11 lots are before the boat launch. And I may or may not have been part of the crew that maintained the road beyond the boat launch in my previous employee at one time. So I know a little bit about this as well.

But if there's not a deed notification of this, is there a deed letting them know there's an easement for the road? You mentioned that there's a 33-foot easement. Is that on the deed?

To the inhabitants of Ellsworth?

to any of the new people who are going to buy lots?

Oh, it would be.

Okay. I just want to make that real clear, that the easement would be noted on the individual deeds, but not any kind of road maintenance HOA requirement, just the fact that there is an easement by the City of Ellsworth on this private road.

But if you look at the drawing, the road which sits in the easement is outside of the property lines of all the proposed lots, right? I mean, this, I'm looking at your drawing.

Does it touch on the bottom? Is it mean?

It basically, you know, it's a curved linear line, and there are, you know, there's all kinds of surveying information. on this map, okay? And what that shows is the red line is the boundary of the properties. And that is described by a court or whatever. But the road itself, whoever owns it or whatever, is outside of that property line. So here's the property line and the road is on the other side of that property line.

The existence of it or is it actually the 33, because a lot of times roads are only 25 foot wide and the pin is actually in the middle and it extends beyond. So that's the question.

Hard to say from this. Right.

But if it touches their property, if it at all touches their property, they should be aware that there's an easement, I would think.

It seems like there should be something official in there.

I mean, that was one question I had, too. And not just your company, but there's been other subdivisions in the past. Individual lots get sold. It was back a while ago. I think there was five or ten lots got sold.

got subdivided by a resident down there and sold.

And I'm not so sure that information that the Cullen Road is not a public road as everybody thinks a public road is. And when people buy these lots and build on, you know, they invest a significant sum of money and then at some point, usually in the spring, when the road turns to mud, then they kind of wonder, well, why isn't the city taking care of it? And I mean, over the years, there have been that discussion before the council. But at this point, I'm not speaking for the city, but they're probably doing as much maintenance on the road as they will ever do. We grade it a few times a year. Whether they should or not, that's another topic for discussion, not before the planning board. But I just wondered if it would be prudent, and I don't know if in the past, if information like the colon road access has appeared on a site plan.

Yeah.

I mean, would you be willing to put that on your site plan so whether it be in the deed, that so when people buy these lots, they have this information that probably in the past they had never had before. So they know what they're buying. I mean, I would just, I don't know if I can force you to do that.

I'm just asking if that would be... Because otherwise you're going to have 11 brand new homeowners that are going to be in here screaming at the city when it's not the city's fault.

Yeah, understood.

So, buyer beware, but give them the information so that we don't create more drama for the city.

Yeah, I mean, this is all good intentions, and I get that. But down the line, when we're all dead, some of us sooner than others, you know, there could be a real problem with, you know, like she's saying. I mean, it's like, what the hell, right?

Can I ask a question?

Not yet. You'll have time. We'll get to a public hearing and... You'll have plenty of time to ask questions.

The other thing is to do what most subdivisions do is require HOA, and then as this road gets more built out, more built out, more built out, you have all these little HOAs, which can be very problematic as well.

I do think this road might be... Almost built out at this point with this addition. There's not a whole lot left down there. Okay. Right along the colon that is developable. But there's some. I'm sorry. Go ahead. I'm done. Are you sure? I think. For now. All right.

But, you know, I mean, it might be something as simple as, you know, making sure that the access between these property owners that would be property owners and this easement is maintained, you know, that they... Yeah, that they're advised.

Yeah. That the easement is shown if it touches their property, but they're advised that this is a private property.

Yeah, each one of these looks like they're, in a sense, an abutter to that easement. Yeah. So it seems like it should get some mention given the weirdness of the relationship.

and you want that information to carry from buyer to buyer, because somebody may buy it, two years later they sell it to somebody else, that person needs to know the information.

Sounds good. What we'll do is we'll get with the owner and with our surveyors to come up with a plan of either putting a note on the plan or incorporating that into the deed just so that they're aware. Or the description or whatever. Or the description, yes.

I think it ought to be both on the plan as well.

That's probably true. You know, have a note on the final drawings and also in the deed description or whatever. It makes it more clear.

And it doesn't really change anything.

It just kind of modifies it, right, sort of, as best we can.

Do you have anything else to present to the board? Yeah.

No, I think that was, you know, a concern by many and just we're trying to better understand it so that, you know, we're not creating any issues there.

Yeah. Questions from the board? I have a couple comments for you. Yes. Knowing that this is a strange road as far as public, private, and the state pays the city to take care of it, several times in your plan or in your narratives, it talks about the appropriate ownership, maintenance, and mechanism will be established as the project proceeds to the final plan approval. And one of the things that I really appreciate in your plan, and Thomas, kudos to you for making this happen, is that Within these pieces of property, you have two underground tanks of 20,000 gallons of fire protection water supply. And I would hope that there would be a narrative in your plan somewhere indicating that the water in those cisterns can be used for all the properties on the Coleman Road, not just your subdivision. And I'm sure the fire department would use it anyway if they had to use it. But that gives the rest of the residents on the Cohen Road all the way down to wherever 20,000 gallons of fire protection water supply, which you are putting in for this subdivision. I think that's an excellent, excellent idea. My question to you is, and I understand there's 50-foot right-of-ways around these cisterns or underground tanks. Who will be maintaining those tanks and maintaining and checking to make sure that they are full at all times? Do you have any idea on that yet?

We're going to work it out with Thomas to make sure we've got a clear plan in place, whether that's up to the lot that it burdens or the subdivision as a whole, and write something so that it would be maintained and established.

Personally, this is from my fire side, I do not believe it's the city's responsibility to maintain those tanks. in the event that something was to happen and there was a catastrophic leak or whatever, and they went to use it and it was empty, the city would be responsible for not having the water there. So, I think it's the responsibility of the developer to make sure that those tanks are maintained and full at all times. So, however you want to do that, but that really should be the developer's responsibility, knowing that you're not going to have an HOA or any kind of road association. It should be the developer that maintains those tanks. That should be on the mylar. as far as the narrative as to your responsibility as the developer for those paintings, not the city. Yeah. Okay?

Understood. And what the thought was, too, is maybe some sort of association is made within the development for that maintenance to occur.

So it's not a road association, but... That's fine, but that needs to be... made very clear to whoever the property owners are for that association and that they understand that those tanks can be used for other properties other than their association. That narrative needs to be specific on the MILR and in the deeds so that they understand that. I think that's important.

Because one of the problems, one of the many problems that could occur is that the You know, everyone's happy as long as the land is still being sold and so forth. But then once that last property, you know, is sold, then it becomes a real problem in terms of who's responsible for the cisterns. And that needs to be clear.

And it's correct. We've run into that before where a developer put a... This was before the tanks were fire ponds. The developer said that they would maintain it, sold all the properties, and never maintained the fire pond. And now it's just a mud hole. So the idea is there needs to be something in writing that the code enforcement can fall back on, or the fire department, indicating that you are responsible, whoever the developer is for that or whatever. But it's an excellent idea because it gives that fire protection for all people down on that road right now. I think that's an excellent point on your part to do that.

That was definitely with coordination with Tom, so much credit there.

Okay. Okay. Anything? What are you saying? No, I was all with the...

If you're going down the line, okay. Just a couple things. Most of them were what we already discussed, but there's a couple other things about the properties that are interesting because, as noted, some of them are in a flood zone, and there's some information about that. And there's also mentioned a Green Lake watershed that is part of this process. And again, when there are things like that, like flood zones, wetlands, Green Lake Watershed, somebody buys it, they don't know what that means. And if it is part of their property and part of this subdivision, those are also pieces of information that should be directly acknowledged on the deed, on the plan, so that every future buyer knows my property has flood zone in it. That means I got to look at flood insurance, no surprises. I I go to build my house and then the building guy tells me I can't do it, you know, what's the problem? So those are the kinds of things that need to be shown and to say it's the Green Lake watershed, what's that? So having the information at the time of sale for each buyer in the future will alleviate headaches for the buyers and headaches for the city trying to explain to people why they can't build in the middle of this wetland. You know, they've got to have buffers. You've got the buffers shown to the streams, but it doesn't do the buyer any good if they don't know what that means and why. So I think that those are two pieces of information that should be included. I didn't find anything about what the Green Lake watershed details were. And if you didn't have them, like, we don't know what they are, so we don't know what to ask.

Gotcha. Okay.

So those are other things that I would like to see.

And just so I'm clear with that, just specific notes on the plan that would be beneficial for that?

The plan's not going to help a buyer. In my belief, that when you have a deed and somebody has a, it's a piece of information that binds to the deed. Your property is part of the Green Lake watershed plan. You need to know that so that you can look it up so that you don't damage the watershed and then find about it, find out about it in a penalty. That's not the time to tell someone and to avoid the city from having to go out and explain to people and sit down with them and explain all this to them. They should know it at the time they buy the lot and that should transfer to every future lot owner in the same way that we talked about the easements because they're critical pieces of environmental information. And we want to preserve the environment to the best of our ability, not be retroactive and fix the problem once it's occurred.

Yeah, makes sense. And just because sometimes the pictures explain so much, the deeds most likely will reference this survey and the subdivision plan that will be recorded in the registry. So they should be able to look up the plan, look at the notes or look at the depiction, you know, how the lots are laid out and the legend. I know it's not... always super easy for people to understand that, but we were trying to put as much on the picture to give reference to that as well on the plans. Yeah.

As long as there's a a true way for somebody purchasing the property to be advised.

Yeah, clearly.

Clearly advised.

And when somebody, for instance, if someone were to buy one of those lots that has a flood zone on it or whatever, when they come in to get permits from us, we inform them what can be done with that property as far as building and everything.

And a good realtor is going to let them know that too.

But a bad realtor won't. So there's that. But as far as the floodplain, that's pretty much information that most people can look for and see, but it's things like this Green Lake watershed. If they don't know it's part of it, how do they know to look for it? That's where it becomes a little confusing. Like if you're in shoreland zoning, but you don't know it, or if you're in a special protected river or protected water, if you're drinking water from Branch Lake or whatever, if you don't know... You can make a mistake and hurt things before you find out. So that's why it needs to be something they can at least know to look for.

Yeah.

Find a way.

And so on the plan, and it's page one or sheet one of two, it's number 13. It mentions that it lies entirely in the Green Lake watershed. Would you, just trying to make sure how we want to provide additional information.

Somewhere within the planned documents, it would probably be a good idea to, is that something that somebody can just look up and find, or is that some obscure thing that you have to look up through deed restrictions or what, you know, like you did with the road? Oh, yeah. As long as it's easy to find.

Okay, and that should be easier to find than that deed work. Okay. Thank you. And just, I want to make sure we get it right with understanding you know, is that note suffice or do we need to?

What do you guys think? Well, I think you can work with Brittany and Rob to get to what boarding is. Okay.

Yeah, because I'm not sure that like this is the plan but every future buyer may not, You know, they're just going to buy it based on the realtor. Here's the lot. It's great. But they'll have it in the deed, so... That's what... And that will be referenced in the deed. That's all you need. That's all you need. Well, there you go.

Okay, perfect.

I think that was... That was really about it. I was just curious. This is one subdivision of two separate parcels, but that's because they're all on one big old deed?

Yes.

Okay. I just wanted to make sure that that was fine.

Just to let you folks know, just in case you haven't seen the site plans, 11 lots altogether, you've probably seen the flags and the sticks down there, but Seven of these lots start shortly after the railroad tracks, you know, heading down towards the lake, and there's four more fairly close to the landing, just so you folks down there, you've probably seen, I mean, the lots themselves, the frontage are staked out along the closed road. You can see where each individual lot's going to be, but it's actually broken up, like I say, seven and four.

Is there any way to show that for the public, Brittany?

Anybody to put that up there? Do you have that? I can pass around a plan, and if they want a closer look, you know, we have a public record copy in my office, and they can request the packet. Just send me an e-mail.

Thank you for explaining that. I should have brought that up. Yeah.

Anything else, Lisa?

Okay.

How about Matt? I'm fine. All right.

Matt?

For reference.

You there, Matt? Ain't nothing for me, thanks. Okay.

Just a couple things. I guess a question not necessarily that deals with the plan board. I always like to ask this, but, I mean, all this property is currently in tree growth, is it not? Is this big lot in tree growth?

I believe it is, yes. Okay.

I mean, are you aware of the fact that if these lots are in tree growth, there's going to be a tree growth penalty fee? He talks to Larry Gardner. You have to pay a fee to take them out of tree growth. I got that right.

Yeah, once it's subdivided. Yeah. It's not necessarily a planning board. Do you want to check with the taxes officer?

Yes, sir.

You have to pay back years of taxes, right? Something like that. I've got no idea.

I'm surprised. We'll check into that and address it.

I guess one question for the code enforcement. Generally, when we deal with subdivisions and They're building a road, coming onto a city road, where these are all, and we deal with sight distance, but where these are all on a pseudo-city road. Pseudo-road. Do their driveways have to comply with site distance?

They're not on a public road. I know this is the weirdest, the only road in town this would ever come up on. But it's not a publicly maintained road, so we don't really have, unless Brian disagreed.

No, Brian said that they still have to pull or do a driveway permit through THE HIGHWAY FOREMAN, SO HE WILL ADDRESS SITE DISTANCE AND MAKE SURE IT'S PROPERLY LOCATED.

OKAY, BECAUSE THAT'S ONE THING, AND DRIVING DOWN THROUGH THERE, I MEAN, THESE LOTS VARY IN SIZE AND FRONTAGE, AND SOME You know, we're located on the road with the road is straight and you've got good visibility. Technically, I mean, it's a 35-mile-an-hour zone, and according to our standards, you have to have 350 feet visibility in each direction.

We don't. Some of them don't have that.

Yeah. And so I think it would be prudent that, you know, not so much maybe to pass it on to the highway department to be really careful about where the these driveways are permitted to get as maximum sight distance as possible.

I flagged that during TRT.

Yeah, and Brian wasn't overly concerned, but he flagged a couple spots that might be, he's going to pay closer attention to.

Yeah, because I think the four that are together down by the boat launch, you have curves and dips and crowns, and that's the place that's going to be most problematic. I certainly don't want to have houses being built and contributing to accidents. Yeah.

So can I add to that a little bit? Certainly. On your checklist, that you've put together. Item four, under lot requirements, you have it checked off and meets requirements. Item I says where a major subdivision abuts or contains an existing or proposed state owned street, driveway, or entrance permits must be obtained from MDOT and noted on the plan and in the deed.

Yes.

Is that correct? Is that what we're talking about here?

It's not a state road.

Okay, so they don't have to do that then?

Correct.

Okay, great.

But John, would it be prudent to not put it on the burden of Ryan trying to figure out each individual one as they sell? Or since it's a subdivision, should we ask for... it to be stated on the plan that this is where the driveways would be best indicated. I mean... I think...

It's a private road.

It's a private road. Can't get there. We don't know how soon they will sell.

Like, there's too many variables.

Because you don't know what the terrain is going to be like in that specific spot. That's true. That's true. That's true. So we just rely on individual... Brian and I will take care of it.

Okay.

Go again. Is there any way from the city's point of view to kind of memorialize that plan because five years from now, ten years from now, you know, if the lots, you know, some lots are still available, you know, just want to make sure that That gets done. Where do you think I'm going?

Say, where do you think I'm going? Just kidding. No, I'm just kidding. No, yeah, we should absolutely, we can work something up, like a memo of understanding or something.

Okay. I will open the public hearing. If you'd like to come make a statement or ask a question, please come up to the podium, give us your name, and I'll go with it.

My name is Jim Testa. I'm a resident of the Nicklin Road. I was just wondering, you know, this public-private thing, it doesn't make any sense to me. I know that you're saying that this isn't a proper forum for this. But you mentioned that this is the only road in town that these issues would be coming up. That should be an alert that there's something off here. I mean, in the summertime, that road is about as private as Main Street. And the city is inviting the public down that road with that boat launch and beach. WOULD THE PLANNING BOARD CONSIDER ASKING THE DEVELOPER TO IMPROVE PORTIONS OF THE ROAD WHERE THOSE LOTS ARE GOING IN?

THAT WOULD BE KIND OF PRETTY MUCH BEYOND OUR PURVIEW. That'd be a city thing. Board directed to the city council. And I don't know, I mean, like I say...

But the other one who issues, who grants the permit? What's that? Who's granting the permit? Who's approving it?

Well, yeah, I mean, we're approving it. We don't have any control over what the city does with the road. And this conversation, this discussion, controversy, I mean, it goes back over 50 years. It goes back longer than that. Oh, yes, absolutely. I say 50 years because that's how long I've been here. And every once in a while, the city council deals with it.

Well, the city, for obvious, I can understand why. I mean, it would be an expense if you called it a public road. But the city is the only one calling it a public road. None of the residents or taxpayers on that road are calling it a public road. I mean, a private road. The city is the one calling it a private road. YOU HAVE ANOTHER EXAMPLE. WELL, ANOTHER EXAMPLE I COULD THINK OF, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAD THE SOLAR FARM COME IN THERE. AND, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT, WHEN THAT ROAD GETS BUILT UP, THERE'S MORE AND MORE HOUSES GOING IN THERE. THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WANT THAT ROAD PAVED, AND THEY'RE GOING TO WANT THE CITY TO DO IT. AND YOU CAN SHAKE YOUR HEAD ALL YOU WANT, BUT THAT COULD BE A SERIOUS ISSUE THAT COMES UP. Why wouldn't the city ask the developer of that solar farm and even the substation to improve the portions of the road? I mean, they're going to be putting additional traffic on the road and use. Why shouldn't they be asked to improve the road and bring it up to specs and maybe get it to a point where the city could take it over?

I don't have an answer for you, Mr. Testo.

Well, I mean, it's a fair question before you grant approval of this.

Well, I mean, it's not in our purview to require him to do, you know, a committee to do that.

Well, the city does the maintenance on the road. So they should have some say.

Yeah, because the state pays us to do that for them so they don't have to send a truck down there and do it. That's the only reason that we're getting that money to do that.

Yeah, the city doesn't maintain other private roads, so...

The only reason we're doing that is because that is a state boat launch, not a city boat launch, and the state needs help keeping that open for the people to use it.

And there's a whole process for a private road to be accepted by the city as a public road. That can be found in Chapter 56, Article 9, Section 917.

Right. So is it that, like, that process has never been initiated? I mean, what is...

It's beyond my time, so I'm not sure if it's been tried before, but there is a procedure set in place. I do know the private road has to be brought up to public road specifications before the council can adopt it, but you do have to go to council to request them to adopt the road as a public road. It's not... The planning board has no say over that. All right.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT, THAT IT HAD TO BE BROUGHT UP TO CERTAIN SPECS.

AND THAT IS CHAPTER 56, ARTICLE I.

SO THIS IS RELEVANT.

AND IT'S ALSO QUITE COSTLY.

that money to pave that road. You can't put the onerous on one property owner who uses that public road just because they're putting in 11 new houses.

But you can certainly ask them to... We're not asking.

Why would... Couldn't they at least do the portion of the road where their subdivision is?

Currently on a private road, which it is, we can't require the developer to pave a section of private road to do the improvements because it's not a state road, it's a private road. Many people enjoy having private roads that are dirt roads for where they want to live, and it's not part of our requirements to have him upgrade that section of road. We can't even get him to do that based on the ordinances and the regulations we have.

There's nothing in the subdivision rules? I mean, if he was putting in a subdivision with a road in the subdivision, wouldn't there be requirements for that road?

That's a new road, and like the other thing Mark read, that's a state road.

I mean, he could also put in a private road that would be dirt, and it wouldn't have to be the city standards. If he wanted to take... BROUGHT THERE AND IT WOULD BE ADOPTED, BUT TO...

BUT THE CITY IS ALLOWING ALL THESE THINGS TO COME IN. THEY'RE ALLOWING SOLAR FARMS TO COME IN. THEY'RE ALLOWING...

OKAY, OKAY. MR. TESTER, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SOLVE THIS TONIGHT, BELIEVE ME.

BUT THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY. THE PROBLEM TO BRINGING IT TO A PUBLIC ROAD IS THAT YOU HAVE TO IMPROVE THE ROAD. And when people come in and propose new subdivisions and things, that would be an opportunity to get some improvements. I mean, why not ask them? I mean, it's inconvenient. Because it's inconvenient for you doesn't mean you can't do it.

We can't get there. We don't have any rules to require someone to do that on a private road. It's just not there. It's a private road.

Well, it doesn't make sense. It seems as though we could have bridged that gap pretty easily if you had just gone to the solar farm. gone to Burson and gone to people who developed significant portions of the road and say, okay, improve that section of the road. Because the city is required to maintain it. Thank you. That's my comment.

Just for disclosure purposes, this is my boss.

Not really, Joe. Everybody knows. So who needs to sit down here? My name's Cooper Friend. I live down on the Nicollin. I'm not sure. How do you pronounce it? Nicollin or Nicollin?

I think it's Nicollin.

I've always pronounced it Nicollin, and everybody pronounces it differently. Yeah, I know.

Okay, how many think it's Nicollin? Okay.

Anyway... There you go. Democracy at work.

So anyway, I've had a lot of... I've had some pretty in-depth discussions with a former city manager here about this road. And the city has been maintaining it a lot better in the last three or four years, so kudos for that. But I have a question. It seems like the city always plays the private road card when it's in their favor, which I guess I understand that. But let me ask you something. WHY, IF IT'S A PRIVATE ROAD, WHY IS THE MAIL DELIVERED ON IT AND THE SCHOOL BUSES ARE ON IT? BECAUSE I HAVE TALKED TO SEVERAL TOWN MANAGERS SLASH CITY MANAGERS, AND THAT'S THE GUIDELINE. THAT'S THE RULE OF THUMB. IF IT'S A PRIVATE ROAD, THEY DON'T GO DOWN THAT. YOU DON'T SEE MAIL DELIVERED ON ANY PRIVATE ROAD. YOU DON'T SEE CHILDREN PICKED UP ON A PRIVATE ROAD. BUT THEY DO ON THE NICOLA ROAD. So, I don't, if push comes to shove, I'm not so sure it's a private road. But regardless, so I said to David Cole, because the road was a mess. You go down that road today, it's nice. You go down after it rains tonight and tomorrow, night and day. It'd be a totally different road. There's so much gravel on it that it just falls apart really, really fast. So I asked David Cole, I said, why don't you put, until you get this straightened out, why don't you put a moratorium on future development? This was several years ago. He didn't have an answer for that either. But he did say that's not a bad idea, but he didn't do anything about it. But it is a big problem, as this gentleman just alluded to. It's a huge problem, and it's not going to get any better. That road falls apart fast. The rain is a dirt road's biggest enemy. Water. And it's just not built for it. And it's the traffic there. I've been on Green Lake for 31 years. AND BACK THEN, NO ONE HARDLY EVER LIVED THERE YEAR ROUND. NOW IT'S RAMPANT. EVERYBODY'S LIVING THERE YEAR ROUND. AND I'M NOT AGAINST DEVELOPMENT. I BELIEVE A HIGH TIDE FLOWS ALL BOATS. I'M IN BUSINESS. I GET IT. I'M SURE THIS GENTLEMAN, THEIR COMPANY WILL DO A GOOD JOB. BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT MORE TRAFFIC. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY EVEN HAS IT. THEY DIDN'T. WHEN I ASKED DAVID COLE THIS APPROXIMATELY FOUR YEARS AGO, They didn't have a traffic count for it. But it is a tremendous amount of traffic. And he alluded to the boat ramp. On weekends, you can't even park around there. And you're playing dodge a car when you go by the boat ramp. I mean, they're parked on both sides. You can't get two cars by there. You know, they can't pass. To his point, it's a problem, and it's not going to get any better. And somebody needs to get their heads together, and let's come up with a solution here, because there's got to be one. Mr. Cole never mentioned to me that the state was reimbursing him for a thing. I find that funny, but maybe he just didn't want to tell me. I don't know. It gets impassable at times. If you get... The past three summers have been great because we haven't had any rain. The road has held up pretty good. No complaints whatsoever. The city does a great job. They're doing a good job. But you wait until Friday morning after we get this rain. You ought to drive down it tonight. Have you all been on the Nicole Road? Is there anybody on the playing board that has not been on the Nicole Road? You ought to try it. Drive it down tonight and then go try Friday morning. It will be totally different. I can assure you. you'll just fall apart. That's all. I just... It's an issue. And the extra traffic is going to be built... Dump trucks, I mean, it's... And when it does get impassable, particularly in the spring, you're going into other lanes to avoid... I can't tell you how many flat tires I've had on that road. I don't... You know, I even ruined a wheel one time. But you just... you've got to go into the other lane if you're on a hill or a turn. In the morning when I come out, it's fine. You can see the headlights.

I mean, obviously a lot has changed in 50 years. And 50 years ago, I mean, it was a camp road. And for the most part, it's still a camp road. It starts down there with camps. I would refer all you folks that live down there and know how much has changed in the last 50 years. But it's the number of houses.

I think that for the purposes of tonight, though, THE THING IS THAT WHETHER THIS ROAD IS A STATE ROAD OR A CITY ROAD OR WHATEVER, OR YOU WANT TO SWITCH IT FROM ONE TO THE OTHER, IT'S REALLY BEYOND OUR PURVIEW. I GET THAT.

I GET THAT.

AND IF YOU REALLY ARE CONCERNED, YOU AND THE NEIGHBORS OR WHATEVER, AND WITH MORE NEIGHBORS, THERE'S MORE POWER. AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING TO TAKE TO COUNSEL, I THINK. I UNDERSTAND THAT.

I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT You know, in your plans and all, it talks about that you're not allowed to impact the environment. You're to clean up after yourself and whatnot like that. So you're not really going to be building anything. So you're not going to be bringing in large trucks with gravel and dirt. You're going to have, like, engineers on site dropping pins. And what else? Installing the cistern.

Yeah, the impact currently would be installing the cisterns. Okay. The land would be, you know, if accepted, sold as the land. Okay.

Nothing would be built. So if your company and the delivery guys during dropping off the cisterns, they damaged the road, you damaged it, you should put it back to the way it came, the way it started. as part of the development because that would be your only construction which if you were building roads and houses and you came out onto a private road or state road or city road you'd have to fix that you know like road openings and damage or whatever so it seems fair that if you damage it when when you're installing the cisterns which hopefully you would do it on a dry day where there's no damage then seems fair that you should take it upon yourself to Put it back the way it started.

I can bring that to the attention of the landowner.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, timing is everything when it comes to construction like that. If you do it during the drought, no harm, no foul, probably.

I'll go see Mr. Pierce, but the private public things, I don't know. That's a card you play. The city plays when it's in their favor, but why are the buses and why are the mail trucks on? You're lucky. I just want to know that. I'm not like a financial leader. I don't have an answer. It just flies in the face of the things I'm talking about. It was really important.

Peter Broberg. I live on the Cullen Road as well. I just got a couple of questions. I've learned more tonight than the 14 years that I've lived here. But a couple things, you know, beating the drum here for road improvements is the grading of the road and dust control. These are all stormwater issues. They're in the stormwater plan. So whether it's on a private road that the city maintains. It's still something that needs to be considered. We loved living here when we first moved here, but the road dust in this year has actually been the best for our section because it was so dry that the road didn't need to be graded. When a road gets graded, it's going to need calcium every time, not just once a year at Memorial. These houses, our house gets so dirty and filthy you could clean it weekly and not be able to see out your windows a week later if it rains with dust. But I guess the one thing that I don't understand is looking back at the private road part and the width of the right of ways and drainage So if we approve this subdivision that's not doing any construction, they're just selling the lot, then is it the person that buys the lot is going to say what they do with their stormwater for each lot? I just don't understand why that wouldn't be part of setting up a subdivision approval. because every lot's different. I mean, some lots may not need any drainage improvements, but the next, if they're on a hill, then when they do their stormwater, their runoff goes to the next person down the hill. So who controls that if the city doesn't or the subdivision rules, I guess?

I don't know if... Rob can speak to that. I mean, when an individual, just a residential lot is sold, I mean, they don't have to meet any stormwater requirements like a building does that has a lot of pavement and stuff. So, I mean, they're just cutting this piece of forest into 11 chunks. and see if you can address what, if any, stormwater issues you deal with.

Yeah, all they're going to do is draw lawns on a map, effectively. So it comes down to the individual property owners when they purchase those lots to ensure that stormwater doesn't leave their property and go on to an abutter's property. They could direct it towards the culvert or the ditch, I guess. It gets directed to the right-of-way of the... private road yeah ultimately that's almost always what happens yeah it ends up going into the ditch but you can't you can't let stormwater leave your property in any greater amount than it did before onto another property like if you can't make it worse

I guess it's basically part of your preview when you issue a building.

Correct. So I'd have to go and then it's also complaint-based so that after they build it, it all appears to be fine. But if now we're in a drought, I can't gauge stormwater. After the fact, if there's an issue, we also address it then if it's complaint-based. So if a neighbor were saying, well, the stormwater is leaving the neighbor's property and impacting mine, We can address it then, too.

Well, that's also the stuff of civil suits. Correct. Between property owners. You know, if you do something here and the water goes overlaying onto their backyard or into their basement or whatever, you know, owner one sues owner two.

Yeah, no, we do have it in the ordinance so that stormwater can't leave your property.

Yeah, in the construction of your home, you can't put your stormwater onto an adjoining property. You need to get it to the road, to the stormwater mechanisms to get it off.

That's it. A lot of this road doesn't have any stormwater mechanisms.

No, I know, but you can't preemptively decide what the stormwater needs are. for an empty lot because they're going to be different.

You can guess and look into it.

But the point there is, though, you know, if you have seven lots right next to each other, conceivably somebody could go in and buy all seven lots and put something large there or leave one or two vacant or whatever. And, you know, you can't do that.

I think the developer really should at least do drainage improvements in front of the lots being sold.

Where are they going to put their house?

At this point? Yeah.

Well, they could ditch it and put culverts in wherever the driveway is going to be.

You were saying we don't really know where the driveway is going to be.

Yeah, but you add the culvert. When the driveway goes in, you then put the culvert in the ditch.

So just ditch the whole thing in preparation?

Fairly minimal cost. I mean, it probably wouldn't take three or four days to ditch these 11 lots at... at the road.

It seems like, I mean, if it's a subdivision, it seems like they would normally ask for that if they were putting in a road.

Does that not become a road improvement then at that point, though?

Yeah. Yeah, it's back to the problem of private or public, which is the real hang-up. It's the real problem.

I mean, ditches can be installed when they go to develop their lot.

Exactly. Kind of what Brian prescribes that... Culver's whenever they do that driveway connection so he would prescribe the size to him, I would assume, because he wants them written in the deed to come get that driveway permit anyway, so he's worrying about the site distance. We can also put in that memo for have him to advise on how to control the stormwater so it doesn't negatively affect anybody else, negatively affect the road, and hopefully keep everybody on the even playing field there.

A problem is when someone uphill of the next residence doesn't do theirs the way that sets it up for the lot below it. And my lot actually is that way right now. I have a nice ditch driveway and right through the yard within that drainage easement. And my culvert never gets a drop of water because the two lots above us were never done.

Mm-hmm.

But like you say, once they start developing, then they will need to put them in according to, if we add that in, that it's going to be done as part of the township review for a permit, then at least as they go, it will not get worse. It should not get worse.

That's part of the highway department. Yeah, that tells me. We have to imagine where the water goes later. And that's Brian's job to make sure of that. driveway goes in a proper place and handles water correctly.

That's the thing, so what if an uphill lot sells and they just go a little bit? It doesn't take care of getting rid of the water for the next three lots.

Currently, the water isn't causing a problem on the road. As the land lays now, it's not causing runoff across the road. So if they don't touch it, it shouldn't make it any worse. But if they build, they make it culvert.

Or they have to address the stormwater in some way. I mean, however we deem it.

Yes, on the crest, they wouldn't have to do much of anything anyway.

Thank you.

My name is Joe LeBrun, and my family's been on Green Lake on that road since 1969. I got to tell you, it's really overburdened now. I've seen several occasions over the years, particularly at the boat launch, Well, you couldn't get an emergency vehicle down there if you had to because the cars are parked parallel parking along a road that's not even late and a half wide. Second question I want to ask is there's 1,600 acres, more or less, on this parcel of land now. We're talking about 11 lots. Is there provision being made in this plan? that allows future subdivisions to be added in and then brought onto the Colwood Road as a way to get out of this sort of potentially compounding the problem. Thank you.

You can answer that question if you'd like.

None that we're aware of right now.

Yep.

Mary Ellen Hunt, also a resident of Nicole and Roe for quite a few years now, and my husband.

I think what the guy was saying right here is what he wants to know is how fast you can break. Right now you've got 11 house laws. How fast can they buy the properties and go from 11 houses, which you're expecting, to 25, 30 houses? Because those are some big laws. How fast can they re-subdivide?

When can they be re-subdivided again?

question from the city so I don't think there's a limit unless there's a state law for a time frame after properties been purchased but if it is further subdivided it does have to come back to planning board that's a major difference on right now he's thinking adding 11 houses to that room and whether the state's paying

on that if say those houses sold like that and they subdivided them like that and they would have to come back to planning board and it could be addressed

And again, it's a lot of what-ifs. We can't discuss what-ifs or plan for everything. We can only focus on what's been presented to us today.

That's the only real property left that they're going to be adding to on this road. If anything else, they'd have to go down Duck Pond, right?

No, the Blueberry Field's gone.

I guess I would ask that. I mean, in numerous subdivisions, there's... They put in deed restrictions on how big a house you can build, how small a house you can build, and whether or not the lot can or cannot be subdivided. I mean, is that something that the developer has thought about, putting in restrictions like that in the deed Yeah, and they vary from about three acres to seven or eight acres. I mean, are they willing to put in there that just any lot can not be subdivided in the future?

I can bring that to their attention and find out.

Is that even legal?

I think so. We can't require it.

Well, we can't require it. I mean, we haven't required it from other developers, and some, depending on who the developer is, have put that in. They have numerous deed restrictions.

It's a fairly common one to have not allowed re-subdivision of a lot. Is that right? Yeah.

It's very common. But they could subdivide all the rest of their property. Correct. The remaining affairs. So here's what they own, and here's what they're developing right now.

I wrote down 706.2, cannot future subdivide. Can't find it. I don't know where it is. But, yeah, that would be something that would ease the stormwater runoff problem. It would ease all the wetland encroachment problems. That would solve a lot of problems.

He will check that. Another question. It sounds like...

the road thing has to be a petition to the state does that what i'm getting to the city council and they go to the state uh well the state won't have anything to do with it i mean they from what i understand they're just paying the city some money to help maintain it but it's not a state road or anything like that okay the city road

Yeah, the boat launch is state maintained. So they pay the city to maintain a private road to get access to their boat launch for everybody.

Which is a big contributing factor on traffic.

You don't petition a state. It has to be brought to council.

For the city to take that road over, it would have to go to the city council.

For the people that live down there, the pay taxes down in there.

Correct.

that don't see a result from those taxes of maintaining the road. And the taxes are very high. You guys have done a good job the last few years. They have done a good job the last few years, much better. But we're the ones that would have to go and ask the city to do it? Correct.

And as Chapter 56, Article 9, Section 917 has the process for that.

The other thing was you'd mentioned about the stormwater, and someone was saying these lots are not a contributing factor, but where this lot is is where the beaver pond is that washed the road out this past spring.

That's what I asked. Completely. I asked if these are contributing now to any depredation to the road. They are.

Because it's not proper.

During this, they are.

They did, and I will say, that's a fantastic job dropping that ditch up through there.

If you bring in a homeowner, chances are the beaver will.

But there's other places along that road.

I've had to wait for him to cross the road.

That I agree should be somehow attached to the property. But they have to deal with it. The runoff can't come straight off there when they put their driveway in there and not protect it in some way from affecting the road.

Well, you also could do a contribution to the wetland. That's all I have. I think that's all. Thank you. Thank you.

Anybody else?

My name is Tom Ashby. I live on the Cullen Road. I'm not sure if people ask this question, but I'll start. Is there a way that you folks are able to determine what the water capacity is? in the proposed subdivision and how it would affect existing neighbors. When we had our well built, we moved in 2018, and we were told that the proper accepted return rate is like three gallons a minute. And they were only able to get three quarters of a gallon a minute in our well. So we were behind the eight ball to begin with. We haven't had any problem yet. But I was just wondering in the future whether there's a way for someone to come in and say, you know, this place has plenty of water or we can't. Is that something that we can't determine or can determine?

Generally, isn't there a letter from a well driller in the packet?

It's in the packet.

I thought there was. There was a letter from a well driller. I did get a copy of it afterwards that, you know, they asked me, we've drilled wells in this area. Generally, what they say is, and we don't foresee a problem with drilling wells in the future. And there's a copy in the package if you'd like to copy. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

ANY MORE QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? ANYTHING ELSE FROM STAFF?

ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANT TO SAY? NO, I JUST APPRECIATE THE BOARD'S COMMENTS, APPRECIATE THE PUBLIC'S COMMENTS. AGAIN, I THINK EVERYBODY'S CONCERNED JUST, YOU KNOW, ABOUT THE WELL-BEING OF THOSE ON THE ROAD. AND, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY I KNOW THE LAND ORDER'S NOT TRYING TO ADD ANY BURDEN, BUT I UNDERSTAND We appreciate the feedback and just want to adhere to the requirements.

And just to let you folks know, this is a preliminary hearing. There's also going to be another hearing after this. So, you know, we accept the application as complete. That doesn't mean we're accepting the subdivision. That comes at the final. So there's another meeting after this, next month or whenever they want to come back.

And things are being resolved between now and then. Yeah. on drawings and whatnot. Quick question.

Do the abutters get a notification for that meeting also?

Yes.

Thank you.

Motion before the board. I move to accept the major subdivision application entitled Boulder Creek Subdivision for Applicant and Owner Little Duck Bond Forest LLC as completed.

Second.

Great name.

All in favor? Matt. Okay, Matt Volchez.

He can't lift his hand.

Okay, thank you. Thank you very much.

Should we tell City Council y'all are coming?

Yeah, make it a point. It's about a bathroom, all right. I read that somewhere in the narrative there was a statement about not subdividing the future.

Is that right?

I know.

I'm going to read it for you.

Yeah, it was in their narrative.

See, they gave us a word document.

Yeah, yeah. Thank you. I'm just going to...

Item number four, final plan review of a major use site development plan entitled Anchoring Campground for Applicant-Owner Superior Realty Incorporated. I'm not gonna bother to read the rest. Due to the moratorium that the City Council voted on and approved Monday night, we are tabling this for FURTHER ACTION BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING BOARD?

I HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT THAT. I MEAN, I GET IT. IT'S FROZEN RIGHT NOW. How long is it before the preliminary approval? How long until that preliminary approval expires, or does the moratorium trump that, or what?

I'll have to verify, but I would imagine the moratorium trumps that. Okay. Technically, you have six months between preliminary approval or preliminary to be submitted for the final, six months. But because it's paused due to the moratorium, I'll double-check with legal, but I can't imagine...

But the idea would be, as far as we know right this second, that they don't have to start over. For example, if the moratorium is lifted or satisfied or whatever, they don't have to start over or anything like that.

They might... I will double-check with legal, but I would hope not.

Okay.

It was just a point of interest.

No, it's a good question that we'll definitely have to...

I mean, currently there's a six-month moratorium, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there won't be another six-month moratorium. Oh, great.

There's a lot of... And we don't know what's going to change, if it's a drastic...

So moved. Second. All in favor? Okay, Matt's got his hand up. Thank you. Looks like you're taking your blood pressure. Okay, item number five. Revision to approve major subdivision plan entitled Beechland Terrace 2A for applicant owner Colton Sanborn and Tyler Kennedy. The proposal reconfigure lots 5A and 5B. The subject properties are approximately 0.5 acres and 1.22 acres located at 128 Beechland Road and 67 Grandview Road. Tax map. 15, lot 3121, and tax map 15, lot 332, in the neighboring zone district. Is there someone representing Beechland Terrace? 2A.

Steve Salisbury.

And I could have sworn you were here several years ago on the same day.

Oh, yeah, we've just moved the lines back to where they were a few years ago. There are a couple of developments that are like... Exactly what happened. Tell us what the job is.

Hey, John, I'm a very close abutter on this one. Do I need to recuse myself?

If you so desire.

I can be objective, so...

I have no concerns. Okay, no concerns again. All right. So you have to stay, sorry. Okay, tell us what we're doing again.

So a... 2020 I guess it's been more than a few years we came to split lot 5 and the idea at that time was to keep the septic system for the block fronting Grandview Road make that lot big enough to contain its own septic system. Now the owner chooses to move the boundary line back and provide an easement for the septic system that's going to be on the Grandview lot. So functionally that Grandview lot will be the same. It will still have access to a septic leach field and just be under an easement instead of owned.

Oh, so the leach field for 5A will actually be on 5A?

The leach field will be on 5A with an easement for access and maintenance. And the reason he moved the line back so he could build a house where it currently is built, it's a white-sided board and batten structure. Anybody's noticed. So where the line was, he couldn't put that house where it is today.

Because of setbacks and things like that.

Setbacks, yeah, the rear setback wouldn't have been met.

So 5A house has their own septic?

They have their own septic a little closer to the road. You can see on the plan there's a proposed septic system, which I think he's under the process of constructing as we speak.

Nobody's called me yet.

Every morning to 7 a.m. Oh, they don't call the inspector until after it's built.

Well, no, I meant the septic system. I don't know if they're building that yet or not.

I think they are. They just put the same difference in.

Any questions from the board?

You're not going back to re-change it again, are you?

I doubt it, because that would involve moving the house.

well or is that public order?

Well I think we're gonna make that part of the motions. They haven't drilled the well yet.

Okay. There's room for it. We don't have to move the line again? No, no.

That'll be in the motion.

Not to come back.

No further resubmit ever.

Okay. Not until I can do my campground again.

I can't get back to that either. Are you all here to make a comment? No, I just live in the neighborhood and I wanted to know what was going on.

Oh, okay. Okay.

We appreciate you coming out. No big deal. I will close the public hearing.

Is there a motion? I move to approve the revision to a major subdivision application entitled Beachlands Terraces 2A for applicant and owner Colton Sanborn and Tyler Kennedy. Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor? There goes a hand. Okay.

One of the faster.

That was quick.

Yeah.

Pretty easy one for him.

Yeah, makes up for all the other ones.

That one's not done.

Okay. Staff comment.

Yes, I have comments.

Oh, there it is.

Okay, so. I've got the plans there. That was my thought. I'll swing by tomorrow and pick them up. Thank you.

So speaking of other projects and moratoriums, we will be having a joint workshop with Council, Council and Planning Board, on October 5th to discuss campground ordinance changes.

And that's a workshop?

And that's a workshop. And we just set the date today, so more will be announced and stuff.

What time is that?

Workshops are at 6 p.m., and that is a Monday, I believe.

What did you say, the 8th?

It's the 5th.

Yeah, it's Monday. Yeah, it's Monday.

So pencil that in. Please come prepared to discuss campground ordinances. And please use all of your expertise.

So just looking for general comments or?

I'm hoping to have a draft of proposed changes available before the workshop and then you will all work together to hash them all out.

You can also bring your own.

Will this go as well as the marijuana ordinance went?

We're going to try to make it better.

No idea. But with your help, I think we can come to a good place and have a great, great ordinance.

We're going to look at the state standard and see where we're lacking and if we exceeded anywhere, which we do exceed it in a few spots. So... That's the main goal is to look at the standards we have now and make sure that they're good to go. And if they're good to go, they're good to go. But that's what the discussion is for.

I don't want to get ahead of ourselves in the discussion, but I mean, are they looking at the location?

MS. So there is discussion on rezoning the rural district to add multiple zones, but that's being treated as kind of a separate project, even though they're somewhat related. But given the six-month timeframe, the ordinance updates are what's feasible within that timeframe.

MR.

The performance standard update? MS.

Yes, Chapter 8.

What's that? The campground performance standards are what's actually achievable in six months. A larger zoning discussion about changing multiple rural zones and everything would take a lot longer than six months to realistically implement. So what we're focusing on is the campground performance standards.

Which is?

Workshops open to the public.

It's open to the public, but there's no public hearing. Okay. It's meant to be working.

Yeah, it'll be, the idea will be for, staff, you, and the city council to all figure out where we want to go with this because we had nothing prepared before this.

We have a lot of ideas, but... Will Tom's attorney be present to help guide people?

Most likely.

Good.

As long as it's not in my budget. So, yeah. And then there will be a separate workshop with council, a separate workshop with just you guys, and then a public workshop so we can get public feedback. And then it will go through planning for approval or recommendation to council and then to council for a final vote. And hopefully that will be done by the end or by the council meeting in January, which is the 20th of January.

I guess just one comment or question on that. on the scheduling and I'm not suggesting we push it back. But you have a council election a month after, which could be sold to two new council members.

Yeah, it's a pretty tough time to do it, but we just, it is what it is.

We got to do it. Given the six-month time frame, we penciled it out, and this is really hard to do it any different than how we're doing it now.

So it may go one way or it may go the other, depending on how the elections go. You're right.

I mean, the first meeting, I mean, we're not going to solve everything.

Exactly. But just... Who approves it before may not be the ones voting on it come January.

And we might do another follow-up joint workshop afterwards. It just depends on how it goes.

Sounds like a conundrum to me.

It's going to be a great...

A conundrum? Yeah, conundrum. You just learned that word? It's a big word. It's a big word.

And then just a reminder, we are still moving forward on planning board bylaws. So that workshop is September 14th. I'm hoping to have something to you roughly a week ahead of time, a draft to review and hash that out a little bit.

And that's at 530?

Yeah, same time, same place, but the 14th. And I will send out an email reminder. And that's it.

Okay.

That's all I have.

Motion.

Can I make a comment?

Certainly.

I don't know how it's going to be taken, but I watched the workshop with the council, and I listened to what was said by the city planner, Brittany, and there was a comment that was made that when I heard it, I felt a little uneasy about, and I was wondering how it was received by the city council when it was implied that the planning board was feeling as if they weren't trusted because they were enacting them if they would to work to enact a moratorium and I just felt like that it it didn't seem to be a coming together feeling it seemed to be a splitting apart feeling by basically telling them if you do this our feelings are hurt And I just didn't, I thought it didn't go over real well. I didn't like that comment. I don't know if that's how the board felt, but you were speaking on behalf of the board and I certainly didn't feel like if they made an action one way or another, that's their purview to do that. And I don't feel slighted as a board member. I don't feel like, I don't feel like they were judging us. They were judging the ordinance.

Yeah, just reading that moratorium, a lot of the information in that, we have the mechanisms to control that. So I think that's why that comment comes out, because we do have the mechanisms to control that, but no one wanted to let us do it. So that's, I think, where staff and the planning board may be hung up on it a little bit, because We couldn't even get there. You have the ability to put a moratorium on 45 days after an approval. So there's plenty of time to, if the council in their purview feels like there is an issue, they could recall that. Day 45.

Right. And they hashed that over quite a lot. I know. And he's advised them several times, and Charlie advised also, that that's what he felt, the same thing. But we certainly don't want to create a situation where it's us against them. We've got to work together. Agreed.